[The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol.II. by Tobias Smollett]@TWC D-Link book
The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol.II.

CHAPTER VI
151/175

They observed, that the government was first settled with another oath, which was like an original contract; so that there was no occasion for a new imposition; that oaths relating to men's opinions had been always considered as severe impositions; and that a voluntary oath was in its own nature unlawful.

During these disputes, another bill of abjuration was brought into the house of commons by sir Charles Hedges, that should be obligatory on all persons who enjoyed employments in church or state; it likewise included an obligation to maintain the government in king, lords, and commons, and to maintain the church of England, together with the toleration for dissenters.

Warm debates arose upon the question, Whether the oath should be imposed or voluntary; and at length it was carried for imposition by the majority of one voice.

They agreed to insert an additional clause, declaring it equally penal to compass or imagine the death of her royal highness the princess Anne of Denmark, as it was to compass or imagine the death of the king's eldest son and heir.

In the house of peers this bill was strenuously opposed by the tories; and when, after long debates, it passed on the twenty-fourth day of February, ten lords entered a protest against it, as an unnecessary and severe imposition.
The whole nation now seemed to join in the cry for a war with France.
Party heats began to abate; the factions in the city of London were in a great measure moderated by the union of the two companies trading to the East Indies, which found their mutual interest required a coalition.
The tories in the house of commons having concurred so heartily with the inclinations of the people, resolved, as far it lay in their power, to justify the conduct of their party in the preceding parliament.


<<Back  Index  Next>>

D-Link book Top

TWC mobile books