tells us[1], that to his knowlege the earl of Bedford (who was made lord treaſurer by king Charles the firſt, to oblige his parliament) intended to have ſet up the exciſe in England, yet it never made a part of that unfortunate prince's revenue; being firſt introduced, on the model of the Dutch prototype, by the parliament itſelf after it's rupture with the crown. Yet ſuch was the opinion of it's general unpopularity, that when in 1642 "aſperſions were caſt by malignant perſons upon the houſe of commons, that they intended to introduce exciſes, the houſe for it's vindication therein did declare, that theſe rumours were falſe and ſcandalous; and that their authors ſhould be apprehended and brought to condign puniſhment[2]." It's original[3] eſtabliſhment was in 1643, and it's progreſs was gradual; being at firſt laid upon thoſe perſons and commodities, where it was ſuppoſed the hardſhip would be leaſt perceivable, viz. the makers and venders of beer, ale, cyder, and perry[4]; and the royaliſts at Oxford ſoon followed the example of their brethren at Weſtminſter by impoſing a ſimilar duty; both ſides proteſting that it ſhould be continued no longer than to the end of the war, and then be utterly aboliſhed[5]. But the parliament at Weſtminſter ſoon after impoſed it on fleſh, wine, tobacco, ſugar, and ſuch a multitude of other commodities that it might fairly be denominated general; in purſuance of the plan laid down by Mr Pymme (who ſeems to have been the father of the exciſe) in his letter to ſir John Hotham[6], ſignifying, "that they had proceeded in the exciſe to many particulars, and intended to go on farther; but that it
- ↑ Hiſt. b. 3.
- ↑ Com. Journ. 8 Oct. 1642.
- ↑ The tranſlator and continuator of Petavius's chronological hiſtory (Lond. 1659.) informs us, that it was firſt moved for, 28 Mar. 1643, by Mr Prynne. And it appears from the journals of the commons that on that day the houſe reſolved itſelf into a committee to conſider of raiſing money, in conſequence of which the exciſe was afterwards voted. But Mr Prynne was not a member of parliament till 7 Nov. 1648; and publiſhed in 1654 "A proteſtation againſt the illegal, deteſtable, and oft-condemned tax and extortion of exciſe in general." It is probably therefore a miſtake of the printer for Mr Pymme, who was intended for chancellor of the exchequer under the earl of Bedford. (Lord Clar. b. 7.)
- ↑ Com. Journ. 17 May 1643.
- ↑ Lord Clar. b. 7.
- ↑ 30 May 1643. Dugdale of the troubles, 120.
