OCT 24 1958 ) DA 396 .L3 B4 1905 Bell, H. B. Archbishop Laud and priestlV government I ARCHBISHOP LAUD AND PRIESTLY GOVERNMENT [ Digitized by tine Internet Archive in 2014 littps://arcliive.org/details/arclibislioplaudprOObell OCT 24 1958 IpGlCM SC*^]^*'^ Archbishop La and Priestly Government HENRY BELL, M.A. Member of the Indian Civil Service {retired), and of the Middle Temfle, Barrister-at-Law LONDON ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE ^ CO Ltd 1 6 JAMES STREET HAYMARK.ET »905 Butler & Tannek, Sei.wood Pkinting Wok: Frome, ano Londok. Contents CHAP. PAGE Introductory ...... i I Early Life (i 573-1606) .... 7 II Chaplain to Bishop Neile (1606-1612) . 14 III Dean of Gloucester (1612-1617) . . 22 IV Bishop of St. David's (1617-1625) . . 28 V Accession of Charles (1625) ... 39 VI The King's Coronation (1626) ... 46 VII The Second Parliament (1626) ... 49 VIII The Forced Loan (1626-1627) ... 56 IX The Isle of Rh6 (1627-1628) ... 62 X The Third Parliament (1628) ... 73 XI Assassination of Buckingham (1628) . . 81 V i CONTENTS CHAP. PAGE XII Second Session of Parliament (1629) . . 88 XIII The King's Ministers (1629-1632) . . 97 XIV Laud's London Episcopate (1629-1632) . in XV The High Commission Court (1629-1632) . 121 XVI The King's Visit to Scotland (1633) . .128 XVII Archbishop of Canterbury (1633-1635) . 134 XVIII Influence of the Bible (1633-1635) . . 148 XIX Puritan Emigration (1633-1635) . -157 XX The Foreign Reformed Churches (1633-1635) 162 XXI Ireland (1633-1635) ..... 168 XXII Laud and the Treasury (1635) . . 182 XXIII The King's Visit to Oxford (1636) . . 189 XXIV Ship Money (1637) 194 XXV Prynne. Burton, and Bastwick (1637) . . 201 XXVI Laud and the Queen (1637) . . . 209 XXVII Scotland (1637-1638) 214 CONTENTS vii CHAP. PAGE XXVIII Preparations for War (1639) . . . 233 XXIX The Earl of Strafford (1640) . . .250 XXX Laud's Troubles (1640) . . . .256 XXXI The Long Parliament (1640-1641) . . 266 XXXII Proceedings in Parliament (1641-1642) 279 XXXIII Debates on the Bishops (1642) . . 286 XXXIV The Trial and Ordinance of Attainder (1643-1645) 294 XXXV Conclusion 304 Index . . . . c . . 325 NOTE The following editions have been used for the references in the under-mentioned works : — Laud's Works, Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology. Hey tin's Life of Laud, ed. 1671. Clarendon' s Life, Oxford University Press, 1857. Clarendon's History, Oxford University Press, 1859. The references in both the Life and History are to the chapters and paragraphs. Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors, 4th ed., 1857. Gardiner's History, ed. 1900. Hallam's Constitutional History, loth ed. Hatch's Organization of Early Christian Churches, ed. 1901. Macaulay's History, ed. i860. Motley's Dutch Republic, ed. 1886. Newman's Apologia, ed. 1879. The dates are given according to the Gregorian Calendar."" viii INTRODUCTORY NO Churchman since the Reformation has more deeply impressed his mark upon the Enghsh Church than Archbishop Laud, and, hke other leaders in religious movements, his principles and conduct have led to unsparing criticism and widely divergent opinions. The view which we are now asked by his admirers to accept of his character is strangely at variance with that of his contemporaries, who regarded him as the origin and cause of all the civil and religious distractions of the times, and condemned him to the scaffold as a political incendiary, for attempting in the days of his power to subvert the laws, the religion and the constitu- tion of his country. Even his tragical death, and the more than doubtful legality of the sentence under which he suffered, failed to arouse in his favour either pity or regret ; and for 200 years he rested in his grave unla- mented and forgotten. But with the Oxford Tractarian movement in the middle of the last century his memory was revived, and he was then presented to us as a martyr and a saint, who had lost his hfe in his attempt to restore to the Church its Catholic and sacerdotal aspect, which the Puritanism of the Reformation had done so much to efface. In the glowing language of Newman, the then leader of the movement, he was described " as a character cast in a mould of proportions that are much above our own, and of a stature akin to the elder days 2 INTRODUCTORY of the Church. The features, hard and steadfast, are full of grace in their boldness, and dignified by a scarce kind of beauty austere and masculine. These are the men vouchsafed to us in the dangers of the Church, It is not so much that Laud's character personally is harsh and unpleasing, as that we have ceased to S5mipa- thize with that class of characters at all, or have rever- ence for that kind of greatness, by which they are dis- tinguished." He then describes in language bold and decisive the great heresy which Laud had laboured to suppress. " It is really quite painful to notice how persons in these days speak of Puritanism. It would be thought wrong instead of being a duty to regard it as a hateful and detestable heresy, or rather a fearful combination of heresies, and a deadly enemy to Christ's holy Church. Men forget how it began in a hatred and putting down of Episcopacy, whereby as regarded themselves the Church was destroyed among them and they were left unblessed. The Presbyterian form, according to all historians the least offensive and disgusting, invites from the most careless reader the application of the Apostle's words : ' Such are false apostles deceitful workers trans- forming themselves into the Apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself is transformed into an Angel of Light.' Things must indeed have come to a fearful pitch, when men are driven perforce to admire earnest heretics for their earnestness, when they should rather have seen in it the life of heresy and its mark. Yet have we been living aU along on Puritan traditions about Archbishop Laud without shame and without reflec- tion." ^ 1 Preface by John Henry Newman to an Autobiography of Laud, pp. xxvii.-xxx., Oxford, 1839. INTRODUCTORY 3 But besides this hatred of Puritanism, common to them both, there were other strong points of resem- blance between Laud and Newman. Both were genuine priests, products of the cloister, solemnly impressed with the mysterious attributes of their sacred office ; and both earnestly laboured to restore to their order the influence it had exercised in the middle ages over the souls and consciences of men. In disposition too they were singularly alike. Both were intensely super- stitious. Laud saw in his distempered dreams and the casual accidents of his hfe omens and prognostications of the future ; while Newman did not hesitate to declare " his conviction that it would be a gain to the country were it vastly more superstitious, more bigoted, more fierce in its religion than at present it shows itself to be." ^ It was natural that such men would be strongly opposed to that spirit of inquiry into the foundations of belief which the Reformation had introduced, holding as they did that the dogmas of the Church, formulated by the clergy in their " holy s3mods," were in some incom- prehensible way divinely inspired, and, however repugnant to reason, were to be implicitly accepted and obeyed. " Truth," said Laud, " was not determinable by human reason." " My battle," said Newman, " was with Liberal- ism ; by Liberalism I mean the antidogmatic principle, the subjecting to human judgment those revealed doc- trines which are in their nature beyond it, and indepen- dent of it." 2 ^ Apologia, p. 46. * lb. 48. But after all, Newman's belief was founded on human judgment. Speaking of Transubstantiation, he says : " I did not believe the doctrine till I was a Catholic. I had no difficulty in believing it as soon as I believed that the Catholic Roman Church was the Oracle of God, and that she had declared the doctrine to be partof the original revelation." (Apologia, -p. 239.) 4 INTRODUCTORY Such doctrines seem somewhat out of place in a re- formed Church estabhshed by Parhament, and dependent upon Parhament for its emoluments and power, but in Laud's days they would possibly have been regarded with indifference or contempt, if he had been content to leave the pubUc worship in the churches, and the private worship of individuals in their houses, alone. To the pious Puritan, religion was not a mere theological dogma, the creation of clerical superstition, but the guiding principle of his daily life. There was no mystery to his mind in the simple truths of the Gospel ; they appealed alike to his reason and his conscience, and so long as he had the approval of his conscience he required no clerical or other external authority for his faith. But this in- ward service of the heart, however acceptable to God, unless accompanied by some external acts of worship, was no indication of the doctrinal orthodoxy of a man's belief, for, said Laud, " the external worship of God in His Church is the great witness to the world that our heart stands right in the service of God ; for of that which is inward, there can be no witness among men, nor no example for men. Now no external action in the world can be uniform without some ceremonies, and these, in religion, the ancienter they be the better, so that they, may fit time and place." ^ In these words we have the key to Laud's administra- tion. Uniformity was to be secured by symbohcal cere- monies, which admitted of no compromise or evasion, and the observance of these ceremonies, and not the purity of a man's life, was to be made the uncompromising test of his religion. In those days, attendance at the public services of the Church was enforced by the law, and the stem Puritans of the Reformation were not ^ Laud's Works, ii. xvi. INTRODUCTORY 5 only compelled to be present at a worship, which they regarded as a revival of a degrading superstition, but were exposed to the vengeance of the bishop, if they refused to attend the services, or ventured to form them- selves into religious societies of their own. The Dissen- ters in the country, when Laud rose to power, were a mere fraction of the population, but before his fall he had succeeded in separating half the nation from the communion of the established Church. An administra- tion so disastrous in its results, so fatal to himself and his order, may well claim our attention at a time when clericalism is again in the ascendant, and engaged in its oft repeated struggle against the enlightenment of the age, a struggle proceeding on the same lines and on the same principles that brought the Church to destruc- tion in the middle of the seventeenth century. But apart from these considerations Laud's life is in itself deeply interesting as an historical study, illustrating the feelings, the manners and the peculiar features of the age in which he lived. He is the only instance since the Reformation of a great Churchman attaining to almost unlimited power in the State. He was the dark and secret force behind the throne that dictated the fatal policy of the reign ; and to form a correct view of his character, we must not only consider him in the light of an ordinary bishop, confining his attention to the discharge of his episcopal functions, but as the active, restless and trusted minister of the Crown, whose power in the .State enabled him to force upon the nation an ideal form of theocratic government, placing under clerical control the morals, the opinions, the education, and the religious observances of the people. In writing the history of a life so varied in its circum- stances and so tragic in its end, I have endeavoured as 6 INTRODUCTORY far as possible to draw a picture of the man as he appears in his own letters, memoirs and diary, for it is only fair to judge him by his own actions and writings, and not by the caricatures of his enemies, or the equally mis- leading portraiture of his friends. I have also quoted freely from two contemporary authorities : the vindica- tion of his life by his confidential chaplain and enthusias- tic biographer. Dr. Peter Heylin ; and the great history of the period by the Earl of Clarendon, who always speaks of Laud with singular tenderness and partiality, as of one to whom he was greatly indebted for his early success in life. CHAPTER I 1573— 1606 EARLY LIFE OF Laud's early life we know very little. He tells us in his diary that he was born at Reading in October 1573, but he is singularly reticent as to his domestic surroundings. Upon the subject of his family he was always foolishly sensitive, for in the days of his greatness his enemies could always torment him by reminding him of the obscurity of his birth. " I remember once," says Heylin, " that I found him in his garden at Lambeth with more than ordinary trouble upon his countenance ; he held in his hand a scandalous libel, which he said re- proached him with so base a parentage as if he had been raked out of the dunghill : adding withal that though he had not the good fortune to be born a gentleman, yet he thanked God that he had been born of honest parents, who lived in a plentiful condition and left a good report behind them." ^ His father was a tradesman and kept a clothier's shop at Reading, and Laud, his only child, was educated for the Church, the only profession then open for poor men's sons. Education in those days was less costly than in ours, and the town of Reading was particularly fortunate in its educational endowments. There was not only a free grammar school in the town, ^ Heylin's Life of Laud, p. 43. 8 ARCHBISHOP LAUD but at St. John's College, Oxford, special scholarships and fellowships were reserved for the more advanced boys, who desired to finish their studies at the University. From his school education Laud seems to have derived but little advantage, for in after years he bitterly com- plained that " he was still sensible of what it was to be bred under an ill schoolmaster." ^ At the age of sixteen he left school for St. John's College, Oxford, and was shortly after elected to one of the Reading scholarships, on the nomination of the Mayor of the town ; and three years later he succeeded to a fellowship on the same foundation before he had taken his degree. Though these appointments were obtained owing to his good fortune of being a native of Reading, they may be accepted as a proof that his college life was exemplary and without reproach. Of his undergraduate career we have no reminiscences, either from himself or from any of his contemporaries. He was naturally of an unsociable disposition, and his over-sensitive nature, and his awkward and home-bred manners, that clung to him through life, unfitted him for the free and easy society of his youthful companions in their hours of recreation ; and he does not appear to have made a single college friend, though it is from coUege that most men date the closest and most lasting intimacies of their lives. The happy faculty of making friends, if not acquired in youth, is seldom acquired in after life. It was certainly the case with Laud. ' His great misfortune,' says Clarendon, ' was the want of a familiar friend, sufficiently intimate to moderate his ill-tempered zeal with wise counsel and advice.' * He lived a lonely life. No intimate friend ever lived in his house. But when he rose to power he was surrounded * Laud's Works, vi. 473. ^ Clarendon's Life, i. 69. AT OXFORD 9 by a hungry crew of clerical adherents, who fawned upon him in the days of his greatness and deserted him in the hour of his distress. " My case," he said when a prisoner in the Tower, " is somewhat like Cicero's. For having now for many years defended the public state of the Church and the private of many Churchmen — as he had done many citizens — when he by prevailing factions came into danger himself, no man took care to defend him, who had defended so many ; which yet I speak not to impute an3rthing to men of my own calling, who, I presume, would have lent me their just defence according to their power, had not the same storm, which drove against my life, driven them into corners to preserve themselves." But though he had not the happy faculty of making friends among his equals in life, he had the unrivalled art of ingratiating himself into the favour of men of influence and power. His first patron was the tutor of his college. Dr. Buckeridge, a High Churchman, much addicted to theological controversy, " who brandished, it is said, the two-edged sword of Holy Scripture against the Papists on the one side, and the Puritans or Noncon- formists on the other." ^ Not a very desirable man, one would think, for a college tutor. But be that as it may, we are told that " the learning and goodness of the tutor had their effect upon the pupil, and the lad grew up ' to found his study on the noble foundations of the Fathers, councils and ecclesiastical historians,' and to stand boldly opposed to the dominant Calvinism of the University." ^ From these " noble foundations " the boy, whether for good or evil, derived the inspiration 1 Laud's Works, iv. 169. 2 Heylin, p. 44. ^ Life of Laud, by the Rev. W. H. Hutton, Tutor of St. John's College, Oxford, p. 6. 10 ARCHBISHOP LAUD of his life. As a youth of immature age and understanding he imbibed the High Church controversial principles of his tutor ; and his opinions, once formed, never changed. "I have ever," he said towards the close of his life, " since I understood aught in divinity, kept one constant tenor in this my profession without variation or shifting from one opinion to another for any worldly ends." ^ He had not a receptive mind ; his first impressions were also his last ; and many of the errors of his life may fairly be attributed to the unfortunate narrowness of his education. His religious horizon was bounded by the teachings of the Fathers, who may have been ex- emplary men in their remote times, but afforded him little assistance in dealing with the complicated problems of the age of Shakespeare and Bacon. After taking his degree (1594) Laud spent the next eight years of his life at Oxford, but they were so entirely uneventful that they may be passed over without notice. If we may believe Heylin, he was not popular in the University, and had no prospect of obtaining any Uni- versity preferment, and shortly after taking priest's orders he resolved to leave Oxford, and accept the offer of a chaplaincy in the family of the Earl of Devon.^ In one respect it was a very judicious appointment for him to take. The Earl had just returned from Ireland, where he had successfully put down a rebellion which had threatened the very existence of the British power. Naturally he was a person in high favour at Court ; and in reward for his services he was created an Earl, made a member of the Privy Council and a Knight of the Garter. To be the domestic chaplain of such a man opened unbounded prospects to an aspiring Churchman, whose talents had failed to secure recognition in an ^ Laud's Works, iv. 60. ^ 1603. CHAPLAIN TO THE EARL OF DEVON ii iinappreciative university. Unfortunately there was one serious drawback to the appointment. The Earl was living at the time in open adultery with the wife of Lord Rich ; and a clergjmian, with ordinary views of morality and self-respect, might have hesitated to accept the equivocal position of chaplain in such a family. But Laud had no such scruples. For nearly three years he lived as a member of Lord Devon's household at Wan- stead in Essex, and shortly after Lord Rich had obtained a divorce he married the divorced wife and the Earl in the village church. In the early years of the Reformation the re-marriage of divorced persons was a question upon which theo- logians were much divided. The Roman Catholic divines, who regarded marriage as a sacrament, held that the marriage tie could only be dissolved by death ; while the Protestant Churches of the Continent allowed re-marriage, when the nuptial contract had been terminated by divorce. The English Church agreed with the Continental Protestants in rejecting the sacramental view of matrimony, but left open the question whether the Ecclesiastical Courts could pass an absolute sentence of divorce entitling the parties to enter into a second marriage. That such divorces, how- ever, were frequent is clear from an Act passed in 1603, the first year of King James, which subjected to the penalties of felony any person having a wife or husband living, who contracted a second marriage, but expressly exempted from the penalties of the Act persons who had been divorced by the sentence of an Ecclesiastical Court. In the following year (1604) Archbishop Ban- croft, a High Churchman of the most pronounced type, passed a canon in Convocation, which deprived the Ecclesiastical Courts of their power to pronounce sen- 12 ARCHBISHOP LAUD tences of divorce except in cases of nullity : in all other cases the marriage was not to be dissolved, but a mere judicial separation or divorce a mensd ef thoro, was to be granted, which relieved the parties from cohabitation, without giving them the liberty to contract a second marriage. But Lord Rich had obtained an absolute divorce before these canons were passed, "and the Earl," says Heyhn, "finding on his return to England in 1603 that Lady Rich had been legally freed by a divorce, and not a voluntary separation a mensd et thoro, thought himself obliged to make her some reparation in point of honour by taking her into his bosom as a lawful wife." ^ It certainly never occurred to the Earl that he was infringing the law, and Laud must have been of the same opinion, for he solemnized the marriage with- out a word of objection. But the King, who prided himself on his theological learning, held that marriages were indissoluble, and was highly indignant with the Earl for marrying a divorcee, and with Laud for having performed the ceremony. But the Earl, who was said to be as distinguished for his learning as his valour, submitted an elaborate vindication of his own and his wife's conduct, which, however, failed to remove the King's displeasure, and he remained in disgrace till his death in the following April. And now occurred the most remarkable part in this transaction. When the Earl was on his death-bed, and there was nothing more to hope from his favour or fear from his resentment, Laud assumed an air of deep con- trition for the offence he had given, in having, as he said at the request of the Earl, and against the dictates of his conscience, consented to solemnize the marriage ; and to emphasize the sincerity of his penitence he proceeded to 1 HeyUn, p. 53. CHAPLAIN TO THE EARL OF DEVON 13 compose a strong censure on his patron's vindication. This paper is still preserved in the Record Office, and bears the following endorsement in Laud's handwriting : " A censure of my Lord of Devonshire's tract about marriage after divorce. " This tract was committed to me to read over twice, and twice censured in these two several papers, which were in my Lord's hands when he died, and were not delivered to me till Easter even ; at which time, at the command of my Lady, Mr. Walter James deUvered them imto me." ^ And so he departed ; but his sudden change of front in no way lessened the King's prejudice against him, and many weary years elapsed before he received any preferment from the Crown. ^ Calendar State Papers Domestic, 1606, 53-4. CHAPTER II 1606 — 1612 CHAPLAIN TO BISHOP NEILE LAUD'S first start in life had ended in disappoint- ment and failure, but he had his fellowship at St. John's to fall back upon, and to Oxford he returned. His old tutor. Dr. Buckeridge, was now President of the College, and upon his recommendation he obtained the appointment of Chaplain to Dr. Neile, Bishop of Rochester. This worthy prelate is described as a man ' who very well understood the constitution of the Church of England, though otherwise not so eminent in all parts of learning as some other bishops of the time.' In the beginning of the reign of King James, by the power and mediation of Archbishop Bancroft, he was made Clerk of the Closet to the King, that, standing continually at his elbow, he might be ready to perform good offices to the Church and Churchmen, and he dis- charged his trust so well that he gained the favour of his master, by whom he was preferred to the Deanery of Westminster, and afterwards successively to the bishoprics of Rochester, Lichfield, Lincoln and Durham, one of the richest in the kingdom." ^ As to his episcopal ^ HeyUn, p. 54. 14 BISHOP NEILE 15 duties the worthy Bishop troubled himself very httle about them. He was translated from one See to another, but never resided in any of his dioceses. He had sump- tuous tastes and a palace in London, and to Court life, with its intrigues and excitement, his existence was devoted. He enjoyed the unenviable reputation of being the most accomplished flatterer at the Court. Even Gardiner, with all his tenderness for bishops, singles him out " as a sycophant of the Court justly regarded as the worst." ^ In the House of Lords he was one of the strongest defenders of the Royal prerogative ; and when the Commons in 1614 had invited the Upper House to a conference on the King's claim to levy impositions by his sole authority on imported articles at the out- ports, he strongly resisted the entertainment of any discussion on the subject, as, he thought it " in no way fit to admit of any parley, in a matter of that nature, which did not strike at the branches but at the root, at the very crown and sceptre itself ; adding, further, that the Lower House was composed of such turbulent and factious spirits, as, if they should give way to a communication or treaty with them, they were like to hear such mutinous speeches as were not fit for their Lordships to lend their hearing to." This was tolerably strong language to apply to an aristocratic assembly comprising the intellect and wealth of the nation, and the indignant Commons required the Lords to take suitable notice of the insult offered to their House : and i^Neile being called upon to explain his speech, " with many tears made a retractation of _his words and disclaimed any intention of giving offence to the Commons," ^ 1 Gardiner's Hist. ii. 243. 2 Court and Times of James I, vol. i. 316. i6 ARCHBISHOP LAUD To this worthy prelate Laud was now attached as a chaplain, and from this time fortune smiled benignantly upon him. It is mentioned to his credit that after he had become the happy possessor of three livings in dif- ferent parts of the country, he resigned his fellowship at Oxford, in order that he might more fully apply himself — not to his parochial duties and his three parishes, but — " to the service of his I-ord and patron, whose fortunes he resolved to follow till God should please to provide otherwise for him." ^ He was wise in his genera- tion, for shortly after Buckeridge was promoted to a Bishopric, and the office of President of St. John's College became vacant. Laud had four months previously severed his connection with the college ; but as Dr. Buckeridge was anxious to secure the appointment for a High Churchman like himself, he started Laud, though no longer a Fellow, as a candidate for the vacant office. But the feeling in the University was strongly opposed to Laud's election, and the Lord Chancellor Ellesmere, who was also Chancellor of the University, at the insti- gation, it is said, of Dr. Abbot, represented to the King that it was most undesirable that a man of Laud's unpopular opinions should hold so responsible a position in the University as the headship of a college. Laud, however, was timely informed of the powerful opposition to his election, and promptly presented a counter-petition to the King, which was so effectually backed up by his patron. Bishop Neile, that James dechned to interfere, and left the fellows of the college to choose their own Head.^ On the day of the election a scene of great confusion occurred in consequence of the illegal pro- ceedings of the Vice-President to secure Laud's election. By the statutes of the college the President was to be 1 Heylin, p. 55. ^ Heylin, p. 56. PRESIDENT OF ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE 17 chosen by the majority of the Fellows, whether graduates or undergraduates, but the Vice-President refused to allow the undergraduate fellows to vote, and after ex- cluding them from the room declared that Laud had been duly elected. The defeated candidate appealed to the visitor, the Bishop of Winchester, who submitted a report to the King embodying the result of his inquiry. In his report the Bishop writes : " I received the manner of their election in a public instrument subscribed by a notary, and brought to me by Doctor Laud himself, upon the reading whereof I confess to your sacred Majesty I marvelled to see them swerve and vary so much from the true intent and plain source of their statute ; for where the founder in manifest words appointeth all and every of the Fellows to take the same oath, and every Fellow to give his voice to the scrutators in the same order that he was first admitted to the college, I found that in the late election of Doctor Laud they had neither sworn the Fellows, that were not graduates, nor suffered them so much as to be present, when the scrutiny was made." ^ For these reasons the visitor held that the election was invalid and ought to be annulled, and with this recommendation submitted the case for his Majesty's orders. The King decided to have the case reargued before himself, and, with Laud's friend, Bishop Neile, at his elbow, his decision was a foregone conclusion. No attempt seems to have been made to deny the manifest illegaUty of the proceedings ; but the King, after pon- dering over the matter for three months, confirmed the election with the sapient remark that it " was apparent that there had been practise and corruption on both 1 Bishop of Winchester to the King, June 14, 161 1. (State Papers Domestic James I, vol. Ixiv. No. 35.) C i8 ARCHBISHOP LAUD sides, but yet of such a kind as we think in this time no election in any college, corporation or company is free from it." ^ And so the illegality was condoned, and Laud notes with much satisfaction in his diary : " The King sat in person three hours to hear my cause about the presidentship of St. John's at Tichboume, and with great justice delivered me out of the hands of my power- ful enemies. It was the anniversary of the beheading of St. John the Baptist. The Archbishop of Canterbury (Dr. Abbot) was the original cause of all my troubles." ^ The anniversary of John the Baptist was ever after regarded with superstitious reverence as one of the most lucky days in Laud's eventful life. Laud was for ten years President of St. John's, but he does not appear to have taken an active part in either the college or University. No reference is made in either his diary or his letters to any event connected with this part of his University life. There was natu- rally a prejudice against him in his own college on account of the illegality of his election, and his theological and political opinions rendered him equally unpopular with the governing body of the University. It was, however, far from his intention to spend his life as a College Don. At Oxford he was merely one among many equals, and among equals, whose views differed from his own, he was always ill at ease. Nor would the intellectual society of the University offer any attractions to a man, who had no literary tastes or pursuits, and whose one object in life was his own advancement. It is not, therefore, surprising, to quote Dr. Heylin again, " that he was no sooner settled in the presidentship of his ^ The King to the Bishop of Winchester, September, 1611. (S.P.D. James I, vol. Ixvi. No. 25 ) 2 Diary, August 29, 161 1. CHAPLAIN TO THE KING 19 college, than he thought it high time to cast an eye upon the Court, and by the power and favour of his good friend and patron Bishop Neile he was shortly after ^ made one of his Majesty's chaplains ; yet he continued his dependencies on his former Lord, enjoying all the accommodation of his house whensoever his occasions brought him to London." ^ The Court, to which Laud was now attached, if we may believe contemporary writers — and there is no reason to discredit them — was the most abandoned scene of profligacy that the country had ever witnessed, — equal, says Hallam, " to that of Charles II in the laxity of female virtue and without any sort of parallel in other respects." With great worldly wisdom Laud seems to have shut his eyes to the gross iniquities around him, and did not, like the Great Apostle, when addressing the profligate Felix, preach of righteousness, temperance and judgment to come, topics which would have mani- festly been unsuited to the Royal ears and the courtly audience he addressed. It was much safer to preach, as we are told he did " with great applause," ^ on Miriam's leprosy, as a warning to the detractors of government, those stiff-necked Puritans, who presumed to criticize the ways and manners of their betters. But if the precepts of the Christian religion, and the ordinary principles of morality, were held of little account in high places, the King displayed an unquestioned zeal in maintaining the orthodox doctrines of the Church, which, " unless a man believes faithfully, he cannot be saved." It may reasonably excite our surprise that men, who were so recklessly regardless of their own salvation, should have troubled themselves about the ^ November 3, 161 1. 2 Heylin, p. 59. ^ Cat. S.P.D. Charles I, vol. viii. No. 61. 20 ARCHBISHOP LAUD salvation of others. But so it was, and a few months after Laud's appointment to the headship of his college, we find him engaged with his patron Bishop Neile in the congenial occupation of burning a heretic at Lich- field. The name of the victim was Wightman, and his name deserves to be held in remembrance, as he was the last man burnt at the stake in England.^ Several heresies were laid to his charge, for he refused to accept the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds as correct exponents of Christian truth. As he lived in the neighbourhood of Lichfield, Dr. Neile, who was then bishop of the diocese, was ordered by the King to examine him strictly as to his religious opinions, and Laud assisted him in the inquiry; and under his able supervision the whole proceedings seem to have been conducted in strict accordance with the discipline and practice of the Catholic Church. Many years afterwards the Privy Council had occasion to ask Neile to explain the nature of the pro- ceedings he had taken in Wightman's case ; and his reply has fortunately been preserved among the State records, and is a very interesting document. After stating that Laud was with him and assisted him in all the proceedings from the beginning to the end, he ex- plained that in the prosecution of Wightman he had acted under the orders of his then Master, King James, " who commanded me to send him down to Lichfield and myself to go after him, there to proceed against him as a blasphemous heretic. At my coming to Lich- field, being there assisted by some divines of very good note, we began with him with divers days' conference, but to no purpose. Then we proceeded against him in a legal way in the Consistory, and appointed a day for sentence, and I read the sentence against him, and ^ April II, 1612, BURNING OF A HERETIC AT LICHFIELD 21 denounced him to be a blasphemous heretic, and to be accordingly certified to the secular power. Whereupon his Majesty's writ was directed to the sheriff to burn him as a heretic. Upon the writ, he being brought to the stake and the fire having scorched him a little, he cried out he would recant. The people thereupon ran into the fire and suffered themselves to be scorched to save him. A form of recantation was then offered to him, which he there read and professed before he was unchained from the stake. Hereupon he was carried back to the prison, and after a fortnight or three weeks' time of pausing upon his recantation, he was brought into the Consistory, there to declare his recantation, and renounce his blasphemous heresies in a legal way, that the same might remain upon record in the Court, as done deliberately and not upon terror of the fire. When he came into the Consistory he blasphemed more audaciously than before. His Majesty being informed of this his behaviour commanded the writ for the burning of him to be renewed ; which was sent down and exe- cuted and he died blaspheming." ^ Strange to say we find no mention in Laud's diary or in any of his published writings of this ghastly exhibi- tion, but it evidently made a favourable impression upon him, for in 1639, when Archbishop of Canterbury, he suggested to the Privy Council, that a stone mason at Dover, who held similar opinions to those of Wight- man, should be visited with a similar fate ; and it was upon this occasion that Neile was called upon to give the Council the benefit of his experience in the burning of heretics. 1 Neile's letter to the Council, August 9, 1639. Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, vol. xv. p. 83. CHAPTER III i6i2 — 1617 laud's preferments LAUD'S diary for the next four years is almost a blank : and a weary time it must have been, hanging about the Court in the daily hope of receiving some mark of the Royal favour. But his shifty conduct in the Earl of Devon's marriage had left a very unfavour- able impression on the mind of James, and Laud in despair was on the point of leaving the Court, and settling down to college life. But his good friend and patron, Bishop Neile, says Heyhn, " advised him to stay a year longer, and to keep him in heart and spirit made him a prebend of Lincoln and Archdeacon of Huntingdon and gave him the reversion of a prebendal stall in West- minster Abbey ; and before the year had expired the King was prevailed upon to give him the Deanery of Gloucester, a Deanery of no very great value, but such as kept him up in reputation, and made men see he was not so contemptible in the eyes of the. King as was generally imagined." ^ Bursting with importance under the dignity of his new office. Laud proceeded to Gloucester, and told the Chapter that his Majesty had been informed that things were much out of order in the cathedral, and that he 1 Heylin, p. 60. 32 DEAN OF GLOUCESTER 23 had been specially sent to set matters right. The Bishop of the diocese, Dr. Miles Smith, was a distinguished Hebrew scholar, who had obtained his bishopric as a reward for the valuable assistance he had given in the translation of the Authorised Version of the Bible. He was what would now be called an Evangelical Bishop, who adhered to the principles of the Reformation, and was opposed to all change in the estabhshed practice and ritual of the Church. The Communion Table, as required by the rubric,^ was placed, as it was in all the parish churches, about eight or ten feet from the east wall. Laud ordered it to be removed and placed altar- wise close to the wall, and to mark the significance im^ plied in its altered position, required the prebends, the choristers and the officers of the Church to bow down to it and make obeisance. ^ This was too much for the amiable old Bishop. He called it a " nehushtan," for he had to draw upon his Hebrew vocabulary for an expletive strong enough to express his abhorrence. Great too was the commotion in the city of Gloucester ; people asked had none of the prebends the spirit of Elias to resist so scandalous an innovation. Laud however had prudently removed himself from the scene without waiting to see the effect produced by his handiwork ; but hearing, on his return to Oxford, of the strong opposi- tion that his unauthorized proceedings had excited, he writes the following characteristic letter to the Bishop : " I am informed that this act — i.e. the converting of the Communion Table into an altar — is very much traduced by some in the city, and let me desire this favour at your Lordship's hands, that these things may be ordered, ' By the rubric prefixed to the Communion Service the table is to stand in the body of the church or in the chancel. 2 Heylin, p. 64. H ARCHBISHOP LAUD and that your Lordship will join to reform such tongues and pens as know not how to submit to any law but their own. I must upon this of force have his Majesty ac- quainted both with the thing itself, and the entertain- ment it has found among turbulent spirits And I pre- sume his Majesty will be well pleased to hear that your Lordship, as in other things, so in this, is careful to pre- serve order and peace in the Church. Thus not doubting but your Lordship will be careful to rectify what is amiss, I for this time, being full of my business for Scotland, humbly take my leave." ^ In marked contrast to this arrogant and insolent letter to his diocesan is his letter on the same subject to Bishop Neile. After presenting " his humble duty and service " he proceeds, " I beseech your Lordship to let me have your lawful assistance, that so long as I do nothing but what is established and practised in our Church, I may not be brought into contempt at my first entrance upon that place by any turbulent spirits, and so disenabled to do that service, which I owe to the Church of God. And if it stand with your Lord- ship's liking, I will humbly desire that his Majesty might know what successes I have in beginning to reform what I have found amiss in that place. A strange mon- ster was lately born in the city of Gloucester ; I pray God, the Puritans, who swarm in those parts, do not say it was one of God's judgments for turning the Com- munion Table into an Altar." ^ Shortly after the occurrences at Gloucester the King paid his long promised visit to his northern kingdom. A few years previously (1610) he had introduced Episco- ^ Laud to the Bishop of Gloucester, February 27, 1617 Laud's Works, vi. 239. Laud to Neile, March 3, 1617. Works, vi. 240. THE KING'S VISIT TO SCOTLAND 25 pacy into the Church of Scotland, but knowing how distasteful the change was to the great body of the people, he had prudently avoided making any change in the ceremonial or external forms of public worship. No attempt. was made to supersede the Book of Common Order, or Knock's liturgy, or to substitute for the black gown of Geneva the canonical surplice, so hateful to rigid Presbyterians as the detested badge of Popery and Paganism. The bishops themselves were simply Presby- terian ministers, who were transformed into bishops by undergoing the ceremony of consecration without being required to be re-ordained as priests. In their office they were mere superintendents without any episcopal authority. After the experiment had been tried for a few years, James thought he might advance a step further, and one of the objects of the royal visit in 1617 was to ascertain how far the General Assembly would agree to a closer approximation to the services of the Church of England. Two bishops, Doctors Neile and Andrewes, attended the King, and Laud was included in the party as Bishop Neile 's chaplain. In June the King arrived in Edinburgh, from which place Secretary Luke writes to the Lord Keeper Bacon, who had been left at the head of the Government in London : " We are fixed for a time in this city till the Parliament be past. In the meantime his Majesty is in consultation by way of preparation for his ends ; that is to procure better main- tenance for the Ministry, and some conformity between this Church and ours in England in the public service. Towards this end his Majesty has set up his chapel here in like manner of service as in England." ^ Mr. Chamber- lain, in writing to Sir Dudley Carleton, the British Am- bassador at the Hague, mentions, that " a pair of organs ^ Nichols's Progresses of King James, vol. iii. p. 336. 26 ARCHBISHOP LAUD costing ;;^400 had been sent to Edinburgh, besides all manner of furniture for a chapel, which Inigo Jones tells me he has charge of, with pictures of the Apostles, Faith, Hope and Charity, and such other religious repre- sentations, which how welcome they will be thither, God knows." ^ But in vain is the net spread in the sight of the birds. The uncompromising followers of John Knock took alarm at these religious representations and ritualistic upholstery ; and " conceiving that the King's coming was upon design to work an uniformity between the Churches of both kingdoms, set up one Struthers to preach against it, who laid so lustily about him in the chief church of Edinburgh, that he not only condemned the rites and ceremonies but prayed God to save Scotland from the same. Laud and the rest of the chaplains, who had heard the sermon, acquainted his Majesty with those passages, but there was no remedy. The Scots were Scots and resolved to go their own way." ^ In another letter Mr. Chamberlain writes : " Our Churchmen and ceremonies are not so well allowed of, for at the burial of one of the guards, who died and was buried after the English fashion, exception was taken to Dr. Laud's putting on a surprlice, when the corpse was to be laid in the ground, so that it seems they are very averse to our customs, in so much that one of the bishops. Dean of the Chapel there to the King, refused to receive the Communion with him kneeling." ^ It is somewhat disappointing to find no allusion in Laud's diary to these proceedings in Scotland. He merely says he accompanied the King to Scotland, but returned before him. We learn, however, from other 1 Court and Times of James I, vol. i. p. 446. 2 Heylin, p. 68. 3 Nichols's Progresses of King James, vol. iii. p. 344. INCURS THE KING'S DISPLEASURE 27 sources that the Scotch divines looked upon him with particular abhorrence. He took no pains to conceal his contempt for the Scotch Church and all connected with it, its unceremonial service and its unceremonious Ministers ; and the King probably felt that it was dangerous to keep such a firebrand in his train, and Laud's further attendance on the progress was dispensed with. Some four years afterwards, when asked to make Laud a bishop, James is reported to have said, " I keep Laud back from all place of rule and authority, because I find he has a restless spirit, and cannot see when matters are well, but loves to toss and change and bring things to a pitch of reformation floating in his own brain, which may endanger the steadfastness of that which, God be praised, is at a good pass. I speak not at random — he has made himself known to me to be such an one. For when three years past I had obtained from the Assembly of Perth their consent to iive articles ^ of order and decency in correspondence with the Church of England, I gave them a promise that I would try their obedience no further anent Ecclesiastical affairs, yet this man hath pressed me to a closer conjunction with the Liturgy and Canons of this nation, but I sent him back with the frivol- ous draft he had drawn." If Charles had read Laud's character as correctly as his father, he would have saved both his Crown and his life. ^ The five articles to which the General Assembly was required to consent were, kneeUng at the Communion, Episcopal Confir- mation, observance of the great festivals, private Baptism and Communion of the sick. CHAPTER IV 1617 — 1625 BISHOP OF ST. David's HERE are only three or four unimportant notices -I- in Laud's diary during tlie next four years of his Hfe. He was out of favour with the King, but he was too wise to sever his connexion with tlie Court, particu- larly as he had a comfortable home in the hospitable palace of his patron. Bishop Neile, where he had the advantage of meeting all the influential courtiers of the day. It was during this period that he was fortunate enough to make the acquaintance of the Duke of Buck- ingham, who was then all-powerful at Court, and James, at his solicitation, though with much reluctance, con- sented to make Laud a bishop. On June 3, 1621, we have the following entry in the diary. " The King's gracious speech to me concerning my long service. He was pleased to say that he had given me nothing but Gloucester, which he well knew was a shell without a kernel." A few days afterwards. Laud preached before the King on his birthday on the duty of praying for the peace of Jerusalem. " Surely, " he said, " we have a Jerusalem, a State and a Church to pray for, and this day was our Solomon, the very peace of our Jerusalem born : and though he was not bom among us, yet he was born to us and for the good and welfare of both Church and State, and can you do other than pray for 28 MISADVENTURE OF ARCHBISHOP ABBOT 29 peace on the day, nay nativity, the very birthday of both peace and peacemaker. * Tlie monarch would indeed have been insensible to merit if he had not re- sponded to this sublime effusion, and Hen days afterwards Laud was made a bishop. The appointment is duly noted in his diary. " His Majesty gave me the grant of the bishopric of St. David's. The King gave me leave to hold the presidentship of St. John's college in my commendani with the bishopric. But by reason of the strictness of that statute, which I will not violate, nor my oath to it under any colour, I am resolved before my consecration to leave it." ^ Laud was certainly not avaricious in money matters, but he had little to com- plain of in the way of preferments. He was a perfect diocese in himself. He was Bishop of St. David's, Dean of Gloucester, a prebend of Westminster, a prebend of Lincoln, and held besides three country livings, and all these preferments he retained with his bishopric. Even his bishopric he treated very much as a sinecure. He had no intention of sacrificing his professional prospects to his episcopal duties, or to bury himself in a remote district, where his very existence might be forgotten. During the five years he was Bishop of St. David's he paid only two flying visits to his diocese. He lived at Durham house with his friend Bishop Neile, and from London the clerical work of his Welsh diocese was carried on, while he devoted his time and attention to pushing his fortunes with my Lord of Buckingham. His formal consecration as a bishop was, however, delayed for six months, owing to a serious mishap, which had befallen the Archbishop of Canterbury, who had ^ Sermon preached before his Majesty, June 19, 162 1, and printed by commandment. {Works, i. 15.) 2 Diary, June 29, 1621. 30 ARCHBISHOP LAUD accidentally killed a gamekeeper while shooting with a crossbow at a stag, in the park of his friend, Lord Zouch. The usual inquest was held, and the " jury returned a verdict that the accident was a pure misadventure caused by the keeper's own fault." ^ The Archbishop wrote at once to the King and informed him of the unfor- tunate occurrence, and James sent him a very sympathetic letter in reply, remarking that an angel might have mis- carried in that sort. Such an unusual event naturally became the all engrossing topic of conversation, and Abbot's enemies were not slow in putting an unfavourable construction upon it. The Lord Keeper WilUams, who was also awaiting consecration as a bishop, at once wrote to Buckingham that " his Grace was upon this accident to forfeit all his estate to his Majesty, and by the Canon law (which is in force with us) was ipso facto irregular, and suspended from all ecclesiastical fimctions ; and that to have a man of blood. Primate and Patriarch of all his Churches sounded very harsh in the old Councils and Canons of the Church"; and in anticipation of suc- ceeding to the expected vacancy in the great office, which this misadventure had caused, he was careful to add, that " his Majesty had promised me, on relinquishing the seal, or before, one of the best places in the Church." ^ Laud, who cordially hated Abbot, raised the same objec- tions and prayed the King that he might not be conse- crated by an " irregular archbishop." Under these circumstances James thought proper to refer the matter to a mixed Commission consisting of six bishops, two judges and two eminent civilians. What the Commis- sion had to determine was whether by the Canon law a 1 Court and Times of James I, vol. ii. p. 271. ^ Williams to the Duke of Buckingham, July 27, 162 1. Ca- bala, p. 260. THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM 31 bishop in shooting at a stag was engaged in an unlawful occupation ; in other words, whether an accident which in a layman would have been a pure misadventure became culpable homicide in the case of a bishop. Upon this momentous question the opinion of the Commission was equally divided. Five bishops, including Williams and Laud, who had been most improperly placed on the Commission, had no scruple in holding that, though no blame attached to Abbot, an involuntary homicide ipso facto disqualified him from the further exercise of his episcopal functions ; while Andrewes and the four civilian members absolved Abbot from this ridicu- lous charge of canonical irregularity. With this view the King agreed, but at the suggestion of the bishops he granted Abbot a dispensation, absolving him from all blame and dispensing with any canons, if there were any canons, which made such an accident an irregularity.^ It must have been extremely gratifying to James's vanity to find that in the opinion of these High Church bishops, he possessed a dispensing power over the Canon law of the Church equal to that of the Pope. With his intimacy with Buckingham, commenced a new and most important Chapter in Laud's life. It was a strange connexion, for it is impossible to con- ceive two men more unhke than the little underbred bishop and this magnificent courtier, the most abandoned profligate in a very profligate Court. " A charming personality," writes a Church historian of the period, " spoilt by success ; a man of vicious Hfe but not of vicious heart, one who sinned and repented, and then sinned again tifl he came to his tragic end." ^ Of this ^ Collier's Ecclesiasiical Hist., vol. vii. p. 418. ^ The English Church under the Stuarts, by the Rev. W. H. Hutton, p. 4. 32 ARCHBISHOP LAUD " charming personality " Laud tells us he was the con- fessor/ and it is only charitable to assume that in his confessorial capacity he discovered virtues in this exem- plary sinner which were concealed from the common eyes of mankind. Letters from Buckingham's mother have been preserved, in which she reproaches her son for his scandalous treatment of his wife, but the bishop was more charitable than the mother. In the many notices of Buckingham in Laud's diary, not a word is said io his discredit ; he is always " the most illustrious Duke of Buckingham, a man whom I am on all accounts bound for ever to honour." ^ In his book of devotions there is a special prayer for his Grace of Buckingham, in which, after praying for blessings for the Duke, he adds, " Con- tinue him a true-hearted friend to me. Thy poor servant, whom Thou hast honoured in his eyes." ^ His one con- stant dread was that he might lose the great man's favour. He toadied him by day, and dreamed of him at night. Even Sundays brought no repose to his active and scheming brain. " Sunday September 4, I was very much troubled in my dreams. My imagination ran al- together upon the Duke of Buckingham, his servants and his family ; all seemed to be out of order. God grant better things.* He seems also to have acted as a sick nurse to his noble patron. " Whit Sunday I watched with my Lord Duke of Buckingham. This was the first fit that he could be persuaded to take orderly. Tues- day night I watched with my Lord Duke of Buckingham ; he took this fit very orderly. Saturday, he missed his After Buckingham, the minister who possessed the fit. >' 3 ^ Diary, June, 1622. Laud's Works, iii. 75. ^ Ibid., April 9, 1625. * Diary, September 4, 1625. ^ Ibid., May 16, 1624. LORD KEEPER WILLIAMS 33 greatest influence with the King was Williams, the Lord Keeper and Bishop of Lincoln. A Welshman by birth, he had finished his education at St. John's College, Cam- bridge, and after taking his Bachelor's degree with great distinction, he was elected a Fellow of his College. Having taken orders, the Lord Chancellor Ellesmere, hearing of his University reputation, took him into his service as one of his domestic chaplains. " Not only did he preach and read prayers before the worthy old Chancellor, but sat by him in the Court of Chancery and the Star Chamber, and by reading, in his hours of relaxation, Littleton's Tenures and the Doctor and Student, he ac- quired a knowledge of the Common Law of the realm. By degrees he was employed by the Chancellor to read weighty petitions, and to assist him in extracting the material facts from voluminous depositions. The lookers on did remark that his Lord did not only use him in his principal employments, but delighted to confer with him. All his business with his great and royal Master he sent by him to be delivered with trust and prudence, and the King took great notice that the chaplain was principalled by his Master to be a statesman and pillar of the realm." ^ When the great seal was brought to James, after Lord Bacon's impeachment and fall in 1621, he exclaimed, " Now, by my soul, I am pained at the heart where to bestow this, for as to my lawyers I think they be all knaves," and the great seal was accordingly handed over to Williams, then Dean of Westminster. Lord Campbell, with the natural jealousy of a lawyer, denounces the appointment as an outrage to his profession, but he candidly admits ^ that no blame can be imputed to Williams while Lord Keeper, as he was most assiduous ' Hacket's Life of Williams, pp. 20-30. ^ Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors, vol. iii. 183. 34 ARCHBISHOP LAUD in the discharge of his duties and gave satisfaction to the pubhc. It was a difficult position for an ecclesiastic to hold, and it speaks highly for his tact and ability that during the five years he presided in the Court of Chancery he managed to secure the confidence and respect of the learned members of the profession who practised before him. In Church matters he advocated a conciliatory policy towards both Catholics and Puritans ; and though it would be too much to say that he held enlightened views on the subject of toleration, he at any rate kept religion out of the reach of party politics. His agreeable manners, lively conversation, and moderate opinions made him a grata persona at Court, and he had the wisdom and tact to maintain friendly relations with Buckingham. Laud he cordially disliked, and the dislike was reciprocal. The patronage of the Church was largely in the Lord Keeper's hands; and as Laud imagined that he was unfairly passed over for preferment, he looked upon Williams as the great obstacle to his advancement, and he was not the man to neglect an opportunity of removing the obstacle out of his way. Towards the conclusion of his reign James had set his heart on a marriage between his son Prince Charles and the Infanta of Spain, an alliance which amounted to an entire abandonment of the traditional policy of England, as the Head of the Protestant powers of Europe. The nation at large looked with abhorrence on the match, and in 1621 the Commons drew up a strong remonstrance against it, and implored the King to marry his son to one of the same reformed religion as themselves. But popular opinion weighed very little with James, and in the follow- ing year Digby, Earl of Bristol, the most distinguished diplomatist in the English service, was sent to Madrid to arrange the terms of the marriage contract. There THE SPANISH MATCH 35 were various difficulties to be overcome. The marriage could not take place without a dispensation from the Pope, and this dispensation the Pope refused to grant unless James consented to repeal the penal laws against his Catholic subjects in the exercise of their reli- gion ; while James on his part required the King of Spain to give an undertaking that the Palatinate should be restored to his son-in-law the Elector Frederick. While these negotiations were proceeding Buckingham and the Prince suddenly appeared, uninvited and unex- pected, at the Court of Madrid. Their departure from England had been kept a profound secret even from the King's Cabinet. In disguise and under assumed names, and with only two attendants, they travelled through France, and their appearance at Madrid was the first intimation the Court of Spain received of this unlooked for visit. Great was the indignation and dismay in England when it was known that the heir to the throne had left the country and placed himself in the power of the King of Spain. The suspicious Puritans saw in it a plot for the conversion of the Prince to the Roman doctrine, and the relaxation of those penal laws upon which the safety of the reformed religion was supposed to depend. So carefully had the secret been kept, that besides the King, Laud seems to have been the only person who had any previous knowledge of this Spanish journey. On the very day of the Prince's departure there is this entry in his diary : " February 17, Monday. The Prince and the Marquis Buckingham set forward very secretly for Spain." Four days after he notes, " I wrote to my Lord of Bucking- had into Spain," and from that day till the Duke's return there was a constant interchange of confidential letters between them. As the Duke's agent or spy it was Laud's 36 ARCHBISHOP LAUD special business to keep an eye upon the Court, and inform his patron if any attempts were made in his absence to undermine his influence with the King. " Nor did it happen," says Heylin, " otherwise than the Duke ex- pected, for he had not been long in Spain when there were strange whisperings into the ears of the King concerning the abuse of his royal favours, the general discontentment which appeared in the people for the Prince's journey, the sad consequences which were feared to ensue upon it in reference to his person and religion, and the blame of all was by the people laid upon the Duke ; but nothing could be thought more strange unto him, than that the Lord Keeper Williams should be of counsel in the plot, of all which practices and proceedings Laud gives intelligence to the Duke." * What the plot was we are not informed, and it seems to have been a convenient invention of Laud's maligant imagination to sow dissension between the Lord Keeper and Buckingham : and the Duke having abruptly broken off the Spanish negotiations returned to England, highly incensed with Williams and determined to have his revenge. Much to Laud's surprise he found that the Lord Keeper had received timely warning of these intrigues, and three days before the Duke's return he tells us, " I was with my Lord Keeper, to whom I found that some had done me very ill offices ; and he was very jealous of Lord B.'s favour : and after my Lord Duke's return I acquainted him with that which passed between the Lord Keeper and me." ^ Then we have the following piteous entries in the diary : " Sunday night I did dream that the Lord Keeper was dead ; that I passed by one of his men, that was about a monument for him : that I heard him say, his lower lip was infinitely swelled and 1 Heylin, p. 107. * Diary, October 3 and 31, 1623. INTRIGUES AGAINST WILLIAMS 37 fallen, and he rotten already. This dream did trouble me." ^ "On Monday morning I went about business to my Lord Duke of Buckingham. We had speech in the Shield gallery at Whitehall. There I found that the Lord Keeper had strangely forgotten himself to him and I think was dead in his affections." ^ " Sunday my Lord Keeper met with me in the withdrawing chamber at Whitehall and quarrelled me gratis ; and I afterwards acquainted my Lord Duke of Buckingham with that which passed on the Sunday between the Lord Keeper and me." ^ " It was Sunday. I was alone and languishing with I know not what sadness. I was much concerned at the envy and undeserved hatred borne to me by the Lord Keeper. I took into my hands the Greek Testa- ment that I might read the portion of the day. I lighted upon the passage, ' The Lord is my helper ; I will not fear what man can do unto me.' I thought an example was set me, and who is not safe under that shield ? Protect me, O Lord my God." * Shortly after his quarrel with Williams we find him engaged in a serious dispute with Abbot, the Archbishop of Canterbury. The clergy in Convocation had voted the King four siibsidies, and Laud thought that the money should be paid by instalments ; but instead of bringing the matter before Convocation, or consulting the Arch- bishop, he imparted his scheme to Buckingham, " who promised to prepare both the King and the Prince." ^ Abbot naturally objected to any underhand pressure being brought to bear on the deliberations of the clergy in a matter which was exclusively one for their own considera- tion ; and Laud tells us " his Grace was very angry, asked what I had to do to make any suit for the Church. ^ Diary, December 14, 1623. ^ Ibid. December 15. ^ Ibid. January 11. * Ibid. Jan. 25. ^ Ibid. March 27. 38 ARCHBISHOP LAUD That I had given the Church such a wound in speaking to any Lord of the laity about it, as I could never make whole again. I answered, I thought I had done a very good office for the Church, and so did my betters, and so we parted." Then follows the usual paragraph, " I went to my Lord Duke of Buckingham and acquainted him with it, lest I might have ill offices done me for it to the King and the Prince. So may God bless me his servant labouring under the pressure of them who always wished ill to me."^ James's reign was now drawing to a close. In the spring of 1625 he was attacked by an ague, which in less than three weeks carried him to his grave. It was Midlent Sunday ; and Laud was preaching at Whitehall. " I ascended," he says, " the pulpit much troubled and in a very melancholy moment, the report spreading that his Majesty King James, of most sacred memory to me, was dead. Being interrupted by the dolours of the Duke of Buckingham I broke off my sermon in the middle. The King died at Theobald's about three-quarters of an hour after eleven in the forenoon. He breathed forth his blessed soul most religiously, and with great constancy of faith and courage. That day about five o'clock Prince Charles was solemnly proclaimed King. God grant him a prosperous and happy reign." ^ And so the old King passed off the stage, and his " most sacred memory," with his vices and virtues were buried with him in his grave. If he left any grieving souls behind him, they ought to have been comforted by Laud's unhesitating assurance that " his rest without question was in Abra- ham's bosom." ^ 1 Diary, March 29, 1624. ^ lb. March 27, 1625. ^ Laud's MemorabUia of King James. Works, vi. 7. CHAPTER V 1625 ACCESSION OF CHARLES WITH the accession of Charles a great change took place in Laud's prospects and position. The Duke of Buckingham was now the ruling power in the State, while in matters affecting the Church he was en- tirely in the hands of his episcopal confessor. Before the old King had been carried to his grave we find Laud busily engaged in grouping the leading clergy into two divisions, marking with the letter O the Orthodox, who were to be promoted, and with the leter P the Puritans, who were to be suppressed. " The Duke of Bucking- ham," he tells us, " commanded me to digest their names in that method that, as himself said, he might deliver them to King Charles." ^ Under the name of Puritan — a name which had been originally confined to Anabap- tists and other separatists from the Church — were now included nine-tenths of the EngUsh clergy. Their only offence was their agreement with Calvin on some abstruse questions of theology, though, says Clarendon, " they abhorred his discipline and reverenced the existing government of the Church and prayed for the peace of it with as much zeal as any in the kingdom." ^ And what was more to the purpose, they possessed the confi- 1 Diary, April 5, 1625. » Clarendon's Hist. i. 191. 39 40 ARCHBISHOP LAUD dence and represented the religious convictions of the vast majority of the nation. From a bishop's point of view Laud had undoubtedly good reasons to dislike Calvinism. A Calvinist, who believed in Predestination and Election, was self-con- tained in his religion, and felt no need of clerical media- tion to assist him in the matter of his salvation. His religion was from above, the concern of his own individual conscience, with which neither bishops nor priests had any right to interfere. The King was equally opposed to Calvinism, but for very different reasons. He had no decided views upon the mysterious theories of specu- lative theology, which troubled the minds of that genera- tion ; but the history of his father's reign had taught him that the Calvinists or Puritans in religion were Liberals in politics, and the great opponents of the monarchical pretensions of the Crown. As Head of the Church he considered that he had a right to the poli- tical support of the clergy, and he readily adopted Laud's suggestion to place the government of the Church in the hands of men who could be relied upon to oppose the religious and political Puritanism of the day. " The result was what might have been expected. Sacred things and secular became one interest. Civil politics and ecclesiastical grew to be the same." ^ And this alliance between the Altar and the Throne for political purposes was the origin and cause of all the subsequent troubles of the reign. The Commons of England were intensely Protestant. They had inherited the hatred of Popery which the cruelties of Alva in the Netherlands, and the life and death struggle with Spain had engendered in the minds of their fathers, and they regarded their reformed Church ^ Morley's Cromwell, p. 6i. HIS FIRST PARLIAMENT 41 with its simple worship as their most sacred inheritance, and the great bulwark of their liberties and rehgion. It was a time of stress and anxiety. The Catholic league had rekindled the flames of religious war/ which threat- ened the very existence of the Protestant cause on the Continent of Europe, while in England there were ominous signs of a strong Catholic revival. Jesuits and seminary priests had emerged from their hiding- places, and openly traversed the country without fear or hindrance : while within the body of the Church sincere Protestants were scandalized and alarmed by the unrestrained promulgation of doctrines, which were opposed to the fundamental principles of the Reforma- tion. Of Charles himself httle was known, but from the commencement of his reign he seems to have been regarded with suspicion. In defiance of the wishes of the nation he had married a Roman Catholic, a daughter of Henry IV of France, and a sister of the reigning King ; and it was generally believed that, as the price of his marriage, he had consented to suspend the penal laws against the Catholic recusants. His first Parlia- ment, which met three months after his accession, gave him a pretty plain indication of the Protestant feeling of the nation. The Speaker of the Commons, when presented to the King, took the opportunity of conveying to him the opinion of the House that " the penal laws against the wicked generation of Jesuits, seminary priests and incendiaries should be put into strict execution." The Lord Keeper replied that the urgent matter before them was the question of supplies, and that the House might trust his Majesty to choose the proper means for defending his religion. Such an answer was not calcu- lated to inspire confidence in the King's intentions, ' The thirty years' war commenced in i6i 8 and lasted till 1648. 42 ARCHBISHOP LAUD and the next question to which the Commons directed their attention brought them into direct colhsion with the Crown. A great controversy was then agitating the mind of the leUgious world, very similar in its origin and nature to the controversy, which arose out of the publication of the Tracts of the Times during the Oxford movement. A book had been published by one Richard Montague, a High Churchman of extreme opinions, containing a deliberate attack upon the prin- ciples of the English Reformation, defending many of the doctrines and practices which the English Reformers had condemned, and condemning many of the doctrines and practices which the English reformers had intro- duced. The book was written with the intemperance, which seems inevitable in all theological discussions. His opponents, who represented the great body of the clergy, were described as " a saint-seeming, Bible-bearing pack of hypocritical Puritans, whose opinions had been cast upon the Church like bastards upon the parish where they were born, or vagabonds on the town where they last dwelt " ; and he concluded with an appeal to the King, " Defend me with your sword, and I will uphold you with my pen." The book naturally gave great offence, as an out- rageous libel on the Protestant clergy ; and Montague was brought before the House of Commons and committed to the custody of the Sergeant-at-arms ; but as Parlia- ment was then about to be adjourned to Oxford on account of the plague, he was released on giving a bond for his appearance when the House met again after the recess. The action of the Commons was a serious attack u^on the doctrines which Laud and the Court bishops were seeking to introduce, and Charles was asked to interpose RICHARD MONTAGUE his authority to stop the prosecution. He was at Hamp- ton Court, and two days after Montague's arrest he received a deputation of the Commons, and informed them that Montague had been appointed one of his chaplains, and that he had taken the case into his own consideration, and therefore hoped that he would be set at liberty, in which case he said he would be ready to give them satisfaction. Laud evidently thought that Montague would now be safe under the protection of the King, for four days afterwards he notes in his diary, that " there having died in the previous week in London from the Plague 1,222 persons, I went into the country to the house of my good friend Francis Windebank. In going thither Richard Montague met me by chance ; I was the first who certified him of the King's favour to him." ^ But the Commons had no intention of allowing the prosecution to drop. Mon- tague's appointment as a chaplain was looked upon as a mere Court intrigue to screen his conduct from investi- gation, and after the successful impeachment of Bacon and the Lord Treasurer Middlesex in the preceding reign, the House of Commons were not disposed to allow an incriminated priest to escape because he happened to be one of the King's chaplains. Montague's book was accordingly referred to the Committee of religion for examination and report ; but before the report was submitted, " a great assault," ^ says Laud, " was made 1 Diary, July 13, 1625. * The dissolution was caused by the refusal of the Commons to vote supplies for a continental war for the recovering of the Palatinate for the King's brother-in-law, the Elector Frederick, for which the King had been making great preparations in anticipation of the sanction of Parliament. In the course of these debates a bitter attack was made upon Buckingham for his gross mis-management of public affairs. 44 ARCHBISHOP LAUD against the Duke of Buckingham, and the Parhament was dissolved, the Commons not hearkening, as was expected, to the King's proposals." ^ The dissolution of Parliament had been decided upon in opposition to the advice of the Lord Keeper Williams, who pointed out the fatal error of commencing a new reign with a quarrel with the House of Commons. He had moreover little sympathy with the restless foreign policy of Buckingham, or the Church policy inaugurated by Laud, and it was therefore resolved to get rid of him. But as Williams had discharged the duties of his office with conspicuous success it was not easy to find a reason for dismissing him. At last Buckingham, it is said, reminded the King that when Williams was made Lord Keeper he had himself proposed the rule that the great seal should never be held by the same person for more than three years. Charles caught at the suggestion, and a mandate was sent to Williams informing him " that his Majesty, understanding that his father, who was with God, had taken a resolution that the Keepers of the great seal should continue in office for not more than three years, had resolved to observe the same order during his own reign, and expects that you should sur- render the seal by All Hallowtide next, and that having so done, you should retire yourself to your bishopric of Lincoln." ^ This was a somewhat flimsy excuse, as Williams had held the great seal for more than three years under James ; and Charles on his accession had restored it to him without conditions or any limitation of time. The seal was then delivered to Sir Thomas Coventry, and Buckingham and Laud were relieved of the presence of a hated rival, whose views of Government ^ Diary, August 12, 1625. Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors, vol iii. p. 182, DISMISSAL OF WILLIAMS 45 differed so widely from their own. " With Lord Keeper Williams," says Mr. Gardiner, " worldly wisdom de- parted from the Councils of Charles. War was dis- fasteful to him, and he cared little or nothing for con- tinental pontics. Dogmatism of all kinds he regarded with the utmost suspicion. He had no sympathy with the prosecution of Laud's friends by the House of Com- mons, and no sympathy with the coming prosecution of the Puritans by Laud himself. Had Charles accepted him as an adviser, the reign would hardly have been eventful, but it would not have ended in disaster." ' * Gardiner's Hist. vi. 31. CHAPTER VI 1626 THE king's coronation 'T^HE day fixed for the King's Coronation was now approaching, and afforded an opportunity of putting an additional shght on WilUams. As Dean of Westminster he was the custodian of the Regaha of the Crown, and it was his special function to arrange the ceremonial in the Abbey. But he was told that his presence would not be required, and Laud, as one of the Prebends, was deputed by the special command of the King to supply his place. This was a great triumph for Laud, and gave him an opportunity of indulging his taste for ritualistic display. " I had," he says, " a perfect book of the ceremonies of the Coronation made ready " ; ^ and then followed a preliminary rehearsal. " The bishops and other peers, who had been nominated by the King to consult of the ceremonies, by his Majesty's command went together to him. The King viewed all the regalia, put on St. Edward's Tunics, and commanded me to read the rubrics of direction. All being read, we carried back the regalia and laid them up in their place." ^ Then follows a description of the ceremony. " February 2. The Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary. His Majesty King Charles was crowned. I then officiated in the place of the Dean of Westminster. 1 Diary, January 23, 1626. ^ Ibid. January 31, 1626. 46 THE KING'S CORONATION 47 The King entered the Abbey Church a httle before ten o'clock, and it was past three before he went out of it. The solemnity being ended in the great hall at Westminster the King deUvered into my hands the regalia, which are kept in the Abbey Church, and also delivered to me the sword called Curtana and two others, ^ which had been carried before the King that day to be kept in the Church with the regalia. I re- turned and offered them solemnly at the altar in the name of the King and laid them up with the rest." ^ This dedication of the swords seems to have been quite a private performance, not included in the public pro- gramme ; and if it pleased Laud, it could certainly do the swords no harm. One novelty in the service, which startled the minds of a Protestant audience, was the introduction of the following admonition to the King, taken by Laud from that most orthodox book the Roman Pontificals. " Stand and hold fast from henceforth the place to which you have been heir by the succession of your forefathers being now delivered to you by the authority of Almighty God, and by the hands of us and all the bishops and servants of God ; and as you see the clergy come nearer to the altar than others, so remember that in place con- venient you give them greater honour ; that the mediator of God and man may establish you on the Kingly throne." And then followed this remarkable prayer : " Let him obtain favour for the people like Aaron in the Tabernacle, Elisha in the Waters, and Zacharias in the Temple. Give him Peter's key of discipline and Paul's doctrine." ^ Another circumstance, which appears to have excited 1 Curtana, the blunt sword of mercy, and the two sharp swords of justice, spiritual and temporal. * Diary, February 2, 1626. ^ Heylin, p. 136. 48 ARCHBISHOP LAUD general observation, was the dress of the King. He was clothed in white satin, contrary to the custom of his predecessors, who were always clad in regal purple. " White," says Heylin, " is the colour of the saints, who are represented in white robes, and some looked upon it as an ill presage that the King laying aside his purple should clothe himself in white, the robe of innocence, as if thereby it was fore-signified that he should divest himself of his regal Majesty, which might have kept him safe from affront and scorn, to rely solely on a virtuous life, which did expose him finally to calamitous ruin." ^ Another ominous circumstance was the absence of the Queen, who, being a Roman Catholic, refused to be crowned by an Anglican bishop, thus taking an early opportunity of publicly announcing her resolution to give no countenance to the established religion of her adopted country. ^ Heylin, p. 138. CHAPTER VII 1626 THE SECOND PARLIAMENT FOUR days after the Coronation Charles's second Parhament met. Six months only had elapsed since the first had been dismissed in disgrace, and in the interval the King's affairs had gone from bad to worse. Though war had not been declared against Spain, hosti- lities had commenced, and an ill-equipped fleet under an incompetent commander had met with a disastrous reverse at Cadiz ; and even the Channel was infested by pirates, and was no longer safe for English commerce. It was an unfortunate time for Charles to meet the representatives of the people. But neither he nor his ministers seem to have had any apprehension of the coming storm. The leading members of the Opposition in the last Parliament had been pricked as sheriffs, and it was hoped that the House of Commons, deprived of its leaders, would not venture to renew its struggle with the Crown. By the King's command Laud was selected to preach the customary sermon at the opening of the Session. " Jerusalem," he told his hearers, " was builded as a city in unity with itself ; and so long as the inhabi- tants served God and were at unity, Jerusalem was the glory of the whole earth ; but when they fell from unity to heart-burnings among themselves, not one stone, neither of temple nor city, was left upon another." 50 ARCHBISHOP LAUD " As Head of the State the centre of unity was in the King, and it was observable that in the discourse of St. Paul concerning the unity of the body, he did not so much as suppose that any members would be at odds with the head. The head can compose other members and settle their peace in the body, but if any quarrel (sic) the head all unity is gone." " God, the Church, and the King — God, His Spouse, and His Lieutenant on Earth — were so near allied, that no one can serve any one of them truly, but he serves all three. The King's power was God's ordinance, and the King's command must be God's glory, and the honour of the subject was obedience to both." And he concluded by giving Charles, whom he called David, a very flattering testimonial. " God had blessed him with many royal virtues ; and never fear him, for God is with him. He will not depart from God's service, nor from the honourable care of his people, nor from wise managing of his treasure. And here in the presence of God and his blessed angels, as well as of you, who are but dust and ashes, I discharge the true thoughts of my heart and flatter not. And now, my dread Sovereign, upon you it lies to make good the thoughts of your most devoted servant." ^ The sermon was then pubhshed by " royal command," and the man who could utter this outrageous nonsense was the person specially selected by the King as his confidential adviser in this and the following Parliament. Very different was the language heard in the House of Commons. Sir John Eliot, whose loyalty to the Crown was unquestioned, was the first to give voice to the general indignation. " View," he said, " I beseech you, the state we are in. Weigh the wrecked and ruined honour of the nation ! Are the numberless lives which ^ Sermon No. 3. Laud's Works, i. 65-6, 79, 86-7. THE SECOND PARLIAMENT 51 have been lost not to be regarded. Our honour is ruined, our ships are sunk, our men perished, not by the sword, not by the enemy, not by chance, but by those we trust." Ehot's speech was the prelude to a stormy Session. In all the debates the one grievance was that great man the Duke of Buckingham. His exorbitant power over- shadowed the throne, and his gross incapacity had led to the disastrous miscarriage of every enterprise he had undertaken. As Lord Admiral he was responsible for the failure of the expedition to Cadiz. He had not even protected English commerce against pirates on the seas, while at home he had been guilty of numerous oppressions on the subject. He had engrossed a large part of the Crown lands ^ to himself, his friends and his relations, and by his prodigality the King's treasures were ex- hausted and his revenues consumed. He had sold places of judicature and titles of honour, and had accu- mulated in his own person many of the great offices of the State. Such were some of the grievances of the Commons against the man whom the King delighted to honour. To show, however, their loyalty to the Crown they made a grant of three subsidies to meet the urgent necessities of Government, but the grant was not to be embodied in a Bill until their grievances had been re- dressed. At this stage of the proceedings the King thought it necessary personally to intervene, and after summoning the Commons to his presence at Whitehall, he told them he would allow them liberty of counsel, but not of control, and ended the interview with a significant threat. " Now ' Mr. Gardiner writes, he had received from the Crown, lands producing a rental of more than ;^3,ooo a year, and ready money to the amount of 160,000, besides valuable grants of other kinds. (Hist. vi. loi.) 52 ARCHBISHOP LAUD that you find me entangled in war, you make my necessity your privilege, and set what rate you please on your supphes. But I pray you be not deceived ;i it is not a Parliamentary way, nor is it a way to deal with a King. Remember that Parliaments are altogether in my power for their calling, sitting, and dissolution ; therefore as I find the faults of them good or evil, they are to continue or not to be ; and if at this time instead of mending your errors, by delay you persist in your errors, you make them greater and irreconcilable." ^ It is only fair to the King's Ministers to say that they were in no way responsible for this arrogant speech. It had been prepared by Laud in the secrecy of the King's cabinet, and was not submitted for the approval of the Council, or even of the officers of the Crown who had the conduct of the Government business in the House of Commons. The only reply given to the King's threats was the immediate impeachment of Buckingham. The impeachment was opened at the bar of the Lords by Sir Dudley Digges, and the Duke took his seat as a peer to listen to the charge with so insolent an air of contempt, that the Commons pressed for his immediate commitment. On the following morning the different articles of charge were summed up by Sir John Eliot in a speech which may well rank with the highest efforts of Enghsh eloquence. It was a long and bitter invective against the Duke, whom he compared for his insolence and pride to Sejanus.^ The speech was reported to the King and great was his indignation with Eliot. " If the Duke," he said, " is Sejanus, I must be Tiberius," and on the following morning he went to the House of Lords, and delivered himself of a speech, which Laud 1 Pari. Hist. ii. 56. 2 Foster's Life of Eliot, vol. i. pp. S4i-Si- IMPEACHMENT OF BUCKINGHAM 53 had hurriedly prepared for him. " My Lords," said the King, " the cause and the only cause of my coming to you this day is to express to you the sense I have of all your honours, for he that toucheth any of you toucheth me in a very great measure. I have thought fit to take order for the punishment of some insolent speeches made to you yesterday. I have been too remiss hitherto in punishing such speeches as concern myself, not that I am greedy of their monies, but that Buckingham through his importunity would not suffer me to take notice of them, lest he might be thought to have set me on. And to approve of his innocency I myself can be a witness to clear him of every one of them." ^ By the King's com- mand Eliot and Digges were then arrested and committed to the Tower. ^ Laud had evidently hoped that this appeal to the honour of the nobility would create a dissension between the Lords and the Commons. If such was his expectation, he was doomed to disappointment. Lord Saye at once suggested that each Peer should be asked whether he had heard in the incriminated speeches anything that could be interpreted as treason : and though a few of the Peers refused to make any declaration at all, the great majority agreed with Lord Saye that nothing had been said contrary to the rule of the House or the King's honour. The Commons were equally united ^ Rushworth's Collections, i. 357. ^ In Laud's Diary, May 11, 1626, occurs the following entry : "Thursday. King Charles came into the Parliament House and made a short speech to the Lords concerning preserving the honour of the nobility against the vile and malicious calumnies of those in the House of Commons, who had accused the Duke. They were eight who in this matter chiefly appeared. The prologue. Sir Dudley Digges, and the epilogue. Sir John Eliot, were this day by the King's command committed to the Tower." 54 ARCHBISHOP LAUD in defence of their privileges, and resolved that no pubUc business should be transacted until the imprisoned mem- bers were released ; and after a few days' confinement both Digges and Eliot were restored to their places in the House. The prominent part that Laud had taken in these transactions, as the secret adviser of the King, was not discovered till his impeachment, when the original drafts of these speeches were found in his study at Lambeth. " It was most unfortunate," he says, in the history of his troubles, " that they were then found, and I had not left them a being, but that I verily thought that I had destroyed them long since. But they were unhappily found among the heaps of my papers." ^ "I might have shuffled and denied the making of them, for their being in my handwriting was no necessary proof." ^ The breach between the King and the Parliament was now complete ; and in reply to a peremptory message from the King, that unless the Subsidy Bill was passed without further delay he would be forced " to use other resolutions," the Commons proceeded to draw up a formal remonstrance regarding the violation of their privileges and the general maladministration of the country ; adding that " until the Duke of Buckingham was removed from intermeddling with the great affairs of State, any subsidy they might give would through his misemployment be turned to the hurt and prejudice of the kingdom, as by lamentable experience they had found in those large supplies formerly and lately given." As Charles had no intention of dispensing with the services of his favourite Minister he suddenly resolved against the advice of his Council, to dissolve the Parlia- ment, and put an end to the Duke's prosecution. So ^ Laud's Works, iv. 272. ^ Ibid. 354. PARLIAMENT DISSOLVED 55 ended the session, and Laud notes in his diary : " After many disputes and strugghng private mahce against the Duke of Buckingham prevailed, and stopped all business. Nothing was done and the Parliament was dissolved." ^ He had need of all his casuistry to explain, when on his trial, this libel on the Parliament, but he boldly said the words could have no reference to Parliament for two reasons. " First, I say private malice did it, but name not the Parliament. Secondly, had I spoken this of Parliament, it could not have been called private, but public mahce, nothing being more public in this kingdom than what is done in Parliament." ^ Diary, June 15, 1626. ^ Laud's Works, iv. 355-6. CHAPTER VIII 1626 — 1627 THE FORCED LOAN FIVE days after the dissolution of Parliament Laud was translated to the more lucrative Bishopric of Bath and Wells ; and he was further informed that it was the King's pleasure that he should be promoted to the See of Canterbury on the Archbishop's death. But this new appointment made no change in his position at Court. During the two years he was Bishop of Bath and Wells he was so entirely occupied with political matters and Court intrigues that he had no time even to visit his diocese. He was Buckingham's counsellor, and assistant in all the measures which were adopted to meet the exigencies of the Government. The dis- solution of Parliament before any supplies had been granted had left Charles without funds for carrying on the administration, and at Buckingham's suggestion, it was decided to enforce the levy of a general loan, to which the people were to contribute according to the rate at which they had been assessed in the last subsidy. As a preliminary measure it was thought advisable to secure the co-operation of the clergy, and Laud was employed to put the clerical machinery in motion. " The Duke of Buckingham," he tells us, willed me to form certain instructions, partly political, partly ecclesias- 66 INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CLERGY 57 tical in the cause of the King of Denmark, a Httle before brought into great straits by General Tilly, to be sent through all parishes. Certain heads were delivered to me. He would have them made ready by Saturday following. I made them ready and brought them at the appointed hour. I read them to the Duke. He brought me to the King. I being so commanded, read them again. Each of them approved them. Sunday, they were read (having been left with the Duke), before the Lords of the Privy Council, and were, thanks be to God, approved by them aU." ' These instructions were drawn up in the form of a letter from the King to the Archbishop of Canterbury calling upon the Church to aid the necessities of the State. " The Church and the State," to quote the instructions, " are so nearly united and knit together, that, though they may seem two bodies, yet indeed they may be accounted but as one. This nearness makes the Church call in the help of the State whensoever she is pressed beyond her strength, and the same nearness makes the State call for the service of the Church, both to teach that duty, which her members know not, and to exhort them to that duty which they know." Then, after dwelling upon the evil consequences of the defeat of the King of Denmark, whom the King had been unable to support owing to the refusal of Parliament to vote supplies for a Continental war, the clergy are told that " the greatest evil of Church and State was the breach of unity now so common among all sorts of men. To this end you are to lay before the people what miseries home dissensions have brought upon this and many other kingdoms. ^ 1 Diary, September 14, 1626. ^ Heylin, pp. 154-6, where the instructions are given in full. 58 ARCHBISHOP LAUD It is imposible to conceive a more Erastian view of the relationship between Church and State than Laud sets forth in these instructions. The Parhament had refused supphes, and the clergy were required to call upon the people to contribute what their representatives in the House of Commons had refused. Naturally these ill-judged instructions altogether failed in their object. " Neither the doctrine of the preachers," says Heylin, " nor the distress of the King of Denmark, did so far prevail among the people, but that the commissioners for the loan found greater opposition in it than they did expect. Many who had been members of the two former Parliaments opposed it with their utmost power, and drew a great part of the subjects to the like refusal. For which refusal some Lords and many of the choice gentry of the kingdom, and others of inferior sort, were committed into several prisons, where they remained until the approach of the next Parliament." ^ Abbot, the Archbishop of Canterbury, had not been consulted either in the matter of the loan or the issue of these instructions to the Clergy. Since Charles's acces- sion he had little influence at Court, and Church patron- age and Church control had passed into the hands of Laud. But the disfavour of the Court increased his popularity in the country, and the resort to his house of some of the leading members of the late House of Com- mons was the cause of great offence to Buckingham. It was therefore determined to make an example of him. One Dr. Sibthorpe, an obscure clergyman, had preached before the judges at the Northampton Assizes on the lawfulness of the loan, and the duty of the people to submit to such impositions or other taxes as the King might think proper to impose. It was a contemptible 1 Heylin, p. 159. SIBTHORPE'S SERMON 59 production, but gave great satisfaction to the Court, and by the King's order it was sent to the Archbishop to authorize its pubhcation with his special licence. Abbot naturally saw the trap that was laid for him. If he allowed the publication, he would make himself a party to the illegal proceedings for the exaction of the loan ; and if he refused his licence he would incur the displeasure of the King. He chose the latter alterna- tive, and respectfully submitted that there were many unwarrantable passages in the sermon, which were op- posed to the laws of the realm. To these objections Laud replied, and the sermon was returned to the Arch- bishop with peremptory orders to license it. This, however, he refused to do. Here for the present the matter rested. Buckingham had managed to drag the country into a war with France, and was at the time busily engaged in collecting a fleet and army for the assistance of the Huguenots of Rochelle against the King of France. In the following month he started on his ill-fated expedition to the Isle of Rhe ^ having previously to his departure had Laud appointed a member of the Privy Council, " in order that during his absence he might have an assured friend near his Majesty, by whom all practices against him might be either prevented or suppressed." He could not have confided his interest to more willing hands. As a member of the Council, Laud was now brought into immediate contact with the King ; and during the five months of his patron's absence in France he never seems to have left the King's side. At Oat- lands, at Hampton Court, at Windsor, or wherever the King went, he was always in attendance, and within a week after Buckingham's departure the intrigue against ^ June 27, 1627. 2 Heylin, p. i6o. 6o ARCHBISHOP LAUD Abbot was revived. Laud was then staying with the King at Oatlands, the only other Minister in attendance being Lord Conway, the Secretary of State. While there he makes this entry in his diary : " July 4. A message was sent by the King for sequestering A. B.C. ^ On the following day the message was verbally delivered by Lord Conway, who informed Abbot that it was his Majesty's pleasure that he should withdraw to his house at Ford, near Canterbury, and no longer meddle with the High Commission. When Abbot asked to be informed of the cause of his disgrace, he was told that it was for a book which he had not allowed and which concerned the King's service. " If that be it," said Abbot, " when I am questioned for it, I doubt not but to give an honest answer." " But you will not be questioned for it," replied the Secretary. " Then," said Abbot, " I am the more hardly dealt with, to be censured and not called to my answer, but do you think it is for the King's service in this sort to send me away ? " " No, by God," replied the Secretary, " and so I told the King yesterday wth an oath." ^ Nothing was said, however, about the Archbishop's sequestration, which Laud had evidently suggested to the King. Possibly Charles, who seems to have had no personal iU-feeling against Abbot, may have thought that he had done enough in confining the Archbishop to his diocese, and leaving Laud in undisputed posses- sion of the High Commission Court. But Laud was by no means satisfied. Two months afterwards, while in attendance upon the King at Hampton Court, he notes in his diary : ^ "I went to my Lord of Rochester — ^ Archbishop of Canterbury. ^ Abbot's Narrative, 3 State Trials, p. 1467. ^ Diary, September, 1627. SEQUESTRATION OF ABBOT 6i his friend Buckeridge — to consider about A. B.C., and returned to Hampton Court " ; and a Commission was then issued in the King's name " to himself, Buckeridge, Neile, and two other bishops to execute archiepiscopal jurisdiction during the sequestration of my Lord's Grace of Canterbury." ^ No reason of any sort was alleged, and no justification offered for these iniquitous and arbitrary proceedings ; and what is more strange, the man who perpetrated this iniquity for the gratification of his own malice was a firm believer in apostolic succession and the divine right of bishops. ^ Diary, October, 1627. CHAPTER IX 1627 — 1628 THE ISLE OF RHE WHILE Laud was engaged in carrying out his plot against the Archbishop, disquieting rumours were reaching the Court of a great reverse in the Isle of Rhe. By an incredible act of folly the supreme com- mand of the expedition had been entrusted to Bucking- ham, who was neither a soldier nor a sailor by profession, and as ignorant of military as of naval tatics. His retreat from the island is one of the most disgraceful records in the annals of British warfare. He had neglected to secure his communications with his fleet, and in their attempt to regain their ships over a narrow causeway the greater part of his army perished. He had left England in June with a force of over 8,000 men, and in November he returned to Portsmouth with some 2,500 men, the miserable remnant of his army " worn out with hunger and enfeebled by disease." It was in vain that he attempted to minimize the disaster. Public opinion pronounced it " the greatest and shamefuUest overthrow since the loss of Normandy." " The fleet ' says Clarendon, " had returned to Portsmouth within such a distance of London that nothing could be con- cealed of the loss sustained, in which most noble families found a son, or a brother, or a near kinsman wanting 62 RETREAT FROM THE ISLAND 63 without such circumstances of their deaths which are usually the consolations and recompenses of such disasters. The retreat had been a rout without an enemy, and the French had their revenge by the disorder and confusion of the English themselves, in which great numbers of noble and ignoble were crowded to death or drowned without the help of an enemy ; and as many thousands of the common men were wanting, so few of the principal officers could be found." ^ A pathetic story is told of Sir Henry Spry, one of the surviving commanders. " His lady, being much joyed at his coming home, but seeing him dejected and not to answer with like gratu- lations, asked him how he did, to whom he answered, 'Though I am returned safe, yet my heart is broken,' ex- pressing great sorrow for those commanders who were slain in his sight, and, as his modesty made him say, all far superior to himself, and thus he died within a day after." * If we may judge of Laud's feelings from his diary, he troubled himself little about his country's dishonour ; he was too much occupied with considering how this national calamity would affect himself. It was the common talk " that there must be a Parliament, and that some would be sacrificed and that he was as like as any." In the matter of the forced loan and the seques- tration of the Archbishop, he had been a prominent actor, and the question that now agitated his mind was the fate that awaited him when Parliament met. Would the King have either the will or the power to protect him ? He communicated his fears to the King, and Charles replied, " Let me desire you not to trouble 1 Clarendon's Hist. i. 86. 2 Meade's letter, December 15, 1627. Court and Times of Charles I, i. 305. 64 ARCHBISHOP LAUD yourself with any reports till you see me forsake my other friends." ^ In the dark days of his troubles, when a prisoner in the Tower, he must often have reflected that an innocent life under the protection of the law was a safer defence than the uncertain favour of princes. No man hated Parliament more heartily than Charles, who said " he did abominate the very name " : but the critical state of the country, both at home and abroad — at home with an empty Treasury, abroad with an unpro- voked war with the two most powerful States of the continent — compelled him to listen to the advice of his Privy Council, and writs were issued for a Parliament to meet in March 1628. As a preliminary step the Arch- bishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of Lincoln (Wil- liams) were restored to the full exercise of their epis- copal jurisdictions ; and as a further concession to public opinion, the prison doors were thrown open for the release of those martyrs to the Commonwealth, as they were called, who had endured the rigours of imprisonment rather than contribute to an arbitrary and illegal tax. The elections both in the Boroughs and the Counties turned upon the burning question of the loan, and in spite of the strenuous exertions of the Court, the popular candidates were almost everywhere elected. In one of the news letters of the period we have an account of a turbulent election at Westminster, " whereof the Duke of Buckingham being steward, made account he should by his authority and vicinity put in one of his placemen, Sir Robert Pye, the Auditor of the Exchequer ; but Bradshaw, a brewer, and Mercer, a grocer, carried it from him by above a thousand voices ; they passing by also Sir Robert Cotton and their last burgesses, because they had discontented their neighbours in urging the payment 1 Diary, October 1627. THE THIRD PARLIAMENT 65 of the loan. It is feared because such patriots are chosen everywhere the Parliament will not last above eight days." ' Another letter gives an account of the opening cere- mony. " There attended upon his Majesty, in their robes on horseback through Westminster, but twenty-one Barons, thirty-three Earls and fourteen Bishops. The House of Commons both yesterday and to-day was as full as one could sit by another. And they say it is the most noble, magnanimous assembly that ever these walls contained ; and I heard a Lord estimate that they were able to buy the Upper House twice over." ^ But this illustrious assembly was not only remarkable for the wealth, but for the character of its members. It com- prised all the best intellect of the country, the flower of the EngHsh gentry and the educated laity, the very manhood of the nation. Hardly a name of any eminence was missing. They were essentially a conservative body, bent only on maintaining the existing constitution in Church and State. Laud was again selected to preach the customary sermon on the opening of Parliament, and he discoursed as usual on the blessings of unity. Of the grievances of the people he made very light, reminding his audience that " under so good a king as David, there were factious individuals who went about the coimtry complaining of the abuses of Government." ^ In his speech from the throne Charles told the Commons that " he judged a Parliament the speediest and best way in times of common danger to obtain supply ; and he expected that their resolutions should be speedy ; but if they would not do their duties, he must use those other means 1 Court and Times of Charles I, i. 327. ^ Ibid. 331. ^ Sermon vi. Laud's Works, i. 158. F 66 ARCHBISHOP LAUD which God had put into his hands. He bid them not take this as a threat, for he scorned to threaten any but his equals, but as an admonition from him, who had most care of their preservation, and he hoped their demeanour would be such as should oblige him in thank- fulness to meet often with them. One thing more he would add, that he would gladly forgive and forget what .was past, so they would leave their former ways of dis- tractions, and follow the counsel lately given them ' to maintain the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. ' " It seems almost incredible that a king in Charles' position should have addressed men smarting under a sense of their own wrongs and their country's dishonour in a speech so arrogant and foolish. No one but Laud could have written it, for it was merely a repetition of the sentiments contained in the sermon which he had delivered earlier in the morning. But the Commons were too conscious of their strength to be either intimi- dated or cajoled. They at once directed their attention to the great grievance of the day, the forced loan and the imprisonment of those who had refused to contribute to it. The question at issue involved the very existence of the laws and liberties of England. Magna Charta and its six confirmatory statutes had provided that no freeman should be imprisoned but by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land, and that no tax should be imposed without the consent of Parlia- ment. Upon these statutes ^ the Commons took their ^ How keenly Laud followed the debates in the Commons is evident from the notes he made on Magna Charta and its con- firmatory statutes. For Magna Charta he had little respect, as "it had an obscure birth from usurpation, and was fostered and showed to the world by rebellion " ; and with regard to the statutes confirming it, he observes that " the reservation salvo jure corona nostrae is intended in all oaths and promises ex- MAGNA CHARTA 67 stand and without a dissenting voice resolved that no subject ought to be imprisoned either by the King or any authority without a legal cause alleged in the war- rant, and that no man's goods ought to be taken from him without his common consent in Parliament. These resolutions were passed on April 21, and on the following morning were communicated to the Lords. We have an interesting account of what followed from one of the newswriters of the day. " The message came to the Lords while they were in eager debate of the very same business, which continued from nine in the morning till six in the evening. A like tongue combat was never before heard in the Upper House. It was performed by nine peers of the side that stood for freedom, and by nine others of that party that to please one man laboured to make themselves and their posterity slaves. And when the ducal party would have metamorphosed the Committee into a small house to the intent that they might have gone to voices. Lord Saye challenged that all of them who would so ignobly stand against the most legal and ancient liberty of the subject, should, together with their names, subscribe their reasons for the vote, which motion daunted them all with the ignominy which would have been stamped upon their fame to all posterity. Had they then proceeded to votes, it is supposed that the greater part would have exceeded the better by ten voices, that is to say sixty-six to fifty-six." ^ The House then consisted of 118 temporal peers and 26 bishops, tracted from the Sovereign : and though a subject might have a fundamental right to a property in his goods and to a liberty in his person, yet he was liable to be deprived of them upon just cause and so fiscal." And this was the view that the King, un- happily for himself, adopted. Laud's Works, vii. p. 628. 1 Meade's letter. May 3, 1629. Court and Times of Charles I, vol. i. 348. 68 ARCHBISHOP LAUD and all the bishops, with the exception of Abbot and Williams, were the subservient supporters of the Court. As for Laud, though he had taken a leading part in the promotion of the loan, he had not a word to say in defence of the Government in the House of Lords. His name does not once appear in the Parliamentary debates. He left to others the odium of defending in public the arbi- trary counsels he could safely give in the secrecy of the King's Cabinet. Five days after this debate in the Lords, the King summoned the Houses to his presence, and the Lord Keeper then told them that his Majesty, foreseeing that the ordinary way of debate would necessarily take more time than the affairs of Christendom would permit, hath commanded me to let you know that he holdeth the Statute of Magna Charta and the six other Statutes to be all in force, and assures you that he will maintain all his subjects in the just freedom of their person and safety of their estates, and that he will govern according to the laws and statutes of the realm, and that you shall find as much security in his Royal word and promise as in the strength of any law you can make." ^ This Royal message met with scant acceptance in the Commons, Mr. Pym said, " he thought his Majesty's oath at his Coronation, binding himself to maintain the laws of England, was as strong as his Royal word could be, and since he had given us that already there was no need to take his word." Mr. Secretary Coke was much shocked by this very obvious remark, and hoped the House would call Mr. Pym to account for upbraiding the King's oath unto him. Whereunto, Mr. Pym answered, "Truly Mr. Speaker, I am just of the same opinion I was, that the King's oath was as powerful as his word." Sir Edward ^ 2 Pari. Hist. 332. PETITION OF RIGHT 69 Coke said, " We sit now in Parliament, and therefore must take his Majesty's word no otherwise than in a Parhamentary way, that is of a matter agreed on by both Houses, his Majesty sitting on his throne in his robes with the crown on his head, in full Parliament, both Houses being present, and such his Royal word and assent being entered upon record in perpetuam rei memor- iam. This, he said, was the Royal word of a King in Parliament, and not a word delivered in a chamber or out of the mouth of a Secretary, or Lord Keeper at second hand. Therefore his motion was that the House of Commons more majorum should draw a Petition of Right to his Majesty, which, being confirmed by both Houses and assented unto by the King, would be as firm an Act as any." ^ This suggestion was adopted, and on May 8, the Petition of Right having been passed by an unani- mous vote of the Commons, was transmitted to the Lords. It was simply a declaratory statute setting forth the various laws from Magna Charta downwards, which had been enacted for the security of the property and personal liberty of the subject, and expressly provided that no tax, loan, benevolence or any other impost should be imposed without the authority of Parliament, and that no person should be restrained in his liberty either by the King, the Privy Council, or any other authority without a legal cause being set forth in the warrant of commitment, and that the validity of such cause should be open to question in the Courts of Law. It was to this last provision that the King especially objected, and the Commons were summoned to a conference with the Lords, when the Lord Keeper proposed that the ^ Court and Times of Charles I, vol. i. 353. Foster's Life of Eliot, vol. ii. 190. 70 ARCHBISHOP LAUD following addition should be made to the Petition of Right : " We present this our humble Petition to your Majesty not only with care to preserve our own liberties > but with due regard to leave entire that sovereign power wherewith your Majesty is trusted for the protection, safety and happiness of your people." ^ On the return of the Commons to their chamber Mr. Pym said, " I am not able to speak to this question, for I know not what it is. All the Petition is for the laws of England, and this power seems to be another power distinct from the power of the law. We can't leave to the King a sovereign power, for he was never possessed of it." ^ " If we do admit," said Sir Thomas Wentworth, "of this addition, we shall leave the subject worse off than we found him, and we shall have little thanks for our labour when we come home. Let us leave all power to his Majesty to punish malefactors, but our laws are not acquainted with sovereign power." After a long debate the Commons unanimously rejected the proposed addition, and the Petition of Right was again sent to the Peers in its original form, and after various conferences was, on May 27, passed by the Lords with " one unanimous consent." The Petition was then presented to the King, who returned the following vague and elusive answer : " The King willeth that right be done according to the laws and customs of the realm, that his subjects may have no cause to complain of any wrongs or oppressions contrary to their just rights and liberties, whereof he holds himself in conscience as well obliged as of his own prerogative." ^ This was no answer to the Petition, which was not even mentioned. Like any other Bill passed by the two ^ 2 Pari. Hist. 255. " Foster's Life of Eliot, vol. ii. p. 204. ^ Foster's Life of Eliot, vol. ii. p. 233. PETITION OF RIGHT 71 Houses, the King had either to give or withhold his assent to its becoming the law of the land, and great was the indignation of the Commons when they returned to their Chamber to take the King's reply into considera- tion. " 'Tis not the King," said Coke, " who is the cause of all these distractions, but the Duke " — (a great cry : 'Tis he, 'tis he)—" and until the King is informed thereof we shall never sit with honour here : that man is the grievance of grievances ; let us set down the cause of all our disasters and they will aU reflect upon him." ^ What followed is very graphically described in one of Meade's letters. "The Commons thereupon fell to recounting the miscarriages of the Government, when a message was sent from his Majesty absolutely forbidding them to meddle with the Government or any of his Ma- jesty's ministers, but forthwith to finish what they had begun ; otherwise he would dismiss them. On the follow- ing day came an unexpected message from the Lords that the Commons would join with them to petition the King for another answer to their Petition of Right, which they most gladly accepted of. The next day, June 7, the Commons continued as before in making the remonstrance. They rose at twelve. I dined with Sir R. Brooke, close by Palace Yard, sat with him till two, at which time he made haste to the Parliament House. About four o'clock news came that his Majesty was coming to Parliament ; and presently the Commons were called and his Majesty spake to them thus : ' The answer I have already given you was made with so good deliberation and approved by the judgment of so many wise men, that I imagined it would have given full satis- faction. But to avoid all ambiguous interpretation, and to show you there is no doubleness in my meaning, I am 1 Foster's Life of Eliot, vol. ii. pp. 261-2. 72 ARCHBISHOP LAUD willing to please you in words as well as in substance. Read your Petition, and you shall have an answer, which I am sure will please you.' The Petition having been read, his Majesty answered, ' Le droit soit fait comme il est desire.' " The House testified their satisfaction with acclama- tions, and the news being come into the City, the bells began to ring and bonfires were kindled, the number whereof equalled those at his Majesty's coming out of Spain. But, what was more strange, if not ominous, a great part of them were made under a misprision that the Duke either was or should be sent to the Tower ; and the old scaffold on Tower Hill was pulled down and burnt by some mischievous boys who said, ' There must be a new one built for the Duke of Bucks.' ^ Meade to Stalville, June 15. Court and Times of Charles I, vol. i. 360-2. CHAPTER X 1628 THE THIRD PARLIAMENT HAVING placed, as they fondly imagined, their pro- perty and their personal liberty under the in- violable security of the law, the Commons next pro- ceeded to deal with certain clerical offenders, who had been reported to the House by the Committee of Religion. First in order came Dr. Manwaring, one of the King's chaplains, who, like his brother sycophant. Dr. Sibthorpe, had preached and published a most outrageous sermon on the subject of the loan ; in which he had maintained that " the King was not bound by the laws of the realm, but that his command in imposing taxes without the consent of Parliament obliged the subjects' conscience upon pain of eternal damnation." ^ For this sermon he was impeached by the Commons at the Bar of the House of Lords ; and though, says Heylin, the poor man on his knees, and with tears in his eyes, and sorrow in his heart, humbly craved pardon for the errors and indiscretions he had committed, yet he could obtain no mercy, and was sentenced to be imprisoned during the pleasure of the House, fined £1,000, and declared incap- able of holding any further ecclesiastical preferment." ^ It appeared from the title-page that the sermon had been licensed for the press under his Majesty's special 1 3 State Trials, 335. * Heylin, p. 170. 78 74 ARCHBISHOP LAUD command by the Bishop of London, and two Lords were sent from the House to understand from his Lordship what authority he had for signifying his Majesty's special command. The Bishop rephed that he had received a letter from the Bishop of Bath and Wells (Dr. W. Laud) directing him by his Majesty's command to hcense the book ; thereupon, the report continues. Dr. Laud, who up to this time had remained silent, said " he could give no sudden answer, but acknowledged that he wrote the said letter by his Majesty's commandment." ^ Having shuffled upon the King the blame of an action for which he alone was responsible, he recorded in his diary, " By God's goodness towards me I was fully cleared in the House." Charles had evidently not read the sermon, for the book was suppressed by a royal proclamation, stating that when the King authorized the publication " he was not aware of the divers passages it contained, trenching on the laws of the land and proceedings of Par- liament." Two other clerical delinquents remained to be dealt with : Dr. Montague, whose impeachment had been voted in the previous Parliament ; and Dr. Cosin, a pre- bendary of Durham, who had published a book of devo- tions, in which " were set forth the seven sacraments, the three theological virtues, the eight beatitudes, the seven deadly sins, with forms of prayer for the first, third, sixth and ninth hours, and for the vespers and compline, formerly called the canonical hours." Even the worthy Heylin, no mean innovator himself, says, " It startled many otherwise very moderate and sober men, who looked upon it as preparatory to usher in the super- stitions of the Church of Rome." ^ 1 3 State Trials, 357. * Heylin, Ltfe of Laud, p. 164 MONTAGUE AND COSIN 75 "The Committee on Religion," writes Mr. Mead, " were very hot against him, and no matter if they trounced him. He is a most audacious fellow, and takes upon himself most impudently to bring superstitious inno- vations into our Church : as, for example, Dr. Ward shows me a letter he had had from Durham wherein were these words : ' Mr. Cosin was so blind at evensong on Candle- mas day that he could not read prayers in the Minster with less than 340 candles, whereof he caused sixty to be placed about the high altar.' A great part of the evil in our Church at this present is supposed to proceed from him, and those he wholly ruleth as my Lord of Durham." (Dr. Neile.) ^ This reverend gentle- man had also published an edition of the Prayer Book, in which the word " minister " had been changed into " priest," and he had publicly asserted in one of his sermons that when our reformers took away the mass they marred all religion, but that the mass was not taken away, inasmuch as the real presence of Christ remained still ; otherwise it was not a reformed, but a deformed " religion." Fortunately for both Montague and Cosin the Parliament was abruptly prorogued, and their cases stood over for consideration to the next Session. By this time the Commons had passed the Subsidy Bill for the grant of the supplies, which had been con- ditionally voted at the commencement of the Session, and they now presented it to the King with a humble remonstrance setting forth the dangers which threatened the national religion by the open avowal of Popish doc- trines, and the introduction of Popish ceremonies, which were opposed to the articles and the established prac- tice of the Church. Bishops Laud and Neile were specially mentioned as the two prelates near his Majesty who ^ Court and Times of Charles I, vol. i. 335. 76 ARCHBISHOP LAUD were the main favourers and supporters of these inno- vating clergy. And the remonstrance concluded with humbly desiring the King to consider whether it was safe that Buckingham, who had so abused his power, should be continued in his great offices and " places of nearness and counsel about your Majesty's sacred per- son." The King promptly accepted the subsidies, but with regard to the remonstrance he told the Commons that " he would take it into consideration, and give such order as it deserved, and so, giving the Duke his hand to kiss before them all, left them." ^ This curt answer to the Remonstrance with the marked expression of his favour to the Duke, was made while the Commons were occupied with the consideration of a Bill for the levy of Tonnage and Poundage, as the customs duties were called. These duties, forming such an im- portant part of the public revenue, had been usually granted for life to the reigning Sovereign on his accession to the throne ; but in the first Parliament of Charles complaints were made by the merchants that during the previous reign the duties on various articles of commerce had been arbitrarily increased beyond the statutory limit fixed by the Act. It was therefore re- solved that the Bill for the renewal of the grant of Ton- nage and Poundage should be preceded by a general revision of the rates. But the abrupt dissolution of the Parliament frustrated the intention of the Com- mons, and the Bill for the grant of the duties fell to the ground with the premature end of the Ses- sion.^ The custom duties, however, continued to be ^ Secretary Conway to Secretary Coke, June i8, 1628. Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, cvii. 70. * Pending the revision of these duties a temporary grant for one year of Tonnage and Poundage had been made by the Com TONNAGE AND POUNDAGE 77 levied, to the great discontent of the merchants, at the rates to which they had been raised in the previous reign. It now remained for the Commons to carry into effect the resolution of the previous Parliament. They had no desire to diminish the revenue received by the Crown from this lucrative source of supply, upon which the maintenance of the fleet mainly depended : all that they desired was to satisfy the merchants by a fair adjust- ment of the rates, and at the same time to establish the principle that custom duties, like internal taxes, could only be imposed and fixed by the authority of Parliament. We will give you, they in effect said to the King, when the necessary alterations in the rates have been made, a life grant for as much as you have heretofore received ; but as this may take two or three months to settle, we will now pass a temporary Act to legalize their collec- tion at the ports until we meet again This was surely a fair and reasonable proposal, but the King refused to entertain it. He had for three years levied these duties by virtue of his prerogative, and was not disposed to admit that the sanction of Parliament was necessary to legalize their imposition. The Commons then suggested that there should be an adjournment instead of a proroga- tion, in order that the Act, when finally passed at their next meeting, might have retrospective effect from the commencement of the Session, and so obviate any ques- tions being raised as to the legality of the collection of these duties during the recess. This suggestion the King also rejected, and the Commons then proceeded mons, and the Bill had been read once in the Lords, when further proceedings were stopped by the dissolution. Gardiner's Hist. vi. 364. ^ Nethersole to Elizabeth, June 30, 1628. S.P.D. cviii. 82. Nethersole was the agent of Charles' sister Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia. 78 ARCHBISHOP LAUD to draw up a further remonstrance declaring " that the receiving of Tonnage and Poundage, and other im- positions not granted by Parhament, was a breach of the fundamental liberties of the kingdom, and contrary to their late Petition of Right." But Charles was determined to receive no more Remon- strances, and on the morning of June 26 he suddenly appeared without his robes in the House of Lords, and, summoning the Commons to his presence, said that " though he was responsible for his actions to God alone,^ he would tell them the reason why he had so unex- pectedly come to end the Session. He had already received one Remonstrance, and he understood that a second Remonstrance was under preparation, in which his right to Tonnage and Poundage was called in ques- tion by reason of his answer to their Petition of Right ; and he therefore thought it proper to declare that, when granting that Petition, he had no intention of surrender- ing his profit of Tonnage and Poundage, one of the chief maintenances of his Crown ; and he called upon all present to take notice of what he said, especially the judges, to whom, under him, and not to the Houses of Parliament, belong the interpretation of the laws." " After this remarkable speech the Parliament was pro- rogued to October 20, and it seems to have been the general impression that the King had no intention of meeting his Parliament again. As Laud throughout the Session had been the one adviser who had been admitted to the secret counsels of 1 This was Laud's favourite doctrine, and the intrinsic evi- dence and the sentiments of the speech clearly point to Laud as its author. It was hurriedly prepared, and not submitted for the approval of the Privy Council. ^ Pari. Hist. vol. ii. p. 434. REPLY TO COMMONS' REMONSTRANCE 79 the King and Buckingham, he was now entrusted with the duty of preparing for pubHcation a reply to the various charges of misgovernment contained in the Remonstrance of the Commons. It was a prohx and lengthy document, but a few extracts may be produced as showing the views he entertained upon some of the important questions which had occupied the attention of the Parliament. It commences, like the King's last speech, with the assertion that " the King was in no way accountable for his actions to his people, but to God only : that it was a mere dream to suppose that any innovations were contemplated in the matter of religion, and that the accusations made against two eminent prel- ates who attend his Majesty's person (as Laud modestly describes his brother Neile and himself) were groundless and without a shadow of proof ; that the levying of money by loans was an act of necessity, which would not have arisen if the previous Parliament had granted adequate supplies ; that the King loved nothing more than Parhaments provided they proceeded with modera- tion and in the ancient parliamentary way, but that the Parliaments themselves, forgetting their ancient and fair way of proceedings, had swollen till they broke them- selves ; that it was no fault of the King that he had taken Tonnage and Poundage without an Act of Parlia- ment, but the fault of those who should have granted it, as it had been granted to his royal progenitors ; and the answer concluded with a defence of Buckingham, and with an indignant denial that the King was a cipher in his hands, or so weak as to be in wardship to any of his Council." 1 This document still exists in the State Paper Office, with the following endorsement in Laud's handwriting : ' fraud's Works, vii. 631-7. 8o ARCHBISHOP LAUD " This I made by the King's command, who had then a purpose to pubhsh it in print. The then Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir Richard Weston, was joined with me to make the Preface, and he had it to frame the Pre- face. But the King's mind altered not to publish it ; and I could never get these papers out of his (Weston's) hands till after his death. Then I received them from his son at Oatlands, July 26, 1635. Who altered the King's mind in this God knows." ^ ^ S.P.D. Charles I, cviii. 67. CHAPTER XI 1628 ASSASSINATION OF BUCKINGHAM LAUD'S services, however, were not forgotten. Four days after the close of the Session he was pro- moted to the See of London with practically the powers of the Primate ; and, Manwaring, who had been de- clared incapable of holding preferment in the Church, received a pardon and a rich living with a dispensation to hold it in commendam with his former benefice. Similar pardons were granted to Montague and Cosin, as a bar to any further proceedings being taken against them in Parliament, and an additional outrage was offered to public opinion by the promotion of Montague to the bishopric of Chicester. A more wanton disregard of the feehngs of the nation was the appointment of Bucking- ham to the command of a fresh expedition for the re- lief of Rochelle ; but while superintending the prepara- tions for the sailing of the fleet, he was assassinated at Portsmouth by Lieutenant Felton, a political fanatic, who said he thought it was better that one man should die than that all England should go to ruin. And such was the general abhorrence in which the Duke was held, that this miserable murderer was looked upon as a martyr, who had deliberately sacrificed his Hfe for the good of his country. When brought before the Privy 82 ARCHBISHOP LAUD Council for examination, he was asked who had instigated him to commit the crime. Upon his denying that he had any accompHces, Laud said, " If you won't confess, you must go to the rack." Even the King, who was present at the Council Board, was staggered by this atrocious suggestion, and said, " Before any such thing be done let the advice of the judges be had therein, whether it be legal or no." Chief Justice Richardson, to his credit, after consulting the Judges, delivered their unanimous opinion that the prisoner ought not to be tortured by the rack, as no such punishment was known or allowed by our law." * Felton was then tried in the King's Bench and received the usual sentence of the law, and his body after his execution was, by the King's express command, suspended in chains at Portsmouth. But while there was open sympathy felt for the mur- derer, the vindictive feelings of the people against his victim were not appeased by his death. The King had decided that the remains of the Duke should be interred with all the pomp of a royal funeral among the graves of the kings in Westminster Abbey ; but at the last moment this intention was abandoned, and " the funeral," says Meade, " was solemnized at ten o'clock at night in as poor and confused a manner as hath been seen, marching from Wallingford House ^ over against Whitehall to Westminster Abbey, there being not much above a hun- dred mourners, who attended upon an empty coffin, borne upon six men's shoulders, the Duke's corpse itself having been previously there interred, as if it had been doubted that the people in their madness might have sur- prised it. But to prevent all disorders, the train bands kept a guard on both sides of the way, beating up their * 3 State Trials, p. 371. ^ The Duke's residence on the site of the present Admiralty. MESSAGES FROM THE KING 83 drums loud, and carrjdng their pikes and muskets upon their shoulders, as in a march, not trailing them at their heels, as is usual in mourning. As soon as the coffin had entered the church they all came away without firing a volley, and this was the obscure catastrophe of this great man." ^ Laud in his diary makes no allusion to the funeral, and does not appear to have followed the empty coffin. He probably thought that as the intimate counsellor of the Duke, it was safer for him to remain at home, than expose himself to the fury of a London mob, which shortly before had murdered Dr. Lamb in the public streets for no other reason than that he was the Duke's physician, and supposed astrologer. If we may judge of Laud's feelings from his diary, his grief for the Duke was less acute than his anxiety about his own position, now that his great friend and supporter had been removed. The correspondence of Sir Dudley Carleton, one of the Secretaries of State, shows that there was a strong party among the members of the King's Cabinet, who were anxious for a complete reconciliation with the House of Commons ; and if this party gained the ascendancy, there could be no doubt that Laud, with his clerical adherents, would be left to the justice of Par- liament, and the King's reign might have had a differ- ent termination. But Charles had no intention of sacrific- ing Buckingham's friend and counsellor, and Laud recalls with much satisfaction in his Diary the consolatory messages he received from the King. " August 27. Mr. Elphinston (the King's cupbearer) brought me a very gracious message from his Majesty upon my Lord Duke's death. " August 30. As I was going to meet the corpse of the Duke, which that night was brought to London, Sir W. ^ Court and Times of Charles I, vol. i. 399. 84 ARCHBISHOP LAUD Fleetwood brought me very gracious letters from the King's Majesty, written with his own hand. " September 9. The first time I went to Court after the death of the Duke of Buckingham, my dear Lord. The gracious speech, which that night the king was pleased to use to me ! " After these gracious speeches we hear of no more regrets for the illustrious Duke of Buckingham ; Laud's position was assured, and the untoward event, which might have led to his ruin, established him more firmly in the confidence and favour of the King. Though the death of Buckingham had removed the ever recurring cause of dissension between Charles and his people, it was not until late in the year that the King finally made up his mind to meet his Parliament again in the following January. At a Cabinet Council held on November 27 he explained the preparations he pro- posed to make to ensure a peaceful Session. " He knew," he said, " the Commons would first begin with religion. Two sects there were, which they would stumble at, the Papists and Arminians. For Papists he would have them all turned out of office, unless they would conform. And for the Arminians — referring to the controverted books of Montague and Cosin — he would have the bishops about the town compare their opinions with the Book of Articles, and to condemn such tenets as were not agree- able thereto." The Earl of Pembroke,^ the Lord Steward 1 William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke, was, says Clarendon, " the most universally beloved and esteemed of any man of that age ; and having a great office in the Court, he made the Court itself better esteemed and more reverenced in the country. He was a great lover of his country and of the reUgion and justice which he beheved could only support it." He was the friend and patron of Shakespeare, and the supposed W. H. of Shake- speare's sonnets ; and to him the first or 1623 edition of Shake- DECLARATION ON THE ARTICLES 85 and Chancellor of the University of Oxford, seconded his Majesty, yet thought he not the consideration of Arminianism so fit to be committed to the bishops about the town, because most of them were Arminians, but rather that they should be referred to the whole Convoca- tion house." ^ But Charles was not asking his Council for advice. In all questions relating to the Church his sole adviser was Laud ; and Laud had made up his mind that there should be no discussion either by the clergy or Convoca- tion regarding the meaning of the articles. In his opinion it was much safer to leave their interpretation to him- self and the Court Bishops sitting in the High Commis- sion Court. As a slight concession, however, to the Com- mons he advised the King to suppress Montague's books, and at the same time to republish the articles of religion prefaced by " a declaration " prohibiting all further discussion on controverted religious questions. It is a remarkable document, and the casual reader must often have wondered how such a declaration, without date or any indication of the circumstances under which it originated, found a place in our Prayer Books at the head of the thirty-nine Articles. It is called " His Majesty's Declaration," issued by him as " the supreme Governor of the Church, with the advice of so many of the Bishcps as might conveniently be called together." " We take comfort in this," it says, " that all clergymen within our realm have always most willingly subscribed to the Articles established, and that even in those curious points in which the present differences lie, men of all sorts take the Articles to be for them, which is an argu- speare's collected plays had been dedicated. Clarendon's Hist. vol. i. p. 100. 1 Court and Times of Charles I, vol. i. 439. 86 ARCHBISHOP LAUD ment that none of them intend any deviation from the Articles established. We therefore wiU that all curious search be laid aside, and that no man hereafter shall either print or preach to draw the Article aside any way, or put his own sense or comment to be the meaning of the Articles, but shall take it in the hteral and grammati- cal sense. That if any public Reader in either of our Universities, or any other person in either of them, shall affix any new sense to any Article, or if any Divine in the Universities shall preach or print anything either way other than is already estabhshed in Convocation with our Royal assent, he or they the offenders shall be liable to our displeasure and the Church's censure in our Com- mission Ecclesiastical." But these curious points — election and free grace, predestination and justification by faith, were in the view of the religious world of that day of the very essence of the Gospel, and to prohibit the clergy from dwelling upon these subjects in their sermons was to deprive the people of that spiritual food, which was dearer to them than all their worldly possessions. In these days of free discussion it is difficult to realize the indignation and dismay which this declaration produced. It was looked upon as a device of Satan for suppressing truth and spreading darkness over the land. Offences against the declaration were to be tried by the High Commis- sion Court, where Laud's voice was all-powerful, and allowing such a tribunal to determine whether contro- verted sermons or writings put " a new sense on the articles other than that already established," was re- garded as an insidious device to undermine the work of the Reformation by robbing the Articles of the distinc- tive sense, in which they had been received and held as expressing the doctrines of the Church of England. MONTAGUE'S BOOKS 87 After the publication of his Majesty's declaration, Montague's books, which had given rise to so much controversy, were suppressed by a royal proclamation ; ^ but as the book had been in circulation for four years, and nearly all the copies had been sold, very little was gained by their suppression, more particularly as Mon- tague was left in undisturbed possession of his bishopric, while his opponents' books were also suppressed, and their authors prosecuted in the High Commission Court. ^ Jan. 17, 1629. Calendar S.P.D. Charles I, vol. iii. p. 481. CHAPTER XII 1629 SECOND SESSION OF PARLIAMENT WHEN Parliament again met in January ^ one of the first questions brought before the House of Commons was the King's recent declaration on the Articles. " Though," said Mr. Pym, " we disclaim laying down rules of faith, we are at any rate bound to know what were the established and fundamental truths to which we have given our assent." The Thirty-nine Articles had been ratified and allowed by Elizabeth in 1571, and in the same year they had been accepted by Parliament in an Act ^ which required all ecclesiastical persons to subscribe to them, and any clergyman who maintained any doctrine contrary to these articles was to be deprived of his benefice by the bishop of the diocese. It was to this Act that the Articles owed their civil vitality ; and the Commons were not disposed to allow the High Commission Court, which derived its authority from Parliament, to place interpretations on the Articles, which were unheard of when the Act of Elizabeth was passed. After considerable discussion the following resolution was passed by the House : " We, the Com- mons now in Parliament assembled, do claim, profess and avow for truth the sense of the Articles of Religion 1 January 20, 1629. 2 ij 'Ehz. c. 12. 88 OLIVER CROMWELL 89 which were established in ParUament in the reign of our late Queen Elizabeth, which by public Act of the Church of England and by the general and concurrent exposition of the writers of our Church have been de- livered to us ; and we do reject the sense of the Jesuits and Arminians, wherein they differ from us." ^ But this was not the only matter which roused the indignation of the Commons. It was brought to the notice of the House that the authorized copies of the Petition of Right, which had been circulated throughout the country, contained not only the King's first answer to the Petition, which the Commons had refused to accept, but also his own interpretation of the Act as contained in his final speech at the end of the Session. This was rather a startling revelation, and the King's Printer was summoned to the bar, who said he had acted under his Majesty's command, communicated to him by the Attorney-General ; and Mr. Secretary Coke, on behalf of the Government, had no further explanation to offer. Here the matter rested, but it made a great impression on the House ; and when the King sent them a message to give precedency to the consideration of a Bill for the levy of Tonnage and Poundage, assuring them, with a slight disregard of truth, that he had always intended to receive these custom duties as a gift from his people instead of claiming them by virtue of his prerogative, the Commons resolved that they must first consider the violation of their liberties and the great danger which threatened the country from the attempts which were being made to undermine the established religion. In these debates the name of Oliver Cromwell is for the first time mentioned in the Parliamentary proceed- ^ 2 Pari. Hist. 454. 90 ARCHBISHOP LAUD ings. He had been appointed a member of the Com- mittee to investigate the circumstances under which pardons had been granted to Montague, Manwaring and Cosin during the recess ; and he informed the House that a person whom he named " had preached fiat Popery at St. Paul's Cross, and that Bishop Neile had commanded him to preach nothing to the contrary ; and that Manwaring, so justly censured by the House for his sermon, was by this Bishop's means preferred to a rich living. If these are steps," he added, " to Church preferments what may we not expect ? " " In this Lord," said Sir J. EUiot, " is contracted all the danger we fear ; for he that procured those pardons may be the author of those new opinions ; and I doubt not that his Majesty being informed thereof wiU leave him to the justice of this House." ^ "Montague," said Sir Walter Earle, "is a principal disturber of the Church, and I want to know how he became a bishop. Two men (Drs. Neile and Laud), that are Privy Councillors, were named in our last remon- strance, and it is very probable that those ecclesiastical officers did give that advice to the King." Sir H. May (Chancellor of the Duchy and a Privy Councillor) then said that he would tell the House what he was privy to on this point. True it was that these two men were named in the said Remonstrance, and the point was before the King and his Council, and the King did utterly dishke such novelties, and then those two bishops being present with tears in their eyes protested they hated the opinions and questions, and upon their confession upon their knees they renounced them.* Another member presented a petition from the book- sellers and printers complaining that the hcensing of * Foster's Life of Eliot, vol. ii. p. 421. 8 2 Pari. Hist. 457. DEBATES IN THE COMMONS 91 books was entirely in the hands of the Bishop of London (Dr. Laud) and his chaplains, and that all books written against Popery and Arminianism were prohibited, and the authors and printers of them prosecuted and punished in the High Commission Court, " whereupon Mr. Selden observed, that there was no law to prevent the printing of any book in England, only a 'decree of the Star Cham- ber ; therefore that a man should be fined and imprisoned and his goods taken from him, was a great invasion of the liberty of the subject." He therefore proposed that a Bill to regulate the hcensing of books should be pre- pared and referred to a select Committee. A Committee was then named " to digest those things that had been already agitated concerning innovation, the cause of the innovation and the remedy." As a reply to Laud's prohibitory declaration on the Articles, the Committee, with equal intolerance, proposed that " the orthodox doctrine of the Church in the points controverted by the Arminian sect should be estabUshed and freely taught according as it has hitherto been generally received without any alteration or innovation, and severe punish- ment provided by law against those who either by word or writing pubhshed anything contrary thereto." With regard to the superstitions ceremonies and innovations, which the two great Bishops near the King were alleged to have encouraged and promoted, it was proposed that " the authors and abettors of these Popish and Arminian innovations should be condignly punished." It is worthy of remark that neither Secretary Coke, nor any of the other Government members objected to the stringency of the proposed measures. They looked upon Laud as an upstart and meddling priest, whose pernicious influence with the King in matters of rehgion had been the great obstacle to a right understanding with the 92 ARCHBISHOP LAUD Commons, and they would gladly have left him to the justice of the House. But Charles had no intention of sacrificing Laud, and while the proposals of the Committee were under consideration, a peremptory order was sent to the House to adjourn to March 2. On March 2 the House again met, when the Speaker (Sir John Finch) said he had received a command from the King to adjourn the House till the loth. Several members objected that it was not the office of the Speaker to deliver such a command, as the adjournment of the House properly belonged to themselves ; and Sir John Elliot then moved a Remonstrance on the subject of Tonnage and Poundage, which the Speaker refused to put from the Chair, as he had an express command from the King to rise as soon as he had delivered his message. Thereupon he rose and was leaving the Chair when he was seized by Mr. HoUis and other members and forcibly kept in his seat. Sir Thomas Edmunds and other Privy Councillors rushed to his assistance, and there was a free fight round the chair of the Speaker ; Mr. Hollis telling him " he should sit still till it pleased them to rise." Then the Speaker, with abundance of tears, answered, " I will not say : I will not put the question ; but I dare not, I dare not sin against the express command of my Sovereign." Selden replied that " he being the servant of the House could not refuse their command under any colour, and that his obstinacy would be a precedent to posterity if it should go unpunished, and he therefore urged him to proceed with the business of the House, which he still refused with extremity of weeping and supplicating orations." As neither threats nor advice could prevail, Mr. Hollis then read the following protestations, which were carried by acclamation : PROTESTATIONS OF THE COMMONS 93 (1) Whoever shall bring in innovation in Religion or seek to introduce Popery and Arminianism shall be reputed a capital enemy to this Kingdom and Common- wealth. (2) Whoever shall advise the levying of Tonnage and Poundage not granted by Parliament, or be an actor therein, shall be reputed a capital enemy of the Kingdom and Commonwealth. (3) Whoever shall voluntarily pay Tonnage and Poun- dage not granted by Parliament shall be reputed a betrayer of the hberties of England and an enemy there- unto. The King finding that the House continued in debate in spite of his order for adjournment, " sent a messenger for the Sergeant with his mace, which being taken from the table, there can be no further proceedings ; but the Sergeant was by the House stayed, and the key of the door taken from him and given to a member of the House to keep." The King then sent Mr. Maxwell for the disso- lution of Parliament with his Black Rod ; but being in- formed that neither he nor his message would be received, he sent for the Captain of the guard to force the door, but by this time the House had risen and adjourned, till March 10," * on which date the Parliament was formally dissolved. In his speech from the throne the King thanked the Lords for their dutiful behaviour, and said it was only the disobedient carriage of the Lower House that had caused the dissolution, but that he did not blame the whole of the House ; but only some vipers amongst them that had cast a mist of undutiful- ness over their eyes. So ended Charles' third Parlia- ment, and no one had more reason to rejoice than Laud. The dissolution had saved him from impeachment, and, 1 2 Pari. Hist. 491. 94 ARCHBISHOP LAUD with characteristic piety, he records in his diary : " The Parhament which was broken up this March lo laboured my ruin ; but, God be blessed for it, found nothing against me." ' To allay the general discontent the King thought it necessary to publish a declaration to all his loving sub- jects of the causes which had moved him to dissolve the Parliament. It was a prolix and tedious document, and from its style, arguments and expressions had evi- dently been written by the same hand that had drafted the answer to the previous Remonstrance of the Commons. It commenced with Laud's favourite doctrine that princes were not accountable for their actions to their subjects, but to God alone ; that the King, by virtue of his prerogative, was the only judge of matters of State and matters of Religion : that the House of Commons had made strange and exorbitant encroachments and usurpations such as were never before attempted ; that they had endeavoured to extend their privileges by setting up general committees for Religion, for Courts of Justice, for trade and the like, a course never heard of until of late : so as where in former times the knights and bur- gesses were wont to communicate to the House such business as they brought from their coimtries, there were now so many chairs erected where complaints of all sorts were entertained, to the unsufferable disturbance and scandal of justice and government, insomuch that young lawyers sitting there took upon themselves to deny the opinions of the judges : and when one of the Members of that House had said, " we had wicked coun- sel " and another that the Council and the Judges sought to trample under foot the liberty of the subject, and a third traduced our Court of Star Chamber, they passed ^ Diary, March lo, 1629. DEATH OF ELIOT 95 without check or censure by the House. By which it appeared how far the members of that House had swollen beyond the rules of moderation and the modesty of former times ; and under pretence of privilege and free- dom of speech had taken liberty to declare against all authority of Council and Courts at their pleasure." But in spite of all that had happened the King was good enough to declare that " he would maintain his subjects in their just liberties provided that they yielded as ready an obedience to his authority and commandments as had been yielded to the greatest of his predecessors." * This was followed by a proclamation in which the King stated that " he should consider it an act of pre- sumption for any one to suggest the calling of a Parlia- ment, but that he would be more inclinable to meet Parhament again when his motives were better under- stood and appreciated, and when those who had bred this interruption had received their condign punishment." Sir John Eliot, HoUis Selden, and four other leading members of the Commons were then arrested and brought before the Privy Council and committed to the Tower. It was, however, against Eliot that the vengeance of the King was specially directed. An information was filed against him in the King's Bench for the speeches he had delivered during the tumultuous proceedings on the last day of the Session. It was in vain he pleaded the privilege of Parliament, and demurred to the juris- diction of the Court. He was sentenced to a fine of £2,000, to be imprisoned during the King's pleasure, and to make a humble submission and acknowledgment of his offence. To this indignity he refused to submit, and after three years' confinement in the Tower he succumbed to the rigours of his imprisonment, and died 1 2 Pari, Hist. 492-503. 96 ARCHBISHOP LAUD a martyr to the liberties of his country. His son asked that his body might be removed to Cornwall to be buried among his own people. The King's answer was written at the foot of the petition. " Let Sir John Eliot's body be buried in the Church of that Parish, where he died." ^ He was accordingly buried within the precincts of the Tower, and to this day not even a stone marks the place of his grave. ^ 1 Court and Times of Charles I, vol. ii. p. 309. 2 Foster's Lift of Eliot, ii. 727. CHAPTER XIII 1629 — 1632 THE king's ministers AFTER the death of Buckingham Charles was his own Prime Minister, and each of the great officers of State conducted the duties of his own department sub- ject only to the general control and orders of the King. The Lord Keeper Coventry ^ held the highest civil office under the Crown, and was, says Clarendon, " a man of wonderful gravity and wisdom, and knew the temper and disposition of the kingdom most exactly, and there- fore naturally abhorred all innovations, which he knew would produce ruinous effects. Yet many, who stood at a distance, thought that he was not active and stout enough in opposing those innovations. For though by his place he presided in all public councils, yet he was seldom known to speak in matters of State, which he well knew were for the most part concluded before they were brought to that public agitation ; never in foreign affairs, which the vigour of his judgment could well comprehend ; nor indeed freely in anything, but what immediately and plainly concerned the justice of the kingdom. And therefore it is no wonder that he retired within himself as much as he could, and stood upon his defence with- ^ He had succeeded Williams as Lord Keeper in 1625. 98 ARCHBISHOP LAUD out making desperate sallies against growing mischiefs, which he knew well he had no power to hinder, and which might probably begin in his own ruin." ^ The two members of the Privy Council who had the greatest influence with the King were the Lord Treasurer Weston, and Laud, the Bishop of London, and before long it became a question which of them should be accounted the greater. In the embarrassed state of the exchequer the Lord Treasurer had a most important and a most difficult office to fill. With a depleted Trea- sury retrenchments had to be made in all departments, even in the household expenses of the King, and Weston incurred much unpopularity by stopping the profuse grants, which in times past had been made to the favour- ites of the Court. But while [stopping the bounty of the Crown to other men, he did not hesitate to accept large grants both in money and land for himself. " His expenditure," says Clarendon, " was so prodigious, that the King was pleased twice to pay or at least to disburse towards it ;^40,ooo in ready money out of his exchequer. Besides his Majesty gave him a whole forest (Chute forest in Hampshire) and much other land belonging to the Crown ; which was the more taken notice of and murmured against, because, being the chief minister of the revenue, he was particularly obhged to prevent such disinherison ; and because, under that obligation, he had avowedly and sorely crossed the pretences of other men and restrained the King's bounty from being exercised almost to any." ^ But though Clarendon had personal reasons for regarding Weston with dislike,^ he never accused him of anything approaching to peculation or dishonesty in the management of the finances ; and in * Clarendon's Hist. i. 98, 100. ^ Infra, 184. a Ibid. i. 108. LAUD'S POSITION 99 spite of the powerful cabals against him he enjoyed his office and the King's confidence till his death. Laud's position in the Cabinet was a somewhat anoma- lous one. He was a member of the Privy Council, but as Bishop of London he was subordinate to the Primate, and had no portfolio, so to speak, of his own, which required him to take the orders of the King. And yet we find him at this period of [his career on the same terms of intimacy with Charles that he had formerly been with Buckingham. He tells us in one of his letters that " while Bishop of London the only 'exercise he got was his almost daily jolting over the stones between London House and Whitehall.^ These daily visits to the Court naturally added greatly to his importance, and gave perhaps an exaggerated idea of his influence ; for addresses in matters temporal as well as spiritual were from this time made through him to the King by the most noble personages.'' He seems too to have acted as a sort of spy on his colleagues in the Council, bringing to his Royal master's notice any shortcomings or dehnquencies he found or suspected in the adminis- tration of their departments. Heylin gives us a case in point. He tells us that " some time in 1631 Laud discovered how ill his Majesty's Treasury had been managed by some of the principal officers of his Treasury, to the enrichment of themselves and the impoverishment of their master, and his Majesty was accordingly ac- quainted with all particulars. For which good service to the King, none was so much suspected by them as Laud, against whom they began to practise, endeavour- ing all they could to remove him from his Majesty's ear." ^ This is a good illustration of Laud's stealthy * Laud's Works, vi. 311. * Rushworth's Collections, vol. ii. Preface. ^ Heylin, p. 284. loo ARCHBISHOP LAUD mode of working. It was his invariable practice to poison the mind of the King against any of his colleagues whom he suspected of standing in his way. Up to this time he had been on the closest intimacy with the Lord Treasurer Weston. They were the two members of the Council, who had advocated the abohtion of Parha- ments, and they also agreed in matters relating to the Church, for in a letter wTitten in 1630 Laud speaks of Weston " as one who hath been and is very noble for the Church." ^ But in the following year Weston com- mitted the tmpardonable offence of opposing a private grant which Laud had obtained from the King, and this circvunstance, Laud notes in his diary, " discovered unto me what I was sorry to find in the Lord Treas\irer." ' Outwardl}-, however, he smothered his resentment, for the Lord Treasurer was too powerful a man to quarrel with ; but from this time his secret intrigues commenced, and were continued %\-ithout interruption till Weston's death, when Laud succeeded in getting the control of the Treasury into his own hands. It was this treachery to his colleagues, this abuse of the ear of the King, that rendered Laud so obnoxious to the other members of the Council. At Court he had not a friend. His position rested entirely upon the King's favour ; and the loss of that favour was the one thing he dreaded. It is piteous to read some of the entries in his diar^' even in the days of his greatest pros- perity and power. " Friday night, I dreamed marvellously that the King was offended with me and would cast me off, and tell me no cause why. Avertat Deus; for cause I have given none." ^ He might truly have said with Wolsey : ^ Laud to Archbishop Usher, July 5, 1630. Works, vi. 273. 2 Diary, June 26, 163 1. * Ibid., October 14, 1636. HIS INFLUENCE WITH THE KING loi O how wretched Is that poor man who hangs on princes' favour. There is betwixt that smile he would aspire to, That sweet aspect of princes and his ruin, More pangs and fears than wars or women have. No man felt those pangs and fears more acutely than Laud in his struggle for power, and no man ever entered upon the struggle so ill provided with the qualifications which generally ensure success. His narrow Church education, his want of commerce with the world, his lack of sympathy with the age in which he lived, his irritable temper and underbred manners, and his inability to see the disastrous consequences of his measures, rendered him the most dangerous empiric that had ever aspired to play the part of a statesman. The secret of his success lay in his intimate knowledge of Charles' character, and the marvellous way in which he used it for his own ends. He posed as the one honest man in the Council, the one faithful and submissive interpreter of his Majesty's policy and wishes. Like all weak rulers, Charles was particularly sensitive of being thought a cipher in the hands of his ministers, while he had not the capacity to originate any fixed policy of his own. No one knew better than Laud how to play upon this weakness. He flattered the King by consulting him even on the most trivial matters, as if he could do nothing without the Royal guidance, and he had the consummate art to make the King believe that the policy suggested for his adoption was the out- come of his own initiative and wisdom. They had, besides, one strong bond of Union in common. In an age of enlightenment and progress they both clung to the traditions of the past. Charles was for ever dweUing on the ready submission which had been yielded to his 102 ARCHBISHOP LAUD Tudor progenitors ; while Laud's mental vision was for ever directed to those glorious pre-Reformation times of ignorance and superstition, when prelates were not merely the spiritual fathers of the Church, but shared equally with the laity all the highest civil offices in the State. Far superior in abiUty to either Weston or Laud was Sir Thomas Wentworth, who had been raised to the Peerage^ and became President of the Council of the North * in the interval between the two Sessions of Parliament. It was an appointment for which he had previously apphed,^ but owing, it is said, to Buckingham's influence his application was refused, and shortly after he was dismissed from his office of Justice of the Peace and Custos Rotulorum of the West Riding. As a further insult his dismissal was communicated to him in open Court, when he indignantly exclaimed, " Since they will put upon me a seeming disgrace in the public face of my country, I shall crave leave to wipe it out as openly." * Then followed the loan and his imprison- ment for refusing to subscribe to it ; and in the next Parliament he had his revenge. He then appeared as " the most earnest vindicator of the laws, the most zealous asserter and champion of the liberties of the people." But while raising his voice in defence of free- dom, his one aspiration was for high employment under the Crown. The House of Commons offered no scope for his ambition, where he was overshadowed by the political sagacity of Pym, and the fiery eloquence of Eliot ; and while the Petition of Right was still under debate in the House of Lords he openly separated him- ^ July 22, 1628. ' December 15, 1628. ^ Wentworth to Secretary Conway, January 20, 1626. S.P.D. Charles I, xviii. 110. ■* Stafford's Letters, i. 33. WENTWORTH self from the party ^ with which he had been temporarily acting." Whether the promise of long coveted office led to his desertion of the popular cause it is impossible to say. We know for certain that after breaking with Pym and Eliot on May 23 he never spoke again in the House of Commons ; and if he had not then received the offer of preferment under the Crown,' he certainly did nothing afterwards to obtain it. Heyhn, after describing Wentworth as a man " of most prodigious parts," says that " the Lord Treasurer Weston used his best endeavours to sweeten and demulce him ; and having gained him to the King, procured him to be made Lord President of the North ; and being so gained over, he became the most devout friend of the Church, the greatest zealot for advancing the monarchical interest, and the ablest minister for peace and war that any of our former histories have afforded to us. He had not long frequented the Council Board when Laud and he, coming to a right understanding of one another, entered into a league of such inviolable friendship, that nothing but the inevitable stroke of death could part them, and joining hearts and hands together, co-operated from thenceforth for advanc- ing the honour of the Church and his Majesty's service." * We are now entering upon the eleven years of Charles' personal government, in which all constitutional forms were dispensed with, and the proclamations of the Privy Council and the Star Chamber took the place of Acts of Parliament. To supply the pressing wants of the Treas- ury " obsolete laws," says Clarendon, " were revived and rigorously executed,^ and no less unjust projects of ' May 23, 1628. " Foster's Eliot, vol. ii. 213-28. ^ Foster's Stafford, i. 225-6. * Heylin, p. 184. ® Clarendon here alluded to the fines imposed on all freeholders possessing an income of £^0 a year who had neglected to apply for knighthood, and to the revival of the ancient laws of the I04 ARCHBISHOP LAUD all kinds, many ridiculous, many scandalous, all very grievous, were set on foot ; and for the better support of these extraordinary ways, and to protect the agents and instruments employed in them, the Council Table and the Star Chamber enlarged their jurisdictions to a large extent, holding — as Thucydides said of the Athenians — ' for honourable that which pleased, and for just that which profited,' and being the same persons in several rooms, ^ grew to be both Courts of Law to determine rights, and Courts of Revenue to bring money into the Treasury ; the Council Table, by proclamations enjoining this to the people that was not enjoined by the law, and prohibiting that which was not prohibited ; and the Star Chamber censuring the breach and disobedience to those proclamations by very great fines and imprison- ment ; so that any disrespect to Acts of State or to the persons of statesmen, was in no time more penal, and those foundations of rights by which men valued their security were never more in danger to be destroyed." ^ To Laud, with his love of the past, this revolutionary Government, which the friend and apologist ^ of Charles so unsparingly condemns, was the re-establishment of the Crown in its ancient pre-eminence and splendour. It was the only form of Government under which his forests, for the recovery of the King's forestal rights, which made great havoc with private property. ^ The Judges in the Star Chamber were composed of the members of the Pri\'y Council. ^ Clarendon's Hist. i. 147-9. ^ " Clarendon's History was first begun by the express com- mand of^King Charles I, who having a desire that an account of the calamities God was pleased to inflict on the unhappy part of his reign should be reported to posterity by some worthy, honest and knowing man, thought that he could not appoint any one more adorned with such quahfications than this author." (Preface to the first Edition of the History, p. xi.) UNPOPULARITY OF LAUD 105 existence was possible ; and he might boast that it was mainly through his counsels that this fundamental change in the constitution of his country was effected. Natur- ally he was held in general detestation, and a few days after the dissolution of Parhament he tells us that threats were made against his life. " Two papers were found in the Dean of Paul's his yard before his house. The one was to this effect, con- cerning myself : Laud look to thyself ; be assured thy life is sought. As thou art the fountain of all wickedness, repent thee of thy monstrous sins, before thou be taken out of the world, and assure thyself neither God nor the world can endure such a vile counsellor to live or such a whisperer, or to this effect. The other was as bad as this against the Lord Treasurer. Mr. Dean delivered both papers to the King that night. Lord, I am a griev- ous sinner ; but I beseech thee, deliver my soul from them that hate me without a cause." ^ The dread of popular vengeance, or the exciting scenes through which he had so recently passed, seem to have affected his health, for almost the next entry in his diary tells us of a serious illness which confined him to the house and debarred him from enjoying the sunshine of the Court till the latter end of the year. " In August I fell sick upon the way towards the Court at Woodstock. I took up my lodging at my ancient friend's house, Mr. Thomas Windebank. There I lay in a most grievous burning fever till Monday, September 7, on which day I had my last fit. I was brought so low that I was not able to return towards my own house in London till October 29. I went first to present my humble duty and service to his Majesty at Denmark House." * 1 Diary, March 29, 1629. ^ Entries in Diary from August to October 29. io6 ARCHBISHOP LAUD The next entry in his diary tells us of his election as Chancellor of the University of Oxford. " Saturday. The Earl of Pembroke, being Chancellor of the University of Oxford, died of an apoplexy. ^ " Monday. The University of Oxford chose me Chancellor, and news was brought me of it the next morning." ^ News of the Earl's death reached Oxford on the Sunday morning, and the Vice-Chancellor, acting in con- sultation with Laud's friends, determined to hold the election on the following day, in order " to speed the business before any other competitor should appear against him." ^ There was, however, a strong party opposed to Laud, and though taken by surprise they started the Earl of Montgomery, the late Chancellor's brother, as a rival candidate. Both parties seemed to have claimed the election, but the Vice-ChanceUor declared that Laud had a majority of nine votes. An appeal was then preferred to the King on the ground that sufficient notice of the election, as required by the statutes, had not been given.* Every member of the University, whether resident or non-resident, was entitled to vote, and an election made without notice to the non-resident members was obviously iUegal. But the appeal came to nothing. Irregularities, however gross, were deemed of no importance provided the candidate chosen was acceptable to the Court ; and Heylin tells us that as soon as Laud received the news of his election " he addressed himself to the King and submitted the place to his disposal. To which his Majesty most graciously returned this answer, that he knew none more worthy of it than himself, and that he should rather study to add further honours than to take ^ Diary, April lo, 1630. ^ April 12. ^ Heylin, p. 197. * Laud's Works, v. 4, note. HIS UNIVERSITY HONOURS 107 any away from him " ; ' " and the appeal does not appear to have been further pressed. It was a great triumph for the High Church party, as it placed the teaching, preaching and discipline of the University entirely under Laud's control. Laud's next honour was one he deeply appreciated. He was specially invited in place of the Archbishop, who was out of favour at Court, to take part in those inter- esting functions which attend the auspicious birth of an heir to the throne. The occurrence is duly noted in his diary. " Saturday Prince Charles was born at St. James' paulo ante primam horam post meridiem. I was in the House three hours before, and had the honour and happi- ness to see the Prince before he was full one hour old." ^ Under the inspiration of this happy occasion he com- posed a form of thanksgiving to be used in all the parish churches with a touching prayer for the infant Prince, and a most delicate compliment to the reigning Monarch : " Double, O Lord, upon him his father's graces if it be possible." ^ At the beginning of the following year there is a mys- terious and to us unintelligible entry in the diary, which possibly may be explained by the statement of Mr, Hut- ton, that Laud occupied the position of confessor to the King. * " Sunday. His Majesty put his great case of ^ Heylin, p. 197. Laud's Works, iv. 189. ^ Diary, May 29, 1630. ^ The words " if it be possible " do not occur in the copy of the prayer printed in vol. iii. p. 103 of Laud's Works. The editor explains that the original MS. of Laud's devotional exer- cises was missing, and that he followed a copy printed in 1667. That the words, however, were part of the prayer circulated to the clergy is clear from Bishop Racket's Life of Bishop Williams, part ii. 96. * Hutton's English Church, p. 4. io8 ARCHBISHOP LAUD conscience to me about, etc., which I after answered God bless him in it." ^ It was evidently a subject which he did not feel at liberty to commit even to his diary, and the fact of his being admitted as confessor to share the King's most secret thoughts must have been of great assistance to him in his management of his Royal master. It was shortly after this that his differences with the Lord Treasurer commenced. To perpetuate his memory at Oxford he had resolved to add a new court to his old college of St. John's, and the King had given him per- mission to obtain the timber required for the building by cutting down the trees in the Shotover forest. It was one of the Royal forests close to Oxford, in which the timber was reserved for the use of the navy. The grant had been made without consulting the Forest Com- missioners, and on their representation the Lord Treas- urer, Weston, urged the King to cancel the grant. * " It was this," says Laud, " which discovered to me that which I was sorry to find in the Lord Treasurer and Sir F. Cottington, the Chancellor of the Exchequer";^ and to strengthen his position at Court he very wisely resolved to have some friends of his own, upon whom he could rely, in places of trust near the King. A secre- taryship of State shortly after fell vacant by the death of Sir Dudley Carleton, Viscount Dorchester, and some of the most eminent peers and commoners, men who had occupied the most important posts under the Crown were competitors for the place, but, to the amazement of everybody. Laud's " ancient friend " Mr. Windebank was appointed to the vacant office. It was certainly an extraordinary appointment, for Windebank was ^ Dta)y, March 31, 1631. ^ Laud to Cottington, July 163 1. Works, vii. 39. ^ Diary, June 26, 163 1. WINDEBANK absolutely an unknown man — an obscure clerk in the signet office — and his appointment to one of the highest offices of State was a direct insult to all the leading statesmen about the Court. In fact, Laud himself, when writing to inform Windebank of his appointment, felt it necessary to assure him that he was not joking. " Mr. Secretary," he writes, " though you think perhaps that I am apt enough to jest, yet you will believe the enclosed,^ and this present day in the afternoon at Council, Secre- tary Coke is by his Majesty's special command to declare it to the Lords. I pray you make haste up and follow the directions of this enclosed. And among other bene- fits, I doubt not the very naming of you to this place will make them at Oxford look well to your son." And then as a further piece of good news he adds in a PS. : " We took another conventicle of separatists in Newing- ton Woods upon Sunday last, in the very brake where the King's stag had been lodged for his hunting next morning." ^ Two days after he notes in his diary, " Mr. Francis Windebank, my old friend, was sworn Secretary of State, which place I obtained for him from my gracious master King Charles." ^ Among the disappointed candidates for the secretary- ship was Sir Thomas Roe, one of the ablest officers of the Crown, whose varied experience as an ambassador in Turkey, Russia and Germany eminently fitted him to succeed Lord Dorchester as Minister for Foreign affairs. He had just returned from a successful mission to the Kings of Poland and Sweden, which had placed Gus- tavus Adolphus at the head of the Protestant league. ^ The official letter of appointment from Secretary Coke, dated June 13, 1632. Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, ccxviii. 45. * Laud to Windebank, June 13, 1632. Works, vii. 43. ^ Diary, June 15, 1632. no ARCHBISHOP LAUD " On his return to England he was welcomed and ap- plauded by Court and people, and the King expressed his approbation of his services, and promised to make his welfare an object of his special care ; but all power was in the hands of the Lord Treasurer Weston and Bishop Laud, neither of whom favoured his Protestant principles, and in spite of all his success he was laid aside." ^ After remaining unemployed for two years he asked Laud to use his influence to procure him another appointment, and received the following reply : " Con- cerning yourself I have spoken more often to his Maj esty than ever I promised you to do, or than ever I thought I should have had opportunity to do. It may be because I once had the happiness to join in assistance to help my old acquaintance, Mr. Secretary Windebank, forward, you may conceive me able to do more than I am ; but I would very wiUingly have you understand that if he had not had more powerful friends than myself he would never have been where he is." ' After this diplomatic depar- ture from the truth he concludes his letter by piously committing his friend to the grace of God. Within the short space of a month a second very desirable appointment was vacated, and this also fell to another of Laud's nominees. " Doctor Juxon, the Dean of Worcester, at my suit sworn Clerk of his Majesty's Closet, that I might have one that I might trust near his Majesty if I grow weak and infirm." ^ * Preface to S.P.D. Charles I, vol. v. p. 9. ^ Laud to Sir Thomas Roe, April 22, 1634. Laud's Works, vii. 73. ^ Diary, July 10, 1632. CHAPTER XIV 1629 — 1632 laud's LONDON EPISCOPATE OCCUPIED as Laud was with all the intrigues and business of the Court, he had little time or indina- tion to attend to the pastoral duties of his office. The important function of confirming children, which would have required his personal attendance in the parishes of his diocese, he altogether ignored, and there is no instance of his having held a single confirmation during his long episcopal career. This solemn rite of the Church in those days of high conformity seems indeed to have fallen into complete disuse, for Heylin tells us that it was one of the charges brought against the bishops in the Long Parhament " that they had laid aside the use of confirm- ing children, though required by law," and he does not deny it.* To preaching, too, he had an unaccountable objection. He disliked preaching himself and did what he could to discourage it in others. His sermons while Bishop of London averaged two or three a year, and were generally delivered in the King's chapel at Whitehall ; and shortly after he became archbishop he gave up preaching alto- gether. In a debate on the shortcomings of the bishops in the Long Parliament, Lord Saye had sarcastically * Heylin, p. 463. Ill 112 ARCHBISHOP LAUD asked what St. Paul meant when he said, " ' Woe is me if I preach not the Gospel.' Did he mean, if I preach not once a year or once a quarter in the King's chapel ? " This allusion provoked Laud to a reply, and he explained how those bishops, whom this Lord had been pleased to jeer at, had preached more and to more purpose than any of his Lordship's divinity darhngs, because, he said, " you must not measure preaching by a formal going up into the pulpit, for a bishop may preach the Gospel more publicly and to far greater ^edification in a court of judicature, or at a coimcil table, where great men are met together to draw things to an issue, than many preachers in their several charges can ; and therefore to far more advancement of the Gospel than any one of his Lordship's sect at a table end in his Lordship's parlour, or in a pulpit in his independent congregations, wheresoever it be. And when he hath said all that he can, or any man else, this shall be found true, that there is not the like necessity of preaching the Gospel lying upon every man in Holy Orders, now Christianity is spread and hath taken root, as lay upon the Apostles and apos- tolical men, when Christ and His religion were stranger to the whole world." And yet he considerately adds, " I speak not this to cast a damp or chillness upon any man's zeal or diligence in that work." ^ So much for Laud's connexion with the pulpit ; let us now see what this gospel was that he teUs us he preached with so much edification in the Courts of Justice. One Dr. Leighton, a Scotsman by birth, and a Doctor of Divinity by profession, had published anonymously a book entitled " Sion's Plea against Prelacy, addressed to the House of Commons during the sitting of the last 1 Laud's answer to Lord Saye's speech. Works, vol. vi, i88 and 191. PROSECUTION OF LEIGHTON 113 Parliament." It was no doubt a very violent pamphlet, in which the bishops were described as men of blood and enemies of God and the State. That the bishops had lamentably neglected their duties was admitted by Laud himself, for in a letter to Wentworth he writes : " I pro- test I am almost ashamed of my calling, I hear and see my brethren are so bad. God of His infinite mercy forgive me my other sins and preserve me from these." But whatever Laud's own opinion might be, he had no idea of allowing the conduct of the bishops to be publicly assailed : and of his own motion, and having no sworn information before him as to the authorship of the book, he had Leighton ^ arrested and committed to Newgate, where he was kept in irons for fifteen weeks, no friend not even his wife, being suffered to come near him. He was then brought to trial before the Star Chamber, where he was sentenced to a fine of £10,000 and imprisonment in the Fleet for life. As a further punishment it was ordered that after being degraded from his orders by the High Commission, he should be placed in the pillory both at Westminster and in Cheapside and there be whipped, and have his ears cut off and his nose split, and be branded on the face with the letters S.S. for a Sower of Sedition. The following entry in Laud's diary shows what a keen interest he took in the execution of the sentence. " November 20, 1630, Leighton was degraded at the High Commission, and that night broke out of the Fleet. The warden says he was got or was helped over the wall, and professes he knew not this till Wednesday noon. He told it not me till Thursday night. He was taken again in Bedfordshire and brought back to the Fleet within a fortnight ; and on the 26th part of his sentence 1 He was the father of the celebrated Archbishop Leighton. I 114 ARCHBISHOP LAUD was executed upon him at Westminster." ^ He was severely whipped before he was put into the pillory. Being set in the pillory he had one of his ears cut off, and one side of his nose spUt, and was branded on the cheek with the letters S.S. That day week his sores upon his back, ear, nose, and face not being healed, he was whipped again at the pillory in Cheapside, and the remainder of his sentence executed upon him by cutting off the other ear, slitting the other side of his nose and branding the other cheek." » We have not, unfortunately, a copy of the speech which Laud delivered on this occasion. All we know is that he seized the occasion for publicly promulgating his favourite doctrine that " the calling of bishops was jure divino, by divine right " ^ ; and it is said that upon the conclusion of the proceedings he took off his cap and thanked God for the exemplary manner in which the honour of these sacred but somewhat depreciated per- sonages had been vindicated. As for the unfortunate Doctor, who is described as a man " well known for his learning and other abihties," he languished in jail for ten years, until he was released by the Long Parliament ; the House of Commons resolving " that the Archbishop of Canterbury, then Bishop of London, should give him satisfaction for his illegal arrest and imprisonment for fifteen weeks under the said Bishop's warrant, and that he should further have " good satisfaction and repara- tion for his great sufferings and damages sustained by the illegal sentence of the Star Chamber." * What com- pensation he received we are not told ; but Laud noted in his journal with considerable indignation, that Dr. Leighton after his release " came to me in the Tower ^ Diary, November g, 1630. ^ 3 State Trials, 385-6. ^ Laud's Works, vi. 43. * 2 Pari. Hist. 763. MUTILATION with a warrant from the House of Commons for the keys of my house at Lambeth to be deUvered to him that prisoners might be brought thither. I referred myself to God, that nothing might trouble me ; but then I saw it evident that all that could, would be done, to break my patience. Had it not been so, somebody else might have been sent to Lambeth, and not Leighton,'who had been censured in the Star Chamber to lose his ears for a base and most virulent libel against bishops and the Church Government established by law : in which book of his were many things which in some times might have cost him dearer." ^ So Laud had no misgivings as to the fitness of the sentence. All that he could urge in his defence on his impeachment for these and similar atro- cities was that the sentence was the sentence of the Court, for which he was no more responsible than the rest of his colleagues. In speaking of this atrocious sentence, Dr. Gardiner has inadvertently brought a serious charge against the Common Law of England. " The Pillory," he says, " with its accompanying brandings and mutilations, was an ordinary penalty known to the law, and there was nothing in Leighton's sentence which was not authorized by the practice of the Star Chamber." ' So far, however, from mutilation being a recognized penalty known to the law, the judges in Felton's case refused to allow the hand, with which he had struck the blow, to be cut off, observ- ing that " the law and no more should be his, hanging and no maiming." ^ As for the practice of the Star Cham- ber, the judges of that arbitrary tribunal did not consider themselves tied down to the recognized punishments 1 Laud's Works, iv. p. 13. * Gardiner's Hist. vii. 149. 3 Foster's Eliot, ii. 373. Ii6 ARCHBISHOP LAUD authorized by either the Statute or the Common Law. ^ In Ehzabeth's reign five cases occurred in which men were sentenced to lose their hands or their ears ; but these cases were so far from being followed in practice that there is no recorded instance in which mutilation was inflicted during the long reign of James. It was not until Laud became the dominating member of the Star Chamber that this abominable punishment, copied from the Roman Inquisition, was systematically resorted to. The first case occurred in 1628 between the two Sessions of Parhament, when a man of the name of Savage was sentenced by the Star Chamber to lose his ears in the pillory. At the opening of the next Session in January, 1629 the case was brought before the Commons by Selden as an instance of a flagrant violation of the law. " Had not," he said, " a punishment been directed in the Star Chamber, without authority or law, whereby one had lost his ears ? They will take away arms next, and then legs, and so lives. Let all in whom his Majesty puts confidence be careful to see that the members of that House were not insensible to this. Customs were creeping on them. He was for a just and open repre- sentation to His Majesty." * These remarks, it was said, were received with much applause. But the abrupt dissolution of Parliament stopped any further proceed- ings being taken, and it was then, says Rushworth, ^ Hudson, in his treatise on the Star Chamber, the authority on which Mr. Gardiner reUes, says : "I cannot set down every particular punishment inflicted, for that is sometimes only the punishment appointed in the Act of Parliament ; sometimes the punishment is by the wisdom of the Court invented in some new manner for new offences ; as for Traske, who raised. Judaism from death and forbade the eating of swine's flesh, he was sentenced to be fed with swine's flesh when he was in prison." (Hargrave's Collectanea Juridica, vol. ii. pp. 224-5.) ^ Foster's Life of Eliot, ii. 401. PROSECUTION OF PRYNNE 117 " that this Court began to swell big, and nothing would satisfy the revenge of some clergymen but cropped ears, slit noses, branded faces, whipped backs and gagged mouths, and with all to be thrown into dungeons and banished to remote islands, till the English nation began to lay to heart the slavish condition they were like to come to, if this Court continued in its greatness." * In all the instances in which mutilation was inflicted, during this eclipse of constitutional government, Laud was in many cases the real prosecutor, and in all cases the judge who passed the severest sentences. And this he called preaching the Gospel in Courts of Justice. It was while Bishop of London that Laud first came into collision with the redoubtable Mr. Prynne, a bar- rister-at-law of Lincoln's Inn, and a most uncompromis- ing opponent of all ecclesiastical innovations. One of the Courts in which he practised was the High Commis- sion Court, where his great knowledge of constitutional law, and the fearless way in which he defended his clients, made him a most unacceptable advocate to the untrained clerical judges of that arbitrary tribunal. Laud's small stock of patience was very soon exhausted, and one day, after sentencing Prynne's chents for the heinous offence of holding incorrect views on the doctrine of justification by faith, he ordered that Mr. Prynne himself should be articled against for the same, observing " we must not sit here to punish poor snakes and let him go scot free." ' But whatever Prynne had said or done he had evidently not exceeded his duty as an advocate, for, to Laud's intense indignation, the proceedings against him were restrained by a writ of prohibition from one of the ^ Rushworth, ii. 475. ^ Reports of cases in Court of Star Chamber and High Com- mission. (Camden Society, N.S. xxxix. p. 314.) ii8 ARCHBISHOP LAUD superior Courts at Westminster. Shortly after this Prynne launched upon the world a portentous and unreadable quarto of i,ooo pages to prove the unlawfulness of plays, masques and dancing, and stigmatizing actresses as notorious courtesans. Laud at once pounced upon the book, and employed his chaplain, our old friend Dr. Heylin, to pick out all the offensive passages which reflected on the morals of the day. These extracts were then submitted to the King, and as the Queen, some six weeks after the publication of the book, had acted a part in a pastoral at Somerset House, Laud maliciously suggested that the allusion to actresses was a studied insult to the Queen ; and the Attorney-General (Noy) was directed to file a criminal information in the Star Chamber against Prynne.^ It was bad enough that Laud, the instigator of these proceedings, should sit as one of the judges at the trial, but his speech, when delivering his judgment, could hardly be beaten for its sycophancy and violence by any of the utterances of Jefferies and Scroggs. " As for Mr. Prynne," he said, " I am heartily sorry for him, for indeed I hold him guilty of high treason by a statute of Edward the Third. I can't tell whether it is yet repealed. It is a scandalous book against the State in an infamous manner. My Lord of Dorset has suffi- ciently defended the Queen'; yet I will add one thing. If aU the malice of the world was infused into one eye, yet it could not see anything whereby to disparage her. As for plays, Mr. Prynne saith that they are in the best acceptation altogether abominable ; that those that see them are devils incarnate. Mr. Hern,^ his counsel, 1 Prynne was committed to the Tower in February, 1633, but the trial before the Star Chamber took place in 1634. K ^ This gentleman was one of Laud's counsel on his impeach- ment. SYMPATHY FOR PRYNNE 119 said that all this was but an omission of duty. I say it is a most wilful commission of no less than treason. Another said that he was hke the astronomer who looked up to heaven. Nay, he rather looked down to hell, and from thence fetched such bloody doctrine." ^ If these words had not been taken from Laud's own notes of his speech, we might charitably have supposed that he had been misreported. The sentence of the Star Chamber, in which all the members concurred, was that Mr. Prynne should be disbarred and degraded at Oxford and be fined £5,000 to the King, and suffer perpetual imprisonment ; and fur- ther, that he should stand in the pillory at Westminster and Cheapside and lose both his ears, an ear at each place. It is impossible to describe the general indignation and alarm that this atrocious sentence created. Sir Simmonds D'Ewes, who was himself a courtier, records in his memoirs that " men were affrighted to see that neither Pr3nine's academical nor his barrister's gown could save him from the infamous loss of his ears ; yet all good men generally conceived it would have been remitted, and many reported it was, till the sad and fatal execution of it in the mid- summer term. I went to visit him a while after in the Fleet, and to comfort him : and found in him the rare effects of an upright heart and a good conscience, by his serenity of spirit and cheerful patience." ^ There had been no sympathy for Prynne until this brutal sentence was passed, but the atrocity of the pun- ishment at once raised him to notoriety as a martyr. A public prosecution for a contemptible book, wildly raihng against the stage and the amusements of the people, might gratify Laud's malevolent feelings against the ^ Laud's Works, vol. vi. 234-5. ^ D'Ewes' Memoirs, vol. ii. 104-5. 120 ARCHBISHOP LAUD author, but it could answer no public purpose. There was no desire at that time among the Puritan party to interfere with the stage or other national amusements, which enlivened the monotony of life. Milton, who may fairly be taken as representing the Puritan feeling of the day, wrote pastorals for the stage and was an enthusiastic admirer of Shakespeare and Jonson. Then to the well trod stage anon If Jonson's learned sock be on, Or sweetest Shakespeare, fancy's child, Warble his native woodnotes wild.^ ^ Milton's I'Allegro, written in 1632. His epitaph on Shake- speare was written in 1630 and prefixed to the second foUo published in 1632. CHAPTER XV 1629 — 1632 PROSECUTION OF SHIRFIELD IT is wonderful how rapidly Laud's character had developed with his growing importance in the State. With the cessation of Parliaments he felt him- self free from all contradiction or control, and relying on the extraordinary favour of the King, he conducted himself with the arrogance of an upstart intoxicated with the irresponsible exercise of power. Even his colleagues on the Star Chamber bench, if they ventured to differ from his opinion, he treated with inconceivable insolence. One of the victims he ' had marked down for exemplary punishment was Mr. Shirfield, the Re- corder of Salisbury, who had made himself conspicuous ^ in the last Parliament by calling in question the pardons which had been granted to Manwaring and Montague. The offence now alleged against him was that acting under an order, passed at a vestry meeting attended by the vicar, the churchwardens and parishioners, he had without the sanction of the Bishop removed from a window in the parish church a painting representing the Creator in the garb of an old man with a pair of compasses in his hand. Fortunately for Shirfield, the Lord Keeper and the two Chief Justices were on the Bench, and expressed a very strong opinion upon the scandalous 1 Gardiner, vii. 49. 121 122 ARCHBISHOP LAUD nature of the picture, and interposed to save him from a degrading and preposterous sentence.^ Laud keenly resented this interference, and concluded his judgment by an attack upon lawyers in general, and the Lord Keeper Coventry in particular. " This much," he said, " let me say to Mr. Shirfield and such of his profession as slight the ecclesiastical laws and persons, that there was a time when Churchmen were as great in this kingdom as you, my Lord Keeper, are now, and let me be bold to prophesy there will be a time when you will be as low as the Church is now, if you go on thus to contemn the Church." 2 By the Church, Laud meant the ecclesiastical hierarchy of the bishops and clergy ; the laity being mere " hewers of wood and drawers of water " to supply the necessities of their clerical superiors. It was a favourite saying of his that " the Church had been low for these himdred years, but he hoped it would flourish again in another hundred." He seems to have entertained some vague idea of undoing the work of the great Reformation Parha- ment of Henry VHI, which a hundred years before had deprived the clergy of their exorbitant privileges and reduced them to the state of ordinary subjects.^ That he contemplated exempting the clergy from the jurisdiction, of the ordinary tribunals seems hardly probable, but he certainly aimed at making the spiritual Courts independent of all civil control. 1 Laud's sentence was a fine of ;^i,ooo, dismissal from the Recordship, and a public acknowledgment of his offence in the parish church and in the Cathedral. The sentence eventually passed by the Court was a fine of £s'^- (3 State Trials, 520.) ^ Laud's Works, vi. 20. ^ The benefit of clergy was abohshed by the 23 Henry VIII, c. 9, and the Canons passed by Convocation, when opposed to the laws of the realm, were declaxed invahd, 23 Henry VIII, c. 20. COURT OF HIGH COMMISSION 123 Of the Ecclesiastical Courts, the chief in power and importance was the Court of High Commission, which " was erected by a statute in the first year of Elizabeth instead of a larger power, which had been exercised under the Pope's authority, then abolished." ^ It was a Court of limited jurisdiction intended for the reforma- tion of manners ; and like all inferior Courts, as weU as the Court which it had superseded, was subject to the superintendence and control of the supreme Courts at Westminster. Clarendon tells us that the bishops who presided in this Court were very much given " to meddling with things which were not within their con- nusance," with the result that their proceedings were summarily stayed by writs of prohibition from the Com- mon Law Courts. That the bishops should be in any way subject to the lawyers and the law, was in Laud's eyes an indignity offered to the Church, and he was in the habit of "laying by the heels " the unfortunate parties and their attorneys, who had the temerity to affront him by presenting these prohibitions. He openly boasted that " he would break the back of prohibitions or that they should break his." In one of his sermons he de- clared " that God would prohibit the entrance into the kingdom of Heaven of all who granted prohibitions to the disturbance of the Church's right." " What," he said to Prynne, " does the King give us power and then are we prohibited^? Let us go and complain " ; and an order was sent from the King to the judges to issue no more prohibitions to the High Commission Court. But though the judges refused to surrender their powers of superintendence, the constant interference of the King with the exercise of their jurisdiction rendered the granting of these writs of prohibition such an unpleasant ^ Clarendon's Hist. iii. 357. 124 ARCHBISHOP LAUD duty that Chief Justice Richardson was candid enough to tell a suitor, who had applied to him for protection, that he durst not do him justice. In another case, where the High Commissioners had been threatened with a stay of their proceedings. Laud declared in open Court that " if the prohibition had been enforced, he would himself have denounced it in Paul's Church and the other churches of his diocese, and have excommunicated all the judges who had had a hand therein." ^ Another circumstance added greatly to the unpopu- larity of the Court. While Bishop of London, Laud had obtained an order from the King that all fines im- posed by the High Commission should be assigned to a fund, which he had started for the repair of St. Paul's Cathedral, and it was generally believed that in the imposition of the fines the interest of the fund, was more regarded than the nature of the offence. " Persons of honour and great quality were every day," says Claren- don, " cited before the Court upon the fame of their incontinence or other scandal in their lives, and the fines imposed were the more questioned because they were assigned to the rebuilding and repairing St. Paul's Church, and thought, therefore, to be the more severely imposed ; and sharpened many men's humours against the bishops before they had any ill intention towards the Church." In those happy days the morals of the laity were very closely watched, and the sins of the people were an un- failing source of revenue for the Church. There were ^ Court and Times of Charles I, vol. ii. 120. This was the case of Sir Giles Alington, who had married the niece of his first wife, and was sentenced to pay the enormous fine of 2,000, which was then handed over as a present to the Queen. ^ Clarendon's Hist. i. 196, ITS SENTENCES AND PROCEDURE 125 informers everywhere to bring to light the hidden sins of darkness, and few immorahties escaped Laud's ever watchful eyes. In one of his reports to the King he writes : " At Kestem dwells the wild young gentleman, Mr. South, concerning whom I have lately spoken and that often with your Majesty ; he hath committed a horrible incest with two sisters. I have called him into the High Commission against the next term, and I hope your Majesty will give me leave to make South blow west for St. Paul's. Upon this the King facetiously notes in the margin, " The south-west wynd is commonly the best, therefore I will not hinder the blowing that way. C.R." ^ And a profitable case it was for St. Paul's, for the wild young gentleman was fined £1,000, and ordered to do penance in the Cathedral of Lincoln, and in the parish Church of Kestem. Then follows, in the High Commission records, the following curious entry : " On defendant's petition it appeared that being a young gentleman and a bachelor, and standing at this time on his preferment in marriage, and that he would be much disgraced, and be in danger of being overthrown in marriage and estate if compelled to do public penance ; it was therefore ordered that the penance should be commuted to a pecuniary fine to be distributed in pious uses, and that he being a man of great estate in lands was well worthy to pay £1,500, but left the business to the further pleasure of the Archbishop of Canterbury." * For obtaining this mitigation of the sentence he had to pay Sir John Lamb, Dean of the Arches and a member of the High Commission Court, £2,000, and a further £200 to a corrupt scoundrel of the name of Kilvert, ' Laud'3 Works, v. 326. * Proceedings of High Commission. Cal. S.P.D. for 1635, P- 234. 12^ ARCHBISHOP LAUD who seems to have acted as an intermediary in the business.* The procedure of this iniquitous tribunal was even more oppressive than its arbitrary sentences. Men were arrested and dragged before the Court without knowing who was their accuser or what was the precise charge brought against them. This was called a pro- ceeding ore tenus, in which the accused was privately exam,ined, not only without knowing what he had to answer, but without the assistance of legal advice. If he was unwarily entrapped into making an admission, which could be tortured into a confession of guilt, he was at once brought before the Court and sentenced : ^ if he denied the charge altogether, the ex-officio oath, as it was styled, was tendered to him, and he was com- pelled to answer a number of interrogatories framed for the express purpose of making him incriminate him- self. If he refused to answer, he was committed to prison for contempt of Court, and the charge against him was taken pro confesso. This oath had been in- vented by Archbishop Whitgift in 1584 for the examina- tion of such of the clergy as were surmised to harbour a spirit of puritanical disaffection ; but the procedure was so repugnant to the rules of the common law and the principles of natural equity, that no species of eccles- iastical tyranny seems to have excited such general in- dignation. Lord Burleigh wrote to the Archbishop in * Proceedings of High Commission. Cal. S.P.D. for 1635, p. 110. ^ Mr. William Hudson, in his treatise on the practice of Star Chamber, writes : " Though the delinquent confesses suo modo, the same is strained against him to his great disadvantage, and many circumstances which are not confessed are urged against him," and this Mr. Hudson calls " an exuberancy of prerogative." (Hargraves' Collectanea Juridica, vol. ii. 126.) THE EX-OFFICIO OATH 127 strong terms of remonstrance against these articles of examination, as " so curiously penned, so full of branches and circumstances, as he thought the inquisition of Spain had not so many questions to comprehend and entrap their preys." ^ In the reign of James, upon a motion made by the Commons in Parliament, the Lords of the Council asked the judges (Popham and Coke) in what cases the Spiritual Courts might examine accused persons ex officio upon oath. They replied that no man, ecclesiastical or temporal, could be examined upon the secret thoughts of his heart, or his secret opinion, unless there was something objected against him which he had spoken or done. They further declared that no layman, except in matrimonial or testamentary cases, could under any circumstances be compelled to take the oath ex officio ^ ^ 1 Hallam's Const. Hist. i. 202. * Burn's Eccl. Law, vol. iii. pp. 14-15. CHAPTER XVI 1633 THE king's visit TO SCOTLAND TOWARDS the end of his London Episcopate Laud paid his second visit to Scotland. In his first visit ^ with King James in 1616 he had conceived the idea of forcing upon the Scotch Presbyterian Church the canons and Hturgy of the Church of England ; but James was too well acquainted with the feelings of his countrymen to entertain an insane project, which would have endangered the peace and security of his Crown. But these were considerations, which Laud's narrow mind was unable to appreciate or understand ; and he had now sufficient influence to persuade Charles to carry into execution his long cherished scheme for uniting the two kingdoms in one form of worship and ritual. Unfortunately Charles knew as little of Scotland as Laud himself. He had left it as a child of two years old and had never visited it since. But in May 1633 he proceeded on a royal progress to Edinburgh to be solemnly crowned in his northern kingdom ; and he took Laud with him as his adviser in effecting the contemplated changes in the government of the Church. He had every reason to be gratified with his reception. Nothing could exceed the loyalty and enthusiasm of the people in welcoming his return to his native country. His progress to Edinburgh was one continued triumph; and ^ Ante, page 24. CORONATION AT EDINBURGH 129 little did he think that in a visit so auspiciously begun he was sowing the seeds of his future troubles. The suspicions of the people — so jealous of any inter- ference with their religion — were first aroused by the novel ceremonial of the coronation. " The bishops," we are told, " were arrayed in blue silk-embroidered robes, which reached to the feet, over which were white rochets with lawn sleeves and loops of gold. An object of particular remark was the introduction of an altar with two chandeliers and two unlighted wax tapers and an empty silver basin. At the back of the altar there was a rich tapestry, on which a crucifix was embroidered, and the officiating bishops, as they passed it, were ob- served to bow the knee and beck (make obeisance) to the symbol of idolatry." ^ Laud acted as Master of the Ceremonies ; and " it was arranged that the two Archbishops should stand beside the King ; St. Andrews on the right hand, and Glasgow on the left ; but Glasgow, being a moderate Churchman, had neglected, with one or two other bishops, to procure the proper episcopal attire ; and he was rudely pushed by Laud from the King's side and the Bishop of Ross put in his place. " This might have passed off as attributable only to Laud's officiousness, but on the following Sunday the King attended the public service in St. Giles' church ; when two English chaplains in their surplices read the English service, and thereafter the Bishop of Moray went into the pulpit and preached a sermon also in his surplice, a thing which had never been seen in St. Giles' kirk since the Reformation, and people were really astounded." ^ Still greater offence was given ^ Aikman's Hist, of Scotland, vol. iii. p. 397. * Masson's Life of Milton, vol. i. 700. K I30 ARCHBISHOP LAUD by a sermon preached by Laud before the King in Holyrood chapel, denouncing the Scottish ser- vice, and urging a further conformity between the Churches of England and Scotland in their rites and ceremonies. These proceedings of Laud and the undue prominence given to the bishops in the gorgeous spectacle of the coronation, were regarded with extreme disfavour by the rigid Presbyterians. Though Episcopacy had been engrafted on the National Church, the bishops were bishops only in name with no episcopal authority. The Government of the Church remained with the General Assembly ; while the bishops merely presided as moderators in the Provincial synods. They had not even ventured to assume the ordinary episcopal dress ; and the first step taken by Laud in his contemplated reforms was to transfer from the General Assembly to the King " the ordering and regulation of ecclesiastical apparel." An Act to accomphsh this object was shortly after the coronation submitted to the Estates, where it provoked the strongest opposition. The leader of the opposition was John Leslie, Earl of Rothes, with whom went thirteen other peers and many lesser barons and burgesses. They wanted the Act explained, and asked his Majesty whether " he intended the surplice." To this question the King would give no answer, but he took a paper out of his pocket and said, " Gentlemen, I have all your names here, and I'll know who will do me service, and who not, this day." The dissentients then proposed to accept part of the Act only ; but as the King insisted on a direct ay or no to the Act as it stood, they voted no. Rothes and others claimed that the 'Noes had the majority ; but as the Clerk Register decided otherwise, they were obliged to yield, and the Act was THE ENGLISH LITURGY 131 passed and ratified by the King with the touch of his sceptre. ' But the opposition which the Act had encountered convinced the Scotch bishops that nothing would induce the people to consent to the radical change, which it was proposed to make in the organization of the Church by the introduction of the English liturgy. Laud, how- ever, was impatient of delay, and many discussions on the subject took place between him and the bishops in the presence of the King. " The Scots," said the bishops, " had long been jealous that by the " King's continued absence from them they would be reduced to be but a province of England and subject to English laws, which they would never submit to, nor would any man of honour, who loved the King best and respected England most, ever consent to bring that dishonour upon his country. If the English liturgy was offered to them, it would kindle and inflame that jealousy as the prologue and introduction to that design, and as the first rung of the ladder, which should serve to mount over all their customs and privileges, and be opposed and detested accordingly : whereas if his Majesty would give orders for the preparation of a special liturgy, with a few desirable alterations, it could easily be done ; and in the meantime they would so dispose the minds of the people for the reception of it, that they would even desire it." ^ These arguments prevailed with the King, and a select number of the bishops were commissioned to draw up in communication with Laud such a service book as would be acceptable to the people. To prepare the way for the more ready reception of 1 Masson's Life of Milton, vol. i. 700 ; Rushworth, ii. 183 ; Burnet's History of his own Times, vol. i. 38. ^ Clarendon's Hist. i. 177. 132 ARCHBISHOP LAUD this service book, which was to transfer the government of the Church from the General Assembly to an Episcopate appointed by the Crown, Laud persuaded Charles to rescue the bishops from the contempt in which they were held by admitting them to a share in the general administration of the country. " He really beheved," says Clarendon, " that nothing more contributed to the benefit and advantage of the Church than the promotion of Churchmen to offices of the greatest honour and trust in the State." ^ In pursuance of this view the Arch- bishop of St. Andrews was made Chancellor of the King- dom — an office which had never been held by Churchmen since the Reformation of religion — and five other bishops were made either members of the Privy Council or Judges of the Session ; "so that by their power in the civil government and in the Courts of Judicature they might be the more reverenced and better enabled to settle the affairs of the Church. But this unreasonable accumu- lation of so many honours upon them, to which their functions did not entitle them, exposed them to the uni- versal envy of the whole nobility, who could not endure to see them possessed of those offices and employments, which they looked upon as naturally belonging to them- selves ; so that this investment of the bishops with civil offices, instead of bringing an advantage to the Church, produced a more general impression against it." ^ It would have been well for the bishops if they had been allowed to remain in their recognized obscurity. Their undue exaltation provoked the resentment, not only of the nobility, but of every class of the community. The lawyers objected to seeing the prizes of their pro- fession given to Churchmen ignorant of the laws and practice of the Courts, while the Prestyterian clergy 1 Clarendon's Hist. i. i8i. ^ Ibid. 183-4. THE SCOTCH BISHOPS 133 and the laity equally objected to men, who were obnox- ious from their office, being entrusted with jurisdiction in secular affairs. The King, however, in happy ignorance of the discontent he had created, returned to London after a two months' sojourn in his northern kingdom, with the full determination of completing his contem- plated reforms. CHAPTER XVII 1633— 1635 ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY A FEW days after the King's return from Scotland the Archbishop of Canterbury died, and Laud, who was then at Greenwich in attendance upon the Court, was immediately promoted to the vacant See. At the same time he received a remarkable offer from a strange and unlooked for quarter. " That very morning," he notes in his diary, " there came one to me seriously, and that avowed ability to perform it, and offered me to be a cardinal." ^ Such a proposal could only have been made to a man, who was known to be favourably inclined to the discipline and doctrines of the Roman Church, and was in itself an Act of High Treason under a statute of Elizabeth ; ^ for the acceptance of a car- dinal's hat necessarily involved the admission of the Pope's supremacy. A Protestant archbishop would have" resented the offer as a treasonable reflection on his loyalty to the Reformed Church of which he was the head ; but Laud certainly did not look upon the proposal in this light ; and if his first answer had not been an undecided one, the offer would not have been repeated, as he tells us it was, a fortnight later.' In the meantime he had consulted the King, who pointed 1 Diary, August 4, 1633. ^ 23 Eliz. cap. i. ' Diary, August 17, 1633. 134 THE POLICY OF THOROUGH 135 out the danger he had incurred in Hstening to such a treasonable proposal ; ^ but even then he did not abso- lutely reject the offer, but merely replied, that " some- thing dwelt within him which would not suffer that till Rome was other than it was." Like a wise man he had no intention of going over to Rome until matters were so arranged that he could take the Church and its emoluments with him. He had now attained the summit of his ambition, and for seven years he revelled in the exercise of an absolutely uncontrolled power over the clergy and the laity alike. To Wentworth, who had written to congra- tulate him on his translation to Canterbury, he writes : " I must desire your Lordship not to expect more at my hands than I shall be able to perform in Church and State. For as for the Church, it is so bound up in the forms of the Common Law, that it is not possible for me or for any man to do that good which he would and is bound to do. For your Lordship sees, no man clearer, that they who have gotten so much power in and over the Church will not let go their hold. And for the State I am for " thorough," but I see that both thick and thin stays somebody,^ where I conceive it should not, and it is impossible for me to go " thorough " alone. And in truth I speak seriously, I have had a heaviness hang upon me ever since I was nominated to this place, and I can give myself no account of it, unless it proceed from an apprehension that there is more expected from me than the craziness of these times will give me leave to do." ^ "^Howsoever, I am resolved to go on steadily in the way which you have formerly seen me go, so that if anything fails of my hearty desire * Laud's Works, iv. 331-2. 2 xhe King. ' Laud to Wentworth, September 9, 1633, Works, vi. 310. 136 ARCHBISHOP LAUD for the King and the Church's service, the fault shall not be mine." ^ To this Went worth ^ replies : "I know no reason but you may as well rule the Common Lawyers in England as I, poor Beagle, do here ; and yet that I do and will do, in all that concerns my master's service, upon the peril of my head. I am confident that the King, being pleased to set himself in the business, is able by his wis- dom and ministers to carry any just and honourable action through all imaginary opposition, for real there can be none ; that to start aside for such panic fears as a Prynne or an Eliot shall set up were the meanest folly in the world." ^ In this correspondence the pohcy which the two confederates were to pursue is clearly indi- cated. " Thorough " was to be the rule both in Church and State ; and as " thorough " was a somewhat ugly excrescence on the law, the lawyers were to be silenced, even at the peril of their heads, said Wentworth, with dim forebodings of the future. The policy of " thorough " in the Church was not inaptly described by Lord Falkland, himself a devoted Royalist and Churchman, as an attempt " to bring in an English, though not a Roman Papacy, but equally absolute, to make the laity dependent on the clergy, and the clergy upon themselves." All authority was centred in the bishops, and the laity, equally with the clergy, were placed under their fatherly control. They held Courts in their own names for the examination and punishment of offenders, and the ministers and church- wardens of every parish were required to submit to them a yearly report of the conduct of their parishioners. ^ Laud to Wentworth, September 9, 1633. Works, vi, 330. ^ Wentworth was then Lord Deputy of Ireland. ^ Strafford's Letters, vol. i. 173. VISITATION ARTICLES 137 The particular subjects calling for information were specified in the Bishops' " Articles of Visitation," issued in the form of interrogatories, which both the ministers and churchwardens, as official informers, were required to answer. These visitation articles, as they were called, embraced all the concerns of parochial life and enumerated in detail the omissions and commissions of the laity, which were to be reported to the Bishop as breaches of Church discipline. The system involved a detailed inquiry into the private conduct of every man in the parish. The churchwardens reported on the short- comings of the minister, and the minister on the delin- quencies of the churchwardens, and both the ministers and churchwardens were required to return the names of all persons, who had either committed any offence or who were vehemently suspected or defamed of having committed any offence, against the canons or discipline of the Church, as laid down in the Bishops' Articles of Visitation. Special information was required regarding the schoolmasters, for the control of education was then, as now, the cherished aim of clerical rule. A few extracts from Laud's Visitation Articles will convey some idea of the close supervision exercised by the clergy over the political and religious opinions, the private conversations and the morals of their parishioners. " Did any speak against the rites and ceremonies of the Church or impugn the government thereof by bishops, deans, archdeacons and the rest that bear office in the same ; or hold or frequent conventicles, or resort to barns and fields, or woods, or private houses, or any ordinary exposition of scriptures or conferences ? did any read or deliver to others books tending to Popery, Puritanism, or any other heresy against the true Religion and Catholic Doctrine now professed in the Church ? " 138 ARCHBISHOP LAUD Attention was to be specially directed to the attendance and behaviour of the people at divine service. " Did they reverently kneel during the prayers and stand up when the Articlas of belief were read ? did they bow at the name of Jesus and kneel when receiving the sacrament, and did the churchwardens diligently search who absented themselves from the Church, or went to hear other preachers ? " With regard to the morals of the people, the minister was enjoined to present " all, who to his knowledge or by common fame and report had committed adultery, fornication or incest, or who by common fame or report were reported to be drunkards, common and usual swearers, railers, sowers of discord among their neighbours,or usurers or simoniacal persons." Then follows an article regarding the Churching of women : " Were they on such occasions apparelled with a fair white veil and did any minister wink at such fan- tastical women who refuse so to do ? " And as the disci- pline of the Church was enforced by excommunication, the churchwardens were required " to provide at the expense of the parish a convenient large sheet and a white wand to be used at such times as offenders were censured for their grievous and notorious crimes." ^ Nothing perhaps contributed more to the general hatred of the bishops and their spiritual Courts than these inquisitorial inquiries, which encouraged the malicious to get up false accusations against their neigh- bours, and fostered everywhere quarrels, disputes and litigation. No one was safe where common fame and report were accounted evidence, and the presentment of a minister or churchwarden was accepted as prima facie proof of an offence. Obedience to these spiritual 1 These few extracts are taken from Laud's Visitation Articles. Works, V. 399-452. CLERICAL INQUISITION 139 tribunals was enforced by excommunication, which en- tailed very serious consequences. Forty days after sentence an excommunicated person was liable to be arrested without bail under a writ from the Court of Chancery, and thrown into prison, until in the garb of a penitent, with a white sheet around him and a white wand in his hand, he humbly admitted, in the presence of the assembled congregation, the heinousness of his offence and obtained the absolution of the Church. Rich and poor were alike exposed to this degrading spectacle, with this difference, however, that in the case of the rich a money payment was accepted in commutation of the penance to the great profit of the Church, the fines being devoted to the " pious uses " of the clergy when not appropriated by the Church officials for themselves.^ We need not suppose that the clergy in the reign of Charles were either better or worse than the State clergy in all places and in all times. Clarendon speaks of them in language with which we are tolerably familiar in our own days ; that " they understood the least and took the worst measure of human affairs of all mankind that could read or write." ^ It is not therefore difficult to imagine the indignation of the landed proprietors in the counties, and the educated laity in the towns, in having their conduct, their morals, even their private conversations and opinions subjected to this clerical inquisition. The clergyman of the parish," to quote Dr. Gardiner, " now found himself exalted to a dignity to which he had been unaccustomed. He was the guar- 1 The misappropriation of the fines was by no means un- common, and in the Convocation of 1640 a special canon (No. 14) was framed against Chancellor's Commissaries and other officials who received these Commutation fines, and did not account for them to the bishop. ^ Clarendon's Life, i. 69. HO ARCHBISHOP LAUD dian of the morals of his parish, whose business it was to enforce ecclesiastical rules on the laity, to see that they did not eat meat in Lent or send their carts across the churchyard. In any difference between the clergy- man and the squire the clergyman knew that he was certain of a favourable hearing from the Archbishop, and that there would be a presumption at Whitehall that he was in the right and his opponent in the wrong. When the Government needed information upon which it could depend, it was increasingly in the habit of apply- ing to the bishop or the rector, and of framing its action in conformity with the information it thus obtained. The country gentlemen had long been made to feel that they were overshadowed by the officers of the Crown. They were now made to feel that they were overshadowed by the incumbents of their own parishes." ^ But while subjecting the laity to the surveillance of the clergy, Laud was fully resolved that the clergy should be altogether independent of any lay control. It had long been the custom of the people, particularly in the market towns, to engage at their own charge preachers or lecturers to supplement the services in the parish church. Their duty appears to have been to preach on the Sunday afternoons and in the mornings on market days. To preaching they devoted their lives without seeking to obtain lucrative preferments in the Church. As citizens of the State their conduct was without re- proach, for such bitter partisans as Heylin never ven- tured to call in question the purity or devotion of their lives. What was more, they worked in harmony with the parochial clergy, and during the long primacy of Abbot, until the ascendency of Laud, they were regarded with favour and encouragement by the rulers of the ^ Gardiner's Hist. viii. 122. SUPPRESSION OF LECTURERS 141 Church. In every sense they were the popular clergy ; they were selected by the people and paid by the people, and were the faithful exponents of that evangelical faith, which had so strong a hold upon the freeholders in the country and the middle and lower classes in the towns. Laud naturally regarded them with an evil eye, because they were, he said, " by reason of their pay the people's creatures and blew the bellows of their sedition." ^ For the suppression of these popular preachers he had drawn out in the King's name a body of instructions, which all bishops were required to observe in their re- spective dioceses. On the Sunday afternoons no sermons were to be allowed, and the lecturer was required to confine his attention to catechising the children, instead of preaching for the edification of his congregation. In the market towns the people were no longer allowed to select their own preachers ; if lectures were required, they were to be given by a company of grave and orthodox divines near adjoining and of the same diocese ; and in the case of lectureships supported by public bodies or corporations, no lecturer was allowed to preach unless he held a benefice or cure within the diocese, or was prepared to accept one, and so place himself under the full jurisdiction of the bishop. As a further check upon these troublesome preachers of the Gospel, the Bishops were required to adopt a system of espionage, " using means by some of the clergy or others to have knowledge how both lecturers and preachers within their several dioceses behave themselves in their sermons, that so they may take present order for any abuse accordingly." ^ ^ Laud's considerations for the better government of the Church. Rushworth, vol. ii. p. 7. ^ The King's instructions, January 19, 1634. Laud's Wovhs, V. 311. 142 ARCHBISHOP LAUD To ensure the observance of these instructions each bishop had to submit a yearly account of the administra- tion of his diocese to the Archbishop, who then prepared for the information and orders of the King a general report for the whole province. Laud's first report as Archbishop was almost entirely occupied with the steps he had taken or proposed to take for the suppression of these hated lecturers. A London merchant, he tells the King, had left a sum of money to the Mercers' Company for the endowment of a lectureship at Huntingdon, vesting in the Company the appointment and the dismissal of the lecturer if he failed to give satis- faction to the people. And this, says Laud, was to be done " without any relation to Bishop or Archbishop ; and my most humble suit to your Majesty is that no layman whatsoever, and least of all Companies or Corpora- tions, may, under any pretence of giving to the Church or otherwise, have power to put in or put out any lecturer or other minister." And the King, whose education in spelling had been somewhat neglected, notes in the mar- gin : " Certainlie I cannot hould fitt that any lay person or Corporation whatsoever shall have the power these men would take to themselves. For I will have no Freest have anie necessitie for a lay dependence. Where- fore I command you to show me the way to overthrow this, and to hinder the performance in tyme of all such intentions. C.R." ' For a similar reason Laud was equally opposed to the employment of the clergy as chaplains in the houses of the landed gentry ; and while Bishop of London he had obtained an order from the King that no one under the rank of a nobleman should be allowed to keep a ' Laud's Annual Report for 1633. Works, v. 321. SUPPRESSION OF LECTURERS 143 chaplain, either for the rehgious instruction of his house- hold or the education of his children. Why this illo- gical distinction was made between a commoner and a peer was not explained, and " the country gentlemen," says Heylin, " took it ill to be deprived of a liberty from which they had not been debarred by the law of the land." ^ Nor were they left in peace when their chaplains were dismissed, and schoolmasters substituted in their place. Laud's eye was still upon them, and he reports to the King, that " some knights and esquires keep school- masters in their houses, or scholars to converse with, or diet the vicar, where his maintenance is little ; and this, they say, is not to keep a chaplain, which your Majesty's instructions forbid. Yet most of these read or say service in their houses, which is the office of a chaplain, but they read not the prayers of the Church according to the liturgy established. The Bishop of the diocese craves direction in this. And I think it very necessary that the bishops proceed strictly, and keep all such that they read or say no prayers but those which are allowed and established by the Church in the Book of Common Prayer." ^ Upon which the King notes in the margin, "It is very necessary that the bishops ob- serve this that you mention strictlie. C.R." ; and so not only the public worship but family prayers were brought under the control of the all-pervading Bishop. But while the suppression of the chaplains affected only the great landholders of the country, the suppression of the lectures touched the religious Puritans of the market towns in their most sensitive point. They had been content to go to their parish churches on the Sunday mornings, and had no desire to separate themselves from the communion of the Church, for the earnest -minded ' Heylin, 190. ^ Laud's Works, v. 368. 144 ARCHBISHOP LAUD preacher, who occupied the pulpit in the afternoons, supphed them with all the religious instruction they needed for the guidance of their lives ; and when his voice was silenced, they drifted into dissent. As for the perse- cuted preachers, the greater part of them sought an asylum in the wilds of New England, where they were followed by hundreds of their congregations. In one respect Laud's reports to the King speak volumes in these preachers' favour. In no single instance were they silenced on account of any irregularity in their lives ; the only charge brought against them was their refusal to accept the new standard of orthodoxy which had been introduced into the Church. Two typical cases, which Laud specially selected for the King's infor- mation, will convey some idea of the episcopal tyranny under which the country groaned. The Rev. John Workman was a lecturer and the in- cumbent of St. Stephen's church in the city of Gloucester. In one of his sermons he had asserted that ornaments and pictures in churches tended to idolatry. It was an opinion which he was entitled to express, for the authorized homilies of the Church had said pretty much the same. For this sermon he was brought before the High Commission, and excommunicated and imprisoned. He had been for fifteen years the minister of St. Stephen's, and the city of Gloucester, in consideration of his piety and the faithful discharge of his duties, granted him an annuity of £20 for his support. For this act of charity the Mayor and several of the Aldermen were cited before the Privy Council, and fined and the annuity stopped. To support himself, when released from prison. Workman set up a smaU school, which Laud ordered to be closed. He then started as a physician, but Laud prohibited him from practising. The unfortunate man, deprived of all SUPPRESSION OF LECTURERS 145 means of gaining a livelihood, then left Gloucester and found a refuge with a friend in Herefordshire. But even here he was not left unmolested. In his report for 1638 Laud informs the King that " this Mr. Workman, who for inconformity in a very high degree had been put from his place by sentence of the High Commission Court, had been received into the house of Mr. Kyrle, of Wallford, and lived there without any cure or other known employ- ment. The Bishop hearing of him, and resolving to call him in question if he did not conform himself ; he hath suddenly left that diocese, and is gone, God knows whither " ; ^ and this is the last we hear of the Rev. John Workman. It must be remembered that these persecuted lecturers were all ordained ministers of the Church of England, and belonged to the same class of society as the beneficed clergy. Many of them had held distinguished positions in their Universities, and were equal in point of learning to the best divines of the day. Their offence consisted in their rigid adherence to the Protestantism of the Reformation, and in their opposition to the innovations which Laud was introducing into the ceremonial worship of the Church. The case of the Rev. Samuel Ward is the next case to which the King's attention was specially directed. He was a Cambridge man and a scholar of St. John's, and was afterwards selected as one of the first Fellows of Sydney Sussex College. This was in 1599, when the teaching of the University was distinctly Protestant. In 1603 he was appointed by the corpora- tion of Ipswich to be their town lecturer ; and by his earnestness and sincerity, as well as by his excellency as a preacher, he soon acquired immense influence, and became a recognized ecclesiastical leader in that part of ^ Laud's Works, v. 357. L 146 ARCHBISHOP LAUD England, always distinguished for its attachment to Protestantism. Such a man was not likely to remain long unmolested under Laud's vigorous rule. The High Commission had their spies everywhere, and at Ipswich there was one Henry Dade, a commissary of the Arch- deacon of Suffolk, who wrote privately to Laud to inform him of the approaching departure of a large body of Puritan emigrants from that town to New England, owing to their dissatisfaction with the State of religion. This, he said, had been caused by one of their breeders, Mr. Ward, of Ipswich, who by preaching against the contents of the Prayer Book and religious innovations had caused this giddiness. He added that he had pre- pared articles to be preferred against Ward in the High Commission, but that he was unwilling to bear the brunt of the prosecution alone, as Ward had adherents of great influence both in London and at Ipswich.^ Laud was not the man to miss the opportunity of crushing such a prominent and influential preacher ; and Ward was promptly brought before the High Com- mission. He was not charged with committing any offence against the Canon law or the rubrics of the Prayer Book, for " he accepted the Prayer Book as it stood and was thoroughly loyal to the institutions of his country in Church and State." ^ His simple offence was that he had expressed in his sermons opinions showing dis- satisfaction with the worship which was being imposed upon the Church. One of his sayings, " that religion stood on tiptoe ready to be gone," had given particular offence. " True, " he said, " I used those words, but 1 expressly referred to George Herbert's lines : 1 Dade to Laud, February 4, 1634. Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, 1633-4, p. 450. ^ Gardiner's Hist. viii. 118. SUPPRESSION OF LECTURERS 147 Religion stands on tiptoe in our land, Ready to pass to th' American strand ; ^ and I added that I did not take such a gloomy view, nor feared an imminent departure of the Gospel." But words which were allowable in an orthodox poet were heresy when uttered by a preacher ; and Ward was deprived of his lectureship and suspended from the execution of his ministerial functions both at Ipswich and elsewhere. He was further required to sign a humble submission admitting the scandalous nature of his opinions, and the justice of the sentence, and as he naturally refused to make any such admission, he was summarily committed to prison. When and on what terms he was released is not known. He was sentenced in 1634, and he was still in jail in February 1637, lor in his annual report of that date Laud informs the King " that Ward, who stands censured in the High Commission, obeys not ; and though the Bishop of the diocese was ready to have allowed the people of Ipswich another lecturer, they had resolved to have Mr. Ward or none, and that in despite of the censure of the Court." ^ The silenced preacher appears to have died in 1640, and his congregation, in recognition of his sufferings, continued to his widow and his eldest son for their lives the payment of ;£ioo a year, which they had been accustomed to make to him.^ * This quotation is from George Herbert's poem, " The Church Militant." ^ Laud's Works, v. 340. ^ Preface to the Calendar of State Papers Domestic for 1635-6. CHAPTER XVIII 1633— 1635 INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE MR. GREEN, in his History of the English People, remarks : " No greater change ever passed over a nation than passed over England during the years which parted the middle of the reign of Elizabeth from the meeting of the Long Parliament. England became the people of a book, and that book was the Bible. It was as yet the one English book which was familiar to every Englishman ; it was read at churches and was read at home : and everywhere its words as they fell on ears, which custom had not deadened to their force and beauty, kindled a startling enthusiasm. ... A new moral impulse spread through every class." ^ Every word in the sacred Book was accepted as inspired, whether in the Old Testament or the New. The Ten Command- ments delivered by Moses to the Jews were affixed to the walls of every church, and were held as binding upon the conscience as the Sermon on the Mount. It was a religious and not a critical age, and by a curious perver- sity the observances, which Moses had prescribed for the seventh day, were regarded as equally applicable to the first day, of the week ; and the rigid observance of Sunday became a distinctive mark of English Protes- tantism. There was no point upon which the national ' Green's History of the English People, vol. iii. p. 9. 148 BOOK OF SPORTS 149 conscience was more tender. But in Court circles laxer views prevailed ; ^ and James towards the end of his reign ^ had issued a declaration expressing his pleasure " that his good people after Divine service on Sunday, should not be disturbed or discouraged from any lawful recreations, such as dancing, leaping, vaulting or such other harmless amusements as May games, Whitsun ales, Morrice dances, and the setting up of May-poles and other sports therewith used." ^ This pious declaration was ordered to be read in the parish churches, but such an outcry was raised by the clergy that James thought it prudent to withdraw the order.* But neither prudence nor respect for the religious convictions of a nation found a place in Laud's adminis- tration ; and one of his first acts as Archbishop was to reissue in the King's name his father's declaration for Sunday sports, with an express command to the bishops to see that it was published in the parish churches.^ Herein lay the sting of the declaration ; and a large number of the Protestant clergy refused to read it, on the ground that they would be no parties to the profanation of the Sabbath by promulgating a licence for Sunday festivities. But little consideration was paid to these religious scruples. A refusal to read the Declaration was treated as an act of canonical disobedience, and ^ Sunday was the day on which the Privy Council met for the transaction of business ; and there are numerous entries in Laud's diary of his attendance at these Sunday meetings of the Privy Council. See also Gardiner, i. 173-82. ^ May 24, 161 8. ^ Rushworth, ii. 193. * Gardiner, iii. 252. ® Laud to the Bishops, October 28, 1633. Works, vi. 329. Laud had shortly before been much provoked by an order made at the Somerset Assizes by Chief Justice Richardson at the request of the County Justices for suppressing Sunday feasts or wakes, which had led to much disorder and drunkenness. I50 ARCHBISHOP LAUD when a clergyman pleaded before the High Commission that there could be no canonical disobedience to an executive order of the king, which was not enjoined by any canon or rubric of the Church, Laud promptly ordered that " the answer shoidd not be accepted until such unfit matters were expunged," and the unfortunate man was excommunicated and deprived of his benefice.^ Similar high-handed measures were adopted in other dioceses. The notorious Bishop Wren, of Norwich, writes to Laud : "At my recent visitation I find upon inquiry that His i\Iajesty's Declaration for lawful sports had not been published in very many places; and having about sixty books * in hand, I caused them to be proposed to such persons as I had most doubt of, but many refused to publish the same and were suspended for their refusal ; yet divers of them presently promised conformity, and so were absolved : so that now in the whole diocese there are not more than thirty excommunicated or sus- pended.^ Upon which Laud writes to the King : " If this account given by my Lord of Norwich be true, as I believe it is, he hath deserved well of the Church, and hath been very ill rewarded for it. His humble suit to your Majesty is, that you will be graciously pleased in your own good time to hear the complaints which have been made against him, that he may not be overborne for doing service." * Similar proceedings to those of Bishop Wren were taken in other dioceses, with the result that 430 ' clergy- men, who had committed no ofience known to the law, 1 Snelling's case. Rushworth, ii. 459-61. 2 The Declaration was published in the form of a booklet of 19 pages : hence the name " Book of Sports." 3 Rushworth, ii. 461. * Laud's report to the King for 1636. Works, v. 341. ^ Benson's Sketch of Laud, p. 103. INTRODUCTION OF ALTARS 151 were deprived of their livings and reduced to poverty. An ordinary layman might have a difficulty in tracing the relation between Church conformity and Sunday sports, and we are indebted to an Oxford Professor of Divinity for our enlightenment of the subject. " A whole Church halo," he writes, " gathers round the ecclesiastical Sunday : it represents the Church system and round of fast and festival, and typifies the high chastised spiritual joy of Catholicism. There is a spirit in the Church Sunday that particularly harmonizes with Church feeling. The consecration of joy by Church sanctions, Church times and seasons, and the being under obligation, as it were, to the Church for your mirth is a true part of Cathohc feeling, and particularly not of Puritan." ^ After the publication of the Book of Sports, the country was next startled by the great ceremonial innovation, with which Laud's name will always be associated, the revival of altar worship in the Church. " The altar," he said, " was the greatest place of God's residence on earth. I say the greatest, yea, greater than the pulpit, for there 'tis. This is my body ; but in the pulpit, 'tis, at most. This is my word. And a greater reverence is no doubt due to the body than to the word of the Lord." ^ Now the one distinctive feature of the English Reforma- tion was the abolition of altars. They had been removed from the churches, first by Edward and afterwards by Elizabeth, and Communion tables had been substituted in their place ; and neither in the revised Prayer Book of Edward VI, nor in that of Elizabeth, nor as a matter of fact in our present Prayer Book, does the word altar occur. The position of the table was fixed by the rubric ^ Mozley's Essay on Laud. Essays, vol. i. 173. ' Laud's Works, vi. 87. 152 ARCHBISHOP LAUD " The table having at the Communion time a fair white linen cloth upon it, shall stand in the body of the church, or the chancel, where Morning Prayer is appointed to be read." And in this position it stood in all the parish churches. The significance of substituting a table for an altar was obvious. No one was likely to pay to a table stand- ing in the middle of the chancel the same superstitious reverence which had been paid to an altar, which repre- sented, if I may without impiety use Laud's expression, " the Divine residence on earth." The nakedness of the table therefore had to be covered and its position altered. It was to be disguised to bear some outward resemblance to an altar, and it was to be placed where the altar formerly stood. In his own chapel at Lambeth, Laud set an example of what he wished to be followed in all churches. The table was removed from the chancel and placed altar- wise under the east waU. It was fenced with a rail and covered with an altar cloth, and " shadowed overhead with a fair frieze of curious workmanship." ^ It does not appear that either cruci- fixes or candlesticks were placed upon the table, but all persons were required on entering or leaving the chapel to make obeisances to it. A general order was then issued that similar arrangements should be made in all the parish churches. The table was to be placed altar- wise under the east wall, covered " with a carpet of silk or some other decent stuff " : any further adornment being apparently left to the caprice of the minister. " The principal colleges at Oxford," says Heylin, " readily followed the example of their Lord and Chancellor, and transposed their tables, fenced them with rails, and fur- nished them with Hangings, Palls, Plate and all other 1 Heylin, p, 277. THE ALTAR CONTROVERSY 153 necessaries." * But in the towns and country villages the removal of the tables from their accustomed place called forth the most determined opposition. " People," says Clarendon, " murmured at the very charge and expense involved in the change ; and if the minister was not a man of discretion — as too frequently he was not — it begat suits and appeals at law, and brought the power and jurisdiction to impose the doing of it to be called in question, contradicted and opposed. Then the manner and gesture and posture in the celebration of the service brought in new disputes and administered new subjects of offence, and those disputes brought in new words and terms, altar and adoration and genuflexion and other expressions for the more perspicuous carrying on these disputations. New books were written for and against this new practice with the same earnestness and con- tention for victory, as if the life of Christianity had been at stake. And without doubt many who loved the established government of the Church and the exercise of religion as it was used, desired not any change in either, and liked not any novelties, and so were liable to entertain jealousies that more was intended than was hitherto proposed." ^ Short work was made, however, of open opposition. The churchwardens of Beckington among others refused to carry out the order, and were promptly excommuni- cated by the Bishop. The parishioners appealed on their behalf to the Archbishop. Laud indignantly rejected the appeal, and threatened to bring the petitioners before the High Commission, and to lay the lawyer, who had drawn the petition, by the heels. The excommunicated churchwardens were then consigned to the common gaol for contempt, and were only released after a year's im- 1 Heylin, p. 277. ? Clarendon's Hist. i. 199-202. 154 ARCHBISHOP LAUD prisonment upon humbly acknowledging in penitential garb, in a form prescribed by the Bishop, that " they had grievously offended the Divine Majesty of Almighty God and the laws ecclesiastical of the realm, in refusing to remove the Communion table and place it under the east wall of the chancel." In other dioceses opposition was crushed in a similar manner, and the unsparing sever- ity with which the recalcitrant ministers and church- wardens were dealt with, had, says Heylin, a most bene- cial effect in inducing the people generally to accept the orders of the bishops. But though opposition was silenced in the Churches, the conduct of the bishops was violently assailed in the Press ; and three pamphleteers ^ were brought before the Star Chamber for libelling the bishops in charging them with making unauthorized innovations in the Church. Laud's speech on the occasion was an elaborate vindica- tion of himself and his episcopal brethren. His authority for the removal of the Communion tables, he explained to his lay colleagues on the Bench, was an Injunction of Queen Elizabeth, "so plain," he said, " that it admitted of no shift. Mark the words. The Holy Table in every church shall be decently made and set in the place where the altar stood " — the rest of the sentence he suppressed — " saving when the Communion of the Sacrament is to be distributed, at which time the same shall be so placed in good sort within the chancel, whereby the minister may be more conveniently heard of the communicants in his prayers and ministrations." What the Injunction con- templated was a table to be moved from one place to another at the time of ministration, not an altar perma- nently affixed to the east wall and surrounded with rails. But misleading the judges by a garbled quotation 1 Bastwick, Burton and Prynne, THE ALTAR CONTROVERSY 155 was only a small part of his dishonesty. The Injunctions themselves were obsolete, and he knew them to be so. They had been drawn up in 1559 for the guidance of the Commissioners who had been appointed to make an ecclesiastical visitation of the churches pending the revision of the Prayer Book and the final settlement of religion. They were merely temporary Injunctions issued for a special purpose, and when that purpose was accom- plished their operation ceased. No one knew this better than Laud, for we find from his letters that a short time previously he had discussed the effect of these Injunc- tions both with the Secretary of State and Bishop Wil- liams. To the latter he writes : " Concerning the Injunc- tions of the Queen, I doubt they are hardly of a binding force. Most of the best of them are received in the canons, though I confess there are some of them omitted of very good consequence : for which omission I never could receive any satisfactory answer of any of the bishops who were then of the Convocation House ; yet perhaps the omission is compensated by the passing by of some others not so fit for a revival, and which had special reference to those times." ^ After dealing with the objections to the removal of the Communion table, he proceeded to defend with con- siderable warmth the bowings and prostrations which he had directed to be made to it in its altered position. " One thing," he says, " sticks much in their stomachs, and they call it an innovation too, and that is bowing or doing reverence at our first coming into church or at our nearer approaches to the Holy Table or Altar, call it whether you will,^ in which they will needs have it ^ Letter to Bishop of Lincoln, July 17, 1635. Works, vi. 430. 2 This is a good specimen of Laud's evasive style of argument. The whole controversy turned upon the name. The rubric of 156 ARCHBISHOP LAUD we worship the Holy Table or God knows what." He then proceeded to give instances of what he called ' ' bodily worship," of Moses who " did reverence at the very door of the Tabernacle ; of David, who " called upon the people with a Venite ; O come let us worship and fall down " ; and after referring to these worthies of the olden time, he modestly tells the judges what he did himself. " For my own part, I take myself bound to worship with body as well as in soul, whenever I come where God is worshipped. . . . But nowadays," he adds in lan- guage forcible but a trifle coarse, " 'tis superstition for a man to come with more reverence into a church than a tinker with his bitch into an alehouse. The comparison is too homely, but my just indignation at the prof aneness of the times makes me speak. And you, my honourable Lords of the Garter" — addressing the members of the Court that belonged to that distinguished order — " in your great solemnities, do your reverence and to Almighty God, I doubt not, but yet it is towards His altar, as the greatest place of God's residence on earth. . . . And I hope a poor priest may worship God with as lowly rev- erence as you do, since you are bound by your order and your oath, according to a constitution of Henry the Fifth, to give due honour and reverence to God " and to His altar," for there is a reverence due to that too, though such as comes far short of Divine worship.^ And this was the only precedent he could produce for enforcing a practice which was neither sanctioned nor required by any canon or rubric of the Church. the Prayer Book used the distinctive term Table, which he changed into Altar, a word of a very different significance. 1 Works, vi. 56-8. CHAPTER XIX 1633— 1635 PURITAN EMIGRATION HE natural result of this prelatical government -L on the nation was the great rise of dissent. Every day the religious Puritan saw his favourite ministers excommunicated and deprived, and the Protestant ser- vices in the Church assimilated nearer and nearer to the Roman model, while he was not permitted even in the privacy of his home to join with his brethren in the exercise of religious communion and worship. By an order of Laud's, issued in the name of the High Com- mission, " all Justices and other Officers of the Peace were required to enter any house, where the people met for the exercise of religion, and to search the rooms for unlicensed books and to bring both the persons and the books before the High Commission." ^ With their worship proscribed and their ministers silenced, large bodies of Puritans now sold their pos- sessions, and abandoned their homes and their trades, and sought in the wilds of New England a refuge from the fury of their oppressors. " And these inoffensive and loyal subjects of the Crown," said I*ym, in the quaint language of the day, " were exiles from the kingdom, not as Elimeleck, to seek for bread in foreign countries by 1 Order dated Lambeth, April i, 1634. Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, 1633-4, p. 538. 167 158 ARCHBISHOP LAUD reason of the great scarcity which was in Israel, but travelhng abroad for the bread of life, because they could not have it at home by reason of the spiritual famine of God's word, caused by this man and his par- takers : and by this means you have had the trade, the manufactory, the industry of many thousands of his Majesty's subjects carried out of the land." ^ It was au epoch-making exodus. Whole congregations, with their venerated and proscribed pastors at their head, many of them in the decline of life, bodily transporting them- selves, with their wives and children, to a foreign settle- ment 3,000 miles from their homes, enduring unexampled hardships and afflictions, not for the sake of gain, but to keep their conscience pure and undefiled before God. As persecution grew hotter the number of emigrants rapidly increased, and before the Long Parliament met " 298 weak and crazy vessels had crossed the Atlantic in safety, and 21,000 Englishmen had found a refuge in the West." ^ The settlement of these Puritan colonists in America powerfully reacted on their brethren at home. Not only had they found an escape from episcopal tyranny, but they had been blessed with every sign of outward prosperity ; " they had raised forts for their protection, built towns for their habitation, brought land into culti- vation for their support, and so disposed and enriched themselves that no man, whose eyes were not blinded by malice, could fail to see that the finger of God had guided and protected them." ^ A spirit had been aroused in the nation which no persecution could crush, and in the darkest hour of their affliction men possessed their ^ Pym on Laud's Impeachment. Foster's Life of Pym, p. 192. ^ Bancroft's Hist, of the United States, vol. i. p. 280. Sir Simonds D'Ewes' Memoirs, vol. ii. 116. LAUD'S REPORTS TO THE KING 159 souls in patience, trusting in God, and awaiting with confidence the time appointed for their dehverance. While the emigrants were quietly establishing them- selves in peace and prosperity in America, Laud con- tinued with unrelenting severity the persecution of their unfortunate brethren at home. But if we may judge from his annual reports to the King, the constancy and endurance of his victims defied his utmost efforts at re- pression. In the beginning of 1637, he writes, " I have every year acquainted your Majesty, and so must do now, that there are still about Ashford and Egerton divers Brownists and other Separatists. But they are so very mean and poor people, that we know not what to do with them. They are said to be the disciples of one Turner and Fenner, who were long ago apprehended and imprisoned by order of the High Commission Court. But how this part came to be so infected with such a humour of Separation I know not, unless it were by too much connivance at their first beginning. Neither do I see any remedy like to be, unless some of their chief seducers be driven to abjure the kingdom, which must be done by the Judges at the Common Law, but is not in our power." Upon which the King notes in the margin, " Inform me of the particulars, and I shall command the Judges to make them abjure. C.R." ^ In the following year Laud again writes : "I must give your Majesty to understand that at and about Ashford in Kent the Separatists continue to hold their conventicles, notwithstanding the excommunication of so many of them as have been discovered. They are all of the poorer sort, and very simple, so that I am utterly to seek what to do with them. Two or three of their principal ringleaders, Brewer, Fenner and Turner, have * Laud's report to the King for 1636. Works, v. 336. i6o ARCHBISHOP LAUD long been in prison, and it was at once thought fit to proceed against them by the statute for abjuration, but I do much doubt, they are so ignorantly wilful, that they will return into the kingdom, and do a great deal more hurt before they can be taken again. Thereupon the King notes, " Keepe those particular persons fast, until ye thinke what to do with the rest. C.R." ' And kept fast they were till the Long Parliament put an end to this prelatical oppression of a long-suffering people. Nothing can convey a better idea of the nature of Laud's ecclesiastical government, than these extracts from his own letters. Even when a prisoner in the Tower, the reverses of fortune made no impression on his understanding or his heart. The poor and despised Separatists were still the object of his scorn and indigna- tion. Lord Saye had pleaded in the House of Lords for toleration in words which will well bear repetition. " Where," he said, " you know there is one and the same God worshipped, one and the same faith embraced, one and the same spirit working love, and causing an unblameable conversation without any offence to the State in your brethren, I entreat you not to suffer them to be thrust out of the land, and cut off from their native country, for ceremonies and things indifferent to you, but burdens to them, and which without offence to the State or prejudice to the Church, you may take off if you will." " No," replied Laud from his prison, " though He be one and the same God whom they worship, yet the wor- ship is not one and the same. . . . And how can their conversation be without great offence, who shall have and maintain private conventicles and meetings in a different way of religion from that which is established by the State ? Besides, no well governed State will allow ^ Laud's Works, v. 347. LORD SAYE ON TOLERATION i6i of private meetings, especially under pretence of re- ligion, without their privity and allowance : for if this be permitted, there lies a way open to all conspiracies against the State whatsoever. Nor is it true that they are thrust out of the land for ceremonies or things in- different. But 'tis true that they have thrust them- selves out and run a madding to New England, scared away, as they say, by certain gross corruptions not to be endured in this Church. Nor after they have gone a madding enough, is their return denied to any. And I know some that went out like fools, and are come back so like , that you cannot know the one from the other." ^ And this was the pious prelate, who for fifteen years controlled the destinies of the English Church. 1 Laud's answer to Lord Saye's speech on the hturgy. Works, vi. 139-41- M CHAPTER XX 1633— 1635 THE FOREIGN REFORMED CHURCHES WHILE Laud's rigid insistence upon the obser- vance of outward forms and ceremonies narrowed the hmits of comprehension within the Church, his doc- trine of the Divine right of Bishops, and the absolute indispensabihty of episcopacy, shut the door to all Communion with the Reformed Churches of the Con- tinent. Presbyterianism was not merely an inferior form of Church government, but was contrary to the ordinance of Christ, a congregation of heretical schis- matics. Now, whatever may be the merits of this view of episcopal government, it was certainly not the doc- trine of the Church of England. The Convocation of 1604, under the presidency of so intolerant a Church- man as Bancroft, expressly recognized the then Presby- terian Church of Scotland as a branch " of Christ's Holy Catholic Church." ^ Episcopacy had been retained by the founders of the Anglican Church, not as an essential form of Church government, but as the form best adapted to a monarchy ; ^ while the Swiss and Dutch repubhcs adopted the Presbyterian system as better suited to ^ Canon 55. 2 This was the reply of Bishop Cooper to Martin Marprelate, pubhshed in 1589, and quoted in Macaulay's History, vol. i. p. 79, note, 163 « ENGLISH AND FOREIGN PROTESTANTS 163 their own political constitution. The Churches might differ in their external government, but the worship was the same ; and both English and foreign Protestants regarded themselves as belonging to the same household of faith. Dutch ministers were not only attached to English regiments serving abroad, but received ecclesias- tical preferments in England, without being required to undergo the formality of an episcopal re-ordination. And when in the latter part of James' reign a synod of Dutch Presbyterian ministers had been convened by the States-General at Dort, an English bishop and an English dean were sent by the King as delegates from the English Church to take part in its deliberations.^ Even a pronounced High Churchman like Bishop Andrewes, whom Laud calls " the great light of the Chris- tian world," never denied to non-episcopal bodies the attributes of a Church. " If our form of ' Episcopacy,' he writes, "be of divine right, it does not follow from thence that there is no salvation without it. He is blind who does not see Churches subsisting without it : he is hard-hearted who denieth them salvation. We put a great difference between these things. There may be something absent in the exterior regiment which is of divine right, and yet salvation is to be had." ^ So far from regarding the members of non-episcopal Churches as schismatics, Andrewes lived on terms of the closest intimacy with the great scholar Casaubon, a Calvinist and member of the Swiss Church, and administered the ^ Joseph Hall, then Dean of Worcester, and afterwards Bishop of Norwich, and the author of Episcopacy by Divine Right, was one of the delegates. In his life by himself, he says : " My unworthiness was named for one of the assistants of that honour- able, grave and reverend meeting." (Macaulay's Hist. i. 79, note. ) ^ Quoted in Canon Henson's Current Church Questions, p. 350. 164 ARCHBISHOP LAUD sacrament to him on his deathbed. " And this," says Mark Pattison, " excited no surprise, as before the rise of the Laudian bishops, the Enghsh Church and the Reformed Churches of the Continent mutually recognized each other as sisters." ^ But all this was changed in the first year of Laud's primacy. English regiments serving abroad and English merchants residing in foreign parts were not only pro- hibited from attending the services of the foreign Churches, but were restricted to the employment of chaplains selected for them by the Archbishop of Canterbury or York, and were required to conform themselves in all respects to the doctrine and discipline settled in the Church of England.^ Having placed the non-episcopal Churches of the Continent upon their own soil outside the pale of a common Christianity, he next proceeded to withdraw from the members of those Churches settled in England the toleration they had enjoyed since the reign of Elizabeth in the free exercise of their religion. These foreign settlers were of various nationalities. There were Dutch immigrants from Holland, Flemish and Walloon immigrants from the Netherlands who had escaped the butcheries of Alva,^ and Huguenot immi- grants from France, who had survived the awful day of St. Bartholomew 1572.* ^ Mark Pattison's Life of Casaubon, p. 473. 2 Laud's letters to the merchants at Delfe, June 17, 1634. {Works, vi. 380.) ^ When Alva reUnquished the government of the Netherlands in 1 57 1 he boasted that during the six years of his administration " he had sent to the stake or the scaffold 18,600 Protestants," while the number of those who had perished by battle, siege, starvation and massacre defied computation. (Motley's Dutch Republic, ii. 483.) * The number of French Protestants who were murdered on that fatal day injcold blood is said to have exceeded 50,000. THE PROTESTANT IMMIGRANTS 165 It was not only the natural sympathy felt for men who had passed through such a fiery furnace of affliction, but the consciousness that England had been marked down as the next victim to be offered on the altar of Papal intolerance and cruelty, that moved Elizabeth to give them a shelter and a home. And fully did the refugees repay their debt of hospitality. They brought with them their trades, their industry and their skill, and the towns in which they settled became in a few years flourishing centres of industries and manufactures be- fore unknown in England. The only concession asked by these industrious immigrants of the great Queen, their protector, was that they might be permitted to enjoy in peace the free exercise of their religion. And this is her reply: "We are not ignorant that the ceremonies have been different in various Churches since the birth of Christianity ; in some the congregation pray standing,^ in others kneeling. It is nevertheless the same religion, provided the prayers are addressed to the same God. We do not despise your service, and we do not constrain you to adopt ours. We approve of your ceremonies, inasmuch as they accord best with the countries whence you come." ^ 1 The great CEcumenical Council of Nice (a.d. 325) which formulated the Nicene Creed, as the authorized profession of the Christian faith, thereafter to be adopted, also passed the follow- ing Canon against kneeling at prayers : " Because there are some who kneel on the Lord's day, and even in the days of Pentecost ; that all things may be uniformly performed in every parish, it seems good to the Holy Synod that prayers be made to God standing." Canon 20, quoted by Canon Henson in his Current Church Questions, p. 121. Burn's Hist, of the Foreign Refugees, p. 3 The original letter, of which the above is a translation, is in Latin and printed in Canterbury's Doom, p. 400. It was found among Laud's papers after his impeachment. i66 ARCHBISHOP LAUD These assurances of toleration were solemnly renewed by James/ and afterwards repeated by Charles himself on his accession to the throne in the following order : " We will and command our Judges etc. to permit and suf- fer the said strangers, members of the outlandish Churches and their children equally to enjoy all and singular such privileges and immunities as have been formerly granted unto them without any troubles, arrests or proceedings by way of information or otherwise ; considering the fair usage and good entertainment, which our subjects and their children do receive beyond the seas." ^ These Royal edicts were, however, treated as so much waste paper. To allow schismatical Churches, with their lay elders and Presbyterian ministers, to exist in a country with an established Episcopal form of worship, was, said Laud, " an example of ill consequences to the subjects of England, and confirmed them in their stubborn ways of disobedience to the Church government." ^ In his first Visitation as Archbishop, the ministers and elders of these foreign Churches were summoned to appear before his Vicar-General, and informed that as all foreigners settled in the country were, after the first descent, English subjects, they must, like other subjects, conform to the rites and ceremonies and descipline of the established Church, and perform all duties and pay- ments required in that behalf. In vain they pleaded that the Royal orders gave the same privileges to the children as to the original settlers, and that the congre- ^ Letter of King James to the French and Dutch Ministers, May 21, 1603. (Canterburj^'s Doom, p. 400.) 2 The order of King Charles for all strangers, dated November 13, 1626. An order of the Privy Council, even in stronger terms, in favour of the Dutch settled at Norwich was passed January 7, 1631. (Canterbury's Doom, p. 401.; 3 Laud's Works, vi. 26. THEIR TREATMENT BY LAUD 167 gations, if reduced in numbers by the compulsory with- drawal of more than three-fourths of their members, would consist of aliens of the meaner sort, and would be unable to bear the charges of their ministers, and must of necessity be dissolved, a contingency which they believed to be contrary to the Archbishop's in- tent." ' This, however, was the very object Laud had in view, and he replied that his Majesty was resolved that his Injunction should be obeyed, and " for my part," he added, I doubt not but yourselves, or your posterity at least, shall have cause to thank both the State and the Church for this care taken of you. But if you refuse, I shall then proceed against the natives according to the Laws and Canons Ecclesiastical. So hoping the best of yourselves, and your obedience I leave you to the Grace of God and rest. Your loving Friend, W. Cant." ^ — a very appropriate signature to such a letter. These orders were rigorously enforced ; the foreign Churches were closed, and their assemblies broken up ; and some 5,000 immigrants, abandoning their English settlements, sought protection for them- selves, their families and their trades in Holland. ^ Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, 1635. June 26, ccxci. No. 68. ^ Letter to the Dutch and Walloon Congregations at Norwich, dated August 19, 1635. (Laud's Works, vi. 432.) CHAPTER XXI 1633— 1635 IRELAND ALLUSION has already been made to the correspon- dence which passed between Wentworth in Ireland, and Laud in England on his promotion to the primacy. They were both voluminous letter writers, and hardly any event of public importance occurred which was not confidentially discussed between them. A great part of this correspondence was in cipher ; but even with this precaution Laud was haunted with the dread that it might fall into the hands of his enemies. " I see," he writes to Wentworth, " you keep copies of your large letters to me. I keep none of them I send you. Yours I keep, as I presume you do mine. The cipher between us both you and I have. By that cipher all our letters may be read when we are dead. Some things you know are personal, and such as, though not hurtful, yet such as neither of us would have some men see. We are both in place. We are not like to die both together. What if our papers be gotten into the hands of others ? Think of this, and whether it were not better to burn all that passes between you and me, and then laugh freely both at fools and knaves " ^ Later he writes, " I like your suggestion to break our letters into two, and ^ Laud's Works, vii. 166. les LAUD AND WENTWORTH 169 in the one to write nothing but barely the King's direc- tions, which may be kept, and in the other all things personal and private, which may be burnt, and this I will most religiously perform and expect the like from you." 1 Fortunately, Wentworth kept copies of his own letters and neglected to burn Laud's, and to this circum- stance we are indebted for the preservation of a corre- spondence which throws a vivid light on the distinctive characters of the two associates, both equally vindictive and unscrupulous ; the one marching boldly toward his purpose with the daring of a lion,^ the other attaining the same ends with the caution and cunning of a fox.^ The friendship, or rather the alliance, between the two men was purely political, for up to this time there had been little personal intercourse between them. Laud had designs upon the Irish Church which could only be carried out with Wentworth's assistance ; while Went- worth felt the need of Laud's powerful influence with the King to counteract the opposition of his numerous enemies at the court. At Wentworth's suggestion, Irish affairs had been withdrawn from the consideration of the Privy Council, and entrusted to a small committee of which Laud was a prominent member. " There are none of it," he writes to the Lord Deputy, " but the > Works, vii. 234. * The comparison is Laud's " I am confident," he writes to his friend, " you could never have compassed half that you have done already if you had not put on some of the lion's skin." {Works, vii. 236.) To which Wentworth replies : " Seeing your Lordship judges some of the lion's skin no ill clothing in this climate, I will even go on as I begun." (Strafford's Letters, i. 520.) ^ Reynard the fox was the familiar name by which he was known to the London apprentices ; and in his picture by Van- dyke, now in the possession of Lord Fitzwilliam, the full face with the cunning eyes is strikingly hke that of a fox. I70 ARCHBISHOP LAUD Lord Treasurer (Weston), the Lord Marshall (Arundel), the Lord Cottington, the two Secretaries and myself. But I am not to trouble the commission with any Church affairs. By this means I shall be able to make you the quicker despatch at all times of these my businesses, when they are to attend on no man's leisure but my own." ^ By this arrangement he at once assumed over the Irish Church the same imperious control that he exercised over the English clergy. His first measure, in furtherance of his scheme for universal conformity, was to require the Lord Deputy to force upon the Irish Church the Articles and Canons of the Church of England. How this was effected is very graphically told by Wentworth. " I found," he writes to Laud, " that the Lower House of Convocation had appointed a select Committee to consider the Canons of the Church of England ; that they had gone through the book of Canons and noted in the margin such as they allowed with an A, and on others they had entered a D, which stood for — deliberandum ; that into the fifth Article they had brought the Articles of Ireland to be allowed and received under the pain of excommunication ; and that they had drawn up their Canons into a body, and were ready that afternoon to make report in the Convocation. I instantly sent for Dean Andrews, who had sat in the Chair at this Committee, requiring him to bring along the foresaid book of Canons, so noted in the margin, together with the draft he was to present that afternoon to the House. But when I came to open the book and scan over their deliberandums, I told him that not a dean of Limerick, but an Ananias had sat in the chair of that Committee. I then warned the Primate, the Bishops and 1 Laud to Wentworth, April 12, 1634. (Works, vii. 66.) THE IRISH CHURCH 171 the Prolocutor, and all those who had been on the Com- mittee to be with me the next morning. Then I publickly told them how unlike clergymen they had proceeded in their Committee, and that these heady and arrogant courses they must know I was not to endure : and I enjoined their Prolocutor that in case any of the Com- mittee should propound any question herein, that he should not put it ; that he should put no question at all touching the receiving or not of the Articles of the Church of Ireland ; and that for allowing and receiving the Articles of England, that he should simply put the ques- tion content or not content, without admitting any discourse at all, for I would not endure that the Articles of the Church of England should be disputed. And finally, that there should be no question in the Canon, which was thus to be voted, I desired the Lord Primate would be pleased to frame it, and after I had perused it, I would send the draft of the Canon to the Prolocutor to be propounded in Convocation. The Primate accordingly framed a Canon, which I not approving, drew up one myself. His grace came instantly to me and told me he was afraid the Canon would never pass in such form as I had drawn it, but he was hopeful, as he had drawn it, it might, and besought me, therefore, to think a little better of it. I told his Lordship I was resolved to put it in those very words. Without any delay, then, I sent a letter to the Prolocutor with the Canon enclosed, which accordingly that afternoon was unanimously voted, first by the bishops, then by the rest of the clergy, ex- cepting one man." He then adds, as if startled by his own audacity in bearding " a holy synod " of reverend divines, " I am not ignorant that my stirring herein will be strongly reported and censured on that side, and how I shall be able to sustain myself against your Prynnes 172 ARCHBISHOP LAUD P3ans and Bens, and the rest of that generation of odd names and natures, the Lord knows." ^ To this the Archbishop complacently replies, " I am heartily glad the Enghsh Articles are so canonically ad- mitted ; it is a great step to piety and peace " ; and he adds in a PS., "I hope now you will not stick at the Canons." ^ Nor did he, and the result exceeded Laud's expectation. " Since the English Canons," he writes, are received in substance, I care not much for the form. And one passing good thing we have got by it, besides placing the altar at the east end, and that is, a passing good Canon about Confession." ^ With an altar at the East end, and a passing good Canon about Confession, the benighted Protestants of Ireland were at length placed in the orthodox way of salvation. With Laud's peculiar ideas of the extreme sanctity of the east end of a church, it was only natural that he should guard from profanation that most sacred part of the edifice. One of his numerous correspondents^ whose name he prudently withholds, had informed him that the great Earl of Cork had erected in St. Patrick's Cathedral a magnificent family tomb, which occupied the place where in pre-Reformation times the high altar had stood. Laud at once brought the matter to the Lord Deputy's notice, observing that the Earl, by placing the tomb in that position, had " thrust God out of His most proper place on earth, next to the hearts of his people." * The tomb had been three years in exis- tence, and had been erected with the sanction and appro- val of the Dean and Chapter ; and the Archbishop of * Wentworth to Laud, December i6, 1634. (Strafford's Letters, vol. i. 343-4.) ^ Laud to Wentworth, January 12, 1635. {Works, vii. 98.) ^ Same to same, May 12, 1635. (Works, vii. 132.) * Laud's Works, vii. 70. THE EARL OF CORK'S TOMB 173 Dublin assured Laud that there could be no objection to the position, as the tomb stood in a great arch at the end of the quire, while the high altar stood at the end of the Lady Chapel, which was beyond it. Laud, however, was not to be diverted from his purpose : and he writes to the Lord Deputy : " I have received letters from my Lord Primate * and the Archbishop of Dublin. Both of them justify that the tomb stands not in the place of the altar, and that so far from being an inconvenience, it is an ornament to that church. I confess I am not satisfied with what they say, yet it is hard for me that am absent to cross directly the report of two Archbishops. But this is not it, which I desire you to take into con- sideration. This it is, the copies of these letters sent to me I am informed are sent to the Lord Treasurer. He takes it very highly because of his kinsman, the Lord Chancellor Weston, who was buried there." * It thus became a personal matter between the Lord Treasurer and himself. If the tomb was not removed, not only would his own prestige at Court suffer, but encouragement would be given to the people of Ireland to seek redress from the despotic acts of the Lord Deputy by appealing to the justice of the King. After a few days' reflection he writes again : " For the tomb itself I cannot smother my judgment. The consequences will be extreme nought if the tomb stand, so you write, and so it is. There- ^ Archbishop Usher. ^ Laud to Wentworth, March 31, 1634. {Works, vi. 358 ) Lord Dungarvan, in writing to his father the Earl, mentions that he had seen the Archbishop, but had Uttle hope of preserving the tomb, as the Lord Treasurer, " stirring in the matter," had much prejudiced the case : the report in the town being that he and the Lord Archbishop were on very ill terms, and that the Lord Archbishop had the King's ear more than he." (Lord Dungarvan to the Earl of Cork, April 26, 1634 ; Lismore Papers, 2nd series, vol. iii. 197-201.) 174 ARCHBISHOP LAUD fore I have laid by all respects of you and myself, and moved the King for a letter to issue out a Commission to inquire. And if the letter can be made ready, you shall receive it enclosed ; if not then, by the next. I went about it as soon as ever I had read your letters, and the King granted it instantly." And he adds a marginal note in cipher, " I find the Lord Treasurer has heard of this, and will cross it." ^ The Commission was addressed to the Lord Deputy himself, and the man who could dominate the Convo- cation was not likely to pay much respect to the opinion of two archbishops, and he acted with his usual prompt- ness and determination. " In a few words," he writes, " I issued a commission according to my warrant, for viewing the Earl's tomb ; and the two Archbishops and himself with four other bishops, and the two deans and chapters were present when we met ; and I made them aU so ashamed that the Earl desires he may have leave to pull it down without reporting further to Eng- land ; so I am content if the miracle be done though Mahomet do it, and there is an end of the tomb before it come to be entombed indeed." ^ To this Laud replies in not very episcopal language, " What, cannot you great men do with us Churchmen and our certificates ? As for my marginal note I see you deciphered it well, and I see you make use of it too. Do so still, thorow and thorow. Oh ! that I were where I might go so too ! but I am shackled between delays and uncertainties. You have a great deal of honour here for your proceedings. Go on, a God's name." ^ ^ Laud to Wentworth, April 12, 1634. vii. 70. 2 Wentworth to Laud, August 23, 1634. Strafford's Letters, vol. i. 298. ^ Laud to Wentworth, October 30, 1634. Works, vi. 397-8. RECOVERY OF CHURCH LANDS 175 Another measure upon which Laud's heart was very piously set, was to recover from the laity all Church lands of which they were either rightfully or wrongfully in possession. It was a measure which even Mary, with her Tudor prerogatives, and her Catholic zeal, had attempted in vain ; but the Deus ex machind in the per- son of the Lord Deputy was equal to the occasion. " It would be necessary," he said, " that a little violence and extraordinary means should be resorted to, and so I have bethought myself of a draft letter of instructions to be issued by his Majesty to me, directing me how I may proceed in these questions concerning the patrimony of the Church. Get it but signed and sent me under the signet, and I shall quickly settle all these affairs here to your contentment. To induce his Majesty to sign it, your Lordship may truly inform him it is a course ever practised by his Privy Council here, and is of absolute necessity for perfecting the pious act of restoring the Church." ' By this letter of instructions all questions involving the title to Church property were transferred from the ordinary Law Courts to the Lord Deputy's determination in the Castle chamber ; and this outrageous attack upon the rights of property met, it is needless to say, with Laud's hearty approval and support. " You shall have," he writes, " the letter asked for and I hope here enclosed. But here I must teU you a tale. I acquainted the King in private with all this before we came to the Irish Com- mittee. At the Committee I moved the Church business as the King directed me and himself was present. When I came to the occasion of this letter and the letter itself, I had Cottington against it. No less ! and they all ^ Wentworth to Laud, March, 1634. Strafford's Letters, i. 380-1. 176 ARCHBISHOP LAUD thought it better to refer such cases to the Chancery. I well hoped that poor Church had not so many enemies. But 'tis no matter ; here was discovery without any hurt, for we shall have our letter." ^ The Earl of Cork was the first victim to experience the beneficent exercise of this usurped jurisdiction. Some thirty years previously he had purchased in fee farm the College of Youghall with the lands and benefices appertaining thereto. The terms of the agreement had been discussed and settled in the Chapter House, and the deed of sale bore the signatures and seals of the Bishop of the diocese and of the Warden and Patron of the College. After the deed had been acted upon for thirty years, Laud received a petition from the Bishop of Waterford ^ praying that an inquiry might be made into the validity of the deed, as it was alleged that the seals were forgeries. This petition had evidently been presented at Laud's instigation, for he had previously written to Wentworth : "I have known the Bishop of Waterford long,^ and when he lived in college he would have done anything or sold any one for sixpence profit. It seems he carried the same mind with him into Ireland, by which means Lismore and Youghall have fared none the better by him ; but it may be, if he be handsomely wrought on, he will be brought to petition me about it, which will be an excellent ground for us both to work on." * How this worthy Bishop was " handsomely wrought upon " we are not informed, but he seems very ^ Laud to Wentworth, March 27, 1635. Works, vii. 115. ^ Laud to Wentworth, May 14, 1634. Works, vi. 374. ^ He was a college contemporary of Laud's, having been elected a scholar of St. John's in 1593. Laud's Works, vi. 308, note h. * Laud to Wentworth, March 11, 1634. Works, vi. 352-3. PROSECUTION OF THE EARL OF CORK 177 readily to have joined in the plot, and the required peti- tion was sent to Laud, and proceedings promptly insti- tuted against the Earl in the Castle Chamber. Finding that he had fallen into the hands of his enemies, the Earl wrote to his friends in England ^ to move the King for licence to come and submit himself and his cause to his Majesty. But nothing could escape Laud's vigilance, and he wrote at once to the Lord Deputy, " Some Lords ^ have been earnest with the King on behalf of the Earl of Cork, that he may come over hither and make his submission here to the King and the Irish Committee, and that a nobleman of his rank may not be disgraced there in a public Court of Justice. As soon as I heard this I stepped to the King to know the cer- tainty of it. His Majesty told me it was true, and that their importunity was great with him, but that he would do nothing but with your knowledge and advice of the fitness of it. . . . Yet for all this I see that letters will be sent to you by Secretary Windebank, whose pen, I hope, will be as wary as it ought to be both for the Church and you. However, these are to give you warning with all the speed I could of this, and to desire you to spare nothing that may make the King sensible of this busi- ness ; for if it come hither, I have no great hope of the Church's part." ^ A tolerably candid admission of the iniquity of the case. In spite, however, of the King's assurances. Secretary Windebank's despatch proved a very disquieting document. It signified his Majesty's pleasure that when all the witnesses were examined, the Lord Deputy, instead of passing judgment, should make a true relation of the state of the cause, and license 1 Lismore Papers, ist series, vol. iv. 117. * The Lord Chamberlain and the Earl of SaUsbury. ^ Laud to Wentvvorth, August 14, 1634. Works, vii. 150. N 178 ARCHBISHOP LAUD the Earl to go over with it to the King. ^ But the Lord Deputy was not the man to have his preconcerted plans interfered with, and he wrote to Laud that he must at once see the King and obtain a reconsideration of the case ; for if the cause was removed from the Castle chamber, not only would the Earl escape punishment, and be maintained to the loss of the Church in possession of his lands, but a slur would be cast upon the administra- tion of what he called Justice in Ireland. His earnest request, therefore, was that the case should be left to his own determination, and he explained how he proposed to deal with it. If the Earl did not prove the consent of the Warden and Fellows to the grant in question, the cause was to proceed to open and public censure of justice ; if, on the contrary, the Earl should sufficiently prove this consent — that is, in plain language, if he proved his title to the land — the case was then to be " privately folded up," and if this folding up was left to his entire manage- ment, he undertook that the college possessions should be wholly restored and that the Earl should pay at least £10,000 to the Exchequer for his Majesty's use.^ Now let us see how his associate, the most reverend the Archbishop of Canterbury, deals with this scheme of barefaced robbery. He seems to have been afraid that his words might rise up in judgment against him, so his answer was communicated in cipher. " I read to his Majesty the full conclusion of those papers of your Lord- ship, where, upon the whole matter, you give your opinion that if the Earl do not prove the consent of the Warden and Fellows, and so be found guilty of forgery, then there will be a necessity of a public and open pro- ^ Lismore Papers, ist series, vol. iv. 174. ^ Wentworth to Laud, August 26, 1638. Strafford's Letters, i. 459-60. PROSECUTION OF THE EARL OF CORK 179 ceeding. In that case, therefore, you must go on. Secondly, if the Earl prove the consent, then the King will not by any means have the Earl to come hither, but leaves him wholly to your managing there : and that you then provide that the college of Youghall be fully and in all parts and points restored, and with £10,000 fine at least, more if you can ; and that by letter an acknow- ledgment be made to the King, that all is done with justice and favour in keeping him from shame. So now, I hope you are past all recks in this business. And 'tis a wonder to see the King so constant." ^ The scandalous charge of forging brought against the Earl proved to be so utterly baseless, that it had to be abandoned, and the further proceedings were left as arranged to the Lord Deputy's " management." And a most excellent manager he was. He sent for the Earl and with great protestations of friendship said it was not his wish to bring the case to a public hearing in the Castle chamber, but to treat privately with him on the business in the presence of his friends. The Earl replied that he was so confident of his own justification that he would trouble no friends at all, and that he was resolved to have a pubhc hearing and acquittal. " By God," said the Lord Deputy, " that you shall never have ; for though it is likely the information would never have been preferred against you if I had not conceived that the deed had been counterfeited, yet the information has not been so fully cleared but that you will be censured, and that deeply too, for drawing the Collegians to take an oath never to trouble you, and you for taking an oath unto them that you would pay them their pensions according to the agreement." The Earl replied that it was an oath volun- tarily pressed upon him by the Warden and Collegians, 1 Laud to Wentworth, October 4, 1635. Works, vii. 180-1. i8o ARCHBISHOP LAUD and so confessed in their depositions, and if any offence in this had been committed, it was one triable in the Ecclesiastical Courts and not in the Castle Chamber." The Lord Deputy replied : "I will speak no more with you on the subject, but will discuss the matter with your friends " ; to whom he explained the terms upon which he was prepared to settle the case amicably. If the Earl voluntarily paid £15,000 for the King's use, the informa- tion against him would be withdrawn, and a new grant to him and his heirs would be obtained from his Majesty of the College house and gardens, and of all other tene- ments and lands belonging to the College, excepting the Parsonages, Vicarages and Tythes, which would be disposed of as his Majesty might please. If these terms were not accepted, he vowed that he would sentence the Earl to a fine of £30,000, deprive him of his office of Trea- surer and clap him up in the Castle chamber prison." * To these forcible and convincing arguments the Earl thought it prudent to submit, and so ended this iniqui- tous prosecution. In the Earl's narrative of these events we have an interesting account of an interview with the Lord Deputy on the following day. " His Lordship sent for me and asked whether I had paid in the first £5,000 into the Exchequer, and what security I could give for the other £10,000. I told him I was preparing the first £5,000 as fast as I could, but I hoped he would give me some good abatement of the last payments, for I was not able to pay them unless I could sell some land. His Lordship answered me, that I had enough iron ^ in my store-houses to pay that and a great deal more, and that he would ^ The Earl's narrative in the Lismore Papers, 2nd series vol. iii. 247-58. 2 This was an allusion to the Earl's iron works. CASTLE CHAMBER JUSTICE i8i have that ;^5,ooo presently, and that I should enter into a recognisance for the rest." " I prayed him well to consider whether in justice he could impose so great a fine upon me. Whereunto he replied, ' God's wounds, sir, when the last Parliament in England broke up you lent the King £15,000. And afterwards in a very uncivil, unmannerly manner you pressed his Majesty to repay it. Whereupon I resolved, before I came out of England, to fetch it back from you by one means or other. And now I have gotten what I desired, you and I will be friends hereafter.' And it is certainly remarkable that while the King got the money and Laud the Parsonages and Tythes, the Warden and Fellows on whose behalf the proceedings were supposed to be instituted, were left completely out in the cold. ^ Lismore Papers, 2nd series, vol. iii. 257. CHAPTER XXII 1635 LAUD AND THE TREASURY WHILE Laud and Wentworth were carrying out their policy of " thorough " in Ireland, a great change took place in the Court and State by the death of the Lord Treasurer Weston. In the beginning of 1635 he was seized with a fatal illness, to which he succumbed on March 13 ; and a few days before his death we find Laud in anxious consultation with the King about the disposal of his office.^ To obtain the control of the Treasury for the enrich- ment of the Church had for years been the object of Laud's ambition ; and it was the one department of Government in which, while Weston lived, he was not allowed to interfere. The death of his great rival, whom he had in vain attempted to supplant, now placed the Treasury within his grasp, and on the day after Weston's 1 The following are the entries on the subject in Laud's Diary. " March i, 1635. The great business which the King com- manded me to think of and give him account and the L.T. (Lord Treasurer). " March 14 (the day after Weston's death). I was named one of the Commissioners of the Exchequer upon the death of Lord Weston, Lord High Treasurer of England. " March 16. I was called the next day into the Foreign Com- mittee by the King." 182 EDWARD HYDE 183 death the Treasury was placed in Commission, with Laud as Chief Commissioner, and the Earl Marshal, Lord Cottington the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the two Secretaries of State as his colleagues. At the same time he was appointed to succeed Weston as Presi- dent of the Committee for Foreign Affairs, so that the whole machinery of government in every department was brought under his immediate supervision. And it was not without a feeling of natural exultation he writes to Went worth : " For yourself you may now go on cheer- fully, for certainly the Lord Treasurer was a heavy block in your way. But I wonder not at it ; for the same block lay in my way too, when I could have wished it otherwise. And certainly things will not go the worse in Ireland or England for this Writ of Remove." ^ With characteristic energy the Archbishop entered upon his new and unepiscopal duties. His first measure was to institute a searching inquiry into the past admin- istration of the Treasury, with the charitable object of blackening the reputation of the man who had for so many years " blocked his way." ^ The result of the inquiry, however, greatly disappointed his expectations, for he writes to Wentworth : " The accounts are so many, so confounded, so broken and so all naught that I have every day less hope to do any great good ; for whether the mighty mass of money he got came out of the King's purse or the people's is not so easy to be found." ^ It was during the prosecution of these inquiries that * Laud's Works, vii. 129-30. 2 " The Archbishop," says Clarendon, " had no great regard for the Lord Treasurer's memory or his friends, and was willing enough to make any discovery of his miscarriages and to inform his Majesty of them, who he believed had too good an opinion of him and his integrity." (Clarendon's Life, i. 18.) 3 Laud to Wentworth, June 12, 1635. Works, vii. 144. i84 ARCHBISHOP LAUD Laud made the acquaintance of Edward Hyde, ^ a young barrister of the Middle Temple, from whom he was told he could obtain much information of the late Treasurer's illegal proceedings. Mr. Hyde was accordingly sent for, and from his pen we have an account of the interview. " I attended the Archbishop, and found him walking alone in his garden at Lambeth. He received me civilly, and, according to his manner, without much ceremony, and presently asked me whether I had not been of council for some merchants in a case against the farmers of the Customs. I answered that about two years past I had been of council in such an affair, but that little progress was made thereupon by reason of the asperity of the Treasurer." " Mr. Hyde then told the Archbishop two or three passages in that transaction and some huffing expressions which fell from the Treasurer, which he found were not ingrateful to the Archbishop, upon whom he attended within a day or two again and delivered him the Merchants' petition and many other useful papers, which pleased him abundantly, and he required him to see him often." The narrative then continues : — " By this accident Mr. Hyde came first to be known to the Archbishop, who ever afterwards used him very kindly, and spoke well of him on all occasions, and took particular notice of him when he came of council in any causes depending at the Coun- cil Board ; and desired his services on many occasions, and particularly in the raising of moneys for the building St. Paul's Church, in which he made a journey or two into Wiltshire with good success, which the Archbishop acknowledged in a more obliging way than he was accus- tomed to ; insomuch as it was so much taken notice of, * The future Earl of Clarendon. TROUBLES AT THE TREASURY 185 that Mr. Hyde (who well knew how to cultivate those advantages) was used with more countenance by all the judges in Westminster Hall, and the eminent prac- tisers than was usually given to men of his years ; so that he grew every day in practice, of which he had as much as he desired." ^ This early assistance rendered at the commencement of his career, Clarendon always remembered with gratitude, and when writing his great history of the Rebellion and of his own times, he always showed a singular tenderness for Laud's memory, qualify- ing and toning down his condemnation of his friend's episcopal administration, and attributing to the over- ruling decrees of a Divine Providence the tragical catas- trophe which wrecked a powerful Church and brought a King to the scaffold. While Laud's appointment as Chief Commissioner of the Treasury "exceedingly provoked the envy, reproach and maUce of all qualities and conditions of men," ^ it was by no means a happy appointment for himself ; for though his personal integrity was above suspicion, he was engaging in secular business, of which he had no knowledge ; and his colleagues on the Commission, particularly Cottington, never lost an opportunity of exposing his financial ignorance. This was particularly trying to a man of his irritable temper, and after three months' experience of Treasury work he notes in his diary : " In these months my troubles at the Commission for the Treasury, and the differences which happened between the Lord Cottington and myself." ^ He had been turning his episcopal mind to the interesting question of soap, which, hke most other commodities, was then the subject of a monopoly. The monopolists in possession had been ^ Clarendon's Life, i. 22-5. ^ Clarendon's Hist. i. 213. 3 Diary, July 1635. 1 86 ARCHBISHOP LAUD incorporated under the name of the New Company by Weston, and paid the King £20,000 a year for the privi- leges they enjoyed. After Weston's death their rivals in the trade had been induced by Laud to offer £40,000 a year for the same concessions. This was a clear gain of £20,000 a year for the King, and Laud prided himself upon having achieved a great financial success ; but when he submitted his proposal to the Commission, Cottington pointed out that the term for which the old monopoly had been granted had not expired, and that it would not be consistent with the King's honour to cancel the charter of the company in possession, not because its terms had been infringed, but simply because certain other soap boilers had offered to pay double the amount to the King. This view of the question seems to have taken Laud by surprise, and in great indigna- tion he writes to Wentworth : " I thought myself sure, and according to the weakness of my brains thought I had reason, but I found great opposition. 'Tis too long to tell you all, but I shall never forget the story. The first cavil was, what security ? I brought them to offer £10,000 for real security ; and for personal four of them were to be bound for £40,000 for their truth to the King ; and when all holes were stopped, then the King could not do it in honour and God knows what." ^ But this was not the whole of his trouble, for he notes in his diary : "Sunday^ at Theobald's the soap business was ended and settled again with the New Corporation. In this business, and in some other of great consequence, my old friend. Sir Francis Windebank, forsook me and joined with Lord Cottington, which put me to the exercise of a great deal of patience." 1 Laud to Wentworth, August 3, 1635. Works, vii. 158. 2 Diary, July 12, 1635. JUXON APPOINTED TREASURER 187 For this desertion, as he calls it, he never forgave Windebank to the day of his death ; and with the petu- lance of a child or a woman he insinuates to Wentworth that all the members of the Commission have been bribed. " I have done with the soap business. Never any man was so used as I was in that business. As for the Earl Marshal — (the Earl of Arundel) — and his fellows,^ I did never doubt that they were pensioners. And let me tell you, when a private turn is to be served, the Earl Marshal is almost as good as the other you name, though he can tell how to cover it better, and is extreme jealous of me." ^ What a charming colleague he must have been to work with ! and can we wonder at the loathing and contempt with which he was regarded ? Naturally he was very sick of his Treasury work, and he tells Wentworth that " he did not expect to see the end of the year. He had so many occasions of grief to see things so much out of the way and no help to utter anything and take ease by vent, since he saw Secretary Windebank grown into such a league with Cottington." ^ Still, he said, " I cannot be so ill a servant to my master as to wish an end to this Commission for my own ease till the King resolve upon a good Lord Treasurer, for such an one certainly he will need, and more an honest than a cunning one." * This was in allusion to Cottington, and rather than see him promoted to the Treasurer- ship, he resolved to continue the Commission until, by his intrigues with the King, he had secured the appoint- ment for a Churchman and a personal friend of his own. His patience was rewarded with success, and early in the following year he notes in his diary : " Sunday, ^ The other members of the Commission. ^ Laud's Works, vii. 175. ^ Ibid. 201. * Ibid. vi. 423. 1 88 ARCHBISHOP LAUD William Juxon, Lord Bishop of London, made Lord High Treasurer of England. No Churchman had it since Henry VII's time. I pray God bless him to carry it so that the Church may have honour, and the King and the State service and contentment by it. And now if the Church will not hold up themselves tmder God, I can do no more." ^ The legitimate emoluments of the office amounted to £7,000 a year, and the greatest of the nobility who were in the chief est employments," says Clarendon, " looked upon it as their prizes when on a sudden the staff was put into the hands of the Bishop of London, a man so unknown that his name was scarce heard of in the kingdom, who had been within two years before but a private chaplain and the president of a poor college in Oxford. This inflamed more men than were angry before, and no doubt did not only sharpen the edge of envy and malice against the Archbishop (who was the known architect of this new fabric), but most unjustly indisposed many against the Church itself, which they looked upon as the gulf to swallow all the great offices, there being others in view of that robe, who were ambi- tious enough to expect the rest." ^ ^ Diary, March 6, 1636. ^ Clarendon's Hist. i. 206. One of Wentworth's correspond- ents writes : " The clergy are so high here since the joining of the white sleeves with the white staff, that there is much talk of having as Secretary Dr. Wren, Bishop of Norwich, and as Chan- cellor of the Exchequer Dr. Bancroft, Bishop of Oxford ; but this comes only from the young fry of the clergy, little credit is given to it, but it is observed they swarm mightily about the Court." (Strafford's Letters, ii. p. 2.) CHAPTER XXIII 1636 THE king's visit TO OXFORD LAUD had now reached the summit of his greatness, and, if we may judge from his diary, the year 1636 was the happiest in his hfe. He had not even an imagi- nary evil to disturb his repose. His star was everywhere in the ascendant, and his enemies, if not crushed, were at any rate silenced. As a crowning triumph he had the honour of entertaining the King and the Queen at Oxford to witness the inauguration of his new buildings at St. John's. Oxford was the place which above all others he loved, the only place where his character was understood and his merits appreciated. The Puritans might curse him as the relentless persecutor of the saints of God ; the courtiers might despise and hate him as a low intriguer for place and power ; but for the obse- quious preferment-hunting Dons the English language did not supply terms sufficiently strong to express their adulation. For them he was the " Summus Pontifex," the " academiae pater ductor, angelus, Archangelus ecquid minus ? " ; " vestra sanctitas," " divini spiritus effusissime plenus," and, what perhaps was more to the purpose, the " divinae munificentiae cisterna " ; titles which he complacently accepted without qualification or remonstrance, and which were urged against him on his impeachment as a proof of his arrogance and spiritual 180 190 ARCHBISHOP LAUD pride. His coach as he travelled from Croydon to Oxford was drawn by six horses, and " my retinue," he tells us, " was between forty and fifty horse," adding, with par- donable pride, " all my own, though I came privately into Oxford in regard to the nearness of the King and Queen at Woodstock." ^ Whether by accident or design, their Majesties' entry into the ancient city was fixed for August 29, a day for Laud of happy augury, as the anniversary of his first great triumph, when King James confirmed his election as President of St. John's. In the carriage with the King were the Queen and his two nephews, the Elector Palatine, from whom our Royal family derive their descent, and Prince Rupert, destined to play a leading part in the troubled days so near at hand. " At one of the clock the University bell rang out to call all the students of quality according to their degrees to wait on his Grace their Chancellor, to meet his Majesty two miles out of the town,* all mounted on horseback with foot-cloths reaching to the ground. Even Oxford could rarely have seen so funny a sight. Heading the proces- sion were the Mayor and Aldermen in their robes of office ; then followed a cavalcade of learned Professors in wide-sleeved gowns, and reverend doctors in scarlet robes, with five bishops of unimpeachable orthodoxy in their episcopal vestments bringing up the rear ; and last of all, immediately in front of the Royal coach, rode the Archbishop, the King's evil genius, with the es- quire bedells bearing their silver pokers before him. The streets were thronged with gaping gownsmen and townsmen, aU in their appointed places, but the solemn procession of bishops, doctors, and professors moved 1 Laud's Works, v. 155. 2 Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, vol. x, p. 114. LAUD'S NARRATIVE 191 along in funereal silence ; no cry of Vivat Rex from the gownsmen, no cheers from the townsmen, greeted the King ; the students and the citizens were alike silent.^ But though there were no demonstrations of loyalty from the people, the King was regaled with adulatory speeches in plenty from the Dons. " The Vice-chan- cellor," to quote Laud's narrative, " made a very good speech unto them where myself and the University met them. That speech ended, they passed along by St. John's, where Mr. Atkinson made another speech unto them, very brief and very much approved of by his Majesty afterwards to me. Within Christ Church gate the public orator entertained them with another speech which was well approved. Thence the King accom- panied the Queen to her lodgings and instantly returned, and went with all the Lords to the Cathedral. There, after his private devotions ended, one of the prebendaries entertained him with another short speech, which was well liked, and thence his Majesty proceeded into the quire and heard service. After supper they were enter- tained with a play at Christ Church, which, though well penned, did not take the Court so well." ^ The next day was the great day of the festival. " It was," says Laud, "St. Fehk his day " — whoever that worthy gentle- men may be — " and all passed happily." ^ At eight in the morning the long-suffering King was again dragged off to the Cathedral to hear a sermon from the senior proctor, " a Mr. Brown, son of the sexton of St. Dunstan's in Fleet Street, a man of good parts and learned." * Judging from his text, " Blessed is the King that cometh ^ Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, vol. ii. preface xxiv. ^ Laud's narrative. Works, v. 148-9. 3 Diary, August 30, 1636. * Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, vol. x. preface xxvi. 192 ARCHBISHOP LAUD in the name of the Lord, peace in heaven and glory in the highest," the sexton's son had not learnt to draw the line between profanity and adulation ; but " it was an excellent sermon," says Laud, " and gave great content." ^ Then there was a convocation and more Latin speeches, and the two princes were made Masters of Arts, and " their names were by his Majesty's command entered in St. John's College to do that house that honour for my sake." ^ Then followed the great event of the day, the dinner at St. John's " in the new library built by myself where the King, the Queen and the Prince Elector dined at one table, which stood cross at the upper end ; and Prince Rupert with all the lords and ladies present, which were very many, dined at a long table in the same room." ^ It was a real theological banquet, for " the baked meats were served up by the cook in the forms of archbishops, bishops and doctors, wherein the King took much content." After dinner there was a play, " which was merry and without offence, and so gave a great deal of content." * Early on the following morning the King escaped from the further boredom of his academical admirers, with their sermons, Latin speeches and indifferent plays, and I, says Laud, " returned homewards the day after, having first entertained all the Heads of Houses together." " I left my steward and some few of my servants at Oxford to look to my plate, linen and other things and to pay all reckonings, that no man might ask a penny after we had left the town. And upon Saturday Sep- tember 3 (God be thanked) I returned safe home to my house at Croydon. The week after my steward came from Oxford to me, where the care of my servants, with ^ Laud's narrative. Works, v. 150. ^ Ibid. 150. ^ Ibid. 152 M. * Ibid. 153. COST OF THE ENTERTAINMENT 193 God's blessing upon it, was such that, having borrowed all the King's plate, which was in the progress, and all my Lord Chamberlain's, and made use of all my own, and hired some of my goldsmith, I lost none, but only two spoons, which were of my own plate and but little of my linen." ' The cost of the entertainment came to ;^2,666 IS. ']d., and Laud evidently thought that the game was not worth the candle, for on his return to Croydon he writes to Wentworth, that " it was a weary and expenseful business." ^ 1 Laud's narrative. Works, v. 155. * Laud to Wentworth, September 8, 1638. Works, vii. 278. CHAPTER XXIV 1637 SHIP MONEY IT would have been well for Laud if his earthly career had closed in this hour of his prosperity and great- ness ; but an avenging Nemesis had reserved him for a harder fate. The year 1637 opened with ominous warnings of a coming storm. It was the second year in which the country had been called upon to pay ship- money. In its inception the tax had been demanded only from the maritime towns, on the assumed authority of certain precedents in the forgotten times of the Plan- tagenets, found by Noy the Attorney-General among the dusty records of the Tower ; but during Laud's administration of the Treasury in 1635 the demand had been doubled and imposed as a general tax on the whole country. 1 Little did Laud think what far-reach- ing issues were involved in the extension of this illegal imposition. With great complacency he writes to Wentworth : " Last year there was money raised upon the ports according to ancient precedent for the setting out of the navy, which is now at sea, and there God bless it ; so we are now going on for a greater navy against the next year ; and because the charge will be 1 The amount demanded in 1634 was ;/^i04,2S2 ; this was raised in 1635 to ;^2o8,900. (Gardiner's Hist. vii. 370 ; and viii. 85-) I9i SHIP MONEY 195 too heavy to lay it upon the ports or maritime countries only, therefore his Majesty has thought fit, a paritate rationis, and for the like defence of the kingdom, to extend it to all counties and corporations within England and Wales, that so the navy may be full, and yet the charge less as coming from so many hands. I pray God bless this business ; for if it go well, the King will be a great master at sea, and in these active times we by God's blessing may be the more safe at land." ^ The country, however, did not join with the Archbishop in invoking the blessing of Heaven upon this audacious violation of the law. " Never in all my life," writes Sir Simonds D'Ewes in his Memoirs, " did I see so many sad faces in England as this new taxation called ship-money occa- sioned. It was the most deadly and fatal blow, which the liberty of the subjects in England had received in five hundred years, for writs were issued to the sheriffs to levy great sums in all the counties under pretext and colour of providing ships for the defence of the kingdom, although we were at peace with all the world. The sum now to be levied came to some ;f 320,000 ; and if this could be done lawfully, then by the same right the King upon the like pretence might gather the sum ten or a hundred times redoubled, when and as often as he pleased." ^ So general was the discontent, and so difficult was the realization of the tax, that the King determined to fortify his position by an extra-judicial opinion from his judges. Two questions were submitted for their decision. When the kingdom is in danger may not the King require his subjects to provide and equip ships for its defence ? And secondly, is not the King the sole 1 Laud to Wentworth, July 6, 1635. Works, vi. 422. 2 D'Ewes' Memoirs, vol. ii. p. [29. 196 ARCHBISHOP LAUD judge of the danger and when and how it is to be pre- vented and avoided ? After five days' deUberation the judges returned an affirmative answer to both ques- tions/ and Laud writes in his usual strain of piety to Wentworth : " God be thanked in all this troublesome business God hath exceedingly blessed his Majesty. For this term the judges have aU declared, under their hands unanimously, that if the kingdom be in danger, the King may call for and ought to have supply for ship- money through the kingdom, and that the King is sole judge when the kingdom is in this danger." ^ " So that for aught I know, nothing now remains of difficulty but to make the assessments as equal as may be. There was a great providence used to compass it, and a great deal of God's blessing to go with it in the success. Few know how the business was so soon and so well ripened. 'Tis this : the King trusted it and the way of settling it to the hands of Lord Coventry (the Lord Keeper) and his attorney (Sir John Banks). I knew nothing of this but the general ; neither of them had skill in the legal rights thereto pertaining. But my Counsel came and informed me, that if one clause was not added, the business would fall short, and the suits be entered against the Crown. Thereupon I acquainted his Majesty, and the King gave order accordingly and the business passed without a rub and is under all the judges' hands." ^ This passage is in cipher, and is somewhat obscure. So much however is clear. The case had been prepared by Cov- entry and Banks for submission to the judges, and this was shown by Laud to his own Counsel, who pointed out a serious omission in the case, and a clause was then * February 7, 1637. ^ Laud to Wentworth, February 11, 1637. Works, vii. 319. ^ Same to same, April 5, 1637. Works, vii. 327, 333. SHIP MONEY 197 added to supply the omission. This must have been the all-important second question, whether the King was not the sole judge of the danger, and of the time and period when the tax was to be imposed. The judges' opinion was then publicly read in the Star Chamber by the Lord Keeper, as the uniform reso- lution of all the judges with one voice, ^ and orders were at the same time passed that it should be entered on record in all the Courts at Westminster, and published by the judges on their circuits at the assizes. And it was now a common saying among the people that there was no longer either Gospel or Law in the land, that the bishops had abolished the one, and the judges the other. In spite, however, of the extra-judicial pronouncement of the judges, and the official pressure exercised by the Government, the collections came in very slowly, and " the arrear this year," writes Laud to Wentworth, " is like to be very great ; the sheriffs not forward to distrain ; some shires out of quiet about the sheriffs' rate ; many men very backward ; and what is worst of all, there has been a libel spread not only against the legality of it, but with most mischievous and dangerous inferences. 'Tis in the form of a remonstrance. It hath been up and down in men's hands, it is said, above this half year, and many spread before found out. I got the first notice of it of any man that would make it known to the King." ^ ^ The opinion had been signed by all the judges, but it after- wards transpired that two of the judges (Croke and Hutton) had dissented from the opinion of their colleagues, and had only signed because they considered themselves bound by the opinion of the majority. ^ Laud to Wentworth, August 28, 1637. (Works, vii. 364.) The Remonstrance is given in Rush. ii. 389. 198 ARCHBISHOP LAUD Up to this time the Courts had persistently refused to allow any argument upon the question of the legality of ship-money, but with the assured support of the judges, the Government now determined to obtain in the Exche- quer Chamber a solemn decision in the King's favour, which, unlike an extra-judicial opinion, would be binding upon the nation. Among the opponents of the tax was John Hampden, the great Buckinghamshire squire, and he was now cited before the Court to justify his refusal to pay the sum of twenty shillings, the amount of his assessment. With considerable misgivings Laud looked upon the coming trial. " The greatest news of the time," he writes to Wentworth, " is the ship-money business, which is now under argument in the Exchequer Chamber before all the judges, brought thither by a case of Mr. Hampden. And though for aught I yet see and hear the argument in the Exchequer Chamber will go current enough for the King, yet believe me there will be other shocks come upon it, which, if the King's Counsel do not prevent, the business will be in great danger for all this ; and at present the search that has been made of records against the King is exceeding great. So many hands and purses have gone to it, whilst the King's search is in the hands of a very few." ^ Never had a case in England excited such extraordinary interest. For six months it was the one absorbing topic * Laud to Wentworth, November 16, 1637. (Works, -vii. 8^2.) Wentworth's reply is characteristic. " Mr. Hampden is a great Brother (Puritan), and the very genius of that nation of people leads them always to oppose civilly as ecclesiastically all that ever authority ordains for them ; but in good faith if they were right served, they should be whipped home into their right wits." (Strafford's Letters, ii. 138.) To which Laud replies: " As for whipping them into their right wits, I think it might be done were the rod rightly used, but as it is used it smarts not." {Works, vii. 399-) HAMPDEN'S CASE 199 of conversation in town and country, and its effect upon public opinion fully justified Laud's worst anticipations, " Your mention of Mr. Hampden," he writes to Went- worth, " puts me in mind of the ship-money business as it now stands. The judges have argued by four in a term, and so eight are passed, and four to come for the next term. Of the eight that are passed, none have gone against the King but Justices Croke and Hutton who both did it and very sourly. The accidents which have followed upon it already are these : First, the faction are grown very bold. Secondly, the King's moneys come in a great deal more slowly than they did in former years, and that to a very considerable sum. Thirdly, it puts thoughts into wise and moderate men's heads which were better out." ^ Naturally the two dissenting judges became the popular heroes of the day. " They were," says our antiquarian friend, Sir Simonds D'Ewes, "great lawyers and most religious, honest men, and so their judgments did out-balance six of their puisnes in all men's opinions. Besides, they were very aged, and so spoke as having one foot in the grave, without fear or affection : nay, they both professed that the case was so clear and undoubted, that they must have sinned against their oaths and their consciences, if they should have argued otherwise ; by which they made themselves to be reverenced in this age, and will for ever in their memories be dear to posterity." ^ The verdict of the Court was indeed for the King, but it was a dearly bought victory. " It is notoriously known," says Clarendon, " that pressure was borne with much more cheerfulness before the judgment for the King than ever it was after ; for moderate men, who had before voluntarily paid the > Laud to Wentworth, May 14, 1638. Works, vi. 524. ^ D'Ewes' Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 131. 200 ARCHBISHOP LAUD tax, when they heard it demanded as of right in a Court of Law, and found it so adjudged by the judges of the law upon such grounds and reasons as every stander by was able to swear was not law, and instead of giving were required to pay, they no longer looked upon it as the case of one man, but the case of the kingdom, not as an imposition laid upon them by the King, but by the judges, which they thought themselves bound in conscience to the public justice not to submit to. And here the damage and mischief cannot be expressed that the Crown and State sustained by the deserved reproach and infamy that attended the judges, by being made use of in this and the like acts of power ; there being no possibility to preserve the dignity, reverence and esti- mation of the laws themselves but by the integrity and innocency of the judges." ^ ^ Clarendon's Hist. i. 150-1. CHAPTER XXV 1637 PRYNNE, BURTON, AND BASTWICK BUT the opposition to ship-money was not the only cloud which this year had arisen on the political horizon. In an evil hour for himself Laud had deter- mined to appeal to the Star Chamber to support his innovations in the Church, and to crush once and for ever by a terrible vengeance the further resistance of his Puritan adversaries. The victims selected for pun- ishment were his old adversary Prynne, Burton a clergy- man, and Bastwick a physician ; so the three learned pro- fessions of law, physic and divinity were all to be repre- sented in the trial. One common charge was brought against the three, of publishing pamphlets scandalously libelling the bishops. In his news from Ipswich Prynne purported to give a detailed account of Dr. Wren's benign administration in the diocese of Norwich ; " but all the first part of it," writes Laud to Wentworth, " strikes at me for innovations in the Church. I send you a copy of it that you may see how I am used. But I pray burn it that no copies may be taken of it, though perhaps some are sent out both to Scotland and Ireland. The way of spreading them here was in letter cases, and so sent to almost all the Lords in the kingdom, and the Court is full of them." ^ The other pamphlets were ^ Laud to Wentworth, December 6, 1636. Works, vii. 301. 201 202 ARCHBISHOP LAUD of a similar nature, accusing the bishops in no measured language of thrusting out the substance of rehgion by their ceremonies and observances. Such was the terror inspired by the Star Chamber that the accused experienced great difficulty in obtaining legal advice ; and when in due course they tendered their answers, the Court refused to receive them, as they were not signed by Counsel. Bastwick's answer was then signed by Mr. Holt, the Counsel who had drawn it, but the Attorney-General suggested it was of a scanda- lous nature, and ought not to be received, and Chief Justice Finch reviled Holt accordingly, and told him he deserved to have his gown pulled over his ears for drawing it. Mr. Holt rephed that it was only an expla- nation of the charge and a recital of Acts of ParHament, and how that could be scandalous and impertinent he could not conceive. Prynne and^ Burton fared no better. No member of the Bar had the courage to under- take their defence. Their answers were rejected, and the Court held that the charge against the three must be taken pro confesso ; and without taking any evidence the Court proceeded to pronoimce sentence, when *' Chief Justice Finch, looking earnestly at Mr. Prynne, said, ' I thought Mr. Prynne had no ears, but methinks he has ears,' and the usher of the Court was directed to turn up his hair and show his ears, upon the sight whereof the Lords were displeased that no more had been cut off." Mr Prynne then said he had a request to make " that your Lordships will be pleased to dismiss the prelates now sitting from having any voice in the censure of the cause, as it was in no way agreeable to either equity or reason, that they who are our adversaries, and the persons alleged to be libelled against, should be our judges. This request was, however, refused ; but though TRIAL IN THE STAR CHAMBER 203 Laud abstained from passing sentence, he spoke, it is said, " for two hours out of a note-book prepared for that purpose " The purport of his speech has already been given at a previous page of this narrative ^ The sentence of the Court was that the three men should lose their ears in the pillory, be fined ;^5,ooo each and undergo perpetual imprisonment in three remote places of the kingdom, where they were to be " deprived of the use of pen, ink and paper, and of any books but the Bible, the Prayer Book and such other books of devotion as their keepers should be answerable for, that they were consonant to the doctrine of the Church of England." ^ The pillory at Westminster, where the next scene in the tragedy was to take place, was erected in Palace Yard in front of the Star Chamber, and it seems to have been the invariable practice of the judges to watch from their windows the execution of their sentences. Upon this occasion, however, it was a most unwelcome sight which Laud and his brother judges were called upon to survey. The pillory was surrounded by a sympathetic and indig- nant crowd, and as the victims approached, the ground was strewed with herbs and flowers, as if they were marching to a marriage feast. For two hours they stood undismayed with their heads in the pillory, rejoicing that they were thought worthy to suffer for the truth. Much had Prynne to say of the Archprelate and his doings, and all his remarks were greeted with wild applause. Such a scene Laud could never before have witnessed, and he moved the Lords, then present in the Star Chamber, that Prynne should be gagged, and an additional punish- ment laid upon him for his contempt of the Court. But the Lord Keeper replied that his Grace would do well 1 Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, vol. xi. p. 219. ^Ante, pp. 154-6. ^ Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, vol. xi. pp. 149. 204 ARCHBISHOP LAUD not to notice what men spoke in pain on the pillory, and so the matter rested. Then followed the grim exe- cution of the sentence. " The people cried and howled terribly," writes Wentworth's correspondent, " when Burton's ears were cropt ; Dr. Bastwick was very merry, and told the people that the Lords had their collar days at Court, and this was his collar day, rejoicing much in it ; and when his ears were cut off his wife called for them and put them in a clean handkerchief and carried them away with her." Prynne had not only to undergo the loss of what remained of his ears, but the additional torture of having his cheeks branded with the letters S.L ; which stood, he told the people, for Stigmata Laudis, the scars of Laud. In Laud's opinion there had been a terrible want of " thorough " in carrying out this brutal sentence. " What say you to it," he writes to Went worth, " that Prynne and his fellows should be suffered to talk what they pleased while they stood in the pillory, and win acclamations from the people, and have notes taken of what they spake, and those notes spread in written copies about the City ; and that when they went out of town to their several imprisonments, there were thousands suffered to be upon the way to take their leave, and God knows what else ?" ^ What, however, troubled him more than these manifestations of public opinion were the libels circulated about himself, and he adds in a postscript to his letter, that " two papers had just come into his hands ; the one found at the south door of St. Paul's, and it makes the devil let it out to the Archbishop for services to damn the souls of men. The other, after ^ Strafford's Letters, ii. 85. 2 Laud to Wentworth, August 28, 1637. Works, vi. 497. RESTRICTIONS ON THE PRESS 205 abuse of some other bishops, makes me captain of the devil's army against the saints : and at the very instant while I was writing this, my Lord Mayor sends me a board hung upon the standard in Cheap, with my speech in the Star Chamber nailed at one end of it, and singed with fire, the corners cut off instead of the ears, a pillory of ink with my name looking through it, with a writing, " The man who puts the saints of God in a pillory of wood stands here in a pillory of ink." What do you think will become of me when I am thus used ? Is not this an excellent reward for my services ? " ^ His ser- vices ! What a conscience the man must have had ! He seems to have been absolutely insensible to the ele- mentary principles of justice, or his thirst for cruelty had grown with its gratification, and deadened within him the natural instincts of humanity. On the principle that prevention is better than cure, the proceedings against Prjmne were immediately followed by a decree of the Star Chamber which, says Heylin, " Laud had procured to be passed to regulate the trade of printing and prevent all abuses of that excellent art to the disturbance of the Church. The number of printers and sellers of books was to be strictly limited, and any unlicensed printer or dealer who should openly or secretly pursue that trade was to be set in the pillory and whipt through the streets." ^ All commentaries on the Common Law of the realm were prohibited " unless licensed by the Chief Justice and the Chief Baron of the Exchequer. And no other books, whether of divinity, physick, philo- sophy or poetry were to appear unless allowed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of London or the Chancellor or Vice Chancellor of the two Universities," 1 Laud's Works, vii. 371. " Heylin, 341. 2o6 ARCHBISHOP LAUD so that not only theologians, but doctors, poets and men of science were placed under clerical control. Printers, dealers and authors infringing the above regulations were to be dealt with by the Star Chamber or the High Com- mission Court as thought fitting.^ Similar restrictions and penalties were also imposed upon books printed abroad : and it was now hoped that all outlets for the expression of public opinion were effectually closed. Six months after this Star Chamber decree, the public conscience was startled by another prosecution in which Laud's vindictive feelings were gratified to the full. John Lilburn, a youth of twenty, had been arrested under a warrant issued by the Archbishop's Chancellor, for sending certain Puritan books reflecting on the bishops from Holland to England. When interrogated in the Star Chamber, he denied that he had had anything to do with the books in question. No evidence was adduced against him, but he was ordered to take the ex officio oath, in the hope that he might be forced to give evidence against himself. Lilburn replied that no freeborn Eng- lishman could be legally compelled to incriminate himself, and he refused the oath. " My Lords," said the Arch- bishop, " do you hear him ? he saith with all reverence and submission he refuseth the oath. He is one of the most notorious dispensers of libellous books that is in the kingdom." Lilburn replied, " You are not able to prove and make good what you have said." " I have testimony of it," said Laud. " Then," said Lilburn, " pro- duce it in the face of the open Court, that we may see what they have to accuse me of, and I am ready here to answer for myself and to make my just defence." This was ^ Star Chamber decree concerning printing, July ii, 1637. Rush. Col. ii. ap. 306. TRIAL OF LILBURN 207 not, one would think, an unreasonable demand ; but the Court unanimously decided that Lilburn, in refusing the oath, had been guilty of a very high contempt and offence, and he was remanded to the Fleet until he submitted to the orders of the Court, and for the contempt was fined £500 and sentenced to be whipt through the streets from the Fleet prison to the pillory at Westminster.^ Five days afterwards the sentence was carried into effect. When Lilburn reached Palace Yard after having been cruelly whipt through the streets, the tipstaff of the Star Chamber brought him a message from the Lords, who were then present in the Chamber to witness the execution of the sentence, that if he would confess his guilt, he would be excused the infliction of the pillory. He still refused, and after making his obeisance to the Star Chamber window, where the Lords were standing, he put his neck into the hole, and in that position com- menced a speech in vindication of himself to the people, and scattered among them copies of some pamphlets he had in his pockets. The Lords thereupon adopted the suggestion which Laud had made in Prynne's case, and the Warden of the Fleet was ordered to gag him. Another order directed the Warden of the Fleet to place Lilburn in irons on his return to the prison, and keep him in confinement in that part of the Fleet where the basest and meanest sort of prisoners were used to be 1 Dr. Gardiner does not notice this novel punishment for contempt of Court ; but with regard to Lilburn's refusal to cri- minate himself, he says : " Such a claim went far beyond the doctrine ultimately accepted by English Courts, that no man may be compelled to criminate himself. He refused to answer any questions of which he did not know the import, a claim which, if admitted, would make it impossible to cross-examine any witness whatever." (Gardiner's H«s/. vii. 249.) But Lilburn was not a witness, but an accused person on his trial. 2o8 ARCHBISHOP LAUD put, and to take special care to hinder the resort of any persons whatsoever to him." ^ This atrocious order was passed by Archbishop Laud, the Lord Keeper, the Lord Treasurer, two Secretaries of State, and three other members of the Privy Council. * 3 State Trials, 1341. CHAPTER XXVI 1637 LAUD AND THE QUEEN IT was during this year 1637 that a marked change took place in Laud's attitude towards the Roman Cathohcs, which brought him into colHsion with the Queen, who was naturally sensitive in all matters con- nected with her religion. In the earlier years of the reign she had been excluded by Buckingham from all participation in public affairs,^ but after his death the King became the most uxorious of husbands, and " so completely made over his affection to his wife that they were out of danger of any other favourite." ^ Her influence increased with her maturer years, and secured for her co-religionists the practical toleration of their religion. In the prosecution of her designs, or I should rather say of the designs of the priests who advised her, she was wise enough to remain on good terms with Laud, and he was equally desirous of securing so power- ful a personage as a patron and a friend. " Saturday at Oatlands," he notes in his diary, " the Queen sent for me, and gave me thanks for a business with which she 1 Buckingham, says Clarendon, took great pains to lessen the King's affection towards his young Queen, being exceedingly jealous lest her interest might be of force enough to cross his designs. {Hist. i. 82.) 2 Thomas Gary to Earl of Carlisle, December 21, 1628. Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, cxxiii. 3. 209 o 210 ARCHBISHOP LAUD trusted me ; her promise then that she would be my friend, and that I should have address to her when I had occasion." ^ The business with which he was trusted is not men- tioned. It was evidently of too delicate or questionable a nature to be committed even to the pages of his diary ; but, if we may credit Heylin, he had laid the Queen under considerable obligations by inducing the King and the Council to allow her to receive at Court an accredited agent from the Pope.^ In the following December a Nuncio arrived in the person of Panzani, who was suc- ceeded in May 1636 by Con, a Scotchman, " who brought with him many relics of saints, medals and pieces of gold with the Pope's picture stamped on them, to be dis- tributed amongst those of that party, but principally among the ladies of the Court and country." ^ With a Papal Nuncio in friendly intercourse with the King, the Jesuits and priests emerged from their hiding-places, and commenced a vigorous system of proselytizing. The Queen's chapel in Somerset House became one of the fashionable attractions of the Court. " The Holy Sacrament was on the altar till noon to satisfy the devo- tion of the multitude of communicants. On festivals nine masses were celebrated in the course of the morn- ing." * Priests and Jesuits ^ swarmed unchecked about the Court and throughout the country, and the frequent conversions to Rome induced the belief that an organized conspiracy was on foot to subvert the established re- ligion of the country. ^ Diary, August 30, 1634. ^ Heylin, 287. ^ Id., 337. * Gardiner, viii. 241. ^ The number of Jesuits in England may be set down at 300, and there were besides 180 regular and 600 secular priests. (Hallam's Hist. vol. ii. p. 61, note a.) THE LAUDIAN CLERGY 211 The general conduct of the Laudian clergy greatly contributed to the uneasy feeling that prevailed. They had ceased to call themselves Protestants, and posed, like their successors in our own days, as Anglo-Catholics and " talked in language unheard of in the reign of Eliza- beth, of priests and altars, of auricular confessions and of the honours to be paid to the saints." ^ Goodman, bishop of Gloucester, said divine offices in private out of the Roman breviary, and " asked permission to keep an Italian priest to say mass secretly in his house." ' Montague, bishop of Chichester, of " Appello Caesarem" notoriety, had entered into secret negotiations with the Papal Nuncio, to effect a reconciliation with the Church of Rome, assuring him that " the two Arch- bishops, the Bishop of London and some other bishops, with many of the most learned clergy, held the opinions of Rome on dogma, and especially on the authority of the Pope, whom he confessed to be the Vicar of Christ, the successor of St Peter, without whom nothing could be determined to bind the Church " ; ^ and he added that only three of the bishops, Davenant of Salisbury, Hall of Exeter, and Morton of Durham were determined anti-Romanists.* With such traitors on the Episcopal bench, and with such doctrines openly avowed by the clergy, the wonder is that the conversions to Rome were not more numerous than they were. But the social position of the converts, some of them occupying important offices at Court, ^ Gardiner, viii. 133. ^ Id., 140. 3 Id., 139. * These negotiations came to nothing. The Pope pointed out to the Nuncio that it was needless hypocrisy to make a dis- tinction between Anglo-Catholics and Puritans, as they were both of them outside the verge of the Church. He required absolute submission, and would listen to no terms of reconcilia- tion. (Hallam's Hist. vol. ii. p. 73.) 212 ARCHBISHOP LAUD naturally added to the public alarm, and " the blame," says Heylin, " was laid upon Laud, who was traduced in libels and common talk for the principal architect in the plot, and the contriver of the mischief." ^ To free himself from this imputation, and to convince the world that he was not a secret emissary of the Pope, Laud now thought it necessary to make a display of Protestant zeal by proposing in Council that the chapel of the Queen, as well as the chapels of the ambassa- dors, should be closed against the entrance of English subjects, and that the contrivers of these conversions should be brought before his Court of High Commission for condign punishment.^ The occasion which called forth this vigorous protest is briefly referred to in his diary : " A great noise about the perverting of Lady New- port. Speech of it at the Council. My free speech there to the King concerning the increase of the Roman party, the freedom at Somerset House, the carriage of Mr. Walter Montague and Sir Thoby Matthew. The Queen acquainted with all I said that very night, and highly displeased with me, and so continues." ^ A few days later he writes to Wentworth : " The Countess of Newport is lately professed Roman Catholic. I did my duty to the King and State openly in Council, and had some occasion to speak particularly of Mr. Walter Mon- tague, who is grown very busy, and is in my opinion too much suffered. From thence we went to the Foreign Committee, and that ended, the King went to the other side, where he told the Queen everything that I had said in Council, and she was very angry, and took great excep- tion to me, and I hear her anger continues. But howso- ever I must bear it, and get out of the briars as I can. 1 Heylin, 337. 2 Gardiner, viii. 240. 3 Diary, October 22, 1637. CONVERSIONS TO ROME 213 Indeed I have a very hard task, for I am between two great factions, veryhke corn between two millstones." ' And this was the end of Laud's remonstrance. He had incurred the undying resentment of the Queen for attempt- ing to invade the freedom of her chapel, while her influence with her husband was successfully exercised to avert the persecution of the Catholics, whom she had taken under her protection. And certainly the King had no reason to regret that he had not yielded to Laud's solicita- tions. The toleration extended to his Catholic subjects secured their loyalty and affection, and in the coming struggle with his people they were among the strongest supporters of his throne. 1 Laud to Wentworth, November i, 1637. Works, vii. 379. CHAPTER XXVII 1637— 1638 SCOTLAND WHILE these events were occurring in England, Laud's restless activity in his zeal for confor- mity had raised a formidable rebellion in Scotland, and we will now take up the thread of events in that kingdom, where we left them after the King's visit in 1633.^ It will be remembered that an act had been forced through the estates at Edinburgh, transferring from the General Assembly to the King the regulation of ecclesiastical apparel, but beyond this no sanction had been given for any alteration in the established government and Presbyterian discipline of the Church. The bishops as well as the inferior clergy continued subject to the control of the local synods and the General Assembly. All this was now to be altered. Prelatical government was to be substituted for Presbyterianism, and this fundamental change in the constitution of the Church was to be effected, not by an Act of the Estates assembled in Parliament, but by an executive order of the King without the advice or consent of the clergy. It is difficult to conceive how such a mad and utterly illegal project could have entered into the brain of any sane man. The one sentiment which animated the Scottish nation, the clergy and the laity alike, from 1 Ante, p. 133. 211 LAUD AND THE SCOTCH CHURCH 215 the noble to the peasant, was an abhorrence of Episco- pacy, and an unswerving attachment to their simple form of worship. What James had said of Laud, was equally true of Charles. " He knew not the stomach of that people." It was a veritable case of the blind lead- ing the blind to destruction. But so completely was the King under the priestly influence of Laud, that he did not think it necessary to consult either his Privy Council in England, or his Council in Scotland, before embarking on an enterprise which, if successful, could bring no advantage to the Crown, and if unsuccessful, might involve the monarchy itself in ruin. The Minister, who had the conduct of Scotch affairs, was the Marquis of Hamilton, but, by the special order of the King, all matters connected with the Church were withdrawn from his control and placed entirely in the hands of Laud. In the two short visits he had paid to Scotland Laud had made the lamentable discovery that there was no religion in the land. The churches were mere barns and the worship mere confusion. There were no altars in the churches to which the people could reverently bow ; there was no ceremonious ritual to guide their devotion ; the ministers officiated in black gowns instead of surphces ; and worst of all, the bishops, with their jus divinum, were mere shadows without authority, subject to the control of General Assemblies, in which lay elders were permitted to discuss the sacred doctrines and discipline of the Church. In this land of spiritual destitution the Royal Chapel at Holyrood was the only place where true orthodox worship could be seen. It was provided with the appro- priate furniture, and shortly after Laud became Arch- bishop, a Royal order was issued that " the Dean should celebrate divine service with the quire twice a day in 2i6 ARCHBISHOP LAUD the chapel according to the Enghsh hturgy," as an exam- ple and model for the rest of the kingdom. " The Dean, whether reading prayers or preaching, was to be clad in his whites," and " he was to look carefully that all who came to the Holy Communion should receive it kneeling." He was further to signify as the King's command that " the Lords of the Privy Council, the Lords of the Session, the Advocates, Writers of the Signet, and the members of the College of Justice, should receive the Holy Communion once every year at the least in the chapel and kneeling, for example sake to the kingdom," and such persons as refused to comply with these commands were to be reported for the special orders of the King.^ But the Presbyterian officials of Edinburgh . had some sense of decency in religious matters, and refused to be parties to a scandalous profanation of the sacrament for political purposes ; and the Dean in much perplexity writes to Laud that " if some were not checked and punished, none would obey." " Twice," says Laud, " I moved the King to punish those who had disobeyed his Majesty's commands " ; * but the King prudently declined to interfere, and no further action was taken in the matter. The miscarriage of this deep laid scheme to compromise the Edinburgh officials in the eyes of their countrymen was laid upon the unfortu- nate Dean, who seems to have been somewhat lukewarm in the business, and he was accordingly transferred to Aberdeen, and the bishopric of Dunblane, with the Deanery of the Royal Chapel, was given to Dr. Wedder- burne, a prebend of Ely, and a man of pronounced High 1 The Royal Edict, October 8, 1633. Laud's Works, iii. 301-2, note. 2 Laud's Works, vi. 395 ; and iii. 306. LAUD'S CANONS 217 Church views. " A capable man withal," writes Laud to the Bishop of Ross, " and very able to do this ser- vice, and will certainly do it, if you can keep up his heart. I pray commend my love to him, and tell him I would not have him stickle at anything, for the King will not leave him long at Dunblane after he has once settled the chapel right." ^ Laud's next measure was the establishment by Royal warrant in Edinburgh of a Court of High Commission, a Court of evil reputation, but a necessary adjunct of episcopal rule. It was intended to strengthen the hands of the bishops in case opposition should be offered to the two final measures which were to complete the ecclesiastical revolution, namely, the promulgation of a Book of Canons, and introduction of a new and orthodox liturgy. The Canons were first taken in hand, and the work, under Laud's supervision, was entrusted to Dr. Wedderburne, the Bishop of Dunblane, and Dr. Maxwell, the Bishop of Ross ; and after receiving his final approval, were without more ado promulgated by him, under a Royal decree,^ as " the Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical ordained to be observed by the Church of Scotland." They were received, we are told, in Scotland with a " kind of dumb amazement " : and men asked by what authority had a foreign prelate, and two Tulchan ^ bishops imposed a code of ecclesiastical law upon an independent Church and nation. Two concessions the Canons had made to Scotch susceptibilities. The clergy were described as presbyters, not as priests ; and the Communion table maintained 1 Laud's Works, vi. 434. ^ May 23, 1635. ^ Tulchan, a calf-skin stuffed with straw and set beside a cow to make her give milk freely. The term was applied in derision to the titular bishops of the Scotch Church. 2i8 ARCHBISHOP LAUD its old designation and was not changed into an altar. But in all other respects the Canons were sufficiently a arming to the Presbyterian mind. The absolute prerogative of the King, God's vicegerent on earth over the Kirk, was asserted, and then followed this astounding paragraph, " Whosoever should hereafter affirm that the King's Majesty had not the same authority in causes ecclesiastical that the Godly kings had amongst the Jews, and the Christian emperors in the primitive Church, should be forthwith excommunicated." A similar punish- ment was provided for all persons who objected to the doctrines, rites, ceremonies and government of the Church as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer, which at the time was not in existence, but under preparation. The general control of the Church was vested in the bishops, and the General Assemblies of the Kirk were suppressed, and were only to meet when specially sum- moned by the King. In the public service the presbyters were not to use extemporary prayers, or to administer the Communion to those who refused to kneel, or to reveal anything told them in confession. Strict restric- tions were imposed on education : "No one was to teach, either in a public school or a private house, unless he was obedient to the orders of the Church, and had been licensed by the bishop of the diocese. All offences against the Canons were to be punished by the bishops or their commissaries sitting in local consistory Courts, and when no penalty had been expressly provided, " it was to be understood that the punishment was to be arbitrary as the bishops should think fittest." ^ After the Canons had received the Royal assent, but before they had been printed, it was brought to Laud's notice that there was a custom in the Scotch Church of hold- 1 The Canons are printed in Laud's Works, vol. v. 585-606. LAUD'S LITURGY 219 ing public fasts on Sunday, a practice which he declared was " opposite to Christianity itself " ; and he at once wrote to the Archbishop of St. Andrews, that it was his Majesty's will and pleasure that a " Canon should be framed against this unworthy custom and printed with the rest." ' In the preparation of the Prayer Book a serious differ- ence of opinion occurred between the two bishops who were entrusted with the work. Maxwell, the Bishop of Ross, was in favour of adopting a liturgy " which had been compiled by some of the Scotch bishops in the reign of James, but had never been brought into use, as the King had given his promise to the Scottish Parliament in 1621, that if the five Articles of Perth were confirmed, there should be no further innovation in the matters of religion." ^ His ritualistic colleague. Dr. Wedderburne, Bishop of Dunblane, objected to this Liturgy as altogether insufficient, and suggested alterations and additions, which Maxwell was convinced would be highly distasteful to the clergy and laity alike. This difference of opinion, instead of being submitted for the consideration of the Scotch bishops, was submitted for Laud's sole decision, and the following extracts from his letter to Dr. Wedder- burne will give some idea of the arbitrary manner in which questions affecting the Scotch Church were dealt with. " I have acquainted his Majesty," he writes, " with the two great reasons that you gave why the (service) book you had in King James' time is short and insufficient. As first, that the order of deacons is made but as a lay office ; and secondly, in the admission to priesthood, the very essential words of conferring orders 1 Letter to Archbishop of St. Andrews, December i, 1635. Laud's Works, vi. 443. 2 Gardiner, vii. 282. 220 ARCHBISHOP LAUD are left out ; ^ at which his Majesty (all Laud's views were his Majesty's) was much troubled, as he had great cause, and concerning which he has commanded me to write that either you do admit of our Book of Ordina- tion ; or else that you amend your own in these two gross oversights, and then see the book reprinted. I pray fail not to acquaint my Lord of St. Andrews and my Lord Ross with this express command of his Majesty. " I received likewise from you certain notes to be considered of, that all, or so many of them as his Majesty should approve, might be made use of in your liturgy, which is now in printing. And though my business hath of late laid heavy upon me, yet I presently acquainted his Majesty with what you have written. After this I and Bishop Wren, by his Majesty's appointment, sat down seriously and considered of them all, and then I tendered them again to the King, with our animadversions upon them, and his Majesty had the patience to weigh and consider them all again. This done, so many as his Majesty approved I have written into a service book of ours, and sent you the book with his Majesty's hand to it, to warrant all your alterations made therein. So in the printing of your Liturgy you are to follow the book which my Lord Ross brought, and the additions which are made to the book I now send. But if you find the book of my Lord Ross's and this to differ in anything that is material, then you are to follow this later book I now send." After certain directions as to the Athanasian Creed, the mode of administering the sacrament and other subjects of minor importance, the letter concludes as follows : " Whereas you write that much more might have 1 I.e. the power of forgiving sins. ITS RECEPTION IN SCOTLAND 221 been done, if the times would have borne it, I make no doubt there might have been a fuller addition. But, God be thanked, this will do very well, and I hope breed up a good deal of devout and religious piety in that king- dom. One thing more, and I have done. In his Majesty's authorizing of the notes to this book prefixed, though he leaves a liberty to my Lord the Archbishop and the bishops, who are upon the place, upon apparent reason to vary some things, yet you must know and inform them that his Majesty, having viewed all these additions, hopes there will be no change of anything, and will be best pleased with little or rather no alteration." ^ It will be observed that Laud had no intention that the Prayer Book, after this final revision, should be sub- mitted to any synod of the clergy or even to the Bench of bishops. The King had approved of it, and would have no further alterations ; and the people of Scot- land were to accommodate their religion, be th in ritual and doctrine, to the wishes of the King. In the following October " the Scottish Privy Council received a missive letter ^ announcing the book, and ordering them to make known his Majesty's command that all his subjects in Scotland should " conform themselves in the practice thereof, it being the only form which we, having taken the counsel of our clergy, think fit to be used in God's worship there." ^ This was the first intimation that the Privy Council in Edinburgh had received on the subject. It was not, however, till May 1637 that copies of the book were pro- curable, and great was the commotion it excited. Public ^ Letter to Bishop Wedderburne, dated April 20, 1636. Laud's Works, vi. 455. * The letter is dated Newark, October 18, 1636. ^ Masson's Life of Milton, vol. i. 718. 222 ARCHBISHOP LAUD opinion pronounced the book little better than the Mass. But the King's orders were peremptory, and a notifica- tion was issued that on Sunday, July 23, the new Liturgy was to be used in all the churches in Edinburgh. At ten o'clock on that eventful day the Cathedral and Church of St. Giles was filled with a large congregation, most of the Council and other officials being present, with the Archbishop and the Bishop of the diocese. As soon as the Dean in his surplice had opened his book his voice was drowned by the moaning of the congrega- tion, when suddenly a woman, who has been handed down to posterity by the name of Jenny Geddes, hurled the stool on which she was sitting at the Dean's head. A general uproar followed, and stones and other mis- siles flew about the church. With difficulty the rioters were ejected and the doors shut ; but in the meantime the tumult had communicated itself to the streets, and crowds were collected outside the church, who broke the windows and endeavoured to force the doors, and amid this confusion the service was brought to a close. When, says Clarendon, " the Council and the magistrates went out of the church to their houses, the rabble fol- lowed the bishops with all the opprobrious language they could invent, of bringing in superstition and Popery and making the people slaves ; and not content with using their tongues, they treated the bishop of Edinburgh so rudely that with great difficulty he got into a house, after they had torn his habit, and was from thence re- moved to his own with great hazard of his life. As this was the reception it had in the Cathedral, so it fared no better in the other churches of the city, but was enter- tained with the same hoUowing and outcries and with the same bitter execrations against Bishops and Popery, insomuch that within a few days the bishops durst not OPPOSITION IN EDINBURGH 223 appear in the streets, but were in danger of their lives, so that there was scarce a bishop left in Edinburgh, and not a minister who durst read the liturgy in any church." ^ The day after the riot in the Cathedral, a proclama- tion was issued by the Scotch Privy Council suspending aU public service in the Edinburgh churches till further instructions were received from London. But so little did Charles or his episcopal adviser realize the extreme gravity of the occasion, that " even, after the advertise- ment of this preamble to rebellion, no mention," says Clarendon, " was made of it at the Council Board." It was treated as a simple matter of Church discipline, and the despatches from Scotland were left for Laud to dis- pose of. It was the first time that his illegal innovations in religion had been met with defiant opposition, and, what was more irritating, the authorities on the spot, including the bishops, declined all responsibility for his handiwork. In great indignation he writes to the Council : " The interdicting of all divine service till his Majesty's further pleasure was known was in effect to disclaim the work, and to give way to the insolency of the baser multitude. But the bishops, disclaiming the book as any act of theirs, but as it was his Majesty's command, was most unworthy. 'Tis most true the King commanded a liturgy, and it was time they had one. They did not like to admit of ours, but thought it more reputation for them to compile one of their own, and they have done it well. Will they now cast down the milk they have given because a few milkmaids have scolded at them ? " ^ The "milkmaids" were therefore to be suppressed, and the Council were peremptorily ordered to enforce the service book, with an intimation of the 1 Clarendon's Hist. ii. 15, iT. 2 Laud's Works, vi. 495. 224 ARCHBISHOP LAUD King's displeasure that the service had been interdicted while none of the rioters had been punished.* When received in Edinburgh, these orders produced " a general combustion." " The nobles, the lesser barons, the burghs and the whole body of the clergy began to bestir themselves. The harvest being nearly over, they poured into Edinburgh, or sent deputies thither in such extraordinary numbers that they were surprised at their own strength. Supplicates, as the petitions were called, were simultaneously presented at the Council table from twenty-four nobles, a considerable number of Barons, loo ministers, 14 towns, and 168 parishes.^ " The old form of worship which had been univer- sally practised since the Reformation had," they said, " been warranted by Acts of the General Assemblies, and by diverse Acts of Parliament ; the new service book was warranted by neither. The Kirk of Scot- land was a free and independent Kirk, as the kingdom was a free and independent kingdom, and its own pastors were best able to judge what form of worship serveth most for the good of the people." ^ In forward- ing these petitions to the King, the Council entered into no discussion as to the merits of the service book. " The effect and substance," they said, " of all the petitions resolves itself into this, that the service enjoined is against the religion by law established, and is introduced with- out the consent of the General Assembly or the author- ity of an Act of Parliament." * The question was now brought to a very simple issue and admitted of only one answer. It was an awkward * Baillie's Letters and Journal, i. 452. ^ Masson's Life of Milton, i. 722. 3 Baillie, i. 450. * Council to King, September 20, 1637. Baillie, i. 453. THE TABLES 225 question for Laud, and he chose to ignore it. The only reply he vouchsafed to give to this remonstrance was an order to the Council to receive no more petitions in the matter of religion, and to require all strangers to depart from Edinburgh within twenty-four hours, on pain of outlawry ; and to prevent a recurrence of these disturbances, the Council and the Court of Session were directed to remove from Edinburgh to Stirhng.^ The proclamation of these orders led to another and more serious riot, and to a demand that the bishops should be excluded from any further participation in the measures of Government, and be put upon their trial as the cause of all the prevailing evils and discontent.^ At the same time permanent committees were appointed to sit in Edinburgh to watch the issue of events. There was a Committee of the Nobles, another of the Lairds or lesser barons, consisting of two gentlemen from each shire, and a third for the burghs, with a representative from each town, and a fourth for the clergy with a minister from each presbytery.' The formation of these committees, or tables, as they were called, was the first step in an organized resistance to the Crown ; and in the face of this opposition the Government in Edinburgh was power- less. Even Charles was convinced that something must be done to maintain his authority, and the Earl of Tra- quair, the Lord Treasurer of Scotland, was summoned to London for a personal conference with the King. He was the one lay member of the Scotch Council who had been admitted to the secrets of the plot, and he had pledged himself, writes Laud, " faithfully and readily to do all the good offices for the Church within his power, according to the commands he should receive from the 1 Rushworth, ii. 401. 2 Id. 402-7. 3 Masson's Milton, i. 724. Q 226 ARCHBISHOP LAUD King, or othen\'ise by the direction of his Majesty from myself." ^ But this understanding between Traquair and himself, he adds, " was to be kept very secret and made known to no other person, either clergy or lay, as the di\nilging of these things would only breed jealousies among men, and disservices in regard to the things them- selves." But the disturbances in Edinburgh had con- \'inced Traquair that to insist upon the acceptance of the ser\'ice book woiild be madness. The Scottish nation, he told the King, " had no wish to cast off his authority, but they would never tolerate any innovations in the matter of their religion, nor take orders from the Arch- bishop of Canterbury. If, however, his Majesty per- sisted in compelling the people to use the new liturgy, he must support it with an army of 40,000 men." Small thanks and little credit Traquair received for his plain speaking. He had been mobbed and hustled in the streets of Edinburgh as the secret agent of the Court, while Laud attributed the failure of his project to Traquair's want of thorough in its execution ; and the King, in blind rehance on his episcopal adviser, and without consulting his Council, thought it sufficient to meet the crisis by another foohsh proclamation. " The Prayer Book," he said, " had been seen and approved by himself, and his Royal authority was much injured by the meetings which had been held and the petitions which had been sent to him against it. All who had taken part in these proceedings were liable to high censure both in their persons and their fortunes, but he was ready to pass over their fault provided they abstained from all further meetings in future. If they disobeyed 1 Laud to Archbishop of St. Andrews, November 10, 1635. Works, \± 439- * Burnet, Memoirs of the Duke of Hamilton, 33. Gardiner, viii. 326. THE SOLEMN COVENANT 227 his commands, he should hold them liable to the penal- ties of high treason." ^ His Majesty's Proclamation, when published at Stirling, called forth a prompt reply from " the Tables." They determined to appeal from the King to the nation, and before a month had expired the Protestants of Scotland, from the highest to the lowest, had bound themselves in a solemn Covenant to defend with their lives the religion of their fathers, and to resist all innovations " until they were tried and allowed in their free Assemblies and Parliament." "The Covenant was now the text in all the pulpits, the topic of all households ; men walked for miles to see a copy and to sign it ; and in many places the swearing was en masse, whole congregations, men, women and children, standing up together after the forenoon sermon on Sun- days, and raising their hands in affirmation while the minister read out the Covenant." ^ And so a local riot in Edinburgh had culminated in a national revolt, and in no enviable frame of mind Laud attended the meeting of the Privy Council, which had been summoned by the King on the first news of the Covenant. When entering the Council Chamber, he was greeted by Archie, the Court Jester, with " news from Scotland your Grace, who is the fool now ? " This was more than the great man could stand. The privileged Jester was at once brought before the Council, and it was solemnly ordered "by His Majesty, with the advice of the Board, that the Jester should have his coat pulled over his head, and be discharged from the King's service, and banished the Court, and the order was immediately carried into execution.^ ' Proclamation of February 19, 1638. Rushworth, ii. 731. ^ Masson's Milton, i. 732. ' Council Register, March 11, 1638. Rushworth, ii. 471. 228 ARCHBISHOP LAUD But the news from Scotland was not so easily dis- posed of. The members of the Privy Council had little love for the Archbishop, and declined all responsibility for measures upon which they had not been consulted, and the meeting broke up without arriving at any defi- nite resolution. Meanwhile the Covenanters were not idle. Every day added to their strength, and they now made a formal demand that a general assembly and a Parliament should be convened to redress the grievances of the nation. The King at last realized how useless it was to pass orders which he had no power to enforce ; and to gain time, 'he resolved to send his kinsman, the Marquis of Hamilton, as his Commissioner to Scotland, to negotiate with the rebels. He was instructed to com- municate directly with the King and the Archbishop of Canterbury, " the only Englishman trusted with the secrets of the business." ^ What these secrets were, Charles himself explains : " I expect not," he writes, to Hamilton, " that anything can reduce that people to obedience, but force only ; in the meantime your care must be how to dissolve the multitude ; and if it be possible, to possess yourself of my two castles of Edin- burgh and Stirling ; and to this end I give you leave to flatter them with what hopes you please, so that you engage not me against my grounds ; and in particular that you consent not either to the calling of Parliament, or a General Assembly, till the Covenant be given up ; your chief end being now to win time, until I be ready to suppress them." ^ It is unnecessary to follow in detail Hamilton's negotia- tions. The Scotch leaders refused to abandon the Cove- nant, but they were willing to explain that " it meant no 1 Burnet's Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton, 51. 2 Charles to Hamilton, June 11, 1638. Rushworth, ii. 752. THE KING'S CONCESSIONS 229 disloyalty to the government of His Majesty, conse- crated as it was by the descent and under the reigns of 107 Kings." This, however, by no means satisfied the King. " As concerning their damnable covenant," he writes to Hamilton, " whether it be with or without explanation, I have no more power in Scotland than as a Duke of Venice, which I will rather die than suffer, yet I com- mand the giving ear to their explanation, or anything else to win time." ^ Very large concessions were now made to the Cove- nanters' demand. The Marquis was authorized to re- voke the Canons and the service book, to abolish the Court of High Commission, and to consent to a limita- tion of the bishops' authority. He was further instructed to summon a General Assembly to meet in the month of November ; but to render its proceedings as harmless as possible, he was to contrive by secret management to keep the turbulent lay element out of the Assembly " by infusing into the minds of the clergy a jealousy of being overruled by laics." * All the demands of the Scots were now granted except the abolition of episcopacy in a limited form ; and that, said the Covenanters, was a question with which only a General Assembly properly constituted could deal. It was with a heavy heart that Laud witnessed the ruin of the cherished scheme which had occupied so much of his time and his thoughts. " I think as you do," he writes to Wentworth, " that Scotland is the veriest devil out of Hell." ' " You cannot have a greater desire to conform Ireland to the Church of England 1 King to Hamilton, June 25, 1638. Masson's Milton, ii. 21. ^ King's Instructions, September 9, 1638. Burnet's Memoirs, 71-4. Rushworth, ii. 759. ' September 10, 1638. Works, vii. 482. 230 ARCHBISHOP LAUD than I, with the seeming desire of the King, to conform Scotland to the Church of England. With divers others, I made the King very fully acquainted with all the honour, strength, and peace that must needs accompany the action. The business was brought to such a pass as that it might most easily have been effected. At last it not only failed, but great troubles have arisen about it, and his Majesty dishonoured. And one of the best businesses he ever undertook in his life failed, only by the treachery of some, and the want of care and cir- cumspection, first in the way of managing the thing itself, and then in timely suppressing the first disorders about it." ^ Again he writes, " I never expected any good from the concessions, which the Marquis was author- ized to make, but there was, in my poor apprehension, a necessity for that Counsel, partly to gain time, the King's preparations being all unready, and partly to make them unmask themselves, and let the world see that religion was not their aim." ^ The General Assembly met ^ in the Cathedral at Glas- gow on the day appointed, and Hamilton, as the King's representative, presided, and James Henderson, the leader of the Presbyterian clergy, was chosen moderator. The first serious question discussed related to the bishops, who had been summoned as delinquents upon various charges to take their trial before the Assembly. The bishops refused to appear, and submitted a declinator or protestation against the competency of the Assembly to judge them. The protestation was read, and the Moderator put the question, " whether they found them- selves competent to judge the bishops notwithstanding ^ Laud to Wentworth, October 8, 1638. Works, vii. 489. ^ Same to same, December 29, 1638. Works, vii. 510. ^ November 21, 1638. DEPOSITION OF THE BISHOPS 231 their declinator. At this point the Marquis rose and said his instructions were to allow no proceedings to be taken against the bishops, as it was contrary to natural justice that the Assembly, who were the bishops' enemies and accusers, should also be their judges. As the Mode- rator insisted that the question be put, the Marquis again interposed and " in his Majesty's name dissolved the Assembly, and discharged their further proceedings under pain of treason." ^ In spite of the dissolution the Assembly continued to sit. Their first act declared their competence to try the bishops. They would neither have bishops with or without limitations. Episcopacy, root and branch, was abolished, and the Kirk re-established on its old Presbyterian basis. The Canons, the service book, the Articles of Perth, and the High Commission were all condemned, and the Provincial Synods and General Assemblies were reinstated in their former jurisdictions. All the bishops were in their absence deposed, and most of them excommunicated besides. The charges against them seem to have been very summarily disposed of. The Bishop of Galloway, " besides common faults, had preached Arminianism, and had in his chamber a crucifix, and spoken of the comfortable use he found in it. He had deposed godly ministers, and fined and confined gentlemen for Nonconformity ; and had profaned the Sabbath by buying a horse, and doing his civil affairs openly on it." The Bishop of Aberdeen was found guilty of simony ; and though he had been removed from the Chapel Royal to Aberdeen, as one who did not favour well enough Canterbury's new ways, yet he had been as forward as any to press the canons and liturgy. He had suspended ministers for fasting on Sundays, and ' Rushworth, ii. 849-53. 232 ARCHBISHOP LAUD had ordered fasting to be kept on Wednesday only." As for the Bishop of Ross, " he was a bower at the altar, a wearer of the cope and rochet, a deposer of godly minis- ters, a companion of papists, and played cards on the Sabbath." ' While the Assembly was sitting, Laud received daily accounts of its proceedings either from Hamilton or the Bishop of Ross, and great was his indignation at finding all Hamilton's plans upset by the firmness, tact and readiness of the Moderator. " Never," he writes to Hamilton,^ " were there more gross absurdities, nor half so many in so short a time, committed in any public meeting : and for a National Assembly, never did the Church of Christ see the like. I am as sorry as your Grace can be that the King's preparations make no more haste. I hope you think, for truth it is, I have called upon his Majesty, and, by his command, upon some others, to hasten all that may be, and more than this I cannot do." 1 Baillie, 1 54-62. 2 Letter dated December 3, 1638. Works, vi. 547. CHAPTER XXVIII 1639 PREPARATIONS FOR WAR WHILE Charles was collecting a force for the main- tenance of his authority in Scotland, the Cove- nanters had not been idle. Copies of the Covenant had been sent to Germany and Sweden for the signature of the numerous Scotchmen who were holding commis- sions in the Protestant armies engaged in the Thirty Years' War. Among these was General Leslie, an officer who had served with great distinction under Gustavus Adol- phus in his German campaigns. He was now summoned to Scotland to advise the Covenanters in their military preparations, and he arrived in Edinburgh about a month before the General Assembly met. Baillie, in his journal, gives us a graphic account of public feeling in Scotland at the time. " We were hopeful," he writes, " of power- ful assistance from abroad if we should have required it. France would not have failed to have embraced our protection. Holland and we were but one in our cause. They had been much irritated lately by the King's assis- tance to Spain. But we resolved to make no use of friendships abroad till our case was more desperate than yet we took it. The assistance of Lutherans, let be of Papists, at this time was to our divines a leaning on the rotten reed of Egypt. But the less our design was for help from abroad, our diligence was the greater to mak e 233 234 ARCHBISHOP LAUD good use of our means at home. There was estabhshed, by common consent, to reside at Edinburgh, a general committee of noblemen, barons and burgesses, also in every shire and presbytery a particular committee to give order for all military a^^airs, the raising of men, provision of armies, and getting of money with all dili- gence. Much help we got from good General Leslie, who sat daily with our general committees ; we intended to give unto him, when the time of need came, the charge of our Generallissimo ; but for the present he was diligent, without any charge, to caU home officers of his regiments, to send for powder muskets and cannons, wherein from Holland, Spain and Germany we were pretty well an- swered. ... In all the land we appointed noblemen and gentlemen for commanders ; divided so many as had been officers abroad among the shires, put all our men, who could bear arms to frequent drillings, and had fre- quent private and public humiliations before our God, in whom was our only trust." ^ Laud had altogether underrated the Covenanters' powers of resistance. He writes to Wentworth, " It is too true that most of that nation dote upon their abominable traitorous covenant. I grant that their lion is rampant, and yet I believe, as you write, he is not so terrible as he is painted ; but the truth is, our lions are too passant, and they have gone on too slowly." ^ Two months later Wentworth writes to him, that he had received a report from Ensign Willoughby, an officer he had sent on a special mission to Scotland, that cannon and other muni- tions of war were being largely imported into Scotland from the Continent, and that driU masters were going up and down the country exercising their men ; but 1 Baillie, 191-5. ^ Laud to Wentworth, November 13, 1638. Works, vii. 502. LAUD'S DREAD OF A PARLIAMENT 235 that, as to General Leslie, he was not such a great kill-cow as they would have him. He could neither read nor write ; and though a Captain, he had never really been a general to the King of the Swedes, but only to a Hanse town or something of that sort." ^ To this Laud replies, " I have received your letter with Ensign Willoughby's report, and showed it to the King. We all believed as much before, but neither his Majesty nor any other had heard it spoken in such plain terms as there it is. And out of doubt it is more than time to mend our pace." ^ Of General Leslie he speaks, with characteristic coarseness, " as a pedlar in his beginnings and in his birth a bastard, gotten upon the body of a mean servant in the house of the Abbot of Coupar in Scotland." ^ He lived, however, to see the pedlar made an Earl and a Privy Councillor : while he, through the vicissitudes of fortune, was a neg- lected prisoner in the Tower. From the first commencement of the Scottish troubles Laud had been haunted with the dread that the King's necessities would compel him to summon a Parliament ; and that he would be the first delinquent who would be called to an account. " The great fear," he writes to Wentworth, " now is the want of money, and that the minds of men are mightily alienated and divided. And I fear you will see the King brought upon his knees to a Parliament ; and then farewell Church and ship-money."* " For the English nation any wise man wbuld think as you do, that if they could be so disloyal to the King, yet their own interests will make them look about them. * Wentworth to Laud, January 12, 1639. Strafford's Letters, ii. 270-4. ^ Laud to Wentworth, January 31, 1639. Works, vii. 520. 3 Same to same, February 27, 1639. Works, vii. 530. *■ Laud to Wentworth, November 13, 1638. Works, vii. 502. 236 ARCHBISHOP LAUD And yet, let me tell you, what with Scottish brags, and desire of a Parliament, and a Puritan fashion, such as it is, and a discontented subject, and a wasted estate, and over open councils and iU neighbours, the case at the best is bad enough, not to add Court divisions and jeal- ousies. As for a Parliament, if it comes, I am myself resolved, but for the Church, a ship it is, and will cer- tainly run the hazard of the ship-money ; and the King will be so hampered as not to be able to stir either at home or abroad." ^ Later he writes, " The Scottish business grows warm, and I pray God we do not follow it too boldly. The truth is, here is such drawing diferent ways for particular ends as that I know not well what to make of it. And notwithstanding what now appears, you would hardly think how many care not what they disturb, so that they may have a Parliament. What this means, and whither it tends, and what it may and will produce half an eye can see." ^ Cottington, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had to provide the sinews of war, seems to have been the leading member of the Privy Council, who pressed upon the King the absolute necessity of convoking a Parliament. He had written to Wentworth, " Our busi- ness of Scotland grows every day worse, so we are almost certain it will come to a war, and that a defensive one on our side, and how we shall defend ourselves without money is not under my cap. No course is taken for levying of money ; the King will not hear of a Parliament, and he is told by a committee of learned men that there is no other way.^ The first public intimation of the King's intention to ^ Laud to Wentworth, December 29, 1638. Works, vii. 513. 2 Laud to Wentworth, January 20, 1639. Works, vii. 517. ^ Cottington to Wentworth. Strafford's Letters, ii. 246. THE KING'S PREPARATIONS FOR WAR 237 raise an army to coerce the Scots was contained in a circular letter to the Nobility calling upon each peer of the realm to attend his Majesty's person at York on April I, " with such equipages and forces of horse as his birth, honour and interest in the'public safety did oblige him unto." Those who were unable to attend in person were expected to make large contributions in money. Orders were at the same time despatched to the Lord Lieutenants of all the counties to raise foot soldiers, and send them to the same destination. The train bands were also to be embodied for active service. From the clergy large contributions in money were demanded. In a circular letter to the bishops, Laud said he expected that " every beneficed clergyman should at least give after the proportion of three shillings and tenpence in the pound of the value of his living or other preferment, and those who refused to subscribe were to be specially reported for his information." ^ On the same day he writes to Wentworth : " The King having resolved to be at York by the beginning of April, makes great noise now. And I find a very general offering of all men of quality, and with more cheerfulness than I expected. The only doubt that some men now have is the common soldiers, lest by devices the faction should work upon them, yet I hope that this also will prove a causeless fear." But the fear was by no means groundless. Public opinion in England had been deeply moved by an appeal which the Covenanters had made to the English nation immediately after the pubhcation of the King's letter summoning the nobility to attend his standard at York. " They had been," they said, " unjustly branded as * Laud to the bishops, January 31, 1639. Works, vi. 558. ^ Laud to Wentworth, January 31, 1639. Works, vii. 523. 238 ARCHBISHOP LAUD rebels and traitors, whereas they were loyal to their Prince, and all they asked was to be allowed to enjoy their religion, and their laws and liberties, according to the fundamental constitution of their Church and State." All their troubles they laid at the door " of a Churchman of the greatest power in England, who, not content with tyrannizing over the consciences, the goods and estates of their Christian brethren in England, had now plotted to overthrow the worship and govern- ment of a friendly nation. And would their brethren in England, who had endured such intolerable suffer- ings from their own bishops, go to war with them for the purpose of re-establishing episcopal government in Scotland, which had been abolished by their ancient Reformation, their Confession of Faith, and the lawful constitution of their Church and kingdom ? " Finally they appealed to the justice of an English Parliament, for " We do assure ourselves," they said, " that if the States of the Parliament in England were convened, and the whole process of this business faithfully repre- sented unto them, they would without doubt be so far from censuring or condemning what we do, that they would be moved to become petitioners to his sacred Majesty on our behalf, and approve of the " equity and loyalty of all our proceedings in this cause." ^ This manifesto was widely circulated throughout the country, and made a deep impression on the nation. Was war, men said, to be waged against their neighbours in the North without the consent of Parliament, to whose justice the Scots themselves had appealed ? Were they not themselves common sufferers with the Scots from the unbridled lawlessness of bishops, and were they for * Appeal to the English nation, February 14, 1639. Rush- worth, ii. 798. OPPOSITION TO THE WAR 239 these same bishops, with the Archprelate at their head, to enter into war with a friendly nation to restore them to their misused pre-eminence ? It was a bishops' war, and why should they take part in it ? Let a Parliament be convoked to determine the justice of this Scottish quarrel, and at the same time to redress the intolerable grievances from which they were themselves suffering before the last traces of their liberties were destroyed. The Covenanters had struck a responsive chord in the hearts of the English nation ; and even Laud could not conceal from himself the importance of the Covenan- ters' appeal. " There was lately," he writes to Went- worth, "a most cunning,' sly and dangerous pamphlet spread at Newcastle, London and all about, to cast the subjects of England asleep, that the Scots, honest men, mean no harm, that so they may arm themselves securely and cut our throats religiously. I make no doubt they are spread in Ireland too, yet for fear you may not have one of them, I here send it you. This hath roused his Majesty very much, and a sharp proclamation is coming out to disabuse the English subject, and make him see their false pretences and his own danger. I did not think I should ever have seen so sharp a proclamation come forth, but 'tis all little enough. It is not yet printed, but so soon as it is, you will get one." ^ This sharp Proclamation,^ which bears evident marks of Laud's collaboration, was published in the early part of March, and ordered to be read in all the parish churches. To no purpose, however, were the Covenanters denounced as traitors and rebels to people smarting under their own grievances, and anxiously awaiting the hour of their deliverance. " You would not believe," writes Laud ^ Laud to Wentworth, February 27, 1639. Works, vii. 528. * Rushworth, ii. 830. 240 ARCHBISHOP LAUD to Wentworth, " how the brethren (the Puritans) work in the city, and make men beheve that the rehgious Scots seek nothing but the freedom of their conscience, and work it such way in the dark as would grieve any honest heart. And for my part, when I look upon all things, I cannot tell what to say to the common soldier, the sourness of this leaven hath sunk so deep." ^ Up to this time the Covenanters had held no direct communications with the Puritan leaders in England, but they received through their agents very accurate information of the proceedings at Court, and the public feeling in the country. Baillie notes in his journal, " Our appeal to the people in England did us good service, for it fully satisfied the hearts of that nation, and established our innocency. As for the English forces they failed like the summer brooks. The country was filled with their own grievances ; a Parliament for many years was absolutely denied to their passionate desires and evident necessities ; and they fully understood that the Scots' quarrel and their own was but one. The hearts of all were averse to this unjust war. The trained bands gave it out peremptorily that they were not bound to follow the King without the country, and that they were re- solved not to pass beyond the bounds of their obligation. The courtiers indeed did arm themselves gallantly for the King's pleasure, but the country noblemen murmured openly at the expedition." ' Among the county noblemen Lords Saye and Brooke told the King plainly that they would be no parties to a war undertaken without the advice of Parliament, and would render only such aid and assistance as the law required them to give. Hamilton also warned the ^ Laud to Wentworth, March 22, 1639. Works, vii. 542. 2 BaiUie, i. 199. DIFFICULTIES OF THE KING 241 King " that he found the hearts of many of the Enghsh nobihty both backward and cold, nor was any heartiness to be expected from some of the general officers." ^ As for the common soldiers, who had been enlisted against their will, " they were readier to join the Scots than to draw their swords in the King's service." ^ To add to the King's difficulties he was absolutely without the necessary funds for conducting a successful campaign. In the beginning of March, Cottington, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had told him, " that the revenue was completely exhausted, and that he had in vain searched every corner from whence any probability of money could be procured," and as the only means of obtaining supplies he again advised the calling of a Parlia- ment. This, however, Laud strongly opposed. "It is a mystery to me," he writes, " why Cottington is for a Parliament ; sure as things stand 'tis some strange end. But I plainly told the King that now was presented an occasion of infinite good to the Crown, and safety withal if God blessed them with wisdom and courage to make right use of it, and that no way by a Parlia- ment." ^ The old ways of " thorough " were still to be followed, and in the beginning of April the leading landholders and gentlemen in the counties were called upon by letters from the Privy Council " to express their fidelity and good affection " by contributing according to their ability for the expenses of the war. The response to this appeal ought to have convinced the King of the distempered state of the country. The whole amount contributed by the laity of England barely exceeded £8,400 ; and the greater part of this sum was provided ^ Burnet's Memoirs, ii6. ^ Northumberland to Wentworth. Strafford's Letters, ii. i86. ^ Laud to Wentworth, March, 1639. Works, vii. 540, 542. R 242 ARCHBISHOP LAUD by judges and other legal officials, who were almost as amenable to pressure as the clergy. The unofficial con- tribution did not exceed £3,000.^ The commercial classes were equally backward in their contributions. All that the city of London could be induced to offer was the paltry sum of £5,200, which the King rejected with scorn. " London," writes Laud, " dreams not of amending their offer, and I verily think they are in all things as much poisoned as Edinburgh itself." ^ " That Lord Cottington is for a ParHament is a thing well known here, and the King also knows it. Well, I'll tell you what I conceive ; he is a wise man, and wily at least. If a Parliament comes (thinks he) in this conjuncture of affairs. Laud and the Lord Treasurer (Bishop Juxon) and all their fellows must out, and then the metamorphosis will be easy of Cottington into Trea- surer. 'Tis true the King hath a great work in hand, and the greatest opportunity that ever can be had. For a Parliament you know my mind ; but yet, si fata volunt, who can help it ? She is the Helena of the time and there are store that would have her, though Troy be fired for it." ' It was easy to abuse Cottington, but the pregnant fact remained that the King was rushing into a war without money or supplies for the maintenance of his army. This to Laud was a minor consideration. Like the Roman Augurs, he believed in omens, and he writes to Wentworth, " I will tell you a tale, which may have some hope in it. There always used to be a nightingale in the walks of Lambeth, and so there was the first year I came : but the second and so forward there was none. * Gardiner's Hist. ix. 25. ^ Laud to Wentworth, May i, 1639. Works, vii. 569. 3 Ibid. 568-9. THE ARMY AT YORK 243 Upon this I prophesied that Mirth and Music had for- saken my dwelhng. And so it hath proved hitherto. This year the nightingale is come again and sings lustily. May not I prophesy now that my times will be better ? Sure I may, if it please God to bless the King with good success. A war you say it will be, and I think so too. As for the Lords of the Covenant, if they can get to be masters, the conditions they will offer will be hateful indeed. And therefore the wisest way is, now at least, since the King has put himself upon an aftergame, not to make too much haste, but to wear them out, which if you stop all their trade and passage into Ireland, as I hope you do, and the like be done in the northern sea at the mouth of the Forth, Berwick and Carlisle being guarded, is not hard to be done. But, for my part, to the hazard of a battle it should not be put." ^ But unfortunately for Charles he had not the necessary sinews of war to wear out his enemies by delay. When he arrived at York on April I, he found there a raw, undiscip- lined, ill-equipped force of some 20,000 men without a proper commissariat, and totally unprepared to take [the field. From York he advanced to Newcastle, and on May 28 pitched his camp near Berwick, two miles on this side the Tweed. Here he received letters from Wentworth, urging him on no account to risk a battle with an imper- fectly disciplined army, but to entrench himself on the border till the end of August, and meanwhile to practise his men in military exercises to give them a knowledge of their profession.^ But for Charles there was as much danger in delaying a battle as in risking one. He had written a few days previously to Hamilton that he was so pressed for money that he did not know how long he should be able " to 1 Idem, 560. ^ Gardiner, ix. 33-4. 244 ARCHBISHOP LAUD keep his army afoot." A few days later he writes that he had determined to keep himself upon the defensive, and make himself at Berwick as fast as he could, as he was fully satisfied of the truth of what Hamilton had previously told him, that he could not depend upon his principal officers in an offensive war against the Scots> Fortunately the Scots were equally averse to a war with the English nation, and negotiations were opened between the two hostile camps, which led to the pacifi- cation of Berwick. The terms of the treaty were speedily settled, and practically conceded all that the Covenanters demanded. A Royal declaration was then issued, that " for settling the distractions of that our ancient kingdom, our Will and Pleasure is that a Free General Assembly be kept at Edinburgh the 6th day of August next ensuing, and thereafter a Parliament to be held in Edinburgh, the 20th day of August next ensuing, for ratifying what shall be concluded in the said Assembly." ^ The influence of Hamilton and the English nobility in Charles' camp had greatly contributed to this pacifi- cation. Their sympathies were entirely with the Scots, and from this time the closest connexion was established between the Covenanters in the North, and the leaders of the Opposition in England. To Laud the terms of the treaty were hateful indeed. " 'Tis true," he writes to Sir Thomas Roe, " that things are referred to a New Assembly and Parliament, but in such a way that there will certainly be no room left for either wisdom or modera- tion to have a voice there ; but faction and ignorance will govern the Assembly, and faction and something else, which I hst not to name, the Parhament. For 1 Letter to Hamilton, June 4. Burnet Memoirs, 139. 2 King's Declaration, June 18. Rushworth, iii. 944. PACIFICATION OF BERWICK 245 they will utterly cast off all episcopal government, and introduce a worse regulated parity than is anywhere else that I know. How this will stand with monarchy future times will discover ; but for my own part, I am clear of opinion, that the King can neither have honour nor safety by it. And considering what a faction we have in England, which leans that way, 'tis much to be feared this Scottish violence will make some unfitting impressions both upon this Church and State, which will much concern the King both in regard of himself and his posterity to look to." * Nor was the King better pleased with the terms of the pacification than Laud. He writes to Went worth : " There is a Scottish proverb that bids you put two locks on your door when you have made friends with a foe : so now upon this pacification I bid you have a most careful eye upon the north of Ireland. As for my affairs here,^ I am far from thinking that at this time I shall get half of my will, though I mean, by the grace of God, to be in person both at the Assembly and Parliament. Nothing but my presence in that country can save it from irreparable confusion. Yet I will not be so vain as absolutely to say that I can. Wlierefore my conclusion is that if I see a great probability, I go ; otherwise not, but return to London or take other Coun- sels." 3 The King's conduct and conversation at Berwick, after he had signed the treaty, had created grave doubts as to his sincerity ; and these suspicions were confirmed by the Royal proclamation, which convened the Assembly and summoned the bishops to attend it. This led to an ^ Laud to Roe, July 26, 1639. Works, vii. 583. ^ At Berwick. ^ King to Wentworth, June 30. Strafford's Letters, ii. 361-2. 246 ARCHBISHOP LAUD immediate protestation from the Covenanters, and Hamilton, who was then at Edinburgh, told the King, on his return to Berwick, that if he wished for peace, and the re-establishment of his authority, he must consent without reserve to the abolition of episcopacy. There was no doubt, he said, " that both the Assembly and the Parliament would abolish the bishops ; and if the King refused to ratify their Acts, there would be a re- newal of the war ; and was it feasible, he asked, to carry on a war without the assistance of Parliament ? The alternative, therefore, was either to consent to the abolition of the bishops, or to summon a Parliament in England, and to leave the event thereof to hazard."^ As the King hesitated to adopt either alternative, Hamilton resigned his commission, and Traquair was appointed High Commissioner in his room ; and on July 28, the King broke up his camp at Berwick and returned to London. On August 12 the Assembly met in Edinburgh, and after passing resolutions similar to those of the Glasgow Assembly regarding the Canons, the Service Book the High Commission, and the Articles of Perth, they declared that " episcopal government was unlawful in this Kirk " ; and at the same time rescinded the Acts of the six assemblies from 1606 to 1618, by virtue of which James had re-established the bishops, and introduced the other innovations in the doctrines and discipline of the Church. These resolutions were drawn up in the form of an Act, containing the causes and remedy of the bygone evils of this Kirk, and received the King's Commissioner's assent, with a promise that he would ratify it in the ensuing Parliament.^ All the demands ^ Hamilton's paper submitted to the King July 5. Burnet's Memoirs, 144-5. ^ Rushworth, iii. 957-9. INSINCERITY OF THE KING 247 of the Covenanters had now been granted ; and the people, under the impression that their rehgious griev- ances had at length been redressed, testified " their joy by bonfires and ringing of bells, and all the pulpits and streets were full of Traquair's praises." ^ These happy anticipations were soon clouded over. Upon Traquair's reporting that he had consented to the Act of the Assembly, and had promised to ratify it in Parliament, he was told in reply that he had ex- ceeded his instructions. " We can never," the King writes, " consent to the rescinding of any Acts of Parlia- ment made in favour of episcopacy, nor do we conceive that our refusal to abolish these Acts is contradictory to what we have consented to, or to that we were obliged to. There is less danger in discovering our future inten- tion, or at the best letting them guess at the same, than if we should permit the rescinding of those Acts of Parlia- ment, which our Father, with so much expense of time and industry, established, and which may hereafter be of so great use to us. And though it should cast all loose, as you express it, yet we take God to witness, we have permitted them to do many things in this Assem- bly for establishing of peace contrary to our own judg- ment. And if on this point a rupture happen, we cannot help it : the fault is on their own part, which one day they may smart for. So you have on this point our full resolution." ^ This letter, if not drafted by Laud, was the exact re- flection of his views. By a process of casuistry or reason- ing pecuhar to himself, he argued that the King's promise to abolish the bishops in no way bound him to consent * Burnet's Memoirs, 158. * The King to Traquair, October i, 1639. Burnet's Memoirs, 158. 248 ARCHBISHOP LAUD to the rep2al of the Acts which had created them.^ The Acts were to remain unrepealed on the statute book, that episcopacy, though abohshed, might be re-intro- duced on the first favourable opportunity. It was un- fortunate for the King that he had such an evil coun- sellor at his side. His refusal to abide by the plain terms of the Berwick pacification was another instance of his habitual insincerity, and led to a renewal of the war, and the eventual ruin of both Laud and himself. The receipt of the King's letter placed Traquair in a very embarrassing position. The Parliament was then sitting in Edinburgh, and Bills were being drafted by the Lords of the articles repealing the Acts which had established episcopacy, and re-establishing the Kirk and government on a Presbyterian basis. Under these circumstances Traquair found it necessary to prorogue the Parliament and proceed to London for fresh instruc- tions. Before leaving Edinburgh he had obtained posses- sion of a letter, written by eight of the leading Covenant- ing nobles to the French King, asking for his protection and mediation in their present difficulties. On November 27 he arrived in London and laid the letter before the Select Committee of the Pri\y Council, which had been formed for consultation on the affairs of Scotland, telling them that it was impossible to prevail with the Covenan- ters except by force, or a total compliance with their demands. Of this Committee Wentworth was the ruling spirit. He had been specially summoned by the King to assist in the deliberations of the Council. In his letters to the Court he had never ceased to urge that the Scots should be " whipped back to their border," and he now believed that the pubHcation of the treason- able correspondence of the Covenanters with the Freach 1 Rushworth, ii. 999 WRITS ISSUED FOR A PARLIAMENT 249 King would arouse such a feeling of indignation in the Enghsh nation, that a Parhament might safely be relied upon to furnish the necessary supplies. Went- worth's advice was unanimously accepted by the Council, and it only remained to obtain the King's consent. His hatred of Parliament was well known, and he asked the Lords, in case the Parliament should prove as unto- ward as the last, " whether they would assist him in such extraordinary ways as should be thought fit." They agreed that they would, and on December 5 Laud notes in his diary : " The King declared his resolution for a Parliament in case of the Scottish rebellion. The first movers to it were my Lord Deputy of Ireland, the Marquis of Hamilton and myself ; ^ and a resolution voted at the Board to assist the King in extraordinary ways if the Parliament should prove peevish." ^ Writs were then issued for Parliament to meet on April 13, 1640. * The following passage in the history of his troubles explains why Laud supported the proposal to summon a Parliament : " The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland," he writes, " proposed the calling of a Parliament ; much was not said against this, but much said for it : nor, indeed, was it safe for any man to declare against it, after it was once publickly moved." (Laud's Works, iii. 283.) 2 Diary, December 5, 1639. • CHAPTER XXIX 1640 THE EARL OF STRAFFORD " TN the interval," says Clarendon, "between the A issue of the writs and the convention of the Parliament, the Lord Keeper Coventry died,^ to the King's great detriment rather than his own. His loss was the more manifest and visible in his successor, the seal being within a day or two given to Sir John Finch, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas — a man exceedingly obnoxious to the people upon the business of the ship- money ; and not of reputation and authority enough to countenance and advance the King's service." ^ Another important change in the personnel of the Cabinet was the appointment of Wentworth as a member of the Council of War. In recognition of his past services, and as a mark of the Royal favour, he had been created Earl of Strafford, and promoted to the higher dignity of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland ; and he was now the one member of the Cabinet upon whose advice the King mainly relied. With his ascendency in Council there was a marked decline in Laud's influence at Court ; and it is certainly remarkable that the intimacy of the two men, who had been such constant correspondents when apart, seems to have considerably cooled when brought face to face with each other at the Council Board. Straf- 1 January 14, 1640. 2 Clarendon's Hist. ii. 64. 260 THE SHORT PARLIAMENT 251 ford was now in direct communication with the King, and had no need of an intermediary to support his inter- est at Court ; while Laud could hardly be expected to look with complacency, even on a friend, who had super- seded him in the counsels of the King. On April 13, after an intermission of eleven years, the new Parliament met. Many of the members of the last Parliament had disappeared from the scene; but in the Commons, Pym, Hampden and Selden remained to vindicate the memory of Eliot, and preserve the traditions of the House. Oliver Cromwell was again returned for Cambridge, but does not appear to have taken any active part in the debates. In opening the Session, the King contented himself with saying that great and weighty reasons had compelled him to call his people together, which the Lord Keeper would submit for their consideration. The Lord Keeper Finch then " related the whole proceedings of Scotland ; His Majesty's con- descensions the year before in disbanding his army upon their promises and professions ; their insolencies since, and their address to the King of France by the intercepted letter of the seven Scottish nobles " ; and after reading the letter he added " that his Majesty did not expect advice from them, much less that they should interpose in any office of mediation, which would not be grateful to him, but that they should, as soon as might be, give his Majesty such a supply as would enable him to provide for the vindication of his honour by raising an army." ^ On the i6th the intercepted letter was read by Secretary Winde- bank to the Commons ; and the calmness with which it was received pretty clearly marked the temper of the House ; Mr. Grimston observing that bad as a Scottish 1 Clarendon's Hist. ii. 66. 252 ARCHBISHOP LAUD invasion might be, the invasions made upon the hberties of the subjects at home were nearer and more dangerous. " We want not," he said, " good laws ; all we want is that an example should be made of the authors of these distractions in the Church and State contrary to those good laws " ^ And no further notice seems to have been taken of the letter which it was hoped would have made a strong impression on the nation. On the following morning the House was inundated with petitions from the counties demanding the redress of civil and religious grievances ; and Clarendon, then Mr. Edward Hyde, and one of the newly elected members, has described the scene which followed. " WTiile men gazed upon each other, looking who should begin (much the greater number having never before sat in Parlia- ment), Mr. Pym, a man of good reputation, but much better known afterw'ards, who had been as long in those assemblies as any man then living, broke the ice, and in a set discourse of above two hours, and after mention of the King with the most profound reverence, enume- rated all the projects which had been set on foot ; all the illegal proclamations which had been pubHshed ; and the proceedings which had been taken on those pro- clamations ; the judgment upon ship-money ; and the many grievances which related to the ecclesiastical juris- diction ; summing up shortly and sharply all that most reflected upon the prudence and justice of the Government, and concluding, " that he had only laid that scheme before them that thej' might see how much work they had to do to satisfy the country : the method and manner of doing thereof, he left to their wisdoms." ^ It was the speech of an able Parhamentary tactician, ^ Rushworth, iii. 1 128-9. ^ Clarendon's Hist. ii. 68. PYM'S LEADERSHIP 253 and he carried the House with him. Even members hke Hyde, devoted to the King and the Royal prerogative, agreed that Pym had made a faithful representation of the condition and discontents of the nation.^ He had carefully avoided all allusion to the causes which had driven the Scots into rebellion, trusting that the examina- tion of their own complaints would convince the House that they were both engaged in a common struggle for the defence of their liberties and religion. Little heed was now paid to the demands of the King for money to equip an army to support his misused authority, and his ministers in the Commons were convinced that there was little hope of obtaining supplies from the representatives of the people. On May 4 the King's patience was exhaus- ted, and Secretary Vane told the House that the King required an immediate answer to his demands, and would accept of nothing less than the twelve subsidies he had asked for in his message. After some discussion the debate was adjourned, and the leaders of the Opposition then arranged that on the following morning Pym should submit to the House a resolution condemning the war, and advising the King to make peace with his subjects in Scotland. Late in the evening the King received information of Pym's plan of operations, and at once summoned the Cabinet to meet at the unusual hour of six on the following morning. " By the mistake of the messengers," says Laud, " I was warned to be at the Council Chamber at seven, and at that hour I came. By this accident I came late, and found a resolution taken to vote the dissolution of that Parliament, and the votes entered upon ; my Lord Cottington being in his speech when I arrived. All votes concurred to the ending 1 Clarendon's Life, i. 78. 254 ARCHBISHOP LAUD of that Parliament save two. The persons dissenting were the Earls of Northumberland and Holland. I con- tributed nothing to that breach but my single vote.^ To prevent the Commons entering upon any business before the arrival of the King, it was then decided to secure the person of the Speaker ; and Secretary Winde- bank was sent to his house in Chancery Lane with a command to bring him to "WTiitehall. The House met at the usual hour, but in the absence of the Speaker were unable to enter upon the business of the day, and at eleven o'clock the King arrived in the House of Lords, bringing the Speaker along with him, and dissolved the Parliament.^ In the afternoon of the same day the Cabinet Council again met, and the King asked their advice as to the course he should take for the suppression of the rebellion in Scotland. The Treasury was empty, and Northumber- land gave his opinion that without money and without the support of the Commons an offensive war could only end in disaster. Strafford was for more vigorous mea- sures. " Let the city," he said to the King, " be required to advance a loan of £100,000, and let ship-money be vigorously collected, and there will be ample funds for a short campaign. Scotland could not hold out five months. In a defensive war there would be loss of honour and reputation. You are now loose and absolved from all rules of government ; being reduced to extreme necessity, everything is to be done that power might admit. They refusing you are acquitted towards God and man. You have an army in Ireland, you may employ here to reduce this kingdom." Laud supported Strafford. " Tried ^ Laud's Works, iii. 283. 2 Rushworth, iii. 1154. Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, vol. xvi. p. 116. PARLIAMENT DISSOLVED 255 all ways," said the Archbishop, " and refused all ways, by the law of God and man you should have subsistence, and ought to have it, and lawful it is to take it." ^ War was accordingly resolved upon, and the supplies to main- tain it were to be obtained from an unwilling and indig- nant nation by all the means that power would admit. * Secretary Vane's notes of the opinions delivered at the Cabinet Council, May 5, 1640. Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, vol. xvi. p. 112; Gardiner's Hist. ix. 120-2. CHAPTER XXX 1640 laud's troubles LAUD'S troubles now commenced in earnest. He tells us that on the day following the dissolution " libels were set up in divers parts of the city, animating and calling together apprentices and others to come and meet in St. George's fields for the hunting of ' William the Fox ' for the breach of the Parliament. I acquainted his Majesty and the Council with it. But upon Monday night following, five hundred of them came about my house at Lambeth to offer it and me violence. By God's merci- ful providence I had some jealousy of their intent, and before their coming left the best order I could to secure my house, and, by the advice of some friends, went over the water and lay at my chamber in Whitehall that night and some others following. So I praise God no great harm was done." ^ One "'of the rioters, who beat the drum, was afterwards apprehended, and charged with high treason, on the ground that a tumultuous demon- stration against an Archbishop unaccompanied by any acts of violence was a levying of war against the King ; and Laud complacently notes in his diary, that the man " was condemned at Southwark and hanged and quar- tered on the Saturday morning following." ^ But a worse atrocity, if possible, was perpetrated. In spite 1 Laud's Works, iii. 284. * Diary, May 23, 1640. 256 CONVOCATION 257 of the opinion of the judges in Felton's case, the unfortu- nate man, on the day before his execution, was, by order of the Council, racked in the Tower, in the hope that he would implicate some persons in high position, who were supposed to have instigated the riot.^ The next trouble which befell Laud was in connexion with convocation. The clergy in those days possessed the privilege of self-taxation, and when Parliament was convoked. Convocation was always convened to fix the contribution which the clergy were to pay ; and these subsidies, after being confirmed by Parliament, were then levied with the subsidies voted by the Commons. During the late Session, the Convocation had agreed to contribute six subsidies, which came to ;£20,ooo a year for six years ; but before the grant was completed the Parliament had ceased to exist. What followed may be told in Laud's own words : " His Majesty was not willing to lose those subsidies, and therefore thought upon continuing the Convocation though the Paliament was ended, but had not opened those thoughts of his to me. Now, I had sent to dissolve the Convocation at their next sitting, but I had forgot that I was to have the King's writ for the dismissing as well as the convening of it. Word was brought me of this from the Convocation House while I was sitting in Council, and his Majesty present. Here- upon, when the Council rose, I moved his Majesty for a writ. His Majesty gave me an unlooked-for reply, namely, that he was willing to have the subsidies which we had granted him, and that we should go on with the finishing of those Canons, which he had given us power under the broad seal of England to make. And when I ^ Gardiner's Hist. ix. 141. Lucy Atkins' Charles I, vol. ii. p. 70. The warrant to torture Archer is dated May 21. S.P.D. Charles I, cccchv. 39. S 258 ARCHBISHOP LAUD replied, it would be excepted against in all likelihood by divers, the King answered that he had spoken with the Lord Keeper Finch about it, and that he assured him it was legal. I confess I was a little troubled, both at the difficulties of the time and the answer itself, that, after so many years of faithful service, in a business concerning the Church so nearly, his Majesty would speak with the Lord Keeper, both without me, and before he would move it to me. Upon this I was commanded to sit and go on with the Convocation ; and we made our act perfect for the gift of six subsidies, following a pre- cedent in Archbishop Whitgift's time in 1586, who was known to be a pious and a prudent prelate, and a man not given to do boisterous things against the laws of the realm or the prerogative of the Crown." ^ The Convoca- tion was, in fact, confronted with a very serious difficulty. The clergy could vote subsidies, but until they were con- firmed by Parliament, there were no legal means of en- forcing them. Instead, therefore, of using the word subsidy, the grant was termed a Benevolence or Free Contribution, which the clergy were nevertheless called upon to pay under pain of excommunication and depriva- tion of their benefices.^ And the only justification that Laud could offer for this arrogant assumption of the powers of Parliament, was the precedent of a pious bishop in a bygone age. Having voted supplies for a war, which the voice of the nation had condemned, the Convocation next proceeded to pass a body of Canons, which Laud had drawn up for the better government of the Church. His one anxiety was to obtain the approval and sanction by Convocation of the various innovations he had introduced into the 1 Laud's Works, iii. 284-6. * Jlushworth, vol. ii. part ii. 1355. THE CANONS public worship. But the altered circumstanees of the times compelled him to moderate the outrageous language he had used in the Star Chamber ; ' and the rites and cere- monies, which for seven years had been enforced as essential elements of the State religion by excommunica- tions, deprivations and imprisonments, were now placed upon a lower platform, as merely permissible though not obligatory. The position of the Communion table was declared to be in its own nature indifferent, and did not imply that it was or ought to be esteemed a true and proper altar whereon Christ was again really sacrificed ; while the reverence paid to it was merely the revival of an ancient and laudable custom, heartily commended to the serious consideration of all good people, not with any intention to exhibit any religious worship to it, nor upon any opinion of a corporal presence of the body of Christ upon it, or in the mystical elements, but only for the advancement of God's majesty ; and that in the prac- tice or omission of this rite, the rule of charity was to be observed, that those'who use the rite, despise not those who use it not, and those who use it not, condemn not those who use it." ^ It argued a singular ignorance of human nature to suppose that men, who for conscience sake had suffered such cruel persecutions for the non-observance of these ceremonies, would be reconciled to their use, because they were now pronounced to be absolutely in- different. But this " holy synod," not content with discussing their own frivolous rites and ceremonies, seized the opportunity of explaining to the nation the duties which subjects owed to the Crown. " The most high and sacred ' Ante, pp. 1 54-6. Canon vii. of the Convocation of 1640. Laud's Works, v. 624. 26o ARCHBISHOP LAUD order of Kings " was declared to be " of Divine right, being the ordinance of God Himself, founded on the prime laws of nature " — whatever those might be — " and clearly established by express texts of both the Old and New Testaments ; and for subjects to maintain or avow any independent co-active power, either papal or popu- lar, was to undermine their great royal office, and cunningly to overthrow that most sacred ordinance, which God Himself had established ; and so was treasonable against God, as well as against the King." It was then declared with obvious reference to the armed resistance of Scotland, that " for subjects to bear arms against their King, offensive or defensive, on any pretext what- soever, is at the least to resist the powers which are ordained of God ; and those who resisted would, in St. Paul's words, receive to themselves damnation." ^ After summarily consigning the Scotch rebels to perdition, the Holy Synod next turned their attention to the mun- dane question of taxation ; and it was accordingly declared that by the law of God, nature and nations, tribute and custom, and aid and subsidy and all manner of necessary support was due to kings from their sub- jects ; and though subjects had a just right, title and property in all their goods and estates, yet these two rights were so far from crossing one another, that they naturally go together for the honourable and comfortable support of both. For as it is the duty of the subjects to supply their King, it is part of the kingly office to support his subjects in the property of their estates." ^ These worthy prelates, with their attendant satellites of deans and archdeacons, next bethought themselves of requiring all ministers, lawyers, physicians, school- masters, registers, actuaries and proctors to take an oath 1 Canon I. 2 Canon I. PUBLIC FEELING IN THE COUNTRY 261 that " they approved the doctrine, discipHne and govern- ment estabhshed in the Church, as containing all things necessary for salvation, and that they would never con- sent to alter the government of the Church by arch- bishops, bishops, deans, archdeacons, etc., as it stands now established and as by right it ought to stand." ^ This etcetera oath, as it was called, was received with general merriment, and so unsparing was the ridicule it excited, that the King thought proper to direct its discontinu- ance.^ Little did Laud foresee how fatal these Canons would be to himself and his Order. " At their first publication," he tells us in his memoirs, " they were generally approved, and I had letters from the remotest parts of the kingdom full of approbation, insomuch that not myself only, but my brethren, were very much joyed at it. But about a month after their printing whisperings began against them by some ministers in London, and this set others on work both in the western and northern parts. Till at last, by the practice of the faction, there was suddenly a great alteration, and nothing was so much cried down as the Canons. The comfort is, Christ Himself had His Hosanna turned into a Crucifige in far less time. By this means the malice of the time took another occasion to whet itself against me." ^ When Strafford advised the vigorous prosecution of the war he was under the delusion that the heart of the country was still with the King, and that an appeal to the patriotism of the people would induce them to grant, what their representatives in the Commons had refused, an ample supply of men and money for a short ^ Canon VI. ^ Laud to the Bishops, October 6, 1640. Works, vi. 584 3 Laud's Works, iii. 291. 262 ARCHBISHOP LAUD and successful campaign. But the abrupt dissolution of Parliament, before a single grievance had been redressed, had produced a marked change in the temper of the nation, and even men most devoted to the Crown were reluctantly convinced that a radical change in the system of govern- ment must be effected, if they were to maintain their constitutional liberties and rights. The Scots in arms were indeed hanging like a dark cloud on the northern frontiers of the kingdom, but they were, at any rate, men of the same reformed religion as themselves, and suffering from the same evils of misgovernment ; and when it was noised abroad that Strafford was bringing over an army of Irish Papists to intervene in this national quarrel, they were filled with horror and resentment.^ And the mem- bers of the Commons, when returning to their counties, fanned the flames of the general discontent. Against these distractions Strafford struggled in vain. The City flatly refused to advance a loan for the suppression of their northern brethren, and the attempts to collect ship-money were everywhere met by the passive resistance of the sheriffs to collect and of the people to pay. And so, says Laud in the narrative of his troubles, " the King's good people were almost generally possessed that his Majesty had a purpose to alter the ancient laws of the kingdom and to bring in slavery upon his people. And some Lords and others had by this time made an under- hand solemn confederacy with a strong party of the Scots. For all men know, and it hath been in a manner confessed, that the Scots durst not have come into England at that * In the petition of the twelve Earls presented to the King on August 28 at York, special reference is made " to the great mischiefs which may fall upon this kingdom if the intentions which have been credibly reported of bringing in Irish and foreign forces should take effect." (Cal. S.P.D. Charles I, vol. xvi. p. 640.) GREAT COUNCIL AT YORK 263 time, if they had not been sure of a party here and a strong one. By these and the like means, the King not being assisted by his Parhament, nor having means enough to put his forces in motion, the Scots, under General Leslie, passed the Tyne at Newburn, and took Newcastle the next day after.^ The King hearing that the Scots were moving, posted away to York on the 20th of August. There he soon found in what straits he was ; and summoned his Great Council of Lords and Prelates to York. How things succeeded there I know not, for my attendance was dispensed with ; but the result of all was a present nomination of some Lords Commissioners to treat at Ripon upon this great affair with other Commissioners from the Scotch army. In this Great Council, while the treaty was proceeding slowly enough, it was agreed that a Parliament should begin in London on November 3, and thither the Commissioners and the treaty were to follow, and so they did." ^ It was with anxious forebodings that Laud looked forward to the meeting of Parliament on November 3. He could not conceal from himself that, after Strafford, he was the most hated man in the kingdom, and he wisely avoided giving further offence by interfering in any way with the election of members for the House of Commons. In a touching letter to the Mayor and Aldermen of Read- ing, his native town, he writes, " I desire you to know that the reason why I did not recommend unto you the choice of a burgess for this Parhament, as I did for the last, was not out of any opinion that you would give me less respect now than you formerly did, but because I found that there was a great deal of causeless malignity cast upon me for I know not what, as you yourselves cannot but know by the tumult which lately beset my house ; * August 29, * Laud's Works, iii. 291-5. 264 ARCHBISHOP LAUD and I was very careful that, whatsoever mahce reported of me, or did to me, no part of it should in the least reflect upon the town by choosing a burgess at my entreaty." ^ On October 22 he appeared with his episcopal sur- roundings for the last time in his beloved Court of the High Commission, which, for greater security, in the excited state of public feeling, had been transferred from Lambeth to St. Paul's. The Court was engaged in its usual occupation of censuring sectaries, and a large and appreciative audience were carefully watching the proceed- ings. The victim on the occasion was a misguided sepa- ratist, with erroneous views on the subject of Conform- ity ; but when Laud was proceeding to sentence him for his enormous wickedness, a violent timiult broke out in the Court ; and the most reverend and venerable prelates, gathering up the skirts of their episcopal garments, on a sudden disappeared from the seat of judgment with a lightness of foot and rapidity of motion that baffled the intentions of their assailants. Pedibus timor addidii alas, and the mob, no longer controlled by the august presence of the Fathers of the Church, tore down the benches, seized upon the books and threw the furniture out of the window, crying out that they would have no bishops and no High Commission.^ Writ- ing to Archbishop Usher on the following morning. Laud could only compare the scene to one of those Edinburgh riots ; and " I like not," he adds, " this preface to the Parliament, and this day I shall see what the Lords will do concerning this tumult." ^ But the Lords of the Privy Council, with the sword of Damocles hanging over their own heads, felt no inclination to mix themselves up with a bishops' quarrel ; and though some of the rioters 1 Laud's Works, vi. 587. * Heylin, p. 425. 3 Laud to Usher, October 23, 1640. Works, vi. 585. CLOSURE OF THE HIGH COMMISSION 265 were apprehended and committed to the Sessions, they were not placed upon their trial, as the Grand Jury quashed the indictment. Five days after his escape from the rioters in St. Paul's, Laud was much disturbed by an ominous occurrence in his own palace which he carefully notes in his diary. " Tuesday, Simon and Jude's eve. I went into my upper study to see some manuscripts I was sending to Oxford. In that study hung my picture taken by the life. And coming in I found it fallen down upon the face and lying on the floor, the string being broken by which it was hanged against the wall. I am almost every day threat- ened with my ruin in Parliament. God grant this be no omen." * ^ Diary, October 27, 1640. CHAPTER XXXI 1640 — 1641 THE LONG PARLIAMENT AT length on November 3 the great ParUament met, but it had, says Clarendon, " a sad and melan- choly aspect, upon the first entrance, which presaged some unusual and unnatural events. The King himself did not ride with his accustomed equipage, nor in his usual majesty to Westminster, but went privately in his barge to the Parliament stairs, and so to the Abbey and the House of Lords." A marked change too was observed in the demeanour of the members; "the same men, who six months before were observed to be of very moderate tempers, and to wish that gentle remedies might be applied, now talked in another dialect both of things and persons." ^ The House of Commons was almost entirely composed of the same members as the last, but they had assembled under altered circum- stances and with very different feelings. Men like Ed- ward Hyde, well affected to the King, were of the same mind as Pym and Hampden, that an end must be put once and for ever to the tyranny and oppression, which, under the name of Government, had for so many years darkened the face of the land. Equally too were they resolved that Strafford and Laud and the other evil * Clarendon's Hist. iii. 1-3. 366 IMPEACHMENT OF STRAFFORD 267 counsellors of the King should be brought to judgment Strafford was then at York with the Army, and foreseeing his impending fate he asked the King to dispense with his attendance in Parliament, and allow him to retire to his Government in Ireland, where he could more effectu- ally promote his Majesty's service. But the King pledged his word that not a hair of his head should be touched, and on November 9 he arrived in London. The loth was spent in consultation with the King, and it was generally believed — and Laud says upon good grounds * — that on the following day he was to impeach Lord Saye, and the other leaders of the Opposition, for treason in having invited the Scots to invade the kingdom. On the following morning, to quote Clarendon's narrative, " Mr. Pym rose in the House, and in a long, formal discourse lamented the miserable state and condition of the kingdom, aggravating all the particulars, which had been done amiss in the Government, as done and contrived maliciously and upon deliberation to deprive the nation of the liberty and property which was their birthright by the laws of the land ; and thereupon en- larging in some specious commendation of the goodness of the King, he said : " We must inquire from what fountain these waters of bitterness flowed, what persons had insinuated themselves into his Royal affections as to be able to pervert his judgment, and wickedly apply his authority to countenance and support their own corrupt designs. Though he doubted there would be many found of this class, yet he believed there was one more signal in that administration than the rest, being a man of great parts and contrivance, a man who in the memory of many present had sat in that house, an earnest vindicator of the laws, and a most zealous asserter and ' Laud's Works, hi. 295. 268 ARCHBISHOP LAUD champion for the hberties of the people ; but that it was long since he had turned apostate from those good affections, and had become the greatest promoter of tyranny that any age had produced. He then named the Earl of Strafford Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and President of the Council of the North. Several other persons continued the discourse, and the morning being spent, so that according to the observation of Parliament hours the time of rising being come, an order was suddenly made that the door should be shut and nobody suffered to go out of the House." ^ At three o'clock the doors opened, and Pjnn foUowed by 300 members appeared at the bar of the House of Lords, and impeached Thomas Earl of Strafford, in the name of the Commons of England, of high treason and other heinous crimes and misdemeanours, and desired in their name that he might be sequestered from all councils, and be put into safe custody. What followed is graphically told by Baillie, who was one of the chaplains attached to General Leslie's army, and was now in London in attendance in the same capa- city on the Scottish Commissioners. " While the Lords were consulting on that strange and unexpected motion, word goes in haste to the Lord Lieutenant where he was with the King. With speed he comes to the House, and with a proud glooming countenance makes towards his accustomed seat. He was met with shouts of " Withdraw, withdraw ! " and forced in confusion to retire. As soon as he was gone, an order was passed sequestering him from his place in the House, and committing him to the custody of James MaxweU, the Keeper of the Black Rod. He was then called in and commanded to kneel and on his knees to hear the sentence. He asked per- mission to speak, but his request was refused. Maxwell 1 Clarendon's Hist. iii. 3-6. THE CANONS 269 then took from him his sword and conducted him out of the House, through a crowd of gazing people, no man capping to him, before whom that morning the greatest of England would have stood discovered." ^ Not a voice in either House had been raised in Straf- ford's defence. Neither the ministers of the Crown nor the bishops ventured to oppose the rising tide of public indignation. Upon Laud himself no direct attack had yet been made, but many of the victims of his ecclesi- astical tyranny had petitioned the Commons for redress, and had received permission to submit their cases for the consideration of the House. Among others Prynne and his associates had been recalled from their distant prisons, and their return to London was made the occasion of a great popular demonstration against the bishops. And it was not without reason that Laud was seriously alarmed. The new Canons, which he had passed in the late Convocation, in the vain hope of strengthening the prerogative of the Crown, and of reconciling the nation to his religious innovations, were now under discussion in the Commons ; and knowing well the hostile feeling against him in that all-powerful assembly, he writes to Selden asking him to intervene on his behalf. " Worthy Sir — I understand that the business about the late Canons will be handled again in your House to-morrow. I shall never ask anything unworthy of you, but give me leave to say as follows. If we have erred in any point of legality unknown to us, we shall be heartily sorry for it, and hope that error will not be made a crime. We hear that ship-money is laid aside, and will die of itself ; may not these unfortunate Canons be suffered to die as quietly ? If this may be, I here promise you I will presently humbly beseech his Majesty ^ Baillie's Journal, i. 272 ; Gardiner, ix. 235. 270 ARCHBISHOP LAUD for a licence to review the Canons and abrogate them, assuring myself that all my brethren will join with me to preserve the public peace, rather than that any act of ours shall be thought a public grievance. I understand you mean to speak of this business in the House to-morrow, and that hath made me write these lines to you, to let you know our meaning and desires. And I shall take it for a great kindness to me and a great service to the Church, if by your means the House will be satisfied with this, which is here offered of abrogating the Canons." ^ But Laud's repentance came too late. The arrogance of the clergy in presuming to promulgate Canons for the observance of the nation without the consent of Parliament was an offence against the constitution not lightly to be passed over or condoned. Without a dissentient voice the House of Commons unanimously resolved ; " That the clergy convened in Convocation had no power to make any constitutions or Canons whatsoever in matters of doctrine, discipline or otherwise, to bind the clergy or the laity of the land without common consent in Parliament." And it was further resolved that the Canons passed by the late Convocation " con- tained matters contrary to the King's prerogative, to the fundamental laws and statutes of the realm, to the rights of Parliament, to the property and liberty of the subjects and of dangerous ■ onsequence." ^ The House then appointed a committee to consider how far the Archbishop of Canterbury had been an actor in this great design for the subversion of the laws ^ Letter dated Lambeth, November 29, 1640. Laud's Works, vi. 589. 2 Resolution of the Commons, December 16, 1640. Rush- worth, part 3, vol. i. p. 112. IMPEACHMENT OF LAUD 271 and the religion of the realm, and to prepare a charge against him. It was not merely as the author and contriver of the Canons that he was impeached, but, as Grimston said on the presentation of the Committee's report, " he had supported Strafford in all his wicked designs ; he had advanced all the popish Bishops, Mon- tague, Manwaring and Wren, the least of all these birds, but one of the most unclean ; he had sat at the helm to manage all the projects which had been set on foot in the kingdom for the past ten years, and there was scarce a grievance or complaint which had come before the House wherein he was not intermentioned ; like a busy and angry wasp, his sting was in the tail of every- thing ; he had been the enemy of all goodness and the persecutor of all good men ; and it was not safe that such a viper should be left near his Majesty's person to distil poison into his sacred ears." ^ His impeachment was unanimously voted, and even his friend Edward Hyde had not a word to say in his defence. What followed in the Lords is told by Laud himself. " Mr. Denzil Hollis, second son of the Earl of Clare, by order of the House of Commons, came up to the Lords and accused me of high treason, and told the Lords that they would make proof in convenient time ; but desired in the meantime that I might be committed to safe custody. Upon this charge I was ordered to withdraw. But I first desired leave to speak a few words, and I spake to this effect. That I was heartily sorry for the offence taken against me ; and that I was most unhappy to have my eyes open to see that day, and mine ears to hear such a charge ; but humbly desired their Lordships to look upon the whole course of my life, which was such as that I did verily persuade myself ^ Rushworth, part 3, vol, i. p. 122. 272 ARCHBISHOP LAUD that no man in the House of Commons did beheve in his heart that I was a traitor. Here my Lord the Earl of Essex interrupted me and said, ' That speech of mine was a scandal put upon the whole House of Commons, that they should bring me up charged with so high a crime, which themselves did not believe.' I humbly desired then that I might be proceeded with in the ancient Parliamentary way of England. This the Lord Saye excepted against, ' as if I would prescribe to them how they should proceed.' So I withdrew, as I was com- manded, and was presently again called in to the bar, and thence delivered to Mr. James Maxwell, the officer of the Black Rod, to be kept in safe custody till the House of Commons should further impeach me. Here I humbly desired leave that I might go home to fetch some papers necessary for my defence. This was granted with some difficulty, and Mr. Maxwell was commanded to attend me all the while I should stay. When I was gone to Lambeth, after some little discourse with my steward and some private friends, I went into my chapel to even- ing prayer. The Psalms for that day gave me much comfort, and I have every day since read over both these Psalms, and, God willing, propose to do so every day of my life. Prayers being ended, I went with Mr. Maxwell as I was commanded ; hundreds of my poor neighbours standing at my gates to see me go, and praying heartily for my safe return to my house ; for which I blessed God and them." ^ For ten weeks he remained a prisoner in Mr. Maxwell's house, and Heylin tells us that he had gained so much upon the good opinion of Mrs. Maxwell, that she told her friends he was " one of the goodest men and most pious souls, but withal one of the silhest fellows to hold 1 Works, iii. 275-7. HIS COMMITTAL TO THE TOWER 273 talk with a lady that ever she met with in all her life." What Laud thought of his hostess we are not told, but he bitterly complained of the fees charged for his diet and custody, " which came," he said " to ^^466 13s. 4d. ; and Mr. Maxwell had it all without any abatement." ^ The scene now changes to the Tower, where Laud was removed after the Commons had settled the particular charges upon which he was to be impeached. There seems always to have been some saint or other connected with all the events of his hfe. " This day," he notes in his diary, " being St. Augustine's day, my charge in general Articles was brought up from the House of Commons to the Lords. It consisted of fourteen Arti- cles.'^ When these Articles had been read to me in the Upper House and I had spoken in a general answer to them, I desired of the Lords that my going to the Tower might be put off till the Monday following, that a lodging there might be had for me with as much convenience as might be. This was granted, and on Monday Mr. Maxwell carried me in his coach to the Tower. St. George's Feast was to begin that evening, and so Mr. Maxwell, (whose office tied him to attendance upon that solemnity) could not go with me to the Tower at evening as I desired. Therefore noon, when the citizens were at dinner, was chosen as the fittest time for private- ness. All was well till I passed through Newgate Sham- bles and entered into Cheapside. Then some one prentice first hallowed out ; more and more followed the coach, till by the time I came to the Exchange the shouting was exceeding great. And so they followed me with clamour and revilings, even beyond barbarity itself, not giving over till the coach was entered into the Tower ^ Laud's Works, iii 392. 2 Diary, February 26, 1640. Works, iii. 396. T 274 ARCHBISHOP LAUD gates." * And here we must leave him, for in the Tower the last four years of his life were spent in neglected obscurity, without sympathy from the King, in whose service he had risked his reputation and his life — forsaken by his followers, whom he had advanced to places of dignity in the Church and the State, and scorned by his enemies as an object of pitiless contempt.^ Stripped of the trappings of office, his greatness fell from him like a cloak, and he had no resources in himself to occupy the weary hours of his imprisonment, and divert his thoughts from brooding over the bitterness of his fall. In the reflections of his solitude he saw nothing in his past career to qualify or regret, nothing in his past actions which required either apology or defence. His self-satisfied conscience never troubled him with any self-reproach. The history of his troubles is filled with petulant complaints of his own ill treatment, and the most scurrilous attacks on the characters of those who had been the instruments of his ruin.^ Neither his present misfortunes, nor the retrospect of the past, had in any way subdued or softened the malignant asperity of his arrogant and ill-regulated mind. It may truly be said of him, as Livy said of Cicero, that " he bore none of his calamities with the dignity of a man except his death." Very different was the demeanour of the man who had shared his most secret counsels, and was now his companion in misfortune. " The Earl of Strafford," 1 Works, iii. 436. ^ Baillie notes in his journal, " That which is the great stop- page to all matters is the trial of Strafford. As for poor Canter- bury, he is so contemptible that all cast him out of their thoughts as a pendicle at the Lord Lieutenant's ears." (Journal, p. 309.) 3 His remarks upon the Earl of Rothes were absolutely unfit for publication. Works, iii. 448. EXECUTION OF STRAFFORD 275 says Clarendon, " behaved himself with great show of humility and submission ; but yet with such a kind of courage as would lose no advantage ; and in truth made his defence with all imaginable dexterity, answering this, and evading that, with all possible skill and eloquence and leaving nothing unsaid that might make for his own justification." ^ And one of the most touching passages in Laud's history of his troubles is the tribute he pays to the memory of his friend, and his bitter reflections on the unstable character of the King in passing the Bill of Attainder, which deprived Strafford of his hfe. " This Bill," he writes, " went on with great haste and earnest- ness ; which the King observing, and loth to lose so great and good a servant, came into the House of Lords, and there, upon Saturday, May i, declared unto both Houses, how carefully he had heard and observed all the charges against the Earl of Strafford (for he was present at every day's hearing^), and found that his fault, whatever it were, could not amount to treason ; and added that if they meant to proceed by Bill, it must pass by him, and that he could not in his conscience find him guilty, nor would he ever wrong his honour or his conscience so far as to pass such a Bill, but advised them to proceed by way of misdemeanour, and he would concur with them in any sentence. This displeased mightily, and I verily think it hastened the Earl's death. And indeed to what end should the King come voluntarily to say this, unless he would bid by it, whatever came ? And it had been far more regal to reject the Bill, when ^ Clarendon's Hist. iii. io8. * "A close box," says Clarendon, " had been made at one end of the hall, at a very convenient distance for hearing, in which the King and the Queen sat untaken notice of, though conspicuous enough." (Hist. iii. 105-60.) 276 ARCHBISHOP LAUD it had been brought to him (his conscience standing so as his Majesty openly professed it did), than to make this honourable preface, and let the Bill pass after. The Bill comes up to the Lords when the House was none of the fullest (but what made so many of them absent I know not), and then it passed.^ And upon Sunday, May 9, the King was so laid at and so frighted, that if justice was not done, and the Bill passed for the Earl's execution, the multitude would come the next day and pull down Whitehall (and God knows what might become of the King himself), and these fears pre- vailing. His Majesty gave way and the Bill passed : and that night late one of the Clerks of the Council was sent to the Tower to give the Earl warning that he must prepare to die Wednesday morning following ; and on Wednesday, about ten of the clock, being May 12, he was beheaded on Tower Hill, many thousands beholding him. The speech which he made at his end was a great testimony of his religion and piety, and he made a patient pious and courageous end, insomuch that some doubted whether his death had more of the Roman or Christian in it. Thus ended the wisest, stoutest and every way the ablest subject that this nation hath bred these many years. The only imperfections that he had, that were known to me, were his want of bodily health, and a carelessness or rather a roughness not to oblige any ; and his mishaps in this last action were, that he groaned under the public envy of the nobles, and served a mild and gracious prince, who knew not how to he, or he made great." ^ The magnanimity which Strafford displayed in this ^ Clarendon says there were only forty-six Lords present, thirty-five voting for the Bill, and eleven dissenting. (Hist. ui. 196.) ^ Laud's Works, iii. 440-3. LAUD IN THE TOWER 277 supreme hour of his fate has gone far to obhterate with posterity the misdeeds of his Hfe. But his contempo- raries, who had felt the iron hand of his tyranny, regarded him from a nearer point of view, as the great Minister of the Crown, whose existence was incompatible with the public safety, and whose death was therefore de- manded, not merely as an act of retributive justice, but as a political necessity for the security of the kingdom. It was his own boast that he had made the King as abso- lute in power as any prince in Christendorn, and this power he had unsparingly used for the gratification of his personal ends. Nor was he insensible of the great danger he was incurring, for his policy of " thorough " had been deliberately adopted, and, as he prophetically said, " at the peril of his head." No one can certainly accuse the House of Commons in this hour of their triumph of being actuated by mere vindictive motives of revenge. Men so generally odious to the people as the Lord Keeper Finch and Secretary Windebank were permitted to escape in safety across the Channel, and after Strafford's execu- tion no other minister of the Crown was brought to a public trial. Even Laud, though sequestered from his office, was almost forgotten in the Tower, where he was attended by his own servants, and with unrestricted liberty to correspond with and receive the visits of his friends. So slight, indeed, were the restrictions placed upon his freedom that he believed that facilities were designedly given him for effecting his escape. But in the Tower he was at any rate protected from the violence of his enemies, and he knew of no asylum abroad where he would be equally secure. To a message from Grotius, in Paris, who had urged him " to pass to some place beyond the seas, there to preserve himself for better 278 ARCHBISHOP LAUD times," he pathetically replied, " I am obliged to my good friend Hugo Grotius for the care he has expressed for my safety. An escape indeed is feasible enough ; yea, 'tis I believe the very thing my enemies desire, for every day an opportunity for it is presented to me, a passage being left free, in all likelihood for this purpose, that I should endeavour to take advantage of it. But they shall not be gratified by me ; I am almost seventy years old, and shall I now go about to prolong a miserable life by the trouble and shame of flying ? and were I willing to be gone whither should I fly ? Should I go into France or any other Popish country, it would be to give some seeming ground to that charge of Popery they have endeavoured with so much industry and so little reason to fasten upon me. But if I should go to Holland, I should expose myself to the insults of those sectaries there, to whom my character is odious, and have every Anabaptist come and pull me by the beard. No, I am resolved not to think of flight ; but, continuing where I am, patiently to expect and bear what a good and wise Providence hath provided for me." ^ So he thought it better to stay, where he was in comparative ease and comfort, to facing the miseries of exile in a foreign land, where he would meet with neither sympathy nor respect, trusting to a turn in the tide which would place the King again in power and himself at liberty. ^ Life of Edward Pocock, by Dr. Twills, i. p. 84. CHAPTER XXXII 1641 — 1642 PROCEEDINGS IN PARLIAMENT MEANWHILE the Commons were too occupied with redressing the grievances of the nation to waste their time upon a man, who could no longer influ- ence or control the course of events. By a series of Acts passed in the first nine months of the Session, they not only restored and consolidated the shattered fabric of the Constitution, but provided securities for its preser- vation in the future. The long intermission of Parlia- ments had deprived the people of the only control which could check the excesses of arbitrary power. A statute, as old as the reign of Edward III, had already provided that a Parliament should be held every year, and oftener if need be. But this enactment had in no age been respected. The calling and dissolution of Parliament depended upon the good pleasure of the King. No provision had been made to enable Parliaments to meet, if the King neglected to convene them. The first Act of the Session ^ provided a long-needed remedy. The interval between Parliaments was never to exceed three years ; and when that period had elapsed, provision was made for the elections to take place without the sanction of the King ; and no future Parliament was to be dis- ^ The Triennial Act, 16 Car. I. i. c. i. 270 28o ARCHBISHOP LAUD solved without its own consent in less than fifty days after the opening of the Session. After laying this solid foundation for the maintenance of the laws, the House of Commons proceeded to cut away the more flagrant and recent usurpations of the Crown. They passed a Bill declaring ship-money illegal, and annulling the judgment of the Exchequer Chamber against Mr. Hampden ; and the long-disputed claim of the Crown to levy custom duties at the ports was finally settled by an Act declaring that no custom, impost or other charge whatever could be levied upon any merchandise exported or imported without the common consent in Parliament ; other Acts retrenched the vexa- tious prerogative of purveyance, and took away that of compulsory knighthood. And one of greater import- ance put an end to a fruitful source of oppression and complaint, by determining for ever the extent of the royal forests according to their boundaries in the twen- tieth year of James, annulling all the proceedings of the Forest Commissioners by which they had been subsequently enlarged. Separate Acts were passed for the abolition of the Star Chamber, and the special tribunals which had been created for the support of arbitrary power, and the liberties of the people were again placed under the pro- tection of the law. The High Commission Court met with a similar fate ; and the bishops, archdeacons and other ecclesiastical judges were at the same time de- prived of their coercive jurisdiction, and were no longer permitted to indulge their sectarian hatred by sentencing separatists, or other offenders against the Canons of the Church, to fines, imprisonment or any other penalty whatsoever. And these measures were not the mere outcome of Puritan zeal, but were passed by the almost THE KING'S VISIT TO SCOTLAND 281 unanimous vote of both the Lords and the Commons. Royahsts hke Edward Hyde and Lord Falkland, devoted to the throne and the Church, made common cause with Pym and Hampden in these legislative and administrative reforms. Against such a demonstration of national feeling, the King was powerless, and was compelled to give his assent to measures, which completely changed the character of the monarchy. In this extremity of his fortunes the King turned his eyes to Scotland, and shortly before the end of the Session we find him in communication with the Scottish Com- missioners in London to obtain their support against the Parliament. The common danger, which had united the two nations was now removed, and National jeal- ousies were again rekindled. All the demands which the English Parliament had made upon the King had been granted, while the Scottish grievances were still unredressed. Edinburgh required the King's presence as much as London ; and the Commissioners assured him " that their nation would do all in their power to place him in his authority again ; and that if he only appeared in Scotland, all political differences would be at an end, for all would serve their natural Prince as one man in such a cause." ^ The Scottish army was still in the field, and great was the consternation in the Commons when the King announced his intention of paying a visit to his northern kingdom ; and, on Falkland's motion, they asked him to postpone his departure till the armies were disbanded.* The King, however, was fixed in his purpose, and " on the loth of August," to quote Laud's narrative, "he rode away post into Scotland, the Parhaments sitting in both kingdoms and the armies not yet dissolved. * Gardiner's Hist. ix. 415-17. ^ Idem, 415. 282 ARCHBISHOP LAUD There was great scanning about this journey, and the House of Commons sent some Commissioners thither, as the Scots had some here." ^ On his way to Edinburgh the King visited the Scottish army then encamped at Newcastle, where he reviewed the troops and was magnificently entertained by the Scottish officers. To General Leslie he was especially gracious and profuse in his promises, and before the King left Scotland this soldier of fortune was created Earl of Leven. On August 14 Charles arrived in Edinburgh, and on his first visit to the Parliament he declared that his chief object in visiting his native country was to perfect what- soever he had promised and to end distractions : ^ and he at once consented to ratify all the Acts, to which he had refused his consent before the outbreak of the war. Among others was the Act for abolishing episcopacy in Scotland, declaring " that the government of the Church by archbishops and bishops was against the word of God, and an enemy to the propagation of the true reformed Protestant religion, and therefore to be utterly abol- ished." ^ Without the slightest hesitation, and without any scruple of conscience, the Royal disciple of Laud touched the Act with his sceptre and it became the law of the land. As a further proof of his sincerity, he dili- gently attended the Presbyterian services and listened with marked devotion to the discourses of the Presby- terian divines. Henderson had, to all appearance, taken the place of Laud, and was in constant attendance at Holyrood as the monitor and adviser of this most religious King.* ^ Laud's Works, iii. 448. ^ Masson's Life of Milton, ii. 303. ^ Clarendon's Hist. iv. 44. * Gardiner's Hist. x. 6. CASE OF THE FIVE MEMBERS 283 But Charles was well satisfied with the political results of his mission. He wrote to the Queen that " the Scots had undertaken to maintain in his service 5,000 foot and 1,000 horse, to be used wherever he wished and against any enemies he might choose ; and that if these were not enough, he was to have more. By assurances of office and promotion he had gained over, he said, his bitterest enemies, and this, he added, will be enough to dispose them to support my interest, and make them depend on me without exception." ^ The great concessions which the King had made to his subjects in Scotland created a marked reaction in public opinion in England. On his return to London on November 25 he was received by the City with the greatest demonstrations of loyalty and respect. The peace-loving citizens were under the delusion that the King had returned with altered feelings, and would now adopt in England the same conciliatory policy that had given peace and contentment to Scotland. But this delusion was soon removed. On January 3, 1642, the King's Attorney-General appeared in the Lords, and impeached Pym, Hampden, and three other Par- liamentary leaders of high treason, and demanded their arrest. Such an unexpected application took the Lords by surprise ; for they were asked to place in confinement the very men who, in concert with themselves, had been the chief instruments in rescuing the nation from an oppressive tyranny, and whose cause the all-powerful Commons would naturally make their own. It was necessary, therefore, to proceed with caution ; and instead of committing the accused members to the Tower, they * Gardiner's Hist. x. 6. 284 ARCHBISHOP LAUD appointed a Committee to inquire what was the proper course to pursue in the extraordinary circumstances in which they were placed. Whether irritated by the procedure of the Lords, or urged on by the violent counsels of the courtiers and the Queen/ the King on the following day, attended by an armed band of some 400 courtiers and retainers, proceeded to the House of Commons and demanded the surrender of the members whom the Lords had refused to arrest. The scene that followed in the House is too well known to require repetition. Not only had the King invaded the privileges of the Commons, but he had given equal offence to the Lords by interfering with their jurisdiction in a case, which was judicially before them. No man realized more clearly than Laud how deeply the King's fortunes and his own fate were involved in this outrageous attempt to arrest the five members. " It made," he said, a " mighty noise on all hands. But the business was so carried that the House adjourned to sit in a Committee at Guild Hall, and after at the Grocer's Hall, where things were so ordered, that, within two or three days, these men were, with great salutes of the people, brought and in a manner guarded to the Committee, and after to the House at Westminster ; and great stir made to and fro about the accusation of th ese men, and the breach of the privileges of Parhament by his Majesty coming thither in that manner. Things were carried in a higher strain than ever before. The King left the City, and withdrew privately first to Hamp- ton Court, and after that to Windsor. Many puttings on and puttings off, concerning this and other great affairs between the King and the House ; all which I ^ Gardiner's Hist. x. 136. LAUD'S REFLECTIONS 285 leave to public records as not concerning this poor his- tory ; yet could not omit to say thus much in the general, because much of the Church business, as well as the State's, and much of mine as well as the Church's, will depend upon it." ^ ' Laud's Works, iii. 455. CHAPTER XXXIII 1642 DEBATES ON THE BISHOPS SO far no definite settlement had been arrived at on the thorny subject of rehgion. There had been frequent debates in both Houses on the misconduct of the bishops, and all parties were agreed that if episcopal Government was to be retained, it must, like the abused prerogatives of the Crown, be placed under very large limitations. Bacon, forty years before had expressed a similar opinion. He had pointed out how injurious to the interests of the Church was " the sole exercise of their authority by the bishops. And therefore," he says, " it seems to me a thing reasonable and religious, and according to the first institution, that bishops in the greatest causes, namely in ordaining, suspending or depriving ministers and the like, should not proceed sole and unassisted." With regard to the liturgy he said, " It is good to take example how the best actions of the worship of God may be extolled excessively and superstitiously, as the extoUing of the Sacrament bred the superstition of the Mass, the extolling of the liturgy and prayers bred the superstition of the monastic " orders and oraisons." And he therefore suggested that " all ceremonies, which were in their nature indifferent, in- stead of being enforced for the sake of Uniformity, should, 286 FIENNES AND FALKLAND 287 in the interest of Unity, and, for the avoidance of offence to scrupulous consciences, be forborne." ^ A moderate measure of reform, on the lines indicated by Bacon, would at that time have been welcomed by Parliament as a happy solution of religious difficulties. Even men of extreme Puritan views like Nathaniel Fiennes advocated little more than Bacon had recom- mended. " In the Civil Government," he said, " every man, from the greatest to the least, has some share in the Government, according to the proportion of his interest in the Commonwealth, but in the Government of the Church all is in the hands of one man in the several dio- ceses, and he exacts canonical obedience to his pontifical commands, with a total exclusion of those that have as much share in the Church, and consequently as much interest in the government of it, as they have in that of the Commonwealth." ^ The Church was a national establishment, and its endowments were held by the clergy under a Parliamentary title in trust for the nation. The bishops, on the contrary, looked upon the Church, not as a trust to be administered, but as an estate over which they had absolute control ; and by the abuse of their patronage, and the misuse of their episcopal authority, they had been able, said Fiennes, " to place and displace the whole clergy of their dioceses, and so to mould them to their wishes as to bring in what rehgion they pleased."^ While Fiennes regarded the bishops from a political point of view, Lord Falkland, a Royalist and a Church- man, far removed from any taint of Puritanism, and a man of the highest intellectual culture, principally dwelt upon the disastrous influence of the bishops on the thought and education of the nation. " They had been," 1 Spedding's Life of Bacon, vol. iii. 103. * Rushworth's Collections, iii. 179. ^ Idem, 180. 288 ARCHBISHOP LAUD he said, " the destruction of Unity under the pretence of Uniformity, and had brought in superstition and scandal in the name of reverence and decency. Catechis- ing had been brought in only to thrust out preaching, and lectures had been cried down by the name of fac- tions, in order to bring in darkness, and by the introduc- tion of ignorance to introduce the better a religion that accounts ignorance the mother of devotion." " Some bishops," he added, " had laboured to bring in an English, though not a Roman Popery, not only the outside and dress of it, but equally absolute, a blind dependence of the people upon the clergy, and the clergy upon themselves. Nay, common fame was more than ordinarily false, if none of them had found a way to reconcile the opinions of Rome to the preferments of England : and to be so absolutely and cordially Papists, that it was all that ;^i,500 a year could do to keep them from confessing it." But still, he said, " in spite of the general defection of that order, there were some honest bishops left, who had no sympathy with the late innovations, and whose only fault had been the silence they had maintained about them. The mischief that had arisen had been caused by the intermission of Parlia- ments, but now that the constant session of Parliament was assured by the Triennial Act, there was no reason to fear any innovation from their tyranny, or to doubt any defect in the discharge of their duty." " He had no belief in their jus divinum, nor did he consider their intermeddling in secular matters, or their titles of Lord- ships, or their voices in Parliament were necessary ad- juncts of their authority; and if these were taken away, he was of opinion that episcopacy might be safely re- tained." 1 ^ Rushworth's Collections, iii. 184-5. THE BISHOPS EXCLUSION BILL 289 The views of a man so universally respected and beloved had great weight with the Commons ; and Pym and Hampden assured him that they had no desire to abolish episcopacy, provided that the bishops were restricted to their proper spiritual duties, and were not allowed to intermeddle with civil affairs. A Bill was accordingly introduced to exclude the bishops from the House of Lords, and to debar all clergymen whatsoever from holding secular offices, and such employments as Privy Councillors at the Council Board and Justices on the Commission of the Peace. The Bill passed the Commons with little or no opposition, but the bishops' votes secured its rejec- tion in the Lords. The Upper House then consisted of 119 temporal Peers, but there were seldom more than 60 or 70 present at a division ; while the 26 bishops could always be relied upon to place their votes at the disposal of the King, and to resist any needed reform in the government of the Church. They had obtained their places in Parliament when they were the sole deposi- taries of learning among an uneducated laity ; " but in 1642 they were," says Gardiner, " no more than an excrescence on the political and religious life of the nation." ^ They were the nominees of the Crown, and were in no sense the representatives even of the clergy. Nor were they a necessary part of the Constitution, for Parliaments had been held from which the clergy had been excluded, and the Act of Uniformity, which had established the Church, had been passed against the united protest of all the bishops.^ In the following February the Bishops Exclusion Bill was again sent up by the Commons to the Lords under circumstances singularly favourable for its recep- 1 Gardiner's Hist. x. i66. ^ Rushworth, iii. 395-6. U 290 ARCHBISHOP LAUD tion. Twelve of the bishops were under impeachment in the Tower, and their votes not being available, the Bill was eventually carried by a majority of thirteen,^ to the great joy and satisfaction of the nation. It now remained to obtain the Royal assent to the Bill. The King naturally hesitated to consent to a diminution of his influence in the Upper House by depriving of their votes twenty-six of his staunchest supporters. But, says Clarendon, " those of the greatest trust about the King, and who were very faithful to his service, per- suaded him that the passing of the Bill was the only way to preserve the Church, there being so united a combina- tion in this particular that he would not be able to withstand it. They alleged that he was upon the matter deprived of their votes already, they being not suffered to come to the House, and the major part in prison under an accusation of high treason ; and then by his power, and the memory of the indirect means that had been used against them, it would be easier to bring them in again than to keep them in now. Above all, they said, if there was to be a breach with the Commons, it must be on a question upon which the King would meet with support from the country, and not in such an unpopular cause as the preservation of the bishops in the House of Peers, which few men thought essential, and most men believed to be prejudicial to the peace and happiness of the kingdom.^ The King's religious convictions were always con- trolled by his political necessities, and he not only gave ^ If Gardiner's figures can be relied upon, the third reading was carried by thirty-six to twenty-three. (Gardiner's Hist. x. 163, note 2.) Three bishops who voted in the minority recorded a formal protest against the Bill. (Lords' Journal, February 6, 1642.) ^ Clarendon's Hist. iv. 299-300. COMMENCEMENT OF THE CIVIL WAR 291 his consent to the Bill, that deprived the bishops of their most coveted distinction, their seats among the Peers, but at the same time declared his intention of leaving the reform of the Church in the hands of Parlia- ment. So low had the bishops sunk in public estimation, that it was not thought necessary to consult them even in matters affecting the Church. Parliament, which had established the Church, was now entrusted with the task of reforming it. What Laud's feelings were may be easily imagined. " Here," he says, " are the King's words : ' Concerning the government and liturgy of the Church, his Majesty is willing to declare that he will refer that whole consideration to the wisdom of his Parliament, which he desires them to enter into speedily, that the present distractions about the same may be composed, but desires not to be pressed to any single act on his part till the whole be so digested and settled by both Houses that his Majesty may clearly see what is fit to be left as well as what is fit to be taken away ! ' So here they are made masters of all, and in a time of great exasperation against the clergy and the bishops, and their votes being newly thrust out of the House. So God bless the poor Church of England, for I very much fear this can bode no good." ^ Here we may close the record of Laud's public life. The subsequent events of the reign are passed over al- most unnoticed in his diary, as having no direct con- nexion with himself. Even on that most deplorable event in English history, the outbreak of the Civil War, he makes no comment beyond observing " that things grew higher in the Parliament, and on the 22nd of August the King set up his standard at Nottingham." ^ ' Laud's Works, iii. 458. ^ Diary, August 22, 1642. 292 ARCHBISHOP LAUD One incident only in connexion with the war he thinks it necessary to notice, as a signal instance of Divine justice falling upon a Parliamentary leader, a dissenter from the Church, and an enemy of bishops. " The Lord Brooke was now in action. A bitter enemy he was to the Church and her government by bishops. On March 2, he was going to give onset upon the close of the Cathedral of Lichfield, and as he was taking a view of the place from a window in the house opposite to the close and his beaver up, so that a musket at such a distance could have done him but little harm, yet was he shot in the left eye, and killed dead in the place with- out speaking one word. Whence I shall observe three things : First, that this great and known enemy to Cathedral Churches, died thus fearfully in the assault of a Cathedral. A fearful manner of death in such a quarrel ! Secondly, that this happened on St. Chad's day, of which saint that Cathedral bears the name. Thirdly that this Lord coming from dinner about two years since from the Lord Herbert's house in Lambeth, upon some discourse upon St. Paul's Church, then in their eye upon the water, said to some young lords that were with him, that he hoped to live to see that one stone of that building should not be left upon another. But that church stands yet, and that eye is put out that hoped to see the ruins of it. Many heavy accidents have already fallen out in these unnatural wars, and God alone knows how many more shall before they end, but I intend no history but of my own sad misfor- tunes ; nor would I have mentioned this, but that it relates to the Church, which for my calling's sake I take as a part, and a near one, of myself." ' ' Laud's Works, iv. 18. LORD BROOKE 293 Lord Brooke, over whose fate Laud gloats with such evident satisfaction, was one of the most distinguished men of the day. He commanded the Parhamentary forces in Warwickshire, and lost his life in an assault on the close of Lichfield Cathedral, which had been converted into a fortress, and was then occupied by a Royalist garrison. Clarendon mentions that many obser- vations were made upon his death occurring on St. Chad's Day, and would certainly have embellished his narrative by alluding to the St. Paul's story, if there had been any truth in it. On the contrary, he has not a word to say to his disparagement, beyond the fact that " from his known hostility to the Government his death was looked upon as no ill omen to peace, and was exceedingly lamented by his party, who had scarce a more absolute confidence in any man than in him." ^ He was the one man in that age of sectarian bitterness, who advocated a general toleration in all religious matters, and " had worked out the problem of his time and had given the solution, which after forty-eight years of religious strife all England would accept." ^ 1 Clarendon's Hist. vi. 277. 2 Gardiner's Hist. x. 37. CHAPTER XXXIV 1643— 1645 LAUD DEPRIVED OF HIS PATRONAGE LAUD had now been two years in the Tower, and the apathy shown in following up his impeachment led him to believe that the Parliamentary leaders, in despair of obtaining a conviction, had no intention of bringing him to trial. This feeling and his irritable temper, never under any sort of control, made him impa- tient of the restraints, which are necessarily imposed upon an official committed to prison under serious charges of misconduct in the exercise of his public duties. Pend- ing his trial, the Lords had required him to make no appointments to vacant benefices in the Church without their approval and sanction. This order he particu- larly resented, as it deprived him of the power of pro- moting his own adherents, and placed in the hands of Parliament the control of the extensive patronage of the Archbishop. Every benefice that fell vacant led to an altercation with the Lords ; and matters were at length brought to a crisis by a letter ^ from the King, directing him to appoint to the valuable living of Chartham, in Kent, a Royalist clergyman, " who had been deprived of his livelihood by his turbulent parishioners "; and adding that " if you shall be restrained from so doing * Dated January 17, 1643. Laud's Works, iii. 249, note. 391 HIS PAPERS SEIZED IN THE TOWER 295 by either or both Houses of Parhament, you then for- bear to present any other to the same, that so the said parsonage, lapsing into our gift, we may, as we intend, confer it upon him." " I returned," said Laud, " a present answer by word of mouth, that I would either give or lapse the benefice, as his Majesty's gracious letter required of me." ^ But the Lords had already selected a nominee of their own, and sent a peremptory order to Laud to collate Chartham upon him : to which he rephed, that " the King had written to him for another, and that he hoped that his duty to his Majesty would be an acceptable answer to their Lordships, and that he would be no more pressed in this particular." ^ This insolent and defiant reply, coupled with the fact of his secret correspondence with the King, con- vinced the Lords that further forbearance in his case was impossible, and in a conference with the Commons they resolved not only to deprive him of the further exercise of his patronage, but to proceed at once with the prosecution of his trial.^ At this stage of the proceedings we again encounter the irrepressible Mr. Prynne, who was now employed by the Committee in charge of the impeachment, to collect, digest and arrange the voluminous evidence to be produced at the trial. In execution of his com- mission, he first paid a visit to the Tower, and Laud has left us a very graphic description of his interview there with his old enemy, Mr. Prynne. " It was Wednesday," * he writes, " the last of May, when a search came betimes in the morning upon all the prisoners in the Tower for letters and other papers. But I have some reasons to think that the search had a special aim at me. First ^ Idem, iv. i6. ^ Ibid. iv. 20, note j ^ April 24, 1643. * May 31, 1643 296 ARCHBISHOP LAUD because, following me thus close upon Chartham, I con- ceive they were desirous to see whether I had such a letter from the King as I pretended : if I had not, they had an ad\'antage against me for my falsehood ; if I had, they meant to see what secret passed from his Majesty to me. Secondly, all other prisoners had their papers re-delivered to them before the searchers left the Tower ; but mine were carried to the Committee. Lastly, because my implacable enemy, Mr. Pr^mne, was picked out to make the search upon me. The manner of the search upon me was thus : Mr. Prynne came into the Tower with other searchers as soon as the gates were open. Other men went to other prisoners. He made haste to my lodging, commanded the warder to open the doors, left two musketeer sentinels below, that no man might go in or out, and one at the stair head ; and \vith three others, who had their muskets ready cocked, he came into my chamber and found me in bed, as were also my ser\'ants in theirs. I presently thought upon my blessed Saviour, when Judas led in the swords and staves about Him. 'Sir. Pr}Tine, seeing me safe in bed, falls first to my pockets to rifle them, and by that time my two servants came running in. I demanded a sight of his warrant ; he showed it me, and therein was expressed that he should search my pockets.^ When my pockets had been sufficiently ransacked, I rose and got my clothes about me, and so half ready, with my gown upon my shoulders, he held me in the search till past nine of the clock in the morning. He took from me twenty-one ^ The word pocket does not occur in the warrant, which was d^a^^•n up in the usual form to search all the prisoners under restraint, and to seize upon all letters and papers, and no doubt full}- justified Prj-nne in searching Laud's pockets. The warrant is given in Laud's Works, iv. 25, note. COMMENCEMENT OF THE TRIAL 297 bundles of papers, which I had prepared for my defence, the letters before named, which came to me from his gracious Majesty about Chartham, and my other bene- fices ; the Scottish service book, with such directions as accompanied it ; a little book or diary containing all the occurrences of my life, and my Book of Private Devotions ; both these last, written through with my own hand. Nor could I get him to leave the last ; but he must needs see what passed between God and me, a thing I think scarce ever offered to any Christian." ^ The papers seized in the Tower were then submitted to the Committee for the management of the trial, and ten additional articles, charging the Archbishop not only with treason, but with other high crimes and misde- meanours, were added to the original articles of impeach- ment. It was then, says Clarendon, " that, finding that the Archbishop, for whom he had a great affection, was about to be tried for his life, he suggested ^ that a pardon should be prepared, and sent to him under the great seal of England, to the end, if they proceeded against him under any form of law, he might plead the King's pardon ; but if they proceeded in a martial or other extraordinary way, without any form of law, his Majesty would thereby declare his justice and affec- tion to an old, faithful servant in having done all to- wards his preservation that was in his power to do. This was carefully sent and delivered into the Arch- bishop's own hand, before he was brought to trial, and was in his hands during the whole time of his trial," ^ 1 Laud's Works, iv. 24-6. 2 Clarendon, then Mr. Edward Hyde, was the King's Chan- cellor of the Exchequer. 3 Clarendon's Hist. viii. 207-8. 298 ARCHBISHOP LAUD The charges upon which the prosecution eventually proceeded were grouped under three heads : ist. An endeavour to subvert the fundamental laws and Government of the country, and instead thereof to introduce an arbitrary and tyrannical government against law. 2nd. An endeavour to subvert the religion by law established, and instead thereof to set up Popish super- stition and idolatry. 3rd. An endeavour to subvert the rights of Parliament, and the ancient course of Parliamentary proceedings, and by false and malicious slanders to incense his Majesty against Parliaments.^ It is not necessary to enter into the details of the trial, for the various acts of Laud's public life, which formed the grounds of his impeachment, have already been stated in the previous narrative. The trial was long and tedious. The hearing of the evidence alone occupied twenty days. But he defended himself with much ingenuity and courage. He had the King's pardon in his pocket, and the assurance of his Counsel that none of the acts charged against him could by any legal construction be aggravated into treason. He saw, there- fore, no reason to offer excuses for his conduct either as a Bishop, a Privy Counsellor or a Judge. Many of the witnesses against him were the victims of his episcopal tyranny, and he objected to their evidence as " they were more than suspected sectaries and separatists from the Church, whereas by law no schismatics ought to be received against their bishop." ^ When it was replied that " some of the witnesses were aldermen, gentle- men, and men of quahty," " that " he said, " is nothing, * Laud's Works, iv. 417, note. ^ Laud's recapitulation of his defence. Id., 373. THE ORDINANCE OF ATTAINDER 299 for both gentlemen, aldermen, and men of all conditions (the more's the pity) as the times now go, are separatists from the doctrine and discipline of the Church." ^ Nor was he, he said, singly accountable for the arbitrary counsels he was charged with giving at the Council Table, or for the sentences he had judicially passed in the Star Chamber and the High Commission Court, as they were the joint acts of public bodies, for which his colleagues were equally responsible with himself. " For how can that," he said, " be treason in me, which is not made so much as a misdeameanour in the rest ? " ^ But however weak Laud's defence may have been on the facts, the question remained whether he was guilty of treason against the King under the statute of 25 Edward III ; and the Lords, after hearing Counsel on this question of law, very properly hesitated to con- vict on the capital charge of treason. But no lesser sentence would satisfy the religious zealots who now dominated the Commons ; and the House then resolved to waive the impeachment, and to proceed, as they had done in Strafford's case, by an Ordinance of Attainder. And now occurred one of the most touching incidents in these long proceedings — Laud's personal appearance in the House of Commons, that dreaded assembly, whose very name filled him with alarm, and whose powerful voice in the days of his power he had managed for eleven years to silence and suppress. He had now fallen from his high estate, and was a friendless man in the midst of his enemies. Upon arriving at the bar the Speaker in- formed him that an ordinance had been drawn up to attaint him of high treason, but that the House would not pass it till they had heard a summary of the charge * Id., 403. 2 Id., 374-407- 300 ARCHBISHOP LAUD and what he had to saym answer to it. After the case for the prosecution had been stated, the House at Laud's request postponed the further hearing to November ii, to give him time to prepare his reply. On his next ap- pearance he felt that he was pleading for his life, and all that he could hope for was a mitigation of the sen- tence. In a speech of several hours' duration he repeated the substance of the defence he had made before the Lords, and reminded the House " that Cardinal Wolsey, to whom he had been compared, had been charged with far graver offences than any that had been proved against himself ; and yet there was no thought of accus- ing the Cardinal of treason, a premunire being all that was laid upon him." And he concluded with a pathetic appeal to the feelings of the House. " And now, Mr. Speaker, with reference to that ordinance you told me was drawn up against me ; if that which I have now said may any way satisfy this honourable House to make stay of it or to mitigate it, I shall bless God and you for it. And I humbly desire you to take into consideration my calling, my age, my former life, my fall, my imprison- ment long and strict, that these considerations may move you. In my prosperity I was never puffed up into vanity, whatever the world may think of me. And in these last four years' durance I have with decent con- stancy borne the weight of a pressing fortune : and I hope God will strengthen me unto and in the end of it. Mr. Speaker, I am very aged,^ considering the turmoils of my life ; and I daily find in myself more decays than I make show of, and the period of my life in the course of nature cannot be far off. It cannot but be a great grief unto me to stand at these years thus charged before 1 He was then seventy-two. IS PASSED BY THE LORDS 301 you ; yet give me leave to say thus much without offence : whatever errors or faults I may have committed through human infirmity — as who is he that hath not offended and broken some statute laws too by ignorance, misappre- hension, or forgetfulness at some sudden time of action ? — yet I will die with these words in my mouth, ' That I never intended, much less endeavoured, the subversion of the laws of the kingdom ; nor the bringing in of Popish superstition upon the true Protestant religion established by law in this kingdom." ^ But this touching appeal was made to ears deaf to the calls of mercy, and the Ordinance condemning Laud to suffer death as a traitor was passed with only one dissentient voice. ^ His fate now depended upon the Lords, and to their credit they made a last, but in- effectual attempt to save him from the scaffold. They were, however, a much reduced and feeble body, for many of the Peers had left London and cast in their lot with the King. " December 16," to quote Laud's narrative, " there was, the times considered, a very full House, and my business largely debated, and ready to come to the question. I wish with all my heart it had, while the House was so full. But it was put off to the next day, when there were but fourteen ^ Lords present. My business was then resumed, and proposed in three questions, and I was voted guilt}' of the fact in all three : namely, guilty of endeavouring to subvert the laws ; to overthrow the Protestant religion ; and to subvert the rights of Parliament." * The judges were then asked to declare whether these findings upon the facts amounted ' Laud's Works, iv. 410. 2 Rushworth, iii. part 2, p. 834. 3 This is a mistake. There were twenty present on the latter date. (Lords' Journal, December 17, 1644.) ♦ Laud's Works, iv. 417 302 ARCHBISHOP LAUD to treason in point of law ; but " they unanimously declined to deliver any opinion in point of treason, but what was particularly expressed to be treason in the statute of the 25 Edward III, and therefore referred the matter wholly to the judgment of the House." ^ After receiving the opinion of the judges, the Lords held a conference with the Commons. They were agreed, they said, as to the facts, but not as to the punishment, and " could not therefore freely consent unto the Ordinance until they were satisfied that the charges amounted to treason in law." ^ But the Commons refused to consent to any mitigation of the punishment ; for though, they said, the acts charged against the Archbishop might not be treason against the King under the statute, they were manifest treason against the realm ; and in such cases it was for Parliament, and for Parliament alone, to determine the nature of the offence, and adjudge the penalty, as they had always done in the past,^ and so recently as in the case of the Earl of Strafford. Yielding to these arguments, or rather to their fear that further opposition would lead to a disastrous breach with the Commons, the Lords, in a House of twenty, on January 4, passed the Ordinance condemning Laud to a traitor's death. He then presented the pardon, which he had so long before obtained from the King, and to which during his trial he had clung with delusive hopes. But it was rejected, and the only request that he had now to make was to be spared the ignominious death of a traitor by the commutation of his sentence to one of decapita- tion. This was granted, and on January 10, 1645, he met his fate with becoming resignation and courage on ^ Idem, note in. ^ Idem, note n. ^ The numerous cases cited by the Commons are given in the Notes to Laud's Works, iv. 420-3. I HIS SPEECH ON THE SCAFFOLD 303 Tower Hill, that fatal spot where so many men, once high in place and power, had bowed their necks to the vengeance of an offended nation. In his speech to the people from the scaffold he made few allusions to his previous life and actions. He had acutely, he said, " felt the slanders and clamours which had been raised against him for labouring to keep an Uniformity in the external service of God, according to the doctrine and discipline of the Church ; and he desired it might be remembered that he had always lived in the Protestant religion established in England, and in that he came to die ; and he solemnly protested at this hour and instant of his death that he had never endeavoured the sub- version of law or religion." ^ Such was the tragic end of Laud's contentious life. A remorseless Nemesis had pursued him to his death. The arbitrary power, which he had so mercilessly used to crush his enemies, had now been turned without mercy against himself. He had been the partner and supporter of Strafford in his long career of lawlessness and oppression, and he could hardly expect that the Commons would make a distinction between Strafford's punishment and his own. By many he was regarded as the more guilty of the two, as the root of all the evils from which the nation was suffering, as the one evil counsellor who had perverted the judgment of the King, and whose criminal abuse of power and priestly arrogance had driven a loyal nation into rebellion, and involved the country in the miseries of a civil war. The incendiary, who had kindled the flames of the revolution, fell a victim to the violent passions he had aroused. ^ Laud's Works, iv. 434-5. CHAPTER XXXV laud's ideal church OF Laud's character little remains to be said. His actions and his writings speak for themselves. They show us a man self-opinionated and fixed in his convictions, who lived in himself and for himself. All his opinions were his own, and there is no recorded instance in his long career in which he sought or desired counsel from others. He lived an isolated life, out of touch with all that was great and noble in the aspirations of his age. His disposition, naturally unsocial and unsympathetic, had been hardened into intolerance by a priestly education, an education never enlarged or corrected by wider and more liberal studies. To the end of his life he remained, as Professor Mozley has de- scribed him, '' a genuine priest, the priest in the political atmosphere, a priestly mixture of subtlety and humility, imperious and underhand at the same time." ^ And his political power in the State enabled him to give full scope to his priestly instincts. He was haunted " by the form of a sacerdotal political Church in power, her orders nobility, her prelates pillars of the State." ^ His ideal was not the Church Militant, but the Church Triumphant, in which the bishops were the nobles and the laity the serfs. All human interests were dragged within the Church's net. Education and political opin- 1 Mozley's Essay on Laud. (Essays, vol. i. p. 205.) 2 Id., p. 125. out THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH 305 ions, the liberty of conscience, and even science and poetry were placed under the fetters of clerical control. It was not the Apostolic Church, but the Church of the middle ages, with its priestly superstitions and its priestly authority, which, in spite of the Reformation, he sought again to introduce. The Church claimed no such power over the laity in Apostohc times. The Greek word " ecclesia," which in our Authorized Version of the New Testament is translated by the abstract and ambiguous word " church," had in the original Greek a very plain and distinctive meaning, which the English rendering entirely misses. This, however, was not the fault of the translators. They were left no option in the matter. One of the rules laid down for their guidance directed them to keep to the old ecclesiastical words, and it was specially ordered that the word " ecclesia " was to be translated " church " instead of its proper meaning " assembly or congregation." ^ This mistranslation is the more to be regretted, for in the word " ecclesia " an important historical fact is embedded. It indicated the nature of the society to which the word was applied. The word " church " has become the symbol of theocratic rule, but the word " ecclesia " has the very opposite signification. It has a democratic origin, and could only be applied to a society founded on popular principles. In the Grecian republics the ecclesia was the general assembly of the citizens in their corporate capacity, which discussed and determined all questions of public interest affecting the Common- ^ EncyclopcBdia Britannica, article " English Bible," vol. viii. 388, 9th ed. It does not appear by whom these rules were drawn up, but they could not have been issued without the sanction of Archbishop Bancroft, whose ecclesiastical leanings are well known. X 3o6 ARCHBISHOP LAUD wealth. And this was precisely the meaning of the word in the early Christian communities. They were voluntary associations — like many similar confra- ternities then existing in the Roman world — united for the purpose of religious worship, living together in brotherly love and equality, contributing jointly to a common fund, eating together a common meal, and framing their own rules and regulations for the internal government and discipline of their members. They appointed their own officers and teachers, by whatever name they were known, and removed them from their office if found unfit to discharge their public duties. No society could be more democratic. From the very birth of Christianity all questions affecting the interest of these Christian associations were submitted for the decision of the general body of the members. Even the Apostles never claimed to exercise an arbitrary control over the internal management of these small communities. When a vacancy among " the Twelve " occurred through the apostasy of Judas, the appoint- ment of his successor was made, not by " the Eleven," but was referred for the decision of the 120 brethren who then formed the nucleus of the Christian Church ; and the elected member was then admitted without further ceremony or ordination into the Apostolic body.^ Seven years later, when it was found necessary to relieve the Apostles of the financial business of the Society, the charge was delegated to " seven men of good repute " selected and chosen by the general voice of the com- munity.^ No special clerical title is given to these men. The imposition of hands, which followed the election, was merely the Jewish mode of doing what in our day is done by a letter of appointment. There was certainly ^ Acts i. 26. ^ Acts vi. 1-6. ITS DEMOCRATIC CONSTITUTION 307 nothing in the proceedings which in any way resembled what in ecclesiastical language is called ordination or consecration/ " The imposition of hands was a Jewish rite ; it was in use among the Jews on various occasions, chiefly in the appointment of members of the local courts, in admitting a scholar to study and in giving him authority to teach. It was in use in the Christian Church not only in admission to office, but also in the admission of an ordinary member and in the readmission of a penitent. Nor was it understood, as it was understood in later times, as conferring special and exclusive spiritual gifts." ^ The election by the assembly was accepted as a proof that the candidate possessed the necessary qualifications for the office. Later, when a serious difference arose between the Christians of Jerusalem and the Christians of Antioch on the subject of circumcision, this purely doctrinal question was not referred for the determination of the Apostles, but was discussed at a meeting of all the breth- ren, and it is specially noted that the resolution adopted was the joint decision of the Apostles, the Elders and the whole assembly (ecclesia).^ The decision itself was noteworthy. External practices were not allowed to create divisions. Unity was not sacrificed for the sake of Uniformity. The Jewish converts were per- ^ It is clear from the Greek text that all the members present, and not only the Apostles, joined in the imposition of hands, as a mark of their individual assent to the resolution at which the meeting had arrived. So when Paul and Barnabas were sent by the Church at Antioch on their first missionary journey, all the brethren joined in the imposition of hands. (Acts xiii. 1-3.) ^ Dr. Hatch's Bampton Lectures on the organization of the early Christian Churches, where the subject is discussed, pp. 129-36. ^ Acts XV. 22. 3o8 ARCHBISHOP LAUD mitted to retain an ancient ceremony they revered, while the Gentile converts, represented by St. Paul, were granted equal liberty to dispense with a practice they abhorred. Scattered as the early Christian communities were in different and remote cities of the Roman Empire, they had no cohesion with one another beyond the ties of a common faith and the bonds of a Christian brotherhood. One characteristic, however, they possessed in common. They were all independent and self-governing bodies, and in the Ecclesia, or general assembly of the members, was lodged the controlling power of the society. The officers they appointed were strictly their ministers and in no sense their rulers. In the many epistles addressed by St. Paul to the Churches he had founded, there is no trace of the existence of any internal authority, whether of one man, or a body of men, not subject to the control of the assembly of the congregation. St. Paul's letters were addressed to the community as a body (the Ecclesia) and not to the office bearers, who had no claim to repre- sent the society in its corporate capacity. When a grave scandal had occurred in the Church of Corinth through the misconduct of one of its members, St. Paul did not claim the right of excommunicating the guilty person, but referred the matter for the consideration and decision of the local ecclesia.^ A meeting was then convened and the man was expelled by the votes of the majority {tmu 7r\ei6va)v).^ The translation in the Authorized Ver- sion, " sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of the many," entirely misses the meaning of the text, that the opinion of the Apostle was submitted for the judgment of the assembly, and was then adopted by a majority of the votes. ' I Cor. V. 4. ^2 Cor. ii. 6. THE POSITION OF THE LAITY 309 This case illustrates the extent and limitation of the Apostles' authority. They admonished and advised, and gave their opinion freely on matters of discipline and doctrine ; and while great attention and respect would naturally be paid to their opinions, they were not binding on the community until considered and adopted in their general assembly. No body of Christians exer- cised more freely the right of private judgment than the Grecian converts at Corinth. " Some followed Paul, some Apollos, some Cephas, while others appealed to the higher authority of Christ." ^ The freedom of their public worship naturally strikes us with surprise. " Each one had a Psalm, a teaching, a revelation, a tongue and an interpretation." ^ All the members of the congre- gation were apparently encouraged to display the spiritual gifts {charismata), with which they were supposed to be endowed. And of these there were great diversities. " To one was given the word of wisdom ; to another the word of knowledge ; to another faith ; to another gifts of healing ; to another prophecy ; to another dis- cernings of spirits ; to another divers kinds of tongues ; to another the interpretation of tongues." ^ Nor did St. Paul attempt to interfere with the enthusiasm of his converts beyond enjoining that " all things should be done decently and in order." * He laid down no form of ritual and government which all were to follow ; no creed or statement of doctrine which all were at their peril to believe. He claimed no " lordship over their faith." ® All that St. Paul insisted upon was a changed life ; " repentance towards God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ." * Nor did he interfere with the internal management * I Cor. i. 12. 2 Id., xiv. 26. ^ Id., xii. 4-1 1. * Id., 32. 5 2 Cor. i. 24. ° Acts xx. 21. 3IO ARCHBISHOP LAUD of their affairs. Each Church was left the hberty of organizing its form of government according to its cir- cumstances and needs. In the Church of Jerusalem a body of elders formed a permanent council under the presidentship, not of an Apostle, but of James, our Lord's brother. In other Churches we read of Paul and Barna- bas appointing {x€i,poTovTj(TdvTe<;) elders,^ and the word implies that these elders were men who had been elected for the office by the votes of the assembly.^ These elders are never mentioned singly, they are always spoken of in the plural as a body. From having the oversight (episcope) of the congregation they were called overseers or bishops^ (episcopoi), and they were the only officers of the Church to whom the name of bishop was originally applied. The two names were synonymous. They were elders by virtue of their office, and overseers or bishops from the nature of their duties. They formed the council or governing body of the Church, subject, however, to the control of the assembly that had appointed them. They seem to have been ordinary laymen, who from their age, character, and reputation possessed the confidence of the congregation. They bore no resem- blance to our stipendiary clergy and did not form a caste by themselves. They continued to follow their ordinary trades and occupations. " The bishops and presbyters of those early days kept banks, practised medicine, wrought as silversmiths, tended sheep or sold their goods in the open market. They were men of the world taking part in the ordinary business of life. The point about 1 Acts xiv. 23. ^ )(€ipoToi'ia was the popular form of election by show of hands. So in the Didache we have x^LpoTovT^a-are iavToit (elect for yourselves bishops and deacons, chap. xv.). ^ Acts XX. 17-28. EARLY CHURCH GOVERNMENT 311 which the Christian communities were anxious was not that their officers should cease to trade, but that in this, as in other respects, they should be examples to the flock." ^ It was the boast of St. Paul that he supported himself by his trade that he might not be a burden to the Churches. How far the various developments of ecclesiastical government have followed or departed from the consti- tution of the Church in the earliest ages of Christianity will appear from the following considerations : 1. The governing body of an Apostolic Church was the Ecclesia, the general assembly of the members, and all questions affecting the interests of the community were submitted for its decision. It was a democratic and not a theocratic form of government. 2. The ministerial and administrative business of the Society was entrusted to a body of men indiscriminately called elders or bishops, who were appointed by the assembly. 3. These officers are always mentioned in the plural as a co-ordinate body ; and no instance is recorded of any single elder or bishop being entrusted with the sole administrative control of the society. 4. These officers did not represent the Church in its corporate capacity, and had no power to act in the name of the society : all communications affecting the general body of the members being made to the ecclesia or assem- bly and not to the office bearers. 5. The lay members of the community were recognized as being endowed with the same spiritual gifts as the office bearers, and freely exercised the right of private judgment both in matters of discipline and doctrine. * Dr. Hatch's Bampton Lectures on the organization of the early Christian Churches, p. 151. 312 ARCHBISHOP LAUD 6. There is no trace of mediating or sacrificing priests or any form of sacerdotalism in the primitive Church. The words "priest" and "altar," in connexion with Christian worship, do not once occur in the New Testa- ment. 7. The separate Churches were all independent and self-governing bodies, and the Apostles never claimed the right to interfere with their internal administration ; nor did they lay down any fixed form of ecclesiastical government, which was to be binding on future genera- tions. It is obvious that Laud's theories of Church govern- ment had little in common with the Apostolic consti- tution of the primitive Church. The autocratic govern- ment of bishops, with its sacerdotal accompaniments, was then absolutely unknowTi. There is no instance in Apostolical times of any Church being governed by a single bishop : the government of all the Churches was then entrusted to a co-ordinate body of men called elders or bishops, chosen by the congregation and sub- ject to their control. The Apostles formed a special and exclusive order by themselves, and after their death the order ceased to exist. They could have had no successors, for their special qualification for their office was their close and immediate connexion with our Lord. They had been autoptic witnesses of His life and teaching, and it was the absence of this qualification that led some of the Christian converts at Corinth to dispute St. Paul's claim to the name of an Apostle. That bishops were the successors of the Apostles is not only a baseless but an absolutely impossible proposition, for the simple reason that the government of the Church by single bishops was not introduced until long after the Apostle's death, and no succession, whether Apostolical or civil, BACON ON CHURCH REFORM 313 can pass to non-existent persons.^ And if there is one point upon which BibHcal experts, both EngUsh and foreign, are agreed, it is that there is no trace of any special Divine operation in the evolution of the forms of Church government more than there is in the evolution of the various forms of civil government. Both owe their development to natural causes, and both are ex- posed to the inevitable law of deterioration and decay. But while the State has renewed its youth and consoli- dated its power by enlarging the basis of its constitution, the Church has proceeded on the opposite principle of exclusiveness, and has blindly clung to a form of govern- ment, which was no doubt suited to the middle ages, when the clergy alone possessed the key of knowledge, and were the only members of the community who could read or write. But we are not living in the middle ages of ignorance and superstition ; and reforms in Church government are as much needed as reforms in civil gov- ernment, to meet the altered circumstances and necessi- ties of the age. This was forcibly pointed out by Laud's great contemporary. Bacon, at the time of the Hampton Court Conference. " I would ask," he said, " why the Civil State should be purged and restored by good and wholesome laws made every third or fourth year in Parlia- ments assembled, devising remedies as fast as time breedeth mischiefs, and contrariwise the Ecclesiastical State should continue on the dregs of time, and receive no alteration. But if it is said there is a difference between civil causes and ecclesiastical, they may as well tell me that churches and chapels need no repara- tion, though houses and castles do : whereas, to speak the truth, dilapidations of the inward and spiritual edifi- 1 In the article "Ministry," in the Encyclopaedia Diblica, the rise of monarchical episcopacy is discussed. 314 ARCHBISHOP LAUD cation of the Church of God are at all times as great as the outward and material. I for my part do confess that in revolving the Scriptures I could never find any such thing but that God had left the like liberty to the Church government as He hath done to the civil government, to be varied according to time, place and accidents. For all civil governments are restrained by God unto the general grounds of justice and manners, but the policies and forms of them are left free. So likewise in Church matters the substance of doctrine is immutable, but for rites and ceremonies and for the particular hier- archies, policies and disciplines of Churches, they are left at large. And therefore it is good we return unto the ancient bands of Unity, — one faith, one baptism and not one hierarchy and one discipline." ^ No man foresaw more clearly than Bacon the dangers that threatened the Church from the centralization of all authority in the hands of the bishops.^ But his counsel was unheeded, and in the next reign, under Laud's arbitrary rule, the Church was brought to destruction. It is again threatened with a similar catastrophe, which it is the interest of all its members to avert. Fortunately we have grown wiser by experience, and there now seems a general consensus of opinion that if the Church is to be retained as a national institution, it must, like the government of the State, be placed on a wider and more liberal basis. Even a pronounced High Churchman like Mr. Gladstone declared that " no form of Church govern- ment that did not fully and distinctly provide for the expression of the voice of the laity could satisfy the needs of the Church of England." ^ The first and great- * Considerations touching the better pacification and edifica- tion of the Church of England, 1604. ^ Ante, p. 286. ^ Morley's Gladstone, vol. ii. p. 163. THE EVILS OF PATRONAGE 315 est need of the laity is protection from the intrusion into their parishes of objectionable priests, whose views and practices give offence to the religious feelings and convictions of a Protestant congregation. This is surely a great grievance, and is more acutely felt at the present time, when a large body of the clergy repudiate alike the Reformation settlement, and the rubrics and articles of the Prayer Book, and the decisions of the Ecclesiastical Courts, and introduce into our Churches the ceremonial and dogmas of the Church of Rome. The root of all these evils lies in the abuse of patronage. Church pre- ferments are looked upon, not as trusts to be administered in the interest of the parish, but as Ecclesiastical free- holds, to which the Patron may appoint any person he pleases without in any way consulting the wishes of the parishioners. In these cases the people have no redress. A clergyman once installed in a parish can do exactly what he pleases, and is free from all local control, however outrageous his conduct may be. It was this forced intrusion of an objectionable minister on a parish in Scotland ^ against the wishes of the parish- ioners that led to the great schism in the Scottish Church in 1843, when one-third of her clergy, and one-third of her members seceded from her communion, and founded the Free Church of Scotland. And so greatly did the Free Church, with her ministers chosen by the people, increase in influence and numbers, that the Established Church in self-defence determined to follow the example of her seceding members ; and, by an Act of the Legislature ^ passed in 1874, patronage was abolished and the right of electing the parish minister was transferred to the congregation, and a long-standing grievance was re- * Auchterarder. ^ 37 & 38 Vict. c. 82. 3i6 ARCHBISHOP LAUD moved, from which all the ecclesiastical troubles of a century and a half had sprung. From Scotland let us turn to Ireland. The Protes- tant Episcopal Church of Ireland was disestablished in 1869/ and thrown as it then was largely upon its own resources for the maintenance of its bishops and clergy, it had to adapt its episcopal polity to the altered circumstances of its position. The constitution of the Irish Church, previous to its disestablishment, was in all respects identical with that of the Church of England. The bishops were the representatives of the Crown, and the clergy of their respective patrons. It was obviously impossible to maintain this position, when the Church, stripped of its endowments, depended for its support on the ' voluntary contributions of the people.' Under the altered circumstances of the case the bishops wisely resolved to secure the co-operation of the laity by giving them a substantial interest in the government of the Church. In 1870 a convention of the bishops, clergy and laity was summoned to determine their future con- stitution. Large diminutions were necessarily made in the bishops' power, and the supreme government of the Church was lodged in a general synod, consisting of the bishops, and of 208 clerical and 416 lay representatives of the several dioceses, whose local affairs were managed by local diocesan synods. The selection of the bishops was entrusted to the diocesan synods, and the patronage of benefices was vested in boards of nomination, on which both the diocese and the parish were represented. Nor were judicial reforms overlooked. Disputed points of doctrine, ritual, and discipline were no longer left to the sole and arbitrary determination of the bishop, * The Act came into operation in January 1871. THE IRISH CHURCH 317 but were transferred to Diocesan Courts, in which the bishop was assisted and controlled by a lay and clerical colleague elected by the respective representative bodies to which they belonged. As a further security for the proper disposal of these disciplinary cases, an appeal was allowed to the Court of the General Synod, composed of three bishops and four laymen who had held judicial office/ With regard to the laity, " the principle of manhood suffrage pure and simple was adopted as the basis of iheir representation. Every man of full age, whether parishioner or accustomed member, who declared him- self in the prescribed form to be a member of the Church, was registered as a vestryman. No other test was re- quired." * And in the opinion of the Bishop, whose words I have quoted, the new life and vigour which animates the Church of Ireland is due to the unre- stricted admission of the laity to take their legitimate share in the government of the Church. In the Protestant Episcopal Church of America the same system of government prevails. It is not op- pressed by the dead weight of patronage. The bishop is chosen by the clergy and laity of the diocese, and the minister of a Church by the adult male members of the congregation, who contribute to his support. Even if a rich man builds a church out of the superfluity of his wealth, he builds it for the service of the people, and has no power to impose upon them a clergyman of his own nomination. The minister must be a man of the people's own choice. In all churches not supported by ' Encyclopcedia Brilannica, article " Church of Ireland," vol. xxix. p. 568, loth ed. * The Bishop of Clogher's speech at the Liverpool Church Congress. Times, October 7, 1904. 3i8 ARCHBISHOP LAUD the State the same rule prevails ; and our own legisla- ture have applied the rule to the established Church of Scotland. If it was found necessary for the peace of the Church of Scotland to allow the laity to appoint their own ministers, on what principle can the same privilege be withheld from the laity of the Church of England ? There is certainly no divine right in patron- age ; no freehold right in the cure of souls. The English Church is the only corporate body in the kingdom where the officers of the Corporation are not appointed by the members. And such an anomaly can only be de- fended on the assumption that the clergy alone constitute the Church, and that their interests are paramount to all other considerations. Nearly all the distractions which afflict the Church at present arise in the parish, and are almost invariably connected with external ceremonies. For objects, that strike the eye, make a more permanent impression on the mind than words that pass through the ear and are heard once and then forgotten. Segnius irritant animos demissa per aurem, Quam quae sunt oculis subjecta fidelibus. The clergy are judged much more by their bowings and genuflections, their adorations and prostrations, their crucifixes, their processions, their emblazoned banners and their variegated vestments, than by the utterances they deliver in the pulpit. But a gaudy ritual, which may be attractive to women, is repulsive to educated men, who regard religion from a spiritual standpoint, as the concern of the heart and not of the eyes. And can we have a more conclusive proof of the utter hollowness of the fashionable religion of the day, than the admitted fact that 85 per cent, of the THE SACERDOTAL REACTION 319 nominal members of the Church never enter its por- tals, while of the small residue of the attendant wor- shippers the great majority are women ? Well may the Bishop of London say that " nothing was more madden- ing to him than to go into a church, where the habit of having the men on one side and the women on the other obtained, and to see the men's side only a quarter full, and the ladies used to fill up the vacant places. That was an insult to the Church of England. Was it to be said that the Church of England was made up of women ? " ^ The absence of laymen from the churches is easily accounted for. The Church has ceased to be the Church of a Protestant nation. It is no longer the reformed Church of our fathers. We are inundated with clergy who are Romanists in all but the name, and the eminent prelate who is " maddened " at the sight of the laity forsaking his churches, might profitably reflect whether the weakness of his own administration has not largely contributed to this result. He seems never to have realized how strongly the Protestant feeling of the country is opposed to the present sacerdotal reaction. In his diocese, the largest and most important in the kingdom, all the corrupt practices and doctrines of an ignorant and superstitious age, which our Reformation condemned and removed, are again being introduced. Sacerdotalism is everywhere triumphant, and with the ascendancy of the priests we are required to accept their traditions and superstitions, mariolatry and the worship of saints, the sacrifice of the Mass and the doctrine of Purgatory, with the claim of the Priesthood to absolve from their sins both the hving and the dead. In many of our ^ Times, October 31, 1904. 320 ARCHBISHOP LAUD churches the administration of "the Lord's Supper, or Holy Communion," to quote the words of the Prayer Book, has been converted both in name and reaUtyinto " the Mass " ; and the common meal, eaten by the early Christians in pious memory of a beloved Master, and as a bond of union between themselves, has been trans- formed by the marvellous exercise of priestly power into a flesh and blood sacrifice, and made the object of adoration and worship. And these idolatrous and repulsive prac- tices, in the teeth of the rubrics of the Church, are tolerated by the bishops. The Acts of Uniformity, the directions of the Prayer Book and the decisions of the Ecclesiastical Courts are alike treated as so much waste paper. " Quous- que tandem, O Catelina ? " How long are the clergy to be permitted to manipulate our religion and insult our intelligence by their gross superstitions ? Unfortunately, the Reformation of the sixteenth century was not a complete and perfect work. If it had been, we should have been spared the present crisis in the Church. But it was a great advance on the re- ligion that had preceded it. It accomplished much in the reform of doctrine, in the reform of ritual, in the re- form of morals. It freed us from the fetters of priestly domination, and gave scope for the intellectual develop- ment of the nation. And these are blessings which a Protestant people will not lightly part with. Any further reformation must proceed on the same lines and with the same objects. It must be a progressive adjustment of our religion to the advanced knowledge of the day, and not a return to the " beggarly elements " of priestly superstition. It is hopeless to expect that the bishops will be pioneers in such a progressive movement. They have been weighed in the balances and found wanting. They are GULF BETWEEN CLERGY AND LAITY 321 a body at variance among themselves. Paralysed by their divisions, they are incapable of united action, and have proved themselves unable to keep under discipline or control a lawless and reactionary clergy. The Refor- mation of the sixteenth century was the work of the laity, and was opposed by all the bishops : and any further reforms must be the work of the same hands. The bishops have inherited with the offices, most of the prejudices of their remote predecessors. The clergy, with their large endowments, are employed by the State to minister to the religious wants and necessities of the people, and it is for the people to see that these endow- ments are given to men who fulfil their obligations. It is the people, and not the patrons or trustee?, who have a direct and beneficial interest in the endowments of the Church ; and in the present advanced state of society the people, who are beneficially interested in the Trust,, may be safely relied upon to administer it themselves by appointing ministers of their own selection. It was a right they possessed in the primitive Church, and it is a right they possess in all Protestant Episcopal Churches except our own. It is a right, too, that the Legislature has granted to the Established Church of Scotland ; and wherever this system of selection by the people is in force, it has proved an unqualified success. It secures for the laity a minister in whom they have confidence, and is equally to the advantage of the clergy. It brings them into touch with the people, and places them in the position of men in other professions, who win their way to distinction and eminence without the necessity or humiliation of courting the favour of patrons. And of all forms of patronage, that of the bishops is the worst. It is at once the greatest and most baneful source of their influence and power. It makes the great Y 322 ARCHBISHOP LAUD bulk of the clergy the absolute slaves of their diocesan. It destroys all independence of thought. No one can hope to share in the Bishops' preferments, who does not conform to the fluctuating standard of episcopal orthodoxy ; and this is a condition to which able and conscientious men are unwilling to submit. Under such a system of government, can we wonder that the Church, with endowments greater than any other pro- fession possesses, no longer attracts the intellect of the nation. The bishops themselves complain of the intellec- tual and educational inferiority of the men who now apply for episcopal ordination. Forty years ago Oxford and Cambridge filled the ranks of the clergy with their most distinguished scholars, now the Church only gets the refuse of the Universities. The men of light and leading carry their talents to other fields, where freedom of thought is not placed under restraint, and the boundaries of knowledge are not defined and fixed by authority, but are ever " widening with the process of the suns." A profession which can no longer enlist the services of able and distinguished men is self-condemned. It loses its prestige and falls into disrepute. Like a tottering fabric that requires buttresses to keep it from falling, it has to depend upon adventitious aids to maintain its credit with the public. And this is the present position of the Church of England. The weakness of its internal administration has compelled it to look to outside influences for support. Every sort of organization, Sisterhoods and Brotherhoods, Church Guilds, and Church Unions, and an endless variety of parochial institutions "worked upon Church lines," have been called into existence for the maintenance of the Church's power. And amid these jarring elements of strife and contention the unfortunate Gospel itself has been pushed into the SUGGESTIONS FOR ITS REMOVAL 323 background : it is out of date and seldom referred to, and in its place Church institutions and Church services are relied upon — if I may reverently quote the somewhat hackneyed expression of an eminent Prelate — " to win souls to Christ." Would it not be well to pay less atten- tion to mechanical services, and more to the character of the men who conduct them ? During the past year (1903) the enormous sum of £1,361,327 was spent out of the voluntary contributions of the people for the maintenance of these services, but nothing was done to obtain a better type of men for the administration of the services themselves. In these days we require something better than the "Mass priest" of pre-Reforma- tion times. The laity are surely not so mean and stinted in their liberality that they cannot afford to secure for the instruction of the people a clergy educated up to the intellectual standard of the age. If the appointment of the clergy, and the control of the Church finances, were in the hands of the laity, there would be no lack of induce- ments to attract educated men to again accept office in the Church. The intellectual gulf which separates the clergy from the laity would no longer exist. The clergy would again become the representatives in thoughts and feelings of the laity. In these utilitarian days Churches are judged by their usefulness and results. There is no solid foundation for any institution, whether ecclesiastical or civil, that does not respond to the knowledge and requirements of the age, and does not rest upon the support and confidence of the people. INDEX Abbot George, Archbishop of Can- terbury. Opposes Laud's election as President of St. John's College, i6 ; his misadventure in shooting a keeper, 29 ; receives a dispensation from theKing, 31 ; refuses to license Sibthorpe's sermon, 58 ; is sequestered from his jurisdiction, 60 ; reinstated before the meeting of Par- liament, 64 ; is out of fa- vour at Court, 107 ; his death, 135. Altars. Substituted for Com- munion Tables by Laud, 23, 151 ; opposition to the change, 153 ; the order enforced by excommunica- tion, 153-4. Andrewes, Launcelot, Bishop of Winchester. His recog- nition of the Reformed Non-episcopal Churches, 163 ; his intimacy with Casaubon, 163-4. Articles of Perth, the five, 27 n. Articles, the Thirty-nine, King's declaration prefixed to, 85, 88 ; forced upon the Irish Church, 170-2. Assembly of the Church of Scotland. See Laud. Bacon, Lord. Objects to the arbitrary authority of bishops, 286 ; and the en- forcement of ceremonies for the sake of uniformity, 287 ; his considerations for the better government of the Church, 313. Bastwick. His trial in the Star Chamber, 201 ; execution of the sentence, 204. Beckington, excommunication of the Churchwardens of, 153- Berwick. Pacification of, 244 ; reluctance of the King to carry out the treaty, 245. Bible, the, its great moral in- fluence on the Enghsh people, 148. Bilson, Thomas, Bishop of Win- chester. Reports on Laud's election at St. John's, 17. Bishop's Exclusion Bill, 289-91. Bishops, the Scottish. Their subordinate position, 25 ; the office abolished by the Glasgow Assembly, 231 ; consent of the King to the aboUtion of episcopacy in Scotland, 282. Bowing to the altar introduced by Laud, 23 ; his defence of the practice, 155, 259. Brooke, Lord. Opposes the war %vith Scotland, 240 ; is killed in an attack on the Close at Lichfield, 292 ; Laud's remarks on his death, 292 ; his character, 293- Buckeridge, Bishop of Roches- ter. Laud's tutor at St. John's, 9. Buckingham, Duke of. His inti- mate relations with Laud, 31 ; visits Madrid with Prince Charles, 3 5 ; breaks off negotiations for the Spanish match, 35-6 ; his 325 326 INDEX influence at Court under Charles, 339 ; procures the dismissal of Lord Keeper Williams, 44 ; his mis- government and impeach- ment, 50-5 ; failure cf his expedition for the relief of Rochelle, 62 ; is denounced in the Commons as the grievance of grievances, 71 ; is assassinated at Portsmouth, 8 1 ; his mock funeral, 82. Burton. His trial in the Star Chamber, 201-2 ; scene at the Pillory, 203. Canons. The Irish, 1635, 172 ; the Scottish, 1636, 217-9; the English, 1640, 258- 61 ; condemned by the Commons, 269-70. Charles I. Visit to Spain when Prince of Wales, 35 ; ac- cession to the throne, 39 ; dislike of the Puritans, 40 ; marries Henrietta Maria, 41 ; his first Parliament, 41 ; objects to the perse- cution of Montague, 43 ; his coronation, 46 ; sec- ond Parliament, 49 ; his speeches prepared by Laud, 51-4 ; the forced loan, 56 ; the third Parliament, 64 ; the Bill of Right, 68-72 ; tonnage and poundage, 77 ; his speech on closing the session, 78 ; grants par- dons to Montague Man- waring and Cosin, 81 ; his declaration to the Articles, 85 ; suppresses Montague's books, 87 ; second session of Parliament, 88 ; irrita- tion of the Commons, 89 ; orders the Speaker to ad- journ the House, 92 ; pro- testations cf the Commons and dissolution of Parlia- ment, 93 ; cruel treatment of Ehot, 95 ; the King's personal government, 97 ; his ministers, 98-103 ; ar- bitrary measures for rais- ing a revenue, 103 ; his coronation in Edinburgh, 129 ; sanctions the pre- paration of a new liturgy for Scotland, 131 ; Pro- motes the bishops to civil ofl&ces, 132 ; is entertained by Laud at Oxford, 189 ; introduction of a new ser- vice book for Scotland, 221 ; disturbances in Edin- burgh, 222 ; the solemn covenant, 227 ; his mea- sures to suppress the Covenanters, 237 ; collects an army at York, 243 ; the pacification of Ber- wick, 244 ; renewal of the war, 245 ; the short Par- Uament, 250-5 ; orders Convocation to sit after the dissolution, 257 ; the Scots invade England and take Newcastle, 263 ; meet- ing of the Long ParUa- ment, 266 ; passes the Bill of Attainder for Strafford's execution, 275 ; assents to all the Bills for redress of grievances, 278 ; visits Scotland to obtain assist- ance against Parliament, 281 ; consents to the abolition of episcopacy in Scotland, 282 ; attempts to arrest the five members, 283 ; leaves London and retires to Hampton Court, 284 ; assents to the Bish- ops' Exclusion Bill, 290 sets up the royal standard at Nottingham, 291. Church, the. Laud's ideal of, 304 ; the primitive Church INDEX 327 a democratic society, 305- 12. Communion Tables. See Altars. Cork, Earl of. His family tomb in St. Patrick's cathedral, 172 ; Laud's letters to Wentworth for its removal, 172-4 ; is prosecuted in the Castle Chamber for being in possession of Church lands, 175-81. Coronation of Charles I, 46-8. Cosin, Dr. Prebendary of Dur- ham. Is prosecuted by the Commons for innovations in the Church, 74-5 ; re- ceives a pardon from the King, 81. Cottington, Lord. Is a member of the Irish Committee, 170 ; opposes the transfer to the Castle Chamber of suits regarding Church pro- perty, 175 ; is placed on the Treasury Commission, 183 ; opposes Laud on the soap monopoly, 185 ; his difSculties as Chancellor of the Exchequer, 236 ; ad- vises the King to call a Parliament, 241. Coventry, Sir Thomas. Succeeds Williams as Lord Keeper, 44 ; his small influence in the Privy Council, 97 ; opposes Laud's suggestion to gag Prynne in the Pil- lory, 203 ; his death, 250. Devon, Earl of. Lord Lieuten- ant of Ireland, 10 ; is married by Laud to the divorced wife of Lord Rich, 1 1 ; his disgrace at Court and death, 12 ; Laud's treatment of him on his deathbed, 12. D'Ewes, Sir Symonds, on Prynne's sentence, 119; on ship money, 195. Divorce. Canon of 1604 against remarriage of divorced per- sons, II. Dort, Synod of, 163. Eliot, Sir John. His leadership in the Second Parliament, 50 ; speech on the im- peachment of Bucking- ham, 52 ; is sent to the Tower, 5 3 ; released on the protest of the Lords, 53-4 ; moves a remonstrance after the Speaker had adjourned the House, 92 ; is com- mitted to the Tower, 95 ; his trial before the King's Bench for spfeches de- livered in the House, 95 ; his imprisonment and death, 96. Excommunication, the weap- on of the spiritual courts, 128 ; the civil and criminal penalties it involved, 129. Ex-ofiicio oath. Introduced by Whitgift, 126 ; de- clared illegal by the Judges, 127. Falkland, Viscount. Recom- mends the retention of episcopacy with limita- tions of the bishops' power, 208. Fiennes, Nathaniel. Speech in the Commons on Church Reform, 207. Finch, Sir John. Speaker in the Parliament of 1628 ; ad- journs the House by order of the King, 92 ; is held down in his chair, 92 ; succeeds Coventry as Lord Keeper, 250 ; his speech at the opening of the Short Parliament, 251 ; advises the continuance of Con- vocation after the dissolu- tion, 258 ; is threatened with impeachment and es- 328 INDEX 2apes across the Channel, 277. Hamilton, Marquis of. Is Charles' adviser in Scottish affairs, 215 ; is sent to Scotland to negotiate with the Covenanters, 228-9 J dissolves the Assembly, 230-1 ; advises the King to abolish episcopacy, 246 ; resigns his commission, 246. Hampden, John. Refuses to pay ship money, 198 ; judgment for the Crown, 199. Henderson, Rev. Alexander. Is elected moderator of the Assembly at Glasgow, 230 ; continues the Assembly after its dissolution by Hamilton, 231 ; his at- tendance upon the King at Holyrood, 282. Henrietta Maria, Queen of England. Her marriage to Charles, 41 ; refuses to be crowned by a Protestant bishop, 48 ; her influence with the King after Buck- ingham's death and her relations with Laud, 209 ; is allowed to receive a nuncio from the Pope. 210 ; attractions of her chapel at Somerset House, 210 ; the conversions to Rome, 211 ; her quarrel with Laud for attempting to close her chapel to English subjects, 212 ; urges the King to arrest the five members, 284. High Commission Court. Its origin, 123 ; subordinate to the superior courts at Westminster, 123 ; its en- croachments upon the common law, 123 ; its ar- bitrary procedure and the ex-ofiicio oath, 126-7 ; abolition of the Court by the Long Parliament, 280. Hyde, Edward, Earl of Claren- don. His acquaintance with Laud, 184 ; his increase of practice from the con- nexion, 185 ; is elected a member of the Short Par- liament, 252 ; in the Long Parliament joins Pym and Hampden in effecting re- forms, 266 ; advises the King to pass the Bishops' Exclusion Bill, 290 ; sug- gests that a pardon should be granted to Laud under the Great Seal, 297. Ireland, Church of. See Laud and Wentworth. James I. Displeased with Laud for the Earl of Devon's marriage, 12 ; confirms Laud's election as presi- dent of St. John's College, 17 ; the profligacy of his Court, 19 ; revives the Catholic practice of burn- ing heretics, 20 ; visits Edinburgh, 24 ; obtains the passing of the five articles of Perth, 27 ; grants Archbishop Abbot a dispensation for killing a keeper, 31 ; gives the great seal to Bishop Wil- liams, 33 ; negotiations for the marriage of Prince Charles with the Infanta of Spain, 34 ; his death, 38. Juxon, Bishop. Is made Clerk of the Closet to the King, no ; and Lord Treasurer, 187 ; Clarendon on the appointment, 188. Laud, William. Parentage and education, 7 ; his college life, 8 ; chaplain to the Earl of Devon, 10-13 »' INDEX 329 chaplain to Bishop Neile, 14 ; president of St. John's College, Oxford, 16-18 ; chaplain to the King, 19 ; assists Bishop Neile in burning a heretic at Lich- field, 20 ; Dean of Glouces- ter, 22 ; turns the Com- munion Table into an Altar, 23 ; accompanies the King to Scotland, 25-7 ; his contempt for the Scotch clerg^% 27 ; appointed Bishop of St. David's, 28 ; refuses to be consecrated by Abbot, 30 ; his inti- macy with Buckingham, 31 ; his intrigues against the I-ord Keeper Williams, 36 ; prepares an O. and P. list of the clergy, 39 ; supports Montague against the Parliament, 42 ; ar- ranges the ceremonial for the King's coronation, 46- 8 ; preaches at the opening of the Second Parhament, 49 ; prepares the King's speeches, S1-4 ; made Bishop of Bath and Wells, 56 ; his instructions to the clergy to support the pay- ment of a forced loan, 57 ; is made a member of the Privy Council,59 ; intrigues against Abbot for refusing to license a sermon in sup- port of the loan, 60 ; his sermon at the opening of the Third Parliament, 65 ; his comments on Magna Charta, 66 n. ; his reply to the remonstrance of the Commons, 78-80 ; be- comes Bishop of London, 81 ; his position after Buckingham's assassina- tion, 83 ; draws up the King's declaration on the Articles, 85 ; is attacked in the Commons, 91 ; his position in the Cabinet after the dissolution of Par- liament, 99 ; his manage- ment of the King, loi ; his alliance with Went- worth, 103 ; Chancellor of Oxford University, 106 ; his friend Windebank made Secretary of State, 109 ; discourages preaching, 1 1 1 ; prosecutes Leighton, 113; and Prjmne, 117-20 ; Shir- field's case, 121 ; attempts to free the Ecclesiastical Courts from the super- vision of the Superior Courts, 123 ; his second visit to Scotland with the King, 128 ; his designs against the Scotch Church, 130-33 ; becomes Arch- bishop of Canterbury, 1 34 ; offer of a Cardinal's Hat, 134 ; correspondence with Wentworth on the policy of Thorough, 135 ; his articles of visitation, 137-9; his crusade against lec- turers, 140-7 ; issues the Book of Sports, 149 ; turns the Communion Tables into altars, 151 ; great oppo- sition to the change, 153 ; defence of his Church inno- vations in the Star Cham- ber, 154-6 ; his increased severity against Dissen- ters, 157 ; his reports to the King, 159 ; his treat- ment of the Foreign Re- formed Churches and the Protestant immigrants, 162-7 ; his confidential correspondence with Went- worth, 1 68 ; his arbitrary treatment of the Irish Church, 169-72 ; removal 330 INDEX of the Earl of Cork tomb's from St. Patrick's cathe- dral, 172-4 ; proceedings against the Earl for the recovery of Church lands, 175-81 ; is appointed Chief Commissioner of the Trea- sury, 182 ; his acquaint- ance with Edward Hyde, the future Earl of Claren- don, 183 ; his quarrels -with his coDeagues at the Trea- sury, 185 ; obtains the appointment of Lord Treasurer for Bishop Juxon, 187 ; entertains the King at Oxford, 189- 93 ; his correspondence with Wentvvorth on ship money, 194-200 ; prose- cution of Pr^Tine, Burton and Bastwick, 201 ; the sentence and scene at the pillory, 203 ; issues a de- cree for the restraint of printing, 205 ; prosecution of Lilburne, 207 ; his changed attitude towards the Roman Cathohcs, 209- 13 ; introduces a new ser- vice book for Scotland, 219-21 ; riots in Edin- burgh and repudiation of the book by the bishops, 223 ; the tables and the covenant, 225-9 ; meeting of the General Assembly andabohtionof episcopacy, 229-32 ; mihtary prepara- tions of the Scots, 233 ; his letters to Wentworth on the state of the country, 234-43 ; his views on the pacification of Berwick, 244 ; supports Strafford's proposal for a Parhament, 249 ; his house at Lam- beth attacked by a mob, 256 ; his troubles in con- nexion with Convoca- tion, 257 ; his canons and their reception, 259 ; his last appearance in the Court of High Commission, 264 ; meeting of the Long Parhament 266 ; offers to abrogate the canons, 269 ; his impeachment and com- mittal to the Tower, 270-4; his tribute to the memory of Strafford, 275 ; refuses to attempt to escape from the Tower, 277 ; his dis- putes with the Lords about his patronage, 294 ; pro- secution of his trial or- dered, 295 ; his papers seized by Pr\Tine in the Tower, 295-7 ; receives a pardon from the King, 297 ; the charges against him, 298 ; the ordinance of at- tainder, 299 ; his appear- ance before the House of Commons, 299-300 ; the ordinance passed by the Commons, 301 , and by the Lords, 302 ; his execu- tion on Tower Hill, 303 ; his priestly character, 304 ; his ideal of the Church contrasted with that of Apostolic times, 305-12. Lecturers, their popularity as preachers, 140 ; Laud's measures for their suppres- sion, 141 -3 ; prosecution of Workman and Ward, 144-7. Leighton, Alexander, prosecu- tion of, 112-15. Leslie, General. Serves under Gustavus Adolphus, 233 ; appointed general of the Scottish army, 234 ; Laud's depreciation of, 235 ; in- vades England and takes Newcastle, 263 ; is visited INDEX 331 by Charles at Newcastle and created Earl of Leven, 282. Lilburne. His trial in the Star Chamber, 206 ; is gagged in the pillory, 207. Magna Charta, Laud's opinion of, 66 n. Manwaring, Dr. (chaplain to the King). His sermon in defence of the loan, 73 ; his impeachment and sen- tence, 73 ; receives a par- don from the King and a rich living, 81. Maxwell, Bishop of Ross. Differs from Wedderburne in the preparation of the Scotch liturgy, 219 ; is excom- municated by the Assem- bly, 232. Montague, tlie Rev. Richard. His attack on the Refor- mation and its doctrines, 42 ; is summoned to the bar of the House of Com- mons, 42 ; claims the privi- lege of a Court chaplain, 43 ; his impeachment voted by the Commons, 74 ; receives a pardon from the King and made Bishop of Chichester, 81 ; his books suppressed by the King, 87 ; his nego- tiations with the Nuncio for reconciliation of the Church of England with the Pope, 211. Mutilation, an illegal punish- ment introduced by the Star Chamber, 11 5-7. Neile, Bishop. His character, 14 ; Laud chaplain to, 16 ; supports Laud's election as President of St. John's, 17 ; burns a heretic at Lichfield, 20 ; attends the King on his visit to Scot- land, 25 ; is named with Laud by the Commons for his innovations in religion, 75- Newman, John Henry. His ex- alted opinion of Laud, i ; hatred of Puritanism, 2 ; objects to the dogmas of the Church being sub- mitted to human reason, 3. Oxford, University of. Election of Laud as chancellor, ic6 ; adulatory titles con- ferred upon him, 189 ; the King's reception by, 190-3. Parliament of 1625, 41-5 ; of 1626, 49-55'; of 1628, 64-80 ; second session, 88- 95 ; of 1640 (the Short), 250-5 ; of 1640 (the Long), 266-303. Pembroke, Earl of, 84. Petition of Right, 69-72. Press, Laud's restrictions on, 205. Prohibitions, Laud's opposition to, 123. Prynne, William. His Histrio- mastix and prosecution in the Star Chamber, 117; Laud's speech and execu- tion of the sentence, 1 18-9; second prosecution of, 201 ; scene at the pillory, 203-5 5 released from prison by the Long Parliament, 269 ; interview with Laud in the Tower, 295. Puritans. Hated by Laud for their religious, by the King for their political opinions, 39-40 ; driven by perse- cution into dissent, 157 ; their emigration to Amer- ica, 157-8. Pym, John. Objects to the Lords' amendment of the Petition of Right, 70 ; 332 INDEX condemns the King's de- claration prefixed to the Articles, 88 ; is the Leader of the Commons in the Short Parhament, 252-3 ; moves the impeachment of Straf- ford in the Long Parha- ment, 267 ; %\ishes to re- form not to aboUsh episco- pacy, 289. Rhe, Isle of, disastrous retreat from, 62. Roe, Sir Thomas, 109. Saye and Sele, Lord. Protests against imprisonment of Digges and Ehot, 53 ; supports the Petition of Right, 67 ; opposition to the war ^\ith Scotland, 240. Scotland, Church of. See titles James, Charles and Laud. Selden, John. Claims freedom for the Press, 91 ; calls attention to the mutilation of Savage, 116; Laud's letter to, on the canons, 269. Ship mone^^ See Laud. Shirfield, Recorder of Glouces- ter, prosecution of, 121. Soap monopoly, 185. Spanish match, the, negotia- tions for, 34-6. Sports, Book of, 34-6. Star Chamber. Prosecution of Leighton for a Ubel on the bishops, 1 1 2-6 ; of Prjime for his Histriomastix, 20; of Shirfield, 121; Laud's speech in, on Church inno- vations, 154-6 ; joint pro- secution of Prjmne, Bur- ton and Basts\"ick, 201-4 » decree in restraint of print- ing, 205. Strafford, Earl of. See Went- worth. Thorough, the pchcy of, 135-6. Tonnage and Poundage, 76-8, 92-3, 280. Torture, use of, declared illegal by the judges, 282 ; last case of, 256-7 n. Traquair, Lord. Treasurer of Scotland, 225 ; advises Charles to withdraw the ser\dce book, 226 ; suc- ceeds Hamilton as High Commissioner, 246 ; pro- mises to ratify in Parha- ment the Acts of the Edin- burgh Assembly, 246 ; is told he has exceeded his instructions, 247 ; inter- cepts a letter from the Covenanters to the King of France, 248. Triennial Act, 278. Tulchan bishops, 217 n. Visitation articles, 136-8. Ward, Rev. Samuel, prosecu- tion of before the High Commission, 145-7. Wedderbum, Dr., Bishop of ©unblane. His correspon- dence with Laud on the Scottish service book, 219. Went^vorth, Sir Thomas. Is de- prived of his ofl&ce of Cus- tos Rotulorum, 102 ; im- prisoned for refusing to subscribe to the loan, 102 ; supports the Petition of Right, 70 ; is raised to the Peerage and accepts ofi&ce under the Crovm, 103 ; his pohcy of Thorough, 135 ; his correspondence with Laud, 168 ; their sum- mar\^ deahngs with the Irish Church, 169-72 ; or- ders the removal of the Earl of Cork's tomb from St. Patrick's cathedral, 172-4 ; proceedings against the earl for recovery of Church lands, 175-81 ; is summoned to London to INDEX 333 advise in the Scottish troubles, 248 ; proposes the calling of Parliament, 249 ; is created Earl of Strafford, 250 ; his ascend- ancy in the Council, 250 ; his advice to the King after the dissolution of Parlia- ment, 254 ; opposition in the country to the war with Scotland, 261 ; meet- ing of the Long Parliament, 266 ; his impeachment and committal to the Tower, 267-9 ; the Bill of Attainder, 275 ; is be- headed on Tower Hill, 276 ; Laud's tribute to his memory, 276. Weston, Lord Treasurer. His administration of the Treasury, 97 ; Laud's in- trigues against, 99-T08 ; his measures for raising money, 103 ; is a member of the Irish Committee, 170 ; opposes the removal of the Earl of Cork's tomb, 173 ; Laud's remarks on his death, 182-3. Williams, John, Bishop ofjLin- coln. Succeeds Bacon as Lord Keeper, 33 ; in- trigues of Laud" against, 36 ; is deprived';" of [the Great Seal, 44 ; Gar- diner on his dismissal, 45 ; his correspondence with Laud on Elizabeth's" in- junctions, 155. Windebank, Sir Thomas. Laud's intimacy with, 105 ; his appointment as Secretary of State, 108-10 ; is ap- pointed a Commissioner of the Treasury, 183 ; op- poses Laud's soap monop- oly, 186 ; his impeachment by the Commons and flight, 277. Workman, Rev. John. Laud's treatment of, 144. Wren, Matthew, Bishop of Nor- wich. Enforces the pub- hcation of the Book of Sports, 150 ; assists Laud in the preparation of the Scotch service book, 220 ; is denounced by Grimston in the Commons, 271. Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Frome, and London. Date Due m PRINTED IN U. S. A.