The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol. I., Part D.: From Elizabeth to James I.
David Hume · en
The most memorable event in this period was a session of parliament,
held on the eighth of February, 1576; where debates were started which
may appear somewhat curious and singular. Peter Wentworth, a Puritan,
who had signalized himself in former parliaments by his free and
undaunted spirit, opened this session with a premeditated harangue,
which drew on him the indignation of the house, and gave great offence
to the queen and the ministers. As it seems to contain a rude sketch
of those principles of liberty which happily gained afterwards the
ascendant in England, it may not be improper to give, in a few words,
the substance of it. He premised, that the very name of liberty is
sweet; but the thing itself is precious beyond the most inestimable
treasures and that it behoved them to be careful, lest, contenting
themselves with the sweetness of the name, they forego the substance,
and abandon what of all earthly possessions was of the highest value
to the kingdom. He then proceeded to observe, that freedom of speech in
that house,--a privilege so useful both to sovereign and subject,--had
been formerly infringed in many essential articles, and was at present
exposed to the most imminent danger: that it was usual, when any subject
of importance was handled, especially if it regarded religion, to
surmise, that these topics were disagreeable to the queen, and that the
further proceeding in them would draw down her indignation upon their
temerity: that Solomon had justly affirmed the king’s displeasure to be
a messenger of death; and it was no wonder if men, even though urged by
motives of conscience and duty, should be inclined to stop short when
they found themselves exposed to so severe a penalty: that by the
employing of this argument, the house was incapacitated from serving
their country, and even from serving the queen herself, whose ears,
besieged by pernicious flatterers, were thereby rendered inaccessible
to the most salutary truths: that it was a mockery to call an assembly
a parliament, yet deny it that privilege which was so essential to its
being, and without which it must degenerate into an abject school
of servility and dissimulation: that as the parliament was the great
guardian of the laws, they ought to have liberty to discharge their
trust, and to maintain that authority whence even kings themselves
derive their being: that a king was constituted such by law, and though
he was not dependent on man, yet was he subordinate to God and the law,
and was obliged to make their prescriptions, not his own will, the rule
of his conduct: that even his commission, as God’s vicegerent, enforced,
instead of loosening this obligation; since he was thereby invested with
authority to execute on earth the will of God, which is nothing but
law and justice: that though these surmises of displeasing the queen by
their proceedings, had impeached, in a very essential point, all freedom