[175] Rot. Parl. p. 372, 385.
[176] Besides the contemporary historians, we may read a full narrative
of these proceedings in the Rolls of Parliament, vol. iii. p. 382. It
appears that Mowbray was the most offending party, since, independently
of Hereford's accusation, he is charged with openly maintaining the
appeals made in the false parliament of the eleventh of the king. But
the banishment of his accuser was wholly unjustifiable by any motives
that we can discover. It is strange that Carte should express surprise
at the sentence upon the duke of Norfolk, while he seems to consider
that upon Hereford as very equitable. But he viewed the whole of this
reign, and of those that ensued, with the jaundiced eye of Jacobitism.
[177] Rot. Parl. 1 H. IV. p. 420, 426; Walsingham, p. 353, 357;
Otterburn, p. 199; Vita Ric. II. p. 147.
[178] It is fair to observe that Froissart's testimony makes most in
favour of the king, or rather against his enemies, where it is most
valuable; that is, in his account of what he heard in the English court
in 1395, 1. iv. c. 62, where he gives a very indifferent character of
the duke of Gloucester. In general this writer is ill-informed of
English affairs, and undeserving to be quoted as an authority.
[179] Rot. Parl. p. 423.
[180] If proof could be required of anything so self-evident as that
these assemblies consisted of exactly the same persons, it may be found
in their writs of expenses, as published by Prynne, 4th Register, p.
450.
[181] 2 R. II. p. 56.
[182] It is positively laid down by the asserters of civil liberty, in
the great case of impositions (Howell's State Trials, vol. ii. p. 443,
507), that no precedents for arbitrary taxation of exports or imports
occur from the accession of Richard II. to the reign of Mary.
[183] 2 R. II. p. 62. This did not find its way to the statute-book.
[184] Rymer, t. vii. p. 544.
[185] Carte, vol. ii. p. 640. Sir M. Hale observes that he finds no
complaints of illegal impositions under the kings of the house of
Lancaster. Hargrave's Tracts, vol. i. p. 184.
[186] Rymer, t. viii. p. 412, 488.
[187] Rot. Parl. vol. iv. p. 216.
[188] Id. p. 301.
[189] Id. p. 302.
[190] Id. vol. iii. p. 546.
[191] Id. p. 568.
[192] Rot. Parl. vol. iii. p. 453.
[193] Id. vol. iv. p. 63.
[194] Walsingham, p. 379.
[195] Walsingham, p. 210. Ruffhead observes in the margin upon this
statute, 8 R. II. c. 3, that it is repealed, bu
|