that a measure was proposed the acceptance of which was doubtful, or the nature of which would provoke debate.  So little jealousy, indeed, was in quiet times entertained of the power of the crown, and so little was a residence in London to the taste of the burgesses and the country gentlemen, that not only were their expenses defrayed by a considerable salary, but it was found necessary to forbid them absenting themselves from their duties by a positive enactment.[218]

In the composition of the House of Commons, however, which had now assembled, no symptoms appeared of such indifference.  The election had taken place in the midst of great and general excitement; and the members chosen, if we may judge from their acts and their petitions, were men of that broad resolved temper, who only in times of popular effervescence are called forward into prominence.  It would have probably been unsafe for the crown to attempt dictation or repression at such a time, if it had desired to do so.  Under the actual circumstances, its interest was to encourage the fullest expression of public feeling.

The proceedings were commenced with a formal “act of accusation” against the clergy, which was submitted to the king in the name of the Commons of England, and contained a summary of the wrongs of which the people complained.  This remarkable document must have been drawn up before the opening of parliament, and must have been presented in the first week of the session,—­probably on the first day on which the House met to transact business.[219] There is appearance of haste in the composition, little order being observed in the catalogue of grievances; but inasmuch as it contains the germ of all the acts which were framed in the following years for the reform of the church, and is in fact the most complete exhibition which we possess of the working of the church system at the time when it ceased to be any more tolerable, I have thought it well to insert it uncurtailed.  Although the fact of the presentation of this petition has been well known, it has not been accurately described by any of our historians, none of them appearing to have seen more than incorrect and imperfect epitomes of it.[220]

“TO THE KING OUR SOVEREIGN LORD

“In most humble wise show unto your Highness and your most prudent wisdom your faithful, loving, and most obedient servants the Commons in this your present parliament assembled; that of late, as well through new fantastical and erroneous opinions grown by occasion of frantic seditious books compiled, imprinted, published, and made in the English tongue, contrary and against the very true Catholic and Christian faith; as also by the extreme and uncharitable behaviour and dealing of divers ordinaries, their commissaries and sumners, which have heretofore had, and yet have the examination in and upon the said errours and heretical opinions; much discord, variance, and debate hath risen, and more and more daily is like to increase and ensue amongst the universal sort of your said subjects, as well spiritual as temporal, each against the other—­in most uncharitable manner, to the great inquietation, vexation, and breach of your peace within this your most Catholic Realm: