found themselves barely equal to govern.' Incessant certainly were the rebukes offered, and the rebuffs received, by Mr. Speaker Lenthal; who, setting aside the one notable act of his career, had but commonplace qualities of his own to sustain him; and who, in especial, seems often to have found (herein perhaps not differing from later experiences in the same seat) the dinner-hour an almost insuperable difficulty. As it has been with many a modern Mr. Speaker between the hours of seven and eight in the evening, so fared it with Mr. Lenthal between twelve and one mid-day. Not a great many

1 Even Sir Simonds D'Ewes himself, one of the most prim and precise of men, and a very Grandison of propriety in regard to all customs, orders, records, and authorities of the House, in which he was a marvellous proficient, yet indulges himself without scruple, when any occasion arises, in a sneering disrespect to Mr. Speaker. On the second of December 1641, for example, there is quite a passage of arms between them. It begins with D'Ewes,"sitting in my usual place "near his chair," correcting Mr. Speaker on a point of order connected with a summons to conference with the lords. Then, upon D'Ewes moving to have the Londoners' petition read over again, Mr. Speaker takes his turn by interposing that it is the worthy member's own fault to have been absent at the reading on the previous day; but has to cry D'Ewes mercy on the latter pleading his absence that day at Hampton Court, by order of the House itself, to assist in presenting the Great Remonstrance to the King. Then Mr. Waller gets up to speak, and handles both the points started, as well the conference with the lords as the Londoners' petition. To him succeeds D'Ewes, who also enlarges upon both subjects under various heads, until Mr. Speaker becomes manifestly uneasy. "Having proceeded thus "far or a little further, I perceived "the Speaker often offering to rise

"out of his chair as if he intended to

66

interrupt me." An explanation follows. Mr. Speaker thinks D'Ewes out of order in not taking points separately, first the matter of conference with the lords, and then the Londoners' petition afterwards. "Whereupon I stood up again and "said, "Truly, sir, I am much be"holding to you for admonishing """me, but if you had been but "pleased to have informed the

666

gentleman who spoke last before "to both the particulars, you would "have saved me my labour, for I "did but follow his method;' at "which the House laughed; and the "Speaker being half ashamed of "what he had done, stood up again "and confessed that he did permit "Mr. Waller, &c., and now he left "it to the House, &c." Other similar instances might be quoted. One had occurred, in reference to a point on the passing of the Subsidy Bill, on the previous 13th of February, 1640-1, when the Speaker had predicted all sorts of ill consequences from a particular course of procedure, and D'Ewes is careful to inform him (and us) that "no inconvenience had followed."

2 There is a pleasant passage in Clarendon's Life (i. 90), where he expressly excepts certain leading members from this habit of rushing out at the time of dinner, and describes what plan they adopted. When their

66

days before the present sitting, the rush of members out of the house at that hour, during a debate on supply, had been such that he was fain flatly to tell them "they were unworthy to sit in this great and wise assembly in a "parliament that would so run forth for their dinners." And now, though the Serjeant has returned with several members from the Hall, so many more continue absent from the house at this clamorous hour, that Mr. Hyde still waits and defers to speak.

While he does this yet a few minutes longer, let us seize the occasion to observe where some of the prominent people sit. The member whose manuscript record chiefly has been quoted, Sir Simonds D'Ewes, will guide us to the knowledge here and there, in jotting down his own speeches; for as it was then the custom to avoid mention as well of the place represented as of the member's name, the principal mode of indicating a previous speaker was by some well known personal quality,

2

hours had become very disorderly, he says, the house seldom rising till after four of the clock in the afternoon, he used to be frequently invited (“im"portuned" he calls it) to dine with the party of whom Pym was the leader, and often went with them accordingly to "Mr. Pym's lodging, which 66 was at Sir Richard Manly's house, "in a little court behind Westminster "Hall, where he, and Mr. Hampden, "Sir Arthur Haselrig, and two or "three more, upon a stock kept a "table, where they transacted much "business, and invited thither those "of whose conversion they had any "hope." It was after one of these dinners, the summer evening being fine, that Nathaniel Fiennes having proposed to Mr. Hyde to ride into the fields and take a little air, they two sent for their horses, and, while riding in the fields between Westminster and Chelsea, Mr. Fiennes did his best to convert Mr. Hyde from his notions as to the government of the Church.

This will explain a saying of

Lord Falkland's reported in one of the suppressed passages of Lord Clarendon's History, recently restored (ii. 595, Appendix F), "that they who "hated bishops, hated them worse "than the devil; and they who loved "them, loved them not so well as "they did their dinners."

2 Thus old Sir Harry Vane, refering to D'Ewes himself (June 26, 1641) "is sorry to miss the gentleman out "of his place who is so well versed "in records ;" and in like manner Sir Robert Pye characterises him (July 1, 1611) "that learned gentleman who 66 was so well skilled in records-and "then he looked at me.' Sir Ralph Hopton is "that ancient parliament man. Mr. Cage, member for Ipswich, is " my old neighbour behind "me," or "an old gentleman who used "to sit here behind me." Sir Thomas Barrington, member for Colchester, is "as ancient a parliament man as "Mr. Cage, though not of as many

66

"years." "No man did more

"honor and love that worthy mem

or by his position in the house. Sir Simonds himself sat usually by the Speaker's chair, on the lowermost form close by the south end of the clerk's table; and there, whatever the subject of debate might be, or the excitement going on around him, this precise self-satisfied puritan gentleman sat, writing-apparatus forming part of his equipment, his eyes close to the paper (for their sight was defective), and ever busily taking his Notes: but it was his custom, when he spoke, to go up two steps higher, that he might more easily be heard by the whole house. In this position, Mr. Harry Marten, the member for Berkshire, was "the gentleman below." Mr. Pym, the acknowledged chief of the majority of the Commons, is ever in his "usual place near the Bar," just beyond the gallery on the same right-hand side of the house at entering. Sir John Culpeper, member for Kent, and so soon to be Chancellor of the Exchequer, is "the gentleman on "the other side of the way." He sat upon the left-hand side; and near him, most generally together, sat Hyde and Falkland; Mr. Geoffrey Palmer, the member for Stamford, and Sir John Strangways, sitting near. On the same side at the upper end, on the Speaker's right, sat the elder Vane, member for Wilton, for a few days longer Secretary of State and Treasurer of the Household; near whom were other holders of office. Sir Thomas Jermyn, his Majesty's Comptroller, who sat for Bury St. Edmund's; Sir Edward Herbert the AttorneyGeneral, who sat for Old Sarum; Oliver St. John the Solicitor-General, member for Totness, still holding the office in the King's service which had failed to draw him over to the King's side; Mr. Coventry, member for Evesham and one of the King's house;' and young Harry

"ber that spake last than myself," are words in which an allusion to Pym is conveyed. And Mr. Denzil Holles is "the worthy gentleman "whom I very much respect.

"I desired that the gentleinan "on the other side of the way-and

1

"then I looked on Sir John Culpeper, "-&c."

2For if the gentleman on the "other side who last pressed it-and "then I looked towards Mr. Coventrie, "&c."

Vane, member for Hull, and Joint-treasurer of the Navy; all sat in this quarter, on the Speaker's right. Near them sat also Mr. Edward Nicholas, clerk of the Council, soon to be Sir Edward and Secretary of State in place of Windebank, now an anxious auditor and spectator of this memorable debate, which he was there to report to the King. Between these members and Hyde, on the same side of the house, sat the member for Wilton, Sir Benjamin Rudyard; Sir Walter Earle; William Strode; and lawyer Glyn, the member for Westminster. Mr. Herbert Price, the member for Brecon, with Mr. Wilmot, member for Tamworth, and a knot of young courtiers, sat at the lower end of the house on the same side, immediately on the left at entering. John Hampden sat on the other side, behind Pym; and between him and Harry Marten, sat Edmund Waller; on one of the back benches, Cromwell; not far from him, Denzil Holles; and under the gallery, the member for Oxford University, the learned Mr. Selden.' Near him sat lawyer Maynard, the other member for Totness; and over them, in the gallery itself, that successful lawyer Mr. Holborne; Sir Edward Dering; and the member for Leicestershire, Sir Arthur Haselrig. But our list must come to a close. The reader has been detained too long from the debate on the Great Remonstrance.

2

Hyde opened it, in a speech of great warmth and great length. The general ground of objection he took was that a Declaration so put forth was without precedent; and he questioned the power of the House, in so far as this was defined by the words used in the writs of election, to make, alone, a remonstrance to the people, without the

"I said that I did prize what66 soever should fall from the pen or "tongue of that learned gentleman "under the gallery-and then I "looked towards Mr. Selden, &c."

2 Mr. Philip Warwick, young courtier as he was, and admirer of all things courtly, could yet detect

the points in which the King's principal advocate in the house was weak, as well for himself as his cause. "Mr. "Hyde's language and style," he remarks, were very suitable to busi'ness, if not a little too redundant." -Memoirs, p. 196.

66

66

concurrence of the Lords. Arguing from this, he asserted that the form of the Declaration touched the honour of the King, and that it ought not, for that reason, to be made public or circulated among the people. Such a publication could only be justified by having peace for its end, and here every such object would be frustrated. In the Remonstrance itself, apart from these considerations, he did not deny that there might be a propriety. The members of the house were accused to have done nothing either for King or kingdom. It was right to repel that charge. But if a parliament must make an apology, let them show what they had done without looking too far back. They may desire themselves to see, but they should not divulge, their own infirmities, any more than a general the defects of his army to the enemy. All was true, if expressed modestly. But such passages as Sir John Eliot's imprisonment under the King's own hand, and his wanting bread,' were ill-expressed. Let them be chary of Majesty. They stood upon their liberties even, for the Sovereign's sake lest he should be King of mean subjects, or they subjects of a mean King.

Lord Falkland rose immediately after Hyde, and, as his wont was, spoke with greater passion in his warmth and earnestness; his thin high-pitched voice breaking

1 In Sir Ralph Verney's Note of the debate (p. 121), this passage stands, "Sir John Eliot's imprison"ment under the King's own hand, "and the King's wanting bread, ill 'expressed." It is clear, however, that the words marked in italics are a repetition by mistake from the previous line. Clarendon in his History (ii. 51) affects to quote, in the exact words of the Remonstrance as it passed ("after many unbecoming ex"pressions were cast out"), the passage respecting Eliot; and he quotes it in inverted commas, thus: "One of "which died in prison, for want of "ordinary refreshment, whose blood "still cried for vengeance." The

"want of ordinary refreshment in the history, is clearly the same as "wanting bread" in the speech; yet certainly the Remonstrance as printed says no such thing, and the words, if ever there, must have been among the unbecoming expressions cast out. The passage really runs thus: "Of "whom one died by the cruelty and "harshness of his imprisonment, "which would admit of no relaxa"tion, notwithstanding the imminent "danger of his life did sufficiently "appear by the declaration of his 'physician. And his release, or at "least his refreshment, was sought by many humble petitions. And his "blood still cries, &c."