The first, of their votes in parliament, which was touched before, what proportion they shall bear to the nobility of England? wherein, if the proportion which shall be thought fit be not full, yet your majesty may, out of your prerogative, supply it; for although you cannot make fewer of Scotland, yet you may make more of England.

The second is touching the place and precedence wherein to marshal them according to the precedence of England in your majesty's style, and according to the nobility of Ireland; that is, all English earls first, and then Scottish, will be thought unequal for Scotland. To marshal them according to antiquity, will be thought unequal for England. Because I hear their nobility is generally more ancient: and therefore the question will be, whether the indifferentest way were not to take them interchangeably; as for example, first, the ancient earl of England, and then the ancient earl of Scotland, and so "alternis vicibus?"

For the laws, to make an entire and perfect union, it is a matter of great difficulty and length, both in the collecting of them, and in the passing of them.

For, first, as to the collecting of them, there must be made by the lawyers of either nation a digest under titles of their several laws and customs, as well common laws as statutes, that they may be collated and compared, and that the diversities may appear and be discerned of. And for the passing of them, we see by experience that "patrius mos" is dear to all men, and that men are bred and nourished up in the love of it; and therefore how harsh changes and innovations are. And we see likewise what disputation and argument the alteration of some one law doth cause and bring forth, how much more the alteration of the whole corps of the law? Therefore the first question will be, whether it be not good to proceed by parts, and to take that that is most necessary, and leave the rest to time? The parts therefore or subject of laws, are for this purpose fitliest distributed according to that ordinary division of criminal and civil, and those of criminal causes into capital and penal.

The second question therefore is, allowing the general union of laws to be too great a work to embrace; whether it were not convenient that cases capital were the same in both nations; I say the cases, I do not speak of the proceedings or trials; that is to say, whether the same offences were not fit to be made treason or felony in both places?

The third question is, whether cases penal, though not capital, yet if they concern the public state, or otherwise the discipline of manners, were not fit likewise to be brought into one degree, as the case of misprision of treason, the case of "pramunire," the case of fugitives, the case of incest, the case of simony, and the rest?

But the question that is more urgent than any of these is, whether these cases at the least, be they of a higher or inferior degree, wherein the fact committed, or act done in Scotland, may prejudice the state and subjects of England, or "e converso," are not to be reduced into one uniformity of law and punishment? As, for example, a perjury committed in a court of justice in Scotland, cannot be prejudicial in England, because depositions taken in Scotland cannot be produced and used here in England. But a forgery of a deed in Scotland, I mean with a false date of England, may be used and given in evidence in England. So likewise the depopulating of a town in Scotland doth not directly prejudice the state of England: but if an English merchant shall carry silver and gold into Scotland, as he may, and thence transport it into foreign parts, this prejudiceth the state of England, and may be an evasion to all the laws of England ordained in that case; and therefore had need to be bridled with as severe a law in Scotland as it is here in England.

Of this kind there are many laws.

The law of the 5th of Richard II. of going over without license, if there be not the like law in Scotland, will be frustrated and evaded: for any subject of England may go first into Scotland, and thence into foreign parts.

So the laws prohibiting transportation of sundry commodities, as gold, and silver, ordnance, artillery, corn, &c., if there be not a correspondence of laws in Scotland, will in like manner be deluded and frustrate; for any English merchant or subject may carry such commodities first into Scotland, as well as he may carry them from port to port in England; and out of Scotland into foreign parts, without any peril of law.

So libels may be devised and written in Scotland, and published and scattered in England. Treasons may be plotted in Scotland and executed in England.

And so in many other cases, if there be not the like severity of law in Scotland to restrain offences that there is in England, whereof we are here ignorant whether there be or no, it will be a gap or stop even for English subjects to escape and avoid the laws of England.

But for treasons, the best is that by the statute of 26 K. Henry VIII. cap. 13, any treason committed in Scotland may be proceeded with in England, as well as treasons committed in France, Rome, or elsewhere.

For courts of justice, trials, processes, and other administration of laws, to make any alteration in either nation, it will be a thing so new and unwonted to either people, that it may be doubted it will make the adminstration of justice, which of all other things ought to be known and certain as a beaten way, to become intricate and uncertain. And besides, I do not see that the severalty of administration of justice, though it be by court

sovereign of last resort, I mean without appeal or error, is any impediment at all to the union of a kingdom as we see by experience in the several courts of parliament in the kingdom of France. And I have been always of opinion, that the subjects of England do already fetch justice somewhat far off, more than in any nation that I know, the largeness of the kingdom considered, though it be holpen in some part by the circuits of the judges; and the two councils at York, and in the marches of Wales established.

But it may be a good question, whether, as "commune vinculum" of the justice of both nations, your majesty should not erect some court about your person, in the nature of the grand council of France: to which court you might, by way of evocation, draw causes from the ordinary judges of both nations; for so doth the French king from all the courts of parliament in France; many of which are more remote from Paris than any part of Scotland is from London.

For receipts and finances, I see no question will arise, in regard it will be matter of necessity to establish in Scotland a receipt of treasure for payments and erogations to be made in those parts: and for the treasure of spare, in either receipts, the custodies thereof may well be several; considering by your majesty's commandment they may be at all times removed or disposed according to your majesty's occasions.

For the patrimonies of both crowns, I see no questions will arise, except your majesty would be pleased to make one compound annexation, for an inseparable patrimony to the crown out of the lands of both nations: and so the like for the principality of Britain, and for other appennages of the rest of your children: erecting likewise such duchies and honours, compounded of the possession of both nations, as shall be thought fit. For admiralty or navy, I see no great question will arise; for I see no inconvenience for your majesty to continue shipping in Scotland. And for the jurisdiction of the admiralties, and the profits and casualties of them, they will be respective unto the coasts, over-against which the seas lie and are situated; as it is here with the admiralties of England.

And for merchandising, it may be a question, whether that the companies, of the merchant adventurers, of the Turkey merchants, and the Muscovy merchants, if they shall be continued, should not be compounded of merchants of both nations, English and Scottish. For to leave trade free in the one nation, and to have it restrained in the other, may percase breed some inconvenience.

For freedoms and liberties, the charters of both nations may be reviewed; and of such liberties as are agreeable and convenient for the subjects and people of both nations, one great charter may be made and confirmed to the subjects of Britain; and those liberties which are peculiar or proper to either nation, to stand in state as they do.

But for imposts and customs, it will be a great question how to accommodate them and reconcile them: for if they be much easier in Scotland than they be here in England, which is a thing I know not, then this inconvenience will follow; that the merchants of England may unlade in the ports of Scotland: and this kingdom to be served from thence, and your majesty's customs abated.

And for the question, whether the Scottish merchants should pay strangers' custom in England? that resteth upon the point of naturalization, which I touched before.

Thus have I made your majesty a brief and naked memorial of the articles and points of this great cause, which may serve only to excite and stir up your majesty's royal judgment, and the judgment of wiser men whom you will be pleased to call to it; wherein I will not presume to persuade or dissuade any thing; nor to interpose mine own opinion, but do expect light from your majesty's royal directions; unto the which I shall ever submit my judgment, and apply my travails. And I most humbly pray your majesty, in this which is done to pardon my errors, and to cover them with my good intention and meaning, and desire I have to do your majesty service, and to acquit the trust that was reposed in me, and chiefly in your majesty's benign and gracious acceptation.

king;" it might be reasonably answered, "No more would the king, were he as an English merchant." And the like may be said of a gentleman of the country, be he never so worthy or sufficient; or of a lawyer, be he never so wise or learned; or of any other particular condition of men in this kingdom: for certainly, Mr. Speaker, if a man shall be only or chiefly sensible of those respects which his particular vocation and degree shall suggest and infuse into him, and not enter into true and worthy considerations of estate, he shall never be able aright to give counsel, or take counsel in this matter. So that if this request be granted, I account the cause obtained.

But to proceed to the matter itself: all consultations do rest upon questions comparative; for when a question is "de vero," it is simple, for there is but one truth; but when a question is "de bono," it is for the most part comparative; for there be differing degrees of good and evil, and the best of the good is to be preferred and chosen, and the worst of the evil is to be declined and avoided; and therefore in a question of this nature you may not look for answer proper to every inconvenience alleged; for somewhat that cannot be especially answered may, nevertheless, be encountered and overweighed by matter of greater moment, and therefore the matter which I shall set forth unto you will naturally receive the distribution of three parts.

First, an answer to those inconveniences which have been alleged to ensue, if we should give way to this naturalization; which, I suppose, you will not find to be so great as they have been made; but that much dross is put into the balance to help to make weight.

Secondly, an encounter against the remainder of these inconveniences which cannot properly be answered, by much greater inconveniences, which we shall incur if we do not proceed to this naturalization.

Thirdly, an encounter likewise, but of another nature, that is, by the gain and benefit which we shall draw and purchase to ourselves by proceeding to this naturalization. And yet, to avoid confusion, which evermore followeth upon too much generality, it is necessary for me, before I proceed to persuasion, to use some distribution of the points or parts of naturalization, which certainly can be no better, or none other, than the ancient distinction of "jus civitatis, jus suffragii vel tribus," and "jus petitionis sive honorum:" for all ability and capacity is either of private interest of "meum et tuum," or of public service; and the public consisteth chiefly either in voice, or in action, or office. Now it is the first of these, Mr. Speaker, that I will only handle at this time and in this place, and refer the other two for a committee, because they receive more distinction and restriction.

leged on the other part, the first of them is, that there may ensue of this naturalization a surcharge of people upon this realm of England, which is supposed already to have the full charge and content: and therefore there cannot be an admission of the adoptive without a diminution of the fortunes and conditions of those that are native subjects of this realm. A grave objection, Mr. Speaker, and very dutiful; for it proceeds not of any unkindness to the Scottish nation, but of a natural fastness to ourselves: for that answer of the virgins, “Ne forte non sufficiat vobis et nobis," proceeded not out of any envy or malign humour, but out of providence, and the original charity which begins with ourselves. And I must confess, Mr. Speaker, that, as the gentleman said, that when Abraham and Lot, in regard of the greatness of their families, grew pent and straitened, it is true, that, brethren though they were, they grew to difference, and to those words,

Vade tu ad dexteram, et ego ad sinistram," &c. But certainly, I should never have brought that example on that side; for we see what followed of it, how that this separation" ad dexteram et ad sinistram," caused the miserable captivity of the one brother, and the dangerous, though prosperous war of the other, for his rescue and recovery.

But to this objection, Mr. Speaker, being so weighty and so principal, I mean to give three several answers, every one of them being, to my understanding, by itself sufficient.

The first is, that this opinion of the number of the Scottish nation, that should be likely to plant themselves here amongst us, will be found to be a thing rather in conceit than in event; for, Mr. Speaker, you shall find those plausible similitudes, of a tree that will thrive the better if it be removed into the more fruitful soil; and of sheep or cattle, that if they find a gap or passage open will leave the more barren pasture, and get into the more rich and plentiful, to be but arguments merely superficial, and to have no sound resemblance with the transplanting or transferring of families; for the tree, we know, by nature, as soon as it is set in the better ground, can fasten upon it, and take nutriment from it: and a sheep, as soon as he gets into the better pasture, what should let him to graze and feed? But there belongeth more, I take it, to a family or particular person, that shall remove from one nation to another: for if, Mr. Speaker, they have not stock, means, acquaintance, and custom, habitation, trades, countenance, and the like, I hope you doubt not but they will starve in the midst of the rich pasture, and are far enough off from grazing at their pleasure and therefore, in this point, which is conjectural, experience is the best guide; for the time past is a pattern of the time to I think no man doubteth, Mr. Speaker,

come.