So many persons of character and distinction had been imprisoned during this reign upon the slightest suspicion, that the discontented part of the nation had some reason to insinuate they had only exchanged one tyrant for another. They affirmed that the habeas-corpus act was either insufficient to protect the subject from false imprisonment, or had been shamefully misused. They expatiated upon the loss of ships, which had lately fallen a prey to the enemy; the consumption of seamen; the neglect of the fisheries; the interruption of commerce, in which the nation was supplanted by her allies, as well as invaded by her enemies; the low ebb of the kingdom’s treasure, exhausted in hiring foreign bottoms, and paying foreign troops to fight foreign quarrels; and the slaughter of the best and bravest of their countrymen, whose blood had been lavishly spilt in support of connexions with which they ought to have had no concern. They demonstrated the mischiefs that necessarily arose from the unsettled state of the nation. They observed that the government could not be duly established until a solemn declaration should confirm the legality of that tenure by which their majesties possessed the throne; that the structure of parliaments was deficient in point of solidity, as they existed entirely at the pleasure of the crown, which would use them no longer than they should be found necessary in raising supplies for the use of the government. They exclaimed against the practice of quartering soldiers in private houses contrary to the ancient laws of the land, the petition of rights, and the subsequent act on that subject passed in the reign of the second Charles. They enumerated among their grievances the violation of property, by pressing transport ships into the service without settling any fund of payment for the owners; the condition of the militia, which was equally burdensome and useless; the flagrant partiality in favour of allies, who carried on an open commerce with France, and supplied the enemy with necessaries, while the English laboured under the severest prohibitions, and were in effect the dupes of those very powers whom they protected. They dwelt upon the ministry’s want of conduct, foresight, and intelligence, and inveighed against their ignorance, insolence, and neglect, which were as pernicious to the nation as if they had formed a design of reducing it to the lowest ebb of disgrace and destruction. By this time, indeed, public virtue was become the object of ridicule, and the whole kingdom was overspread with immorality and corruption; towards the increase of which many concurring circumstances happened to contribute. The people were divided into three parties, namely, the Williamites, the Jacobites, and the discontented Revolutioners; these factions took all opportunities to thwart, to expose, and to ridicule the measures and principles of each other, so that patriotism was laughed out of doors as an hypocritical pretence. This contention established a belief that every man consulted his own private interest at the expense of the public, a belief that soon grew into a maxim almost universally adopted. The practice of bribing a majority in parliament had a pernicious influence upon the morals of all ranks of people, from the candidate to the lowest borough elector. The expedient of establishing funds of credit for raising supplies to defray the expenses of government, threw large premiums and sums of money into the hands of low sordid usurers, brokers, and jobbers, who distinguished themselves by the name of the monied interest. Intoxicated by this flow of wealth, they affected to rival the luxury and magnificence of their superiors; but being destitute of sentiment and taste to conduct them in their new career, they ran into the most absurd and illiberal extravagancies. They laid aside all decorum; became lewd, insolent, intemperate, and riotous. Their example was caught by the vulgar. All principle, and even decency, was gradually banished; talent lay uncultivated, and the land was deluged with a tide of ignorance and profligacy.
DISSENSION BETWEEN THE QUEEN AND PRINCESS ANNE.
King William having ascertained the winter quarters of the army, and concerted the operations of the ensuing campaign with the states-general and the ministers of the allies, set sail for England on the fifteenth day of October; on the eighteenth landed at Yarmouth, was met by the queen at Newhall, and passed through the city of London to Kensington amidst the acclamations of the populace. He received a congratulatory address from the lord-mayor and aldermen, with whom he dined in public by invitation. A day of thanksgiving was appointed for the victory obtained at sea. The lustring company was established by patent, and the parliament met on the fourth day of November. The house of lords was deeply infected with discontent, which in some measure proceeded from the dissension between the queen and her sister, the princess of Denmark, which last underwent every mortification which the court could inflict. Her guards were taken away; all honours which had been paid to her rank by the magistrates of Bath, where she sometimes resided, and even by the ministers of the church where she attended at divine service, were discontinued by the express order of his majesty. Her cause was naturally espoused by those noblemen who had adhered to her in her former contest with the king about an independent settlement; and these were now reinforced by all the friends of the earl of Marlborough, united for a double tie; for they resented the disgrace and confinement of that lord, and thought it their duty to support the princess Anne under a persecution incurred by an attachment to his countess. The earl of Shrewsbury lived in friendship with Marlborough, and thought he had been ungratefully treated by the king; the marquis of Halifax befriended him from opposition to the ministry; the earl of Mulgrave for an opportunity to display his talents, and acquire that consideration which he thought due to his merit. Devonshire, Montague, and Bradford, joined in the same cause from principle; the same pretence was used by the earls of Stamford, Monmouth, Warrington, and other whigs, though in effect they were actuated by jealousy and resentment against those by whom they had been supplanted. As for the Jacobites, they gladly contributed their assistance to promote any scheme that had a tendency to embroil the administration.
THE LORDS VINDICATE THEIR PRIVILEGES.
The king, in his speech to parliament, thanked them for their last supplies, congratulated them upon the victory obtained at sea, condoled them on the bad success of the campaign by land, magnified the power of France, represented the necessity of maintaining a great force to oppose it, and demanded subsidies equal to the occasion. He expressed his reluctance to load them with additional burdens, which he said could not be avoided, without exposing his kingdom to inevitable destruction. He desired their advice towards lessening the inconveniences of exporting money for the payment of the forces. He intimated a design of making a descent upon France; declared he had no aim but to make his subjects a happy people; and that he would again cheerfully expose his life for the welfare of the nation. The lords, after an adjournment of three days, began with great warmth to assert their privileges, which they conceived had been violated in the cases of the earl of Marlborough and the other noblemen who had been apprehended, committed to prison, and afterwards admitted to bail by the court of king’s-bench. These circumstances being fully discussed in a violent debate, the house ordered lord Lucas, constable of the Tower, to produce the warrants of commitment, and the clerk of the king’s-bench to deliver the affidavit of Aaron Smith, the court solicitor, upon which the lords had been remanded to prison. At the same time the whole affair was referred to a committee, empowered to send for persons, papers, and records. The judges were ordered to attend: Aaron Smith was examined touching the evidence against the committed lords. The committee reported their general resolution, which produced a vehement dispute. The opinion of the judges was unsatisfactory to both parties; the debate was referred to a committee of the whole house, in which it was resolved and declared, as the sense of that assembly, that in pursuance of the habeas-corpus act, it was the duty of the judges and gaol-delivery to discharge the prisoner on bail if committed for high treason, unless it be made appear, upon oath, that there are two witnesses against the said prisoner, who cannot be produced in that term, session, or general gaol-delivery. They likewise resolved it was the intention of the said statute, that in case there should be more than one prisoner to be bailed or remanded, there must be oath made that there are two witnesses against each prisoner, otherwise he cannot be remanded to prison. These resolutions were entered in the books as standing directions to all future-judges, yet not without great opposition from the court members. The next debate turned upon the manner in which the imprisoned lords should be set at liberty. The contest became so warm that the courtiers began to be afraid, and proposed an expedient which was put in practice. The house adjourned to the seventeenth day of the month, and at its next meeting was given to understand that the king had discharged the imprisoned noblemen. After another warm debate, a formal entry was made in the journals, importing, That the house being informed of his majesty’s having given directions for discharging the lords under bail in the king’s-bench, the debate about that matter ceased. The resentment of the peers being thus allayed, they proceeded to take his majesty’s speech into consideration.
THE COMMONS PRESENT ADDRESSES TO THE KING AND QUEEN.
The commons having voted an address of thanks, and another, praying that his majesty’s foreign alliances should be laid before them, determined on a bill for regulating trials in cases of high treason. They passed a vote of thanks to admiral Russel, his officers and seamen, for the victory they had obtained, and then proceeded to an inquiry, Why that victory had not been pursued? why the descent had not been made? and why the trade had not been better protected from the enemy’s cruisers? The admiral having justified his own conduct, they commanded the lords of the admiralty to produce copies of all the letters and orders which had been sent to the admiral; they ordered Russel to lay before them his answers; and the commissioners of the transports, victuallers, and office of ordnance, to deliver in an account of their proceedings. They then presented addresses to the king and queen, acknowledging the favour of God in restoring him to his people; congratulating him upon his deliverance from the snares of his open and secret enemies; and assuring him they would, according to his majesty’s desire in his most gracious speech, be always ready to advise and assist him in the support of his government. The queen was thanked for her gracious and prudent administration during his majesty’s absence; they congratulated her on their signal deliverance from a bold and cruel design formed for their destruction, as well as on the glorious victory which her fleet had gained; and they assured her that the grateful sense they had of their happiness under her government, should always be manifested in constant returns of duty and obedience.