The storm came in the form of a war upon Scotland, to enforce the
established Church, which it had cast out "root and branch" for the
Presbyterianism which pleased it. The Loyalists were alarmed by rumors
that Scotland was holding treasonable communication with her old ally,
France; and after an interval of eleven years, a Parliament was
summoned, which was destined to outlive the King.
The Commons came together in stern temper, Pym standing promptly at the
Bar of the House of Lords with Strafford's impeachment for High
Treason. The great Earl's apologists among the Lords, his own
ingenious and powerful pleadings, the King's entreaties and worthless
promises, all were in vain.
The King saw the whole fabric of tyranny {115} crumbling before his
eyes. He was over-awed and dared not refuse his signature to the fatal
paper. It is said that as Strafford passed to the block, Laud, who was
at the window of the room where he too was a prisoner, fainted as his
old companion in cruelty stopped to say farewell to him.
There were a few moments of silence, then,--a wild exultant shout.
"His head is off--His head is off."
The execution of the Archbishop swiftly followed, then the abolition of
the Star Chamber, and of the High Commission Court; then a bill was
passed requiring that Parliament be summoned once in three years, and a
law enacted _forbidding its dissolution except by its own consent_.
They were rapidly nearing the conception that Parliament does not exist
by sanction of the King, but the King by sanction of Parliament.
What could be done with a King whom no promises could bind--who, while
in the act of giving solemn pledges to Parliament in order to save
Strafford, was perfidiously planning to overawe it by military force?
{116} The attempted arrest of Hampden, Pym, and three other leaders was
part of this "Army Plot," which made civil war inevitable. The trouble
had resolved itself into a deadly conflict between King and Parliament.
If he resorted to arms, so must they.
If Hampden stands out pre-eminent as the Champion who like a great
Gladiator fought the battle of civil freedom, Pym is no less
conspicuous in having grasped the principles on which it must be
fought. He saw that if either Crown or Parliament must go down, better
for England that it should be the crown. He saw also, that the vital
principle in Parliament lay in the House of Commons. If the King
refused to act with them, it should be treated as an abdication, and
Parliament must act without him, and if the Lords obstructed reform,
then they must be told that the Commons must act alone, rather than let
the Kingdom perish.
This was the theory upon which the future action was based.
Revolutionary and without precedent it has since been accepted {117} as
the correct construction of English Constitutional principles.
Better would it have been for Charles had he let the ship sail, which
was to have borne Hampden and Oliver Cromwell (cousin of the latter)
toward the "Valley of the Connecticut." When he gave that order, he
recalled the man who was to be his evil genius. Cromwell could not so
accurately have defined the constitutional right of his cause as Pym
had done, nor make himself its adored head as was Hampden; but he had a
more compelling genius than either. His figure stands up colossal and
grim away above all others from the time he raised his praying,
psalm-singing army, until the defeat of the King's forces at Naseby
(1645), the flight of the King and his subsequent surrender.
[Illustration: Cromwell dissolving the Long Parliament, 1653. Having
commanded the soldiers to clear the hall, he himself went out last, and
ordered the doors to be locked. From the drawing by Seymour Lucas.]
It was at this time that Cromwell began to manifest as much ability as
a political as he had done as a military leader. Hampden had fallen on
the battlefield, Pym was dead, he was virtual head of the cause.
Perhaps it needed just such a terrible, uncompromising instrument, to
carry {118} England over such a crisis as was before her. Not
overscrupulous about means, no troublesome theories about Church or
State--no reverence for anything but God and "the Gospel."
When Parliament halted and hesitated at the last about the trial of the
King, it was the iron hand of Cromwell which strangled opposition, by
placing a body of troops at the door, and excluding 140 doubtful
members. A Parliament, with the House of Lords effaced, and with 140
obstructing members excluded, leaving only a small body of men of the
same mind, sustained by the moral sentiment of a Cromwellian Army,--can
scarcely be called a Representative body; nor can it be considered
competent to create a Court for the trial of a King! It was only
justifiable as a last and desperate measure of self-defence.
Charles wins back some of our sympathy and esteem by dying like a brave
man and a gentleman. He conducted himself with marvellous dignity and
self-possession throughout the trial, and at the end of {119} seven
days, laid his head upon the block in front of his royal palace of
Whitehall.
That small body of men, calling itself the "House of Commons," declared
England a "Commonwealth," which was to be governed without any King or
House of Lords. Cromwell was "Lord Protector of England, Scotland and
Ireland." He scorned to be called King, but no King was ever more
absolute in authority. It was a righteous tyranny, replacing a vicious
one.
There was no longer an eager hand dipping into the pockets of the
people, compelling the poor to share his scanty earnings with the King.
There was safety, and there was prosperity. But there was rage and
detestation, as Cromwell's soldiers with gibes and jeers, hewed and
hacked at venerable altars and pictures, and insulted the religious
sentiment of one-half the people. Empty niches, mutilated carvings,
and fragments of stained glass, from
"Windows richly dight,
Casting a dim religious light,"
show us to-day the track of those profane fanatics.
{120}
When the remnant of the House of Commons calling itself a Parliament
was not alert enough in its obedience, Cromwell marched into the Hall
with a company of musketeers, and calling them names neither choice nor
flattering, ordered them to "get out," then locked the door, and put
the key into his pocket. Such was the "dissolution" of a Parliament
which had been strong enough to overthrow a Government, and to send a
King to the Scaffold! This might be fittingly described as a
_personal_ Government!
He was loved by none but the Army. There was no strong current of
popular sentiment to uphold him as he carried out his arbitrary
purposes; no engines of cruelty to fortify his authority; no "Star
Chamber" to enforce his order. Men were not being nailed by the ears
to the pillory, nor mutilated and branded, for resisting his will. But
the spectacle was for that reason all the more astonishing: a great
nation, full of rage, hate and bitterness, but silent and submissive
under the spell of one dominating personality.
{121}
He had no experience in diplomatic usages, no skilled ministers to
counsel and warn, but by his foreign policy he made himself the terror
of Europe; Spain, France, and the United Provinces courting his
friendship, while Protestantism had protection at home and abroad.
That the man who did this had a commanding genius, all must be agreed.
But whether he was the incarnation of evil, or of righteousness, must
ever remain in dispute. We shall never know whether or not his death,
in 1658, cut short a career which might have passed from a justifiable
to an unjustifiable tyranny.
A fabric held up by one sustaining hand, must fall when that hand is
withdrawn. Cromwell left none who could support his burden. Charles
II., who had been more than once foiled in trying to get in by the back
door of his father's kingdom, was now invited to enter by the front,
and amid shouts of joy was placed on the throne.
{122}