The History of England from the First Invasion by the Romans - to the Accession of King George the Fifth - Volume 8 by John Lingard;Hilaire Belloc
page 262 of 732 (35%)
page 262 of 732 (35%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
those of Widdrington and Whitelock, Scot and Marten. But the first two
declined to attend; and, when the clerk brought them a summons, retired into the country.[1] [a]At the recommendation of this committee, the house passed a vote declaratory of the law, that it was high treason in the king of England, for the time being, to levy war against the parliament and kingdom of England; and this was followed up with an ordinance erecting a high court of justice to try the question of fact, whether Charles Stuart, king of England, had or had not been guilty of the treason described in the preceding vote. But the subserviency of the Commons was not imitated by the Lords. They saw the approaching ruin of their own order in the fall of the sovereign; and when the vote and ordinance were transmitted to their house, they rejected both without a dissentient voice, and then adjourned for a week.[b] This unexpected effort surprised, but did not disconcert, the Independents.[c] They prevailed on the Commons to vote that the people are the origin of all just power, and from this theoretical truth proceeded to deduce two practical falsehoods. As if no portion of that power had been delegated to the king and the lords, they determined that "the Commons of England assembled in parliament, being chosen by and representing the people, have the supreme authority:" and thence inferred [Footnote 1: Journals, Dec. 23. Whitelock, 363.] [Sidenote a: A.D. 1649. Jan. 1.] [Sidenote b: A.D. 1649. Jan. 2.] [Sidenote c: A.D. 1649. Jan. 4.] that "whatsoever is enacted and declared for law by the Commons in parliament hath force of law, and concludes all the people of the nation, |
|