The most memorable sitting in Parliament, in the fourth year of King
Charles the First, was that of the House of Commons, on March 2d, 1629,
which was pronounced by Sir Simonds D'Ewes as "_the most gloomy, sad,
and dismal day for England that had happened for five hundred years_."
The incidents of this day will be recollected by every one. Sir John
Eliot is said, according to all accounts, to have made an indignant
attack upon Lord Weston, the new Treasurer, and to have concluded by
moving the adoption of a Remonstrance. The Speaker, Sir John Finch,
declined to put the Remonstrance to the vote, and announced that he had
received the King's command to adjourn the House until the 10th of
March. The House paid little attention to the royal message, contending,
first, that it was not the office of the Speaker to deliver any such
command; and, secondly, that the power of adjournment belonged to the
House, and not to the Crown. Regardless of these arguments, the Speaker
prepared to obey the royal mandate. He rose and quitted the chair, when
two members, Denzil Holles, son of the Earl of Clare, on the one side,
and Benjamin Valentine, on the other side, stepped forward, and forced
him back into his official seat. He appealed to the House with abundance
of tears. Selden argued and remonstrated with him. Sir Peter Hayman
disavowed him, we are told, "as a kinsman," and denounced him as a
disgrace to a noble family. Again he endeavoured to quit the chair. Sir
Thomas Edmondes, who was old enough to have been ambassador from Queen
Elizabeth to Henry IV. of France--a man of small stature, but of great
courage--with other privy councillors, pressed forward to the Speaker's
help; but Holles violently held him in his chair, and swore, by what is
termed Queen Elizabeth's oath, "God's wounds!" that he should sit still
until it should please the House to rise.
In the midst of this uproar, Coriton and Winterton, two of the members,
are said to have fallen to blows, numbers of the more timid fled out of
the House, and the King, hearing of the tumult, sent to Edward
Grimstone, the Serjeant-at-Arms, who was then within the House in
attendance upon the Speaker, to bring away the mace, without which it
was supposed that no legal meeting could be held. To defeat this object,
the key of the door was taken from the Serjeant-at-Arms, and delivered
to Sir Miles Hobart. Sir Miles stopped the egress of the
Serjeant-at-Arms, and having taken from him the mace, quietly put him
out of the House and locked the door. The mace was then replaced upon
the table, and Holles, standing by the side of the Speaker, put to the
House three resolutions, which were deemed to be voted by acclamation.
The King is said to have sent, in the meantime, Mr. Maxwell, the Usher
of the Black Rod, to summon the House to attend in the House of Lords,
but Maxwell could gain neither hearing nor admission. Grown now, as is
stated in Lord Verulam's manuscript, "into much rage and passion," the
King sent for "the Captain of the Pensioners and Guard to force the
door." Ere this officer could muster his stately band, the House had
done its work. The resolutions had been passed, the Speaker had been
released from the strong grasp of Denzil Holles, Sir Miles Hobart had
unlocked the door, the excited members had been set free; and, _for a
period of eleven years, parliamentary discussion in England had come to
an end_.
Such is the narrative which was read by Mr. Bruce to the Society of
Antiquaries, in 1859, upon his reading also a "True Relation" of the
scene, in the handwriting of Lord Verulam, now in the manuscript
collection at Gorhambury. Other MSS. of the proceedings of this Session
are not uncommon, and many variations occur. Mr. Bruce has, in his
paper, printed that portion of Lord Verulam's MS. which relates to the
sitting of the 2d of March. Mr. Bruce, who has narrated the leading
points according to Lord Verulam's MS., instead of Hayman's word,
"kinsman," gives these words: "he was sorry he was a Kentish man, and
that he was a disgrace to his country, and a blot to a noble family."
Lord Verulam, too, gives Mr. Stroud's speech, not in other MSS.: he
"tould the Speaker that he was the instrument to cutt off the libertie
of the subject by the roote, and that if he would not be perswaded to
put the same to question, they must all retorne as scattered sheepe, and
a scorne put upon them as it was last session." This is important, since
it explains more precisely than had hitherto been known, why he (Stroud)
was prosecuted for his share in that day's transactions. On the other
hand, Lord Verulam's MS. does not mention the Resolutions that were put
to the House by Holles standing by the Speaker's chair. The concurrent
testimony of a variety of authorities, however, forbids us to doubt that
those Resolutions were really passed in the way described, and that in
this respect Lord Verulam's MS. is defective.