401 ([return])
[ Commons' Journals, Aug. 2. 1689; Dutch Ambassadors Extraordinary to the States General, July 30/Aug 9]
402 ([return])
[ Lords' Journals, July 30. 1689; Narcissus Luttrell's Diary; Clarendon's Diary, July 31. 1689.]
403 ([return])
[ See the Commons' Journals of July 31. and August 13 1689.]
404 ([return])
[ Commons' Journals, Aug. 20]
405 ([return])
[ Oldmixon accuses the Jacobites, Barnet the republicans. Though Barnet took a prominent part in the discussion of this question, his account of what passed is grossly inaccurate. He says that the clause was warmly debated in the Commons, and that Hampden spoke strongly for it. But we learn from the journals (June 19 1689) that it was rejected nemine contradicente. The Dutch Ambassadors describe it as "een propositie 'twelck geen ingressie schynt te sullen vinden.">[