« PreviousContinue »
In the Third Paragraph of the same Article, whereas it is said, “That all persons in Ireland be "made capable to elect or to be elected who, before “the First of March 1649, have borne arms for the “Parliament, or otherwise given testimony of their "good' affections to the Parliament and continued faith"ful to the Parliament:" -- and yet perhaps many of them are since revolted 'against us!' - Whether it be not necessary that this be more clearly expressed? For it seems to capacitate all those who revolted from the Parliament;* if they have borne arms for the State before the First of March 1649, it seems to restore them. But if since then they have revolted, as I doubt many of our English-Irish have done, why then the question is, Whether those men who lately ** have been angry and have flown to arms; Whether you will think their having borne arms formerly on the Parliament's side shall be an exemption to them? This is but tendered to you, for some worthy person here to give an answer unto? .
[Very rational and irrefragable. It is accordingly altered: “Signal testimony of their good affection to the Commonwealth (or your Highness, and continued" &c. - And now let us look at Paragraph Fifth; concerning the last item of which his Highness has a word to say:
" Article Fourth, Paragraph Fifth. All who are atheistical, “blasphemous, married to Popish wives,' who train or shall strain any child to be Popish, or consent that a son or daugh. "ter of theirs shall marry a Papist; -- who are scoffers of reli"gion, or can be proved to have scoffed any one for being "religious; who deny the Scriptures to be God's Word; who “ deny Sacraments, Ministry or Magistracy to be ordinances
* The Ormond Royalists almost all; – Malignant enough many of ** in late years.
6 of God (Harrison's set); who are Sabbath-breakers, swearers, “haunters of taverns or alebouses; - in short demonstrably "unchristian men. All who are Public Preachers too." Concerning this latter clause his Highness has a remark to make.
"Following in the rear of which, in the same Fifth Para"graph, is a new Item which still more deserves consideration. “For securing the Freedom of Parliament' as well as its "Purity, there are to be Forty-one Commissioners appointed soby Act of Parliament with your Highness's consent,' who “are to examine and certify whether the Persons returned by "these rules are, after all, qualified to sit.” – So that it is not to be by the Council of State henceforth, and by Nathaniel Tayler, Clerk of the Commonwealth in Chancery,' with his Certificate in the Lobby, that Honourable Gentlemen are to be turned back at the door of the House, and sent to redact Protests, as in the case of this present Parliament! Forty-one Commissioners are now to do it. His Highness on this also will have a word to say.)
In the Fifth Paragraph of the same Article, you have incapacitated Public Preachers from sitting in Parliament. And truly I think your intention is 'of' such 'only' as have Pastoral Function; such as are actually real Ministers. For I must say to you, in behalf of our Army, — in the next place to their fighting, they have been very good “Preachers:" and I should be sorry they should be excluded from serving the Commonwealth because they have been accustomed to “preach" to their troops, companies and regiments: which I think has been one of the blessings upon them to the carrying-on of the great Work. I think you do not mean so that they should be excluded:' but I tender it to you that, if you think fit, there may be a consideration had of it. There may be some of us, it may be, who have been a little guilty of that, who would be loath to be excluded from sitting in Parliament ‘on account of it!' ["I myself have been known, "on occasion, to exhort my troops with Bible texts and “considerations; to preach,' if you like to call it so! “What has my whole Life been but a ‘Sermon' of some "emphasis ; preached with tongue and sword, with head " and heart and right hand, and soul and body and “breeches-pocket, not without results, one would venture " to hope!” – This Clause, the Committee, expressly or tacitly, ill modify as desired.]
In the same Paragraph, there is care taken for the nominating of Commissioners to try the Members who are chosen to sit in Parliament. And truly those Commissioners are uncertain Persons; and it is hard to say what may happen. I hope they will be always good men; — but if they should be bad, then perhaps they will keep out good men! Besides we think, – truly, if you will give us leave to help as to the "freedom of Parliament,” this ‘of the Commissioners' will be something that may go rather harshly down than otherwise! Very many reasons might be given; but I do only tender it to you. I think, if there were no Commissioners, it might be never a whit the worse: -+ if you make qualifications for Membership, and any man presume to sit without those qualifications, you may deal with him. A man without qualifications, sitting there, is as if he were not chosen; and if he sit without being chosen, without having qualification, - I am sure the old custom was to send him to the Tower, [That will settle him!] to imprison such a one! If any sit there that have not right to sit, —- if any stranger come in upon a pretended title of election, perhaps it is a different case, but if any sit there upon a pre
tence of qualification in him, you may send hin to prison without more ado. Whether you think fit to do so or no, is parliamentary business: – I do but hint it to you. I believe, If any man had sat in former Parliaments without, ‘for instance,' taking the oaths &c. that were prescribed, it would have been fault enough in him. I believe something of that kind, instead of your Forty-one Commissioners,' might be equivalent to any other way, if not better.
The Honourable House does not want any more concern with Nathaniel Tayler and his Certificates. This Paragraph remains unaltered. Forty-one Commissioners, Fifteen a quorum; future Parliaments to name a future set when they like: the Examinations as to Members are to be by oath of informer in writing, with copies left &c., and rigorous enough formalities. — Let us now glance at Article Fifth:
" Article Fifth relates to the 'Other House;' a new House of “Lords we are getting up. Not more than Seventy of them, “not fewer than Forty: they are to be nominated by our High“ness and approved by this House: all classes excluded by the "preceding Article from our body are of course excluded from “theirs." His Highness has a remark to make on this also.]
In that Article, which I think is the Fifth Article ( Yes), which concerns the Nomination of the Other House, in the beginning of that Article it stands, That the House is to be nominated as you there design it,* and the approbation is to be from This House, I would say, from the Parliament. It stands so. But then now, if any shall be subsequently named, after the Other House is sat, upon any accidental removal or death, - you do not say 'How. Though it seems to refer to the same 'rule' as the first original' selec
* "as you there design it;" polite for “by me." .
tion doth; yet it doth not so clearly intimate this, That the nomination shall be, where it was, with the Chief Officer,* and the approbation of the “Other House.” If I do express clearly what you – Pardon me: but I think that is the aim of it; and it is not clearly expressed there; — as I think you will be able to judge whether it be or no.
[Article Fifth ruled as his Highness wishes. And now take Article Seventh:
"Article Seventh promises, but does not say how, that there “shall be a yearly Revenue of 1,300,0001.; one million for Navy Wand Army, 300,0001, for the support of the Government. No "part of it by a Land-tax. Other temporary supplies to be "granted by the Commons in Parliament, - and neither thie “Revenue nor any other charge whatever to be laid upon the "subject except according to the Parliament's direction and "sanction.” Such yearly Revenue the Parliament promises in this Petition and Advice, but does not specify in what way it shall be raised: which omission also his Highness fails not to comment on.]
tenazeed in Revenue, de it contended to. That
In the Seventh Article, which concerns the Revenue, that is, the Revenue which you have appointed for the Government; wherein you have distributed Three-hundred-thousand pounds of it to the Maintenance of the Civil Authority, and One-million to the maintenance of your Forces by Sea and Land: “ you have indeed in your Instrument said so, that there shall be such a Revenue,' and we cannot doubt of it: but yet you have not made it certain; nor yet those "temporary supplies” which are intended for the peace and safety of the Nations. It is desired, That you - will take this into your thoughts, and make the general
. . • Cannot say "me."