king, and his heirs, according to the
act of settlement. It was proposed that this oath should be voluntary,
tendered to all persons, and their subscription or refusal recorded
without any other penalty. This article was violently opposed by the
earl of Nottingham, and the other lords of the tory interest. They
observed, that the government was first settled with another oath, which
was like an original contract; so that there was no occasion for a
new imposition; that oaths relating to men's opinions had been always
considered as severe impositions; and that a voluntary oath was in its
own nature unlawful. During these disputes, another bill of abjuration
was brought into the house of commons by sir Charles Hedges, that should
be obligatory on all persons who enjoyed employments in church or state;
it likewise included an obligation to maintain the government in king,
lords, and commons, and to maintain the church of England, together with
the toleration for dissenters. Warm debates arose upon the question,
Whether the oath should be imposed or voluntary; and at length it was
carried for imposition by the majority of one voice. They agreed to
insert an additional clause, declaring it equally penal to compass or
imagine the death of her royal highness the princess Anne of Denmark,
as it was to compass or imagine the death of the king's eldest son and
heir. In the house of peers this bill was strenuously opposed by the
tories; and when, after long debates, it passed on the twenty-fourth day
of February, ten lords entered a protest against it, as an unnecessary
and severe imposition.

The whole nation now seemed to join in the cry for a war with France.
Party heats began to abate; the factions in the city of London were in a
great measure moderated by the union of the two companies trading to the
East Indies, which found their mutual interest required a coalition.
The tories in the house of commons having concurred so heartily with the
inclinations of the people, resolved, as far it lay in their power, to
justify the conduct of their party in the preceding parliament. They
complained of some petitions and addresses which had reflected upon
the proceedings of the last house of commons, and particularly of the
Kentish petition. The majority, however, determined that it was the
undoubted right of the people of England to petition or address the
king for the calling, sitting, or dissolving of parliaments, and for the
redressi