was a draft of a paper of a peculiar kind, inquiring "whether Sir John may not be sequestered in the meantime;" in fact, whether he could not be struck without the awkwardness of being heard. Eliot stood between a Hamburgh merchantman and a gang of Welsh pirates; this again seemed to be in some way an infraction of the Lord Admiral's designs and ideas. Several cases are recited during this period of the government by prerogative, in which "Bottomless Bagge's" foul play, and the vile connivance of the Council are brought out conspicuously. "Honesty among them," says Mr. Forster, "was only a commodity to deal in-too scarce to be wasted; and to any share of it such people as Sir John Eliot could have no claim." We next find Eliot, in those days of prerogative, refusing the loan, the celebrated loan, of which John Hampden said, "I could be content to lend as well as others, but I should fear to draw upon myself the curse in Magna Charta, which should be read twice a year, against those who infringe it." Eliot issued a public appeal through the West against the loan, and grounded his resistance to it upon its essentially unconstitutional character. Bagge, who in addition to being a rascal, was an exceeding ass, wrote to show that the much-vaunted Magna Charta, which Eliot magnified, was a mere abortion; he laughed at the Barons and their rebellious armies in the meadows of Staines, and called their meeting together" satanical," and Eliot is "satanical," too, for citing it. About this business Eliot found his way

into the Gate-house. The nation raised a loud outcry for a Parliament. It had been hoped that Eliot might have been outlawed; at any rate, it was hoped that he might be excluded from a Parliament. Alas! when he was released, it was only to be received with rapture throughout Cornwall, and to be returned, not as member for Newport, but as knight of the shire. Thus the man most disaffected to the Duke and the Court appeared with half the country at his heels in the third Parliament of Charles I.; that ominous Parliament, than which only another was more fearful to the king. It met in March, 1628. Eliot was then thirty-eight years old, and had only four more years to live at all. How much to be done in those four years! The king at once told his Commons. that he only called them together that they should vote him sufficient supply. He trusted they would not give way to the follies of particular men. The "particular men," however, entered the House with the same resolution they exhibited two years before. Eliot was one of the first speakers upon those grounds of offence growing out of the resistance of Nonconformity to prelatical assumptions. How eloquent are the following words, and how do their forcible expressions enlighten us on the character of the man!

66

Religion," he proceeded, "is the chief virtue of a man, devotion and religion; and of devotion, prayer and fasting are the chief characters. Let these be corrupted in their use, the devotion is corrupt. If the devotion be once tainted, the religion is impure.

It then, denying the power of godliness, becomes but an outward form; and, as it is concluded in the text, a religion that is in vain. Of such religion in this place, or at these times, I impeach no man. Let their own consciences accuse them. Of such devotion I make no judgment upon others, but leave them to the Searcher of all hearts. This only for caution I address to you: that if any of us have been guilty in this kind, let us now here repent it. And let us remember that repentance is not in words. It is not a 'Lord! Lord!' that will carry us into heaven, but the doing the will of our Father which is in heaven. And to undo our country is not to do that will. It is not that Father's will that we should betray that mother. Religion, repentance, prayer, these are not private contracts to the public breach and prejudice. There must be a sincerity in it all; a throughout integrity and perfection, that our words and works be answerable. If our actions correspond not to our words, our successes will not be better than our hearts. When such near kindred differ, strangers may be at odds; and the prevention of this evil is the chief reason that I move for. Nor is it without cause that this motion does proceed. If we reflect upon the former passages of this place, much might be thence collected to support the propriety of the caution. But the desire is better, to reform errors than to remember them. My affections strive for the happiness of this meeting, but it must be had from God. It is His blessing though our crown. Let us for Him,

therefore, in all sincerity expect it; and if any by vain shadows would delude us, let us distinguish between true substances and those shadows. It is religion, and not the name of religion, that must guide us; that in the truth thereof we may with all unity be concordant: not turning it into subtlety and art, playing with God as with the powers of men; but in the sincerity of our souls doing that work we came for. Which now I most humbly move, and pray for that blessing from above."

His attacks upon the illegalities of the last two years were as brave as before: the state of maritime affairs-the suspension and violation of statutes. With much condemnation, however, a vote of five subsidies was granted to the king; but the time when the collection was to be made, or the Bill introduced, was not mentioned. The House immovably resolved that both were to depend on the good faith of the king. It was the greatest grant ever made in Parliament. The Secretary, on behalf of the king, proceeded to thank the House, but coupled thanks of Buckingham with thanks of the king. Sir John Eliot leaped up, and taxed Mr. Secretary with intermingling a subject's speech with the king's message: "in that House they knew of no other distinction but that of king and subjects." Whereupon many of the House made exclamation, " Well spoken, Sir John Eliot!"

There were, to our minds, some extraordinary subjects of debate, especially on the king's claim to commit without cause shown on the face of the war

rant.

"The greatest question," exclaimed Pym,

"What," answered

"that ever was in this place or elsewhere!" Selden and Coke both spoke upon it. Coke, "shall I accept such law? Shall I have a state of inheritance for life, or for years, in my land, and shall I be a tenant at will, for my liberty! A freeman to be a tenant at will for his freedom! There is no such tenure in all Littleton." We follow with earnest interest those discussions in which Eliot took so great and prominent a part, out of which came into existence the immortal Petition of Rights. These are great debates, greater debates are not recorded in history. "Magna Charta is such a fellow," said Coke, "he will have no Sovereign." The great charter of the people's liberties was upheld and strengthened by the Petition of Rights.

And it is in the course of these debates that the stately form of Wentworth, afterwards Earl of Strafford, rises to the life. Wentworth's was no vulgar ambition; there is little reason to think that any such spirit, textured as his was, could have any hearty sympathies with the people or with freedom. True, his voice was also heard in favour of the great Petition of Rights; but Mr. Forster has very distinctly brought out the reason of this. He had been thwarted by Buckingham, and the majestic and powerful man-to whom, in the great gallery of statesmen, Buckingham bore some such resemblance as a butterfly might bear to an eagle-taught the favourite more rightly to estimate his power. Wentworth had been refused the