and shaking many of the foundations of law, religion, and public security."-- _Parliamentary History_, xvii., 391.] [Footnote 30: The import duty on wheat was fixed at 6_d_.

a quarter on grain, and 2_d_.

per cwt.

on flour, when the price of wheat in the kingdom should be at or above 48s.; when it was at or above 44s., the exportation was to be altogether prohibited .-- _Parliamentary History_, xvii., 476.] [Footnote 31: See Hallam, "Constitutional History," iii., 38-46, ed.
1833, where, as far as the imperfection of our early Parliamentary records allows, he traces the origin of the assertion of this peculiar privilege by the Commons, especially referring to a discussion of the proper limits of this privilege in several conferences between the two Houses; where, as on some other occasions, he sees, in the assertion of their alleged rights by the Commons, "more disposition to make encroachments than to guard against those of others." A few years before (in 1763), the House of Lords showed that they had no doubt of their right to reject a money-bill, since they divided on the Cider Bill, which came under that description.

As, however, the bill was passed, that division was not brought under the notice of the House.