« PoprzedniaDalej »
quarrel between the king and the two houses was not grounded upon any matter of religion, the rebels professing themselves to be of the same of which his majesty was known to be.”—Clarend. Vol. 111. p. 175.—“The inilitia, says Nelson, was the apple of contention: and though they have. endeavoured to make it bellum episcopale, yet, most certainly, it was a war begun, not for the mitre, but for the sceptre and the sword.”— Introd. to Coll. p. 77.
“ It was not a few of either house, says Welwood, but indeed all the great PATRIOTS that concurred at first to make inquiry into the grievances of this reign. Sir Edward Hide (afterwards Lord Clarendon) the Lords Digby, Falkland, Capel, Mr. Grimstone (speaker of the house of commons) which brought in king Charles II. Mr. Hollis (since Lord Hollis) all of which afterwards suffered on the king's side: and in general most of those who took the king's part in the succeeding war, were the men who appeared with the greatest zeal for the redress of grievances, and made the sharpest speeches on those subjects. Their intentions were certainly noble and just, and tended to the equal advantage of king and people."—WVelwood's Mem. p. 43.
“The general temper and humour of the kingdom, Lord Clarendon assures us, was little inclined to the papist, and less to the puritan. The murmur and discontent that was, appeared to be against the excess of power exercised by the crown, and supported by the judges in Westminster-hall. Very much the major part even of those members who still continued with the house (long after the war commenced, and after the bill for the extirpation of episcopacy had passed) were cordially affected to the government of the church establishment, at least not affected to any other.
And in truth very few of them desired the extirpation should take effect. The church was not repined at, nor the least inclination to alter the governinent and discipline of it, or to change the doctrine shewn. Nor was there any considerable number of persons of valuable condition who did wish either. The cause of so prodigious a change as happened a few years after was too visible from the effects. The archbishop's (Laud's) heart was so set upon the advancement of the church; in which he well knew he had the king's full concurrence, which he thought would be too powerful for any opposition, and that he should need no other assistance."--Clarend. Vol. 1. p. 92. Vol. III. p. 117. Vol. 111. p. 174. Vol. 1. p. 92, To the violent and illegal measures, therefore, by which that furious archbishop sought to advance it was its consequent overthrow, without all peradventure, principally owing
“Even when the covenant was subscribed by both houses, and enjoined to be taken by the people, it is far, says "Tindal, from appearing that the presbyterians were the majority in the parliament: but there seem to be very strong arguments to the contrary.”—Tind. Cont. Int. p. 10.- Lord Clarendon represents them as “an handful of men, not exceeding the proportion of three to ten, i. e. not a third part of the house of commons.** Clarend. Vol. II. p. 320. Again, “ The number of those who really intended these prodigious alterations was very inconsiderable.”—Page 662.“ And even the independent party, his lordship declares, comprehended many who were not so much enemies to the state, or to the church, as not to desire heartily that a peace might be established upon the foundations of both, so their own particular ambition might be complied with.” Vol. iv. p. 746.
" They were therefore gentlemen, members of the church of England, who hegan the quarrel with the king, and first drew the sword against him. The Earl of Essex, the parliament's general, and whose very name raised an army, was episcopal. Lord Clarendon says of him, that he was rather displeased with the person of the archbishop and some other bishops, than indevoted to the function; and was as much devoted as any man to the book of Common Prayer, and obliged all his servants to be constantly present with him at it. Of the admiral who seized the king's ships, and employed him, in the service of the parliament, the same noble historian says, he never discovered any aversion to episcopacy, bụt professed the contrary. Sir John Hotham, who shut the gates of Hull against the king, and was the first man proclaimed a traitor by him, he declares to have been very well affected to, and to have unquestioned reverence for the government both in church and state: the same of Sir Henry Vane, and of Lenthall the speaker; and of Pym, a person of the greatest influence in the house, that he professed to be very entire to the doctrine and discipline of the church. Nay we are told, by the same great author, that all those who were countenanced by the Earl of Essex, or in his confidence, were such as desired no other alteration in the church or government, but only of the persons who acted in it. And Mr. Baxter says, That the great officers in Esser's army were conFORMISTS; and some of them so zealous for the liturgy and diocesans, that they would not hear a man as a minister that had not EPISCOPAL ordination. It is also known that a noted clergyman, Dr. Williams, archbishop of York, accepted a commissjon from the parliament, and went into the army,* (and did in person assist the rebels, as Lord Clarendon expresses it, to take a castle of the king's, in which there was a garrison, and which was taken by a long siege.) So that it is, I think, past dispute with reasonable men, if there was any fault in opposing the king's measures and taking up arms against him, it must be imputed to the church of England, for they were first and the deepest in the quarrel."--Bennet's Memor. p. 287.-Clarend. Vol. 1. p. 223. Vol. iv. p. 564. W. II. p. 389. V. II. p. 214. V. iv. p. 620. V. 1. P. 63. V. 111. p. 462. Vol 11. p. 350.
Finally, by the noble historian's own aecount, the horrors of that war and the ocean of blood it spilt had happily been prevented, but for the fatal ivflexibility of the king himself, and his obstia date refusal of the counsel and persuasions of his most intimate counsellors and faithfullest friends. For even after his standard was erected at Not tingham, and the parliament by messages had invited him to return, his lordship. informs us, “ All bopes of an army seeming desperate, he was privately advised by some, whom he trusted as much as any, and whose affections were as entire to him as any men's, to give all other thoughts over, and instantly to make all imaginable haste to London, and to appear in the parliament house before they had any expectation of him. And they conceived there would be more likelihood for him to prevail that way, than by any army he was likely to raise. And it must be solely attributed to his majesty's own resolution that he took not that course.”—Ibid. Vol. 11. P. 11, 12 . To the temerity of the king, therefore, and the rashness of his own single and private resolution,
* He was commander in chief of the parliament forces in North Wales.
in opposition to the advice of his wisest and best friends, were the consequent troubles owing : they all are for pacific measures; the king ALONE is for war; and plunges himself and his kingdom in blood.
Besides the lives of so many thousand brave Britons as fell in this fatal war, it cost immense sums. “ From the year 1641 to 1647, there was levied, on the parliament's side only, in money and money-worth above forty millions.”—Tindal's Sum. p. 131.
THE power of raising money is justly accounted the grand bulwark of the people's liberties; for the moment this is seized by the king, and yielded by the people, he becomes absolute, they vassals and slaves. “When once kings may impose duties, as they think fit, there is an end of liberty.”—Le Clerc, on Clarend. Hist. p. 21. This has been ever the sense of the British nation, which has made them always, with great reason, extremely jealous of this right; knowing their freedom to depend entirely upon it. But king Charles not liking the restraints of parliaments, and desinging to reign absolute, strikes at this essential and vital part of our constitution, and resolves to raise money without the ceremony of parliament, and by the mere dint of his royal prerogative and will. «He told the parliament in plain terms by the lord keeper, and frequently himself, that he knew how to find money without the help of parlia. ment."--Rapin, Vol. x. p. 284.