the bishops of the risk which they would run in the streets, and advised them to pass the night within the precincts of the House. "These people," he said, "vow they will watch you at your going out, and will search every court with torches so as you cannot escape." The danger was not so great as Herford imagined, and the bishops reached their homes in safety.'

Dec. 28.

Most of the

bishops absent

themselves.

The next morning only two of the bishops were bold enough to take their seats. It is easy to ridicule those who absented themselves as unreasonably careful for their own safety. The mob had done no great harm as yet. But the only thing that can be safely predicted of an excited and undisciplined mass of human beings is that its future proceedings are beyond calculation, and the bishops cannot be blamed for refusing to expose themselves to danger. By this time the mob was thoroughly bent on mischief Missing their sport with the bishops, they rushed to Westminster Abbey to break down the organ and Fortunately, they were kept at bay by Abbey. Williams's servants, assisted by some gentlemen

Attack on

Westminster the altar.

whom he called to his aid.

The Com

to blame the

If both Houses had combined to restore order, the task would have been easy. Unhappily, after the appointment of Lunsford and the examination of Dillon, the majority mons refuse of the Commons was far too much afraid of the mob, King to join the Lords in taking action against the mob. They firmly refused to throw blame upon the citizens. "God forbid," said Pym, "the House of Commons should proceed in any way to dishearten people to obtain their just desires in such a way."3 "The greater part of the House," noted D'Ewes, "thought it unreasonable to make any such declaration at this time, to discontent the citizens of London, our surest friends, when so many designs and plots were

1 Hall's Hard Measure,' Works, i. xlv.

2 Goodman of Gloucester and Pierce of Bath and Wells. Lords' Minute Book.

H. of

3 These words, given by Clarendon (iv. 14), are taken from Dover's Notes, Clarendon MSS. 1,603.

but offer to join the Lords in

asking for a guard, if

daily consulted of against our safety." The Lords were informed that the Commons would join them in asking for a guard, if Essex might command it. In a conversation which ensued Cromwell drove the nail home by moving an address to the King to remove command. Bristol from his counsels, on the ground that he had recommended him in the spring to bring the northern army to his support.

Essex may

Motion in the Lords that Parlia

free.

1

There is little doubt that Cromwell was mistaken. The Commons, however, were not likely to interpret Bristol's conduct more favourably when they learned that a debate had been raised in the Lords, on a motion to declare ment is not that, in consequence of the continued presence of the rabble, Parliament was no longer free.2 Of this motion Bristol's son, Digby, was the warm supporter, and probably the actual proposer.3 A feeling sprang up in the Lower House that the proposal meant more than its words implied. If Parliament was not free now, it could hardly be said to have been free in May. If so, it might be held that Charles was not bound by the Act prohibiting a dissolution, and he might proceed at once either to get rid of a Parliament which he detested, or to adjourn it to some place where the citizens would not be able to come to its rescue.1

It is, of course, possible that less than this was intended. It the motion had been carried and had been followed by the adjournment of the House of Lords for a considerable time, the King would have had the Commons alone to deal with.

'D'Ewes's Diary, Harl. MSS. clxii. fol. 287 b.

? The connection is plainly seen in the unfinished sentence which concludes the notice in the Minute Book. "Upon the rabble's coming and pressing about the Parliament there was much dispute whether this Parliament

3 The words ascribed to Digby are 'that the House of Commons have invaded the privileges of the Lords' House, and the liberty of the subject,' and that this is no free Parliament.'-L. 7. iv. 495. Rossetti says he 'prese l'assunto di provare' this proposition, which looks as if he had proposed the motion.—Rossetti to Barberini, Jan. 2, R. O. Transcripts.

19

Smith to Pennington, Dec. 30, S. P. Dom.

The Commons alone would have been constitutionally powerless to effect anything whatever. Whether the King had made up his mind or not to seize their leaders upon a charge of treason cannot be known; but it can hardly be doubted that he had long contemplated such a measure, or that the scheme was favoured by a far larger number of persons than those who were ready to avow it after the attempt had been made and failed.

Its rejection..

That failure had begun already. The perception of danger from the King as well as from the House of Commons made the Lords an uncertain support for the King to lean on. As far as was possible they strove to do their duty. Royalist as the Upper House was, it voted, though by a bare majority of four, that Parliament was free.' The next day they not only consulted the judges as to the legal mode of dealing with the mob, but they directed the Attorney-General to draw up a proclamation forbidding the wearing of weapons in the vicinity of Parliament. They were wiser than the King. They wished to free the Houses alike from tumultuous citizens and swaggering officers.

Dec. 29.

The Lords try to mediate.

Dec. 28.

The King's proposal to send volunteers to Ireland.

Unhappily the Lords could not count on Charles. To repress all violence, and to throw the blame on those who persisted in attempting to disturb the peace, was too simple a course for him. There can be little doubt that his mind had been strongly attracted to Ireland once more by Dillon's message, and on the 28th he had informed the Lords that he was himself ready to raise 10,000 volunteers for Ireland, if the Commons would find The very next day those, if any there were, who were disposed to trust him with the selection of such a force, received a warning against the imprudence. On the 29th the King invited to dinner the very officers against whom complaints had been made, as a compliment to them on their appointment to commands in the 1 L. F. iv. 494. Rossetti to Barberini, Jan. R. O. Tran cripts.

them pay.2

Dec. 29. Dinner

given to the officers.

16

26'

The attendances given in the Minute Books show that 54 were present, and that some of the Opposition, who had protested on the 24th, were absent.

2 L. J. v. 494.

army destined for Ireland.1 A force selected by the King, and officered by Lunsford and his companions, was the new danger against which Pym had to provide.

Cavaliers

heads.

It was, indeed, difficult to keep the peace amidst such jarring elements. In those days of trouble, two names, destined to a wide celebrity, were heard of for the first and Round time. The high-mettled gentlemen sneeringly applied the appellation of Roundheads to the short-haired apprentices who had rejected the unloveliness of lovelocks. Their adversaries retorted by speaking of the officers as Cavaliers -a word which carried with it a flavour of opprobrium, as implying a certain looseness and idleness of military life. Before long the two nicknames would be the accepted terms for two great political parties.

The fray in front of Whitehall.

When the Cavaliers came out from dinner, eight or ten of them strolled in front of the Palace. There they found about a hundred men, armed with clubs, swords, and staves, bawling out "No Bishops! No Popish Lords! Hang up the Popish Lords!" Spying the group of officers, they shouted, "There stand redcoats, a knot of Papists!" and one of the crowd followed up the abuse by throwing a clot of dirt. On this 'the gentlemen, with their swords drawn, went over the rails to them, and so the affray began, many swords being drawn on either side, and those who would deliver their swords, the gentlemen gave them a kick, and bade them begone; others that resisted had some hurt.' Other similar combats-if combats they can be called- occurred in the neighbourhood. Some sixty citizens, according to one account, and one or two gentlemen were more or less injured. As they went off, the citizens threatened to return on

The disturbance, of which an account will be immediately given, happened 'le jour que le Roy traittoit les colonnels et capitaines qui doibvent aller en Irelande.'- Heenvliet to the Prince of Orange, Jan. Z Groen van Prinsterer, 2me sér. tome iii. 498.

179

Groen van Prinsterer, 2me

2 Heenvliet to the Prince of Orange, Jan. sér. tome iii. 398. Examinations of Cox, Downs, and Sherlok, Dec. 29, S. P. Dom. The gentlemen'in all their skirmishes have avoided thrust

the morrow for their revenge. At Court it was expected that they would come 10,000 strong.1

Charles sets a guard at Whitehall.

In the face of this threat Charles finally determined to throw over the Lords. Instead of combining with them to set up some constitutional barrier against tumultous assemblies, he fell back upon the officers whom he had gathered round him. He directed that all the gentlemen of his Court should wear swords, and that a guard should be posted at Whitehall Gate. Those very men whose presence was offensive to both Houses were to form his mainstay in time of trouble.

The protest

of the bishops.

Worse was yet to come. As the King was going to bed, Williams arrived with a protest, signed by himself and eleven other bishops, for presentation to the King and the Lords. The bishops, it declared, having been violently assaulted in coming to the House, and lately chased away and put in danger of their lives, could find 'no redress or protection.' They therefore protested that all laws, orders, votes, resolutions, and determinations made in their absence were null and void; or, in other words, that the vote of the 28th, declaring Parliament to be free, was to be set aside as irregular.2 They concluded by asking the King to command that this protest should be entered amongst the records of the House.3

Who was

Was this protest, so memorable in its consequences, in reality the work of Williams? Charles took it from the author the hand of the Archbishop, and, without reading a word, gave it to Nicholas. The next morning Nicholas, also without reading a word, gave it to the Lord Keeper, with instructions to lay it before the Lords.

of it?

Dec. 30.

It is

ing at them because they would not kill them.'-Slingsby to Pennington, Dec. 30, S. P. Dom.

Smith to Pennington, Dec. 30, S. P. Dom.

16 26'

R. O. Transcripts.

2 Rossetti distinctly points to this particular vote as the one to be annulled by the protest.-Rossetti to Barberini, Jan. 3 L. J. iv. 496.

Heenvliet to the Prince of Orange, Jan. sér. 2me, tome iii. 497.

Groen van Prinsterer,