Personal rule

Question 1

The role of parliament in 17th century England

Answer 1

• Approve taxes
• Advise King
• Pass legislation
• Voice grievances

Question 2

Why did Charles I decide to rule without Parliament in 1629?

Answer 2

1) Peace abroad
- Treaty of Susa, April 1629, ended war with France
- Treaty of Madrid, May 1630, ended war with Spain
- Withdrawal from conflict made Charles less financially dependent on Parliament

2) Financial policy
- Forced loan to finance foreign wars was controversial. C.f. 5 Knights case 1627, Habeus Corpus…
- Crown was solvent for the first time in seven years as a result of peace with France and Spain
- If Parliament were summoned, it might want to get rid of tonnage and poundage, the crown’s main source of income
- “If Charles could finance his government by other means, then he had no need for Parliament” - Anderson

3) Impact of individuals and council
- Shift in balance of power at court
- Buckingham’s death meant Coke, Coventry and Manchester yielded less influence
- Westen, Laud, Cottington, Windebank (Pro-Spanish) were opposed to recall (esp Westen and Laud)

4) Charles’ own views
- Preferred to govern alone
- Distaste for puritans and proto-republicans (Cust) in the Commons
- Parliament of 2nd March 1629 declared that anyone assisting the collection of tonnage and poundage that wasn’t granted by Parliament was a capital enemy
- Charles felt misunderstood, and that he should dissolve Parliament to do what he felt was right until his subjects had a better understanding of it
- Petition of right encroached on Charles prerogative

Question 3

Tonnage and Poundage+ new impositions as a source of income in the personal rule

Answer 3

What was it?
- Custom duties on import/export
- Trade rose with peace with France and Spain, and so did export duties
- New impositions were similar. Collected approx £53 000 annually from 1631-5 + £119 600 from 1636-41
Problems?
-Not approved by Parliament, a cause of friction since 1625

Question 4

Ship Money as a source of income in the personal rule

Answer 4

What was it?

• Taxation of the costal counties for the preservation of the navy. Caused sheriffs to once again rise to prominence
• Requested for the first time in six years in 1634, and then again less than a year later for £218 500 - More than 4* the rate of a Parliamentary subsidy. 90% paid
• Requested again in 1636, which indicated that it had become an annual tax, and was no longer simply for emergencies
• 9/10 of the £196 400 requested in 1637 still paid, but slower. Foot dragging caused by Scotland’s progression towards a rebellion+the trial of John Hamden

Pros

• The Ship Money Fleet was the best England had had for a long time
• The money raised by the tax was used exclusively to fund the navy, nothing else. - Stressed by Sharpe
• Levy was huge, but the number of people paying was too, so often only a small amount was requested
• Cust: “by modern standards, ship money was a remarkably successful tax”
• Brought thousands into the national rating system for the first time. Essex shows 12 000 taxed for the first time in 1637

Cons:

• Seen as violation of the Petition of Right
• Ship money attracted disputes over the ratings and questioned whether it was a constitutional tax
• Rates fixed by sherifs. Conrad Russell sees this as an attack on government by consent as the sherifs acted “arbitrarily and alone”
• Separate card for details of opposition*