term often devised,
strangely contrasted with the thing itself. Levies of money were long
raised under the pathetic appeal of _benevolences_. When Edward IV. was
passing over to France, he obtained, under this gentle demand, money
towards "the great journey," and afterwards having "rode about the more
part of the lands, and used the people in such fair manner, that they
were liberal in their gifts;" old Fabian adds, "the which way of the
levying of this money was after-named a benevolence." Edward IV. was
courteous in this newly-invented style, and was besides the handsomest
tax-gatherer in his kingdom! His royal presence was very dangerous to
the purses of his loyal subjects, particularly to those of the females.
In his progress, having kissed a widow for having contributed a larger
sum than was expected from her estate, she was so overjoyed at the
singular honour and delight, that she doubled her _benevolence_, and a
second kiss had ruined her! In the succeeding reign of Richard III. the
term had already lost the freshness of its innocence. In the speech
which the Duke of Buckingham delivered from the hustings in Guildhall,
he explained the term to the satisfaction of his auditors, who even then
were as cross-humoured as the livery of this day, in their notions of
what now we gently call "supplies." "Under the plausible name of
_benevolence_, as it was held in the time of Edward IV., your goods were
taken from you much against your will, as if by that name was understood
that every man should pay, not what he pleased, but what the king would
have him;" or, as a marginal note in Buck's Life of Richard III. more
pointedly has it, that "the name of _benevolence_ signified that every
man should pay, not what he of his own good will list, but what the king
of his good will list to take."[129] Richard III., whose business, like
that of all usurpers, was to be popular, in a statute even condemns this
"benevolence" as "a new imposition," and enacts that "none shall be
charged with it in future; many families having been ruined under these
pretended gifts." His successor, however, found means to levy "a
benevolence;" but when Henry VIII. demanded one, the citizens of London
appealed to the act of Richard III. Cardinal Wolsey insisted that the
law of a murderous usurper should not be enforced. One of the common
council courageously replied, that "King Richard, conjointly with
parliament, had enacted many good statutes." Even the