412 JURA POPULI ANGLICANI. The other pamphlet mentioned above, was the production of Lord Somers, and intitled, "Jura Populi Anglicani; or, the Subject's Right of Petitioning set forth. Occasioned by the case of the Kentish Petitioners. With some Thoughts on the Reasons which induced those Gentlemen to petition; and of the Commons' Right of Imprisoning. London: printed in the year 1701." In a preface of considerable length, the author notices the general dissatisfaction of the nation, at the late proceedings of the Commons, which had given just grounds for jealousy and suspicion, and plainly demonstrated very extraordinary designs. After considering the different acceptations of the terms Whig and Tory, he shews that neither can properly belong to the faction that ruled in Parliament. "If we consider the "If we consider the men, and compare what they have done with the pretended principles of their party, 'twill hardly seem odder to see Sir Edward Seymour bring in a bill to prevent bribery; or, Mr. John Howe exclaim against exorbitant grants; or, Sir Christopher Musgrave violent either against grants, or a standing army; or, to find them who discovered a plain inclination to quiet France in the possession of all the Spanish dominions, quarrel at the Treaty of Partition for giving France too much, than to see them assume the name of Tories. Is not Robert Harley a ring-leader in this Tory party? Is not his brother Edward a leading member? Does not he attend all ordi If there's a Brutus in the nation found, Posterity will be asham'd to own, The actions, we, their ancestors, have done, JURA POPULI ANGLICANI. 413 nances, and as constantly, every week-day, frequent the service of the church (for his is a church party) in St. Stephen's chapel, as he does the conventicle every Lord'sday? Are not the Foley's, Winningtons, St. John's, and others of that leaven, members of this fraternity? 'Tis, methinks, hard to say how a faction, blended with such a number of names noted for their inveteracy to the true Tory principles, can be called a Tory party. Nothing, sure, but necessity, and a want of men to serve some great design, could make them, who pretend to be genuine Tories, and consequently must hate a comprehension, and love to keep their party pure and unmixed, herd with a set of men so odious to them." Our author justly observes, that if we would judge rightly between the contending parties, we ought to consider their actions, and not the names and characters they assume, or give to each other. That the practices of the prevailing party were in direct opposition to the avowed principles of the Tories, he argues, from their repeated invasions of the prerogative, their usurpations upon the privileges of the Lords, and the distrust they had created between the king and his people, which was subverting one principal pillar and support of the monarchy. He further shews, that they had broken in upon the rights of the people, by taking upon themselves both the executive and legislative powers, and punishing men contrary to law. From the principles of the men by whom they were supported in parliament, who were known for their hatred to the king, and their zeal for the interests of the abdicated family, there was strong reason to suspect the tendency of their measures. For, "in this party are all those whom either the love of money, or of the St. Germain family, or Popery, has reconciled to the French interest." The author observes, that England, of all countries, had most reason to be alarmed at the growing power of France, the apprehensions from which, had given rise to the discontents and resentments expressed by the people 414 JURA POPULI ANGLICANI. against their representatives, who discovered no concern to prevent it. These clamours, which echoed through the kingdom, produced the Kentish Petition, for which those who presented it were committed to prison. In discussing the illegality of this measure, the writer arranges his thoughts under the three following heads: 1. What power the House of Commons has to imprison. 2. The subject's Right of Petitioning. 3. What reasons the gentlemen of the county of Kent had to offer that petition when they did. The arguments brought forward are such as might be expected from the eminent abilities of the writer, who confirms them by a reference to the best legal authorities, supported by the claims of reason, and the natural rights of mankind. Under the last particular, he insinuates that French gold had a considerable influence in the management of public affairs. The party attacked in these publications was not without its advocates. Legion was assailed in "England's Enemies Exposed, and its true Friends and Patriots defended. By a True Englishman;" who was attacked in his turn, in the preface to the second edition of "The Present Disposition of England Considered.". The author of Jura Populi Anglicani, observing upon the first of these writers, says, “If he shew no better judgment in discovering who deserve to be called the enemies, who the friends of England, than in laying the charge of babbling and nonsense (against Legion), he will do as little service to England in helping her to make any useful discovery of her real friends and enemies, as he has done to his friends by his poor, his paltry, and palpable flatteries." The points of charge brought against the Commons by Legion, were infused into a ballad, and publicly cried about the streets, as was Legion himself, to the great annoyance of his opponents. To turn the edge of these satires, an anonymous writer thought fit to reprint them, with a Commentary PAMPHLETS AGAINST LEGION. 415 of his own, under the title of "The Ballad; or, some scurrilous Reflections, in verse, on the Proceedings of the Honourable House of Commons, answered Stanza by Stanza. With the Memorial, alias Legion, replyed to, Paragraph by Paragraph. The fourth edition. London; printed by D. Edwards, and sold by the booksellers of London and Westminster, 1701." 8vo. Of these political squibs, many thousand copies were dispersed about the country, but the plain dealing of Legion made the greatest impression. CHAPTER XXVII. Controversy arising out of the late Proceedings in Parliament.-Sir Humphrey Mackworth's Vindication of the Commons.-Replied to by Lord Somers in his Vindication of the Lords.-And by De Foe in his Original Power of the People of England.-Abstract of his Argument.—Strictures upon one of his Positions.-Inquiry into the Origin of Government.-And the Nature of Original Right.-Suggestions for the Improvement of our Constitution. And for the more general Diffusion of Wealth.-Third Edition of De Foe's Tract.—Dedication to the Lord Mayor. 1701. THE proceedings detailed in the foregoing chapter, gave rise to the discussion of some grave political questions, which involved as well the liberty of the subject, as the privileges of parliament. In the course of the controversy, Sir Humphrey Mackworth, a Welch member, published "A Vindication of the Rights of the Commons of England. By a Member of the Honourable the House of Commons. Lond. 1701." Folio. After three separate dedications, to the King, Lords, and Commons, bespeaking a candid reception of his work, he proceeds in a Preface of some length to unfold its object, as well as the motives that influenced him to undertake it: and, that he might not be charged with shrinking from the cause he had undertaken to defend, he affixed his name to each of the dedications. For the sake of method, he divides his work into four chapters, bearing the following titles, which sufficiently unfold his purpose. 1. Of the nature and excellency |