[The Life of John Milton, Volume 5 (of 7), 1654-1660 by David Masson]@TWC D-Link book
The Life of John Milton, Volume 5 (of 7), 1654-1660

CHAPTER I
14/295

the amount of his prerogative in the form of a negative on Bills trenching on fundamentals.

In his last speech he had himself indicated these "fundamentals," which ought to be safe against attack even by Parliament--one of them being Liberty of Conscience, another the Control of the Militia as belonging to the Protector _in conjunction with_ the Parliament, and a third the provision, that every Parliament should sit but for a fixed period.

In all other matters he was content with a negative for twenty days only; but on bills trenching on these fundamentals he required a negative absolutely.

The question had come to the vote in a very subtle form.
The motion of the Opposition was that Bills should become Law without the Protector's consent after twenty days, "provided that such Bills contain nothing in them contrary to such matters wherein the Parliament shall think fit to give a negative to the Lord Protector," while the amendment of the Oliverians or Court-party altered the wording into "wherein the Single Person and the Parliament shall declare a negative to be in the Single Person," thus giving Cromwell himself, and not the Parliament only, a right of deciding where a negative should lie.

On this question the Oliverians were beaten by 109 votes to 85, and the decision would probably have caused a rupture had not the Opposition conceded a good deal when they went on to settle the matters wherein Parliament _would_ grant the Protector a negative.[1] [Footnote 1: Journals of dates and Godwin, IV.


<<Back  Index  Next>>

D-Link book Top

TWC mobile books