as deputy, and summoning a parliament, announced his intention to hold two sessions, one for the benefit of the king, the other for the people. In the first session, he obtained larger subsidies than had ever been granted before, but in the second, the most important parts of the concessions promised were peremptorily refused. 2. Wentworth offends the Irish Church by imposing the English Articles, 1634. The great object of Laud the primate was to unite the Protestant Churches of England, Scotland, and Ireland, in the profession of the same doctrine, and the observance of the same discipline. Objections were raised by the Irish bishops, on the ground that theirs was a distinct and independent church, that they owed no obedience to the Archbishops of Canterbury, and that they were satisfied with the Articles of the Irish Church. Wentworth tried to soothe the Convocation by granting permission to compose a new code of ecclesiastical discipline, only requiring that in substance it should not depart from that of the English Church, and that its canons should include an unlimited admission of the Thirty-nine Articles. The compilers, nevertheless, dared to frame a canon enjoining the admission of the Irish Articles, under the penalty of excommunication. But Wentworth, conscious of his power, drew up himself a canon authorising the English Articles, and sending it to the House, ordered that no debate should be permitted, and that those who voted against it should be reported to him. The point was gained, though at the loss of the respect of the Irish Church.

3. Wentworth declares Connaught forfeited, 1635. One of the principal Irish grievances was the insecurity of landed property, owing to dormant pretensions of the crown. It was this that led the Irish proprietors to ask of Charles to confine the claims of the crown to the last sixty years; this he promised, but influenced by Wentworth, did not perform. The Deputy assured his master a permanent revenue, if he could only have time to work his plans, one of which turned out to be a claim on the part of the crown, to the whole province of Connaught. It was pretended, that in the reign of Henry III. the province was partly in the hands of that sovereign, and partly in those of Richard de Burgo; that the claims of the latter had by marriage passed to the Duke of York, through him to his grandson Edward IV., and from Edward IV. the right had been in the reigning monarch. The juries, under intimidation, mostly returned verdicts in favor of the crown, but Galway, peopled by Catholics, maintained that it could not be proved that Edward IV. descended from Richard de Burgo. The jury found for the freeholders, for which the sheriff was fined a thousand pounds. The jurymen were sent to Dublin and severally fined four thousand pounds, besides being

imprisoned during the pleasure of the Deputy. By means of a proclamation offering favor to those who voluntarily surrendered their lands, and threatening those who did not, Wentworth hoped to secure his purpose. But the people appealed by a deputation, to the equity of the king; he however arrested the delegates, and sent them prisoners to Dublin. There remained now but one course-S submission. Wentworth proposed to take from the proprietors one-fourth, and from the men of Galway one-half of their lands; these were to be disposed of to Englishmen, on conditions which would bring a yearly revenue into the exchequer. But before the design was completed, the Deputy was called over to England to support the failing cause of his master. This part of Wentworth's proceedings justly alarmed the Irish proprietors, and was one cause of the outbreak in 1641.

SECTION X. AFFAIRS OF SCOTLAND.

1. Charles visits Scotland and holds a parliament, 1633. In Scotland, as in Ireland, impolitic acts had tended to alienate the people from the king, though worse were yet to come. Charles, to obtain funds towards a permanent revenue, was persuaded to resume the ecclesiastical property that had fallen to the crown at the Reformation, but which during the minority of his father had been alienated. The visit of the king was received with great joy, which was however somewhat damped by the officious interference of Laud, when his master was crowned at Edinburgh on the 18th of June. Laud had accompanied the king, to aid in the chief purpose of this journey-the completion of his father's scheme with respect to episcopacy, and the introduction of the English Liturgy.

The parliament gave liberal supplies, but its harmony was soon disturbed on the question of clerical vestments, the power to regulate which it was proposed to give to the crown. Anticipating further encroachments, the parliament resisted. The aged Lord Melville, addressing himself to the king, exclaimed, "I have sworn with your father and the whole kingdom to the Confession of Faith, in which the innovations intended by these articles were solemnly abjured". Charles was disconcerted and withdrew; soon returning, he commanded them not to debate, but to vote, and pointing to a paper in his hand, said, "Your names are here; I shall know to-day who will do me service and who will not". The lord-register declared the majority had voted for the articles, the Earl of Rothes declared that the votes had been erroneously collected, or falsely reported, and demanded a scrutiny. This the king evaded, and the articles being ratified by a touch of the royal sceptre, the parliament was dissolved after a session of nine days.

Charles, before he left Scotland, established" singing men" in the chapel of Holyrood, and an episcopal see at Edinburgh, with a diocese extending from the Forth to Berwick; the introduction of the Liturgy was not attempted. But the introduction of a high altar, tapers, and genuflexions at the coronation, and the parliamentary contention respecting the clerical dress, had a tendency to increase the distrust, that already existed in Scotland, towards the king.

2. Resistance to the introduction of a new Service Book, 1637. James had obtained from the General Assembly an act authorising the composition of a book of Common Prayer, which indeed was actually composed, but the resistance offered to the articles of Perth, made it appear prudent not to force the matter for a time. Charles revived the idea in 1629, and consigned the task, together with the construction of new canons, to four Scotch bishops, whose work was revised by the bishops of Canterbury, London, and Norwich. By their instructions, they were carefully to preserve the substance of the English Liturgy, though permitted to make some alterations. When completed, the Service Book corresponded very nearly with that of the Church of England, yet the points in which it differed, indicated a nearer approach to the Romish ritual, the whole blame of which fell on Laud, though he expressly denied that he was chargeable therewith. What was equally offensive to the Scotch, was the enjoining both the canons and the service-book by "his authority royal", a right, to use the words of Bishop Short, "quite incompatible with the political existence of any church".

The character of the new service was generally known, before the time set for its use; when the day come (23rd July) resistance was already prepared, the leaders committing the honor of it" to the Christian valyancie of the godly women". In the High Church, which had recently been converted into a cathedral, where the bishop and dean of Edinburgh officiated, and in the Grey-friars church, where the bishop of Argyle read the new service, the like kind of opposition was offered. Groans and hisses were followed by shouts of "Down with the priest of

Baal. A pope, a pope. Antichrist, &c." Janet Geddes threw

a stool at the dean's head, and when the bishop mounted the pulpit to restore order, sticks, stones, and dirt were thrown. In the afternoon, the service met with little interruption, for the people were for the most part excluded. The bishop, on his way home, after the morning service, was attacked by the women, pelted with stones, rolled in the mire, and in danger of being trodden to death; in the afternoon it was even worse, and it would have fared hard with him, had not the Earl of Roxburgh

taken him into his coach, and kept off the mob by ordering his attendants to draw their swords. The day following, the council issued a proclamation forbidding all tumultuous meetings under pain of death; the town council, however, suspended the reading of the new service till his majesty's pleasure should be known, for which act they were censured by Laud, in the name of his master. The Scottish council was afterwards reproved for suspending the letters of "horning" or banishment, against all such ministers as refused the new book of Common Prayer, so little did Charles or his adviser understand the character of the storm they had raised.

66

3. The "Tables" established, and National Covenant published, 1638. The harvest time being over, numbers resorted to Edinburgh and joined a petition that the service-book might not be pressed upon them; but a proclamation from the king, read at the market cross, commanded all Presbyterians to return to their homes, under pain of being treated as rebels. Charles was warned of the rising spirit of the nation, and of the powerlessness of the government to control it; he nevertheless determined to go thorough" with it, without delay, and gave orders that the council should remove from Edinburgh. The petitioners now formed the "Four Tables", or committees, representing respectively the lords, gentry, Presbyterian clergy, and burgesses. These Tables corresponded with lesser committees in the country, and to centralise the movement a general Table was formed of certain members from the four leading committees. In this way was organised in Edinburgh a provisional government, which exercised an uncontrolled authority over the greater part of Scotland. No sooner were the Tables satisfied of the possession of the real power, than their demands increased, and the Treasurer, Traquair, becoming alarmed, issued a proclamation, declaring the Tables unlawful, and commanding all strangers to return to their homes, under penalty of treason.

To sustain their movement, the Presbyterian party now proceeded to frame the celebrated National Covenant, whereby they undertook to defend the true religion, by which they meant the old form of worship and confession of faith, subscribed to by Charles's father and all ranks of the people in 1580; to resist all contrary errors and corruptions; and to stand to the defence of the king, his person and authority, in preservation of the religion, liberties, and laws of the kingdom, and to the defence of each other in the same cause. The Tables now summoned every Scotchman who valued his kirk, to repair to the capital, there to observe a fast preparatory to renewing the Covenant. The call was generally obeyed, and the Covenant sworn to, by the assem

bled multitudes in the High Church. Copies of this document were sent all over the kingdom, and by the influence of the ministers, the subscribers outnumbered their opponents, in the proportion of one hundred to one. Charles had resolved to crush this movement by force, but meanwhile sent down the Marquis of Hamilton, as his commissioner, with instructions to promise that the canons and liturgy should be pressed only in a legal way. On its appearing that Hamilton's mission had failed, a proclamation was issued discharging the service-book and canons, and commanding the people to lay aside the new Covenant, and take that published in 1580. That Charles was insincere in these concessions, appears from his letters to Hamilton: "Your chief end being now to win time; that they may commit public follies, until I be ready to suppress them”.

4. A general Assembly meets at Glasgow and proves refractory, 1638. By his majesty's pleasure a general assembly was summoned to meet in November, but before its meeting the Scottish leaders had received intimation that the king's object was to lull them into security. They therefore persisted in their union, and the Tables employed successfully their influence in the election of a large number of laymen. When the assembly met on the 21st of November, Hamilton protested against the part taken by the Tables, and the introduction of laymen, which had been some time discontinued; but he was overborne on ever subject by numbers, and finding that he could not control the House, dissolved it at the end of the week. Encouraged by the countenance of the Earl of Argyle, the assembly declared the dissolution illegal and void, and continued the session till the 20th of December. Their proceedings were characterised with sufficient energy. A resolution declared the Kirk independent of the civil power; every ecclesiastical regulation since 1603 was revised; the liturgy, ordinal, canons, and High Commission Court were abolished; the bishops and ministers that supported them excommunicated or deprived. The king by proclamation annulled these proceedings, but the Scotch had already resolved to give battle for their religious rights. The downfall of episcopacy, in a political sense, was the prime reason of the nobility's proceedingseight of the bishops being Lords of the Articles, who had the power to choose other eight of the nobility, whom they knew to be most addicted to his majesty, and these sixteen the rest, so that all depended upon the bishops, and they upon his majesty. These Lords of the Articles engrossed nearly the whole power parliament to themselves, for according to Hallam, "The parliament itself met only on two days, the first and last of their pretended session, the one time to choose the lords of the articles,

of