Did James the First of England die from the effects of poison, or from natural causes? / by Norman Chevers.

  • Norman Chevers
Date:
1862
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Did James the First of England die from the effects of poison, or from natural causes? / by Norman Chevers. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

    56/68 (page 54)
    On the same day, the Commons sent a message to the Lords, by Sir Nathaniel Rich, recommending that the Duke might be arrested. No action was taken upon this hold sug- gestion. The Duke defended himself in a short and spirited speech. Urging his own innocency and entreating that his trial might be hastened, but protesting that he would not give way to any of the unjust demands of his accusers. The Commons took so much umbrage at the imprisonment of their two members, and at the expression of the King's anger that they resolved to proceed in no other business until they were righted in their liberties;—and they ordered that the house might be turned into a grand committee, imme- diately, to sit and consider the best means of being righted in their liberties—no member being suffered to go forth. As the House sat in solemn silence, Sir Dudley Carleton, the Vice- chamberlain, addressed them in a temperate speech in which he objected to the expressions used by the movers of the prologue and epilogue. Sir Dudley Digges had gone too far beyond his commission in speaking of the death of the King's father in these words,—<c That he was commanded by the House, con- cerning the plaisters applied to the King, that he did forbear to speak further in regard to the king's honor, or words to that effect. In this point, his Majesty ought to be assured that the House did not warrant Sir Dudley Digges. The sense of the is great and of great consequence, and unless God show the way out we are but in ill case. Domine Miserere. The Duke being in the bed-chamber, private with the king, his Majesty was overheard, (as they talk) to use these words—‘ What can I do more P I have engaged my honour to mine uncle of Denmark and other Princes. I have in a manner lost the love of my subjects. And what wouldst thou have me do ? Whence some think the Duke moved the King to dissolve the parliament, &c.” Weldon’s commentary upon these events is, as usual, full of bitterness. He says—“ But the occasion taken to dissolve it” [this Parliament] “ was worst of all, for Buckingham by his insolent behaviour had not only lost that love, his hatred to Spaine had procured him, but was now grown into such an hatred that they fell on him for the death of his old master, which had been of long time whispered ; the examinations bred such con- fusions, that it looked with an ugly deformed poysonous countenance, and nothing but the dissolution of that Parliament could have saved his dissolution, and that with a brand of shame and infamy, as well as in- gratitude. I remember I heard an old Parliament man, and a noble gentleman of that Committee for examinations say at first he derided the very thought of it; but after the first dayes examination it proved so foul, as that he both hated and scorned the name of Buckingham, and though man would not punish it, God would, which proved an unhappy prediction.”