maudlin
tenderness, he had encouraged to presume on his favour.

The services which the government had expected from him were performed,
not merely without flinching, but eagerly and triumphantly. His first
exploit was the judicial murder of Algernon Sidney. What followed was
in perfect harmony with this beginning. Respectable Tories lamented the
disgrace which the barbarity and indecency of so great a functionary
brought upon the administration of justice. But the excesses which
filled such men with horror were titles to the esteem of James.
Jeffreys, therefore, very soon after the death of Charles, obtained a
seat in the cabinet and a peerage. This last honour was a signal mark of
royal approbation. For, since the judicial system of the realm had been
remodelled in the thirteenth century, no Chief Justice had been a Lord
of Parliament. [233]

Guildford now found himself superseded in all his political functions,
and restricted to his business as a judge in equity. At Council he was
treated by Jeffreys with marked incivility. The whole legal patronage
was in the hands of the Chief Justice; and it was well known by the bar
that the surest way to propitiate the Chief Justice was to treat the
Lord Keeper with disrespect.

James had not been many hours King when a dispute arose between the two
heads of the law. The customs had been settled on Charles for life only,
and could not therefore be legally exacted by the new sovereign. Some
weeks must elapse before a House of Commons could be chosen. If, in
the meantime, the duties were suspended, the revenue would suffer; the
regular course of trade would be interrupted; the consumer would derive
no benefit, and the only gainers would be those fortunate speculators
whose cargoes might happen to arrive during the interval between the
demise of the crown and the meeting of the Parliament. The Treasury was
besieged by merchants whose warehouses were filled with goods on which
duty had been paid, and who were in grievous apprehension of being
undersold and ruined. Impartial men must admit that this was one of
those cases in which a government may be justified in deviating from the
strictly constitutional course. But when it is necessary to deviate from
the strictly constitutional course, the deviation clearly ought to be
no greater than the necessity requires. Guildford felt this, and gave
advice which did him honour. He proposed that the duties should be
levied, but should be ke