The History of England Volume V. David Hume
of prejudices masqued with reason, the most criminal of passions covered with the appearance of duty, which seduced them into measures, that were fatal to themselves, and had so nearly proved fatal to their country.b
The Lords Mordaunt and Stourton, two catholics, were fined, the former 10,000 pounds, the latter 4,000, by the star-chamber; because their absence from parliament had begotten a suspicion of their being acquainted with the conspiracy. The earl of Northumberland was fined 30,000 pounds, and detained several years prisoner in the Tower; because, not to mention other grounds of suspicion, he had admitted Piercy into the number of gentlemen pensioners, without his taking the requisite oaths.c
The king, in his speech to the parliament, observed, that, though religion had engaged the conspirators in so criminal an attempt, yet ought we not to involve all the Roman catholics in the same guilt, or suppose them equally disposed to commit such enormous barbarities. Many holy men, he said, and our ancestors among the rest, had been seduced to concur with that church in her scholastic doctrines; who yet had never admitted her seditious principles, concerning the pope’s power of dethroning kings, or sanctifying assassination. The wrath of Heaven is denounced against crimes, but innocent error may obtain its favour; and nothing can be more hateful than the uncharitableness of the puritans, who condemn alike to eternal torments, even the most inoffensive partizans of popery. For his part, he added, that conspiracy, however atrocious, should never alter, in the least, his plan of government: While with one hand he punished guilt; with the other, he would still support and protect innocence.d After this speech, he prorogued the parliament, till the 22d of January.e
1606.
The moderation, and, I may say, magnanimity, of the king, immediately after so narrow an escape from a most detestable conspiracy, was no wise agreeable to his subjects. Their animosity against popery, even before this provocation, had risen to a great pitch; and it had perhaps been more prudent in James, by a little dissimulation, to have conformed himself to it. His theological learning, confirmed by disputation, had happily fixed his judgment in the protestant faith; yet was his heart a little byassed by the allurements of Rome, and he had been well pleased, if the making of some advances could have effected an union with that ancient mother-church. He strove to abate the acrimony of his own subjects against the religion of their fathers: He became himself the object of their dissidence and aversion. Whatever measures he embraced; in Scotland to introduce prelacy, in England to inforce the authority of the established church, and support its rites and ceremonies; were interpreted as so many steps towards popery; and were represented by the puritans as symptoms of idolatry and superstition. Ignorant of the consequences, or unwilling to sacrifice to politics his inclination, which he called his conscience, he persevered in the same measures, and gave trust and preferment, almost indifferently, to his catholic and protestant subjects. And finding his person, as well as his title, less obnoxious to the church of Rome, than those of Elizabeth, he gradually abated the rigour of those laws, which had been enacted against that church, and which were so acceptable to his bigotted subjects. But the effects of these dispositions on both sides became not very sensible, till towards the conclusion of his reign.
A parliament.
At this time, James seems to have possessed the affections even of his English subjects, and, in a tolerable degree, their esteem and regard. Hitherto their complaints were chiefly levelled against his too great constancy in his early friendships; a quality, which, had it been attended with more economy, the wise would have excused, and the candid would even, perhaps, have applauded. His parts, which were not despicable, and his learning, which was great, being highly extolled by his courtiers and gownmen, and not yet tried in the management of any delicate affairs, for which he was unfit, raised a high idea of him in the world; nor was it always through flattery or insincerity, that he received the title of the second Solomon. A report, which was suddenly spread about this time, of his being assassinated, visibly struck a great consternation into all orders of men.f The commons also abated, this session, somewhat of their excessive frugality, and granted him an aid, payable in four years, of three subsidies and six fifteenths, which, Sir Francis Bacon said in the house,g might amount to about four hundred thousand pounds: And for once the king and parliament parted in friendship and good humour. The hatred which the catholics so visibly bore him, gave him, at this time, an additional value in the eyes of his people. The only considerable point, in which the commons incurred his displeasure, was by discovering their constant goodwill to the puritans, in whose favour they desired a conference with the lords: h Which was rejected.
November 18.
The chief affair transacted next session, was the intended union of the two kingdoms.i Nothing could exceed the king’s passion and zeal for this noble enterprize, but the parliament’s prejudice and reluctance against it. There remain two excellent speeches in favour of the union, which it would not be improper to compare together; that of the king,k and that of Sir Francis Bacon. Those, who affect in every thing such an extreme contempt for James, will be surprised to find, that his discourse, both for good reasoning and elegant composition, approaches very near that of a man, who was undoubtedly, at the time, one of the greatest geniuses in Europe. A few trivial indiscretions and indecorums may be said to characterize the harangue of the monarch, and mark it for his own. And in general, so open and avowed a declaration in favour of a measure, while he had taken no care, by any precaution or intrigue, to ensure success, may safely be pronounced an indiscretion. But the art of managing parliaments, by private interest or cabal, being found hitherto of little use or necessity, had not, as yet, become a part of English politics. In the common course of affairs, government could be conducted without their assistance; and when their concurrence became necessary to the measures of the crown, it was, generally speaking, except in times of great faction and discontent, obtained without much difficulty.
The king’s influence seems to have rendered the Scottish parliament cordial in all the steps which they took towards the union. Though the advantages, which Scotland might hope from that measure, were more considerable; yet were the objections too, with regard to that kingdom, more striking and obvious. The benefit which must have resulted to England, both by accession of strength and security, was not despicable; and as the English were, by far the greater nation, and possessed the seat of government, the objections, either from the point of honour or from jealousy, could not reasonably have any place among them. The English parliament indeed seem to have been swayed merely by the vulgar motive of national antipathy. And they persisted so obstinately in their prejudices, that all the efforts for a thorough union and incorporation ended only in the abolition of the hostile laws, formerly enacted between the kingdoms.l
Some precipitate steps, which the king, a little after his accession, had taken, in order to promote his favourite project, had been here observed to do more injury than service. From his own authority, he had assumed the title of king of Great Britain; and had quartered the arms of Scotland, with those of England, in all coins, flags, and ensigns. He had also engaged the judges to make a declaration, that all those, who, after the union of the crowns, should be born in either kingdom, were, for that reason alone, naturalized in both. This was a nice question, and, according to the ideas of those times, susceptible of subtile reasoning on both sides. The king was the same: The parliaments were different. To render the people therefore the same, we must suppose, that the sovereign authority resided chiefly in the prince, and that these popular assemblies were rather instituted to assist with money and advice, than endowed with any controuling or active powers in the government. It is evident, says Bacon in his pleadings on this subject, that all other commonwealths, monarchies only excepted, do subsist by a law precedent. For where authority is divided amongst many officers, and they not perpetual, but annual or temporary, and not to receive their authority but by election, and certain persons to have voices only in that election, and the like; these are busy and curious frames, which of necessity do presuppose a law precedent, written or unwritten, to guide and direct them: But in monarchies, especially hereditary, that is, when several families or lineages of people do submit themselves to one line, imperial or royal; the submission is more natural and simple; which afterwards, by law subsequent, is perfected, and made more formal: but that is grounded upon nature.m It would seem from this reasoning, that the idea of a hereditary, limited monarchy, though implicitly supposed in many