A 
 
 OXFORD MANUALS 
 
 HS STORY 
 
 \J" T? ? "5. '*
 
 This book is DUE 
 
 stamped below 
 
 DEC 3 W23 

 
 Now in Course of Publication. 
 
 THE OXFORD MANUALS 
 
 OF ENGLISH HISTORY. 
 
 EDITED BY C. W. C. OMAN, M.A., F.S.A. 
 
 Fellow of All Souls College. Oxford. 
 
 The series will consist of six volumes, bound in neat cloth, u' 
 Maps, Genealogies, and Index, price 50 cents net, each. 
 
 I. The Making of the English Nation; 55 B.C.-IIJS A.D. 
 By C. G. ROBERTSON, B.A., Fellow of All Souls, Modern 
 History Lecturer, Exeter College. (Ready.) 
 
 II. King and Baronage; A.D. 1135-1328. By VV. H. HUTTON, 
 B.D., Fellow and Tutor of St. John's College. (Ready.) 
 
 III. The Hundred Years' War; A.D. 1328-1485. By C. \V. C. 
 
 OMAN, M.A., Editor of the series. 
 
 IV. England and the Reformation; A.D. 1485-1603. By 
 
 G. W. POWERS, M.A., Late Scholar of New College. 
 
 V. King and Parliament; A.D. 1603-1714. By G. H. WAKE- 
 
 LING, M.A., Fellow of Brasenose College. (Ready.) 
 
 VI. The Making of the British Empire; A.D. 1714-1832. 
 By A. HASSALL, M.A., Senior Student and Tutor of Christ 
 Church. 
 
 NEW YORK : CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
 
 Ije *forb manuals of (Englisl) 
 
 Edited by C. W. C. OMAN, M.A., F.S.A 
 
 KING AND PARLIAMENT 
 
 (A.D. 16031714) 
 
 G. H. WAKELING, M.A. 
 
 FELLOW OF BRASENOSE COLLEGE, OXFORD 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 
 1896 
 
 1900 
 
 MJG -
 
 STATE NORMAL SCHOOL, DA 
 
 LtOS A^GHJUES, C All. 
 
 !2 
 
 GENERAL PREFACE. 
 
 There are so many School Histories of England al- 
 ready in existence, that it may perhaps seem presump- 
 tuous on the part of the authors of this series to add 
 six volumes more to the number. But they have their 
 defence : the " Oxford Manuals of English History " 
 are intended to serve a particular' purpose. There 
 are several good general histories already in use, and 
 there are a considerable number of scattered ' epochs' 
 or ' periods '. But there seems still to be room for a 
 set of books which shall combine the virtues of both 
 these classes. Schools often wish to take up only a 
 certain portion of the history of England, and find 
 one of the large general histories too bulky for their 
 use. On the other hand, if they employ one of the 
 isolated 'epochs' to which allusion has been made, 
 they find in most cases that there is no succeeding 
 work on the same scale and lines from which the 
 scholar can continue his study and pass on to the 
 next period, without a break in the continuity of his 
 knowledge. 
 
 The object of the present series is to provide a set 
 of historical manuals of a convenient size, and at a 
 very moderate price. Each part is complete in itself, 
 but as the volumes will be carefully fitted on to each 
 other, so that the whole form together a single con- 
 tinuous history of England, it will be possible to use 
 any two or more of them in successive terms or years 
 at the option of the instructor. They are kept care-
 
 fully to the same scale, and the editor has done his 
 best to put before the various authors the necessity 
 of a uniform method of treatment. 
 
 The volumes presuppose a desire in the scholar 
 to know something of the social and constitutional 
 history of England, as well as of those purely polit- 
 ical events which were of old the sole staple of the 
 average school history. The scale of the series does 
 not permit the authors to enter into minute points 
 of detail. There is no space in a volume of 130 pages 
 for a discussion of the locality of Brunanburgh or of 
 the authorship of Junius. But due allowance being 
 made for historical perspective, it is hoped that every 
 event or movement of real importance will meet the 
 reader's eye. 
 
 All the volumes are written by resident members of 
 the University of Oxford, actively engaged in teaching 
 in the Final School of Modern History, and the au- 
 thors trust that their experience in working together, 
 and their knowledge of the methods of instruction in 
 in it, may be made useful to a larger public by means 
 of this series of manuals.
 
 (A.D. I603 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The Middle Ages had ended in England amid the 
 storm and stress of the Wars of the Roses. Wearied out 
 by thirty years of bloodshed on the battlefield The Tudor 
 and the scaffold, the English nation threw government, 
 itself at the feet of Henry VII., and craved of him nought 
 but "strong governance" and the end of anarchy. It 
 was on these terms that he and his progeny ruled Eng- 
 land. But jhe_Tudors_hadL_a__shrewd perception of the 
 truth that Englishmen are more easily led than driven. 
 They were ^tyrannical to many individuals who resisted 
 their will in things secular or religious, but to the majority 
 they represented that majesty and security which we now 
 describe as the J^State ". For, while they maintained 
 strict la\v~and order in the land, as is the first duty of 
 every government, they studiously avoided collisions with 
 the prejudices and feelings of the nation. 
 
 The result was that during the sixteenth century Eng- 
 lishmen developed a new spirit. It was not quite a spirit 
 of liberty. We are accustomed nowadays to L e ci to a na- 
 a freedom in our actions and opinions which tionai spirit, 
 was quite unknown thert. If a man spoke or wrote or 
 even thought differently from his fellows in Tudor times, 
 he was suspected of disloyalty. There had been so much 
 anarchy and division during the civil wars of the previous 
 century, that an absence of disagreement was felt to be 
 the all-important thing. 
 
 The king and his government must be obeyed without
 
 2 THE ENGLISH REFORMATION. 
 
 Criticism. Religion was not, as now, a matter for each 
 man to choose for himself without interference. The 
 government could not afford to let men obey their own 
 consciences. A Roman Catholic was an enemy of the 
 nation, because he believed in the pope's authority rather 
 than in the king's. A Puritan was suspected ofCd^sloyafiy 
 because he placed his own ideas before the law of the 
 land. No one could be loyal both to pope and king: 
 many had to choose between law and conscience. The 
 slightest criticism of any matter in church or state was 
 considered the forerunner of rebellion. If the Tudors 
 gave England peace and order, they expected in return 
 unquestioning obedience. The nation was to be one in 
 thought and belief, for only so could it be one in action. 
 
 It was thus that Englishmen learnt to feel that they 
 were one, and the sixteenth century gave us a national 
 spirit. It was shown Th many ways. Men like Raleigh 
 felt sure that Nature intended Englishmen to fight Span- 
 iards. Men like Richard Grenville expressed their joy 
 that they "never turned their backs on Don or Devil 
 yet". Shakspere transplanted into the tale of the Lan- 
 castrian reigns a fire and a patriotism which really be- 
 longed to his own day. 
 
 But the real source of this spirit was the change in 
 religion. The Reformation had a profound effect upon 
 The double England as a nation, and upon the separate 
 effect of the individuals who composed it. It taught Eng- 
 Reformation. }i s h me n to believe in their independence and 
 freedom from the interference of the " Bishop of Rome". 
 This was at the bottom of the great national feeling of 
 which we have spoken. But men also learnt that since 
 they are responsible to God for their own acts and words, 
 they must learn to think for themselves. This was an 
 entirely different feeling. It made each man believe in 
 himself. It may be called the "personal" spirit. Now 
 the Tudors wished to have the national spirit without this 
 personal one. The first would help to secure reverence 
 for their government, for men could see in the monarch 
 the embodiment of that free orderly nation which was for
 
 TWO RESULTS OF THE REFORMATION. 3 
 
 the future to depend upon itself. Eut_the second was 
 considered dangerous. It might lead men to question 
 the sovereign's right to decide religion, as it had led them 
 to question the pope's right. 
 
 Now this is exactly what happened. This personal 
 spirit led men jnto a new religious belief. JTVhen in the 
 latter half of the sixteenth century the Church , 
 
 .... / T ,.. . , Puritanism. 
 
 of England, as established by law in Elizabeth s 
 day, failed to satisfy some earnest thinkers, they adopted 
 the_extreme opinions of the continental Protestants. This 
 new religious force was called in derision Puritanism. 
 The men who held it wished to purify the church of all 
 that reminded them of a hated Popish past of bishops, 
 of ceremonies and ritual, even of sacraments. Elizabeth, 
 while relaxing wherever, possible the bonds of discipline, 
 yet refused to allow to individual consciences any depar- 
 ture from the church system she had established, either 
 in the direction of Roman Catholicism or of the advanced 
 Protestantism of the Continent. So the Puritans were 
 punished for not conforming to the national church, no 
 less than were the Roman Catholics. Some obeyed and 
 accepted the Prayer-book and Episcopacy; others shook 
 the dust of England from their feet and w r ent abroad. 
 Thus there were two new spirits or forces in the land 
 which must some day become antagonistic to each other 
 the national ^nd ,thSiipfitSQiQ<^P*tUi The Tudor govern^, 
 ment had set itself to use the first and curb the second. 
 
 At the beginning of the seventeenth century, therefore, 
 England needed a great man, and there was a great work 
 for him to do. When a nation becomes strong Political 
 and united the time for absolute government danger of the 
 is past. A monarch may act for a people time ' 
 when they are disunited, and discipline them when they 
 quanvl, but he must act with them when they have 
 learned the lesson of unity. They will then require some 
 share in their own government, some right to advise or 
 choose. They will refuse to be told what they are to do 
 and believe, as if they were still unable to act and think 
 for themselves. It is always a slow r movement from the
 
 4 A PROBLEM FOR THE STEWARTS. 
 
 one form of government to the other, and at the crisis 
 it needs a man who possesses the nation's confidence 
 to lead it steadily along the path of toleration and self- 
 government. Such a leader must believe in the nation 
 no less than in himself. 
 
 The crisis had now arrived, and unfortunately for Eng- 
 land the Stewart kings, who now sat upon the throne of 
 The Stewarts tne Tudors, were quite unfitted for the task, 
 fail to meet it. They believed in themselves and not in the 
 nation. They thought they had a personal mission to 
 govern, and consequently treated opposition and criticism 
 as impudence or ignorance. No doubt they had a good 
 deal of both to encounter; but the new rulers were unable 
 to discern that, underneath the opposition and prejudices, 
 there lay that spirit which has been the making of all 
 great nations. James I. and Charles I. wished to work 
 on Tudor principles, and failed to understand that they 
 had to deal with a people which had already spent a 
 sufficient number of years in the nursery. Nor were these 
 kings prepared to work with the nation and take it as it 
 was. They believed they possessed a " divine hereditary 
 right", a right endorsed by their own wisdom and abilities, 
 sanctioned by the personal power allowed to past kings, 
 and upheld by their family tree. They did not compre- 
 hend that the sovereign power, which all efficient govern- 
 ments must possess, will only be respected by those who 
 approve its work and can understand its methods. _o 
 they drew a line between themselves and the nation, and 
 thus ^destroyed that mutual understanding which had 
 supported the Tudor government. While the tyrant 
 Henry VIII. had often taken his parliaments into his 
 confidence, King James or King Charles were always 
 careful to remind the Two Houses that they and their 
 sovereign could never treat as equals. Thus the union 
 of king and people which the Tudors had fostered the 
 Stewarts neglected. 
 
 But the nation had learned the lesson and believed in 
 it. When the good-natured laziness of James I. and the 
 conceit of his son Charles allowed the national feeling to
 
 SOVEREIGNTY THE QUESTION OF THE CENTURY. 5 
 
 be wounded by arrogant Spanish ambassadors and sub- 
 servient royal chaplains, resistance was aroused at once. 
 In contemning the national spirit these kings aroused 
 the personal one the Puritan one. Roman En Ush 
 Catholicism was still to most Englishmen the Puritan spirit^ 
 Evil One in disguise, and when the Stewarts nses 
 refused to see it in that light, yet condescended to give' 
 no reasons for toleration, Puritan politicians were exas- 
 perated, while Puritan divines and pamphleteers wrote 
 enthusiastic and wearisome tracts to prove that England 
 was pledged to the continental form of Protestantism. 
 High-Church clergymen were rewarded by royal favour 
 for preaching and writing that the king was .above the 
 law, and could be neither criticised nor resisted. And 
 the Puritans answered by combining their resistance to 
 ecclesiastical "innovations" with a passionate claim for 
 the supremacy of Parliament over the royal power. Thus 
 the religious and the political opposition were merged in 
 one. 
 
 The struggle that ensued became a battle for "sove- 
 reignty ", that is for the supreme and final power in the 
 state. Both parties claimed divine sane- sovereignty 
 tion for their religious programme, and each at stake ^ 
 
 wished the state to enforce it. The king and a majority '*/ 
 ofjhe churchmen combined to resist the claims of the 
 Parliament and the Puritans. The Parliament and the 
 Puritans combined to dispute the king's right to lay down 
 the law in church and state. Thus the opposition, though^X 
 it claimed to be national, was really inspired by 'that per- 
 sonal spirit which claimed the right to think for itself in 
 matters political as well as in matters religious. Men 
 began to teach that the real duty of a government was to 
 get at the mind of the nation and carry out its will, rather 
 than to dictate what was to be done and believed. 
 
 Now, the question of sovereignty was one on which it 
 was useless to appeal to former practice; for The 
 there were enough precedents in church and respective 
 state to justify both parties. Each accused ar * uments 
 the other of "innovation", or departure from custom,
 
 6 WHAT ENGLAND HAD TO LEARN. 
 
 and each claimed the conservative position so dear to / 
 Englishmen. The king said that the claims of Parliament/ 
 to a share in the sovereign power were unheard of, as 
 indeed they were, if Tudor times were the test. Arch 
 bishop Laud thought the Puritan idea of a strict obser- 
 vance of the Sabbath was unheard of, which, until very 
 recent years, it certainly was. On the other hand, Par- 
 liament considered that the king's claim to be above the 
 law was unheard of, and on medieval precedents this too 
 was true. The Puritans urged that the ceremonies they 
 were told to observe were " innovations ", and for many 
 years this also was true. 
 
 The solution of the religious dispute was a gradual 
 extension of freedom in thought and action, but for this / 
 The real neither party was as yet prepared. The solu-</ 
 solution in tion of the political dispute was a gradual 
 ire ' change of the form of government from one 
 in which the king commanded and the nation chafed, into 
 one in which the government was responsible to Parlia- 
 ment, while Parliament was responsible to the electors. 
 The struggle wore on till it ended in war, which did not 
 bring a settlement of the question. Not till the end of 
 the century was toleration begun in practice, and the law 
 finally placed above the king. But by the time of Wil- 
 liam III., the "Cabinet" responsible to Parliament, which 
 carries on a national government in accordance with na- 
 tional wishes, was not far distant. 
 
 When England had learnt that the majority of men in 
 a civilized nation cannot be permanently excluded from 
 a share in its government, the goal, to which the struggles 
 of the seventeenth century had been pointed, was reached. 
 It is our own fault to-day if we cannot trust each other in 
 religious questions, and trust our elected government in 
 national questions.
 
 CHARACTER OF JAMES. 7 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE REIGN OF JAMES I.: 1603-1625. 
 
 James Stewart, the' successor of Elizabeth on the 
 English throne, was the son of the famous Mary "Queen 
 of Scots ". He had been king in Scotland _ 
 
 ,, ..... . . . The new king. \i 
 
 almost from his birth: on his accession to 
 the crown of the triple kingdom, henceforth called Great 
 Britain and Ireland, he was thirty-seven years old. His 
 position in Scotland had been one of great difficulty, 
 largely owing to the Presbyterian clergy, whose constant 
 officious interference with him had grafted in his mind a 
 firm belief in the merits of an Episcopal Church depen- 
 dent upon the crown. 
 
 James was acute in his own limited way, learned, and 
 good-humoured; but his character was fatally marred by 
 conceit, obstinacy, and indecision. His uncouth man- 
 ners and ungainly person rendered absurd his claim to 
 be considered a supernaturally-gifted king the " British 
 Solomon" as he loved to be called. An honest belief in 
 his own abilities and good intentions is always a source 
 of weakness to a man who has little power of work and , 
 less appreciation of difficulties. James was, and re-i/ 
 mained, without a policy, though a policy was impera- 
 tively necessary for one who had to deal with the two, 
 ,u r reat questions which Elizabeth had left unsolved, the^ 
 question of Sovereignty of the state, and the question of 
 toleration in the Church. 
 
 The first ten years of this reign are marked by constant 
 little failures which are hardly retrieved by the absence of / 
 any great mistakes. The king failed to keep character of 
 in touch with his first Parliament, which the first period. \j 
 lasted from 1604 to 1610, as completely as he showed 
 himself unable to solve the increasing religious difficulties 
 caused by the rise of the Puritans. In Ireland and Scot- 
 land attempts at a statesmanlike policy were thwarted by 
 the royal obstinacy; but in foreign matters, where in after
 
 8 A BAD BEGINNING. 
 
 days James was apt to flounder more than in domestic, 
 he was kept from serious harm by the wisdom of his first 
 minister, Robert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury. 
 
 The attitude of the Parliament toward the king was 
 from the beginning ominous of troubles to come. The 
 The feeling of Commons stated in the " Form of Apology "/ 
 Parliament. (1604) that their privileges were their "rightV, 
 not derived, as James thought, from the royal "grace". 
 This strong language was occasioned by his attack upon 
 the right of the Lower House to decide disputed elec- 
 tions. Nor did the leaders spare hints that the dangers 
 of Elizabeth's reign had kept the Parliamentary demands 
 more moderate than they were likely to be in future. 
 The king merely replied that they should use their liberty 
 with more modesty. 
 
 The complete union of England with Scotland was one 
 of James's dearest projects ; but the English were jealous 
 The Scottish of Scots, and the matter was finally dropped 
 Union. because there was no agreement as to how it 
 
 should be managed. Parliament wished to have a share 
 in effecting it by legally naturalizing Scotchmen. This, 
 the king thought, was accomplished by the mere fact of 
 his accession. An appeal to the judges produced the 
 decision that a child born in Scotland since 1603 was not 
 an alien; and further than this the king, who had the 
 best intentions in the matter, was unable to go. 
 
 In religion, which was likely to prove the greatest crux 
 of all, there were three parties : those orthodox Anglicans, 
 The religious who conformed to the Prayer-book and the 
 difficulty. Church system of Elizabeth; the obstinate 
 few who remained true to Roman Catholicism ; and the 
 Puritans, who had been persecuted by Elizabeth, but 
 hoped for better times under the new regime. The 
 Policy to Roman Catholics were menaced by many / 
 Roman laws passed in the late reign, which made thev 
 
 exercise of their religion high treason. They 
 were also liable to fines for not attending their parish 
 churches. The former are called the " Penal laws", the 
 latter " Recusancy" fines. James did not share the bitter
 
 THE GUNPOWDER PLOT. ^ 
 
 feeling which had prompted these laws, and would fain 
 have put an end to all religious quarrels. A noble aim ; 
 but not a practical one in an age when the Popes still 
 looked upon England as probably reclaimable to the / 
 dominion of the Roman see. Parliament spoke the voice J 
 of_the_jtnajority of Englishmen when it demanded the 
 enforcement of these cruel laws. Their attitude was 
 strengthened by the wild attempt of some fanatical 
 Papists to sweep away king and Commons alike by the 
 horrible "Gunpowder Treason". In 1605, these eager 
 spirits their chiefs were Catesby, Winter, Fawkes, and 
 Digby formed the "Gunpowder Plot". The Houses of 
 Parliament wen to be blown up during a sitting, at which 
 the king and the Prince of Wales were to be present, by 
 means of gunpowder placed in the cellars beneath. It 
 was discovered through a letter in which one of the con- 
 spirators endeavoured to hint to his friend the danger of 
 attending Parliament on November 5. After the execution 
 of Guy Fawkes and others, persecution fell more strin- 
 gently on the Catholics, for the nation suspected that they 
 had all been implicated in the plot, and wished to exter- 
 minate the whole sect. 
 
 Meantime the Puritans were far from satisfied. In the 
 Millenary Petition 1 presented to the king very shortly 
 after his arrival in England (1603), -they had 
 
 , , c -it. The Puritans. 
 
 asked for some alterations in the ceremonies 
 to which all ministers had to conform. James arranged 
 a conference between bishops and Puritan divines at 
 Hampton Court. But there were great difficulties in the 
 way of making the church wide enough to contain these 
 men, who wished to modify the thirty-nine articles and to 
 grant all presbyters a share in the Episcopal power. The 
 high churchmen opposed all such changes. James him- 
 self had a wholesome dread of the introduction of the 
 Scottish system. The only result of the conference was 
 that some canons were drawn up in 1604, binding clergy 
 and laity still more strictly to the Prayer-book. 
 
 1 So called because it was supposed to contain the signatures of 1000 ministers. 
 As a matter of fact there were less than 800.
 
 well / 
 :ials/ 
 no? 
 
 10 THE KING APPEALS TO THE JUDGES. 
 
 For the time the parliamentary protests against this . 
 attitude of church and crown were in vain. But when / 
 Two theories James showed a disposition to side strongi)*/ 
 of government. w fth church against state in matters of law, 
 and proposed to settle the vexed question of the jurisdic- 
 tion of church courts by hearing cases himself, he was led 
 into a serious quarrel with r.hittf-jnstir.p Cpk^ The lawyer 
 plainly told him that the rnya,] power was official rather 
 than personal, and that the Law was above it. Such a 
 doctrine was anything but agreeable to one who held 
 with "divine hereditary righj.". 
 
 Taxation was another point on which James was soon 
 at issue with his subjects. The king's income was not 
 Parliament sufficient for the needs of government as well 
 and taxation. as those of an extravagant court, whose officials^ 
 made money at the nation's expense. Parliament was 
 liberal to a king with whom they so seldom agreed, and / 
 James, relying on precedents in the late reign, took upon/ 
 himself to increase the import duties without consulting 
 Parliament. Such " impositions " had been made illegal 
 in Edward III.'s reign, but the judges decided in the case / 
 of Bate (1606) that the king could increase or vary such 
 taxes by his prerogative or royal power alone. This was 
 the fkst of a long series of cases during the century in 
 which the king appealed to the Bench for a confirmation 
 of his rights. James's first Parliament closed its seven 
 years' duration with a quarrel over another financial diffi- 
 culty. The "Great Contract" was a scheme by which 
 the crown should renounce the antiquated feudal pay- 
 ments due from land in return for a fixed annual sum. 
 This finally failed, for the Commons required, as a pre- 
 liminary, satisfaction about "impositions" and church 
 courts. 
 
 It was of little use for men like Bacon to hope that 
 king and Parliament would work together for reform and 
 NO real hope" progress. Each was in fact beginning to 
 of harmony. c i a j m f or itself a " discretionary power" to 
 act somewhat beyond the existing law. The Tudor plan 
 of doing what was necessary was losing credit in the face 
 
 (962)
 
 IRISH AND FOREIGN QUESTIONS. II 
 
 of the further question of what was right; and it is certain 
 that a man like James put a great strain on the idea that 
 kings govern because they know best. 
 
 Meanwhile Ireland had its own set of difficulties and 
 problems. The Irish rebellion of 1598 had been pitilessly 
 crushed, and in 1604 Sir A. Chichester under- chichester's 
 took the government of Ireland. There mle in Irelan '*s s j 
 were two chief difficulties, land and religion,. The native 
 Irish looked on Protestantism as a foreign creed forced 
 on them against their will. The Lord Deputy tried con- 
 ciliatory measures, and hoped to educate the Irish in the 
 change of faith. But the Irish Parliament of 1613 proved 
 as intractable as the English, and James foolishly recalled 
 Chichester, of whose moderate policy he had not ap- 
 proved. The agrarian difficulty, which Chichester had 
 proposed to solve by abolishing the ancient Irish custom 
 by which the whole tribe held the tribal lands in common 
 tenure, and making the natives free tenants, led to a 
 wholesale eviction of the latter and the colonization of 
 Ulster by English and Scotch settlers. 
 
 On the Continent the government had inherited from 
 Elizabeth a policy of war with Spain, but as Spain was 
 no longer dangerous James and Cecil wisely Foreign 
 made peace (1604). There was, however, a Protestant \/ 
 feeling in England that something should be policy. v 
 
 done for the Netherlands, that is, the countries we now 
 call Belgium and Holland. The northern or Dutch pro- 
 vinces had recently thrown off the yoke of Spain, while 
 the southern or Belgian had by cruel persecutions been / 
 kept back in their servitude. James was in fact induced v/ 
 in 1609 to guarantee, on behalf of the Northern provinces, 
 a treaty by which they obtained a twelve years' truce from 
 Philip III., but he refused to be dragged into a war 
 against Spain in their interest. He also allied himself >/ 
 with Henry IV. of France, and with the Protestant 
 princes in Germany, marrying his daughter Elizabeth to 
 the Protestant Elector Frederick of the Palatinate. Such 
 was the policy of Cecil, who died in 1612. With his 
 death, following on that of Henry IV., and of James's 
 
 (062) B
 
 12 THE ROYAL PEACEMAKER. 
 
 hopeful son, Prince Henry, the chances of a successful 
 1 foreign policy came to an end. 
 
 From 1612 to 1619 James fell from bad to worse. 
 
 M Finding that Parliament could not be moulded to his will, 
 Second period he came to rely on favourites who moulded 
 
 sj of the reign. hj m to theirs. He opened an intrigue with 
 Spain, and became a tool in the hands of its quick- 
 jwitted ambassador, Sarmiento, Count of Gondomar. Fie 
 v/adopted Bacon's fatal theory that the judges should be 
 "lions under the throne", i.e. the king's tools, and dis- 
 missed the Chief Justice, who objecteolo be made the 
 exponent of this experiment in natural history. He 
 trampled on the Scottish Church, quarrelled with the 
 Dutch, and so lost touch with his people that when a 
 national question arose in the last period of his reign- he 
 was unable to avoid disaster. 
 
 A Scotchman named Robert Carr, upon whom James 
 lavished titles and favours, was now his chief adviser. 
 
 V Carr and the He had been made Viscount Rochester, and 
 Spanish party, shortly became Earl of Somerset. The Spanish 
 party at court, and the Spanish ambassador, Sarmiento, 
 used this favourite to further their policy. The alliance 
 with France had failed after the three deaths before men- 
 tioned, and the efforts of Spain were now directed to replace 
 it by a closer friendship with the court of Madrid. The 
 Spaniards had a delusion that Protestantism was merely 
 an English fad, which might be removed with patience 
 and care. 
 
 James's own idea was expressed in the words " beati 
 padfici". He loved to dream of himself as the peace- 
 The king's making arbiter of a docile Europe. But he 
 aims. failed to see that Spain liked peace for other 
 
 reasons; that she did not want England to help the 
 Dutch, and was only trying to win toleration for the 
 Catholics, fondly dreaming of the complete conversion of 
 , England to crown her castle in the air. 
 
 ^ The financial needs of the government caused a Parlia- 
 ment to be summoned in 1614. But the new assembly 
 refused to supply the Royal needs unless it could obtain
 
 THE FALL OF CHIEF-JUSTICE COKE. 13 
 
 some satisfaction about "impositions", which had been 
 largely increased since the case of Bate. 1 The Spanish 
 party suggested that a marriage of Prince The " Addie\ 
 Charles, now heir to the English throne, with Parliament "> 
 the wealthy Infanta Maria, daughter of Philip III., would 
 settle James's debts; and the king, relying on the kindly 
 feelings of the Spanish ambassador, dissolved Parliament 
 after two months. Digby, afterwards Earl of Bristol, was 
 intrusted with negotiations of a vague character for the 
 Spanish match. He was able and honest, too honest to 
 be on a level with the Spanish diplomatists. 
 
 The obstinacy and consequent dissolution of Parliamei 
 soon caused another return to arbitrary taxation by royal 
 mandate. This took the form of a " Benevo- L SW an d p r e- 
 lence" or free gift, but the gift was in truth so rogative. 
 little free that a man named Oliver St. John was prose- 
 cuted in the Star Chamber for refusing to contribute. This 
 court, the king's favourite engine, was extremely powerful, 
 because exempt from the ordinary rules of judicial pro- 
 cedure. It had been very effectual in suppressing dis- 
 order in Tudor times, and was now composed of the 
 members of the Privy Council, who were thus able to 
 punish those who resisted the royal authority. It was 
 practically the ministry sitting as unfettered judge of its 
 own acts. It was not long before the crown gained a 
 further ally in a subservient Bench. Chief-justice Coke\ 
 had an exaggerated opinion of the importance of the 
 lawyers, but his belief in the law was a useful weapon 
 against a king who claimed to be irresponsible. He dis- 
 agreed with Bacon's idea, and considered that the judges 
 should be arbiters in the state, a view which would only 
 suit James so long as they arbitrated in his favour. When, / 
 therefore, Coke asserted his duty as a judge to act, not on \/ 
 the king's orders, but- as the law dictated, he was dismissed 
 (1616). Bacon became Chancellor soon after this, and 
 the Stewarts had little further trouble from independent 
 judges. 
 
 The Dutch were driving James further in the direction 
 
 1 See page 10.
 
 14 EXECUTION OF RALEIGH. 
 
 of a Spanish alliance by disputing the English monopoly 
 Fail of Somer- of whale-fishing, and excluding them from 
 set. 1616. trade with the Spice Islands in the East 
 Indies. But the arrogance of Somerset was unbearable, 
 and his anti-Spanish opponents were already undermining 
 his monopoly of the king's favour, by teaching a handsome, 
 clever youth named Villiers to attract the king's notice. 
 At this moment the Spanish conditions of marriage were 
 announced, and as they included a suspension of the Penal 
 laws and a Catholic education for the future heir to the 
 throne, the hopes of the opposite party revived. Their 
 triumph appeared even more sure after a scandalous law- 
 suit, in which Somerset and his wife were pronounced 
 guilty of poisoning a courtier named Overbury, who had 
 known some damaging facts about the divorce of Lady 
 Somerset from her first husband. James, however, was 
 Raleigh and n ot easily diverted from his hankering after 
 the Spaniards. Spain. He feared the nation's feeling might 
 develop into a war-cry, and apparently thought he could 
 allay their prejudices by selling their laws and opinions. 
 The enemies of Spain had now found a ready weapon in 
 the old Elizabethan sea-captain, Sir Walter Raleigh. He 
 had been in prison for twelve years for supposed complicity 
 in a plot against the king. But he was still eager to sail 
 to the Orinoco and discover a mine of gold of which he 
 had heard in former voyages. James allowed him to go, 
 though the Spaniards cried out against the scheme as an 
 infringement of the unlimited rights which they claimed 
 in the West Indies. Raleigh, though warned not to 
 trespass on these rights, started with no intention of 
 keeping so impossible a promise. After an unsuccessful 
 voyage, in which his men fought with Spanish settlers 
 and burnt St. Thome, he returned to find the king pledged 
 to hand him over to Spain. The disgrace was avoided, 
 but Raleigh was sacrificed to Spanish hatred, and executed 
 in 1618 on the old charge of treason, which had kept him 
 so many years in the Tower. 
 
 The new favourite, George Villiers, had now become 
 the king's trusted adviser as Duke of Buckingham, but
 
 THE THIRTY YEARS' WAR. 1 5 
 
 did not at once throw in his lot with the Spanish party. 
 This, and the fact that the Infanta and her dowry could 
 not be obtained without complete toleration of the Roman 
 Catholics, caused a suspension of the marriage scheme. 
 But the king, though he ceased for the time to bargain for 
 the sale of the conscience of England, showed but scant re- 
 spect for that of Scotland. He called an Assembly at Perth 
 (1618), which was forced to adopt Five Articles, prescrib- 
 ing rites and ceremonies to which the Scottish clergy and 
 people strongly objected. It is to be noticed, however, 
 that James never went so far as his less prudent son, and 
 made no attempt to enforce uniformity of worship in his 
 two kingdoms. 
 
 Meanwhile the European horizon grew dark with the 
 great shadow of the Thirty Years' War. This struggle 
 began in Bohemia in the year 1618, and Third period v 
 aroused the national feeling in a way that of the reign, 
 made it more than ever necessary that there should be a 
 leader with clear aims and the confidence of his people. 
 But the last period of the reign, from 1618 to 1625, pre- 
 sents a pitiable spectacle. A helpless king, drifting aim- 
 lessly amid a sea of conflicting interests, without a policy 
 which he dared to explain to the nation, was content to 
 seek for guidance from the bitterest enemy of the nation 
 Spain. 
 
 The struggles which had begun during the last century 
 between Protestants and Catholics in Germany had been 
 compromised but not settled. There were The Thirty \ / 
 German princes pledged to each side, and Years' War. V 
 each prince claimed to regulate the religion of his subjects. 
 But latitude and longitude cannot really determine opinion, 
 and if they could, it would be hard to settle what was to 
 be done, when a ruler held sway oyer many lands of 
 varying opinion. This was the difficulty which had now 
 occurred. The Emperor Matthias, when dealing with his 
 Bohemian subjects, was obliged to allow both religions. 
 The claims of Protestants to build churches on Catholic 
 church-lands led to the destruction of one of their places 
 of worship, and the Protestants at once rebelled. The rest
 
 1 6 THE KING'S INDECISION. 
 
 of Germany was composed of states interested in one side 
 or the other; but before much could happen the Em- 
 The Bohemian peror died, and the Bohemians took the oppor- 
 Eiection. 1619. tunity of refusing to accept his successor, the 
 bigoted Ferdinand II. In August, 1619, they elected 
 James's son-in-law, Frederick of the Palatinate, as their 
 king. James believed in his family far more than in his 
 country, and was anxious to prevent the loss of his son- 
 in-law's domain on the Rhine, which would probably follow 
 should Ferdinand be successful in Bohemia. But he 
 believed even more in himself, and so he began to study 
 the question of Bohemian rights while the time for action 
 slipped away. 
 
 James had two choices. He might meditate or he might 
 fight. For the latter alternative he had a thorough dis- 
 Mediation or like, and he was certainly wise in not wishing 
 War? to embroil England in continental quarrels for 
 
 the sake of a man like Frederick. This prince was proud 
 and incapable, and went to Prague only to see his cause 
 overthrown by the Imperial forces in Oct., 1620. But if 
 James would mediate he had a fair chance. Spain, though 
 connected by her Royal family and religion with the Em- 
 peror Ferdinand, was not at all eager to fight for the 
 Catholic cause; as she was shortly expecting a renewal of 
 her war with the Dutch. The Protestant princes were 
 not anxious to see their religion trampled on, and the 
 Palatinate transferred from Frederick to the Duke of 
 Bavaria, which was the Emperor's intention. France, too, 
 was bound to be jealous of Austro-Spanish success. Thus 
 there was an opportunity both to defend the Palatinate in 
 force, and to mediate in the matter of Bohemia. 
 
 While James was studying the question the Palatinate 
 was seized. Thus the clever Gondomar had gained his 
 Parliament or object. James had relied on the high opinion 
 Spain? 1621. he always held of Spanish kindness, and 
 Buckingham had at lasr thrown in his lot with Spain. 
 When the affairs of the nation had got quite beyond their 
 control the Stewarts generally summoned a Parliament, 
 and in 1621 James pursued this course. Here was a good
 
 QUARREL AND DISSOLUTION. 17 
 
 opportunity to put himself at the head of his people. He 
 spoke of money which he needed to enable him to mediate 
 " sword in hand ", but, as he did not explain his intentions 
 further, no money was voted. The truth yas. h p HaH.jnn. 
 plans to explain. Parliament attacked the trade mono- 
 polies, which were sold to courtiers, demanded the execu- 
 tion of the Penal laws on the Papists, and begged the king 
 to fight Spain and marry his son to a Protestant. While 
 the Commons were showing the intensity of their feeling 
 by cruelly punishing a Roman Catholic named Floyd for 
 expressing pleasure at the defeat of Frederick, James and 
 Buckingham were hoping to get back the Palatinate by 
 the old delusion of the Spanish marriage. The king first 
 promised Gondomar not to allow Parliament to offend the 
 religious feeling of Spain, and then promised the Houses 
 not to conclude any treaties which would be disadvan- 
 tageous to the religion of England ! When the Commons 
 refused to' leave "the matter to the care of the king and the / 
 Spanish ambassador^they were told not to meddle witlW 
 " mysteries of state ". This, with a further declaration 
 that their power to discuss national interests was de- 
 rived from the royal grace, caused them to protest that 
 their liberties were their birthright. The protest was 
 torn from the journals by the angry monarch's own r~ 
 hand, and the third Parliament of King James was dis-/ 
 solved. 
 
 Meanwhile the war in Germany went on. The Protes- 
 tant cause was in the hands of a reckless soldier of fortune 
 named Mansfield, who was alienating friends Failure in 
 by plundering and slaying the peasants of Palatinate. 
 the Rhine districts. The Protestant Union gave up the 
 struggle, and the saving of the Elector's cause was 
 rendered hopeless when Heidelberg, his capital, fell in 
 September, 1622. The "intervention" of Spain, on which 
 James had relied, was as far off as ever; and the Spaniards, 
 having now secured their object, were inclined to finish 
 the negotiations by pleading the impossibility of obtaining 
 the Pope's assent to the marriage. 
 
 At home James was without a single wise counsellor.
 
 1 8 FAILURE OF THE SPANISH MATCH. 
 
 Digby was in Spain trying to construct a policy out of 
 
 Spanish politeness and his master's fears, 
 w project. Baconj the Lord Chance i lor> had fallen a 
 
 victim to his own carelessness in accepting presents which 
 can Only have been meant as bribes, and was in disgrace. 
 Buckingham and the Prince, over whose weak character 
 the quick and reckless favourite had complete influence, 
 now determined to go to Spain and arrange the marriage 
 themselves. James was induced to assent to this absurd 
 scheme; but his council preferred to send an ultimatum 
 to Spain asking whether Philip would fight the emperor 
 to force the restitution of the Palatinate. This brought 
 a deceptive reply, but it showed the Spaniards that their 
 game was nearly played out. 
 
 The situation when the travellers reached Madrid was 
 remarkable. The king, Philip IV., and his ministers, as 
 The visit to well as the Infanta herself, were all in reality 
 Madrid. 1623. av erse to the match. James never meant to 
 promise the repeal of the Penal laws, and the Spaniards 
 never meant to take less. Charles imagined that he was 
 in love as soon as he saw the Princess, while Buckingham 
 offended all the Spaniards he could offend in the short 
 time given him. The Pope refused to be made the cause 
 of a rupture of which the Spaniards meant him to bear the 
 blame, and Philip IV. found it impossible to propose any 
 terms which Charles was not foolish enough to accept. 
 Even after bargaining to obtain a repeal of the Penal laws 
 in three years, the Prince still failed to carry off the prize, 
 and left Madrid in a fit of il! 7 temper. 
 
 When he was home again his pride outweighed his 
 affections, and he called for vengeance on the Spaniards. 
 Parliament of He was still pledged to the marriage, but it 
 1624. was now England's turn to raise the terms, 
 
 and Philip was asked to arm against his family and his 
 religion to secure a restitution of the Palatinate. The 
 dilemma was in fact so hopeless that another Parliament 
 was summoned for February, 1624. Buckingham and 
 Charles were able to pose as national heroes, who had 
 burst the chains riveted by Spain to fetter English freedom.
 
 DEATH OF JAMES I. 19 
 
 The treaties were dissolved and money voted. But the 
 chance of acting with Parliament speedily vanished. 
 
 Buckingham now became anxious for an alliance with 
 France, the old foe of Spain, and wished to secure the 
 hand of a French princess for Charles. Par- A hope i ess 
 liament was more than ever determined to confusion of 
 keep to the Penal laws, and in foreign affairs pohtlcs - 
 to renew the work of Elizabeth and smite Spain by sea 
 and land. The King of England was thinking only of the 
 Palatinate, and was as willing to rely on French charity as 
 on Spanish, but hated all idea of a religious war. The 
 French were delighted to see Spain injured, but cared 
 nothing for the Palatinate, since they were only bent on 
 recovering the Valtelline, the Alpine valley by which the 
 Spaniards had an access to Germany from the Mediter- 
 ranean. Nor was France sufficiently in need of the Eng- 
 lish alliance to waive her claim for toleration of Roman 
 Catholics in England. 
 
 The result of this confusion was soon apparent. James, 
 having given a clear promise to Parliament not to repeal 
 the Penal laws, thought that he could still Result of the 
 write a secret " engagement " with France, by confusion, 
 which the Roman Catholics were promised toleration. 
 The marauder Mansfeld was hired to lead English troops 
 to recover the Palatinate, but when they crossed the sea 
 they were left to die in hundreds of cold and hunger on 
 the Dutch frontiers. The marriage treaty with France, 
 however, was duly signed, and the French king was pro- 
 mised assistance against his rebellious Protestant subjects. 
 While Buckingham, who still retained the unmerited con- 
 fidence of the nation (won on his return from Spain), was 
 thus unwittingly concocting a series of national disgraces, 
 the king died on March ayth, 1625. He was only in his 
 sixtieth year, but his unhealthy habits and hard drinking 
 had made him old and decrepit long before his time.
 
 20 CHARACTER OF CHARLES. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE REIGN OF CHARLES I. TO THE MEETING OF THE 
 LONG PARLIAMENT: 1625-1640. 
 
 From the accession of the second Stewart king in 1625 
 until the meeting in 1640 of the Parliament which was 
 Three divi- to arm na ^ England against him, there are 
 sions of three well-marked periods. Till 1629 there 
 is peno . - g a constant struggle with three successive 
 Parliaments which refused to finance the kaleidoscopic 
 foreign policy of the king and Buckingham. From 1629 
 to 1637 the rule of the king was absolute. He summoned 
 no parliament, he taxed as he pleased, he legislated by 
 proclamation, he bent the judges to his will, and gave 
 Archbishop Laud carte-blanche to mould the church to 
 the extreme High-Church and anti-Puritan model; while 
 Strafford in Ireland reproduced on a smaller scale the 
 same tyrannical form of government. The nation seemed 
 quiet, and all fear of resistance to the Stewart methods 
 appeared to be at an end, when Scotland rose in rebellion 
 in defence of its religion. The three years' struggle that 
 ensued__completed the period. In 1640 there was no; 
 hope for Charles but in an English Parliament, and on 
 Nov. 3 the long struggle began for the sovereignty of 
 England. 
 
 The new king was married to Henrietta Maria, sister 
 of Louis XIII. of France, in June, 1625, but her influ- 
 
 charies and ence was at ^ rst s ^g nt compared to that of 
 his coun- Buckingham. Charles was a prince of a 
 quiet and sober disposition : hejDossessed all 
 the private virtues, and was an enlightened friend of art 
 and letters, but he had learnt only too well his father's 
 doctrine of the infallibility of kings, and he was so ob- 
 stinate and so convinced of his own good intentions that 
 he scarcely understood the necessity of saying exactly 
 what he meant and meaning exactly what he said. His 
 word could never be depended upon. " He was easily led
 
 THE POLICY OF "THOROUGH 
 
 into a sudden action, and easily " amazed " when he was 
 committed to it. ~ Thus his policy at home and abroad 
 was marked by impulse rather than by thoughtfulness. 
 He disliked intolerance, but used it when it suited any 
 policy which he had in hand. Indeed he seems to have 
 thought that even deception was a fair weapon to gain 
 ends which he believed to be just. Yet he was a loving 
 husband and father, a hard-working man of business, 
 and a fairly staunch supporter of his friends. His 
 greatest fault as a king lay in the fact that he did not 
 in the least understand men. He considered that all 
 those who disagreed with him must be wicked rather 
 than mistaken, and must be forced to see things in the 
 right light. The same fatal flaw was in his friend and 
 adviser, William Laud, whom he made Archbishop of 
 Canterbury in 1633. 
 
 Sir Thomas \Ventworth, afterwards Earl of Strafford, 
 who, after a brief resistance to the court in Parliament, 
 joined the king's party because he found himself out of 
 his element among Puritan members, was a j^hird believer 
 in the necessity of carrying through the opinions he held, 
 no matter what resistance was offered, a method which 
 he called the policy of "Thorough". These were the 
 three men who were soon to exasperate England, and 
 bring Scotland and Ireland to open rebellion, not be- 
 cause they wished to harm any one, but because they did 
 not know how to lead men who refused to be driven. 
 
 Before his first Parliament met, Charles and his favourite 
 were resolved to fight Spain. But Louis of France was 
 quite unwilling to give any active help, smd Parliament * 
 England, besides engaging in the new Spanish of l62 s- 
 war, was also pledged to assist the Dutch, pay large 
 sums to Mansfield, and subsidize the Danish king, who 
 was now posing as the champion of Protestantism in 
 Germany. The first Parliament showed its distrust o'f the 
 king, to none of whose confidences it was admitted, by 
 refusing to vote a tax on imports and exports, known as 
 " tunnage and poundage", which had for centuries been 
 granted to kings on their accession as a matter of course.
 
 22 UNSUCCESSFUL EXPEDITIONS. 
 
 Their Puritan sentiments were also outraged by the en- 
 couragement of those clergy who openly taught the king's 
 superiority to law, and maintained extreme high-church 
 doctrines. \In the end the leaders began to single out 
 Buckingham as the chief cause of troubles. This was an 
 attempt to make a royal minister responsible to Parlia- 
 ment, and though there were many precedents for it, yet 
 it was so opposed to Tudor practice and Stewart theory 
 that Charles dissolved Parliament in the same year. At 
 once the favourite and his master resolved to show their 
 ability by an attack on Spain. They sent out an expedi- 
 tion, which sailed into Cadiz harbour in October, 1625, 
 hut it turned out a complete and disgraceful failure. 
 
 A second Parliament found this expedition an addi- 
 tional grievance. Sir John Eliot, Vice-admiral of Devon, 
 Parliament \ e & the attack, and the favourite was im- 
 of 1626. peached. This, again, was more than Charles 
 
 would permit, and the Houses were dissolved after de- 
 manding the dismissal of Buckingham as an enemy of 
 church and state. 
 
 The French alliance was becoming too great a strain 
 on Charles's temper. He was vexed that the ships which 
 War with he lent to his ally were used against the re- 
 France. 1627. bellious French Protestants at La Rochelle, 
 though it was for this very end that Louis XIII. had 
 borrowed them. He was annoyed by the claims of his 
 wife to regulate her household, and he dismissed her 
 French attendants. He was of course quite unable to 
 fulfil his promises to tolerate Roman Catholics, and in 
 1627 a war with France was the natural result. Bucking- 
 ham started to attack the island of Rhe', from which 
 Rochelle was menaced. 
 
 The expedition, however, proved an even more dismal 
 failure than that of Cadiz, and Parliament met in 1628 to 
 Parliament present an ever-increasing list of grievances, 
 ofieas. These now take clear shape. The exaction 
 
 of forced loans and benevolences, the imprisonment of 
 men by the Royal power alone, the billeting of recruits 
 in private houses, and the use of martial law, were de-
 
 ARMINIANISM. 23 
 
 clared to be against the rights of Englishmen; and Charles, 
 after some attempts at resistance, was compelled to agree 
 to this "Petition of Right". 
 
 But it was not only in political matters that Parliament 
 was determined to make a stand. They complained bit- 
 terly of the "Arminians". 1 This was a name -,. 
 
 T 11-1-11 i/--i The " 
 
 given to Laud and his high-church friends, ian" griev 
 who were carrying the king with them in their ance ' 
 resistance to Puritanism. They refused to acquiesce in 
 the extreme forms of Protestantism which had been for a 
 long time in force on the Continent, and to which the 
 Puritans wished to bind the English church. This de- 
 velopment of Protestantism was called Calvinism, from 
 the French reformer Calvin, who had led the movement 
 in the sixteenth century, and whose teaching had been 
 largely accepted in Switzerland and other places. One 
 of his chief tenets was "Predestination". He taught that 
 God had once for all chosen His elect by His mere will 
 and pleasure, and to the number of those there could be 
 no additions. This was felt by many to be opposed to 
 the idea of a merciful God who called upon men to repent 
 and accept salvation. English churchmen resisted this 
 Calvinism, and maintained that the teaching and cere- 
 monies of the English church were to be looked for in 
 her history, and that she could repudiate the errors of 
 Rome without needing the hard teaching of the extreme 
 Reformers. But the fact that the Churchmen firmly be- 
 lieved that the Commons were only resisting the king for 
 their private ends, and were encouraged by Royal favour 
 to say as much, complicated the religious difficulty by 
 making it political. 
 
 In the summer of the year 1628 Buckingham was as- 
 sassinated at Portsmouth while preparing an expedition 
 to relieve the Huguenots in Rochelle. An charles 
 officer named Felton, who grew angry at not against Par- 
 getting promotion, brooded over his wrongs, 
 and began to attribute them to the man who was spoken 
 
 1 So called from Arminius, a Dutchman, who led the opposition to Calvinism 
 in Holland.
 
 24 THE DISSOLUTION OF 1629. 
 
 of in Parliament as the enemy of his country. He was 
 at last driven by such thoughts 'to the terrible crime of 
 murdering the hated duke by stabbing him. The king 
 was thus left to conduct his own government. The way 
 seemed open for a better understanding. Much might 
 have been done now, for the Houses would have wel- 
 comed any attempt to work with them. Pym, the future 
 parliamentary leader, and Eliot, the future martyr to 
 liberty, were alike anxious to see king and Parliament in 
 harmony. Not a word had been said against Charles 
 personally. Even a Puritan writer, who did not scruple 
 to describe the bishops as " knobs and wens and bunchy 
 popish flesh", had a kind word for the "good, harmless 
 
 V king". 
 
 \ But Charles was dogmatically sure of his path, and in- 
 
 \) sisted on his right to levy tunnage and poundage without 
 Religious and S rant > holding that it was not included in his 
 financial renunciation of " gifts, loans, taxes, or bene- 
 
 grievances. volences in the p et ition of Right. The 
 
 leaders of the House encouraged merchants to refuse 
 payment. They were also thoroughly alarmed at " inno- 
 vations" in religion, and determined to put their case 
 before the country. Three resolutions were passed, de- 
 claring those who introduced religious innovations, paid 
 tunnage and poundage, or exacted it, to be enemies of 
 the country. The Speaker, who wished to abscond, was 
 meanwhile held in the chair by excited Puritan members, 
 and the doors locked to prevent the dissolution which 
 they knew to be imminent, and which followed as a matter 
 of course. 
 
 The king now determined to rule without Parliament, 
 and for eleven years he managed to get along somehow 
 Absolute without one. Eliot and others were im- 
 ruie. 1639. prisoned for their recent action in the House, 
 and the judges were induced to refuse them liberty un- 
 less they acknowledged their fault and promised amend- 
 ment. This was refused by some, and Eliot died in 
 prison three years later. 
 
 Peace had of course to be made with France and
 
 THE SHIP-MONEY WRITS. 25 
 
 Spain (1630), and though Charles had a fine opportunity 
 for recovering the Palatinate he was obliged Foreign policy 
 to refuse it. Gustavus Adolphus, King of and ship- 
 Sweden, the greatest warrior of the age, m 
 carried all before him in Germany; but the English king 
 had no power to back him, and the Protestant champion 
 fell on the field of Liitzen in 1632. Yet, Charles was 
 not inclined to abandon his sister's cause. In 1633 he 
 returned to his father's futile hope, and actually allied 
 with Spain against the Dutch in order to get Spanish 
 help in the matter of the Palatinate. He required a fleet, 
 and revived an old custom by which maritime counties 
 were obliged to supply ships and money in time of 
 danger. As he dared not announce his Spanish intrigue, 
 even to his council, he issued his first writ of Ship-money 
 in 1634 on the plea that channel pirates must be put 
 down. The fleet sailed about the channel but accom- 
 plished nothing, and as France and Holland now com- 
 bined against Spain there was small hope of her interven- 
 tion to secure Charles's family interests in the Palatinate. 
 In 1633 two events of profound import occurred. 
 Wentworth was made Lord Deputy of Ireland, and 
 Laud succeeded Abbott as Archbishop of Wentworth 
 Canterbury. For seven years Ireland was and Laud - 
 ruled by a fearless and strong hand. Wentworth knew 
 that it required both. "Where I found a church, a 
 crown, and a people spoiled, I could not imagine to 
 redeem them with gracious smiles and gentle looks. It 
 would cost warmer water than so." This was his own 
 account of his prospects, and he certainly followed it out. 
 In a few years he modelled and disciplined a standing 
 army, cleared the coasts of pirates, intFOkrced some 
 manufactures, started the growing of ilax, and reformed 
 the church system. But he forgot to be careful about the 
 means he used. In order to get land for colonists he 
 violated some concessions known as the "Graces", which 
 had secured the native lords against such possible confis- 
 cations. He brushed aside legal and constitutional rules 
 as easily as he crossed the ideas and customs which
 
 26 ARCHBISHOP LAUD. 
 
 centuries of use had endeared to the people. His objects 
 were noble, his achievements were great, but his lasting 
 success was nil. He won no hearts. 
 
 What Wentworth sought in Ireland Laud sought in 
 England unity by means of enforced uniformity. For 
 The Laudian both the lever was the Royal power. For 
 system. both the watchword was " thorough ". Laud 
 
 used the Star Chamber and High Commission Court to 
 force Englishmen into a groove. He spared neither rank 
 nor creed. He wished to punish the immorality of the 
 rich, the nonconformity of the Puritan, and the recusancy 
 of the Roman Catholic. The object, unity, was as noble 
 as Strafford's, but the methods were as fatal to real 
 success. Laud wished to see the Church one in the 
 "Beauty of Holiness"; one in belief, one in ceremonial, 
 one in resistance to Romanism. 
 
 This was impossible. There were good and holy men 
 who were unable to agree with him, and there were also 
 Twofold those whose scurrilous language and irreverent 
 resistance. ways were a legacy from the fierce struggles 
 of the early days of the Reformation. Some of these 
 ardent Puritans, disappointed at the failure of the Mil- 
 lenary Petition and Hampton Court Conference, had 
 already left their country to seek a new home where they 
 could worship without interference. These " Pilgrim 
 Fathers" sailed in the Mayflower (1620) to the shores 
 of North America. Here they formed a colony, soon 
 to become the great state of New England. Among 
 those who remained at home, there was a feeling that 
 the outward forms, to which the Archbishop exacted 
 conformity, were really a pathway to Rome. Thus men 
 refused to bow at the Sacred Name, to kneel at Holy 
 Communion, to use the Communion Table anywhere 
 but in the centre of the church. Though we can now 
 acquit Laud of any desire or intention of being untrue to 
 the national church, there were not wanting signs which 
 led honest men to think otherwise. A papal messenger 
 was long at the court on friendly terms with king and 
 ministers. Roman Catholic converts were sure of the
 
 HAMPDEN AND SHIP-MONEY. 2J 
 
 queen's protection, and the chapels of her majesty and 
 the foreign ambassadors were neutral ground. If this 
 was only tolerant we must not forget that it was also 
 illegal, and to the majority of Englishmen incomprehen- 
 sible, except on the basis of a deeply-laid scheme to 
 restore the church to the Pope. Men were imprisoned, 
 whipped, pilloried, and mutilated for libels on the 
 bishops. Of these victims the best known is Prynne, who 
 had already been punished by the Star Chamber for a 
 book condemning stage-plays, which was thought to con- 
 tain some aspersions on the theatre-loving queen. In 
 1636 he was a second time pilloried, and the remains of 
 his ears shorn off. 
 
 The national feeling was shown by the open sympathy 
 which such men received. But there was no sign of a 
 cessation of the system. In 1635 Ship-money sovereignty 
 was demanded in a second writ which ^x- of king or of 
 tended the tax to inland counties and towns. * 
 The king consulted the judges and published their 
 answer, which declared that he could legally order such 
 payment, and "was the sole judge of the danger" which 
 justified such unusual demands. But it was clear there 
 was no immediate danger. The nation required a defen- 
 sive system for which Parliament might easily have been 
 summoned. To pretend that a discretionary power, 
 which is necessary in an emergency, had become part of 
 the ordinary law of the land, was to raise the question 
 whether Parliament was more than a name in England. 
 The freedom of the nation was at stake. 
 
 In 1636 a third Ship-money writ followed, and a 
 gentleman of Buckinghamshire, named John Hampden, 
 whose contribution was assessed at twenty would Eng- 
 shillings, determined to refuse payment and land submit? 
 have the matter tried in a law-court. His counsel took 
 their stand on ancient laws, concluding with an appeal to 
 the Petition of Right, and urged that no man was bound 
 to pay taxes except when granted by Parliament. The 
 judges, however, adopted the theory that the king had 
 a right to command, since he was the soul of the body 
 
 (962) C
 
 28 THE SCOTTISH REBELLION. 
 
 politic, and by a narrow majority gave judgment for the 
 crown. Ship-money was not the only means taken by 
 Charles to fill his coffers and avoid a Parliament. Ancient 
 forest rights were revived, and men were fined for infring- 
 ing them; compulsory knighthood, a relic of the feudal 
 age, was revived, and fines demanded for exemption; 
 monopolies were granted to companies, since a law of 
 1624 forbade them to individuals; and the customs were 
 collected and increased, though, as we have seen, they 
 had never been granted to Charles by Parliament. Yet, 
 the king seemed secure in his course. There were no 
 newspapers, railways, or meetings to make the national 
 disgust articulate. Nothing but a Parliament could focus 
 the religious and constitutional opposition to the system 
 of " thorough ", and since the king was determined to 
 avoid all foreign complications there seemed no prospect 
 of such an assembly being summoned. 
 
 The blow which shattered this system came from 
 Scotland. James had irritated the Presbyterians by his 
 The Scots' bishops and ceremonies, but Charles did 
 resistance. worse. He visited Scotland in 1633 and 
 gave the bishops a footing they had never had before. 
 They were promoted to political office, and the chief 
 power in the Scottish Parliament. This sent even the 
 nobles, although they feared and disliked the democratic 
 Presbyterian clergy, into the arms of the kirk. But worse 
 was yet to come. Laud and his master were determined 
 to unite England with Scotland in religion as a step 
 towards complete political union. To this end canons, 
 which enforced a new Prayer-book and a ceremonial 
 foreign to the Scottish Church, were prepared in 1636. 
 Charles had already been warned not to " import a servi- 
 tude on this church not practised before", but he knew 
 not the meaning of a nation's feelings. When in 1637 
 the new service book appeared it was described as the 
 " Mass in English ", and a riot occurred in July when it 
 was introduced at St. Giles's in Edinburgh. 
 
 Charles had at last roused a resistance which was 
 national. The Scots nobles, clergy, and people, with
 
 THE COVENANT. 29 
 
 very few exceptions, refused to admit that their religion 
 could be touched except by national assent. And they 
 did not need to wait for a Parliament to Covenant and 
 express their meaning, for the very nature Assembly, 
 of Presbyterian organization was political. T 3 ' 
 Each parish had its "kirk-session", whose representatives 
 sat in the Provincial Synod; while the whole church met 
 in a National Assembly, where laymen and clergymen 
 attended on behalf of every congregation. A church so 
 organized could not be tampered with. Petitions poured 
 in from the parishes, commissioners were elected to meet 
 in Edinburgh, and in 1638 a National Covenant was 
 ready for signature. It pledged the Scots to resist all 
 popery and innovations, and was signed by high and low. 
 An assembly met at Glasgow which scouted the king's 
 attempts to check its action, and swept away at one blow 
 Episcopacy and Perth Articles. 
 
 Charles, having no standing army, was not ready with 
 the weapons of force : he began to temporize. His offers 
 to modify the position he had taken up were what would 
 refused ; the Scots, now fully roused, would Charles do ? 
 be content with nothing less than an acknowledgment of 
 their absolute freedom in religious matters. The difficulty 
 before the king was great. He had no army, no money, 
 and no friends. The English feeling during the three 
 years of struggle was largely in favour of the Scots. Laud 
 was mobbed in London, and a daring hand placarded the 
 Royal Palace "to let". The Scots knew how to avail 
 themselves of this, and more than once appealed to the 
 English nation. There were two plans before the king. 
 Wentworth wrote advising a delay of hostilities, fortifying 
 of the border, blockading of Scottish ports, to " keep the 
 blue bonnet to his peck of oatmeal", and careful training 
 of a force for action in the coming year. But this could 
 only be done if money were forthcoming, and there was 
 little hope of that. The king determined on war. The 
 Scots were ready. They had collected a large force at 
 Dunse, on the border, under a veteran soldier, Alexander 
 Leslie, and their historian Baillie describes them as con-
 
 30 THE BISHOPS' WAR. 
 
 stantly preaching, praying, and drilling. Puritanism had 
 become the church militant. What had the English king 
 with which to meet this enthusiasm? 
 
 He rode to York and on to Berwick, but the forces 
 which had been got together were both badly disciplined 
 Pacification of and half-hearted, in marked contrast to the 
 
 Sy^sho'rt" rebels a few miles off - In J une > l6 39> a 
 Parliament, verbal treaty was made at Berwick, in which 
 
 no real settlement was made, and a General Assembly and 
 a Parliament promised to the Scots. When these met in 
 August they demanded the abolition of Episcopacy and 
 a veto on the king's appointment of commanders in the 
 Royal castles. Charles, failing to see that he was expected 
 to play the part of a conquered enemy, at once accepted 
 Wentworth's proposal to rely on his English Parliament. 
 After eleven years' silence the representatives of England 
 met again in the Short Parliament, April 13, 1640. They 
 sat for three weeks. Pym stated the feeling of the nation 
 when he claimed for Parliament that position as "the soul 
 of the body politic" which Charles had so long claimed for 
 himself. The grievances of eleven years were put forward 
 and discussed. The king attempted to rouse enthusiasm 
 against the Scots by exhibiting a letter addressed "Au 
 roi ", which the latter had, perhaps, intended to send to 
 the King of France. But this seemed a trifle compared 
 to the three writs of Ship-money. Parliament was clearly 
 not to be moved to abandon its claims. Nor would it 
 give the government a penny to fight with, and the inevitable 
 dissolution followed on May 5, 1640. 
 
 This time Wentworth, now Earl of Strafford, wished for 
 no delay. He gave his advice at a meeting of the Privy 
 Stafford's Council, in which he urged the king's right to 
 programme. g O on w jf n th e wajj " loose and absolved from 
 all rules of government". " You have an army in Ireland," 
 he is reported to have added, " which you may employ 
 here to reduce this kingdom." Though this speech was 
 to cost him his life, which was even now in danger from 
 a terrible disease, its import was greater for his country 
 than for himself. Once before Strafford had urged the
 
 A SCOTTISH VICTORY. 31 
 
 king to govern England as he had himself been ruling 
 Ireland, and the conviction that Charles meant to do so 
 was to grow until it severed the nation into two hostile 
 camps. 
 
 On August 20, 1640, Charles left London, and the 
 Scots, who were again ready to fight for religious inde- 
 pendence, crossed the border on the same Second 
 day. This time there was no hesitation : they SSf 
 forced a passage of the Tyne at Newburn on Ripon. 
 the 28th, and occupied the Northern counties, the Royal 
 army gradually falling back before them. The king, being 
 without money or means of obtaining a reliable force, 
 summoned a Great Council at York, which could only 
 suggest a Parliament and a fresh negotiation with the rebel 
 Scots. At Ripon the king agreed to pay the latter ^850 
 a day while they remained in England, which they meant 
 to do until they obtained a peace and religious settlement 
 after their own wishes.. Thereon commissioners were 
 appointed and the negotiations were to be re-opened in 
 London. 
 
 Stafford's advice had not been followed. All classes 
 of Englishmen, from the peers at York to the 'prentices 
 in London, were at last fully roused. While The king's 
 the former urged the necessity of reliance on lesson. 
 Parliament, the latter tore down the posters which pro- 
 claimed the Scots as rebels. It would have been well if 
 the king had now been convinced that no reliance on a 
 man, or a theory, or a party can enable government to 
 conquer a national spirit which it will not lead. But this 
 was a lesson Charles never learnt, though his failure has 
 taught it to succeeding ages.
 
 A 
 
 32 TRIAL OF STRAFFORD. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 FROM THE MEETING OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT TO THE 
 COMMENCEMENT OF THE CIVIL WAR: NOV. 3, 1640 
 AUG. 22, 1642. 
 
 When the Long Parliament met on Nov. 3, 1640, there 
 was among its members no clear plan of action, and cer- 
 Reform with tainly no idea of rebellion. There was an 
 the king. almost universal feeling in favour of a thorough 
 reform, not of the constitution, but of that which contem- 
 poraries call the "state of the kingdom". But it was to 
 be done with the king and not despite him. King and 
 people, it was said, needed each other, and " reciprocation 
 is the strongest union". The interest of the first period 
 is to watch the collapse of this noble ideal as soon as it 
 became evident that the two conditions, trust and mutual 
 understanding, were wanting. 
 
 The first object was to vindicate law and restore the 
 rights of Parliament. " We are assembled to do God's 
 Earl business and the king's," said a foremost 
 
 measures of speaker: this meant doing away with Straf- 
 ford's influence and Laud's power. Accord- 
 ingly they were both impeached, together with others who 
 were responsible for arbitrary acts. This challenge to 
 the power above the law was marked by the release of 
 Prynne and others imprisoned by the Star Chamber and 
 High Commission Court. The " Triennial Act ", provid- 
 ing that a Parliament should meet even without a Royal 
 summons, after three years had elapsed since it last sat, 
 was then passed. 
 
 The trial of Strafford was delayed till March, 1641. 
 He was accused of an intention to upset the rule of law 
 Trial of ar >d replace it- by arbitrary government. 
 Strafford. Besides many acts and sayings, in Ireland 
 and in his Northern Presidency, alleged against him to 
 prove this, there was his speech in the Privy Council, in 
 which he was accused of telling the king to govern as he
 
 STRAFFORD'S ATTAINDER. 33 
 
 thought best, there being an army in Ireland which could 
 be used against "this kingdom". Now, "this kingdom" 
 might mean Scotland, which was then in rebellion ; but it 
 might also mean England, and the Commons felt sure it 
 did. It was difficult to prove that the acts of which he 
 was accused were treasonable, for they were not in any 
 way directed against the king; and the law knew nothing 
 of any other treason. The expression of an opinion 
 might, as Strafford urged, make a heretic but not a 
 traitor; and the two witnesses required by law to depose 
 their knowledge to treasonable acts were not forthcoming, 
 unless, indeed, a surreptitious copy made by the younger 
 Vane of the notes taken by his father, a member of the 
 Privy Council at the fatal sitting, could be reckoned a 
 sufficient second witness. The Commons began to fear 
 that the Lords would not condemn Strafford, and there- 
 fore substituted a Bill of Attainder. 1 This only required 
 a majority of opinion that Strafford was a traitor, and 
 thus shifted the question from a legal to a political one. 
 The Commons held a noble theory of treason : " Treason 
 which is against the kingdom is more against the king 
 than that which is against his person " : but this was not 
 law. Some of them claimed to be above the law in such 
 a crisis. They were beginning to learn that the theory 
 of Divine right was double-edged, and might be claimed 
 by parliaments no less than by kings. The bill was passed, 
 and the Lords were induced to accept it by various 
 rumours (not without foundation) that the king's party /' 
 was tampering with the army in the north. Charles signed"/ 
 it it was the meanest moment in his life and gave 
 away the life of his faithful servant, though he had pledged 
 his word to Strafford for his safety: but Charles was 
 influenced by mobs without and by casuistry within. The 
 former threatened the lives of those he held dearest, 
 while the latter taught him to regard his duty as a king as 
 unconnected with his promise as a man. Strafford died 
 
 1 An impeachment is a trial before the Lords, in which the accused has his 
 chance of defending himself: an attainder is a mere declaratory bill stating that 
 the accused has committed treason and shall be punished for it.
 
 34 CHARLES GOES TO SCOTLAND. 
 
 on Tower Hill, May 12, 1641. At the same time a bill 
 t was passed that this Parliament should not be dissolved 
 J without its own consent. This exceptional guarantee for 
 its political stability was necessary if Parliament was to 
 regain its position after eleven years of non-existence. 
 The ground for a reformed system of law and govern- 
 ment was further cleared by the abolition of the Star 
 Chamber, the High Commission Court, and other extra- 
 legal courts in Wales and the North. The most sacred 
 principle of the old constitution was vindicated by the 
 reversal of the Hampden judgment on ship-money, and 
 by a clear surrender of the royal claim to take customs 
 vwithdut Parliamentary consent. 
 
 4 Charles now appeared to have given in. and the reform 
 seemed complete. But at this moment he announced his 
 The king win intention ot going to Scotland, which might 
 Parjfam^lt! 1 niean further intrigues with the army. Pym 
 June, 1641. and the leaders saw this would not add to the 
 harmony upon which the new state of things depended, 
 and cleverly united the Lords and Commons, who had 
 shown signs of disagreement, by the production of a docu- 
 ment called the "Ten Propositions". TJiese asked the 
 king to disband the Irish and English armies, to delay 
 his journey,, and to put his affairs in the hands of those 
 whom Parliament could trust. For the moment, how- 
 ever, little notice was taken of this motion, and when 
 Charles departed for Scotland in August, 1641, a suspi- 
 cious but still united Parliament was left behind him. 
 
 Suspicion was to increase, unity to diminish. So far 
 the Parliament had been completely successful both in 
 The begin- clearing the ground of the instruments of arbi- 
 unlon and S " trary government and in consolidating their 
 revolution. O wn position : law had been restored, and the 
 legislature vindicated. Put th<^ supreme object, reform 
 king, had failed: he was not in touch with the 
 
 Parliamentary leaders, and it was clear that they must 
 base their further progress on support outside their walls. 
 For this the ground was already prepared, but it 
 involved the danger of a split among themselves. To
 
 A PARTY FOR THE KING. 35 
 
 understand this we must go back and trace the gradual for- 
 mation in Parliament of a church party prepared to resist 
 the Puritan extremes which Pym allowed to 
 
 c 11 T-U- f i. ' f Disunion. 
 
 his followers. This is of vast importance, for, 
 though there was now no court party to be reckoned with, 
 apy violent action inspired by Puritanism would rouse a 
 .church party which would sooner trust the king than 
 allow the church to be pulled down. Early in the session 
 there had been an animated debate on a petition to abolish 
 Episcopacy, some wishing to consider it, others, while 
 willing to modify the power of the bishops, being averse 
 to any idea of abolishing the office. A " Root and 
 Branch " party, pledged to destroy Episcopacy, was thus 
 face to face with men like Hyde and Culpeper, who were 
 opposed to such extremes quite as much as to arbitrary 
 government. The Commons had issued a commission 
 to deface and demolish crucifixes and images, while the 
 House of Lords had appointed a committee to discuss 
 ecclesiastical innovations with a bishop in the chair. The 
 Scots commissioners in London were working against 
 Episcopacy, and there was a strong and growing feeling 
 that Scots had no right to meddle. The London citizens 
 might present petitions against Episcopacy " in their best 
 apparel", but many felt, and one member said, that "a 
 parity in the Church " must lead to a " parity in the Com- 
 monwealth". It was thus clear that if Pym and his party 
 put the church question in the front rank the unanimity 
 against the king would be at an end. They did so, 
 nevertheless. 
 
 There was therefore a considerable reaction in favour 
 of Charles at the end of 1641; he had given way to 
 all demands, he had surrendered his old 
 
 , . , , , . , Charles gams 
 
 advisers, he had gone to Scotland with no bythisdis- 
 bad effect on the English army; the bishops union ' 
 were not without their supporters; the Scots were not 
 everywhere popular, and there was a feeling that the 
 " lads at Newcastle " had been the mainstay of the rapid 
 Parliamentary success since October, 1640. 
 
 The Commons precipitated a split on religion by an
 
 36 A REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT. 
 
 ordinance (Sep. 1641) against the Laudian ceremonies, 
 Further an ^ tne Sunday sports. The Lords replied 
 religious by ordering the services to be conducted in 
 accordance with the law of the land. This 
 gave Charles a chance, and he seized it. He took up 
 this attitude of obedience to law and announced that he 
 would maintain the Church as in Elizabeth's day. 
 
 But Charles never knew how to play his own game 
 even when he had winning cards. An event in Scotland 
 Suspicions increased the suspicions of Parliament. The 
 increasing. "Incident", as it was called, arose from a 
 quarrel among the Scottish nobles. Mon- 
 trose was opposed to the democratic form of government 
 for which Covenanters under Argyle were striving. 
 Hamilton was intimate with Argyle, and Montrose 
 offered to prove him a traitor; a plot was formed by 
 certain other nobles to arrest and carry off Hamilton and 
 Argyle, and it was rumoured that Charles was concerned 
 in it. This was not at all likely, but his motives in going 
 to Scotland were suspicious, and it was believed in Eng- 
 land that some such attempts were contemplated against 
 English leaders. Parliament voted for itself a guard to 
 be placed round the Houses, though members who were 
 estranged from the majority on church matters ridiculed 
 this alarm. It was clear that the split in Parliament was 
 complete, and that Charles would have a party to depend 
 upon and a cause to maintain. 
 
 The Irish rebellion, which broke out in 1641, attended 
 with horrid massacres of Protestants, brought matters to 
 An ultimatum a head. It was at once said that Charles and 
 to the king, the queen were concerned in this rising of 
 Roman Catholics against Protestants. There was im- 
 mediate need of action to suppress it. Parliament had 
 been taking upon itself to issue ordinances without Royal 
 sanction during Charles's absence, and now sent to Scot- 
 land to tell the king that, unless ministers approved by 
 Parliament were appointed, they would be compelled to 
 take measures for the safety of the kingdom without him. 
 This was a revolutionary challenge. Distrust had culmi-
 
 THE KING TAKES HIS STAND. 37 
 
 nated in an ultimatum. What would be the attitude of 
 the non-Puritan party? This was soon to be tested. The 
 situation was clear. The Parliamentary leaders, unable 
 to act with the king in a reformed government, had given 
 him the choice of acting with them or being neglected. 
 
 Such a situation was at once seized by Pym in the N 
 "Grand Remonstrance"; this re-stated all past grievances 
 from the accession of Charles, and concluded The Grand 
 with a fresh demand for ministers whom Remonstrance. 
 "Parliament may have cause to confide in". Nov- m> l641 ' 
 It was a bold appeal to the nation against the king. The / 
 Remonstrance was carried by the narrow majority of i ij 
 - ari d tb p ?plit in the Long Parliament was complete. 
 
 Charles had now returned from Scotland, where he had 
 recklessly yielded to demands without obtaining a party 
 on his side. Once in London he set to work charles - s act i n 
 to court popularity, made a foolish speech at increases 
 the Guildhall, referring to his favour with all distrust - 
 but the lower classes, and withdrew the guards of the 
 House of Commons. In his answer to the Remonstrance 
 he took his stand on the strict letter of the law; he would 
 support government in church and state as it was estab- 
 lished. This gave no security for that Parliamentary 
 control over the king's ministers upon which Pym and his 
 followers were set. How far suspicion carried the con- 
 stitutional leaders may be seen from the fact that their 
 next step was a bill to transfer to the Houses a share in 
 the control of the Militia the only armed force known 
 to the ancient law. Charles did his best to justify these 
 suspicions by appointing a notorious bravo called Luns- 
 ford to the most important military post in England, the 
 command of the Tower ; yet, a moment after, he cancelled 
 the appointment in deference to the outcry it caused. 
 The bishops, who had been mobbed on their way to the 
 House, protested against the legality of all that took place 
 in their absence, and Charles approved their action. 
 There was a motion in the Lords that Parliament was not 
 free, and there was a fear that the king would repudiate 
 his past concessions and punish the Parliamentary leaders.
 
 38 CIVIL WAR IMMINENT. 
 
 Finally Charles made the blunder of impeaching five 
 members of the Commons and one peer "for endeavour- 
 ing to subvert the fundamental laws of the realm, to 
 deprive the king of his power, and to alienate the affec- / 
 tions of the people from him ". It was quite illegal to do v 
 this, as the king cannot impeach. But Charles went 
 further. When the impeachment failed he made the 
 irreparable mistake of going himself to the House with 
 an armed retinue and trying to seize the persons of the 
 "five members", Pym, Hampden, Holies, Hazelrigg, and 
 Strode. Warned in time, they had left the House, and 
 Charles had to retire amid cries of "privilege". The 
 king had put himself hopelessly in the wrong. 
 
 The Militia, question now became a real one. Parlia-y/ 
 ment was disinclined to admit any power in the king to 
 Preparing for call out the local forces of the country, and 
 war. 1642. demanded that all fortresses and the militia 
 should be confided to men whom it could trust. This 
 Charles would not grant, and an ordinance for the dis- 
 posal of the militia was drawn up by Parliament. Men 
 were named in each county to train and order the force. 
 This was finally agreed to by both Houses, and the king 
 had already decided to retire from London. It was 
 evident that both sides were now preparing for war. The 
 Parliament had the courage of its convictions, and as 
 Charles would not act with the leaders, they took measures 
 for the defence of the kingdom. Hull was ordered to be 
 guarded, the port of Portsmouth was closed, the Tower 
 was besieged, and the magazines all over the country 
 were secured. 
 
 The question now was whether any one would fight 
 for a king who had proved the suspicions entertained of 
 Appeals to him to be well grounded. Appeal was made 
 the nation. O j-^g nation by both parties during the early 
 months of 1642 in a series of vigorous manifestos. 
 
 Charles took his stand oil his, legal power as kinp-. He 
 The king's would not be " swaggered into any more con- 
 attitude, cessions ". He would maintain the church in- 
 tact, though he signed a Bill for removing Bishops from
 
 PAPER WAR. 39 
 
 the House of Lords. But there was also the Divine 
 right of himself and his family; he would not give up 
 "the power he was born unto", nor prejudice the inheri- 
 tance of his successors. This was a strong position. 
 attracted^all those who feared democratic government, 
 who loved the church, or who believed it a sin to rebel 
 against the will and person of the king. 
 
 If Charles solved the problem of sovereignty by an 
 appeal to his pedigree it was impossible for the Parlia- 
 mentary leaders, now that they had gone so parliamentary 
 far, to stop. Their own solution, to which casus belli - 
 they had been gradually led, was a startling challenge to y 
 the king's. They claimed to be the interpreters of the 
 national will, to which the king's will must finally bend. 
 He was an officer, not a despot. The kingdom was not / 
 his property, but only the sphere of his trusteeship." 
 "The judgment of Parliament," they declared, "is the 
 king's judgment, though the king in his person be neither 
 present nor assenting thereunto." 
 
 There remained no solution but war, which began with 
 a series of races for the possession of the local magazines 
 of arms, that of Hull for instance. Hull Taking mea- 
 was, moreover, a strong post, in a loyal sures for war - 
 district within easy reach of Scotland. Charles, on 
 demanding admission, was met by the answer that HulW 
 could only be opened to those who possessed the king's 
 orders "signified" by Parliament. Here was the new 
 theory put into practice. Parliament issued the Militia 
 ordinance, and began assembling trained-bands in London. 
 The paper war, to which reference has been made, came 
 to a head on June 2, 1642, when the "Nineteen Proposi- * \ 
 tions" were presented to the king at York. They placed V 
 him in the position of a figure-head to the constitution, 
 and were by his friends called " Articles of Deposition ". 
 Charles replied by issuing " commissions of array ", and 
 began to assemble troops. The Earl of Essex, a taciturn 
 spldier, with a stern sense of duty, some experience, and 
 'not a spark of genius, was made general of the Parlia- 
 mentary forces. True to their conception of sovereignty,
 
 40 THE CAUSE OF WAR. 
 
 the leaders raised soldiers who were "to live and die 
 with the Earl of Essex for the defence of his majesty 
 and Parliament". The king's standard was hoisted at 
 Nottingham on the 22d of August, 1642. 
 
 The cause of the Civil War has been much in dispute. 
 Was it a religious or a political struggle? The answer is 
 Religion or clearly that it was both. The gradual sun- 
 Poiitics? dering of king and Parliament as the various 
 questions arose has been shown. The question of 
 government was insoluble, because every moment the 
 breach between the two theories of the constitution grew 
 wider. There was no compromise possible. But the 
 nation might have found a better -way had there been no 
 religious severance. Puritanism and its organization had 
 been used as an engine to coerce the king, and thus his 
 party was made possible. " Let religion be our primum 
 quizrite" said a speaker in November, 1640. The question 
 of government and sovereignty had, however, been the 
 real one, and religion had served to accentuate differences 
 which might otherwise have been almost unnoticed. His 
 majesty's will as expressed by Parliament was in conflict 
 with his majesty's will as expressed by himself, and this 
 difference was rightly placed in the forefront of the 
 Parliamentary programme. The question of religion was 
 to regain its importance, and provide the enthusiasm 
 with which Cromwell and Fairfax would beat the king 
 when their less zealous friends, the mere political refor- 
 mers, had grown tired of fighting for a cause which they 
 did not understand. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE CIVIL WAR TO THE KING'S DEATH, 1642-1649. 
 
 When war was thus declared neither party had a power- 
 Division of ful army, a definite plan of action, or a sure 
 
 England. \\Q\& Qn an y ] ar g e trac(; ^ fa e coun t rVi B u t } 
 
 roughly speaking, it may be said that the North and West
 
 J 
 
 fa 
 
 TAKING SIDES. 41 
 
 voured the king, while the East and South, immeasurably 
 the richer half of England, adhered to Parliament. Yet 
 there were local struggles in which divisions appeared in- 
 side these limits; and along the border-line between East 
 and West, in Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Leicestershire, War- 
 wickshire, Berkshire, and Hampshire, there was plentiful 
 division. 
 
 The king could reckon on the strong loyalty which was / 
 still felt for his person and for the cause of the church 
 among large numbers of the nobility, gentry, Prospects of 
 and peasantry. Parliament was sure of a few the combat- 
 similar adherents, and of the whole of the a 
 middle classes in the districts which held to them. But / 
 there was this important difference. The Royal causer 
 centred round a person, the Parliamentary cause round a 
 principle little understood and vaguely enunciated. Further, 
 in the Parliamentary cause there was this difficulty what 
 was the real aim of the war? Was Charles to be beaten 
 in the field and forced to terms, or pursued and punished? 
 This is what made the rebel position so awkward. There 
 was no clear understanding of the object of the war. The 
 vow "to live and die in defence of king and Parliament " 
 did not sound a very thrilling cry when those who uttered 
 it were fighting with one but against the other. The king, on / 
 the other hand, had a clear end to pursue, the conquest 
 and subjection of Parliament, for which was needed only 
 a victorious march to London. 
 
 Thus the struggle was sure to develop in one direction. 
 The king must attack, and the rebels must defend, the * 
 line which divided their respective strong- Nature of the 
 holds. Every accession of territory for the struggle. 
 king would be therefore a step nearer his end, but for 
 Parliament attention must be concentrated on defence. 
 Even if they beat him Charles was still king, and no one 
 knew on what terms Parliament would lay down their 
 arms. This course of action, defence by Parliament and 
 attack by Charles, was made even more necessary by the 
 fact that the former had no reliable permanent force. Too 
 many of the Parliament's adherents were willing to fight a
 
 42 EDGEHILL. 
 
 campaign with the clear object of barring the king's pro- 
 gress to London, or relieving a besieged garrison; but 
 they were sure to flag when the effort was over. " The 
 Londoners, as is their miskent custom, after a piece of 
 service, get them home," says the Scots commissioner. 
 
 Meanwhile the war had definitely commenced, with 
 some advantage to the Parliamentarians. Goring, who 
 Early fighting held Portsmouth for the king, surrendered it 
 in 1642. early in September, and thus put an end for 
 
 the present to any hope of a strong southern position for 
 the Royalists. The Marquis of Hertford had been placed 
 by Charles in command of his forces in the South-west, 
 but was stoutly resisted. He succeeded in getting pos- 
 session of Shepton- Mallet, but was besieged on taking 
 post at Sherborne, and failed to make any stand in these 
 parts. He went, therefore, into Wales, sending his lieu- 
 tenant, Sir Ralph Hopton, to Cornwall. 
 
 The central struggle of the year was between the king 
 and the main Parliamentary army under Essex. The latter 
 Edgehiii. assembled at Northampton and pressed on 
 Oct. 23, 1642. towards Nottingham, where Charles had but 
 a small force. The king determined to march westward 
 and recruit his ranks among his adherents in Wales. On 
 his way from Shrewsbury to Chester he gained large re- 
 inforcements. Essex followed and occupied Worcester, 
 though Prince Rupert, the king's nephew, a dashing, reck- 
 less cavalry officer, won a skirmish at Powick Bridge, in 
 an endeavour to save it. Having at last gathered a host of 
 some strength, Charles started for London on October 1 2. 
 Essex followed and came up with him on the slopes of Edge- 
 hill, not far from Banbury. The Royal forces had to leave 
 a strong position on Edgehiii to make the attack. Rupert 
 at once charged, drove the enemy's cavalry before him, and 
 pursued them for five miles, leaving the king to fight with 
 infantry only. These were practically without leadership, 
 for the king possessed courage without military skill. The 
 Puritan foot-soldiers in Essex's army behaved splendidly, 
 and their conduct was matched by that of the king's 
 "Red Regiment". Sir Edmund Verney died with the
 
 THREE ROYALIST CENTRES. 43 
 
 Royal Standard in his hands, and the Earl of Lindsey, 
 the king's general-in-chief, was taken prisoner, mortally 
 wounded. When evening came the Royalist position was still 
 maintained, though Rupert returned to the field to find that 
 his reckless pursuit had turned a victory into a drawn battle. 
 
 Charles had so far the best of the encounter that he 
 was able to go on to Oxford after taking Banbury. There 
 had been some conflict in Oxford, where the The march to 
 loyalty of the University was not shared by London, 
 the townsmen; but now it was to become the king's chief 
 stronghold and head-quarters during the rest of the war. 
 The way to London was open, and the advance began in 
 November. The citizens expected an attack. When 
 Rupert had sacked Brentford, the whole militia of London 
 marched out to Turnham Green - to oppose the Royal 
 army. Charles, not inclined to risk a battle with 25,000 
 citizens fighting to save their hearths and homes, retired 
 to Reading, and finally to Oxford, thus throwing away 
 his hopes of success. 
 
 There were now three chief gatherings of Royalist forces, 
 the king's head-quarters at Oxford, Hopton's Ro alist 
 small force in Cornwall, and the Northern successes till 
 Royalists under Newcastle, fighting for su- Au e ust - 16 <3- 
 premacy in Yorkshire. These three centres must be 
 separately watched during the next campaigns. 
 
 In the centre there were many small encounters, chiefly 
 owing to the endeavours of the rebel commanders to stop 
 communication between various Royal forces. j n the Mid- 
 Essex took Reading, and established himself lands - 
 on the east side of Oxford, where he was attacked by 
 Rupert and his cavalry. The engagement at Chalgrove 
 Field (June, 1643) * s chiefly noteworthy owing to the death 
 of Hampden, the hero of the old dispute about the Ship- 
 money, who was mortally wounded during the skirmish. 
 The Queen landed on the Yorkshire coast with arms 
 and money from Holland, and the Royalist successes in 
 the Midlands, where they took Tamworth, Lichfield, and 
 many other towns, enabled her to get in safety from York 
 to Oxford. 
 
 (962) D
 
 44 COLONEL OLIVER CROMWELL. 
 
 In the North Newcastle had some difficulty in holding 
 his own against Lord Fairfax and his son Thomas, York- 
 Newcastle in shire magnates who were vigorous for Parlia- 
 the North. rnent. He penetrated as far as Pontefract 
 after beating Lord Fairfax at Tadcaster. As Newark was 
 held for the king it would have been easy for him now to 
 join Charles, but he preferred to turn his attention to the 
 reduction of the West Riding. His advance was checked 
 by the younger Fairfax, who recovered a part of the county 
 for Parliament. This was, however, retrieved by a victory 
 over the two Fairfaxes at Adwalton Moor (June 30, 1643), 
 which once more turned the tide in the North. Hull 
 alone held out for Parliament. To utilize this success by 
 an attack on the enemy's forces in the Eastern counties 
 was Newcastle's next project. This, however, was not 
 well carried out, and the Eastern Roundheads, under 
 Colonel Oliver Cromwell, who now first appears on 
 the scene, were able to beat the Royalists at Gains- 
 borough. Cromwell came of an old Huntingdonshire 
 family, and had been in Parliament as early as 1628. 
 He was already giving proofs of those qualities which 
 were to raise him to the foremost place in England. 
 While others hesitated Cromwell always acted, and knew 
 how to adapt means to ends. W 7 hile so many in Parlia- 
 ment and in the field were far from sure as to their aims 
 and methods, this man of clear views and quick action 
 was a power indeed. To common sense and tact he 
 added all that was most vigorous in Puritanism, a firm 
 belief in Divine guidance, and a keen sense that a great 
 cause was intrusted to him and his "lovely company", 
 as he called his grim Puritan troopers. 
 
 Meanwhile, in the West of England, the king's troops 
 had won a series of brilliant victories. Hopton, assisted 
 Hopton in by the local gentry, among whom the Gren- 
 the West. villes were conspicuous, made himself master 
 of Cornwall. He won a clear victory at Bradock Down 
 in January, and was then confronted by Lord Stamford, 
 who came from Wales to aid the Western Roundheads. 
 The departure of Stamford to the West had set Hertford
 
 ROYALIST VICTORIES. 45 
 
 free to join Charles at Oxford with his Welsh recruits, and 
 when he had taken Cirencester, all the Severn Valley, 
 except Gloucester, was in Royalist hands. Sir William 
 Waller was now sent as Parliamentary general to the West, 
 and by his "nimble marches" secured Bristol, Monmouth, 
 and Chepstow, and surprised Hereford. Meanwhile, 
 Charles was writing to Hopton in Cornwall, bidding him 
 push on to Oxford. Hopton had again beaten Stamford 
 at Stratton and "taken in" most of Devonshire. This had 
 to be stopped, and Waller came from Wales for the pur- 
 pose. It was no light task, for there were already Royalist 
 troops at Salisbury ready to join Hopton : their junction 
 was effected at Chard, and in two combined attacks on 
 Waller at Lansdown and Roundway Down they were 
 completely successful. The result of these successes 
 was the surrender of Bristol, then, and for long after, the 
 second city in the kingdom. 
 
 Thus in these six months of 1643 there had been an 
 almost uninterrupted series of Royalist victories. With 
 Newcastle supreme in Yorkshire and Hopton The crisis, 
 in the West Charles had no force to fear. This August, 1643. 
 was the moment for striking a final blow on his enemies 
 by concentrating all his forces on London. But it was 
 impossible. Hopton and Newcastle reported that their 
 troops " utterly refused " to leave their homes exposed to 
 attacks from rebel garrisons. Charles himself had a 
 " miserable army " for such an attempt, and the chance 
 was abandoned when it was decided to attempt the siege 
 of Gloucester instead of taking advantage of the dissen- 
 sions in London. 
 
 There had indeed been during this period a growing 
 desire for peace. The extreme Puritan party had no part 
 in it, but the Lords and the City of London, Treaty of 
 together with several counties, were anxious to Oxford, 
 send terms to the king. The Commons had 
 to assent, and proposals hardly less stringent than the 
 Nineteen Propositions were sent to Oxford in February, 
 1643. Charles sent counter proposals, demanding re- 
 storation of ships, forts, and revenue, protection for the
 
 46 A DRAWN BATTLE. 
 
 Prayer-book, and a disclaimer of the right to tax and 
 imprison. There was no hope of agreement, though the 
 fruitless negotiations dragged on for months. 
 
 The determination of the king to besiege Gloucester 
 called forth an enthusiasm on the part of his enemies to 
 First Battle reueve ^- Essex's resolute eight days' march 
 of Newbury. with 8ooo Londoners through a hostile country 
 Sep. 20, 1643. wag one Q f ^ Boldest strokes of the whole 
 
 war. On his approach Charles abandoned the siege, 
 intending to cut off the enemy's return to London. After 
 an unsuccessful attempt to outmanoeuvre Essex the 
 Royalist force followed him in the direction of Newbury. 
 The Parliamentarians had taken the Kennet-valley road 
 to London, and to occupy Newbury was the only chance 
 of barring their passage. Essex and his men fought their 
 way on from field to field only to find the open country 
 stoutly held. Two regiments of London trained-bands 
 resisted the shock of Rupert's cavalry and behaved "to 
 wonder". The Royalists lost some of their noblest. 
 Lord Falkland, sickened by the sights and sounds of civil 
 war, courted and found death. A whole day's fighting 
 left the Royal position still unforced; but during the 
 night the king, being short of ammunition, abandoned his 
 posts, and Essex reached Reading in safety. The year's 
 fighting was brought to a close by the successes of Hop- 
 ton, who led his Western army as far as Arundel, 
 Winchester having been already surprised, and Dart- 
 mouth surrendered to Rupert's brother Maurice. In the 
 eastern counties Lord Manchester had been placed in 
 command by the Parliament, and his second in command, 
 Cromwell, had grasped the truth, that enthusiasm, equal 
 to that of the Cavalier gentlemen, could only be secured 
 by enrolling Puritans who would fight with "a spirit". 
 His new levies soon proved their worth by defeating 
 the Royalist cavalry at Winceby. [October, 1643.] 
 
 With the commencement of 1644 two important changes 
 Allies on must be noticed. The Scots had been in- 
 both sides. duced to send a force into England on the Par- 
 liamentary side, and Charles had made a treaty with the Irish
 
 ENGLAND 
 
 as divided between the 
 
 King 1 and the Parliament 
 
 at the end of 1643. 
 
 .-"x^ -, ^ ,- 
 
 .Deitiic^Nottingh 
 Shrewsbury v > 
 
 /-^LichfieH-^ GLeicest
 
 48 PURITANISM DIVIDED. 
 
 leaders, by which he had already obtained an increased 
 force and hoped for more. The " Solemn League and 
 Covenant " entered into by the Scots and the Parliament 
 in September, 1 643, was, from the Scottish point of view, 
 an alliance for the establishment of Presbyterianism in 
 England, but the English looked little further than the 
 assistance they were likely to afford in the war. The 
 Irish "Cessation", September, 1643, was a twelve months' 
 truce with the Catholics in Ireland, which would enable 
 Charles to bring over his English troops, the wrecks of 
 Strafford's old army, and use them against Parliament. 
 
 The " Solemn League and Covenant " was Pym's last 
 triumph. His death in December, 1643, removed the 
 great leader who had kept a majority together Death of 
 during the critical days of religious difference p y m - 
 in the Long Parliament, and who, though no theologian, 
 had placed the Puritan programme in the van of the 
 Parliamentary position. He believed in Puritanism as a 
 national force. 
 
 But the Westminster Assembly, where a settlement of 
 religion was now being debated, was beginning to show 
 a line of division between Presbyterians and Division in 
 Independents, which was, later on, to wreck both camps, 
 the cause of Puritanism in England. Difficulties were 
 occurring too in the Royalist camp. There were quarrels 
 among the commanders, many of whom, like Prince 
 Rupert and his brother Maurice, objected to civilian 
 influence exercised by such men as Hyde and Culpeper. 
 Charles had gathered a counter parliament at Oxford 
 his "mongrel Parliament", as he called it which also 
 caused trouble, as his conduct in Irish affairs was not 
 popular among the English gentry. But it gave the king's 
 cause a great show of legality, as it included more than 
 half the House of Lords, and a third of the Commons. 
 
 Similar contentions were arising in the eastern counties 
 and among the Parliamentary commanders. Essex and 
 Waller were jealous of each other, and Cromwell was 
 anxious to bring forward in the army the Independent 
 Puritan elements which he had seen to be of such
 
 BALANCED SUCCESS. 49 
 
 splendid fighting quality. Thus, with Irish intrigues, 
 military dissensions, and religious bitterness, the interven- 
 tion of the Scots, who were anxious to convert England 
 to the opinions they held on Presbyterianism, only threw 
 one more question on the table the "divine right" of 
 presbyters and elders to rule church and control state. 
 
 Early in 1644 Hopton's successes received a rude check 
 by his defeat at Cheriton, in Hampshire. Newark was 
 Dangers in a ^ so m danger, and there were indications that 
 the North and Newcastle would be hemmed in by the Scots 
 centre. 1644. from the North and by Cromwell from the 
 
 East. The loss of the North would be a crushing blow 
 to Charles, who was unable to concentrate his forces to 
 relieve Newcastle, as he was now met by a combination 
 of Essex and Waller. They approached Oxford at the 
 end of May. Rupert was sent with the best of the king's 
 troops to relieve York, into which Newcastle had retired, 
 and Charles remained in the Midlands with the rest of 
 his host to deal with his two foes. 
 
 Fortunately for the Royal cause Essex and Waller 
 elected to act separately, and the former went south to 
 Royalist sue- re ^ eve trie ^ ew seaports which held out in 
 cess in the Devon and Dorset from local assailants. 
 Charles had now to fight Waller, and suc- 
 ceeded in checking him at the engagement of Cropredy 
 Bridge. Waller's troops were clamouring to get home, 
 and thus Charles had no difficulty in marching after 
 Essex, who actually retired into Cornwall in the end of 
 July, and allowed himself to be hemmed in by the king. 
 His army surrendered at Lostwithiel, but he himself 
 escaped by sea to Plymouth. [September, 1644.] 
 
 Meanwhile, this success of the king in the West was 
 more than balanced by the entire loss of the North. 
 LOSS of the Here the Scots had joined the Fairfaxes and 
 North. the troops of the Eastern Association under 
 
 Manchester and Cromwell, for the siege of York. Rupert 
 had carried all before him till he outmanoeuvred the 
 Parliamentary generals and reached York. Joining New- 
 castle's forces he advanced close to the enemy on the
 
 50 MONTROSE FOR THE KING. 
 
 slopes of Marston Moor on the evening of July 2. The 
 rebel forces at once attacked. Cromwell's cuirassiers and 
 Leslie's dragoons broke up Rupert's cavalry, though Goring 
 routed Fairfax on the other wing, and the Scots in the 
 centre were terribly pressed. But Cromwell defeated 
 Goring as he returned from the pursuit, and Leslie suc- 
 coured his countrymen in the centre. Finally the Royalist 
 infantry fell back, and a complete victory for the rebels 
 dealt a final blow to the king's hopes in the North. But 
 in this perplexing war local struggles were raging every- 
 where. 
 
 There was no unanimity even in Scotland. The Mar- 
 quis of Montrose, who was opposed to the idea of a 
 Presbyterian democracy, placed his hopes in Montrose in 
 Charles; and with the astounding belief that Scotland. 
 Presbyterianism on an aristocratic basis could be achieved 
 for England and Scotland by helping the Royalist cause, 
 he now raised a Highland force and prepared to strike a 
 blow for the king. He won some wonderful victories, 
 beginning with Tippermuir in September, 1644, and by 
 the middle of 1645 his successes seemed as if they might 
 have a serious effect on the ultimate event of the war. 
 
 After the great victory of Marston Moor there is no 
 doubt that vigorous action on the part of Parliament 
 might have gone far to stop hostilities and The Parlia . 
 bring the king to terms. Charles had to get ment's 
 back from the West, and if the rebel forces chance - 
 could have concentrated rapidly enough, it would have 
 been possible to bar his passage to Oxford and pen him 
 in the western peninsula. The army of Essex was dis- 
 solved, but Waller was sent to hold Charles in check, and 
 Manchester was ordered to go to the "West" to support 
 him. Manchester, who is described as a "sweet, meek 
 man " by the Scotchman Baillie, had no taste for crushing 
 the king in person; while Cromwell, his lieutenant, the 
 "darling of the Sectaries", felt that this was precisely what 
 was wanted. His troopers, who fined each other for 
 swearing, and sang their psalms before throwing them- 
 selves on the Royalist cavalry, would have followed him
 
 SECOND BATTLE OF NEWBURY. 5 I 
 
 against an}- foe, spiritual or political. The result was, 
 that, in spite of the necessity, and the eagerness of some, 
 Manchester asked for a definition of the word " West ", 
 and delayed to co-operate with Waller. This was fatal. 
 Charles, having given his foes time by waiting for levies, 
 arrived near Xewbury on October 22, 1644. Waller had 
 fallen back and been tardily joined by Manchester and 
 Cromwell. The Parliamentary cause was not advanced 
 by the action of the " Committee of Both Kingdoms ", a 
 body in whose hands military matters had been placed 
 since the arrival of the Scots in England. They gave 
 orders from London, and instead of placing one man in 
 command and giving him a general's freedom of action, 
 they had on this occasion appointed a council of war to 
 manage the campaign. The result was shown in the battle 
 that ensued at Newbury. 
 
 The Royal forces were strongly posted, and it was de- 
 cided to attack them in the rear by a flank movement. 
 The chance is ^ ma ^ e success certain the main body was 
 lost. Oct. 27, to divert attention by attacking the Royal 
 position in front. A party under Cromwell 
 and others successfully stormed the rear of the king's 
 position at Speen. But Manchester hesitated to make 
 the attack in front, and when he finally did so, late in the 
 day, he was repulsed. Darkness put an end to the strug- 
 gle, and Charles's forces got safely away towards Oxford. 
 The prey had escaped. 
 
 Both sides had now lost a great opportunity, and both 
 had learnt the lesson. Organized forces and determined 
 The lessons leaders must be obtained for Parliament if 
 of failure. t h e y were to beat the king. The Royal 
 forces must leave Oxford to itself, and crush their foes in 
 detail, as they could not yet get to London. 
 
 Meanwhile, the Parliament had begun to organize the 
 " New Model Army ", a permanent Puritan force, which 
 was ready early in 1645. The "Self-denying Ordinance" 
 excluded all members of Lords and Commons from com- 
 mand, and left military power in the hands of a proved 
 soldier, the younger Fairfax.
 
 ,2 PRESBYTERIANS AND INDEPENDENTS. 
 
 Hand in hand with this reform came the execution of 
 Archbishop Laud (June 10, 1645), an d the further sever- 
 ance of Presbyterians from Independents. Religious 
 The latter wished for toleration and state divisions. 
 supremacy over the church, the former for the systematic 
 enforcement of Presbyterian methods and no state inter- 
 ference. The Independents believed in themselves, while 
 the Presbyterians believed in a system of church govern- 
 ment. There was a weighty third party, at whose head 
 was the great lawyer Selden, which dissented from the 
 extreme views of both Independents and Presbyterians, 
 and meant to uphold state control over both. Yet the 
 growth of the Independent party was on the whole steady. 
 The Scots were keenly averse to this new form of Puritan- 
 ism, and began to hope for something from Charles; 
 hence the fruitless negotiations which took place at Ux- 
 bridge in January, 1645. The Independents smiled and 
 went on with the New Model. 
 
 In the spring of 1645 Rupert went to Wales to recruit, 
 and hoped to be joined by Charles. The two would 
 attack the Scots, who had been obliged to The king's 
 send large forces to the North, where Mon- P lan 
 trose was wasting Argyleshire. Cromwell, with a handful 
 of cavalry, made a dashing raid round Oxford, and carried 
 off 'the horses, without which no guns could leave the 
 Royal head-quarters. By this time the New Model was 
 ready, and though Rupert had joined the king, Fairfax 
 was ordered to relieve Taunton. This was a mistake, for 
 it left Charles free to fight the Scots. While he was en- 
 deavouring to find them, Fairfax, abandoning the relief 
 of Taunton, came back to besiege Oxford. If the place 
 had been stronger the king might have beaten the Scots and 
 joined Montrose, who was carrying all before him. But 
 Charles, after sacking Leicester (May 31), feared to go 
 too far from his southern stronghold, and Fairfax was 
 therefore able to bring him to battle. Charles was at 
 Daventry, and the Royalists neither knew nor Naseby. 
 cared anything about the New Model army. J une J 4> rf*s 
 The despised Parliamentary forces surprised the king near
 
 THE ROYAL CAUSE FALLING. 53 
 
 the village of Naseby on June 14. Again Rupert dashed 
 off the field after making a brilliant charge. Cromwell 
 and his troopers were thus enabled to turn the scale in 
 favour of the Parliamentary infantry, and the king's army 
 was completely beaten and its infantry cut to pieces. 
 
 Charles's cause was now almost hopeless. Enthusiasm 
 and organization were on the side of his enemies. Their 
 Failure of the quarrels were laid aside, and the real victory 
 Royal cause, rested with the Independents. The Royal 
 intrigues with the Irish and with foreign powers had been 
 discovered by the capture of the king's cabinet at Naseby, 
 and proofs of his machinations were on view in London 
 to convince doubters. His commanders were quarrelling, 
 or, like Goring, drinking away his cause in the West. 
 
 The real weakness of the king's position was that he 
 was safe nowhere. His foes now realized that he must be 
 Pariiamentar c l se ty followed and prevented from raising 
 victories in the another army. He was in Wales in July, 
 west. i6 45 . t)ut the g CQts were ma k m g j t untenable, and 
 
 the king's hope was in a junction with his western forces. 
 In the West, however, the New Model, after its victory in 
 the Midlands, was engaged in a brilliant campaign which 
 made Parliament masters of the Devonian peninsula. 
 After Fairfax's victories at Langport and Bridgewater in 
 July the only ray of hope was in the North. Montrose 
 had beaten the forces sent against him in two brilliant 
 actions at Auldearn and Alford. But his Highlanders, 
 like the troops of Essex and Waller, after a success "got 
 them home" to stow away their booty. 
 
 Still, if Montrose could not come south, Charles might 
 join him in the North. With this object the king assem- 
 The king's bled the Yorkshire gentry at Doncaster only 
 last hope. t o fi n( j himself hotly pursued by Colonel 
 Poyntz and the Scottish cavalry under David Leslie, 
 though the latter was soon recalled to Scotland to face 
 Montrose, who had just defeated Baillie at Kilsyth. Any 
 hope of getting to Scotland was spoiled by the wariness 
 of Poyntz, and the king was again obliged to make for 
 Oxford.
 
 54 CHARLES GOES TO THE SCOTS. 
 
 His marches during these months are well described 
 by Clarendon as "perpetual motion". Leaving Oxford 
 on August 30 he managed to relieve Hereford A Royal 
 from the Scots, but his recruiting ground was fugitive. 
 now worked out, and no forces were available for the 
 relief of Bristol, which Fairfax was now besieging. Again 
 the fugitive king wandered aimlessly northwards, only to 
 see his troops defeated by his pursuer near Chester, on 
 Rowton Heath (Sept. 24). From Newark, he might still 
 reach Montrose. But that brilliant adventurer had just 
 been beaten and ruined, after a year of unprecedented 
 victory, by David Leslie at the surprise of Philiphaugh. 
 Bristol was stormed and surrendered on September 10 
 by Rupert, who had no liking for a failing cause. When 
 Charles, beaten and low-spirited, once more reached 
 Oxford in October, his position in the Midlands had 
 become untenable owing to the activity of the Parliamen- 
 tary generals. The next few months were occupied by 
 Cromwell and Fairfax in the complete subjugation of the 
 West. Hopton made a gallant stand, but all was lost 
 early in 1646. Chester had surrendered, Newark was 
 invested by the Scots, and South Wales was all but lost. 
 
 Such hope as the king now had rested on a treaty with 
 the Scots army. This was possible owing to the disgust 
 of the Northerners at the failure of their Fu g htofthe 
 hopes for the conversion of England to kin e- Mav l6 * 6 - 
 Presbyterianism, and at the complete success of the 
 Independents in the army of Cromwell and Fairfax. 
 French diplomacy was used to create a superficial agree- 
 ment between Charles and the Scots, consisting of a 
 verbal treaty in which neither party said what they meant. 
 The result was that the king left Oxford in May, 1646, to 
 take refuge in the Scots camp outside Newark. With 
 the capitulation of Oxford on June 24 the civil war was 
 ended. The Scottish forces retired to Newcastle with the 
 king practically a prisoner in their camp. His position 
 was the result of a resolve to try and get the help of their 
 swords without giving them what they required in return, 
 namely, a definite pledge for Presbyterianism in England.
 
 SCOTS LEAVE ENGLAND. 55 
 
 They never intended to take less, and he never meant to 
 grant as much. 
 
 In fact, the situation had now changed. Intrigue took 
 the place of war. There were three clear parties : first, 
 Altered char- ^ e Scots, anxious to make England Presby- 
 acterofthe terian; secondly, the army of the Parliament 
 situation. fl us hed with victory, and hating the Scots as 
 much as the Scots hated bishops; lastly, the English 
 Parliament itself, where there were many moderate men 
 in favour of a compromise, and as yet a decided majority 
 for Presbyterianism. Charles's object for the next few 
 years was to play with these three forces in order to 
 secure his own ends, while each party was willing to 
 treat with him, also for its own ends. This explains the 
 constant attempts of the various parties to secure the 
 king's person and so gain his ear. 
 
 The Scots, who held the prize, now combined with 
 Parliament to offer the so-called "Newcastle Proposi- 
 Newcastie tions". The Parliament was perfectly aware 
 Propositions, of the Scots' intrigue, in spite of their auda- 
 juiy, 1646. c i ous denial of all knowledge of the king's 
 intended journey to their camp. Yet, fearing the Inde- 
 pendents, the majority at Westminster concurred in 
 pressing the treaty, by which Charles was asked to take 
 the Covenant, abolish Episcopacy, and resign the control 
 of militia to Parliament for twenty years. The king's 
 attitude was disappointing. Instead "of refusing manfully, 
 he spoke of discussion. The Queen, wiser in her genera- 
 tion, wished him to yield, with the hope of getting back 
 his power gradually. Finally he suggested a compromise, 
 which was refused, and the Scots decided to leave Eng- 
 land. Their arrears were paid by Parliament, and the 
 king was handed over to English commissioners, who 
 took him to Holmby House, in Northamptonshire, 
 February, 1647. 
 
 He at once renewed his negotiations with the English 
 Presbyterians, who were more moderate than the Scots. 
 Their main wish was to get rid of the army, and they 
 were now proposing to send some regiments to Ireland,
 
 56 ARMY QUARRELS WITH PARLIAMENT. 
 
 and disband others. This led to a most important move- 
 ment, for the army had long been growing into a political 
 force, and at once organized itself to resist Parliament 
 extinction at the hands of a Presbyterian versus 
 Parliament. Each troop elected a represen- 
 tative, and these chose two "Agitators" for each regiment. 
 The army was disgusted at the discovery that Parliament 
 was not only scheming to dissolve it, but also concocting 
 an arrangement with the king in the Presbyterian interest. 
 And so Cromwell and the officers, who had not yet sided 
 with the army against Parliament, contrived to arrange 
 the seizure of Charles by Cornet Joyce. He was taken 
 to Newmarket, and there kept up the feud between his 
 enemies by complaining to Parliament of his unlawful 
 seizure by the army. The two forces, military and civil, 
 were now at open strife. The Commons were known to 
 be relying on the London trained -bands, and the army 
 promptly issued its famous manifesto, in which the leaders 
 declared they would march on the city to satisfy their 
 "just demands". The trained-bands were called out, 
 but the army shrank from bloodshed, and the manifesto, 
 on being handed to Parliament, was found to contain a 
 demand for a dissolution, and short Parliaments, in 
 which we can trace the idea of sovereignty of the people. 
 Another peremptory request was for the expulsion of 
 eleven Presbyterian members who had been instrumental 
 in the late negotiations with the king. These prudently 
 fled, but the Commons resolved that the army should 
 not come within 25 miles of London. The flight of 
 the leading Presbyterians made Parliament more inclined 
 to come to terms with the army, but the city was still in 
 favour of accepting a compromise with Charles, and 
 many of the Independent members took refuge from mob 
 violence in the army. 
 
 This gave Fairfax an excuse for marching on London, 
 which he did in August, 1647, to restore these T he march 
 members. Meanwhile Cromwell and Fairfax on London, 
 had themselves been endeavouring to come to some 
 terms with the king. But the extreme democratic party
 
 ORIGIN OF THE SECOND CIVIL WAR. 57 
 
 in the army, led by the "Agitators", was for a more 
 complete change, including manhood suffrage and avowed 
 popular sovereignty. Thus the king had a threefold 
 choice, to side with the moderate Presbyterians, to accept 
 the moderate army proposals, or to succumb to the 
 thorough-paced democracy of the " levelling " party. 
 
 At first he refused to accept any overtures from the 
 Independents, but subsequently he endeavoured to keep 
 A split in the his foes divided by telling Parliament that he 
 army. preferred the army proposals, and wished to 
 
 consider them. The army was now thoroughly divided, 
 and the influence of the extreme party was sufficient to 
 raise a storm against Cromwell, who was spoken of as 
 "Judas". A mutiny occurred and was suppressed by 
 the leaders, but it was becoming clear that the Agitators 
 must be reckoned with. They were already speaking of 
 justice on the " man of blood ", and Charles began to 
 fear for his safety. In November, 1647, ne escaped to 
 the Isle of Wight, still putting his main trust in increasing 
 the conflicts of his enemies. His rejection, however, of 
 the " Four Bills ", in which he was asked to give security 
 for Parliament's independence and control over the Militia, \ 
 at last induced the army and Parliament to forget their 
 differences and combine against him. The vote for dis- 
 continuing further " Addresses " to the king was passed 
 in January, 1648. 
 
 It was now clear to Cromwell that no hope remained 
 Difficulties of ot comm g to terms with Charles. But how 
 the army to arrange any future agreement between army 
 fanatics, moderate Republicans, and Indepen- 
 dents was not so clear. 
 
 For Charles one card remained to play. The Scots 
 had not ceased to ply him with promises, and he now 
 Charles turns si g ned an agreement, known as the "Engage- 
 to the Scots, ment ", by which the Scots pledged them- 
 >ec. 26, 1647. se j ves to res t or e him to power in return for 
 concessions to Presbyterianism in England. This last 
 proof of duplicity led to the Second Civil War, which 
 broke out at once.
 
 58 A SCOTTISH INVASION. 
 
 The English rising came first; the scattered survivors 
 of the Royalist party took arms on all sides, but they 
 were badly organized, and there was little second civil 
 difficulty in repressing them. Cromwell had war - l6 < 8 - 
 a campaign in South Wales, and Fairfax crushed risings 
 at Maidstone and Colchester. The Prince of Wales, to 
 whom a portion of the fleet had turned, threatened the 
 capital, but was compelled to retire for lack of provisions. 
 Somewhat strangely, no enthusiasm was called forth in 
 London, and the city shut its gates on the Royalist forces. 
 
 The Scots gave more trouble. Their kingdom was 
 divided into two parties : the extreme Presbyterians under 
 Argyle would have no hand in the rising unless Charles 
 took the Covenant and forswore Bishops and Prayer- 
 book. The more moderate party, with whom the majority 
 of the nobility sided, were opposed to all extreme cleri- 
 calism, and were willing to fight on Charles's moderate 
 promises. Unfortunately their leader was the incapable 
 Hamilton. Though only partially supported he advanced 
 into England in July. There he was soon to meet Crom- 
 well, who had done his work in Wales and was ready to 
 oppose the Northern host. The Scottish forces were sur- 
 prised before they could join the English royalists in 
 North Wales. Their English contingent was caught and 
 conquered at Preston (August 17, 1648). The Scottish 
 army decamped towards the South, and Cromwell fol- 
 lowed in pursuit through Wigan, taking 10,000 prisoners, 
 some of whom were sent home, while others were sent as 
 slaves to the West Indies. Hamilton capitulated, and 
 the campaign was over. 
 
 When the war was finished there was a marked change. 
 The party of moderate Presbyterianism in London had 
 again the upper hand, and was able to send Resulto f the 
 terms to Charles at Newport. But the king war in 
 only replied by offering a very trifling part of En e land - 
 what was asked. In the' army, however, there was a 
 much stronger feeling that negotiation must cease and 
 justice begin. He who had caused the second war must 
 be punished now that it was safely ended. Cromwell
 
 DEATH OF CHARLES I. 59 
 
 had written from Preston about "destroying those who 
 trouble the land". After sending an ultimatum to the 
 king at Newport on Nov. 16, the Army Council asked for 
 vParliament's concurrence in their " Remonstrance ", in 
 which the establishment of democracy and the trial of 
 the king were urged. This was neglected by the Parlia- 
 ment, and the army was exasperated into declaring that 
 Parliament had broken its trust and it was the duty of 
 the army to put a stop to such proceedings. " Pride's 
 Purge", the ejection of the obstinate members by Col. 
 Pride on December 6, left Parliament a tool in the hands 
 of the army. Charles had already been seized by com- 
 mand of the officers and conveyed to Hurst Castle on 
 the Hampshire coast: there was now no further question 
 about bringing him to London for trial. The Commons 
 passed an Ordinance for trying the king on January i, 
 1649, and when the Lords refused it the Lower House 
 further declared that as the people are the real source 
 of power the House of Commons might make laws alone. 
 A High Court of Justice was then nominated, but less 
 than half of those originally nominated to it sat to try the 
 king in Westminster Hall. 
 
 Legally there was no justification for such a course, as 
 no process can issue against the sovereign. The justifi- 
 Triai and cation must be sought in moral and political 
 death of the grounds. For us it is enough to note that 
 the prisoner was charged with carrying on "a 
 wicked and tyrannical power, according to his own will ", 
 instead of that "limited authority" with which he was 
 intrusted by the nation and laws. Thus was raised in 
 its greatest and most terrible form the question of sove- 
 reignty which had already caused so much bloodshed. 
 But thus it found no satisfactory answer. The king's 
 reply, completely convincing according to the old consti- 
 tution, and the letter of the law, was a restatement of his 
 superiority to law and a criticism of the illegality and 
 partisan character of the court. He was condemned, and 
 beheaded at Whitehall on January 30, 1649, meeting his 
 fate with a dignity and resignation which moved the 
 
 (962) E
 
 60 ENGLAND WITHOUT A GOVERNMENT. 
 
 hearts even of his enemies. In the compassion which 
 was felt for his bloody end it was forgotten by most men 
 that he had brought his fate on himself, by his persistent 
 machinations against his captors and his reckless stirring 
 up of the Second Civil War. If he had kept quiet in his 
 captivity he would never have come to the scaffold. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE COMMONWEALTH. 1649 1660. 
 
 During the next ten years England was practically 
 without a Constitution. One strong man, with a military 
 force behind him, gained the power and kept character of 
 order amid ever-increasing difficulties. Crom- the Period, 
 well aimed at a settlement which should establish peace, 
 toleration, order, and commerce; but he failed to secure 
 them more than temporarily, even by the sword. The 
 reason is not far to seek. As England then was, the task 
 was impossible. It was a political chaos. The nation 
 was split into two hostile camps, and these again into 
 many sections and shades of religious and political opinion. 
 A constable to keep the pe.ace till the ground-works of 
 law and order should be relaid was required. Cromwell 
 achieved this and no more, in spite of brilliant foreign 
 policy and firm suppression of disorder. He never gained 
 the heart of the nation. He would succumb to no party, 
 and no party was willing to sink its own opinions in order 
 to secure the benefits which he was able to confer upon 
 the country. He found and brought no unity. 
 
 The Army and the " Rump" (as the sixty Independent 
 members who formed the remnant of the purged Parlia- 
 ment were named) were now supreme. But A 
 
 . . ... A Provisional 
 
 this supremacy was not likely to produce a government, 
 peaceful settlement. The Army leaders were l649 ' 
 not unwilling to work with the mutilated assembly, but the 
 " Agitators " and their programme had still to be reckoned
 
 CROMWELL IN IRELAND. 6 1 
 
 with. A scheme brought before Parliament on January 
 20, entitled "The Agreement of the People", explained*-^ 
 their views in favour of a complete democracy. Frequent 
 Parliaments, truly representing the "people", should carry 
 out the national will. But the programme of these Extrem- 
 ists was not adopted. After Kingship and the House 
 of Lords had been abolished,Ai Council of State was 
 appointed in February, with authority from Par^ament to 
 carry on the entire government of the countr^ There 
 was much talk of the responsibility of this council to 
 Parliament, and of the future free and equally distributed 
 representation of the people; but in talk it stopped. The 
 discontent which the " Levellers " thereon manifested was 
 pitilessly crushed by Cromwell, and a rising of the more 
 hot-headed spirits led to no result but the discredit of 
 their cause. 
 
 There was thus a provisional government with every- 
 thing to settle. But for the present the Republic had to 
 Threefold make good its position against a threefold 
 Royalist opposition. In Ireland there had existed for 
 on - eight years a formidable rebellion. If partly 
 religious (for the Catholics of English blood were not given 
 any toleration), it was still more national. The Irish 
 Romanists were demanding, as always, supre- 
 
 In Ireland. . .. ' . , J ' T r 
 
 macy and separation from England. Hence 
 came the failure of the loyal and high-hearted Ormond to 
 combine the elements of the rising into a Royalist move- 
 ment. In the autumn of 1649 Cromwell came over and 
 sacked the towns of Drogheda and Wexford, massacring 
 their garrisons with pitiless severity. His allegation was 
 that slaughter, after due warning, would end opposition, 
 and so be merciful. The struggle speedily showed its true 
 character to be one of race : the English Catholics deserted 
 Ormond and Royalism was crushed. The subjugation of 
 Ireland went on under Ireton; English colonists were in- 
 troduced and the natives driven behind the 
 line of the Shannon. Cromwell was next called 
 to Scotland, where more work awaited him. After Ha- 
 milton's defeat the extreme Presbyterian party was in
 
 62 PRINCE CHARLES AND SCOTLAND. 
 
 power. But they had no wish to see England a Republic 
 with Independency triumphant. Nor had they any sym- 
 pathy with the execution of the king. They still hoped 
 to obtain from the Prince of Wales the concessions which 
 they had failed to wring from his father at Newcastle. 
 Charles II. had been proclaimed in Edinburgh on his 
 father's execution, but did not go to Scotland until after 
 the failure of the Irish rising. He swallowed the Cove- 
 nant graciously enough, and the Scottish rising became a 
 fact. In a skilful campaign, which ended with the decisive 
 victory of Dunbar (September 3, 1650), Cromwell stifled 
 once more the hopes of Presbyterian Royalism. But 
 while he was further settling the country, a strong wave of 
 Royalism rose behind him. Hamilton and Montrose had 
 been executed as traitors to their country and the Cove- 
 nant, but an army of their adherents marched into Eng- 
 land with Charles at their head in August, 1651. Crom- 
 well rapidly followed, and at Worcester, his " Crowning 
 Mercy", routed this force on September 3. Prince Charles 
 escaped to France after a thousand adventures, and the 
 opposition in England was crushed. Only at sea did the 
 Royalists under Prince Rupert succeed in giving the navy 
 of the young Republic considerable work; for Royalist 
 piracy, with centres in Scilly and the Channel Islands, 
 continued to menace the trade of the country for some 
 time. 
 
 Thus, with a threefold victory at home the new govern- 
 ment opened its career. It was not long before foreign 
 War with the affairs called for action. Jealousy of Dutch 
 Dutch. 1652. commercial enterprise led to the passing of 
 the "Navigation Act" in 1651. This aimed at securing for 
 English ships and English capital the lucrative carrying- 
 trade by which the Dutch made large profits out of Eng- 
 land's commerce. Henceforth no ship was to land goods 
 in English ports unless she were English made and manned, 
 or belonged to the country whose products she was bring- 
 ing over. This was to apply the economic doctrine of 
 " protection " to the creation of a merchant navy. The 
 Dutch were naturally angry, and a collision occurred be-
 
 CROMWELL SUPREME. 63 
 
 tween the English admiral Blake and the celebrated Van 
 Tromp, which led to a declaration of war in July, 1652. 
 The English navy was ably organized, and there was fre- 
 quent and victorious righting in the Channel. 
 
 But in spite of this successful outset the new govern- 
 ment was experiencing grave troubles at home. The 
 party of progress and reform in the army, Renewed 
 /though baulked of its dearest aims, did not %m* t 
 V cease to advocate changes; and the old feud and Army, 
 between Arrny and Parliament was always threatening to 
 break out. \~ Cromwell and his council of officers were 
 willing to seVsome reforms carried out, while the " Rump" 
 did not hesitate tcrolaim the full sovereignty of the unmu- 
 tilated Parliament-* It was not to be expected that such 
 antagonistic principles would long work in harmony. 
 When in November, 1651, the " Rump" consented to dis- 
 solve itself, but not till three years should have passed, 
 the Army grew wondrous impatient. The introduction in 
 the spring of 1653 of a bill for making the "Rump" a per- 
 petual Parliament, with a veto on future elections, brought 
 matters to a crisis. Th e officers were "necessi- Crornwen 
 tated, though with much reluctaney, to put dissolves the 
 an end to this Parliament". Everyone knows ' um P"- 
 how Cromwell entered the House at the head of his 
 musketeers, forcibly evicted the recalcitrant members, 
 and bade his myrmidons "remove that bauble", the 
 Speaker's mace. The Army, though as usual disclaiming 
 any desire to interfere with civil affairs, had once more 
 interfered. This was considered by the Council of State 
 a menace to all government, and its members forthwith 
 dissolved their body. The Lord-general and his officers 
 now stood alone, and England was without a government. 
 The appointment of a fresh Council of State, in which the 
 officers and their chief placed a large majority of their 
 own body, was only a temporary expedient.<^To Crom- 
 well it seemed that England could be kept in order by the 
 sword, aided by a few local and central officials who 
 would continue to act as if Parliament were sitting. But 
 there were many opponents watching Cromwell. The
 
 64 THE INSTRUMENT OF GOVERNMENT. 
 
 " Saints ", as the extreme Independents were called, were 
 claiming to rule the earth. The true Republicans, who 
 The new Con- tnou g nt Saints should be modest and wait till 
 stitutionai the kingdom was given them, were anxious for 
 a settled free government by and for the people 
 " government by consent", as they called it. To neither 
 of these views could Cromwell subscribe : his answer was 
 complete. " Where," he asked, " shall we find the consent? 
 Amongst the Prelatical, Presbyterian, Independent, Ana- 
 baptist, or Levelling parties?" This is the key to his 
 position. A free Parliament he would not allow, for a 
 free Parliament meant Royalty, and the nation finally 
 refused to take anything less. 
 
 For the moment, however, he thought it wise to allow 
 the "Saints" to try their hand. A body of nominees, 
 First attempt mainly chosen by the Independent ministers, 
 to solve it. was summoned, to the number of 144. To 
 them Cromwell committed the affairs of the kingdom. 
 They began to reform and abolish with vigour, and finally, 
 in their zeal, threatened to upset the institution of private 
 property by attacking tithes and patronage. Their assem- 
 bly, which is known as " Barebones Parliament ", because 
 one of its prominent members bore that extraordinary 
 name, resigned its power in December, 1653. 
 
 The army leaders under Lambert now proposed to make 
 Cromwell " Lord Protector ", with a council and a Parlia- 
 The " instru- ment in due form. The Proposal was drawn 
 Smber' i e ~ U P in tne " Instrument of Government ". It 
 1653- was a new kind of constitution, for all the 
 
 powers of Protector and Parliament were carefully defined 
 and separated, no alteration in their respective powers be- 
 ing allowed. The liberty of the Commons was preserved 
 by its being made impossible for the Protector to dissolve 
 them till they should have sat five months. Here then 
 was the barrier against party violence, and to this barrier 
 Cromwell looked to save the kingdom. 
 
 With a settled form of government all might go well, 
 Peace with an d i n foreign affairs the outlook was pro- 
 Holland. 1654. misirig. The Dutch had been beaten and
 
 MILITARY DESPOTISM. 65 
 
 brought to terms, and now bowed before English com- 
 mercial supremacy. Cromwell had allied himself closely 
 with Sweden in order to keep open the Baltic trade against 
 the monopolizing spirit of Danes and Dutch, and it was 
 this alliance which had brought the latter to terms. 
 
 The test of the new government would be a Parliament, 
 and this met in September, 1654. Scotland and Ireland 
 were for the first time represented at West- Par i iament 
 minster, and a rational rearrangement of the upsets the 
 constituencies, foreshadowing in many points scheme - 
 the famous Reform Bill of 1832, had been carried 
 out. But Cromwell's plan met with little respect. His 
 opponents in the new Parliament discussed the very 
 foundation of the whole, " government in the hands of a /' 
 single person and Parliament ".TThe Protector thereupon./ 
 declared that they were not to criticise any " fundamen-K 
 tal " part of the new scheme, and turned out of Parlia- 
 ment those who persisted in doing soTj Yet the remainder , 
 proved so obstinate that a dissolution occurred after the / 
 legal five months stipulated in the "Instrument". They 
 unpopularity in which this coup d'etat involved the Pro- 
 tector caused the Royalists to attempt a rising in Wilt- 
 shire under Penruddock. It was easily suppressed, but 
 the need of strengthening the central authority in 
 country districts led to a new device. Englan 
 divided into eleven provinces, over which as 
 officers were placed. These " Major-generals " 
 organize the local militia, and to use it for police 
 poses. This temporarily abrogated the system of local 
 government established by the Tudors. The institutions 
 of the country were in abeyance, taxes were imposed 
 illegally, and men were arbitrarily imprisoned. Republi- 
 cans and Independents complained of these "pashas" and 
 their high-handed doings. Yet much was done which 
 made in the Protector's favour. Men nominated to 
 livings were carefully supervised by a board of "Triers". 
 Jews were allowed to return to England for the first time 
 since 1290. The legal system was reformed and simpli- 
 fied. Yet discontent increased.
 
 66 PETITION AND ADVICE. 
 
 When a new parliament assembled in September, 1656, 
 foreign politics were for the moment in the ascendant. 
 The two great powers of France and Spain were now 
 face to face on the conclusion of the Thirty Years War; 
 each was anxious for the alliance of England. Cromwell 
 France or chose France. This secured the expulsion 
 Spain? o f Prince Charles from French soil, and 
 was more likely to satisfy glowing Protestantism than any 
 dealings with Spain. Philip IV. was the champion of 
 Catholicism, and, moreover, claimed a complete mono- 
 poly of the West Indian trade. English enterprise found 
 vent in a successful attack on the rich isle of Jamaica, 
 and war was declared against Spain in February, 1656. 
 It was not long before France actively joined in the war, 
 and Cromwell was able to secure from her the restoration 
 of the Protestants of the Waldensian Valleys, whom the 
 Duke of Savoy had been persecuting. Dunkirk was 
 taken for England before the Protector's deadi., 
 / The new Parliament had been carefully picked. The 
 V " Instrument " had given the Protector's Council the 
 The " Petition P ower to reject members who were considered 
 and Advice", "disabled to be elected". Nearly 100 Re- 
 publicans and Presbyterians having been thus 
 excluded, the remainder proceeded to offer Cromwell the 
 title of king under a new documentary constitution. This 
 "Humble Petition and Advice" gave more freedom and 
 \/ power to Parliament, though it still remained powerless 
 to touch any of the " fundamentals ". A house of Peers 
 was also to be created. Cromwell, after much debate, 
 refused to take the kingship, but accepted the rest of the 
 new constitution. 
 
 When Parliament met again in January, 1658, the 
 
 members before excluded were allowed to take their 
 
 Again the seats, as no power of scrutiny had been put 
 
 plan fails. m the hands of the government by the 
 
 " Petition and Advice". Their objection to the new 
 
 constitution, and to the " other house ", as they called 
 
 Cromwell's Peers, made it impossible for the Protector to 
 
 keep them in session without altering his views. He
 
 DEATH OF CROMWELL. 67 
 
 expected his Parliament to be loyal to a constitution 
 which many of them had had no hand in framing : as 
 this was impossible, he dissolved them. It was useless for 
 him to beg for unity in the face of the dangers which 
 from time to time threatened the Republic. They would 
 not listen. 
 
 Thus he who for years had kept England safe, pros- 
 perous, and respected, had settled nothing. His death, 
 which occurred in September, 1658, left the Death of the 
 problem of government to be faced by men Protector, 
 infinitely less able than himself. 
 
 The late Lord Protector's rule had satisfied no party, 
 though it had curbed all : and now the strife was going to 
 break out again. His son Richard, who Richard . s 
 succeeded by virtue of the provisions of the short 
 "Petition and Advice", was both by taste and l 
 education a mere country gentleman. He had neither 
 the power nor the wish to take up the task which lay 
 before him, and his speedy fall made way for absolute 
 anarchy. Cromwell had foreseen this; but when he had 
 named the many parties whose existence made free 
 government impossible, he, had omitted to speak of one 
 the party which would restore the king in order to secure 
 order and peace. 
 
 On Richard's accession, the military officers under 
 Lambert, Fleetwood, and others at once began to 
 demand for the army a leader independent of Quarrel with 
 the civil government. Oliver had been both the Army. 
 General and Protector, but Richard hardly knew a pike 
 from a musket. To resist this movement the new 
 Protector summoned a Parliament, in which he had a 
 majority against the " Wallingford House " party, as the 
 officers were named. His Protectorate was recognized, 
 and the army, finding that they were outvoted in Parlia- 
 ment, demanded a dissolution. Richard, fearing an 
 outbreak of civil war, took the only sensible course and 
 abdicated, on the 220! of April, 1659. 
 
 The party of Lambert, with whom the Republican foes 
 of the Protectorate were allied, was now supreme. But
 
 68 A CIVIL CHAOS. 
 
 it contained a strong leaven of " Levellers " and other 
 
 The army extremists. A fresh element of discord was 
 
 ^Rump"? 6 added when its leaders resolved to restore 
 
 May, 1659! the " Rump " Parliament, which had been 
 
 driven from Westminster by Oliver. 
 
 The tottering fabric of the Republic now consisted of 
 this caricature of a Parliament it consisted of only 40 
 And quarrels members, a few self-seeking soldier leaders, 
 ensue. an( j an army which was daily becoming more 
 
 unpopular owing to its connection with the Levelling pro- 
 grammes. The wildest discord was rife between the civil 
 and military elements. Parliament claimed supremacy, 
 while the Army, fresh from Lambert's victory over some 
 Royalists in Cheshire, did not care to conceal its claim to 
 complete independence. Finally, in October, 1659, rely- 
 ing on the adherence of Monk, who was commanding in 
 Scotland, the "Rump" took the daring step of depriving of 
 their commissions Lambert and those of his friends who 
 had encouraged petitions in favour of the independence of 
 the Army. The irate officers replied by driving the 
 " Rump " a second time from Westminster. 
 
 George Monk, from his post beyond the Tweed, was 
 grimly watching the dance at Westminster. Nominally a 
 intervention Presbyterian, certainly loathing the whole race 
 of Monk. o f Sectaries and Levellers, he saw in Lambert's 
 triumph nothing but danger for the future. When it was 
 announced that he was preparing to march into England, 
 the very rumour of his opposition sufficed to overthrow 
 the military government in London; and while Lambert 
 marched northward to confront Monk, the " Rump " 
 returned uninvited to Westminster. The fleet held to the 
 civil power, the sailors petitioned for a free and full 
 Parliament, and such leaders of the Army as could be 
 safely touched were banished. 
 
 Monk started from Scotland on New-year's Day, 1660. 
 In London, where he was at once completely master of 
 His march to affairs, he restored the Presbyterian members 
 London. expelled by Colonel Pride twelve years before, 
 and declared for a free Parliament. The Royalist Pres-
 
 THE RESTORATION. 69 
 
 byterian members were now in a majority. Writs were 
 issued for a free "Convention", and the Long Parliament 
 at last consented of its own free will to dissolve itself 
 (March, 1660). The new convention Parliament con- 
 tained a large majority for the moderates. On all sides 
 was heard the cry for the restoration of the old order. 
 Charles was in Holland, and issued from Breda, at Monk's 
 suggestion, his famous " Declaration ". It promised 
 amnesty, toleration, and a general settlement The King's <^/ 
 of the kingdom in accordance with the de- Rtum. 
 cisions of Parliament. This was considered sufficient. 
 The more prudent Presbyterians wished for some clearer 
 understanding with the prince, but the nation would not 
 wait. The reaction was in full flow. The first act of 
 the Convention was to invite Charles to return, and to / 
 resolve that government in England was vested in King,*/ 
 Lords, and Commons. The Naseby, rechristened for the 
 occasion the Royal Charles, brought the king to Dover, 
 and he reached the capital on May 29 amid universal 
 rejoicings. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 CHARLES II.: 1660-1685. 
 
 Charles, the eldest son of the late monarch, was thus 
 accepted as king, not so much because he had a right to 
 the position, as because the nation could not character 
 get on without him. The experience of the of the 
 last few years was felt to be worse than any- 
 thing that had gone before. Men of all conditions now 
 rallied to the side of the crown because it was likely to 
 be the champion of a known order of government. 
 Cavaliers and Republicans, Presbyterians and Church- 
 men made, a temporary alliance in the interests of the 
 old constitution. 
 
 The Rebellion had settled hardly anything. The pro- 
 blem of Sovereignty was still without a solution. There
 
 70 THE NEW KING'S PROSPECTS. 
 
 should not be a sovereign army or a sovereign presbytery ; 
 in that, and that only, men were agreed. The question 
 Result of the of Toleration was not answered. The coun- 
 Rebeiiion. try was just as much split up into parties as 
 before, but the nation as a whole was nervous about order, 
 and forgot- to be anxious about liberty. One thing alone 
 was tolerably certain as a result of the long struggle. No 
 future king could hope to set himself for any long period 
 against the will of the entire people. If Charles wished 
 to have his own way it must also be the way of the nation, 
 or of a clear majority of the nation. Ship money or forced 
 loans were not likely to recur. If this was the net result/ 
 of the war it would soon become clear that the king had 
 a fair chance to rule as he pleased, provided he could 
 play off the numerous parties against each other, and 
 keep the fear of civil war well before the eyes of moderate 
 men. 
 
 Now this is exactly what Charles did. He was a cool- 
 headed selfish man, with admirable manners, and no con- 
 character of victions to trouble him. He was not likely 
 Charles. t o m ake a crusade to save bishops, or to save 
 anything. But he liked his own way, not because he felt 
 that he had a duty to do, but because he found it pleasant 
 to be independent. Yet on one point he shared his / 
 father's and grandfather's ideas. He believed in they 
 mission of the Stewart family, and would put up even 
 with personal inconvenience rather than repudiate the 
 Divine hereditary right. Fortunately for him, he pos- 
 sessed, along with this view, the inestimable gift of tact, 
 in which his family was generally so conspicuously want- 
 ing. He knew as well as anybody that he could not 
 withstand the whole nation. As he himself put it, he 
 did not wish " to go on his travels again ". 
 
 Hence the whole reign became a struggle, in which 
 the king, however much he might offend one party, was 
 character of never without a party to side with him. The 
 the Reign. reason of this is to be looked for in the old 
 religious parties which now take three forms Church- 
 men, Protestant Dissenters of all sorts, and Roman
 
 ANALYSIS OF THE REIGN. 71 
 
 Catholics. Here were sufficient sources of discord on 
 a vital question; a fourth element was soon added the 
 King of France. Charles was not proud, and if his par- 
 liament or his opposition proved troublesome he would 
 apply for money and advice to Louis XIV. That prince 
 generally found it worth his while to supply both. 
 
 There are five well-marked periods into which the 
 twenty-five years of this reign may be divided. The first 
 lasted only about a year, and witnessed the Periods of 
 attempt of the Convention Parliament to Re'g 
 settle the outstanding questions of religion and politics 
 on a moderate basis. Its place was taken by the " Cava- 
 lier" Parliament, which set to work to strengthen the 
 revived monarchy, re-establish the Anglican Church, and 
 persecute all other creeds. This was during the full tide 
 of reaction against the ideals of Puritanism. The seconc 
 period (1662-1672) finds this Parliament gradually losing] 
 confidence in the king, whose schemes of toleration it 
 hated, and whose minister it impeached. The king and 
 his secret councillors now trafficked with Louis, and there 
 gradually appeared a fair possibility of a complete reaction^ 
 against the restered monarchy. Two parties were form-j 
 ing; one that of the Parliament, whose religious policj 
 had been outraged, another the popular party, which hatec 
 the foreign intrigues and the persecuting statutes to whicj 
 the king had assented. The third period (1672-1679^ 
 was one in which this twofold opposition failed to com- j 
 bine against the crown, and Charles was able to play off/ 
 his opponents one against the other. In the fourth period 
 (1679-1681) a great opposition, the beginning of the\ 
 future Whig party, was organized, and the attempt was | 
 made to oust the Duke of York, an avowed Papist, from 
 the succession to the crown. This question divided the 
 nation, and the popular party, in the hands of immpderate,/ 
 men, wrecked its own cause. The last period (i68i-\ 
 1685) found the king secure and triumphant, free from\ 
 Parliament, and from his other enemies, who had roused I 
 the fears of the nation, and hurried all those who cared^ - 
 more for order than for liberty into the royal camp.
 
 72 THE CONVENTION AT WORK. 
 
 The Convention, which had no strict claim to the name 
 
 of Parliament since it was not summoned by royal writ, 
 
 had a tremendous problem to deal with. 
 
 1 he Kestora- . 5T ,. . , .... 
 
 tion Settle- After such a time of religious and political 
 ment, 1660. di scor cl it was no easy task to set things in 
 order. Some revenge upon the regicides was to be ex- 
 pected, and thirteen of the most prominent were put to 
 death. A bill of Indemnity, covering the whole period 
 from 1637 to 1660, secured other men from punishment. 
 The House of Lords was restored, and the bishops re- 
 gained their seats. The army was disbanded, the royal 
 income fixed at ^i, 200,000 per annum, and the crown 
 lands restored. But the CavaHers, who had been obliged 
 to sell their lands, were not reinstated if they had in any 
 way recognized the usurping government. The religious 
 question was far more difficult. The king had been both 
 a Covenanter and a Roman Catholic in his time, and it 
 now suited him to pose as an Anglican. The Conven- 
 tion represented that combination of Churchmen and 
 Presbyterians which had brought back the king. They 
 restored the clergy who had been ejected from livings by 
 the Puritans, but did not disturb men -who had been 
 rightly inducted by the patrons, and thus left many Pres- 
 byterians and Independents in possession of livings. The 
 only arrangement which could make this system work 
 well would have been a scheme of "comprehension", 
 which is the term used for the adaptation of the Church 
 to suit the views of the more moderate Dissenters. The 
 king wished to carry this out, but as he included tolera- 
 tion for Independents and Roman Catholics, it was not 
 likely that the Churchmen and Presbyterians would agree 
 to it. 
 
 \In December, 1660, this famous Assembly was dis- 
 solved, and an intensely strong Anglican and Cavalier 
 The"Cava- spirit animated the new Parliament. It con- 
 mVnt.^eei 1 -*" demned the claims of the Long Parliament 
 1679- ' to regulate the militia, and declared that force 
 
 to be entirely in the hands of the crown. The religious 
 reaction was complete ; and after the failure of a confer-
 
 PERSECUTION OF DISSENTERS. 73 
 
 ence at the Savoy Palace, in which Churchmen and Pres- 
 byterians made an ineffectual attempt to bridge over their 
 differences, the true character of the change was shown. 
 Parliament passed the Corporation Act (1661), by which 
 all members of town corporations were compelled to re- 
 nounce the Covenant, repudiate the right of people to 
 resist the crown, and receive the Sacrament as Church- 
 men. The king was obliged to accept this policy as he^ 
 was in need of money, and Parliament cared more for 
 their church than even for their king. In May, 1662, the 
 Presbyterians who still held livings were confronted by 
 the "Act of Uniformity", which compelled all beneficed 
 clergy to accept the Prayer Book, and two thousand 
 ministers quitted their posts rather than submit. It was 
 not unnatural that Churchmen should think it necessary 
 that men who held benefices should be ordained by 
 bishops and believe in the legal church. But they had 
 shown a persecuting spirit in forcing town officers to 
 believe as they did, and were soon to cruelly persecute 
 those who had been removed from office in the Church. 
 The Cavaliers had now struck a blow at their enemies in 
 town and parish, and carried the king with them. They 
 shortly afterwards took vengeance on Sir Harry Vane, 
 the hero of the scene in the House of Commons when 
 Stafford's famous words in the Council were produced. 
 He, with Lambert, was tried for treason, on the ground 
 that Charles II. was legally king during the period of 
 Cromwell's government. Vane was executed on this 
 flimsy argument. The next period raises the question 
 how far Charles could be dragged along by this party. 
 
 The chief minister was now the Earl of Clarendon, 
 who, as Sir Edward Hyde, had been one of Charles the 
 First's most trusted advisers. He was strongly Clarendon - s 
 opposed to Toleration, and wished the Church Administra- 
 te keep her supremacy. Indeed, the persecut- t! on> lK 
 ing statutes of this period have been named the "Clarendon 
 Code". Charles did not like the domination of Clarendon 
 any better than the supremacy of Parliament, but, for a 
 time, all went well. The king was married (1662) to a
 
 74 FOREIGN POLITICS. 
 
 Portuguese princess, Catharine of Braganza. This alliance 
 naturally brought the English government into line with 
 France, for Louis was supporting Portugal in the main- 
 tenance of her independence against Spain. The sale of 
 Dunkirk to the French king bound this friendship closer, 
 and pleased Charles, who saw in the purchase-money a 
 means of independence. But there was no harmony, for 
 the king was already talking of using his inherent power 
 of dispensing 1 with laws in order to lighten the burdens 
 upon Roman Catholics and Protestant Pissenters. Par- 
 liament and the Chancellor Clarendon agreed in resisting 
 this royal attempt to undermine their policy. 
 ) A war with Holland temporarily united king and Parlia- 
 ment. The Dutch were still our commercial rivals on the sea 
 The Dutch and our colonial opponents in the Indies. In 
 war, 1665-1667. the (j a y S o f King James English Puritan colon- 
 ists had sailed to the shores of North America, and the 
 descendants of these famous " Pilgrim Fathers " had now 
 established a great group of colonies east of the Hudson 
 river. This settlement was known as New England. Lower 
 down the coast, Virginia, the oldest of the English settle- 
 ments abroad, had grown into a prosperous slave-owning 
 country. Between these two settlements was a district 
 colonized by the Dutch, and hence constant quarrels arose. 
 Charles was also angry with Holland on his own account. 
 His sister Mary had married the Prince of Orange, who 
 died young. On his decease the Dutch refused to con- 
 tinue his son William III. in his father's office of Stadt- 
 holder. A great statesman, named de Witt, now guided 
 Dutch politics, under the title of Grand Pensionary, and 
 the young William of Orange, Charles's nephew, the future 
 King of England, was kept out of the chief-magistracy 
 which his ancestors had held for three generations. 
 
 The war broke out in 1665, and was hotly waged at sea. 
 The King of France, for the moment, joined the Dutch 
 against England. His policy was a deep and clever one. 
 
 1 Dispensing power means the ancient Royal right to pardon the breach of an 
 Act : suspending power is a claim to declare the Act or Acts to be no longer in 
 force.
 
 LOUIS' PROGRAMME. 75 
 
 The real object which he had in view was the exten- 
 sion of France to the Rhine, and the gradual absorption 
 of the decaying Spanish empire. For these Louis XIV 
 two objects he strove until his death. All and his 
 the lands between the French border and the schemes - 
 Rhine the Spanish Netherlands (Belgium), Luxembourg, 
 Lorraine, the county of Burgundy, and Alsace were 
 meant to be attacked in turn. Louis' wife was the sister of 
 King Charles II. of Spain, a sickly boy, who, it was hoped, 
 would soon die. His vast inheritance might then fall to 
 the French king, in spite of his renunciation in the Treaty 
 of the Pyrenees of all future rights which should accrue 
 through his wife. All this was plainly opposed to Dutch 
 interests, for the Dutch were bound to resent the approach 
 of so powerful a monarch to their frontiers. 1 But Louis 
 was, for the present, pledged by treaty to assist them, and 
 did not wish to show his hand. 
 
 When Louis declared war (1666) the English govern- 
 ment was extending its policy of persecution, being alarmed 
 lest the Dissenters should side with the Dutch. E lish diffi . 
 Thus the cruel Conventicle Act imposed in cuities, 1665- 
 1 664 severe penalties against those who should l667 ' 
 worship in any way other than that prescribed by the Act 
 of Uniformity; and in 1665 the Dissenting ministers were 
 further forbidden by the Five Mile Act to approach within 
 five miles of any corporate town, and so debarred from 
 earning a livelihood by teaching. The great Plague was 
 raging in London, and a few months later the great Fire 
 destroyed a large part of the city. Thus England was 
 prepared by her disunion and disaster rather for peace 
 than for war. The Dutch also became alive Peace of 
 to the dangers with which they were threat- Breda, July, 
 ened by Louis' schemes. Thus negotiations l667 ' 
 were opened between the two principals. In order to 
 hasten the English into peace de Witt sent his vessels 
 into the Thames and Medway, and " the roar of foreign 
 guns was heard for the first and last time by the citizens of 
 London". In the end England secured the Dutch colonies 
 
 1 See map p. 105. 
 (962) F
 
 7 6 PARLIAMENT GROWS DISCONTENTED. 
 
 between New England and Virginia, while the Dutch 
 kept their hold on the Spice Islands of the East Indies. 
 
 For some time discontent had been growing both in 
 and out of Parliament; there were grave scandals as to 
 p I! f the management of public money voted for 
 
 clarendon, the War; there were rumours that the king 
 August, 1667. had a design to ally himself with F ranc e and 
 
 to govern without a Parliament by means of armed force ; 
 small as the standing army was, since all but a few 
 regiments had been disbanded in 1660, it was not un- 
 naturally considered a menace to freedom; the sale of 
 Dunkirk was thought almost as great a national disgrace 
 as the burning of English shipping by the Dutch in the 
 Medway. All ills were ascribed to the minister. Charles 
 was not inclined to exert himself to save his father's old 
 friend, for Clarendon did not share his views as to 
 Toleration, or scruple to show contempt for the king's 
 immoral life. He was impeached and banished. 
 
 The next administration is known in history as the 
 "Cabal", because the names of the men who were 
 The "Cabal", chiefly consulted by the king during the next 
 1667-1673. f ew years were found to spell Cabal 1 by their 
 initial letters. They were Clifford and Arlington, who 
 were Roman Catholics; Buckingham, the son of James 
 I.'s favourite; Anthony Ashley, afterwards Earl of Shaftes- 
 bury; and Lauderdale, who was governing Scotland in 
 the Episcopal interest and persecuting the Covenanters, 
 who, after the execution of their leader Argyle at the 
 Restoration, continued to be an oppressed and discredited 
 party until the end of the century. These five men were 
 widely different in their ideas, and had but one common 
 object a broader view in church matters than was 
 prevalent in Parliament. 
 
 Louis was alarming the Dutch by his successes in the 
 Spanish Netherlands, which he was now claiming by right 
 of his wife. Englishmen were hostile to the advance of 
 the great Catholic monarch, and an alliance was made 
 by England, Holland, and Sweden to force him to desist. 
 
 1 Cabal = Cabala, secret knowledge of the occult sort.
 
 CHARLES INTRIGUES WITH FRANCE. 77 
 
 He gave way for the time, and restored the county 
 of Burgundy, though he kept several recently acquired 
 fortresses in the Netherlands. But Charles Triple AIH- 
 had never cared for the popular policy ^." c | and f 
 of the Triple Alliance, and soon entered Dover, 668- 
 into a secret negotiation with the French l670 ' 
 king. Louis was anxious to crush the Dutch, who 
 were bound to be the opponents of his grasping frontier 
 policy, and was most anxious to bind Charles and the 
 English to neutrality if not to co-operation. Parliament*/ 
 was opposed to Louis, and therefore Charles could not 
 join him unless he obtained money for doing so, since 
 such an alliance was bound to alienate his subjects. / 
 Here at last was a chance to get free from the leading 
 strings in which the "Cavalier Parliament" had kept him, 
 and the king seized it. By the secret Treaty of Dover, 
 known only to Clifford and Arlington, Charles agreed to 
 help Louis against the Dutch, and to declare himself a 
 Roman Catholic for a round sum of ^"200,000 a year. 
 This treaty was nearly as ridiculous as it was disgraceful. 
 That the English would ever allow themselves to be led 
 back to Popery by their king ought by this time to have 
 been clear even to a Stewart. 
 
 The real policy of the Cabal was shown when in 1672 
 the king issued his famous Declaration of Indulgence. 
 
 Thp_ Pqrjiflmpnf^wriir.h had already shown The Indul- 
 
 the church than for the eence. 
 
 crown, was not sitting at the moment ; and the king's 
 supposed power to suspend ecclesiastical laws was used 
 to grant freedom from the stringent penal laws to both 
 Nonconformists and Roman Catholics. The leader of 
 this policy was Ashley, who had just been made Earl of 
 Shaftesbury and Lord Chancellor. 
 
 When Parliament met in 1673, after a long prorogation, 
 the Declaration of Indulgence was before their eyes, 
 though the treaty with Louis was still a secret, opposition 
 War had just been declared against Holland, increases. 
 and men who knew nothing of the secret plot were not 
 sorry to punish Holland for her attack on English ships
 
 78 GROWING OPPOSITION. 
 
 in 1667. The third period of the reign opens with this 
 session, in which the king soon found himself opposed to 
 two parties: the Cavaliers, who resented the Declaration, 
 and the moderate men, who began to fear that the De- 
 claration was only part of the French alliance, and tended 
 to Roman Catholicism and arbitrary government rather 
 than to the relief of Protestant Dissenters. 
 
 At first the Parliament was eager for the war against 
 the Dutch. Shaftesbury, the Lord Chancellor, made his 
 The Test celebrated speech, in which he announced 
 Act, 1673. the policy of the French alliance (he knew 
 nothing of the secret treaty) in the words " Delenda est 
 Carthago ". Parliament voted large sums, but showed no 
 sign of bowing to the Indulgence scheme. It was not 
 long before its views were more clearly expressed. The 
 king had to withdraw the Declaration, and the Test Act 
 was passed. It declared that all who held any office 
 under the crown must renounce the doctrine of Tran- 
 substantiation and receive the Sacrament in the English 
 Church. This was the final blow to the Cabal. 
 
 Meanwhile Englishmen were becoming alarmed at the 
 successes of Louis. Perhaps some suspicions of the 
 Adisurfited secret treaty were abroad. The war with 
 opposition. Holland became unpopular; the fear of 
 Roman Catholicism increased when men reflected that 
 we were at war with a Protestant power in alliance with a 
 Catholic one. Many feared that Charles would use his 
 army to make himself independent, for the Common- 
 wealth was not forgotten; and Shaftesbury, the apostle of 
 toleration, was dismissed. He very soon entered the 
 ranks of the opposition, but not, of course, to act in 
 alliance with the bigoted Churchmen who had passed 
 the Test Act. The various elements of this opposition 
 were not likely to unite, and so the king, at present, had 
 little to fear. Shaftesbury had been willing to use the 
 Royal Prerogative to gain Toleration, and could not 
 therefore complain with Parliament of the Suspending 
 power. The Cavaliers of the Test Act were not likely 
 to join the originators of the Indulgence. But the
 
 PARLIAMENT UNPOPULAR. 79 
 
 opposition to France was too strong to be resisted, 
 and in 1674 Charles cleverly yielded so much, and made 
 peace with Holland. Thus the king had twice yielded 
 his point, in each case on the question of religion, for 
 his alliance with Louis was really a Catholic policy. 
 So disunited were his opponents, however, that he might 
 have been absolute if he had desisted from all religious 
 opposition to Parliament. 
 
 There was in 1675 & return to the policy of Clarendon 
 when Sir Thomas Osborne, Earl of Danby, a strong 
 churchman and a friend of royalty, became Danby chief 
 chief adviser of the crown. But the popu- minister, 
 larity of this long Parliament was now waning. l6?5 ' 
 It had outstayed its welcome. Men were tired of its 
 factious temper, especially when Danby produced a 
 bill to impose on all "placemen 1 " an oath that they 
 would neither resist the crown nor attempt alteration of 
 government in church or state. This, however, he failed 
 to convert into law. The leaders of the Toleration party 
 were anxious for a dissolution, as they hoped for a broader 
 religious feeling in the next Parliament. That the nation 
 was partly of the same opinion may be peeling 
 gathered from the fact that the government against Par- 
 thought proper to order the closing of the 1! :nt> l67 ' 
 " coffee-houses ", in which men were in the habit of 
 discussing politics, there being no newspapers to read. 
 Lastly the king of France, who was now obliged to face a 
 general European coalition against his schemes, was most 
 anxious to see the "Cavalier Parliament" dissolved. 
 Their strong and- French attitude might, he thought, force 
 Charles into a French war as it had already forced him 
 into a Dutch peace. When, after more than a year's 
 prorogation, Parliament reassembled in February, 1677, 
 Louis' anticipations were realized, and a cry for a French 
 war arose. The opposition lords, with Shaftesbury at 
 their head, maintained that a year's prorogation dissolved 
 ipso facto a Parliament, since, by the old laws, there must 
 be a meeting every year. This was a mere quibble for 
 
 1 Persons holding office unJer the crown.
 
 8o CHARLES' DIPLOMATIC CONCESSIONS. 
 
 the Triennial Act of 1641, requiring a meeting at least 
 once in three years, was still in force, though its more 
 stringent provisions had been repealed. But the action 
 of these leaders serves to show that there was an opposi- 
 tion to both king and Parliament. 
 
 In this situation the shrewd king once more proved 
 his tact. Since Parliament was averse to France he 
 The king's determined to side with them and desert his 
 change of French alliance. He would thus play off 
 policy, 1677. p ar n am ent against the Toleration party, which 
 suspected his Roman Catholic designs. The money which 
 he could no longer obtain from Louis he would be able to 
 get from his subjects, for, his real aim being to strengthen 
 his army in case of future need, money was absolutely 
 necessary. Thus the Toleration party, which could not, 
 like Louis and Parliament, supply money, was isolated. 
 A grand opportunity to persuade a rather incredulous" 
 Parliament of his anti-French intentions now presented 
 itself, and the king was not slow to take it. During the 
 Dutch war the Grand Pensionary had been murdered by 
 a mob, and the young Prince of Orange had been re- 
 stored, at the age of twenty-one, to the Stadtholdership. 
 This Protestant prince, the lifelong enemy of the great 
 French king, was now married, with the approval of 
 Charles, to his cousin Mary, eldest daughter of James, 
 Duke of York, the king's brother. Parliament was greatly 
 pleased at this third marked success. They voted a mil- 
 lion, and the astute king was able to add to his army. 
 He soon found, however, that he had only exchanged 
 masters. 
 
 And as for Louis his revenge was easy. There was a 
 growing fear in England that Charles had meant to secure 
 Theopposi- ^is own independence of Parliament by an 
 tion and army and French help. The French king 
 LOUIS xiv. c i ever iy stimulated this fear, and took into 
 his pay several of the unscrupulous leaders of the English 
 opposition, while assuring them that he had deserted the 
 cause of their sovereign. The Toleration party, forsaken 
 by Charles, was taken up by Louis!
 
 A NATIONAL PANIC. 8l 
 
 This was, indeed, a sufficient complication, and yet 
 Charles added another string to his bow by asking Louis 
 to pay him large sums to enable him to be A complicated 
 independent of the Cavalier Parliament. So situation > l6 7 8 
 intricate had the politics of England become that, though 
 king and Parliament were apparently in alliance against 
 France, both were asking money from that power to do 
 its behests. Such a situation could not last. The French 
 king took the opportunity to make peace with Holland 
 at Nimuegen (August, 1678), and obtained his coveted 
 county of Burgundy together with many fortresses in the 
 Netherlands. Parliament was becoming more and more 
 nervous as to the intentions of Charles. The opposition 
 was becoming stronger and clearer, though there w r as, as 
 yet, no great question on which they could unite. 
 
 At this moment the king's luck deserted him. There 
 arose a cry on which the opposition could appeal to a 
 sensitive nation. The Popish Plot, a tissue The Popish 
 of falsehoods weaved around a slender thread Dissolution! 
 of fact, was announced by a depraved villain I6 ?8- 
 named Titus Gates. He, and others like him, declared 
 that there was a deep-rooted plot by which Roman 
 Catholics were endeavouring to subvert the freedom of 
 the country, assassinate the king, and restore England to 
 the Papal allegiance. The nation was alarmed. The 
 old fears of the French alliance and the Indulgence had 
 made the way easy for such a panic. Parliament caught 
 the alarm, Papists were hurried to execution on the 
 slenderest evidence, and the opposition leaders, some of 
 whom believed genuinely in the story, fanned the flames. 
 An act to disable Papists from sitting in either house of 
 Parliament was passed. As if to show where the real 
 Popish Plot had been, the secret of a letter, written by 
 Danby at the king's bidding, in which the English am- 
 bassador was instructed to ask Louis for money, was now 
 made public by Danby's enemies. The old Treaty of 
 Dover was as yet only suspected. The minister was at 
 once impeached. Charles avowed his own orders, and, 
 to screen his too faithful servant, dissolved the Cavalier
 
 82 A REAL DANGER FOR CHARLES. 
 
 Parliament. Louis had, for the moment, the game in his 
 hands, and the opposition had gained a case to lay before 
 the country. 
 
 In the fourth period of the reign this case took a defi- 
 nite shape, and led dangerously near to rebellion. James, 
 New Pariia- tne king's brother, was heir to the throne, for 
 ment and Charles had no legitimate children. He was 
 sition^ iviarch, a declared Roman Catholic, and had recently 
 l679 - married as his second wife the Princess Mary 
 
 of Modena, who was of the same faith. His first wife 
 was Anne Hyde, daughter of the Chancellor Clarendon, 
 and mother of James's daughters, Mary and Anne, who 
 were afterwards Queens of England. With the Popish 
 Plot filling men's mouths, an army still on foot in spite 
 of Parliamentary demands for its disbandment, and Louis 
 XIV. still successfully creeping up to the Rhine frontier, 
 it was not difficult for the opposition to raise a cry that 
 the Protestant Constitution was in danger. They struck 
 straight at the one idea which Charles cherished more 
 than his ease or his independence the hereditary right 
 of his family; and demanded security against a Popish 
 successor. Lord William Russell led in the Commons, 
 while Shaftesbury represented the opposition in the Lords. 
 Charles tried to divert attention from James by adopting 
 a Protestant foreign policy, but when Danby pleaded the 
 royal pardon to bar his impeachment another strong case 
 was added to the score of the popular party; for Parlia- 
 ment declared such a pardon to be illegal. At last there 
 was a point which the king would not yield and could 
 not, by shuffling the cards, evade. 
 
 At this critical moment Sir William Temple brought 
 forward his celebrated scheme intended to solve the ever- 
 Tempie to the recurring conflicts between Parliament and 
 rescue, 1679. th e crown. He proposed that the Privy 
 Council should be reconstructed and made a sort of 
 mediator between king and Parliament. It was to con- 
 sist of thirty members, fifteen royal nominees, and fifteen 
 members of the Legislature. They were to advise the 
 crown, and no step was to be taken without them.
 
 A CANDIDATE FOR THE THRONE. 83 
 
 Charles adopted this cumbrous plan. Many of his 
 bitterest opponents were made members, Shaftesbury be- 
 coming President. The king now hoped to stave off the 
 succession difficulty, and offered extraordinary securities 
 for Protestantism, provided the Duke of York was allowed 
 to succeed in due course. All holders of places of trust, 
 together with the military and naval administration, were 
 to be approved by Parliament, which was to be secured 
 from a dissolution at the time of the king's death. 
 
 But the leaders of the Opposition were not to be 
 silenced. They rightly concluded that such safeguards 
 were illusory, for no Parliament can bind its Exclusion 
 successors; and in May, 1679, the Exclusion 3111,1679. 
 Bill, to prevent the succession of James, was produced. 
 The king meant to go to all lengths to prevent this; and 
 therefore, after passing the celebrated Habeas Corpus 
 Act, which secured that the ancient writ to enquire into 
 the cause of imprisonment should not be evaded by legal 
 officers, his third Parliament was dissolved. The Council 
 scheme had completely failed. 
 
 The idea of Exclusion involved some plan for a suc- 
 cessor other than James. And it is here that Shaftesbury 
 and his party made their greatest mistake. Monmouth's 
 They openly proposed to seat the Duke of candidature. 
 Monmouth, one of the many natural sons of the king, 
 upon the throne of England. Monmouth was popular, 
 and had gained some military reputation, having just 
 won a victory over the extreme Covenanters in Scotland 
 at Bothwell Brig, and suppressed a very dangerous rising. 
 There were not wanting agitators who spread a tale of 
 Charles's marriage with Lucy Walters, the young Duke's 
 mother. This the king emphatically denied, and the per- 
 sistence of the Shaftesbury faction in this plan brought 
 about a split even in the ranks of the Opposition. Lord 
 Halifax, a brilliant and adventurous politician, threw in 
 his lot with the government. He is generally known as 
 the ''Trimmer", for he loved to desert the winning side 
 and thus gratify his vanity by rectifying the balance. 
 Russell and others still adhered to Shaftesbury.
 
 84 ORIGIN OF ENGLISH PARTY NAMES. 
 
 Once more a Parliament was elected in October, 1679, 
 but Charles refused to summon it, and for a year the 
 Whigs and members never assembled. It is during this 
 Tories, 1680. tj me that the names Whig and Tory were 
 first given to the two parties. Those who believed in the 
 Popish Plot, and wished to change the succession, were 
 derisively compared to the "Whigamores", or "Whigs", a 
 bitter sect of Scottish Covenanters. Those who adhered to 
 the Court and Divine Right were styled "Tories", a name 
 by which the outlawed banditti of Ireland were known. 
 The Whigs petitioned for a summons of Parliament, while 
 the Tories arranged counter-petitions "abhorring" the idea 
 of altering the succession. Thus the terms "Petitioners" 
 and "Abhorrers" were also used to describe the two 
 factions. Beneath the question of the succession lay the 
 great dispute, which had commenced in the days of the 
 Long Parliament, as to whether the nation was to have a 
 personal king or an official one. For it was practically 
 the same thing to discuss whether a nation may choose 
 a king or must accept a distasteful one because of his 
 pedigree. The Stewart theory of Divine Right trembled 
 in the balance, as that of the Discretionary power of 
 monarchs had in the days of Charles I. and Laud. The 
 two great parties had a different view of the question of 
 Sovereignty, as they had of the question of Toleration. 
 
 In October, 1680, the Parliament at last met. Charles 
 tried once more to shelve the question by asking for 
 Rejection of unity in the face of the French king's advances 
 the BUI. towards the Dutch frontier. But men saw 
 through this, and knew that he probably had another 
 letter about French gold ready for his ministers. Besides, 
 Louis had been careful to keep up the quarrel, for he 
 knew England was a dangerous factor in European 
 politics if it was united. He worked up the fears of 
 arbitrary government, and the Exclusion Bill was passed 
 in the Commons. In the Lords, however, Halifax made 
 a brilliant speech, cutting deeply into the Whig programme. 
 The two Protestant daughters of James, Mary, Princess 
 of Orange, and Anne, were excluded by Shaftesbury's
 
 REACTION IN FAVOUR OF CHARLES. 85 
 
 scheme, and the Lords, taught by Halifax, refused to 
 adopt it. 
 
 But the Opposition could not now retreat. Already 
 there was a talk in Parliament of Toleration and Compre- 
 hension, and the city of London was pledged The last 
 to the Exclusion Bill. Charles once more dis- Parliament 
 solved Parliament, and summoned a new one March l68r 
 to Oxford, in order to be out of the way of Shaftesbury's 
 " brisk boys ", as the mobs he hoped to raise were styled. 
 In March, 1681, this Assembly met in Christ Church 
 Hall. The Whig leaders, fearing lest they might be 
 molested in that home of Royalism, came with armed 
 followers, an unconstitutional blunder to which they 
 largely owed their ruin. The question speedily came to 
 an issue. Charles offered everything; even to make the 
 Prince of Orange Regent during his brother's lifetime, 
 provided the title of king were reserved to the latter, who 
 might be banished from the kingdom. This was clever, 
 for it forced Shaftesbury to rely on the Duke of Mon- 
 mouth as his candidate. Charles refused point blank to 
 recognize his natural son as heir to the throne. He had 
 split the Opposition by this manoeuvre, and knew that he 
 had Louis' gold in reserve, for the latter would not care 
 to see a new government under Monmouth and Shaftes- 
 bury pledged to a Protestant policy. Louis only wanted 
 Charles to quarrel with his parliament, and would pay 
 either, or both, so long as they were not on speaking 
 terms. The last Parliament of King Charles was at once 
 dissolved after one week's stormy session. 
 
 The last period of the reign witnesses a great Tory 
 reaction. There was no Parliament. William of Orange 
 came to ask his uncle's- help against the The turn of 
 French, who were overrunning Alsace, but the tide - 
 obtained no assistance. The Cavaliers, who feared their 
 church policy would collapse if Shaftesbury and his party 
 obtained power, now rallied to the king. To prevent the 
 Dissenters from getting a footing in politics they were 
 willing to keep to hereditary succession, just as their an- 
 cestors had rallied to Charles, rather than trust the Church
 
 86 CHARLES CRUSHES THE WHIGS. 
 
 to Pym and the Puritans. The entire moderate party 
 were more alarmed at the menacing attitude of the Whigs 
 than at the royal army which Charles maintained or at 
 the seizure of Strasburg by Louis XIV. Civil war was 
 an evil they never meant to face again. Thus there was 
 for the first time in the reign no need for the king to give 
 way. He had not to choose between abandoning his 
 brother and " starting on his travels ", for the majority of 
 the nation, sensitive as they were about Popery, chose for 
 him. James they considered a less evil than civil war. 
 
 Thus the conditions enabled the king to change his 
 tactics. Instead of defending hereditary right, which men 
 
 Attack on were now ea g er to do for him,- he was able to 
 shaftesbury, attack its assailants. Shaftesbury was accused 
 of treason. The London grand jury, to the 
 delight of the Whigs, threw out the bill. But the men 
 who now advised Charles Sunderland, Lawrence Hyde, 
 and Halifax were determined to crush their opponents. 
 London, which, by adhering to Parliament, had ruined 
 Charles I., and had so recently proved itself a stronghold 
 of the Whigs, saw its gates thrown down and its privileges 
 attacked. On various trifling pretexts the ancient charter 
 of the capital city was confiscated, and was only renewed 
 upon conditions which ensured a subservient corporation. 
 A similar fate was meted out to other towns, and the 
 great centres of Dissent and Whiggery were thus rendered 
 harmless. Meanwhile Shaftesbury's ill-advised design to 
 appeal to arms on the question of the Succession com- 
 pleted the ruin of the already discredited Whigs. Russell, 
 Monmouth, and others were averse to such an extreme 
 course; and Shaftesbury, no longer able to rely on the 
 adherence of London, fled to Holland, where he died in 
 1683. 
 
 But his fiery spirit, which had already ruined the move- 
 ment, lived on in a more desperate body of men. An 
 The Rye attempt was made by some extreme membi-is 
 House Plot, of the rank and file of the Whigs to settle the 
 June, 1683. w hole question by a plot to assassinate Charles 
 and his brother. The plan happily an abortive one
 
 DEATH OF CHARLES II. 87 
 
 was to waylay the victims at the Rye House on their way 
 from Newmarket. This naturally caused all who had 
 been connected with the recent agitation to be suspected. 
 Russell and Algernon Sydney were tried and executed, 
 though there was no evidence to connect them with the 
 murderous plan. But the laws of treason were severely 
 administered, and the known opinions of these men, evi- 
 denced in Sydney's case by some unpublished writings 
 declaring the right to resist a bad king, were sufficient to 
 bar all hope of acquittal. Monmouth was banished, and 
 the great agitation which had threatened to sweep away 
 the Stewart theory of Divine Right was at an end. 
 
 In the moment of triumph, when four years had elapsed 
 without a parliament, with the Opposition discredited and 
 crushed, the skilful victor died. The Roman Death of the 
 Catholics, for whom he had risked so much kin > l68 s- 
 and achieved so little, had the satisfaction of receiving 
 Charles into their communion on his deathbed. As he 
 was calm and collected amid the crises and agitations of 
 his political life, so his perfect manners, quiet humour, 
 and unflinching courage in the midst of great pain, lasted 
 to the end. After apologizing to those who stood around 
 for the " unconscionable time " which he took in dying, 
 Charles expired on February 6, 1685. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 JAMES II.: 1685-1689. 
 
 James came to the throne as the hero of a victory 
 which others had won. The Whigs were crushed. The 
 attack on Hereditary Right was now but an 
 
 , . ,. i. The situation 
 
 episode in a discredited movement, the cry 
 of a fallen party. The reaction in favour of monarchy 
 was as complete at the end of Charles' reign as it had 
 been in 1660. Indeed it was, in a sense, 
 stronger, for it was the result of a double
 
 88 THE NEW KING. 
 
 lesson: the threats of the "Exclusionists" had reminded 
 men of the anarchy of the Rebellion. Yet this reaction 
 was not at bottom so much in favour of the crown as for 
 the cause of peace. 
 
 Louis XIV. was now paramount in Europe; all other 
 nations saw a menace to their safety in his illimitable 
 claims and his unscrupulous raids. Pope and 
 Emperor alike longed to check him. And 
 one stern young Prince had long ago set his face like a 
 flint towards the French frontiers, and meant to stem 
 the tide of conquest. William of Orange had a double 
 interest in England. To her he looked, as champion of 
 Dutch independence, for that assistance against France, 
 without which his determination to die on the last dyke 
 was likely to be realized. To her he looked, as the 
 Princess Mary's husband, for a kingdom whose resources 
 he might use when his wife should in due course become 
 Queen. 
 
 The new king was 52 years old. He was a hard 
 
 worker, a man of business, an experienced soldier, sailor, 
 
 and administrator. He was without the lazy 
 
 James char- . . 
 
 acter and hesitancy of his grandfather, and lacked the 
 aims. noble resignation of his father, while he 
 
 possessed to the full the obstinate belief in the Stewart 
 mission, which had clogged the one and ruined the 
 other. Moreover, he had developed the Stewart want of 
 tact quite as much as his brother had avoided it. In 
 fact he had a great deal of experience with none of its 
 fruits. No character could make a man more unfit to be 
 a king. When he persisted in a wrong course it was 
 with a blind infatuation. What, then, was he likely to do 
 with the grand opportunity to which he succeeded? 
 
 He reigned barely four years. In that short time he 
 managed to alienate the Church of England, which had 
 Character of preached Divine Right and Non-Resistance 
 the reign. f or nearly a century; to restore the Whig 
 party to a supremacy which lasted for upwards of 80 
 years; and finally to uproot his own dynasty from its firm 
 hold in the hearts of the English people. Under James
 
 SKETCH OF THE REIGN. 89 
 
 the fear of a Popish king vanquished the fear of a civil 
 war. 
 
 The reason is to be sought, like the clue to most of the 
 seventeenth century problems, in Religion ; James was a 
 bigoted Roman Catholic, and while he persecuted to the 
 death Presbyterians in Scotland, he determined to remove 
 all restrictions on the political and religious position of 
 the Roman Catholics in England. The laws which had 
 been passed against Nonconformists of all sorts fall into 
 two clear divisions. First, faejwtal laws, which forbade 
 and punished the exercise oftrierr~Te1igion ; secondly, 
 the Tests, which refused them all political and military 
 office, unless they denied by word and deed their dearest 
 beliefs. The former involved religious persecution, the 
 latter political death. The Penal Laws might perhaps, in 
 a short time, have been mitigated; for they were cruel 
 and bloody, and many enlightened men disliked them. 
 Meanwhile there would have been little difficulty in using 
 the "Prerogative of Dispensing" to pardon those who were 
 threatened with the more terrible punishments. Gradually 
 men would have learned that punishment for religious 
 opinion is no part of man's duty to man or to God. But the 
 Tests, on the other hand, were considered by the majority, 
 in the case of the Roman Catholics, as necessary for the 
 national safety; and, in the case of Protestant Dissenters, as 
 a useful means of keeping enemies out of power. James's- 
 attempts to break down the barriers which divided his 
 co-religionists from the best and highest places in the 
 land are the main feature of his reign. Like Charles, he 
 relied on Louis' gold and on an army; but, unlike Charles, 
 he had no idea what things were possible and what were 
 not. James pursued his schemes till an exasperated 
 nation called and welcomed his nephew and son-in-law to 
 deliver it. Then he fled. No doubt Toleration was a 
 good object, but Englishmen had reason to distrust 
 Roman Catholics, who aimed -at supremacy, and had 
 perpetually endeavoured since the Reformation to over- 
 throw the government by conspiracy or by open 
 force.
 
 90 MONMOUTH'S REBELLION. 
 
 When James found the nation resolute against his plan 
 he endeavoured to carry it out against their will and their 
 laws. Thus the Revolution which ensued turned on the 
 old question Is the king a personal ruler and above 
 the law of the land? This question was at last to be 
 answered in the negative. ' ^- 
 
 The first and only Parliament of the reign was strongly 
 loyal, but James was to find it still more strongly allied 
 First meeting with th . e existing form of church government, 
 of Parliament. The king promised to maintain the church 
 
 May, i68s i i f i i i i j 
 
 and keep the laws, but had already received 
 a large present from Louis, and informed that king's 
 envoy that he relied on his master's help. Parliament 
 voted a large increase of the -royal revenue, though James 
 had been taking ungranted customs. There was but one 
 member who raised his voice in opposition to the crown, 
 and he gained no supporters. 
 
 Already a rebellion had occurred in Scotland. Archi- 
 bald Earl of Argyle, son of the great Covenanter who had 
 Therisin of been beheaded in 1660, had landed in the 
 Monmouth. Western Highlands early in 1685 to rouse 
 June, 1685. n j g coun t r y m en in defence of their religion ; 
 but the scheme was badly organized, and the rising was 
 easily suppressed. A far more dangerous foe was now in 
 arms in the South. The Duke of Monmouth, the natural 
 son of the late king, had been living in Holland, where 
 he was surrounded by many refugees of the old Exclusion 
 and Whig party. Relying on his undoubted popularity 
 in England he now landed at Lyme Regis (June, 1685), 
 and declared for a free Parliament and relief of Dissenters. 
 He received no support from the Prince of Orange, who 
 was not likely to compromise his future by such a scheme. 
 At Taunton the invader was proclaimed as King, but 
 after a brief moment of success his followers were cut to 
 pieces on Sedgmoor (July 6). He was captured and 
 executed, after a piteous appeal to his uncle's mercy. 
 His adherents, and all who had been concerned in the 
 rising, were cruelly punished by the soldiers of Colonel 
 Kirke and the judicial murders of Chief-justice Jeffreys,
 
 A STORMY PROSPECT. gi 
 
 who conducted the memorable " Bloody Assize " in the 
 south-western counties with reckless blood-thirstiness. 
 
 This complete victory was a new advantage for the 
 crown. Monmouth had corroborated the suspicions of 
 those who had feared the " brisk boys " of Shaftesbury, 
 and a third object lesson had thus confirmed the loyalty 
 of all moderate men. But James drew the wrong lesson 
 from his easy victory. 
 
 He was able indeed to increase his army as a measure 
 of security. But when in November, 1685, the second 
 session of Parliament opened, it was found Second Ses . 
 that Halifax, whose tongue had saved the sion of Pariia- 
 king in the Exclusion debate, had already ment - 
 been dismissed from office. James had appointed Roman 
 Catholics to military posts from which they were excluded 
 by the Test Act, and now announced to Parliament his 
 intention to keep them there. Halifax had refused to 
 vote for the repeal of the Act, and James meant to get 
 that repeal from a Parliament of zealous churchmen. 
 This proved to be quite impossible, and thus the most 
 loyal Parliament a Stewart ever had was prorogued, as it 
 proved, never to meet again. 
 
 Yet there was no sign that the king would, moderate 
 his course. His chief advisers were Roman Catholics 
 Father Petre, a Jesuit, Tyrconnel, a reckless Formation of 
 Irish noble, and others. There were not parties, 
 wanting men who, while agreeing with James, hoped he 
 would not rush headlong to his ruin by attacking the 
 church. Many moderate Roman Catholics were anxious 
 to see him hold back, and Lawrence Hyde, Earl of 
 Rochester, his own brother-in-law, a strong Tory and 
 churchman, led a milder court party. But already there 
 was forming an opposition, among men who were not 
 inclined to take the royal assurance that promises should 
 be kept as a sufficient national security. Halifax, Devon- 
 shire, and Compton, Bishop of London led this party. 
 Thus we may say there were three divisions the Jesuit 
 cabal, the moderate Court party, and the opposition. 
 The meaning of Roman Catholic toleration and the 
 
 (962) G
 
 92 THE KING'S RECKLESS POLICY. 
 
 reliance to be placed upon royal promises were being 
 illustrated just now in France, where Louis in 1685 re- 
 scinded the Edict of Nantes, which had given security 
 to French Protestants for nearly a hundred years. This 
 was unfortunate for James, since it quickened the sym- 
 pathies and the fears of Englishmen. 
 
 The infatuated king meanwhile determined to prevent 
 Parliament from meeting till he had a better opinion of 
 Goddenv. ^^ m tentions; and to enlighten them he 
 Hales. June, determined to get his power to dispense with 
 the Test Act recognized in a court of law. 
 After carefully packing the bench of judges with men 
 whose servility was beyond suspicion, the king was 
 gratified by a favourable verdict. It was a bogus case. 
 The servant of a Roman Catholic officer, Sir Edward 
 Hales, was induced to sue him for damages, which any 
 informer could obtain by proving that the Act had been 
 broken. The king had, by a dispensation, given Hales 
 leave to break the law. Thus the question to be decided 
 was, whether such a dispensation was a valid defence in 
 law against the claim for the informer's reward. It was 
 decided by the judges, in words which made the king a 
 present of the English constitution, that the dispensation 
 was quite valid. This dispensing power was certainly 
 legal, but Charles II. had been warned by Parliament 
 that it was not looked upon with any favour, and James 
 was using it to accomplish an object which he had not 
 dared to ask from Parliament rather than to mitigate the 
 severities of the ordinary laws. It had been frequently 
 used to save men from the rigours of the penal laws ; but 
 now it was to be openly used to evade the Tests. 
 
 A few days later another blow was struck at the Con- 
 stitution as defined by Parliament. A court of Ecclesias- 
 Revivai of ^ ca ^ Commission, much resembling that which 
 High commis- had been abolished in 1641, was set on foot. 
 
 >n ourt. j ames wished to punish Bishop Compton for 
 refusing to suspend the Dean of Norwich, who had, 
 contrary to royal orders, preached against the Roman Ca- 
 tholic faith. The powers granted to this royal commission
 
 A BAIT TO CATCH DISSENTERS. 93 
 
 were the old spiritual powers wrested from the Pope by 
 Henry YIII. James was not afraid to put back our 
 history for 150 years by using them to further the Papal 
 cause against the laws of England. Compton was sus- 
 pended from his sacred functions. Such open measures 
 were not tamely acquiesced in, and least of all by the 
 suspended bishop, who was not of a submissive turn of 
 mind. Riots occurred in London, and the short-sighted 
 king established a large camp of soldiers under carefully 
 chosen Popish officers on Hounslow Heath to keep his 
 capital in awe. 
 
 A futile attempt to bend the Scots Parliament to that 
 submission which he could no longer, at the moment, 
 expect from England failed to show the king A change of 
 the folly of his course; and the beginning of p lic y- l68 7- 
 1687 found him still determined to go on. The Hydes, 
 Clarendon (eldest son of the famous chancellor) and 
 Rochester, were dismissed from office, as they were not to 
 be induced to change their religion. Clarendon, who had 
 been Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, was succeeded by the 
 rampant Romanist Tyrconnel. This pointed clearly to the 
 complete triumph of the Jesuit party at court. But it was 
 also the beginning of a great change of policy : the king 
 had tried to get his way with Parliament and with the 
 moderate party, represented by Tories and high church- 
 men; he now determined to dissolve Parliament, and 
 rely on the Dissenters rather than on the Church party. 
 It was hoped that, if he offered them toleration, they 
 would be prepared to assist him against the church by 
 letting him raise Roman Catholics, as well as themselves, 
 to civil and military office. For the Dissenters could not 
 be expected to love the church, whose persecuting sons 
 had shaped the " Clarendon Code" of 1664. James also 
 calculated that the church, pledged to the doctrine that 
 it was sinful to resist the king, might be insulted with 
 impunity; though it might sulk it would, he thought, 
 never rebel. 
 
 In accordance with this new plan the famous Declara- 
 tion of Indulgence was issued in April, 1687. The penal
 
 I 
 
 (J 
 
 94 THE BAIT IS REFUSED. 
 
 laws and Tests were alike suspended. The Parliament 
 would not repeal them, so the king did so himself. 
 xhe"Deciara- Roman Catholics and Protestant Dissenters 
 tion". were relieved of their civil disabilities, and 
 
 allowed the free exercise of their religion. Charles II., in 
 1672, had only dared to suspend the penal laws, and had 
 been compelled to give up the attempt. James had gone 
 further, and in defiance of the clearest expression of the 
 national opinion had set himself against the most rooted 
 prejudices of his people. The question seemed no longer 
 to be whether there should be Toleration, but whether 
 there should be laws at all. 
 
 All now depended on the attitude of the Protestant 
 Dissenters. If they were willing to accept a Toleration, 
 The Dis- which the king's whole life proved to be 
 senters. insincere, because it suited him, then the 
 
 cause of church and law might fall together. Some of 
 the leading Dissenters, such as William Penn, the Quaker, 
 were closely allied with the king. But many notable 
 Presbyterians, especially Baxter, were not likely to believe 
 in the royal promises or desert the cause of national 
 liberty for a momentary relief. Halifax, who had the 
 keenest intellect of the day, issued a pamphlet 1 showing 
 that the Dissenters, who were to be " hugged " now that 
 they might be " squeezed " later on, were not the king's 
 choice but his refuge; he implored them not to accept a 
 brief against Magna Carta and destroy all laws in order 
 to get relieved of one. They had a better chance, he 
 urged, by waiting till the "next probable Revolution". 
 The Dissenters were true to the cause of liberty, and in 
 large numbers refused to show their preference of " in- 
 fallibility " to "liberty". 
 
 By way of attacking the English Church in its most 
 vital source the king next proposed to place his religion 
 The church on an equality with Anglicanism in the 
 attacked. Universities. The laws forbade men to hold 
 college preferment without taking the oath of supremacy 
 and other tests. Already Roman Catholic heads had 
 
 1 Letter to a Dissenter, 1687.
 
 THE SEVEN BISHOPS' PETITION. 95 
 
 been appointed to two Oxford colleges, University and 
 Christ Church, and the vice-chancellor at Cambridge 
 suspended for refusing to grant a degree to a monk. In 
 the summer of 1687 James insisted that the Fellows of 
 Magdalen College, Oxford, should elect as their president 
 his nominee. When they resisted he secured their ex- 
 pulsion, and turned the college into a " Popish seminary". 
 Preparations were now made for a Parliament, in which 
 the king, by "packing", hoped to secure a majority for 
 his schemes. But the attempt to obtain promises and 
 subservient candidates was a failure. And the astute 
 Halifax came forward to show that the king's promise to 
 substitute some other guarantee for the present laws 
 against Roman Catholics was not an " equivalent ", since, 
 if he did not respect laws which were already made, he 
 would not respect laws which were yet to be made. The 
 royal anger was preferable, urged this writer, to the national 
 ruin. 
 
 In the year 1688 came the two events which strained 
 the loyalty of the nation beyond its limits. The king's 
 order in council (May, 1688) that the The Crisis. 
 " Declaration " should be publicly read in l688 - 
 church nerved the bishops to a memorable resistance. 
 The birth of an heir to the throne in June led all classes 
 of Englishmen to look over-sea to Holland for help, since 
 a peaceful change upon James' death was no longer 
 possible, after the appearance of a Popish heir. 
 
 Sancroft, Archbishop of Canterbury, and six bishops, 
 after a meeting at Lambeth, signed a petition to James 
 against his order in council. Relying upon Trial of the 
 their determination to resist, clergymen in seven bishops, 
 all parts of the country had refused to read the Declaration 
 in compliance with that order. James was furious at 
 this manifestation of hostility where he had expected 
 obedience, and determined to prosecute the seven bishops 
 for addressing " a false, malicious, and seditious libel " to 
 their king. After a trial, watched with breathless interest 
 by the entire nation, they were acquitted. It was argued 
 by Somers, a young Whig lawyer, that the subject had a
 
 96 THE COMING OF WILLIAM. 
 
 right to petition the crown, and that the document in 
 question was neither false, nor malicious, nor seditious, 
 nor a libel. The manifestations of delight with which the 
 verdict was greeted in London and the country would 
 have been sufficient warning to most men. Even the 
 soldiers at Hounslow threw up their hats. 
 
 Almost at the same moment a letter was sent to 
 William of Orange, inviting him to come and deliver the 
 William in- land from the galling bonds of a Popish 
 fc. d jun n e 30, ^^ce. A few leading men, Devonshire, 
 1688. ' Compton, Russell, and others, signed this 
 
 letter and promised a favourable reception. The task 
 was not an easy one for William. The little Prince was 
 not believed to be the son of James and his Queen ; but, 
 apart from the revolutionary movement which the de- 
 position of a tyrant and the dispossession of his heir 
 William's involved, there were other difficulties. Wil- 
 difficuities. ij am could not risk a battle between English 
 soldiers and Dutch troops, which would have stirred the 
 patriotism of all people against a foreign invasion. He 
 could not leave his loved Dutch frontiers at the mercy 
 of the dragoons of Louis XIV. He was not sure that 
 Tories in England would combine with Whigs to dispossess 
 a monarch whom they considered as the Lord's Anointed. 
 He could not reckon on supplies from the Dutch 
 burghers, many of whom had no great love for his name 
 and his house. Yet for William the chance had come. 
 James could go no further and the iron was hot. He 
 determined to strike. Louis, who wished to keep James 
 above water lest England should be united and strong 
 enough to interfere abroad, was nevertheless short-sighted 
 enough to send, just at the wrong moment, all his forces 
 to attack the districts of the Upper and Middle Rhine. 
 
 Thus relieved, the Whig Deliverer landed at Torbay, 
 November 5, 1688. James had made some efforts at 
 The landing conciliation, but to little purpose. The 
 of William, bishops refused to exhort the nation not to 
 resist their king. In a short while the invader was joined 
 by the foremost Whigs; and a large part of the army,
 
 THE REVOLUTION. 97 
 
 under the influence of Churchill, the future Duke of 
 Marlborough, who had been sent to Salisbury to oppose 
 William, deserted the Royal cause. As the invader drew 
 nearer London James, after sending his wife and child to 
 France, endeavoured to follow them ; but he was captured 
 and brought back to the capital. AVilliam had not claimed 
 the kingdom, but had merely declared in favour of a 
 free Parliament and Toleration, with a maintenance of 
 the Tests and other bulwarks against Popery. Nothing 
 was settled, though bloodshed had been avoided. The 
 next step was critical. It was an anxious moment for all. 
 
 James was told that he could not stay in London, and 
 was allowed to select a place of refuge. He chose 
 Rochester, and promptly fled thence to France. The Revoiu- 
 This altered the character of the Revolution. tion > l688 - 
 Tories, who held that no violence to a king was possible, 
 would have been relieved from many scruples if they could 
 honestly have considered that James had vacated his post. 
 But it was obvious that he had been obliged to go, and it 
 was no secret that he was in fear of personal violence. 
 Thus the Revolution, which had begun in an alliance of 
 Whigs and Tories, became a Whig victory, from which it 
 at first appeared that all true Tories must stand aloof. 
 The Whigs held that a bad king had no rights, and said 
 as much. 
 
 William took the government into his hands at the 
 invitation of the peers, who advised that a Convention 
 Parliament should be summoned. The surviv- The Conven- 
 ing members of some of Charles the Second's tion - l68 9- 
 Parliaments were also called, and gave the same advice. 
 On February i, 1689, this memorable assembly met at 
 Westminster. It contained in the lower House a majority 
 for the Whigs, who meant to change the succession. But 
 in the Lords there was a Tory majority, still hampered by 
 the difficulty of reconciling their theory of Non-Resistance 
 and Passive Obedience with a Revolution. Some were for 
 appointing William Regent for James, while others argued 
 that James was dead to the constitution and his daughter 
 Mary was already Queen by hereditary right. Finally,
 
 98 THE DECLARATION OF RIGHT. 
 
 after much debate and many searchings of heart, it was 
 declared that James having broken " the original contract 
 between king and people and withdrawn himself out of 
 the kingdom, has abdicated the government, and the 
 throne is thereby vacant". The scruples of the Tories 
 had been removed by William's announcement that he 
 would go home unless they made him King, and that he 
 would not stay here as his wife's "gentleman usher". 
 William and Mary were promptly declared King and 
 Queen of England. 
 
 The Revolution was a compromise. The Whigs secured 
 
 the insertion into the Constitution of their theory that 
 
 , government is a contract and not an heirloom 
 
 Character ot P . ,, , 
 
 theconstitu- in any family. The Tones were allowed to 
 
 tional change. makebdieve that j amgs ha( j left them no 
 
 other course by his flight. After a brief discussion about 
 the conditions on which the new rulers should be received, 
 it was decided to draw up a " Declaration of Right ", 
 which, when the Convention had decided to continue its 
 own existence as a legal Parliament, was passed into law 
 as the " Bill of Rights". This famous document asserted 
 most clearly that the law was sovereign in England by 
 enumerating the acts by which James had exasperated the 
 nation, and declaring them, one by one, to be illegal. 
 This was the solution of- the problem Avhich had pressed 
 for an answer for so long. Henceforth there could be in 
 no part of the constitution a claim to set aside a law when 
 duly passed by King, Lords, and Commons. The right 
 to act in virtue of a "discretionary" power, which was 
 summed up in the words Salus populi suprema lex, was 
 to be heard of no more. The motto which the Stewarts 
 had tried to affix to the English constitution must, after 
 the Revolution, be read Lex suprema populi salus.
 
 WILLIAM OF ORANGE. 99 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 WILLIAM III.: 1689-1702. 
 
 William, Prince of Orange, and Stadtholder of the 
 United Provinces, was now King of England, not as 
 Mary's husband, but together with her as the The new 
 chosen successor of James. He was just kin &- 
 forty years old, and had profited by his experience in a 
 way that was to make him able to rule England and play 
 the foremost part in European politics. It has been said 
 that William was never young. He had been born and 
 bred amid intrigues, revolutions, plots; and had grown 
 to manhood with the roar of French guns in his ears. He 
 was cold and hard in manner, had wretched health, and 
 was personally unattractive. 
 
 His ambition had been to make himself and his be- 
 loved Holland a power in Europe, and\his chance had 
 been so opportunely seized that he now hoped . 
 
 to add the name and resources of England to 
 that League of Augsburg which the restless Louis XIV. had 
 roused against himself in 1686. The Pope, the numerous 
 German princes, the Emperor, and the King of Spain had 
 long been anxious to check the daring monarch who 
 swooped down now on the Pyrenees, now on Italy, now 
 on the Rhine or the Sambre. If William, backed by the 
 English nation and the English navy, could lead the way, 
 there would be some chance of making headway even 
 against so great a power as that wielded by Louis. 
 
 The austere and forbidding nature of the new king was 
 thus redeemed by one splendid passion, love for Holland 
 and all that Holland meant upon the map of William and 
 Europe. But he was also a man of the most his prospects 
 dauntless courage, displayed alike on the field 1: 
 and in the council. No military reverse could diminish 
 it, no political difficulties limit it. And he needed it all. 
 For in England he found not enthusiasm or reverence for
 
 ioo WILLIAM'S DIFFICULTIES. 
 
 the deliverer, but much treachery and more distrust. Only 
 where he could make them see that he was working for 
 their own immediate interests, or when Louis put a trump 
 card into his hand by attack or insult, did the English 
 nation rally round William. They were jealous of his 
 Dutch favourites ; they knew he loved the gardens of Loo 
 better than all the attractions of Kensington, and that he 
 neither loved nor admired Englishmen, except indeed 
 when he watched their corpses being piled beneath the 
 walls of a French fortress. 
 
 But more than this. England was, so far as concerns 
 
 her government, in a stage of transition. The "king 
 
 above the law " was no more. But the " law 
 
 Changes in . . 
 
 the English above the king was not a condition of things 
 
 constitution. wWch CQuld be ^^ substituted for the old 
 
 Stewart theory in a few weeks. Parliament was strong, 
 and divided into two hostile camps of Whig and Tory. 
 The Tories disliked William and felt ashamed of themselves 
 for their revolutionary conduct. The Whigs hated the 
 Tories and thought William should follow their example. 
 The king had no mind to become a tool of the Whigs, 
 and hoped to keep both in order by playing one party 
 against the other. But he could only do so by retaining 
 some of his kingly power, and thus he gave some sections 
 of both parties a chance to combine against him. Nowa- 
 days the sovereign remains in the background, while the 
 ministries, composed on strict party lines, replace each 
 other when the nation is dissatisfied with the party in 
 power. But this "Cabinet government" was not, in 
 William's day, more than an occasional expedient, and the 
 nation had not yet learnt its power to make its wishes felt. 
 Thus Parliament was more powerful than was just then 
 desirable. It was free from the king, without being subject 
 to the nation. The king could only manage it by choos- 
 ing ministers whom it would support, thus beginning that 
 system which is now always in operation government by 
 a cabinet with a majority in Parliament to pass its measures. 
 William was, throughout his reign, obliged to rush back- 
 wards and forwards from the Dutch frontiers to London,
 
 TREASON OF MANY STATESMEN. IOI 
 
 to work a machine without which he could do nothing, 
 yet which frequently thwarted his best endeavours. 
 
 His greatest difficulty, however, arose from his own in- 
 secure position : few believed that, with a divided nation, 
 and a greedy, watchful enemy, who announced Insecurit 
 his intention by word and deed to restore the breeds trea- 
 fallen Stewart, William could long remain King son ' 
 of England. The Jacobites, as the adherents of James 
 and his descendants were called, were powerful and alert. 
 Every victory of France on the Continent sent a thrill of 
 treason through the English politicians who watched the 
 great game. It is disappointing to find statesmen of all 
 shades of opinion involved in this treachery; with very few 
 exceptions they corresponded secretly with James at St. 
 Germains, where he now kept up regal state at the expense 
 of the King of France. William knew and understood this, 
 and it is not the least part of his title to fame that he not 
 only refused to take vengeance, but actually contrived to 
 work with men of whose letters to the exile he had copies 
 in his hands. 
 
 We may divide the reign into five periods. The first 
 two years (1689-1691) were occupied with the settlement 
 of Scotland and Ireland, for James and Louis periods of 
 made a great attempt to keep William out of the rei e n - 
 their path by giving him work in Ireland. This expedient 
 would, if successful, have tied the king's hands very effect- 
 ually. But all fears of a Jacobite Ireland were allayed by the 
 battle of the Boyne. From 1692 to 1695 William struggled 
 unsuccessfully with his great foe on the Continent, while 
 he contrived to keep his government efficient at home by 
 intrusting more and more power to the Whigs. The death 
 of Queen Mary marks the close of this second period. 
 The third consists of two years (1695-1697) in which the 
 power of France was successfully tired out, while the con- 
 tinued domination of the Whigs secured a strong war 
 policy. With the Peace of Ryswick (1697) the nation, 
 led by Tories, ceased to support William; and in the 
 fourth period (1697-1701) his parliaments became more 
 and more unmanageable, while on the Continent the tardy
 
 102 THE NON-JURORS. 
 
 death of the Spanish king raised the greatest political 
 problem of the age. Just as the French king was about 
 to seize all those gains which the English jealousy against 
 William was pouring into his hands, the death of James II. 
 occurred. The recognition of his son as King of Eng- 
 land, which Louis promptly made, once more stung the 
 English into a warlike temper. The fifth period (1701- 
 1702) therefore shows us William and his adopted country 
 again at one, but with the last and fiercest struggle still to 
 come. At this moment William died. 
 
 The " Convention " was, at the commencement of the 
 reign, made into a legal and competent Parliament, and 
 Settlement of continued in session. William wished to 
 the kingdom, secure a moderate settlement of religion and 
 finance, so that all faithful men might serve the state and 
 the state might be strong against France, But no such 
 simple solution was possible. The Toleration Act (1689) 
 was passed, but gave only relief from penal laws to those 
 Protestant dissenters who were prepared to take the oaths 
 of allegiance and supremacy. No tests or penal laws were 
 done away with. It was toleration in partial practice 
 without the principle. There was no chance of "com- 
 prehension", the reconciliation of Protestant noncon- 
 formists to the Church of England though William 
 wished it and Convocation discussed it. The new oath 
 of allegiance to William and Mary was made compulsory 
 for all officers in church or state, and those who refused to 
 take it, the "Non-jurors", as they are called, lost their posts. 
 Bancroft, the hero of the resistance to James's Declaration, 
 led a party of non-juring bishops, and was deprived of his 
 archbishopric. The revenue was settled on William, but 
 Parliament considered it necessary to assert the principles 
 of the constitution by granting it only for one year at a time. 
 The Whig section now began to show a violent party 
 spirit. They tried to secure their own domination by 
 punishing those who had abetted James's illegal acts, espe- 
 cially those who had surrendered the charters of corpora- 
 tions to the last two kings. This, together with their re- 
 sistance to the Bill of Indemnity, which was to pardon the
 
 CONQUEST OF IRELAND. 103 
 
 past, caused a dissolution. In March, 1690, a new Par- 
 liament, with a larger preponderance of Tories, gave the 
 king a firmer position and enabled him, to some extent, 
 to hold the balance of parties. His ministers were drawn 
 from both sections, the chief being Godolphin, Shrewsbury, 
 Nottingham, Halifax, and Danby. 
 
 Meanwhile in Ireland William's presence had be- 
 come necessary. James, assisted by the French, had 
 landed there in March, 1689; and at once the national 
 feeling, so long repressed by the system which The struggle 
 Cromwell established in the English and Pro- in inland, 
 testant interest, sprang to life. James was welcome as a 
 Roman Catholic, but the Irish thought more of securing 
 their independence of those who had taken their land 
 and proscribed their religion, than of restoring the king. 
 The Protestants intrenched themselves in Londonderry 
 and Enniskillen, while the Irish Parliament set to work 
 to undo the settlement of 1660. 
 
 Londonderry was relieved in July, 1689, after 105 days 
 of siege and suffering ; but Marshal Schomberg, whom 
 William sent over with a small army, failed to secure 
 Dublin. Thus in June, 1690, William, who then landed 
 in Ireland with large reinforcements, had to face the 
 whole rebellion with James still at its head. With 
 such a coward as James, however, the issue could not 
 long be doubtful. The decisive battle took place near 
 Drogheda, where James hoped to defend his position be- 
 hind the Boyne. The river was crossed and the position 
 was stormed on July i, 1690. James fled to France in 
 craven haste. The fall of Limerick a year later completed 
 the defeat of the Irish. Again the country was given up 
 to the Protestant and English settlers, who, at once, more 
 than restored the system of 1660, and utterly excluded the 
 Roman Catholics from political power and social con- 
 sideration. 
 
 The French, who had for the moment a sufficient ad- 
 vantage at sea to make communication between England 
 and Ireland impossible, had not managed to do so. But 
 though William was allowed to cross, the error was partly
 
 104 DUNDEE IN SCOTLAND. 
 
 retrieved by their occupation of the Channel, whence 
 they drove Lord Torrington and his fleet after an engage- 
 The struggle ment . at Beachy Head, June 30, 1690. The 
 in the Chan- English fleet, though chased to the Thames, 
 was still powerful, and as the cause of James 
 in Ireland was already lost, this reverse did little for the 
 Jacobites. In truth there ought to have been such a 
 French fleet in existence as would have kept William in 
 England, enabled James to hold Ireland, and succoured 
 the Jacobites in Scotland. 
 
 For here, too, there was a party for the late king. The 
 Covenanters, forced in 1660 to submit to the religious 
 The Scottish government they hated, had risen on James's 
 rising. f^ an( j j n a Convention (March, 1689) abo- 
 
 lished Episcopacy and proclaimed William and Mary. 
 But the Highlanders had been raised in the Jacobite 
 interest by Graham of Claverhouse, better known as 
 Viscount Dundee, who roused the clans that hated the 
 Covenanting tribe of the Campbells, the great supporters 
 of Whiggery, to fight for King James. They won a battle 
 at Killiecrankie Pass in July, 1689, but lost their leader, 
 and with the fickleness that Celtic hosts have always 
 shown, they at once dispersed. William endeavoured, 
 when this formidable rising was over, to settle Scotland 
 by establishing the Presbyterian form of church govern- 
 ment. His efforts to stop the persecution of Episcopal 
 clergy were in a great measure successful, and redound to 
 his credit; though we cannot acquit him of all blame for 
 the dastardly way in which the Macdonalds of Glencoe 
 were murdered in the beginning of 1692. Their chief 
 had failed to comply with an order that all clans were to 
 submit to the government by January i. His submission 
 a few days later was refused, and William signed an order 
 for the extermination of the clan, which was carried out 
 by brutal treachery instead of by military execution. 
 
 By the summer of 1691 William was able to commence 
 his great struggle with France. The allies were already 
 in arms, and some fighting had taken place on various 
 parts of the French frontiers. The war is not interesting,
 
 THE FRENCH FRONTIERS. 
 
 I0 5
 
 106 BATTLE OF LA HOGUE. 
 
 for it consisted, so far as William was concerned, in a stern 
 struggle to keep his allies true to their promises and his 
 character of P ar ^ ar nents to their interests, and in marching 
 the war on the out to meet the French armies, which were 
 :nt ' personally conducted by Louis so long as only 
 sieges and no battles took place. For when he could not 
 hold a brilliant court round some starving garrison, the 
 French king left his generals to fight the King of England. 
 As William was a very unlucky commander, the advan- 
 tages he secured by diplomacy among his allies and 
 at Westminster were not infrequently lost when he faced 
 a French army, led by such a general as Luxembourg. 
 But though often out-manoeuvred and sometimes routed, 
 William's true greatness always appeared more splendidly 
 in defeat than in victory. Each summer a campaign took 
 place, and it was merely a question which could continue 
 to put men and money into the business longest. If the 
 alliance broke up, or the Parliament refused supplies, 
 William must lose; if France sickened with exhaustion he 
 might win. 
 
 In 1691 William arrived on the frontiers only to find 
 that the fortress of Mons had passed into the hands of 
 Campaign of the French king (April, 1 69 1). He left a parlia- 
 I6 9 J - ment recently nerved to vote supplies by the 
 
 burning of Teignmouth, which had followed the naval 
 defeat of Beachy Head. But a network of Jacobite in- 
 trigue was spreading, and while men like Russell, the 
 seaman, and Marlborough, the soldier, were content with 
 sending their expressions of fluty and service to James, the 
 more active members of the party prepared plans for a 
 rising, while on the French shores armies were being 
 collected for an attack upon England. 
 
 In May, 1692, the French fleet was beaten and de- 
 stroyed off Cape La Hogue by Russell, who was not 
 campaign of ashamed to write letters to James pleading 
 ^692,1693. the excuse that his professional reputation 
 was at stake in the matter. The descent upon England 
 was thus put out of the question. This was a sufficient 
 revenge for the defeat at Beachy Head, and France gave
 
 THE BANK OF ENGLAND. 107 
 
 us little more trouble by sea. Meanwhile the French 
 king and his court were watching the siege of Namur, 
 which surrendered in June, 1692. William, who arrived 
 too late to save it, was then badly beaten by Luxembourg 
 at Steenkerke (August, 1692). A second serious defeat at 
 Landen in the following July brought the military pros- 
 pects of the Allies very low. 
 
 7 s But in England matters were improving. The factious 
 / spirit in Parliament was shown when the Whigs, jealous of 
 / the Tories, proposed the Triennial Bill, which whi s ain 
 would put an end to William's plan of getting ground, 1693- 
 l a ministry to manage the Parliament for as l694 ' 
 \long a time as he could. A general election every three 
 years would give the party out of power a better chance ; 
 the bill was passed, but was rejected by William, who thus 
 exercised his legal power of refusing to assent to a bill. 
 But the Whigs were too strong to be neglected, and, as a 
 compromise, their champion Somers was made Lord 
 Keeper of the Seal, while the Tory Nottingham had to 
 resign. Sunderland, who was able to give good advice, 
 though unable to keep true to any principles, suggested to 
 William to make a united Whig ministry, and so keep his 
 Parliament in good humour. The Tories, who had been 
 in the ascendant for the last few years, were losing ground. 
 They had no hearty belief in the war, and their lack 
 of energy in its conduct was a source of failure. The 
 Whigs were also fortunate in securing at 'this time the 
 strongest support they ever had, the commercial interest 
 - of England; not only those merchants whose ships had 
 been lost when in 1693 the Smyrna fleet was captured and 
 its convoy dispersed by the French; but all those who 
 were concerned in the new financial expedients. For it 
 was an age of financial expedients; a young and clever 
 Whig named Montague had succeeded in raising loans for 
 the war expenses by setting up the Bank of England. This 
 meant that a body of men who negotiated the loans received 
 from government privileges, by which they were enabled 
 to secure a practical monopoly of the lucrative business 
 of money-lending. The Tories soon grew jealous of this 
 
 (962) H
 
 Io8 DEATH OF QUEEN MARY. 
 
 power. For it played into the Whig hands by firmly 
 attaching those men who lent the money to the govern- 
 ment, from which alone they could hope for payment. 
 They tried to secure similar advantages by what is known 
 as the Land Bank. This was an absurd scheme for mak- 
 ing money by the wholesale lending or mortgaging of land: 
 but as many people wanted to borrow money and few to 
 borrow land, the Bank of England won the day, and soon 
 became a powerful and important Whig institution. 
 
 With Montague chancellor of the exchequer, and his 
 financial success on every tongue, the campaign of 1694 
 The whig was opened; nothing beyond an unsuccessful 
 successes. at t a ck upon the French harbour of Brest need 
 be mentioned. The Whigs were able to secure the Tri- 
 ennial Act, for William did not care to veto it a second 
 time; it looked as if the war would be waged with vigour, 
 and the party strife at home be ended by the domination 
 of the Whigs and the war party. 
 
 At this moment a great blow fell upon William. His 
 wife, to whom he was sincerely attached, died suddenly 
 
 Death of of small-pox in December, 1694. This blow, 
 
 Mary - from which it seemed at first as if the king 
 himself would scarcely rally, for a time seriously menaced 
 his political position. Mary's presence upon the throne 
 of her ancestors had in fact been a rallying point for 
 Tories and High Churchmen. It had been the means 
 of securing a larger number of adherents for government, 
 both in and out of Parliament, than could have been 
 hoped for had William been without the much-needed 
 aid of her popularity, sweet temper, and good sense. But 
 the fall of Danby, one of the last surviving Tory ministers, 
 who was at this time accused of receiving bribes from the 
 East India Company, brought the Whigs further to the 
 front, and their combination was strong enough to stand 
 the strain. 
 
 The third period of the reign was the most successful 
 for William. Godolphin was now the only Tory minister. 
 Mary's sister, the Princess Anne, who had been estranged 
 from the court by the jealous intrigues of her friend the
 
 FENWICK'S ASSASSINATION PLOT. 109 
 
 Countess of Marlborough, was now reconciled to Wil- 
 liam; though Marlborough was in disgrace owing to his 
 dealings with St. Germains. Great financial vigorous 
 efforts were made, and in August, 1695, policy at home 
 William had the satisfaction of retaking Na- a 
 mur. With this decided success to back him the king 
 returned and dissolved Parliament, with a view to gaining 
 a further Whig success in the elections. He made a real 
 effort to secure personal popularity by making a "pro- 
 gress " through the country, visiting large towns, and 
 staying in the country houses of important men. The 
 Whigs were largely victorious at the polls, and a liberal 
 war grant followed. But there was also plenty of work 
 to be done at home. A bill to make trials for high 
 treason more humane, by allowing the prisoner to have 
 the same legal advantages as in other trials, was passed. 
 The Whig financiers, Somers and Montague, assisted by- 
 Locke and Sir Isaac Newton, carried through a much- 
 needed scheme for amending the coinage. A sound 
 currency is the condition of a sound commerce, and the 
 Whigs, who were supported by the "monied interest", 
 replaced the old thin and clipped silver by new and 
 thicker coins of full weight. 
 
 The French were not inactive, in spite of the fall of 
 Namur and the death of their best general, Luxembourg. 
 Louis was willing to assist any rising in Eng- Jacobite 
 land, and James's illegitimate son, the Duke troubles, 
 of Berwick, crossed the Channel in disguise. But he 
 found that, like the French, the English Jacobites wished 
 to see the others make the first move. There was no general 
 rising, and Louis was too business-like a plotter not to 
 require something solid for his money. Early in 1696, 
 however, a plot was formed among some desperate men 
 to attack and murder William when he went hunting at 
 Richmond. Fortunately a large party had to be enrolled 
 in order to overcome his guards, and 'there was a fair 
 sprinkling of traitors among these would-be assassins. 
 The plot was betrayed, and the result was all in William's 
 favour. An association was formed, and swore to defend
 
 110 PEACE OF RYSWICK. 
 
 the king and maintain the succession of the Princess 
 Anne. Thus the Whigs won all along the line, and in 
 1697 William had a completely Whig ministry, a fairly 
 loyal nation, and a Parliament ready to work with the 
 government. 
 
 It was now clear that France was terribly exhausted by 
 the gigantic efforts she had made to keep up the war 
 Peace of along her entire frontier. The King of Eng- 
 Ryswick. land might therefore take advantage of this 
 either to secure a peace or to strike a blow. The former 
 would disarm his foes at home, who relied upon French 
 assistance, and William opened negotiations. It was 
 finally arranged that the French king should recognize 
 William as King of England and Aane as his successor. 
 He was to give up all that he had taken or conquered since 
 the peace of 1678, with the important exception of Stras- 
 bourg, which he insisted on retaining. (Sept. 10, 1697.). 
 
 The retention of this fortress was, however, a very trifle 
 compared to the enormous accession of territory that 
 Spanish Louis hoped to acquire on the death of 
 succession Charles II. of Spain. It was now plain that 
 the feeble life of that monarch was drawing 
 to a close, and Europe was awed into a calm at the 
 thought of the vastness of the issues at stake. It was 
 during this calm the fourth period of the reign that 
 Louis and William endeavoured to avert the threatening 
 storm, by a scheme for the Partition of the hereditary 
 dominions of the Spanish crown. There were numerous 
 claimants, but the great question lay between the Imperial 
 or Austrian house arid that of the Bourbons. The three 
 royal houses of Spain, France, and Austria were united 
 by various complicated intermarriages. But so far as 
 blood was concerned the Dauphin had a clear right to 
 the whole Spanish dominion, consisting of Spain, the 
 Indies, Sicily, Naples, Milan and the Netherlands. The 
 danger of so great an accession of power to France had 
 long been foreseen, and by the Treaty of the Pyrenees 
 (1659) Louis' wife had renounced all rights for herself 
 and her descendants. The Dauphin's claim was there-
 
 THE SPANISH SUCCESSION. 
 
 Ill 
 
 n 
 
 -w" 2 K/ 
 
 % s a b 
 ^ew* o 5 x 
 
 u i 
 ~w S 
 
 X 2 
 
 || CA 
 
 x td 
 
 
 
 B 
 
 
 
 Q u 
 
 < 
 
 
 5 J 
 
 g S 
 
 g < 
 
 J 
 
 "*< 
 
 K V 
 
 g 1 * 1 
 
 U 
 
 
 *". 
 
 II 
 
 ~" s 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 S 'Z 
 
 K 
 O 
 
 
 b 
 
 n 
 
 O 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 HH 
 
 CO 
 
 1 ^ 
 
 
 
 j 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 (4 
 
 h w 
 
 g* 
 
 
 
 
 u 
 
 W 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 
 _w u 
 
 o 
 
 * V 
 
 H 
 
 Pi 
 
 1 
 
 l-H ^ 
 
 " id 
 J 
 
 -11 
 
 1(1 
 
 fe 
 
 a 
 
 2 W 
 
 W 
 
 CO 
 
 2 ~^ 
 
 H 
 
 CO 
 
 5 
 
 O ". 
 
 M < 
 
 N 
 
 K - 
 
 ta < 
 
 u <! 
 
 CO S 
 
 W "- 
 o ffi 3 
 
 3 ? 
 II g 3 o 
 
 _s S 
 
 < J li _ . 
 
 s u- -s ; 
 
 H. 
 
 < ft 
 
 3 S 3 *S 
 
 > 
 
 j 5 
 
 ^. B 11 "O 
 
 w h M .a 
 
 
 
 ~ > 1 
 ^ < 1 
 
 H 3 ^ 
 
 
 Ctf ^ -^- Q 
 <; W 
 
 M j ^ 
 
 < - M 3 C 
 
 a 
 
 2 
 
 
 -5 > X 
 
 i ! w 
 
 
 3 5 o o- = 
 
 1 s < ? ! 
 
 w 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 ' n 
 
 o 
 
 
 1 H 
 
 
 fe 
 
 fc > 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 ^ 's 
 
 J.J* 
 
 
 
 pM 
 
 
 2 IS 
 
 K 'J-j 
 
 
 8_ 
 
 pQ 
 
 5; 
 
 | 
 
 PH^ 
 
 
 3 
 < 
 
 E 
 
 i-i w H 
 
 6. 
 
 Tl 
 
 
 II - 
 
 
 u 
 
 M K 
 
 < a B 
 
 
 
 
 | < 
 
 5 K j 
 
 T3 
 
 
 
 ^i 
 
 ^ s 
 
 C 
 
 
 "cT 
 
 . Q^ 
 
 H 
 
 hjQ **" 
 
 
 3 
 
 'F *- 
 
 
 g X 
 
 
 M 
 
 *O ^ c 
 
 
 pq uj 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 *"* W u H v 
 
 M O 
 
 > 
 
 < ~*l~a* 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 W H-_P^ W 
 
 ~K 2 Kg 
 
 "l! ^
 
 112 THE FIRST PARTITION TREATY. 
 
 fore barred by international agreement. The Emperor 
 Leopold I. had a claim through his mother, which, 
 though not so good by pedigree, was hampered by no 
 renunciation. A third claim passed to his daughter, the 
 Electress of Bavaria, through her mother, the younger 
 sister of Charles of Spain, but this was also barred by 
 a treaty. The houses of Austria and France were 
 each bound to resent so great a windfall coming to 
 the other. The young Electoral Prince of Bavaria re- 
 presented a third party, whose accession to the crown of 
 Spain would at least keep out the direct heirs of both the 
 rival powers. And it was upon him that the great inher- 
 itance was settled by the famous First Partition Treaty, 
 First arranged between William and Louis. Eng- 
 
 Partition, Hsh interests were concerned, inasmuch as the 
 union or close alliance of Spain and France 
 would be practically a veto upon English trade and com- 
 merce in the New World and the Mediterranean. Louis 
 was anxious to keep Austria from the inheritance, and to 
 secure a further slice of European territory without fight- 
 ing for it. This arrangement, therefore, gave the Indies, 
 Spain, and the Netherlands to the Bavarian prince. French 
 ambition was allayed by the offer of Naples and Sicily, 
 together with a small part of the north of Spain (Gui- 
 puscoa). The Archduke Charles, Leopold's younger son, 
 received the Duchy of Milan. This seemed a fair way- 
 out of the terrible dilemma, but scarcely was it settled 
 when the Bavarian prince died of small-pox, and the 
 whole negotiation was rendered useless. 
 
 William had in his hands the whole management of 
 these puzzling continental politics, but his next efforts to 
 Reaction in settle the matter out of court were cramped 
 England. by the condition of affairs at home. No 
 sooner was the Peace of Ryswick signed than the Eng- 
 lish nation ceased to support him. The tension of the 
 continental struggle once over, a reaction began. The 
 national fear and jealousy of a standing army broke out 
 fiercely. There were three reasons why such a force was no 
 longer dangerous as of old. William was not a James II.,
 
 FAILURE OF WILLIAM'S POLICY. 113 
 
 and had no quarrel with English laws. The rapacity 
 of Louis made it absolutely necessary to treat with him 
 sword in hand. The Mutiny Act (1689), by which Parlia- 
 ment granted special disciplinary powers over the army, 
 was annually passed, and could be refused if the Houses 
 had cause to distrust those who maintained the army. 
 Without such powers no army could be kept in order. 
 
 But a Tory reaction was in progress, and the magnifi- 
 cent forces of William were reduced, to 7000 men. The 
 favourite Dutch guards were sent home, though the king 
 made a pathetic appeal to be allowed to retain them. 
 The expenses of the late war gave the Tories a handle, 
 and they insisted on resuming large grants of crown 
 lands which William had foolishly given in some profusion 
 to Dutch favourites. Men thought more of the taxation 
 which would follow a fresh outburst of war than of making 
 such war impossible by a bold policy. 
 
 The death of Joseph of Bavaria made necessary a 
 Second Partition Treaty, in which Louis found much 
 advantage. The Archduke Charles was made second Parti- 
 heir to Spain and the Netherlands, which were tion > I 7- 
 both far enough from Austria to make this increase of 
 Hapsburg power unimportant. Louis still received for his 
 son Naples and Sicily, as well as Milan, which he hoped to 
 exchange for Lorraine, a province long since practically 
 his own by right of theft and occupation. 
 
 Hardly was this arranged when the unhappy prince, 
 whose dominions were thus meted out, died in the Escu- 
 rial, November, 1700. He had been per- Failure of 
 suaded at the last, by those who succeeded in William's 
 gaining influence over his weak and tortured po lcy> 
 mind, to make a will, by which all his dominions were to 
 pass to Louis' grandson, Philip, Duke of Anjou. Thus 
 for a second time the labours and cares of months were 
 thrown away, and Louis, lightly breaking his treaty and 
 his promise, accepted the will. The Pyrenees, as he 
 proudly boasted, existed no longer, and all Western 
 Europe had become the heritage of the Bourbons. 
 
 To William this was a severe blow. But the English
 
 114 THE A CT OF SETTLEMENT. 
 
 people refused to share his alarm. The Partition, with 
 its addition to French power in the Mediterranean, was 
 unpopular among the merchants, and they had little fear 
 of a future policy so united on the part of France and 
 Spain as to menace Europe in general or English ships in 
 particular. 
 
 This was the darkest moment in William's reign. He 
 had been tricked abroad, humiliated at home, and there 
 The lowest appeared no way out of the difficulty. More- 
 ebb, over a succession difficulty seemed about to 
 threaten in England itself. Anne's only son, the Duke 
 of Gloucester, died in 1700; and as William's health was 
 daily failing a new scheme of succession was absolutely 
 necessary if Jacobite hopes were to be disappointed. 
 Long ago it had been suggested that the crown should 
 pass, after the death of Anne, to the family of Sophia, 
 Electress of Hanover, who was a granddaughter of 
 James I. 1 The Act of Settlement (1701) made this into 
 law, and thus completed the work of the Revolution. 
 The crown was to be strictly hereditary in the Hanoverian 
 family, provided they were Protestants. At the same 
 time the independence of the judges was secured; they 
 were now to be removed only after an address from both 
 Houses of Parliament, and several other important con- 
 stitutional provisions added. But strong jealousy of the 
 Dutch king and his favourites was still shown. The fears 
 of William were, however, speedily justified. By the 
 Peace of Ryswick Dutch soldiers were allowed to garrison 
 certain fortresses on the frontiers of the Netherlands, since 
 Spanish troops were neither efficient nor trustworthy. 
 Louis in 1701 occupied these "Barrier Fortresses", and 
 thus once more showed his contempt for the public law 
 of Europe. 
 
 There was now no means of sairking the question of 
 
 Part struggle war> ^e commercial interest was alarmed 
 
 in England, and party strife ran high. The Tories were 
 
 not inclined to yield their position when the 
 
 war feeling began. They impeached four members of 
 
 1 See p. in-
 
 DEATH OF KING WILLIAM. 1 15 
 
 William's government, and imprisoned some freeholders 
 who presented the " Kentish Petition " in favour of war. 
 
 But for William, though he had been obliged to yield 
 his dearest plans and see his efforts thwarted, fate had one 
 triumph in store. In September, 1701, James Louis insults 
 II. died at St. Germains. "The French king England, 
 had really only one more solemn engagement left to 
 break. He seized this opportunity to break it, and osten- 
 tatiously recognized James's son, the Pretender, as King of 
 England. This was enough to complete the overthrow of 
 the Tories and to give William the enthusiasm he wished 
 to rouse. Parliament was dissolved amid national clamours 
 for war against the French. The Whigs, who gained the 
 advantage at the polls, voted supplies and passed a bill to 
 secure the Protestant succession. Once more the king 
 had the English behind him. But for William there was 
 to be no part in the mighty struggle which was now to 
 break the power of his foe, and raise English arms and 
 an English general to the highest pinnacle of military 
 glory. A fall from his horse stretched him on a bed of 
 sickness from which he never moved. At the very mo- 
 ment when one animated by a life-long passion for war 
 against France would have most cared to live, William 
 breathed his last at Kensington, on March 8, 1702. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 ANNE: 1702-1714. 
 
 Anne, the younger daughter of James II. by his first 
 marriage, became queen on William's death by the express 
 terms of the Revolution settlement. She was The new 
 likely to be popular, for she was a Stewart, queen, 
 and yet a sincere member of the Anglican Church. The 
 Tories would see in her a representative of the family 
 whose misdeeds they were so anxious to forgive. The 
 Whigs would approve of a queen succeeding by laws
 
 Il6 PERSONAL CHARACTER OF ANNE. 
 
 framed against the enemies of England's liberties. She 
 was a good woman without much will of her own. Thus 
 it was easy to influence her. And it was necessary 
 for those who wished to secure power to do so, for she 
 retained a good deal of the importance in politics which 
 had belonged to her predecessors. She sat in the council, 
 and the ministers were her nominees, or the nominees of 
 those who worked upon her feelings. 
 
 The constitution was, as we have seen, changing. A 
 
 time was coming when the sovereign would be obliged to 
 
 choose ministers trusted by the Commons and 
 
 .Tier consti- * 
 
 tutionai im- the country. The existence of parties had 
 forced William to do so. This was becoming 
 even more necessary in Anne's reign. Indeed, her great- 
 est change of ministers in 1710 was the result of a national 
 and party agitation which carried the queen along with it. 
 This presents a great contrast to the early days of the 
 period, when the Stewart kings had endeavoured to main- 
 tain ministers in opposition to the movement of the time. 
 The extension of this system was destined in the end to 
 solve the problem of English government. But mean- 
 while the fact remains that Anne was sufficiently her own 
 mistress to be unwilling to make changes except under 
 pressure. Thus her easily-led nature became a most im- 
 portant political matter. Her personal influence was 
 perhaps heightened by the fact that her husband, Prince 
 George of Denmark, was a man of no political weight. 
 There was "nothing in him", according to Charles II., 
 who professed to have " tried him drunk and tried him 
 sober ". 
 
 The reign is much less puzzling than that which pre- 
 ceded it. Three main problems, the European question, 
 chief points the position of Parliament in the state, and 
 of the reign, fae permanence of the Revolution settlement, 
 seem to come to a clear issue an issue whose importance 
 is none the less on account of its clearness. 
 
 The position of France on the Continent remained to 
 be determined. It was a problem which had occupied 
 the minds of statesmen since the end of'the Thirty Years'
 
 BEGINNINGS OF PARTY GOVERNltfENT. 1 17 
 
 War in 1648. Louis XIV. had first tried to seize the 
 Netherlands, and been checked by the Triple Alliance and 
 the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle. He had next (l) The 
 tried to punish the Dutch, but had been European 
 forced to desist at the Peace of Nimuegen. 
 His ambition, still unsatisfied by his gains, had then been 
 confronted by a European coalition, which finally bound 
 him by the Peace of Ryswick. Now was to come the 
 war of the Spanish Succession, which was to break his 
 proud spirit and rescue the Continent from the spectre of 
 French domination which had haunted the imagination 
 of Europe for fifty years. 
 
 This foreign war carried the second problem with it. 
 Whigs and Tories could not fight out their party struggle 
 upon the question of Jacobitism; for the Pre- (a) The party 
 tender never wavered in his allegiance to f t t s r Trnp 1 ort- nd 
 Rome, and most Tory statesmen knew that a ance. 
 Roman Catholic king was out of the question, even if a 
 son of James II. might otherwise have been desirable. 
 But the Whig war and the Whigs who carried it on; the 
 Dissenters who were still the friends of the Whigs; the 
 "monied men" who supplied the Whig exchequer these 
 were always open to the Tory attack. The reign of Anne, 
 thus became a period of keen party struggle, complicated 
 at every step by the military question on the Continent; a 
 struggle carried on by any and every means, at the termi- 
 nation of which the great constitutional change had been 
 brought far on its way. For, with a weak woman on the 
 throne, it became only a battle of " ins " and " outs ", of 
 those who held power and those who wished to supplant 
 them. Those who won must do so by having Parliament 
 on their side. A pale reflection of such a struggle is wit- 
 nessed now in our everyday political life. The difference 
 is that, now, the whole nation, with its millions of voters 
 and its hourly newspapers, watches, and finally decides the 
 struggle at the polls; whereas in those days, though pam- 
 phlets issued rapidly from Whig pens and Tory pens, it 
 took as many days as it now takes hours for the real truth 
 concerning the parliamentary debates to penetrate to the
 
 Il8 THE SUCCESSION QUESTION. 
 
 ears even of the cultivated classes. The party that was 
 out of power had to raise a cry sufficient to influence those 
 few who had votes. It had also to secure the queen's ear 
 by means of those who were about her. Yet, after the 
 strides made in the direction of " Cabinet " government l 
 between the Revolution and the accession of George I., 
 the bringing of the will of the nation to bear on these 
 matters was only a question of time. The control of 
 government had passed for ever from the hands of the 
 personal monarch. It was bound eventually to pass to 
 the majority of the nation. 
 
 One more question, which had agitated England for a 
 long time, was also co come up for solution. The Jacob- 
 (3) The Sue- ^ tes hoped that, though Anne might be per- 
 cession prob- mitted to reign, no German prince would ever 
 lem> succeed to the throne of the Stewart House. 
 
 The Hanoverian succession was the law of the land, but 
 whether it would be converted into a fact was in grave 
 doubt during the last few years of Anne's life. Between 
 a foreigner and a Roman Catholic the choice was not an 
 easy one. 
 
 With these three points before us the European crisis, 
 Three periods the party struggle, and the succession dilemma 
 of the reign. fa e re ig n ma y be divided into three periods. 
 
 In the first (1702-1708) the European question was 
 foremost. The national enthusiasm set the war going, 
 and the genius of Marlborough made it successful. The 
 queen was completely under the influence of the wife of 
 her great commander; the Whigs secured a majority in 
 Parliament, and the ministers were chosen from among 
 them. Louis was beaten on all sides and sued for peace, 
 which was at first refused. In the second period (1708- 
 1710) the strife of parties at home is all -important. 
 Wearied by the long war, the nation refused to support 
 Marlborough, as they had refused to support William. 
 The danger seemed over. The influence of the duchess 
 was undermined, and Queen Anne ceased to take 
 
 1 This means that the ministers are chosen entirely from the leaders of the party 
 which has a majority in Parliament, and resign directly they lose that majority.
 
 COMMENCEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN WAR. 1 19 
 
 pleasure in the society of a " brawling woman in a wide 
 house ". A Tory reaction occurred. Churchmen raised 
 their voices against toleration, and the foolish pro- 
 secution of one of them gave away the dignity of the 
 government, who, their popularity being already gone, 
 could not long hope to retain office. The struggle 
 ended in a victory for the Tories, and thus incidentally 
 for the principle of party government. A Tory ministry 
 was soon appointed, and in the third period (1710-1714) 
 the Revolution settlement trembled in the balance. Peace 
 was made with France, a peace perhaps necessary, perhaps 
 just, yet in terms far less glorious than our victorious 
 armies were considered to have earned. The Tory minis- 
 ters plotted for a Tory triumph, perhaps for a Stewart 
 Restoration. The death of Anne, however, found this 
 ministry divided by a quarrel between its leaders, and 
 the Whigs were able to obtain sufficient influence in the 
 council to secure the succession of George I. 
 
 The war of the Spanish succession (1702-1713) was 
 waged mainly in three separate quarters. First, on the 
 eastern side of France, in_lhe_Netherlands, xcharacterot 
 along the Rhine and the borders of Bavaria the war - 
 and Austria. Here Marlborough and his Dutch allies 
 had to succour the Emperor, and to drive Louis from the 
 Netherlands, which they had to regain foot by foot. 
 Secondly, in Italy, where Eugene, a prince of the house 
 of Savoy, faced the French armies sent into the Milanese 
 Duchy, and endeavoured to prevent them from reaching 
 Austria by the Tyrolese passes. Thirdly, in Spain itself, 
 where the English, with their Spanish and Portuguese 
 allies, endeavoured to drive Philip V. from his newly- 
 acquired throne, and to place the Archduke Charles the 
 candidate of the Allies in his place. This was the 
 ostensible purpose for which the war was being waged, 
 though it turned into a struggle to keep France from 
 attacking the empire and the Netherlands, as well as from 
 obtaining a commanding position in North Italy; the 
 Spanish campaigns always remained of secondary import- 
 ance.
 
 120 CAMPAIGN OF 1703. 
 
 As William had died when war was popular there was no 
 delay in taking up the struggle. Marlborough took com- 
 A promising mand of the allies in the Netherlands, and 
 opening. war was formally declared in May, 1702. 
 Anne was still as much as ever under the influence of 
 this great man and his wife. The queen allowed her 
 favourite to call her " Mrs. Morley ", and, in the familiar 
 intercourse between the friends, the duchess was " Mrs. 
 Freeman ". The ministry comprised both Whigs and 
 Tories ; Marlborough and Godolphin, to whom the former 
 was related by marriage, being the leading spirits. Soon, 
 however, it became clear that* the Tories loved neither the 
 war nor those who were conducting it, and they gradually 
 were eliminated from the administration. Nottingham 
 left office in 1704, and the Whigs Sunderland 1 and 
 Somers soon appeared in the ministry. The elections in 
 1705 were in favour of the Whigs, and the gradual stiffen- 
 ing of the Whig element in the government reflected their 
 gains in Parliament. Thus, for the first period of the 
 reign, the war policy went smoothly enough at home. 
 It will be well, therefore, to describe the main features of 
 the military struggle. 
 
 The first necessity for Marlborough was to check the 
 French advance towards the Dutch frontier, for Louis 
 Mariborougn's na d already possession of most of the Span- 
 objects. i s h Netherlands. In 1702 the English 
 general was occupied with the siege of several fortresses 
 in order to construct the desired barrier. Liege was cap- 
 tured, and in 1703 he took Bonn, thus stretching his line 
 considerably towards the Middle Rhine. Louis' main 
 object, however, was not to expend strength on this fron- 
 tier where English and Dutch stood firm. Between 
 Eugene in Italy and Marlborough in Flanders lay a great 
 tract of country, in which Louis' allies, the Bavarians, 
 were for the moment dominant. It was, therefore, the 
 object of the French to send forces through this great 
 gap and attack the emperor in his hereditary dominion of 
 Austria. He was the weakest member of the coalition; 
 
 1 Son of the old minister of James II., but a strong Whig himself.
 
 THE BATTLE OF BLENHEIM. 121 
 
 and, if Louis could seize Vienna as he had seized Stras- 
 bourg, he could dictate terms to one at least of the Allies. 
 Prince Eugene won the battle of Cremona in 1702, and 
 prevented the French, who held Milan, from pouring 
 troops through the Tyrol to Austria. But the French 
 attack was soon after made in the centre, where Marshal 
 Tallard made a dash for the valley of the Upper Danube 
 in 1704. 
 
 The King of France, however, had to deal with a man 
 whose ordinary calm commonsense flashed into genius 
 when a campaign or a battle was to be worked Battle of 
 out or fought. Marlborough saw through the Blenheim, 
 plan and determined to defeat it. He exe- Aug ' I3> I7 4 ' 
 cuted a rapid movement towards the Upper Danube 
 valley and joined Prince Eugene near Ulm. Together 
 they advanced to attack the enemy, and at Blenheim, a 
 little village on the left bank of the Danube, a crushing 
 defeat was inflicted upon the French and Bavarians. 
 France never recovered the ,blow during the war. The 
 whole electorate of Bavaria fell into the hands of the 
 Allies. The empire was saved. 
 
 In 1705 the chief interest ot the fighting lies.in_Spain. 
 The Earl of Peterborough captured and held Barcelona, 
 and the entire district of Catalonia declared campaigns 
 for Charles. Meanwhile in 1704 the English in Spain, 
 fleet, which had already seized a great squadron of Span- 
 ish treasure-ships in Vigo Bay, took Gibraltar, under the 
 leadership of Sir John Rooke and Sir Cloudesley Shovel. 
 
 In 1 706 the Allies triumphed on all three theatres of war. 
 Marlborough broke into the French lines and crushed 
 their armies a second time at Ramillies (May A year of 
 23), securing the Netherlands, and occupying success. 
 Brussels, Antwerp, Ghent, and Bruges. The French still 
 held the barrier fortresses, chief of which were Mons, 
 Tournai, and Lille; but they were obliged to keep to 
 their own frontier instead of menacing that of Holland. 
 In the same year Eugene succeeded in winning a vic- 
 tory at Turin, and thus prevented a diversion in favour 
 of Louis in North Italy. The Empire, Holland, and Italy
 
 122 CAMPAIGNS OF 1707-8. 
 
 were now safe. It remained to see if the allies could seat 
 their candidate in Spain. Here, too, there was success in 
 that year. Barcelona was retained; Madrid was entered; 
 yet the obstinate hostility of the Castilians was destined 
 before long to render the position of the Allies in Spain 
 quite untenable. Portugal was on their side, having been 
 secured by the Methuen Treaty (1703), by which England 
 consented to receive Portuguese wines at a less duty than 
 French ones. This, though a useful alliance, had its 
 disadvantage, in that Englishmen took to drinking port 
 instead of claret. But, in spite of the gain of Portugal 
 on one side of Spain and of Catalonia on the other, there 
 still remained the all-important central provinces, whose 
 animosity to the Allies and their candidate, Charles, could 
 not be overcome. In 1707 the Duke of Berwick beat the 
 Allies in the battle of Almanza, and confined them strictly 
 to the small district round Barcelona, which had been true 
 to them all along. There was little hope of a final triumph 
 in Spain. 
 
 But Marlborough's career of victory went on unchecked. 
 Baffled in their attack on Italy and on Austria, the French 
 in 1708 made a vigorous effort to recover their hold on the 
 Netherlands. But Eugene joined Marlborough, and a 
 third signal victory was placed to the credit of the Allies 
 at Oudenarde (July n, 1708). The capture of Lille, the 
 leading frontier fortress of France, soon followed. 
 
 Meanwhile in Scotland the oft-raised question of a 
 Union with England had been settled at last. All 
 The union through the century since James I.'s useless 
 with Scotland, attempt the question had lain open. There 
 were two great difficulties. The Scots abso- 
 lutely refused all along to have anything to do with an 
 Episcopal Church. The wretched failure of the Stewarts 
 to force this upon them had been recognized by William 
 as definite and never to be renewed. The separation of 
 the two countries in church matters had been made abso- 
 lute. Clearly, then, any political union must be one of 
 state and not of church. Here the difficulty lay in mat- 
 ters commercial. English and Scottish merchants were
 
 THE UNION WITH SCOTLAND. 123 
 
 not on good terms. The Scots had to suffer the burden 
 of the navigation laws as fully as if they had been Dutch- 
 men. A parliamentary union might also be resisted by 
 patriotic Scots, who liked to think of days when a handful 
 of their race had beaten back the Plantagenet attack. 
 But here there would not be much trouble. If religion 
 were divided and commerce shared, the Union was likely 
 to be easily accomplished. Under the rule of Cromwell 
 Scotland had been united to England, and then all com- 
 mercial restrictions had been removed. This free ex- 
 change ceased when, at the Restoration, the Scots Par- 
 liament regained its independence. They had, therefore, 
 now to choose between independence and free trade. A 
 scheme proposed by one Paterson, in the reign of William 
 III., by which Scots were to secure a foremost place in 
 the commercial world by colonizing the isthmus of Darien 
 and making it a depot for trade of east and west, had 
 failed miserably. The Spaniards, whose rights they in- 
 vaded, and the climate, which they thought much better 
 than it proved to be, combined to kill off the colonists. 
 This, together with the jealousy shown towards the enter- 
 prise in England, was enough to make a wider breach 
 more probable than a closer union between the two 
 nations. 
 
 But the Scots took advantage of the coming succession 
 problem to make Englishmen think less of Scottish com- 
 mercial rivalry and more of Scottish political The Act of 
 union. Their parliament in Edinburgh de- Security, 
 clared in 1703 that, though they would have as sove- 
 reign after Queen Anne a descendant of the Electress 
 Sophia, yet their nominee should not be the same as 
 England's unless their religion and trade were secured. 
 This "Act of Security" was indeed a skilful trick to 
 bring the English to terms. Commissioners were named 
 to discuss a union of the two realms, as soon as the 
 northern kingdom threatened to sever the union of the 
 two crowns, which had been a fact since 1603. The 
 terms finally adopted were those we have suggested. 
 Their religion was secured, their commerce made free:
 
 124 MALPLAQUET. 
 
 their legal system remained to bear witness, if necessary, 
 to their ancient independence : Scottish members, to the 
 number of 45, were to sit in the House of Commons, 
 while 1 6 peers were to be elected by the whole body of 
 nobles to represent them in the House of Lords. Thus 
 ended one of the greatest difficulties of the seventeenth 
 century. We have seen how it baffled the wit of James I., 
 brought Charles and Laud to war, and their system to 
 overthrow. It had given occasion for the display of the 
 cynical indifference of Charles II., and the bigoted bru- 
 tality of his brother. Now prosperity and peace were to 
 reward the Scots for a century of bloodshed and persecu- 
 tion. 
 
 Taking advantage ot some considerable discontent 
 
 when the independence of the kingdom was lost, the 
 
 French and the Pretender tried in 1708 to 
 
 Malnlaquet. ,. . , T ... 
 
 create a diversion, by a Jacobite rising in 
 Scotland. But the Pretender was delayed by the measles, 
 and the French fleet was dispersed by the vigorous 
 measures of Admiral Byng. Far from being recalled 
 to defend England Marlborough was winning his fourth 
 wonderful victory in September, 1709, by crushing Mar- 
 shal Villars at Malplaquet. Mons fell, and the power of 
 France was broken. 
 
 But this series of victories was over. In the second 
 period of the reign the government was to be defeated at 
 A Tory home though victorious abroad. For some 
 reaction. tj me t hg Tory party, though weak, had been 
 working to recover influence. They were led by Robert 
 Harley, an ambitious and unscrupulous statesman, who, 
 with Henry St. John, better known afterwards as Lord 
 Bolingbroke, represented a Tory opposition to Marl- 
 borough and the war. The national feeling was now too 
 important to be neglected, and every shift in it was 
 eagerly watched by the Tories. They were not slow to 
 note that the war, in spite of all its brilliant moments, 
 was steadily waning in popularity; the taxation necessary 
 to support it was heavy, and it was loudly asserted that 
 Marlborough and the Whigs continued the war because it
 
 A TORY REACTION. 125 
 
 kept them in power. There were some grounds for such 
 an assertion. More than once Louis had proposed to 
 negotiate for a peace. He had even offered to give up 
 assisting his grandson in Spain, to give the Dutch a 
 number of barrier fortresses, and to banish the Pretender. 
 But the Allies were not content: they insisted that the 
 French king should help them to drive his grandson from 
 Spain. They asked a half-conquered foe to join the Allies 
 who had beaten him. This was too much ; and France 
 was stirred to enthusiasm by the imposition of terms which 
 amounted to a national insult. This failure to make peace 
 when it was offered on fair conditions exasperated many 
 and caused a Tory reaction. 
 
 But another event in 1 609 had even more effect. A high- 
 church clergyman, named Dr. Sacheverell, attacked the 
 Whigs and Dissenters from the pulpit, and Dr. Sacheve- 
 went the length of publishing his sermons. rel1 - 
 He spoke of the perils of the faithful among "false 
 brethren ", and described these latter in terms so clear 
 that no one could mistake them. The government 
 actually impeached this preacher, which was very foolish, 
 for it gave him popularity among a far larger number of 
 people than those who read the sermons in question. 
 The man who had attacked and been attacked by 
 the unpopular Whig government became a hero among 
 Tories and churchmen, and the Tories gained from the 
 enthusiasm which Sacheverell roused against the Whigs. 
 
 Meanwhile Harley was securing an ally at court whose 
 services were more important still. Mrs. Masham, his 
 cousin, was quietly gaining an influence over , 
 
 . .', r l ' V t Mrs. Masham. 
 
 the mind of Anne which was soon to supplant 
 
 that of the duchess. The queen was tired of this tyrannous 
 
 woman, and welcomed the more gentle sway of the new 
 
 favourite. 
 
 Thus, with a Tory influence supreme at court and a 
 Tory enthusiasm spreading in the street, the ,, ,.. 
 
 ..... . r 3 . r all ot the 
 
 crisis ot the war in 1710, when Louis pro- war ministry, 
 
 posals were again refused at Gertruydenberg, I7I ' 
 
 led to a clean sweep of the Whig ministry. The queen
 
 126 FALL OF THE WHIGS. 
 
 had already refused to appoint Marlborough captain- 
 general for life. The Tories came into power, and in the 
 following year the great duke and his wife were dismissed 
 from their offices. No pains were spared by the Tories 
 to secure this triumph. They accused Marlborough of 
 peculation under circumstances which do them little credit. 
 They also secured the services of pamphleteers, foremost 
 among whom was Dean Swift, the greatest prose writer of 
 the age. In the Conduct of the Allies he attacked the war 
 policy, and endeavoured to undermine the support which 
 the Whigs possessed in the commercial interests of the 
 nation : England, he urged, was getting terribly into debt 
 in order to preserve Dutch towns, whose citizens would 
 repay her by underselling English merchants. We were 
 fighting for our rivals, not for ourselves. Our interest in 
 the war was slight, yet we had become a chivalrous power 
 willing to fight other people's battles all over Europe. 
 Language like this had a great effect. 
 
 The Tory ministry marked its accession to power by 
 an attack upon the Dissenters. They passed the famous 
 bill against Occasional Conformity. It forbade men to 
 receive the Sacrament, merely to qualify for office, and then 
 go back to their Dissenting meeting-houses. The Tories 
 hoped thus to exclude the Dissenting element from the 
 town corporations, and through them from Parliament. 
 
 But the greatest achievement of the new ministers was 
 the ending of the war by the Peace of Utrecht. They 
 Treaty of had come to power as a peace ministry, pro- 
 utrecht, 1713. testing against the war and the war-makers. 
 They now put an end to the struggle. The claimant for 
 whom the Allies were fighting, the Archduke Charles, 
 had become emperor about the time of the accession of 
 the Tories to office. Their task was therefore easy. It 
 was absurd to suppose that Spain was to be wrested from 
 Louis and handed to the Emperor. Charles had been 
 chosen as king when it was improbable that he would 
 ever become emperor. It therefore remained to find 
 another candidate and begin the war afresh, or to make 
 peace. To leave Philip V. on the throh-e, of Spain was
 
 HARLEY AND ST. JOHN. 127 
 
 certainly to give up an essential point. But as there was 
 no one else, and as the Spaniards were not likely to accept 
 any one else, it was a not altogether bad solution. 
 
 Louis therefore had the satisfaction of securing Spain 
 for his grandson, and added a solemn engagement that 
 the crowns of France and Spain should never be united, 
 for the benefit of anyone who might still believe in solemn 
 engagements. He acknowledged the Hanoverian succes- 
 sion, banished the Pretender, and restored to the Dutch 
 their barrier fortresses. English merchants obtained some 
 limited trading rights in the Spanish Indies. Finally, 
 while England kept Gibraltar and Minorca, her colonial 
 gains in the eighteenth century were foreshadowed by the 
 acquisition of Newfoundland and other portions of French 
 North America. The Netherlands and the Italian pro- 
 vinces of Milan, Sardinia, and Naples went to the emperor, 
 the Duke of Savoy obtained Sicily, while Louis retained 
 Strasbourg. 
 
 Thus, by 1713, the European question was settled and 
 the triumph of party government had begun in England. 
 It is noticeable that Tory peers were created specially to 
 make a majority in the House of Lords in order to pre- 
 vent opposition to the Peace. 
 
 In the third period of the reign the Succession question 
 loomed large. Anne was in bad health. The Electress 
 Sophia was over 80 years of age, and thus Danger tothe 
 there was a near prospect of two rapid Protestant 
 changes in the occupancy of the throne, if the s< 
 latter should outlive the queen. Fortunately she died a 
 few weeks earlier. Her son George, Elector of Hanover, 
 was about fifty years of age and a good soldier, but beyond 
 this little was known about him. The party spirit was 
 so completely dominant in England that the Tory leaders 
 may well have doubted whether such a king would be 
 accepted by the nation. Harley, now Earl of Oxford, 
 and his colleague Bolingbroke, are generally supposed to 
 have intended to restore the Pretender, since they wrote 
 letters to him. Perhaps they were only trimming, as 
 better men had done before. But it seems that Boling-
 
 128 DEATH OF QUEEN ANNE. 
 
 broke at least had gone very far in the direction of con- 
 spiring for the restoration of James III. by force of arms. 
 It is clear they had little to hope from the legal heir to 
 the throne, who was sure to place power in the hands 
 of the Whigs. Fortunately for England these two states- 
 men quarrelled just before Anne died. Oxford was dis- 
 missed. The question arose who should succeed him as 
 Lord Treasurer. Some of the Whig lords promptly 
 seized this opportunity of the Queen's illness, forced their 
 way into the Privy Council, and secured the appointment 
 of the Earl of Shrewsbury, a firm supporter of the Hano- 
 verian succession. This decided the matter. Queen 
 Anne died on August i, 1714, and the Elector George 
 Lewis was proclaimed King of Great Britain, France, and 
 Ireland, Defender of the Faith. 
 
 The days of the Stewarts were over. Personal govern- 
 ment by the monarch was now to become obsolete, under 
 two foreign kings who knew nothing and cared nothing 
 for English politics. For the first time in the history of 
 the realm the sovereign was to become a secondary 
 person in the governance of the land where he reigned 
 but did not rule. His place was to be taken by the 
 prime-minister, . the chief of one of the party cabinets 
 which were for the future to be the rule and not the 
 exception. The next period of English history should be 
 called the reign of Walpole, and not labelled with the 
 comparatively insignificant names of the first two Georges. 
 The ancient struggle between king and parliament had 
 reached its end.
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Abhorrers, the, 84. 
 
 Addresses, Vote of No, 57. 
 
 Adwalton Moor, battle of, 44. 
 
 Agitators, the, 56, 57, 60. 
 
 "Agreement of the People", 61. 
 
 Alfprd, battle of, 53. 
 
 Alliance, Triple, 76, 77. 
 
 Almanza, battle of, 122. 
 
 Alsace, coveted by Louis XIV., 75; 
 occupied by him, 85. 
 
 America, Puritan colonists of, 74. 
 
 Anne, Queen, 82; excluded from the 
 throne by Exclusion Bill, 84; recon- 
 ciled to William III., 109; ruled by 
 Countess of Marlborough, 109; acces- 
 sion of, 115, 120; character of, 116; 
 dismisses the Churchills, 126; death, 
 127. 
 
 Argyle, Archibald Campbell, Marquis 
 of, leader of Covenanters, 36, 58 ; 
 executed, 76. 
 
 Argyle, Archibald, Earl of, son of above, 
 rebels against James II., 90. 
 
 Arlington, Lord, member of the "Ca- 
 bal ", 76 ; concerned in Treaty of 
 Dover, 77. 
 
 Arminianism, 23, and note. 
 
 Army, Standing, disliked, 76, 78, 80 ; 
 disbandment of, demanded, 82 ; in- 
 creased by James II., 91; established 
 at Hounslow, 90. 
 
 Army, the New Model. See Model. 
 
 Array, Commissions of, issued by 
 Charles I., 39. 
 
 Ashley, Anthony. See Skaftesbury. 
 
 Assembly, Glasgow, 29 ; Westminster, 
 48. 
 
 Assize, the Bloody, 91. 
 
 Association, the Eastern, 49. 
 
 Attainder, Bill of, against Strafford, 33. 
 
 Auldearn, battle of, 53. 
 
 Bacon, Sir Francis, 10 ; his theory of 
 
 the judge's position, 12; disgrace of, 
 
 18. 
 
 Baillie, Robt., Scottish historian, 29, 50. 
 Bank of England founded, 107. 
 Barebones' Parliament, 64. 
 Bate, Case of Impositions, 10, 13. 
 Bavaria, Joseph, prince of, allotted 
 
 Spain by the partition treaty, 112; 
 
 dies, 113. 
 Bavaria, Elector of, joins the French, 
 
 120; beaten at Blenheim, 121. 
 
 Baxter, Richard, Presbyterian divine, 
 94- 
 
 Benevolence, a form of taxation, 13, 22. 
 
 Berwick, Duke of, wins battle of Al- 
 manza, 122. 
 
 Berwick, Pacification of, 30. 
 
 Bills, the Four, 57. 
 
 Bishops ejected from House of Lords, 
 38 ; restored, 72 ; Petition of the 
 ' Seven, 95 ; their trial, 95. 
 
 Blake, Admiral, 63. 
 
 Blenheim, battle of, 121. 
 
 Bohemia rebels, 16; elects Frederick 
 of the Palatinate as king, 16. 
 
 Bolingbroke, Henry St. John, Viscount, 
 leader of the Tories, 124 ; intrigues 
 with the Pretender, 127. 
 
 Bothwell Brig, battle of, 83. 
 
 Boyne, battle of the, 103. 
 
 Bradock Down, battle of, 44. 
 
 Breda, Declaration of, 69; Peace of, 75. 
 
 Brentford, sack of, 43. 
 
 Bridgewater stormed, 53. 
 
 Bristol, secured by Waller, 45; surren- 
 dered, 45 ; besieged by Fairfax and 
 stormed, 54. 
 
 Buckingham, George Villiers, Duke of, 
 14, 17; influence over Charles I., 18; 
 visit to Spain, 18; attacked in Parlia- 
 ment, 22 ; assassinated, 23. 
 
 Buckingham, George, Duke of, son of 
 above, member of the "Cabal", 76. 
 
 Burgundy, County of, secured by Louis 
 XIV., 75. 77, 81. 
 
 Byng, Admiral, disperses French fleet, 
 124. 
 
 Cabal, meaning of, 76, note ; the ad- 
 ministration of the, 76, 77; fall of, 78. 
 
 Cabinet, the, 6. 
 
 Cadiz, Expedition to, 22. 
 
 Cambridge, Vice-chancellor of, sus- 
 pended by James II., 95. 
 
 Canons of 1604, 9. 
 
 Carr, Robert. See Rochester and 
 Somerset. 
 
 Catesby the conspirator, 9. 
 
 Catharine of Braganza, wife of Charles 
 II... 74- 
 
 Cavalier Parliament. See Parliament. 
 
 Cecil, Robert, Earl of Salisbury, mini- 
 ster of James I., 8 ; his policy and 
 death, n. 
 
 "Cessation", Irish, the, 48.
 
 1 3 o 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Chalgrove, battle of, 43. 
 
 Charles I., King of England, 4; pro- 
 posed marriage with Spanish Prin- 
 cess, 13; visit of, to Spain, 18; acces- 
 sion of, 20 ; marriage, 20 ; character, 
 20 ; absolute rule of, 24 ; visits Scot- 
 land, 28; consents to Strafford's death, 
 33 ; visits Scotland, 34 ; reaction in 
 favour of, 35 ; church policy, 36 ; 
 his conservative attitude, 37, 38, 39 ; 
 blunders in exciting suspicion, 38 ; 
 his attempt on the Five members, 38; 
 leaves London, 38; his military pros- 
 pects, 41; failure of his cause, 52; his 
 intrigues, 53; is pursued, 54; flies to 
 Scottish camp, 54 ; seized by Cornet 
 Joyce, 56 ; escapes to Isle of Wight, 
 $7 ; trial and death of, 59. 
 
 Charles II., King of England: pfo- 
 claimed in Edinburgh, 62 ; takes 
 Covenant, 62; defeated at Worcester 
 and escapes to France, 62 ; expelled 
 from France, 66 ; issues Declaration 
 of Breda, 69; restoration of, 69; cha- 
 racter of, 70; his relations with Louis 
 XIV., 71 ; his religious changes, 72; 
 marriage, 73 ; his quarrel with Hol- 
 land, 74 ; makes the secret Treaty of 
 Dover, 77; issues Declaration of In- 
 dulgence, 77 ; opposition of Parlia- 
 ment to, 78, 80; applies to Louis XIV. 
 for money, 81 ; defends his brother's 
 succession, 82, 83, 85; secures a strong 
 party, 85, 86; death, 87. 
 
 Charles II., King of Spain, designs of 
 Louis XIV. on his kingdom, 75; dies, 
 112. 
 
 Charles, Archduke of Austria, candidate 
 for the Spanish throne, 112; becomes 
 Emperor, 126. 
 
 Cheriton, battle of, 49. 
 
 Chester, surrender of, 54. 
 
 Christ Church, Oxford, parliament in, 
 85 ; Roman Catholic appointed as 
 Dean of, 95. 
 
 Churchill, John. See Marlborough. 
 
 Clarendon, Edward Hyde, Earl of, 
 leader of church party in Long Par- 
 liament, 35; minister of Charles II. 
 73; fall of his administration, 76; im- 
 peached and banished, 76. 
 
 Clarendon, second Earl of, son of above, 
 Lord-lieutenant of Ireland: dismissed 
 by James II., 93. 
 
 Claverhouse, James Graham of. Vis- 
 count Dundee, heads Jacobite rising 
 in Scotland, killed at Killiecrankie, 
 104. 
 
 Clifford, Sir Thomas, member of 
 " Cabal ", 76, 77. 
 
 Code, the " Clarendon ", 73, 93. 
 
 Coke, Chief Justice, quarrel of, with 
 James I., 10, 12, 13. 
 
 Colchester, Royalist rising at, 58. 
 
 Commission, Court of High, 26: abol- 
 ished 34; revived, 92. 
 
 Commonwealth, the, 60. 
 
 Comprehension, meaning of, 72. 
 
 Compton, bishop of London : opposed 
 to James II., 91, 92; suspended, 93; 
 invites William to England, 96. 
 
 Conference, Hampton Court, 9, 26. 
 
 Conference, Savoy, 73. 
 
 Contract, the Great, 10. 
 
 Conventicle Act, the, 75. 
 
 Convention, the, of 1660, 69; character 
 of its work, 71, 72; dissolution of, 72. 
 
 Convention of 1688, 97, 98, 102. 
 
 Corporation Act, 73. 
 
 Council, Privy, Temple's scheme for 
 organizing, 82, 83. 
 
 Council of State during the Common- 
 wealth, 61, 63. 
 
 Covenant, the Scottish, 29; the Solemn 
 League and Covenant, 48. 
 
 Covenanters, persecution of, 76; defeat 
 of, 83; proclaim William and Mary, 
 104. 
 
 Cromwell, Oliver, character of, 44 ; 
 policy for organizing the Army, 46, 
 48; his raid round Oxford, 52; his 
 campaign in the West, 54; attempts 
 to come to terms with Charles, 56, 57; 
 unpopular, 57; his part in Second Civil 
 war, 58; his aims, 60; his campaign 
 in Ireland, 61; in Scotland, 61; dis- 
 solves the "Rump", 63; becomes 
 Protector, 64; opposed in Parliament, 
 65; his foreign policy, 66; refuses the 
 title of king, 66; dies, 67. 
 
 Cromwell, Richard, son of above, be- 
 comes Protector, 67; his character and 
 abdication, 67. 
 
 Culpeper, Sir John, 35, 48 
 
 Danby, Sir Thomas Osborne, Earl of, 
 minister of Charles II., 79, 81; im- 
 peached, 81, 82; minister of William 
 III., 103; his fall, 108. 
 
 Darien Scheme, the, 123. 
 
 Declaration of Indulgence. See Indul- 
 gence. 
 
 Devonshire, Earl of, opposes James II., 
 91, 96. 
 
 Digby, Sir Everard, conspirator, 9. 
 
 Digby, John, Earl of Bristol, ambas- 
 sador in Spain under James I., 13, 
 18. 
 
 Dispensing Power, 74, note; use of, 80, 
 92; recognized by law, 92; James's 
 abuse of, 92. 
 
 Dissenter, Letter to a, 94, note. 
 
 Dissenters, persecution of, 73; James II. 
 and the, 93, 94. 
 
 Divine right, 4, 10, 70, 84, 87, 88. 
 
 Dover, Secret Treaty of, 77.
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Drogheda, massacre at, 61. 
 
 Dunbar, battle of. 62. 
 
 Dundee. See Cla-verhouse. 
 
 Dunkirk, taken for England, 66; Sold 
 
 to France, 74, 76. 
 Dutch, England's rivalry with, 14, 74; 
 
 Cromwell's war with, 62, 64; designs 
 
 of Louts XIV. against, 75, 76, 77; 
 
 Charles II. 's wars with, 74, 75, 76, 
 
 77; peace with, 79. 
 
 Edgehill, battle of, 42. 
 
 Edinburgh, riot in, 28. 
 
 Eliot, Sir John, leads opposition in Par- 
 liament, 22; imprisonment and death 
 of, 24. 
 
 Elizabeth, Queen, her church policy, 3. 
 
 Elizabeth, daughter of James L, her 
 marriage, n. 
 
 England, New, 26, 74. 
 
 Episcopacy, attacked in Long Parlia- 
 ment, 35. 
 
 I/ Eugene of Savoy, leader of Austrian 
 army, 119; wins battle of Cremona, 
 121 ; joins Marlborough before Blen- 
 heim, 121 ; wins battle at Turin, 121; 
 joins Marlborough before battle of 
 Oudenarde, 122. 
 
 Exclusion Bill, 83, 84, 85. 
 
 Fairfax, Thomas, Lord, 44, 50; com- 
 mands the New Model army, 5 1 ; cam- 
 paigns of, 53, 54; marches on London, 
 56; his work in Second Civil war, 58. 
 
 Falkland, Lord, death of, 46. 
 
 Fawkes, Guy, 9. 
 
 Felton assassinates Buckingham, 23. 
 
 Ferdinand II., Emperor, 16. 
 
 Fire of London, 75. 
 
 Five Mile Act, 75. 
 
 Fleclwood demands independence of 
 the army, 67. 
 
 Tloyd, cruel punishment of, 17. 
 
 Frarce, Buckingham allied with, 19; 
 war with, 22 ; peace with, 24 ; alliance 
 of Cromwell with, 66. 
 
 Frederick, Elector Palatine, marries 
 daughter of James II., n; elected 
 King of Bohemia, 16; character of, 
 16. 
 
 ^/Gainsborough, battle of, 44. 
 
 George of Denmark, husband of Queen 
 
 Anoe, 1 1 6. 
 George, Elector of Hanover, becomes 
 
 King of England, 127. 
 Gibraltar taken by the English, 121. 
 Glasgow, Assembly at, 29 
 Glencoe, massacre of, 104. 
 Gloucester, siege of, 45, 46. 
 Godolphin, minister of William III., 
 
 103; of Anne, 120. 
 Gondomar, Spanish ambassador, 12, 16. 
 
 Goring, Lord, surrenders Portsmouth, 
 
 42; misconduct of, 53. 
 Graces, the, 25. 
 Grenville, Sir Bevil, 44. 
 Gustavus Adolphus, King of Sweden, 25. 
 
 Habeas Corpus Act, 83. 
 
 Hales, Sir Edward, case of, dispensing 
 
 power, 92. 
 Halifax, George Savile, Lord, opposes 
 
 Exclusion Bill, 83, 84; dismissed by 
 
 James I., 91; his writings, 94, 95. 
 Hamilton, Marquis of, 36; leads Scots 
 
 in Second Civil war, 58; executed, 
 
 62. 
 Hampden, John, resists Ship-money, 
 
 27; impeached, 38; killed, 43. 
 Harley, Robert, Earl of Oxford, leader 
 
 of the Tories, 124; intrigues with the 
 
 Pretender, 127. 
 
 Haslerigg, one of the Five members, 38. 
 Heidelberg, fall of, 17. 
 Henrietta Maria married to Charles I., 
 
 20; lands in England with money, 43 
 Henry IV. of France, death of, n. 
 Henry, Prince of Wales, death of, 12. 
 Hereford surprised by Waller, 45; re- 
 lief of, 54. 
 
 Hertford, Marquis of, 42, 44. 
 Hogue, La, battle of, 106. 
 Holies, one of the Five members, 38. 
 Hopton, Sir Ralph, victories of, 42-46; 
 
 defeat of, 49, 54. 
 
 Hull, Charles refused admission to, 39. 
 Hyde, Anne, wife of James II., 82. 
 Hyde, Edward. See Clarendon. 
 Hyde, Lawrence, son of above. See 
 
 Rochester. 
 
 Impositions, question of, 10, 13. 
 
 Incident, the, 36. 
 
 Indemnity, Bill of, 72, 102, 103. 
 
 Independents, 48; contrasted with Pree- 
 byterians, 52; success of, 52, 54; ex- 
 treme party of, 64. 
 
 Indulgence, Declaration of, 1672, 77; 
 withdrawn, 78. 
 
 Indulgence, Declaration of, 1687, 93; 
 compared with that of 1672, 94; or- 
 dered to be read in church, 95. 
 
 Instrument of Government, the, 64. 
 
 Ireland, difficulties under James I., u; 
 Chichester's government of, n ; Straf- 
 ford's government of, 25; rebellion of 
 1641, 36, 61; rising against the Com- 
 monwealth, 61; Jacobite rebellion in, 
 103. 
 
 Ireton, Henry, 61. 
 
 Jacobites, their intrigues against William 
 III., 101; rising in Ireland, 103; in 
 Scotland, 104 ; assassination plot 
 against William III., 109.
 
 132 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Jamaica, capture of, 66. 
 
 James I., 4; character, 7; his problem, 
 7; his first parliament, 8, 10; religious 
 policy, 9 ; quarrels with parliament, 
 8, ID, 1 7 ; quarrels with Coke, 10 ; 
 foreign policy, n, 12, 16, 19; his 
 Spanish leanings, 14, 15, 17; death 
 of, 19. 
 
 James II., scheme to exclude him from 
 the throne, 82, 83, 84; his Roman 
 Catholicism, 82, 89 ; marries Anne 
 Hyde, 82; marries Mary of Modena, 
 82; his accession, 87; character and 
 aims, 88, 89; his breach of Test Act, 
 91 ; opposition to him, 91 ; his measures 
 to secure power, 92, 93; his attack on 
 the universities, 95; birth of his son, 
 95; his escape, 97; his court at St. 
 Germains, 101 : heads rising in Ire- 
 land, 103; defeated and returns to 
 France, 103; death, 114. 
 
 James, son of James II. See Preten- 
 der. 
 
 Jeffreys, Chief Justice, his Bloody 
 Assize, 90, 91. 
 
 Jesuits, their influence at court of James 
 II-, 9 1 , 93- 
 
 Jews allowed to return to England, 65. 
 
 Joyce, Cornet, seizes Charles I., 56. 
 
 Judges appealed to by Stewarts, 10. 
 
 Killiecrankie, battle of, 104. 
 
 Kilsyth, battle of, 52. 
 
 Kirke, Colonel, his cruelty, 90. 
 
 Lambert, John, General, leader of the 
 Army, 64; demands independence for 
 it, 67; deprived of his commission, 68; 
 tried for treason, 73. 
 
 Langport, battle of, 53. 
 
 Lansdown, battle of, 45. 
 
 Laud, William, Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury, 21-25; character of, 21; his Ar- 
 minian tendencies, 23; provokes resis- 
 tance, 26 ; impeached, 32 ; executed, 
 5'- 
 
 Lauderdale, member of the "Cabal", 
 76; governing in Scotland, 76. 
 
 Leicester sacked, 52. 
 
 Leslie, Alexander, 29. 
 
 Leslie, David, 53; defeats Montrose,54. 
 
 Levellers, the, 57, 61, 68. 
 
 Limerick, siege of, 103. 
 
 Lindsey, Earl of, slain at Edgehill, 43. 
 
 London, petitions against Episcopacy, 
 35; anxious for peace, 45; fire of, 75; 
 stronghold of the Whigs, 86; charter 
 of, confiscated, 86; riots in, 93. 
 
 Londonderry, siege of, 103. 
 
 Lords, House of, abolished during Com- 
 monwealth, 61; restored at Restora- 
 tion, 72; rejects Exclusion Bill, 85. 
 
 Lostwithiel, surrender of Essex at, 49. 
 
 Louis XIII., 20; secures English help 
 against Huguenots, 22. 
 
 Louis XIV , his relations with Charles 
 II., 71, 74; his European schemes, 
 75; war against England, 75; claims 
 Spanish Netherlands, 76 ; Triple 
 Alliance against, 76, 77 ; makes Treaty 
 of Dover, 77; English opposed to, 
 78, 79 ; bribes English members of 
 parliament, 80; his policy in England, 
 84,85; paramount fii Europe, 88; helps 
 James II., 90; rescinds Edict of 
 Nantes, 92; fails to prevent the in- 
 vasion of William III., 96: receives 
 James II., 101: his war with William 
 III., 106; aids the Jacobites, 109; 
 acknowledges William III. by Treaty 
 of Ryswick, no; his partition treaties, 
 IT 2, 113; recognizes the Pretender as 
 king of England, 115; war of Spanish 
 Succession, 119-126; makes Treaty of 
 Utrecht, 126. 
 
 Lunsford, Colonel, 37. 
 
 Magdalen College, Oxford, attacked by 
 James II., 95. 
 
 Maidstone, Royalist rising at, 58. 
 
 Malplaquet, battle of, 124. 
 
 Manchester, Lord, 46, 50, 51. 
 
 Manifesto, the Army, 56. 
 
 Mansfield, Count, 17; his expedition, 19. 
 
 Maria, Infanta of Spain, proposed mar- 
 riage of Charles I. to, 13. 
 
 Marlborough, John Churchill, Duke of, 
 his intrigues with James II., 106 ; 
 commands army in the Netherlands, 
 119, 120; wins battle of Blenheim, 121 ; 
 of Ramillies, 121; of Oudenarde, 122; 
 of Malplaquet, 124; dismissed from 
 office, 126. 
 
 Marlborough, Sarah, Duchess of, her 
 ascendancy over Queen Anne, 109, 
 120; dismissed, 126. 
 
 Marston Moor, battle of, 50. 
 
 Mary, Queen of Scots, 7. 
 
 Mary, daughter of Charles I., 74. 
 
 Mary, daughter of James II., married 
 to William III., 80; excluded from 
 throne by Exclusion Bill, 84; declared 
 Queen by the Tories, 97; death, 108. 
 
 Mary of Modena, 82. 
 
 Masham, Mrs., her influence over 
 Queen Anne, 125. 
 
 Matthias, Emperor, 15. 
 
 Maurice, Prince, 46, 48. 
 
 MtiyJJower, voyage of the, 26. 
 
 Methuen Treaty, the, 122. 
 
 Militia, the question of the control of, 
 37; demanded by parliament, 38; or- 
 dinance for regulating. 38, 39; declared 
 to be in royal power, 72. 
 
 Millenary Petition, 9, 26. 
 
 Model, the New, 51; success of, 53;
 
 INDEX. 
 
 133 
 
 becomes a political power, 56, 57, 58; 
 
 remonstrance of, 59 ; quarrels with 
 
 parliament, 63, 67, 68; disbanded, 72. 
 Monk, George, restores Charles II., 68. 
 Monmouth, James, Duke of, proposed 
 
 as successor to Charles II., 83, 85; 
 
 banished, 87 ; rebels against J ames II., 
 
 oo; executed, 90. 
 Monopolies, 17, 28. 
 Montro.se, Marquis of, opposes Argyle, 
 
 36: fights for Charles I., 50, 52, 53; 
 
 defeated, 54: executed, 62. 
 Mutiny Act, the, 113. 
 
 Namur, capture of by the French, 107; 
 
 retaken by William III., 109. 
 Nantes, EJdict of, revoked, 92. 
 Naseby, battle of, 53. 
 Navigation Act, 62. 
 Netherlands, n ; Dutch, their truce 
 
 with Spain, n; Spanish, coveted by 
 
 Louis XIV., 75, 76. 
 Newark, 44, 54. 
 Newburn, battle of, 31. 
 Newbury, first battle of, 46 ; second 
 
 battle of, 51. 
 Newcastle, Scots retire to, 54; proposi- 
 
 tion of, 55. 
 Newcastle, Marquis of, 43; victories of, 
 
 44; danger of, 49; defeat of, 50. 
 Newmarket, 56. 
 Newport, Treaty of, 58. 
 Nimwegen, Peace of, 81 
 Non-jurors, the, 102. 
 
 , Titus, his perjuries, 81. 
 Occasional Conformity, bill against, 126. 
 Orange, William, Prince of, father of 
 
 William III., 74. 
 Orange, William, Prince of. See Wil- 
 
 liam III. 
 Ordinance, militia, 38, 39; self-denying, 
 
 5i- 
 
 Ormond, Duke of, 61. 
 Osborne, Sir Thomas. See Danby. 
 Oudenarde, battle of, 122. 
 Overbury, Sir Thomas, murdered, 14. 
 Oxford, head-quarters of Charles I., 43; 
 
 treaty of, 45; surrender of, 54; parlia- 
 
 ment held at, 85. 
 
 Palatinate, loss of, 17. 
 
 Parliament, power of, in Tudor times, 
 
 6; quarrels with James I., 8, 10; in- 
 
 tolerance of, 9. 
 
 the Addled, 13 ; the Short, 30; the 
 Mongrel, 48; Barebones", 64. 
 
 the Long, meets, 32 ; work of, 34 ; 
 disunion in, 35, 36 ; Puritan tendency 
 of, 35 ; becomes revolutionary, 36 ; 
 demands militia, 38 ; quarrels with 
 Army, 56 ; claims sole legislative 
 power, 59 ; dissolves itself, 69. 
 
 Parliament under Cromwell, packed, 66; 
 refuses to accept a written constitu- 
 tion, 67. 
 
 the "Cavalier", 71; its work, 72; 
 persecutes Dissenters, 73 ; opposes 
 Charles II., 77, 78; unpopularity of, 
 79, 81 ; dissolution of, 81. 
 
 under James II., 90. 
 
 Parties, origin of English political, 84. 
 
 Partition Treaties, the, 112, 113. 
 
 Penal Laws, origin of, 8 ; question of, 
 14, 18, 19, 77, 89, 94. 
 
 Penn, William, 94. 
 
 Penruddock, rebellion of, 65. 
 
 Pensionary, Grand, 74. 
 
 Perpetuation Bill, 63. 
 
 Perth, Assembly at, 15 ; Five Articles 
 of, 15, 29. 
 
 Petition and Advice, the, 66. 
 
 Petition of the Seven Bishops, 95. 
 
 "Petitioners", the, 84. 
 
 Petre, Father, 91. 
 
 Philip III. of Spain, n, 13. 
 
 Philip IV. of Spain, 66. 
 
 Philip of Anjou, King of Spain, 113. 
 
 Philiphaugh, battle of, 54. 
 
 Pilgrim Fathers, the, 26, 74. 
 
 Plague, the Great, 75. 
 
 Plot, Gunpowder, 9; Popish, 81 ; Rye 
 House, 86. 
 
 Portsmouth, 38; surrendered, 42. 
 
 Powick Bridge, battle of, 42. 
 
 Prague, battle of, 16. 
 
 Presbyterians, 7 ; organization of, 29 ; 
 have majority in Parliament, 55: offer 
 terms to Charles at Newport, 58: ex- 
 pelled from Parliament by Pride, 59; 
 opposed to Cromwell, 66; restored to 
 Parliament by Monk, 68; persecution 
 of, 73, 89. 
 
 Preston, battle of, 58. 
 
 Pretender, the, son of James II., 95,96; 
 acknowledged King of England by 
 Louis XIV., 115. 
 
 Pride, Colonel, purges Parliament, 59. 
 
 Propositions, the Ten, 34; the Nineteen, 
 39 ; of Newcastle, 55. 
 
 Protector, Cromwell becomes, 64. 
 
 Prynne, Puritan writer, 27, 32. 
 
 Purge, Pride's, 59. 
 
 Puritans, 2 ; origin of, 3 ; persecution 
 of, 3; spirit of, 5; political importance 
 of, 5, 40; demands of, 9, 23; division 
 among, 48, 52. 
 
 Pym, John, 24, 30, 34, 37, 38, 48. 
 
 Pyrenees, Treaty of, 75. 
 
 Raleigh, Sir Walter, 2, 14. 
 Ramillies, battle of, 121. 
 Rebellion, the Great, results of, 70. 
 Recusancy, 8. 
 
 Reform of Constituencies during Com- 
 monwealth, 65.
 
 134 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Reformation, the, effect of, in England, 
 
 2 . 3- 
 
 Regicides, punishment of, 72. 
 Remonstrance, the Grand, 37. 
 
 of the Army, 59. 
 Republican party, 64, 66, 67. 
 Restoration, causes of the, 69, 70. 
 Revolution of 1688, 90, 98. 
 Rhe, Expedition to, 22. 
 
 Right, Declaration of, 98. 
 
 Petition of, 23, 27. 
 Rights, Bill of, 98. 
 Ripon, Treaty of, 31. 
 Rochelle, 22. 
 
 Rochester, Lawrence Hyde, Earl of, 
 
 86, 91 ; dismissed, 93. 
 Roman Catholics, 2 ; persecuted, 3, 8, 
 
 9, 81, 89, Charles II. leans towards, 
 
 77, 80; James II. assists, 89, 94. 
 Root and Branch party, 35. 
 Rowton Heath, battle of, 54. 
 Rump, the, Parliament restored, 68 ; 
 
 expelled, 68. 
 Russell, Admiral, wins battle of La 
 
 Hogue, 106; his intrigues with James 
 
 II., 106. 
 Russell, Lord William, leads Exclusion 
 
 party, 82 ; executed, 87. 
 Russell, Edward, 96. 
 Rye House Plot, 86. 
 Ryswick, Treaty of, no. 
 
 Sacheyerell, his sermons against the 
 Whigs, 125. 
 
 St. John, Henry. See Bolingbroke. 
 
 St. John, Oliver, prosecution of, 13. 
 
 St. Thome" burned by Raleigh's expe- 
 dition, 14. 
 
 Saints, the, 64 ; Cromwell relies on 
 them, 64. 
 
 Sancroft, Archbishop, 95 ; forfeits the 
 archbishopric as a non-juror, 102. 
 
 Sarmiento. See Gondomar. 
 
 Savoy, Duke of, persecutes Protes- 
 tants, 66. 
 
 Savoy Palace, Conference at, 73. 
 
 Schomberg, Marshal, sent by William 
 III. to subdue rebellion in Ireland, 
 103. 
 
 Scotland, Union with England pro- 
 posed, 8 ; rebellion of, against Charles 
 I., 28; fights for Parliament, 48; army 
 of, presents propositions to Charles I., 
 55 ; makes engagement with Charles 
 I. , 57 ; invades England, 58 ; rises 
 against the Commonwealth, 61 ; forces 
 of, beaten at Dunbar, 62 ; and at 
 Worcester, 62; Jacobite rising in, 104; 
 union with England, 122. 
 
 Scots anxious to convert England, 48, 
 49; make terms with Charles, 54. 
 
 Security, Act of, 123. 
 
 Sedgmour, battle of, 90. 
 
 Selden, John, 52. 
 
 Settlement, Act of, 114. 
 
 Shaftesbury, Anthony Ashley Cooper, 
 Earl of, 76; member of "Cabal": ad- 
 vises the Declaration of Indulgence, 
 
 77 ; made Chancejlor, 77 ; dismissed, 
 
 78 ; joins opposition, 78, 82, 83 ; his 
 exclusion scheme, 84 ; tried for trea- 
 son, 86; flies to Holland and dies, 86. 
 
 Ship-money, 25, 27, 34. 
 
 Shrewsbury, minister of William III., 
 103; lord-treasurer in 1714, 128. 
 
 Somers, John, Lord, his defence of the 
 seven bishops, 95. 
 
 Somerset, Robert Carr, Earl of, 12, 14. 
 
 Sophia, Electress of Hanover, heiress 
 to the throne of England, 1*4; death 
 of, 127. 
 
 Sovereign power, 4; question of, raised, 
 5, 59; true solution of, 6; real ques- 
 tion in the Civil war, 40 ; unsolved. 
 69; parties divided as to, 84; solution 
 reached in 1688, 98. 
 
 Spain, James I. makes peace with, n ; 
 objects of, 12 ; war with, 21 ; peace 
 with, 24; campaigns in, 121, 122. 
 
 Spanish Succession, Problem of, no; 
 war of, 119-126. 
 
 Spice Islands, the, 14, 73. 
 
 Stamford, Lord, Parliamentary general, 
 
 Star Chamber, 13, 26, 27; abolished, 34. 
 
 Steenkerke, battle of, 106. 
 
 Stewart house, genealogy of, in. 
 
 Strafford, Thomas Wentwprth, Earl of, 
 joins Charles I., 21 ; his policy, 21 ; 
 in Ireland. 25 ; his advice about the 
 Scottish rebellion, 29 ; his speech in 
 Privy Council, 30, 32; impeached, 32: 
 condemned by attainder, 33 ; exe- 
 cuted, 34. 
 
 Strasbourg seized by Louis XIV., 86. 
 
 Stratton, battle of, 45. 
 
 Strode, William, 38. 
 
 Sunderland, Earl of, adviser of Charles 
 II., 86. 
 
 Sweden joins Triple Alliance, 76. 
 
 Swift, Dean, his Tory pamphlets, 126. 
 
 Sydney, Algernon, executed, 87. 
 
 Tadcaster, battle of, 44. 
 
 Taunton, relief of, 52 ; crowning of 
 
 Monmouth at, 90. 
 Taxation, arbitrary, 10, 13, 21, 24, 27, 
 
 34. 65. 
 
 Temple, Sir William, 82. 
 Test Act, 78, 91, 92. 
 Tests, 89; suspended, 94. 
 Tippermuir, battle of, 50. 
 Toleration, 6, 70, 77, 78, 79, 80, 84, 89, 
 
 oo, 93, 97. 
 
 Toleration Act, the, 102. 
 Torbay, landing of William III. at, 96.
 
 INDEX. 
 
 135 
 
 Tories, origin of, 84 ; victory of in 
 Charles II. 's time, 85, 86; their diffi- 
 culties at the Revolution, 97 ; policy 
 of, under William III., too, 107; un- 
 der Anne, 117. 
 
 Treason, law of, 33, 87. 
 
 Triennial Act of 1641, 80. 
 
 Triennial Bill of 1693 vetoed by Wiliiam 
 III., 107 ; passed, 108. 
 
 Triers, Board of, appointed by Crom- 
 well, 65. 
 
 Tromp, Admiral Van, 63. 
 
 Tunnage and Poundage, 21, 24. 
 
 Turnham Green, Charles I. at, 43. 
 
 Tyrconnel, Earl of, adviser of James 
 II., 91 ; rules in Ireland, 93. 
 
 Ulster, Colonization of, n. 
 
 Uniformity, Act of, 73. 
 
 Union, the, of England and Scotland, 
 
 8, 122, 124. 
 
 Utrecht, Treaty of, 126. 
 Uxbridge, Treaty of, 52. 
 
 Vane, Sir Harry, 33; executed, 73. 
 Verney, Sir Edmund, death of, 42. 
 Villars, Marshal, defeated at Mal- 
 
 plaquet, 124. 
 
 Villiers. See Buckingham. 
 Virginia, Colony of, 74. 
 
 Waller, Sir William, 45, 48, 49, 50. 
 Wallingford House party, 67. 
 War, The Bishops', 31. 
 
 The Great Civil, cause of, 40; nature 
 of, 41. 
 
 The Second Civil, 57, 58. 
 
 The Thirty Years', 15, 16, 17, 25. 
 Wentworth, Sir Thos. See Strafford. 
 Wexford, storm of, 61. 
 
 Whigs, origin of, 84, 85, 86; ruin of, by 
 Shaftesbury, 86 ; restored by James 
 II.'s conduct, 88; victory of, in 1689, 
 97; their policy under William III., 
 loo, 102, 107; their successes, 108-1:0; 
 their policy under Anne, 117. 
 
 William III. kept from his office in 
 Holland, 74 ; restored to it, 80; mar- 
 riage, 80; opposes Louis XIV., 88; 
 invited to England, 96; his difficulties, 
 96 ; lands at Torbay, 96 ; is made 
 king, 98 ; his policy, 99 ; subdues re- 
 bellion in Ireland, 103 ; war with 
 France, 101, 106, 107, 109 ; makes 
 Peace of Ryswick, 112 ; partition 
 treaties, 112, 113; death, 115; triumph 
 of his policy, 115. 
 
 Winceby, battle of, 47. 
 
 Witt, de, 74, 75 ; murdered, 80. 
 
 York, attack upon Newcastle at, 49. 
 York, James, Duke of. See "James II.
 
 ' ' The volumes contain the ripe results of the studies of men wht 
 are authorities in their respective fields." THE NATION. 
 
 EPOCHS OF HISTORY 
 
 EPOCHS OF 
 ANCIENT HISTORY 
 
 Eleven volumes, i6mo, 
 each $1.00. 
 
 EPOCHS OF 
 MODERN HISTORY 
 
 Eighteen volumes, i6mo, 
 each $1.00. 
 
 The Epoch volumes have most successfully borne the test of 
 experience, and are universally acknowledged to be the best series 
 of historical manuals in existence. They are admirably adapted in 
 form and matter to the needs of colleges, schools, reading circles, 
 and private classes. Attention is called to them as giving the 
 utmost satisfaction as class hand-books. 
 
 NOAH PORTER, President of Yale College. 
 "The ' Epochs of History' have been prepared with knowl- 
 edge and artistic skill to meet the wants of a large number of 
 readers. To the young they furnish an outline or compendium. 
 To those who are older they present a convenient sketch of the 
 heads of the knowledge which they have already acquired. The 
 outlines are by no means destitute of spirit, and may be used with 
 great profit for farnily reading, and in select classes or reading clubs." 
 
 CHARLES KENDALL ADAMS, President of Cornell University. 
 
 "A series of concise and carefully prepared volumes on special 
 eras of history. Each is also complete in itself, and has no especial 
 connection with the other members of the series. The works are 
 all written by authors selected by the editor on account of some 
 especial qualifications for a portrayal of the period they respectively 
 describe. The volumes form an excellent collection, especially 
 adapted to the wants of a general reader." 
 
 The Publishers -will supply these volumes to teachers at SPECIAL 
 
 NE T RA TES, and would solicit correspondence concerning 
 
 terms for examination and introduction copies. 
 
 CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Publishers 
 
 153-157 Fifth Avenue, New York.
 
 is the best proof of its general popularity, and the excellence of 
 the various volumes is further attested by their having been 
 adopted as text-books in many of our leading educational institu- 
 tions. The publishers beg to call attention to the following list 
 comprising some of the most prominent institutions using volumes 
 of the series : 
 
 Smith College, Northampton, Mass. 
 Univ. of Vermont, Burlington, Vt. 
 Yale Univ., New Haven, Conn. 
 Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Mass. 
 Bellewood Sem., Anchorage, Ky. 
 Vanderbilt Univ., Nashville, Tenn. 
 State Univ., Minneapolis, Minn. 
 Christian Coll., Columbia, Mo. 
 Adelphi Acad., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
 Earlham Coll., Richmond, Ind. 
 Granger Place School, Canandaigua, 
 
 N. Y. 
 
 Salt Lake Acad., Salt Lake City, Utah. 
 Beloit Col., Beloit, Wis. 
 Logan Female Coll., Russellville, Ky. 
 No. West Univ., Evanston, 111. 
 State Normal School, Baltimore, Md. 
 Hamilton Coll., Clinton, N. Y. 
 Doane Coll., Crete, Neb. 
 Princeton College, Princeton, N. J. 
 Williams Coll., Williamstown, Mass. 
 Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N. Y. 
 Illinois Coll., Jacksonville, 111. 
 
 Univ. of South, Sewaunee, Tenn. 
 Wesleyan Univ., Mt. Pleasant, la. 
 Univ. of Cal., Berkeley, Cal. 
 So. Car. Coll., Columbia, S. C. 
 Amsterdam Acad., Amsterdam, 
 
 N. Y. 
 
 Carleton Coll., Northfield, Minn. 
 Wesleyan Univ., Middletown, Mass. 
 Albion Coll., Albion, Mich. 
 Dartmouth Coll., Hanover, N. H. 
 Wilmington Coll., Wilmington, O. 
 Madison Univ., Hamilton, N. Y. 
 Syracuse Univ., Syracuse, N. Y. 
 Univ. of Wis., Madison, Wis. 
 Union Coll.,Schenectady, N. Y. 
 Norwich Free Acad., Norwich, Conn. 
 Greenwich Acad., Greenwich, Conn. 
 Univ. of Neb., Lincoln, Neb. 
 Kalamazoo Coll., Kalamazoo, Mich. 
 Olivet Coll., Olivet, Mich. 
 Amherst Coll., Amherst, Mass. 
 Ohio State Univ., Columbus, O. 
 Free Schools, Oswego, N. Y. 
 
 Bishop J. F. HURST, ex- President of Drew Theol. Sem. 
 " It appears to me that the idea of Morris in his Epochs is 
 strictly in harmony with the philosophy of history namely, that 
 great movements should be treated not according to narrow 
 geographical and national limits and distinction, but universally, 
 according to their place in the general life of the world. The 
 historical Maps and the copious Indices are welcome additions 
 to the volumes."
 
 EPOCHS OF MODERN 
 HISTORY. 
 
 A SERIES OF BOOKS NARRATING THE HISTORY OF 
 
 ENGLAND AND EUROPE AT SUCCESSIVE EPOCHS 
 
 SUBSEQUENT TO THE CHRISTIAN ERA. 
 
 Edited by 
 
 EDWARD E. MORRIS. 
 
 Eighteen volumes, i6mo, with 74 Maps, Plans, and Tables. 
 
 Sold separately. Price per vol., $1.00. 
 The Set, Roxburgh style, gilt top, in box, $18.00. 
 
 THE BEGINNING OF THE MIDDLE AGES- 
 England and Europe in the Ninth Century. 
 By the Very Rev. R. W. CHURCH, M.A. 
 
 "A remarkably thoughtful and satisfactory discussion of 
 the causes and results of the vast changes which came upon 
 Europe during- the period discussed. The book is adapted to 
 be exceedingly serviceable." Chicago Standard. 
 
 "At once readable and valuable. It is comprehensive and 
 yet gives the details of a period most interesting to the student 
 of history. " Herald and Presbyter. 
 
 "It is written with a clearness and vividness of statement 
 which make it the pleasantest reading. It represents a great 
 deal of patient research, and is careful and scholarly." 
 Boston Journal. 
 
 THE NORMANS IN EUROPE The Feudal 
 System and England under the Norman 
 Kings. By Rev. A. H. JOHNSON, M.A. 
 
 " Its pictures of the Normans in their home, of the Scan- 
 dinavian exodus, the conquest of England, and Norman 
 administration, are full of vigor and cannot fail of holding the 
 reader's attention." Episcopal Register. 
 
 " The style of the author is vigorous and animated, and he 
 has given a valuable sketch of the origin and progress of the 
 great Northein movement that has shaped the history of 
 modern Europe." Boston Transcript.
 
 EPOCHS OF MODERN HISTORY 
 
 THE CRUSADES. By Rev. G. W. Cox. 
 
 " To be warmly commended for important qualities. The 
 author shows conscientious fidelity to the materials, and such 
 skill in the use of them, that, as a result, the reader has 
 before him a narrative related in a style that makes it truly 
 fascinating." CongregationaZist. 
 
 " It is written in a pure and flowing style, and its arrange- 
 ment and treatment of subject are exceptional." Christian 
 Intelligencer. 
 
 THE EARLY PL A N T AGEN ETS Their 
 Relation to the History of Europe; The 
 Foundation and Growth of Constitutional 
 Government, By Rev. W. STUBBS, M.A. 
 
 "Nothing could be desired more clear, succinct, and well 
 arranged. All parts of the book are well done. It may be 
 pronounced the best existing brief history of the constitution 
 for this, its most important period." The Nation. 
 
 " Prof. Stubbs has presented leading events with such fair- 
 ness and wisdom as are seldom found. He is remarkably 
 clear and satisfactory." The Churchman, 
 
 EDWARD 111. By Rev. W. WARBURTON, M.A. 
 
 " The author has done his work well, and we commend it 
 as containing in small space all essential matter." New York 
 Independent. 
 
 " Events and movements are admirably condensed by the 
 author, and presented in such attractive form as to entertain 
 as well as instruct." Chicago Interior. 
 
 THE HOUSES OF LANCASTER AND YORK 
 The Conquest and Loss of France. By 
 
 JAMES GAIRDNER. 
 
 "Prepared in a most careful and thorough manner, and 
 ought to be read by every student." New York Times. 
 
 "It leaves nothing to be desired as regards compactness, 
 accuracy, and excellence of literary execution. "~Boston 
 Journal.
 
 EPOCHS OF MODERN HISTORY 
 
 THE ERA OF THE PROTESTANT REVO- 
 LUTION. By FREDERIC SEEBOHM. With Notes, on 
 Books in English relating to the Reformation, by Prof. 
 GEORGE P. FISHER, D.D. 
 
 "For an impartial record of the civil and ecclesiastical 
 changes about four hundred years ago, we cannot commend a 
 better manual." Sunday-School Times. 
 
 "All that could be desired, as well in execution as in plan. 
 The narrative is animated, and the selection and grouping of 
 events skillful and effective." The Nation. 
 
 THE EARLY TUDORS Henry VII., Henry 
 V11I. By Rev. C. E. MOBERLEY, M.A., late Master in 
 Rugby School. 
 
 "Is concise, scholarly, and accurate. On the epoch of which 
 it treats, we know of no work which equals it." JV. Y. Observer. 
 
 " A marvel of clear and succinct brevity and good historical 
 judgment. There is hardly a better book of its kind to be 
 named." New York Independent. 
 
 THE AGE OF ELIZABETH. By Rev. M. 
 CREIGHTON, M.A. 
 
 "Clear and compact in style ; careful in their facts, and 
 just in interpretation of them. It sheds much light on the 
 progress of the Reformation and the origin of the Popish 
 reaction during Queen Elizabeth's reign ; also, the relation of 
 Jesuitism to the latter." Presbyterian Review. 
 
 " A clear, concise, and just story of an era crowded with 
 events of interest and importance. " A^w Yc~ World. 
 
 THE THIRTY YEARS' WAR I 61S-! 648 
 
 By SAMUEL RAWSON GARDINER. 
 
 " As a manual it will prove of the greates' practical value, 
 while to the general reader it will afford a clear and interesting 
 account of events. We know of no more spirited and attractive 
 recital of the great era." Boston Saturday Evening Gazette. 
 
 " The thrilling story of those times has never been told so 
 vividly or succinctly as in this volume." Episcopal Register.
 
 EPOCHS OF MODERX HISTORY. 
 
 THE PURITAN REVOLUTION ; and the First 
 Two Stuarts, 1 6O3- 1 66O. By SAMUEL RAWSON 
 GARDINER. 
 
 " The narrative is condensed and brief, yet sufficiently com- 
 prehensive to give an adequate view of the events related." 
 Chicago Standard. 
 
 " Mr. Gardiner uses his researches in an admirably clear 
 and fair way " Congregaiionalist. 
 
 " The _-ketcn;o concise, but clear and perfectly intelligible." 
 Hartford Courant. 
 
 THE ENGLISH RESTORATION AND LOUIS 
 XIV., from the Peace of Westphalia to the 
 Peace of Nimwegen. By OSMUND AIRY, M. A. 
 
 " It is crisply and admirably written. An immense amount 
 of information is conveyed and with great clearness, the 
 arrangement of the subjects showing great skill and a thor- 
 ough command of the complicated theme." Boston Saturday 
 Evening Gazette. 
 
 "The author writes with fairness and discrimination, and 
 has given a clear and intelligible presentation of the time." 
 New York Evangelist. 
 
 THE FALL OF THE STUARTS; and Western 
 Europe. By Rev. EDWARD HALE, M.A. 
 
 " A valuable compend to the general reader and scholar." 
 Providence Journal. 
 
 "It will be found of great value. It is a very graphic 
 account of the history of Europe during the I7th century, 
 and is admirably adapted for the use of students." Boston 
 Saturday Evening Gazette. 
 "An admirable handbook for the student. " TheChurchman. 
 
 THE AGE OF ANNE. By EDWARD E. MORRIS, M.A. 
 
 " The author's arrangement of the material is remarkably 
 clear, his selection and adjustment of the facts judicious, his 
 historical judgment fair and candid, while the style wins by 
 its simple elegance." Chicago Standard. 
 
 "An excellent compendium of the history of an important 
 period." The Watchman.
 
 EPOCHS OF MODERN HISTORY. 
 
 ^ 
 
 THE EARLY HANOVERIANS Europe from 
 the Peace of Utrecht to the Peace of Aix- 
 la-Chapelle. By EDWARD E. MORRIS, M.A. 
 
 " Masterly, condensed, and vigorous, this is one of the 
 books which it is a delight to read at odd moments ; which 
 are broad and suggestive, and at the same time condensed in 
 treatment." Christian Advocate. 
 
 " A remarkably clear and readable summary of the salient 
 points of interest. The maps and tables, no less than the 
 author's style and treatment of the subject, entitle the volume 
 to the highest claims of recognition." Boston Daily Ad- 
 vertiser. 
 
 FREDERICK THE GREAT, AND THE SEVEN 
 YEARS' WAR. By F. W. LONGMAN. 
 
 " The subject is most important, and the author has treated 
 it in a way which is both scholarly and entertaining." The 
 Churchman. 
 
 ' ' Admirably adapted to interest school boys, and older 
 heads will find it pleasant reading." New York Tribune. 
 
 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION, AND FIRST 
 EMPIRE. By WILLIAM O'CONNOR MORRIS. With 
 Appendix by ANDREW D. WHITE, LL.D. , ex-President of 
 Cornell University. 
 
 " We have long needed a simple compendium of this period, 
 and we have here one which is brief enough to be easily run 
 through with, and yet particular enough to make entertaining 
 reading." New York Evening Post. 
 
 " The author has well accomplished his difficult task of 
 sketching in miniature the grand and crowded drama of the 
 French Revolution and the Napoleonic Empire, showing 
 himself to be no servile compiler, but capable of judicious 
 and independent criticism." Spring field Republican. 
 
 THE EPOCH OF REFORM 1 83O- 1 85O. By 
 
 JUSTIN MCCARTHY. 
 
 '.' Mr. McCarthy knows the period of which he writes 
 thoroughly, and the result is a narrative that is at once enter- 
 taining and trustworthy." New York Examiner 
 
 " The narrative is clear and comprehensive, and told with 
 abundant knowledge and grasp of the subject." Boston 
 Courier.
 
 IMPORTANT HISTORICAL 
 WORKS. 
 
 CIVILIZATION DURING THE MIDDLE AGES. 
 Especially in its Relation to Modern Civil- 
 ization. By GEORGE B. ADAMS, Professor of History in 
 Yale University. 8vo, $2.50. 
 
 Professor Adams has here supplied the need of a text-book 
 for the study of Mediaeval History in college classes at once 
 thorough and yet capable of being handled in the time usually 
 allowed to it. He has aimed to treat the subject in a manner 
 which its place in the college curriculum demands, by present- 
 ing as clear a view as possible of the underlying and organic 
 growth of our civilization, how its foundations were laid and its 
 chief elements introduced. 
 
 Prof. KENDRIC C. BABCOCK, University of Minnesota : "It 
 is one of the best books of the kind which I have seen. We 
 shall use it the coming term." 
 
 Prof. MARSHALL S. BROWN, Michigan University: "I 
 regard the work as a very valuable treatment of the great 
 movements of history during the Middle Ages, and as one 
 destined to be extremely helpful to young students. ' ' 
 
 BOSTON HERALD: "Professor Adams admirably presents 
 the leading features of a thousand years of social, political, 
 and religious development in the history of the world. It is 
 valuable from beginning to end." 
 
 HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES. By E. 
 
 BENJAMIN ANDREWS, D.D., LL.D., President of Brown 
 University. With maps. Two vols. , crown octavo, $4.00. 
 
 BOSTON ADVERTISER : " We doubt if there has been so 
 complete, graphic, and so thoroughly impartial a history of our 
 country condensed into the same space. It must become a 
 standard." 
 
 ADVANCE: "One of the best popular, general histories of 
 America, if not the best." 
 
 HERALD AND PRESBYTER: "The very history that many 
 people have been looking for. It does not consist simply of 
 minute statements, but treats of causes and effects with philo- 
 sophical grasp and thoughtfulness. It is the work of a scholar 
 and thinker."
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES 
 THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below 
 
 FEB 1 1937 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 Form L-9-15?/i-7,'35 
 
 m 281959 
 
 MAR 17 1952 
 
 
 REC'D DWJ 
 10 1952* ^ 
 
 1 5 1954 
 
 2 1954 
 
 JAN 2 195
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 A 000802102 4 
 
 g: 
 
 I 
 
 PLEA cl u DO NOT REMOVE 
 THIS BOOK CARD 
 
 University Research Library 
 
 T 
 
 Ul 
 
 UJ