Tuesday, March 27.
On Mr Hatcher's Petition, setting forth that he is duly
elected for the Borough of Stamford in the County of Lincoln,
Mr Hatcher being High-Sheriff of the said County.
Serjeant Crook.] A Writ of summons to chuse Members of Parliament is an original thing, and not an
Iôta in it can be altered, without Act of Parliament.
He hears it said, "That the Corporation makes the
Return of the Writ." No; they elect, but the Sheriff
makes the Return. And 'tis against the Law of Nature for the same man to be both Agent and Patient.
In Lord Coke's case, who was made Sheriff of Buckingham, and returned for the County of Norfolk, to serve
in Parliament as Knight of the Shire, it was carried that
he might be chosen for Norfolk, and the whole Debate
then ran that he could not be returned, being Sheriff,
in his own County. If they might return themselves,
most of the Sheriffs of England would sit here. There is
reason in it, and 'tis against a rule of Law, and a
dangerous precedent, for a Sheriff to return himself
against all ancient usage.
Mr Powle.] "Nec tu, nec aliquis, &c." the words of
the Writ. Now whether it be of the County, or an inferior Borough—The case of Sir Walter Long, who
was chosen Burgess for Bath, and was Sheriff of that
County; he was presented in the Star-chamber for
being out of the County during his Office, but he
was not discharged here. Were eligible in another
County—Serjeant Crook's Brother served here, in the
Long Parliament, for a Borough in Oxfordshire, when
Sheriff of that County. Though the Sheriff be incapable of serving, it shall not make the minor part of
the Corporation capable to elect, though the Sheriff
be incapable. He would stay for a report of this from
the Committee of Elections. The other is the sitting
Member, and the House has no prejudice by it.
Sir Thomas Lee.] Sawyer has told you the irregularity of this Petition. In his own case he kept the matter depending to keep men in awe—He cannot but
take notice that 'tis some great matter sure, that men
desire to be chosen Parliament-men for. He takes not
this to be the case of Mr Hatcher only, but the Pettion is lodged, and 'tis asserted that he had the majority
of votes for him, and you refuse the Petition without
hearing him, and refuse him to make out his capacity of being elected—This is of weight—There
is a great difference betwixt a Sheriff's Return of himself for a Borough, where he is no judge of the Poll,
as he is in a County. He thinks he is not barred
by his own Act; nor the town barred by his Act neither. So it was not a matter eligible whether the
Sheriff should sign the Indenture, or no. Mr Oakley
was chosen a Member, when Sheriff of the County
wherein the Borough was, [Bishops-castle] and sits upon
Sir John Charlton.] The cases of Lord Coke, and Sir
Walter Long, spoken of, were held good Elections.
But it was Casus primæ impressionis. Long was chosen
when great stirs were in the Nation. In the Starchamber, it was set forth in the Bill against him,
"His going out of the County without the King's
Licence:" He answered, "He was not forsworn, because he never took that Oath." So the thing was
changed, and he was fined for exercising that Office
without taking the Oath. The words of the Writs
are "Ita quod tu, nec aliquis alius Vice-comes regni
nostri, sit electus, &c." Suppose this Borough of
Stamford had not petitioned—If you judge him incapable, and yet he have the major Voice, he that
had the minor Voices must sit. It appeared against
one chosen for a Borough in Yorkshire, that he was
in Orders, and so was rendered incapable of sitting
here. Mr Wandesford, who had much the fewer Voices,
stood against him, and you judged it for Mr Wandesford;
the other being incapable, though he had the majority of Voices. The thing is new, and never was
before. Mr Oakley was not Sheriff, &c. but if it were
so, the thing was never litigated, never called in question.
Mr Oakley.] He was Sheriff of Shropshire in the Convention, and his Return was then. They put out
Major Waring, and made him Sheriff, who was no
delinquent. But he would stand, and did sit here accordingly, without any dispute.
Sir John Trevor.] Sawyer said, "That the Petition of
Mr Hatcher's was shuffled into the House by him."
Lord Burleigh delivered it to him to present, before
twenty Gentlemen, and here were forty Members in
the House when he delivered it. He said, these Petitions are brought in to keep men in awe for their
Votes here. Every man knows how Sawyer was in his
Vote, during the dependency of that Petition against
him. But as soon as the clock struck twelve, and
his Election was determined, you know what he did;
he changed his opinion.
Mr Sollicitor Winnington.] He knows neither of the
parties concerned in this Petition. He thinks it agreed
on all sides, that the Gentleman now pretending, by his
Petition, is Sheriff of the County of Lincoln, and chosen
for a Borough in that County. Now, whether being
Sheriff, he can return himself, is the Question. To say
a Sheriff of one County cannot serve for another—"ita
quod tu, nec aliquis alius Vice-comes, &c." If "Tu" be "no
Sheriff,"— If but a recital of the Law, then you are
at liberty to argue whether the Sheriff of one County
may be returned for another. The Writ for Election
is directed to the Sheriff of the County. Every Officer must obey the Mandate; if qualified, he must obey
the Qualification—If the subsequent Clause were not
in the Writ, then it might be probable. Sir Nicholas
Bacon suffered a common Recovery whilst he was Sheriff: The Writ could not be directed to himself, and
the Recovery was void; because the Writ gave him no
authority to do it being Demandant—Does that Clause
"Ita quod tu, &c." in the Writ, signify nothing? Long's
and Coke's Case was in another County. "Tu" must be
"The man," "Sheriff." It is in Law the Sheriff's
Return. 'Tis his Officers that act for him—That he
offers to consideration.
Mr Hatcher's Petition was, upon the Question, rejected.
The Bill from the Lords for educating the Children of the
Royal Family in the Protestant Religion, &c. (See p. 284.) was
read the second time.
The House sat some time very silent, whereupon.
Mr Secretary Williamson said] This Bill is of great
weight, by the silence in the House. He remembers,
at the first reading, a remark upon one part of it:
For the Education of the Children, 'twas thought the
time was too narrow, "from seven to fourteen years
of age." He thinks it reasonable to enlarge it. Exceptions may be taken at the second reading of a Bill
properly, and this goes not so far as it might for the
time, and moves that it may go to a Committee for
Amendment, at least for that.
Mr Powle.] Would have it committed with the Bill
of Popery, and between them hopes you may make
a good Bill.
Sir Thomas Meres.] He must say now, commit this
Bill, or no. He would commit this, and read our
other Bill of Popery, and then refer them both to
the same Committee. Since then the matter is really before us, and the Question is, if we should
have a King of a different Religion from the Nation,
what is fit for England to be done? And upon the
Debate all insisted for a Committee of the whole
House, to consider what should be done, should such
a thing happen, as a King or Queen of England to
be of a different Religion.
Sir Eliab Harvey.] Would have instruction to the
Committee, "that from the time the Bill shall take
place, all dignified Clergy should be married, or else
be made incapable of their places."
Sir Nicholas Carew.] Seconds the Motion, "that
Clergymen should be capable of no dignity unless
they were married;" and he is sure none of the Church
of Rome can come into a dignity if they be married.
Mr Garroway.] He believes there is no better step
to keep Popery in than without it—"No Bishop, Chancellor, nor any to be capable of those preferments, but
married men" will be so great a tie upon them,
that, in truth, nothing can be greater, and they will
not easily alter.
Col. Birch.] He is not very desirous of that Clause,
but he will take any by the hand that will proffer to
save us from what we fear, Popery.
Sir Winston Churchill.] The title of the Bill is for
securing the Hierarchy, as well as the Protestant Religion. One condition in the Bill makes Bishops forfeit their Bishopricks, if they certify not the Oath into
Chancery—Void ipso facto—All the Bishopricks may
be void, and then he would know who shall make
the Bishops in that case?
Mr Mallet.] In this Bill there are interlineations,
and figures, which is unparliamentary. He is against
the commitment of the Bill—It will blow up the Government, it states an interregnum and an Oligarchy.
'Tis now a Thesis amongst some Churchmen, that the
King is not King but by their magical Unction—He
knows not what the Bill is—No interregnum can be by
Law—It sets up nine Mitres above the Crown—
Sir Thomas Littleton.] There was a large Debate at
the first reading of the Bill. He will observe, now, but
one thing in it. In the primitive times, there was
another way of electing Bishops—viz. By the Diocese; the Clergy and Laity were joined. But that
being found tumultuous, it was laid aside. This Bill
looks not that way, nor would he have it. The objection of a Commonwealth comes in at every turn.
But there was no objection from the Empire of Rome
against it, then at the height. The Lord Chancellor,
Lord Admiral, and Privy Council were formerly, on
emergent occasions, named in Parliament—The Bill
observes no way suitable to former practice. The
Bishops were formerly named by the Pope. This Bill
is utterly dissonant from what has formerly been, in
civil, or ecclesiastical practice. As for this short Test
in the Bill, he does not approve of it. But would
have another, in another Bill, larger, instead of this.
Would commit this Bill, but, withall, would read our
other Bill of Popery.
Mr Vaughan.] Some good end, he believes, transported the Lords beyond all ends, in this Bill, that
they intended to arrive at. Observe the injustice of
it: All Gentlemen that have right of patronage, are not
obliged to take any Test; the King shall not present
without a Test; in this case, the subject doing it
without Test, is in better case than the King. Bishopricks anciently were given per traditionem annuli et
baculi. 1 King John, VI. repealed. If the Test
be unjust, as to the Subject, much more unjust to
the King. It intrenches upon the King's Supremacy—The King is the founder of all English Justice, and therefore the Law entrusts him with promotions. This Bill divides betwixt the Bishops Jurisdiction and the Crown. The King is summum caput
Ecclesiæ; not by 26 Henry VIII, nor 1 Eliz. Those
are but declaratory laws; the King's right is as ancient as Edward the Confessor. The Law calls the
Bishops "immediate dispensers of the King's ecclesiastical authority;" and the King cannot part with it,
because 'tis the best flower of the Prerogative, and
the subjects ought not to stand debtors to any for their
justice, but to their lawful Prince. The King by this
Bill is made capable of error; and if once an offence
be sheltered under error of the King, you may seek
impeachments elsewhere than in the House of Commons. He finds not the great rights amongst the
Bishops, which the Romanists say—If Popery come in,
they and-their books must burn together—'Tis said,
"The King's Children are to be taught the Lord's
Prayer, &c. and the rudiments of Religion;" but as
Parrots, &c. Liberavi animam meam. The Bill is
fatal to the Crown, and so little in it to be retained,
and so much to be rejected, that he would throw it out.
Sir Edward Dering.] The King has parted with
many things of his Prerogative, this Parliament, as
high as this is in the Bill; as in the case of purging
Mr Williams.] The things in the Bill are only in
prospect, upon demise of the King. That Prince that
is popishly inclined will exercise his Prerogative for
all this Bill. The inherent right of making Bishops
is in the Crown. We know who makes Judges, and,
no doubt, but upon any dispute hereafter upon this
Bill, the Judges will give it for the King, and consequently there will be no judging against the King.
Mr Marvell.] He wonders to see this Bill so ready
to be committed, that the consequence may be no
likelihood of the King's consent—But 'tis an ill thing,
and let us be rid of it as soon as we can. He could
have wished it had perished at the first reading rather
than have been revived by a second. He is sorry the
matter has occasioned so much mirth. He thinks
there was never so solemn and sad an occasion, as this
Bill before you; but he is glad the House is returned
into that temper, which the gravity of the matter requires. The Bill seems very unseasonable; the beginning is of two things not of mature consideration.
First, it supposes "the death" of the King—It might
have had a more modest word to have disguised it from
the imagination ("Demise.") Secondly, it supposes
"that possibly the Crown may devolve on a Popish
Government;" which ought not to be supposed easily and readily. God be thanked for the King's age
and constitution of body! The King is not in a declining age; and if we intermeddle in things of this
consequence, we are not to look into it so early, as if
it was the King's last Will and Testament. The Law
makes it Treason, "to imagine the death of the King
that is—" A word more in it—The true and proper sense
is not to imagine the King's death—His age may confirm you in no danger suddenly of the consequences
of the Bill, but as for that of " a Popish Successor," he
hopes 'tis a matter remote in the event, and would not
precipitate that evil, no, not in a supposition. For
some reason, without doubt, this matter has been
thought of in the House of Lords, and next to the
King living, he would cast as little umbrage on the
Successor, as might be. There is none yet in sight,
but whose minds are in the hands of God, who turns
them like the rivers of water. Whilst there is time there
is life, and whilst life, time for information, and the
nearer the prospect is to the Crown, information of
Judgment will be much easier. When God takes him
on high, and shows him the glory of the World, and tells
him, "All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall
down and worship me," he thinks these will be no temptation—Those who change for conscience-sake will have
so much self-denial, that the Crown will not make them
alter the thing—'Tis unseasonable; it may be proper
some other time, but not now. This Bill is a great
invasion on Prerogative—To whom ever God shall
dispose the Kingdom, 'tis entire to the King. He does
not love to reflect on the persons of those who represent the Protestant Religion—(the Bishops.) But 'tis said,
"This Invasion is not made by the Prelates; they were
but passive in it." But he will not speak of such reverend persons, with any thing of severe reflection, but
will only suppose this power of the Bishops given to
any other order of men; to nine Physicians, and
they administer the Test to the King—Having altered
the property of the persons, to speak with a little more
freedom, he knows no body of men, if the Parliament
please, but may do it as well as they. The College
of Physicians have a Charter from the King, and are
his sworn servants; let these come to the King to administer the Oath, 'Tis a pretty experiment, Just a tryal,
whether the Loadstone will attract the Iron, or the
Iron the Loadstone. Who can think that any body
of men, that must depend upon the King, &c? Which
way, think you, it draws? We have seen (and he hopes
we shall never see it again) in Henry VIII's, Edward VI's,
Queen Mary's, and Queen Elizabeth's time, all sorts
ready to turn, one, one way, another, another. 'Tis
appointed by the Bill, "that the Bishops should wait
upon the King at Whitehall, &c." He thinks not
but Physicians, may be thought by a Popish King, as
proper a cure for his Soul, as Bishops. The Chevalier
de Menevicette, Physician to the Great Turk, was by him
made Patriarch of Antioch. He thinks this power not
fit to be lodged in any sort of persons whatsoever. Whatever Prince God gives us, we must trust him. Let
us not, in prevention of future things so remote, take
that immoderate care in this Bill. Sufficient to the day
is the evil thereof. Here is pricking of Bishops, as if
pricking Sheriffs. If the King does not, they must.
'Twas complained of the Stamford Election, "that
the same persons were Agents and Patients"—Here
Bishops make Bishops; (as inherent-a right to the
Crown as any thing possible.) He desires, that, during this King's reign, we may apply ourselves to preserve the people in the Protestant Religion, not only
in the profession of it, but that men may live up to
it, in morality and virtue of Religion, and then you
establish men against the temptation of Popery, and a
Prince that may be popishly affected. If we do not
practise upon ourselves, all these Oaths and Tests are
of no use; they are but Phantoms. The Bill has
a very good title, and a good intention, but nothing
but the title is urged to be of the least validity. This
puts him in mind of a priyate Bill—You would not
countenance the pretence of "no people to make
compact for themselves," 'Tis said, "the Bishops promoted not the Bill, but they were under fear, in the
Lords House (fn. 1) ." Promotions make some men much
better, and 'tis power that makes Popery—So great a
power assembled upon such a body of men! The Bill
he spoke of, pretended, that the Dean and Chapter of
Durhan would have benefit by a ballast shore to be
erected at Yarrow-Sleake, on Newcastle side. Says one,
"it will narrow the river." Says another, "it will
widen it." 'Twas then said, "that Gentlemen love
not to play tricks with Navigation," much less
should the Nation play tricks with Religion. But
whether this Bill will prevent Popery, or not, this will
secure the Promotions of the Bishops; 'twill make them
certain. He is not used to speak here, and therefore
speaks with abruptness. Closes all with his Motion
that the Bill may have the same fate others have moved
for, "not to be committed."
Serjeant Maynard.] Nothing is more desirable than
the end of this Bill, but to the means to attain that
end, he knows not how far he can consent, or whether at all. But he is not for desperate remedies—He
would not have any thing propounded prejudicial to
the Crown. This Bill cannot pass without the King's
consent, and all is a nihil, and signifies nothing without it. That propounded in the Bill, is not for this
King's life, but temporary; and he hopes that no Romish
Patron shall put any into a living—He is glad, though
'tis not in the Bill, that it has been proposed. You
have done it already in a Law, in recusants convict,
and there is no injustice in it. But if any thing in
the Bill can attain your end, he would offer at it.
To use that argument in general, "that the Bill is
against the King's Prerogative," you may shut up
your doors and make no more Laws. Henry III.
Edward I. That of "Estates in tail not forfeitable to
the Crown, &c." Does any thing more touch the Prerogative than calling a Parliament, and how often has
that been done by Law in Parliament? Wardship
was the greatest power of the Prerogative; Heirs to
be in the custody of the King, and the King had the
marriage of the Heir, and the Widow took an Oath
not to marry without the King's consent, or to fine
for it. All this was done, and yet you propounded it
to the King, and he did it. The King is willing to
part with his Prerogative. 36 Henry VIII. The case
of Escheats (Forfeitures) concerning the Government,
and those were altered. Wherein the King's Prerogative is concerned, 'tis his place (as the King's Serjeant) to defend it, but where Religion is concerned,
to prevent alteration. 'Tis not within the King's Prerogative, and when the Bill is committed, he shall
declare himself more freely. He has some difficulties
upon him, but would commit the Bill.
Sir Robert Howard.] The King's Prerogative is an
argument too weak against the Bill. He thinks the
consequences of the Bill dangerous. The Precedents
of Suffragan Bishops, and a Parliament to be held every
three years—If the precedents be good, we may apply them—If the King will not do it, the High Constable shall. Is this a legal Precedent? If you pass this
Bill, in the administration and intention they both
agree, not else. If Precedents be applied, 'tis fair that
this Act be brought to it. If this be Law, and the
Crown must be obliged by it, 'tis as fit to look to
civil as ecclesiastical men—Judges and Bishops shall
do so and so, and the King—You may put it otherwise on the subject, and better, that the King do no
subject's action. What case are the Bishop's like to
be in? He will not suppose the King a Papist, against
that Law already made. Surely they must suppose it.
The Bill was committed (fn. 2) , [127 to 88.]
Wednesday, March 28.
In a Grand Committee, on the explanatory Bill to prevent
stauds and abuses in importing Irish Cattle.
The Speaker.] If once we make it the interest of
particular persons, if once we make a Law, 'tis in
the nature of public faith—Men are come just now
to the benefit of breeding Cattle, in England; will
you gratify and reward a people that would enervate
your Laws? 'Twas not the practice of the Romans
(See the printed paper of fraudulent seizing Irish Cattle when landed in England.) It has not long since been
delivered for doctrine in this House, (by Birch) maliciously enough, "that misery and poverty came in
with the orthodox Clergy." This Irish Act was passed
for national, at the same time that the Act of Conventi
cles passed. And no man believes, but that if the Gentleman (Marvell) spoke irreverently of "the Physicians (fn. 3) ," he would have done the same of "the Bishops"—
He said, "That Persons that bear their proportion of
the charge of the Nation, should have likewise the
benefit by bringing in Irish Cattle, as London, &c."
All persons come and spend their Money here at London; and the next step of requital is to riject all improvements that must come from those, that support
them. Great plenty is suggested. "No," says one,
"Corn produced not the mojety at importation 2s. If not
but 18d. &c. destroy that Trade, and suppress Navigation." The Western Ports have but two famous;
Ilfracomb and Minion—They have converted all to
fishery—Make them great in Navigation and Trade,
and then where is the difference between England and
Ireland? Cattle out of Ireland are sold cheaper than
those bred here. Bought in at 40 s. and sold at
3 l. Lean Cattle here 3l. The cheapest price governs
the market, and by this sraudulent seizure the Act is
totally eluded. Thus much only in short; no man but
would feed, if he can buy in cheaper than he can breed,
and the consequence will be, we shall depend upon
Ireland for Cattle. Ireland affords it you so, because
you neglect your own breed, and then they impose
what price they please; and if Ireland be in danger of
France, we are at that King's courtesy to eat beef.
Col. Birch.] Seymour has honoured him much in
answering his Arguments, as if no other Gentleman's Arguments were worth answering, but his; as
the primitive Christians were lapped, by their persecutors, in Bears and Wolves Skins, to worry them. He
knows what public faith-bills are as well as Seymour,
and these Bills answer public faith-bills, and will be
so paid. (reflecting upon Navy tickets.)
Mr Swynfin.] The Act has not prohibited Wool, but
Beasts, out of Ireland. They send away their Wool
abroad, and there the Trade turns from you. For after
a great rot in England, yet Wool fell in its price.
Sir Henry Ford.] Reason has but a few Proselytes both
within doors, and without, and so you might have
sooner come to a Question. The interest of England is
governed by Parliament. 'Tis the populace that makes
the value of Land. There is no reason for Irish Land
being of low value, but the poverty of the people, and
not the fifth part of Ireland peopled. Little Money
went back into Ireland from France and Holland; and
there they will go. The Peasants eat no beef in France,
nor wear any shoe-leather—Beef is at 2 s. the quarter
in Ireland, and will you take away so beneficial a thing
from your fellow-subjects? This Bill has decreased
the Trade of black Cattle in Ireland, and increased
Sheep, and Wool comes in upon you. The thing is
indifferent to his County, and he will make no Motion in it.
The Speaker.] Devonshire, Ford's County, is 30,000l.
a year worse by Irish Cattle than it was, and Ford is
much mistaken in that County.
Col. Birch.] The greatness of the importation of
Irish Cattle is that which sinks Land—Though Turkey
be more, yet not half the cloth is exported, that was
twenty years ago.
Resolved, That the Laws prohibiting the importation of Irish
Cattle shall be made perpetual. [Which was agreed too by the
House] 145, 128, [and the Bill was ordered to be ingrossed.]
Tuesday, March 29.
Mr Marvell, coming up the House to his place, stumbling
at Sir Philip Harcourt's foot, in recovering himself, seemed to
give Sir Philip a box on the ear. The Speaker acquainting
the House, "that he saw a box on the ear given, and 'twas
his duty to inform the House of it," this Debate ensued (fn. 4) .
Mr Marvell.] What passed was through great acquaintance and familiarity betwixt us. He neither gave
him an affront, nor intended him any. But the
Speaker cast a severe reflection upon him yesterday,
when he was out of the House (fn. 5) , and he hopes, that, as
the Speaker keeps us in Order, he will keep himself
in Order for the future.
Sir John Ernly.] What the Speaker said yesterday,
was in Marvell's vindication. If these two Gentlemen
are friends already, he would not make them friends,
and would let the matter go no farther.
*****.] The Gentleman that had the blow given
him, had once one given him by Lord Clifford, and
had satisfaction given him by the House. Would
have this go for a mistake, but would have it examined;
for he never knew before a blow given in the House
Sir Joh Charlton.] Is sorry a thing of this nature has
happened, and no more sense of it. You in the Chair,
and a stroke struck! Marvell deserves for his reflection
on you, Mr Speaker, to be called in question. You
cannot do right to the House, unless you question it;
and moves to have Marvell sent to the Tower.
The Speaker.] He saw a blow on one side, and a
stroke on the other.
Sir Philip Harcourt.] Marvell had some kind of
a stumble, and mine was only a thrust; and the thing
Sir Henry Goodrick.] The persons have declared the
thing to be accidental, but if done in jest, not fit to
be done here. He believes it an accident, and hopes
the House thinks so too.
Mr Secretary Williamson.] This does appear, that
the action for that time was in some heat. He cannot
excuse Marvell who made a very severe reflection on
the Speaker, and since 'tis so enquired, whether you
have done your duty, he would have Marvell withdraw,
that you may consider of it.
Col. Sandys.] Marvell has given you trouble, and, instead of excusing himself, reflects upon the Speaker:
A strange confidence, if not an impudence!
The Speaker.] He is sorry to think Marvell took
it for a reflection from him. He explained himself to
him, and told him what he said.
Mr Marvell.] Has so great a respect to the Privilege, Order, and decency of the House, that he is
content to be a sacrifice for it. As to the casualty that
happened, he saw a seat empty, and going to sit in it,
his friend put him by, in a jocular manner, and what
he did was of the same nature. So much familiarity
had ever been between them, that there was no heat
in the thing. He is sorry he gave an offence to the
House. He seldom speaks to the House, and if he
commit an error, in the manner of his Speech, being
not so well tuned, he hopes it is not an Offence.
Whether out, or in, the House, he has a respect to
the Speaker. But he has been informed, that the
Speaker resumed something he had said, with reflection—He did not think fit to complain of Mr Seymour
to Mr Speaker—He believes, that is not reflective. He
desires to comport himself with all respect to the House.
This passage with Harcourt was a perfect casualty, and
if you think fit, he will withdraw, and sacrifice himself to the censure of the House.
Sir Henry Capel.] The blow given Harcourt was
with his hat; the Speaker cast his eye upon both of
them, and both respected him. He would not aggravate the thing. Marvell submits, and he would have
you leave the thing as it is.
Sir Robert Holmes.] He saw the whole action. Marvell flung about three or four times with his hat, and
then gave Harcourt a box on the ear.
Sir Henry Capel.] Desires, now that his honour is
concerned, that Holmes may explain, whether he saw
not Marvell with his hat only give Harcourt the stroke
"at that time." Possibly, "at another time" it might
The Speaker.] Both Holmes and Capel are in the
right. But Marvell struck Harcourt so home, that his
fist, as well as his hat, hit him.
Sir Robert Howard.] Hopes the House will not have
Hartourt say, he received a blow, when he has not.
He thinks what has been said by them both sufficient.
Mr Garroway.] Hopes, that, by the Debate, we shall
not make the thing greater than it is. Would have
them both reprimanded for it.
Mr Secretary Williamson.] He submits the honour of
the House to the House—Would have them made
friends, and give that necessary assurance to the House,
and he, for his part, remains satisfied.
Sir Thomas Meres.] By our long sitting together, we
lose, by our familiarity and acquaintance, the decencies
of the House. He has seen five hundred in the House,
and people very orderly; not so much as to read a letter, or set up a foot. One could scarce know any body in the House, but him that spoke. He would have
the Speaker declare that Order ought to be kept; but
as to that Gentleman (Marvell) to rest satisfied.
And so the thing passed over.
Sir John Trevor reports the Address to his Majesty, which is
"We your Majesty's most loyal Subjects, [the Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, in Parliament assembled,] do, with unspeakable joy and comfort, present our humble thanks to your
Majesty, for your Majesty's gracious acceptance of our late Address, and that your Majesty was pleased, in your princely wisdom, to express your concurrence in opinion with your two
Houses, in reference to the preservation of the Spanish Netherlands: And we do, with most earnest and repeated desires, implore your Majesty, that you would be pleased to take timely
care to prevent those dangers that may arise to these Kingdoms,
by the great power of the French King, and the progress he
daily makes in those Netherlands, and other places: And therefore, that your Majesty would not defer the entering into such
Alliances as may attain those ends. And in case it shall happen
that, in pursuance of such Alliances, your Majesty shall be engaged in a War with the French King, we hold ourselves obliged,
and do, with all humility and chearfulness, assure your Majesty, that
your most loyal subjects shall always be ready, upon the signification
[thereof] in Parliament, fully, [and] from time to time, to assist
your Majesty with such Aids and Supplies, as, by the divine assistance,
may enable your Majesty to prosecute the same with success.
"All which we do most humbly offer to your Majesty, as the
unanimous sense and desire of the whole Nation."
Sir John Ernly.] You are already in Alliances defensive, and farther Alliances must be War, and so you
will expose yourselves to depredations of the French at
sea, upon your merchant-ships, and give the French a
million by putting the King upon this Address. He
declares, that the King's entering into farther Alliances is a War.
Mr Secretary Williamson.] The Question is, whether
this addition of "farther Alliances" in this Address be
a repetition, or to make the former Address more effectual? The middle period of your Paper is quite other
matter, which was laid by, and set aside by the House.
"To preserve the Netherlands from the growing power
of France, and to enter into stricter Alliances for that
purpose." He begs leave only to observe that exception for a Question, and to leave it out.
Sir Thomas Meres.] This Address is not good sense
if it has not reference to the former, and the King
cannot but think of the former. We are told, "That
stricter Alliances import War;" but if any thing saves
Flanders, it will be "stricter Alliances;" and he doubts
not but that the Parliament having resolved it, it will
be of weight. He will not say what Alliances the King
should enter into, but doubts not but they will be good
Mr Vaughan.] Is not our men going into France as
much a Declaration of War, as the Motion of sending
Money into Germany? He would agree to the Address.
Mr Powle.] He expects no farther Answer from the
King. The design of the House is to give the King
thanks for what he thinks so. This goes no farther
than the other Address, and extends not the thing at
all. "Not defer to enter into farther Alliances;" that
is, Not delay till opportunity be lost. 'Tis said, "That
this will incense the French King into a present War
with us;" but this only enables the King for a present
War, if there shall be occasion. When the World knows
that the King and his people are together, he is as formidable as any King; and he would agree to the Address.
Mr Secretary Williamson.] He excepted only against
the middle part of the Address, viz. "Not to defer
entering into farther Alliances," making it to prejudice the King in the thing. Youinsist that this is the time.
'Tis to be hoped that you will leave the thing to the King.
He cannot agree with that part—That when, upon the
whole Debate, Peace or War is before you—He would
re-commit the Address, and would have it made suitable
to your Vote.
Sir Robert Howard.] If you cut off that from the
King, you cut off what he has to protect you with. The
Address ought not to be so large as it is now before you.
He would have all things left out of it that are of
present pressure upon the King. You may else put
him upon a denial of your Address, or making some
ill bargain in his Alliances; and how the Confederates
have dealt with one another, you know. Why should
you do more than give the King thanks for his Answer, and tell him that you will assist him? Whether
with discretion, or no, you put the King upon doing
it; and he would have it considered.
Col. Birch.] He was not at the drawing up of this
Address, and therefore 'tis not a brat of his own, to
be fond of it. He takes the Address to be good.
The King said, "He agreed with the opinion of the
House of Commons," and you thank the King for agreeing with your opinion, and you desire him "not to
defer entering into Alliances, &c." It has been said,
"This puts a force upon the King, presently to do it."
But this shows the opinion of the House, and their
zeal in it. "From time to time" we will stand by the
King—He never saw, but when things came on unitedly, it was the likeliest way to be quiet. What has
this great man on the other side of the water done?
The jealousies he has sown between the King and his
people have given him that confidence. 'Tis said,
That ships are not ready; and therefore such a Declaration of the King, as we desire in the Address, is
improper." But he believes that the danger was as much
for want of ships eighteen months since, as now, when
we would have given money for ships, and it was not
accepted—Now, or never, is the time to let the King
of France see, that breaches are made up between the
King and his People.
The Address was agreed to by the House, [the Question for its
being recommitted being carried in the Negative, 131 to 122.]
March 30, and 31, and April 2, and 3, omitted.