Makers of History

 Charles I. 

 BY JACOB ABBOTT

 WITH ENGRAVINGS

 NEW YORK AND LONDON

 HARPER & BROTHERS PUBLISHERS

 1901

 Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1848, by

 HARPER & BROTHERS, In the Clerk's Office of the Southern District of New York. 

 Copyright, 1876, by JACOB ABBOTT. 

[Illustration: TOWER OF LONDON. ]

[Illustration: JOHN HAMPDEN. ]

PREFACE. 

The history of the life of every individual who has, for any reason, attracted extensively the attention of mankind, has been written in agreat variety of ways by a multitude of authors, and persons sometimeswonder why we should have so many different accounts of the samething. The reason is, that each one of these accounts is intended fora different set of readers, who read with ideas and purposes widelydissimilar from each other. Among the twenty millions of people in theUnited States, there are perhaps two millions, between the ages offifteen and twenty-five, who wish to become acquainted, in general, with the leading events in the history of the Old World, and ofancient times, but who, coming upon the stage in this land and at thisperiod, have ideas and conceptions so widely different from those ofother nations and of other times, that a mere republication ofexisting accounts is not what they require. The story must be toldexpressly for them. The things that are to be explained, the pointsthat are to be brought out, the comparative degree of prominence to begiven to the various particulars, will all be different, on account ofthe difference in the situation, the ideas, and the objects of thesenew readers, compared with those of the various other classes ofreaders which former authors have had in view. It is for this reason, and with this view, that the present series of historical narrativesis presented to the public. The author, having had some opportunity tobecome acquainted with the position, the ideas, and the intellectualwants of those whom he addresses, presents the result of his labors tothem, with the hope that it may be found successful in accomplishingits design. 

 CONTENTS. 

 Chapter Page

 I. HIS CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH 13

 II. THE EXPEDITION INTO SPAIN 34

 III. ACCESSION TO THE THRONE 58

 IV. BUCKINGHAM 81

 V. THE KING AND HIS PREROGATIVE 107

 VI. ARCHBISHOP LAUD 131

 VII. THE EARL OF STRAFFORD 155

 VIII. DOWNFALL OF STRAFFORD AND LAUD 177

 IX. CIVIL WAR 203

 X. THE CAPTIVITY 234

 XI. TRIAL AND DEATH 261

 ENGRAVINGS. 

 Page

 PORTRAIT OF HAMPDEN _Frontispiece_. 

 ILLUMINATED TITLE

 TOWER OF LONDON 1

 CHARLES I. AND ARMOR BEARER 10

 QUEEN HENRIETTA MARIA 11

 WINDSOR CASTLE 22

 THE ESCURIAL 55

 ST. STEPHEN'S 76

 LAMBETH PALACE 133

 WESTMINSTER HALL 187

 STRAFFORD AND LAUD 199

 THE KING'S ADHERENTS ENTERING YORK 221

 THE LANDING OF THE QUEEN 228

 NEWARK 236

 CARISBROOKE CASTLE 254

 RUINS OF CARISBROOKE CASTLE 265

[Illustration: CHARLES I. AND ARMOR BEARER]

[Illustration: QUEEN HENRIETTA MARIA]

KING CHARLES I. 

CHAPTER I. 

HIS CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. 

1600-1622

Born in Scotland. --The circumstance explained. --PrincessAnne. --Royal marriages. --Getting married by proxy. --Jamesthwarted. --Getting married by proxy. --James thwarted. --Jamesin Copenhagen. --Charles's feeble infancy. --Death ofElizabeth. --Accession of James to the English crown. --Secondsight. --Prediction fulfilled. --An explanation. --Charles'stitles of nobility. --Charles's governess. --Windsor Castle. --Journeyto London. --A mother's love. --Rejoicings. --Charles's continuedfeebleness. --His progress in learning. --Charles improves inhealth. --Death of his brother. --Charles's love of athleticsports. --Buckingham. --Buckingham's style of living. --Royalty. --Truecharacter of royalty. --The king and Buckingham. --Indecentcorrespondence. --Buckingham's pig. --James's petulance. --The story ofGib. --The king's frankness. --Glitter of royalty. --The appearance. --Thereality. 

King Charles the First was born in Scotland. It may perhaps surprisethe reader that an English king should be born in Scotland. Theexplanation is this:

They who have read the history of Mary Queen of Scots, will rememberthat it was the great end and aim of her life to unite the crowns ofEngland and Scotland in her own family. Queen Elizabeth was then Queenof England. She lived and died unmarried. Queen Mary and a young mannamed Lord Darnley were the next heirs. It was uncertain which of thetwo had the strongest claim. To prevent a dispute, by uniting theseclaims, Mary made Darnley her husband. They had a son, who, after thedeath of his father and mother, was acknowledged to be the heir to theBritish throne, whenever Elizabeth's life should end. In the meantime he remained King of Scotland. His name was James. He married aprincess of Denmark; and his child, who afterward was King Charles theFirst of England, was born before he left his native realm. 

King Charles's mother was, as has been already said, a princess ofDenmark. Her name was Anne. The circumstances of her marriage to KingJames were quite extraordinary, and attracted great attention at thetime. It is, in some sense, a matter of principle among kings andqueens, that they must only marry persons of royal rank, likethemselves; and as they have very little opportunity of visiting eachother, residing as they do in such distant capitals, they generallychoose their consorts by the reports which come to them of the personand character of the different candidates. The choice, too, is verymuch influenced by political considerations, and is always more orless embarrassed by negotiations with other courts, whose ministersmake objections to this or that alliance, on account of its supposedinterference with some of their own political schemes. 

As it is very inconvenient, moreover, for a king to leave hisdominions, the marriage ceremony is usually performed at the courtwhere the bride resides, without the presence of the bridegroom, hesending an embassador to act as his representative. This is calledbeing married by proxy. The bride then comes to her royal husband'sdominions, accompanied by a great escort. He meets her usually on thefrontiers; and there she sees him for the first time, after havingbeen married to him some weeks by proxy. It is true, indeed, that shehas generally seen his _picture_, that being usually sent to herbefore the marriage contract is made. This, however, is not a matterof much consequence, as the personal predilections of a princess havegenerally very little to do with the question of her marriage. 

Now King James had concluded to propose for the oldest daughter of theKing of Denmark and he entered into negotiations for this purpose. This plan, however, did not please the government of England, andElizabeth, who was then the English queen, managed so to embarrass andinterfere with the scheme, that the King of Denmark gave his daughterto another claimant. James was a man of very mild and quiettemperament, easily counteracted and thwarted in his plans; but thisdisappointment aroused his energies, and he sent a splendid embassyinto Denmark to demand the king's second daughter, whose name wasAnne. He prosecuted this suit so vigorously that the marriage articleswere soon agreed to and signed. Anne embarked and set sail forScotland. The king remained there, waiting for her arrival with greatimpatience. At length, instead of his bride, the news came that thefleet in which Anne had sailed had been dispersed and driven back by astorm, and that Anne herself had landed on the coast of Norway. 

James immediately conceived the design of going himself in pursuit ofher. But knowing very well that all his ministers and the officers ofhis government would make endless objections to his going out of thecountry on such an errand, he kept his plan a profound secret fromthem all. He ordered some ships to be got ready privately, andprovided a suitable train of attendants, and then embarked withoutletting his people know where he was going. He sailed across theGerman Ocean to the town in Norway where his bride had landed. Hefound her there, and they were married. Her brother, who had justsucceeded to the throne, having received intelligence of this, invitedthe young couple to come and spend the winter at his capital ofCopenhagen; and as the season was far advanced, and the sea stormy, King James concluded to accept the invitation. They were received inCopenhagen with great pomp and parade, and the winter was spent infestivities and rejoicings. In the spring he brought his bride toScotland. The whole world were astonished at the performance of suchan exploit by a king, especially one of so mild, quiet, and grave acharacter as that which James had the credit of possessing. 

Young Charles was very weak and feeble in his infancy. It was fearedthat he would not live many hours. The rite of baptism was immediatelyperformed, as it was, in those days, considered essential to thesalvation of a child dying in infancy that it should be baptizedbefore it died. Notwithstanding the fears that were at first felt, Charles lingered along for some days, and gradually began to acquire alittle strength. His feebleness was a cause of great anxiety andconcern to those around him; but the degree of interest felt in thelittle sufferer's fate was very much less than it would have been ifhe had been the oldest son. He had a brother, Prince Henry, who wasolder than he, and, consequently, heir to his father's crown. It wasnot probable, therefore, that Charles would ever be king; and theimportance of every thing connected with his birth and his welfare wasvery much diminished on that account. 

It was only about two years after Charles's birth that Queen Elizabethdied, and King James succeeded to the English throne. A messenger camewith all speed to Scotland to announce the fact. He rode night andday. He arrived at the king's palace in the night. He gained admissionto the king's chamber, and, kneeling at his bedside, proclaimed himKing of England. James immediately prepared to bid his Scotch subjectsfarewell, and to proceed to England to take possession of his newrealm. Queen Anne was to follow him in a week or two, and the otherchildren, Henry and Elizabeth; but Charles was too feeble to go. 

In those early days there was a prevailing belief in Scotland, and, infact, the opinion still lingers there, that certain persons among theold Highlanders had what they called the gift of the secondsight--that is, the power of foreseeing futurity in some mysteriousand incomprehensible way. An incident is related in the old historiesconnected with Charles's infancy, which is a good illustration ofthis. While King James was preparing to leave Scotland, to takepossession of the English throne, an old Highland laird came to bidhim farewell. He gave the king many parting counsels and good wishes, and then, overlooking the older brother, Prince Henry, he wentdirectly to Charles, who was then about two years old, and bowedbefore him, and kissed his hand with the greatest appearance of regardand veneration. King James undertook to correct his supposed mistake, by telling him that that was his second son, and that the other boywas the heir to the crown. "No, " said the old laird, "I am notmistaken. I know to whom I am speaking. This child, now in his nurse'sarms, will be greater than his brother. This is the one who is toconvey his father's name and titles to succeeding generations. " Thisprediction was fulfilled; for the robust and healthy Henry died, andthe feeble and sickly-looking Charles lived and grew, and succeeded, in due time, to his father's throne. 

Now inasmuch as, at the time when this prediction was uttered, thereseemed to be little human probability of its fulfillment, it attractedattention; its unexpected and startling character made every onenotice and remember it; and the old laird was at once an object ofinterest and wonder. It is probable that this desire to excite theadmiration of the auditors, mingled insensibly with a sort of poeticenthusiasm, which a rude age and mountainous scenery always inspire, was the origin of a great many such predictions as these; and then, inthe end, those only which turned out to be true were remembered, whilethe rest were forgotten; and this was the way that the reality of suchprophetic powers came to be generally believed in. 

Feeble and uncertain of life as the infant Charles appeared to be, they conferred upon him, as is customary in the case of young princes, various titles of nobility. He was made a duke, a marquis, an earl, and a baron, before he had strength enough to lift up his head in hisnurse's arms. His title as duke was Duke of Albany; and as this wasthe highest of his nominal honors, he was generally known under thatdesignation while he remained in Scotland. 

[Illustration: WINDSOR CASTLE. ]

When his father left him, in order to go to England and takepossession of his new throne, he appointed a governess to take chargeof the health and education of the young duke. This governess wasLady Cary. The reason why she was appointed was, not because of herpossessing any peculiar qualifications for such a charge, but becauseher husband, Sir Robert Cary, had been the messenger employed by theEnglish government to communicate to James the death of Elizabeth, andto announce to him his accession to the throne. The bearer of goodnews to a monarch must always be rewarded, and James recompensed SirRobert for his service by appointing his wife to the post of governessof his infant son. The office undoubtedly had its honors andemoluments, with very little of responsibility or care. 

One of the chief residences of the English monarchs is Windsor Castle. It is situated above London, on the Thames, on the southern shore. Itis on an eminence overlooking the river and the delightful valleythrough which the river here meanders. In the rear is a very extensivepark or forest, which is penetrated in every direction by rides andwalks almost innumerable. It has been for a long time the chiefcountry residence of the British kings. It is very spacious, containing within its walls many courts and quadrangles, with variousbuildings surrounding them, some ancient and some modern. Here KingJames held his court after his arrival in England, and in about a yearhe sent for the little Charles to join him. 

The child traveled very slowly, and by very easy stages, his nursesand attendants watching over him with great solicitude all the way. The journey was made in the month of October. His mother watched hisarrival with great interest. Being so feeble and helpless, he was, ofcourse, her favorite child. By an instinct which very strongly evincesthe wisdom and goodness which implanted it, a mother always bestows adouble portion of her love upon the frail, the helpless, and thesuffering. Instead of being wearied out with protracted and incessantcalls for watchfulness and care, she feels only a deeper sympathy andlove, in proportion to the infirmities which call for them, and thusfinds her highest happiness in what we might expect would be aweariness and a toil. 

Little Charles was four years old when he reached Windsor Castle. Theycelebrated his arrival with great rejoicings, and a day or twoafterward they invested him with the title of Duke of York, a stillhigher distinction than he had before attained. Soon after this, whenhe was perhaps five or six years of age, a gentleman was appointed totake the charge of his education. His health gradually improved, though he still continued helpless and feeble. It was a long timebefore he could walk, on account of some malformation of his limbs. Helearned to talk, too, very late and very slowly. Besides the generalfeebleness of his constitution, which kept him back in all thesethings, there was an impediment in his speech, which affected him verymuch in childhood, and which, in fact, never entirely disappeared. 

As soon, however, as he commenced his studies under his new tutor, hemade much greater progress than had been expected. It was soonobserved that the feebleness which had attached to him pertained moreto the body than to the mind. He advanced with considerable rapidityin his learning. His progress was, in fact, in some degree, promotedby his bodily infirmities, which kept him from playing with the otherboys of the court, and led him to like to be still, and to retire fromscenes of sport and pleasure which he could not share. 

The same cause operated to make him not agreeable as a companion, andhe was not a favorite among those around him. They called him _Baby_Charley. His temper seemed to be in some sense soured by the feelingof his inferiority, and by the jealousy he would naturally experiencein finding himself, the son of a king, so outstripped in athleticsports by those whom he regarded as his inferiors in rank and station. 

The lapse of a few years, however, after this time, made a totalchange in Charles's position and prospects. His health improved, andhis constitution began to be confirmed and established. When he wasabout twelve years of age, too, his brother Henry died. Thiscircumstance made an entire change in all his prospects of life. Theeyes of the whole kingdom, and, in fact, of all Europe, were now uponhim as the future sovereign of England. His sister Elizabeth, who wasa few years older than himself, was, about this time, married to aGerman prince, with great pomp and ceremony, young Charles acting thepart of brideman. In consequence of his new position as heir-apparentto the throne, he was advanced to new honors, and had new titlesconferred upon him, until at last, when he was sixteen years of age, he was made Prince of Wales, and certain revenues were appropriated tosupport a court for him, that he might be surrounded with externalcircumstances and insignia of rank and power, corresponding with hisprospective greatness. 

In the mean time his health and strength rapidly improved, and withthe improvement came a taste for manly and athletic sports, and theattainment of excellence in them. He gradually acquired great skill inall the exploits and performances of the young men of those days, suchas shooting, riding, vaulting, and tilting at tournaments. From beinga weak, sickly, and almost helpless child, he became, at twenty, anactive, athletic young man, full of life and spirit, and ready for anyromantic enterprise. In fact, when he was twenty-three years old, heembarked in a romantic enterprise which attracted the attention of allthe world. This enterprise will presently be described. 

There was at this time, in the court of King James, a man who becamevery famous afterward as a favorite and follower of Charles. He isknown in history under the name of the Duke of Buckingham. His namewas originally George Villiers. He was a very handsome young man, andhe seems to have attracted King James's attention at first on thisaccount. James found him a convenient attendant, and made him, atlast, his principal favorite. He raised him to a high rank, andconferred upon him, among other titles, that of Duke of Buckingham. The other persons about the court were very envious and jealous of hisinfluence and power; but they were obliged to submit to it. He livedin great state and splendor, and for many years was looked up to bythe whole kingdom as one of the greatest personages in the realm. Weshall learn hereafter how he came to his end. 

If the reader imagines, from the accounts which have been given thusfar in this chapter of the pomp and parade of royalty, of the castlesand the ceremonies, the titles of nobility, and the various insigniaof rank and power, which we have alluded to so often, that the mode oflife which royalty led in those days was lofty, dignified, and trulygreat, he will be very greatly deceived. All these things were merelyfor show--things put on for public display, to gratify pride andimpress the people, who never looked behind the scenes, with highideas of the grandeur of those who, as they were taught, ruled overthem by a divine right. It would be hard to find, in any class ofsociety except those reputed infamous, more low, gross, and vulgarmodes of life than have been exhibited generally in the royal palacesof Europe for the last five hundred years. King James the First has, among English sovereigns, rather a high character for sobriety andgravity of deportment, and purity of morals; but the glimpses we getof the real, every-day routine of his domestic life, are such as toshow that the pomp and parade of royalty is mere glittering tinsel, after all. 

The historians of the day tell such stories as these. The king was atone time very dejected and melancholy, when Buckingham contrived thisplan to amuse him. In the first place, however, we ought to say, inorder to illustrate the terms on which he and Buckingham livedtogether, that the king always called Buckingham _Steeny_, which was acontraction of Stephen. St. Stephen was always represented in theCatholic pictures of the saints, as a very handsome man, andBuckingham being handsome too, James called him Steeny by way of acompliment. Steeny called the king _his dad_, and used to signhimself, in his letters, "your slave and dog Steeny. " There are extantsome letters which passed between the king and his favorite, written, on the part of the king, in a style of grossness and indecency suchthat the chroniclers of those days said that they were not fit to beprinted. They would not "blot their pages" with them, they said. KingCharles's letters were more properly expressed. 

To return, then, to our story. The king was very much dejected andmelancholy. Steeny, in order to divert him, had a pig dressed up inthe clothes of an infant child. Buckingham's mother, who was acountess, personated the nurse, dressed also carefully for theoccasion. Another person put on a bishop's robes, satin gown, lawnsleeves, and the other pontifical ornaments. They also provided abaptismal font, a prayer-book, and other things necessary for areligious ceremony, and then invited the king to come in to attend abaptism. The king came, and the pretended bishop began to read theservice, the assistants looking gravely on, until the squealing of thepig brought all gravity to an end. The king was _not_ pleased; but thehistorian thinks the reason was, not any objection which he had tosuch a profanation, but to his not happening to be in a mood for it atthat time. 

There was a negotiation going on for a long time for a marriagebetween one of the king's sons, first Henry, and afterward Charles, and a princess of Spain. At one time the king lost some of the papers, and was storming about the palace in a great rage because he could notfind them. At last he chanced to meet a certain Scotchman, a servantof his, named Gib, and, like a vexed and impatient child, who lays thecharge of a lost plaything upon any body who happens to be at hand toreceive it, he put the responsibility of the loss of the papers uponGib. "I remember, " said he, "I gave them to you to take care of. Whathave you done with them?" The faithful servant fell upon his knees, and protested that he had not received them. The king was only madethe more angry by this contradiction, and kicked the Scotchman as hekneeled upon the floor. The man rose and left the apartment, saying, "I have always been faithful to your majesty, and have not deservedsuch treatment as this. I can not remain in your service under such adegradation. I shall never see you again. " He left the palace, andwent away. 

A short time after this, the person to whose custody the king hadreally committed the papers came in, and, on learning that they werewanted, produced them. The king was ashamed of his conduct. He sentfor his Scotch servant again, and was not easy until he was found andbrought into his presence. The king kneeled before him and asked hisforgiveness, and said he should not rise until he was forgiven. Gibwas disposed to evade the request, and urged the king to rise; butJames would not do so until Gib said he forgave him, in so many words. The whole case shows how little of dignity and noble bearing therereally was in the manners and conduct of the king in his daily life, though we are almost ready to overlook the ridiculous childishness andfolly of his fault, on account of the truly noble frankness andhonesty with which he acknowledged it. 

Thus, though every thing in which royalty appeared before the publicwas conducted with great pomp and parade, this external magnificencewas then, and always has been, an outside show, without any thingcorresponding to it within. The great mass of the people of Englandsaw only the outside. They gazed with admiration at the spectacle ofmagnificence and splendor which royalty always presented to theireyes, whenever they beheld it from the distant and humble points ofview which their position afforded them. Prince Charles, on the otherhand, was behind the curtain. His childhood and youth were exposedfully to all the real influences of these scenes. The people ofEngland submitted to be governed by such men, not because they thoughtthem qualified to govern, or that the circumstances under which theircharacters were formed were such as were calculated to form, in aproper manner, the minds of the rulers of a Christian people. They didnot know what those circumstances were. In their conceptions they hadgrand ideas of royal character and life, and imagined the splendidpalaces which some saw, but more only heard of, at Westminster, werefilled with true greatness and glory. They were really filled withvulgarity, vice, and shame. James was to them King James the First, monarch of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, and Charles wasCharles, Prince of Wales, Duke of York, and heir-apparent to thethrone. Whereas, within the palace, to all who saw them and knew themthere, and really, so far as their true moral position was concerned, the father was "Old Dad, " and the son, what his father always calledhim till he was twenty-four years old, "Baby Charley. "

CHAPTER II. 

THE EXPEDITION INTO SPAIN. 

1623

The Palatinate. --Wars between the Protestants and Catholics. --Fredericdispossessed of his dominions. --Flees to Holland. --Elizabeth. --James'splan. --Donna Maria. --Negotiations with Spain. --Obstaclesand delays. --Buckingham's proposal. --Nature of theadventure. --Buckingham's dissimulation. --Charles persuaded. --James'sperplexity. --He reluctantly yields. --James's fears. --Royalcaptives. --Buckingham's violence. --Angry disputes. --James'sdistress. --Charles and Buckingham depart. --Charles and Buckingham'sboisterous conduct. --Arrested at Dover. --Arrival at Paris. --PrincessHenrietta. --Bourdeaux. --Entrance into Madrid. --Bristol'samazement. --Charles's reception. --Grand procession. --Spanishetiquette. --The Infanta kept secluded. --Athletic amusements. --Charlessteals an interview. --Irregularities. --Delays anddifficulties. --Letters. --The magic picture. --The pope'sdispensation. --The treaty signed. --Buckingham is hated. --He breaksoff the match. --Festivities at the Escurial. --Taking leave. --Returnto London. --The Spanish match broken off. 

In order that the reader may understand fully the nature of theromantic enterprise in which, as we have already said, Prince Charlesembarked when he was a little over twenty years of age, we mustpremise that Frederic, the German prince who married Charles's sisterElizabeth some years before, was the ruler of a country in Germanycalled the Palatinate. It was on the banks of the Rhine. Frederic'stitle, as ruler of this country, was Elector Palatine. There are agreat many independent states in Germany, whose sovereigns havevarious titles, and are possessed of various prerogatives and powers. 

Now it happened that, at this time, very fierce civil wars were ragingbetween the Catholics and the Protestants in Germany. Frederic gotdrawn into these wars on the Protestant side. His motive was not anydesire to promote the progress of what he considered the true faith, but only a wish to extend his own dominions, and add to his ownpower, for he had been promised a kingdom, in addition to hisPalatinate, if he would assist the people of the kingdom to gain thevictory over their Catholic foes. He embarked in this enterprisewithout consulting with James, his father-in-law, knowing that hewould probably disapprove of such dangerous ambition. James was, infact, very sorry afterward to hear of Frederic's having engaged insuch a contest. 

The result was quite as disastrous as James feared. Frederic not onlyfailed of getting his new kingdom, but he provoked the rage of theCatholic powers against whom he had undertaken to contend, and theypoured a great army into his own original territory, and made an easyconquest of it. Frederic fled to Holland, and remained there afugitive and an exile, hoping to obtain help in some way from James, in his efforts to recover his lost dominions. 

The people of England felt a great interest in Frederic's unhappyfate, and were very desirous that James should raise an army and givehim some efficient assistance. One reason for this was that they wereProtestants, and they were always ready to embark, on the Protestantside, in the Continental quarrels. Another reason was their interestin Elizabeth, the wife of Frederic, who had so recently left England ablooming bride, and whom they still considered as in some sensepertaining to the royal family of England, and as having a right tolook to all her father's subjects for protection. 

But King James himself had no inclination to go to war in such aquarrel. He was inactive in mind, and childish, and he had littletaste for warlike enterprises. He undertook, however, to accomplishthe object in another way. The King of Spain, being one of the mostpowerful of the Catholic sovereigns, had great influence in all theircouncils. He had also a beautiful daughter, Donna Maria, called, asSpanish princesses are styled, the Infanta. Now James conceived thedesign of proposing that his son Charles should marry Donna Maria, andthat, in the treaty of marriage, there should be a stipulationproviding that the Palatinate should be restored to Frederic. 

These negotiations were commenced, and they went on two or three yearswithout making any sensible progress. Donna Maria was a Catholic, andCharles a Protestant. Now a Catholic could not marry a Protestantwithout a special dispensation from the pope. To get thisdispensation required new negotiations and delays. In the midst of itall, the King of Spain, Donna Maria's father, died, and his son, herbrother, named Philip, succeeded him. Then the negotiations had all tobe commenced anew. It was supposed that the King of Spain did not wishto have the affair concluded, but liked to have it in discussion, asit tended to keep the King of England more or less under his control. So they continued to send embassies back and forth, with drafts oftreaties, articles, conditions, and stipulations without number. Therewere endless discussions about securing to Donna Maria the fullenjoyment of the Catholic religion in England, and express agreementswere proposed and debated in respect to her having a chapel, andpriests, and the right to celebrate mass, and to enjoy, in fact, allthe other privileges which she had been accustomed to exercise in herown native land. James did not object. He agreed to every thing; butstill, some how or other, the arrangement could not be closed. Therewas always some pretext for delay. 

At last Buckingham proposed to Charles that they two should set offfor Spain in person, and see if they could not settle the affair. Buckingham's motive was partly a sort of reckless daring, which madehim love any sort of adventure, and partly a desire to circumvent andthwart a rival of his, the Earl of Bristol, who had charge of thenegotiations. It may seem to the reader that a simple journey fromLondon to Madrid, of a young man, for the purpose of visiting a ladywhom he was wishing to espouse, was no such extraordinary undertakingas to attract the attention of a spirited young man to it from love ofadventure. The truth is, however, that, with the ideas that thenprevailed in respect to royal etiquette, there was something veryunusual in this plan. The prince and Buckingham knew very well thatthe consent of the statesmen and high officers of the realm couldnever be obtained, and that their only alternative was, accordingly, to go off secretly and in disguise. 

It seemed, however, to be rather necessary to get the king's consent. But Buckingham did not anticipate much difficulty in this, as he wasaccustomed to manage James almost like a child. He had not, however, been on very good terms with Charles, having been accustomed to treathim in the haughty and imperious manner which James would usuallyyield to, but which Charles was more inclined to resist and resent. When Buckingham, at length, conceived of this scheme of going intoSpain, he changed his deportment toward Charles, and endeavored, byartful dissimulation, to gain his kind regard. He soon succeeded, andthen he proposed his plan. 

He represented to Charles that the sole cause of the delays insettling the question of his marriage was because it was left soentirely in the hands of embassadors, negotiators, and statesmen, whoinvolved every thing in endless mazes. "Take the affair into your ownhands, " said he, "like a man. Set off with me, and go at once intoSpain. Astonish them with your sudden and unexpected presence. TheInfanta will be delighted at such a proof of your ardor, courage, anddevotion, and will do all in her power to co-operate with you inbringing the affair at once to a close. Besides, the whole world willadmire the originality and boldness of the achievement. "

Charles was easily persuaded. The next thing was to get the king'sconsent. Charles and Buckingham went to his palace one day, andwatching their opportunity when he was pretty merry with wine, Charles said that he had a favor to ask, and wished his father topromise to grant it before he knew what it was. James, after somehesitation, half in jest and half in earnest, agreed to it. They madehim promise that he would not tell any one what it was, and thenexplained their plan. The king was thunderstruck; his amazementsobered him at once. He retracted his promise. He never could consentto any such scheme. 

Buckingham here interposed with his aid. He told the king it wasperfectly safe for the prince to go, and that this measure was theonly plan which could bring the marriage treaty to a close. Besides, he said, if he and the prince were there, they could act far moreeffectually than any embassadors in securing the restoration of thePalatinate to Frederic. James could not withstand these entreaties andarguments, and he finally gave a reluctant consent to the plan. 

He repented, however, as soon as the consent was given, and whenCharles and Buckingham came next to see him, he said it must be givenup. One great source of his anxiety was a fear that his son might betaken and kept a prisoner, either in France or Spain, and detained along time in captivity. Such a captive was always, in those days, avery tempting prize to a rival power. Personages of very high rank maybe held in imprisonment, while all the time those who detain them maypretend not to confine them at all, the guards and sentinels beingonly marks of regal state, and indications of the desire of the powerinto whose hands they have fallen to treat them in a manner comportingwith their rank. Then there were always, in those days, questions anddisputes pending between the rival courts of England, France, andSpain, out of which it was easy to get a pretext for detaining anystrolling prince who might cross the frontier, as security for thefulfillment of some stipulation, or for doing some act of justiceclaimed. James, knowing well how much faith and honor were to beexpected of kings and courts, was afraid to trust his son in French orSpanish dominions. He said he certainly could not consent to hisgoing, without first sending to _France_, at least, for asafe-conduct--that is, a paper from the government, pledging the honorof the king not to molest or interrupt him in his journey through hisdominions. 

Buckingham, instead of attempting to reassure the king by fresharguments and persuasions, broke out into a passion, accused him ofviolating his promise not to reveal their plan to any one, as he knew, he said, that this new opposition had been put into his head by someof his counselors to whom he had made known the design. The kingdenied this, and was terrified, agitated, and distressed byBuckingham's violence. He wept like a child. His opposition at lengthgave way a second time, and he said they might go. They named twoattendants whom they wanted to go with them. One was an officer of theking's household, named Collington, who was then in the anteroom. Theyasked the king to call him in, to see if he would go. When Collingtoncame in, the king accosted him with, "Here's Steeny and Baby Charleythat want to go to Spain and fetch the Infanta. What think you of it?"Collington did not think well of it at all. There followed a newrelapse on the part of the king from his consent, a new storm of angerfrom Buckingham, more sullen obstinacy on the part of Charles, withprofane criminations and recriminations one against another. The wholescene was what, if it had occurred any where else than in a palace, would have been called a brawl. 

It ended, as brawls usually do, in the triumph of the mostunreasonable and violent. James threw himself upon a bed which was inthe room, weeping bitterly, and saying that they would go, and heshould lose his Baby Charley. Considering that Charles was now themonarch's only child remaining at home, and that, as heir to thecrown, his life was of great consequence to the realm, it is notsurprising that his father was distressed at the idea of his exposinghimself to danger on such an expedition; but one not accustomed towhat is behind the scenes in royal life would expect a little moredignity and propriety in the mode of expressing paternal solicitudefrom a king. 

Charles and Buckingham set off secretly from London; their twoattendants were to join them in different places--the last at Dover, where they were to embark. They laid aside all marks of distinction indress, such as persons of high rank used to wear in those days, andtook the garb of the common people. They put on wigs, also, the hairof which was long, so as to shade the face and alter the expression oftheir countenances. These external disguises, however, were all thatthey could command. They could not assume the modest and quiet airand manner of persons in the ordinary walks of life, but made suchdisplays, and were so liberal in the use of their money, and carriedsuch an air and manner in all that they did and said, that all who hadany intercourse with them perceived that they were in disguise. Theywere supposed to be wild blades, out on some frolic or other, butstill they were allowed to pass along without any molestation. 

They were, however, stopped at Dover, where in some way they attractedthe attention of the mayor of the town. Dover is on the Channel, opposite to Calais, at the narrowest point. It was, of course, especially in those days, the point where the principal intercoursebetween the two nations centered. The magistrates of the two townswere obliged, consequently, to be on the alert, to prevent the escapeof fugitives and criminals, as well as to guard against the efforts ofsmugglers, or the entrance of spies or other secret enemies. The Mayorof Dover arrested our heroes. They told him that their names were TomSmith and Jack Smith; these, in fact, were the names with which theyhad traveled through England thus far. They said that they weretraveling for amusement. The mayor did not believe them. He thoughtthey were going across to the French coast to fight a duel. This wasoften done in those days. They then told him that they were indeedpersons of rank in disguise, and that they were going to inspect theEnglish fleet. He finally allowed them to embark. 

On landing at Calais, they traveled post to Paris, strictly preservingtheir incognito, but assuming such an air and bearing as to create theimpression that they were not what they pretended. When they reachedParis, Buckingham could not resist the temptation of showing Charles alittle of life, and he contrived to get admitted to a party at court, where Charles saw, among other ladies who attracted his attention, thePrincess Henrietta. He was much struck with her beauty and grace, buthe little thought that it was this princess, and not the Infanta whomhe was going in pursuit of, who was really to become his wife, and thefuture Queen of England. 

The young travelers thought it not prudent to remain long in Paris, and they accordingly left that city, and pressed forward as rapidly aspossible toward the Spanish frontier. They managed, however, toconduct always in such a way as to attract attention. Although theywere probably sincerely desirous of not having their true rank andcharacter known, still they could not resist the temptation to assumesuch an air and bearing as to make people wonder who they were, andthus increase the spirit and adventure of their journey. At Bourdeauxthey received invitations from some grandees to be present at somegreat gala, but they declined, saying that they were only poorgentlemen traveling to inform their minds, and were not fit to appearin such gay assemblies. 

At last they approached Madrid. They had, besides Collington, anotherattendant who spoke the Spanish language, and served them as aninterpreter. They separated from these two the day before they enteredMadrid, so as to attract the less attention. Their attendants were tobe left behind for a day, and afterward were to follow them into thecity. The British embassador at Madrid at this time was the Earl ofBristol. He had had charge of all the negotiations in respect to themarriage, and to the restoration of the Palatinate, and believed thathe had brought them almost to a successful termination. He lived in apalace in Madrid, and, as is customary with the embassadors of greatpowers at the courts of great powers, in a style of the highest pompand splendor. 

Buckingham took the prince directly to Bristol's house. Bristol wasutterly confounded at seeing them. Nothing could be worse, he said, inrespect to the completion of the treaty, than the prince's presence inMadrid. The introduction of so new and extraordinary an element intothe affair would undo all that had been done, and lead the King ofSpain to begin anew, and go over all the ground again. In speaking ofthis occurrence to another, he said that just as he was on the pointof coming to a satisfactory conclusion of his long negotiations andtoils, a demon in the shape of Prince Charles came suddenly upon thestage to thwart and defeat them all. 

The Spanish court was famous in those days--in fact, it has alwaysbeen famous--for its punctilious attention to etiquette and parade;and as soon as the prince's arrival was known to the king, heimmediately began to make preparations to welcome him with allpossible pomp and ceremony. A great procession was made through thePrado, which is a street in Madrid famous for promenades, processions, and public displays of all kinds. In moving through the city on thisoccasion, the king and Prince Charles walked together, the monarchthus treating the prince as his equal. There was a great canopy ofstate borne over their heads as they moved along. This canopy wassupported by a large number of persons of the highest rank. Thestreets, and the windows and balconies of the houses on each side, were thronged with spectators, dressed in the gay and splendid courtdresses of those times. When they reached the end of the route, andwere about to enter the gate of the palace, there was a delay todecide which should enter first, the king and the prince eachinsisting on giving the precedence to the other. At last it wassettled by their both going in together. 

If the prince thus, on the one hand, derived some benefit in thegratification of his pride by the Spanish etiquette and parade, hesuffered some inconvenience and disappointment from it, on the otherhand, by its excluding him from all intercourse or acquaintance withthe Infanta. It was not proper for the young man to see or to speak tothe young lady, in such a case as this, until the arrangements hadbeen more fully matured. The formalities of the engagement must haveproceeded beyond the point which they had yet reached, before thebridegroom could be admitted to a personal interview with the bride. It is true, he could see her in public, where she was in a crowd, withother ladies of the court, and where he could have no communicationwith her; but this was all. They arranged it, however, to give Charlesas many opportunities of this kind as possible. There were shows, inwhich the prince could see the Infanta among the spectators; and theyarranged tiltings and ridings at the ring, and other athletic sports, such as Charles excelled in, and let him perform his exploits in herpresence. His rivals in these contests did not have the incivility toconquer him, and his performances excited expressions, at least, ofuniversal admiration. 

But the prince and Buckingham did not very willingly submit to thestiffness and formality of the Spanish court. As soon as they came tofeel a little at home, they began to act with great freedom. At onetime the prince learned that the Infanta was going, early in themorning, to take a walk in some private pleasure grounds, at a countryhouse in the neighborhood of Madrid, and he conceived the design ofgaining an interview with her there by stealth. He accordinglyrepaired to the place, got admitted in some way within the precinctsof the palace, and contrived to clamber over a high wall whichseparated him from the grounds in which the Infanta was walking, andso let himself down into her presence. The accounts do not statewhether she herself was pleased or alarmed, but the officer who hadher in charge, an old nobleman, was very much alarmed, and begged theprince to retire, as he himself would be subject to a very severepunishment if it were known that he had allowed such an interview. Finally they opened the door, and the prince went out. Many peoplewere pleased with this and similar adventures of the prince and ofBuckingham, but the leading persons about the court were displeasedwith them. Their precise and formal notions of propriety were verymuch shocked by such freedoms. 

Besides, it was soon found that the characters of these high-bornvisitors, especially that of Buckingham, were corrupt, and their livesvery irregular. Buckingham was accustomed to treat King James in avery bold, familiar, and imperious manner, and he fell insensibly intothe same habits of intercourse with those about him in Spain. Thelittle reserve and caution which he manifested at first soon wore off, and he began to be very generally disliked. In the mean time thenegotiation was, as Bristol had expected, very much put back by theprince's arrival. The King of Spain formed new plans, and thought ofnew conditions to impose. The Catholics, too, thought that Charles'scoming thus into a Catholic country, indicated some leaning, on hispart, toward the Catholic faith. The pope actually wrote him a longletter, the object of which was to draw him off from the ranks ofProtestantism. Charles wrote a civil, but rather an evasive reply. 

In the mean time, King James wrote childish letters from time to timeto his two dear boys, as he called them, and he sent them a great manypresents of jewelry and splendid dresses, some for them to wearthemselves, and some for the prince to offer as gifts to the Infanta. Among these, he describes, in one of his letters, a little mirror, setin a case which was to be worn hung at the girdle. He wrote to Charlesthat when he gave this mirror to the Infanta, he must tell her that itwas a picture which he had had imbued with magical virtue by means ofincantations and charms, so that whenever she looked into it, shewould see a portrait of the most beautiful princess in England, France, or Spain. 

At last the great obstacle in the way of the conclusion of the treatyof marriage, which consisted in the delays and difficulties in gettingthe pope's dispensation, was removed. The dispensation came. But thenthe King of Spain wanted some new guarantees in respect to theprivileges of Catholics in England, under pretense of securing moreperfectly the rights of the Infanta and of her attendants when theyshould have arrived in that country. The truth was, he probably wishedto avail himself of the occasion to gain some foothold for theCatholic faith in England, which country had become almost entirelyProtestant. At length, however, all obstacles seemed to be removed, and the treaty was signed. The news of it was received with great joyin England, as it seemed to secure a permanent alliance between thetwo powerful countries of England and Spain. Great celebrations tookplace in London, to do honor to the occasion. A chapel was built forthe Infanta, to be ready for her on her arrival; and a fleet wasfitted out to convey her and her attendants to her new home. 

In the mean time, however, although the king had signed the treaty, there was a strong party formed against the marriage in Spain. Buckingham was hated and despised. Charles, they saw, was almostentirely under his influence. They said they would rather see theInfanta in her grave than in the hands of such men. Buckingham becameirritated by the hostility he had awakened, and he determined to breakoff the match entirely. He wrote home to James that he did not believethe Spanish court had any intention of carrying the arrangement reallyinto effect; that they were procrastinating the affair on everypossible pretext, and that he was really afraid that, if the princewere to attempt to leave the country, they would interpose and detainhim as a prisoner. King James was very much alarmed. He wrote in thegreatest trepidation, urging "the lads" to come away immediately, leaving a proxy behind them, if necessary, for the solemnization ofthe marriage. This was what Buckingham wanted, and he and the princebegan to make preparations for their departure. 

The King of Spain, far from interposing any obstacles in the way, onlytreated them with greater and higher marks of respect as the time oftheir separation from his court drew nigh. He arranged great andpompous ceremonies to honor their departure. He accompanied them, withall the grandees of the court, as far as to the Escurial, which is afamous royal palace not far from Madrid, built and furnished in themost sumptuous style of magnificence and splendor. Here they hadparting feasts and celebrations. Here the prince took his leave of theInfanta, Bristol serving as interpreter, to translate his partingspeeches into Spanish, so that she could understand them. From theEscurial the prince and Buckingham, with a great many English noblemenwho had followed them to Madrid, and a great train of attendants, traveled toward the seacoast, where a fleet of vessels were ready toreceive them. 

[Illustration: THE ESCURIAL. ]

They embarked at a port called St. Andrew. They came very near beinglost in a storm of mist and rain which came upon them while going outto the ships, which were at a distance from the shore, in small boatsprovided to convey them. Having escaped this danger, they arrivedsafely at Portsmouth, the great landing point of the British navy onthe southern shores of England, and thence proceeded to London. They sent back orders that the proxy should not be used, and the matchwas finally abandoned, each party accusing the other of duplicity andbad faith. King James was however, very glad to get his son safe backagain, and the people made as many bonfires and illuminations tocelebrate the breaking up of this Catholic match, as they had donebefore to do honor to its supposed completion. As all hope ofrecovering the Palatinate by negotiation was now past, the king beganto prepare for the attempt to conquer it by force of arms. 

CHAPTER III. 

ACCESSION TO THE THRONE. 

1625

James prepares for war. --He falls ill. --Suspicions. --Death ofJames. --Accession of Charles. --Different ideas of the nature andend of government. --Hereditary succession illustrated by anargument. --Property and prerogatives. --Hereditary succession anabsolute right. --Three things hereditary in England. --TheStuarts. --Parliament. --The Legislature in the United States. --Thenature of Parliament. --The nobles. --The House of Commons. --Its humbleposition. --The king's power over Parliament. --His responsibility. --Anillustration. --James's message to Parliament. --Its hightone. --Privileges of the House of Commons. --The king'sprerogatives. --Charles's contest with Parliament. --Present conditionof the Commons. --Its vast influence. --Old forms still retained. --Willprobably be changed. --Effects of a demise of the crown. --All officesexpire. --Westminster. --The Strand. --Temple Bar. --SomersetHouse. --James's funeral. --Marriage of Charles. --Imposingceremonies. --Arrival of the bride at London. --Her residence. 

King James made slow progress in his military preparations. He couldnot raise the funds without the action of Parliament, and the houseswere not in very good humor. The expenses of the prince's visit toSpain had been enormous, and other charges, arising out of the pompand splendor with which the arrangements of the court were maintained, gave them a strong feeling of discontent. They had other grievances ofwhich they were disposed to complain, and they began to look upon thiswar, notwithstanding its Protestant character, as one in which theking was only striving to recover his son-in-law's dominions, and, consequently, as one which pertained more to his personal intereststhan to the public welfare of the realm. 

While things were in this state the king fell sick. The mother of theDuke of Buckingham undertook to prescribe for him. It was understoodthat Buckingham himself, who had, in the course of the Spanishenterprise, and since his return, acquired an entire ascendency overCharles, was not unwilling that his old master should leave the stage, and the younger one reign in his stead; and that his mother shared inthis feeling. At any rate, her prescriptions made the king much worse. He had the sacrament administered to him in his sick chamber, and saidthat he derived great comfort from it. One morning, very early, hesent for the prince to come and see him. Charles rose, dressedhimself, and came. His father had something to say to him, and triedto speak. He could not. His strength was too far gone. He fell backupon his pillow, and died. 

Charles was, of course, now king. The theory in the English monarchyis, that the king never dies. So soon as the person in whom the royalsovereignty resides ceases to breathe, the principle of supremacyvests immediately in his successor, by a law of transmission entirelyindependent of the will of man. The son becomes king by a divineright. His being proclaimed and crowned, as he usually is, at someconvenient time early in his reign, are not ceremonies which _make_him king. They only acknowledge him to be so. He does not, in anysense, derive his powers and prerogatives from these acts. He onlyreceives from his people, by means of them, a recognition of his rightto the high office to which he has already been inducted by the fiatof Heaven. 

It will be observed, thus, that the ideas which prevailed in respectto the nature and province of government, were very different inEngland at that time, from those which are entertained in America atthe present day. With us, the administration of government is merely a_business_, transacted for the benefit of the people by theiragents--men who are put in power for this purpose, and who, like otheragents, are responsible to their principals for the manner in whichthey fulfill their trusts. But government in England was, in the daysof the Stuarts--and it is so to a great extent at the present day--a_right_ which one family possessed, and which entitled that family tocertain immunities, powers, and prerogatives, which they held entirelyindependent of any desire, on the part of the people, that they shouldexercise them, or even their _consent_ that they should do so. Theright to govern the realm of Great Britain was a sort of estate whichdescended to Charles from his ancestors, and with the possession andenjoyment of which the community had no right to interfere. 

This seems, at first view, very absurd to us, but it is notparticularly absurd. Charles's lawyers would say to any plainproprietor of a piece of land, who might call in question his right togovern the country, The king holds his crown by precisely the sametenure that you hold your farm. Why should you be the exclusivepossessor of that land, while so many poor beggars are starving?Because it has descended to you from your ancestors, and nothing hasdescended to them. And it is precisely so that the right to manage thefleets and armies, and to administer the laws of the realm, hasdescended, under the name of _sovereignty_, to him, and no suchpolitical power has descended to you. 

True, the farmer would reply; but in matters of government we are toconsider what will promote the general good. The great object to beattained is the welfare and happiness of the community. Now, if thisgeneral welfare comes into competition with the supposed rights ofindividuals, arising from such a principle as hereditary succession, the latter ought certainly to yield. 

But why, might the lawyer reply, should rights founded on hereditarysuccession yield any more readily in the case of _government_ than inthe case of _property_? The distribution of property influences thegeneral welfare quite as much as the management of power. Suppose itwere proved that the general welfare of your parish would be promotedby the division of your land among the destitute there. You havenothing to oppose to such a proposition but your hereditary right. Andthe king has that to oppose to any plan of a division of hisprerogatives and powers among the people who would like to share them. 

Whatever may be thought of this reasoning on this side of theAtlantic, and at the present day, it was considered very satisfactoryin England two or three centuries ago. The true and properjurisdiction of an English monarch, as it had existed from ancienttimes, was considered as an _absolute right_, vesting in eachsuccessive inheritor of the crown, and which the community could notjustly interfere with or disturb for any reasons less imperious thansuch as would authorize an interference with the right of successionto private property. Indeed, it is probable that, with most men atthat time, an inherited right to _govern_ was regarded as the mostsacred of the two. 

The fact seems to be, that the right of a son to come into the placeof his father, whether in respect to property, power, or social rank, is not a natural, inherent, and indefeasible right, but a _privilege_which society accords, as a matter of convenience and expediency. InEngland, expediency is, on the whole, considered to require that allthree of these things, viz. , property, rank, and power, in certaincases, should descend from father to son. In this country, on theother hand, we confine the hereditament to property, abrogating it inthe case of rank and power. In neither case is there probably anyabsolute natural right, but a conventional right is allowed to takeits place in one, or another, or all of these particulars, accordingto the opinion of the community in respect to what its true interestsand the general welfare, on the whole, require. 

The kings themselves of this Stuart race--which race includes MaryQueen of Scots, the mother of the line, and James I. , Charles I. , Charles II. , and James II. --entertained very high ideas of thesehereditary rights of theirs to govern the realm of England. They felta determination to maintain these rights and powers at all hazards. Charles ascended the throne with these feelings, and the chief pointof interest in the history of his reign is the contest in which heengaged with the English people in his attempts to maintain them. 

The body with which the king came most immediately into conflict inthis long struggle for ascendency, was the Parliament. And hereAmerican readers are very liable to fall into a mistake by consideringthe houses of Parliament as analogous to the houses of legislation inthe various governments of this country. In our governments the chiefmagistrate has only to execute definite and written laws andordinances, passed by the Legislature, and which the Legislature maypass with or without his consent; and when enacted, he must begoverned by them. Thus the president or the governor is, in a certainsense, the agent and officer of the legislative power of the state, tocarry into effect its decisions, and this _legislative_ power hasreally the control. 

By the ancient Constitution of England, however, the Parliament wasmerely a body of counselors, as it were, summoned by the king to givehim their advice, to frame for him such laws as he wished to haveframed, and to aid him in raising funds by taxing the people. The kingmight call this council or not, as he pleased. There was no necessityfor calling it unless he needed more funds than he could raise by hisown resources. When called, they felt that they had come, in a greatmeasure, to aid the king in doing his will. When they framed a law, they sent it to him, and if he was satisfied with it, he _made itlaw_. It was the king who really enacted it. If he did not approve thelaw, he wrote upon the parchment which contained it, "The king willthink of it, " and that was the end. The king would call upon them toassess a tax and collect the money, and would talk to them about hisplans, and his government, and the aid which he desired from them toenable him to accomplish what he had himself undertaken. In fact, theking was the government, and the houses of Parliament his instrumentsto aid him in giving effect to his decrees. 

The nobles, that is, the heads of the great families, and also thebishops, who were the heads of the various dioceses of the Churchformed one branch of this great council. This was called the House ofLords. Certain representatives of the counties and of the townsformed another branch, called the House of Commons. These delegatescame to the council, not from any right which the counties and townswere supposed to possess to a share in the government, but simplybecause they were summoned by the king to come and give him their aid. They were to serve without pay, as a matter of duty which they owed tothe sovereign. Those that came from counties were called knights, andthose from the towns burgesses. These last were held in very littleestimation. The towns, in those days, were considered as merecollections of shopkeepers and tradesmen, who were looked down uponwith much disdain by the haughty nobles. When the king called hisParliament together, and went in to address them, he entered thechamber of the House of Peers, and the commons were called in, tostand where they could, with their heads uncovered, to hear what hehad to say. They were, in a thousand other ways, treated as aninferior class; but still their counsels might, in some cases, be ofservice, and so they were summoned to attend, though they were to meetalways, and deliberate, in a separate chamber. 

As the king could call the Parliament together at any time and placehe pleased, so he could suspend or terminate their sittings at anytime. He could intermit the action of a Parliament for a time, sendingthe members to their homes until he should summon them again. This wascalled a _prorogation_. Or he could dissolve the body entirely at anytime, and then require new elections for a new Parliament whenever hewished to avail himself of the wisdom or aid of such a body again. 

Thus every thing went on the supposition that the real responsibilityfor the government was with the king. He was the monarch, and the realsovereignty vested in him. He called his nobles, and a delegation fromthe mass of the people, together, whenever he wanted their help, andnot otherwise. He was responsible, not to them nor to the people atlarge, but to God only, for the acts of his administration. The dutyof Parliament was limited to that of aiding him in carrying out hisplans of government, and the people had nothing to do but to beobedient, submissive, and loyal. These were, at any rate, the ideas ofthe kings, and all the forms of the English Constitution and theancient phraseology in which the transactions are expressed, correspond with them. 

We can not give a better proof and illustration of what has been saidthan by transcribing the substance of one of King James's messages tohis Parliament, delivered about the close of his life, and, of course, at the period of which we are writing. It was as follows:

 "My Lords spiritual and temporal, and you the Commons: In my last Parliament I made long discourses, especially to them of the Lower House. I did open the true thought of my heart. But I may say with our Savior, 'I have piped to you and ye have not danced; I have mourned to you and you have not lamented;' so all my sayings turned to me again without any success. And now, to tell the reasons of your calling and of this meeting, apply it to yourselves, and spend not the time in long speeches. Consider that the Parliament is a thing composed of a head and a body; the monarch and the two estates. It was, first, a monarchy; then, after, a Parliament. There are no Parliaments but in monarchical governments; for in Venice, the Netherlands, and other free governments there are none. The head is to call the body together; and for the clergy the bishops are chief, for shires their knights, for towns and cities their burgesses and citizens. These are to treat of difficult matters, and counsel their king with their best advice to make laws[A] for the commonweal and the Lower House is also to petition the king and acquaint him with their grievances, and not to meddle with the king's prerogative. They are to offer supply for his necessity, and he to distribute, in recompense thereof, justice and mercy. As in all Parliaments it is the _king's_ office to make good laws, whose fundamental cause is the people's ill manners, so at this time. 

[Footnote A: Meaning advice to him how he shall make laws, as isevident from what is said below. ]

 "For a supply to my necessities, I have reigned eighteen years, in which I have had peace, and I have received far less supply than hath been given to any king since the Conquest. The last queen had, one year with another, above a hundred thousand pounds per annum in subsidies; and in all my time I have had but four subsidies and six fifteens[B]. It is ten years since I had a subsidy, in all which time I have been sparing to trouble you. I have turned myself as nearly to save expenses as I may. I have abated much in my household expenses, in my navies, and the charge of my munition. "

[Footnote B: Species of taxes granted by Parliament. ]

After speaking about the affairs of the Palatinate, and calling uponthe Parliament to furnish him with money to recover it for hisson-in-law, he adds:

 "Consider the trade for the making thereof better, and show me the reason why my mint, these eight or nine years, hath not gone. I confess I have been liberal in my grants; but if I be informed, I will amend all hurtful grievances. But whoever shall hasten after grievances, and desire to make himself popular he hath the spirit of Satan. I was, in my first Parliament, a novice; and in my last, there was a kind of beasts, called _undertakers_, a dozen of whom undertook to govern the last Parliament, and they led me. I shall thank _you_ for your good office, and desire that the world may say well of our agreement. "

This kind of harangue from the king to his Parliament seems not tohave been considered at the time, at all extraordinary; though, ifsuch a message were to be sent, at the present day, to a body oflegislators, whether by a king or a president, it would certainlyproduce a sensation. 

Still, notwithstanding what we have said, the Parliament did contrivegradually to attain to the possession of some privileges and powers ofits own. The English people have a great deal of independence andspirit, though Americans traveling there, with ideas carried from thiscountry, are generally surprised at finding so little instead of somuch. The knights and burgesses of the House of Commons, though theysubmitted patiently to the forms of degradation which the lords andkings imposed upon them, gradually got possession of certain powerswhich they claimed as their own, and which they showed a strongdisposition to defend. They claimed the exclusive right to lay taxesof every kind. This had been the usage so long, that they had the sameright to it that the king had to his crown. They had a right too, topetition the king for a redress of any grievances which they supposedthe people were suffering under his reign. These, and certain otherpowers and immunities which they had possessed, were called their_privileges_. The king's rights were, on the other hand, called his_prerogatives_. The Parliament were always endeavoring to extend, define, and establish their privileges. The king was equally bent onmaintaining his ancient prerogatives. King Charles's reign derives itschief interest from the long and insane contest which he waged withhis Parliament on this question. The contest commenced at the king'saccession to the throne, and lasted a quarter of a century: it endedwith his losing all his prerogatives and his head. 

This circumstance, that the main interest in King Charles's reign isderived from his contest with his Parliament, has made it necessary toexplain somewhat fully, as we have done, the nature of that body. Wehave described it as it was in the days of the Stuarts; but, in ordernot to leave any wrong impression on the mind of the reader in regardto its present condition, we must add, that though all its externalforms remain the same, the powers and functions of the body havegreatly changed. The despised and contemned knights and burgesses, that were not worthy to have seats provided for them when the king wasdelivering them his speech, now rule the world; or, at least, comenearer to the possession of that dominion than any other power hasever done, in ancient or modern times. They decide who shalladminister the government, and in what way. They make the laws, settlequestions of trade and commerce, decide really on peace and war, and, in a word, hold the whole control, while the nominal sovereign takesrides in the royal parks, or holds drawing-rooms in the palaces, inempty and powerless parade. There is no question that the BritishHouse of Commons has exerted a far wider influence on the destinies ofthe human race than any other governmental power that has everexisted. It has gone steadily on for five, and perhaps for tencenturies, in the same direction and toward the same ends; andwhatever revolutions may threaten other elements of European power, the British House of Commons, in some form or other, is as sure as anything human can be of existence and power for five or ten centuries tocome. 

And yet it is one of the most remarkable of the strange phenomena ofsocial life, that this body, standing at the head, as it really does, of all human power, submits patiently still to all the marks andtokens of inferiority and degradation which accompanied its origin. Itcomes together when the sovereign sends writs, _ordering_ the severalconstituencies to choose their representatives, and therepresentatives to assemble. It comes humbly into the House of Peersto listen to the instructions of the sovereign at the opening of thesession, the members in a standing position, and with headsuncovered. [C] It debates these suggestions with forms and in aphraseology which imply that it is only considering what _counsel_ togive the king. It enacts nothing--it only recommends; and it holds itsexistence solely at the discretion of the great imaginary power whichcalled it into being. These forms may, very probably, soon be changedfor others more true to the facts; and the principle of election maybe changed, so as to make the body represent more fully the generalpopulation of the empire; but the body itself will doubtless continueits action for a very long period to come. 

[Footnote C: Even in the case of a committee of conference between thetwo houses, the lords have _seats_ in the committee-room and weartheir hats. The members from the commons must _stand_, and beuncovered during the deliberations!]

According to the view of the subject which we have presented, itwould of course follow, as the real sovereignty was mainly in theking's hands, that at the death of one monarch and the accession ofanother, the functions of all officers holding their places under theauthority of the former would cease. This was actually the case. Andit shows how entirely the Parliament was considered as the instrumentand creation of the king, that on the death of a king, the Parliamentimmediately expired. The new monarch must make a new Parliament, if hewished one, to help him carry out his own plans. In the same manneralmost all other offices expired. As it would be extremelyinconvenient or impossible to appoint anew all the officers of such arealm on a sudden emergency, it is usual for the king to issue adecree renewing the appointments of the existing incumbents of theseoffices. Thus King Charles, two days after his father's death, made ithis first act to renew the appointments of the members of his father'sprivy council, of the foreign embassadors, and of the judges of thecourts, in order that the affairs of the empire might go on withoutinterruption. He also issued summonses for calling a Parliament, andthen made arrangements for the solemnization of his father's funeral. 

[Illustration: ST. STEPHEN'S. ]

The scene of these transactions was what was, in those days, calledWestminster. Minster means cathedral. A cathedral church had beenbuilt, and an abbey founded, at a short distance west from London, near the mouth of the Thames. The church was called the West_minster_, and the abbey, Westminster Abbey. The town afterward tookthe same name. The street leading to the city of London fromWestminster was called the Strand; it lay along the shore of theriver. The gate by which the city of London was entered on this sidewas called Temple Bar, on account of a building just within the walls, at that point, which was called the Temple. In process of time, Londonexpanded beyond its bounds and spread westward. The Strand became amagnificent street of shops and stores. Westminster was filled withpalaces and houses of the nobility, the whole region being entirelycovered with streets and edifices of the greatest magnificence andsplendor. Westminster is now called the West End of London, though thejurisdiction of the city still ends at Temple Bar. 

Parliament held its sessions in a building near the shore, called St. Stephen's. The king's palace, called St. James's Palace, was near. The old church became a place of sepulture for the English kings, where a long line of them now repose. The palace of King James's wife, Anne of Denmark, was on the bank of the river, some distance down theStrand. She called it, during her life, Denmark House, in honor of hernative land. Its name is now Somerset House. 

King James's funeral was attended with great pomp. The body wasconveyed from Somerset House to its place of repose in the Abbey, andattended by a great procession. King Charles walked as chief mourner. Two earls attended him, one on each side, and the train of his robeswas borne by twelve peers of the realm. The expenses of this funeralamounted to a sum equal to two hundred thousand dollars. 

One thing more is to be stated before we can consider Charles asfairly entered upon his career, and that is the circumstance of hismarriage. His father James, so soon as he found the negotiations withSpain must be finally abandoned, opened a new negotiation with theKing of France for his daughter Henrietta Maria. After some delay, this arrangement was concluded upon. The treaty of marriage was made, and soon after the old king's death, Charles began to think ofbringing home his bride. 

He accordingly made out a commission for a nobleman, appointed for thepurpose, to act in his name, in the performance of the ceremony atParis. The pope's dispensation was obtained, Henrietta Maria, as wellas the Infanta, being a Catholic. The ceremony was performed, as suchceremonies usually were in Paris, in the famous church of Notre Dame, where Charles's grandmother, Mary Queen of Scots, had been married toa prince of France about seventy years before. 

There was a great theater, or platform, erected in front of the altarin the church, which was thronged by the concourse of spectators whorushed to witness the ceremony. The beautiful princess was married byproxy to a man in another kingdom, whom she had never seen, or, atleast, never known. It is not probable that she observed him at thetime when he was, for one evening, in her presence, on his journeythrough Paris. The Duke of Buckingham had been sent over by Charles toconduct home his bride. Ships were waiting at Boulogne, a port nearlyopposite to Dover, to take her and her attendants on board. She badefarewell to the palaces of Paris, and set out on her journey. [D]

[Footnote D: See portrait at the commencement of this volume. ]

The king, in the mean time, had gone to Dover, where he awaited herarrival. She landed at Dover on the day after sailing from Boulogne, sea-sick and sad. The king received his bride, and with theirattendants they went by carriages to Canterbury, and on the followingday they entered London. Great preparations had been made forreceiving the king and his consort in a suitable manner; but Londonwas, at this time, in a state of great distress and fear on account ofthe plague which had broken out there. The disease had increasedduring the king's absence, and the alarm and anxiety were so great, that the rejoicings on account of the arrival of the queen wereomitted. She journeyed quietly, therefore, to Westminster, and took upher abode at Somerset House, which had been the residence of herpredecessor. They had fitted it up for her reception, providing forit, among other conveniences, a Roman Catholic chapel, where she couldenjoy the services of religion in the forms to which she had beenaccustomed. 

CHAPTER IV. 

BUCKINGHAM. 

1625-1628

Charles's accession. --Leading events of his reign. --Buckingham. --Hisinfluence over the king. --General system of government. --Hismajesty. --Every thing done in the king's name. --The Privy Council. --Itrepresents the king. --Constitution and functions of the PrivyCouncil. --Restrictions on the royal power. --A new Parliament. --The newParliament meets at Oxford. --Difficulties commence between the kingand Parliament. --Demands of Parliament, and the king's answers. --Theking and the Commons both in the wrong. --The king promises everything. --His insincerity. --Commons not satisfied. --Parliamentdissolved. --New one called. --Subterfuges of the king. --Parliamentagain dissolved. --The breach between the king and the Parliamentwidens. --Impeachment of Buckingham. --The king interferes. --Anotherdissolution. --Buckingham's reckless conduct. --The Round Robin. --Returnof the English fleet. --The officers and men desert. --Expedition toSpain. --Buckingham's egregious folly. --The expedition ends indisaster. --Buckingham's quarrel with Richelieu. --He resolveson war. --The French servants dismissed. --War declaredagainst France. --Expedition to France abortive. --Anotherprojected. --Assassination of Buckingham. --The king notsorry. --Buckingham's monument the universal execration of hiscountrymen. 

Charles commenced his reign in 1625. He continued to reign abouttwenty-four years. It will assist the reader to receive and retain inmind a clear idea of the course of events during his reign, if weregard it as divided into three periods. During the first, whichcontinued about four years, Charles and the Parliament were both uponthe stage, contending with each other, but just at open war. Eachparty intrigued, and maneuvered, and struggled to gain its own ends, the disagreement widening and deepening continually, till it ended inan open rupture, when Charles abandoned the plan of having Parliamentsat all, and attempted to govern alone. This attempt to manage theempire without a legislature lasted for ten years, and is the secondperiod. After this a Parliament was called, and it soon made itselfindependent of the king, and became hostile to him, the two powersbeing at open war. This constitutes the third period. Thus we havefour years spent in getting into the quarrel between the king andParliament, ten years in an attempt by the king to govern alone, and, finally, ten years of war, more or less open, the king on one side, and the Parliament on the other. 

The first four years--that is, the time spent in getting really intothe quarrel with Parliament, was Buckingham's work, for during thattime Buckingham's influence with the king was paramount and supreme;and whatever was done that was important or extraordinary, though donein the king's name, really originated in him. The whole country knewthis and were indignant that such a man, so unprincipled, so low incharacter, so reckless, and so completely under the sway of hisimpulses and passions, should have such an influence over the king, and, through him, such power to interfere with and endanger the mightyinterests of so vast a realm. 

It must not be supposed, however, in consequence of what has been saidabout the extent of the regal power in England, that the daily careand responsibility of the affairs of government, in its ordinaryadministration, rested directly upon the king. It is not possible thatany one mind can even comprehend, far less direct, such an enormouscomplication of interests and of action as is involved in the carryingon, from day to day, the government of an empire. Offices, authorities, and departments of administration spring up gradually, and all the ordinary routine of the affairs of the empire are managedby them. Thus the navy was all completely organized, with itsgradations of rank, its rules of action, its records, its accountbooks, its offices and arrangements for provisionment and supply, thewhole forming a vast system which moved on of itself, whether the kingwere present or absent, sick or well, living or dead. It was so withthe army; it was so with the courts; it was so with the generaladministration of the government, at London. The immense mass ofbusiness which constituted the work of government was all systematizedand arranged, and it moved on regularly, in the hands of more or lessprudent and careful men, who governed, themselves, by ancient rulesand usages, and in most cases managed wisely. 

Every thing, however, was done in the king's _name_. The ships werehis majesty's ships, the admirals were his majesty's servants, thewar was his majesty's war, the court was the _King's_ Bench. The ideawas, that all these thousands of officers, of all ranks and grades, were only an enormous multiplication of his majesty; that they were todo his will and carry on his administration as he would himself carryit on were he personally capable of attending to such a vast detail;subject, of course, to certain limits and restrictions which the lawsand customs of the realm, and the promises and contracts of hispredecessors, had imposed. But although all this action wastheoretically the king's action, it came to be, in fact, almost whollyindependent of him. It went on of itself, in a regular and systematicway, pursuing its own accustomed course, except so far as the kingdirectly interposed to modify its action. 

It might be supposed that the king would certainly take _the generaldirection_ of affairs into his own hands, and that this charge, atleast, would necessarily come upon him, as king, day by day. Somemonarchs have attempted to do this, but it is obvious that there mustbe some provision for having this general charge, as well as all thesubordinate functions of government, attended to independently of theking, as his being always in a condition to fulfill this duty is notto be relied upon. Sometimes the king is young and inexperienced;sometimes he is sick or absent; and sometimes he is too feeble inmind, or too indolent, or too devoted to his pleasures, to exerciseany governmental care. There has gradually grown up, therefore, in allmonarchies, the custom of having a central board of officers of state, whom the king appoints, and who take the general direction of affairsin his stead, except so far as he chooses to interfere. This board, inEngland, is called the Privy Council. 

The Privy Council in England is a body of great importance. Its natureand its functions are, of course, entirely different from those of thetwo houses of Parliament. _They_ represent, or are intended torepresent, the nation. The Parliament is, in theory, the nation, assembled at the king's command, to give him their advice. The PrivyCouncil, on the other hand, represents the king. It is the king'sPrivy Council. They act in his name. They follow his directions whenhe chooses to give any. Whatever they decide upon and decree, the kingsigns--often, indeed, without any idea of its nature. Still he signsit, and all such decrees go forth to the word as the king's orders incouncil. The Privy Council, of course, would have its meetings, itsofficers, its records, its rules of proceeding, and its varioususages, and these grew, in time, to be laws and rights; but still itwas, in theory, only a sort of expansion of the king, as if to make akind of artificial being, with one soul, but many heads and hands, because no natural human being could possibly have capacities andpowers extensive and multifarious enough for the exigencies ofreigning. Charles thus had a council who took charge of every thing, except so far as he chose to interpose. The members were generallyable and experienced men. And yet Buckingham was among them. He hadbeen made Lord High Admiral of England, which gave him supreme commandof the navy, and admitted him to the Privy Council. These were veryhigh honors. 

This Privy Council now took the direction of public affairs, attendedto every thing, provided for all emergencies, and kept all thecomplicated machinery of government in motion, without the necessityof the king's having any personal agency in the matter. The king mightinterpose, more or less, as he was inclined; and when he didinterpose, he sometimes found obstacles in the way of immediatelyaccomplishing his plans, in the forms or usages which had graduallygrown into laws. 

For instance, when the king began his reign, he was very eager to havethe war for the recovery of the Palatinate go on at once; and he was, besides, very much embarrassed for want of money. He wished, therefore, in order to save time, that the old Parliament which KingJames had called should continue to act under his reign. But his PrivyCouncil told him that that could not be. That was _James's_Parliament. If he wanted one for his reign, he must call upon thepeople to elect a new Parliament for him. 

The new Parliament was called, and Charles sent them a very civilmessage, explaining the emergency which had induced him to call them, and the reason why he was so much in want of money. His father hadleft the government a great deal in debt. There had been heavyexpenses connected with the death of the former king, and with his ownaccession and marriage. Then there was the war. It had been engaged inby his father, with the approbation of the former Parliament; andengagements had been made with allies, which now they could nothonorably retract. He urged them, therefore, to grant, without delay, the necessary supplies. 

The Parliament met in July, but the plague was increasing in London, and they had to adjourn, early in August, to Oxford. This city issituated upon the Thames, and was then, as it is now, the seat of agreat many colleges. These colleges were independent of each other intheir internal management, though united together in one generalsystem. The name of one of them, which is still very distinguished, was Christ Church College. They had, among the buildings of thatcollege, a magnificent hall, more than one hundred feet long, and verylofty, built in a very imposing style. It is still a great object ofinterest to all who visit Oxford. This hall was fitted up for the useof Parliament, and the king met the two houses there. He made a newspeech himself, and others were made by his ministers, explaining thestate of public affairs, and gently urging the houses to act withpromptness and decision. 

The houses then separated, and each commenced its own deliberations. But, instead of promptly complying with the king's proposals they senthim a petition for redress of a long list of what they calledgrievances. These grievances were, almost all of them, complaints ofthe toleration and encouragement of the Catholics, through theinfluence of the king's Catholic bride. She had stipulated to have aCatholic chapel, and Catholic attendants, and, after her arrival inEngland, she and Buckingham had so much influence over the king, thatthey were producing quite a change at court, and gradually through allranks of society, in favor of the Catholics. The Commons complained ofa great many things, nearly all, however, originating in this cause. The king answered these complaints, clause by clause, promisingredress more or less distinctly. There is not room to give thispetition and the answers in full, but as all the subsequent troublesbetween Charles and the people of England arose out of this difficultyof his young wife's bringing in so strong a Catholic influence withher to the realm, it may be well to give an abstract of some of theprincipal petitions, with the king's answers. 

The Commons said:

 That they had understood that popish priests, and other Catholics, were gradually creeping in as teachers of the youth of the realm, in the various seminaries of learning, and they wished to have decided measures taken to examine all candidates for such stations, with a view to the careful exclusion of all who were not true Protestants. 

 _King. _--Allowed. And I will send to the archbishops and all the authorities to see that this is done. 

 _Commons. _--That more efficient arrangements should be made for appointing able and faithful men in the Church--men that will really devote themselves to preaching the Gospel to the people; instead of conferring these places and salaries on favorites, sometimes, as has been the case, several to the same man. 

The king made some explanations in regard to this subject, andpromised hereafter to comply with this requisition. 

 _Commons. _--That the laws against sending children out of the country to foreign countries to be educated in Catholic seminaries should be strictly enforced, and the practice be entirely broken up. 

 _King. _--Agreed; and he would send to the lord admiral, and to all the naval officers on the coast, to watch very carefully and stop all children attempting to go abroad for such a purpose; and he would issue a proclamation commanding all the noblemen's children now on the Continent to return by a given day. 

 _Commons. _--That no Catholic (or, as they called him, popish _recusant_, that is, a person _refusing_ to subscribe to the Protestant faith, recusant meaning _person refusing_) be admitted into the king's service at court; and that no _English_ Catholic be admitted into the queen's service. They could not refuse to allow her to employ her own _French_ attendants, but to appoint English Catholics to the honorable and lucrative offices at her disposal was doing a great injury to the Protestant cause in the realm. 

The king agreed to this, with some conditions and evasions. 

 _Commons. _--That all Jesuits and Catholic priests, owing allegiance to the See of Rome, should be sent away from the country, according to laws already existing, after fair notice given; and if they would not go, that they should be imprisoned in such a manner as to be kept from all communication with other persons, so as not to disseminate their false religion. 

 _King. _--The laws on this subject shall be enforced. 

The above are sufficient for a specimen of these complaints and of theking's answers. There were many more of them, but they have all thesame character--being designed to stop the strong current of Catholicinfluence and ascendency which was setting in to the court, andthrough the court into the realm, through the influence of the youngqueen and the persons connected with her. At the present day, and inthis country, the Commons will be thought to be in the wrong, inasmuchas the thing which they were contending against was, in the main, merely the toleration of the Catholic religion. But then the king wasin the wrong too, for, since the laws against this toleration stoodenacted by the consent and concurrence of his predecessors, he shouldnot have allowed them to be infracted and virtually annulled throughthe influence of a foreign bride and an unworthy favorite. 

Perhaps he felt that he was wrong, or perhaps his answers were allframed for him by his Privy Council. At all events, they were entirelyfavorable to the demands of the Commons. He promised every thing. Inmany things he went even beyond their demands. It is admitted, however, on all hands, that, so far as he himself had any agency inmaking these replies, he was not really sincere. He himself, andBuckingham, were very eager to get supplies. Buckingham was admiral ofthe fleet, and very strongly desired to enlarge the force at hiscommand, with a view to the performing of some great exploit in thewar. It is understood, therefore, that the king intended his repliesas promises merely. At any rate, the promises were made. The Commonswere called into the great hall again, at Christ Church, where thePeers assembled, and the king's answers were read to them. Buckinghamjoined in this policy of attempting to conciliate the Commons. He wentinto their assembly and made a long speech, explaining and justifyinghis conduct, and apologizing, in some sense, for what might seem to bewrong. 

The Commons returned to their place of deliberation, but they were notsatisfied. They wanted something besides promises. Some were in favorof granting supplies "in gratitude to his majesty for his graciousanswer. " Others thought differently. They did not see the necessityfor raising money for this foreign war. They had greater enemies athome (meaning Buckingham and popery) than they had abroad. Besides, ifthe king would stop his waste and extravagance in bestowing honors andrewards, there would be money enough for all necessary uses. In aword, there was much debate, but nothing done. The king, after a shorttime, sent a message to them urging them to come to a decision. Theysent him back a declaration which showed that they did not intend toyield. Their language, however, was of the most humble character. Theycalled him "their dread sovereign, " and themselves "his poor commons. "The king was displeased with them, and dissolved the Parliament. They, of course, immediately became private citizens, and dispersed to theirhomes. 

After trying some ineffectual attempts to raise money by his own royalprerogatives and powers, the king called a new Parliament, taking somesingular precautions to keep out of it such persons as he thoughtwould oppose his plans. The Earl of Bristol, whom Buckingham had beenso jealous of, considering him as his rival, was an influential memberof the House of Peers. Charles and Buckingham agreed to omit him insending out the royal writs to summon the peers. He petitionedParliament, claiming a right to his seat. Charles then sent him hiswrit, but gave him a command, as his sovereign, not to attend thesession. He also selected four of the prominent men in the House ofCommons, men whom he considered most influential in opposition to himand to Buckingham, and appointed them to offices which would call themaway from London; and as it was the understanding in those days thatthe sovereign had a right to command the services of his subjects, they were obliged to go. The king hoped, by these and similar means, to diminish the influence against him in Parliament, and to get amajority in his favor. But his plans did not succeed. Such measuresonly irritated the House and the country. After another struggle thisParliament was dissolved too. 

Things went on so for four or five years, the breach between the kingand the people growing wider and wider. Within this time there werefour Parliaments called, and, after various contentions with them, they were, one after another, dissolved. The original subject ofdisagreement, viz. , the growing influence of the Catholics, was notthe only one. Other points came up, growing out of the king's use ofhis prerogative, and his irregular and, as they thought, illegalattempts to interfere with their freedom of action. The king, or, rather, Buckingham using the king's name, resorted to all sorts ofcontrivances to accomplish this object. For instance, it had long beenthe custom, in case any member of the House of Peers was absent, forhim to give authority to any friend of his, who was also a member, tovote for him. This authority was called a _proxy_. This word issupposed to be derived from _procuracy_, which means action in theplace of, and in behalf of, another. Buckingham induced a great numberof the peers to give him their proxies. He did this by rewards, honors, and various other influences, and he found so many willing toyield to these inducements, that at one time he had thirty or fortyproxies in his hands. Thus, on a question arising in the House ofLords, he could give a very large majority of votes. The House, aftermurmuring for some time, and expressing much discontent and vexationat this state of things, finally made a law that no member of theHouse should ever have power to use more than _two_ proxies. 

One of the Parliaments which King Charles assembled at length broughtarticles of impeachment against Buckingham, and a long contest aroseon this subject. An impeachment is a trial of a high officer of statefor maladministration of his office. All sorts of charges were broughtagainst Buckingham, most of which were true. The king considered theirinterfering to call one of his ministers to account as whollyintolerable. He sent them orders to dismiss that subject from theirdeliberations, and to proceed immediately with their work of layingtaxes to raise money, or he would dissolve the Parliament as he haddone before. He reminded them that the Parliaments were entirely "inhis power for their calling, sitting, and dissolution, and as he foundtheir fruits were for good or evil, so they were to continue, or notto be. " If they would mend their errors and do their duty, henceforward he would forgive the past; otherwise they were to expecthis irreconcilable hostility. 

This language irritated instead of alarming them. The Commonspersisted in their plan of impeachment. The king arrested the menwhom they appointed as managers of the impeachment, and imprisonedthem. The Commons remonstrated, and insisted that Buckingham should bedismissed from the king's service. The king, instead of dismissinghim, took measures to have him appointed, in addition to all his otheroffices, Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, a very exaltedstation. Parliament remonstrated. The king, in retaliation, dissolvedthe Parliament. 

Thus things went on from bad to worse, and from worse to worse again;the chief cause of the difficulties, in almost all cases, beingtraceable to Buckingham's reckless and arbitrary conduct. He wascontinually doing something in the pursuit of his own ends, by therash and heedless exercise of the vast powers committed to him, tomake extensive and irreparable mischief. At one time he ordered a partof the fleet over to the coast of France, to enter the French service, the sailors expecting that they were to be employed against theSpaniards. They found, however, that, instead of going against theSpaniards, they were to be sent to Rochelle. Rochelle was a town inFrance in possession of the Protestants, and the King of Francewished to subdue them. The sailors sent a remonstrance to theircommander, begging not to be forced to fight against their brotherProtestants. This remonstrance was, in form, what is called a _RoundRobin_. 

In a Round Robin a circle is drawn, the petition or remonstrance iswritten within it, and the names are written all around it, to preventany one's having to take the responsibility of being the first signer. When the commander of the fleet received the Round Robin, instead ofbeing offended, he inquired into the facts, and finding that the casewas really as the Round Robin represented it, he broke away from theFrench command and returned to England. He said he would rather behanged in England for disobeying orders than to fight against theProtestants of France. 

Buckingham might have known that such a spirit as this in Englishmenwas not to be trifled with. But he knew nothing, and thought ofnothing, except that he wished to please and gratify the Frenchgovernment. When the fleet, therefore, arrived in England, heperemptorily ordered it back, and he resorted to all sorts of pretextsand misrepresentations of the facts to persuade the officers and menthat they were not to be employed against the Protestants. The fleetaccordingly went back, and when they arrived, they found thatBuckingham had deceived them. They were ordered to Rochelle. One ofthe ships broke away and returned to England. The officers and mendeserted from the other ships and got home. The whole armament wasdisorganized, and the English people, who took sides with the sailors, were extremely exasperated against Buckingham for his blind andblundering recklessness, and against the king for giving such a manthe power to do his mischief on such an extensive scale. 

At another time the duke and the king contrived to fit out a fleet ofeighty sail to make a descent upon the coast of Spain. It caused themgreat trouble to get the funds for this expedition, as they had tocollect them, in a great measure, by various methods depending on theking's prerogative, and not by authority of Parliament. Thus the wholecountry were dissatisfied and discontented in respect to the fleetbefore it was ready to sail. Then, as if this was not enough, Buckingham overlooked all the officers in the navy in selecting acommander, and put an officer of the army in charge of it; a manwhose whole experience had been acquired in wars on the land. Thecountry thought that Buckingham ought to have taken the commandhimself, as lord high admiral; and if not, that he ought to haveselected his commander from the ranks of the service employed. Thusthe fleet set off on the expedition, all on board burning withindignation against the arbitrary and absurd management of thefavorite. The result of the expedition was also extremely disastrous. They had an excellent opportunity to attack a number of ships, whichwould have made a very rich prize; but the soldier-commander eitherdid not know, or did not dare to do, his duty. He finally, however, effected a landing, and took a castle, but the sailors found a greatstore of wine there, and went to drinking and carousing, breakingthrough all discipline. The commander had to get them on board againimmediately, and come away. Then he conceived the plan of going tointercept what were called the Spanish galleons, which were shipsemployed to bring home silver from the mines in America, which theSpaniards then possessed. On further thoughts he concluded to give upthis idea, on account of the plague, which, as he said, broke out inhis ships. So he came back to England with his fleet disorganized, demoralized, and crippled, and covered with military disgrace. Thepeople of England charged all this to Buckingham. Still the kingpersisted in retaining him. It was his prerogative to do so. 

After a while Buckingham got into a personal quarrel with Richelieu, who was the leading manager of the French government, and he resolvedthat England should make war upon France. To alter the whole politicalposition of such an empire as that of Great Britain, in respect topeace and war, and to change such a nation as France from a friend toan enemy, would seem to be quite an undertaking for a single man toattempt, and that, too, without having any reason whatever to assign, except a personal quarrel with a minister about a love affair. But soit was. Buckingham undertook it. It was the king's prerogative to makepeace or war, and Buckingham ruled the king. 

He contrived various ways of fomenting ill will. One was, to alienatethe mind of the king from the queen. He represented to him that thequeen's French servants were fast becoming very disrespectful andinsolent in their treatment of him, and finally persuaded him to sendthem all home. So the king went one day to Somerset House, which wasthe queen's residence--for it is often the custom in high life inEurope for the husband and wife to have separate establishments--andrequested her to summon her French servants into his presence, andwhen they were assembled, he told them that he had concluded to sendthem all home to France. Some of them, he said, had acted properlyenough, but others had been rude and forward, and that he had decidedit best to send them all home. The French king, on hearing of this, seized a hundred and twenty English ships lying in his harbors inretaliation of this act, which he said was a palpable violation of themarriage contract, as it certainly was. Upon this the king declaredwar against France. He did not ask Parliament to act in this case atall. There was no Parliament. Parliament had been dissolved in a fitof displeasure. The whole affair was an exercise of the royalprerogative. Nor did the king now call a Parliament to provide meansfor carrying on the war, but set his Privy Council to devise modes ofdoing it, through this same prerogative. 

The attempts to raise money in these ways made great trouble. Thepeople resisted, and interposed all possible difficulties. Howeversome funds were raised, and a fleet of a hundred sail, and an army ofseven thousand men, were got together. Buckingham undertook thecommand of this expedition himself, as there had been so muchdissatisfaction with his appointment of a commander to the other. Itresulted just as was to be expected in the case of seven thousand men, and a hundred ships, afloat on the swelling surges of the EnglishChannel, under the command of vanity, recklessness, and folly. Theduke came back to England in three months, bringing home one third ofhis force. The rest had been lost, without accomplishing any thing. The measure of public indignation against Buckingham was now full. 

Buckingham himself walked as loftily and proudly as ever. He equippedanother fleet, and was preparing to set sail in it himself, ascommander again. He went to Portsmouth, accordingly, for this purpose, Portsmouth being the great naval station then, as now, on the southerncoast of England. Here a man named Felton, who had been an officerunder the duke in the former expedition, and who had been extremelyexasperated against him on account of some of his management there, and who had since found how universal was the detestation of him inEngland, resolved to rid the country of such a curse at once. Heaccordingly took his station in the passage-way of the house whereBuckingham was, armed with a knife. Buckingham came out, talking withsome Frenchmen in an angry manner, having had some dispute with them, when Felton thrust the knife into his side as he passed, and, leavingit in the wound, walked away, no one having noticed who did the deed. Buckingham pulled out the knife, fell down, and died. The bystanderswere going to seize one of the Frenchmen, when Felton advanced andsaid, "I am the man; you are to arrest me; let no one suffer that isinnocent. " He was taken. They found a paper in his hat, saying that hewas going to destroy the duke, and that he could not sacrifice hislife in a nobler cause than by delivering his country from so great anenemy. 

King Charles was four miles off at this time. They carried him thenews. He did not appear at all concerned or troubled, but onlydirected that the murderer--he ought to have said, perhaps, the_executioner_--should be secured, and that the fleet should proceedto sail. He also ordered the treasurer to make arrangements for asplendid funeral. 

The treasurer said, in reply, that a funeral would only be a temporaryshow, and that he could hereafter erect a _monument_ at half the cost, which would be a much more lasting memorial. Charles acceded. Afterward, when Charles spoke to him about the monument, the treasurerreplied, What would the world say if your majesty were to build amonument to the Duke before you erect one for your father? So the planwas abandoned, and Buckingham had no other monument than the universaldetestation of his countrymen. 

CHAPTER V. 

THE KING AND HIS PREROGATIVE. 

1628-1636

Difficulty in raising funds. --The king's resources. --Modes of raisingmoney. --Parliaments abandoned. --The government attaches the propertyof a member of Parliament. --Confusion in the House ofCommons. --Resolutions. --The Commons refuse to admit the king'sofficers. --Members imprisoned. --Dissolution of Parliament. --The kingin the House of Lords. --The king's speech on dissolvingParliament. --The king resolves to do without Parliaments. --Forcedloans. --Monopolies of the necessaries of life. --Tonnage andpoundage. --Ship money. --Origin of these taxes. --John Hampden. --Herefuses to pay ship money. --Hampden's trial. --He is compelled topay. --A fleet raised. --Its exploits among the herring-busses. --Courtof the Star Chamber. --Its constitution. --Trial by jury. --No jury inthe Star Chamber. --Crimes tried by the Star Chamber. --Origin of theterm. --Immense power of the Court of Star Chamber. --Oppressivefines. --King's forests. --Offenses against the king and his lords. --Agentleman fined for resenting an insult. --Murmurs silenced. --Thekingdom of Scotland. --The king visits Scotland. --He is crownedthere. --The king returns to London. --Increasing discontent. 

The great difficulty in governing without a Parliament was the raisingof funds. By the old customs and laws of the realm, a tax upon thepeople could only be levied by the action of the House of Commons; andthe great object of the king and council during Buckingham's life, insummoning Parliaments from time to time, was to get their aid in thisrespect. But as Charles found that one Parliament after anotherwithheld the grants, and spent their time in complaining of hisgovernment, he would dissolve them, successively, after exhausting allpossible means of bringing them to a compliance with his will. Hewould then be thrown upon his own resources. 

The king had _some_ resources of his own. These were certain estates, and lands, and other property, in various parts of the country, whichbelonged to the crown, the income of which the king could appropriate. But the amount which could be derived from this source was verysmall. Then there were certain other modes of raising money, which hadbeen resorted to by former monarchs, in emergencies, at distantintervals, but still in instances so numerous that the king consideredprecedents enough had been established to make the power to resort tothese modes a part of the prerogative of the crown. The people, however, considered these acts of former monarchs as irregularities orusurpations. They denied the king's right to resort to these methods, and they threw so many difficulties in the way of the execution of hisplans, that finally he would call another Parliament, and make newefforts to lead them to conform to his will. The more the experimentwas tried, however, the worse it succeeded; and at last the kingdetermined to give up the idea of Parliaments altogether, and tocompel the people to submit to his plans of raising money withoutthem. 

The final dissolution of Parliament, by which Charles entered upon hisnew plan of government, was attended with some resistance, and theaffair made great difficulty. It seems that one of the members, acertain Mr. Rolls, had had some of his goods seized for payment ofsome of the king's irregular taxes, which he had refused to paywillingly. Now it had always been considered the law of the land inEngland, that the person and the property of a member of Parliamentwere sacred during the session, on the ground that while he was givinghis attendance at a council meeting called by his sovereign, he oughtto be protected from molestation on the part either of hisfellow-subjects or his sovereign, in his person and in his property. The House of Commons considered, therefore, the seizure of the goodsof one of the members of the body as a breach of their privilege, andtook up the subject with a view to punish the officers who acted. Theking sent a message immediately to the House, while they were debatingthe subject, saying that the officer acted, in seizing the goods, inobedience to his own direct command. This produced great excitementand long debates. The king, by taking the responsibility of theseizure upon himself, seemed to bid the House defiance. They broughtup this question: "Whether the seizing of Mr. Rolls's goods was not abreach of privilege?" When the time came for a decision, the speaker, that is, the presiding officer, refused to put the question to vote. He said he had been commanded _by the king_ not to do it! The Housewere indignant, and immediately adjourned for two days, probably forthe purpose of considering, and perhaps consulting their constituentson what they were to do in so extraordinary an emergency as the king'scoming into their own body and interfering with the functions of oneof their own proper officers. 

They met on the day to which they had adjourned, prepared to insist onthe speaker's putting the question. But he, immediately on the Housecoming to order, said that he had received the king's command toadjourn the House for a week, and to put no question whatever. He wasthen about to leave the chair, but two of the members advanced to himand held him in his place, while they read some resolutions which hadbeen prepared. There was great confusion and clamor. Some insistedthat the House was adjourned, some were determined to pass theresolutions. The resolutions were very decided. They declared thatwhoever should counsel or advise the laying of taxes not granted byParliament, or be an actor or instrument in collecting them, should beaccounted an innovator, and a capital enemy to the kingdom andCommonwealth. And also, that if any person whatever should voluntarilypay such taxes, he should be counted a capital enemy also. Theseresolutions were read in the midst of great uproar. The king wasinformed of the facts, and sent for the sergeant of the House--one ofthe highest officers--but the members locked the door, and would notlet the sergeant go. Then the king sent one of his own officers to theHouse with a message. The members kept the door locked, and would notlet him in until they had disposed of the resolutions. Then the Houseadjourned for a week. 

The next day, several of the leading members who were supposed to havebeen active in these proceedings were summoned to appear before thecouncil. They refused to answer out of Parliament for what was saidand done by them in Parliament. The council sent them to prison in theTower. 

The week passed away, and the time for the reassembling of the Housesarrived. It had been known, during the week, that the king haddetermined on dissolving Parliament. It is usual, in dissolving aParliament, for the sovereign not to appear in person, but to send hismessage of dissolution by some person commissioned to deliver it. Thisis called dissolving the House by commission. The dissolution isalways declared in the House of Lords, the Commons being summoned toattend. In this case, however, the king attended in person. He wasdressed magnificently in his royal robes, and wore his crown. He wouldnot deign, however, to send for the Commons. He entered the House ofPeers, and took his seat upon the throne. Several of the Commons, however, came in of their own accord, and stood below the bar, at theusual place assigned them. The king then rose and read the followingspeech. The antiquity of the language gives it an air of quaintnessnow which it did not possess then. 

 "My Lords, --I never came here upon so unpleasant an occasion, it being the Dissolution of a Parliament. Therefore Men may have some cause to wonder why I should not rather chuse to do this by Commission, it being a general Maxim of Kings to leave harsh Commands to their Ministers, Themselves only executing pleasing things. Yet considering that Justice as well consists in Reward and Praise of Virtue as Punishing of Vice, I thought it necessary to come here to-day, and to declare to you and all the World, that it was merely the undutiful and seditious Carriage in the Lower House that hath made the dissolution of this Parliament. And you, my Lords, are so far from being any Causers of it, that I take as much comfort in your dutiful Demeanour, as I am justly distasted with their Proceedings. Yet, to avoid their Mistakings, let me tell you, that it is so far from me to adjudge all the House alike guilty, that I know there are many there as dutiful subjects as any in the World it being but some few Vipers among them that did cast this mist of Undutifulness over most of their Eyes. Yet to say Truth, there was good Number there that could not be infected with this Contagion. 

 "To conclude, As those Vipers must look for their Reward of Punishment, so you, my Lords, may justly expect from me that Favor and Protection that a good King oweth to his loving and faithful Nobility. And now, my Lord Keeper, do what I have commanded you. "

Then the lord keeper pronounced the Parliament dissolved. The lordkeeper was the keeper of the great seal, one of the highest officersof the crown. 

Of course this affair produced a fever of excitement against the kingthroughout the whole realm. This excitement was kept up and increasedby the trials of the members of Parliament who had been imprisoned. The courts decided against them, and they were sentenced to longimprisonment and to heavy fines. The king now determined to do withoutParliaments entirely; and, of course, he had to raise money by hisroyal prerogative altogether, as he had done, in fact, before, a greatdeal, during the intervals between the successive Parliaments. It willnot be very entertaining, but it will be very useful to the reader toperuse carefully some account of the principal methods resorted to bythe king. In order, however, to diminish the necessity for money asmuch as possible, the king prepared to make peace with France andSpain; and as they, as well as England, were exhausted with the wars, this was readily effected. 

One of the resorts adopted by the king was to a system of _loans_, asthey were called, though these loans differed from those made bygovernments at the present day, in being apportioned upon the wholecommunity according to their liability to taxation, and in being made, in some respects, compulsory. The loan was not to be absolutelycollected by force, but all were expected to lend, and if any refused, they were to be required to make oath that they would not tell anybody else that they had refused, in order that the influence of theirexample might not operate upon others. Those who did refuse were to bereported to the government. The officers appointed to collect theseloans were charged not to make unnecessary difficulty, but to do allin their power to induce the people to contribute freely andwillingly. This plan had been before adopted, in the time ofBuckingham, but it met with little success. 

Another plan which was resorted to was the granting of what was calledmonopolies: that is, the government would select some important andnecessary articles in general use, and give the exclusive right ofmanufacturing them to certain persons, on their paying a part of theprofits to the government. Soap was one of the articles thus chosen. The exclusive right to manufacture it was given to a company, on theirpaying for it. So with leather, salt, and various other things. Thesepersons, when they once possessed the exclusive right to manufacturean article which the people must use, would abuse their power bydeteriorating the article, or charging enormous prices. Nothingprevented their doing this, as they had no competition. The effectwas, that the people were injured much more than the government wasbenefited. The plan of granting such monopolies by governments is nowuniversally odious. 

Another method of taxation was what was called _tonnage and poundage_. This was an ancient tax, assessed on merchandise brought into thecountry in ships, like the _duties_ now collected at ourcustom-houses. It was called tonnage and poundage because themerchandise on which it was assessed was reckoned by weight, viz. , theton and the pound. A former king, Edward III. , first assessed it toraise money to suppress piracy on the seas. He said it was reasonablethat the merchandise protected should pay the expense of theprotection, and in proper proportion. The Parliament in that dayopposed this tax. They did not object to the tax itself, but to theking's assessing it by his own authority. However, they granted itthemselves afterward, and it was regularly collected. SubsequentParliaments had granted it, and generally made the law, once for all, to continue in force during the life of the monarch. When Charlescommenced his reign, the Peers were for renewing the law as usual, tocontinue throughout his reign. The Commons desired to enact the lawonly for a year at a time, so as to keep the power in their own hands. The two houses thus disagreed, and nothing was done. The king thenwent on to collect the tax without any authority except his ownprerogative. 

Another mode of levying money adopted by the king was what was called_ship money_. This was a plan for raising a navy by making every towncontribute a certain number of ships, or the money necessary to buildthem. It originated in ancient times, and was at first confined toseaport towns which had ships. These towns were required to furnishthem for the king's service, sometimes to be paid for by the king, atother times by the country, and at other times not to be paid for atall. Charles revived this plan, extending it to the whole country; atax was assessed on all the towns, each one being required to furnishmoney enough for a certain number of ships. The number at one timerequired of the city of London was twenty. 

There was one man who made his name very celebrated then, and it hascontinued very celebrated since, by his refusal to pay his ship money, and by his long and determined contest with the government in regardto it, in the courts. His name was John Hampden. He was a man offortune and high character. His tax for ship money was only twentyshillings, but he declared that he would not pay it without a trial. The king had previously obtained the opinion of the judges that he hada right, in case of necessity, to assess and collect the ship money, and Hampden knew, therefore, that the decision would certainly, in theend, be against him. He knew, however, that the attention of the wholecountry would be attracted to the trial, and that the arguments whichhe should offer, to prove that the act of collecting such a tax on thepart of the king's government was illegal and tyrannical, would bespread before the country, and would make a great impression, althoughthey certainly would not alter the opinion of the judges, who, holdingtheir offices by the king's appointment, were strongly inclined totake his side. 

It resulted as Hampden had foreseen. The trial attracted universalattention. It was a great spectacle to see a man of fortune and ofhigh standing, making all those preparations, and incurring so greatexpense, on account of a refusal to pay five dollars, knowing too, that he would have to pay it in the end. The people of the realm wereconvinced that Hampden was right, and they applauded and honored himvery greatly for his spirit and courage. The trial lasted twelve days. The illegality and injustice of the tax were fully exposed. The peopleconcurred entirely with Hampden, and even some of the judges wereconvinced. He was called the patriot Hampden, and his name will alwaysbe celebrated in English history. The whole discussion, however, though it produced a great effect at the time, would be of no interestnow, since it turned mainly on the question what the king's rightsactually were, according to the ancient customs and usages of therealm. The question before mankind now is a very different one; it isnot what the powers and prerogatives of government have been in timespast, but what they ought to be now and in time to come. 

The king's government gained the victory, ostensibly, in this contest, and Hampden had to pay the money. Very large sums were collected, also, from others by this tax, and a great fleet was raised. Theperformances and exploits of the fleet had some influence in quietingthe murmurs of the people. The fleet was the greatest which Englandhad ever possessed. One of its exploits was to compel the Dutch to paya large sum for the privilege of fishing in the narrow seas aboutGreat Britain. The Dutch had always maintained that these seas werepublic, and open to all the world; and they had a vast number offishing boats, called herring-busses, that used to resort to them forthe purpose of catching herring, which they made a business ofpreserving and sending all over the world. The English ships attackedthese fleets of herring-busses, and drove them off; and as the Dutchwere not strong enough to defend them, they agreed to pay a large sumannually for the right to fish in the seas in question, protesting, however, against it as an extortion, for they maintained that theEnglish had no control over any seas beyond the bays and estuaries oftheir own shores. 

One of the chief means which Charles depended upon during the longperiod that he governed without a Parliament, was a certain famoustribunal or court called the _Star Chamber. _ This court was a veryancient one, having been established in some of the earliest reigns;but it never attracted any special attention until the time ofCharles. His government called it into action a great deal, andextended its powers, and made it a means of great injustice andoppression, as the people thought; or, as Charles would have said, avery efficient means of vindicating his prerogative, and punishing thestubborn and rebellious. 

There were three reasons why this court was a more convenient andpowerful instrument in the hands of the king and his council than anyof the other courts in the kingdom. First, it was, by its ancientconstitution, composed of members of the _council_, with the exceptionof two persons, who were to be judges in the other courts. This planof having two judges from the common law courts seems to have beenadopted for the purpose of securing some sort of conformity of theStar Chamber decisions with the ordinary principles of Englishjurisprudence. But then, as these two law judges would always beselected with reference to their disposition to carry out the king'splans, and as the other members of the court were all members of thegovernment itself, of course the court was almost entirely undergovernmental control. 

The second reason was, that in this court there was no jury. There hadnever been juries employed in it from its earliest constitution. TheEnglish had contrived the plan of trial by jury as a defense againstthe severity of government. If a man was accused of crime, the judgesappointed by the government that he had offended were not to beallowed to decide whether he was guilty or not. They would be likelynot to be impartial. The question of his guilt or innocence was to beleft to twelve men, taken at hazard from the ordinary walks of life, and who, consequently, would be likely to sympathize with the accused, if they saw any disposition to oppress him, rather than to joinagainst him with a tyrannical government. Thus the jury, as they said, was a great safeguard. The English have always attached great value totheir system of trial by jury. The plan is retained in this country, though there is less necessity for it under our institutions. Now, inthe Star Chamber, it had never been the custom to employ a jury. Themembers of the court decided the whole question; and as they wereentirely in the interest of the government, the government, ofcourse, had the fate of every person accused under their directcontrol. 

The third reason consisted in the nature of the crimes which it hadalways been customary to try in this court. It had jurisdiction in agreat variety of cases in which men were brought into collision withthe government, such as charges of riot, sedition, libel, oppositionto the edicts of the council, and to proclamations of the king. Theseand similar cases had always been tried by the Star Chamber, and thesewere exactly the cases which ought not to be tried by such a court;for persons accused of hostility to government ought not to be triedby government itself. 

There has been a great deal of discussion about the origin of the termStar Chamber. The hall where the court was held was in a palace atWestminster, and there were a great many windows in it. Some thinkthat it was from this that the court received its name. Others supposeit was because the court had cognizance of a certain crime, the Latinname of which has a close affinity with the word star. Another reasonis, that certain documents, called _starra_, used to be kept in thehall. The prettiest idea is a sort of tradition that the ceiling ofthe hall was formerly ornamented with stars, and that thiscircumstance gave name to the hall. This supposition, however, unfortunately, has no better foundation than the others; for therewere no stars on the ceiling in Charles's time, and there had not beenany for a hundred years; nor is there any positive evidence that thereever were. However, in the absence of any real reason for preferringone of these ideas over the other, mankind seem to have wiselydetermined on choosing the most picturesque, so that it is generallyagreed that the origin of the name was the ancient decoration of theceiling of the hall with gilded stars. 

However this may be, the court of the Star Chamber was an engine ofprodigious power in the hands of Charles's government. It aided themin two ways. They could punish their enemies, and where these enemieswere wealthy, they could fill up the treasury of the government byimposing enormous fines upon them. Sometimes the offenses for whichthese fines were imposed were not of a nature to deserve such severepenalties. For instance, there was a law against turning tillage landinto pasturage. Land that is tilled supports men. Land that ispastured supports cattle and sheep. The former were a burden, sometimes, to landlords, the latter a means of wealth. Hence there wasthen, as there is now, a tendency in England, in certain parts of thecountry, for the landed proprietors to change their tillage land topasture, and thus drive the peasants away from their homes. There werelaws against this, but a great many persons had done itnotwithstanding. One of these persons was fined four thousand pounds;an enormous sum. The rest were alarmed, and made _compositions_, asthey were called; that is, they paid at once a certain sum oncondition of not being prosecuted. Thirty thousand pounds werecollected in this way, which was then a very large amount. 

There were in those days, as there are now, certain tracts of land inEngland called the king's forests, though a large portion of them arenow without trees. The boundaries of these lands had not been verywell defined, but the government now published decrees specifying theboundaries, and extending them so far as to include, in many cases, the buildings and improvements of other proprietors. They thenprosecuted these proprietors for having encroached, as they calledit, upon the crown lands, and the Star Chamber assessed very heavyfines upon them. The people said all this was done merely to getpretexts to extort money from the nation, to make up for the want of aParliament to assess regular taxes; but the government said it was ajust and legal mode of protecting the ancient and legitimate rights ofthe king. 

In these and similar modes, large sums of money were collected asfines and penalties for offenses more or less real. In other casesvery severe punishments were inflicted for various sorts of offensescommitted against the personal dignity of the king, or the great lordsof his government. It was considered highly important to repress allappearance of disrespect or hostility to the king. One man got intosome contention with one of the king's officers, and finally struckhim. He was fined ten thousand pounds. Another man said that a certainarchbishop had incurred the king's displeasure by desiring sometoleration for the Catholics. This was considered a slander againstthe archbishop, and the offender was sentenced to be fined a thousandpounds, to be whipped, imprisoned, and to stand in the pillory atWestminster, and at three other places in various parts of thekingdom. 

A gentleman was following a chase as a spectator, the hounds belongingto a nobleman. The huntsman, who had charge of the hounds, ordered himto keep back, and not come so near the hounds; and in giving him thisorder, spoke, as the gentleman alleged, so insolently, that he struckhim with his riding-whip. The huntsman threatened to complain to hismaster, the nobleman. The gentleman said that if his master shouldjustify him in such insulting language as he had used, he would servehim in the same manner. The Star Chamber fined him ten thousand poundsfor speaking so disrespectfully of a lord. 

By these and similar proceedings, large sums of money were collectedby the Star Chamber for the king's treasury, and all expression ofdiscontent and dissatisfaction on the part of the people wassuppressed. This last policy, however, the suppression of expressionsof dissatisfaction, is always a very dangerous one for any governmentto undertake. Discontent, silenced by force, is exasperated andextended. The outward signs of its existence disappear, but its inwardworkings become wide-spread and dangerous, just in proportion to theweight by which the safety-valve is kept down. Charles and his courtof the Star Chamber rejoiced in the power and efficacy of theirtremendous tribunal. They issued proclamations and decrees, andgoverned the country by means of them. They silenced all murmurs. Butthey were, all the time, disseminating through the whole length andbreadth of the land a deep and inveterate enmity to royalty, whichended in a revolution of the government, and the decapitation of theking. They stopped the hissing of the steam for the time, but causedan explosion in the end. 

Charles was King of Scotland as well as of England. The two countrieswere, however, as countries, distinct, each having its own laws, itsown administration, and its own separate dominions. The sovereign, however, was the same. A king could inherit two kingdoms, just as aman can, in this country, inherit two farms, which may, nevertheless, be at a distance from each other, and managed separately. Now, although Charles had, from the death of his father, exercisedsovereignty over the realm of Scotland, he had not been crowned, norhad even visited Scotland. The people of Scotland felt somewhatneglected. They murmured that their common monarch gave all hisattention to the sister and rival kingdom. They said that if the kingdid not consider the Scottish crown worth coming after, they might, perhaps, look out for some other way of disposing of it. 

The king, accordingly, in 1633, began to make preparations for a royalprogress into Scotland. He first issued a proclamation requiring aproper supply of provisions to be collected at the several points ofhis proposed route, and specified the route, and the length of staywhich he should make in each place. He set out on the 13th of May witha splendid retinue. He stopped at the seats of several of the nobilityon the way, to enjoy the hospitalities and entertainments which theyhad prepared for him. He proceeded so slowly that it was a monthbefore he reached the frontier. Here all his English servants andretinue retired from their posts, and their places were supplied byScotchmen who had been previously appointed, and who were awaiting hisarrival. He entered Edinburgh with great pomp and parade, all Scotlandflocking to the capital to witness the festivities. The coronationtook place three days afterward. He met the Scotch Parliament, and, for form's sake, took a part in the proceedings, so as actually toexercise his royal authority as King of Scotland. This being over, hewas conducted in great state back to Berwick, which is on thefrontier, and thence he returned by rapid journeys to London. 

The king dissolved his last Parliament in 1629. He had now beenendeavoring for four or five years to govern alone. He succeededtolerably well, so far as external appearances indicated, up to thistime. There was, however, beneath the surface, a deep-seateddiscontent, which was constantly widening and extending, and, soonafter the return of the king from Scotland, real difficultiesgradually arose, by which he was, in the end, compelled to call aParliament again. What these difficulties were will be explained inthe subsequent chapters. 

CHAPTER VI. 

ARCHBISHOP LAUD. 

1633-1639

Archbishop Laud. --The Church. --System of the English Church. --TheArchbishop of Canterbury. --Canterbury. --TheCathedral. --Officers. --Laud made archbishop. --His businesscapacity. --Laud's character. --Episcopacy in England and theUnited States. --Opposition to the Established Church. --ThePuritans. --Disputes about the services of the Church. --Controversyabout amusements on Sunday. --Laud's contention with thejudges. --Severe punishments for expression of opinion. --Caseof Lilburne. --His indomitable spirit. --The young lawyer'stoast. --Ingenious plea. --Laud's designs upon the ScotchChurch. --Motives of Laud and the king. --The Liturgy. --TheScotch. --Laud prepares them a Liturgy. --Times of tumult. --Preachingto an empty church. --The Scotch rebel. --The king's fool. --Ageneral assembly called in Scotland. --The king's expedition to thenorth. --The army at York. --The oath. --The king's march. --Artificeof the Scots. --The compromise. --The army disbanded. --The king'sdifficulties. --He thinks of a Parliament. 

In getting so deeply involved in difficulties with his people, KingCharles did not act alone. He had, as we have already explained, agreat deal of help. There were many men of intelligence and rank whoentertained the same opinions that he did, or who were, at least, willing to adopt them for the sake of office and power. These men hedrew around him. He gave them office and power, and they joined him inthe efforts he made to defend and enlarge the royal prerogative, andto carry on the government by the exercise of it. One of the mostprominent and distinguished of these men was Laud. 

The reader must understand that _the Church_, in England, is verydifferent from any thing that exists under the same name in thiscountry. Its bishops and clergy are supported by revenues derived froma vast amount of property which belongs to the Church itself. Thisproperty is entirely independent of all control by the people of theparishes. The clergyman, as soon as he is appointed, comes intopossession of it in his own right; and he is not appointed by thepeople, but by some nobleman or high officer of state, who has_inherited_ the right to appoint the clergyman of that particularparish. There are bishops, also, who have very large revenues, likewise independent; and over these bishops is one great dignitary, who presides in lofty state over the whole system. This officer iscalled the Archbishop of Canterbury. There is one other archbishop, called the Archbishop of York; but his realm is much more limited andless important. The Archbishop of Canterbury is styled the LordPrimate of all England. His rank is above that of all the peers of therealm. He crowns the kings. He has two magnificent palaces, one atCanterbury and one at London, and has very large revenues, also, toenable him to maintain a style of living in accordance with his rank. He has the superintendence of all the affairs of the Church for thewhole realm, except a small portion pertaining to the archbishopric ofYork. His palace in London is on the bank of the Thames, oppositeWestminster. It is called Lambeth Palace. 

[Illustration: LAMBETH PALACE. ]

The city of Canterbury, which is the chief seat of his dominion, issoutheast of London, not very far from the sea. The Cathedral isthere, which is the archbishop's church. It is more than five hundredfeet in length, and the tower is nearly two hundred and fifty feethigh. The magnificence of the architecture and the decorations of thebuilding correspond with its size. There is a large company ofclergymen and other officers attached to the service of the Cathedral. They are more than a hundred in number. The palace of the archbishopis near. 

The Church was thus, in the days of Charles, a complete realm ofitself, with its own property, its own laws, its own legislature, andcourts, and judges, its own capital, and its own monarch. It wasentirely independent of the mass of the people in all these respects, as all these things were wholly controlled by the bishops and clergy, and the clergy were generally appointed by the noblemen, and thebishops by the king. This made the system almost entirely independentof the community at large; and as there was organized under it a vastamount of wealth, and influence, and power, the Archbishop ofCanterbury, who presided over the whole, was as great in authority ashe was in rank and honor. Now Laud was Archbishop of Canterbury. 

King Charles had made him so. He had observed that Laud, who had beenadvanced to some high stations in the Church by his father, KingJames, was desirous to enlarge and strengthen the powers andprerogatives of the Church, just as he himself was endeavoring to doin respect to those of the throne. He accordingly promoted him fromone post of influence and honor to another, until he made him at lastArchbishop of Canterbury. Thus he was placed upon the summit ofecclesiastical grandeur and power. 

He commenced his work, however, of strengthening and aggrandizing theChurch, before he was appointed to this high office. He was Bishop ofLondon for many years, which is a post, in some respects, second onlyto that of Archbishop of Canterbury. While in this station, he wasappointed by the king to many high civil offices. He had greatcapacity for the transaction of business, and for the fulfillment ofhigh trusts, whether of Church or state. He was a man of greatintegrity and moral worth. He was stern and severe in manners butlearned and accomplished. His whole soul was bent on what heundoubtedly considered the great duty of his life, supporting andconfirming the authority of the king and the power and influence ofEnglish Episcopacy. Notwithstanding his high qualifications, however, many persons were jealous of the influence which he possessed with theking, and murmured against the appointment of a churchman to such highoffices of state. 

There was another source of hostility to Laud. There was a large partof the people of England who were against the Church of Englandaltogether. They did not like a system in which all power andinfluence came, as it were, from above downward. The king made thenoblemen, the noblemen made the bishops, the bishops made the clergy, and the clergy ruled their flocks; the flocks themselves havingnothing to say or do but to submit. It is very different withEpiscopacy in this country. The people here choose the clergy, and theclergy choose the bishops, so that power in the Church, as in everything else here, goes from below upward. The two systems, when atrest, look very similar in the two countries; but when in action, thecurrent of life flows in contrary directions, making the twodiametrically opposite to each other in spirit and power. In England, Episcopacy is an engine by which the people are ecclesiasticallygoverned. Here, it is the machinery by which they govern. Thus, thoughthe forms appear similar, the action is very diverse. 

Now in England there was a large and increasing party that hated andopposed the whole Episcopal system. Laud, to counteract this tendency, attempted to define, and enlarge, and extend that system as far aspossible. He made the most of all the ceremonies of worship, andintroduced others, which were, indeed, not exactly new, but ratherancient ones revived. He did this conscientiously, no doubt, thinkingthat these forms of devotion were adapted to impress the soul of theworshiper, and lead him to feel, in his heart, the reverence which hisoutward action expressed. Many of the people, however, bitterlyopposed these things. They considered it a return to popery. The morethat Laud, and those who acted with him, attempted to magnify therites and the powers of the Church, the more these persons began toabhor every thing of the kind. They wanted Christianity itself, _inits purity_, uncontaminated, as they said, by these popish andidolatrous forms. They were called _Puritans_. 

There were a great many things which seem to us at the present day ofvery little consequence, which were then the subjects of endlessdisputes and of the most bitter animosity. For instance, one point waswhether the place where the communion was to be administered should becalled the communion table or the altar; and in what part of thechurch it should stand; and whether the person officiating should becalled a priest or a clergyman; and whether he should wear one kind ofdress or another. Great importance was attached to these things; butit was not on their own account, but on account of their bearing onthe question whether the Lord's Supper was to be considered only aceremony commemorative of Christ's death, or whether it was, whenevercelebrated by a regularly authorized priest, _a real renewal_ of thesacrifice of Christ, as the Catholics maintained. Calling thecommunion table an altar, and the officiating minister a priest, andclothing him in a sacerdotal garb, countenanced the idea of a renewalof the sacrifice of Christ. Laud and his co-adjutors urged the adoptionof all these and similar usages. The Puritans detested them, becausethey detested and abhorred the doctrine which they seemed to imply. 

Another great topic of controversy was the subject of amusements. Itis a very singular circumstance, that in those branches of theChristian Church where rites and forms are most insisted upon, thegreatest latitude is allowed in respect to the gayeties and amusementsof social life. Catholic Paris is filled with theaters and dancing, and the Sabbath is a holiday. In London, on the other hand, the numberof theaters is small, dancing is considered as an amusement of a moreor less equivocal character, and the Sabbath is rigidly observed; andamong all the simple Democratic churches of New England, to dance orto attend the theater is considered almost morally wrong. It was justso in the days of Laud. He wished to encourage amusements among thepeople, particularly on Sunday, after church. This was partly for thepurpose of counteracting the efforts of those who were inclined toPuritan views. They attached great importance to their sermons andlectures, for in them they could address and influence the people. Butby means of these addresses, as Laud thought, they put ideas ofinsubordination into the minds of the people, and encroached on theauthority of the Church and of the king. To prevent this, theHigh-Church party wished to exalt the _prayers_ in the Church service, and to give as little place and influence as possible to the sermon, and to draw off the attention of the people from the discussions andexhortations of the preachers by encouraging games, dances, andamusements of all kinds. 

The judges in one of the counties, at a regular court held by them, once passed an order forbidding certain revels and carousals connectedwith the Church service, on account of the immoralities and disorders, as they alleged, to which they gave rise; and they ordered that publicnotice to this effect should be given by the bishop. The archbishop, Laud, considered this an interference on the part of the civilmagistrates, with the powers and prerogatives of the Church. He hadthe judges brought before the council, and censured there; and theywere required by the council to revoke their order at the next court. The judges did so, but in such a way as to show that they did itsimply in obedience to the command of the king's council. The people, or at least all of them who were inclined to Puritan views, sidedwith the judges, and were more strict in abstaining from all suchamusements on Sunday than ever. This, of course, made those who wereon the side of Laud more determined to promote these gayeties. Thus, as neither party pursued, in the least degree, a generous orconciliatory course toward the other, the difference between themwidened more and more. The people of the country were fast becomingeither bigoted High-Churchmen or fanatical Puritans. 

Laud employed the power of the Star Chamber a great deal in theaccomplishment of his purpose of enforcing entire submission to theecclesiastical authority of the Church. He even had persons sometimespunished very severely for words of disrespect, or for writings inwhich they censured what they considered the tyranny under which theysuffered. This severe punishment for the mere expression of opiniononly served to fix the opinion more firmly, and disseminate it morewidely. Sometimes men would glory in their sufferings for this cause, and bid the authorities defiance. 

One man, for instance, named Lilburne, was brought before the StarChamber, charged with publishing seditious pamphlets. Now, in allordinary courts of justice, no man is called upon to say any thingagainst himself. Unless his crime can be proved by the testimony ofothers, it can not be proved at all. But in the Star Chamber, whoeverwas brought to trial had to take an oath at first that he would answerall questions asked, even if they tended to criminate himself. Whenthey proposed this oath to Lilburne, he refused to take it. Theydecided that this was contempt of court, and sentenced him to bewhipped, put in the pillory, and imprisoned. While they were whippinghim, he spent the time in making a speech to the spectators againstthe tyranny of bishops, referring to Laud, whom he considered as theauthor of these proceedings. He continued to do the same while in thepillory. As he passed along, too, he distributed copies of thepamphlets which he was prosecuted for writing. The Star Chamber, hearing that he was haranguing the mob, ordered him to be gagged. Thisdid not subdue him. He began to stamp with his foot and gesticulate;thus continuing to express his indomitable spirit of hostility to thetyranny which he opposed. This single case would be of no greatconsequence alone, but it was not alone. The attempt to put Lilburnedown was a symbol of the experiment of coercion which Charles in thestate, and Laud in the Church, were trying upon the whole nation; itwas a symbol both in respect to the means employed, and to the successattained by them. 

One curious case is related, which turned out more fortunately thanusual for the parties accused. Some young lawyers in London weredrinking at an evening entertainment, and among other toasts theydrank confusion to the Archbishop of Canterbury. One of the waiters, who heard them, mentioned the circumstance, and they were broughtbefore the Star Chamber. Before their trial came on, they applied to acertain nobleman to know what they should do. "Where was the waiter, "asked the nobleman, "when you drank the toast?" "At the door. " "Oh!very well, then, " said he; "tell the court that he only heard a partof the toast, as he was going out; and that the words really were, 'Confusion to the Archbishop of Canterbury's enemies. '" By thisingenious plea, and by means of a great appearance of humility anddeference in the presence of the archbishop, the lawyers escaped witha reprimand. 

Laud was not content with establishing and confirming throughout allEngland the authority of the Church, but attempted to extend the samesystem to Scotland. When King Charles went to Scotland to be crowned, he took Laud with him. He was pleased with Laud's endeavors to enlargeand confirm the powers of the Church, and wished to aid him in thework. There were two reasons for this. One was, that the same class ofmen, the Puritans, were the natural enemies of both, so that the kingand the archbishop were drawn together by having one common foe. Then, as the places in the Church were not hereditary, but were filled byappointments from the king and the great nobles, whatever power theChurch could get into its hands could be employed by the king tostrengthen his own authority, and keep his subjects in subjection. 

We must not, however, censure the king and his advisers too stronglyfor this plan. They doubtless were ambitious; they loved power; theywished to bear sway, unresisted and unquestioned, over the wholerealm. But then the king probably thought that the exercise of such agovernment was necessary for the order and prosperity of the realm, besides being his inherent and indefeasible right. Good and badmotives were doubtless mingled here, as in all human action; but thenthe king was, in the main, doing what he supposed it was his duty todo. In proposing, therefore, to build up the Church in Scotland, andto make it conform to the English Church in its rites and ceremonies, he and Laud doubtless supposed that they were going greatly to improvethe government of the sister kingdom. 

There was in those days, as now, in the English Church, a certainprescribed course of prayers, and psalms, and Scripture lessons, foreach day, to be read from a book by the minister. This was called theLiturgy. The Puritans did not like a Liturgy. It tied men up, and didnot leave the individual mind of the preacher at liberty to rangefreely, as they wished it to do, in conducting the devotionalservices. It was on this very account that the friends of stronggovernment _did_ like it. They wished to curtail this liberty, which, however, they called license, and which they thought made mischief. Inextemporaneous prayers, it is often easy to see that the speaker isaiming much more directly at producing a salutary effect on the mindsof his hearers than at simply presenting petitions to the SupremeBeing. But, notwithstanding this evil, the existence of which nocandid man can deny, the enemies of forms, who are generally friendsof the largest liberty, think it best to leave the clergyman free. Thefriends of forms, however, prefer forms on this very account. Theylike what they consider the wholesome and salutary restraints whichthey impose. 

Now there has always been a great spirit of freedom in the Scottishmind. That people have ever been unwilling to submit to coercion orrestraints. There is probably no race of men on earth that would makeworse slaves than the Scotch. Their sturdy independence anddetermination to be free could never be subdued. In the days ofCharles they were particularly fond of freely exercising their ownminds, and of speaking freely to others on the subject of religion. They thought for themselves, sometimes right and sometimes wrong; butthey would think, and they would express their thoughts; and theirbeing thus unaccustomed, in one particular, to submit to restraints, rendered them more difficult to be governed in others. Laud thought, consequently, that _they_, particularly, needed a Liturgy. He preparedone for them. It was varied somewhat from the English Liturgy, thoughit was substantially the same. The king proclaimed it, and requiredthe bishops to see that it was employed in all the churches inScotland. 

The day for introducing the Liturgy was the signal for riots all overthe kingdom. In the principal church in Edinburgh they called out "_Apope! A pope!_" when the clergyman came in with his book and hispontifical robes. The bishop ascended the pulpit to address the peopleto appease them, and a stool came flying through the air at his head. The police then expelled the congregation, and the clergyman wentthrough with the service of the Liturgy in the empty church, thecongregation outside, in great tumult, accompanying the exercises withcries of disapprobation and resentment, and with volleys of stonesagainst the doors and windows. 

The Scotch sent a sort of embassador to London to represent to theking that the hostility to the Liturgy was so universal and so strongthat it could not be enforced. But the king and his council had thesame conscientious scruples about giving up in a contest withsubjects, that a teacher or a parent, in our day, would feel in thecase of resistance from children or scholars. The king sent down aproclamation that the observance of the Liturgy must be insisted on. The Scotch prepared to resist. They sent delegates to Edinburgh, andorganized a sort of government. They raised armies. They tookpossession of the king's castles. They made a solemn covenant, bindingthemselves to insist on religious freedom. In a word, all Scotland wasin rebellion. 

It was the custom in those days to have, connected with the court, some half-witted person, who used to be fantastically dressed, and tohave great liberty of speech, and whose province was to amuse thecourtiers. He was called the _king's jester_, or, more commonly, _thefool_. The name of King Charles's fool was Archy. After this rebellionbroke out, and all England was aghast at the extent of the mischiefwhich Laud's Liturgy had done, the fool, seeing the archbishop go byone day, called out to him, "My lord! who is the fool now!" Thearchbishop, as if to leave no possible doubt in respect to the properanswer to the question, had poor Archy tried and punished. Hissentence was to have his coat pulled up over his head, and to bedismissed from the king's service. If Laud had let the affair pass, it would have ended with a laugh in the street; but by resenting it, he gave it notoriety, caused it to be recorded, and has perpetuatedthe memory of the jest to all future times. He ought to have joined inthe laugh, and rewarded Archy on the spot for so good a witticism. 

The Scotch, besides organizing a sort of civil government, tookmeasures for summoning a general assembly of their Church. Thisassembly met at Glasgow. The nobility and gentry flocked to Glasgow atthe time of the meeting, to encourage and sustain the assembly, and tomanifest their interest in the proceedings. The assembly verydeliberately went to work, and, not content with taking a standagainst the Liturgy which Charles had imposed, they abolished thefabric of Episcopacy--that is, the government of bishops--altogether. Thus Laud's attempt to perfect and confirm the system resulted inexpelling it completely from the kingdom. It has never held up itshead in Scotland since. They established Presbyterianism in its place, which is a sort of republican system, the pastors being all officiallyequal to each other, though banded together under a common governmentadministered by themselves. 

The king was determined to put down this rebellion at all hazards. Hehad made such good use of the various irregular modes of raising moneywhich have been already described, and had been so economical in theuse of it, that he had now quite a sum of money in his treasury; andhad it not been for the attempt to enforce the unfortunate Liturgyupon the people of Scotland, he might, perhaps, have gone on reigningwithout a Parliament to the end of his days. He had now about twohundred thousand pounds, by means of which, together with what hecould borrow, he hoped to make one single demonstration of force whichwould bring the rebellion to an end. He raised an army and equipped afleet. He issued a proclamation summoning all the peers of the realmto attend him. He moved with this great concourse from London towardthe north, the whole country looking on as spectators to behold theprogress of this great expedition, by which their monarch was going toattempt to subdue again his _other_ kingdom. 

Charles advanced to the city of York, the great city of the north ofEngland. Here he paused and established his court, with all possiblepomp and parade. His design was to impress the Scots with such anidea of the greatness of the power which was coming to overwhelm themas to cause them to submit at once. But all this show was very hollowand delusive. The army felt a greater sympathy with the Scots thanthey did with the king. The complaints against Charles's governmentwere pretty much the same in both countries. A great many Scotchmencame to York while the king was there, and the people from all thecountry round flocked thither too, drawn by the gay spectaclesconnected with the presence of such a court and army. The Scotchmendisseminated their complaints thus among the English people, andfinally the king and his council, finding indications of so extensivea disaffection, had a form of an oath prepared, which they requiredall the principal persons to take, acknowledging allegiance toCharles, and denying that they had any intelligence or correspondencewith the enemy. The Scotchmen all took the oath very readily, thoughsome of the English refused. 

At any rate, the state of things was not such as to intimidate theScotch, and lead them, as the king had hoped, to sue for peace. So heconcluded to move on toward the borders. He went to Newcastle, andthence to Berwick. From Berwick he moved along the banks of the Tweed, which here forms the boundary between the two kingdoms, and, finding asuitable place for such a purpose, the king had his royal tentpitched, and his army encamped around him. 

Now, as King Charles had undertaken to subdue the Scots by a show offorce, it seems they concluded to defend themselves by a show too, though theirs was a cheaper and more simple contrivance than his. Theyadvanced with about three thousand men to a place distant perhapsseven miles from the English camp. The king sent an army of fivethousand men to attack them. The Scotch, in the mean time, collectedgreat herds of cattle from all the country around, as the historianssay, and arranged them behind their little army in such a way as tomake the whole appear a vast body of soldiers. A troop of horsemen, who were the advanced part of the English army, came in sight of thisformidable host first, and, finding their numbers so much greater thanthey had anticipated, they fell back, and ordered the artillery andfoot-soldiers who were coming up to retreat, and all together cameback to the encampment. There were two or three military enterprisesof similar character, in which nothing was done but to encourage theScotch and dishearten the English. In fact, neither officers, soldiers, nor king wished to proceed to extremities. The officers andsoldiers did not wish to fight the Scotch, and the king, knowing thestate of his army, did not really dare to do it. 

Finally, all the king's council advised him to give up the pretendedcontest, and to settle the difficulty by a compromise. Accordingly, inJune, negotiations were commenced, and before the end of the montharticles were signed. The king probably made the best terms he could, but it was universally considered that the Scots gained the victory. The king disbanded his army, and returned to London. The Scotchleaders went back to Edinburgh. Soon after this the Parliament and theGeneral Assembly of the Church convened, and these bodies took thewhole management of the realm into their own hands. They sentcommissioners to London to see and confer with the king, and thesecommissioners seemed almost to assume the character of embassadorsfrom a foreign state. These negotiations, and the course which affairswere taking in Scotland, soon led to new difficulties. The king foundthat he was losing his kingdom of Scotland altogether. It seemed, however, as if there was nothing that he could do to regain it. Hisreserved funds were gone, and his credit was exhausted. There was noresource left but to call a Parliament and ask for supplies. He mighthave known, however, that this would be useless, for there was sostrong a fellow-feeling with the Scotch in their alleged grievancesamong the people of England, that he could not reasonably expect anyresponse from the latter, in whatever way he might appeal to them. 

CHAPTER VII. 

THE EARL OF STRAFFORD. 

1621-1640

The Earl of Strafford. --His early life. --Strafford's course inParliament. --His opposition to the king. --The leaders removed. --Theopposition still continues. --Wentworth imprisoned. --His returnto Parliament. --Wentworth is courted. --He goes over to the king. --Theking appoints Wentworth to office. --Wentworth is appointed Presidentof the North. --Wentworth appointed to the government ofIreland. --Wentworth's arbitrary government. --He is made anearl. --Difficulties. --Laud's administration of his office. --Defenseof Episcopacy. --Progress of non-conformity. --A Parliamentcalled. --Strafford appointed commander-in-chief. --Meeting ofParliament. --The king's speech. --Address of the lordkeeper. --Grievances. --Messages. --Parliament dissolved. --The Scotscross the borders and invade England. --March of the Scots. --The kinggoes to York. --Defeat of the English. --Perplexities and dangers. --Theking calls a council of peers. --Message from the Scots. --The kingcompromises with the Scots. --Opposition of Strafford. --Strafforddesires to return to Ireland. --The king's promised protection. 

During the time that the king had been engaged in the attempt togovern England without Parliaments, he had, besides Laud, a veryefficient co-operator, known in English history by the name of theEarl of Strafford. This title of Earl of Strafford was conferred uponhim by the king as a reward for his services. His father's name wasWentworth. He was born in London, and the Christian name given to himwas Thomas. He was educated at the University of Cambridge, and wasmuch distinguished for his talents and his personal accomplishments. After finishing his education, he traveled for some time on theContinent, visiting foreign cities and courts, and studying thelanguages, manners, and customs of other nations. He returned atlength to England. He was made a knight. His father died when he wasabout twenty-one, and left him a large fortune. He was about sevenyears older than King Charles, so that all these circumstances tookplace before the commencement of Charles's reign. For many years afterthis he was very extensively known in England as a gentleman of largefortune and great abilities, by the name of Sir Thomas Wentworth. 

Sir Thomas Wentworth was a member of Parliament in those days, and inthe contests between the king and the Parliament he took the side ofParliament. Charles used to maintain that _his_ power alone washereditary and sovereign; that the Parliament was his council; andthat they had no powers or privileges except what he himself or hisancestors had granted and allowed them. Wentworth took very strongground against this. He urged Parliament to maintain that their rightsand privileges were inherent and hereditary as well as those of theking; that such powers as they possessed were their own, and wereentirely independent of royal grant or permission; and that the kingcould no more encroach upon the privileges of Parliament, thanParliament upon the prerogatives of the king. This was in thebeginning of the difficulties between the king and the Commons. 

It will, perhaps, be recollected by the reader, that one of the planswhich Charles adopted to weaken the opposition to him in Parliamentwas by appointing six of the leaders of this opposition to the officeof sheriff in their several counties. And as the general theory of allmonarchies is that the subjects are bound to obey and serve the king, these men were obliged to leave their seats in Parliament and go home, to serve as sheriffs. Charles and his council supposed that the restwould be more quiet and submissive when the leaders of the partyopposed to him were taken away. But the effect was the reverse. TheCommons were incensed at such a mode of interfering with their action, and became more hostile to the royal power than ever. 

Wentworth himself, too, was made more determined in his opposition bythis treatment. A short time after this, the king's plan of a forcedloan was adopted, which has already been described; that is, a sum ofmoney was assessed in the manner of a tax upon all the people of thekingdom, and each man was required to lend his proportion to thegovernment. The king admitted that he had no right to make people_give_ money without the action of Parliament, but claimed the rightto require them to _lend_ it. As Sir Thomas Wentworth was a man oflarge fortune, his share of the loan was considerable. He absolutelyrefused to pay it. The king then brought him before a court which wasentirely under royal control, and he was condemned to be imprisoned. Knowing, however, that this claim on the part of the king was verydoubtful, they mitigated the punishment by allowing him first a rangeof two miles around his place of confinement, and afterward theyreleased him entirely. 

He was chosen a member of Parliament again, and he returned to hisseat more powerful and influential than ever. Buckingham, who had beenhis greatest enemy, was now dead, and the king, finding that he hadgreat abilities and a spirit that would not yield to intimidation orforce, concluded to try kindness and favors. 

In fact, there are two different modes by which sovereigns in all agesand countries endeavor to neutralize the opposition of popularleaders. One is by intimidating them with threats and punishments, andthe other buying them off with appointments and honors. Some of theking's high officers of state began to cultivate the acquaintance ofWentworth, and to pay him attentions and civilities. He could not butfeel gratified with these indications of their regard. Theycomplimented his talents and his powers, and represented to him thatsuch abilities ought to be employed in the service of the state. Finally, the king conferred upon him the title of baron. Commongratitude for these marks of distinction and honor held him back fromany violent opposition to the king. His enemies said he was bought offby honors and rewards. No doubt he was ambitious, and, like all otherpoliticians, his supreme motive was love of consideration and honor. This was doubtless his motive in what he had done in behalf of theParliament. But all that he could do as a popular leader in Parliamentwas to acquire a general ascendency over men's minds, and make himselfa subject of fame and honor. All places of real authority wereexclusively under the king's control, and he could only rise to suchstations through the sovereign's favor. In a word, he could acquireonly _influence_ as a leader in Parliament, while the king could givehim _power_. 

Kings can exercise, accordingly, a great control over the minds oflegislators by offering them office; and King Charles, after findingthat his first advances to Wentworth were favorably received, appointed him one of his Privy Council. Wentworth accepted the office. His former friends considered that in doing this he was desertingthem, and betraying the cause which he had at first espoused anddefended. The country at large were much displeased with him, findingthat he had forsaken their cause, and placed himself in a position toact against them. 

Persons who change sides in politics or in religion are very apt to gofrom one extreme to another. Their former friends revile them, andthey, in retaliation, act more and more energetically against them. Itwas so with Strafford. He gradually engaged more and more fully andearnestly in upholding the king. Finally, the king appointed him to avery high station, called the Presidency of the North. His office wasto govern the whole north of England--of course, under the directionof the king and council. There were four counties under hisjurisdiction, and the king gave him a commission which clothed himwith enormous powers--powers greater, as all the people thought, thanthe king had any right to bestow. 

Strafford proceeded to the north, and entered upon the government ofhis realm there, with a determination to carry out all the king'splans to the utmost. From being an ardent advocate of the rights ofthe people, as he was at the commencement of his career, he became amost determined and uncompromising supporter of the arbitrary power ofthe king. He insisted on the collection of money from the people, inall the ways that the king claimed the power to collect it byauthority of his prerogative; and he was so strict and exacting indoing this, that he raised the revenue to four or five times what anyof his predecessors had been able to collect. This, of course, pleasedKing Charles and his government extremely; for it was at a time duringwhich the king was attempting to govern without a Parliament, andevery accession to his funds was of extreme importance. Laud, too, thearchbishop, was highly gratified with his exertions and his success, and the king looked upon Laud and Wentworth as the two most efficientsupporters of his power. They were, in fact, the two most efficientpromoters of his destruction. 

Of course, the people of the north hated him. While he was earning theapplause of the archbishop and the king, and entitling himself to newhonors and increased power, he was sewing the seeds of the bitterestanimosity in the hearts of the people every where. Still he enjoyedall the external marks of consideration and honor. The President ofthe North was a sort of king. He was clothed with great powers, andlived in great state and splendor. He had many attendants, and thegreat nobles of the land, who generally took Charles's side in thecontests of the day, envied Wentworth's greatness and power, andapplauded the energy and success of his administration. 

Ireland was, at this time, in a disturbed and disordered state, andLaud proposed that Wentworth should be appointed by the king to thegovernment of it. A great proportion of the inhabitants wereCatholics, and were very little disposed to submit to Protestant rule. Wentworth was appointed lord deputy, and afterward lord lieutenant, which made him king of Ireland in all but the name. Every thing, ofcourse, was done in the name of Charles. He carried the same energyinto his government here that he had exhibited in the north ofEngland. He improved the condition of the country astonishingly inrespect to trade, to revenue, and to public order. But he governed inthe most arbitrary manner, and he boasted that he had rendered theking as absolute a sovereign in Ireland as any prince in the worldcould be. Such a boast from a man who had once been a very prominentdefender of the rights of the people against this very kind ofsovereignty, was fitted to produce a feeling of universal exasperationand desire of revenge. The murmurs and muttered threats which filledthe land, though suppressed, were very deep and very strong. 

The king, however, and Laud, considered Wentworth as their most ableand efficient co-adjutor; and when the difficulties in Scotland beganto grow serious, they recalled him from Ireland, and put that countryinto the hands of another ruler. The king then advanced him to therank of an earl. His title was the Earl of Strafford. As thesubsequent parts of his history attracted more attention than thosepreceding his elevation to this earldom, he has been far more widelyknown among mankind by the name of Strafford than by his original nameof Wentworth, which was, from this period, nearly forgotten. 

To return now to the troubles in Scotland. The king found that itwould be impossible to go on without supplies, and he accordinglyconcluded, on the whole, to call a Parliament. He was in serioustrouble. Laud was in serious trouble too. He had been indefatigablyengaged for many years in establishing Episcopacy all over England, and in putting down, by force of law, all disposition to dissent fromit; and in attempting to produce, throughout the realm, one uniformsystem of Christian faith and worship. This was his idea of theperfection of religious order and right. He used to make an annualvisitation to all the bishoprics in the realm; inquire into the usageswhich prevailed there; put a stop, so far as he could, to allirregularities; and confirm and establish, by the most decisivemeasures, the Episcopal authority. He sent in his report to the kingof the results of his inquiries, asking the king's aid, where his ownpowers were insufficient, for the more full accomplishment of hisplans. But, notwithstanding all this diligence and zeal, he found thathe met with very partial success. The irregularities, as he calledthem, which he suppressed in one place, would break out in another;the disposition to throw off the dominion of bishops was getting moreand more extensive and deeply seated; and now, the result of thereligious revolution in Scotland, and of the general excitement whichit produced in England, was to widen and extend this feeling more thanever. 

He did not, however, give up the contest, He employed an able writerto draw up a defense of Episcopacy, as the true and scriptural form ofChurch government. The book, when first prepared, was moderate in itstone, and allowed that in some particular cases a Presbyterian mode ofgovernment might be admissible; but Laud, in revising the book, struckout these concessions as unnecessary and dangerous, and placedEpiscopacy in full and exclusive possession of the ground, as thedivinely instituted and only admissible form of Church government anddiscipline. He caused this book to be circulated; but the attempt toreason with the refractory, after having failed in the attempt tocoerce them, is not generally very successful. The archbishop, in hisreport to the king this year of the state of things throughout hisprovince, represents the spirit of non-conformity to the Church ofEngland as getting too strong for him to control without moreefficient help from the civil power; but whether it would be wise, headded, to undertake any more effectual coercion in the presentdistracted state of the kingdom, he left it for the king to decide. 

Laud proposed that the council should recommend to the king thecalling of a Parliament. At the same time, they passed a resolutionthat, in case the Parliament "should prove peevish, and refuse togrant supplies, they would sustain the king in the resort toextraordinary measures. " This was regarded as a threat, and did nothelp to prepossess the members favorably in regard to the feeling withwhich the king was to meet them. The king ordered the Parliament to beelected in December, but did not call them together until April. Inthe mean time, he went on raising an army, so as to have his militarypreparations in readiness. He, however, appointed a new set ofofficers to the command of this army, neglecting those who were incommand before, as he had found them so little disposed to actefficiently in his cause. He supplied the leader's place withStrafford. This change produced very extensive murmurs ofdissatisfaction, which, added to all the other causes of complaint, made the times look very dark and stormy. 

The Parliament assembled in April. The king went into the House ofLords, the Commons being, as usual, summoned to the bar. He addressedthem as follows:

 "My Lords and gentlemen, --There was never a King who had a more great and weighty Cause to call his People together than myself. I will not trouble you with the particulars. I have informed my lord keeper, and now command him to speak, and I desire your Attention. "

The keeper referred to was the keeper of the king's seals, who was, ofcourse, a great officer of state. He made a speech, informing thehouses, in general terms, of the king's need of money, but said thatit was not necessary for him to explain minutely the monarch's plans, as they were exclusively his own concern. We may as well quote hiswords, in order to show in what light the position and province of aBritish Parliament was considered in those days. 

 "His majesty's kingly resolutions, " said the lord keeper, "are seated in the ark of his sacred breast, and it were a presumption of too high a nature for any Uzzah uncalled to touch it. Yet his Majesty is now pleased to lay by the shining Beams of Majesty, as Phoebus did to Phaeton, that the distance between Sovereignty and Subjection should not bar you of that filial freedom of Access to his Person and Counsels; only let us beware how, with the Son of Clymene, we aim not at the guiding of the Chariot, as if that were the only Testimony of Fatherly Affection; and let us remember, that though the King sometimes lays by the Beams and Rays of Majesty, he never lays by Majesty itself. "

When the keeper had finished his speech, the king confirmed it bysaying that he had exaggerated nothing, and the houses were left totheir deliberations. Instead of proceeding to the business of raisingmoney, they commenced an inquiry into the grievances, as they calledthem--that is, all the unjust acts and the maladministration of thegovernment, of which the country had been complaining for the tenyears during which there had been an intermission of Parliaments. Theking did all in his power to arrest this course of procedure. He sentthem message after message, urging them to leave these things, andtake up first the question of supplies. He then sent a message to theHouse of Peers, requesting them to interpose and exert their influenceto lead the Commons to act. The Peers did so. The Commons sent themback a reply that their interference in the business of supply, whichbelonged to the Commons alone, was a breach of their privileges. "And, " they added, "therefore, the Commons desire their lordships intheir wisdom to find out some way for the reparation of theirprivileges broken by that act, and to prevent the like infringement infuture. "

Thus repulsed on every hand, the king gave up the hope ofaccomplishing any thing through the action of the House of Commons, and he suddenly determined to dissolve Parliament. The session hadcontinued only about three weeks. In dissolving the Parliament theking took no notice of the Commons whatever, but addressed the Lordsalone. The Commons and the whole country were incensed at suchcapricious treatment of the national Legislature. 

The king and his council tried all summer to get the army ready to beput in motion. The great difficulty, of course, was want of funds. The _Convocation_, which was the great council of the Church, andwhich was accustomed in those days to sit simultaneously withParliament, continued their session afterward in this case, and raisedsome money for the king. The nobles of the court subscribed aconsiderable amount, also, which they lent him. They wished to sustainhim in his contest with the Commons on their own account, and then, besides, they felt a personal interest in him, and a sympathy for himin the troubles which were thickening around him. 

The summer months passed away in making the preparations and gettingthe various bodies of troops ready, and the military stores collectedat the place of rendezvous in York and Newcastle. The Scots, in themean time, had been assembling their forces near the borders, and, being somewhat imboldened by their success in the previous campaign, crossed the frontier, and advanced boldly to meet the forces of theking. 

They published a manifesto, declaring that they were not enteringEngland with any hostile intent toward their sovereign, but were onlycoming to present to him their humble petitions for a redress of theirgrievances, which they said they were sure he would graciouslyreceive as soon as he had opportunity to learn from them how greattheir grievances had been. They respectfully requested that the peopleof England would allow them to pass safely and without molestationthrough the land, and promised to conduct themselves with the utmostpropriety and decorum. This promise they kept. They avoided molestingthe inhabitants in any way, and purchased fairly every thing theyconsumed. When the English officers learned that the Scotch hadcrossed the Tweed, they sent on immediately to London, to the king, urging him to come north at once, and join the army, with all theremaining forces at his command. The king did so, but it was too late. He arrived at York; from York he went northward to reach the van ofhis army, which had been posted at Newcastle, but on his way he wasmet by messengers saying that they were in full retreat, and that theScotch had got possession of Newcastle. 

The circumstances of the battle were these. Newcastle is upon theTyne. The banks at Newcastle are steep and high, but about four milesabove the town is a place called Newburn, where was a meadow near theriver, and a convenient place to cross. The Scotch advanced in a veryslow and orderly manner to Newburn, and encamped there. The Englishsent a detachment from Newcastle to arrest their progress. The Scotchbegged them not to interrupt their march, as they were only going to_present petitions to the king_! The English general, of course, paidno attention to this pretext. The Scotch army then attacked them andsoon put them to flight. The routed English soldiers fled toNewcastle, and were there joined by all that portion of the army whichwas in Newcastle, in a rapid retreat. The Scotch took possession ofthe town, but conducted themselves in a very orderly manner, andbought and paid for every thing they used. 

The poor king was now in a situation of the most imminent and terribledanger. Rebel subjects were in full possession of one kingdom, andwere now advancing at the head of victorious armies into the other. Hehimself had entirely alienated the affections of a large portion ofhis subjects, and had openly quarreled with and dismissed theLegislature. He had no funds, and had exhausted all possible means ofraising funds. He was half distracted with the perplexities anddangers of his position. 

His deciding on dissolving Parliament in the spring was a hasty step, and he bitterly regretted it the moment the deed was done. He wishedto recall it. He deliberated several days about the possibility ofsummoning the same members to meet again, and constituting them againa Parliament. But the lawyers insisted that this could not be done. Adissolution was a dissolution. The Parliament, once dissolved, was nomore. It could not be brought to life again. There must be new ordersto the country to proceed to new elections. To do this at once wouldhave been too humiliating for the king. He now found, however, thatthe necessity for it could no longer be postponed. There was such athing in the English history as a council of peers alone, called in asudden emergency which did not allow of time for the electionsnecessary to constitute the House of Commons. Charles called such acouncil of peers to meet at York, and they immediately assembled. 

In the mean time the Scotch sent embassadors to York, saying to theking that they were advancing to lay their grievances before him! Theyexpressed great sorrow and regret at the victory which they had beencompelled to gain over some forces that had attempted to prevent themfrom getting access to their sovereign. The king laid thiscommunication before the lords, and asked their advice what to do; andalso asked them to counsel him how he should provide funds to keep hisarmy together until a Parliament could be convened. The lords advisedhim to appoint commissioners to meet the Scotch, and endeavor tocompromise the difficulties; and to send to the city of London, askingthat corporation to lend him a small sum until Parliament could beassembled. 

This advice was followed. A temporary treaty was made with the rebels, although making a treaty with rebels is perhaps the most humiliatingthing that a hereditary sovereign is ever compelled to do. The Earl ofStrafford was, however, entirely opposed to this policy. He urged theking most earnestly not to give up the contest without a more decisivestruggle. He represented to him the danger of beginning to yield tothe torrent which he now began to see would overwhelm them all if itwas allowed to have its way. He tried to persuade the king that theScots might yet be driven back, and that it would be possible to getalong without a Parliament. He dreaded a Parliament. The king, however, and his other advisers, thought that they must yield a littleto the storm. Strafford then wanted to be allowed to return to hispost in Ireland, where he thought that he should probably be safe fromthe terrible enmity which he must have known that he had awakened inEngland, and which he thought a Parliament would concentrate and bringupon his devoted head. But the king would not consent to this. Heassured Strafford that if a Parliament should assemble, he would takecare that they should not hurt a hair of his head. Unfortunatemonarch! How little he foresaw that that very Parliament, from whoseviolence he thus promised to defend his favorite servant so completelyas to insure him from the slightest injury, would begin by taking offhis favorite's head, and end with taking off his own!

CHAPTER VIII. 

DOWNFALL OF STRAFFORD AND LAUD

1640-1641

Opening of the new Parliament. --The king's speech. --Attacks onStrafford and Laud. --Speeches against them. --Feelings ofhostility. --Bill of attainder. --Mode of proceeding. --Thetrial. --Proceedings against Strafford. --Arrest of Strafford. --Usher ofthe black rod. --Laud threatened with violence. --Arrest of Laud on thecharge of treason. --Laud's speech. --His confinement. --Trial ofStrafford. --Unjust conduct of the Commons. --Arrangements atWestminster Hall. --Charges. --Imposing scene. --Strafford's able andeloquent defense. --The charge of treason a mere pretext. --Vote on thebill of attainder. --Interposition of the king. --Clamor of thepopulace. --Condemnation. --The king hesitates about signing thebill. --The Tower. --Strafford's letter to the king. --The king signs thebill. --Strafford's surprise. --The king asks mercy forStrafford. --Mercy refused. --Strafford's message to Laud. --Composure ofStrafford. --His execution. --Execution of Laud. --His firmness. 

The Parliament assembled in November, 1640. The king proceeded toLondon to attend it. He left Strafford in command of the army at York. Active hostilities had been suspended, as a sort of temporary trucehad been concluded with the Scots, to prepare the way for a finaltreaty. Strafford had been entirely opposed to this, being still fullof energy and courage. The king, however, began to feel alarmed. Hewent to London to meet the Parliament which he had summoned, but hewas prepared to meet them in a very different spirit from that whichhe had manifested on former occasions. He even gave up all theexternal circumstances of pomp and parade with which the opening ofParliament had usually been attended. He had been accustomed to go tothe House of Lords in state, with a numerous retinue and great parade. Now he was conveyed from his palace along the river in a barge, in aquiet and unostentatious manner. His opening speech, too, wasmoderate and conciliatory. In a word, it was pretty evident to theCommons that the proud and haughty spirit of their royal master wasbeginning to be pretty effectually humbled. 

Of course, now, in proportion as the king should falter, the Commonswould grow bold. The House immediately began to attack Laud andStrafford in their speeches. It is the theory of the BritishConstitution that the king can do no wrong; whatever criminality atany time attaches to the acts of his administration, belongs to his_advisers_, not to himself. The speakers condemned, in most decidedterms, the arbitrary and tyrannical course which the government hadpursued during the intermission of Parliaments, but charged it all, not to the king, but to Strafford and Laud. Strafford had been, asthey considered, the responsible person in civil and military affairs, and Laud in those of the Church. These speeches were made to try thetemper of the House and of the country, and see whether there washostility enough to Laud and Strafford in the House and in thecountry, and boldness enough in the expression of it, to warrant theirimpeachment. 

The attacks thus made in the House against the two ministers weremade very soon. Within a week after the opening of Parliament, one ofthe members, after declaiming a long time against the encroachmentsand tyranny of Archbishop Laud, whose title, according to Englishusage, was "his Grace, " said he hoped that, before the year ran round, his grace would either have more grace or no grace at all; "for, " headded, "our manifold griefs do fill a mighty and vast circumference, yet in such a manner that from every part our lines of sorrow do meetin him, and point at him the center, from whence our miseries in thisChurch, and many of them in the Commonwealth, do flow. " He said, also, that if they must submit to a pope, he would rather obey one that wasas far off as the Tiber, than to have him come as near as the Thames. 

Similar denunciations were made against Strafford, and they awakenedno opposition. On the contrary, it was found that the feeling ofhostility against both the ministers was so universal and so strong, that the leaders began to think seriously of an impeachment on acharge of high treason. High treason is the greatest crime known tothe English law, and the punishment for it, especially in the case ofa peer of the realm, is very terrible. This punishment was generallyinflicted by what was called a bill of attainder, which brought withit the worst of penalties. It implied the perfect destruction of thecriminal in every sense. He was to lose his life by having his headcut off upon a block. His body, according to the strict letter of thelaw, was to be mutilated in a manner too shocking to be heredescribed. His children were disinherited, and his property allforfeited. This was considered as the consequence of the _attainting_of the blood, which rendered it corrupt, and incapable of transmittingan inheritance. In fact, it was the intention of the bill of attainderto brand the wretched object of it with complete and perpetual infamy. 

The proceedings, too, in the impeachment and trial of a high ministerof state, were always very imposing and solemn. The impeachment mustbe moved by the Commons, and tried by the Peers. A peer of the realmcould be tried by no inferior tribunal. When the Commons proposedbringing articles of impeachment against an officer of state, theysent first a messenger to the House of Peers to ask them to arrest theperson whom they intended to accuse, and to hold him for trial untilthey should have their articles prepared. The House of Peers wouldcomply with this request, and a time would be appointed for the trial. The Commons would frame the charges, and appoint a certain number oftheir members to manage the prosecution. They would collect evidence, and get every thing ready for the trial. When the time arrived, thechamber of the House of Peers would be arranged as a court room, orthey would assemble in some other hall more suitable for the purpose, the prisoner would be brought to the bar, the commissioners on thepart of the Commons would appear with their documents and theirevidence, persons of distinction would assemble to listen to theproceedings, and the trial would go on. 

It was in accordance with this routine that the Commons commencedproceedings against the Earl of Strafford, very soon after the openingof the session, by appointing a committee to inquire whether there wasany just cause to accuse him of treason. The committee reported to theHouse that there was just cause. The House then appointed a messengerto go to the House of Lords, saying that they had found that there wasjust cause to accuse the Earl of Strafford of high treason, and toask that they would sequester him from the House, as the phrase was, and hold him in custody till they could prepare the charges and theevidence against him. All these proceedings were in secret session, inorder that Strafford might not get warning and fly. The Commons thennearly all accompanied their messenger to the House of Lords, to showhow much in earnest they were. The Lords complied with the request. They caused the earl to be arrested and committed to the charge of the_usher of the black rod_, and sent two officers to the Commons toinform them that they had done so. 

The usher of the black rod is a very important officer of the House ofLords. He is a sort of sheriff, to execute the various behests of theHouse, having officers to serve under him for this purpose. The badgeof his office has been, for centuries, a black rod with a golden lionat the upper end, which is borne before him as the emblem of hisauthority. A peer of the realm, when charged with treason, iscommitted to the custody of this officer. In this case he took theEarl of Strafford under his charge, and kept him at his house, properly guarded. The Commons went on preparing the articles ofimpeachment. 

This was in November. During the winter following the partiesstruggled one against another, Laud doing all in his power tostrengthen the position of the king, and to avert the dangers whichthreatened himself and Strafford. The animosity, however, which wasfelt against him, was steadily increasing. The House of Commons didmany things to discountenance the rites and usages of the EpiscopalChurch, and to make them odious. The excitement among the populaceincreased, and mobs began to interfere with the service in some of thechurches in London and Westminster. At last a mob of five hundredpersons assembled around the archbishop's palace at Lambeth. [E] Thispalace, as has been before stated, is on the bank of the Thames, justabove London, opposite to Westminster. The mob were there for twohours, beating at the doors and windows in an attempt to forceadmission, but in vain. The palace was very strongly guarded, and themob were at length repulsed. One of the ringleaders was taken andhanged. 

[Footnote E: See view of this palace on page 133. ]

One would have thought that this sort of persecution would haveawakened some sympathy in the archbishop's favor; but it was toolate. He had been bearing down so mercilessly himself upon the peopleof England for so many years, suppressing, by the severest measures, all expressions of discontent, that the hatred had become entirelyuncontrollable. Its breaking out at one point only promoted itsbreaking out in another. The House of Commons sent a messenger to theHouse of Lords, as they had done in the case of Strafford, saying thatthey had found good cause to accuse the Archbishop of Canterbury oftreason, and asked that he might be sequestered from the House, andheld in custody till they could prepare their charges, and theevidence to sustain them. 

The archbishop was at that time in his seat. He was directed towithdraw. Before leaving the chamber he asked leave to say a fewwords. Permission was granted, and he said in substance that he wastruly sorry to have awakened in the hearts of his countrymen such adegree of displeasure as was obviously excited against him. He wasmost unhappy to have lived to see the day in which he was made subjectto a charge of treason. He begged their lordships to look at the wholecourse of his life, and he was sure that they would be convinced thatthere was not a single member of the House of Commons who could reallythink him guilty of such a charge. 

Here one of the lords interrupted him to say that by speaking in thatmanner he was uttering slander against the House of Commons, chargingthem with solemnly bringing accusations which they did not believe tobe true. The archbishop then said, that if the charge must beentertained, he hoped that he should have a fair trial, according tothe ancient Parliamentary usages of the realm. Another of the lordsinterrupted him again, saying that such a remark was improper, as itwas not for him to prescribe the manner in which the proceedingsshould be conducted. He then withdrew, while the House should considerwhat course to take. Presently he was summoned back to the bar of theHouse, and there committed to the charge of the usher of the blackrod. The usher conducted him to his house, and he was kept there forten weeks in close confinement. 

At last the time for the trial of Strafford came on, while Laud was inconfinement. The interest felt in the trial was deep and universal. There were three kingdoms, as it were, combined against one man. Various measures were resorted to by the Commons to diminish thepossibility that the accused should escape conviction. Some of themhave since been thought to be unjust and cruel. For example, severalpersons who were strong friends of Strafford, and who, as wassupposed, might offer testimony in his favor, were charged withtreason and confined in prison until the trial was over. The Commonsappointed thirteen persons to manage the prosecution. These personswere many months preparing the charges and the evidence, keeping theirwhole proceedings profoundly secret during all the time. At last theday approached, and Westminster Hall was fitted up and prepared to bethe scene of the trial. 

[Illustration: WESTMINSTER HALL]

Westminster Hall has the name of being the largest room whose roof isnot supported by pillars, in Europe. It stands in the region of thepalaces and the Houses of Parliament at Westminster, and has been forseven centuries the scene of pageants and ceremonies without number. It is said that ten thousand persons have been accommodated in it at abanquet. [F] This great room was fitted up for the trial. Seats wereprovided for both houses of Parliament; for the Commons were to bepresent as accusers, and the Lords as the court. There was, as usual, a chair of state, or throne, for the king, as a matter of form. Therewas also a private gallery, screened from the observation of thespectators, where the king and queen could sit and witness theproceedings. They attended during the whole trial. 

[Footnote F: It is two hundred and seventy feet long, seventy-fivewide, and ninety high. ]

One would have supposed that the deliberate solemnity of thesepreparations would have calmed the animosity of Strafford's enemies, and led them to be satisfied at last with something less than hisutter destruction. But this seems not to have been the effect. Theterrible hostilities which had been gathering strength so long, seemedto rage all the more fiercely now that there was a prospect of theirgratification. And yet it was very hard to find any thing sufficientlydistinct and tangible against the accused to warrant his conviction. The commissioners who had been appointed to manage the case dividedthe charges among them. When the trial commenced, they stated andurged these charges in succession. Strafford, who had not knownbeforehand what they were to be, replied to them, one by one, withcalmness and composure, and yet with great eloquence and power. Theextraordinary abilities which he had shown through the whole course ofhis life, seemed to shine out with increased splendor amid the awfulsolemnities which were now darkening its close. He was firm andundaunted, and yet respectful and submissive. The natural excitementsof the occasion; the imposing assembly; the breathless attention; themagnificent hall; the consciousness that the opposition which he wasstruggling to stem before that great tribunal was the combinedhostility of three kingdoms, and that the torrent was flowing from areservoir which had been accumulating for many years; and that thewhole civilized world were looking on with great interest to watch theresult; and perhaps, more than all, that he was in the unseen presenceof his sovereign, whom he was accustomed to look upon as the greatestpersonage on earth; these, and the other circumstances of the scene, filled his mind with strong emotions, and gave animation, and energy, and a lofty eloquence to all that he said. 

The trial lasted eighteen days, the excitement increasing consistentlyto the end. There was nothing proved which could with any proprietybe considered as treason. He had managed the government, it is true, with one set of views in respect to the absolute prerogatives andpowers of the king, while those who now were in possession of powerheld opposite views, and they considered it a matter of necessity thathe should die. The charge of treason was a pretext to bring the casesomewhat within the reach of the formalities of law. It is one of thenecessary incidents of all governmental systems founded on force, andnot on the consent of the governed, that when great and fundamentalquestions of policy arise, they often bring the country to a crisis inwhich there can be no real settlement of the dispute without theabsolute destruction of one party or the other. It was so now, as thepopular leaders supposed. They had determined that stern necessityrequired that Laud and Strafford must die; and the only object ofgoing through the formality of a trial was to soften the violence ofthe proceeding a little, by doing all that could be done towardestablishing a legal justification of the deed. 

The trial, as has been said, lasted eighteen days. During all thistime, the leaders were not content with simply urging the proceedingsforward energetically in Westminster Hall. They were maneuvering andmanaging in every possible way to secure the final vote. But, notwithstanding this, Strafford's defense was so able, and the failureto make out the charge of treason against him was so clear, that itwas doubtful what the result would be. Accordingly, without waitingfor the decision of the Peers on the impeachment, a bill of attainderagainst the earl was brought forward in the House of Commons. Thisbill of attainder was passed by a large majority--yeas 204, nays 59. It was then sent to the House of Lords. The Lords were very unwillingto pass it. 

While they were debating it, the king sent a message to them to saythat in his opinion the earl had not been guilty of treason, or of anyattempt to subvert the laws; and that several things which had beenalleged in the trial, and on which the bill of attainder chieflyrested, were not true. He was willing, however, if it would satisfythe enemies of the earl, to have him convicted of a misdemeanor, andmade incapable of holding any public office from that time; but heprotested against his being punished by a bill of attainder on acharge of treason. 

This interposition of the king in Strafford's favor awakened loudexpressions of displeasure. They called it an interference with theaction of one of the houses of Parliament. The enemies of Straffordcreated a great excitement against him out of doors. They raisedclamorous calls for his execution, among the populace. The people madeblack lists of the names of persons who were in the earl's favor, andposted them up in public places, calling such persons Straffordians, and threatening them with public vengeance. The Lords, who would havebeen willing to have saved Strafford's life if they had dared, beganto find that they could not do so without endangering their own. Whenat last the vote came to be taken in the House of Lords, out of eightymembers who had been present at the trial, only forty-six were presentto vote, and the bill was passed by a vote of thirty-five to eleven. The thirty-four who were absent were probably all against the bill, but were afraid to appear. 

The responsibility now devolved upon the king. An act of Parliamentmust be signed by the king. He really enacts it. The action of the twohouses is, in theory, only a recommendation of the measure to him. Theking was determined on no account to give his consent to Strafford'scondemnation. He, however, laid the subject before his Privy Council. They, after deliberating upon it, recommended that he should sign thebill. Nothing else, they said, could allay the terrible storm whichwas raging, and the king ought to prefer the peace and safety of therealm to the life of any one man, however innocent he might be. Thepopulace, in the mean time, crowded around the king's palace atWhitehall, calling out "_Justice! justice!_" and filling the air withthreats and imprecations; and preachers in their pulpits urged thenecessity of punishing offenders, and descanted on the iniquity whichthose magistrates committed who allowed great transgressors to escapethe penalty due for their crimes. 

The queen, too, was alarmed. She begged the king, with tears, not anylonger to attempt to withstand the torrent which threatened to sweepthem all away in its fury. While things were in this state, Charlesreceived a letter from Strafford in the Tower, expressing his consent, and even his request, that the king should yield and sign the bill. 

The Tower of London is very celebrated in English history. Thoughcalled simply by the name of the Tower, it is, in fact, as will beseen by the engraving in the frontispiece, an extended group ofbuildings, which are of all ages, sizes, and shapes, and covering anextensive area. It is situated below the city of London, having beenoriginally built as a fortification for the defense of the city. Itsuse for this purpose has, however, long since passed away. 

Strafford said, in his letter to the king, "To set your Majesty's conscience at Liberty, I do most humbly beseech your Majesty for Prevention of Evils, which may happen by your Refusal, to pass this Bill. Sir, My Consent shall more acquit you herein to God, than all the World can do besides; To a willing Man there is no Injury done; and as by God's Grace, I forgive all the World, with a calmness and Meekness of infinite Contentment to my dislodging Soul, so, Sir, to you I can give the Life of this World with all the cheerfulness imaginable, in the just Acknowledgment of your exceeding Favors; and only beg that in your Goodness you would vouchsafe to cast your gracious Regard upon my poor Son and his three sisters, less or more, and no otherwise than as their unfortunate Father may hereafter appear more or less guilty of this Death. God long preserve your Majesty. "

On receiving this letter the king caused the bill to be signed. Hewould not do it with his own hands, but commissioned two of hiscouncil to do it in his name. He then sent a messenger to Strafford toannounce the decision, and to inform him that he must prepare to die. The messenger observed that the earl seemed surprised; and afterhearing that the king had signed the bill, he quoted, in a tone ofdespair, the words of Scripture, "Put not your trust in princes, norin the sons of men, for in them is no salvation. " Historians havethought it strange that Strafford should have expressed thisdisappointment when he had himself requested the king to resist thepopular will no longer; and they infer from it that he was not sincerein the request, but supposed that the king would regard it as an actof nobleness and generosity on his part, that would render him moreunwilling than ever to consent to his destruction, and that he wasaccordingly surprised and disappointed when he found that the king hadtaken him at his word. It is said, however, by some historians, thatthis letter was a forgery, and that it was written by some ofStrafford's enemies to lead the king to resist no longer. The reader, by perusing the letter again, can perhaps form some judgment whethersuch a document was more likely to have been fabricated by enemies, orreally written by the unhappy prisoner himself. 

The king did not entirely give up the hope of saving his friend, evenafter the bill of attainder was signed. He addressed the followingmessage to the House of Lords. 

 My Lords, --I did yesterday satisfy the Justice of this Kingdom by passing the Bill of Attainder against the Earl of Strafford: but Mercy being as inherent and inseparable to a King as Justice, I desire at this time in some measure to show that likewise, by suffering that unfortunate Man to fulfill the natural course of his Life in a close Imprisonment: yet so, if ever he make the least Offer to escape, or offer directly or indirectly to meddle in any sort of public Business, especially with Me either by Message or Letter, it shall cost him his Life without farther Process. This, if it may be done without the Discontentment of my People, will be an unspeakable Contentment to me. 

 "I will not say that your complying with me in this my intended Mercy, shall make me more willing, but certainly 'twill make me more cheerful in granting your just Grievances: But if no less than his Life can satisfie my People, I must say Let justice be done. Thus again recommending the consideration of my Intention to you, I rest, "Your Unalterable and Affectionate Friend, "CHARLES R. "

[Illustration: STRAFFORD AND LAUD]

The Lords were inexorable. Three days from the time of signing thebill, arrangements were made for conducting the prisoner to thescaffold. Laud, who had been his friend and fellow-laborer in theking's service, was confined also in the Tower, awaiting his turn tocome to trial. They were not allowed to visit each other, butStrafford sent word to Laud requesting him to be at his window at thetime when he was to pass, to bid him farewell, and to give him hisblessing. Laud accordingly appeared at the window, and Strafford, ashe passed, asked for the prelate's prayers and for his blessing. Theold man, for Laud was now nearly seventy years of age, attempted tospeak, but he could not command himself sufficiently to express whathe wished to say, and he fell back into the arms of his attendants. "God protect you, " said Strafford, and walked calmly on. 

He went to the place of execution with the composure and courage of ahero. He spoke freely to those around him, asserted his innocence, sent messages to his absent friends, and said he was ready and willingto die. The scaffold, in such executions as this, is a platformslightly raised, with a block and chairs upon it, all covered withblack cloth. A part of the dress has to be removed just before theexecution, in order that the neck of the sufferer may be fully exposedto the impending blow. Strafford made these preparations himself, andsaid, as he did so, that he was in no wise afraid of death, but thathe should lay his head upon that block as cheerfully as he ever didupon his pillow. 

 * * * * *

Charles found his position in no respect improved by the execution ofStrafford. The Commons, finding their influence and power increasing, grew more and more bold, and were from this time so absorbed in theevents connected with the progress of their quarrel with the king, that they left Laud to pine in his prison for about four years. Theythen found time to act over again the solemn and awful scene of atrial for treason before the House of Peers, the passing of a bill ofattainder, and an execution on Tower Hill. Laud was over seventy yearsof age when the ax fell upon him. He submitted to his fate with acalmness and heroism in keeping with his age and his character. Hesaid, in fact, that none of his enemies could be more desirous to sendhim out of life than he was to go. 

CHAPTER IX. 

CIVIL WAR. 

1641-1646

Increasing demands of the Commons. --The king gradually loses hispower. --The king determines to change his policy. --The king sends hisofficers to the House. --The king goes to the House himself. --Theking's speech in the House. --Great excitement in the House. --Thespeaker's reply. --Results of the king's rashness. --Committee of theCommons. --The king goes to London. --Cries of the people. --Preparationsto escort the committee to Westminster. --Report of thecommittee. --Alarm of the king. --The king yields. --Increasingexcitement. --Civil war. --Its nature. --Cruelties and miseries of civilwar. --Taking sides between the king and Parliament. --Preparations forwar. --Fruitless negotiations. --Messages between the king andParliament. --Ravages of the war. --Death of Hampden. --PrinceRupert. --His knowledge and ingenuity. --Progress of thewar. --Difficulty of making peace. --The women clamor for peace. --QueenHenrietta's arrival in England. --The vice-admiral cannonades thequeen. --The queen's danger. --She seeks shelter in a trench. --The queenjoins her husband. --Her influence. --The royal cause declines. --ThePrince of Wales. --Hopeless condition of the king. --Invasion by theScots. --The king surrenders to the Scots. --End of the civil war. 

The way in which the king came at last to a final rupture withParliament was this. The victory which the Commons gained in the caseof Strafford had greatly increased their confidence and their power, and the king found, for some months afterward, that instead of beingsatisfied with the concessions he had made, they were continuallydemanding more. The more he yielded, the more they encroached. Theygrew, in a word, bolder and bolder, in proportion to their success. They considered themselves doing the state a great and good service bydisarming tyranny of its power. The king, on the other hand, considered them as undermining all the foundations of good government, and as depriving him of personal rights, the most sacred and solemnthat could vest in any human being. 

It will be recollected that on former occasions, when the king had gotinto contention with a Parliament, he had dissolved it, and eitherattempted to govern without one, or else had called for a newelection, hoping that the new members would be more compliant. But hecould not dissolve the Parliament now. They had provided against thisdanger. At the time of the trial of Strafford, they brought in a billinto the Commons providing that thenceforth the Houses could not beprorogued or dissolved without their own consent. The Commons, ofcourse, passed the bill very readily. The Peers were more reluctant, but they did not dare to reject it. The king was extremely unwillingto sign the bill; but, amid the terrible excitements and dangers ofthat trial, he was overborne by the influences of danger andintimidation which surrounded him. He signed the bill. Of course theCommons were, thereafter, their own masters. However dangerous ordestructive the king might consider their course of conduct to be, hecould now no longer arrest it, as heretofore, by a dissolution. 

He went on, therefore, till the close of 1641, yielding slowly andreluctantly, and with many struggles, but still all the time yielding, to the resistless current which bore him along. At last he resolved toyield no longer. After retreating so long, he determined suddenly anddesperately to turn back and attack his enemies. The whole worldlooked on with astonishment at such a sudden change of his policy. 

The measure which he resorted to was this. He determined to select anumber of the most efficient and prominent men in Parliament, who hadbeen leaders in the proceedings against him, and demand their arrest, imprisonment, and trial, on a charge of high treason. The king wasinfluenced to do this partly by the advice of the queen, and of theladies of the court, and other persons who did not understand how deepand strong the torrent was which they thus urged him to attempt tostem. They thought that if he would show a little courage and energyin facing these men, they would yield in their turn, and that theirboldness and success was owing, in a great measure, to the king's wantof spirit in resisting them. "Strike boldly at them, " said they;"seize the leaders; have them tried, and condemned, and executed. Threaten the rest with the same fate; and follow up these measureswith energetic and decisive action, and you will soon make a change inthe aspect of affairs. "

The king adopted this policy, and he did make a change in the aspectof affairs, but not such a change as his advisers had anticipated. TheCommons were thrown suddenly into a state of astonishment one day bythe appearance of a king's officer in the House, who rose and readarticles of a charge of treason against five of the most influentialand popular members. The officer asked that a committee should beappointed to hear the evidence against them which the king waspreparing. The Commons, on hearing this, immediately voted, that ifany person should attempt even to seize the papers of the personsaccused, it should be lawful for them to resist such an attempt byevery means in their power. 

The next day another officer appeared at the bar of the House ofCommons, and spoke as follows. "I am commanded by the king's majesty, my master, upon my allegiance, that I should come to the House ofCommons, and require of Mr. Speaker five gentlemen, members of theHouse of Commons; and those gentlemen being delivered, I am commandedto arrest them in his majesty's name, on a charge of high treason. "The Commons, on hearing this demand, voted that they would take itinto consideration. 

The king's friends and advisers urged him to follow the matter upvigorously. Every thing depended, they said, on firmness and decision. The next day, accordingly, the king determined to go himself to theHouse, and make the demand in person. A lady of the court, who wasmade acquainted with this plan, sent notice of it to the House. Ingoing, the king took his guard with him, and several personalattendants. The number of soldiers was said to be five hundred. Heleft this great retinue at the door, and he himself entered the House. The Commons, when they heard that he was coming, had ordered the fivemembers who were accused to withdraw. They went out just before theking came in. The king advanced to the speaker's chair, took his seat, and made the following address. 

 "Gentlemen, --I am sorry for this occasion of coming unto you. Yesterday I sent a Sergeant at Arms upon a very important occasion to apprehend some that by my Command were accused of High Treason; whereunto I did expect Obedience and not a message. And I must declare unto you here, that albeit no king that ever was in England shall be more careful of your Privileges, to maintain them to the uttermost of his Power, than I shall be; yet you must know that in cases of Treason no Person hath a Privilege; and therefore I am come to know if any of those Persons that were accused are here. For I must tell you, Gentlemen, that so long as these Persons that I have accused (for no slight Crime, but for Treason) are here, I can not expect that this House will be in the right way that I do heartily wish it. Therefore I am come to tell you that I must have them wherever I find them. "

After looking around, and finding that the members in question werenot in the hall, he continued:

 "Well! since I see the Birds are flown, I do expect from you that you shall send them unto me as soon as they return hither. But I assure you, on the Word of a King, I never did intend any Force, but shall proceed against them in a legal and fair way, for I never meant any other. 

 "I will trouble you no more, but tell you I do expect, as soon as they come to the House, you will send them to me, otherwise I must take my own course to find them. "

The king's coming thus into the House of Commons, and demanding inperson that they should act according to his instructions, was a veryextraordinary circumstance--perhaps unparalleled in English history. It produced the greatest excitement. When he had finished his address, he turned to the speaker and asked him where those men were. He hadhis guard ready at the door to seize them. It is difficult for us, inthis country, to understand fully to how severe a test this suddenquestion put the presence of mind and courage of the speaker; for wecan not realize the profound and awful deference which was felt inthose days for the command of a king. The speaker gained greatapplause for the manner in which he stood the trial. He fell upon hisknees before the great potentate who had addressed him, and said, "Ihave, sir, neither eyes to see, nor tongue to speak, in this place, but as the House is pleased to direct me, whose servant I am. And Ihumbly ask pardon that I can not give any other answer to what yourmajesty is pleased to demand of me. "

The House was immediately in a state of great excitement andconfusion. They called out "_Privilege! privilege!_" meaning thattheir privileges were violated. They immediately adjourned. News ofthe affair spread every where with the greatest rapidity, and produceduniversal and intense excitement. The king's friends were astonishedat such an act of rashness and folly, which, it is said, only _one_ ofthe king's advisers knew anything about, and he immediately fled. Thefive members accused went that night into the city of London, andcalled on the government and people of London to protect them. Thepeople armed themselves. In a word, the king found at night that hehad raised a very threatening and terrible storm. 

The Commons met the next morning, but did not attempt to transactbusiness. They simply voted that it was useless for them to proceedwith their deliberations, while exposed to such violations of theirrights. They appointed a committee of twenty-four to inquire into andreport the circumstances of the king's intrusion into their councils, and to consider how this breach of their privileges could be repaired. They ordered this committee to sit in the city of London, where theymight hope to be safe from such interruptions, and then the Houseadjourned for a week, to await the result of the committee'sdeliberations. 

The committee went to London. In the mean time, news went all over thekingdom that the House of Commons had been compelled to suspend itssittings on account of an illegal and unwarrantable interference withtheir proceedings on the part of the king. The king was alarmed; butthose who had advised him to adopt this measure told him that he mustnot falter now. He must persevere and carry his point, or all would belost. 

He accordingly did persevere. He brought troops and arms to his palaceat Whitehall, to be ready to defend it in case of attack. He sent into London, and ordered the lord mayor to assemble the city authoritiesat the Guildhall, which is the great city hall of London; and then, with a retinue of noblemen, he went in to meet them. The peopleshouted, "_Privileges of Parliament! privileges of Parliament!_" as hepassed along. Some called out, "_To your tents, O Israel!_" which wasthe ancient Hebrew cry of rebellion. The king, however, persevered. When he reached the Guildhall, he addressed the city authorities thus:

"Gentlemen, --I am come to demand such Persons as I have alreadyaccused of High Treason, and do believe are shrouded in the City. Ihope no good Man will keep them from Me. Their Offenses are Treasonand Misdemeanors of a high Nature. I desire your Assistance, that theymay be brought to a legal Trial. " Three days after this the kingissued a proclamation, addressed to all magistrates and officers ofjustice every where, to arrest the accused members and carry them tothe Tower. 

In the mean time, the committee of twenty-four continued their sessionin London, examining witnesses and preparing their report. When thetime arrived for the House of Commons to meet again, which was on the11th of January, the city made preparations to have the committeeescorted in an imposing manner from the Guildhall to Westminster. Avast amount of the intercommunication and traffic between differentportions of the city then, as now, took place upon the river, thoughin those days it was managed by watermen, who rowed small wherries toand fro. Innumerable steamboats take the place of the wherries at thepresent day, and stokers and engineers have superseded the watermen. The watermen were then, however, a large and formidable body, bandedtogether, like the other trades of London, in one great organization. This great company turned out on this occasion, and attended thecommittee in barges on the river, while the military companies of thecity marched along the streets upon the land. The committee themselveswent in barges on the water, and all London flocked to see thespectacle. The king, hearing of these arrangements, was alarmed forhis personal safety, and left his palace at Whitehall to go to HamptonCourt, which was a little way out of town. 

The committee, after entering the House, reported that the transactionwhich they had been considering constituted a high breach of theprivileges of the House, and was a seditious act, tending to asubversion of the peace of the kingdom; and that the privileges ofParliament, so violated and broken, could not be sufficientlyvindicated, unless his majesty would be pleased to inform them whoadvised him to do such a deed. 

The king was more and more seriously alarmed. He found that the stormof public odium and indignation was too great for him to withstand. Hebegan to fear for his own safety more than ever. He removed fromHampton Court to Windsor Castle, a stronger place, and more remotefrom London than Hampton Court; and he now determined to give up thecontest. He sent a message, therefore, to the House, saying that, onfurther reflection, since so many persons had doubts whether hisproceedings against the five members were consistent with theprivileges of Parliament, he would waive them, and the whole subjectmight rest until the minds of men were more composed, and then, if heproceeded against the accused members at all, he would do so in amanner to which no exception could be taken. He said, also, he wouldhenceforth be as careful of their privileges as he should be of hisown life or crown. 

Thus he acknowledged himself vanquished in the struggle, but theacknowledgment came too late to save him. The excitement increased, and spread in every direction. The party of the king and that of theParliament disputed for a few months about these occurrences, andothers growing out of them, and then each began to maneuver andstruggle to get possession of the military power of the kingdom. Theking, finding himself not safe in the vicinity of London, retreated toYork, and began to assemble and organize his followers. Parliamentsent him a declaration that if he did not disband the forces which hewas assembling, they should be compelled to provide measures forsecuring the peace of the kingdom. The king replied by proclamationscalling upon his subjects to join his standard. In a word, beforemidsummer, the country was plunged in the horrors of civil war. 

A civil war, that is, a war between two parties in the same country, is generally far more savage and sanguinary than any other. The hatredand the animosities which it creates, ramify throughout the country, and produce universal conflict and misery. If there were a war betweenFrance and England, there might be one, or perhaps two invading armiesof Frenchmen attempting to penetrate into the interior. All Englandwould be united against them. Husbands and wives, parents andchildren, neighbors and friends, would be drawn together more closelythan ever; while the awful scenes of war and bloodshed, theexcitement, the passion, the terror, would be confined to a fewdetached spots, or to a few lines of march which the invading armieshad occupied. 

In a civil war, however, it is very different. Every distinct portionof the country, every village and hamlet, and sometimes almost everyfamily, is divided against itself. The hostility and hatred, too, between the combatants, is always far more intense and bitter thanthat which is felt against a foreign foe. We might at first besurprised at this. We might imagine that where men are contending withtheir neighbors and fellow-townsmen, the recollection of pastfriendships and good-will, and various lingering ties of regard, wouldmoderate the fierceness of their anger, and make them more considerateand forbearing. But this is not found to be the case. Each partyconsiders the other as not only enemies, but traitors, and accordinglythey hate and abhor each other with a double intensity. If anEnglishman has a _Frenchman_ to combat, he meets him with a murderousimpetuosity, it is true, but without any special bitterness ofanimosity. He _expects_ the Frenchman to be his enemy. He even thinkshe has a sort of natural right to be so. He will kill him if he can;but then, if he takes him prisoner, there is nothing in his feelingstoward him to prevent his treating him with generosity, and even withkindness. He hates him, but there is a sort of good-nature in hishatred, after all. On the other hand, when he fights against hiscountrymen in a civil war, he abhors and hates with unmingledbitterness the traitorous ingratitude which he thinks his neighborsand friends evince in turning enemies to their country. He can see nohonesty, no truth, no courage in any thing they do. They areinfinitely worse, in his estimation, than the most ferocious offoreign foes. Civil war is, consequently, always the means of farwider and more terrible mischief than any other human calamity. 

In the contention between Charles and the Parliament, the variouselements of the social state adhered to one side or the other, according to their natural predilections. The Episcopalians generallyjoined the king, the Presbyterians the Parliament. The gentry and thenobility favored the king; the mechanics, artisans, merchants, andcommon people the Parliament. The rural districts of country, whichwere under the control of the great landlords, the king; the citiesand towns, the Parliament. The gay, and fashionable, and worldly, theking; the serious-minded and austere, the Parliament. Thus every thingwas divided. The quarrel ramified to every hamlet and to everyfireside, and the peace and happiness of the realm were effectuallydestroyed. 

Both sides began to raise armies and to prepare for war. Beforecommencing hostilities, however, the king was persuaded by hiscounselors to send a messenger to London and propose some terms ofaccommodation. He accordingly sent the Earl of Southampton to theHouse of Peers, and two other persons to the House of Commons. He hadno expectation, probably, of making peace, but he wanted to gain timeto get his army together, and also to strengthen his cause among thepeople by showing a disposition to do all in his power to avoid openwar. The messengers of the king went to London, and made theirappearance in the two houses of Parliament. 

The House of Lords ordered the Earl of Southampton to withdraw, and tosend his communication in writing, and in the mean time to retire outof London, and wait for their answer. The House of Commons, in thesame spirit of hostility and defiance, ordered the messengers whichhad been sent to them to come to the bar, like humble petitioners orcriminals, and make their communication there. 

The propositions of the king to the houses of Parliament were, thatthey should appoint a certain number of commissioners, and he also thesame number, to meet and confer together in hope of agreeing upon someconditions of peace. The houses passed a vote in reply, declaring thatthey had been doing all in their power to preserve the peace of thekingdom, while the king had been interrupting and disturbing it by hismilitary gatherings, and by proclamations, in which they were calledtraitors; and that they could enter into no treaty with him until hedisbanded the armies which he had collected, and recalled hisproclamations. 

To this the king replied that he had never intended to call themtraitors; and that when they would recall their declarations and votesstigmatizing those who adhered to him as traitors, he would recall hisproclamations. Thus messages passed back and forth two or three times, each party criminating the other, and neither willing to make theconcessions which the other required. At last all hope of anaccommodation was abandoned, and both sides prepared for war. 

The nobility and gentry flocked to the king's standard. They broughttheir plate, their jewels, and their money, to provide funds. Some ofthem brought their servants. There were two companies in the king'sguard, one of which consisted of gentlemen, and the other of theirservants. These two companies were always kept together. There was thegreatest zeal and enthusiasm among the upper classes to serve theking, and equal zeal and enthusiasm among the common people to servethe Parliament. The war continued for four years. During all this timethe armies marched and countermarched all over the kingdom, carryingruin and destruction wherever they went, and plunging the wholecountry in misery. 

[Illustration: THE KING'S ADHERENTS ENTERING YORK. ]

At one of the battles which was fought, the celebrated John Hampden, the man who would not pay his ship money, was slain. He had been avery energetic and efficient officer on the Parliamentary side, andwas much dreaded by the forces of the king. At one of the battlesbetween Prince Rupert, Charles's nephew, and the army of theParliament, the prince brought to the king's camp a large number ofprisoners which he had taken. One of the prisoners said he wasconfident that Hampden was hurt, for he saw him riding off the fieldbefore the battle was over, with his head hanging down, and his handsclasping the neck of his horse. They heard the next day that he hadbeen wounded in the shoulder. Inflammation and fever ensued, and hedied a few days afterward in great agony. 

This Prince Rupert was a very famous character in all these wars. Hewas young and ardent, and full of courage and enthusiasm. He wasalways foremost, and ready to embark in the most daring undertakings. He was the son of the king's sister Elizabeth, who married the ElectorPalatine, as narrated in a preceding chapter. He was famous not onlyfor his military skill and attainments, but for his knowledge ofscience, and for his ingenuity in many philosophical arts. There is amode of engraving called mezzotinto, which is somewhat easier ofexecution than the common mode, and produces a peculiar effect. PrinceRupert is said to have been the inventor of it, though, as is the casewith almost all other inventions, there is a dispute about it. Hediscovered a mode of dropping melted glass into water so as to formlittle pear-shaped globules, with a long slender tail. These globuleshave this remarkable property, that if the tip of the tail is brokenoff ever so gently, the whole flies into atoms with an explosion. These drops of glass are often exhibited at the present day, and arecalled Prince Rupert's drops. The prince also discovered a verytenacious composition of metals for casting cannon. As artillery isnecessarily very heavy, and very difficult to be transported onmarches and upon the field of battle, it becomes very important todiscover such metallic compounds as have the greatest strength andtenacity in resisting the force of an explosion. Prince Rupertinvented such a compound, which is called by his name. 

There were not only a great many battles and fierce encounters betweenthe two great parties in this civil war, but there were also, attimes, temporary cessations of the hostilities, and negotiations forpeace. But it is very hard to make peace between two powers engaged incivil war. Each considers the other as acting the part of rebels andtraitors, and there is a difficulty, almost insuperable, in the way ofeven opening negotiations between them. Still the people became tiredof the war. At one time, when the king had made some propositionswhich the Parliament would not accept, an immense assemblage of womencollected together, with white ribbons in their hats, to go to theHouse of Commons with a petition for peace. When they reached thedoor of the hall their number was five thousand. They called out, "Peace! peace! Give us those traitors that are against peace, that wemay tear them to pieces. " The guards who were stationed at the doorwere ordered to fire at this crowd, loading their guns, however, onlywith powder. This, it was thought, would frighten them away; but thewomen only laughed at the volley, and returned it with stones andbrickbats, and drove the guards away. Other troops were then sent for, who charged upon the women with their swords, and cut them in theirfaces and hands, and thus at length dispersed them. 

During the progress of the war, the queen returned from the Continentand joined the king. She had some difficulty, however, and encounteredsome personal danger, in her efforts to return to her husband. Thevice-admiral, who had command of the English ships off the coast, received orders to intercept her. He watched for her. She contrived, however, to elude his vigilance, though there were four ships in herconvoy. She landed at a town called Burlington, or Bridlington, inYorkshire. This town stands in a very picturesque situation, a littlesouth of a famous promontory called Flamborough Head, of which thereis a beautiful view from the pier of the town. 

The queen succeeded in landing here. On her arrival at the town, shefound herself worn down with the anxiety and fatigue of the voyage, and she wished to stop a few days to rest. She took up her residencein a house which was on the quay, and, of course, near the water. Thequay, as it is called, in these towns, is a street on the margin ofthe water, with a wall but no houses next the sea. The vice-admiralarrived at the town the second night after the queen had landed. Hewas vexed that his expected prize had escaped him. He brought hisships up near to the town, and began to fire toward the house in whichthe queen was lodging. 

[Illustration: THE LANDING OF THE QUEEN]

This was at five o'clock in the morning. The queen and her attendantswere in their beds, asleep. The reports of the cannon from the ships, the terrific whistling of the balls through the air, and the crash ofthe houses which the balls struck, aroused the whole village fromtheir slumbers, and threw them into consternation. The people sooncame to the house where the queen was lodging, and begged her tofly. They said that the neighboring houses were blown to pieces, andthat her own would soon be destroyed, and she herself would be killed. They may, however, have been influenced more by a regard to their ownsafety than to hers in these injunctions, as it must have been a greatobject with the villagers to effect the immediate removal of a visitorwho was the means of bringing upon them so terrible a danger. 

These urgent entreaties of the villagers were soon enforced by twocannon-balls, which fell, one after another, upon the roof of thehouse, and, crashing their way through the roof and the floors, wentdown, without seeming to regard the resistance, from the top to thebottom. The queen hastily put on her clothes, and went forth with herattendants on foot, the balls from the ships whistling after them allthe way. 

One of her servants was killed. The rest of the fugitives, findingtheir exposure so great, stopped at a sort of trench which they cameto, at the end of a field, such as is dug commonly, in England, on oneside of the hedge to make the barrier more impassable to the animalswhich it is intended to confine. This trench, with the embankmentformed by the earth thrown out of it, on which the hedge is usuallyplanted, afforded them protection. They sought shelter in it, andremained there for two hours, like besiegers in the approaches to atown, the balls passing over their heads harmlessly, though sometimescovering them with the earth which they threw up as they bounded by. At length the tide began to ebb, and the vice-admiral was in danger ofbeing left aground. He weighed his anchors and withdrew, and the queenand her party were relieved. Such a cannonading of a helpless anddefenseless woman is a barbarity which could hardly take place exceptin a civil war. 

The queen rejoined her husband, and she rendered him essential servicein many ways. She had personal influence enough to raise both moneyand men for his armies, and so contributed very essentially to thestrength of his party. At last she returned to the Continent again, and went to Paris, where she was still actively employed in promotinghis cause. At one of the battles in which the king was defeated, theParliamentary army seized his baggage, and found among his papers hiscorrespondence with the queen. They very ungenerously ordered it to bepublished, as the letters seemed to show a vigorous determination onthe part of the king not to yield in the contest without obtainingfrom the Parliament and their adherents full and ample concessions tohis claims. 

As time rolled on, the strength of the royal party gradually wastedaway, while that of Parliament seemed to increase, until it becameevident that the latter would, in the end, obtain the victory. Theking retreated from place to place, followed by his foes, and growingweaker and more discouraged after every conflict. His son, the Princeof Wales, was then about fifteen years of age. He sent him to thewestern part of the island, with directions that, if affairs shouldstill go against him, the boy should be taken in time out of thecountry, and join his mother in Paris. The danger grew more and moreimminent, and they who had charge of the young prince sent him firstto Scilly, and then to Jersey--islands in the Channel--whence he madehis escape to Paris, and joined his mother. Fifteen years afterward hereturned to London with great pomp and parade, and was placed upon thethrone by universal acclamation. 

At last the king himself, after being driven from one place of refugeto another, retreated to Oxford and intrenched himself there. Here hespent the winter of 1646 in extreme depression and distress. Hisfriends deserted him; his resources were expended; his hopes wereextinguished. He sent proposals of peace to the Parliament, andoffered, himself, to come to London, if they would grant him asafe-conduct. In reply, they _forbade_ him to come. They would listento no propositions, and would make no terms. The case, they saw, wasin their own hands, and they determined on unconditional submission. They hemmed the king in on all sides at his retreat in Oxford, andreduced him to despair. 

In the mean time, the Scots, a year or two before this, had raised anarmy and crossed the northern frontier, and entered England. They wereagainst monarchy and Episcopacy, but they were, in some respects, aseparate enemy from those against whom the king had been contending solong; and he began to think that he had perhaps better fall into theirhands than into those of his English foes, if he must submit to one orto the other. He hesitated for some time what course to take; but atlast, after receiving representations of the favorable feeling whichprevailed in regard to him in the Scottish army, he concluded to makehis escape from Oxford and surrender himself to them. He accordinglydid so, and the civil war was ended. 

CHAPTER X. 

THE CAPTIVITY. 

1646-1648

The king's escape from Oxford. --The king delivers himself to theScots. --His reception. --Proclamation by Parliament. --Surrender ofNewark. --Negotiations about the disposal of the king's person. --TheScots surrender the king. --Whether he was sold. --The king's amusementsin captivity. --Holmby House. --Contest about forms. --Intolerance. --TheScotch preacher. --The king's presence of mind. --The king receivesletters from the queen. --The army. --Oliver Cromwell. --His plan toseize the king. --Cornet Joyce. --He forces admittance to theking. --Joyce's interview with the king. --His "instructions. "--Theking taken to Cambridge. --Closely guarded. --The king's evil. --Theking removed to Hampton Court. --The king's interview with hischildren. --Contentions. --The king's escape from HamptonCourt. --Carisbrooke Castle. --Colonel Hammond. --The king again aprisoner. --His confinement in Carisbrooke Castle. --Negotiations. --Theking's employments. --Unsuccessful attempts to escape. --Osborne. --Planof escape. --Rolf's treacherous design. --Rolf foiled. --The king made acloser prisoner. --The king's wretched condition. 

The circumstances of King Charles's surrender to the Scots were these. He knew that he was surrounded by his enemies in Oxford, and that theywould not allow him to escape if they could prevent it. He and hisfriends, therefore, formed the following plan to elude them. 

They sent word to the commanders of each of the several gates of thecity, on a certain day, that during the ensuing night three men wouldhave to pass out on business of the king's, and that when the menshould appear and give a certain signal, they were to be allowed topass. The officer at each gate received this command without knowingthat a similar one had been sent to the others. 

[Illustration: NEWARK. ]

Accordingly, about midnight, the parties of men were dispatched, andthey went out at the several gates. The king himself was in one ofthese parties. There were two other persons with him. One of thesepersons was a certain Mr. Ashburnham, and the king was disguised ashis servant. They were all on horseback, and the king had a valiseupon the horse behind him, so as to complete his disguise. This was onthe 27th of April. The next day, or very soon after, it was known atOxford that his majesty was gone, but no one could tell in whatdirection, for there was no means even of deciding by which of thegates he had left the city. 

The Scotch were, at this time, encamped before the town of Newark, which is on the Trent, in the heart of England, and about one hundredand twenty miles north of London. There was a magnificent castle atNewark in those days, which made the place very strong. The town heldout for the king; though the Scots had been investing it for sometime, they had not yet succeeded in compelling the governor tosurrender. The king concluded to proceed to Newark and enter theScottish camp. He considered it, or, rather, wished it to beconsidered that he was coming to join them as their monarch. _They_were going to consider it surrendering to them as their prisoner. Theking himself must have known how it would be, but it made his sense ofhumiliation a little less poignant to carry this illusion with him aslong as it was possible to maintain it. 

As soon as the Parliament found that the king had made his escape fromOxford, they were alarmed, and on the 4th of May they issued an orderto this effect, "That what person soever should harbor and conceal, orshould know of the harboring or concealing of the king's person, andshould not immediately reveal it to the speakers of both houses, should be proceeded against as a traitor to the Commonwealth, and diewithout mercy. " The proclamation of this order, however, did notresult in arresting the flight of the king. On the day after it wasissued, he arrived safely at Newark. 

The Scottish general, whose name was Lesley, immediately representedto the king that for his own safety it was necessary that they shouldretire toward the northern frontier; but they could not so retire, hesaid, unless Newark should first surrender. They accordingly inducedthe king to send in orders to the governor of the castle to give upthe place. The Scots took possession of it, and, after havinggarrisoned it, moved with their army toward the north, the king andGeneral Lesley being in the van. 

They treated the king with great distinction, but guarded him veryclosely, and sent word to the Parliament that he was in theirpossession. There ensued long negotiations and much debate. Thequestion was, at first, whether the English or Scotch should have thedisposal of the king's person. The English said that _they_, and notthe Scots, were the party making war upon him; that they had conqueredhis armies, and hemmed him in, and reduced him to the necessity ofsubmission; and that he had been taken captive on English soil, andought, consequently, to be delivered into the hands of the EnglishParliament. The Scots replied that though he had been taken inEngland, he was their king as well as the king of England, and hadmade himself their enemy; and that, as he had fallen into their hands, he ought to remain at their disposal. To this the English rejoined, that the Scots, in taking him, had not acted on their own account, butas the allies, and, as it were, the agents of the English, and thatthey ought to consider the king as a captive taken for them, and holdhim subject to their disposal. 

They could not settle the question. In the mean time the Scottish armydrew back toward the frontier, taking the king with them. About thistime a negotiation sprung up between the Parliament and the Scots forthe payment of the expenses which the Scottish army had incurred intheir campaign. The Scots sent in an account amounting to two millionsof pounds. The English objected to a great many of the charges, andoffered them two hundred thousand pounds. Finally it was settled thatfour hundred thousand pounds should be paid. This arrangement was madeearly in September. In January the Scots agreed to give up the kinginto the hands of the English Parliament. 

The world accused the Scots of selling their king to his enemies forfour hundred thousand pounds. The Scots denied that there was anyconnection between the two transactions above referred to. Theyreceived the money on account of their just claims; and they afterwardagreed to deliver up the king, because they thought it right andproper so to do. The friends of the king, however, were neversatisfied that there was not a secret understanding between theparties, that the money paid was not the price of the king's delivery;and as this delivery resulted in his death, they called it the priceof blood. 

Charles was at Newcastle when they came to this decision. His mind hadbeen more at ease since his surrender to the Scots, and he wasaccustomed to amuse himself and while away the time of his captivityby various games. He was playing chess when the intelligence wasbrought to him that he was to be delivered up to the EnglishParliament. It was communicated to him in a letter. He read it, andthen went on with his game, and none of those around him couldperceive by his air and manner that the intelligence which the lettercontained was any thing extraordinary. Perhaps he was not aware of themagnitude of the change in his condition and prospects which thecommunication announced. 

There was at this time, at a town called Holmby or Holdenby, inNorthamptonshire, a beautiful palace which was known by the name ofHolmby House. King Charles's mother had purchased this palace for himwhen he was the Duke of York, in the early part of his life, while hisfather, King James, was on the throne, and his older brother was theheir apparent. It was a very stately and beautiful edifice. The housewas fitted up in a very handsome manner, and all suitableaccommodations provided for the king's reception. He had manyattendants, and every desirable convenience and luxury of living; but, though the war was over, there was still kept up between the king andhis enemies a petty contest about forms and punctilios, which resultedfrom the spirit of intolerance which characterized the age. The kingwanted his own Episcopal chaplains. The Parliament would not consentto this, but sent him two Presbyterian chaplains. The king would notallow them to say grace at the table, but performed this duty himself;and on the Sabbath, when they preached in his chapel, he never wouldattend. 

One singular instance of this sort of bigotry, and of the king'spresence of mind under the action of it, took place while the king wasat Newcastle. They took him one day to the chapel in the castle tohear a Scotch Presbyterian who was preaching to the garrison. TheScotchman preached a long discourse pointed expressly at the king. Those preachers prided themselves on the fearlessness with which, onsuch occasions, they discharged what they called their duty. To capthe climax of his faithfulness, the preacher gave out, at the closeof the sermon, the hymn, thus: "We will sing the fifty-first Psalm:

 "'Why dost thou, tyrant, boast thyself, Thy wicked works to praise?'"

As the congregation were about to commence the singing, the king casthis eye along the page, and found in the fifty-sixth hymn one which hethought would be more appropriate. He rose, and said, in a veryaudible manner, "We will sing the fifty-_sixth_ Psalm:

 "'Have mercy, Lord, on me I pray, For men would me devour. '"

The congregation, moved by a sudden impulse of religious generosityextremely unusual in those days, immediately sang the psalm which theking had chosen. 

While he was at Holmby the king used sometimes to go, escorted by aguard, to certain neighboring villages where there werebowling-greens. One day, while he was going on one of theseexcursions, a man, in the dress of a laborer, appeared standing on abridge as he passed, and handed him a packet. The commissioners whohad charge of Charles--for some of them always attended him on theseexcursions--seized the man. The packet was from the queen. The kingtold the commissioners that the letter was only to ask him somequestion about the disposal of his son, the young prince, who was thenwith her in Paris. They seemed satisfied, but they sent the disguisedmessenger to London, and the Parliament committed him to prison, andsent down word to dismiss all Charles's own attendants, and to keephim thenceforth in more strict confinement. 

In the mean time, the Parliament, having finished the war, were readyto disband the army. But the army did not wish to be disbanded. Theywould not be disbanded. The officers knew very well that if theirtroops were dismissed, and they were to return to their homes asprivate citizens, all their importance would be gone. There followedlong debates and negotiations between the army and the Parliament, which ended, at last, in an open rupture. It is almost always so atthe end of a revolution. The military power is found to have becometoo strong for the civil institutions of the country to control it. 

Oliver Cromwell, who afterward became so distinguished in the days ofthe Commonwealth, was at this time becoming the most influentialleader of the army. He was not the commander-in-chief in form, but hewas the great planner and manager in fact. He was a man of greatsternness and energy of character, and was always ready for the mostprompt and daring action. He conceived the design of seizing theking's person at Holmby, so as to take him away from the control ofthe Parliament, and transfer him to that of the army. This plan wasexecuted on the 4th of June, about two months after the king had beentaken to Holmby House. The abduction was effected in the followingmanner. 

Cromwell detached a strong party of choice troops, under the commandof an officer by the name of Joyce, to carry the plan into effect. These troops were all horsemen, so that their movements could be madewith the greatest celerity. They arrived at Holmby House at midnight. The cornet, for that was the military title by which Joyce wasdesignated, drew up his horsemen about the palace, and demandedentrance. Before his company arrived, however, there had been an alarmthat they were coming, and the guards had been doubled. The officersin command asked the cornet what was his name and business. Hereplied that he was Cornet Joyce, and that his business was to speakto the king. They asked him by whom he was sent, and he replied thathe was sent by _himself_, and that he must and would see the king. They then commanded their soldiers to stand by their arms, and beready to fire when the word should be given. They, however, perceivedthat Joyce and his force were a detachment from the army to which theythemselves belonged, and concluding to receive them as brothers, theyopened the gates and let them in. 

The cornet stationed sentinels at the doors of those apartments of thecastle which were occupied by the Scotch commissioners who had theking in charge, and then went himself directly to the king's chamber. He had a pistol loaded and cocked in his hand. He knocked at the door. There were four grooms in waiting: they rebuked him for making such adisturbance at that time of the night, and told him that he shouldwait until the morning if he had any communication to make to theking. 

The cornet would not accede to this proposition, but knocked violentlyat the door, the servants being deterred from interfering by dread ofthe loaded pistol, and by the air and manner of their visitor, whichtold them very plainly that he was not to be trifled with. The kingfinally heard the disturbance, and, on learning the cause, sent outword that Joyce must go away and wait till morning, for he would notget up to see him at that hour. The cornet, as one of the historiansof the time expresses it, "huffed and retired. " The next morning hehad an interview with the king. 

When he was introduced to the king's apartment in the morning, theking said that he wished to have the Scotch commissioners present atthe interview. Joyce replied that the commissioners had nothing to donow but to return to the Parliament at London. The king then said thathe wished to see his instructions. The cornet replied that he wouldshow them to him, and he sent out to order his horsemen to parade inthe inner court of the palace, where the king could see them from hiswindows; and then, pointing them out to the king, he said, "These, sir, are my instructions. " The king, who, in all the trials andtroubles of his life of excitement and danger, took every thingquietly and calmly looked at the men attentively. They were finetroops, well mounted and armed. He then turned to the cornet, andsaid, with a smile, that "his instructions were in fair characters, and could be read without spelling. " The cornet then said that hisorders were to take the king away with him. The king declined going, unless the commissioners went too. The cornet made no objection, saying that the commissioners might do as they pleased aboutaccompanying him, but that he himself must go. 

The party set off from Holmby and traveled two days, stopping at nightat the houses of friends to their cause. They reached Cambridge, wherethe leading officers of the army received the king, rendering himevery possible mark of deference and respect. From Cambridge he wasconducted by the leaders of the army from town to town, remainingsometimes several days at a place. He was attended by a strong guard, and was treated every where with the utmost consideration and honor. He was allowed some little liberty, in riding out and in amusements, but every precaution was taken to prevent the possibility of anescape. 

The people collected every where into the places through which he hadto pass, and his presence-chamber was constantly thronged. This wasnot altogether on account of their respect and veneration for him asking, but it arose partly from a very singular cause. There is acertain disease called the scrofula, which in former times had thename of the King's Evil. It is a very unmanageable and obstinatedisorder, resisting all ordinary modes of treatment; but in the daysof King Charles, it was universally believed by the common people ofEngland, that if a _king_ touched a patient afflicted with thisdisease, he would recover. This was the reason why it was called theking's evil. It was the evil that kings only could cure. Now, as kingsseldom traveled much about their dominions, whenever one did make sucha journey, the people embraced the opportunity to bring all the caseswhich could possibly be considered as scrofula to the line of hisroute, in order that he might touch the persons afflicted and healthem. 

In the course of the summer the king was conducted to Hampton Court, abeautiful palace on the Thames, a short distance above London. Here heremained for some time. He had an interview here with two of hischildren. The oldest son was still in France. The two whom he sawhere were the Duke of Gloucester and the Princess Elizabeth. He foundthat they were under the care of a nobleman of high rank, and thatthey were treated with great consideration. Charles was extremelygratified and pleased with seeing these members of his family again, after so long a separation. His feelings of domestic affection werevery strong. 

The king remained at Hampton Court two or three months. While he washere, London, and all the region about it, was kept in a continualstate of excitement by the contentions of the army and Parliament, andthe endless negotiations which they attempted with each other and withthe king. During all this time the king was in a sort of elegant andhonorable imprisonment in his palace at Hampton Court; but he foundthe restraints to which he was subjected, and the harassing careswhich the contests between these two great powers brought upon him, sogreat, that he determined to make his escape from the thraldom whichbound him. He very probably thought that he could again raise hisstandard, and collect an army to fight in his cause. Or perhaps hethought of making his escape from the country altogether. It is notimprobable that he was not decided himself which of these plans topursue, but left the question to be determined by the circumstances inwhich he should find himself when he had regained his freedom. 

At any rate, he made his escape. One evening, about ten o'clock, attendants came into his room at Hampton Court, and found that he hadgone. There were some letters upon the table which he had left, directed to the Parliament, to the general of the army, and to theofficer who had guarded him at Hampton Court. The king had left thepalace an hour or two before. He passed out at a private door, whichadmitted him to a park connected with the palace. He went through thepark by a walk which led down to the water, where there was a boatready for him. He crossed the river in the boat, and on the oppositeshore he found several officers and some horses ready to receive him. He mounted one of the horses, and the party rode rapidly away. 

They traveled all night, and arrived, toward morning, at the residenceof a countess on whose attachment to him, and fidelity, he placedgreat reliance. The countess concealed him in her house, though it wasunderstood by all concerned that this was only a temporary place ofrefuge. He could not long be concealed here, and her residence was notprovided with any means of defense; so that, immediately on theirarrival at the countess's, the king and the few friends who were withhim began to concert plans for a more secure retreat. 

The house of the countess was on the southern coast of England, nearthe Isle of Wight. There was a famous castle in those days upon thisisland, near the center of it, called Carisbrooke Castle. The ruins ofit, which are very extensive, still remain. This castle was under thecharge of Colonel Hammond, who was at that time governor of theisland. Colonel Hammond was a near relative of one of King Charles'schaplains, and the king thought it probable that he would espouse hiscause. He accordingly sent two of the gentlemen who had accompaniedhim to the Isle of Wight to see Colonel Hammond, and inquire of himwhether he would receive and protect the king if he would come to him. But he charged them not to let Hammond know where he was, unless hewould first solemnly promise to protect him, and not subject him toany restraint. 

[Illustration: CARISBROOKE CASTLE. ]

The messengers went, and, to the king's surprise, brought backHammond with them. The king asked them whether they had got hiswritten promise to protect him. They answered no, but that they coulddepend upon him as a man of honor. The king was alarmed. "Then youhave betrayed me, " said he, "and I am his prisoner. " The messengerswere then, in their turn, alarmed at having thus disappointed anddispleased the king, and they offered to kill Hammond on the spot, andto provide some other means of securing the king's safety. The king, however, would not sanction any such proceeding, but put himself underHammond's charge, and was conveyed to Carisbrooke Castle. He wasreceived with every mark of respect, but was very carefully guarded. It was about the middle of November that these events took place. 

Hammond notified the Parliament that King Charles was in his hands, and sent for directions from them as to what he should do. Parliamentrequired that he should be carefully guarded, and they appropriatedŁ5000 for the expenses of his support. The king remained in thisconfinement more than a year, while the Parliament and the army werestruggling for the possession of the kingdom. 

He spent his time, during this long period in various pursuitscalculated to beguile the weary days, and he sometimes planned schemesfor escape. There were also a great many fruitless negotiationsattempted between the king and the Parliament, which resulted innothing but to make the breach between them wider and wider. Sometimesthe king was silent and depressed. At other times he seemed in hisusual spirits. He read serious books a great deal, and wrote. There isa famous book, which was found in manuscript after his death among hispapers, in his handwriting, which it is supposed he wrote at thistime. He was allowed to take walks upon the castle wall, which wasvery extensive, and he had some other amusements which served tooccupy his leisure time. He found his confinement, however, in spiteof all these mitigations, wearisome and hard to bear. 

There were some schemes attempted to enable him to regain his liberty. There was one very desperate attempt. It seems that Hammond, suspecting that the king was plotting an escape, dismissed the king'sown servants and put others in their places--persons in whom hesupposed he could more implicitly rely. One of these men, whose namewas Burley, was exasperated at being thus dismissed. He went throughthe town of Carisbrooke, beating a drum, and calling upon the peopleto rise and rescue their sovereign from his captivity. The governor ofthe castle, hearing of this, sent out a small body of men, arrestedBurley, and hanged and quartered him. The king was made a closeprisoner immediately after this attempt. 

Notwithstanding this, another attempt was soon made by the kinghimself, which came much nearer succeeding. There was a man by thename of Osborne, whom Hammond employed as a personal attendant uponthe king. He was what was called gentleman usher. The king succeededin gaining this person's favor so much by his affability and hisgeneral demeanor, that one day he put a little paper into one of theking's gloves, which it was a part of his office to hold on certainoccasions, and on this paper he had written that he was at the king'sservice. At first Charles was afraid that this offer was only atreacherous one; but at length he confided in him. In the mean time, there was a certain man by the name of Rolf in the garrison, whoconceived the design of enticing the king away from the castle on thepromise of promoting his escape, and then murdering him. Rolf thoughtthat this plan would please the Parliament, and that he himself, andthose who should aid him in the enterprise, would be rewarded. Heproposed this scheme to Osborne, and asked him to join in theexecution of it. 

Osborne made the whole plan known to the king. The king, onreflection, said to Osborne, "Very well; continue in communicationwith Rolf, and help him mature his plan. Let him thus aid in gettingme out of the castle, and we will make such arrangements as to preventthe assassination. " Osborne did so. He also gained over some othersoldiers who were employed as sentinels near the place of escape. Osborne and Rolf furnished the king with a saw and a file, by means ofwhich he sawed off some iron bars which guarded one of his windows. They were then, on a certain night, to be ready with a few attendantson the outside to receive the king as he descended, and convey himaway. 

In the mean time, Rolf and Osborne had each obtained a number ofconfederates, those of the former supposing that the plan was toassassinate the king, while those of the latter understood that theplan was to assist him in escaping from captivity. Certain expressionswhich were dropped by one of this latter class alarmed Rolf, and ledhim to suspect some treachery. He accordingly took the precaution toprovide a number of armed men, and to have them ready at the window, so that he should be sure to be strong enough to secure the kingimmediately on his descent from the window. When the time came for theescape, the king, before getting out, looked below, and, seeing somany armed men, knew at once that Rolf had discovered their designs, and refused to descend. He quickly returned to his bed. The next daythe bars were found filed in two, and the king was made a closerprisoner than ever. 

Some months after this, some commissioners from Parliament went to seethe king, and they found him in a most wretched condition. His beardwas grown, his dress was neglected, his health was gone, his hair wasgray, and, though only forty-eight years of age, he appeared asdecrepit and infirm as a man of seventy. In fact, he was in a stateof misery and despair. Even the enemies who came to visit him, thoughusually stern and hard-hearted enough to withstand any impressions, were extremely affected at the sight. 

CHAPTER XI. 

TRIAL AND DEATH. 

1648

The king removed to Hurst Castle. --Its extraordinarysituation. --Another plan of escape. --Objections. --Theking's perplexity. --He refuses to break his word. --Distressof the king's friends. --He is removed from CarisbrookeCastle. --Arrangements for the king's trial. --Arbitrary measuresof the Commons. --The king brought to London. --Roll ofcommissioners. --The king brought into court. --His firmness. --Thecharge. --The king interrupts its reading. --The king objects to thejurisdiction of the court. --Sentence of death pronounced againstthe king. --Tumult. --The king grossly insulted. --The king's lastrequests. --They are granted. --Devotions of the king. --He declinesseeing his friends. --The king's interview with his children. --Partingmessages. --The warrant. --Warrant signed by the judges. --The kingsleeps well. --Preparations. --Reading the service. --Summons. --Theking carried to Whitehall. --Devotions. --Parting scenes. --The king'sspeech. --His composure. --Death. --The body taken to WindsorCastle. --The Commonwealth. --Government in the UnitedStates. --Ownership. --No stable governments result from violentrevolutions. 

As soon as the army party, with Oliver Cromwell at their head, hadobtained complete ascendency, they took immediate measures forproceeding vigorously against the king. They seized him at CarisbrookeCastle, and took him to Hurst Castle, which was a gloomy fortress inthe neighborhood of Carisbrooke. Hurst Castle was in a veryextraordinary situation. There is a long point extending from the mainland toward the Isle of Wight, opposite to the eastern end of it. Thispoint is very narrow, but is nearly two miles long. The castle wasbuilt at the extremity. It consisted of one great round tower, defended by walls and bastions. It stood lonely and desolate, surrounded by the sea, except the long and narrow neck which connectedit with the distant shore. Of course, though comfortless and solitary, it was a place of much greater security than Carisbrooke. 

The circumstance of the king's removal to this new place ofconfinement were as follows: In some of his many negotiations with theParliament while at Carisbrooke, he had bound himself, on certainconditions, not to attempt to escape from that place. His friends, however, when they heard that the army were coming again to take himaway, concluded that he ought to lose no time in making his escape outof the country. They proposed the plan to the king. He made twoobjections to it. He thought, in the first place, that the attemptwould be very likely to fail; and that, if it did fail, it wouldexasperate his enemies, and make his confinement more rigorous, andhis probable danger more imminent than ever. He said that, in thesecond place, he had promised the Parliament that he would not attemptto escape, and that he could not break his word. 

The three friends were silent when they heard the king speak thesewords. After a pause, the leader of them, Colonel Cook, said, "SupposeI were to tell your majesty that the army have a plan for seizing youimmediately, and that they will be upon you very soon unless youescape. Suppose I tell you that we have made all the preparationsnecessary--that we have horses all ready here, concealed in apent-house--that we have a vessel at the Cows[G] waiting for us--thatwe are all prepared to attend you, and eager to engage in theenterprise--the darkness of the night favoring our plan, and renderingit almost certain of success. Now, " added he, "these suppositionsexpress the real state of the case, and the only question is what yourmajesty will resolve to do. "

[Footnote G: There were two points or headlands, on opposite sides ofan inlet from the sea, on the northern side of the Isle of Wight, which in ancient times received the name of _Cows_. They were calledthe East Cow and the West Cow. The harbor between them formed a safeand excellent harbor. The name is now spelled Cowes, and the port is, at the present day, of great commercial importance. ]

The king paused. He was distressed with perplexity and doubt. Atlength he said, "They have promised _me_, and I have promised _them_, and I will not break the promise first. " "Your majesty means by _they_and _them_, the Parliament, I suppose?" "Yes, I do. " "But the scene isnow changed. The Parliament have no longer any power to protect you. The danger is imminent, and the circumstances absolve your majestyfrom all obligation. "

But the king could not be moved. He said, come what may, he would notdo any thing that looked like a breaking of his word. He would dismissthe subject and go to bed, and enjoy his rest as long as he could. His friends told him that they feared it would not be long. Theyseemed very much agitated and distressed. The king asked them why theywere so much troubled. They said it was to think of the extreme dangerin which his majesty was lying, and his unwillingness to do any thingto avert it. The king replied, that if the danger were tenfold morethan it was, he would not break his word to avert it. 

The fears of the king's friends were soon realized. The next morning, at break of day, he was awakened by a loud knocking at his door. Hesent one of his attendants to inquire what it meant. It was a party ofsoldiers come to take him away. They would give him no information inrespect to their plans, but required him to dress himself immediatelyand go with them. They mounted horses at the gate of the castle. Theking was very earnest to have his friends accompany him. They allowedone of them, the Duke of Richmond, to go with him a little way, andthen told him he must return. The duke bade his master a very sad andsorrowful farewell, and left him to go on alone. 

[Illustration: RUINS OF CARISBROOKE CASTLE. ]

The escort which were conducting him took him to Hurst Castle. TheParliament passed a vote condemning this proceeding, but it was toolate. The army concentrated their forces about London, took possessionof the avenues to the houses of Parliament, and excluded all thosemembers who were opposed to them. The remnant of the Parliament whichwas left immediately took measures for bringing the king to trial. 

The House of Commons did not dare to trust the trial of the king tothe Peers, according to the provisions of the English Constitution, and so they passed an ordinance for attainting him of high treason, and for appointing _commissioners_, themselves, to try him. Of course, in appointing these commissioners, they would name such men as theywere sure would be predisposed to condemn him. The Peers rejected thisordinance, and adjourned for nearly a fortnight, hoping thus to arrestany further proceedings. The Commons immediately voted that the actionof the Peers was not necessary, and that they would go forwardthemselves. They then appointed the commissioners, and ordered thetrial to proceed. 

Every thing connected with the trial was conducted with great stateand parade. The number of commissioners constituting the court wasone hundred and thirty-three, though only a little more than half thatnumber attended the trial. The king had been removed from Hurst Castleto Windsor Castle, and he was now brought into the city, and lodged ina house near to Westminster Hall, so as to be at hand. On theappointed day the court assembled; the vast hall and all the avenuesto it were thronged. The whole civilized world looked on, in fact, inastonishment at the almost unprecedented spectacle of a king tried forhis life by an assembly of his subjects. 

The first business after the opening of the court was to call the rollof the commissioners, that each one might answer to his name. The nameof the general of the army, Fairfax, who was one of the number, wasthe second upon the list. When his name was called there was noanswer. It was called again. A voice from one of the galleriesreplied, "He has too much wit to be here. " This produced somedisorder, and the officers called out to know who answered in thatmanner, but there was no reply. Afterward, when the impeachment wasread, the phrase occurred, "Of all the people of England, " when thesame voice rejoined, "No not the half of them. " The officers thenordered a soldier to fire into the seat from which theseinterruptions came. This command was not obeyed, but they found, oninvestigating the case, that the person who had answered thus wasFairfax's wife, and they immediately removed her from the hall. 

When the court was fully organized, they commanded thesergeant-at-arms to bring in the prisoner. The king was accordinglybrought in, and conducted to a chair covered with crimson velvet, which had been placed for him at the bar. The judges remained in theirseats, with their heads covered, while he entered, and the king tookhis seat, keeping his head covered too. He took a calm and deliberatesurvey of the scene, looking around upon the judges, and upon thearmed guards by which he was environed, with a stern and unchangingcountenance. At length silence was proclaimed, and the president roseto introduce the proceedings. 

He addressed the king. He said that the Commons of England, deeplysensible of the calamities which had been brought upon England by thecivil war, and of the innocent blood which had been shed, andconvinced that he, the king, had been the guilty cause of it, werenow determined to make inquisition for this blood, and to bring him totrial and judgment; that they had, for this purpose, organized thiscourt, and that he should now hear the charge brought against him, which they would proceed to try. 

An officer then arose to read the charge. The king made a gesture forhim to be silent. He, however, persisted in his reading, although theking once or twice attempted to interrupt him. The president, too, ordered him to proceed. The charge recited the evils and calamitieswhich had resulted from the war, and concluded by saying that "thesaid Charles Stuart is and has been the occasioner, author, andcontinuer of the said unnatural, cruel, and bloody wars, and istherein guilty of all the treasons, murders, rapines, burnings, spoils, desolations, damages, and mischiefs to this nation acted andcommitted in the said wars, or occasioned thereby. "

The president then sharply rebuked the king for his interruptions tothe proceedings, and asked him what answer he had to make to theimpeachment. The king replied by demanding by what authority theypretended to call him to account for his conduct. He told them thathe was their king, and they his subjects; that they were not even theParliament, and that they had no authority from any true Parliament tosit as a court to try him; that he would not betray his own dignityand rights by making any answer at all to any charges they might bringagainst him, for that would be an acknowledgment of their authority;but he was convinced that there was not one of them who did not in hisheart believe that he was wholly innocent of the charges which theyhad brought against him. 

These proceedings occupied the first day. The king was then sent backto his place of confinement, and the court adjourned. The next day, when called upon to plead to the impeachment, the king only insistedthe more strenuously in denying the authority of the court, and instating his reasons for so denying it. The court were determined notto hear what he had to say on this point, and the presidentcontinually interrupted him; while he, in his turn, continuallyinterrupted the president too. It was a struggle and a dispute, not atrial. At last, on the fourth day, something like testimony wasproduced to prove that the king had been in arms against the forces ofthe Parliament. On the fifth and sixth days, the judges sat inprivate to come to their decision; and on the day following, which wasSaturday, January 27th, they called the king again before them, andopened the doors to admit the great assembly of spectators, that thedecision might be announced. 

There followed another scene of mutual interruptions and disorder. Theking insisted on longer delay. He had not said what he wished to sayin his defense. The president told him it was now too late; that hehad consumed the time allotted to him in making objections to thejurisdiction of the court, and now it was too late for his defense. The clerk then read the sentence, which ended thus: "For all whichtreasons and crimes this court doth adjudge that he, the said CharlesStuart, is a tyrant, traitor, murderer, and public enemy, and shall beput to death by the severing of his head from his body. " When theclerk had finished the reading, the president rose, and saiddeliberately and solemnly, "The sentence now read and published is the act, sentence, judgment, and resolution of the whole court. "

And the whole court rose to express their assent. 

The king then said to the president, "Will you hear me a word, sir?"

 _President. _ "Sir, you are not to be heard after the sentence. "

 _King. _ "Am I not, sir?"

 _President. _ "No, sir. Guards, withdraw the prisoner!"

 _King. _ "I may speak after sentence by your favor, sir. Hold--I say, sir--by your favor, sir--If I am not permitted to speak--"

The other parts of his broken attempts to speak were lost in thetumult and noise. He was taken out of the hall. 

One would have supposed that all who witnessed these dreadfulproceedings, and who now saw one who had been so lately the sovereignof a mighty empire standing friendless and alone on the brink ofdestruction, would have relented at last, and would have found theirhearts yielding to emotions of pity. But it seems not to have been so. The animosities engendered by political strife are merciless, and thecrowd through which the king had to pass as he went from the hallscoffed and derided him. They blew the smoke of their tobacco in hisface, and threw their pipes at him. Some proceeded to worseindignities than these, but the king bore all with quietness andresignation. 

The king was sentenced on Saturday. On the evening of that day he senta request that the Bishop of London might be allowed to assist at hisdevotions, and that his children might be permitted to see him beforehe was to die. There were two of his children then in England, hisyoungest son and a daughter. The other two sons had escaped to theContinent. The government granted both these requests. By asking forthe services of an Episcopal clergyman, Charles signified his firmdetermination to adhere to the very last hour of his life to thereligious principles which he had been struggling for so long. It issomewhat surprising that the government were willing to comply withthe request. 

It was, however, complied with, and Charles was taken from the palaceof Whitehall, which is in Westminster, to the palace of St. James, notvery far distant. He was escorted by a guard through the streets. AtSt. James's there was a small chapel where the king attended divineservice. The Bishop of London preached a sermon on the futurejudgment, in which he administered comfort to the mind of the unhappyprisoner, so far as the sad case allowed of any comfort, by thethought that all human judgments would be reviewed, and all wrong maderight at the great day. After the service the king spent the remainderof the day in retirement and private devotion. 

During the afternoon of the day several of his most trusty friendsamong the nobility called to see him, but he declined to grant themadmission. He said that his time was short and precious, and that hewished to improve it to the utmost in preparation for the great changewhich awaited him. He hoped, therefore, that his friends would not bedispleased if he declined seeing any persons besides his children. Itwould do no good for them to be admitted. All that they could do forhim now was to pray for him. 

The next day the children were brought to him in the room where he wasconfined. The daughter, who was called the Lady Elizabeth, was theoldest. He directed her to tell her brother James, who was the secondson, and now absent with Charles on the Continent, that he must now, from the time of his father's death, no longer look upon Charles asmerely his older brother, but as his sovereign, and obey him as such;and he requested her to charge them both, from him, to love eachother, and to forgive their father's enemies. 

"You will not forget this, my dear child, will you?" added the king. The Lady Elizabeth was still very young. 

"No, " said she, "I will never forget it as long as I live. "

He then charged her with a message to her mother, the queen, who wasalso on the Continent. "Tell her, " said he, "that I have loved herfaithfully all my life, and that my tender regard for her will notcease till I cease to breathe. "

Poor Elizabeth was sadly grieved at this parting interview. The kingtried to comfort her. "You must not be so afflicted for me, " he said. "It will be a very glorious death that I shall die. I die for the lawsand liberties of this land, and for maintaining the Protestantreligion. I have forgiven all my enemies, and I hope that God willforgive them. "

The little son was, by title, the Duke of Gloucester. He took him onhis knees, and said, in substance, "My dear boy, they are going to cutoff your father's head. " The child looked up into his father's facevery earnestly, not comprehending so strange an assertion. 

"They are going to cut off my head, " repeated the king, "and perhapsthey will want to make you a king; but you must not be king as long asyour brothers Charles and James live; for if you do, very likely theywill, some time or other, cut off your head. " The child said, with avery determined air, that then they should never make him king as longas he lived. The king then gave his children some other partingmessages for several of his nearest relatives and friends, and theywere taken away. 

In cases of capital punishment, in England and America, there must be, after the sentence is pronounced, written authority to the sheriff, orother proper officer, to proceed to the execution of it. This iscalled the warrant, and is usually to be signed by the chiefmagistrate of the state. In England the sovereign always signs thewarrant of execution; but in the case of the execution of thesovereign himself, which was a case entirely unprecedented, theauthorities were at first somewhat at loss to know what to do. Thecommissioners who had judged the king concluded finally to sign itthemselves. It was expressed substantially as follows:

 "At the High Court of Justice for the trying and judging of Charles Stuart, king of England, January 29th, 1648:

 "Whereas Charles Stuart, king of England, has been convicted, attainted, and condemned of high treason, and sentence was pronounced against him by this court, to be put to death by the severance of his head from his body, of which sentence execution yet remaineth to be done; these are, therefore, now to will and require you to see the said sentence executed in the open street before Whitehall, upon the morrow, being the thirtieth day of this instant month of January, between the hours of ten in the morning and five in the afternoon of the said day, with full effect; and for so doing this shall be your sufficient warrant. "

Fifty-nine of the judges signed this warrant, and then it was sent tothe persons appointed to carry the sentence into execution. 

That night the king slept pretty well for about four hours, thoughduring the evening before he could hear in his apartment the noise ofthe workmen building the platform, or scaffold as it was commonlycalled, on which the execution was to take place. He awoke, however, long before day. He called to an attendant who lay by his bedside, and requested him to get up. "I will rise myself, " said he, "for Ihave a great work to do to-day. " He then requested that they wouldfurnish him with the best dress, and an extra supply of underclothing, because it was a cold morning. He particularly wished to bewell guarded from the cold, lest it should cause him to shiver, andthey would suppose that he was trembling from fear. 

"I have no fear, " said he. "Death is not terrible to me. I bless Godthat I am prepared. "

The king had made arrangements for divine service in his room early inthe morning, to be conducted by the Bishop of London. The bishop camein at the time appointed, and read the prayers. He also read, in thecourse of the service, the twenty-ninth chapter of Matthew, whichnarrates the closing scenes of our Saviour's life. This was, in fact, the regular lesson for the day, according to the Episcopal ritual, which assigns certain portions of Scripture to every day of the year. The king supposed that the bishop had purposely selected this passage, and he thanked him for it, as he said it seemed to him veryappropriate to the occasion. "May it please your majesty, " said thebishop, "it is the proper lesson for the day. " The king was muchaffected at learning this fact, as he considered it a specialprovidence, indicating that he was prepared to die, and that he shouldbe sustained in the final agony. 

About ten o'clock, Colonel Hacker, who was the first one named in thewarrant of execution of the three persons to whom the warrant wasaddressed, knocked gently at the king's chamber door. No answer wasreturned. Presently he knocked again. The king asked his attendant togo to the door. He went, and asked Colonel Hacker why he knocked. Hereplied that he wished to see the king. 

"Let him come in, " said the king. 

The officer entered, but with great embarrassment and trepidation. Hefelt that he had a most awful duty to perform. He informed the kingthat it was time to proceed to Whitehall, though he could have sometime there for rest. "Very well, " said the king; "go on; I willfollow. " The king then took the bishop's arm, and they went alongtogether. 

They found, as they issued from the palace of St. James into the parkthrough which their way lay to Whitehall, that lines of soldiers hadbeen drawn up. The king, with the bishop on one side, and theattendant before referred to, whose name was Herbert, on the other, both uncovered, walked between these lines of guards. The king walkedon very fast, so that the others scarcely kept pace with him. When hearrived at Whitehall he spent some further time in devotion, with thebishop, and then, at noon, he ate a little bread and drank some lightwine. Soon after this, Colonel Hacker, the officer, came to the doorand let them know that the hour had arrived. 

The bishop and Hacker melted into tears as they bade their masterfarewell. The king directed the door to be opened, and requested theofficer to go on, saying that he would follow. They went through alarge hall, called the banqueting hall, to a window in front, throughwhich a passage had been made for the king to his scaffold, which wasbuilt up in the street before the palace. As the king passed outthrough the window, he perceived that a vast throng of spectators hadassembled in the streets to witness the spectacle. He had expectedthis, and had intended to address them. But he found that this wasimpossible, as the space all around the scaffold was occupied withtroops of horse and bodies of soldiers, so as to keep the populace atso great a distance that they could not hear his voice. He, however, made his speech, addressing it particularly to one or two persons whowere near, knowing that they would put the substance of it on record, and thus make it known to all mankind. There was then some furtherconversation about the preparations for the final blow, the adjustmentof the dress, the hair, &c. , in which the king took an active part, with great composure. He then kneeled down and laid his head upon theblock. 

The executioner, who wore a mask that he might not be known, began toadjust the hair of the prisoner by putting it up under his cap, whenthe king, supposing that he was going to strike, hastily told him towait for the sign. The executioner said that he would. The king spenta few minutes in prayer, and then stretched out his hands, which wasthe sign which he had arranged to give. The axe descended. Thedissevered head, with the blood streaming from it, was held up by theassistant executioner, for the gratification of the vast crowd whichwas gazing on the scene. He said, as he raised it, "Behold the headof a traitor!"

The body was placed in a coffin covered with black velvet, and takenback through the window into the room from which the monarch hadwalked out, in life and health, but a few moments before. A day or twoafterward it was taken to Windsor Castle upon a hearse drawn by sixhorses and covered with black velvet. It was there interred in a vaultin the chapel, with an inscription upon lead over the coffin:

 KING CHARLES 1648. 

After the death of Charles, a sort of republic was established inEngland, called the Commonwealth, over which, instead of a king, Oliver Cromwell presided, under the title of Protector. The countrywas, however, in a very anomalous and unsettled state. It became moredistracted still after the death of the Protector, and it was onlytwelve years after beheading the father that the people of England, bycommon consent, called back the son to the throne. It seems as ifthere could be no stable government in a country where any very largeportion of the inhabitants are destitute of property, without the aidof that mysterious but all controlling principle of the human breast, a spirit of reverence for the rights, and dread of the power of anhereditary crown. In the United States almost every man is thepossessor of property. He has his house, his little farm, his shop andimplements of labor, or something which is his own, and which he feelswould be jeopardized by revolution and anarchy. He dreads a generalscramble, knowing that he would probably get less than he would loseby it. He is willing, therefore, to be governed by abstract law. Thereis no need of holding up before him a scepter or a crown to induceobedience. He submits without them. He votes with the rest, and thenabides by the decision of the ballot-box. In other countries, however, the case is different. If not an actual majority, there is at least avery large proportion of the community who possess nothing. They getscanty daily food for hard and long-continued daily labor; and aschange, no matter what, is always a blessing to sufferers, or at leastis always looked forward to as such, they are ready to welcome, at alltimes, any thing that promises commotion. A war, a conflagration, ariot, or a rebellion, is always welcome. They do not know but thatthey shall gain some advantage by it, and in the mean time theexcitement of it is some relief to the dead and eternal monotony oftoil and suffering. 

It is true that the revolutions by which monarchies are overturned arenot generally effected, in the first instance, by this portion of thecommunity. The throne is usually overturned at first by a higher classof men; but the deed being done, the inroad upon the establishedcourse and order of the social state being once made, this lower massis aroused and excited by it, and soon becomes unmanageable. Whenproperty is so distributed among the population of a state that allhave an _interest_ in the preservation of order, then, and not tillthen, will it be safe to give to all a share in the _power_ necessaryfor preserving it; and, in the mean time, revolutions produced byinsurrections and violence will probably only result in establishinggovernments unsteady and transient just in proportion to thesuddenness of their origin. 

THE END.