The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol. I., Part D.: From Elizabeth to James I.
David Hume · en
The commons, alarmed at this intelligence, appointed another committee
to attend the queen, and endeavor to satisfy her of their humble
and dutiful intentions. Elizabeth gave a gracious reception to the
committee: she expressed her great “inestimable loving care” towards her
loving subjects; which, she said, was greater than of her own self, or
even than any of them could have of themselves. She told them, that
she had already given orders for an inquiry into the abuses attending
purveyance, but the dangers of the Spanish invasion had retarded the
progress of the design; that she had as much skill, will, and power
to rule her household as any subjects whatsoever to govern theirs, and
needed as little the assistance of her neighbors; that the exchequer was
her chamber, consequently more near to her than even her house’ bold,
and therefore the less proper for them to intermeddle with; and that
she would of herself, with advice of her council and the judges, redress
every grievance in these matters, but would not permit the commons, by
laws moved without her privity, to bereave her of the honor attending
these regulations.[*] The issue of this matter was the same that
attended all contests between Elizabeth and her parliaments.[**] She
seems even to have been more imperious, in this particular, than her
predecessors; at least her more remote ones: for they often permitted
the abuses of purveyance[***] [31]to be redressed by law.[****] Edward
III., a very arbitrary prince, allowed ten several statutes to be
enacted for that purpose.
* D’Ewes, p. 444.
** Si rixa est, ubi tu pulsus, ego vapulo tantum. Juv.
*** See note EE, at the end of the volume.
**** See the statutes under the head of Purveyance.
In so great awe did the commons stand of every courtier, as well as of
the crown, that they durst use no freedom of speech which they thought
would give the least offence to any of them. Sir Edward Hobby showed in
the house his extreme grief, that by some great personage, not a member
of the house, he had been sharply rebuked for speeches delivered in
parliament: he craved the favor of the house, and desired that some of
the members might inform that great personage of his true meaning
and intention in these speeches.[*] The commons, to obviate these
inconveniencies, passed a vote that no one should reveal the secrets of
the house.[**]
* D’Ewes, p. 432, 433.
** An act was passed this session, enforcing the former
statute, which imposed twenty pounds a month on everyone
absent from public worship: but the penalty was restricted
to two thirds of the income of the recusant. 29 Eliz. c. 6.