XXV. CHAP. against the validity of all acts which might be passed during their compulsory absence. This protestation might be "good law and good logic;" but it was not good policy. It was previously shown to the king by Williams himself, who undertook to justify its legality; but the king declined to give an opinion on so delicate a subject, and delivered the document to the lord-keeper, Littleton, to be communicated to the house of lords. Littleton, "willing to ingratiate himself with the house of commons, and the faction to which he knew himself sufficiently obnoxious *,” read it openly in the house of lords, and having characterized it as containing matters of high and dangerous import, sent it down to the house of commons. After a short debate there, an impeachment against all the protesting bishops was brought up by serjeant Glynne, accusing them of high treason, and on the same evening the offending prelates were sequestered from parliament. Ten were immediately sent to the Tower, while the bishops of Durham and Lichfield, in consequence of the piety and learning of the one, and the age and inDec. 30. firmities of both, were committed to the custody of the usher of the black rod. 1642. Jan. 4. If the rash conduct of these prelates accelerated the downfal of the order, the imprudent and illegal conduct of the king, a few days after their committal, deprived him of the power of arresting the ruin either of the church or monarchy. The tumults occasioned by his attempt to seize, within the walls of the house of commons, five obnoxious * Clarendon. members, compelled him to leave his palace at Whitehall, and to retire, first to Hampton-court, and afterwards to Windsor. On the day following the imprisonment of the prelates, the commons urged the lords to resume the consideration of a bill which had been laid aside, for taking away all temporal jurisdiction from the clergy. The impeachment of the bishops was committed to the "sharpest wits and greatest lawyers" of the party; but even their perspicacity could not see any treason in the protestation*; "insomuch that one of their oracles, being demanded his judgment concerning the fact, professed to them, that they might with as good reason accuse the bishops of adulteryt." But the sequestration of the protesting prelates from the house pending their impeachment, facilitated the bill for depriving the whole order of its parliamentary privileges. The impeachment was ultimately abandoned; for the imprisoned prelates, after a confinement of five months, were set at liberty on bail; but the bill for removing the bishops from the house of lords was immediately resumed. On a single prelate, not included in the protestation, Warner bishop of Rochester, devolved the honourable office of defending to the last, the rights of episcopacy. As long as he had a voice left, he raised it in pleading the antiquity and justice of the seats of bishops in parliament‡. The bill, however, passed by a large majority, and the citizens of London expressed their joy at the event by bells and bonfires §. * Bishop Hall's Hard Measure. + Ibid. § Ibid. A. D. 1642. Charles I. СНАР. Feb. 6. Still the royal assent was to be obtained, and it was not obtained without difficulty. The commons sent a message to Windsor, pressing the compliance of the king, and intimating that his assent would be received as a pledge of his sincerity in wishing to redress the other grievances of the nation. The message from the commons was enforced by the confidential advisers of the crown, who argued, that the combination against the bishops was irresistible, and that to pass the bill was the only way to save the church. Yet these arguments would not have prevailed, if the queen had not exerted her despotic influence. She was herself persuaded by her favourites, that if she were the accredited adviser of the measure, and succeeded in its accomplishment, she would render herself acceptable to the house of commons and the whole nation. The firmness of Charles was Feb. 14. at last overcome, the royal assent* was notified by commission while the king was at Canterbury, accompanying the queen on her journey to Holland. But the reluctance with which his assent was given rendered the boon unacceptable. This was one of the last bills to which he assented, and the only bill to which he assented in prejudice of the church. Here he determined to make a stand; and, in a message to the two houses, expressed his desire that he might not be urged to any further act, till the ecclesiastical government and the liturgy were so digested and settled, that he might see clearly what was fit to remain, and what to take away t. * St. 16 Car. I. c. 27. † Rushworth's Collect. CHAPTER XXVI. Preparations for Hostilities.-Parliament unites with the Scots. -Parliament passes a Bill for the Abolition of Episcopacy.— Commencement of Hostilities.-Oxford the Residence of the Court.-Treaty at Oxford.-Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction placed in the Hands of a Committee of the House of Commons.— Committees for scandalous Ministers and plundered Ministers. Fifths allowed to the ejected Clergy.-Assembly of Divines.-Solemn League and Covenant taken by the two Houses, and by the Assembly of Divines.-King's Expurgation.-Regulation of the University of Cambridge.- Power of ordaining Ministers vested in the Assembly of Divines.— Directory. A. D. 1642. THE departure of the king from Whitehall, and his refusal to resign the command of the militia, were followed by disguised preparations for hos- Charles I. tilities, on the side of the king and parliament. Charles gradually withdrew himself from the vicinity of the metropolis, and at last fixed his residence at York. Declarations and remonstrances of justification and recrimination were interchanged, while each party was providing for its security and defence. The Scottish commissioners, though they had gained all which they proposed for themselves, offered to mediate between the king and his parliament, yet with an evident inclination to the commons. While the king was still at Windsor, they told him that the liberties of England and Scotland must stand or fall together; and they expressed an opinion that the distractions of England XXVI. CHAP. originated in the plots of papists and prelatists, whose aim had been to prevent reformation, and to subvert true and pure religion. To the houses Jan. 15. of parliament they returned thanks, for the assistance which they had received in the Scottish troubles, and in return offered their mediation in composing the dissensions of England. The king rejected this officious interference with indignation, and informed the commissioners that the situation of the two kingdoms was widely different. In Scotland, episcopacy was never fully established, and after a short trial was found to be inconsistent with the character of its people: but in England, it was rooted in the constitution, and had flourished without interruption for eighty years. He therefore commanded them not to interfere between him and his parliament, without a previous and private communication with himself. The aim of the Scots was not only to abolish the English episcopacy, but, according to an article of the pacification, to bring both kingdoms to an uniformity in religion. To one part of their design the English parliament readily agreed, but not to the other. Yet, as it was impossible that the parliament should succeed in the approaching conflict without the assistance of the Scots, and as that assistance could not be expected but on their own terms, it was expedient to temporize *. The lords and commons, therefore, issued two April 5. documents, almost simultaneously; the one called the NEGATIVE OATH, being a promise not to assist the king, directly or indirectly, against the parlia * Clarendon's History of the Rebellion, vol. ii. |