Chapter 9 - The Political Nation, 1640

Question 1

The Short Parliament

Answer 1

• no access to money to fight the Covenanters
• Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, advised the king to recall Parliament
• 13th April 1640
• Parliament needed to grant subsidies and then he would listen to grievances
• Parliament dissolved on the 5th of May, with nothing achieved

Question 2

Why was the Short Parliament dissolved?

Answer 2

• Charles still had some expectation that he might get money from the Spanish king or Pope
• In a recent Privy Council meeting, Strafford had suggested using the Irish Army (which he had overhauled while Lord Deputy) to help put down the Covenanters
• Strafford himself was ill and therefore unable to help the king with political management
• Some in Parliament sympathised with the Covenanters and did not want them to be crushed
• Many in Parliament were desperate to discuss grievances and did not trust the king to keep his word once subsidies had been granted

Question 3

The Long Parliament

Answer 3

• Events in Scotland led to the recall of Parliament in Novemeber 1640
• Truce of Ripon: 1) the king had to recall Parliament 2) the king could not dissolve Parliament until it had voted the subsidies that would enable the Scottish Army to be paid off, which would trigger its withdrawal from the north of England back into Scotland

Question 4

Charles position in relation to the truse

Answer 4

• politically, financially and militarlity weak
• so couldn’t defy the terms
• ## Parliament not formally dissolved until 1660

Question 5

England in the 17th century

Answer 5

• traditional and conservative
• order, hierarchy and Divine Right were all accepted, respected and even welcomed
• no public voices advocating for the overthrow of the monarchy

Question 6

Support in the House of Lords

Sources of the king’s strength

Answer 6

• 1640, power lay in the Lords not the Commons
• natural allegiance of the majority of the Lords was with the King
• King could still rely on a majority of them to support his side during debates

Question 7

Supremacy in the legal system

Sources of the king’s strength

Answer 7

• Charles = pinnacle of justice system, therefore able to use it for his own ends
• e.g. after the dissolution of the Short Parliament he arrested 3 Lords he regarded as his leading critics, Warwick, Brooke and Saye and Sele and two Commons, Sir John Pym and John Hampden

Question 8

Command of the army

Sources of the king’s strength

Answer 8

• authority to call the militia in England
• Strafford had revitalsed the Irish Army and put it at the King’s disposal
• Charles could deploy the army at will
• His authority wasn’t challenged from his commanders

Question 9

Censorship of the press

Sources of the king’s strength

Answer 9

• early 1640s, he retained command over what could be published
• and was able to extert pressure, even extreme punishment on those who offended him or challenged his authority

Question 10

Authority over foreign policy

Sources of the king’s strength

Answer 10

• no restraints on the king’s pursuit of foreign policy

Question 11

Determined and effective ministers

Sources of the king’s strength

Answer 11

• Laud and Wentworth, Earl of Strafford
• Laud backed him up with the 1640 Canons
• Strafford’s return from Ireland, now profitable and well managed, meant that he had his most ruthless and efficient adviser at hand

Question 12

Resources of the 3 kingdoms

Sources of the king’s strength

Answer 12

• Charles was the king of 3 kingdoms, and so had access to all their resources
• Strafford in Ireland
• Laud’s episcopacy in Scotland
• Ireland was profitable; England should be able to finance war with Scotland
• Strafford might be able to bring the English parliament into line as he had achieved in Ireland

Question 13

Charles’ weakness

Answer 13

• Charles’ style of rule
• feeling of alienation in the gentry
• ## Charles was overly reliant on consensus and good will to enforce his commands

Question 14

Unity of purpose

Sources of strength for parliament

Answer 14

The majority of Commons and Lords were united in the goals they shared in opposition to the king

1) to remedy the abuses of the Personal Rule
2) to revive the relationship between the kings and the country, represented in Parliament

This unity made it possible for them to pass measures swiftly in order to address these two issues.

Question 15

Measures taken to remedy grievanves from Personal Rule

Answer 15

Dismantle the prerogative courts of Star Chamber and High Commision
- Star Chamber abolished by Habeas Corpus Act 1640
- High Commission abolished by Triennial Act Feb 1641

Abolish the fiscal feudalism of Ship Money and Tonnage and Poundage
- Ship Money Act 1640
- T&P regulated by the Tonnage and Poundage Act 1641

Remove the king’s ‘evil councilors’
- Strafford impeached in Nov 1640
- Laud impeached in Dec 1640
- both accused of treaason and imprisoned in the Tower of London to await trial

Remove Laudian excesses from prison
- Prynne, Bastwick and Burton were released form prison
- Root and Branch petition presented to Commons in Dec 1640

Ensure regular Parliaments
- Triennial Act Feb 1641

Prevent dissolution without consent
- Act against Dissolution May 1641

Question 16

Interconnections

Sources of strength for parliament

Answer 16

• ease of communication
• shared goals

Includes:
- Providence Island Commpany
- Hampden Case
- Drafted the Peition of RIght 1628
- etc etc

Question 17

Quality of Intellect

Sources of strength for parliament

Answer 17

• opposition, particularly in Commons, were well edcuated, intelligent, professional men

Question 18

Support from Londoners

Sources of strength for parliament

Answer 18

• 15,000 signatures added onto the end of Root and Branch Petition
• this gave indication of the extent on how many Londoners were vocal in their demands that Parliament should push through reforms
• numerous demonstrations and pamphlets supporting wide change

Question 19

Sources of division in Parliament

Answer 19

• hard to decide what to put in place to disassemble the instruments of abuse during Personal Rule
• Pym = king wouldn’t willingly reach a negotiated settlement and therefore felt that they had no choice but to push forward a radical agenda that would force a settlement onto him
• Others wouldn’t abandon their conservatism and wanted to continue to pursue a negotiated settlement
• Some thought the king was in the right

Two issues stood out in the spring of 1641:
1) how to work effectively with the king
2) how to administer the Church

Question 20

Bridge Appointments

Initiatives intended to restore a good working relationship with the king

Answer 20

• Earl of Bedford
• provide Charles with a workable financial settlement, Charles would agree to hold regular Parliaments and abolish the most hated tools of his Personal Rule
• Laud and Strafford to be replaced by Bedford and Pym - Parliament would be closely involved with the king’s finances
• 19th February 1641, Bedford, Saye and Sele, Essex were appointed to the Privy Council, and Oliver St John became Solicitor-General

Question 21

Why didn’t the Bridge Appointments work?

Answer 21

• Bedford and his allies were collaborating with the Scottish Covenanters so that they could work together to broker and agreement that would be acceptable to the Scots and the King
• Covenanters wanted episcopacy abolished and Strafford executed
• Bedford feared that the Covenanters’ demands would make it impossible for the king to agree to his scheme

Question 22

Initiative in the Commons

Initiatives intended to restore a good working relationship with the king

Answer 22

• after the failure of the Bridge Appointments, the impetus for reform was shifted into the Commons
• Pym was the leader of the Junto

Question 23

The Ten Propositions

Initiatives intended to restore a good working relationship with the king

Answer 23

• a “confused and rambling” document JP Kenyon describes it
• Pym brought this list of suggestions to Parliament on 21st June

key terms would have dramatically reduced the king’s powers:
- disbandment of the army in the North
- Parliamentary input into who would be in the Privy Council
- oversight of the Queen’s household
- Parliamentary control over the education of the Royal Children

Question 24

Root and Branch Bill

Answer 24

• presented in Commons in May 1641
• ‘put right’ Laudian reforms
• root out episcopacy, root and branch by abolising the offices of archbishop and bishop
• dismantle the structure of the CofE
• and redued the king’s power he appointed bishops and thus could ensure that he had loyal support in the Lords

Question 25

Arguments over the Root and Branch Bill

Answer 25

• exposed divisions within Parliament; different attitudes individual MPs had towards the Church
• A significant group wanted to remove Laud’s influence from the Church because they felt he tried to rise higher than the king’s own authority
• within this group were those who wanted to restore the Church to its pre-laudian state, back to the ‘true reformed Protestant religion’
• Root and Branch was a radical way to remove Laud and Arminain bishops; some felt that it went too far
• A smaller number wanted to alter the structure of the Chuch and bring it more in line with Puritan Congregational Churches that were springing up in New England
• the involvement of faith mean that debates were contentious
• The Bill was so divisive that it was shelved in August 1641