prominent a part. We fhall fhortly be able as to in its pro racy the fame writer had before defcribed its commencement, has already been feen.* Of the fimilar spirit in which its progress had also been narrated, the reader who has here had all its details before him will be able to judge, when he is further informed, ftill on Lord incidents Clarendon's authority,† that "the debate held many hours, in which the framers and con"trivers of the Declaration faid very little, << nor answered any reafons that were alleged "to the contrary: the only end of paffing it, "which was to incline the people to fedition, grefs. being a reafon not to be given but ftill "called for the queftion, prefuming their number, if not their reafon, would serve to carry it; and after two of the clock in the morning (for fo long the debate continued, "if that can be called a debate where those "only of one opinion argued), when many had gone home, &c. &c." It may be doubted A tiffue if hiftory contains fuch another inftance of of mifflagrant and deliberate falfification of the truth, ments. committed by one to whom the truth was perfonally known. ftate Nor unworthy to rank befide it are the fentences firft quoted, defcriptive of what followed as to his own and Palmer's proteftation when the Remonftrance had paffed. It was Real not Hampden who moved the order for the mover of printing. printing, but Mr. Peard, the member for See ante, p. 214. + Hift. ii. 594-5. It is fomewhat ftrange that this particular misstatement fhould have been made by Clarendon, whofe habit it is to Mr.Peard. Barnstaple, a lawyer of the Middle Temple in good repute in his profeffion, and who had fat in the laft as well as the present parliament. It was not then announced for the reprefent Hampden as invariably, on fuch occafions, reserving himself in the background and putting others in the front. I am bound to add that Clarendon feems to have fhared with others this habit, which I once thought peculiar to himself. Hyde and For, as it is one of the objects of this Work to show how enHampden.tirely untrustworthy is his authority for any statement adverse D'Ewes on Hamp. den. Art of making ufe of others: open to mifjudg ment. to the leaders against Charles I, it is the more necessary not to omit any inftance in which such statements made by him find unexpected fupport. Thus, in an entry of D'Ewes's Journal relating to the debate of "the Bill of Epifcopacy," on the 10th June, 1641, after mentioning that the bill was moved by Sir Robert Harley, the member for Herefordshire, Sir Simonds adds: "Mr. Pym, Mr. Hampden, and others, with "Mr. Stephen Marshall, parfon of Finchingfield in the county "of Effex, and fome others, had met yefternight and appointed "that this bill should be proceeded withal this morning, and "the faid Sir Robert Harley moved it first in the House: for "Mr. Hampden, out of his ferpentine fubtlety, did still put "others to move those bufineffes that he contrived." It is impoffible not to compare this with what Clarendon fays (Hift. iv. 93) of Hampden's moderation during the first year of the Long Parliament, "that wife and difpaffioned men "plainly difcerned that that moderation proceeded from pru"dence, and observation that the feason was not ripe, rather "than that he approved of the moderation; and that he begat many opinions and notions, the education whereof he "committed to other men, so far difguifing his own designs, "that he feemed feldom to with more than was concluded." The reader will at the fame time not too hastily conclude, that, even affuming the feeling reflected in thefe paffages to have been entertained by members on both fides of the House, it is neceffarily the true one. Hampden's was a character, more than most men's, open to mifconception. He was peculiarly self-reliant and self-contained, and in a remarkable degree he had the faculty of filence. Until the time arrived for fpeaking, he had never the leaft difpofition to utter what lay within the depths of his breaft-alta mente repôftum. On no man of this great period is fo unmistakeably impressed the qualities which fet apart the high-bred English gentleman, calm, courteous, reticent, felf-poffeffed; yet with a perfuafive force fo irrefiftible, and a will and energy fo indomitable, lying in those filent depths, that all who came within their reach came alfo under their control. Clarendon, though he still 66 pro first time, but had fubftantially been confeffed all through the debate, that the Declaration was meant as an appeal to the people. And True fo far from the defire to "proteft" having object of arisen naturally and fuddenly out of that an- tefters." nouncement, we have feen, by the irrefragable evidence unconsciously afforded in Secretary Nicholas's letter to the King, that the protest had been concerted as a party move, and made known to the King's fervants before the Declaration was voted. The intention was obvious. It was meant to divide, and To divide by that means deftroy, the authority of the and House of Commons. It was a plan delibe- authority rately devised to exhibit, before the face of House. of the country, the Minority as in open conflict against the Majority, and as poffeffed of rights to be exercised independently. The destroy imparts his own colour to the feeling, gives it fairer expreffion in the paffages where he speaks of his poffeffing "that feeming "humility and fubmiffion of judgment as if he brought no Claren"opinion of his own with him, but a defire of information and don: Hift. "inftruction; yet had so subtle a way of interrogating, and, iv. 92. "under the notion of doubts, infinuating his objections, that "he left his opinions with thofe from whom he pretended to "learn and receive them." And again he says: "He was "not a man of many words, and rarely begun the discourse, "or made the first entrance upon any business that was "affumed; but a very weighty fpeaker, and after he had "heard a full debate, and obferved how the House was like to be inclined, took up the argument, and shortly, and "clearly, and craftily, fo ftated it, that he commonly con"ducted it to the conclufion he defired; and if he found he A go"could not do that, he was never without the dexterity to vernor of "divert the debate to another time, and to prevent the deter"mining anything in the negative which might prove incon"venient in the future." Hift. i. 323-4. Here we have again the craft and the fubtlety, but it is lefs "ferpentine." I have enlarged upon this theme in my Arrest of the Five Members, § xvii. 66 Y men. Why fo refifted. balance would be thus redreffed; and the refolutely King's party, outvoted in the House, would yet be a recognised power without its walls, and would carry thenceforward a share of its authority. Happily, the leaders faw the intention, and on the inftant met and defeated it. The right to proteft, they faid, never had been, and never could be, admitted there. The House of Commons was indivifible. acted with one will, and one power; and it exercised rights with which individual claims Exiftence were incompatible. Its authority derived from of House the people, its privilege to addrefs them, its power to tax them, refted upon a foundation that would at once be undermined and overthrown by what Hyde and his friends had asked for. involved. Unex It To ufe merely the language of Clarendon in giving account of what followed thereupon, and fimply to fay that many members rofe to fpeak without diftinction and in fome diforder, fo that there was after scarce any ampled quiet and regular debate, were to offer a faint verfion indeed of the truth. Never had those walls witneffed fuch a scene as now, from the report of eye-witneffes lefs prejudiced and partial, waits to be described. fcene. Remonftrance § XVIII. VALLEY OF THE SHADOW OF DEATH. HARDLY had announcement been made of the divifion which carried the Remonftrance carried by by a majority of eleven votes, when one more ftrenuous effort was made to have it addressed 159 to 148. to the King. This was fuccefsfully refifted; Denzil Hollis expreffing his intention to move, Poft, 343. on another occafion, that it should be referred to a committee to give effect to the modified fuggeftion already thrown out by Pym. Mr. Peard then moved that the Declaration might Peard be printed, which was oppofed with the greateft moves printing. warmth and vehemence by Hyde and Culpeper; Hyde again giving utterance to the extraordinary opinion he had ventured to exprefs in the debate, that the House of Commons had no Hyde. right to print without the Lords' concurrence. opposes. Wherefore, he added, if the motion were perfifted in, he should ask the leave of the House to have liberty to enter his protest. Culpeper's speech in the fame ftrain, replying to the determined objection made upon this, firft Confused very calmly by Pym, and then more excitedly debate. by Denzil Hollis, carried the excitement still higher; and in the midst of it were now heard feveral voices, and among them very confpicuously that of Palmer, crying out that they alfo protested. Some one then rofe, and moved that the names of the protesters might Members be taken; but this, being declared against the protesting. forms and orders, was not at the moment preffed. "So," according to D'Ewes's account, derived from Sir Chriftopher Yelverton, “this "matter was understood to be laid afide until "a further time of debate, when everybody "thought the bufinefs had been agreed upon, "and that the Houfe fhould have rifen, it "being about one of the clock of the morning Palmer "enfuing, when Mr. Geoffrey Palmer, a moves to lawyer of the Middle Temple, ftood up." names take down |