Of the parliamentary transactions up to this period, the principal have been noticed in the preceding pages.  I shall add a few others which may be thought worthy the attention of the reader. 1.  It was complained that, since the abolition of the spiritual tribunals, the sins of incest, adultery, and fornication had been multiplied, in consequence of the impunity with which they might be committed; and, at the prayer of the godly, they were made[a] criminal offences, cognizable by the criminal courts, and punishable, the two first with death, the last with three months’ imprisonment.

[Footnote 1:  “We intended,” says Scot, “to have gone off with a good savour, but we stayed to end the Dutch war.  We might have brought them to oneness with us.  Their ambassadors did desire a coalition.  This we might have done in four or five months.  We never bid fairer for being masters of the whole world.”—­Burton’s Diary, iii. 112.]

[Sidenote a:  A.D. 1650.  May 16.]

But it was predicted at the time, and experience verified the prediction, that the severity of the punishment would defeat the purpose of the law. 2.  Scarcely a petition was presented, which did not, among other things, pray for the reformation of the courts of justice; and the house, after several long debates, acquiesced[a] in a measure, understood to be only the forerunner of several others,[b] that the law books should be written, and law proceedings be conducted in the English language.[1] 3.  So enormous were the charges of the commonwealth, arising from incessant war by sea or land, that questions of finance continually engaged the attention of the house.  There were four principal sources of revenue; the customs, the excise, the sale of fee-farm rents,[2] of the lands of the crown, and of those belonging to the bishops, deans, and chapters, and the sequestration and forfeiture of the estates of papists and delinquents.  The ordinances for the latter had been passed as early as the year 1643, and in the course of the seven succeeding years, the harvest had been reaped and gathered.  Still some gleanings might remain; and in 1650, an act was passed[c] for the better ordering and managing such estates; the former compositions were subjected to examination; defects and concealments were detected; and proportionate fines were in numerous cases exacted.  In 1651, seventy individuals, most of them of high rank, all of opulent fortunes, who had imprudently displayed their attachment to the royal cause, were condemned[d] to forfeit their property,

[Footnote 1:  Journals, May 10, Nov. 22.  Whitelock, 478-483.]

[Footnote 2:  The clear annual income from the fee-farm rents amounted to seventy-seven thousand pounds.  In Jan. 1651, twenty-five thousand three hundred pounds of this income had been sold for two hundred and twenty-five thousand six hundred and fifty pounds.—­Journals, Jan. 8.]

[Sidenote a:  A.D. 1650.  Nov. 8.] [Sidenote b:  A.D. 1650.  Nov. 22.] [Sidenote c:  A.D. 1651.  Jan. 22.] [Sidenote d:  A.D. 1651.  July 16.]