A.D. 1626.] CHARLES'S ARBITRARY CONDUCT. 167 young king was involved by the foreign wars in which he had engaged, the leaders of the House of Commons, men of the greatest ability and purest virtue, resolved upon exercising what they believed to be their constitutional right of withholding supplies until the measures they proposed should be accepted by the Crown. Charles, nurtured in the belief that no impediment should stand in the way of the sovereign will, resented, as we have seen, the first manifestations of independent spirit in the Parliament by pronouncing its dissolution. An expedition against Cadiz, undertaken in the hope of seizing Spanish treasures, and of intercepting the rich galleons from the West Indies, ended in utter failure, owing to the plague having broken out amongst the troops, as well as to the incompetency of the commander, Cecil Lord Wimbleton. Want of money obliged Charles to summon a second Parliament (1626), but it adopted the views of the last; for although willing to grant the necessary supplies, yet it was on condition of having grievances redressed. The Earl of Bristol, who had long been in disgrace because of his opposition to Buckingham, now took his seat in the House of Lords contrary to the wish of the king, who threatened him with impeachment for high treason. Upon this, Bristol accused Buckingham to the Commons, who took up the charge. While lying under the impeachment of the Commons, the king had Buckingham elected Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, which was regarded as a gratuitous affront, and gave the Commons much offence. So far from yielding to the proceedings of the Commons, Charles sent a harsh message to the House, not to meddle with his servant Buckingham, but to make haste and vote supplies, or he should be obliged to try "new counsels." The two members of the House employed to manage the impeachment, Sir Dudley Digges and Sir John Elliot, were thrown into prison, and the king, notwithstanding a petition from the Peers, again dissolved the Parliament. Charles, now driven to shifts for raising money, appointed a Commission, charged with power to free Catholics from penal laws in return for certain sums. Maritime towns were ordered to provide so many ships for the carrying on of war, and this gave rise to the question of Ship-money, which afterwards produced such memorable consequences. A general loan was next ordered, accompanied by heavy threats against all who should refuse to subscribe. The Archbishop Abbot, having refused to license the printing of sermons recommending passive obedience to the king's demands, was suspended, and banished from London. Soldiers were, contrary to law, billeted upon persons who refused the loan, many of whom also were thrown illegally into prison, while others were pressed into the army or forced to perform disagreeable services. In the midst of these perplexities Charles, already at war with Spain, quarrelled with France, at the instigation of Buckingham, who, under pretence of supporting the Protestants of Rochelle, headed an expedition against the Isle of Rhé (July 1629), which, by its ignominous failure, covered Buckingham with shame. Despite his apprehensions, Charles was driven by his necessities again to convoke Parliament (the third, 1628). The members of this Parliament all of them men independent by their wealth, and of great acquirements-began in a moderate and deliberate spirit, by passing resolutions condemning arbitrary imprisonments and forced loans. The king having, after great hesitation, ratified these resolutions, the House granted supplies, with which Charles declared himself satisfied. The House, however, resolved that it would, by an express act, affirm the right of the nation not to be exposed to forced loans, to arbitrary imprisonment for refusing such loans or for any other cause, to billeting of soldiers, and martial law; and refused to pay the subsidies until these objects were gained. It accordingly drew up the famous PETITION OF RIGHTS embodying these demands, to which the king was obliged, after having attempted to induce the Parliament to accept without success an evasive answer, to give his assent (1628). Dr. Mainwaring was then impeached for a sermon teaching subjects that the king's right over their property was supreme, and, being found guilty, was fined, imprisoned, and suspended; yet no sooner A.D. 1629.] PEACE WITH SPAIN AND FRANCE. 169 was the session ended than the king pardoned and promoted him. After the royal assent to the Petition of Rights, the Commons drew up a remonstrance recapitulating the evil acts that had been perpetrated under Buckingham's administration; when, to put an end to their proceedings, Charles suddenly declared the session prorogued. The Earl of Denbigh having returned from an idle effort to relieve Rochelle, Buckingham, who was his brother-in-law, determined to retrieve the dishonour; but while he was preparing to embark at Portsmouth, where he had collected a large fleet and army, he was assassinated by a fanatic named Felton. When the Parliament next assembled (1629), Sir John Elliot presented a remonstrance against the king's levying tonnage and poundage without consent of Parliament. This was a duty on exports and imports, which, if allowed to the king, would render him independent of Parliament, and give rise to hurtful restrictions on trade. The Speaker refusing to put the remonstrance to the vote, was forcibly held down on his attempting to leave the chair, until the remonstrance was passed. In a few days after, the king dissolved the Parliament. Some members were, in direct violation of the privileges of the Commons, thrown into prison, one of whom, Sir John Elliot, the author of the remonstrance, died before being released. With the dissolution of this third Parliament ends the first period of Charles's reign. He now resolved to conduct the government without a Parliament at all. After Buckingham's death Charles made peace with Spain and France. His next most trusted minister was Thomas Wentworth, whom he raised to the rank of Earl of Strafford. In ecclesiastical affairs, Laud bishop of London became supreme. Strafford was arbitrary and imperious, Laud very narrow-minded, and both exceedingly obnoxious to the people. The king, about the same time, issued a proclamation, which seemed to imply that he would never again call Parliament together. Monopolies were revived. The customs' duties of tonnage and poundage, levied by royal authority at the different sea-ports on imports and exports, the exemption of Roman Catholics from penal laws in return for money-payments, and money raised by the old illegal expedients, furnished the means of carrying on the government without calling for the usual parliamentary subsidies. Wentworth was placed over the arbitrary criminal court called the Council of York. The authority of the Star-Chamber* was extended, as well as the Court of High Commission, and some cruel sentences were inflicted for the purpose of terrifying the opponents of arbitrary power. All who spoke or wrote against the civil or ecclesiastical state of affairs were rigorously punished, by fines or otherwise. During the year (1633) Charles paid a visit to Scotland, for which country dreadful scenes were preparing; and on his return he raised Laud to be Archbishop of Canterbury. By the year 1637, public liberty was so oppressed, that eight ships, which had been fitted out to sail with Puritans to America, there to seek a land where they might enjoy freedom of worship, were detained in the Thames. Among the intending emigrants were Pym, Hampden, and Cromwell. Charles, in order to provide himself with a navy without calling Parliament together, revived an obsolete custom, and called on the sea-ports to assess themselves for the support of ships of war. This tax was called Ship-money, and was afterwards extended to inland places; the design of supporting a standing army also, to give permanence to arbitrary power, being scarcely concealed. Hampden, when called on to pay this tax, resisted the demand as illegal, and brought the question before the law courts, giving rise to a trial which drew the attention of the whole nation (1636). Although the judges, with the exception of five, pronounced for the Crown, yet Hampden for his courageous resistance to arbitrary exactions, became a hero in the eyes of the people; while the discussions in Court opened their eyes to the constitutional founda The Star-Chamber was a court instituted by the Privy Council to try offenders. Being under the influence of the king, many were exposed to accusation and punishment simply because they were obnoxious to him. In this way much injustice was frequently done. The Court of High Commission was instituted to try those who were considered to be heretics-in short, a kind of Inquisition. A.D. 1637-40.] THE SCOTTISH COVENANT. 171 tion of their liberties and rights, which they saw to spring out of the laws, no less than out of the customs of their ancestors. The 23d July (1637) was a memorable day in Scotland, as that on which began the violent opposition to the king's attempt to interfere with the National Church, with which, according to the Scotch, the civil government had no right to meddle. In the Cathedral Church of Edinburgh, when the dean, arrayed in surplice, began to read the service, he was obliged to desist in consequence of the tumult that was raised. Such scenes of disorder followed, that the primate remonstrated with the king on his fruitless attempts to disregard the wishes of the people. The Earl of Traquair went to London for the same purpose, but Charles remained inflexible. All ranks accordingly united, forming four tables, as they were called, consisting, one of nobility, another of gentry, a third of ministers, and a fourth of burgesses, in whose hands the authority of the kingdom was placed. Their first act was the production of the famous Covenant. Forces were enlisted, the command was given to Lesley, a soldier who had served with distinction in Germany, and Leith was fortified. Charles joined his army, numbering 23,000 men, commanded by Lord Arundel, and moved on to Berwick, but the Scotch showed such resolution that the king listened to overtures for a pacification. The negotiations that followed failed in establishing peace, and as the king's means were not equal to the prosecution of hostilities without supplies, he at last felt obliged to convoke Parliament. The Parliament so called together (1640) met after an interval of eleven years, the longest prorogation which had ever occurred in English history,-a period too during which the king, under a mistaken notion of the regal prerogative, had exercised the most arbitrary and illegal powers. The members accordingly showed themselves more anxious about securing their own liberties, than desirous of helping the king with money to put down the Scotch-conduct which so vexed Charles, that he quickly dissolved the House. This caused great exasperation throughout the country. The Scotch army having by this time |