62

HISTORY OR ENGLAND.

CTIAP.

XIV.

16S9.

Disputesabout aDillof In-demnity.

Oates’s writ of error had been censured in the Painted Chamber.They had been plainly told across the table that they wereunjust judges; and the imputation was not the less irritatingbecause they were conscious that it was deserved. They re-fused to make any concession; and the Bill of Rights wassuffered to drop.*

But the most exciting question of this long and stormysession was, what punishment should be inflicted on those menwho had, during the interval between the dissolution of theOxford Parliament and the Revolution, been the advisers orthe tools of Charles and James. It was happy for England that,at this crisis, a prince who belonged to neither of her factions,who loved neither, who hated neither, and who, for the ac-complishment of a great design, wished to make use of both,was the moderator between them.

The two parties were now in a position closely resemblingthat in -which they had been twenty eight years before. Theparty indeed which had then been undermost was now up-permost: but the analogy between the situations is one of themost perfect that can be found in history. Both the Restora-tion and the Revolution were accomplished by coalitions. Atthe Restoration, those politicians who were peculiarly zealousfor liberty assisted to reestablish monarchy: at the Revolutionthose politicians who W'ere peculiarly zealous for monarchyassisted to vindicate liberty. The Cavalier would, at theformer conjuncture, have been able to effect nothing withoutthe help of Puritans who had fought for the Covenant; norwould the Whig, at the latter conjuncture, have offered a suc-cessful resistance to arbitrary power, had he not been backedby men who had a very short time before condemned resistanceto arbitrary power as a deadly sin. Conspicuous among those

* The history of this Bill may be traced In the Journals of the twoHouses, and in Grey’s Debates.