Political state in 1640 and recall of parliament

The Political Nation in 1640 and the Recall of Parliament

Short Parliament (1640)

  • Recall: King Charles I recalled Parliament due to insufficient funds for fighting the Scottish Covenanters.
    • Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, advised the King on this decision.
  • Session Start: April 13, 1640.
  • King's Expectations:
    • Parliament was expected to grant subsidies before addressing grievances.
    • The King presented an intercepted letter from the Covenanters seeking French assistance, hoping to sway Parliament.
  • Convocation: The church's equivalent of Parliament, met at Saint Paul's Cathedral.
  • Dissolution: Parliament was dissolved on May 5 without granting subsidies or discussing grievances.
    • Charles expected to receive funds from the King of Spain or the Pope.
    • Strafford suggested using the Irish army against the Covenanters.
    • Some Parliament members sympathized with the Covenanters.
    • Many wanted to address grievances and distrusted the King's promises.

Long Parliament (1640-1660)

  • Reason for Recall: Events in Scotland, specifically the truce of Ripon.
  • Truce of Ripon Clauses:
    • The King had to recall Parliament.
    • Parliament could not be dissolved until subsidies were voted to pay off the Scottish army, ensuring their withdrawal from Northern England.
Closer Look: Laud's Canons

  • New Canons: Archbishop Laud issued new canons, increasing pressure on the religious settlement.

  • Etcetera Oath: A compulsory oath of allegiance requiring adherence to the discipline of the Church of England as it stood.

    • Addressed to archbishops, bishops, deans and archdeacons.
    • The "etcetera" seemed to open the door for innovations of any kind.
    • This oath was a blow to the Puritan wing, emphasizing the authority of bishops, similar to the Catholic Church's emphasis on the Pope.

  • Charles' Weakness: Charles was politically, financially, and militarily weak, leaving him with no option but to recall Parliament.

  • First Session: Began November 3, 1640.

  • Duration: Not formally dissolved until 1660.

  • Charles' Position: Trapped and reliant on Parliament for funds, understanding they would likely demand their grievances be heard first.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Charles I in 1640

Strengths
  • King's Authority: Charles held traditional monarchical power.
    • John Finch stated that the king's resolutions resided in his "sacred breast."
    • England was still a traditional, conservative country, respecting order, hierarchy, and divine right.
    • No significant public voices advocated overthrowing the monarchy.
  • House of Lords Support: The Lords held significant power, and most naturally aligned with the King.
  • Legal System Supremacy: Charles controlled the justice system.
    • He arrested his leading critics after dissolving the Short Parliament but released them due to lack of evidence of conspiracy with the Scots.
  • Command of the Army: The King commanded the militia and Stratford revitalized the Irish army for his disposal.
  • Censorship of the Press: Charles controlled publications and could punish dissenters.
  • Authority over Foreign Policy: No legislative restraints on his foreign policy pursuits.
    • He could seek aid from foreign powers like Spain and the Pope.
  • Determined Ministers: Charles had support from William Laud and Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford.
    • Laud supported him with the 1640 canons.
    • Strafford returned from Ireland offering ruthless and efficient advice.
  • Resources of Three Kingdoms: As King of England, Scotland, and Ireland, Charles had access to diverse resources.
Fatal Weaknesses
  • Disquiet and Criticism: Charles interpreted dissent as disloyalty and rebellion.
  • Lack of Consensus: Effective government relied on consensus, which Charles struggled to achieve.
    • Alienation of the gentry due to Personal Rule and centralization efforts.
  • Reliance on Goodwill: Charles depended on the voluntary cooperation of local government officers.
    • Ship money collection rates declined during the Scottish crisis.
    • Twelve peers petitioned Charles in August 1640, refusing cooperation without a new Parliament.

Strengths and Divisions of Parliamentary Opposition

  • Governing Party: Edward Hyde identified a governing party within Parliament (Lords and Commons).
  • Key Actors:
    • Lords: Robert Devereux (Earl of Essex), William Fiennes (Viscount Saye and Sele), Robert Greville (Lord Brooke), Edward Montagu (Viscount Mandeville), Francis Russell (Earl of Bedford), Robert Rich (Earl of Warwick), Philip Wharton (Lord Wharton).
    • Commons: John Hampden, Nathaniel Fiennes, Denzil Holles, John Pym, Oliver St John, William Strode, Sir Henry Vane the Younger.
Sources of Strength
  • Unity of Purpose: In the Short Parliament and the early Long Parliament, most members of Parliament were united in opposition to the king.
    • Goals included remedying abuses of the Personal Rule and reviving the relationship between the king and Parliament.
Measures Taken to Remedy Grievances
  • Dismantling Prerogative Courts
    • Goal: dismantle the prerogative courts of Star Chamber and High Commission.
    • Action:
      • Star Chamber abolished by Hapias Corpus Act in 1640 and confirmed in July 1641.
      • The high commission abolished by Triennial Act, February 1641.
  • Tonnage and Poundage
    • Goal: Abolish the fiscal feudalism of ship money and tonnage and poundage.
    • Action:
      • Ship money repealed by Ship Money Act in 1640.
      • Tonnage and poundage re regulated by the Tonnage and Poundage Act in June 1641.
  • King's Evil Counsellors
    • Goal: Remove the king's evil counselors.
    • Action:
      • Strafford impeached, November 1640.
      • Laud impeached, December 1640. Both men were accused of treason and imprisoned in the Tower Of London to await trial.
  • Laudian Excesses
    • Goal: Remove laudian excesses from the Anglican church.
    • Action: Prune, Bastrich, and Burton were released from prison.
      • Root and branch petition presented to the Commons in December 1640.
  • Regular Parliaments
    • Goal: Ensure regular parliaments.
    • Action: Triennial Act in 02/15/1641.
  • Act Against Dissolution
    • Goal: Prevent dissolution without consent.
    • Action: Act against dissolution, May 1641.
  • Triennial Act: Passed in February 1641, representing a step towards constitutional change.
  • Interconnections: Strong interconnections among key opposition figures suggested an opposition network.
  • Quality of Intellect: Opposition members were well-educated and professional, bringing their talents to politics.
  • Political Support from Londoners: Demonstrated by the 15,000 signatures on the Root and Branch petition.
Sources of Division
  • Complexities: Disagreement arose on what to replace the abuses of the Personal Rule with, influenced by culture, background, social status, and religious persuasion.
  • Radical Agenda: Some felt the king should not breach settlements and pushed a radical agenda.
  • Conservatism: Others wanted a negotiated settlement, while some felt the king was right.
  • Key Issues (Spring 1641):
    • How to work effectively with the king.
    • How to administer the church.
Initiatives to Restore a Good Working Relationship with the King
  • Independent Initiatives: Because no single solution was agreed upon, these emanated from the Lord and the commons separately.
  • House of Lords Initiative: Bridge Appointments
    • Earl of Bedford's Scheme: Aimed to provide Charles with a financial settlement in exchange for regular parliaments and abolishing the Personal Rule's tools.
    • The Scheme also suggested that Charles would agree to hold regular parliament and abolish the most hated tools of his personal rule. Lord and Stratford would lose their preeminence and be replaced by men such as Bedford, who would become lord treasurer and Pym, who would take on the role of chancellor of the exchequer.
    • Charles appointed Bedford, Saye and Sele, Essex, and Mandeville to the Privy Council, and Oliver St John became solicitor general.
      • However, the scheme collapsed.
    • Covenanters' Demands: The Covenanters demanded the abolition of episcopacy and the execution of Stratford in exchange for working the King.
    • Scheme's Unraveling: Bedford's death in May 1641 ended the plan.
    • Historiography
    • Historians disagree over Bedford's intentions.
    • Conrad Russell argued that Bedford's ideas were an attempt with backing from inside the heart of government to drag the king kicking and screaming into the real world and thereby to reunite the country.
    • John Adamson suggests that Bedford led a group of peers who were vigorously pursuing a new and highly calculated policy of constitutional reform that would reduce the king's authority and power to that of the Venetian dodges.
  • House of Commons Initiative
    • Following the collapse of Bedford's scheme, the focus shifted to Pym in the Commons.
    • Pym was seen as a leader.
  • Venetian Ambassador view of Pym: The Venetian ambassador wrote that Pym was the director of the home home machine, while Hyde described him as being able to do most hurt.
    • Pym was both applauded and reviled.
  • The Ten Propositions (June 24)
    • Presented by Pym, outlining how to settle with the King.
    • The eighth head that his majesty be pleased to give directions to his learned counsel to prepare a general pardon in such a large manner as may be for the release relief of his majesty's subjects and elsewhere very specific, while elsewhere very specific the fourth head that the that the college of Capuchins, Catholic monks, at Somerset House may be dissolved and sent out of the kingdom.
    • Terms included disbanding the army in the North, parliamentary input in Privy Council appointments, oversight of the Queen's household, and control over royal children's education.
    • Parliament established committees to address these points.
  • The root and branch debates.
    • Radical terms introduced dramatic constitutional innovations.
  • Root and Branch Petition (December 1640): Opened debate on church administration and Parliament's role.
    • Oliver St John redrafted the Londoners' petition into a Root and Branch Bill, presented by Henry Vane Jr. and Oliver Cromwell in May 1641.
  • Context of the Bill: Parliament reformed the Church of England, addressing Laudian excesses.
  • Parliament's Involvement: Unprecedented involvement in the day-to-day governance of the Church of England.
  • Content of the Bill:
    • Intended to abolish the offices of archbishop and bishop.
    • Abolish the structure of the church of England and substantially alter the composition of the house of lords.
    • Reducing King's Power: Politically, it would reduce the king's power because he appointed bishops and thus could ensure that he had loyal supporters in the lords.
  • Arguments Over the Bill: The bill exposed divisions in Parliament regarding attitudes toward the church.
    • The difficulty presented by the bill was that it exposed divisions within parliament that centered around the different attitudes individual MPs had towards the church.
  • Attitudes Toward the Church A significant group of MPs wanted to remove Lord's influence from the church because they felt that he had tried to rise higher than the king's own authority.
  • Divisiveness: The bill proved divisive and was shelved in August 1641.