Page:History of England (Froude) Vol 7.djvu/483

 1566.] THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 463 should be approached no further on pain of her dis- pleasure. The same night a note was flung into the presence-chamber saying that the debate on the suc- cession had been undertaken because the commonwealth required it, and that if the Queen interfered it might be the worse for her. 1 In the most critical period of the reign of Henry the Eighth, speech in Parliament had been ostenta- tiously free ; the Act of Appeals had been under dis- cussion for two years and more, Catholic and Protestant had spoken their minds without restraint ; yet among the many strained applications of the treason law no peer or commoner had been called to answer for words spoken by him in his place in the legislature. The Queen's injunction of silence had poured oil into the fire, and raised a. fresh and more dangerous question of privilege. As soon as the House met again on Monday morning Mr Paul Wentworth rose to know whether such an order ' was not against the liberties ' of Par- liament. 2 He and other members inquired whether a message sent by a public officer was authority sufficient to bind the House, or if neither the message itself nor the manner in which it was delivered was a breach of privilege, * what offence it was for any of the House to declare his opinion to be otherwise/ 3 The debate lasted 1 ' A noche echaron en la camera de presencia un escrito que contenia en sustancia que se habia tratado en el Parlamento de la sucesion porque convenia al bien del Reyno, y que si la Reyna no consentia que se tratase dello que veria alguuas cosas que no le placerian.' De Silva to Philip, November 1 1 : MS. Simancas. 2 Commons' Journals, 8 Elizabeth. 8 Note of Proceedings in Parlia. ment, November 1 1 : Domestic MSS , Elizabeth, vol. xli.