340

HISTORY OF ENGLAND.

CHAP.

XX.

1694 .

I'laceBiU.

Bill forthe Regu-lation ofTrials incases ofTreason.

The

Triennial

Bill

i>asscd.

Bill, the Bill for the Regulation of Trials in cases of Treason,and the Triennial Bill.

The Place Bill did hot reach the Lords. It was thrice readin the Lower House, but was not passed. At the very last mo-ment it was rejected by a hundred and seventy five votes to ahundred and forty two. Howe and Harley were the tellers forthe minority. *

The Bill for the Regulation of Trials in cases of Treasonwent up again to the Peers. Their Lordships again added toit the clause which had formerly been fatal to it. The Commonsagain refused to grant any new privilege to the hereditaryaristocracy. Conferences were again held: reasons were againexchanged: both Houses were again obstinate; and the billwas again lost. **

The Triennial Bill was more fortunate. It was brought inon the first day of the session, and went easily and rapidlythrough both Houses. The only question about which therewas any serious contention was, how long the existing Parlia-ment should be suffered to continue. After several sharpdebates November in the year 1696 was fixed as the extremeterm. The Tonnage Bill and the Triennial Bill proceededalmost side by side. Both were, on the twenty-second ofDecember, ready for the royal assent. William came in stateon that day to Westminster. The attendance of members ofboth Houses was large. When the Clerk of the Crown read thewords, “A Bill for the frequent Calling and Meeting of Par-liaments,” the anxiety was great. When the Clerk of theParliament made answer, “Le roy et la royne le veulent,” a

* Commons’ Journals, Feb. 20. 169£. As this bill never reached theLords, it is not to be found among their archives. I have therefore nomeans of discovering whether it differed in any respect from the bill of thepreceding year.

** The history of this bill may be read in the Journals of the Houses.The contest, not a very vehement one, lasted till the ‘20th of April.