JAMES THE SECOND.

91

The Lords had, in the meantime, discussed several im- c im-portant questions. The Tory party had always been strong J6 85 .among the peers. It included the whole bench of Bishops, procoed-and had been reinforced, during the four years which had iheLords.elapsed since the last dissolution, by several fresh creations.

Of the new nobles, the most conspicuous were the LordTreasurer Rochester, the Lord Keeper Guildford, the LordChief Justice Jeffreys, the Lord Godolphin, and the LordChurchill, who, after his return from Versailles, had beenmade a baron of England.

The peers early took into consideration the case of fourmembers of their body who had been impeached in the latereign, but had never been brought to trial, and had, after along confinement, been admitted to bail by the Court ofKing’s Bench. Three of the noblemen who were thus underrecognisances were Roman Catholics. The fourth was a Pro-testant of great note and influence, the Earl of Danby. Sincehe had fallen from power and had been accused of treason bythe Commons, four Parliaments had been dissolved; but hehad been neither acquitted nor condemned. In 1679 theLords had considered, with reference to his situation, thequestion whether an impeachment was or was not terminatedby a dissolution. They had resolved, after long debate andfull examination of precedents, that the impeachment wasstill pending. That resolution they now rescinded. A fewWhig nobles protested against this step, but to little purpose.

The Commons silently acquiesced in the decision of the UpperHouse. Danby again took his seat among his peers, andbecame an active and powerful member of the Tory party. *

the constitutional question on which the Lords thus, inthe short space of six years, pronounced two diametricallyopposite decisions, slept during more than a century, andwas at length revived by the dissolution which took place* Lords’ Journals, March 18, 19.1079, May 22 . 1685.