During this marching and countermarching it was that Leslie had posted

his army on Dunse Hill, opposite Charles's camp, and the king, who had

hitherto despised the Scottish force, now felt alarmed at their close

proximity, and the hasty retreat of Holland. He blamed Lord Arundel

for giving him no notice of the approach of the rebels, Arundel blamed

the scout-master, and the scout-master blamed the scouts. There were

earthworks suddenly thrown up to protect his camp and intimation given

that overtures would be listened to. Accordingly, on the 6th of June,

1639, the Earl of Dunfermline, attended by a trumpet, arrived in the

royal camp, bearing a humble petition to his majesty, entreating him

to appoint a few suitable persons to confer with a deputation from the

Scots, so that all misunderstandings might be removed, and the peace

of the kingdom preserved. The petition was received, for besides the

ill-success of Holland, the ill-success of Hamilton and his fleet was

notorious; and it was, moreover, rumoured that the mother of Hamilton,

a most zealous covenanter, had paid him a visit on board his vessel,

and that he was much disinclined by her persuasions to press the Scots

closely. There were daily rumours of a descent from Ireland, on the

other hand and of a rising of the Royalists in the Highlands under

Lord Aboyne, son of the Earl of Huntly, which rendered the Covenanters

more desirous of an accommodation. On the part of the Crown the Earls

of Essex, Holland, Salisbury, and Berkshire, Sir Henry Vane, and Mr.

Secretary Coke, were appointed commissioners; on that of the Covenanters

the Earls of Rothes and Dunfermline, the Lord Loudon, and Sir William

Douglas, sheriff of Teviotdale. To these afterwards, much to the

displeasure of the king, were added Alexander Henderson, late moderator

of the assembly, and Johnstone, the clerk-register. They met in Arundel's

tent; but before they could proceed to business, the king suddenly

entered, and telling the Scottish commissioners that as he understood

they complained that they could not be heard, he had determined to hear

them himself, and he demanded what it was they wanted. The Earl of Rothes

replied simply, to be secured in their religion and liberty. Loudon

made some apology for the boldness of the proceedings of the Scots, but

Charles cut him short, telling him that he could admit of no apologies

for what was past, but that if they came to implore pardon, they must put

down what they had to say in writing, and in writing he would answer them.

This was Charles's peculiar style, by which the negotiation appeared

likely to come to a speedy end; but the Scots were firm, and adhered to

their old sound principle, declaring that they had sought nothing but

their own native rights, and the advancement of his majesty's service,

and desired to have those severely punished who had misrepresented them

to the king. Some historians assert that Hamilton at this juncture came

into the camp from the Forth, and strongly advised the king to close with

the Scots; though Clarendon affirms that he did not arrive till after

the agreement was signed, and found much fault with it. However this

may be, after much debate, and several attempts to overreach the Scots,

which their caution defeated, it was agreed that the king should ratify

all that had been done by his commissioner, which was next to nothing,

though he would not recognise the acts of what he called the pretended

General Assembly. But the main and only important concession was that

all disputes should be settled by another Assembly, to be held on the

6th of August, and by a Parliament which should ratify its proceedings,

to be held on the 20th of August, when an act of oblivion should be

passed. Both parties were to disband their armies; the king's forts were

to be restored, with all the ammunition; the fleet was to be withdrawn;

Scottish merchant vessels and goods were to be returned; and the honours

and privileges of the subjects replaced. The king resisted, however,

any mention of episcopacy in the agreement; for he was as resolved as

ever to reinstate the bishops. And indeed, that same duplicity guided

him in this as in other actions of his life, being determined to break

the whole agreement on the first possible opportunity. The Covenanters

strongly suspected as much; and when Charles, before returning, invited

fourteen of the leaders to meet him in Berwick, they had the fear of

the Tower before their eyes, and declined the honour, and sent as their

commissioners the Earls of Loudon, Lothian, and Montrose. Charles

represented that it had been his intention to proceed to Edinburgh, and

hold the Parliament in person, but that fresh instances of "the valyance

of the godly females" deterred him; his chief officers not being able to

show themselves in the streets of Berwick without insult from these good

women.

What Charles had failed to do in the Convention at large, he managed to

effect to a certain degree with the nobles. Loudon and Lothian were said

to be greatly softened by the king's conversation, but Montrose was won

over altogether.

The two armies were disbanded on the 24th of June, and the Earl of

Traquair was appointed the king's commissioner in Scotland, Hamilton

firmly declining to return thither. Charles reached London on the 1st

of August, and one of the first things which he did was to write to the

Scottish bishops, telling them that he would never abandon the idea of

reinstating them, and would in the meantime provide for their support.

He forbade them to present themselves at the approaching Assembly or

Parliament, as that would ruin everything; but he advised them to send in

a protest against the infringement of their rights, and get it presented

by some mean person, so as to create not too much notice. Such was

Charles's perfidious conduct, at the very moment that he was promising

the Covenanters the contrary. Accordingly the bishops fixed themselves in

the vicinity of the borders, some at Morpeth, some in Holy Island, some

in Berwick itself, keeping up a correspondence with their adherents in

the Scottish capital, and ready to rush in again on the first favourable

chance.

If we are to believe Clarendon, however, "The king was very melancholy,

and quickly discovered that he had lost reputation at home and abroad,

and those counsellors who had been most faulty either through want of

courage or wisdom--for at that time few of them wanted fidelity--never

afterwards recovered spirit enough to do their duty, but gave themselves

up to those who so much had outwitted them, every man shifting the

fault from himself." On the contrary, he says, "The Scots got so

much benefit and advantage by it, that they brought all their other

mischievous devices to pass with ease, and a prosperous gale in all

they went about." They declared that "they did not intend by anything

contained in the treaty, to vacate any of the proceedings which had

been in the late General Assembly at Glasgow, by which all the bishops

were excommunicated, and renewed all their menaces against them by

proclamation, and imposed grievous penalties on all who should presume

to harbour any of them, so that by the time the king came to London, it

appeared plainly that the army was disbanded without a peace being made,

and the Scots in more reputation and equal inclination to affront his

majesty than ever." The fact was, that whilst Charles was pretending

to concede, meaning to revoke when he had the power, the Scots were

conscious of their advantage and did not mean to allow him to do so.

They were earnest and outspoken in their resolves, and therefore Charles

seized a paper in which they published what had really been promised in

the treaty, and had it burned by the common hangman.

The Assembly was opened on the 12th of August in Edinburgh, and in spite

of what Charles had assured the bishops, they were given up in the

instructions to Traquair, for he meant to resist the abolition of the

bishops, and to restore them when he had the power, but endeavoured to

make political capital out of this concession. Traquair was to obtain, if

possible, the admission of fourteen ministers into Parliament instead of

the bishops, or, if that were not possible, as many lay members whom the

king was to appoint, and who were to choose the lords of the articles.

By these perpetual finesses, Charles continually sought to withdraw the

concessions that he made, as though those whom he tried to overreach were

not as wide awake as himself. He thought, if he could select the Lords

of the Articles, and fourteen others devoted to him, he could revoke in

the Parliament what he gave up in the Assembly--the characteristic of

short-sighted cunning.

The bishops presented their protest to the Commissioner, which, without

being read, was to serve as a proof of their not having yielded up their

claims; and the commissioner, finding the Covenanters firm to all their

demands--for every member of the Assembly before entering it had sworn to

support all the acts of the Assembly of Glasgow--gave the royal assent

to all the proceedings, and the news of the overthrow of episcopacy was

received with shouts of acclamation by the people.

The Parliament of Scotland met on the day appointed, the 20th of August.

There the Covenanters displayed their determination not to stickle for

small matters, but to destroy the scheme by which that body had been

made dependent on the royal will. They would no longer admit the bishops

nor the Lords of the Articles whom the bishops had chosen, and who

selected the topics, under the direction of the Crown, which should or

should not come before the House. They proposed that the lesser barons,

the commissioners of the shires, should take the place of the bishops,

and that the Lords of the Articles should be selected from men of each

estate, by those estates themselves. In order not to appear obstinate,

they permitted the Commissioner to name the Lords of the Articles for

this once, not as an act of right, but of grace, from themselves. They

then decreed that all acts in favour of episcopacy should be rescinded;

that patents of peerage should for the future be granted to none but

such as possessed a rental of ten thousand marks from land in Scotland;

that proxies should never again be admitted; and that the fortresses

of Edinburgh, Stirling, and Dumbarton, should be entrusted to none but

Scotsmen.

These measures would have completely enfranchised Scotland from the

shackles of the Crown, and Traquair, unable to avoid the necessity of

ratifying them, prorogued the Parliament to the 14th of November, so that

he could receive the instructions of the king. Charles, to get rid of

the demands of the Covenanters altogether, prorogued it for six months.

The members, who saw the intention, protested against the prorogation

under circumstances so vital to the country, but obeyed after naming a

deputation to go to the king on the subject. This deputation, headed by

the Lords Loudon and Dunfermline, on arriving at Whitehall were refused

audience, because they had not come with the sanction of the royal

Commissioner; and Traquair was immediately summoned to court to answer

for having conceded so much to the Scots. He had, indeed, conceded

nothing but what Charles himself had instructed him to do but the king

was angry because he had not been able to recover in Parliament, as he

had vainly hoped, what was lost in the Assembly.

Traquair, who was aware that having implicitly followed these

instructions would avail him little with the king in his mortification,

thought of an expedient to divert Charles's anger into another channel.

He had discovered a letter addressed by the Covenanters to the King of

France, complaining of the miserable condition of Scotland through the

attempts of the king to root out the religion of the people; of his

having violated the late treaty at Berwick, and dissolved Parliament

contrary to the will of the states and to all national precedent, and

entreating him to mediate in their favour. This letter was signed by

seven lords, and addressed _Au Roi_. The letter had been publicly

declined by Louis, but privately answered, though in very cautious terms.

The production of this letter had all the effect that Traquair hoped for.

The wrath of the king was immediately turned on the Covenanters, and

Traquair deepened the impression by assuring the king that nothing but

war would pacify the Covenanters, and declaring this discovery to be a

perfect justification.

The Scots demanded an opportunity of vindicating themselves, and

requested leave to send up deputies for that purpose. It was granted,

and Dunfermline and Loudon were sent up. No sooner did they arrive than

Loudon, whose name was one of those appended to the intercepted letter,

was instantly seized and brought before the Council. The letter being

addressed simply _Au Roi_, which was the manner from subjects to their

own sovereign, and not as from foreigners, it was deemed treasonable on

that ground, if on no other. Loudon asserted that the letter had been

written before the pacification at Berwick, and, not being approved,

had never been sent, but the contents contradicted that statement; and,

moreover, William Colvill, who had carried it to the French court, was

in London, and was taken prisoner. Loudon thereupon insisted on his safe

conduct, and demanded liberty to return, contending that, if he had done

anything wrong, it was in Scotland and not there that he ought to be

interrogated. But the king sent both him and Colvill to the Tower.

The Covenanters were greatly incensed at the seizure of their envoy, and

demanded his release, but Charles signed a warrant for his execution and

was prevented from putting him to death only by the solemn declaration

that if he did Scotland was lost for ever. After this it became plain

that nothing could avert a conflict between the infatuated king and

the Scottish people. Charles's object was to obtain funds; that of the

Scots to divide the king's attention by exciting discontent nearer home.

England itself had abundant causes of dissatisfaction. The disuse of

Parliaments, the continued illegal levying of taxes by the king's own

will, the rigorous and ruinous prosecutions in the Star Chamber and the

High Commission Court, the brandings, scourgings, and mutilations of such

as dared to dispute the awful tyranny of the Government, portended a

storm at home ere long, and the Scots found many well-wishers and friends

amongst the English patriots. These were everyday drawing into their

ranks men of the highest position and the most distinguished talents. The

Earls of Essex, Bedford, and Holland were secretly connected with them;

the Lord Say, Hampden, Pym, Cromwell, and other men of iron nerve and

indomitable will, were watching with deep interest movements in the North

so congenial to their own.

Whilst the king was pondering on the means of raising money, an

event took place which for the moment promised to present him with a

considerable sum. A Spanish fleet of seventy sail was discovered by the

Dutch admiral, De Witt, off the Land's End. As it was bearing troops

from Spain to Flanders, which were hard pressed by the Dutch, De Witt

followed it up the Channel, firing guns to harass its rear, but still

more to awake the attention of Van Tromp, who was lying off Dunkirk. The

two celebrated Dutch admirals were soon in full chase of the Spaniards.

Sixteen of the ships, having four thousand troops on board, bore away

with all speed for the coast of Flanders, but the rest fled for shelter

into the Downs. Charles sent the Earl of Arundel to inquire of Oquendo

the Spanish admiral, what was his destination, being apprehensive lest

the fleet might be intended for a descent on Ireland, or in aid of his

disaffected subjects of Scotland.

Oquendo satisfied Arundel that they were really on their way to Flanders,

and demanded the protection of Charles as a friendly king. Charles was

willing to grant it for a consideration, and the sum of one hundred and

fifty thousand pounds was the price named in ready cash. For this Charles

was to send the Spanish fleet under protection of his own to Flanders;

but the two Dutch admirals, having now no less than one hundred sail,

from continued fresh arrivals, attacked the Spaniards in the English

roads, sank and burned five of the largest vessels, drove twenty-three

more on shore, and pursued the rest across the Channel, suffering only

ten of them to escape. All this time the English admiral lay near at

hand, but made no movement in protection of the Spaniards. The English

people on shore beheld the destruction of the Spanish fleet with the

utmost exultation, the memory of the great Armada being yet so strong

amongst them; but Charles had lost his much desired money, and with the

loss had acquired an immense amount of foreign odium. To have suffered

the vessels of a friendly Power, which had fled to him for shelter, to

be attacked and chased from his own harbour, lowered him greatly in the

estimation of Continental nations.

[Illustration: JOHN HAMPDEN. (_From an Engraving by Houbraken._)]

At the time of this untoward occurrence Charles had sent for Wentworth

from Ireland, to assist him by his counsels as to the best mode of

dealing with his difficulties at home, and the Scots in the North.

Wentworth had overridden all obstacles in Ireland, and had forced an

income out of the reluctant people there; he was thought, therefore,

by Charles the only man whose wisdom and resolution were equal to the

crisis. Wentworth had strongly advised Charles not to march against the

Scots, knowing that the king's raw levies would have no chance against

them; and he had gone on actively drilling ten thousand men, to prepare

them for the campaign, which he felt must come, even after all seemed

settled at Berwick.

Clarendon, who is a regular Royalist and inclined to see more virtues in

Wentworth than other historians of the time, is yet obliged to sketch

this picture of the enmities which he justly provoked:--"He was a man of

too high and severe deportment, and too great a contemner of ceremony,

to have many friends at court, and therefore could not but have enemies

enough. He had two that professed it, the Earl of Holland and Sir Henry

Vane." Besides having said that "the king would do well to cut off

Holland's head," he had insulted the Earl in various ways. He had done

all he could to prevent Sir Henry Vane from being made secretary in place

of Sir John Coke, whom the king removed on his return from Scotland;

but, worse still, Charles now creating him Earl of Strafford, nothing

would satisfy him but that he must be also made Baron of Proby, Vane's

own estate, from which he himself hoped to derive that title. "That,"

continues Clarendon, "was an act of the most unnecessary provocation that

I have known, and though he contemned the man with marvellous scorn, I

believe it was the loss of his head. To these a third adversary, like

to be more pertinacious than the other two, was the Earl of Essex,

naturally enough disinclined to his person, his power, and his parts."

This enmity in Essex, we are told, was increased by Wentworth's insolent

conduct to Lord Bacon, for whom Essex had a friendship; and he openly

vowed vengeance. "Lastly, he had an enemy more terrible than all the

others, and like to be more fatal, the whole Scottish nation, provoked by

the declaration he had procured of Ireland, and some high carriage and

expressions of his against them in that kingdom." Moreover, Wentworth had

no friend in the queen, from his persecution of the Catholics in Ireland,

and was continually thwarted by her.

But all these councillors could devise no way to raise funds but by the

old and irritating mode of ship-money, for which writs to the amount of

two hundred thousand pounds were immediately issued, and this bearing

no proportion to the requirements of a campaign against the Scots, they

advised Charles to call together a Parliament. To this he demurred; but

when they persisted in that advice, he ordered a full Council to be

called, and put to it this question:--"If this Parliament should prove

as untoward as some have lately been, will you then assist me in such

extraordinary ways as in that extremity should be thought fit?"

Charles was thus bent on extraordinary ways, and the Council promised

him its support. Wentworth returned to Ireland, being not only created

Earl of Strafford, but made Lord-lieutenant of that country. He promised

to obtain a liberal vote from the Irish Parliament, which it was thought

might act as a salutary example for England. Accordingly, no one daring

to oppose his wishes, he obtained four subsidies, with a promise of

more if found necessary. The English Parliament was delayed till this

was effected, and was then summoned for the 13th of April. To assist the

king and council in what was felt to be a critical emergency, Wentworth,

now Strafford, returned, though suffering from a painful complaint. He

left orders for the immediate levy of an army of eight thousand men, and

Charles took measures for the raising in England of fifteen thousand

foot and four thousand horse, which he thought would serve to overawe

Parliament; and, what is singular, the order for the raising of these

troops and providing artillery and ammunition was signed by Laud, so

little had he an idea of an archbishop being a minister of the Prince

of Peace. Before the arrival of Strafford, Charles read to the Council

the account of the liberal subsidies and the loyal expressions which

Strafford had put into the mouths of the enslaved Irish Commons. This he

did at the request of Strafford himself, to prove not only the loyalty of

the Irish, but his own popularity there, in spite of the assertions of

his being hated in that country.

When the king met the Parliament on the 13th of April he had not abated

one jot of his high-flown notions of his divine right, and of the slavish

obedience due from Parliament. The Lord Keeper Finch formerly Speaker

of the House but now more truly in his element as a courtier, made a

most fulsome speech, describing the king as "the most just, the most

pious, the most gracious king that ever was." He informed them that for

many years in his piety towards them he had taken all the annoyances of

government from them, and raised the condition and reputation of the

country to a wonderful splendour; that, notwithstanding such exemplary

virtues and exhibitions of goodness, some sons of Belial had blown the

trumpet of rebellion in Scotland, and that it was now necessary to

chastise that stiff-necked people; that they must therefore lay aside all

other subjects, and imitate the loyal Parliament of Ireland in furnishing

liberal supplies; that had not the king, upon the credit of his servants

and out of his own estate, raised three hundred thousand pounds, he could

not have made the preparations already in progress; and that they must

therefore grant him tonnage and poundage from the beginning of his reign,

and vote the subsidies at once, when his Majesty would pledge his royal

word that he would take into his gracious consideration their grievances.

And all this attempt to get the supplies before the discussion of

grievances, from sturdy commoners who had never yet given way to force or

flattery!

[Illustration: VISIT OF CHARLES I. TO THE GUILDHALL.

FROM THE WALL PAINTING IN THE ROYAL EXCHANGE, BY SOLOMON J. SOLOMON,

A.R.A]

Charles then produced the intercepted letters of the Scottish lords to

the King of France, to show the treason of the Scots and the necessity

of taking decisive measures with them. But the Commons were not likely

to be moved from their settled purpose by any such arguments. They

elected Serjeant Glanvil as Speaker, and proceeded first and foremost

to the discussion of the grievances of the nation. Amongst their old

members--though the brave Sir John Eliot had perished in prison, and

Sir Edward Coke, who by his later years of patriotism had effaced the

memory of the arbitrary spirit of his earlier ones, was also dead--there

were Oliver Cromwell, now sitting for Cambridge, Pym, Hampden, Denzil

Holles, Maynard, Oliver St. John, Strode, Corriton, Hayman, and Haselrig.

There were amongst the new ones, Harbottle Grimston, Edmund Waller, the

poet, Lord George Digby, the son of the Earl of Bristol, a young man of

eminent talent, and other men destined to become prominent. Sir Benjamin

Rudyard and Grimston delivered speeches recommending at once courtesy and

respect towards the Crown, but unflinching support of the rights of the

people. Harbottle Grimston described the commonwealth as miserably torn

and massacred, all property and liberty shaken, the Church distracted,

the Gospel and professors of it persecuted, Parliament suspended, and

the laws made void. Sir Benjamin Rudyard protested that he desired

nothing so much as that they might proceed with moderation, but that

if Parliaments were gone, they were lost. A remarkable feature of this

Parliament was the number of petitions sent in by the people. These were

poured in against ship-money and other abuses, as the Star Chamber and

High Commission Court, from the counties of Hertford, Essex, and Sussex.

After these matters had been warmly debated for four days, for the king

had many advocates in the House, on the 17th Mr. Pym delivered a most

eloquent and impressive speech, in which he narrated the many attacks on

the privileges of Parliament and the liberty of the subject, and laid

down the constitutional doctrine "that the king can do no wrong," thus

bringing the conduct and counsels of his ministers under the direct

censure of the House, and loading them with the solemn responsibility--an

awful foreshadowing of the judgments to come on Laud and Wentworth. From

that point the debate turned on the arbitrary treatment of the members

of the Commons, and orders were issued for a report of the proceedings of

the Star Chamber and the Court of King's Bench against Sir John Eliot,

Mr. Holles, and Mr. Hampden, to be laid on the table of the House. The

conduct of the late Speaker Finch, in adjourning the House at the command

of the king, was declared unconstitutional.

The king could no longer restrain his impatience, and summoned both

Houses before him in the Banqueting Hall. There the Lord Keeper Finch,

in the presence of Charles, recalled their attention to the necessity of

voting the supplies, and repeated the king's promises. He endeavoured

to excuse the raising of ship-money as a necessity for chastising the

Algerine pirates who infested the seas, and again recommended the liberal

example of the Irish Parliament. The only effect produced by this was

a most vivid and trenchant speech the next day by Waller, in which

he told the House that the king was personally beloved, but that his

mode of extorting his subjects' money was detested; and that neither

the admiration of his majesty's natural disposition, nor the pretended

consent of the judges, could ever induce them to consent to such

unconstitutional demands. He then severely castigated the conduct of the

bishops and clergy who preached the divine right of monarchs to plunder

the public at their own pleasure. "But," said he, "they gain preferment

by it, and then it is no matter, though they neither believe themselves

nor are believed by others. But since they are so ready to let loose the

consciences of their kings, we are bound the more carefully to provide

against this pulpit law, by declaring and enforcing the municipal laws of

this kingdom."

This again roused the king, who went down to the Lords, and read them

a sharp lesson on their not supporting him in his just demands of

supplies from the Commons. Thereupon the Lords sent for the Commons to

a conference on the 29th of April, and recommended them to pass the

votes and take the king's word for the redress of grievances; but the

Commons resented their intruding their advice about money matters as an

infringement of the privileges of the House; and on the 1st of May, the

Lords, through the Lord Keeper, disclaimed any intention of encroaching

on any of the well-known rights of the Commons, but that the Lords had

felt bound to comply with the request of the king. The Commons returned

to their debate on ship-money, and on Saturday, the 2nd of May, Charles

sent a message by Sir Henry Vane, now Secretary of State and Treasurer

of the Household, desiring an immediate answer regarding the supplies.

Lord Digby reminded the House that the demand was that of a hasty and

immediate answer to a call for funds to involve the nation in a civil war

with the Scots, a people holding the same religion and subjects of the

same king as themselves. The debate was continued for two days, Clarendon

accusing Vane of deliberately keeping from the House the fact entrusted

to him, that the king, though asking for twelve subsidies, would consent

to take eight.

But it was not so much the amount as the principle involved in the

subsidies which was the question; for, on the 4th of May, Charles sent

Vane again with the remarkable offer to abolish ship-money for ever, and

by any means that they should think fit, on condition that they granted

him twelve subsidies, valued at eight hundred and fifty thousand pounds,

to be paid in three years, with an assurance that the House should not be

prorogued till next Michaelmas. This was a mighty temptation: here was

the direct offer of at once getting rid of one of the monster grievances

for ever; but it did not escape the attention of the more sagacious that,

by accepting the bargain, they were conceding the king's right to set

aside the most established laws, to force his own notions of religion on

his subjects, and to make war on them if they refused. They rejected the

snare, and maintained the debate for some hours against all the arguments

of the Court party. On rising, they informed Vane that they would resume

the debate the next morning at eight o'clock; but Sir Henry, seeing very

well how it would terminate, assured the king in Council that he was

certain that the House would not grant him a penny for the war against

the Scots.

On this Charles adopted one of his stratagems. Early in the morning he

sent for Glanvil the Speaker, before the Commons had assembled, and

detained him at Whitehall, so that the Commons without him could not vote

against the supplies, nor protest against the war; and suddenly hastening

to the House of Lords, he sent for the Commons and dismissed them. In

doing this, he praised the peers at the expense of the Commons, and

declared that as to the liberties of the people which the Commons made so

much talk of, they had not more regard for them than he had.

This was the last Parliament which Charles was ever to dissolve, and the

folly of his conduct became speedily palpable. The Parliament had only

sat about three weeks, having met on the 13th of April, and being now

dissolved on May 5th. By this hasty act the king had put himself wholly

on the army. Had he allowed the Commons to vote against the supplies,

many would have sympathised with him; now he had only himself to blame.

His enemies rejoiced, exceedingly, and his friends deplored the deed with

gloomy auguries.

The king was made to feel his mistake, on applying to the City of

London for a loan and receiving a cool and evasive answer. The Scots

were greatly elated. They had their agents in close though secret

communication with the leaders of the opposition, and now saw the king

deprived of the means of effectually contending with them, and felt

that they had numerous friends of their cause in England. The passion

of the king only increased their advantages. He issued a proclamation

declaring why he had dismissed the Parliament, charging the Commons

with malice and disaffection to the State, and with designing to bring

government and magistracy into contempt; and he gave fresh proofs of his

vindictive feeling by arresting a number of the members the day after the

dissolution. The public had not forgotten the cruelty practised on their

faithful servant Sir John Eliot, and they now saw Sir John Hotham and Mr.

Bellasis committed to the Fleet, Mr. Crew, afterwards Lord Crew, to the

Tower, and the house of Lord Brooke forced, and his study and cabinets

broken open in a search for papers.

To add to the general exasperation, Laud, who had summoned Convocation

previous to the meeting of Parliament, continued its sessions after the

dissolution, contrary to all custom; and its sitting was employed to

pass a series of seventeen new canons of the most offensive and slavish

kind. The public excitement was so great against the innovation that

the Lord Keeper Finch and some of the judges had to furnish a written

opinion declaring the right of Convocation to sit after the close of

Parliament, and a new commission was issued with the usual words,

"during the Parliament," altered to "during our pleasure." But a guard

of soldiers was deemed necessary to protect the sittings, in which

the clergy first voted six subsidies to the king, and then passed to

the canons, one of which ordered that every clergyman once a quarter

should instruct his parishioners in the divine right of kings, and the

damnable sin of resisting authority. Others fulminated the most flaming

intolerance of Catholics, Socinians, and Separatists. All clergymen and

graduates of the universities were called on to take an oath declaring

the sufficiency of the doctrines and discipline of the Church of England,

in opposition to Presbyterianism and Popery.

[Illustration: GUILDHALL, LONDON, IN THE TIME OF CHARLES I.]

On the publication of these canons, great was the ferment in the country,

and petitions and remonstrances from Northampton, Kent, Devon, and

other counties, were sent up against them. The code was most ungracious

as regarded the Catholics, who had just presented to the king, at the

suggestion of the queen, fourteen thousand pounds. The queen remonstrated

against it, and the king gave orders to Laud to desist from further

annoyance in that direction. But anger and discontent were spreading

throughout the country, from the outrageous measures to raise money.

Fresh writs of ship-money were issued, and many victims were dragged into

the Star Chamber for refusal to pay, and fined, so that their money was

obtained by one process or the other. The names of the richest citizens

were picked out in order to demand loans from them. Bullion, the property

of foreign merchants, was seized at the Mint, and forty thousand pounds

were extorted for its release; and bags of pepper on the Exchange were

sold at whatever they would fetch. It was next proposed to coin four

hundred thousand pounds' worth of bad money; but the merchants and other

intelligent men came forward and drew such a picture of the ruin and

confusion that such an act would produce, that the king was alarmed,

and gave the project up. The Council, however, hit upon the scheme of

purchasing goods at long credit, and selling them at a low price for

ready money. All this time large sums of money were levied throughout

the land by violence, for the support of the troops collected for the

campaign against the Scots. Carts, horses, and forage were seized at the

sword's point; and whoever dared to represent these outrages to the king

was branded as an enemy to the Government. The Corporation of London was

dealt with severely, because it showed no fondness for enforcing the

king's arbitrary demands. The Lord Mayor and sheriffs were cited into the

Star Chamber for remissness in levying the ship-money; and several of

the aldermen were committed to prison for refusing to furnish the names

of such persons in their wards as were able to contribute to Charles's

forced loans. Strafford said things would never go right till a few fat

London aldermen were hanged.

These desperate measures inflamed the public mind beyond expression, and

greatly strengthened the league of the discontented with the Scots. All

except the insane tyrants who were thus forcing the nation to rebellion,

could see tempests ahead; and the Earl of Northumberland, writing to

a friend, said, "It is impossible that all things can long remain in

the condition they are now in: so general a defection in this kingdom

hath not been known in the memory of man." The disaffection began to

find expression, and, according to Clarendon, inflammatory placards

were scattered about the City and affixed on gates and public places,

denouncing the king's chief advisers. Laud, Strafford, and Hamilton,

were the marks of the most intense hatred, and the London apprentices

were invited, by a bill posted on the Royal Exchange, to demolish the

episcopal palace at Lambeth and "haul out William the fox."

The train-bands assembled and kept the peace by day, but at night a mob

of five hundred assembled and attacked Lambeth Palace, and demolished

the windows, vowing that they would tear the archbishop to pieces. In a

couple of hours the train-bands arrived, fired on them, and dispersed

the multitude. Laud got away to Whitehall, where he remained some days,

till the damages were repaired and the house was fortified with cannon.

Another crowd, said to be two thousand in number, entered St. Paul's,

where the High Commission Court sat, tore down the benches, and cried

out, "No bishop! no High Commission!" A number of rioters were seized by

the train-bands and lodged in the White Lion Prison; but the prison was

forced open by the insurgents, and their associates released all but two,

a sailor and a drummer, who were executed, according to some authorities;

according to others, only one was thus disposed of.

The king was greatly alarmed at this outbreak. He removed the queen to

Greenwich, as she was near her confinement, and placed a strong guard

over the palace with sixteen pieces of cannon; nor was he easy till he

saw a force of six thousand men at hand.

The time for the meeting of the Scottish Parliament had now arrived, and

Charles sought to prevent it by another prorogation; but the Scots were

not to be put off in any such manner. The king had for some time been

treating them like a nation at war; he had prohibited all trade with

Scotland, and his men-of-war had been ordered to seize its merchantmen,

wherever found. The Scots therefore met on the 2nd of January, set

aside the king's warrant of prorogation on the plea of informality, and

the members took their seats, elected a president, an officer hitherto

unknown, and passed the new Acts. They then voted a tax of ten per

cent. on all rents, and five per cent. on interest of money to open the

inevitable campaign; and, before rising, appointed a Committee of Estates

for the government of the kingdom till the next meeting of Parliament.

This Committee was to sit either at Edinburgh or at the place where

the headquarters of the army should be, and a bond was entered into to

support the authority of Parliament, and to give to the statutes which

it had passed or should pass the same force as if they had received the

royal assent.

But they had not waited for Parliament to take the necessary steps for

organisation of the army. They had retained in full pay the experienced

officers whom they had invited from Germany, and the soldiers who had

disbanded at the pacification of Berwick returned with alacrity to their

colours in March and April. Leslie was still commander-in-chief, and

determined to reduce the castle of Edinburgh before marching south. It

was in vain that Charles issued his proclamations, warning them of the

treasonable nature of their proceedings; they went on as if animated

by one spirit, and determined not only to strike the first blow, but to

advance into England instead of waiting to be attacked at home.

Charles, on his part, was far from being so early ready or so well

served. His plans for the campaign were grand. He proposed to attack

Scotland on three sides at once--with twenty thousand men from England,

with ten thousand from the Highlands under the Marquis of Hamilton, and

with the same number from Ireland under Strafford. But his total want of

funds prevented his progress, and the resort to the lawless practices

which we have related for raising them, was alienating the hearts of his

English subjects from him in an equal degree. It was not till the month

of July, and the loan of three hundred thousand pounds by the Lords, that

he dared to issue writs for the number of forces. Thus the Scots were

ready for action when the king was only mobilising an army.

In the appointment of commanders gross blunders were committed. The Earls

of Essex, Holland, and Arundel were set aside, and this, with personal

affronts to Essex, tended to throw these officers into the interest

of the opposition. Essex and Holland were at undisguised hostility

with Strafford, and as he was to take a leading part in the campaign,

they were kept out of it to oblige him. The Earl of Northumberland was

appointed commander-in-chief instead of Arundel, but was prevented by a

severe illness from acting; and Strafford was desired to leave Ireland

in the charge of the Earl of Ormond, and take the chief command, which

he consented to do, but nominally only as lieutenant to Northumberland.

Lord Conway was made general of the horse, partly because he had

been born a soldier in his father's garrison of Brell, and had held

several subordinate commands; but still more from the causes which put

incompetent generals at the head of our armies in later times--Court

influence.

On the 29th of June Leslie collected his army at Chouseley Wood, near

Dunse, his former camp, and drilled them there three weeks. He had

entrusted the siege of the castle of Edinburgh to a select party, and

had the pleasure soon after this period to hear of its surrender to

his officers. Meanwhile, Conway was advancing northward, and soon gave

evidence of his gross incapacity, by writing in all his despatches to

Windebank, the Secretary of State, "that the Scotch had not advanced

their preparations to that degree, that they would be able to march that

year." But the king, Clarendon says, had much better information, and

ought to have distrusted the vigilance of such a commander. Moreover,

his soldiers displayed a most decided aversion to the service. They were

evidently leavened with the same leaven of reform as the Parliament.

They wanted to know whether their officers were Papists, and would

not be satisfied till they saw them take the Sacrament. "They laid

violent hands," says May, "on divers of their commanders, and killed

some, uttering in bold speeches their distaste to the cause, to the

astonishment of many, that common people should be sensible of public

interest and religion, when lords and gentlemen seemed not to be."

Strafford was so well aware of the readiness of the Scots, and the

unreadiness and disaffection of the English soldiery, that he issued

strict injunctions to Conway not to attempt to cross the Tyne, and expose

his raw and wavering recruits in the open country between that river

and the Trent, but to fortify the passage of the Tyne at Newburn, and

prevent the Scots from crossing. The Scots, however, did not leave him

time for his defences. On the 20th of August, Leslie crossed the Tweed

with twenty thousand infantry and three thousand cavalry. He had been

strongly advised to this step by the leaders of the English opposition

themselves, and "the Earls of Essex, Bedford, Holland, the Lord Say,

Hampden, and Pym," says Whitelock, "were deeply in with them." No sooner

were the Scots on English ground, than the preachers advanced to the

front of the army with their Bibles in their hands, and led the way.

The soldiers followed with reversed arms, and a proclamation was issued

by Leslie that the Scots had undertaken this expedition at the call of

Divine Providence, not against the people of England, but against the

"Canterbury faction of Papists, Atheists, Arminians, and Prelates."

God and their consciences bore them witness that they sought only the

peace of both kingdoms by putting down the "troublers of Israel, the

fire-brands of hell, the Korahs, the Balaams, the Doegs, the Rhabshakehs,

the Hamans, the Tobiahs, the Sanballats of the times," and that done,

they would return with satisfaction to their own country.

On the 27th of August they arrived at Heddon-law, near Newburn, on the

left bank of the Tyne, and found Conway posted on the opposite side,

between Newburnhaugh and Stellahaugh. The Scots kindled that night great

fires round their camp, thus giving the English an imposing idea of its

great extent; and we are told that numbers of the English soldiers went

over during the night amongst them, and were well received by them, for

they assured them that they only came to demand justice from the king

against the men who were the pest of both nations. The next day the Scots

attempted to ford the river, but were driven back by a charge of six

troops of horse; these horse were, however, in their turn repulsed by the

discharge of artillery, and a second attempt of the Scots succeeded. "As

for Conway," says Clarendon, "he soon afterwards turned his face towards

the army, nor did anything like a commander, though his troops were

quickly brought together again, without the loss of a dozen men [the real

loss was about sixty], and were so ashamed of their flight, that they

were very willing, as well as able, to have taken what revenge they could

upon the enemy."

This was not true, for though "our whole army made the most shameful

and confounding flight that was ever heard of," they had no chance of

taking revenge with such a commander, being only about four thousand

five hundred altogether, horse and foot, while the Scots were twenty-six

thousand strong. Moreover, the English had no heart for the work, while

the Scots were resolute as one man, and commanded by officers who had

grown grey in the service of the victorious Swede, the great Gustavus

Adolphus. When the English forces reached Newcastle, they did not feel

able to defend it against such an army, and they fled on to Durham.

The Scots could scarcely believe their eyes when they found Newcastle

evacuated.

The retreating English army, under the panic-stricken Conway, meantime

dared not even stop at Durham, but continued their flight to Darlington,

where they met Strafford coming up with reinforcements. He was suffering

from gout and stone, and in a marvellously bad humour at the late

scandalous disaster; and he must have seen enough of the demoralisation

of Conway's troops, for he turned back with him to Northallerton, where

Charles was lying with the bulk of his army. Altogether, Charles had

now twenty thousand men and sixty pieces of cannon wherewith to face

the Scots; but the disaffection became so manifest, the desertions so

frequent, and the whole condition of the force so unsatisfactory, that

though Strafford professed to speak with contempt of the Scots, he

assured Charles that it would require two months to put his army into

fighting order. They therefore fell back upon York, intending to entrench

a camp under its walls, and to send the cavalry to Richmond or Cleveland

to guard the passes of the Tees.

The Scots had meanwhile taken unopposed possession of Newcastle, Durham,

Shields, Tynemouth, and other towns, and were masters of the four

northern counties of England, without having lost twenty men. In this

position it has been matter of wonder that they did not still advance,

and drive the king before them; but those writers who have thus imagined

have greatly mistaken the whole business. The object of the Scots was

not, as of old, to annoy and devastate, much less to conquer England; it

was simply to force from the king and his evil ministers the recognition

and the guarantee of their just national rights. They had advanced into

England with this plain declaration; they had attempted not to fight

except so far as to force their way to the king's presence. To this they

were, in fact, now come. They had achieved a vantage-ground from which to

treat, and, though strongly posted, and possessed of the whole country

north of the Tees, they had refrained from all ravages and impositions

on the people with whom they had no quarrel, paying for whatever they

needed. To have done otherwise, would have broken faith with the

people of England, who were seeking the same redress of grievances as

themselves, and have at once roused the jealousy of the English public,

who would have regarded them as invaders instead of friends, and thus

strengthened the hands of the king. The Scots knew perfectly well what

they were about, and how best to obtain their just demands. They now

therefore sent Lord Lanark, Secretary of State for Scotland, and brother

of the Marquis of Hamilton, to present the petition of the Covenanters to

the king, who was plainly in a strait and therefore compelled to listen

to it. They respectfully repeated their pacific designs, and implored

the king to assemble a Parliament, and by its wisdom to settle peace

between the two kingdoms. This was precisely what the people of England

were earnestly seeking, and demonstrates the perfect concert between the

leaders of the two nations. To assemble a Parliament was of all things

the last which Charles was disposed to consent to, but he was in no

condition to refuse altogether. He therefore took three days to consider

their request, and on the 5th of September returned to Lord Lanark the

answer, that he would assemble a great council of English Peers in York

to settle the matters in dispute between them, and that he had already

summoned this Assembly for the 24th of that month. By this means Charles

endeavoured to escape the necessity of calling a Parliament, but his

hesitation did not avail him. All parties were too much interested to let

this opportunity slip. Twelve peers--Bedford, Essex, Hertford, Warwick,

Bristol, Mulgrave, Say and Sele, Howard, Bolingbroke, Mandeville, Brooke,

and Paget--presented a petition, urgently representing the necessity

of a Parliament, and describing the sufferings of the nation from the

lawlessness of the soldiers, the damage done to trade by the arbitrary

levies on merchants, and the danger of bringing in wild Irish troops.

The citizens of London prepared a similar one, which Laud endeavoured to

quash, but in vain; they obtained ten thousand signatures, and despatched

some of the Aldermen and members of the Common Council to present it

at York. The gentry of Yorkshire presented another, detailing their

sufferings from the support of the army, and their cry, too, was for a

Parliament. Strafford, who was desired to present it, endeavoured to

persuade them to leave the prayer for a Parliament out, on pretence that

he knew the king meant to call one; but they would on no account omit it.

Thus pressed on all sides, Charles was reluctantly compelled to promise,

and on the meeting of the great council of Peers on the 24th, announced

to them that he had issued the writs for the meeting of a Parliament on

the 3rd of November.

[Illustration: ADVANCE OF THE COVENANTERS ACROSS THE BORDER INTO ENGLAND.

(_See p._ 587.)]

The Scots had comprised their demands under seven heads, the chief of

which were the full and free exercise of their religion; the total

abolition of episcopacy; the restoration of their ships and goods; the

recall of the offensive epithet of traitors; and the punishment of the

evil counsellors who had created all these troubles. The Lords, delighted

at the prospect of a Parliament, saw no difficulty in coming to terms

with the Scots. They named sixteen of their own body to meet with eight

Commissioners of the Covenanters at Ripon, to negotiate the terms of a

peace, and sent a deputation of six other lords to London, to raise for

the king a loan of two hundred thousand pounds, on their own securities.

Charles would have drawn the Conference from Ripon to York, where his

army lay, but the Scots were too cautious to be caught in such a snare.

They represented the danger of their putting their Commissioners into the

power of an army commanded by Strafford, one of the very incendiaries

against whom they were complaining, and who termed them rebels and

traitors in the Parliament in Ireland, and had recommended the king to

subdue and destroy them. The Conference was opened at Ripon, but got no

further from the 1st to the 16th of October, than the settlement of the

question of the maintenance of the Scottish army till all was concluded.

Charles offered to leave them at liberty to make assessments for

themselves, but this they declined, as looking too much like plundering;

and it was finally agreed that they should retain their position in the

four northern counties, and receive eight hundred and eighty pounds for

two months, binding themselves to commit no depredations on any party;

and the time for the meeting of Parliament approaching, the Conference

was adjourned to London on the 24th.

The last Parliament had been called the Short Parliament; this was

destined to acquire the name of the Long Parliament, never to be

dissolved till it had dissolved the monarchy--the most memorable

Parliament that ever sat. "The Parliament," says Clarendon, "met on the

3rd of November, 1640. It had a sad and a melancholie aspect upon the

first entrance, which presaged some unusual and unnatural events. The

king himself did not ride with his accustomed equipages, nor in his usual

majesty to Westminster, but went privately in his barge to the Parliament

stairs, and so to the church, as if it had been a return of a prorogued

or adjourned Parliament. There was likewise an untoward, and, in truth,

an unheard of accident, which broke many of the king's measures, and

infinitely disordered his service beyond a capacity of reparation."

This was the defeat in the City of the man on whom he had fixed as

Speaker of the Commons, Sir Thomas Gardiner, the Recorder of London, a

lawyer on whom Charles greatly calculated for managing the House. But

that very morning he learned that Gardiner had been thrown out as one of

the four members, and he was so confounded that it was afternoon before

he could go to the House. There Lenthall, a bencher of Lincoln's Inn, was

immediately elected Speaker, and Charles, believing him well affected

to the Church and State, when two days afterwards he was, according to

custom, presented to him, confirmed the choice, which he afterwards most

bitterly repented. But it was not only in the case of the Speaker that

the king was doomed to see himself disappointed. The whole body of the

House was of a new character and spirit. "There was," says Clarendon,

"observed a marvellous elated countenance in most of the members of

Parliament before they met together in the House. The same men, who six

months before were observed to be of very moderate tempers, and to wish

that gentle remedies might be applied without opening the wound too

wide and exposing it to the air, and rather to excuse what was amiss

than too strictly make inquisition into the causes and origin of the

malady, talked now in another dialect both of things and persons. Mr.

Hyde, who was returned to serve for a borough in Cornwall, met Mr. Pym in

Westminster Hall some days before the Parliament, and conferring together

on the state of affairs, Pym told Hyde that 'they now must be of another

temper than they were the last Parliament; that they must not only sweep

the house clean below, but must pull down the cobwebs which hung on the

tops and corners, that they might not breed dust, and so make a foul

house hereafter. That they had now an opportunity to make their country

happy by removing all grievances, and pulling up the causes of them by

the roots, if all men would do their duties;' and used much other sharp

discourse to the same purpose, by which it was discerned that the warmest

and boldest counsels and overtures would find a much better reception

than those of a more temperate allay, which fell out accordingly."

Charles opened Parliament, as usual, by promising freely redress of

grievances on the granting of the necessary subsidies, and called on the

two Houses to abandon all suspicions, and put confidence in him; but,

after fifteen years of constant struggle and constant breaches of faith,

this was impossible. The Commons saw the certainty at length of achieving

their objects, not from any goodwill towards constitutional freedom

in the king, but from the stringent necessity in which he had placed

himself. His creeping into Parliament, as it were, by the back door,

instead of coming there in the usual state, showed that he was anxious

and depressed, and his advisers were in an equal state of terror. His

latest hope--the selection of the Speaker--had failed him, and he saw the

Commons commence their work by passing altogether over the question of

supplies, and falling in ominous earnestness on the grievances.

On the fourth day of their session they proceeded from acts to deeds.

They passed an order that those victims of the Star Chamber, Prynne,

Bastwick, and Burton, whose horrible mutilations had revolted the whole

civilised world, putting the Reformed Church of England on a par with

persecuting and murdering Rome in her worst days, should be sent for

from their distant prisons, and called on to state by whose authority

they had been thus mutilated, branded, and imprisoned. This order spread

a wonderful joy amongst the Reformers everywhere. The three lopped and

tortured men were welcomed with acclamations at all places on their

journey, and on the 28th of November they entered London attended by

hundreds of carriages, and by five thousand people on horseback, both

men and women, all wearing in their hats and caps bays and rosemary,

and followed by great multitudes, with boughs and flowers, and strewing

flowers and herbs as they passed. This was a change from the day when

Laud pulled off his cap at the passing of Prynne's horrible sentence, and

thanked God for it. The House of Commons, after hearing their statement,

voted them damages to the amount of six thousand pounds to Burton, and

five thousand pounds each to Prynne and Bastwick, which was to be paid

by Archbishop Laud and his associates in the High Commission and Star

Chamber.

But they did not stop there; from compensating the sufferers they passed

on to the punishment of the oppressors. The Committee of Religion

proceeded to inquire into the loose lives of the clergy, their cruelties

towards the Puritans, and their introduction of papistical ceremonies.

"Their first care," says May in his "History of Parliament," "was to

vindicate distressed ministers, who had been imprisoned or deprived

by the bishops, and all others who in the cause of religion had been

persecuted by them. Many of those ministers were released from durance

and restored to their livings, with damages from their oppressors.

Many doctors and divines that had been most busy in promoting the late

church innovations about altars and other ceremonies, and therefore

most gracious and flourishing in the State, were then questioned and

committed, inasmuch as the change, and the suddenness of it, seemed

wonderful to own, and may serve worthily as a document to all posterity,

_quam fragili loco starent superbi_--how insecure are the proud." On the

18th of December, Denzil Holles was sent to the Upper House to demand

the impeachment of Laud. On hearing this the Archbishop rose, and, with

his usual warmth declaring his own innocence, was proceeding to charge

his accusers with various offences, when he was promptly called to order

by the Earl of Essex and the Lord Say, and was stopped by the House and

consigned to the Usher of the Black Rod. He apologised, and obtained

leave, under surveillance of the gentleman usher, to fetch some papers

from his house, necessary to his defence; and after remaining in the

custody of the Black Rod for ten weeks he was committed to the Tower

(February 24, 1641).

[Illustration: JOHN PYM. (_From an Engraving by Houbraken._)]

But the Commons had been all this time more deeply engaged in securing

the most daring and dangerous offender of all, the Earl of Strafford.

Laud, who was generally in London, was more safely within their power

at any moment; but Strafford was left in the North, where he was

lieutenant-general of the army, Lord President of the Council of the

North, and could at any instant slip away to Ireland, where he had still

more authority, and a considerable army. Laud, once caged, could wait;

but Strafford must be both secured and promptly dealt with. His own

friends in London, and his own sagacity, sufficiently apprised Strafford

of the danger which awaited him if he came to town. He represented to the

king that it were much better on all accounts that he should remain where

he was; that in London he should by his presence remind the opposition of

their enmity towards him; and that he would only further embarrass the

king's affairs if he came, whilst he could be of service with the army,

and, if necessary, escape to Ireland, where he might do the king real

service. But Charles, who felt his weakness without Strafford, in whose

judgment and power of overruling men he had the highest faith, would not

hear of it, but insisted on his coming to London: and pledged himself

to guarantee his safety, reminding him that he was King of England, and

that Parliament should not touch a hair of his head. Strafford was rather

bound to obey as a subject and servant of the Crown, than assured of

his safety by those solemn pledges. He went to town, and on the third

day after his arrival he was arrested, and placed in the custody of the

Keeper of the Black Rod.

[Illustration: ARREST OF THE EARL OF STRAFFORD. (_See p._ 593.)]

On the 11th of November, 1640, assuming an outward air of unconcern,

Strafford went to take his seat in the House of Lords. The Earl of

Northumberland, writing to the Earl of Leicester on the 13th, declared

that "a greater and more universal hatred was never contracted by any

person than he has drawn upon himself, yet he is not at all dejected."

Before he appeared in the House, the impeachment had been carried thither

from the Commons. Strafford at once hastened to meet his enemies.

Baillie, who was one of the Scottish commissioners, gives this striking

account of his arrest:--"He calls rudely at the door: James Maxwell,

Keeper of the Black Rod, opens. His lordship, with a proud, gloomy

countenance, makes towards his place at the board head; but at once many

bid him avoid the House, so he is forced in confusion to go back till

he is called. After consultation, being called in, he stands, but is

commanded to kneel, and on his knees to hear the sentence. Being on his

knees he is delivered to the Keeper of the Black Rod, to be prisoner,

till he was cleared of these crimes the House of Commons had charged him

with. He offered to speak, but was commanded to be gone without a word.

In the outer room James Maxwell, required him, as prisoner, to deliver

his sword. When he had got it, he cries with a loud voice for his man to

carry my Lord-lieutenant's sword. This done, he makes through a number of

people towards his coach, all gazing, no man capping him, before whom,

that morning, the greatest of England would have stood uncovered, all

crying, 'What is the matter?' He said, 'A small matter, I warrant you.'

They replied, 'Yes, indeed, high treason is a small matter.' Coming to

his place where he expected his coach, it was not there, so he behoved to

return the same way, through a crowd of gazing people. When at last he

found his coach, and was entering, James Maxwell told him, 'Your lordship

is my prisoner, and must go in my coach;' so he behoved to do." In a few

days he was committed to the Tower, and the Commons proceeded to deal

with those next in degree. But Windebank, Secretary of State, and Finch

the Lord Keeper, fled from the reach of their vengeance.

This, then, was the marvellous state of affairs at this moment. "Within

less than six weeks," says Clarendon, "these terrible Reformers had

caused the two greatest councillors of the kingdom--Laud and Strafford,

whom they most feared, and so hated--to be removed from the king, and

imprisoned under an accusation of high treason; and frightened away

the Lord Keeper of the Great Seal of England and one of the principal

Secretaries of State into foreign kingdoms for fear of the like,

besides preparing all the Lords of the Council, and very many of the

principal gentlemen throughout England, who had been sheriffs and

deputy-lieutenants, to expect such measure of punishment from their

general votes and resolutions as their future demeanour should draw upon

them for their past offences." And thus ended the ever memorable year

1640, in which the Parliament had secured the ascendency after fifteen

years' determined struggle with the present king, and many more with his

father; had humbled the proud and obstinate monarch; imprisoned his two

arch-counsellors; impressed a salutary terror on the whole royal party;

and initiated changes of the most stupendous kind.

The House of Commons commenced the year 1641 with an endeavour to secure

annual Parliaments, and succeeded in obtaining triennial ones. They

proposed that the issuing of the writs should take place at a fixed time,

and to prevent the Crown from defeating this intention, they demanded, in

case the king did not order the writs at the regular time, it should be

imperative on the Lord Keeper or Lord Chancellor to do it; in case they

neglected it, it should become the duty of the House of Lords to do so;

if the Lords failed, then the sheriffs, and if the sheriffs neglected or

refused, the people should proceed to elect their own representatives

without any writs at all. To frustrate in future any hasty prorogations,

by which the House of Commons was liable at any moment to be stopped by

the Crown, they proposed that the king should not have power to prorogue

or dissolve Parliament within fifty days of its meeting without its own

consent.

At one time Charles would have resented so bold a measure most

indignantly, and would have dissolved the audacious body at once; but now

he condescended to reason with them in a far different tone. He protested

against the measure as a direct encroachment on his prerogative, by which

sheriffs and constables were to be endowed with powers that hitherto had

been only kingly; but he was fain at last to give way, and the Bill, so

far as regarded triennial Parliaments, was passed, and a Bill securing

the Houses from hasty prorogation followed in May. By that act Charles

tied up his hands from dissolving Parliament at all without its own

consent, so that he could no longer defeat its measures as he had done.

Thus a real and most momentous infringement on the prerogative was made,

being brought about by the king's resistance to the cession of just

rights. In obstinately claiming the people's privileges, he was driven to

forfeit his own. He was now in a dilemma. The army of the Scots still lay

in the North, and both the English Commons and the Scottish Commissioners

in London were in no hurry to have it disbanded. Whilst it lay there

well supported by Parliamentary allowance, the king and his friends were

overawed and powerless, and both parties, the Commons of England and the

Covenanters of Scotland, were the better able to press their claims and

support each other. Both parties were bent on abolishing or reducing

episcopacy.

The Scottish Commissioners exerted themselves with the leaders of the

English Commons to move for the total abolition of episcopacy in England,

and the establishment of Presbyterianism; but this led only to the

development of a variety of views in the Commons. Some of the members

favoured the Scottish proposal, and of these were the supporters of the

petition with fifteen thousand signatures, brought in from London by

Alderman Pennington, called the "root and branch petition." Others, as

the Lords Wharton, Say, and Brooke, preferred the still more levelling

system of the Independents. On the other hand, some of the most prominent

Reformers--the Lords Digby and Falkland, and Selden and Rudyard--were

opposed to the extinction of the bishops. Digby compared the London

petition to a comet portending nothing but anarchy, and with its tail

pointing to the North, meaning that it was a Scottish comet; and Lord

Falkland was for relieving the bishops of their temporal cares, but not

removing them from the Church altogether. The question was warmly debated

for two days, but the fate of the bishops was deferred awhile by that of

Strafford.

All being prepared, Strafford was brought from the Tower on the 22nd

of March, 1641, and placed before the tribunal appointed to try him

in Westminster Hall. He had been about three months in prison, and

meanwhile a deputation had arrived from Ireland. They brought a

petition, calling on the Commons of England to join them in obtaining

his condign punishment. They enumerated their grievances and sufferings

from his lawless violence under sixteen heads. The Commons welcomed

the deputation, as may be supposed, and to obtain full evidence of

Strafford's doings in Ireland, not only accused his most active

instrument--Sir George Ratcliffe--of high treason, too, but almost every

one of his willing subordinates, and secured all of them that they

could, and kept them in readiness to be questioned, by which means they

also prevented them from doing mischief with the army. The Scottish

Commissioners were equally vehement in demanding justice against him for

having counselled the king to put down their religion and government by

force, and for offering to supply an army of Irish for the purpose. Thus

all three kingdoms were arrayed against the common enemy.

After much debate, it had been concluded that the trial should take place

in Westminster Hall, before the Lords and Commons. The Earl of Arundel

was appointed to preside as Lord High Steward. On each side of the throne

was erected a cabinet, where the king, queen, and Prince of Wales could

sit without being seen, these cabinets having trellis work in front,

and being hung with arras. Before the throne ran lines of seats for the

peers, and woolsacks for the judges, and on each side of the peers were

ranged seats for the Commons, who consented to sit uncovered there. Near

them were the Scottish and Irish deputies, and there was a desk or dock

enclosed for the prisoner and his counsel. One-third of the Hall was

left open to the public, the rest being defended by a bar; and there was

a gallery near for ladies, which was crowded by those of highest rank.

There was an intense interest, indeed, felt by all classes, and the hall

was daily so crowded, that Mr. Principal Baillie, minister of Kilwinning,

whom we have already mentioned, says in the quaint manner of his time,

"We always behoved to be there before five in the morning: the house was

full before seven."

Strafford was brought from the Tower guarded by a hundred soldiers, who

filled, with the officers, six barges; and on landing at Westminster he

was received and conducted forward by two hundred of the train-band. All

cross streets and entries were occupied by a strong force of constables

and watchmen, placed there as early as four in the morning. The king,

queen, and prince arrived about nine o'clock, and about the same time

the prisoner was conducted into the Hall. On his appearance the porter

demanded of the Usher of the Black Rod whether the axe should be borne

before him; but the Usher said no, the king had expressly forbidden it.

The bishops did not appear amongst the lords, for their presence had

been strongly objected to by the House of Commons, on the plea that

the canons forbade their taking part in any trial which involved

bloodshed--"_clericus non debet interesse sanguini_." But the real fact

was that they were supporters of Laud, and Williams, of Lincoln, very

adroitly volunteered a motion as from the prelates themselves, that

they should be excused. The Commons had objected to those who had been

made peers since Strafford had been impeached, as they were his avowed

friends. All, except Lord Lyttelton, who had been made a baron and Lord

Keeper in the place of the fugitive Finch, refused to comply and took

their seats; and so says Clarendon, might the bishops, too, had they had

the same spirit.

All being ready, the impeachment was read, consisting of twenty-eight

capital articles, and then Strafford's reply to it, which filled two

hundred sheets of paper. This occupied the first day. The court rose

about two o'clock, and the prisoner was reconducted to the Tower. This

was the routine of each day during the trial, which lasted eighteen

days. On entering the court at nine o'clock, Strafford made three

obeisances to the Earl of Arundel, the High Steward, two of which might

be interpreted as intended for the king and queen, though they were not

at first visible, nor during the whole time were supposed to be so; but

the interest of the proceedings quickly made the king impatient of the

trellis work, and, according to Baillie, he pulled it down with his own

hands. "It was daily the most glorious assembly," continues Baillie,

"that the isle could afford; yet the gravity was not such as I expected.

After ten, much public eating, not only of confections, but of flesh and

bread; bottles of beer and wine going thick from mouth to mouth without

cups, and all this in the king's eye.... There was no outgoing to return,

and often the sitting was till two, three, or four o'clock at night."

As Strafford went and came, the crowd conducted themselves towards

him with forbearance and courtesy, and he returned their greetings

with humility and politeness. Few of the lords at first returned his

obeisances, and the managers, thirteen in number, showed him no favour.

When the Lord Steward ordered the Committee of Management to proceed

on the second morning, Pym opened the case with an eloquent charge,

commencing with these words:--"My lords, we stand here by the commandment

of the knights, citizens, and burgesses, now assembled for the Commons

in Parliament, and we are ready to make good that impeachment whereby

Thomas, Earl of Strafford, stands charged in their name, and in the

name of all the Commons of England, with high treason. This, my lords,

is a great cause, and we might sink under the weight of it, and be

astonished with the lustre of this noble assembly, if there were not in

the cause strength and vigour to support itself, and to encourage us.

It is the cause of the king; it concerns his majesty in the honour of

his government, in the safety of his person, in the stability of his

crown. It is the cause of the kingdom: it concerns not only the peace

and prosperity, but even the being of the kingdom. We have that piercing

eloquence, the cries, and groans, and tears of all the subjects assisting

us. We have the three kingdoms, England, and Scotland, and Ireland, in

travail and agitation with us, bowing themselves, like the hinds spoken

of in Job, to cast out their sorrows. Truth and goodness, my lords,

they are the beauty of the soul, they are the perfection of all created

natures, they are the image and character of God upon the creatures.

This beauty, evil spirits and evil men have lost; but yet there are none

so wicked, but they desire to march under the show and shadow of it,

though they hate the reality of it. This unhappy earl, now the object

of your lordships' justice, hath taken as much care, hath used as much

cunning, to set a face and countenance of honesty in the performance of

all these actions. My lords, it is the greatest baseness of wickedness,

that it dares not look in its own colours, nor be seen in its natural

countenance. But virtue, as it is amiable in all aspects, so the least is

not this, that it puts a nobleness, it puts a bravery upon the mind, and

lifts it above hopes and fears, above favour and displeasure: it makes it

always uniform and constant to itself. The service commanded to me and my

colleagues, is to take off those vizards of truth and uprightness, which

hath been sought to be put upon this cause, and to show you his actions

and intentions in their own natural blackness and deformity."

Pym, after this passage, went one by one through the pleas of Strafford

in his reply, and rent away ruthlessly the arguments by which he

endeavoured to veil the flagrancy of his actions; but he dwelt for

this time more especially on his conduct in Ireland, representing him

there as treading on all the rights, privileges, and property of the

people in a manner utterly regardless of any constitution or compacts.

He then produced as witnesses Sir Pierce Crosby, Sir John Clotworthy,

Lord Ranelagh, Lord Mountnorris, and Mr. Barnwell, who had suffered

insult, loss of office and honour from the Lord-Lieutenant's overbearing

despotism. To this Strafford replied in a long and able speech. The

subject of Ireland was resumed the next day, and then from day to day.

After the Managers had gone through some particular charge, and produced

their witnesses, the court adjourned for half an hour, when Strafford

made his defence and produced his witnesses; the Managers then commented

on the evidence, and the court closed for the day. Thus it went on

for thirteen days. "All the hasty and proud expressions that he had

uttered at any time," says Clarendon, "since he was first made a privy

councillor; all the acts of passion or power that he had exercised in

Yorkshire, from the time that he was first President there; his engaging

himself in projects in Ireland, as the sole making of flax and selling

tobacco in that kingdom; his extraordinary proceedings against Lord

Mountnorris and the Lord Chancellor Loftus; his assuming a power of

judicature at the Council table to determine private interest, and matter

of inheritance; some rigorous and extrajudicial determinations in cases

of Plantations; some high discourses at the Council table in Ireland; and

some casual and light discourses at his own table and at public meetings;

and, lastly, some words spoken in secret Council in this kingdom, after

the dissolution of the last Parliament, were urged and pressed against

him to make good the general charge of an endeavour to overthrow the

fundamental government of the kingdom, and to introduce an arbitrary

power." "In his defence," continues the same historian, "the earl behaved

himself with great show of humility and submission, but yet with such

a kind of courage, as would lose no advantage; and, in truth, made his

defence with all imaginable dexterity, answering this and evading that

with all possible skill and eloquence; and though he knew not till he

came to the bar upon what parts of his charge they would proceed against

him, or what evidence they would produce, he took very little time to

recollect himself, and left nothing unsaid that might make for his own

justification."

Though this is the language of the royalist historian, it is borne out

by all accounts of this extraordinary trial. Strafford was one of the

most eloquent, able, and imposing men of any age. His commanding person,

and persuasive and impressive manner, had made his influence paramount

wherever he had appeared. He had the faculty vastly developed of making

the worse appear the better reason; and never had his splendid talents

been so successfully displayed as on this great occasion, when all the

ability, the patriotism, and the elocution of the time were arrayed

against him. The very weight and vastness of the opposition bearing upon

him acted in his favour. There he stood, alone, as it were, against the

three kingdoms, dauntless, and unsubdued; laden with growing infirmities,

and the deadly hatred of innumerable hosts, yet disdaining to succumb to

them; and with a readiness of wit, a promptness of reply, an adroitness

of application or of evasion, a keenness of ridicule, a weight of reason,

and a rich eloquence, that raised admiration even in those who most

loathed him. The sympathies of the ladies were every day more and more

enlisted in his cause. They were seen--those of the highest rank--taking

notes, discussing the proceedings, and discovering their vivid interest

in him by a thousand signs. The courtiers were enraptured; the lords,

even the sternest, rapidly relaxed, and at length were almost all on

his side. The clergy were unanimous in their plaudits of him, and the

Managers saw with dismay a change which threatened their defeat.

[Illustration: WESTMINSTER HALL AND PALACE YARD, IN THE TIME OF CHARLES

I.]

Maynard and Glynne, two acute lawyers, were the Managers who chiefly

brought forward the accusations, and directed the evidence against him;

but they appeared no match for Strafford's intellect and address. They

endeavoured to establish a charge of constructive treason, that is, of

treason not founded on one clear and palpable act, but on accumulated

evidence, the aggregate of many offences; but the prisoner's answer to

this was triumphant. They had not his letters, which we have; and though

they could point to a long course of arbitrary and unconstitutional

conduct, amounting to high misdemeanours, they could not lay their

fingers on the damning proofs of his avowed intentions under his own

hand, as we now can in the Strafford Papers. But even had they possessed

these, it would still have been technically impossible to establish a

charge of high treason according to any definition of law, or idea of

treason then existing. All the statutes of high treason had heretofore

been directed against designs or attempts to injure or remove the king,

or any of his family; to subvert the Government, or change the possession

of the Crown. That there might be such a thing as treason against the

people and their rights had never entered into governing heads.

In vain would Pym or Selden then search Coke upon Littleton, or the

statutes at large, for any definition of a treason that would serve them.

The statute of 25 Edward III. c. 2 was the great landmark of English

history in those matters, and amongst the seven distinct declarations of

treasonable offences, they would look in vain for one to fit Wentworth,

for most assuredly against none of them had Strafford offended. He was

working with the king and his officers; his acts and intentions pointed

in a totally different direction. His object was to strengthen the king's

government beyond all precedent; to make him, as we now have it under

his own hand, the most absolute and independent monarch that ever lived.

True, from the reign of Henry IV. to that of Queen Mary, many other

species of high treason had been created by the Crown, and especially by

Henry VIII. But in none of these reigns, when almost every imaginable

or unimaginable thing affecting kingship was made treason, had it ever

entered the royal or legal head to conceive of the possibility of treason

against the people. Therefore, had all these descriptions of treason been

yet existent, none of them would have availed against Strafford, who was

most loyal to the king and his government.

The matter was too palpable to be denied, but at this crisis an event

occurred which gave fresh hope to the accusers. The younger Sir Henry

Vane communicated to Pym a paper which he had discovered in the cabinet

of his father, the Secretary of State. The account which he gave of the

occurrence, according to Whitelock, was this:--His father being out of

town, had sent him the key of his study, desiring him to search for some

papers which he wanted. In this search he came upon one paper of such

extraordinary contents, that he held himself bound in duty to secure

it. The paper was a minute of what had passed in the Privy Council on

the morning of the day on which the last Parliament had been dissolved.

The question before the Council was offensive or defensive war with the

Scots. The king said, "How can I undertake a war without money?" And

Strafford was made to reply, "Borrow one hundred thousand pounds of the

City. Go rigorously on to levy ship-money. Your majesty having tried the

affections of your people, you are absolved and loosed from all rules of

government, and may do what power will admit. Having tried all ways, you

shall be acquitted before God and man. You have an army in Ireland, which

you may employ to reduce this kingdom to obedience, for I am confident

the Scots cannot hold out five months." Laud and Cottington declared with

similar vehemence that the king was absolved from all law.

Pym, having obtained from young Vane a copy of this paper, on the 10th of

April informed the Commons of the fact. After hearing it read, Vane the

younger rose and confirmed the relation, excusing himself on the ground

that it had appeared his bounden duty to make the matter known, and that

Mr. Pym had confirmed him in this opinion. After giving Mr. Pym the copy,

he had returned the original paper to its proper place in the cabinet.

Sir Henry Vane, the father, here rose, and remarked, with much sign of

resentment against his son, that he now saw whence all this mischief

came, and that he could give no further particulars of the matter but

found himself in an ill condition from its testimony.

On the 12th, charge was made against Strafford in court, who replied

that old Vane was his most inveterate enemy; that, as was most probable,

if he had delivered this paper to his son, he had been guilty of an

unpardonable breach of his oath as a Privy Councillor, to preserve the

king's secrets, and was therefore totally unworthy of credit; that he

had been strictly examined on what passed at that Council, and at first

denied all memory of any such words spoken by him, Strafford, on that

occasion; and even on his third examination, after having been shown

this paper, he had only recollected he had spoken these words, or some

like them; that such words and such counsel were not likely to be soon

forgotten; yet, of eight Privy Councillors then present, none of those

whose evidence could be obtained could remember any such words, except

the Earl of Northumberland, who thought he recollected such words as

those--"of being absolved from all rules of government." The Archbishop

of Canterbury and Windebank were not present to give their evidence;

but the Marquis of Hamilton, Bishop Juxon, and Lord Cottington, could

remember no such words. Even had he used the words, it depended much

on whether the phrase "this kingdom" meant England or Scotland; that

the country under debate was Scotland, and he had demanded of Vane,

whether the word used was really "this" or "that." And further, could the

authority of this paper be established, it would not establish a charge

of treason, for the law demanded the evidence of two witnesses, and this

was but the evidence of one.

Pym therefore put in the verified copy of the paper, for the paper itself

having been laid on the table of the Committee of Commons, had been

purloined, and was never afterwards recovered. That in the possession

of Charles was in the handwriting of Digby, which brought him under

suspicion. Pym contended that the evidence of the minute itself, and that

of Sir Henry Vane, amounted to the required proofs of the law, being

two witnesses against the earl. The Lord Steward, Arundel, then called

on Strafford to say whether he had any observations to make on this

additional proof, and he replied most eloquently:--

"Where has this species of guilt lain so long concealed? Where has this

fire been so long buried during so many centuries, that no smoke should

appear till it burst out at once, to consume me and my children? Better

it were to live under no law at all, than to fancy we have a law on which

we can rely, and find at last that this law preceded its promulgation,

and try us by maxims unheard of till the moment of the prosecution. If I

sail on the Thames, and split my vessel on an anchor, in case there be no

buoy to give warning, the party shall pay me damages; but if the anchor

be marked out, then is the striking on it at my own peril. But where is

the mark set upon this crime? Where the token by which I should discover

it?

"It is now full two hundred and forty years since treasons were defined,

and so long has it been since any man was touched to this extent upon

this crime before myself. We have lived, my lords, happily to ourselves

at home; we have lived gloriously abroad in the world; let us be content

with what our fathers have left us; let not an ambition carry us to

be more learned than they were in these killing and destructive acts.

My lords, be pleased to give that regard to the peerage of England,

as never to expose yourselves to such moot points, such constructive

interpretations of law. If there must be a trial of wits, let the

subject matter be of somewhat else than the lives and honours of peers.

It will be wisdom for yourselves, for your posterity, and for the whole

kingdom, to cast into the fire these bloody and mysterious volumes of

constructive and arbitrary treason, as the primitive Christians did their

books of curious arts, and betake yourselves to the plain letter of the

statute, which tells you where the crime is, and points out the path by

which you may avoid it....

"My lords, I have now troubled your lordships a great deal longer than

I should have done, were it not for the interest of these pledges which

a saint in heaven left me. I should be loth----" here he pointed to

his children, and his weeping stopped him. "What I forfeit for myself

is nothing, but that my indiscretion should extend to my posterity,

I confess, wounds me very deeply. You will be pleased to pardon my

importunity. Something I should have said, but I see I shall not be able,

and therefore I shall leave it. And now, my lords, I thank God that I

have been by His blessing sufficiently instructed in the vanity of all

temporary enjoyments, compared to the importance of an eternal duration.

And so, my lords, even so with all tranquillity of mind, I submit clearly

and freely to your judgment; and whether that righteous doom shall be

life or death, I shall repose myself, full of gratitude and confidence,

in the arms of the great Author of my existence--'_In te Domine confido:

non confundar in æternum_.'"

What the effect of this address must have been, may be inferred from

the observations of Whitelock, the chairman of the Committee which was

conducting the prosecution:--"Certainly, never any man acted such a part

on such a theatre, with more wisdom, constancy, and eloquence; with

greater reason, judgment, and temper; and with a better grace in all his

words and actions, than did this great and excellent person, so that he

moved the hearts of all his auditors, some few excepted, to remorse and

pity."

The Commons were alarmed at the effect of the trial. The production of

Vane's paper had been a blow enough to have sunk another man, but the

extraordinary eloquence and address of Strafford seemed to have effaced

even that; they had little faith in procuring a verdict from the Lords

in their present course, and they resolved to change their plan, and

proceed against the offender by a Bill of Attainder. They have been

accused of adopting the arbitrary measures of Henry VIII. in so doing,

and of depriving Strafford of the fair influence of his trial; but we,

who enjoy the benefit of their deed, ought not to join in that cry.

Strafford was guilty, if ever man was, of the most atrocious attempt that

a man can entertain--that of destroying the liberties of his country.

The laws had been so framed, from royal bias, as not duly to designate

his crime; but not for that, nor for any temporary feeling of pity raised

by his admirable defence, did these patriots mean to allow of his escape.

But in the House of Commons the Bill of Attainder met with unexpected

opposition from one of the most zealous of the Reformers, Lord Digby. He

saw, like the rest, that technically they could not condemn Strafford

for high treason as the law then stood, and he feared the precedent of

condemning men under a show of law that did not exist. It was, in fact,

too much imitating the king. It was a real difficulty, which the patriots

had not sufficiently foreseen. Instead of charging him with treason,

as it was then defined, they should first have remodelled the law, or

have charged Strafford with the violation of the national guarantee of

Magna Charta, on which there could be no doubt, and for which he was

well worthy of death; but it was too late to retrace their steps, and

they were obliged to condemn him for the unquestionable crime of treason

against the nation, making the act of the Legislature in all its branches

an extension of the law. Digby himself did not question his guilt. He

said "he believed him still that grand apostate to the commonwealth,

who must not expect to be pardoned in this world till he be despatched

to the other;" but he pleaded that on the ground of law he should have

his life spared. But the Commons knew that while he lived there was no

security. On the first occasion the king would pardon and restore him,

and all their labour would be thrown away. They sought, therefore, to

erect Parliament in so great an emergency into a court of equity as well

as of law, believing that what was decreed by both Houses, and had the

sanction of the Crown, was and would be a law of itself. They did not,

like the Tudors and the Stuarts, seek to condemn him by setting aside the

established courts and trial by jury; they gave him the highest court

in the realm, and a full trial by his peers, and by their Bill they now

called for a verdict.

But that verdict was not obtained without a great struggle. In the

Commons it was warmly debated, and it was not till the eleventh day, the

21st of April, that it was carried by a vast majority. Only fifty-four,

or, according to Whitelock, fifty-nine members voted against the Bill,

and the next morning the names of these were placarded in the streets

as "Straffordians," who, to allow a traitor to escape, would betray

their country. The Lords, who had been greatly influenced by Strafford's

speeches, and his confident exposition of the law, displayed no alacrity

to pass the Bill of Attainder through their House; but they soon found

themselves exposed to the pressure from without. The nation had made up

its mind to the punishment of the man who had advised the king to reduce

them to the condition of serfs; and the Lords could not appear anywhere

without being pursued by cries of "Justice! justice on the traitor!"

Vast crowds surrounded the Parliament House, uttering the same demands,

and a petition was carried up from the City, signed by many thousands.

The country was terrified by rumours of insurrections and invasions,

which were made plausible by the lately discovered plot for marching

the army of York on London, and the Court preparations for rescuing and

getting away Strafford. There is also clear evidence from the despatches

of Rosetti, who was in the confidence of the queen, that the king had

ordered the fortifications of Portsmouth to be strengthened; and the

command of the fortress was given to Goring, that Charles might have a

place of retreat if he was obliged to quit London, and an opening for the

landing of troops from France or Holland, whom he might prevail on to

come to his assistance.

In carrying up the Bill to the Lords, the Attorney-General, St. John, had

endeavoured to get rid of the legal objections to the death of Strafford,

by saying that laws were made for the protection of the peaceable and

the innocent, not for those who broke all law for the destruction of

the people. This was a dangerous doctrine, and did not at all mend the

matter; he did not see that the real strength and justification of the

case lay in the three branches of the Legislature interpreting the law as

extending to the State and Constitution altogether, and by their united

act rendering it law.

In the meantime, the anxiety and perplexity of the king became

excruciating. He had clearly, by his confident assertions of protection,

drawn Strafford into the snare, and if the Lords passed the Bill, how

was he, by his own decayed authority, to defend him? He had previously

sought the aid of the Earl of Bedford, who was the most influential of

the peers, and promised him the disposal of all the great offices of

State, on condition that Strafford's life should be spared. Bedford had

accepted it, but just at this crisis he fell sick and died. Clarendon

says, of his own knowledge, that it was the plan of Bedford to give the

king the excise as a settled source of income, and thus extricate him

out of all his troubles,--the very thing which was afterwards granted

to his son, Charles II. On Bedford's death, Lord Say accepted the same

position on the same terms; and it is asserted by Clarendon that it was

by his advice that Charles now took a step that proved very fatal. He

proceeded to the House of Lords on the 1st of May, whilst the Bill of

Attainder was still before it, and calling for the Commons, informed

them that having, as they knew, been constantly present at the trial of

Strafford, he was perfectly familiar with all that had been advanced on

both sides, and that the serious conclusion at which he had arrived was

that he was not guilty of treason, and, therefore, in his conscience, he

could not condemn him if the Bill were passed and came to him. "It was

not," he said, "for him to argue the matter with them; his place was to

utter a single decision. But," he continued, "I must tell you three great

truths:--First, I never had any intention of bringing over the Irish

army into England, nor ever was advised by any one to do so. Second,

there never was any debate before me, either in public council or private

committee, of the disloyalty or disaffection of my English subjects.

Third, I was never counselled by any to alter the least of any of the

laws of England, much less alter all the laws."

[Illustration: CHARLES SIGNING THE COMMISSION OF ASSENT TO STRAFFORD'S

ATTAINDER. (_See p._ 603.)]

After the long breach of the law that the king shall not levy taxes

without consent of Parliament; after the long exercise of the arbitrary

power of the Star Chamber and the High Commission Court, where Magna

Charta was utterly set aside; after the brandings, the lopping off

of ears, the slitting of noses, and the fining and imprisonment of

the subject at the king's pleasure, these assertions show how utterly

regardless of truth this king was. He then admitted that Strafford was

guilty of great misdemeanours. "Therefore," he said, "I hope you may

find some middle way to satisfy justice and your own fears, and not to

press upon my conscience. My lords, I hope you know what a tender thing

conscience is. To satisfy my people I would do great matters, but in

this of conscience, no fear, no respect whatever, shall ever make me go

against it. Certainly, I have not so ill-deserved of the Parliament this

time that they should press me on this tender point." He proposed that

Strafford should be rendered incapable hereafter of holding any place of

trust or honour under the Crown.

But the very declarations which he had made in this address were so

untrue, that every one must have felt that as long as Strafford lived

there was no security against his return to power. The Commons, however,

took up the matter in another manner. On their return to their own

House--the king had not recognised their presence by a single observation

in the other--they instantly passed a resolution, declaring the king's

interference with any bill before either House of Parliament, a most

flagrant abuse of their privileges. This was Saturday, and the next

day the ministers, Scottish and Puritan, took up the subject in their

pulpits, and roused their hearers to a sense of their danger, only to be

averted by the death of the arch-traitor. On Monday the population poured

out in a vast concourse, and directed their steps towards Westminster.

Six thousand infuriated people surrounded the Houses of Parliament, armed

with clubs and staves, crying out for justice on the prisoner.

At this moment Pym was haranguing the House of Commons on the discovery

of the plot to debauch the army, and informing them, moreover, that there

was already a strong body of French troops assembled on the opposite

coast, and that it was declared to be their intention to take possession

of Jersey and Guernsey, and to land at Portsmouth. This was so far true

that Montague, a favourite of the queen's, had been despatched to the

French court, a fleet had assembled on the coast of Brittany, and an

army in Flanders. Montreuil had endeavoured to convince the popular

leaders, through the Earl of Holland, that the army was destined for the

war in the Netherlands, and the fleet to protect the coasts of Portugal.

Their being so near this country, however, was sufficient to justify

the popular suspicion, and the public excitement continued to increase.

Montague was advised to seek his safety by flight, and the queen was

so terrified that she ordered her carriages to Whitehall to flee to

Portsmouth. The Lords, however, prevented this by a remonstrance to the

king, and thereby probably saved the queen's life from the enraged mob;

for it was now that the disclosures of Colonel Goring of the Army Plot

became public.

Pym seized the opportunity of this occurrence to press on the Commons a

resolution to the effect that the seaports should be closed, and that the

king should command that neither the queen, the prince, nor any person

attending upon his majesty, should leave London without the permission of

the king, acting on the advice of his Parliament. This was passed, and

Pym then called on them to make a solemn Protestation, after the manner

of the Scottish Covenant, which should be taken by the whole House,

binding them by a vow, in the presence of God, to maintain and defend his

majesty's royal person and estate, as well as the power and privileges

of Parliament, the lawful rights and liberties of the subject, the peace

and union of the three kingdoms against all plots, conspiracies, and evil

practices, and that neither hope, fear, nor any other respect, should

induce them to relinquish this promise, vow, and protestation. It was

instantly signed by the Speaker, and by every member present.

The Commons next addressed a letter to the army in the North, assuring

them that, notwithstanding the attempts to corrupt them, Parliament

relied on their fidelity, and would take care to furnish their pay.

They ordered the forces in Wiltshire and Hampshire to advance nearer

to Portsmouth, and those in Kent and Sussex to draw towards Dover, and

declared any man advising the introduction of foreign troops to be

an enemy to his country. These resolutions they despatched with the

Protestation to the Upper House by Denzil Holles, calling on the whole

House to subscribe to the Protestation. The next morning, being the 4th

of May, the Lords desired a conference with the Commons, and informed

them of a message from the king, desiring that the intimidation of

the mobs might be withdrawn, that the deliberation of the Parliament

might be free; and as the peers proposed to take the Protestation

unanimously, Dr. Burgess, a popular preacher, was sent out to inform

the people of this, and to desire that they would peaceably withdraw to

their own homes. The crowds, on this assurance, melted rapidly away. The

Protestation was then sent out to be subscribed by the whole nation, as

the Covenant had been in Scotland, and with the intimation that any one

declining to adopt it should be looked upon as an enemy to his country.

To complete their security, the Commons passed a Bill that Parliament

should on no account be dissolved without the consent of both Houses.

The next day, on a false alarm that the House of Commons was in danger,

the train-bands, headed by Colonel Mainwaring, marched with beat of

drum to Westminster; it proved an unnecessary caution, but one that

convinced the peers and the king that any resistance to the Commons,

backed by the public, was useless. The very next day the news was

circulated in Parliament that six or eight dangerous conspirators had

fled, amongst them Jermyn, the queen's favourite, and Percy, both members

of the Commons, and that the queen was still bent, if opportunity could

be found, of escaping too. On the following day, May 7th, the peers

voted by a majority that the fifteenth and nineteenth charges against

Strafford were proved, namely, that he had quartered soldiers on the

peaceable inhabitants of Ireland contrary to law, and had imposed

on his own authority an illegal oath on all Scotsmen living in that

country. Thereupon they consulted the judges, who unanimously decided

that Strafford deserved to suffer the pains and penalties of treason.

The Catholics kept away from the House because they would not take the

Protestation, and therefore bore no part in Strafford's condemnation. The

Bill was passed by a majority of twenty-six to nineteen. The following

morning, May 8th, the Bill of Attainder was read a third time and passed;

and, at the same time, the Lords also passed the Bill of the Commons

against the dissolution of Parliament.

Charles was now reduced to a pitiable condition. On the one hand, he had

solemnly pledged himself, both to Strafford and to Parliament, never

to consent to the earl's death; but, on the other hand, the two Houses

had pronounced against him, and the public was waiting with impatience

for his ratification of the sentence. He had lately seen the ominous

assemblage of the people, and the march of the City bands to support

Parliament; the Scots still lay in the North, waiting with fierce desire

for the fall of their enemy; one signal, and the whole country would be

in a blaze. The Bill was passed on Saturday, and perhaps never was a

Sunday spent by any man, or any house, in so dreadful a state as that

passed by Charles and his family. The only alternative left him was to

summon his Privy Council, and submit to them his difficulty. But from

them he derived very little comfort. The members in general urged on him

the necessity of complying with the demand of both Houses of Parliament,

and the manifest desire of the public, who were again loudly declaring

that they would have either the head of Strafford or the king's. The

bishops strongly urged the same arguments; the terror of the Parliament

and the people was upon them.

Williams, the old bishop of Lincoln, who had been treated with stern

severity by both Strafford and Laud, told the king, when he talked of

his conscience, that there was a public as well as a private conscience;

that he had discharged his private conscience by doing all in his power

to save the earl, and he might now exercise his public conscience by

conceding to the decision of his Parliament; that the question now was

not about saving Strafford, but about saving himself, his queen, and

family. Juxon, Bishop of London, alone had the courage to tell him

boldly not to consent to the shedding of the blood of a man whom in his

conscience he felt to be innocent. Ussher of Armagh, Morton of Durham,

and another bishop, advised him to be guided by the opinion of the

judges. The judges being then asked, repeated their judgment that the

case, as put to them by the Lords, amounted to treason. Thus borne down

by all parties, Charles reluctantly gave way, and late in the evening,

though he would not directly sign his assent to the Bill, he signed a

commission to several lords to give the assent. Even in this last act

his friends endeavoured to console him with the assurance that "his own

hand was not in it." It was a miserable subterfuge, for the deed was

equally valid, and he executed it with tears, declaring the condition of

Strafford happier than his own.

The day of execution was fixed for Wednesday, the 12th of May, and on

Monday, the 10th, the commission to this effect passed the Great Seal.

But still Charles could not give up the hope of saving the unhappy

man. He sent to the two Houses to inform them that he would instantly

disband the Irish army; and the next morning, having appeared to have

made a favourable impression on the Commons, who had returned a very

flattering message, he sent the Prince of Wales to the Lords with a

letter once more imploring them to consult with the Commons, and grant

him "the unspeakable contentment" of changing the sentence of the earl

to perpetual imprisonment, with a pledge never to interfere in his

behalf; and if the earl should ever seek his liberty, especially by

any application to himself, his life should be forfeited. If, however,

it could not be done with satisfaction to the people, he said "_Fiat

justitia_." In a postscript, stated to have been added at the suggestion

of the queen, he appended the fatal words, "If he must die, it were

charity to reprieve him till Saturday;" words which seemed to imply that,

though he asked, he really did not hope to save him. Nothing, however,

could have saved him. The House, after reading the letter twice, and

after "sad and serious consideration," sent a deputation to inform him

that neither of the requests could be complied with.

[Illustration: THE OLD PARLIAMENT HOUSE, EDINBURGH.]

Strafford, on the previous Tuesday, hearing of the king's extreme

agitation and trouble on his account, had sent him a letter which was

full of magnanimity. He informed him that the hearing of the king's

unwillingness to pass the Bill, on the ground that he did not believe

him guilty, and of the excitement of the people against him on that

account, had brought him into a great strait; that the ruin of his

family on the one side, and fear of injury to the king on the other, had

greatly troubled him; that to say that there had not been a great strife

in him, would be to say that he was not made of flesh and blood; yet

considering that the chief thing was the prosperity of the realm and the

king, he had, with a natural sadness, come to the conclusion to desire

the king to let matters take their course rather than incur the ill that

refusing to sign the Bill might bring on his sacred majesty. Whitelock

assures us that the king sent Carleton to him, to inform him that he had

been compelled to pass the Bill, and adding that he had been the more

reconciled to it by his willingness to die. On hearing this, Strafford

started up from his chair, lifted up his eyes to heaven, laid his hand

upon his heart, and said, "Put not your trust in princes, nor in the sons

of men, for in them there is no salvation."

The night before the day fixed for his execution, Archbishop Ussher

visited the prisoner, who begged him to go to his fellow-prisoner,

Archbishop Laud, and beg his prayers for him that night, and his blessing

when he should go forth in the morning. He had in vain endeavoured to

persuade the Lieutenant Balfour to permit him to have an interview

with the fallen prelate. In the morning, when led out to the scaffold,

on approaching the window of the archbishop's prison, he begged the

lieutenant to allow him to make his obeisance towards the prelate's room,

though he could not see him himself.

[Illustration: STRAFFORD ON HIS WAY TO EXECUTION.

AFTER THE PAINTING BY PAUL DELAROCHE, IN THE POSSESSION OF THE DUKE OF

SUTHERLAND.]

[Illustration: THE MARQUIS OF MONTROSE. (_From a contemporary print by

Faithorne.)_]