Sir Francis Glanville, Kt., M.P., J.P., and Deputy Lieutenant for the County of Devon, of Kilworthy, near Tavistock,

Was the eldest son of Judge Glanville. The earlier days of Francis were spent in vicious living and great profligacy in. London. His father had often threatened to disinherit him if he did not amend his ways and choose a better calling in life ; but Francis, not heeding these threats, and probably thinking that his father would not be so unnatural as to cut him out of his will, continued these wild pranks until one day he happened, in a singular manner, to save the life of William Crymes, Esq., a landowner in Devon, from the hands of a band of assassins in the streets of London. Mr Crymes, not knowing who the preserver of his life was, asked Francis to call at his house in London the day after the attempted outrage, so that he could then more fully express his deep gratitude to his preserver.

Next day, at the appointed hour, Francis waited upon Mr. Crymes as he had been invited to do. When the hall door was opened Francis inquired for the gentleman of the house, but being informed by the old retainer of the Crymes's that his master was then engaged, he asked him to sit down and wait until he was able to see him. While Francis was waiting to be called into the presence of Mr. Crymes, his eye caught the beautiful portrait of Elizabeth Crymes, the young daughter, hanging on the wall. The first sight of this lovely face struck deeply into the heart of Master Frank Glanville, and from that moment he made up his mind to marry the original of the picture, which, as will be shortly seen, he did do. Having waited some time, he was at last ushered into the presence of the gentleman whose life he had so nobly preserved, and after the most grateful acknowledgments on the part of Mr. Crymes, he proceeded to inquire the name of his preserver, whereupon Francis informed him that he was the eldest son of Sir John Glanville, who lived at Tavistock in Devonshire. Imagine the surprise of Frank when Mr. Crymes told him that he also lived in Devonshire; and not only that, but likewise resided near Tavistock, and was intimately acquainted with his father, the Judge. The question next arose, what should Mr. Crymes do for Francis in recognition for his timely protection. Francis replied that he much desired Mr. Crymes to intercede between his father and himself. This Mr. Crymes gladly promised to do directly on his return into Devon. The mission of peace no doubt would have been successful had not death taken Judge Glanville, for on the arrival of Mr. Crymes at Kilworthy he found that Francis's father had gone to his last home, and that his younger brother, John Glanville, had succeeded to the property which really belonged by right of birth to Francis. This sad event led Frank to moralize on the follies of his youth, and ended by his making up his mind to cut all his old friends and entirely amend his present living. Having come to this laudable determination, Francis set to with a hearty goodwill to make up for lost time. Entering himself as a law student, he rapidly regained the good opinions of his relations, and among the first to recognise his improvement was his own brother. Sir John Glanville, which he did in a right noble manner, as I shall now relate. When Sir John was fully convinced of his brother Francis's penitence, he sent and invited him to a feast that he proposed giving to his friends at Kilworthy. When the repast was nearly finished one dish was ordered by Sir John to be placed before Francis, which being done, he bade him lift the cover and accept the contents. Francis obeyed, and much to his astonishment, as well as to that of the company present, instead of finding savoury meats, the dish contained a bundle of writings, whereupon Sir John Glanville informed the company that what he now did was only the same act that he felt assured would have been performed by his father could he have lived to witness the happy change which they all knew had taken place in his eldest son; therefore he freely restored to his brother the whole estates. Francis proved worthy of the trust his brother had reposed in him, for he lived to be knighted and to perform many useful acts of service to his country. [fn 118]

In 1620 Sir Francis Glanville and Sir Baptist Hexte were elected Members of Parliament for Tavistock. In 1625 he again sat for the same town with John Pym, Esq., and also in 1628. The Rectory of Charlton Musgrove becoming vacant in 1617, Glanville, as patron, presented the Rev. Richard Leir, B.D., of Exeter, aa Rector.

King James, in his letter written from Theobalds, and dated the 11th December, 1623, to Lord Keeper Lincoln, renewed Lord Russel's commission of Lieutenancy for Devonshire and Exeter, and added to the list of Deputy Lieutenants Sir Francis Glanville and Lewis Pollard for Devonshire, and Jeffry Waltham and John Modeford for Exeter. In the year 1626, February 27th, Sir Francis Glanville wrote from Tavistock to Secretary Conway on behalf of his brother, William Crymes, and requested Lord Conway to give some good words to the Master of the Wards for obtaining the Wardship of his son. Sir Francis also recommended another person who was summoned to appear before the Privy Council. Sir Francis likewise held the position of a Magistrate in his native county, for Francis, Earl of Bedford, writing to the Privy Council in 1638, informed the Lords that he had examined the Account of William Hockin, son and executor of Christopher Hockin, for conduct money received by the said C. Hockin from the N. division of Devonshire in 1627, and sums thereout expended for billeting soldiers who had returned from Rhe. The Earl added that the King sent down money on behalf of the county, out of which Mr. Hockin, instead of £300, received only £96 7s. 9d which he paid out according to a warrant signed by Baronet Chudleigh, Sir William Stroud, and Sir Francis Glanville.

In 1635 the Harbour of Catwater, Devon, had become out of repair, so much so that the Mayor and Commonalty of Plymouth were obliged to petition the Lords of the Privy Council, Sir Francis Glanville, Sir James Bagg, Sir Nicholas Slanning, and others, certifying to the "great decays" of the said harbour. The matter was referred to the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench and Common Pleas, and the Lord Chief Baron, to consider the best ways and means for raising money to repair the harbour. Again on the 26th April, 1636, Thomas Crampporne, Mayor of Plymouth, Sir James Bagg, and Sir Francis Glanville addressed the Privy Council, and informed the Lords that they, according to their order of the 5th of February last, had viewed the harbour of Catwater, near Plymouth, which they found much decayed, and "quar'd" up, which they attributed to the quantities of sand and earth thrown out of certain tin-works, and ballast cast out at Saltash, and also allowing a ship sunk there eleven years since to lie still, and to the quantities of sand and gravel brought down by the rivers Plym and Mew.

Sir Francis Glanville married Elizabeth, daughter of William Crymes of Buckland Monachorum, Devon, Esq., on 21st September, 1604 (she was the lady whose portrait had so much struck Francis when he was awaiting his interview with Mr. Crymes, her father), and by her had issue:-

1. John Glanville of Kilworthy, Esq., died before 1620 without issue.
2. Alice Glanville, married Edmund Fowell (son of John Fowell, Esq., Barrister- at-Law), M.P. for Tavistock in the years 1640, 1658, and 1659, and again in 1660 for Plymouth. He was a frequent speaker in the House. Edmund Fowell married secondly Jane, daughter of Sir Anthony Barker of Sunning in Berkshire.
3. Elizabeth Glanville, married William Fowell of Black Hall and Diptford, Devon, Esq., a representative of one of the finest old Devonshire houses.

4. Dionysia Glanville, married 1635 John Doidge of Harlesditch and Willow Street, Devon, Esq. The Doidge family rank amongst the oldest and most respectable of freeholders of Devon. The eldest son of this union, John Doidge, was M.P. for Tavistock, and High Sheriff of Devonshire. He married Judith, daughter of Sir Nicholas Trevanion, and had one daughter, Maria, his heiress, who allied herself to the Reverend William Taunton of Freeland Lodge, Oxford, whose son, Joseph Taunton of Totness, married Margaret, daughter of B. Babbage, and their son, William Doidge Taunton (born 1781), became Mayor of Totness.
5. Joan Glanville, married in 1632 Oliver Sawle of Penrice, Cornwall, Esq., who in 1663 was Sheriff of Cornwall; from this alliance descended the present Baronet, as the following pedigree will shew:-

6. Francis Glanville, who succeedecl his father. Sir Francis Glanville, in the Kilworthy property, married, 11th March 1647, Maria Bolle, [fn 1190 daughter of Henry Rolle of Heanton, Devon, Esq. Dying without isssue he left his property to his sister, Margaret Glanville, who became the wife of William Kelly of Kelly, Devon, Esq., and she brought with her into that family the Kilworthy property, which descended to her only daughter, Elizabeth Kelly of Kelly and Kilworthy, who married Ambrose Manaton of Trecaral, Esq. (son of Ambrose Manaton, by Ann, daughter of P. Edgecumbe of Edgecumbe, Esq.), and into the Manaton family passed the Glanville property.
7. George Glanville, youngest brother to the preceding, was born in 1618, and married Jane, daughter of Richard Evelyn of Wooton, Surrey, and sister to the celebrated John Evelyn of Sayes Court. Evelyn, in his 'Diary' says, "June 1st, 1691, I went with my son and brother-in-law Glanvill and his son to Wooton to solemnize the funeral of my nephew (Glanville), which was performed the next day, very decently and orderly by the Heralds, in the afternoon, a very great appearance of the country being there." On the death of George Glanville, Evelyn also writes, "1702, April 12th, my brother-in-law Glanville departed this life this morning, after a long languishing illnesse, leaving a son by my sister, and two granddaughters. Our relation and friendship had been long and greate. He was a man of excellent parts. He died in the 84th year of his age, and will'd his body to be wrapped in lead and carried down to Greenwich, put on board a ship, and buried in the sea about Dover and Calais, about the Goodwin Sands, which was done on the Tuesday or Wednesday after. He was a gentleman of an ancient family in Devonshire, and married my sister Jane. By his prudent parsimony he much improved his fortune. He had a place in the Alienation Office, and might have made an extraordinary man had he cultivated his parts" George Glanville, as Evelyn says, left issue one son, William Glanville, Barrister-at-Law, who married Frances, daughter of E. Hales of Kent,Esq., [fn 120] and by her had two daughters - Francis Glanville, who became eventually heiressto her father on her sister's death, married her cousin William Evelyn of St. Clere, in Kent, [fn 121] who assumed the name and arms of "Glanville," and had issue a daughter:-
Frances Glanville, who became the wife of the Honourable Edward Boscawen, Admiral of the Blue, General of Marines and a Lord of the Admiralty. This distinguished officer was the second son of Hugh Boscawen, Viscount Falmouth, by his wife (married 23rd April, 1700), Charlotte, elder daughter and coheiress of Charles Godfrey, Esq., and niece maternally of the celebrated Duke of Marlborough. By the union of Admiral Boscawen with Frances Glanville, three children survived:-
1. George Evelyn, b. 6th May, 1758, and who became third Viscount Falmouth.
2. Frances, married 6th July, 1773, Admiral John Leveson Gower, brother to Granville, first Marquis of Stafford.
3. Elizabeth, married Henry, fifth Duke of Beaufort.

Pedigree shewing the Descent of the present Viscount Falmouth from the Glanvilles.

Sir John Glanville of Broadhinton Manor, Wilts, Speaker of the House of Commons 1640, D.C.L., and Serjeant-at-Law to Charles I. and II

SIR JOHN GLANVILLE, a younger son of Judge Glanville, and brother to Sir Francis, was born at Kilworthy, near Tavistock, about 1589. By his father's will he inherited Kilworthy, but, as already shewn, he nobly returned that estate to his elder brother. Sir John Glanville at an early age entered himself as a student at Lincoln's Inn, and with the help of his father's notes he soon rose in his profession, and practised as a councillor with great reputation. In the year 1614, he was elected Recorder of Plymouth, and Member of Parliament, in company with Thomas Sherwill, Esq., for the same town, and was again elected for that place in the years 1620, 1623, 1625, 1626, and 1628. In the Parliament that met Feb. 6, 1620, Mr. Glanville spoke on the decrease of money, and said "That there is a great complaint throughout the kingdom of .the great scarcity of money, which is a business worthy the consideration of this House. 1, Whether there be such want of money or not; 2, What are the causes of it? For the first, he believeth that there is a want and scarcity of coin, because of the general complaint of all men; for that landlords can get no rent of their farmers; for that the price of land is fallen from twenty years' purchase to eighteen, sixteen, fourteen, and in some places to thirteen and twelve years' purchase; and for that the Mint for coinage hath not gone these ten or twelve years. Second, that the reasons and causes of the want of money are divers - more than, he doubteth, can be found out, or will be revealed; some say there is too much coin carried northward; that our expenses and cost on foreign commodities and merchandise is another cause; and the excess of plate, insomuch that gentlemen of ordinary fashion will be served in plate; and although this may be thought a means to treasure up silver and gold against a time of scarcity and need, yet is there great want of it by using it. The patent of the East India Company's another cause of the want of money, for though they affirm they carry away, they carry no plate or coin out of this kingdom, but that they have it elsewhere; yet they sell our commodities beyond sea, and from thence carry the money they receive from them into the East Indies, and so forestall the coming of the money hither."

The position of England previous to the meeting of the third Parliament of King Charles I. was serious in the extreme; there was every reason to apprehend disorder or an insurrection from the discontented portion of the English people. The nation had met with disasters during the Spanish war, and the French campaign had nearly annihilated its commerce; but not only these misfortunes raised the indignation of a proud race, but also a really more important and sacred right was, they thought, being gradually taken from them their liberties, which their forefathers had spent so much blood to obtain, were now in the balance; and King Charles was blamed for admitting into his councils the ambitious Duke of Buckingham. When the King perceived that it was absolutely necessary to summon the estates of the realm, both he and the Duke dreaded the consequences, although the latter pretended that it had been through his advice the King had called Parliament together. On the 17th March, 1628, the Commons of England assembled, and the majority of them seemed to be men of the same high and independent spirit that animated their ancestors; and their property was computed to be three times as great as that of the Upper House.

In Charles's first speech he told the Commons that "He must, in discharge of his conscience, use those other means which God had put into his hands in order to save that which the follies of some particular men may otherwise put in danger;" this of course alluded to Parliamentary supplies. From the above speech the Commons foresaw that, on the least pretence, the King would dissolve them, which if that happened, either insurrection or, worse still, a civil war would break out. The feelings of the people compelled Parliament to pass a vote against arbitrary imprisonments and forced loans. Charles now applied for money, and five subsidies had been already voted him, but although voted, they had not passed into law; and before it did so, the Commons resolved to employ the interval in devising some measures to protect their rights and liberties which had been so lately violated, and for this purpose they appointed a committee, which drew up the celebrated PETITION OF RIGHT, and Mr. Recorder Glanville and Sir Henry Martin were intrusted with its passage through the House of Lords.

On the 23rd May, 1628, Glanville delivered the following speech in a full committee of both Houses of Parliament, in the Painted Chamber at Westminster, on the liberty of the subject:-

My Lords, I have in charge from the Commons' House of Parliament (whereof I am a member) to express this day before your lordships some part of their clear sense, touching one point that hath occurred in the great debate which hath so long depended in both Houses. I shall not need many words to induce or state the question which I am to handle in this free conference. The subject matter of our meeting is well known to your lordships, I will therefore only look so far back upon it, and so far recollect summarily the proceedings it hath had, as may be requisite to present clearly to your lordships' consideration the nature and consequence of the particular wherein I must insist.

Your lordships may be pleased to remember now that the Commons in this Parliament have framed a petition to be presented, to his Majesty; a Petition of Right, rightly composed, relating nothing but truth, desiring nothing but justice; a petition justly occasioned; a petition necessary and fit for these times; a petition founded upon solid and substantial grounds, the laws and statutes of this realm - sure rocks to build upon; a petition bounded within due limits, and directed upon right ends, to vindicate some lawful and just liberties of the free subjects of this kingdom from the prejudice of violations past, and to secure them from future innovations; and because my following discourse must reflect chiefly, if not wholly, upon the matter of this Petition of Right, I shall here crave leave shortly to open to your lordahips the distinct parts whereof it doth consist, and those are four. The first concerns levies of moneys, by way of loans or otherwise, for his Majesty's supply: declaring that no man ought, and praying that no man hereafter be compelled, tomake or yield any gift, loan, benevolence, tax, or such like charge without common consent by Act of Parliament. The second is concerning that liberty of person which rightfully belongs to the free subjects of this realm, expressing it to be against the tenure of the laws and statutes of the land that any freeman should be imprisoned without cause shewn; and then reciting how this liberty, amongst others, hath lately been infringed, it concludeth with a just and necessary desire for the better clearing and allowance of this privilege for the future. The third declareth the unlawfulness of billeting or placing soldiers or mariners to sojourn in free subjects' houses against their wills, and prayeth remedy against that grievance. The fourth and last aimeth at redress touching commissions to proceed to the trial and condemnation of offenders, and causing them to be executed and put to death by the law martial, in times and places, when and where, if by the laws and statutes of the land they have deserved death by the same laws and statutes also they might, and by none other ought to be adjudged and executed.

This petition the careful House of Commons, not willing to omit anything pertaining to their duties, or which might advance their moderate and just ends, did therefore offer up unto your lordships' consideration, accompanied with an humble desire that in your nobleness and justice you would be pleased to join with them in presenting to his Majesty, that so coming from the whole body of this realm, the Peers and People, to him that is the head of both, our gracious sovereign, who must crown the work, or else all our labour is in vain, it might, by your lordships' concurrence and assistance, find the more easy passage, and obtain the better answer.

Your lordships, as your manner is in cases of so great importance, were pleased to debate and weigh it well, and thereupon yon propounded to us some new amendments (as you termed them) by way of alteration, alleging that they were only in matters of form, and not of substance; and that they were intended to no other end but to sweeten the petition and make it the most passable with his Majesty.

In this the House of Commons cannot but observe that fair and good respect which your lordships have used in your proceedings with them by your concluding or voting nothing in your House until you had imparted it unto them, whereby our meetings about this business have been justly styled free conferences, either party repairing hither disengaged, to hear and weigh the other's reasons, and both Houses coming with a full intention, upon due consideration of all that can be said on the other side, to join at last in resolving and acting that which shall be found most just and necessary for the honour and safety of his Majesty and the whole kingdom. And touching those propounded alterations, which were not many, your Lordships cannot but remember that the House of Commons have yielded to an accommodation, or change of their petition in two particulars; whereby they hope your lordships have observed, as well as you may, they have not been affected unto words and phrases, not overmuch abounding in their own sense, but rather willing to comply with your lordships in all indifferent things. For the rest of your proposed amendments, if we do not misconceive your lordships, as we are confident we do not, your lordships of yourselves have been pleased to relinquish them, with a new overture for one only clause to be added in the end or foot of the petition, whereby the work of this day is reduced to one simple head, whether that clause shall be received or not. This yielding of the Commons in part unto your lordships, on other points by you somewhat insisted upon, giveth us great assurance that our ends are one; and putteth us in hope that in conclusion we shall concur and proceed unanimously to seek the same means.

The clause propounded by your lordships to be added to the petition is this:-
"We humbly, present this Petition to your Majesty not only with a care for preservation of liberties, but with a due regard to leave entire that sovereign power wherewith your Majesty is intrusted for the protection, safety, and happiness of your people." A clause specious in shew and smooth in words, but in effect and consequence most dangerous, as I hope to make most evident. However, coming from your lordships, the House of Commons took it into their considerations, as became them, and apprehending upon the first debate that it threatened ruin to the whole petition, they did heretofore deliver some reasons to your lordships for which they then desired to be spared from admitting it.

To these reasons, your lordships offered some answers at the last meeting; which having been faithfully reported to our House, and there debated as was requisite for a business of such weight and importance, I must say truly to your lordships, yet with due reverence to your opinions, the Commons are not satisfied with your arguments; and therefore they have commanded me to recollect your lordships' reasons for this clause, and in a fair reply to let you see the causes why they differ from you in opinion.

But before I come to handle the particulars wherein we dissent from your lordships, I will in the first place take notice yet a little farther of that general wherein we all concur; which is, that we desire not, neither do your lordships, to augment or dilate the liberties and privileges of the subjects beyond the just and due bounds, nor to encroach upon the limits of his Majesty's prerogative royal. And as in this, your lordships at the last meeting expressed clearly your own senses, so were your lordships not mistaken in collecting the concurrent sense and meaning of the House of Commons; they often have protested, they do, and ever must protest, That these have been, and shall be the bounds of their desires, to demand and seek nothing but that which may be fit for dutiful and loyal subjects to ask, and for a gracious and just king to grant; for as they claim by laws some liberties for themselves, so do they acknowledge a prerogative, a high and just prerogative belonging to the king, which they intend not to diminish. And now, my lords, being assured, not by strained inferences or obscure collections, but by the express and clear declarations of both Houses, that our ends are the same, it were a miserable unhappiness if we should fail in finding out the means to accomplish our desires.

My lords, the heads of those particular reasons which you insisted upon the last day were only these:
1. You told us that the word "leave" was of such a nature that it could give no new thing to his Majesty.
2. That no just exception could be taken to the words "sovereign power;" for that as his Majesty is a King, so he is a sovereign; and as he is a sovereign, so he hath power.
3. That the sovereign power mentioned in this clause is not absolute or indefinite, but limited and regulated by the particle "that;" and the word "subsequent" which restrains it to be applied only for protection, safety, and happiness of the people, whereby ye inferred there could be no danger in the allowance of such power.
4. That this clause contained no more in substance, but the like expressions of our meanings in this petition, which we had formerly signified unto his Majesty by the mouth of Mr. Speaker, that we no way intended to encroach upon his Majesty's sovereign power or prerogative.
5. That in our petition we have used other words, and of larger extent, touching our liberties, than are contained in the statutes whereon it is grounded: In respect of which enlargement, it was fit to have some express, or implied saving, or narrative declaratory for the king's sovereign power, of which narrative you allege this clause to be.
Lastly. Whereas the Commons, as a main argument against, the clause, had much insisted upon this, that it was unprecedented and unparliamentary in a petition from the subject to insert a saving for the crown; your lordships brought for instance to the contrary, the two statutes of the 25 Ed. I commonly called confirmatio chartarum, and 26 Ed. I., known by this name Articuli super Chartas; in both which statutes there are savings for the king.

Having thus reduced to your lordships' memories the effects of your own reasons, I will now, with your lordships' favour, come to the points of our reply, wherein I must humbly beseech your lordships to weigh the reasons which I shall present, not as the sense of myself, the weakest member of our House, but as the genuine and true sense of the whole House of Commons, conceived in a business there debated with the greatest gravity and solemnity, with the greatest concurrence of opinions, and unanimity, that ever was in any business maturely agitated in that House. I shall not, peradventure, follow the method of your lordships' recollected reasons in my answering to them, nor labour to urge many reasons. It is the desire of the Commons that the weight of their arguments should recompense, if need be, the smallness of their number. And, in conclusion, when you have heard me through, I hope your lordships shall be enabled to collect clearly, out of the frame of what I shall deliver, that in some part or other of my discourse there is a full and satisfactory answer given to every particular reason or objection of your lordships.

The reasons that are now appointed, to be presented to your lordships are of two kinds, legal and rational, of which those of the former sort are allotted, to my charge; and the first of them is thus:-

The clause now under question, if it be added to the petition, then either it must refer or relate unto it, or else not; if it have no such reference, is it not clear that it is needless and superfluous? And if it have such reference, is it not clear that then it must needs have an operation upon the whole petition and upon all the parts of it? We cannot think that your lordships would offer us a vain thing; and therefore taking it for granted, that if it be added, it would refer to the petition; let me beseech your lordships to observe with me, and with the House of Commons, what alteration and qualification of the same it will introduce.

The petition of itself, simply, and without this clause, declareth absolutely the rights and privileges of the subject, in divers points; and among the rest touching the levies of moneys, by way of loans or otherwise, for his Majesty's supply, That such loans and other charges of the like nature, by the laws and statutes of this land, ought not to be made or laid without common consent by Act of Parliament: But admit this clause to be annexed with reference (to the petition), and it must necessarily conclude and have this exposition, That Loans and the like charges (true it is, ordinarily) are against the laws and statutes of the realm, "unless they be warranted by sovereign power," and that they cannot be commanded or raised without assent of Parliament, "unless it be by sovereign power:" What were this but to admit a sovereign power in the king above the laws and statutes of the kingdom?

Another part of this petition is, That the free subjects of this realm ought not to be imprisoned without cause shewed: But by this clause a sovereign power will be admitted, and left entire to his Majesty, sufficient to control the force of law, and to bring in this new and dangerous interpretation, That the free subjects of this realm ought not by law to be imprisoned without cause shewed, "unless it be by sovereign power."

In a word, this clause, if it should be admitted, would take away the effect of every part of the petition, and become destructive to the whole: for thence will be the exposition touching the billeting of soldiers and mariners in freemen's houses against their wills; and thence will be the exposition touching the times and places for execution of the law martial, contrary to the laws and statutes of the realm.

The scope of this petition, as I have before observed, is not to amend, our case, but to restore us to the same state we were in before; whereas, if this clause be received, instead of mending the condition of the poor subjects, whose liberties of late have been miserably violated by some ministers, we shall leave them worse than we found them; instead of curing their wounds, we shall make them deeper. We have set bounds to our desires in this great business, whereof one is not to diminish the prerogative of the king, by mounting it too high; and. if we bound ourselves on the other side with this limit, not to abridge the lawful privileges of the subject, by descending beneath that which is meet, no man, we hope, can blame us.

My lords, as there is mention made in the additional clause of sovereign power, so is there likewise of a trust reposed in his Majesty, touching the use of sovereign power.

The word "Trust" is of great latitude and large extent, and therefore ought to be well and warily applied and restrained, especially in the case of a king: there is a trust inseparably reposed in the persons of the kings of England, but that trust is regulated by law. For example, when statutes are made to prohibit things not mala in se, but only mala quia prohibita, under certain forfeitures, and penalties, to accrue to the king, and to the informers that shall sue for the breach of them; the Commons must and ever will acknowledge a regal and sovereign prerogative in the king, touching such statutes, that it is in his Majesty's absolute and undoubted power to grant dispensations to particular persons, with the clauses of non obstante, to do as they might have done before those statutes, wherein his Majesty, conferring grace and favour upon some, doth not do wrong to others. But there is a difference between those statutes, and the laws and statutes whereupon the petition is grounded: by those statutes the subject has no interest in the penalties, which are all the fruit such statutes can produce, until by suit or information commenced he become entitled to the particular forfeitures; whereas the laws and statutes mentioned in our petition are of another nature; there shall your lordships find us rely upon the good old statute, called Magna Charta, which declareth and confirmeth the ancient common laws of the liberties of England: there shall your lordships also find us to insist upon divers other most material statutes, made in the time of Kings Edw. III. and Edw. IV., and other famous kings, for explanation and ratification of the lawful rights and privileges belonging to the subjects of this realm: laws not inflicting penalties upon offenders, in malis prohibitis, but laws declarative or positive, conferring or confirming, ipso facto, an inherent right and interest of liberty and freedom in the subjects of this realm, as their birthrights and inheritance descendable to their heirs and posterity; statutes incorporate into the body of the common law, over which (with reverence be it spoken) there is no trust reposed in the king's "sovereign power," or "prerogative royal," to enable him to dispense with them, or to take from his subjects that birthright or inheritance which they have in their liberties, by virtue of the common law and of these statutes.

But if this clause be added to our petition, we shall then make a dangerous overture to confound this good destination touching what statutes the king ia trusted to control by dispensations, and what not; and shall give an intimation to posterity, as if it were the opinion both of the Lords and Commons assembled in this Parliament, that there is a trust reposed in the king, to lay aside by his "sovereign power," in some emergent cases, as well the Common-Law, and such statutes as declare or ratify the subjects' liberty, or Confer interest upon their persons, as those other penal statutes of such nature as I have mentioned before; which, as we can by no means admit, so we believe assuredly, that it is far from the desire of our most gracious sovereign, to effect so vast a trust, which being transmitted to a successor of a different temper, might enable him to alter the whole frame and fabric of the commonwealth, and to resolve that government whereby this kingdom hath flourished for so many years and ages, under his Majesty's most royal ancestors and predecessors.

Our next reason is, that we hold it contrary to all course of Parliament, and absolutely repugnant to the very nature of a Petition of Right, consisting of particulars, as ours doth, to clog it with a general saving or declaration, to the weakening of the right demanded; and we are bold. to renew with some confidence our allegation, that there can be no precedent shewed of any such clause in any such petitions in times past.

I shall insist the longer upon this particular, and labour the more carefully to clear it, because your lordships were pleased the last day to urge against us the statutes of 25 and 28 of Edw. I. as arguments to prove the contrary, and seemed not to be satisfied with that which in this point we had affirmed. True it is, that in those statutes there are such savings as your lordships have observed; but I shall offer you a clear answer to them, and to all other savings of like nature that can be found in any statutes whatsoever.

First in the general, and then I shall apply particular answers to the particulars of those two statutes; whereby it will be most evident that those examples can no ways suit with the matter now in hand. To this end it will be necessary that we consider duly what that question is, which indeed concerneth a petition, and not an Act of Parliament. This being well observed, by shewing unto your lordships the difference between a petition for the law, and the law ordained upon such a petition, and opening truly and perspicuously the course that was holden in framing of statues before 2 Hen. V., different from that which ever since then hath been used, and is still in use amongst us, and by noting the times wherein these statutes were made, which was about one hundred years before 2 Hen. V., besides the differences between these savings and this clause; I doubt not but I shall give ample satisfaction to your lordships, that the Commons, as well in this as in all their other reasons, have been most careful to rely upon nothing but that which is most true and pertinent.

Before the second year of King Henry V. the course was thus: when the Commons were suitors for a law, either the Speaker of their House by word of mouth from them, the lords' house joining with them, or by some Bill in writing, which was usually called their Petition, moved the king to ordain laws for the redress of such mischiefs or inconveniences as were found grievous unto the people.

To these petitions the king made answer as he pleased, sometimes to part, sometimes to the whole, sometimes by denial, sometimes by assent, sometimes absolutely, and sometimes by qualification. Upon these motions and petitions, and the king's answers to them, was the law drawn, up and ingrossed in the statute-roll to bind the kingdom; but this inconvenience was found in this course, that oftentimes the statutes thus framed were against the sense and meaning of the Commons, at whose desires they were ordained; and therefore in the 2 Hen. V finding that it tended to the violation of their liberty and freedom, whose right it was, and ever had been, that no law should be made without their assent, they then exhibited a petition to the king, declaring their right in this particular: praying, that from thenceforth no law might be made or ingrossed as statutes) by additions or diminutions to their motions or petitions, that should change their sense or intent, without their assent; which was accordingly established by Act of Parliament. Ever since then the right hath been) as the use was before, that the king taketh the whole, or leaveth the whole of all Bills or Petitions) exhibited for the obtaining of laws.

From this course, and from the time when first it became constant and settled, we conclude strongly, that it is no good argument, because ye find savings in Acts of Parliaments before the second of Hen. V., that those savings were before in the petitions that begat those statutes: for if the petitions for the two loans so much insisted upon, which petitions, for any thing we know, are not now extant, were never so absolute, yet might the king, according to the usage of those times, insert the savings in his answers; which passing from thence into the statute-roll, do only give some little colour, but are not proof at all that the petitions also were with savings.

This much for the general: to come now to the particular statute of 25 Edw. I., which was a confirmation of Magna Charta, with some provision for the better execution of it, as Common law, which words are worth the noting. It is true, that statute hath also a clause to this effect, That the king, or his heirs, from thenceforth shall take no aids, taxes, or prisage of his subjects, but by common assent of all the realm, saving the ancient aids and prisage due and accustomed.

This saving, if it were granted (which is not, nor cannot be proved) that it was as well in the petition as in the Act; yet can it no way imply that it is either fit or safe that the clause now in question should be added to our petition: for the nature and office of a saving, or exception, is to exempt particulars out of a general, and to ratify the rule in things not exempted, but in no sort to weaken or destroy the general rule itself.

The body of that law was against all aids, and taxes, and prisage in general, and was a confirmation of the common law, formerly declared by Magna Charta; the saving was only of aids and prisage in particular, so well described and restrained by the words, "ancient and accustomed," that there could be no doubt what could be the clear meaning and extent of that exception; for the king's right to those ancient aids, intended by that statute to be saved to him, was well known in those days, and is not yet forgotten.

These aids were three; from the king's tenants by knight's service, due by the common law, or general custom of the realm: aid to ransom the king's royal person, if unhappily he should be taken prisoner in the wars: aid to make the king's eldest son a knight, and aid to marry the king's eldest daughter once, but no more: and that those were the only aids intended io be saved to the crown by that statute, appeareth in some clearness by the Charter of King John, dated at Running-Mead the 15th of June, in the fifth year of his reign, wherein they are enumerated with an exclusion of all other aids whatsoever. Of this Charter I have here one of the originals, whereon I beseech your lordships to cast your eyes, and give me leave to read the very words which concern this point. These words, my lords, are thus: "Nullum scutagium vel auxilium ponatur in regno nostro, nisi per commune consilium regni nostri, nisi ad corpus nostrum redimendum, et primogenitum filium nostrum militem faciendum, et ad filiain nostram primogenitam semel mairitandam, et ad hoc non fiat nisi rationabile auxilium."

Touching prisage, the other thing excepted by this statute, it is also of a particular right to the crown so well known, that it needeth no description, the king being in possession of it by every day's usage. It is to take one tun of wine before the mast, and another behind the mast, of every ship bringing in above twenty tuns of wine, and here discharging them by way of merchandise.

But our petition consisteth altogether in particulars, to which if any general saving, or words amounting to one, should be annexed, it cannot work to confirm things not excepted, which are none, but to confound things included, which are all the parts of the petition; and it must needs beget this dangerous exposition, -that the rights and liberties of the subject, declared and demanded by this petition, are not theirs absolutely, but sub modo; not to continue always, but only to take place, when the king is pleased not to exercise that "sovereign power," wherewith, this clause admitted, he is trusted for the protection, safety, and happiness of his people. And thus that birthright and inheritance, which we have in our liberties, shall by our own assents be turned into a mere tenancy at will and sufferance.

Touching the statute of 28 Edw. I., Articuli super Chartas; the scope of that statute, among other things, being to provide for the better observing and maintaining of Magna Charta, hath in it nevertheless two savings for the king; the one particular, as I take it, to preserve the ancient prisage, due and accustomed, as of wines and other goods; the other general, seigniory of the crown in all things.

To these two savings, besides the former answers, which may be for the most part applied to this statute as well as to the former, I add these further answers: the first of these two savings is of the same prisage of wines, which is excepted in the 25 Edw. I., but in some more clearness; for that here the word, wines, is expressly annexed to the word, prisage, which I take for so much to be in exposition of the former law: and albeit these words, and of other goods, be added, yet do I take it to be but a particular saving, or exception, which being qualified with the words, ancient, due, and accustomed, is not very dangerous, nor can be understood of prisage or levies upon goods of all sorts at the king's will and pleasure; but only of the old and certain customs upon wool, woolfels, and leather, which were due to the crown, long before the making of this statute.

For the latter of the two savings in this act, which is of the more unusual nature, and subject to the more exception; it is indeed general, and if we may believe the concurrent relations of the Histories of those times, as well those that are now printed, as those that remain only in manuscripts, it gave distaste from the beginning, and wrought no good effect, but produced such distempers and troubles in the state, as we wish may be buried in perpetual oblivion; and that the like saving in these and future times may never breed the like disturbance: for from hence arose a jealousy, that Magna Charta, which declared the ancient right of the subject, and was an absolute law in itself, being now confirmed by a latter act, with this addition of a general saving; for the king's right in all things by the saving was weakened, and that made doubtful, which was clear before. But not to depart from our main ground, which is, that savings in old Acts of Parliament, before the 2 H. V., are no proof that there were the like savings in the petitions for those acts; let me observe unto your lordships, and so leave this point, that albeit this petition, whereon this act of 28 Ed. I., was grounded, be perished; yet hath it pleased God, that the very frame and context of the act itself, as it is drawn up, and entered upon the Statute-roll, and printed in our book, doth manifestly import, that this saving came in by the king's answer, and was not in the original petition of the Lords and Commons; for it cometh in at the end of the act after the words (le roy ie veut) which commonly are the words of the royal assent to an Act of Parliament. And though they be mixed and followed with other words, as though the king's counsel, and the rest who were present at the making of this ordinance, did intend the same saving; yet is not that conclusive, so long as by the form of those times, the king's answer working upon the materials of the petition, might be conceived by some to make the law effectual, though varying from the frame of the petition.

The next reason which the Commons have commanded me to use, for which they still desire to be spared from adding this clause to their petition, is this: This offensive law of 28 E. I., which confirmed Magna Charta, with a saving, rested not long in peace, for it gave not that satisfaction to the lords or people, as was requisite they should have in a case so nearly concerning them: and therefore about 33 or 34 of the same king's reign, a latter Act of Parliament was made, whereby it was enacted, that all men should have their laws, and liberties, and free customs, as largely and wholly as they had used to have at any time when they had them best; and if any statutes had been made, or any customs brought in to the contrary, that all such statutes and customs should be void.

This was the first law which I call now to mind, that restored Magna Charta to the original purity wherein it was first moulded, aibeit it hath since been confirmed above twenty times more by several Acts of Parliament, in the reigns of divers most just and gracious kings, who were most apprehensive of their rights, and jealous of their honours, and always without savings; so as if between 22 and 34 Edw. I., Magna Charta stood blemished with many savings of the king's rights or seigniory, which might be conceived to be above the law; that stain and blemish was long since taken away, and cleared by those many absolute declarations and confirmations. of that excellent law which followed in after ages, and so it standeth at this day purged and. exempted now from any such saving whatsoever.

I beseech your lordships therefore to observe the circumstance of time, wherein we offer this petition to be presented to your lordships, and by us unto his Majesty: Do we offer it when Magna Charta stands clogged with savings ? No, my lords, but at this day, when latter and better confirmations have vindicated and set free that law from all exceptions; and shall we now annex another and worse saving to it, by an unnecessary clause in that petition, which we expect should have the fruits and effects of a law? Shall we ourselves relinquish or adulterate that, which cost our ancestors such care and trouble to purchase and refine? ~No, my lords, but as we should hold ourselves unhappy, if we should not amend the wretched estate of the poor subject, so let us hold it a wickedness to impair it.

Whereas it was further urged by your lordships, That to insert this clause into our petition, would be no more than to do that again at your lordships' motion and request, which we bad formerly done by the mouth of our Speaker; and that there is no cause why we should recede from that which so solemnly we have professed: To this I answer and confess, it was then in our hearts, and it is now, and shall be ever, not to encroach on his Majesty's sovereign power. But I beseech your lordships to observe the different occasion and reference of that protestation, and of this clause.

That was a general answer to a general message, which we received from his Majesty warning us not to encroach upon his prerogative; to which, like dutiful and loving subjects, we answered at full, according to the integrity of our own hearts; nor was there any danger in making such an answer to such a message, nor could we answer more truly or more properly: but did that answer extend to acknowledge "a sovereign power" in the king, above the laws and statutes mentioned in our petition, or control the liberties of the subjects, therein declared and demanded? No, my lords, it hath no reference to any such particulars; and the same words which in some cases may be fit to be used, and were unmannerly to be omitted, cannot in other cases be spoken, but with impertinency at the least, if not with danger. I have formerly opened my reasons, proving the danger of this clause, and am commanded to illustrate the impertinency of adding it to the petition, by a familiar case, which was put in our House by a learned gentleman, and of my own robe; the case is this, two manors or lordships lie adjoining together, and perchance intermixed, so as there is some difficulty to discern the true bounds of either; as it may be touching the confines where the liberty of the subject and the prerogative of the crown do border each upon the other; to the one of the manors the king hath clear right, and is in actual possession of it, but the other is the subject's. The king being misinformed, that the subject hath intruded upon his majesty's manor, asketh his subject, whether he doth enter upon his majesty's manor, or pretendeth any title to it, or any part of it. The subject being now justly occasioned, maketh answer truly to the king, that he hath not intruded, nor will intrude upon his Majesty's manor, nor doth make any claim or title to it, or any part of it. This answer is proper and fair; nay, it were unmannerly and ill done of the subject not to answer upon this occasion. Afterwards the king, upon colour of some double or single matter of record, seizeth into his highness's hands, upon a pretended title, the subject's manor: the subject then exhibiteth his Petition of Right to his Majesty, to retain restitution of his own manor, and therein layeth down title to his own manor only: Were it not improper and absurd, in this case for him to tell the king, that he did not intend to make any claim or title to his Majesty's manor, which is not questioned? Doubtless it were. This case, rightly applied, will fit our purpose well, and notably explain the nature of our petition.

Why should we speak of leaving entire the king's "sovereign power," whereon we encroach not, while we only seek to recover our own liberties and privileges, which have been seized upon by some of the king's ministers ? If our petition did trench actually upon his Majesty's prerogative, would our saying, that we intended it not, make the thing otherwise than the truth?

My lords, there needeth no protestation or declaration to the contrary of that which we have not done; and to put in such a clause, cannot argue less than a fear in us, as if we had invaded it: which we hold sacred, and are assured, that we have not touched either in our words or in our intentions. And touching your lordships' observation upon the word (leave), if it be not a proper word to give any new thing to the king, sure we are, it is a word dangerous in another sense; for it may amount, without all question, to acknowledge an old right of "sovereign power" .in his Majesty, above those laws and statutes whereon only our liberties are founded; a doctrine which we most humbly crave your lordships' leave freely to protest against. And for your lordships' proffering, that some saving should be requisite for preservation of his Majesty's "sovereign power" in respect our petition runneth in larger words than our laws and statutes whereon we ground it; what is this but a clear confession by your lordships, that this clause was intended by you to be that saving ? For other saving than this we find not tendered by you; and if it be such a saving, how can it stand with your lordships' other arguments, that it should be of no other effect than our former expression to his Majesty by the mouth of our Speaker? But I will not insist upon collections of this kind; I will only shew you the reasons of the Commons, why this petition needeth no such saving, albeit the words of these statutes be exceeded in the declaratory part of our petition: those things that are within the equity and true meaning of a statute, are as good laws as those which are contained in the express letter, and therefore the statutes of the 42 Edw. III., 36 Hen. III., Rot. Par. n. 12, and other the statutes made in this. time of King Edw. III., for the explanation of Magna Charta, which hath been so often vouched in this Parliament, though they differ in words from Magna Charta, had so saving annexed to any of them, because they enacted more than was contained in effect in that good law, under the words, "per legale judicium parium suorum, aut per legem terrae;" which by these latter laws are expounded to import, that none should be put to answer without presentment, or matter of record, or by due process, or writ original: and if otherwise, it should be void, and holden for error.

It hath not been yet shewn unto us from your lordships, that we have in any of our expressions or applications strained or misapplied any of the laws or statutes whereon we do insist; and we are very confident and well assured, that no such mistaking can be assigned in any point of our petition now under question: If therefore it do not exceed the true sense and construction of Magna Charta in the subsequent laws of explanation, whereon it is grounded; what reason is there to add a saving to this petition more than to those laws; since we desire to transmit the fruits of these our labours to posterity, not only for the justification of ourselves, in right of our present and their future liberties, but also for a brave expression and perpetual testimony of that grace and justice, which we assure ourselves we shall receive in his Majesty's speedy and clear answer? This is the thing we seek for, and this is the thing we hoped for, and this is the thing only will settle such an unity and confidence betwixt his Majesty and us, and raise such a cheerfulness in the hearts of all his loving subjects, as will make us proceed unanimously, and with all expedition, to supply him for his great occasions in such measure, and in such way, as may make him safe at home, and feared abroad.

The House of Lords at last agreed with the Commons in omnibus, and shortly after King Charles unwillingly gave his assent to this Petition of Right, and having received it the Parliament and whole country became a little more satisfied, and the dark cloud hovering over England for a short time disappeared.

In October, 1625, Mr. Glanville acted as Secretary-at-War to the Cadiz expedition, although by a letter of his, still in existence, he appeared to have much objected to this appointment, and he gave his reasons for doing so. On 7th March, 1626, he returned from the seat of war in company with Lord Wimbledon.

In 1630 Glanville was chosen Lent Reader of his House, and on the 20th May, 1637, advanced to the rank of Serjeant-at-Law. [fn 122] In 1635 Glainville and Mr. Rolles were ordered by the Lords, sitting in the celebrated Star Chamber, to end the difference (if they were able) between Lord Poulett and the Reverend Richard Gove.

Glanville also held the office of Notary and Prothonotary to the Court of Chancery with the fee of £100 per annum, payable out of the Hanaper, in trust for Lady Thomasine Carew and John Howston his Majesty's servant, in reversion with John Glanville.

In the year 1639 Serjeant Glanville acted in the capacity of a Judge and the following extracts from a letter will shew the business he was then upon: [fn 123]

Aug. 26, 1639, Bishop Skinner of Bristol, writing to Archbishop Laud, says, "I should not have been troublesome now to you had not Davis's arraignment at Bristol occasioned it. He was arraigned on Wednesday the 21st inst., and returned by the jury 'Not Guilty.' But why not guilty? when the evidence was so pregnant and the witnesses so constant and confident. I think the Judge himself is yet unsatisfied. The Tuesday night before I had free conference with Serjeant Glanville, who sat as Judge, about the whole case, and my desire to him was that a matter of this high nature might not be slighted, nor slumbered over, but carried at least with severity so as metus ad omnes, at which time he, Glanville, told me that he had advised upon the case with the Lord Keeper, Judge Croke, and the Attorney-General, whose opinions he repeated, and moreover said that he had been with you also. The truth is, both in his charge and arraignment, and even after Davis was quit by the jury, the Judge did his part copiously, gravely, and with semblance of great severity. The Judge (Glanville) took his cue to know of the prisoner what he thought of Bishops, hiasanswer was that he thought their calling to be the ordinance of God, and that they were appointed by Christ for the government of his church, and at last, upon the 'Not Guilty,' lie kneeled down and prayed for the King, Archbishops, and Bishops, and for all the Magistrates, etc. My conceit upon the whole matter is this, that the whole carriage of the business was a mere scene, wherein the Judge acted his part cunningly, the jury plausibly populo ut placerent, and the prisoner craftily, that he might no longer resemble Davis qui pertubat omnia."

Another extract from a letter in the same collection may be of interest:-
April 13, from Burdrop, 1640. Sir William Calley, writing to Richard Harvey, says, "I pray speak to Mr Long that in future my letters to him may be opened though he be from home and the inclosures delivered to you. Mr. Serjeant Glanville told me that he had bought Highway for £4700 and shewed me the articles. I marvel that you never wrote to me of the arrival of Sir Peter Wyche, considering our former acquaintance with him and with the means which were used for his first employment in Turkey."

In the Parliament summoned to meet at Westminster, 13th April, 1640, in the 16 Charles I., between eight and nine in the morning, the Earl Marshal of England, Lord Steward of his Majesty's Honourable Household, came into the outward room of the Commons' House, accompanied with the Treasurer of the Household, Mr. Secretary Windebank, and others, where the Clerk of the Crown, attended by the Cryer of Chancery, called over the names of all such knights, citizens, burgesses, and barons of the Cinque Ports as were then returned; and the said Lord Steward having sworn about forty, did make his deputation under his hand and seal, which was read, and which did nominate many of the Privy Council and other members of the House of Commons, thereby authorising them or any one or more of them to administer the oaths of supremacy and allegiance to all the members of the said House during that Parliament; and so departed to wait upon the King.

About twelve o'clock his Majesty, accompanied by all his nobles and other principal officers in great solemnity, rode in state from Whitehall to Westminster Abbey, and there heard a sermon preached by the Bishop of Ely, and from thence they went to the House of Lords. When the King was seated on his throne, and the Prince seated on his left hand, and all the Lords appearing in their robes, the Commons were called into the House of Peers, when hip Majesty made this short speech,-

"There was never a King that had more great and. weighty cause to call his people together than myself. I will not trouble you with the particulars; I have informed my Lord Keeper, and commanded him to speak and desire your attention."

Then Sir John Finch, Lord Keeper, in obedience to his Majesty's commands, rose up and delivered his speech to the assembled Lords and Commons, which being finished, King Charles addressed the Lords again, and when he had ended the Lord Keeper spoke to the Commons thus:-

"You. of the House of Commons, His Majesty's pleasure is that you do now repair to your own House, there to make choice of your Speaker, whom his Majesty will expect to be presented to him on Wednesday next at two of the clock in the afternoon."

The Commons then returned to their own House, and being seated, Mr. Treasurer put them in mind of the King's command for choosing a Speaker, not one of the King's own appointment, but freely among themselves, and then he nominated Mr. Serjeant Glanville. Mr. Serjeant Glanville then stood up and acquainted the House that he accounted it an honour to be named, but to be accepted a disadvantage to the House, and endeavoured to excuse himself from the occasion of the summons, which was a matter of weight. His excuse more raised the acclamations, To the Chair! To the Chair! and so at length, between Mr. Treasurer Vane and Mr. Secretary Windebank, he was brought to the chair, where again he excused himself, and afterwards appealed to the royal judgment of his Majesty.

Upon Wednesday, the 15th of April, his Majesty being seated on his throne, Mr. Serjeant Glanville was called in and was presented by the House of Commons as their Speaker, and he approaching the bar spake as follows:-

"May it please your Majesty:
"The knights, citizens, and burgesses of your Commons' House of Parliament, in conformity to most ancient and most constant usage (the best guide in great solemnities), according to their well-known privileges (a sure warrant for their proceedings), and in obedience to your Majesty's most gracious counsel and command (a duty well becoming royal subjects), have met together in their House and chosen a Speaker, one of themselves, to be the mouth indeed your servant of all the rest, to steer watchfully and prudently in all their weighty consultations and debates, to collect faithfully and readily the genuine sense of a numerous assembly, to propound the same seasonably, and. in apt questions of their final resolutions, and so represent them and their conclusions, their declarations and petitions, upon all urgent occasions, with truth, with right, with life, and with lustre, and with full advantage to your most excellent Majesty. With what judgment, what temper, what spirit, what elocution ought he to be endowed and qualified, that, with any hope of good success, should undertake such employment? Your Majesty in your great wisdom is best able to discern and judge, both as it may relate to your own peculiar and most important affairs of State and Government, and as it must relate to the proper business of your House of Commons, which was never final nor mean, and is like at this time to be exceeding weighty. Had your House of Commons been as happy in their choice (as they were regular, well warranted, and dutiful) of myself who stand elected yet to be their Speaker, and am now presented by them to your Majesty for your gracious and royal approbation, I should not have needed to become troublesome to your Majesty in this suit, for my releasement and discharge, which now, in duty to your Majesty and care for the good prosperity and success of your affairs, I hold myself obliged to make. My imperfections and disabilities are best known to myself, to your Majesty I suppose not altogether unknown, before whom, in the Court of my practice and profession, I have divers times had the honour and favour to appear and bear a part as an ordinary pleader.

"It is a learned age wherein we live under your Majesty's most peaceful and flourishing government, and your House of Commons (as it is now composed) is not the only representative body, but the abstracted quintessence of the whole commonalty of this your noble realm of England; there be very many amongst them, much fitter for this place than I am, few or none, in my opinion, so unfit as myself. I moat humbly beseech your Majesty, as you are the father of the Commonwealth and head of. the whole Parliament, to whom the care of all our welfare chiefly appertains, have respect to your own ends, have regard to your House of Commons, have compassion upon me the most unworthy member of that body, ready to faint with fears before the burthen light upon me.

"In the fulness therefore of your kingly power, your piety and your goodness, be graciously pleased to command your House of Commons once more to meet together to consult and deliberate better, about their choice of a meet Speaker, till they can agree of some such person as may be worthy of their choosing, and of your Majesty's acceptance."

The Lord Keeper, after receiving directions from his Majesty, replied .as follows:

"His Majesty, with a gracious ear, a princely attention, hath listened to your humble and modest excuse, full of flowers of wit, of flowers of eloquence, and flowers of judgment.

"Many reasons from yourself he hath taken to approve and agree to the choice and election, made by the House of Commons. He finds none from anything that you have said, to dissent or disagree from it: you have set forth your inabilities with so much ability, you have so well deciphered and delineated the parts, duties, and offices of a good Speaker, which is to collect the sense of the House judiciously, to render it with fidelity, to sum it up with dexterity, and to mould it up into fit and apt questions for resolutions, and those, as occasion shall serve, to present with vigour, advantage, and humility to his Majesty, he doubts not but that you, who are so perfect in the theory, will with great ease perform the practick part, and with no less commendation.

"His Majesty hath taken notice, and well remembers, your often waiting on him in private causes, wherein you have always so carried yourself, and won so much good opinion from his Majesty, as he doubteth not but that now when you are called forth to serve him and the publick, your affections and the powers of your soul will be set on work with more zeal and more alacrity. It's that for which the philosophers call a man happy, when men that have ability and goodness, to meet with an object fit to bring into act, and such at this time is your good fortune, an occasion being ministered unto you, to shew your ability and goodness, and your fidelity to his Majesty's service, to shew the candor and clearness of your heart towards those of the House of Commons; in all which his Majesty nothing doubteth, but you will so discharge yourself, as he may to his former favours, find occasion and reason to add more unto you, that the House of Commons may rejoice in this election of theirs, and that the whole kingdom, by your good, clear, and candid service, may receive fruits that may be comfortable unto all.

"His Majesty therefore doth approve and confirm the choice of the House of Commons, and ratifies you for the Speaker."

Speaker Glanville then rose, and addressing the King, said -

"Most gracious Sovereign, - My profession hath taught me, that from the highest judge there lies no writ of error, no appeal. What then remains, but that I first beseech Almighty God, the author and finisher of all good works, to enable me to discharge honestly and effectually, so great a task, so great a trust; and in the next place, humbly to acknowledge your Majesty's favour. Some enemies I might fear, the common enemy of such services, expectation and jealousy; I am unworthy of the former, and I contemn the latter; hence the touchstone of truth shall teach the babbling world I am, and will be found, an equal freeman, zealous to serve my sovereign, zealous to serve my country.

"A king's prerogative is as needful as great; without which he would want that majesty which ought to be inseparable from his crown; nor can any danger result thereby to the subjects' liberties, so long aas both admit the temperament of law and justice, especially under such a prince, who, to your immortal honour, hath published this to the whole world as your maxim, that the people's liberties strengthen the king's prerogative, and the king's prerogative is to defend the people's liberties; apples of gold in pictures of silver.

"Touching justice, there is not a more certain sign of an upright Judge, than by his patience to be well informed before sentence is given; and I may boldly say, that all the judges in the kingdom may take example of your Majesty, and learn their duties by your practice: myself have often been a witness thereof, to my no little admiration.

"From your patience, give me leave to press to your righteous judgment, and exemplify it, but in one instance. When your lords and people, in your last Parliament, presented your Majesty a petition concerning their rights and liberties, the petition being of no small weight, your Majesty, after mature deliberation, in a few but most effectual words (soit droit fait comme est desire) made such an answer, as shall renown you for just judgment to all posterity.

"Were this nation never so valiant and wealthy, if unity be not among us; what good will riches do us, or your Majesty, but enrich the conqueror? He that commands all hearts by love, he only commands assuredly; greatness without goodness can at best but command bodies.

"It shall therefore be my hearty prayer, that such a knot of love may be knit betwixt the head and the members, that, like Gordian's, it never be loosed; that all Jesuited foreign states, who look asquint upon our Hierusalem, may see themselves defeated of all the subtle plots and combinations of all their wicked hopes and expectations, to render us, if their mischief might take effect a people inconsiderable at home and contemptible abroad. Religion hath taught us 'si deus nobiscum quis contra nos?' and experience I trust will teach us 'si sumus insuparabiles.' It was found, and I hope it will ever be the term of the House of Commons, that the King and the people's good cannot be severed, and cursed be every one who goes about to destroy them." [fn 124]

go to Go to
Index to Book
go to Go to
Previous Page
go to Go to
Next Page
go to Go to
Jay's Genes