custody of one of the sheriffs. The scene produced an impression on the bystanders which was hardly equalled by that which had been produced by the arrest of Strafford himself. Feb. 13. Petition against the Parliament could reach a judge at Westminster. It was more difficult to deal with nine thousand armed men beyond the Irish Channel. The Commons resolved to ask the Lords to join them in petitioning for the disIrish army. banding of the Irish army, the disarming of the English Catholics, and the dismissal from the Queen's Court of four obnoxious personages. Feb. 15. Bill and the It would have been Charles's highest wisdom to have anticipated these demands. The one thing necessary to him was to awaken confidence, and the suspicion of danger from the Irish army would always be a source of weakness to him as long as that army remained on foot. Yet he had no thought of giving way. He preferred to retain a weapon which he could not use. He did not indeed feel himself able to offer at all points a stubborn resistance. On the 15th the Subsidy Bill The Subsidy and the Triennial Bill were ready for the Royal Triennial assent. A deputation from both Houses urged him to pass them both. He answered surlily that they should know his resolution on the following day. When the next day came he had made up his mind to give way. Members of Parliament had been heard to say that if the Triennial Bill were rejected, they would stop all business till the King had changed his mind. As the subsidies could not be employed except by directions from Parliament, such a resolution would leave Charles with two unpaid armies in the North upon his hands. Bill. On February 16, therefore, Charles appeared in the House of Lords to give the required assent to both the Bills. He had come, he said, to fulfil his promise of placing himself in the hands of his Parliament by yielding up one of the fairest flowers 1 Giustinian to the Doge, Lester, Feb. 19 Feb. 19 Ven. Transcripts. Salvetti's News Giustinian speaks of the threats as having been used in Parliament. Most likely they were only used in private conversation between members, but the thing may have been said in open debate. 1641 Feb. 16. They receive the Royal assent. CHARLES'S REMONSTRANCE. 291 of his garland. He hoped that in return they would begin to think of him, instead of thinking only of their own grievances. He had already spoken of two rocks in the way. He had now removed one of them. If the other rock should be as happily passed over, they could ask nothing which he would be unwilling to yield. "Hitherto," he added, "to speak freely, I have had no great encouragement to do it. If I should look to the outward face of your actions or proceedings, and not look to the inward intentions of your hearts, I might make no question of doing it. . . . A skilful watchmaker, to make clean his watch, will take it asunder, and when it is put together it will go the better, so that he leave not out one pin of it." In the afternoon, when the Houses came to return thanks for his acceptance of the Triennial Bill, he was more gracious. He said that he had resolved to rule by Parliaments even if no such Bill had been offered to him. He hoped they would never have cause to complain of the infrequency of Parliaments. As he had satisfied their desires he hoped they would in due time think of providing for the kingdom and himself. The words, doubtless, expressed at least a momentary phase of Charles's mind. If Parliament would content itself with keeping in working order the old machinery of government, and replacing every pin of it, Charles had no objection to frequent Parliaments. The postponement of the discussion on Episcopacy may perhaps have given him some hope that this would be the case. Strafford's trial objected to. Charles would soon learn how very different were the views of the House of Commons. The debate on Episcopacy might Delay of be postponed, because none of the leading members desired to thrust into the foreground a question on which there was such a wide difference of opinion. Strafford's trial could not be postponed much longer. Already many were growing impatient of the time which the Lords, in fairness to the prisoner, had allowed for the preparation of his defence to so complicated a charge. That impatience was by no means confined to the party which afterwards stood up 1 Rushworth, iv. 188 b. D'Ewes's Diary, Harl. MSS. clxiv. fol. 119. against the King. Capel, who was one day to shed his blood for the Royal cause, now urged with general assent that the Lords ought to compel Strafford to give in his answer. Earl had had a fortnight for its preparation, and surely he could want no more.1 Feb. 17. Strafford before the Lords. Excitement in the The The next morning, as the House was in full debate, a strange interruption occurred. It was whispered that Strafford was in a barge on the Thames on his way to the House of Lords. A crowd of members rushed to the windows to see him pass. Another crowd plunged through the doorway to have a still nearer view of the fallen Minister. When order was restored it appeared that he had asked for further delay, and that the Lords had granted him another Commons. Further delay allowed. week. Feb. 18. the Commons. The news that Strafford's request for time had been accorded roused considerable irritation in the Commons. A proposal was made that the House should adjourn for Irritation of the week which had been allowed to Strafford for the preparation of his defence. Falkland rose to reprove this childish ebullition of feeling. "The Lords," he said, "have done no more than they conceived to be necessary in justice." It would be impossible to show Strafford a better courtesy than to jar with the Upper House, or to retard their own proceedings.'2 The House followed Falkland's lead. Feb. 19. Privy Coun The next day strange news was circulated. Seven new Privy Councillors-Bristol, Bedford, Essex, Hertford, Saye, Mandeville, and Savile-had taken their places at The new the Board. Yet these promotions do not appear cillors. to have struck contemporaries as being of any great importance. They knew that Bedford and Pym had not been appointed to official positions. They knew too, that a man might have a seat in the Privy Council without acquiring the slightest influence over the conduct of affairs. Business of weight was settled with a select number of favourites in the King's private apartments-the Cabinet Council, as it was be 1 D'Ewes's Diary, Harl. MSS. clxii. 229. 2 Ibid. clxii. 237. 1641 NEW COUNCILLORS. 293 ginning to be called.' It therefore did not follow that Charles's policy would in any way conform itself to the opinions of the new councillors. If it had been otherwise the change thus made would have been portentous. Every one of these men had been bitterly opposed to Charles's recent policy. The greater number of them continued to be opposed to his policy to the end of their lives. Charles's What had been done had been done upon Hamilton's advice, and was of a piece with the advice which that intriguing nobleman had given at other times. There can be intention. little doubt that the object of Charles was not to make it understood that he intended to conform to the wishes of Parliament, but to win votes in the House of Lords. "All this," wrote the Venetian ambassador, who had excellent opportunities of making himself acquainted with the truth, "has been done merely to gain them over in this matter." It could not escape notice that none of the offices vacant or ready to be vacated were allotted to any one of the seven noblemen, and it is therefore probable enough that Charles hoped to bind them to himself by an expectation of future favours. About the same time it became known that he intended to create new peers who would pay largely for the honour, and thus increase his following in the Upper House. Folly of Charles's proceedings. The attempt to win over the peers by personal favours was the first of the King's many ill-judged interferences with the course of justice which ultimately cost Strafford his life. Charles was unable to throw himself unreservedly on the peers' sense of justice, any more than The earliest certain use of anything approaching the phrase, as far as I know, is in Massinger's Duke of Milan, ii. 1, written before 1623 :"No; these are cabinet counsels And not to be communicated, but In the editions which I have seen the word is printed, in the old spelling, councils. I venture to correct it. On July 14, 1630 (S. P. Dom. clxx. 53), Roe speaks of Vane as said to be of the Cabinet. more official committee, like the Committee of Eight. unpublished paper by Bacon, Harl. Charters, 111, D, phrase is used, probably not later than 1618. The Junto was a See, however, an 14, in which the he was able to throw himself unreservedly on the good sense of the Commons. Yet even at this time dispassionate observers who calculated the chances in Strafford's favour believed that the Lords were inclined, not indeed to acquit him altogether, but to declare him innocent of the crime of high treason.1 What Charles could have In one way at least, the Lords, if they were to take the course which Charles fervently wished them to take, would need assistance which only he could give. The cry for justice against Strafford which was raised at this done to help time did not so much proceed from a thirst of venStrafford. geance, as from the pitilessness of terror. By separating himself for ever from Strafford and his ways, and by showing that, even if the fallen minister were allowed to live, there would be no longer any danger that he would ever again be allowed to wield authority in England, Charles would have rendered to his devoted follower every service which it was in his power to render. Feb. 20. Feeling about the Scots. The day after the appointment of the new councillors there was a scene in the Commons which gave evidence of the rise of a feeling which might easily have been turned in Charles's favour. Englishmen could hardly bear with patience the indignity of the occupation of the northern counties by the Scots, and the details which reached London of the hardships endured by the men of Durham and Northumberland served to strengthen this feeling of impatience. Naturally this dislike of Scottish intervention in English affairs. was felt most deeply by the party which in the recent discussions had upheld the cause of Episcopacy. The City Three days before, Pennington had announced that the greater part of a City loan of 60,000l. had already loan. been paid in, and would be handed over to Sir William Uvedale, the treasurer of the army. Shortly afterwards the House was informed by Uvedale that payment had been stopped after the first 21,000l. It was understood that the money was kept back in consequence of the ill-will felt in the City at the delay of Strafford's trial, and it was now proposed |