The king indeed went so far as to tell the
parliament from the throne, "that he had fully informed himself of that
matter, and did affirm, that no part of those moneys which they had
given him had been diverted to other uses; but, on the contrary, besides
all those supplies, a very great sum had been raised out of his standing
revenue and credit, and a very great debt contracted; and all for the
war." Though artificial pretences have often been employed by kings
in their speeches to parliament, and by none more than Charles, it is
somewhat difficult to suspect him of a direct lie and falsehood. He
must have had some reasons, and perhaps not unplausible ones, for this
affirmation, of which all his hearers, as they had the accounts lying
before them, were at that time competent judges.[*] [2]
* See note B, at the end of the volume.
The method which all parliaments had hitherto followed, was to vote
a particular sum for the supply, without any distinction, or any
appropriation to particular services. So long as the demands of the
crown were small and casual, no great inconveniencies arose from this
practice. But as all the measures of government were now changed, it
must be confessed that, if the king made a just application of public
money, this inaccurate method of proceeding, by exposing him to
suspicion, was prejudicial to him.
Pages:
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156