gathered together and wickedly took by force, and spoiled the ships, goods, and merchandise, not only of the King's subjects, but the subjects of our friends in the sea, which hath been defended by the English nation." The writ went on to recite how men "were carried away into captivity, and the merchant shipping of the kingdom endangered by the preparations made to molest our merchants. Accordingly, the Princely honour of the King required that force should be employed to defend the kingdom, guard the seas, and give security to shipping." Upon these grounds Ship-money was demanded by the King, without the sanction and authority of Parliament, and, out of this unconstitutional proceeding arose the quarrel which had so fatal a termination for that ill-advised monarch. The city of London petitioned the King, setting forth that they were exempted by their privileges from the demand. But the King persevered; Hampden was defeated in the courts of law, which, under the influence of corrupt judges, pronounced the writ legal, and thus the levy of Ship-money, at first peculiar to the maritime towns, was imposed upon the entire kingdom.
Its payment enforced by law. This great struggle was no doubt the proximate cause of the final severance of the merchant vessels from the royal navy, as, after the Restoration, the constitutional action of Parliament provided the requisite funds for the maintenance of a royal navy on a permanent footing, so that the shipowners were
- [Footnote: pretext for their questionable demands (Macpherson, ii. pp. 284 and
302). The earliest treaty between England and Algiers for the mutual protection of shipping is dated April 10, 1682 (Hertslet, 'Treaties,' etc., vol. ii. p. 58).]
