The benefit which must have resulted to England, both by accession of strength and security, was riot despicable; and as the English were by far the greater nation, and possessed the seat of government, the objections, either from the point of honor or from jealousy, could not reasonably have any place among them.

The English parliament, indeed, seem to have been swayed merely by the vulgar motive of national antipathy.

And they persisted so obstinately in their prejudices, that all the efforts for a thorough union and incorporation ended only in the abolition of the hostile laws formerly enacted between the kingdoms.[*] * The commons were even so averse to the union, that they had complained in the former session, to the lords, of the bishop of Bristol, for writing a book in favor of it; and the prelate was obliged to make submissions for this offence.

The crime imputed to him seems to have consisted in his treating of a subject which lay before the parliament: so little notion had they as yet of general liberty.

See Parliamentary History, vol.v.p 108, 109, 110 Some precipitate steps, which the king, a little after his accession, had taken, in order to promote his favorite project, had been here observed to do more injury than service.