little more than three weeks the absentee members of the Commons might again be seen on the benches of the House. If an Episcopalian majority were the result, Charles would be able to settle the Church as he pleased. There could be little doubt that nothing at all would be done to conciliate the Puritans. The Laudian system would return, not now outside the pale of the law, but sanctioned by the very law itself. Church system of the Restoration would be anticipated. even this was not the limit of the danger. It was rather against violence than against law that the majority of the Commons sought to provide-violence, it might be, carried out in the name of the law, and executed by troops put in motion at the command of the King. The Yet 107 1641. Charles's intentions. CHAPTER CIII. THE ATTEMPT ON THE FIVE MEMBERS. ! MANTEVE.Y J WOULD Charles have patience to wait till January 12 brought back the absentee members? Patience is hardly possible except where a deliberate plan has been formed, and Charles was never capable of forming such a plan. It can hardly be doubted that the idea of bringing the leaders of the Commons before a criminal tribunal, had again and again presented itself to his mind. It was just the sort of act, combining a show of legality with a reality of violence, which would have most readily commended itself to him, and there is every reason to believe that he had sought in Scotland for evidence to convict his political opponents of complicity with the Scottish invasion. But with him it was always one thing to propose a course of action to himself, and another to carry it out. Unless something occurred to force his hand, it was probable that this project would never be pushed on to actual execution, and might share the fate of the two Army Plots, and of the combination with the Irish Lords. Dec. 21. The new Common Council. That something occurred on December 21. The elections to the Common Council took place, accoiding to custom, on that day, and the elections were largely in favour of the Puritan opposition. The constitutional An account is to be found in Somers' Tracts, iv. 588, but I have grave doubts of the truth of the charge that the newly elected councillors came to vote before they were legally qualified to do so. From a pamphlet, An answer to a late... pamphlet (E. 135), it would seem that there was raised a question of the treatment of the poor by the old Com mon Councillors. division in Parliament was reproduced in the City. The new Common Council would side with Pym. The Aldermen would side with Charles and the Peers. Charles The Charles felt that he had not a moment to lose. opposition in the City would now have the benefit of organisation, and the City mob would be able, as powerfully resolves to do as it had done in the days of Strafford's trial, to something. dictate terms to him at Westminster. The wisdom of waiting till actual tumults had taken place, and of falling back upon the dislike of the country to violence and disorder, was unknown to Charles. He directed or persuaded Balfour to surrender the Lieutenancy of the Tower, and appointed Lunsford in his place.1 Lunsford appointed Lieutenant of the Tower. The Commons heard of Balfour's dismissal before they broke up on the 21st. As the 22nd was observed as a fast, they could not take action till the 23rd. There was everything in the change to raise suspicion. Balfour had been staunch in resisting the introduction of Billingsley and his soldiers when Strafford's escape Dec. 23. was planned. Lunsford was only known as a debauched ruffian, who was believed to be capable of any villany. If the talk of the seizure and execution of the leaders, of which so much had been recently heard, was to be carried into practice, Lunsford was the very man to keep a tight hold on his prisoners. Hardly less significant than Lunsford's appointment was the answer which Charles at last saw fit to make to the RemonThe King's Strance. Rating the Commons severely for their disrespect in printing their complaints against his express wish, he declared his entire ignorance of the existence of any malignant party in the country. In all matters answer to the Remonstrance. Balfour told the Commons' that, the Earl of Newport being made Constable of the Tower, he had moved his Majesty that either he might be wholly entrusted with that charge, or else might surrender his Lieu. tenant's place which he had by word of mouth surrendered.'-D'Ewes's Diary, Harl. MSS. clxii. fol. 266 b. Newport, however, had been Constable for many months; and, though Balfour probably felt hurt at the appointment, there must have been pressure put on him to bring him to give effect to his grievance at so convenient a moment. of religion he was quite ready to pay attention to grievances which might be presented to him in a Parliamentary way, or, in other words, with the concurrence of both Houses. The right of the bishops to their seats in the Upper House was part of the fundamental laws of England. If Parliament advised the calling of a National Synod, he would take the request into consideration, though he was persuaded that no Church could be found in which there was greater purity of doctrine than in the Church of England, or in which the government and discipline were more free from superstition. This he was ready. to maintain with his life against Popery on the one hand, and the irreverence of schismatics and Separatists on the other. As to the demand for a change of evil counsellors, he could only say that he knew of none to whom that description applied, and that he had always been careful to choose men of ability and experience.1 Nature of Charles's appeal. Such was Charles's profession of faith. He stood for the ancient Constitution and the ancient Church. Some slight changes might be needed, but they must be changes which would secure the approval of the House of Lords and of himself. That his words would find an echo there could be little doubt. Not all England was Puritan. At Dover, the recent proclamation on religion had been received with shouts of applause. "God bless his Majesty ! was the cry, "we shall have our old religion again; "2 and the same feeling undoubtedly existed in many parts of the country. The Lords refuse to The stand taken by the King rallied to him the House of Lords. To a request from the Commons that they would join in a petition for the dismissal of Lunsford, and for the appointment of Conyers in his stead, the Peers returned a blank refusal.3 petition for Lunsford's removal. The reply of the Lords was taken in evil part by the House of Commons. For the first time the Peers had refused con 1 Rushworth, iv. 452. ? Perceval to Pennington, Dec. 18, S. P. Dem. 3 C. F. ii. 354. L. J. iv. 487. Displeasure mons. currence in protesting against a manifest danger to the persons of the members of the Lower House. What avowof the Com- able reason, it was asked, could the King have had for the appointment of a man given to drinking, swearing, and quarrelling, much in debt, and very desperate?' Yet what were the Commons to do? They had no constitutional power to pass over the resistance of the Lords. The City was, no doubt, on their side. On the afternoon of the 23rd a petition asking for the rooting out of Episcopacy was brought in with 30,000 signatures. The leaders of the House, however, had no wish to appeal to force. They preferred to remain as long as possible on constitutional ground. On the 24th the Militia Bill received a second reading, and a special appeal for co-operation was sent up to Dec. 24. the Lords. The Com ration for the kingdom. In this protest the Lords were conjured to join in a declaration to the King of the danger into which the kingdom had fallen through the machinations of Papists and other mons' decla- disaffected persons. Lunsford's appointment was the safety of sufficient evidence that this design was now approaching maturity. As the Lords had refused to joir 'n petitioning against that appointment, the Commons now. declared 'before God, and the whole kingdom,' that they had done all that was in their power to do. They had frustrated the design of bringing in the Irish army, and the plots for bringing up the English army and seizing the Tower. The malignant party was now encouraged by the progress of the Irish Rebellion, and by the delays in the House of Lords. All that was left for the Commons to do was to protest their innocence of the blood which would be spilt if Lunsford were continued in his charge. They would appeal to the King to grant such commissions as would enable them 'to defend his Royal person and his loyal subjects from the cruelty and rage of the Papists,' and they hoped that such of the Lords as shared their apprehensions would join them in making them known to hist Majesty, and would do what appertains to persons of honour and fidelity for the common good.' The Lords were in a difficulty. Men like Bristol had no |