well on account of his engagement with France, as
from his own disposition, was determined to take no
step that might indicate an intention of governing
by parliaments, or a consciousness of his being dependent
upon them for his revenue, he adopted, therefore,
the advice of Jeffreys, advice not resulting so much,
probably, either from ignorance or violence of disposition,
as from his knowledge that it would be most agreeable
to his master, and directed the duties to be paid
as in the former reign. It was pretended, that
an interruption in levying some of the duties might
be hurtful to trade; but as every difficulty of that
kind was obviated by the expedients proposed, this
arbitrary and violent measure can with no colour be
ascribed to a regard to public convenience, nor to
any other motive than to a desire of reviving Charles
I.’s claims to the power of taxation, and of
furnishing a most intelligible comment upon his speech
to the council on the day of his accession.
It became evident what the king’s notions were,
with respect to that regal prerogative from which he
professed himself determined never to depart, and
to that property which he would never invade.
What were the remaining rights and liberties of the
nation, which he was to preserve, might be more difficult
to discover; but that the laws of England, in the
royal interpretation of them, were sufficient to make
the king as great a monarch as he, or, indeed, any
prince could desire, was a point that could not be
disputed. This violation of law was in itself
most flagrant; it was applied to a point well understood,
and thought to have been so completely settled by
repeated and most explicit declarations of the legislature,
that it must have been doubtful whether even the most
corrupt judges, if the question had been tried, would
have had the audacity to decide it against the subject.
But no resistance was made; nor did the example of
Hampden, which a half century before had been so successful,
and rendered that patriot’s name so illustrious,
tempt any one to emulate his fame, so completely had
the crafty and sanguinary measures of the late reign
attained the object to which they were directed, and
rendered all men either afraid or unwilling to exert
themselves in the cause of liberty.
On the other hand, addresses the most servile were
daily sent to the throne. That of the University
of Oxford stated that the religion which they professed
bound them to unconditional obedience to their sovereign
without restrictions or limitations; and the Society
of Barristers and Students of the Middle Temple thanked
his majesty for the attention he had shown to the
trade of the kingdom, concerning which, and its balance
(and upon this last article they laid particular stress),
they seemed to think themselves peculiarly called
upon to deliver their opinion. But whatever might
be their knowledge in matters of trade, it was at
least equal to that which these addressers showed
in the laws and constitution of their country, since
they boldly affirmed the king’s right to levy
the duties, and declared that it had never been disputed
but by persons engaged, in what they were pleased
to call rebellion against his royal father.
The address concluded with a sort of prayer that all
his majesty’s subjects might be as good lawyers
as themselves, and disposed to acknowledge the royal
prerogative in all its extent.