HISTORY OF ENGLAND. 1641. Aug. 10. The Root Bill dropped. CHAPTER C. THE FORMATION OF PARTIES. As the first result of the King's departure the Root-and-Branch Bill was tacitly dropped.' It was no time to rouse party feeling, and there was no hope that, even if the Bill could be got through the Lords, it would receive the and-Branch Royal assent. The energies of the Houses were directed to the provision of money, in order that both armies might be got rid of as soon as possible. It had been arranged that the Scots were to receive 80,000l. of the Brotherly Assistance immediately, and that on August 25 they should cross the Tweed. September 7 was set apart as a day of public thanksgiving for the conclusion of peace.2 Aug. 12. The armies to be got rid of. Parliament ary Com missioners to attend the Parliament was anxious to keep the Scots in good humour. It was also anxious to keep a watch on the movements of the King. It was resolved that Parliamentary Commissioners should follow him to Scotland, nominally to see to the execution of the treaty, but in reality to see that Charles was not playing tricks. So suspardon put picious were the Commons that they took no notice of the King's offer to issue a general pardon. They were afraid lest it might be interpreted as shielding Finch and King. General aside. 'On the 12th there was an order to go into committee on it on the 16th, but it was not acted on. 2 C. F. ii. 253. Windebank, Percy and Jermyn, from the merited punishment which would fall on them if they returned to England.' They rather determined to deter the officers in the North from joining the King in any fresh scheme of violence, by declaring Suckling, Percy, and Jermyn to have been guilty of treason." They again directed the preparation of the Remonstrance of the state of the Church and Kingdom. They would appeal to the people against the King. Nothing, however, was done in this direction for the present. Perhaps it was felt that the time needed more active measures. On the 13th Captain Aug. 13. Chudleigh, who had served as intermediary between Suckling and the troops in the first Army Plot, was examined at length, and deposed that he had been informed that a thousand horse were to be maintained by the clergy in support of the design. That such a plan should have been talked of in March was enough to increase the alarm of those who heard of it in August. On the 14th a committeeAugust 14. A Committee the Committee of Defence, as it was called-was appointed to direct the attention of the Lords to the state of the Tower and other fortresses, and to take into consideration what power will be fit to be placed, and in what persons, for commanding of the trained bands and ammunition of the kingdom.' The future Militia Bill was already foreshadowed in these terms of reference. Falkland and Culpepper sat on this committee by the side of Pym and the younger Vane. There was an Episcopalian party in the House, but there was no Royalist party as yet.1 of Defence. Holland in 3 All ears were open for tidings from the North. Some weeks before, Holland had been appointed Lord the North. General in Northumberland's room, and had been sent down to Yorkshire to take measures for the disbandment of the army. It has been said that he was out of temper with 1 Giustinian to the Doge, Aug. 13, Ven. Transcripts. L. J. iv. 365. 2 Moore's Diary, Harl. MSS. cccclxxix. fol. 148 b. • Bishop Hall denies that the clergy had any such project; but it does not follow that it was not suggested by Suckling or Jermyn.-Letter to W W. (E. 158). • C. 7. ii. 257. the Court in consequence of the refusal of the King to grant him the nomination of a new baron, which would have placed a few thousand pounds in his pocket. On the 16th an enigmatical letter written by him to Essex, in which the Aug. 16. Reading of a existence of danger was not obscurely hinted at, was read in both Houses.2 The immediate result was a Report from report from the Committee of Defence, recommending that 'some authority should be given to some person, in the absence of the King, to put the kingdom in a state of defence.' letter from him. the Com mittee of Defence. No government in England. Charles, in short, had left England without a recognised Government. The Elector Palatine, Lennox, and Hamilton had alone accompanied him on his journey. The Privy Council, with all its varied elements, had none of Charles's confidence, and was utterly incapable of acting with decision in any one direction. A body of commissioners, indeed, had a limited authority to pass certain Bills, but there was not even a Secretary of State to carry out the King's orders, as Vane joined the King in Scotland not long after his arrival. One of the clerks of the Council, Edward Nicholas, a diligent and faithful servant, remained behind, with orders to forward news to Edinburgh, and to carry out any instructions that he might receive; but he was in no position to command authority. The Queen, having conducted her mother to the sea-coast on her way to the Continent, had returned to Oatlands, angrily brooding over her fallen fortunes. She declared that, unless times changed, she would remain in England no longer.3 Suggestion that Parlia ment can issue ordinances. Before the end of the day on which Holland's letter was read, a suggestion was made in the House of Commons, which led to a far more daring innovation on established usage than anything that had yet been done. A difficulty had arisen in procuring formal authority for the Parliamentary Commissioners who were to 1 Clarendon, iv. 2. 2 The Lord of Holland's Letter from York, 1621, 100. 20 3 Giustinian to the Doge, Aug. Ven. Transcripts, R. O. 30' proceed to Edinburgh nominally to treat with the Scottish Parliament. The Lord Keeper was asked to pass their commission under the Great Seal. This Lyttelton positively refused to do without directions from the King. A proposal was made to order him to do it. D'Ewes-who earlier in the session had discovered that, though it was immoral and irreligious to pay interest, it was perfectly innocuous to pay damages-now informed the Commons that, though the Houses could not make the order which was proposed, 'an ordinance of the two Houses in Parliament' had always been of great authority; and he then cited from the Rolls of Parliament an ordinance of the year 1373.1 It is true that the citation had no bearing whatever on the point in question, as the ordinance of 1373 had been made by the King, though it had been announced to Parliament in answer to a petition of the Commons." Aug. 20. The first ordinance. The House caught at the idea, and the first ordinance of the Long Parliament was sent up to the Lords. On the 20th the Lords adopted it. From henceforth the term 'ordinance' would be taken to signify, not, as it had done in the Middle Ages, a declaration made by the King without the necessary concurrence of Parliament, but a declaration of the two Houses without the necessary concurrence of the King.3 Its character. As far as this first ordinance was concerned, the assumption of authority by Parliament was not very outrageous. It conveyed to Bedford and Howard of Escrick, in the name of the Lords, to Fiennes, Armyn, Stapleton, and Hampden, in the name of the Commons, authority to attend his Majesty in Scotland, in order to present to him the humble desires of the two Houses according to certain annexed instructions. Parliament did no more than appoint a com 1 D'Ewes's Diary, Harl. MSS. clxiv. fol. 32 b. 2 It was 'faite en mesme le Parlement,' which perhaps led D'Ewes astray, but it was on the petition of the Commons, and the last clause begins Mes voet le Roi.'-Rolls of Parl. ii. 310. 3 Professor Stubbs, to whom I naturally applied on the subject, informs me that he is unable to recollect any case in the Middle Ages in which ordinances were made by the two Houses without the Royal authority. mittee to reside in Scotland, instead of appointing one to meet at Westminster; but the idea that the Houses could act alone, when it had once been thrown before the world was certain to gather strength. It would not be long before the House would grasp the reins of executive government which the King had dropped in his pursuit of military support. Practically, indeed, this had been already done. The Houses shrank from ordering the Lord Keeper to set the Great Seal to a commission, but they had not shrunk from ordering Holland to secure Hull and that store of munitions which had been gathered there to supply the army in the last war, or from ordering Newport, the Constable of the Tower, to take up his residence in that fortress, and to see that it was safely guarded.2 Aug. 17. Hull to be secured, Aug. 18. and the Tower. That these measures were taken against the King there can be no reasonable doubt. They were the same in kind as those which brought about the Civil War in the following year. Yet they passed both Houses without the faintest opposition. Aug. 13 The excited feeling of apprehension which had given birth to these measures, did not last long. It was soon known that the King had passed through both armies without causing any stir amongst them. At Newcastle he nad been magThe King at nificently entertained by the Scottish commanders, Newcastle. had reviewed their troops and had expressed his high satisfaction at their military bearing. To Leslie he was especially courteous, and he promised an earldom to the rough soldier of fortune.3 It was not on an immediate military revolt that Charles was calculating. He knew that he must satisfy the Scottish Parliament before those sturdy peasants would draw sword in his cause. On the 14th Charles rode into Edinburgh. On his first visit to the Parliament he offered to touch with the sceptre, and so to convert into law, all the Acts which he had so long resisted, and was somewhat disappointed to find that at least a show of more mature consideration was Aug. 14. He arrives at Edin burgh. 1 L. 7. iv. 372. 2 Ibid. 367, 369. • Vane to Nicholas, Aug. 14, Nicholas MSS. |