DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.69463#0338
STRAFFORD. [england.
trouble ourselves with disputes about a constitution, fran-
chises, property of goods, and the like ? What may any
man call his own, if not the liberty of his person ? I am
weary of treading these ways.” Sir Thomas Wentworth,
after reprobating the folly and the tyranny of the mini-
sters, added, “These have introduced a privy council,
ravishing, at once, the spheres of all ancient government*
destroying all liberty, imprisoning us without bail or
bond. They have taken from us—what shall I say ? In-
deed, what have they left us ? By tearing up the roots of
all property, they have taken from us every means of sup-
plying the king, and of ingratiating ourselves, by volun-
tary proofs of our duty and attachment towards him. To
the making whole all these breaches, I shall apply myself;
and to all these diseases, shall propound a remedy. By
one and the same thing have the king and the people
been hurt, and by the same must they be cured. We
must vindicate—what ? New things ? No; our ancient,
legal, and vital liberties, by reinforcing the laws enacted
by our ancestors; by setting such a stamp upon them,
that no licentious spirit shall dare, henceforth, to invade
them. And shall we think this a way to break a parlia-
ment ? No ; our desires are moderate and just. I speak
both for the interest of the king and people. If we enjoy
not these rights, it will be impossible for us to relieve him.
Let us, therefore, never doubt of a favourable reception
from his goodness.” How superior was such native and
spontaneous eloquence to the mechanical speech-making
of modern times!
It may be perceived, however, that the language of
Wentworth, though bold and manly, is of a less republi-
can cast than that of Philips, and more favourable to the
king. In fact, in less than a year from the date of these
memorable harangues, his opinions underwent a total
change, and he became as firm a pillar of the throne, as
trouble ourselves with disputes about a constitution, fran-
chises, property of goods, and the like ? What may any
man call his own, if not the liberty of his person ? I am
weary of treading these ways.” Sir Thomas Wentworth,
after reprobating the folly and the tyranny of the mini-
sters, added, “These have introduced a privy council,
ravishing, at once, the spheres of all ancient government*
destroying all liberty, imprisoning us without bail or
bond. They have taken from us—what shall I say ? In-
deed, what have they left us ? By tearing up the roots of
all property, they have taken from us every means of sup-
plying the king, and of ingratiating ourselves, by volun-
tary proofs of our duty and attachment towards him. To
the making whole all these breaches, I shall apply myself;
and to all these diseases, shall propound a remedy. By
one and the same thing have the king and the people
been hurt, and by the same must they be cured. We
must vindicate—what ? New things ? No; our ancient,
legal, and vital liberties, by reinforcing the laws enacted
by our ancestors; by setting such a stamp upon them,
that no licentious spirit shall dare, henceforth, to invade
them. And shall we think this a way to break a parlia-
ment ? No ; our desires are moderate and just. I speak
both for the interest of the king and people. If we enjoy
not these rights, it will be impossible for us to relieve him.
Let us, therefore, never doubt of a favourable reception
from his goodness.” How superior was such native and
spontaneous eloquence to the mechanical speech-making
of modern times!
It may be perceived, however, that the language of
Wentworth, though bold and manly, is of a less republi-
can cast than that of Philips, and more favourable to the
king. In fact, in less than a year from the date of these
memorable harangues, his opinions underwent a total
change, and he became as firm a pillar of the throne, as