Preface

PREFACE.

The papers calendared in the present volume extend over a period of six months, viz., the three closing months of the year 1639 and the opening months of the eventful year 1640. The startling occurrences which took place in England during this and the two succeeding years have ever since been the subject of much controversy, and the documents which are preserved to us illustrative of the motives and characters of the men by whose instrumentality they were brought about are by no means too abundant. The student will, therefore, welcome the more gladly the large contribution to the history of the earlier portion of this period furnished by the papers in this volume. These papers relate chiefly to the events between the close of the first campaign against the Covenanters and the assembling of the Short Parliament. In the preface to the last volume of Domestic Calendar a rather full summary was given of the events which led to the undertaking of the Bishops' wars, as these two first campaigns are frequently designated. A brief notice of the general character of the documents in this volume is all, therefore, that will be needed by way of introduction in this place. The great bulk of the papers have some reference to the constitutional questions which culminated in the Long Parliament. Next in number are those relating to the Scottish dispute, and the military preparations for the renewal of the war. The reception given by the King to the Commissioners deputed by the Scottish Parliament receives elucidation from these papers; and the notes jotted down by Secretary Windebank at their audiences with the King are of especial interest.

The appeal made by some of the leading Covenanters to certain of the English nobility to use their influence in favour of peaceful counsels was seized on by the Government as an evidence of the treachery of the Scots. The animus which moved the King and Council at that time is clearly shown in the King's letter, (fn. 1) summoning John Leslie, Earl of Rothes, "to make his immediate repair hither into England to answer to these and any other matters that shall be objected against him." The letter of Rothes (fn. 2) complained of was addressed to Philip Earl of Pembroke and Montgomery, Lord Chamberlain, and is of an eminently pacific character. In it Rothes writes:—

"You found we had reason for our lawful defence, and that we had loyal hearts to our Prince, and justice in all our desires, which moved you to plead for us, and so engaged the affections of many to you; but since, when Lord Traquair made his relation that moved hard conclusions against us, not requiring so much as that it should not obtain truth, to the prejudice of a whole nation, till we were heard; and agreeing that an army should be levied, and lending moneys hath much grieved us, to be disappointed of one we so much trusted, I have therefore made bold to entreat that we may keep better correspondence, or else by mistake we may be brought again to begin a mischief that will not end in our days. As we have formerly declined it, so shall it not be our fault. And it lies in your Lordship and other great persons to prevent these evils. You have lived in all great ease, [peace] and plenty [for many years] as any nation in the world, and if you like to interrupt your own happiness for the pleasure of some prelates who will share little in the hardship and dangers that will be endured, you are not well advised."

Besides appealing to certain of the English nobility to advocate their cause, it would appear that the Covenanters had designed to interest the Queen of Bohemia and the French King in their favour, (fn. 3) which was a matter of still more serious import. When Traquair, who had been sent for to give an account of his proceedings in the Scotch Parliament, delivered to the King a letter addressed to Louis XIII. which had fallen into his hands, matters at once assumed a different aspect from what they had previously done. Charles and the junto of the Privy Council by which the affairs of Scotland were managed, consisting of eight persons, all Englishmen except Hamilton, would appear to have hastily concluded that this direct appeal to a foreign prince for his countenance and assistance—high treason by the law of Scotland, (fn. 4) —would inspire all England with an indignation equal to their own, and remove the remaining scruples of those who had previously objected to the legitimacy of the war with Scotland as an unwarrantable interference with the internal affairs of a "neighbour country," which, although united under the same crown, was guaranteed the enjoyment of its separate constitution and laws.

All negotiation with the Scottish commissioners was consequently at an end, and the chief of them, Loudoun, whose signature was subscribed to this letter (fn. 5), was by the King's order committed to the Tower.

At page 610 will be found a draft of the letters summoning all the other covenanting Lords whose signatures were subscribed, to make their immediate repair to the court, to answer certain grave charges, which, although not specified, may be taken to relate to this letter, as the names of those to whom it was addressed are identical with those who signed the letter.

The letter itself to the French King is printed in Rushworth's Collections, (fn. 6) together with an English translation; and a contemporary copy, made by Windebank and compared with the original by the King himself, is preserved amongst the State Papers. It has been calendared under the date of March 1640 (see p. 610), when it was submitted by the King to the Council, though probably written much earlier, as Loudoun deposes in his examination, dated April 14th, 1640, which is also preserved amongst these papers, that the letter was drawn out "the last year, [i.e. 1639,] about the time the royal army went into the North."

It was addressed "Au Roy," evidently meaning Louis XIII., and is subscribed by the Earls of Rothes, Montrose, Marr, Mountgomery, Loudoun, Forrester, and Sir Alexander Lesley. Much discussion has taken place as to the historical importance to be attached to this letter,—some holding it to be a duplicate of the letter sent, while others refuse to believe that any letter at all was transmitted. Since, however, the publication of the notes at the end of M. Mazure's Hist. de la Révolution en 1688, the receipt of the letter by the French Government has been supposed to be established, contrary to the previously expressed opinion of Hume, Laing, Brodie, and other historians. Loudoun, however, in his Deposition, (fn. 7) which was taken upon oath at the time, explicitly states his belief "that neither Mr. Colvile nor any other did carry these letters [into France], or that any use was made of them at all, because peace ensued, and so it was not thought convenient to send them; so other noblemen told him." And from Secretary Windebank's endorsement to the copy of the letter calendared in this volume, we learn that the original letter secured by Traquair, and delivered to the King, was transmitted to the Earl of Leicester, then English ambassador at Paris; so that even if the letter should have come into the possession of the French Government there is no proof that it was sent by the Scots to Louis XIII. On the contrary, the letter bearing the original signatures was that which was delivered by Traquair to the King. (fn. 8) This view of the transaction is further supported by the King's speech at the opening of Parliament: (fn. 9) "for my part, I think it was never accepted of by him [Louis XIII]. Indeed it was a letter to the French King, but I know not that ever he had it; for by chance I intercepted it, as it was going unto him; and therefore I hope you will understand me right in that;" and from a passage in the Large Declaration, (fn. 10) where the King writes, "But because the world shall see that we charge them not but upon very good and sure grounds, we have thought fit to set down here their own letter; of which we have given our good brother, the French King, an account, being confident he will not assist any rebels against us;" it is consequently clear that the letter was made known at the French court through the English embassy.

Much stress was laid upon the superscription "Au Roy," which is asserted (fn. 11) to be understood, when used in France, as applicable "only from those subjects to their natural Prince;" thus implying that the Covenanters by using this phrase had meant to transfer their allegiance to Louis XIII., and had "practised to let in foreign power into that our kingdom of Scotland." (fn. 12)

This was the gravamen of the charge against the Scots to be preferred in the English parliament, should an appeal to the nation in the present emergency be thought advisable. To solve his doubts, the King applied to Viscount Wentworth, whose experience in parliamentary debate necessarily gave great weight to his judgment, as to whether this great experiment should be tried. This nobleman, it will be remembered, had returned from Ireland late in the preceding autumn to arrange some business relative to his own government of Ireland, and had been received by his sovereign with marked distinction, and raised to the rank of Earl of Strafford (12 Jan. 1640). His presence at Court at once became an object of solicitude, men not knowing on which side his influence would be exerted; and it was evidently a surprise when he gave his advice in favour of the immediate calling of a Parliament. "I believe," writes Edward Nicholas to Sir John Pennington, who was then absent in the Downs in command of the Channel fleet, "you will have heard before this can come to your hands of his Majesty's resolution to call a Parliament about the end of March or beginning of April next, whereof his Majesty made a public declaration this day se'nnight (Dec. 5) sitting in Council, and it is said that it hath been the Lord Deputy [Wentworth] who has persuaded the King to a Parliament. I pray God it may succeed as well for the good of the kingdom as the news of it is acceptable to all men in this kingdom. The writs for levying ship-money this next year are sent out, and shall proceed notwithstanding the assembling of a Parliament, which is much marvelled at by many discreet and well-affected men."

Whether the project for a Parliament was favoured by Laud the papers in this volume do not assist us in determining; but at page 329 (fn. 13) is calendared a copy of the advice addressed to James I. by Sir Henry Neville, touching the holding of a Parliament, with marginal notes in the Archbishop's handwriting,—which points to the inference that it was consulted by him as a precedent for the expediency of calling a Parliament this year. After some weeks further consultation with the King, Strafford returned to his government in Ireland, with the superior title of Lord-Lieutenant, in order to meet the Parliament of that kingdom, which had been previously summoned, and to levy men for his intended army for the invasion of the Western Isles of Scotland. But before his departure he had taken pains to see that the King was provided with present means for hastening the military preparations in England, and, in order to set an example to the rest of the courtiers and councillors, had headed a loan with the munificent subscription of 20,000l., equal to about 100,000l. of our money; the Lord Keeper, the Lord Privy Seal, and the Earl of Newcastle following with 10,000l. apiece, and so divers others, to the value of 300,000l. in all. (fn. 14)

Upon his arrival in Dublin (March 18), Stafford immediately repaired to the Irish Parliament, in which he so well employed his interest that they condescended to levy 8,000 men (fn. 15) for the King's service out of Ireland, and voted a supply of four entire subsidies from the laity of 45,000l. each, and six subsidies from the clergy, who already owed three more, " so that their nine subsidies and our four subsidies," writes Lord Thomas Cromwell, (fn. 16) will all be paid in three years if God say Amen."

In the preamble to the Act of Subsidy the Irish representatives took occasion to express the sundry great causes of joy and comfort they had experienced under the wise administration of their Governor. With these high encomiums, and the promise of further assistance in men and money should the King's occasions require them, Stafford again returned to England to assist the King in organising the army and selecting officers,—a service in which he had had much experience. These energetic measures, however, were regarded in a different light in England to what they were in Ireland. "The "raising of troops before a Parliament," writes Sir Richard Cave, (fn. 17) "begets discourse and censures of several sorts." But, nevertheless, the military preparations were proceeded with, and the estimates for the army will be found in this volume. There are also papers relating to the pressing and conducting of the soldiers for embarkation to furnish the garrisons on the Borders. Meanwhile, the writs had been issued for the elections in England; and the opening of the Parliament, afterwards known as the Short Parliament, was fixed for the 13th April.

At the news that a Parliament was to be summoned, England was astonished. "We in Devonshire," writes (fn. 18) a correspondent of Lord Cottington, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, "have news of a Parliament, but no man believes it. The ship-money we are sure of, for every man feels it already; and although the rate of this county be high, being 9,000l., yet is there no grudging; so, as I think, we are the King's best subjects." It would thus appear that the country had almost ceased to hope for a legal reform, though as yet no violent designs had been even contemplated by the mass of the people, whatever ulterior objects some of the Puritanical leaders may have had in view, in their struggle for the overthrow of the Established Church. There was a time, indeed, not very far distant, when the country, under much less provocation, had resorted to arms, and had ventured to oppose the mighty power of the Tudors; but a long period of peace and the pursuits of commerce had somewhat mollified the national character, and the English tamely brooked what the Scots resented as an unwarrantable infringement of their ancient laws and liberties. It was not possible, however, that Scotland should be allowed to have her will, and England be expected to sit still. Some, indeed, thought that the latter country might be kept quiet, and the ecclesiastical policy of Laud enforced by ordinary measures. "The last Lord Keeper, Coventry," writes Dr. Burton, (fn. 19) "as soon as he was chosen, took instantly a survey of all the justices in every county, and expunged divers without rendering any cause; amongst whom was Mr. Hayes, although since he has scrambled in again. And so may the present Lord Keeper, Finch, if he please, [expurgate the list of justices,] a thing done out of course by his predecessors." Statesmen like Strafford and Laud, however, could not help perceiving that the conflict which had begun in Scotland could not be confined to that country (fn. 20) unless speedily suppressed with an iron hand. Hall, Bishop of Exeter, writing to Archbishop Laud on the 8th October (1639), says, "We begin already to find the effects of the Scottish schism. I am grieved to say that one of my clergy, Benjamin Cox, of Sandford, in my diocese, has lately in his chapel rather than church vented doctrine foully prejudicial to the divine institution of Episcopal government. . . I wait your pleasure by the hands of my chancellor, to whom I have sent the sermon originally written. I took it the more heinous from him, for that the man had been all this while conformable, and was one of the first of my diocese who removed his table voluntarily to an altarly situation; quo percitus ætro he hath done this, I know not. I doubt more will follow this peevish humour." In Archbishop Laud's reply (fn. 21) to Hall of the 14th November, giving him some animadversions on his intended book in defence of Episcopacy, the Archbishop writes, "The adversaries of Episcopacy are not only the furious Aerian heretics, out of which are now raised Prynn, Bastwick, and our Scottish masters, but some also of a milder and subtiler alloy, both in the Genevan and Roman factions. And it will become the Church of England so to vindicate it against the furious Puritans as that we lay it not open to be wounded by either of the other two more cunning and more learned adversaries." Thus encouraged by his Metropolitan, (fn. 22) Hall, who had already won considerable renown in polemical discussions by his Satires, published in 1597-9, under the title "Virgidemiarum," proceeded with his labours in defence of the Anglican Church, and proved to the satisfaction of many the apostolical origin of Episcopacy. His opponents, however, were not so easily to be overwhelmed with scholastic lore; and no sooner was the war note sounded than five Puritan divines, putting their heads together, answered by a "Counterblast," (March 1641,) bearing the initials of Stephen Marshal, Edward Calamy, Thomas Young (Milton's first tutor), Matthew Newcomen, and William Spurstow;—the first letters of whose names clubbed together formed the not very euphonious word Smectymnuus. The wordy war having fairly commenced, Archbishop Usher, whose erudition was of the highest order, came forward to Hall's rescue, and undertook the refutation of Smectymnuus. Thus reinforced, the champions of Episcopacy carried on the literary battle, which promised to incline to the side of the Prelates, who mustered amongst their number some of the best scholars of that age. The young and fervid Milton, then only just coming into notice as a poet, seeing "the good cause" likely to be lost for want of judicious defenders, "consented," as he says, "to lay aside his "singing-robes" for a more convenient season, and "to leave a calm and pleasing solitariness, fed with cheerful and confident thoughts," in order "to embark in a troubled sea of noises and hoarse disputes." He imagined that a year or two of such work, to which he felt he was lending "only his left hand," would be all that would be required of him. But, once engaged in the controversies of the time, he was led on and on; and, as Mr. Masson observes in his admirable short sketch of Milton's life, "for the space of full twenty years we see him only as a polemical prose writer, giving and taking blows in the cause of the Revolution, and producing nothing at all in verse except an occasional Latin scrap or epigram, and a few English sonnets suggested by passing occurrences." On hearing that Smectym"nuus had been replied to, he felt his spirit rise, and, without waiting for an invitation to enter the lists, rushed into the fray, and, grappling with Archbishop Usher and his associates, kept them fully employed by a succession of pamphlets, each one more trenchant than that which had preceded it, and in which he aimed at nothing less than the abolition of sacerdotalism and prelacy in all its forms and essence. The battle of the pen was thus carried on for several years, either party alternately claiming the advantage. But the stars in their courses fought against the Bishops, whose voices were drowned, before they had had their last say, by the sound of the drum which announced the commencement of the Civil War. It is only with the earliest portion of this literary tournament that the papers in the present volume have any connection, for it was Hall's book, above alluded to by Laud, which commenced the series of pamphlets. Milton's name does not even occur in this volume, but at page 389 is calendared a petition of his intimate friend and schoolmaster, Dr. Alexander Gill, who, on the death of his father in 1635, had been preferred to the headmastership of St. Paul's school. It will be recollected that at the time when Milton, being about 14 years of age, was sent by his father to St. Paul's school, situated only a few minutes' walk from the scrivener's house in Bread Street, the headmastership was filled by Alexander Gill, a Lincolnshire man, whose reputation as a teacher was then great, and who had under him, as his usher, his son the Rev. Alexander Gill, a young man of great promise.

During the father's lifetime everything seems to have gone on in the usual routine at St. Paul's school, but when Dr. Gill had succeeded to the headmastership a dispute arose between him and the feoffees as to the employment of the school's endowments. In the beforementioned petition the Doctor tells us "that he had been more than four years diligently employed in educating the scholars in piety, conformity, good manners, and good literature, to the approval of the Mercers' Society and other learned men intrusted by them to enquire and judge of his endeavours," when, finding that a great part of the revenues of the school were not employed according to the founder's intention, "he ventured to express a desire that there might be fair play above board, and that the school might know its own and have its own." The feoffees, taking umbrage at this interference on the part of the headmaster, were not long without an excuse to deprive him of his post, "upon the unjust complaint of a lying, thieving boy, your poor subject's scholar and servant;" "and, contrary to the founder's statute, at an unlawful time, in an unlawful place, without any just cause proved, have warned your poor subject to depart the school, he having no other livelihood in the world."

While Milton's old schoolmaster was thus getting himself into trouble by running tilt against vested interests, the Poet himself, having returned from his continental tour, took up his pen, as before stated, in defence of the popular cause, and warmly espoused the defence of the Reformed Religion, which even many well-wishers to the Church of England then thought to be endangered by the Laudian innovations. It will be found that the papers calendared in this volume give not the slightest colour to the Puritan belief that Laud was intentionally working in favour of Rome; but, on the other hand, it is clearly established by them that Laud's authority was exerted to rehabilitate the sacerdotal character of the Church of England; (fn. 23) which gave umbrage to that numerous party of English Protestants who rejected the doctrine of a priesthood and dreaded it as leading to the restoration of the supremacy of the Church of Rome, a contingency they regarded as the greatest of all possible calamities. To us who look back upon the past, aided by the lights of history, such a reaction may appear improbable; but to those who had witnessed the expulsion of the Protestants from France and Flanders, and the establishment of a rigid imperial and ecclesiastical despotism throughout Germany, it was by no means an imaginary danger. Nor was it forgotten, at least by the Puritans, who regarded the drama as the school of Satan, that Laud, when Bishop of London, had ignored the request of the churchwardens of Blackfriars to remove a theatre from their parish.

Amid the numerous matters occupying the attention of the two Parliaments of 1640 that of Church reform was paramount. The root of the evil, it was felt by the Puritanical party in the Church, was in the prelatical constitution of the Church itself; and already there were those who publicly advocated nothing less than an abolition of bishops, deans, and chapters, and all Episcopal forms, and a reconstruction of the Church of England after the Presbyterian model.

It would appear from the letter of Dr. Edward Burton (fn. 24) to Dr. Bray, one of Laud's chaplains, that in some parts of England the justices, despairing of obtaining redress in the Ecclesiastical Courts, had attempted to settle Church matters at the sessions. "When I first attended his Grace," writes Dr. Burton, (fn. 25) "I acquainted him that the Puritan faction was growing strong amongst the justices upon our Bench for the eastern part of this county [of Sussex], steered rather by humour and faction than justice; so strong, indeed, that such as are moderately disposed were not able to withstand it; that Messrs. Stapley, Rivers, Baker, and Hayes were ringleaders; that it was grown to that height that Stapley at Michaelmas sessions last (our churches being well and peaceably composed before) possessed the people in his charge that the altering of the Communion table altarwise was an innovation detracting from God's glory, and that some prelates in this kingdom did not approve of it." The words used on this occasion are then stated, and particulars as to what took place. "Mr. White, a justice of the peace, asking Mr. Stapley, after the charge was done, what he meant to meddle with those businesses there, which the Bench had nothing to do withall, received answer that he was so pressed by other men to do it that he could not deny them. As for their swaying of temporal affairs in open sessions their own way, with difference and distinction between other men and those of their own character, it were endless to mention particulars; we are most sensible of it that see it and feel the burden."

Indeed, nothing is more clearly established by these papers than the growing influence exercised by Puritanism on the administration of public affairs. Thus, while we find the rector of Newcastle writing (fn. 26) to the Archbishop of York (January 27), "there is good hope now that the neck of the Puritanical faction is broken, if the Bishop of Durham will but have a vigilant eye and keep a strict hand over them," the Bishop of Bristol was obliged to be guided in his reformation of the cathedral abuses of that city by a wholesome dread of Puritanical criticism. Thus he writes to Archbishop Laud: (fn. 27) "I told Mr. Dean that it stood not with your Grace's honour, nor yet with my poor reputation, to take from Dean Chetwind 200l., and then to put it into his pocket, for what would a thousand Puritans say?" And on the same day Neale, Archbishop of York, writes to Secretary Windebank (fn. 28) relative to the Puritanical lecturer at Newcastle, Dr. Jenison: "I am in a strait, not knowing what to do with him. To let him return to Newcastle I dare not; to restrain him from his house, wife, and children, he thinks a very hard case, and indeed so it is. If I knew how his Majesty accepted of that answer I should the better resolve what to do with him. He still professes conformity which I dare not trust him in."

Again, on the 5th February, we find Sir John Marlay writing (fn. 29) to Secretary Windebank, "I am persuaded if some of the chief of that faction in Northumberland and Newcastle, who are the patrons of the inferior sort, were strictly examined and dealt with, it will be the ready means to root out that mystery of iniquity from the Northern parts. If his Majesty please to command me any further service I shall faithfully perform it, but I am sure if anything is to be done in Northumberland there will be need of a strict command to the justices there for assistance."

Although persecuted themselves for their nonconformity to the Established Church, the Puritans showed no sympathy for their fellow-sufferers the Papists, who experienced but sparse justice at the hands of some of the Puritanical sheriffs, who were inclined to enforce with too much zeal the sufficiently harsh provisions of the penal statutes. On the 5th of October, Secretary Windebank writes to the sheriff of Oxfordshire:—

"There lately issued forth to yourself and others a commission for finding of the lands, goods, and chattels of certain recusants, which proceeding being only intended for enabling those who are already convicted and mentioned in a schedule annexed to the commission to make composition for the several sums due to his Majesty upon the statutes for their recusancy, according to his Majesty's instructions in that behalf, which otherwise they could not do. Forasmuch as the commission of enquiry has been by divers misunderstood as an unusual violent prosecution against recusants, which is not his Majesty's intention, these are to signify that his Majesty's intention is that no seizure be made of any of the lands, goods, or chattels of those who shall, at the execution of the aforesaid commission, enter their names that they will, within three months after, prosecute their composition in London with his Majesty's Commissioners for Recusancy, and that you be careful, in the execution of the commission, that all further or unusual prosecution against recusants be forborne by those who shall be therein employed. If any seizures be already made by you or your deputies contrary to these his Majesty's gracious intentions, the same shall be forthwith restored, such being his Majesty's clemency towards them at this time at the instance of her Majesty."

The exultation with which the Puritanical party looked forward to the assembling of Parliament is shown by several passages in these papers. Thus we find, under date February 6th, Simon Pettyward expressing his mind (fn. 30) :—"We hope the Lord has a speedy work to work for his people, and that the very old men shall see his deliverance."

In advocating the calling of a Parliament, it is probable that Strafford was not fully aware of the temper of the English people, which had considerably altered during his long absence in the sister island; otherwise he could never have anticipated that they would consent to the voting of supplies without first obtaining a redress of grievances. The nature and extent of these grievances will be best judged of from the numerous papers relative to monopolies, patents, impost on wines, ship-money, forced loans, resumption of forestal rights, ecclesiastical innovations, invasion of private property by saltpetremen, royal commissions for compounding with offenders against the penal statutes; and last, but not least, the arbitrary decisions of the Star Chamber and High Commission, by which the common law was set at defiance. Even if Strafford could have partially forgotten the events of the last Parliament, they were yet vivid in the recollection of other men, notwithstanding the lapse of 11 years since 1629,—an interval longer than had ever before occurred in the history of England between one Parliament and the next. Only once had there been an intermission of Parliaments for half that space of time. In the memorable session of 1629 the same topics of discussion were foremost as those which were expected to be propounded by the Commons in the present Parliament, and many thoughtful men were naturally dubious as to the result. (fn. 31) Besides the growing conviction of the illegality of ship-money, notwithstanding the contrary decision of the judges, (fn. 32) the mode of its assessment had become a fertile source of contention and dissatisfaction; an example of which is supplied by the letter of the sheriff of Monmouth to the Council of the 9th February. (fn. 33) "The laity conceive," writes the sheriff, "that the only just way of rating the clergy is by the pound yearly; for if the tithes and church profits should pay but the tenth part of the tax of the parish, then a parsonage of 100l. or 120l. per annum should pay no more than a farm of 50l. per annum, for the parson receives the tenths of all the profits which the husbandman can raise out of his farm by his stock with his own and his servants' industry, which must be more than double the rent of his farm, or else he will not be able to live upon it; so that where all the land in the parish is not worth above 400l. or 500l. per annum, the parsonage is most commonly worth 120l. per annum, or more. And whereas I received your letter of the 12th January requiring me to pay in the money by the 20th of February, together with an account of my proceedings, I have to certify you that although I used my best endeavours to perform your directions, yet there were so many complaints made to me of pressures and wrong dealing in the particular assessments by the constables that I cannot possibly accomplish your commands so speedily as is expected, unless I were to give the county just cause to exclaim upon me."

Five days later the sheriff of Northumberland writes (fn. 34) :— "Upon communication with the authorities of the towns of Newcastle, Berwick, and Morpeth, it was arranged that those towns should contribute respectively 700l., 20l., and 20l. of the 2,100l. charge of ship-money, and the residue be assessed upon the county as suggested by the Council. The authorities of Newcastle, however, refused to be assessed, and still persist in their difference of opinion from us, pretending the tax to be an unjust pressure on them; we, on the contrary, maintaining the same to be just and equal. In order that this should be as little hindrance to the service as possible, I have sent out warrants to all parts of this county for levying the residue of that sum with all possible expedition." Numerous other examples might be quoted from these papers showing the deep dissatisfaction of the people at the persistence of the Government in levying money and soldiers by what they considered questionable authority, when the meeting of Parliament was so near at hand. "Truly, Sir," writes the sheriff of Berkshire to Nicholas, (fn. 35) "to deal plainly with you, I conceive the main ground of the slackness in payment of ship-money at this present more than heretofore, is the expectation they have of the Parliament, in which it will be represented to the King as a grievance, whereby they hope to obtain a remission thereof."

By a strange fatuity, Charles and his advisers failed to see that their obstinacy in persisting in these arbitrary ways was incompatible with a successful appeal to the nation for its sympathy and support in the present crisis; and that the coming Parliament, however patriotic, could not be expected to sanction what its predecessors had condemned. It was struggling against the inevitable when Charles in the last Parliament of 1629 sought to ward off an open breach with the opposition leaders. Even during those days of adjournment which preceded the closing catastrophe, when the Speaker was forcibly held down in his chair, we are told by Contarini that the King did not despair of finally devising some means of conciliation. In like manner it was, we may safely believe, with a sincere hope of accommodation that Charles prepared to meet the Short Parliament, the elections for which form one of the leading political topics in the present volume.

Writing on the 14th February, Secretary Vane says, (fn. 36) "Although it may seem there are many reasons which might threaten some rubs and difficulties in the desired success of his Majesty's gracious resolution and intention of meeting with his subjects in Parliament, fixed for the 13th April next, yet there is great hope that by his wisdom all shall be overcome and carried, so that so happy a meeting may be followed by a like conclusion, to the contentment and satisfaction both of the King and his subjects."

The extraordinary exertions made by the Government to secure a majority in the Lower House are evidenced by the papers in this volume. "There is very much labouring," writes Edward Nicholas, (fn. 37) "by divers to be Parliament men, but I think they will be happiest who are not of the House." In Essex, where the contest waxed very warm, we read that (fn. 38) "Before the election the Earl of Warwick made good use of his Lord Lieu tenancy in sending letters out to the captains of the train-bands, who, having power to charge the people with arms, they durst not offend, which brought many to his side." And in the same county we are told (fn. 39) that "those ministers who voted for the Earl of Warwick, as Mr. Marshall and others, preached often out of their own parishes before the election." As a remedy for these evils it is suggested by a favourer of good government, Mr. Nevill of Cressing Temple, that the qualification should be raised from 40s. to 20l., "the present value of the sum fixed when that statute was made." "If this alteration were made it would be a great quiet to the State, for then gentlemen would be looked up to, and it would save the ministers a great deal of pains in preaching away from their own churches; whereas now a man having but 40s. a year freehold has as great a voice in the election as any, and yet this man is never a subsidy-man, and therefore no way concerned in the result of the election for his own particular." In a few instances open bribery would appear to have been resorted to by Government officials to secure their own return; for we read in the declaration of the freemen of Hastings, calendared at page 565, (fn. 40) "Mr. White, in the behalf of Robert Read, made this proffer, that if the mayor, jurats, and freemen would be pleased to make choice of him for one of their burgesses, he would do them the best service he could, and moreover, would give to the poor of the town of Hastings 20l. down, and 10l. a year during his life, besides two barrels of powder yearly for exercising the youths. A friend or two more stood up, and seconded this motion; when the Mayor, perceiving the freemen not inclined to embrace it, adjourned the assembly to another day." Eventually Read was returned, (fn. 41) the freemen for the most part having withdrawn from the [town] hall.

In another instance of a Government official being put up for a borough, that of Edward Nicholas, (fn. 42) the influence of the patron, backed by that of the mayor and jurats, was ineffectual to secure his return for Sandwich,—the imputation of Popery being a barrier to all chance of admission into the popular assembly. A fact not without interest as bearing upon his subsequent career. In general, however, the free choice of the people was not systematically interfered with, and the elections passed off in comparative quiet. But the full significance of the contest was not lost sight of for an instant, and all political parties exerted themselves to the uttermost. Only in a few instances popular tumults took place. "In Northamptonshire (fn. 43) some turbulent spirits by undue practices caused great clamours amongst the multitude to be raised against the authority of the lieutenancy." And in Cheshire, party and personal animosities ran so high that Sir Thos. Smith's correspondent writes, (fn. 44) "I am sorry in my heart to see the preparations of discord, and I sit down in silence to see what God will do in the ambition of these men, who all joined for their own profit where there was a bare pretence of a public good, and now rend the bowels of it [their country] to advance their own interests and popularity." In a letter of Dr. Burton to one of Archbishop Laud's chaplains we read, (fn. 45) "The town of Lewes as well as the sessions house is tainted with the Puritan faction; for at this present, notwithstanding the Earl of Dorset's and Lord Goring's letters and intimations for their creatures to be Parliament men, yet Mr. Stapley and Mr. Rivers have a strong party in the town, and it is much feared they will be chosen burgesses for the town of Lewes. God forbid the greater part of a Parliament should be of their stamp; if so, Lord have mercy upon our Church. God who knows my heart, knows that it is not the men I except against, but their condition: and it was the peace of the Church and Commonwealth that moved me to move his Grace. To be brought forward as an informer against them will cause an implacable cloud of hatred to hang over me, not to be undergone; yet what I have either spoken or written I will make good."

In Gloucestershire (fn. 46) the contest assumed an exceptional phase, a novel manœuvre being resorted to, to bring in the popular candidate.

"On Wednesday morning, when it was generally expected that the election should be a matter of ceremony and formality, and be both speedily and unanimously despatched, suddenly there was set up, and forcedly, as he pretends, Mr. Stephens, of Eastington, for opposing of the ship-money, in which cause he had suffered, having been put out of the commission of the peace, and with an opinion of much zeal towards the zealous. Sir Robert Tracy's side proceed bonâ fide according to the tenour of their former agreement, and in the second place nominate Sir Robert Cooke, who had either charmed his party so coldly as that he had left them indifferent to any but himself, or else, which is vilely suspected, had given some underhand intimations for his partisans otherwise to dispose of themselves; whether this way or that way I cannot resolve; but this I am sure of, that I myself both saw and heard some of his tenants busily stickling for Stephens, a shrewd presumption that their leader has been either languid or double in his dealing. Hem fidem Puritanicam! By this means Sir Robert Tracy brought at the first day's polling 800 voices to Sir Robert Cooke, and received not 20 back. These proceedings exasperate Mr. Dutton and his accomplices, while Tracy's side challenge Cooke of [political] infidelity, Dutton sparing not to tell him openly that for his sake he would never more trust any man that wore his hair shorter than his ears. Cooke, on the other side, professes his sincerity, and that he had dealt with them as far as they would be dealt withal."

A favourable example of a popular electioneering address of that time is preserved in the letter of Mr. Harrington to the borough of Stamford, (fn. 47) who, though not returned, must have represented the sentiments of many influential politicians. In concluding his address he writes, "Let it be your care then that it [the Parliament] may prove a Bethel, a house of God,—not a Babel, a tower of confusion. This, like the first temple, must be built with stones ready squared; no hewing, no putting to school; their 30 winters are scarce sufficient to warrant them from mouldering to dust under the pressure of that employment. To you is committed both the sword and the balance to divide and to distinguish. These corner-stones must neither recline, decline, nor incline, but stand upright and perpendicular to heaven, as being immovably fixed upon the basis and foundation of naked truth. If by these honest remembrances I have excluded myself, I am well contented, with that reverend bishop, rather to want a place than that the place should want a man."

We may well believe that some uneasiness was felt at the large proportion of untried men who were likely to be returned to this Parliament, for many of those who had sat in former Parliaments were now dead or im poverished, and it was therefore by no means certain that the parliamentary opposition would be managed with the same adroitness. The advent of Strafford's reappearance on the political scene was watched by the country gentlemen with much jealousy. His government of Ireland, so far as its material interests were concerned, had been pre-eminently successful. (fn. 48) Wealth took the place of poverty, trade and commerce sprang up where none had existed before, and peace and security reigned throughout the English pale; but these material advantages had not been secured without the overriding of private rights, and the almost entire suppression of political freedom. (fn. 49) It had long been his most ardent anxiety to be employed near his master,—the only post in which his ambition could hope for the power and glory he aimed at. But he soon found himself not only opposed by the champions of political liberty, but by no inconsiderable faction of the courtiers. He could not even prevent one of his personal enemies, Sir Harry Vane, the elder, from being, through the Queen's influence, (fn. 50) advanced to the important post of Secretary of State, vacated by the retirement of the aged Sir John Coke, who had left the Court in disgrace. (fn. 51) This vainglorious Secretary made a show of thwarting the influence of Strafford, and set himself up as his rival. (fn. 52) "The Court," writes Sir Richard Cave, "as it is generally taken notice of, is divided into a double faction. The Lieutenant of Ireland goes on still in a close high way; while Sir H. Vane marches after him in a more open posture. Some wise men marvel why his Lordship would so palpably affront (that word is used) Sir H. Vane to take the barony of Raby over his head, who was capable of the honour, and, as 'tis said, pretends unto it himself; others give the Lord Lieutenant reason, as being heir-general to the honour by descent; but most certain it is, that fiery feud there is between them."

Other causes of confusion were not wanting, owing chiefly to the jealousies which followed upon the new military appointments. The Earls of Arundel, Essex, and Holland, who had filled high commands in the late army, felt themselves slighted at being passed over, or offered only inferior posts; so that Sir Richard Cave, in communicating the news of these preferments to Sir Thos. Roe, writes, (fn. 53) "thus, you see, we are ready to scratch each others faces." It is scarcely necessary to mention that Sir Thos. Roe was a great confidant of Laud and of Elizabeth Queen of Bohemia, familiarly termed the Queen of Hearts, who not unfrequently addresses him in her letters as "Honest Tom." Their correspondence is calendared in the present volume, and relates chiefly to the affairs of the English royal family and the fortunes of the young Prince Palatine, who, in his endeavours to recover his ancient patrimony, had the misfortune to be made prisoner, as well as his brother Prince Rupert, and was at the present time confined in the Bois de Vincennes, (fn. 54) where, as we are informed by Sir Richard Cave, (fn. 54) "he had not liberty to write or receive a word from anybody; nor has he had one letter of mine since his imprisonment, nor the King's and Queen's, but upon hateful conditions; nor may he talk to any man, or any to him, except in French, and that aloud before company. They will, with their devilish usage, make him forget his English and whispering." From this thraldom he was, two months later (March 23), partially released, and his expenses were promised to be defrayed by the French King, "who," the Queen of Bohemia writes, (fn. 55) "has sent me a very fine compliment, that I shall now see what he will do for me. I believe all I see, and no more."

Besides the difficulty of procuring money for the military preparations, the impossibility of securing the services of a competent number of experienced officers to take the command of the troops and to defend the fortresses was a constant source of uneasiness, and ultimately occasioned the reduction in the number of regiments composing the army. Taught by the experience of the late campaign, greater strictness was observed in the selection of officers, and preparations "were made in a far better manner than the last year." (fn. 56) The Earl of Arundel, Earl Marshal of England, who had commanded in the last campaign, was unceremoniously informed that "his Majesty, observing of late that you, by reason of your often indispositions, have become less able than in former times to undergo so great and painful a charge, has thereupon made choice of the Earl of Northumberland to be general of his army to be set out this year. And further, I am commanded to let you know that, for the better ordering of these great affairs, his Majesty has appointed a Council of War, of which his Majesty has not yet named you, not knowing whether you will be able to give that constant and frequent attendance which so important a business requires. Besides that, his Majesty, having, for the reason aforesaid, named another general, cannot tell whether you will be contented to sit there or no." The two high commands of Lord High Admiral and Captain General of the land forces were thus combined in the one individual whose ability and patriotism had been tested in managing the recent complication with the Dutch and French fleets, which in the past autumn had dominated the narrow seas, and engaged in a murderous fight with the Spanish fleet, even within sight of the English shores. (fn. 57) The letters narrating the full particulars of this fight, one of the most daring in the annals of naval warfare, will be found in the earlier part of this volume. The command now entrusted to the Lord General was of a more arduous and desperate character than even that of defending the English seas against the unwelcome presence of three hostile navies; for though the kingdom against which these vast preparations were to be hurled was but an insignificant enemy in comparison, and one which in times past had frequently been vanquished though never crushed, and the power of England to subdue which was not many years after proved, yet the heart of the English nation was not in this war. "For my part," writes Sir Richard Cave, (fn. 58) "I push not very hard after any employment in these occasions. I shall be glad to live to do my master service in the wars out of Great Britain, but I care not much for fighting in this island." It is probable that the Earl of Northumberland himself did not over much relish his new appointment to the chief command; for we find his private secretary, Thos. Smith, writing to Admiral Pennington (fn. 59) on the 5th March, "Those captains who go with the seven ships are as here named; whither they go, we know not, but think for Scotland, against the people of which country we make as much preparation and as speedy as if we were to eat them up, but I fear the worst." It is, at all events, significant that before the time of conflict had arrived, the Earl found himself, by reason of his failing health, obliged to relinquish the command into the hands of his Lieutenant-General, Strafford, who continued leader of the army until the fight at Newburn. Such at least was the ostensible cause of the Earl of Northumberland's sudden retirement; but a different version was accepted beyond the Border. Spalding, in his History of the Troubles, (fn. 60) narrates that when copies of the patents appointing the Earl CaptainGeneral over his Majesty's forces by land and sea were brought to Aberdeen, "some judged them false and fabulous; others thought them over true; ilk man had his own opinion, and many stood in great fear. Howsoever the matter was, this Earle refused to accept thir offices, and in the King's own presence and face of Parliament laid down his batton of his office of Admiraltie, whereat the King was highly offended; but this Earle was otherwayes sett, being for the Parliament all the way, as may hereafter be sein; and he no sooner quyted the Admiraltie, but the Earle of Warwick, at his own hand, medled with the same office, by consent of the King as hereafter appears: And the Deputy of Ireland accepted to be CaptainGeneral of his Majesty's army by land."

It is possible that when Strafford took upon himself the arduous task of conducting the army into Scotland he was not fully aware of the nature of the struggle he had entered upon, or the character of the enemy he was to meet. "It is reported," writes William Roberts, secretary to Lord Ettrick, on the 17th March 1640, "that Lesley made a speech in this present meeting [at Edinburgh], which has much encouraged the people, so that they resolve to fight with his Majesty's army, though ten to one. It is supposed that the Lord Deputy of Ireland is to invade the North of Scotland with an army from Ireland; and it is said that if he does so the Earl of Argyle will, from a river in the west, transport an army to Ireland, and hopes to make a strong party of malcontents there to join with him. The Earl has prepared boats and other vessels in a river where his Majesty can send no ships to prevent them. They say their armies will be all volunteers and very willing men, and the King's armies prest men, therefore they care not how great the King's armies are. They report that they have as much ordnance and ammunition as they desire;—besides many other great boasts which they make daily." To assist the Lord General in his preparations, a Council of War had been appointed by patent in December 1639, chiefly composed of members of the Privy Council, of which it virtually formed a committee. A list of the members, set down in the King's own hand, will be found at page 188; (fn. 61) any five of their number to form a quorum, (fn. 61) and to have placed at their disposal a privy seal (fn. 62) for 300,000l. The notes of its proceedings, jotted down by the indefatigable Edward Nicholas, who acted as its secretary, are calendared in the present volume under the days when it sat for business. The garrisoning of the Border fortresses was one of the first cares of the Council of War, and extraordinary exertions were made to obtain the services of experienced soldiers for this purpose. Sir Nicholas Byron, a member of that Council, was dispatched into the Low Countries to bring thence 100 expert sergeants and corporals, in place of 200 volunteers to be dispatched thence. (fn. 63) The command of Berwick was entrusted to Sir John Conyers, (fn. 64) who had been induced by the promise of permanent employment in the King's service to give up the command of his company in the service of the States of Holland. (fn. 65)

The governorship of Carlisle with its citadel and garrison was committed to the charge of Sir Nicholas Byron, a member of the Council of War, while the defence of Edinburgh Castle was entrusted to General Riven, as he was popularly called, but whose real title was Patrick Ruthven, Earl of Ettrick. This nobleman's correspondence with the King and Secretary Windebank relative to the provisioning of the garrison, (fn. 66) and the steps taken in order to introduce secretly a number of English soldiers into the fortress, (fn. 67) as the loyalty of the Scotch garrison was not to be trusted, (fn. 68) will be found towards the close of the present volume, and furnishes some interesting particulars of the progress of events in Scotland, where General Leslie went about attended in the streets by 30 or 40 officers. (fn. 69) "Order has been given," writes Sir Michael Ernle from Berwick on the 22nd January, "to the towns of Kelsoe and Dunse, that they should be ready for the quartering of 8,000 or 10,000 men, but no preparation made;—which, doubtless, therefore, is nothing but mere brag. I am now absolutely of opinion that the best way to tame them is to bid them do their uttermost, for I doubt not but they will shortly see their error, though at this time they seem to be more furious than ever they have been."

The sudden falling down of the outer walls of Edinburgh Castle on two sides gave great anxiety to the Governor, and was likened by the Covenanters to the fall of the walls of Jericho. The demand for materials to repair the dilapidations brought matters to a crisis, as the burghers were unwilling to furnish the necessary timber and other materials; which being communicated by the Governor to the King, he replied on the 30th March, (fn. 70) —

"In all which, though they heap more guiltiness upon themselves, yet it is a great contentment to us to find you so resolute to reduce them to obedience by force, according to our letters of the 19th, which we do again hereby require you to pursue punctually and with expedition, judging that by this means you will gain many advantages, and not only free our castle of such a bridle, but in consequence of that, in procuring materials for the works and all necessary supplies for yourself and the garrison, preserve our honour and interests, and rally these rebellious people to that duty which they owe us. This, we acknowledge, will be a work of some difficulty, considering, as you observe, how much the place is weakened by the ruin of the walls, and what just cause of distrust you have of the Scotchmen there. But your glory will be the greater in venturing rather to preserve it gallantly than in lying still, and suffering the yoke to be put upon you quietly and without opposition by a company of seditious burghers. You are therefore to go on cheerfully, and to be confident you shall have supplies with all the speed that may be."

In these straits, the Governor addressed a very thoughtful letter to the King, in which (fn. 71) he writes, "The Covenanters much boast that their cause has many wellwishers near your Majesty, but I hope they will deceive themselves in such vain hopes, though I cannot assure you of any faithful servants you have here."

Amongst the notices of Court news are some interesting particulars of the Royal family. Thus, Robert Read, writing to young Thos. Windebank, says, (fn. 72) "I was left at Court this evening to get some things signed by the King, who was so long at cards that I came almost too late home to present my service to you." Again, under date 14th February (1640), Secretary Vane informs Sir Thos. Roe, (fn. 73), that "their Majesties, with their royal children, are in perfect health, and for their recreation intend to dance again their mask this Shrovetide; the joy of Her Majesty being enceinte again, advancing rather than hindering that pastime."

There are, besides the subjects above treated of, many others which receive elucidation from these papers. As an example, may be mentioned the supply of London with pure water,—a subject which had already become of such grave importance that the authority of the Council was invoked on several occasions. Complaint having been (fn. 74) made by the warder of the Fleet Prison that whereas he paid 5l. fine, besides 5l. yearly rent, for having water brought to the prison by pipe from Sir Hugh Middleton's river, it is now threatened by Sir William Middleton's agents or officers to be cut off unless he will pay a greater fine and increased rent, the Lords in the exercise of their discretion ordered "that Sir William Middleton, or any others interested in the said waterwork, shall forbear as well to cut off the pipe as to raise the rent and fine, which if they shall refuse to do, then they are required to attend the Council Board." The greater part of London, however, was still supplied from the springs in the immediate vicinity of the metropolis, and thus we find (fn. 75) the poor water-tankard bearers complaining "that the water which used to feed the conduits of the City is now much taken away by many private branches and pipes laid into private houses, which are often suffered to run to waste, to the general grievance, many being thereby forced to dress their meat with other water not so pure or wholesome, and your petitioners much prejudiced and hindered from getting their livelihood." The Council upon this petition address their letters to the Lord Mayor and Aldermen, requiring them "to cause a particular view to be taken what number of pipes are laid from each conduit, and into what houses, by leave or otherwise, and whether conveyed by quills or pipes." The report of the civic authorities will be found at page 596, No. 30. A return was likewise ordered of all butchers within the City selling meat in Lent, and by whose authority they were licensed. Other papers, which can be readily turned to by reference to the Index, will be found to illustrate biography, law, topography, and literature.

In the Appendix to the Fourth Report of the Historical MSS. Commission, a Calendar will be found of the papers belonging to the House of Lords for the reign of Charles I. to the end of the year 1641. These papers form a valuable supplement to the Domestic Series of State Papers calendared in this and the preceding volumes.

Wm. Douglas Hamilton.

20th December 1876.