mputation of delinquency.[*]

The most unpopular of all Charles's measures, and the least justifiable,
was the revival of monopolies, so solemnly abolished, after reiterated
endeavors, by a recent act of parliament. Sensible of this unhappy
measure, the king had of himself recalled, during the time of his first
expedition against Scotland, many of these oppressive patents; and the
rest were now annulled by authority of parliament, and every one who was
concerned in them declared delinquents. The commons carried so far their
detestation of this odious measure, that they assumed a power which had
formerly been seldom practised,[**] and they expelled all their members
who were monopolists or projectors; an artifice by which, besides
increasing their own privileges, they weakened still further the very
small party which the king secretly retained in the house. Mildmay,
a notorious monopolist, yet having associated himself with the ruling
party, was still allowed to keep his seat. In all questions, indeed, of
elections, no steady rule of decision was observed; and nothing further
was regarded than the affections and attachments of the parties.[***]
Men's passions were too much heated to be shocked with any instance of
injustice, which served ends so popular as those which were pursued by
this house of commons.

* Clarendon, vol. i. p. 206. Whitlocke, p. 37. Rush. vol. v.
p. 235, 359. Nalson, vol. i. p. 807.

** Lord Clarendon says it was entirely new; but there are
instances of it in the reign of Elizabeth. D'Ewes, p. 296,
352. There are also instances in the reign of James.

*** Clarendon, vol. i. p. 176.

The whole sovereign power being thus in a manner transferred to the
commons, and the government, without any seeming violence or disorder,
being changed in a moment from a monarchy almost absolute to a pure
democracy, the popular leaders seemed willing for some time to suspend
their active vigor, and to consolidate their authority, ere they
proceeded to any violent exercise of it. Every day produced some new
harangue on past grievances. The detestation of former usurpations was
further enlivened; the jealousy of liberty roused; and, agreeably to the
spirit of free government, no less indignation was excited by the view
of a violated constitution, than by the ravages of the most enormous
tyranny.

This was the time when genius and capacity of all kinds, freed from the
restraint of autho