STORMY SCENE IN THE HOUSE

21

liberty of England. The king, who was in the House of Lords, was greatly enraged. He desired the captain of the guard to break open the doors; but before this could be done the Commons had finished their proceedings and the assembly rushed out. Through these stormy scenes the Commons showed the extreme respect which the English have ever kept for forms. The proceedings were regular as long as the Speaker could be held down in the chair, and the mace was lying on the table. While they carried resolutions known to be most unpleasing to the king, it was their love and trust in his majesty, for his preservation and his honour, that they voted. Those who desired to gratify the king's wishes were traitors and enemies to his majesty. Charles did not take this view. He at once suspended the sittings of the assembly, and on the 10th March went to the House of Lords, and formally dissolved the parliament. "The disobedient carriage of the Lower House," he said, "had alone caused this dissolution." He did not lay the fault equally upon all, it was "only some vipers amongst them that have cast this mist of difference before

their eyes." "Those evil affected persons must

look for their reward, so you that are here of the Higher House, may justly claim from me that protection and favour that a good king oweth to his loyal and faithful nobility."

Immediately after the dissolution he issued a proclamation setting forth : "That whereas, for several ill ends, the calling again of a parliament is divulged, howsoever his majesty hath showed by his frequent meeting with his people his love to the

use of parliaments; yet the late abuse having, for the present, driven his majesty unwillingly out of that course, it will be considered presumption for any one to prescribe to him any time for the calling of that assembly."

And for the next eleven years there was no parliament.

Once dissolved, the individual members were helpless against the king, who possessed the means of overawing or dismissing the judges and the power of breaking through the laws. The leaders of the Commons, Eliot, Holles, Selden, Hobart, Valentyne, Coryton, Hayman, Long, and Strode, were brought before the privy council. Questions were privately addressed to the judges, whether these members could be held to have committed

any offence against the law. The judges gave doubtful and temporising answers, which encouraged the court to proceed. Eliot refused to make any answer to what he had done in a public capacity. The others pleaded the privilege of parliament with more or less firmness. Charles himself directed the proceedings against Eliot. He was fined a sum which he was quite unable to pay, and remained in prison for well-nigh four years, refusing to the last to acknowledge that he had done wrong. He died on the 27th November 1632. The king refused the petition of Sir John Eliot's son to allow the body of his victim to be laid in the sepulchre of his ancestors. He was buried in the Tower, where he died.

Holles, refusing to make submission or to pay a fine, was imprisoned for about a year, when he made his

AN UXORIOUS PRINCE

23

escape. He lived a banished man for seven years and was glad at last to pay his fine.' The other offenders were visited with penalties, more or less severe in proportion to their steadfastness or submission. Charles was now seriously committed to the undertaking of over-riding the law and raising a revenue by unconstitutional methods. By making peace with France and Spain he got rid of an inglorious war and of an army and navy which, though ill provided for and wretchedly paid, still cost money. Had he fallen in with popular tastes, or had he even possessed the skill and vigour to maintain an equable and economical administration, his way would have been easier. Charles was attentive to details, but incapable of grand designs, or of giving a proper direction to the whole machinery of government. never knew the relative importance of things. would spend his time correcting the style of a public document without having brought to maturity within his mind its scope and purpose. He used to say that

He

He

he found it better to be a cobbler than a shoemaker. He was induced to do imprudent things to please his wife, Henrietta Maria, a lively and beautiful but frivolous woman, who expected him to keep up a splendid court and to have his will carried out in everything, like her brother the King of France, and who offended the public sentiment by harbouring Jesuits and sheltering priests.

See Studies and Illustrations of the Great Rebellion, by J. L. Sanford. London, 1858, p. 159.

CHAPTER II

Condition of England. The Puritans and the Cavaliers. Insecurity of Commerce. The British Coast infested by Pirates. The Dutch attack a Spanish Fleet in the Downs.

IN seeking to gather all the nation into one church, the Tudor rulers were influenced both by religious and political considerations. They saw that if Protestant dissent split into a number of rival sects, it would be difficult to make head against the united front of Romanism. The division of ranks in the episcopal hierarchy was agreeable to their own notions of political inequality. inequality. From the beginning the more energetic amongst the Protestants wished to push on the work of the Reformation; the more conservative wished to hold back and preserve much of the old ritual and church government. The Reformers proclaimed that the bible was the religion of Protestants. They circulated translations of the scriptures, which they declared to be infallibly inspired, and thus put it in the power of every thinking man to form his own creed. Naturally, some thought for the rest, and framed creeds which they presented as true, absolute and final, with as much assurance as the pope and councils had done. King James, escaping from the austere control of the Scottish Presbyterian clergy, was pleased to find the bishops willing to admit his pre

THE CAVALIERS AND PURITANS

25

tensions to unlimited power. He took a zest in prompting the people to disregard the sabbatical observation of the Sunday, and offended many serious people by ordering the ministers to read his proclamation of the book of sports, in which it was declared that people might lawfully amuse themselves after service on Sunday afternoons. The opposition was strong enough to deter James; but his son, less cautious and more wilful, pushed through the order in 1634. In opposition, the keeping of the Lord's day with a strictness approaching to the Jewish Sabbath became distinctive of the English Puritan and Scottish Presbyterian. The Puritan affected a solemn deportment, and regarded life as too serious for frivolous amusements. The most extreme kept their hair short, dressed plainly, and spoke with a nasal twang. The courtiers and Cavaliers were distinguished by their long hair and jaunty air, swearing, drinking, and fighting. In the present age men have a less dismal faith, take their pleasures, but take them more quietly. They no longer affect the sanctimoniousness of the Puritan, or the coarseness of the Cavalier. They keep their hair short, and dress with uniform plainness; swearing and drinking are no longer used by those who affect gentility, and duelling is a mere tradition.

No

Historians on the Cavalier side have asserted that the condition of England during the reign of Charles I. was one of great prosperity and commercial wealth, which was destroyed by the civil wars. doubt the long peace following the union of England and Scotland under King James was favourable to the greater accumulation of wealth. To one who had witnessed the desolation of Germany during the