Booklet 1 - Finance during personal rule period Flashcards
Why was finance so important during the personal rule period?
Because Charles no longer called parliament to raise funds, so he had to secure his financial position otherwise aggressive foreign policies couldn’t take place.
What did Charles do to try and solve financial problems?
He signed 2 peace treaties:
1. Treaty of Suza with France - 1629
2. Treaty of Madrid with Spain - 1630
However, Charles was still in debt of over £1 million.
How did the king decide to raise finances?
By exploiting his prerogative powers and reintroduced forgotten laws, however they increased hostility towards Charles.
Explain Tonnage and Poundage
Custom duties were put on imports and exports and due to trade reviving after peace treaties with France and Spain, custom duties rose quickly.
Problem: Not approved by parliament
Explain Monopolies
Selling businesses the right to produce, import and sell products
Problems: Prices were increased on products and were sold more than once, mass corruption took place
Explain Distraint of Knighthood
Landowners who’s land was worth more than £40 had to present themselves for knighthood at the king’s corination - those who didn’t present themselves had to buy their knighthood and extra taxes were put on their land due to their increased social status
Problems: Over 9000 individuals were charged and a campaign against the tax took place in Yorkshire, 1634. The nobles appeared to be targetted.
Explain ship money
It was a tax imposed on coastal counties and ports to build ships to protect trade against piracy, they were traditionaly taxed in times of war but in 1635 the tax was extended to inland counties. It raised £200,000 a year until 1638 and in 6 years it raised nearly £800,000
Problems: Charles faced great resistance and people took him to court, including Hampden. However, 90% of the tax was collected so it was extremely successful.
Explain the Hampden case
- John Hampden refused to pay his ship money in 1636 and took his case to court but unsurprisingly, the court was in favour of the king
- The Hampden case was a defeat and the lack of parliamentry voice in the case revealed their weak position.
- Those who did speak out about the case were silenced byt the privy council
