The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol. I., Part F.: From Charles II. to James II. — David Hume — John Shaqi
The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol. I., Part F.: From Charles II. to James II.
David Hume · en
It soon appeared that Charles had entertained a just opinion of the
dispositions of the house. So much were the commons actuated by the
cabals of Shaftesbury and other malecontents, such violent antipathy
prevailed against Popery that the king’s concessions, though much more
important than could reasonably have been expected, were not embraced. A
bill was brought in for the total exclusion of the duke from the crown
of England and Ireland. It was there declared, that the sovereignty of
these kingdoms, upon the king’s death or resignation, should devolve to
the person next in succession after the duke; that all acts of royalty
which that prince should afterwards perform, should not only be void,
but be deemed treason; that if he so much as entered any of these
dominions, he should be deemed guilty of the same offence; and that all
who supported his title should be punished as rebels and traitors. This
important bill, which implied banishment as well as exclusion, passed
the lower house by a majority of seventy-nine.
The commons were not so wholly employed about the exclusion bill as to
overlook all other securities to liberty. The country party, during
all the last parliament, had much exclaimed against the bribery and
corruption of the members; and the same reproach had been renewed
against the present parliament. An inquiry was made into a complaint
which was so dangerous to the honor of that assembly; but very little
foundation was found for it. Sir Stephen Fox, who was the paymaster,
confessed to the house, that nine members received pensions to the
amount of three thousand four hundred pounds; and after a rigorous
inquiry by a secret committee, eight more pensioners were discovered. A
sum also, about twelve thousand pounds, had been occasionally given or
lent to others. The writers of that age pretend, that Clifford and Danby
had adopted opposite maxims with regard to pecuniary influence. The
former endeavored to gain the leaders and orators of the house, and
deemed the others of no consequence. The latter thought it sufficient
to gain the majority, however composed. It is likely, that the means,
rather than the intention, were wanting to both these ministers.
Pensions and bribes, though it be difficult entirely to exclude them,
are dangerous expedients for government; and cannot be too carefully
guarded against, nor too vehemently decried, by every one who has a
regard to the virtue and liberty of a nation. The influence, however,
which the crown acquires from the disposal of places, honors, and
preferments, is to be esteemed of a different nature. This engine of
power may become too forcible, but it cannot altogether be abolished,
without the total destruction of monarchy, and even of all regular
authority. But the commons at this time were so jealous of the crown,
that they brought in a bill, which was twice read, excluding from the
lower house all who possessed any lucrative office.