CHARLES I.
{1629.} There now opens to us a new scene. Charles naturally disgusted
with parliaments, who, he found, were determined to proceed against him
with unmitigated rigor, both in invading his prerogative and refusing
him all supply, resolved not to call any more, till he should see
greater indications of a compliant disposition in the nation. Having
lost his great favorite, Buckingham, he became his own minister and
never afterwards reposed in any one such unlimited confidence. As
he chiefly follows his own genius and disposition, his measures
are henceforth less rash and hasty; though the general tenor of his
administration still wants somewhat of being entirely legal, and perhaps
more of being entirely prudent.
We shall endeavor to exhibit a just idea of the events which followed
for some years, so far as they regard foreign affairs, the state of
the court, and the government of the nation. The incidents are neither
numerous nor illustrious; but the knowledge of them is necessary for
understanding the subsequent transactions which are so memorable.
Charles, destitute of all supply, was necessarily reduced to embrace a
measure which ought to have been the result of reason and sound policy:
he made peace with the two crowns against which he had hitherto waged
a war, entered into without necessity, and conducted without glory.
Notwithstanding the distracted and helpless condition of England, no
attempt was made either by France or Spain to invade their enemy nor did
they entertain any further project than to defend themselves against the
feeble and ill-concerted expeditions of that kingdom. Pleased that the
jealousies and quarrels, between king and parliament had disarmed so
formidable a power, they carefully avoided any enterprise which might
rouse either the terror or anger of the English, and dispose them to
domestic union and submission. The endeavors to regain the good will of
the nation were carried so far by the king of Spain, that he generously
released and sent home all the English prisoners taken in the expedition
against Cadiz. The example was imitated by France after the retreat of
the English from the Isle of Rhé. When princes were in such
dispositions, and had so few pretensions on each other, it could not be
difficult to conclude a peace. The treaty was first signed with
France.[*] The situation of the king's affairs did not entitle him to
demand any conditions for the Hugonots, and they were abandoned to the
will of their sovereign.
{1630.} Peace was afterwards
concluded with Spain, where no conditions were made in favor of the
palatine, except that Spain promised in general to use their good
offices for his restoration.[**] The influence of these two wars on
domestic affairs, and on the dispositions of king and people, was of the
utmost consequence; but no alteration was made by them on the foreign
interests of the kingdom.
* Rushworth, vol. ii. p. 23, 24.
** Rushworth, vol. ii. p. 75. Whitlocke, p. 14.
Nothing more happy can be imagined than the situation in which England
then stood with regard to foreign affairs. Europe was divided between
the rival families of Bourbon and Austria, whose opposite interests, and
still more, their mutual jealousies, secured the tranquillity of this
island. Their forces were so nearly counterpoised, that no apprehensions
were entertained of any event which could suddenly disturb the balance
of power between them. The Spanish monarch, deemed the most powerful,
lay at greatest distance; and the English, by that means, possessed the
advantage of being engaged by political motives into a more intimate
union and confederacy with the neighboring potentate. The dispersed
situation of the Spanish dominions rendered the naval power of England
formidable to them, and kept that empire in continual dependence. France,
more vigorous and more compact, was every day rising in policy and
discipline; and reached at last an equality of power with the house of
Austria; but her progress, slow and gradual, left it still in the power
of England, by a timely interposition, to check her superiority.
And thus Charles, could he have avoided all dissensions with his own
subjects, was in a situation to make himself be courted and respected by
every power in Europe; and, what has scarcely ever since been attained
by the princes of this island, he could either be active with dignity,
or neutral with security.
A neutrality was embraced by the king; and during the rest of his reign,
he seems to have little regarded foreign affairs, except so far as he
was engaged by honor and by friendship for his sister and the palatine,
to endeavor the procuring of some relief for that unhappy family. He
joined his good offices to those of France, and mediated a peace between
the kings of Sweden and Poland, in hopes of engaging the former to
embrace the protection of the oppressed Protestants in the empire. This
was the famed Gustavus, whose heroic genius, seconded by the wisest
policy, made him in a little time the most distinguished monarch of the
age, and rendered his country, formerly unknown and neglected, of great
weight in the balance of Europe. To encourage and assist him in his
projected invasion of Germany, Charles agreed to furnish him with six
thousand men; but, that he might preserve the appearance of neutrality,
he made use of the marquis of Hamilton's name.[*]
* Rushworth, vol. i. p. 46, 53, 62. 83.
That nobleman entered into an engagement with Gustavus; and enlisting
these troops in England and Scotland, at Charles's expense, he landed
them in the Elbe. The decisive battle of Leipsic was fought soon after,
where the conduct of Tilly and the valor of the imperialists were
overcome by the superior conduct of Gustavus and the superior valor of
the Swedes. What remained of this hero's life was one continued series
of victory, for which he was less beholden to fortune than to those
personal endowments which he derived from nature and from industry. That
rapid progress of conquest which we so much admire in ancient history,
was here renewed in modern annals; and without that cause to which,
in former ages, it had ever been owing. Military nations were not now
engaged against an undisciplined and unwarlike people; nor heroes set in
opposition to cowards. The veteran troops of Ferdinand, conducted by the
most celebrated generals of the age, were foiled in every encounter; and
all Germany was overrun in an instant by the victorious Swede. But by
this extraordinary and unexpected success of his ally, Charles failed
of the purpose for which he framed the alliance. Gustavus, elated by
prosperity, began to form more extensive plans of ambition; and in
freeing Germany from the yoke of Ferdinand, he intended to reduce it
to subjection under his own. He refused to restore the palatine to his
principality, except on conditions which would have kept him in total
dependence.[*] And thus the negotiation was protracted, till the battle
of Lutzen, where the Swedish monarch perished in the midst of a complete
victory which he obtained over his enemies.
We have carried on these transactions a few years beyond the present
period, that we might not be obliged to return to them, nor be
henceforth interrupted in our account of Charles's court and kingdoms.
* Franklyn, vol. i. p. 415.
When we consider Charles as presiding in his court, as associating
with his family, it is difficult to imagine a character at once more
respectable and more amiable. A kind husband, an indulgent father, a
gentle master, a steadfast friend; to all these eulogies his conduct
in private life fully entitled him. As a monarch too, in the exterior
qualities, he excelled; in the essential, he was not defective.
His address and manner, though perhaps inclining a little towards
stateliness and formality, in the main corresponded to his high rank,
and gave grace to that reserve and gravity which were natural to him.
The moderation and equity which shone forth in his temper seemed to
secure him against rash and dangerous enterprises: the good sense which
he displayed in his discourse and conversation, seemed to warrant his
success in every reasonable undertaking. Other endowments likewise he
had attained, which, in a private gentleman, would have been highly
ornamental, and which, in a great monarch, might have proved extremely
useful to his people. He was possessed of an excellent taste in all
the fine arts; and the love of painting was in some degree his favorite
passion. Learned beyond what is common in princes, he was a good judge
of writing in others, and enjoyed himself no mean talent in composition.
In any other age or nation, this monarch had been secure of a prosperous
and a happy reign. But the high idea of his own authority which he had
imbibed, made him incapable of giving way to the spirit of liberty which
began to prevail among his subjects. His politics were not supported
by such vigor and foresight as might enable him to subdue their
pretensions, and maintain his prerogative at the high pitch to which
it had been raised by his predecessors. And, above all, the spirit of
enthusiasm, being universally diffused, disappointed all the views
of human prudence, and disturbed the operation of every motive which
usually influences society.
But the misfortunes arising from these
causes were yet remote. Charles now enjoyed himself in the full
exercise of his authority, in a social intercourse with his friends
and courtiers, and in a moderate use of those pleasures which he most
affected.
After the death of Buckingham, who had somewhat alienated Charles from
the queen, she is to be considered as his chief friend and favorite.
That rustic contempt of the fair sex which James affected, and which,
banishing them from his court, made it resemble more a fair or
an exchange than the seat of a great prince, was very wide of the
disposition of this monarch. But though full of complaisance to the
whole sex, Charles reserved all his passion for his consort, to whom he
attached himself with unshaken fidelity and confidence. By her sense
and spirit, as well as by her beauty, she justified the fondness of
her husband; though it is allowed that, being somewhat of a passionate
temper, she precipitated him into hasty and imprudent measures. Her
religion likewise, to which she was much addicted, must be regarded as
a great misfortune; since it augmented the jealousy which prevailed
against the court, and engaged her to procure for the Catholics some
indulgences which were generally distasteful to the nation.[*]
In the former situation of the English government, when the sovereign
was in a great measure independent of his subjects, the king chose
his ministers either from personal favor, or from an opinion of their
abilities, without any regard to their parliamentary interest or
talents. It has since been the maxim of princes, wherever popular
leaders encroach too much on royal authority, to confer offices on them,
in expectation that they will afterwards become more careful not to
diminish that power which has become their own. These politics were now
embraced by Charles; a sure proof that a secret revolution had happened
in the constitution, and had necessitated the prince to adopt new maxims
of government.[**]
* May, p 21.
** Sir Edw. Walker, p. 328.
But the views of the king were at this time so repugnant to those of
the Puritans, that the leaders whom he gained, lost from that moment
all interest with their party, and were even pursued as traitors with
implacable hatred and resentment. This was the case with Sir Thomas
Wentworth, whom the king created, first a baron, then a viscount, and
afterwards earl of Strafford; made him president of the council of
York, and deputy of Ireland; and regarded him as his chief minister and
counsellor. By his eminent talents and abilities, Strafford merited
all the confidence which his master reposed in him: his character
was stately and austere; more fitted to procure esteem than love:
his fidelity to the king was unshaken; but as he now employed all his
counsels to support the prerogative, which he had formerly bent all his
endeavors to diminish his virtue seems not to have been entirely pure,
but to have been susceptible of strong impressions from private interest
and ambition. Sir Dudley Digges was about the same time created master
of the rolls; Noy, attorney-general; Littleton, solicitor-general. All
these had likewise been parliamentary leaders, and were men eminent in
their profession.[*]
* Whitlocke, p. 13. May, p. 20.
[Illustration: 1-647-strafford.jpg EARL OF STRAFFORD]
In all ecclesiastical affairs, and even in many civil, Laud, bishop of
London, had great influence over the king. This man was virtuous, if
severity of manners alone, and abstinence from pleasure, could deserve
that name. He was learned, if polemical knowledge could entitle him
to that praise. He was disinterested; but with unceasing industry he
studied to exalt the priestly and prelatical character, which was his
own. His zeal was unrelenting in the cause of religion; that is, in
imposing by rigorous measures his own tenets and pious ceremonies on
the obstinate Puritans, who had profanely dared to oppose him.
In prosecution of his holy purposes, he overlooked every human
consideration; or, in other words, the heat and indiscretion of his
temper made him neglect the views of prudence and rules of good manners.
He was in this respect happy, that all his enemies were also imagined
by him the declared enemies to loyalty and true piety, and that every
exercise of his anger by that means became in his eyes a merit and
a virtue. This was the man who acquired so great an ascendant over
Charles, and who led him, by the facility of his temper, into a conduct
which proved so fatal to himself and to his kingdoms.
The humor of the nation ran at that time into the extreme opposite to
superstition; and it was with difficulty that the ancient ceremonies
to which men had been accustomed, and which had been sanctified by the
practice of the first reformers, could be retained in divine service:
yet was this the time which Laud chose for the introduction of new
ceremonies and observances. Besides that these were sure to displease
as innovations, there lay, in the opinion of the public, another very
forcible objection against them. Laud, and the other prelates who
embraced his measures, were generally well instructed in sacred
antiquity, and had adopted many of those religious sentiments which
prevailed during the fourth and fifth centuries; when the Christian
church, as is well known, was already sunk into those superstitions
which were afterwards continued and augmented by the policy of Rome. The
revival, therefore, of the ideas and practices of that age, could not
fail of giving the English faith and liturgy some resemblance to the
Catholic superstition, which the kingdom in general, and the Puritans in
particular, held in the greatest horror and detestation. Men also were
apt to think, that, without some secret purpose, such insignificant
observances would not be imposed with such unrelenting zeal on the
refractory nation; and that Laud's scheme was, to lead back the English
by gradual steps to the religion of their ancestors. They considered
not, that the very insignificancy of these ceremonies recommended them
to the superstitious prelate, and made them appear the more peculiarly
sacred and religious, as they could serve to no other purpose. Nor was
the resemblance to the Romish ritual any objection, but rather a merit
with Laud and his brethren; who bore a much greater kindness to
the mother church, as they called her, than to the sectaries and
Presbyterians, and frequently recommended her as a true Christian
church; an appellation which they refused, or at least scrupled to give
to the others.[*] So openly were these tenets espoused, that not only
the discontented Puritans believed the church of England to be relapsing
fast into Romish superstition: the court of Rome itself entertained
hopes of regaining its authority in this island; and, in order to
forward Laud's supposed good intentions, an offer was twice made him in
private of a cardinal's hat, which he declined accepting.[**] His answer
was, as he says himself, "That something dwelt within him, which would
not suffer his compliance, till Rome were other than it is."[***]
* May, p. 25.
** Rushworth, vol. ii. p. 190. Welwood, p. 61.
*** Rushworth, vol. iii. p. 1327. Whitlocke, p. 97.
A court lady, daughter of the earl of Devonshire, having turned
Catholic, was asked by Laud the reason of her conversion: "'Tis
chiefly," said she, "because I hate to travel in a crowd." The meaning
of this expression being demanded, she replied, "I perceive your grace
and many others are making haste to Rome; and therefore, in order to
prevent my being crowded, I have gone before you." It must be confessed,
that though Laud deserved not the appellation of Papist, the genius of
his religion was, though in a less degree, the same with that of
the Romish: the same profound respect was exacted to the sacerdotal
character, the same submission required to the creeds and decrees of
synods and councils; the same pomp and ceremony was affected in
worship; and the same superstitious regard to days, postures, meats, and
vestments. No wonder, therefore, that this prelate was every where among
the Puritans regarded with horror, as the forerunner of Antichrist.
As a specimen of the new ceremonies to which Laud sacrificed his own
quiet and that of the nation, it may not be amiss to relate those which
he was accused of employing in the consecration of St. Catharine's
church, and which were the object of such general scandal and offence.
On the bishop's approach to the west door of the church, a loud voice
cried, "Open, open, ye everlasting doors, that the king of glory may
enter in!" Immediately the doors of the church flew open, and the bishop
entered. Falling upon his knees, with eyes elevated and arms expanded,
he uttered these words: "This place is holy; the ground is holy: in the
name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, I pronounce it holy."
Going towards the chancel, he several times took up from the floor
some of the dust, and threw it in the air. When he approached, with his
attendants, near to the communion table, he bowed frequently towards
it; and on their return, they went round the church, repeating, as they
marched along, some of the psalms; and then said a form of prayer, which
concluded with these words: "We consecrate this church, and separate it
unto thee as holy ground, not to be profaned any more to common uses."
After this, the bishop, standing near the communion table solemnly
pronounced many imprecations upon such as should afterwards pollute that
holy place by musters of soldiers, or keeping in it profane law-courts,
or carrying burdens through it. On the conclusion of every curse, he
bowed towards the east, and cried, "Let all the people say, Amen."
The imprecations being all so piously finished, there were poured out
a number of blessings upon such as had any hand in framing and building
that sacred and beautiful edifice, and on such as had given, or should
hereafter give to it, any chalices, plate, ornaments, or utensils. At
every benediction he in like manner bowed towards the east, and cried,
"Let all the people say, Amen."
The sermon followed; after which the bishop consecrated and administered
the sacrament in the following manner.
As he approached the communion table, he made many lowly reverences;
and coming up to that part of the table where the bread and wine lay, he
bowed seven times. After the reading of many prayers, he approached the
sacramental elements, and gently lifted up the corner of the napkin in
which the bread was placed. When he beheld the bread, he suddenly let
fall the napkin, flew back a step or two, bowed three several times
towards the bread; then he drew nigh again, opened the napkin, and bowed
as before.
Next he laid his hand on the cup, which had a cover upon it, and was
filled with wine. He let go the cup, fell back, and bowed thrice towards
it. He approached again; and lifting op the cover, peeped into the
cup. Seeing the wine, he let fall the cover, started back, and bowed as
before. Then he received the sacrament, and gave it to others. And many
prayers being said, the solemnity of the consecration ended. The walls,
and floor, and roof of the fabric were then supposed to be sufficiently
holy.[*]
Orders were given, and rigorously insisted on, that the communion table
should be removed from the middle of the area where it hitherto stood in
all churches, except in cathedrals.[**] It was placed at the east end,
railed in, and denominated an "altar;" as the clergyman who officiated
received commonly the appellation of "priest." It is not easy to imagine
the discontents excited by this innovation, and the suspicions which it
gave rise to.
* Rushworth, vol. ii. p. 76, 77. Welwood, p. 275. Franklyn,
p. 386.
** Rushworth, vol ii. p. 207. Whitlocke, p. 24.
The kneeling at the altar, and the using of copes, a species of
embroidered vestment, in administering the sacrament, were also known
to be great objects of scandal, as being Popish practices; but the
opposition rather increased than abated the zeal of the prelate for the
introduction of these habits and ceremonies.
All kinds of ornament, especially pictures, were necessary for
supporting that mechanical devotion which was purposed to be raised in
this model of religion: but as these had been so much employed by the
church of Rome, and had given rise to so much superstition, or what
the Puritans called idolatry it was impossible to introduce them into
English churches without exciting general murmurs and complaints. But
Laud possessed of present authority, persisted in his purpose, and made
several attempts towards acquiring these ornaments. Some of the pictures
introduced by him were also found, upon inquiry, to be the very same
that might be met with in the mass-book. The crucifix too, that eternal
consolation of all pious Catholics, and terror to all sound Protestants,
was not forgotten on this occasion.[*]
It was much remarked, that Sheffield, the recorder of Salisbury, was
tried in the star chamber, for having broken, contrary to the bishop of
Salisbury's express injunctions, a painted window of St. Edmond's
church in that city. He boasted that he had destroyed these monuments
of idolatry: but for this effort of his zeal, he was fined five
hundred pounds, removed from his office, condemned to make a public
acknowledgment, and be bound to his good behavior.[**]
Not only such of the clergy as neglected to observe every ceremony were
suspended and deprived by the high commission court: oaths were, by many
of the bishops, imposed or the churchwardens; and they were sworn
to inform against any one who acted contrary to the ecclesiastical
canons.[***] Such a measure, though practised during the reign of
Elizabeth, gave much offence, as resembling too nearly the practice of
the Romish inquisition.
To show the greater alienation from the churches reformed after the
Presbyterian model, Laud advised that the discipline and worship of the
church should be imposed on the English regiments and trading companies
abroad.[****] All foreigners of the Dutch and Walloon congregations were
commanded to attend the established church; and indulgence was granted
to none after the children of the first denizens.[v]
* Rushworth, vol. ii. p. 272, 273.
** Rushworth, Vol. ii. p. 152. State Trials, vol. v. p 46.
Franklyn, p. 410, 411, 412.
*** Rushworth, vol. ii. p. 186.
**** Rushworth, vol, ii. p. 249. Franklyn, p. 451.
v Rushworth, vol. ii. p. 272
Scudamore, too, the king's ambassador at Paris, had orders to withdraw
himself from the communion of the Hugonots. Even men of sense were apt
to blame this conduct, not only because it gave offence in England, but
because, in foreign countries, it lost the crown the advantage of being
considered as the head and support of the reformation.[*]
On pretence of pacifying disputes, orders were issued from the council,
forbidding on both sides all preaching and printing with regard to
the controverted points of predestination and free will. But it was
complained of, and probably with reason that the impartiality was
altogether confined to the orders, and that the execution of them was
only meant against the Calvinists.
In return for Charles's indulgence towards the church, Laud and his
followers took care to magnify, on every occasion, the regal authority,
and to treat with the utmost disdain or detestation all Puritanical
pretensions to a free and independent constitution. But while these
prelates were so liberal in raising the crown at the expense of public
liberty, they made no scruple of encroaching, themselves, on the royal
rights the most incontestable, in order to exalt the hierarchy, and
procure to their own order dominion and independence. All the doctrines
which the Romish church had borrowed from some of the fathers, and which
freed the spiritual from subordination to the civil power, were now
adopted by the church of England, and interwoven with her political
and religious tenets. A divine and apostolical charter was insisted on,
preferably to a legal and parliamentary one.[**]
* State Papers collected by the earl of Clarendon, p 338.
** Whitlocke, p. 22.
The sacerdotal character was magnified as sacred and indefeasible: all
right to spiritual authority, or even to private judgment in spiritual
subjects, was refused to profane laymen: ecclesiastical courts were held
by the bishops in their own name, without any notice taken of the king's
authority: and Charles, though extremely jealous of every claim in
popular assemblies, seemed rather to encourage than repress those
encroachments of his clergy. Having felt many sensible inconveniencies
from the independent spirit of parliaments, he attached himself entirely
to those who professed a devoted obedience to his crown and person;
nor did he foresee, that the ecclesiastical power which he exalted, not
admitting of any precise boundary, might in time become more dangerous
to public peace, and no less fatal to royal prerogative, than the other.
So early as the coronation, Laud was the person, according to general
opinion, that introduced a novelty which, though overlooked by Charles,
made a deep impression on many of the bystanders. After the usual
ceremonies, these words were recited to the king: "Stand and hold fast,
from henceforth the place to which you have been heir by the succession
of your forefathers, being now delivered to you by the authority of
Almighty God, and by the hands of us and all the bishops and servants of
God. And, as you see the clergy to come nearer the altar than others,
so remember that, in all places convenient, you give them greater honor;
that the Mediator of God and man may establish you on the kingly throne,
to be a mediator betwixt the clergy and the laity; and that you may
reign forever with Jesus Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords."
[*]
The principles which exalted prerogative, were not entertained by the
king merely as soft and agreeable to his royal ears; they were also put
in practice during the time that he ruled without parliaments. Though
frugal and regular in his expense, he wanted money for the support of
government; and he levied it, either by the revival of obsolete laws, or
by violations, some more open, some more disguised, of the privileges of
the nation. Though humane and gentle in his temper, he gave way to a
few severities in the star chamber and high commission, which seemed
necessary in order to support the present mode of administration, and
repress the rising spirit of liberty throughout the kingdom. Under these
two heads may be reduced all the remarkable transactions of this reign
during some years; for, in peaceable and prosperous times, where
a neutrality in foreign affairs is observed, scarcely any thing is
remarkable, but what is in some degree blamed or blamable. And, lest the
hope of relief or protection from parliament might encourage opposition,
Charles issued a proclamation, in which he declared, "That whereas, for
several ill ends, the calling again of a parliament is divulged; though
his majesty has shown, by frequent meetings with his people, his love to
the use of parliaments: yet the late abuse having for the present driven
him unwillingly out of that course; he will account it presumption
for anyone to prescribe to him any time for the calling of that
assembly."[**]
* Franklyn, p. 114. Rushworth, vol. i. p. 201.
** Parl. Hist. vol. viii. p. 389. Rush. vol. ii. p. 3.
This was generally construed as a declaration, that during this reign no
more parliaments were intended to be summoned.[*] And every measure of
the king's confirmed a suspicion so disagreeable to the generality of
the people.
Tonnage and poundage continued to be levied by the royal authority
alone. The former additional impositions were still exacted. Even new
impositions were laid on several kinds of merchandise.[**]
The custom-house officers received orders from the council to enter into
any house, warehouse, or cellar; to search any trunk or chest; and to
break any bulk whatever; in default of the payment of customs.[***]
In order to exercise the militia, and to keep them in good order, each
county, by an edict of the council, was assessed in a certain sum, for
maintaining a muster-master, appointed for that service.[****]
Compositions were openly made with recusants, and the Popish religion
became a regular part of the revenue. This was all the persecution which
it underwent during the reign of Charles.[v]
A commission was granted for compounding with such as were possessed of
crown lands upon defective titles; and on this pretence some money was
exacted from the people.[v*]
There was a law of Edward II.,[v**] that whoever was possessed of twenty
pounds a year in land, should be obliged, when summoned, to appear and
to receive the order of knighthood. Twenty pounds at that time, partly
by the change of denomination, partly by that in the value of money,
were equivalent to two hundred in the seventeenth century; and it seemed
just that the king should not strictly insist on the letter of the law,
and oblige people of so small revenue to accept of that expensive honor.
Edward VI,[v***] and Queen Elizabeth,[v****] who had both of them made
use of this expedient for raising money, had summoned only those who
were possessed of forty pounds a year and upwards to receive knighthood,
or compound for their neglect; and Charles imitated their example, in
granting the same indulgence.
* Clarendon, vol. i. p. 4. May, p. 14.
** Rush. vol. ii. p. 8. May, p. 16.
*** Rush. vol. ii. p. 9.
**** Rush. vol. ii. p. 10.
v Rush. vol. ii. p. 11, 12, 13, 247.
v* Rush. vol. ii: p. 49.
v** Statutum de militibus.
v*** Rymer, tom. xv. p. 124.
v**** Rymer, tom. xv. p. 493, 504.
Commissioners were appointed for fixing the rates of composition; and
instructions were given to these commissioners not to accept of a less
sum than would have been due by the party upon a tax of three subsidies
and a half.[*] Nothing proves more plainly how ill disposed the people
were to the measures of the crown, than to observe that they loudly
complained of an expedient founded on positive statute, and warranted
by such recent precedents. The law was pretended to be obsolete; though
only one reign had intervened since the last execution of it.
Barnard, lecturer of St. Sepulchre's, London, used this expression in
his prayer before sermon: "Lord, open the eyes of the queen's majesty,
that she may see Jesus Christ, whom she has pierced with her infidelity,
superstition, and idolatry." He was questioned in the high commission
court for this insult on the queen; but, upon his submission,
dismissed.[**] Leighton, who had written libels against the king, the
queen, the bishops, and the whole administration, was condemned by
a very severe, if not a cruel sentence; but the execution of it was
suspended for some time, in expectation of his submission.[***] All
the severities, indeed, of this reign were exercised against those
who triumphed in their sufferings, who courted persecution, and braved
authority; and on that account their punishment may be deemed the more
just, but the less prudent. To have neglected them entirely, had it been
consistent with order and public safety, had been the wisest measure
that could have been embraced; as perhaps it had been the most severe
punishment that could have been inflicted on these zealots.
{1631.} In order to gratify the clergy with a magnificent fabric,
subscriptions were set on foot for repairing and rebuilding St. Paul's;
and the king, by his countenance and example, encouraged this laudable
undertaking.[****] By order of the privy council, St. Gregory's
church was removed, as an impediment to the project of extending and
beautifying the cathedral. Some houses and shops likewise were pulled
down, and compensation was made to the owners.[v]
* Rush. vol. ii. p. 70, 71, 72. May, p. 16.
** Rush vol. ii. p. 32.
*** Kennets Complete Hist. vol. iii. p. 60. Whitlocke, p.
15.
**** Whitlocke, p. 17.
v Rush. vol. ii. p. 88, 89, 90, 207, 462 718.
As there was no immediate prospect of assembling a parliament, such acts
of power in the king became necessary; and in no former age would the
people have entertained any scruple with regard to them. It must be
remarked, that the Puritans were extremely averse to the raising of
this ornament to the capital. It savored, as they pretended, of Popish
superstition.
A stamp duty was imposed on cards; a new tax, which of itself was liable
to no objection, but appeared of dangerous consequence when considered
as arbitrary and illegal.[*]
Monopolies were revived; an oppressive method of levying money, being
unlimited, as well as destructive of industry. The last parliament of
James, which abolished monopolies, had left an equitable exception in
favor of new inventions; and on pretence of these, and of erecting
new companies and corporations, was this grievance now renewed. The
manufacture of soap was given to a company who paid a sum for their
patent.[**] Leather, salt, and many other commodities, even down to
linen rags, were likewise put under restrictions.
It is affirmed by Clarendon, that so little benefit was reaped from
these projects, that of two hundred thousand pounds thereby levied on
the people, scarcely one thousand five hundred came into the king's
coffers. Though we ought not to suspect the noble historian of
exaggerations to the disadvantage of Charles's measures, this fact, it
must be owned, appears somewhat incredible. The same author adds, that
the king's intention was to teach his subjects how unthrifty a thing it
was to refuse reasonable supplies to the crown: an imprudent project:
to offend a whole nation under the view of punishment: and to hope
by acts of violence to break their refractory spirits, without being
possessed of any force to prevent resistance.
{1632.} The council of York had been first erected, after a rebellion,
by a patent from Henry VIII., without any authority of parliament; and
this exercise cf power, like many others, was indulged to that arbitrary
monarch. This council had long acted chiefly as a criminal court; but,
besides some innovations introduced by James, Charles thought proper
some time after Wentworth was made president, to extend its powers,
and to give it a large civil jurisdiction, and that in some respects
discretionary.[***]
* Rush. vol. ii. p. 103.
** Rush. vol. ii. p. 136, 142, 189, 252.
*** Rush. vol. ii. p, 158, 159, etc. Franklyn, p. 412.
It is not improbable, that the king's intention was only to prevent
inconveniencies, which arose from the bringing of every cause, from
the most distant parts of the kingdom, into Westminster Hall: but the
consequence, in the mean time, of this measure, was the putting of
all the northern counties out of the protection of ordinary law, and
subjecting them to an authority somewhat arbitrary. Some irregular acts
of that council were this year complained of.[*]
{1633.} The court of star chamber extended its authority; and it was
matter of complaint that it encroached upon the jurisdiction of the
other courts; imposing heavy fines and inflicting severe punishment,
beyond the usual course of justice. Sir David Foulis was fined
five thousand pounds, chiefly because he had dissuaded a friend
from compounding with the commissioners of knighthood.[**]
* Rush. vol. ii. p. 202, 203.
** Rush, vol. ii. p. 215, 216, etc.
Prynne, a barrister of Lincoln's Inn, had written an enormous quarto of
a thousand pages, which he called Histrio-Mastyx. Its professed purpose
was to decry stage-plays, comedies, interludes, music, dancing; but
the author likewise took occasion to declaim against hunting, public
festivals, Christmas-keeping, bonfires, and may-poles. His zeal against
all these levities, he says, was first moved by observing that plays
sold better than the choicest sermons, and that they were frequently
printed on finer paper than the Bible itself. Besides, that the players
were often Papists, and desperately wicked; the play-houses, he affirms,
are Satan's chapels; the play-haunters little better than incarnate
devils; and so many steps in a dance, so many paces to hell. The chief
crime of Nero, he represents to have been his frequenting and acting of
plays; and those who nobly conspired his death, were principally moved
to it, as he affirms, by their indignation at that enormity. The rest of
his thousand pages is of a like strain. He had obtained a license from
Archbishop Abbot's chaplain; yet was he indicted in the star chamber as
a libeller. It was thought somewhat hard that general invectives against
plays should be interpreted into satires against the king and queen,
merely because they frequented these amusements, and because the
queen sometimes acted a part in pastorals and interludes which were
represented at court. The author, it must be owned, had, in plainer
terms, blamed the hierarchy, the ceremonies, the innovations in
religious worship, and the new superstitions introduced by Laud;[*]
and this, probably, together with the obstinacy and petulance of his
behavior before the star chamber, was the reason why his sentence was so
severe. He was condemned to be put from the bar; to stand on the pillory
in two places, Westminster and Cheapside; to lose both his ears, one
in each place; to pay five thousand pounds' fine to the king; and to be
imprisoned during life.[**]
This same Prynne was a great hero among the Puritans; and it was
chiefly with a view of mortifying that sect, that though of an honorable
profession, he was condemned by the star chamber to so ignominious a
punishment. The thorough-paced Puritans were distinguishable by the
sourness and austerity of their manners, and by their aversion to
all pleasure and society.[***] To inspire them with better humor was
certainly, both for their own sake and that of the public, a laudable
intention in the court; but whether pillories, fines and prisons were
proper expedients for that purpose, may admit of some question.
Another expedient which the king tried, in order to infuse cheerfulness
into the national devotion, was not much more successful. He renewed his
father's edict for allowing sports and recreations on Sunday to such
as attended public worship; and he ordered his proclamation for that
purpose to be publicly read by the clergy after divine service.[****]
Those who were Puritanically affected refused obedience, and were
punished by suspension or deprivation. The differences between the
sects were before sufficiently great; nor was it necessary to widen them
further by these inventions.
Some encouragement and protection which the king and the bishops gave
to wakes, church ales, bride ales, and other cheerful festivals of the
common people, were the objects of like scandal to the Puritans.[v]
* Rush. vol. ii. p. 223.
** Rush. vol. ii. p. 220, 221, etc.
*** Dugdale, p. 2.
**** Rush, vol. ii. p. 193, 459. Whitlocke, p. 16, 17.
Franklyn, p. 431*.
v Rush. vol. ii. p. 191, 192. May, p. 2.
The music in the churches he affirmed not to be the noise of men, but a
bleating of brute beasts; choristers bellow the tenor, as it were oxen;
bark a counterpart, as it were a kennel of dogs; roar out a treble, as
it were a sort of bulls; and grunt out a bass, as it were a number of
hogs: Christmas, as it is kept, is the devil's Christmas: and Prynne
employed a great number of pages to persuade men to affect the name
of "Puritan," as if Christ had been a Puritan; and so he saith in his
index.
This year, Charles made a journey to Scotland, attended by the court,
in order to hold a parliament there, and to pass through the ceremony of
his coronation. The nobility and gentry of both kingdoms rivalled each
other in expressing all duty and respect to the king, and in showing
mutual friendship and regard to each other. No one could have suspected,
from exterior appearances, that such dreadful scenes were approaching.
One chief article of business, (for it deserves the name,) which the
king transacted in this parliament, was, besides obtaining some supply,
to procure authority for ordering the habits of clergymen.[*] The act
did not pass without opposition and difficulty. The dreadful surplice
was before men's eyes, and they apprehended, with some reason, that
under sanction of this law, it would soon be introduced among them.
Though the king believed that his prerogative entitled him to a power,
in general, of directing whatever belonged to the exterior government
of the church, this was deemed a matter of too great importance to be
ordered without the sanction of a particular statute.
Immediately after the king's return to England, he heard of Archbishop
Abbot's death; and, without delay, he conferred that dignity on his
favorite, Laud; who, by this accession of authority, was now enabled to
maintain ecclesiastical discipline with greater rigor, and to aggravate
the general discontent of the nation.
Laud obtained the bishopric of London for his friend Juxon: and, about
a year after the death of Sir Richard Weston, created earl of Portland,
had interest enough to engage the king to make that prelate high
treasurer. Juxon was a person of great integrity, mildness, and
humanity, and endued with a good understanding.[**] Yet did this last
promotion give general offence. His birth and character were deemed too
obscure for a man raised to one of the highest offices of the crown.
And the clergy, it was thought, were already too much elated by former
instances of the king's attachment to them, and needed not this further
encouragement to assume dominion over the laity.[***] The Puritans,
likewise, were much dissatisfied with Juxon, notwithstanding his eminent
virtues, because he was a lover of profane field sports and hunting.
* Bushworth, vol. ii. p. 183.
** Whitlocke, p. 23. Clarendon, vol. i. p. 99.
*** Clarendon, vol. i. p. 97. May, p. 23.
{1634.} Ship money was now introduced. The first writs of this kind had
been directed to seaport towns only: but ship money was at this time
levied on the whole kingdom; and each county was rated at a particular
sum, which was after wards assessed upon individuals.[*] The amount of
the whole tax was very moderate, little exceeding two hundred thousand
pounds: it was levied upon the people with equality: the money was
entirely expended on the navy, to the great honor and advantage of the
kingdom: as England had no military force, while all the other powers of
Europe were strongly armed, a fleet seemed absolutely necessary for her
security; and it was obvious, that a navy must be built and equipped at
leisure, during peace; nor could it possibly be fitted out on a sudden
emergence, when the danger became urgent; yet all these considerations
could not reconcile the people to the imposition. It was entirely
arbitrary: by the same right any other tax might be imposed: and men
thought a powerful fleet, though very desirable both for the credit and
safety of the kingdom, but an unequal recompense for their liberties,
which, they apprehended, were thus sacrificed to the obtaining of it.
England, it must be owned, was in this respect unhappy in its present
situation, that the king had entertained a very different idea of the
constitution, from that which began in general to prevail among his
subjects. He did not regard national privileges as so sacred and
inviolable, that nothing but the most extreme necessity could justify an
infringement of them. He considered himself as the supreme magistrate,
to whose care Heaven, by his birthright, had committed his people; whose
duty it was to provide for their security and happiness, and who was
vested with ample discretionary powers for that salutary purpose. If the
observance of ancient laws and customs was consistent with the present
convenience of government, he thought himself obliged to comply with
that rule, as the easiest, the safest, and what procured the most prompt
and willing obedience. But when a change of circumstances, especially
if derived from the obstinacy of the people, required a new plan of
administration, national privileges, he thought, must yield to supreme
power; nor could any order of the state oppose any right to the will of
the sovereign, directed to the good of the public.[**]
* Rush. vol. ii. p. 257, 258, etc.
** Rush. vol. iv p 535, 542.
That these principles of government were derived from the uniform tenor
of the English laws, it would be rash to affirm. The fluctuating nature
of the constitution, the impatient humor of the people, and the variety
of events, had, no doubt, in different ages, produced exceptions and
contradictions. These observations alone may be established on both
sides, that the appearances were sufficiently strong in favor of the
king to apologize for his following such maxims; and that public liberty
must be so precarious under this exorbitant prerogative, as to render an
opposition not only excusable, but laudable in the people.[*] [4]
Some laws had been enacted, during the reign of Henry VII., against
depopulation, or the converting of arable lands into pasture. By a
decree of the star chamber, Sir Anthony Roper was fined four thousand
pounds for an offence of that nature.[**] This severe sentence was
intended to terrify others into composition; and above thirty thousand
pounds were levied by that expedient.[***] Like compositions, or, in
default of them, heavy fines, were required for encroachments on the
king's forests, whose bounds, by decrees deemed arbitrary, were extended
much beyond what was usual.[****] The bounds of one forest, that
of Rockingham, were increased from six miles to sixty.[v] The same
refractory humor which made the people refuse to the king voluntary
supplies, disposed them, with better reason, to murmur against these
irregular methods of taxation.
Morley was fined ten thousand pounds for reviling, challenging, and
striking, in the court of Whitehall, Sir George Theobald, one of the
king's servants.[v*] This fine was thought exorbitant; but whether it
was compounded, as was usual in fines imposed by the star chamber, we
are not informed.
* See note D, at the end of the volume.
** Rush. vol. ii. p. 270; vol. iii. App. p. 106.
*** Rush. vol. iii. p. 333. Franklyn, p. 478.
**** May, p. 16.
v Strafford's Letters and Despatches, vol. ii. p. 117.
v* Rush. vol. ii. p. 270.
Allison had reported, that the archbishop of York had incurred the
king's displeasure, by asking a limited toleration for the Catholics,
and an allowance to build some churches for the exercise of their
religion. For this slander against the archbishop, he was condemned in
the star chamber to be fined one thousand pounds, to be committed to
prison, to be bound to his good behavior during life, to be whipped,
and to be set on the pillory at Westminster, and in three other towns in
England. Robins, who had been an accomplice in the guilt, was condemned
by a sentence equally severe.[*] Such events are rather to be considered
as rare and detached incidents, collected by the severe scrutiny of
historians, than as proofs of the prevailing genius of the king's
administration which seems to have been more gentle and equitable than,
that of most of his predecessors: there were, on the whole, only five
or six such instances of rigor during the course of fifteen years,
which elapsed before the meeting of the long parliament. And it is also
certain, that scandal against the great, though seldom prosecuted at
present, is, however, in the eye of the law, a great crime, and subjects
the offender to very heavy penalties.
There are other instances of the high respect paid to the nobility and
to the great in that age, when the powers of monarchy, though disputed,
still maintained themselves in their pristine vigor. Clarendon[**] tells
us a pleasant incident to this purpose: a waterman, belonging to a man
of quality, having a squabble with a citizen about his fare, showed his
badge, the crest of his master, which happened to be a swan; and thence
insisted on better treatment from the citizen. But the other replied
carelessly, that he did not trouble his head about that goose. For
this offence, he was summoned before the marshal's court; was fined, as
having opprobriously defamed the nobleman's crest, by calling the swan a
goose; and was in effect reduced to beggary.
Sir Richard Granville had thought himself ill used by the earl of Suffolk
in a lawsuit; and he was accused before the star chamber of having said
of that nobleman, that he was a base lord. The evidence against him was
somewhat lame; yet for this slight offence, insufficiently proved, he
was condemned to pay a fine of eight thousand pounds; one half to the
earl, the other to the king.[***]
* Bush. vol. u. p, 269.
** Life of Clarendon, vol. i. p. 72.
*** Lord Lansdown, p. 514.
Sir George Markham, following a chase where Lord Darcy's huntsman was
exercising his hounds, kept closer to the dogs than was thought proper
by the huntsman, who, besides other rudeness, gave him foul language,
which Sir George returned with a stroke of his whip. The fellow
threatened to complain to his master: the knight replied, "If his master
should justify such insolence, he would serve him in the same manner;" or
words to that effect. Sir George was summoned before the Star chamber,
and fined ten thousand pounds: "So fine a thing was it in those days to
be a lord!"--a natural reflection of Lord Lansdown's in relating
this incident.[*] The people, in vindicating their liberties from the
authority of the crown, threw off also the yoke of the nobility. It is
proper to remark that this last incident happened early in the reign of
James. The present practice of the star chamber was far from being an
innovation; though the present dispositions of the people made them
repine more at this servitude.
{1635.} Charles had imitated the example of Elizabeth and James, and had
issued proclamations forbidding the landed gentlemen and the nobility
to live idly in London, and ordering them to retire to their country
seats.[**] For disobedience to this edict, many were indicted by
the attorney-general, and were fined in the star chamber.[***] This
occasioned discontents; and the sentences were complained of as illegal.
But if proclamations had authority, of which nobody pretended to doubt,
must they not be put in execution? In no instance I must confess, does
it more evidently appear, what confused and uncertain ideas were during
that age entertained concerning the English constitution.
Ray, having exported fuller's earth, contrary to the king's
proclamation, was, besides the pillory, condemned in the star chamber
to a fine of two thousand pounds.[****] Like fines were levied on
Terry, Eman, and others, for disobeying a proclamation which forbade
the exportation of gold.[v] In order to account for the subsequent
convulsions, even these incidents are not to be overlooked as frivolous
or contemptible. Such severities were afterwards magnified into the
greatest enormities.
There remains a proclamation of this year, prohibiting hackney coaches
from standing in the street.[v*] We are told, that there were not above
twenty coaches of that kind in London. There are at present near eight
hundred.
* Lord Lansdown, p. 515. This story is told differently in
Hobart's Reports, p. 120. It there appears, that Markham was
fined only five hundred pounds, and very deservedly; for he
gave the lie and wrote a challenge to Lord Darcy. James was
anxious to discourage the practice of duelling, which was
then very prevalent.
** Rush. vol. ii. p. 144.
*** Rush. vol. ii, p. 288.
**** Rush. vol. ii. p. 348.
v Rush. vol. ii. p. 360.
v* Rush. vol. ii. p. 316.
{1636.} The effects of ship money began now to appear. A formidable
fleet of sixty sail, the greatest that England had ever known, was
equipped under the earl of Northumberland, who had orders to attack
the herring busses of the Dutch, which fished in what were called the
British seas. The Dutch were content to pay thirty thousand pounds for
a license during this year. They openly denied, however, the claim of
dominion in the seas beyond the friths, bays, and shores; and it may be
questioned whether the laws of nations warrant any further pretensions.
This year, the king sent a squadron against Sallee; and, with the
assistance of the emperor of Morocco, destroyed that receptacle of
pirates, by whom the English commerce, and even the English coasts, had
long been infested.
{1637.} Burton, a divine, and Bastwick, a physician, were tried in the
star chamber for seditious and schismatical libels, and were condemned
to the same punishment that had been inflicted on Prynne. Prynne himself
was tried for a new offence; and, together with another fine of five
thousand pounds, was condemned to lose what remained of his ears.
Besides that these writers had attacked with great severity, and even an
intemperate zeal, the ceremonies, rites, and government of the church,
the very answers which they gave in to the court were so full of
contumacy and of invectives against the prelates, that no lawyer
could be prevailed on to sign them.[*] The rigors, however, which they
underwent, being so unworthy men of their profession, gave general
offence; and the patience, or rather alacrity, with which they suffered,
increased still further the indignation of the public.[**]
* Rush. vol. ii. p. 381, 382, etc. State Trials, vol. v. p.
66.
** State Trials, vol. v. p. 80.
The severity of the star chamber, which was generally ascribed to Laud's
passionate disposition, was, perhaps, in itself somewhat blamable;
but will naturally, to us, appear enormous, who enjoy, in the utmost
latitude, that liberty of the press, which is esteemed so necessary
in every monarchy, confined by strict legal limitations. But as these
limitations were not regularly fixed during the age of Charles, nor at
any time before, so was this liberty totally unknown, and was generally
deemed, as well as religious toleration, incompatible with all good
government. No age or nation among the moderns had ever set an example
of such an indulgence; and it seems unreasonable to judge of the
measures embraced during one period by the maxims which prevail in
another.
Burton, in his book where he complained of innovations mentioned, among
others, that a certain Wednesday had been appointed for a fast, and
that the fast was ordered to be celebrated without any sermons.[*] The
intention, as he pretended, of that novelty was, by the example of
a fast without sermons, to suppress all the Wednesday's lectures in
London. It is observable, that the church of Rome and that of England,
being both of them lovers of form, and ceremony, and order, are more
friends to prayer than preaching; while the Puritanical sectaries, who
find that the latter method of address, being directed to a numerous
audience present and visible, is more inflaming and animating,
have always regarded it as the chief part of divine service. Such
circumstances, though minute, it may not be improper to transmit to
posterity; and those who are curious of tracing the history of the human
mind, may remark how far its several singularities coincide in different
ages.
Certain zealots had erected themselves into a society for buying in of
impropriations, and transferring them to the church; and great sums of
money had been bequeathed to the society for these purposes. But it was
soon observed, that the only use which they made of their funds was to
establish lecturers in all the considerable churches; men who, without
being subjected to Episcopal authority, employed themselves entirely
in preaching and spreading the fire of Puritanism. Laud took care, by
a decree which was passed in the court of exchequer, and which was much
complained of, to abolish this society, and to stop their progress.[**]
It was, however, still observed, that throughout England the lecturers
were all of them Puritanically affected; and from them the clergymen,
who contented themselves with reading prayers and homilies to the
people, commonly received the reproachful appellation of "dumb dogs."
* State Trials, vol. v. p. 74. Franklyn, p. 839.
** Rush. vol. ii. p. 150, 151. Whitlocke, p. 15. History of
the Life Sufferings of Laud, p. 211, 212.
The Puritans, restrained in England, shipped themselves off for America,
and laid there the foundations of a government which possessed all
the liberty, both civil and religious, of which they found themselves
bereaved in their native country.
But their enemies, unwilling that they
should any where enjoy ease and contentment, and dreading, perhaps, the
dangerous consequences of so disaffected a colony, prevailed on the king
to issue a proclamation, debarring these devotees access even into those
inhospitable deserts.[*] Eight ships, lying in the Thames, and ready to
sail, were detained by order of the council; and in these were embarked
Sir Arthur Hazelrig, John Hambden, John Pym, and Oliver Cromwell,[**]
who had resolved forever to abandon their native country, and fly to
the other extremity of the globe; where they might enjoy lectures
and discourses of any length or form which pleased them. The king had
afterwards full leisure to repent this exercise of his authority.
The bishop of Norwich, by rigorously insisting on uniformity, had
banished many industrious tradesmen from that city, and chased them
into Holland.[***] The Dutch began to be more intent on commerce than on
orthodoxy; and thought that the knowledge of useful arts and obedience
to the laws formed a good citizen; though attended with errors in
subjects where it is not allowable for human nature to expect any
positive truth or certainty.
Complaints about this time were made, that the petition of right was
in some instances violated; and that, upon a commitment by the king and
council, bail or releasement had been refused to Jennings, Pargiter, and
Danvers.[****]
Williams, bishop of Lincoln, a man of spirit and learning, a popular
prelate, and who had been lord keeper, was fined ten thousand pounds by
the star chamber, committed to the Tower during the king's pleasure, and
suspended from his office. This severe sentence was founded on frivolous
pretences, and was more ascribed to Laud's vengeance, than to any guilt
of the bishop.[v] Laud, however, had owed his first promotion to the
good offices of that prelate with King James. But so implacable was the
haughty primate, that he raised up a new prosecution against Williams,
on the strangest pretence imaginable.
* Rush. vol. ii. p. 409, 418.
** Mather's History of New England, book i. Dugdale. Bates
Hutchinson's History of Massachusetts Bay, vol. i. p. 42.
This last quoted author puts the fact beyond controversy.
And it is a curious fact, as well with regard to the
characters of the men, as of the times. Can any one doubt
that the ensuing quarrel was almost entirety theological,
not political? What might be expected of the populace when
such was the character of the most enlightened Readers?
*** May, p. 82.
**** Rush. vol. ii. p. 414.
v Rush. vol. ii. p. 416, etc.
In order to levy the fine above mentioned, some officers had been sent
to seize all the furniture and books of his episcopal palace of Lincoln;
and in rummaging the house, they found in a corner some neglected
letters, which had been thrown by as useless. These letters were written
by one Osbaldistone, a schoolmaster, and were directed to Williams.
Mention was there made of "a little great man;" and in another passage,
the same person was denominated "a little urchin." By inferences and
constructions, these epithets were applied to Laud; and on no better
foundation was Williams tried anew, as having received scandalous
letters, and not discovering that private correspondence. For this
offence, another fine of eight thousand pounds was levied on him:
Osbaldistone was likewise brought to trial, and condemned to pay a fine
of five thousand pounds, and to have his ears nailed to the pillory
before his own school. He saved himself by flight; and left a note in
his study, wherein he said, "that he was gone beyond Canterbury."[*]
These prosecutions of Williams seem to have been the most iniquitous
measure pursued by the court during the time that the use of parliaments
was suspended. Williams had been indebted for all his fortune to the
favor of James; but having quarrelled, first with Buckingham, then with
Laud, he threw himself into the country party; and with great firmness
and vigor opposed all the measures of the king. A creature of the court
to become its obstinate enemy, a bishop to countenance Puritans; these
circumstances excited indignation, and engaged the ministers in those
severe measures. Not to mention, what some writers relate, that, before
the sentence was pronounced against him, Williams was offered a pardon
upon his submission, which he refused to make; the court was apt to
think, that so refractory a spirit must by any expedient be broken and
subdued.
In a former trial which Williams underwent,[**] (for these were not the
first,) there was mentioned in court a story, which, as it discovers the
genius of parties, may be worth relating. Sir John Lambe urging him to
prosecute the Puritans, the prelate asked what sort of people these same
Puritans were. Sir John replied, "that to the world they seemed to be
such as would not swear, whore, or be drunk; out they would lie, cozen,
and deceive; that they would frequently hear two sermons a day, and
repeat them too, and that some, times they would fast all day long."
This character must be conceived to be satirical; yet it may be allowed,
that that sect was more averse to such irregularities as proceed from
the excess of gayety and pleasure, than to those enormities which are
the most destructive of society, The former were opposite to the
very genius and spirit of their religion; the latter were only a
transgression of its precepts: and it was not difficult for a gloomy
enthusiast to convince himself, that a strict observance of the one
would atone for any violation of the other.
* Rush. voL ii. p. 803, etc. Whittocke, p. 25.
** Rush. vol. ii. p. 416.
In 1632, the treasurer Portland had insisted with the vintners, that
they should submit to a tax of a penny a quart upon all the wine which
they retailed; but they rejected the demand, In order to punish them, a
decree suddenly, without much inquiry or examination, passed in the star
chamber, prohibiting them to sell or dress victuals in their houses.[*]
Two years after, they were questioned for the breach of this decree; and
in order to avoid punishment, they agreed to lend the king six thousand
pounds. Being threatened, during the subsequent years, with fines and
prosecutions, they at last compounded the matter, and submitted to pay
half of that duty which was at first demanded of them.[**] It required
little foresight to perceive, that the king's right of issuing
proclamations must, if prosecuted, draw on a power of taxation.
* Rash. vol. ii p. 197.
** Rush. vol. ii, p. 45.
Lilburne was accused before the star chamber of publishing and
dispersing seditious pamphlets. He was ordered to be examined; but
refused to take the oath usual in that court that he would answer
interrogatories, even though they might lead him to accuse himself. For
this contempt, as it was interpreted, he was condemned to be whipped,
pilloried, and imprisoned. While he was whipped at the cart, and stood
on the pillory, he harangued the populace, and declaimed violently
against the tyranny of bishops. From his pockets also he scattered
pamphlets, said to be seditious, because they attacked the hierarchy.
The star chamber, which was sitting at that very time, ordered him
immediately to be gagged. He ceased not, however, though both gagged and
pilloried, to stamp with his foot and gesticulate, in order to show the
people that, if he had it in his power, he would still harangue them.
This behavior gave fresh provocation to the star chamber; and they
condemned him to be imprisoned in a dungeon, and to be loaded with
irons.[*] It was found difficult to break the spirits of men who placed
both their honor and their conscience in suffering.
The jealousy of the church appeared in another instance less tragical.
Archy, the king's fool, who by his office had the privilege of jesting
on his master and the whole court, happened unluckily to try his wit
upon Laud, who was too sacred a person to be played with. News having
arrived from Scotland of the first commotions excited by the liturgy,
Archy, seeing the primate pass by, called to him, "Who's fool now, my
lord?" For this offence Archy was ordered, by sentence of the council,
to have his coat pulled over his head and to be dismissed the king's
service.[**]
Here is another instance of that rigorous subjection in which all men
were held by Laud. Some young gentlemen of Lincoln's Inn, heated by
their cups, having drunk confusion to the archbishop, were at his
instigation cited before the star chamber. They applied to the earl of
Dorset for protection. "Who bears witness against you?" said Dorset.
"One of the drawers," they said. "Where did he stand when you were
supposed to drink this health?" subjoined the earl, "He was at the
door," they replied, "going out of the room." "Tush!" cried he, "the
drawer must be mistaken: you drank confusion to the archbishop of
Canterbury's enemies and the fellow was gone before you pronounced the
last word." This hint supplied the young gentlemen with a new method of
defence: and being advised by Dorset to behave with great humility and
great submission to the primate, the modesty of their carriage, the
ingenuity of their apology, with the patronage of that noble lord, saved
them from any severer punishment than a reproof and admonition, with
which they were dismissed.[***]
* Rush. vol. ii. p. 465, 466, 467.
** Rush. voL ii. p. 470. Welwood, p. 278.
*** Rush. vol. iii. p. 180.
This year, John Hambden acquired, by his spirit and courage, universal
popularity throughout the nation, and has merited great renown with
posterity, for the bold stand which he made in defence of the laws and
liberties of his country. After the imposing of ship money, Charles, in
order to discourage all opposition, had proposed this question to
the judges: "Whether, in a case of necessity, for the defence of the
kingdom, he might not impose this taxation; and whether he were not sole
judge of the necessity." These guardians of law and liberty replied,
with great complaisance, "that in a case of necessity he might impose
that taxation, and that he was sole judge of the necessity."[*] Hambden
had been rated at twenty shillings for an estate which he possessed in
the county of Buckingham: yet, notwithstanding this declared opinion
of the judges, notwithstanding the great power and sometimes rigorous
maxims of the crown, notwithstanding the small prospect of relief from
parliament, he resolved, rather than tamely submit to so illegal an
imposition, to stand a legal prosecution, and expose himself to all the
indignation of the court. The case was argued during twelve days, in
the exchequer chamber, before all the judges of England; and the nation
regarded, with the utmost anxiety, every circumstance of this
celebrated trial. The event was easily foreseen: but the principles, and
reasonings, and behavior of the parties engaged in the trial, were much
canvassed and inquired into; and nothing could equal the favor paid to
the one side, except the hatred which attended the other.
* Rush. vol. ii. p. 355. Whitlocke, p. 24.
It was urged by Hambden's counsel, and by his partisans in the nation,
that the plea of necessity was in vain introduced into a trial of
law; since it was the nature of necessity to abolish all law, and, by
irresistible violence, to dissolve all the weaker and more artificial
ties of human society. Not only the prince, in cases of extreme
distress, is exempted from the ordinary rules of administration: all
orders of men are then levelled; and any individual may consult the
public safety by any expedient which his situation enables him to
employ. But to produce so violent an effect, and so hazardous to every
community, an ordinary danger or difficulty is not sufficient; much less
a necessity which is merely fictitious and pretended. Where the peril is
urgent and extreme, it will be palpable to every member of the society;
and though all ancient rules of government are in that case abrogated,
men will readily, of themselves, submit to that irregular authority
which is exerted for their preservation. But what is there in common
between such suppositions and the present condition of the nation?
England enjoys a profound peace with al her neighbors; and what is
more, all her neighbors are engaged in furious and bloody wars
among themselves, and by their mutual enmities further insure their
tranquillity. The very writs themselves, which are issued for the
levying of ship money, contradict the supposition of necessity, and
pretend only that the seas are infested with pirates; a slight and
temporary inconvenience, which may well await a legal supply from
parliament. The writs likewise allow several months for equipping the
ships; which proves a very calm and deliberate species of necessity,
and one that admits of delay much beyond the forty days requisite for
summoning that assembly. It is strange, too, that an extreme necessity,
which is always apparent, and usually comes to a sudden crisis, should
now have continued without interruption for near four years, and should
have remained during so long a time invisible to the whole kingdom. And
as to the pretension, that the king is sole judge of the necessity, what
is this but to subject all the privileges of the nation to his arbitrary
will and pleasure? To expect that the public will be convinced by such
reasoning, must aggravate the general indignation, by adding to violence
against men's persons, and their property, so cruel a mockery of their
understanding.
In vain are precedents of ancient writs produced: these writs, when
examined, are only found to require the seaports, sometimes at their own
charge, sometimes at the charge of the counties, to send their ships
for the defence of the nation. Even the prerogative which empowered the
crown to issue such writs is abolished, and its exercise almost entirely
discontinued from the time of Edward III.;[*] and all the authority
which remained, or was afterwards exercised, was to press ships into the
public service, to be paid for by the public.
* State Trials, vol. v. p. 245, 255.
How wide are these precedents from a power of obliging the people, at
their own charge, to build new ships, to victual and pay them, for
the public; nay, to furnish money to the crown for that purpose? What
security either against the further extension of this claim, or against
diverting to other purposes the public money so levied? The plea of
necessity would warrant any other taxation as well as that of ship
money; wherever any difficulty shall occur, the administration, instead
of endeavoring to elude or overcome it by gentle and prudent measures,
will instantly represent it as a reason for infringing all ancient laws
and institutions: and if such maxims and such practices prevail, what
has become of national liberty? What authority is left to the Great
Charter, to the statutes, and to the very petition of right, which in
the present reign had been so solemnly enacted by the concurrence of the
whole legislature?
The defenceless condition of the kingdom while unprovided with a navy;
the inability of the king, from his established revenues, with the
utmost care and frugality, to equip and maintain one; the impossibility
of obtaining, on reasonable terms, any voluntary supply from parliament;
all these are reasons of state, not topics of law. If these reasons
appear to the king so urgent as to dispense with the legal rules of
government, let him enforce his edicts by his court of star chamber, the
proper instrument of irregular and absolute power, not prostitute the
character of his judges by a decree which is not, and cannot possibly
be legal. By this means, the boundaries, at least, will be kept
more distinct between ordinary law and extraordinary exertions of
prerogative; and men will know, that the national constitution is only
suspended during a present and difficult emergence, but has not under
gone a total and fundamental alteration.
Notwithstanding these reasons, the prejudiced judges, four[*] excepted,
gave sentence in favor of the crown. Hambden, however, obtained by the
trial the end for which he had so generously sacrificed his safety
and his quiet: the people were roused from their lethargy, and became
sensible of the danger to which their liberties were exposed.
* See State Trials, article, Ship Money, which contains the
speeches of four judges in favor of Hambden.
These national questions were canvassed in every company; and the more
they were examined, the more evidently did it appear to many, that
liberty was totally subverted, and an unusual and arbitrary authority
exercised over the kingdom. Slavish principles they said, concur with
illegal practices; ecclesiastical tyranny gives aid to civil usurpation;
iniquitous taxes are supported by arbitrary punishments; and all the
privileges of the nation, transmitted through so many ages, secured by
so many laws and purchased by the blood of so many heroes and patriots,
now lie prostrate at the feet of the monarch. What though public
peace and national industry increased the commerce and opulence of
the kingdom? This advantage was temporary, and due alone, not to any
encouragement given by the crown, but to the spirit of the English, the
remains of their ancient freedom. What though the personal character of
the king amidst all his misguided counsels, might merit indulgence, or
even praise? He was but one man; and the privileges of the people,
the inheritance of millions, were too valuable to be sacrificed to
his prejudices and mistakes. Such, or more severe, were the sentiments
promoted by a great party in the nation: no excuse on the king's
part, or alleviation, how reasonable soever, could be hearkened to or
admitted: and to redress these grievances, a parliament was impatiently
longed for; or any other incident, however calamitous, that might secure
the people against these oppressions which they felt, or the greater
ills which they apprehended from the combined encroachments of church
and state.