1640 STRAFFORD IN IRELAND. 95 of the Parliament. I should not fail, though Sir John Eliot were living." 1 Meeting of the Irish Parliament. Strafford kept his word. On the 18th he landed in Ireland. The Parliament had been already two days in session. A body so equally divided was always at the disposal of a strong ruler. With his little phalanx of officials well. in hand, he could throw the majority in the House of Commons on which side he pleased. In 1634 he had thrown it on the side of the colonists of English birth. In 1640 he threw it on the side of the native Irish. Predisposed by their religious ties to dread the victory of the Covenanting Scots, the Irish Catholics would be ready to follow Strafford at least so long as he could convince them of his power. he left England he had intended to ask for six subsidies, a grant which was estimated as equivalent to 270,000l. On the recommendation of the Council, however, he contented himself with asking for four, or 180,000l., on condition that the Commons would supplement it by a declaration that, if more were required, more should be given.2 When Never was there a Abhorrence of the Cove The demand was made on the 23rd. greater appearance of unanimity. March 23. dies voted. nanters expressed itself in every word which was Four subsi- uttered. The King was thanked for not having taken what he needed by a simple act of the prerogative. He was assured that his Irish subjects would supply his needs if they left no more than hose and doublet to themselves. When the vote was taken, not a single negative was heard. Hands were stretched aloft and hats flung into the air, in a burst of enthusiasm. Those who witnessed the scene. declared that if one part of the assembly was more vehement than another, it was that in which the native Irish were to be found. Strafford to (?), March 16, Strafford Letters, ii. 303. The editor gives this letter as written to Secretary Coke, though Coke was no longer Secretary. I suspect Conway to have been the recipient. 2 The King to Strafford, March 2, 3. The Irish Council to Windebank, March 19, 23, Strafford Letters, ii. 391, 394, 396, 397. Cromwell to Conway, March 31, S. P. Dom. ccccxlix. 47. This exuberant loyalty found full expression in a declaration by which the grant was accompanied. Its phrases sound unreal enough now. Yet they were doubtless not altogether unreal to those who uttered them. The zeal of the Irish Catholics, at least, was quickened by a lively anticipation of future favours. If they took the lead in the overthrow of the King's enemies, what could possibly be denied them? March 24. An Irish army to be levied. In Strafford's eyes the declaration was a simple act of confidence in himself. The Irish, he wrote, would be as ready to serve with their persons as with their purses. By the middle of May he would be ready to take the field at the head of an army of 9,000 men, if only money were sent from England to enable him to make the first payments before the subsidies began to come in.2 The session was speedily brought to an end, and the Lord-Lieutenant recrossed the sea in hope to be as successful at Westminster as he had been at Dublin. The English elections were held in March. The returns were not to the satisfaction of the Court. Suspicion was doing The English its work among the electors and the elected. Men elections. spoke of the cavalry which was being raised for the Northern war as if it were intended to keep Parliament in check. When the members arrived in London, it was evident that they did not quail before the danger. Their talk was of limitations to be placed on the prerogative, and of calling in question the ministers by whom it had been unduly exalted. The work of the Long Parliament was already in their minds.3 On the other hand, counsellors were not wanting to urge Charles to be prepared to resort to force, and, in the belief of those who were likely to be well informed, he cherished the idea as at least a possible resource in the not improbable event of a refusal of supplies. As if to give warning of coming danger, he appointed a consider The King advised to use force. Journals of the Commons of Ireland, i. 141. Strafford to Windebank, March 24, Strafford Letters, ii. 398. Salvetti's News-Letter, March 20. 30 Giustinian to the Doge, March 13, 20 Ven. Transcripts R. O. 1640 THE LETTER OF THE SCOTS. 97 able number of Catholics as officers in his new army, whilst all who were tainted with Puritanism were sedulously excluded.1 He expects much from the letter of It was no immediate blow that Charles contemplated. He placed great confidence in the effect likely to be produced even upon the new House of Commons by the revelation which he had in store. On the back of the letter the Scots to which Traquair had brought him was an address Au Roi. It was evident to Charles not only that the Scots had committed treason in addressing Louis as their King, but that every reasonable person was certain to come to the same conclusion. The opinion of the House of Commons would in this way be gained over to his side. Louis. A copy of the letter was first sent to the King of France.2 Louis, of course, disavowed having ever seen it before; and, as the letter which he had seen was a different one, he was able to make this disavowal with at least literal truthfulness. Richelieu congratulated himself that he had kept clear of all negotiation with the Scots. "By this event," he wrote, "M. de Bellievre will see that we have been more prudent than he." 3 April 11. The letter communicated to Louis. Committal Of those whose signatures were appended to the letter, one only was in Charles's power. Loudoun was one of the Scottish Commissioners in London. He was at once comof Loudoun. mitted to the custody of one of the sheriffs, and the other commissioners shared his fate, though they had nothing to do with the letter. It is probable that Charles's real motive was to be found in his anxiety to cut off all communication between them and the members of the English Parliament. At all events, Loudoun was soon removed to stricter confinement in the Tower. In spite of the hopes which he founded on the effect of the letter which he had in his hands, Charles was depressed and 1 Rossetti to Barberini, Richelieu to Chavigny, VOL. IX. March 27 R. O. Transcripts. April 11, Sydney Letters, ii. 645. H anxious. The Privy Councillor's loan had been all too little for his needs. In vain he called on the citizens to The City reuses to lend lend him 100,000l. at eight per cent. for the necessary money. defence of the realm. Two days before the date appointed for the meeting of Parliament, the Lord Mayor and aldermen were summoned before the Council. Manchester assured them not only that they were sure to have the money repaid, but that they ought to be grateful to the King for offering such advantageous terms. The citizens were not to be persuaded by his eloquence.1 April 13. Finch's speech at the l'arliament. Parliament was opened on April 13. The new Lord Keeper, who had recently been raised to the peerage as Lord Finch of Fordwich, set forth at length the disloyalty of the Scots, dwelt upon their unnatural conduct in opening of opening negotiations with foreign states, and pointed out that, now that Ireland had been civilised, Scotland was the only quarter from which England was open to attack. It was in defence as much of his subjects as of himself, that the King had been compelled to raise an army. For the payment of that army money was urgently needed. In order to anticipate any dispute about tonnage and poundage, a Bill had been prepared, in which those duties would be granted from his Majesty's accession. When this and a Subsidy Bill had been passed, Parliament would have some time to devote to the consideration of grievances, and, if the season of the year did not allow sufficient opportunity, another session should be held in the following winter. the French King pro As soon as the Lord Keeper had finished his speech, the King called on him to read the intercepted letter. "The The letter to superscription," said Finch, "is this-Au Roi. For the nature of which superscription, it is well known duced. to all that know the style of France that it is never written by any Frenchman to any but to their own king; and therefore, being directed Au Roi, it is to their own king; for so in effect they do by that superscription acknowledge him." As the letter itself bore no intimation of any such acknow ' Rossingham's News-Letter, April 14, S. P. Dom. ccccl. 88. 640 ATTACK ON SHIP-MONEY. 99 ledgment, the whole evidence of treasonable intention lay in the superscription; and it is needless to say that this evidence was far too flimsy to support the weight which it was intended to bear. Even if the superscription had been treasonable, there was nothing to connect it with any one of those by whom the letter had been signed. On the 14th Loudoun was examined. He asserted that he was completely ignorant of the French language, but that, so far as At all events, it had never April 14. Loudoun examined. he knew, the letter was harmless. reached its destination. April 16. The Com Charles had gone too far to draw back. On the 16th the letter was read by Windebank in the House of Commons. It made no impression whatever there. The Commons were far more interested in noting that Finch had not had even a passing word to spare for mons proceed to business. the all-important subject of ship-money.2 Grimston's The intercepted letter was therefore simply ignored by the Commons. Harbottle Grimston, the member for Colchester, was the first to break the ice. He argued that, bad speech. as a Scottish invasion might be, the invasions made upon the liberties of the subjects at home were nearer and more dangerous. Not only ought these grievances to be remedied, but an example ought to be made of those men with whom they had originated." Grimston was an excellent specimen of that great middle party, on whom devolved the burden of maintaining in its Several No doubt Au Roi was not in any proper sense a direction. letters would be included in one packet, and marked Au Roi, Au Cardinal, &c., for the mere instruction of the bearer or receiver. * Rossingham's News-Letter, April 14, S. P. Dom. ccccl. 88. The scanty notices of this Parliament which are to be found in Rushworth may be largely supplemented from Rossingham's letters and notes. There is also a separate set of notes in Harl. MSS. 4,931, fol. 47, and there are special reports of speeches amongst the State Papers. This phrase, used by Clarendon of Pym, is here used of Grimston, to whom it properly belongs. Clarendon's account of this session is nearly worthless. Rushworth, iii. 1128. |