508 THE SUCCESSION QUESTION October Scotland's agent in London, lodged information against him before the privy council, charging him with impugning the Scottish title to the succession. To this charge Dalton put in his reply, copies of both surviving amongst the State Papers. 1 Three days after Dalton 's speech Elizabeth retracted her veto on freedom of discussion in the commons. 2 Her decision was conveyed to the house by a message of which a draft is extant, written by Cecil and amended by the queen ; and to this is attached an important foot-note. It reads : ' This manner of answer hir Maiesty hath thought best without any furder answer to the request that hath bene made to have leave to conferr uppon the libertyes of the howse, for as much as therof must nedes have insued more inconvenience than wer mete.' 3 At once we are puzzled as to what request this was, and why it was made. For Froude there was no problem. It was the commons' reply to the seizure of Dalton. Having been told of his speech, he wrote, the queen ' chose to believe that the House of Commons intended to defy her ; she ordered Dalton into arrest and had him examined before the Star Chamber ; she construed her own orders into a law, and seemed determined to govern the House of Commons as if it was a debating society of riotous boys '. In con- sequence, ' The original question of the succession was lost in the larger one of privilege, and the address which they had previously drawn seemed no longer distinct enough for the occasion '. 4 But Froude has had to deal in cavalier fashion with his authorities to reach these conclusions. The problem is one of dates. Cecil's draft of the queen's message is endorsed by him 24 November, which we may regard as correct since the message itself was delivered the next day. Now 24 November was a Sunday, and therefore the very latest date which we can assign to the motion of the commons for leave to confer upon their liberties is 23 November, the day following Dalton's speech. But the date endorsed on the copy of Melville's complaint is 24 November. If we accept this as correct it would fix Dalton's reply to it as either later that day, or more probably on some subsequent day ; and here we are supported by the endorsement of 26 November on a draft message to the commons written by Cecil in the name of the queen and on behalf of the privy council : 1 State Papers, Dom., Eliz., xli, nos. 28 and 29. 2 Commons 1 Journals, i. 78. 3 State Papers, Dom., Eliz., xli, no. 30. There is another and different text of the message in the State Papers, perhaps a draft suggested by Walsingham, for the hand is similar to his. The original is wrongly dated in vol. xxvii, no. 45, and there are two transcripts in vol. xli, nos. 15 and 31, of which the former has a note ' One of Sr. Fr. Wals Secyes (I take it) '. We may safely assume that Cecil's was the draft actually used. 4 Froude, vii. 467.
