WILLIAM AND ALARY.

241

ties and to particular individuals; and our ancestors, as usual,did not think it worth their while to dispute this claim, till itproduced serious inconvenience. At length, in the reign ofElizabeth, the power of creating monopolies began to be grossly-abused; and, as soon as it began to be grossly abused, it beganto be questioned. The Queen wisely declined a conflict with aHouse of Commons backed by the whole nation. She franklyacknowledged that there was reason for complaint: she cancelledthe patents which had excited the public clamours; and herpeople, delighted by this concession, and by the graciousmanner in which it had been made, did not require from her anexpress renunciation of the disputed prerogative.

The discontents which her wisdom had appeased wererevived by the dishonest and pusillanimous policy which hersuccessor called Kingcraft. He readily granted oppressivepatents of monopoly. Whenheneeded the help of his Parliament,he as readily annulled them. As soon as the Parliament hadceased to sit, his Great Seal was put to instruments more odiousthan those which he had recently cancelled. At length that excel-lent House, of Commons which met in 1623 determined to apply astrong remedyto the evil. The King was forced to give his assentto a law which declared monopolies established by royal authorityto be null and void. Some exceptions, however, were made,and, unfortunately, were not very clearly defined. It wasespecially provided that every Society of Merchants which hadbeen instituted for the purpose of carrying on any trade shouldretain all its legal privileges.* The question whether a mono-poly granted by the Crown to such a company were or were nota legal privilege was left unsettled, and continued to exercise,during many years, the ingenuity of lawyers.** The nation,

* Stat. 21 Jac. 1. c. 3.

** See particularly Two Letters by a Barrister concerning the EastIndia Company (1676), and an Answer to the Two Letters published in theMacaulay, Hislory. VI. 16