The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol. I., Part E.: From Charles I. to Cromwell
David Hume · en
From all quarters of England, the prime nobility and gentry, either
personally or by messages and letters, expressed their duty towards him;
and exhorted him to save himself and them from that ignominious slavery
with which they were threatened. The small interval of time which had
passed since the fatal accusation of the members, had been sufficient
to open the eyes of many, and to recover them from the astonishment with
which at first they had been seized. One rash and passionate attempt
of the king's seemed but a small counterbalance to so many acts of
deliberate violence which had been offered to him and every branch of
the legislature; and, however sweet the sound of liberty, many
resolved to adhere to that moderate freedom transmitted them from their
ancestors, and now better secured by such important concessions, rather
than, by engaging in a giddy search after more independence, run a
manifest risk either of incurring a cruel subjection, or abandoning all
law and order.
Charles, finding himself supported by a considerable party in the
kingdom, began to speak in a firmer tone, and to retort the accusations
of the commons with a vigor which he had not before exerted.
Notwithstanding their remonstrances, and menaces, and insults, he
still persisted in refusing their bill; and they proceeded to frame an
ordinance, in which, by the authority of the two houses, without
the king's consent, they named lieutenants for all the counties, and
conferred on them the command of the whole military force, of all the
guards, garrisons, and forts of the kingdom. He issued proclamations
against this manifest usurpation; and, as he professed a resolution
strictly to observe the law himself, so was he determined, he said, to
oblige every other person to pay it a like obedience The name of the
king was so essential to all laws, and so familiar in all acts of
executive authority, that the parliament was afraid, had they totally
omitted it, that the innovation would be too sensible to the people. In
all commands, therefore, which they conferred, they bound the persons to
obey the orders of his majesty signified by both houses of parliament.
And inventing a distinction, hitherto unheard of, between the office and
the person of the king, those very forces which they employed against
him they levied in his name and by his authority.[*]