A.D. 1640.

THE EARL OF STRAFFORD IMPEACHED.

315

CHAPTER XXIV.

Clarendon

On the 3rd of November Charles opened the parliament. tells us of the House of Commons in this first year of the Long Parliament, that "the major part of that body consisted of men who had no mind to break the peace of the kingdom, or to make any considerable alteration in the government of church or state." On the day of opening very few members were absent from their places. Charles addressed the Houses in a tone of conciliation. Sir Thomas Gardiner, recorder of London, had been designed by the king as speaker, but the city would not elect him, and Lenthall was chosen speaker. From the Fleet Prison came a petition from Alexander Leighton, who had been ten years in confinement; and another from John Lilburne, the sturdy London apprentice who had been whipped and imprisoned for distributing Prynne's books. Lilburne's petition was presented by Oliver Cromwell. From the several distant castles in which they were confined, the petitions of Prynne, and Burton, and Bastwick, reached the House. These prisoners were ordered to be brought to London. Leighton, mutilated, deaf, blind, crept out of the cell in which he expected to die, to receive some recompense for his sufferings. Lilburne had a money compensation voted to him. Prynne and Burton made a triumphal entry into London. It was voted that these sufferers should be restored to their callings; and that those who had unjustly sentenced them should pay high damages, as compensation, to each of them. Bastwick returned from Scilly at the beginning of December, with trumpets sounding, and torches burning, and a thousand horses for his convoy. On the night of Monday, the 9th of November, the earl of Strafford came to London. On the morning of Wednesday, the 11th, Pym rose in his place in the House of Commons, and, saying that he had matter of the highest importance to propose, desired that strangers should be excluded and the doors of the House be locked. He then recapitulated all that the nation had endured in the attempt to deprive them of the liberty and property which was their birthright; "these calamities falling upon us in the reign of a pious and virtuous king, who loved his people, and was a great lover of justice." There was one man more signal than the rest in bringing these miseries upon the nation-and then he named "the earl of Strafford." After many hours of bitter investigation into the actions of Strafford, it was moved, "that he might be forthwith impeached of high treason, which was no sooner mentioned than it found an universal approbation and consent from the whole House." Late as it was, the peers were still sitting. The doors of the House of Commons were thrown open, and Pym, at the head of three hundred members, proceeded to the House of Lords, and there, at the bar, in the name of the Lower House, and of all the Commons of England, impeached Thomas, earl of Strafford, of high treason, and required his arrest. Whilst the Lords were consulting, Strafford arrived, and was delivered as a prisoner to the usher of the Black Rod. He was committed to the Tower on the 25th of November. On the 18th of December,

Denzel Hollis carried a message to the Lords, impeaching Laud of high treason. The archbishop was handed over to the custody of the Black Rod, and ten weeks afterwards was committed to the Tower. Articles of impeachment were prepared against the lord-keeper Finch, and against sir Francis Windebank, secretary-of-state. They both fled the country. Five of the judges, who had declared ship-money lawful, were visited with a just retribution for their servility. They were compelled to give securities to abide the judgment of parliament, whilst the most obnoxious of them, sir Robert Berkeley, being impeached of high treason, was taken to prison from his judgment-seat in the King's Bench. On the 30th of January, the charges against Strafford were laid before the House of Lords. These were twenty-eight in number. The Scottish Commissioners, and a deputation from the Irish parliament, also put forward the same charges, of endeavouring to rule the north of England and Ireland by military power; of attempting to subvert the fundamental laws of the realm; of labouring to overthrow parliaments and parliamentary authority. On Monday, the 22nd of March, as on every succeeding day, the earl of Strafford was brought to Westminster from the Tower in a barge, accompanied by the lieutenant, with boats full of armed men ; and on his landing he was guarded by the trained band. The hall was fitted up in a manner quite unusual in any previous state-trial. The members of the House of Commons were all there in committee. The king did not occupy the throne, but sat with the queen and his family in a box on the side of the throne. "The trellis, that made them to be secret, the king broke down with his own hand, so they sat in the eye of all," writes Baillie, who was present in the seats appointed for the Scotch Commissioners. The Lords were in their places daily by eight o'clock; the king was usually half-an-hour before them. Many ladies were present, in galleries allotted to them. Strafford took his place below the bar, at a desk, attended by four secretaries and his counsel. "He was always in the same suit of black, as in doole [mourning]." The sitting each day was prolonged to two, three, or four o'clock. The House of Commons had passed a vote "that the earl of Strafford had endeavoured to subvert the ancient and fundamental laws of the realm, and to introduce arbitrary and tyrannical government." To sustain this allegation was the chief object of Pym and the other managers of the impeachment; and although the greater number of the articles exhibited could not be technically brought within the Statute of Treasons, they contended that acts which tended to subvert the constitution were acts of treason against the king. On all the charges Pym spoke, having constant reference to the answers which Strafford had put in. Strafford replied; and Pym rejoined. Day after day this contest went on. On the thirteenth day of the trial, the 10th of April, Pym moved in the House of Commons that the proceedings should take the new form of a bill of attainder against the earl of Strafford. There was a rising member of the House, Henry Vane, the son of sir Henry Vane, who was comptroller of the royal household in 1639, and in 1641 was secretary of state. On that 10th of April Pym stood up, Henry Vane being in his seat, and produced a paper containing "a copy of notes taken at a junto of the Privy Council for the Scots affairs, about the 5th of May last." These notes,

A.D. 1641. PYM ARGUES THAT A KING MAY BE A TRAITOR. 317

which were in the handwriting of old sir Henry Vane, were obtained through young Vane's breach of his father's confidence. They were the record of a dialogue in which Laud, Hamilton, and Strafford were the speakers in Council; and the words which Strafford addressed to the king were these: "You have an army in Ireland that you may employ to reduce this kingdom to obedience." On the 13th of April, Pym read these notes in Westminster Hall. They were admitted as evidence against Strafford. Whilst the bill of attainder was debated in the Commons, the Lords continued to sit judicially in Westminster Hall, as if no such measure were in agitation. After the notes discovered by the younger Vane had been received, Strafford was called upon for his general defence upon the facts, leaving the law to his counsel. He spoke two hours and a half. His speech, which was full of passages of impassioned eloquence, wound up with these words: "My Lords, I have troubled you longer than I should have done, were it not for the interest of these dear pledges a saint in heaven left me."-Here he paused and shed a few tears.-"What I forfeit for myself is nothing; but that my indiscretion should extend to my posterity woundeth me to the very soul. You will pardon my infirmity; something I should have added, but am not able, therefore let it pass. And now, my Lords, for myself, I have been by the blessing of Almighty God, taught that the afflictions of this present life are not to be compared to the eternal weight of glory which shall be revealed hereafter. And so, my Lords, even so, with all tranquillity of mind I freely submit myself to your judg ment; and whether that judgment be of life or death, Te Deum laudaAfter these burning words, the majestic periods of Pym's reply would fall dull and cold. But there never was a grander scene than when Pym, in the presence of the king of England, proclaimed that treason against the people was treason against the throne, and intimated that the sovereign who abetted such treason was not himself safe from "a miserable end." Again and again Pym asserted his leading principle, that the offences of Strafford constituted the crime of treason, inasmuch as he had "endeavoured by his words, actions, and counsels, to subvert the fundamental laws of England and Ireland, and to introduce an arbitrary and tyrannical government." "Shall it be treason," he said, "to embase the king's coin, though but a piece of twelvepence or sixpence? And must it not needs be the effect of a greater treason to embase the spirit of his subjects, and to set up a stamp and character of servitude upon them, whereby they shall be disabled to do anything for the service of the king and commonwealth?" Pym wound up his speech with this appalling denunciation :-"The forfeitures inflicted for treason, by onr law, are of life, honour, and estate, even all that can be forfeited; and this prisoner having committed so many treasons, although he should pay all these forfeitures, will be still a debtor to the commonwealth. Nothing can be more equal than that he should perish by the justice of that law which he would have subverted. Neither will this be a new way of blood. There are marks enough to trace this law to the very original of this kingdom; and if it had not been put in execution, as he allegeth, these two hundred and forty years, it was not for want of law, but that all that time hath not bred a man bold enough to commit such crimes as these." Pym had a few more formal words to utter,

mus.

but having turned round, his eyes met those of Strafford, who was intently gazing on his accuser-the friend of his earlier years-his associate in the great struggle which produced the Petition of Right. Their eyes met, and Pym faltered.

The Bill of Attainder of the earl of Strafford was passed by the Commons on the 21st of April. Fifty-nine members voted against it out of a house of two hundred and sixty-three. The Bill was carried to the Upper House by Pym, with a message "that it was a Bill that highly concerned the Commonwealth in the expediting of it." The king then went to the House of Lords, and stated that he had been present during the whole trial of Strafford; that he could not condemn him of high-treason; but, said he, "I must confess for matter of misdemeanours, I am so clear in that, that though I will not chalk out the way, yet let me tell you, that I do think my lord Strafford is not fit hereafter to serve me or the Commonwealth in any place of trust, no, not so much as that of a constable." This interference was offensive to the Commons, who deemed it a breach of privilege for the king to take notice of any Bill during its passage through parliament. The Peers, consulting with the judges whether some of the articles against Strafford, which they considered proved, amounted to treason, received an unanimous opinion that he had incurred the penalties which the law awarded to that crime. In a house of forty-five, twenty-six Peers voted Strafford guilty, and passed the Bill of Attainder.

Whilst this question was under debate in the House of Lords, the Commons were singularly moved by the disclosures which were made of the king's own participation in the design "to disaffect the army to the Parliament;" to bring it up from the north with the view to place absolute power in the Crown. The evidence of this plot, though by no means definite or conclusive, was sufficient to prove that the king had listened to a proposal of appealing to a military force to control the representatives of the people. The first resolution of the Commons was to draw up a Protestation, under oath, to defend the Protestant Church, his majesty's person and power, the privileges of parliament, and the lawful rights and liberties of the people. This was immediately sworn to and signed by every member present; was sent to the House of Peers, who all signed except two ; and was circulated for general signature through the kingdom. Next, by a Bill "to prevent inconvenience which may happen by the untimely adjourning, proroguing, or dissolving this present parliament,"the parliament was made the sole arbiter of its own duration. The royal assent was given by commission to this Bill on the 10th of May. "It is impossible to think," writes sir Philip Warwick, "how so intelligent a person as this king was, should by any persuasions, which certainly were great on the queen's side, or treachery, which certainly was great on the side of many of his great courtiers, be induced thus to divest himself of all majesty and power.' ."* On the same day, the same commissioners consented to the Bill of Attainder against the earl of Strafford. On the 11th of May, the king sent a letter to the Lords by the Prince of Wales, in which he

"Memoirs," p. 181.

A.D. 1641.

INCREASING POWER OF PARLIAMENT.

319

desired that a conference might take place with the Commons, to the intent, he said, that "both Houses of Parliament consent, for my sake, that I should moderate the severity of the law in so important a case.' This extraordinary postscript was added:-"If he must die, it were charity to reprieve him until Saturday." Strafford met his fate with the same resolution which had characterised the public actions of his life.

At this time the queen desired to leave the country. The princess royal was betrothed to the eldest son of the prince of Orange. A secret article of the treaty stipulated that the prince should assist the king, if the disputes with his parliament came to an open rupture. The queen, a few months later, alleging her ill-health, wished to seek a remedy in the Spawaters. Upon the remonstrance of both Houses of Parliament she consented to remain in England.

The Parliament now went boldly and steadily forward in the work of reform. A subsidy and a poll-tax were granted; but another subsidy of tonnage and poundage was granted for a very limited time, from May 25 to July 15; so that the Commons might exercise the right of renewal, according to circumstances. This subsidy was renewed, by subsequent Acts, until July 2, 1642. In the great legislative measures of this session, the Houses were invariably anxious to rest their reforms upon the ancient foundations of law and liberty. Again and again the principle of arbitrary taxation was made to hear its death-knell. An Act was passed abolishing the court of Star-chamber; the jurisdiction of the courts of the Marches of Wales, of the northern parts of the Duchy of Lancaster, and of the county palatine of Chester. In this session the court of High Commission was also abolished; and the ecclesiastical courts were deprived of the power to inflict temporal penalties for spiritual offences. Another statute confined forests within such limits as were recognised in the twentieth year of James I. By another Act, compulsory knighthood was put an end to. In all these enactments for the removal of great oppressions, constant reference was had to the origin of the abuses.

The pacification with Scotland was concluded by Act of Parliament; and by another Act, the sum of £300,000 was agreed "to be given for a friendly assistance and relief towards the supply of the losses and necessities of our brethren of Scotland." On the 10th of August the king left London for Scotland. On the 9th of September the Parliament adjourned. The king was accompanied by two commissioners named by the Lords, and four named by the Commons, amongst whom was Hampden. There was no discourtesy between Charles and these commissioners; but they were evidently there to watch and counteract his secret designs. The king met the Scottish Parliament; sanctioned all their proceedings even to the abolition of episcopacy; and seemed bent upon securing the affections of the nation by swearing to the terms of the Covenant, and attending the Presbyterian worship. There can be no doubt that he was plotting to destroy those whom he chose to consider as his personal enemies. Montrose had been in correspondence with the king. Argyle had intercepted a letter in cypher, and the Parliament had imprisoned the daring man who was now the great supporter of the old order of affairs in the Scottish Church and State. Montrose contrived to correspond with Charles, through one