Challenges to the Arbitrary Government of Charles I

Disagreements Between King and Parliament

  • Initial Conflict (1625-1629): Intense disagreements between Charles I and Parliament regarding collaboration and power dynamics.
    • Charles emphasized his divine right and favored minimal parliamentary involvement, leading to perceptions of arbitrary government (his will alone being executed).
    • Parliament asserted its historical role as the representative of subjects' rights and sought to limit the king's authority.
    • Charles viewed Parliament as arrogant and innovative in demanding powers it was not entitled to.

Reactions Against Financial Policies

Tonnage and Poundage (1625)

  • Context: Charles I pursued an anti-Spanish foreign policy, requiring significant funds for military forces.
    • He requested approximately 1,000,0001,000,000 from Parliament, including special one-off payments (subsidies) and confirmation of his right to collect tonnage and poundage.
  • Tonnage and Poundage Defined: A tax on imports and exports used since 1547 to support the navy's role in protecting trade routes. Calculated per ton of wine and pound of other produce.
  • Parliament's Response: Expressed mistrust of Charles' foreign policy (influenced by the Duke of Buckingham) by granting limited funds: two subsidies (worth around 140,000140,000) and one year's right to tonnage and poundage.
    • This restriction aimed to curb Buckingham's influence, as he benefited directly from tonnage and poundage as Lord High Admiral.
    • The House of Lords opposed this limitation, deeming it contrary to tradition.
  • Charles' Reaction: Viewed the limited grant as an attack on his divine right and prerogative, leading him to ignore Parliament and continue collecting tonnage and poundage beyond the approved year.

Forced Loans

  • Nature of Forced Loans: Infrequently demanded by monarchs, typically from wealthy individuals, with little expectation of repayment.
  • Charles' Implementation (1626): Ordered all those who normally paid parliamentary subsidies to contribute to a forced loan, equivalent to five parliamentary subsidies.
    • This raised concerns about taxation without parliamentary consent.
  • Benevolences: Charles initially requested voluntary gifts of money (benevolences) but received few contributions.

Opposition to the Forced Loan

  • Methods of Opposition: Substantial opposition, both anonymous and open.
  • Examples of Opposition:
    • Thomas Scott MP attacked Buckingham, arguing subjects could disobey an unworthy king's commands that exceeded normal duty.
    • Scott asserted the right to oppose rulers who defended evil subjects and undermined parliament, forcing the collection of unlawful taxes.
    • Some judges refused to endorse the loan's legality; Chief Justice Carroux was dismissed.
    • Archbishop of Canterbury George Abbott was suspended for refusing to license a sermon supporting the forced loan.
  • Sermons and Politics: Sermons were a common means of disseminating political ideas due to compulsory church attendance.
    • Kings commissioned sermons to be delivered in every parish church.
    • Ministers sometimes used the pulpit to criticize the monarch or policies.

The Five Knights Case (1627)

  • Background: Charles imprisoned 76 gentry members and the Earl of Lincoln for refusing to pay the forced loan without specific charges.
  • Habeas Corpus: Five of the imprisoned knights issued a writ of habeas corpus, demanding trial or release.
  • Legal Test Case: The trial became a test case on the king's authority to raise the loan and imprison opponents without trial.
  • Judgment: Upheld Charles' prerogative to imprison without trial those who refused to pay the loan.

Reasons for and Outcomes of Conflict Over the Church

Rise of Arminianism

  • Context: Religion as a significant issue in early Stuart England.
  • Arminianism: A strand of Protestantism gaining influence in the Church of England during the 1620s.
    • Differed from Calvinism, which emphasized predestination (God's predetermined selection of who would be saved).
    • Jacobus Arminius argued that God allows each person to freely choose salvation.
    • Puritans (Calvinists) viewed Arminianism as aligned with Catholicism.
  • Political Implications:
    • Parliament contained Puritan members (e.g., John Pym) and moderate Anglicans.
    • Pym led the Calvinist faction in Parliament.
    • Charles favored Arminianism due to its emphasis on order, ceremony, and hierarchy, aligning with his belief in divine right.
    • Puritan members resisted the forced loan, while Armenian clergymen supported it.

The York House Conference (1626)

  • Purpose: Convened by the Earl of Warwick to discuss Arminianism and potentially sway Charles away from it.
  • Participants: Included Puritan nobles (e.g., Earl of Pembroke) and Armenian clergy (e.g., Edmund Sheffield).
  • Buckingham's Role: Acted politically, supporting Arminianism to reinforce his relationship with Charles.
  • Outcomes:
    • Charles remained supportive of Arminianism.
    • Focused on the writings of Richard Montagu, an Armenian clergyman who argued similarities between Catholicism and the Church of England.
    • The conference ended inconclusively but helped define the Armenian faction within the Anglican Church.

Religious Division in Parliament

  • Conflict: Tensions between Puritans and Armenians extended into Parliament.
  • Parliament's Actions:
    • Attempted to bring Montagu to trial for his religious writings (1625-1626).
    • Passed a resolution condemning Montagu's doctrine as contrary to the Church of England's articles.
    • Ordered Montagu's arrest.
  • Moderate Anglican Resentment: Moderate Anglicans resented Montagu for labeling his opponents as Puritans.
  • Charles' Response: Dissolved Parliament in the summer to protect Buckingham and Montagu.

Reactions Against Foreign Policy and the Role of Buckingham

Parliament's Mistrust

  • Parliamentary Concerns: Parliament was wary of Charles' foreign policy and refused to grant sufficient funds without cooperation.
  • Mansfield Expedition (1624): A reference point for Parliament's distrust. Charles and Buckingham supported this military campaign (under Count Mansfield), intended to assist Frederick (Charles' brother-in-law) in regaining lands in the Palatinate.
    • The expedition failed due to diplomatic breakdown with France, resulting in the army being stranded and decimated by starvation and sickness.

Cadiz Expedition (September 1625)

  • Objective: To open a second front against Spain and distract them from the Palatinate.
  • ** финансирование:** финансировалось приданым королевы. Queen's dowry funded it (120,000120,000).
  • Outcome: A humiliating failure. The English failed to capture the port or Spanish treasure ships, and soldiers became drunk on Spanish wine.
  • Parliamentary Reaction: Furious, blaming Buckingham (Lord High Admiral) for the failure.

Relations with France

  • Initial Expectations: Charles' marriage to Henrietta Maria was expected to foster cooperation with France against Spain.
  • French Interests: Louis XIII (influenced by Cardinal Richelieu) prioritized France's interests.
    • Refused to join an alliance against Spain in 1625.
    • Charles agreed to pay the King of Denmark 30,00030,000 to develop the Danish army.
  • Embarrassing Incident: English ships loaned to France were used against Huguenots at La Rochelle, despite Charles' attempts to recall them.
  • Deteriorating Relations: Charles and Henrietta Maria's marriage started poorly, with arguments leading to a breach.
  • French-Spanish Peace: France agreed to a separate peace with Spain in February 1626, harming the Protestant cause in Europe.
  • Buckingham's Response: Furious, he attempted to remove Richelieu and planned an uprising supported by Huguenots.
  • Recall of Parliament: Charles recalled Parliament in February to finance this new enterprise.

The Attempted Impeachment of Buckingham (May 1626)

  • Parliament's Blame: Parliament sought to blame Buckingham for foreign policy failures.
  • Charles' Counter-Blame: Charles blamed Parliament for insufficient funding.
  • Impeachment Proceedings: Despite Charles' attempts at compromise, MPs launched impeachment proceedings against Buckingham.
  • Key Figures:
    • Sir John Elliott and Sir Dudley Diggs led the attack on Buckingham in the Commons.
    • The Earl of Bristol's testimony was particularly damaging; he revealed that Charles had bribed Spanish courtiers and promised concessions to English Catholics during negotiations in Madrid (1623).
  • Charles' Reaction:
    • Charged Bristol with treason.
    • Imprisoned Elliott and Diggs in the Tower of London.
    • Implied a threat to Parliament's future existence, seen as absolutist.
  • Dissolution of Parliament: Charles dissolved the 1626 Parliament to protect Buckingham and Montagu.

The La Rochelle Raids (1627-1628)

  • Objective: Buckingham launched a naval expedition to relieve Huguenots under attack at La Rochelle.
  • Escalation of Conflict: England and France were now at war.
  • Failure at Ile De Rey: Buckingham's force landed on the Ile De Rey and laid siege to Saint Martin but failed due to inadequate scaling ladders.
  • Consequences:
    • Another expensive failure.
    • Out of 7,833 soldiers sent to La Rochelle, only 2,989 returned.
    • Approximately one-third of the 50,000 men who served in Buckingham's forces between 1624 and 1628 died.
    • Charles' loyalty to Buckingham was seen as misguided and dangerous.
  • Recall of Parliament (1628): Charles had to recall Parliament due to depleted funds.