they were permitted to enjoy, depended solely on the royal grace." Agreeably to these sentiments, he exercised a despotic, and indeed tyrannous, power over that parliament. "With one voice the commons voted a grant of six subsidies, four for paying the debts of the establishment, and two for buying rents and pensions; not that the uses were determined by a formal appropriation: they entrusted the management of their supply solely to the deputy, requesting only by petition, that it might be appropriated to these purposes." Such were the proceedings alluded to, as a proper precedent for the commons, in 1640, to have followed in the manner of rating their supplies. But these commons thought very differently of that precedent; for lord Wentworth, now earl of Strafford, having been recalled into England, and having left directions with his deputy, Wandesford," his lordship's friend and ally," to issue the same instructions, for settling the rates of taxation, with regard to the present subsidies, as had been formerly issued concerning those granted by parliament, in 1634 (which was accordingly done), the commons thought fit to make use of the liberty, which they now were possessed of by his absence; and knowing that the former grants were "exorbitant and oppressive," ventured to alter the mode of assessing three of these subsidies; declaring, at the same time, "that in consideration of his majesty's many and pressing occasions, the first of the four subsidies should be levied according to the instructions issued by the deputy and council; not in deference to these instructions, but merely by their own authority and direction; and that neither these instructions, nor what was done in the late parliament (1634), with respect to the subsidies then raised, should be a guide or precedent, in levying the three other subsidies, which they ordered to be raised in a moderate, equal and parliamentary way. They likewise ordered," as the second subsidy was not payable till December, and as it might conduce to his majesty's service, to hasten the payment of the third also, that both should be paid together, on the first of December 1640; six months earlier than the third subsidy had been made payable by the original grant." 3 Lel. Hist. of Ireland, vol. ii. 4 Id. ib. 7 Ib. 5 Id. ib. This particular care to hasten the payment of the first and third subsidies indicated, one would imagine, in these commons, some attention to his majesty's service. But his majesty, it seems, was persuaded to think otherwise; for we are told, that he looked upon this proceeding to be so ridiculous and insolent, that he ordered,s" with a peevish impatience,” the leaf in which this resolution was inserted, to be torn from their journals; which order was accordingly executed by the deputy, on the 19th of November 1640." But the king was soon after brought to a right way of thinking, concerning this particular. For on the 4th of January following, he wrote to the Irish council, (and ordered his letter to be publicly read in the house), " that having,' by a committee of the commons of Ireland, received satisfaction, both in their loyalty and affection unto him, and also in those matters which induced him to require his deputy to vacate an order made, concerning the levying of the subsidies granted in the same parliament; he was then graciously pleased, and did thereby authorize and require them, to cause the inclosed (the vacated order) to be again inserted and registered in the same place, to continue and be of equal force, as if the original had remained there." From hence it appears, that these commons were actuated by two very just and patriotic motives, viz. Opposition to a measure confessedly" exorbitant and oppressive," and a lau dable desire, to recover their ancient constitutional right of rating their own grants, which had been violently taken from them in the preceding parliament. But how it could possibly be inferred from such conduct, that they intended to annul and rescind their late money bill, or that they were united in a regular and determined scheme of opposition, for any disloyal or unconstitutional purpose, is, I think, very hard to be conceived. CHAP. VIII. The Irish commons encomium on the earl of Strafford's administration considered. FOR the expedition against the Scottish rebels, lord Strafford had raised an army in Ireland, consisting of about nine thousand men; eight thousand of which number were Irish catholics. For his lordship knew, and did attest, that in the support or defence of his majesty's crown and dignity,' "the Irish were as ready to venture their persons, as they were to open their purses." "Sir William St. Leger, serjeant-major-general of the army, having reviewed these troops at Carrickfergus, saw such willingness and aptness in them to learn their exercises, and that mettle and gallant appearance, which would recommend them to be chosen for a service where a crown lay at stake, made no scruple to pronounce, that considering how newly they had been raised, no prince in the christian world had, for their number, a better and more orderly body of men in his service."* Lord Strafford was extremely desirous to have the chief command of this army; but he was conscious, at the same time, that he was represented in England as a person odious to the people of whom it was chiefly composed; in short, " as a vizier,3 bashaw, or any thing else that might be worse; and as one hateful both to God and man," In order to remove that obstacle, he labored privately to persuade the king,+ ‚4❝ that the Irish did not distaste him so much as willingly to change him; or to desire any new deputy in his stead; and, that if it were left to their choice, they would not have any other general but himself." But his lordship found means to procure a much more persuasive testimony, than his own for this purpose; even a public and solemn attestation in his favor, from that house of com 2 Carte's Ormond, vol. i. fol. 99. 1 Straff. State Letters, vol. ii. "The raising, cloathing, paying and providing this army, by the latter end of September 1640, when it was dispersed, cost 204,057.”— Carte's Orm. vol. i. fol. 105. mons, which he had so often insulted and abused. For, in the preamble of the act of subsidies lately passed, we find the commons, returning thanks to his majesty, for having placed over them, so wise, just, and vigilant a governor; extolling his lordship's sincere and upright administration of justice, without partiality; his having increased his majesty's revenue, without the least hurt or grievance to any of his majesty's loving subjects; and his care to relieve and redress the poor and oppressed." "There could not be," says Mr. Carte," " an higher, and there has seldom been a juster eulogium given of a governor and of his upright and impartial administration by any body of men, than was given of this lord lieutenant, and his administration, by this house of commons; it was given nemine contradicente, and passed with loud and general acclamations of applause." Thus we see, that although this honorable testimony had not then the wished for success in saving his lordship's person from the rage of his enemies, yet it has been since more effec tually made use of by historians, to rescue his memory from that infamy, which his administration of Ireland particularly, has brought upon it. But Mr. Carte has very imperfectly related another passage recorded in the same journals of the commons, from whence he took this eulogium, viz. The solemn protestation of these commons against it, (in which they were joined by the lords) to this effect; that the "aforesaid, preamble to the act of subsidies," was contrived, penned, and inserted fraudulently, (without the privity of the house,) either by the earl of Strafford himself, or by some other person or persons, advisers, procurors or actors of, or in the manifold and general grievances and oppressions of his majesty's kingdom of Ireland, by the direction and privity of the said earl, on purpose to prevent and anticipate the just and universal complaints of his majesty's faithful, dutiful and loving subjects against him." And they required their committee, then attending his majesty, "to present unto him that their protestation and proofs thereof; and likewise to present unto his majesty, their humble request, that an act might be passed in that parliament for revoking, vacating, and taking from the records 6 Orm, vel. i. 5 Com. Jour, vol. i. 7 Com. Jour. Jm Duggan's Book of parliament, the before-recited part of the preamble concerning the earl of Strafford." The reason they assigned in that protestation, for having suffered this part of the preamble to pass, when it was first communicated to them, was, "that before such time as that act (having been formerly transmitted to England, and returned from thence) was read, or known in the house, the said earl of Strafford did declare and signify to both houses of parliament, his majesty's urgent and great occasions; and the near and approaching danger, that Ireland was suddenly to be invaded by the Scots; and thereupon, and not before, the said act was read, and made known in the house of commons; and that their natural and fervent zeal and devotion to his majesty's service, and the fears of the said declared eminent danger, and the inconveniencies which they suspected might ensue, if they then had excepted against the said part of the preamble, concerning the earl of Strafford, and had expected a new transmission, as a statute of force in this realm, doth require, did occasion and enforce, their not then speaking, or protesting against the said part of the preamble." CHAP. IX. Complaints of grievances. THE before-mentioned committee of parliament, attending the king in England, had presented a remonstrance of grievances which the commons had voted," of their own know.. ledge to be so clear and manifest, that no place was left for denial of proof." These grievances were great and numerous. Part of those recited in their journals, are the scandalous extortions of the ecclesiastical courts,* for old popish rites and The dissenters of Ulster in their petition to the English house of commons in 1640, did not fail to take notice of these abuses. "The prelates," say they," and their faction, as they inherit the superstition of the papacy, so of late they exact, with all severity, the obsolete customs of St. Mary's-gallons, mortuaries, &c. which, as they were given by supersti tion, and used to idolatry, so now they are taken by oppression, and ap plied to riotousness.—Pryn's Antipathy to Bishops, part ii. p. 375, |