It would be hardly possible to conceive a more direct progress to despotism, than that which these articles describe. The discretion given by the law seems to have been grossly abused for the purpose of punishing those who were obnoxious to the court. The recollection of the

evils here enumerated, and the care of our ancestors to close this avenue to arbitrary power, may be traced in the provisions of the Bill of Rights. It may also be remarked, that the characters which have been handed down to us of the judges of this reign, amply justify the fears that were entertained of their influence. "Lest the means of destroying the best Protestants in England should fail," says Algernon Sydney, in the speech which he left behind him, "the Bench was filled with such as had been blemishes to the Bar." Scroggs, Saunders, and Jeffries, unworthy of the name of judges, were the fit tools of a King above the law. Intemperate and scandalous in their private conduct, savage

missing the grand jury in an irregular manner, and thereby disappointing that bold measure of Shaftesbury and his friends. For this crime, the Commons sent up an impeachment against him, as also against Jones and Weston, two of the judges, who, in some speeches from the Bench, had gone so far as to give the first reformers the appellation of fanatics." Vol. viii. p. 145. It must be allowed, that this is either a careless or an unfair representation.

and merciless in the exercise of their public functions, they were fawning to their Sovereign, indulgent to themselves, insolent and overbear ing to the prisoners who obtained at their Bar the appearance of a trial. *

North and Pemberton were more respectable; but the one was prejudiced, and the other unprincipled.

The impeachment ordered by the Commons. could not be brought to a trial before the dissolution of parliament; but Scroggs was soon after removed from the Bench. His disgrace seems to confirm the truth of the charges against him. It is gratifying to find, that, even in the worst times, public opinion may reach those who debase themselves so far as to abuse the sacred name of justice, and, instead of being the organ of the laws, speak from the Bench the language of the Court.

The Commons now passed a vote, in consequence of the general cry against corruption, that no member should accept of any office, or place of profit from the Crown, without leave of the House. t

* If any one thinks this character too severe, let him look at the portraits of these men by North. See Appendix. †There had been great talk of certain conditions to bę offered to the King. Lord Russell was to be Governor of Portsmouth; Colonel Titus, Secretary of State; Sir Wil

A message from the Lords désired their concurrence to a vote, declaring the existence of a Popish plot in Ireland. In agreeing to this vote, the Commons added another, that the Duke of York's being a Papist, had given great encouragement to this plot, as well as that in England.

The last address of the Commons, insisting on the Exclusion Bill, had created great division in the King's council. Sir William Temple thought that, as there existed a difference between the two Houses on the subject, the King might, with decency, excuse himself from giving any positive answer. But those ministers, who had been branded in the votes of the Commons, thought there now remained no safety for them, but in a total disuse of parliaments. In order to widen the breach, therefore, they drew up an answer, in which the King told the Commons, that he was confirmed in his opinion against the Exclusion Bill, by the judgment of the Lords. Sir William Temple, who neither

liam Jones, Chief Justice; Lord Shaftesbury was to be Lord Treasurer; but he, when he heard of it, fell into a great passion, that he should be thought capable of sacrificing the public good to his private interest, The report of this project caused the self-denying vote mentioned in the text. Such is the account given in James's Life, for the accuracy of which I will not vouch.

agreed to the spirit, nor prepared the form of this address, was prevailed upon by the King to deliver it. When he appeared at the Bar of the House, Sir William Jones, who had conceived an affection for him, told him, that for himself, he was old and infirm, and did not expect to live long; "but you," he added, " he added, "will, "in all probability, live to see the whole king"dom lament the consequences of the message "you have now brought us from the King."

The manner in which this message was received, shows that the House of Commons were resolved to go all lengths, rather than recede from their favourite measure. Mr. Booth said, that as no expedients in lieu of the Exclusion Bill had been proposed, after two years' consideration, and the endeavour of two successive Parliaments, it was plain that nothing plausible could be offered. He, therefore, proposed resolutions, declaring, that without that Bill, neither the King, nor the Protestant religion, could be safe; that without it, no money could be given; that lending money by way of advance upon the King's revenue, should be prevented; and that, as some of the King's advisers had been said to have advised a dissolution of parliament, they should be censured. The motion was seconded by

as the only security; and branding those who had hindered it passing."

This motion brought on a debate upon ex-. pedients. A proposal of Sir J. Markham, that the Crown should be settled on the Prince of Orange, jointly with the Duke, was laughed at by the House. Sir L. Jenkins, and Mr. D. Finch, were the only other members who argued in favour of expedients. They were opposed by all the men of ability in the House, and particularly by Colonel Titus; who said, that to accept of expedients, after such a King had mounted the throne, would be as strange as if there were a lion in the lobby, and they should vote to secure themselves by letting him in, and chaining him, instead of keeping him out.

The resolutions passed were the same in substance as those moved by Mr. Booth. By one of these, the House voted an address to the King, to remove the Marquis of Worcester, the Earl of Clarendon, the Earl of Feversham, Mr. L. Hyde, and Mr. Seymour, from his presence and councils for ever: by another they declared, that till the Exclusion Bill were passed, they could not grant the King any manner of supply: by two other resolutions, they voted that those who should lend money to the Crown upon the customs, excise, or hearth