CHAPTER XV

THE FAILURE OF PERSONAL GOVERNMENT

302. Government by Privy Council. The Petition of Right is one of the great landmarks in the history of England. The document has great constitutional and historical significance; but more important is the fact that its adoption virtually forced Charles I farther along the road toward practical absolutism. Parliament had proved refractory: instead of assisting the king and providing the needed funds, it had tried to restrain the

Eleven years of arbitrary rule.

monarch and control his government. Charles accordingly determined to make an experiment in government without a legislature, and for eleven years the representatives of the nation were not consulted in any matter of governmental action or policy.

It was the king's purpose to carry on the administration through the privy council and its courts or committees.1 This

The privy council in

Stuart times.

agency, which the Tudors had found so useful and efficient, saw the highest development of its power in the first half of the seventeenth century, and since the early Stuart period its decline has been swift; at present it has a membership of nearly three hundred highly honored and very able men, but it is rarely called upon to transact governmental business. In Stuart times it was a comparatively small body of about forty members or a few more, all appointed by the king himself. The weakness of such a system is apparent, however; as royal appointees, the privy councillors might be expected to represent only one party or faction in the state. It is, indeed, true that Charles did not shut the opposition out altogether: such active Puritans as the elder

1 Review sec. 194.

THE TWO PROBLEMS: FINANCE AND RELIGION

333

Sir Henry Vane and the cunning Lord Saye (who is also remembered for promoting a settlement in Connecti- Opposition cut) were councillors during these years. There were also many moderate royalists and churchmen

members in

the council.

in the privy council; but the majority and the most influential members were men after the king's own heart and mind.

of finance.

303. The Two Problems: Finance and Religion. There was no law to compel the king to summon a parliament, and the people had not always felt the necessity or even the desirability of frequent or regular parliamentary sessions, as such meetings were expensive and usually meant new or increased taxes. If Charles could have carried on the gov- The problem ernment without violating English laws, no great complaint would have been heard. But this was impossible. As king he had certain ancient revenues, largely feudal survivals, which he could lawfully collect and which centuries before had been fairly adequate.1 Times had changed, however, and Charles' predecessors had found it necessary to ask for frequent money grants from parliament.

Arbitrary methods of

taxation.

The chief question that the king had to face was, therefore, a financial one: where was he to find revenues to carry on an expensive government and to support an extravagant court? The situation forced him to adopt unusual and questionable methods of taxation. It was these that most aroused the indignation of his subjects. Many Englishmen who sympathized with the king's religious policy regarded his financial exactions as a violation of the constitution which called for resistance.

Second in importance was the religious issue. Up to this time the Puritans had been the more aggressive party; now the conservative Anglican, who loved the stately The religious ceremonial of the Prayer Book, had found a mighty issue. leader in William Laud, Bishop of London, who combined a veneration for the historic church with a vigorous dislike for all forms of pruning. Bishop Laud possessed considerable

1 Review sec. 146.

abilities his will was iron; his energy inexhaustible. It seemed clear that both Laud and the non-conforming Puritans violated the statutes governing the church: the Puritans by omitting significant matters in the ceremonial; Laud and the high churchmen by making unwarranted additions, either by reviving discarded forms or by borrowing from the storehouse of the Catholic church. On the whole, however, it seems that Bishop Laud kept closer to the law; the Puritans, in trying to evade what the statutes specifically commanded, were greater offenders than he, who merely revived what was not expressly forbidden. But Laud was tactless and obstinate, and his exasperating methods drove moderate Englishmen in large numbers into the ranks of the Puritan opposition.

304. Bishop Laud and the Puritans. The Puritans were especially numerous in eastern England from the Thames Strongholds of northward to the Humber. It was from this secPuritanism. tion that the great migration to New England came during the reign of Charles I. The intellectual center of Puritanism was the University of Cambridge. The region about Cambridge had long been responsive to the

Cambridge. newer ideas in religion: a century earlier Cranmer and his associates in the Protestant revolt had gone forth from this university; later Cambridge sent forth Burleigh and Parker, but its colleges also produced Thomas Cartwright and Robert Browne.1 The tendency toward radicalism in this region was in part due to the fact that it was the wool district of England, and consequently was in close touch with the Continent, especially with the United Netherlands which were one of the strongholds of Calvinism. The English Pilgrims who migrated early in the century went to Holland; on the other hand Flemish and Walloon weavers in considerable numbers had settled in the wool district and were sowing seeds of hostility to Anglicanism. In many parishes the entire congregation had become Puritan under the influence of priests educated at Cambridge. This condition

The wool district.

1 Review secs. 206, 247, 279-280.

FINANCIAL EXACTIONS

335

Laud was determined to rectify. As bishop of the great diocese of London, he was the ruler in church affairs of the Puritans of Essex; as privy councillor and strong friend of the king, he had much influence in the government of the kingdom. This influence became authority in 1633, when Laud became archbishop of Canterbury and primate of the national church.1

tations."

A bishop is primarily a superintendent; and as such Archbishop Laud proceeded to investigate the situation in the English church. The years 1634-1637 were the period of Laud's "visiLaud's "visitations," which carried the Archbishop's deputies into all parts of England to determine, among other things, whether the priests carried out the law as Laud understood it. Priests who were not found obedient or repentant were disciplined. The engine that was used to enforce obedience upon clergymen and others who violated religious statutes was the Court of High Commission.2 This Court of High was a committee of the privy council which, as Commission. will be recalled, was created in the reign of Elizabeth, chiefly to deal with the Romanist recusants. Though the high commission took no life, its punishments were still very severe. this court Archbishop Laud was a leading member.

Financial methods of

Charles I.

Of

Even such

305. Financial Exactions. During these same years, 16341637, the period of Laud's warfare on the Puritan clergy, there arose a stern opposition to the king's financial tyranny. The royal strong-box was sadly in need of replenishing, and to provide funds additional customs duties were levied; monopolies were created; and old long-forgotten laws were revived for the purpose of levying fines for their violation or forcing monetary settlements. a necessary article as soap was made the subject oly, and Englishmen were forbidden to use any other brand than the one that the privy council had approved. It was once the rule that all men who possessed a certain amount of wealth should apply to the king for knighthood, which would be granted in consideration of a fee. This custom had become 1 Innes, II, 31-35.

2. Review sec. 282.

of monop

3 Review sec. 195.

obsolete; but Charles, seeing another source of revenue, tried to revive the practice. At one time he even bought a ship load of pepper on credit and sold it at a low price to secure a little ready cash.

The most famous expedient employed was the exaction of ship money from the inland counties. Since the time of the

Danish invasions it had been customary for the

Ship money. shore towns to provide ships for the royal navy or to furnish an equivalent in money. Charles preferred the latter.

John
Hampden.

With the ships and the

money he built a fine and efficient fleet; but he failed to provide adequate food and wages for the sailors, and a few years later, when the civil war broke out, the dissatisfied crews saw the opportunity for revenge and deserted to the Puritans, who probably would have lost the fight but for the fleet that Charles I built with the hated ship money.

King Charles also tried to collect ship money from the interior counties. Whether it could be legally collected in

times of peace even from the seaports was doubtful; for such levies elsewhere in England there was no precedent. The levy met much opposition; and John Hampden, a squire from Buckingham, supported by Lord Saye and perhaps by other lords, determined to take the matter into 1 Gardiner, 523-524; Tuell and Hatch, No. 46 (Firth).