somewhat difficult to suspect him of a direct lie and falsehood. He
must have had some reasons, and perhaps not unplausible ones, for this
affirmation, of which all his hearers, as they had the accounts lying
before them, were at that time competent judges.[*] [2]

* See note B, at the end of the volume.

The method which all parliaments had hitherto followed, was to vote
a particular sum for the supply, without any distinction, or any
appropriation to particular services. So long as the demands of the
crown were small and casual, no great inconveniencies arose from this
practice. But as all the measures of government were now changed, it
must be confessed that, if the king made a just application of public
money, this inaccurate method of proceeding, by exposing him to
suspicion, was prejudicial to him. If he were inclined to act otherwise,
it was equally hurtful to the people. For these reasons, a contrary
practice, during all the late reigns, has constantly been followed by
the commons.

{1670.} When the parliament met after the prorogation, they entered anew
upon the business of supply, and granted the king an additional duty,
during eight years, of twelve pounds on each tun of Spanish wine
imported, eight on each tun of French. A law also passed, empowering him
to sell the fee-farm rents; the last remains of the demesnes, by which
the ancient kings of England had been supported. By this expedient, he
obtained some supply for his present necessities, but left the crown,
if possible, still more dependent than before. How much money might be
raised by these sales is uncertain; but it could not be near one million
eight hundred thousand pounds, the sum assigned by some writers.[*]

* Mr. Carte, in his vindication of the Answer to the
Bystander, (p 99,) says, that the sale of the fee-farm rents
would not yield above one hundred thousand pounds; and his
reasons appear well founded with regard to the
interpretation of any part of the act.

The act against conventicles passed, and received the royal assent. It
bears the appearance of mitigating the former persecuting laws; but if
we may judge by the spirit which had broken out almost every session
during this parliament, it was not intended as any favor to the
nonconformists. Experience probably had taught, that laws over rigid and
severe could not be executed. By this act, the hearer in a conventicle
(that is, in a dissenting assembly, w