this vote into a law was reserved until the end of the session, that they might have an opportunity of forcing the king to make concessions. This harsh conduct was greatly resented by Charles; but he found himself obliged to submit. In the mean time they attacked the duke of Buckingham, who was become generally obnoxious; and was impeached by the earl of Bristol, on account of his conduct with respect to the Spanish negociation. The earl's impeachment, however, was entirely overlooked, and the commons were able to prove nothing otherwise of any consequence against him. The king, imagining that Buckingham's greatest crime was the having been so much in favor with his sovereign, commanded the house expressly not to meddle with his minister, but to finish, in a few days, the bill they had begun for the subsidies; otherwise they must expect to sit no longer. Suggestions of this kind had a bad effect; and, when the king proceeded further to throw into prison two members of the house who had managed the impeachment against Buckingham, the commons declared that they would proceed no farther till they had satisfaction in their privileges. Charles alleged, as the reason of this measure, certain seditious expressions, which, he said, had, in their accusation of the duke, dropped from these members. Upon enquiry it appeared that no such expressions had been used, and the members were released. Soon after, the house of lords, moved by the example of the commons, claimed liberty for the earl of Arundel, who had been lately confined in the tower, and, after many fruitless evasions, the king was obliged, however ungraciously, to comply. The next attack made by the commons, had it succeeded, would have reduced the king to an absolute dependence on parliament. They were preparing a remonstrance against the levying of tonnage and poundage. This article, together with the new impositions laid on merchandise by James, constituted nearly one-half of the crown revenues; and, after having gained this point, they were to petition, or rather to have commanded the king to remove Buckingham from his presence and councils. The king, however, being alarmed at the yoke they were preparing for him, dissolved this second parliameut, June 15th, 1626.

Charles, having now made such a breach with his parliament as there was no hope of repair ing, was obliged to exercise every branch of his prerogative to supply himself with money. A commission was granted to compound with the Catholics, and agree for dispensing with the penal laws. By this expedient the king, indeed, filled his coffers, but gave general disgust. From the nobility he desired assistance; from the city he required a loan of £100,000. The former contributed slowly but the latter, after many excuses, gave, at last, a flat denial. To equip a fleet, a distribution, by order of the council, was made to all the maritime towns, and each of them was required, with the assistance of the adjacent counties, to arm so many vessels. London was rated at twenty ships; and this is the first appearance, in Charles's reign, of shipmoney; a taxation which had once been imposed

by Elizabeth, but which, when carried some steps farther by Charles, produced the most violent discontents. These methods of supply were carried on with some moderation, till news arrived of the king of Denmark being totally defeated by count Tilly the imperial general; but, supplies having then become more than ever necessary, it was suggested in council, that the most equal and convenient method of obtaining them was by a general loan from the subject, according as every man was assessed in the rolls of the last subsidy. That precise sum was required which each would have paid, had the vote of four subsidies been passed into a law: care, however, was taken that the sums thus exacted were not to be called subsidies but loans. Many throughout England now refused these loans, and some were even active in encouraging their neighbours to insist upon their common rights and privileges. By warrant of the council, these were thrown into prison. Most of them patiently submitted to confinement, or applied by petition to the king, who commonly released them. Five gentlemen, however, Sir Thomas Darnel, Sir John Corbet, Sir Walter Earl, Sir John Haveningham, and Sir Edward Hampden, demanded release, not as a favor from the court, but as their due by the laws of their country. No particular cause was assigned for their commitment. The special command of the king and council was alone pleaded. And it was alleged that, by law, this was not sufficient reason for refusing bail or releasement to the prisoners. The question was brought to a solemn trial before the court of king's bench; and the whole kingdom was attentive to the issue. By the debates on this subject it appeared, that personal liberty had been secured by no less than six different statutes, and by an article in magna charta itself. It appeared, that, in times of turbulence and sedition, the kings had infringed these laws; and of this also many examples were produced. The difficulty then lay to determine when such violent measures were necessary; but of that the court pretended to be the supreme judge. As it was legal, therefore, that these five gentlemen should plead the statute, by which they might demand bail, so it was expedient in the court to remand them to prison, without determining on the necessity of taking bail for the present. This was a cruel evasion of justice, and, in fact, satisfied neither party. The court insisted that no bail could be taken; the country exclaimed that the prisoners ought to be set free.

While the king was thus embroiled at home, he rashly engaged in a war with France, a kingdom with which he had but lately formed the most natural alliance. Historians generally agree that this war proceeded from the rivalship of the duke of Buckingham and cardinal Richelieu; both of whom aspired at the affections of the queen of France. However this may be, war was declared against France; and Charles was taught to hope, that hostilities with that kingdom would be the surest means of procuring tranquillity at home. The success of this war was proportionable to the wisdom with which it was commenced. Buckingham was appointed com

mander; and, being entirely unacquainted both with the sea and land service, he managed to lose two-thirds of his army, and returned in total discredit both as an admiral and general. The discontents in England now rose to such a height, that there was reason to apprehend an insurrection. Charles was also reduced to the greatest distress for want of money. That which he had levied by virtue of his prerogative came in very slowly, and it was dangerous to renew the experiment, on account of the ill-humor of the nation. A third parliament was therefore called, March 17th, 1628; whom Charles told, at the beginning of the session, that if they should not do their duties, in contributing to the necessities of the state, he must, in discharge of his conscience, use those other means which God had put into his hands, in order to save that which the follies of some particular men might otherwise put in danger.' They began with voting against arbitrary imprisonments and forced loans; after which five subsidies (£280,000) were voted to the king; a sum with which Charles, though much inferior to his wants, declared himself well satisfied. The commons, however, resolved not to pass this vote into a law, before they had obtained from the king a sufficient security, that their liberties should be no longer violated. They resolved upon a petition of right, in which they recapitulated all the unlawful exertions of the prerogative. The chief grievances complained of were forced loans, benevolences, taxes without consent of parliament, arbitrary imprisonments, billeting soldiers, and martial law. They pretended not to any unusual power or privileges; nor did they intend to infringe the royal prerogative, they said, in any respect: they aimed only at securing those rights and privileges derived from their ancestors. But the king now began plainly to aim at nothing less than absolute power. This petition he did his utmost to evade, by repeated messages to the house, in which he always offered his royal word, that there should be no more infringements of the liberty of the subject. These messages, however, had no effect on the commons: they knew how insufficient such promises were, without further security. The petition, therefore, at last passed both houses, as embodying the law of those questions, and nothing was wanting but the royal assent to give it legal force. The king accordingly came to the house of peers, sent for the commons, and, being seated in the chair of state, the petition was read to him. In answer to it, he said, "The king willeth that right be done according to the laws and customs of the realm, and that the statutes be put into execution; that his subjects may have no cause to complain of any wrong or oppression contrary to their just rights and liberties, to the preservation whereof he holds himself in conscience as much obliged as of his own prerogative.' This equivocal answer was highly resented by the commons. They first directed their indignation against a Dr. Manwaring, who had preached a sermon, and at the special command of the king, which was found to contain doctrines subversive of civil liberty. It taught, that though property VOL. X

was commonly lodged in the subject, yet, whenever any exigency required supply, all property was transferred to the sovereign; that the consent of parliament was not necessary for the imposition of taxes; and that the divine laws required compliance with every demand, however irregular, which the prince should make upon his subjects. For these doctrines Manwaring was sentenced to be imprisoned during the pleasure of the house; to be fined £1000 to the king: make submission and acknowledgement for his offence; be suspended three years; be incapable of holding any ecclesiastical dignity or secular office; and that his book be called in and burnt. No sooner, however, was the session ended, than Manwaring received a pardon, and was promoted to a living of considerable value. Some years afterwards he was advanced to the see of St. Asaph. At last, the king, seeing it was impossible to carry his point, yielded to the importunities of parliament. He came to the house of peers, and pronouncing the usual form of words, 'Let it be law as is desired,' gave full sanction and authority to the petition. The house resounded with acclamations, and the bill for five subsidies was immediately passed.

The commons, however, were not yet satisfied; they began to attack the duke of Buckingham, against whom they were implacable; they also asserted, that the levying of tonnage and poundage without consent of parliament was a palpable violation of the ancient liberties of the people, and an open infringement of the petition of right so lately granted. The king, to prevent a remonstrance on that subject, suddenly prorogued the parliament, June 26th, 1628.

The commons were soon delivered from their enemy Buckingham; who was murdered on the 23d of August following, by one Felton who had formerly served under him. The king did not appear much concerned at his death, but retained an affection for his family. He desired also that Felton might be tortured, in order to extort from him a discovery of his accomplices; but the judges very properly declared, that, though that practice had been once common, it was altogether illegal. In 1629 the contentions between the king and his parliament were renewed. The great article on which the commons broke with their sovereign, and which finally created in him a disgust at all parliaments, was their claim with regard to tonnage and poundage. The dispute was, whether this tax could be levied without consent of parliament or not. Charles, supported by multitudes of precedents, maintained that it might; and the parliament, in consequence of their petition of right, asserted that it could not, and were resolved to support their rights. They began with summoning before them the officers of the custom-house, to give an account by what authority they had seized the goods of those merchants, who had refused to pay the duties The barons of exchequer were questioned with regard to their decrees on that head; and the sheriff of London was committed to the Tower for supporting the officers of the custom-house The goods of Rolles, a merchant, and member of the house, being seized for his refusal to pay 2 D

the duties, complaints were made of this violence, as a flagrant breach of privilege. Charles, on the other hand, supported his officers; and the quarrel between him and the commons became every day more virulent. Sir John Elliot framed A remonstrance against tonnage and poundage, which he offered to the clerk to read; but it was refused, and he then read it himself. The question being called for, the speaker Sir John Finch said, that he had a command from the king to adjourn, and to put no question; upon which de rose and left the chair. The whole house Was in an uproar; the speaker was pushed back into the chair, and forcibly held in it, till a short remonstrance was formed, which was instantaneously passed by acclamation, Religious feelings and controversies also mingled with all this. Papists and Arminians were declared capital enemies to the commonwealth, and those who levied tonnage and poundage were branded with the same epithet. Even the merchants, who should voluntarily pay these duties, were called betrayers of English liberty, and public enemies. The doors being locked, the gentleman usher of the house of lords, who was sent by the king, could get no admittance till this remonstrance was finished. By the king's order he took the mace from the table, which put an end to their proceedings, and on the 10th of March the parliament was dissolved, and some of the members imprisoned.

Charles, being now disgusted with parliaments, firmly resolved to call no more; but, finding himself destitute of resources, was obliged to make peace with the two powers with whom he was at war. A treaty was signed with France on the 14th of April, and another with Spain on the 5th of November, 1630. As if, however, resolved on his own ruin, and to lose the small degree of affection towards him which remained among his subjects, Charles now began to make innovations in religion. Archbishop Laud had obtained a prodigious ascendancy over him; and, by his superstitious attachment to foolish ceremonies, led him into a conduct that proved fatal to himself and to the kingdom. He chose this time, of all others the most inauspicious, for attempting to renew the ceremonies of the fourth and fifth centuries, and so openly were many of the Popish tenets espoused, that not only the Puritans believed the church of England to be relapsing fast into that superstition, but the court of Rome itself entertained hopes of regaining its authority. Laud was actually offered, it is said, a cardinal's hat. See LAUD. He exacted the old and superstitious veneration for the sacerdotal character, and implicit submission to the creeds and decrees of synods and councils; and enjoined great pomp and ceremony in worship. Orders were given, that the communion table should be removed from the middle of the area, where it had hitherto stood in all churches except cathedrals, to the east end; and that it should be railed in, and denominated an altar, All kinds of ornaments, especially pictures, were introduced. The crucifix, too, was not omitted. In return for Charles's favor, Laud and his followers took care to magnify on every occasion the real authority, and to treat with the umjest

disdain all puritanical pretensions to civil and religious liberty. In the star chamber and high commission both the church and king found a ready instrument to suppress the rising spirit of liberty. Tonnage and poundage were continued to be levied by royal authority alone. The former arbitrary impositions were still exacted, and new impositions laid upon different kinds of merchandise. The custom-house officers received orders from the council to enter into any house, warehouse, or cellar; to search any trunk or chest; and to break any bulk whatever, in default of the payment of customs. In order to exercise the militia, each county by an edict of the council was assessed in a certain sum for maintaining a muster-master appointed for that service. Compositions were now again openly made with rescusants, and the Popish religion afforded a regular branch of revenue. A commission was also granted for compounding with such as possessed crown lands on defective titles; and on this pretence considerable sums of money were exacted of the people.

While the English were thus driven to the utmost discontent, and almost ready to break out into rebellion, Charles thought proper to attempt the establishment of episcopacy in Scotland. The canons for erecting a new ecclesiastical jurisdiction were promulgated in 1635, and received without much outward opposition; but when the first reading of the liturgy was attempted in the cathedral church of St. Giles, Edinburgh, in 1637, such a tumult was produced, that it was not thought safe to repeat the experiment. A universal combination against the religious innovations began immediately to take place; and to the proclamation of Charles, the nobility, gentry, and ministers, opposed the celebrated production of the Covenant. This consisted of a renunciation of Popery, formerly signed by James in his youth, and filled with many virulent invectives against that party. A bend of union followed, by which the subscribers obliged themselves to resist all religious innovations, and to defend each other against all opposition. It was subscribed by people of all ranks and conditions. The king now began to be alarmed. He sent the marquis of Hamilton, as commissioner, to treat with the covenanters; and he required that obligation to be renounced and recalled. In answer to this demand the covenanters told him, they would sooner renounce their baptism! and invited the commissioner himself to sign it. Hamilton returned to London; made another fruitless journey with new concessions to Edinburgh; returned again to London, and was immediately sent back with still greater concessions. The king was now willing to abolish entirely the canons, the liturgy, and the high commission court; he even resolved to limit extremely the power of the bishops, and was content if on any terms he could retain that order in the church of Scotland. To ensure all these gracious offers, he gave Hamilton av thority to summon first an assembly, and then a parliament, where every grievance should be redressed. The offer of an assembly and a parliament, in which they expected to be entirely martes, was very willingly embraced by the

covenanters. When they found, however, that Charles's proposal of a new covenant was only meant to weaken and divide them, they received it with the utmost detestation; and proceeded in their own way to model the assembly. It met at Glasgow in 1638. A firm determination had been entered into of utterly abolishing epis copacy; and, as a preparative to it, there was laid before the presbytery of Edinburgh, and solemnly read in all the churches of the kingdom, an accusation against the bishops, as guilty of heresy, simony, bribery, perjury, cheating, adultery, &c. &c. The bishops sent in a protest, declining the authority of the assembly; the commissioner too protested against that court, as illegally constituted and elected; and, in his majesty's name, dissolved it. This measure was foreseen, and little regarded. The court still continued to sit; and all the acts of assembly, from the accession of James VI. to the crown of England, were declared null and invalid. Thus the whole fabric which James and Charles, in a long course of years, had been rearing with much care and policy, fell at once to the ground. The covenant likewise was ordered to be signed by every one, under pain of excommunication.

In 1639 the covenanters prepared in earnest for war. The earl of Argyle, though he long seemed to temporise, at last embraced their party, which the earls of Rothes, Cassilis, Montrose, Lothian, the lords Lindesay, Loudon, Yester, and Balmerino, also joined. Charles, on the other hand, was not deficient in his endeavours to oppose this formidable combination. By a system of rigid economy he had not only paid all the debts contracted in the French and Spanish wars, but had amassed a sum of £200,000, which he had reserved for any sudden exigency. The queen had great interest with the Catholics; and she easily persuaded them to give large contributions, as a mark of their duty to the king. Thus a considerably supply was gained, and the king's fleet became formidable. Having put 5000 land forces on board, he intrusted it to the marquis of Hamilton, who had orders to sail to the frith of Forth, while an army was levied of nearly 20,000 foot and 3000 horse; and put under the command of the earl of Arundel. The earl of Essex, a man of strict honor, and extremely popular, especially among the soldiery, was appointed lieutenant general; and the earl of Holland was general of the horse. The king himself joined the army, and summoned all the peers of England to attend him. The whole had the appearance of a splendid court rather than a military armament, and in this array the camp arrived at Berwick.

So prudent were the Scottish leaders that they immediately sent very submissive messages to the king, and craved leave to be admitted to a treaty. Charles, as usual, took the worst course. He concluded a sudden pacification, in which it was stipulated that he should withdraw his fleet and army; that within forty-eight hours the Scots should dismiss their forces; that the king's forts should be restored to him; his authority be acknowledged; and a general assembly and parliament be immediately summoned, to settle all differences. The peace, however, was not of

on

long duration. Charles could not prevail or himself to abandon the cause of episcopacy: the assembly, on the other hand, proceeded with zeal and firmness, and vote l it to be unlawful in the church of Scotland. The parliament also, which sat after the assembly, adopted measures which tended to diminish the civil power of the monarch; and, what probably affected Charles still more, they were proceeding to ratify the acts o assembly, when, by the king's orders, Traquaire the commissioner prorogued them. On account of these proceedings, which might have been easily foreseen, war was recommenced the same year.

No sooner had Charles concluded the peace than he found himself obliged to disband his army, on account of his want of money; and, as the soldiers had been held together merely by mercenary views, it was not possible, without great trouble, expense, and loss of time, to reassemble them. On the contrary, the covenanters, in dismissing their troops, had been careful to preserve nothing but the appearance of a pacification. The soldiers were warned not to think the nation secure from an English invasion; and the religious zeal which animated all ranks of men made them immediately fly to their standards, as soon as the trumpet was sounded by their spiritual and temporal leaders. When, in 1640, the king drew an army together, finding himself unable to support them, he was obliged to call a parliament, after an intermission of about eleven years.

He pressed them for money, and they insisted on their grievances, till a dissolution ensued. To add to the unpopularity of this measure, the king, notwithstanding his dissolving the parliament, allowed the convocation to sit; a practice of which, since the Reformation, there had been very few examples. Besides granting to the king a supply from the spirituality, the convocation, jealous of innovations similar to those which had taken place in Scotland, imposed an oath on the clergy and the graduates in the universities, by which every one swore to maintain the established government of the church, by archbishops, bishops, deans, chapters, &c. These steps were deemed illegal, because not ratified by consent of parliament; and the oath, containing an &c. in the middle of it, became a subject of general ridicule.

The king, disappointed of parliamentary subsidies, was again obliged to have recourse to expedients. Ile borrowed money from his ministers and courtiers: who subscribed above £300,000 in a few days. Some vain attempts were made towards forcing a loan from the citizens; but £40,000 was extorted from the Spanish merchants who had bullion in the tower. Coat and conduct money for the soldiery was levied on the counties: an ancient practice, but supposed to be abolished by the petition of right. All the pepper was bought from the East India Company upon trust; and sold, at a great discount, for ready money. A scheme was proposed for coining £200,000 or £300,000 of base money. Such were the extremities to which Charles was reduced. These expedients, however, enabled the king, though with great difficulty, to march his army to the north, consisting of 19,000