chapter 9 - political divisions: the long parliament, pym and the outbreak of the civil war Flashcards
bedfords proposal
bridge gap between crown and parliament
1 - abolition of most confrontational financial and political aspects of personal rule
2 - return of elizabethan based protestant church
3 - separate financial settlement for charles
NOT successful charles refused to settle
impeachment of wentworth
without evil councillors charles would have to accept reform and rule with parliament
replacement eg pym or bedford ensure parliament was seen as good government
bill of attainder
anyone who was seen as a threat to be removed by parliament without trial
charles ordered officers to return to commands with english army in north\
parliament worried charles would use them to dissolve parliament
charles less inclined to negotiate with parliament
wentworths death - execution on 12th may 1641
issues over charles’ ministers -
wentworth and laud
wentworth recalled from ireland in 1639 to help charles face the scots
regarded by many in parliament as the man with potential to make charles absolutist
mps focused on wentworth because of the danger he appeared to represent but they tried to use him as a scapegoat
kings relationship with wentworth -
loyal to charles
shown he was capable of dealing with conflict in ireland
to becomes charles main advisor to sort out growing problems such as bankrupcy and war with scottish covenanters
supported charles desire to renew war against the scots wheras parliament wanted to make peace
parliaments criticisms of wentworth -
took a heavy handed approach in handling irish situation and wanted to raise parliamentary funds to wage war with the scots
real risk of punishment for openly criticising the king so it was safer to blame the evil councillors for the scottish crisis
direct attack on charles risked undermining the divine right of kings and whole system of government
split views on wentworth - some wanted him imprisoned and some wanted him executed
scots also demanded wentworths death
london mob
negative term given to londoners who participated in politics and supported parliamentary causes
derogatory term based on fear of popular revolution
mps were aware of potential of mobilising londoners support for their campaigns
15,000 londoners signed the root and branch petition
crowd went to tower of london in may 1641 amid rumours of royalist army plot to seize it and release wentworth
importance and leadership of john pym
leading figure in the commons in 1640
regarded as a chief opponent of charles
aims =
removal and punishment of charles’ evil councillors
political settlement without the threat of being overturned by charles
removal of the threat of catholic popery and establishment of a strong protestantism
initially pyms agenda was not radical
pym became more radical during the long parliament as charles continued to threaten to use force
pyms chief methods to achieve his aims during the long parliament
- impeachment of wentworth and laud
- formation of a working alliance with scottish covenanters occupying northern england as military protection for the long parliament
- supporting bedfords bridge appointments scheme
- using parliamentary financial pressures to control charles political options —-> achieved by giving charles income from tonnage and poundage
- getting parliament to transfer to itself some of the key prerogative powers of the crown
- using parliamentary committees to steer parliament towards a settlement
triennial act
passed on 15th february 1641
abolished ship money without parliamentary consent
stated —–> charles had to call parliament every 3 years and it should last a minimum of 50 days
if king failed to do this then the written legal order for calling parliament would be done automatically by the lord chancellor
ensured there wouldn’t be another period of prolonged rule
creation of a royalist party
preventing personal rule
bill of attainder
religion
party was a reaction against pym
root and branch petition
1640
signed by 15,000 Londoners in december 1640
demanded end of bishops and episcopacy and Puritanism was the force behind it
debated in parliament in feb 1641
clear disagreement as what to replace Laudianism with
many saw dismantling of the church structure as undermining whole order of society
all the commons could agree on was secular powers of bishops should be curtailed and an exclusion bill was written stating bishops should no longer sit and vote in house of lords
sent to lords in march 1641 and was rejected on 8th june 1641
ten propositions
24th june 1641
radicalism of parliament seemed to be confirmed by the 10 propositions
stated -
parliamentary input over who was in his privy council
parliamentary control of those around the queen
parliamentary control over religious education for the royal children
little chance Charles would agree to such restrictions
reaction in scotland, 1641
cumberland band
aug 1640 - earl of montrose and 17 other scottish nobles
document stating a desire to defend the king
signalled the division in scotland
charles chose to accept the abolition of epsicopacy (government of a church by bishops) in scotland
charles left for scotland - parliament distrusted him and organised a committee of defence to send comissioners to keep an eye on him
growing divisions
the incident
october 1641
royalist plot to kidnap radical scottish covenanters
investigators included more extreme royalists and moderate covenanters
wanted to be rid of leading radical covenanter leaders eg archibald campbell
the incident destoyed charles’ hope of gaining further support in scotland as he was linked to the plot
forced to appoint opponents in key posts in english parliament
growth of opposition in parliament
significance of the grand remonstrance
november 1641
introduced by pym to the commons in november
list of criticisms of charles government since 1625
clearly showed why the king could not be trusted with contol of the army that needed to be raised to crush the irish rebellion
timed to come immediately before the kings return from scotland - done to appeal to the london crowd by illustrating charles could not be trusted with an army
moderates alarmed by the language used as it was seen as anti catholic
why was the grand remonstrance significant
seen as a direct attack on charles
political issues directed away from westminster to involve the people themselves to put pressure on parliament
debate on whether to publish shows divisions in parliament - formation of 2 sides in the civil war
debate on grand remonstrance
lasted 12 hours
vote on 23 november 1641
passed 159 votes to 148
