The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol. I., Part F.: From Charles II. to James II.Hume, David
PhilosophyPhilosophy
The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol. I., Part F.: From Charles II. to James II.
Hume, David
Great Britain -- History -- Charles II, 1660-1685; Great Britain -- History -- James II, 1685-1688
of defence, had begun a violent attack upon kingly power; and after
involving the kingdom in blood, had finally lost that liberty for which
they had so imprudently contended. They thought, perhaps erroneously,
that it was no longer possible, after such public and such exorbitant
pretensions, to persevere in that prudent silence hitherto maintained
by the laws; and that it was necessary, by some positive declaration, to
bar the return of like inconveniencies. When they excluded, therefore,
the right of defence, they supposed that the constitution, remaining
firm upon its basis, there never really could be an attack made by the
sovereign. If such an attack was at any time made, the necessity was
then extreme; and the case of extreme and violent necessity, no laws,
they thought, could comprehend; because to such a necessity no laws
could beforehand point out a proper remedy.
The other measures of this parliament still discovered a more anxious
care to guard against rebellion in the subject than encroachments in
the crown; the recent evils of civil war and usurpation had naturally
increased the spirit of submission to the monarch, and had thrown the
nation into that dangerous extreme. During the violent and jealous
government of the parliament and of the protectors, all magistrates
liable to suspicion had been expelled the corporations; and none had
been admitted who gave not proofs of affection to the ruling powers, or
who refused to subscribe the covenant. To leave all authority in such
hands seemed dangerous; and the parliament therefore empowered the king
to appoint commissioners for regulating the corporations, and expelling
such magistrates as either intruded themselves by violence, or professed
principles dangerous to the constitution, civil and ecclesiastical. It
was also enacted, that all magistrates should disclaim the obligation
of the covenant, and should declare both their belief that it was not
lawful, upon any pretence whatsoever, to resist the king, and their
abhorrence of the traitorous position of taking arms by the king’s
authority against his person, or against those who were commissioned by
him.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account