C H A R L E S If.

themselves, particularly the chancellor. The houseof commons represented to the king, that his decla-ration of Breda contained no promise to the presby-terians and other dissenters, but only an expressionof his intentions, upon supposition of the con-currence of parliament : That even if the non-conformists had been entitled to plead a promise,they had intrusted this claim , as all their otherrights and privileges, to the house of commons,who were their representatives , and who nowfreed the king from that obligation : That itwas not to be supposed , that his majesty andthe houses were so bound by that declaration asto be incapacitated from making any laws, whichmight be contrary to it : That even at the king’srestoration, there were laws of uniformity inforce, which could not be dispensed with butby act of parliament : And that the indulgenceintended would prove most pernicious both tochurch and state, would open the door to schism,encourage faction, disturb the public peace, anddiscredit the wisdom of the legislature. The kingdid not think proper, aster this remonstrance, toinsist any farther at present on the project ofindulgence.

In order to deprive the catholics of all hopes,the two houses concurred in a remonstranceagainst them. The king gave a gracious answer;though he scrupled not to profess his gratitudetowards many of that persuasion , on account oftheir faithful services in his father’s cause andin hi; own. A proclamation, for form’s fake,

II A f:lxiii.

166 J,