Hyde as an unofficial adviser. recommended at this conjuncture is of no historical importance. No doubt he regarded as traitorous the attempt to effect a change of law by bringing down a mob to intimidate the House of Lords; and it is probable enough that he regarded Pym and a few others as having justly earned the penalty which he had himself joined in awarding to Strafford. But we may be sure that no reasonable man would have advised an attack upon the leaders of the Commons at a moment when the House of Lords had been alienated by conduct so irritating. If Charles was about to make a false move, it was not from Hyde, or Culpepper, that the impulse came. The Parliamentary leaders are said to intend to Just as Charles fancied that he had once more placed himself on constitutional ground, he received news from the City which must have filled him with agony and alarm. There had been, it was said, long secret conferences amongst the Parliamentary leaders, who had betaken impeach the themselves to Guildhall to attend the Committee. Queen. They had convinced themselves that the Queen was at the root of the mischief, and had resolved to impeach her as having conspired against the public liberties, and as having held intelligence with the Irish rebels.' They, wrote the Venetian ambassador, fermati in lunghe secrete conferenze, persuaderano a se stessi che le mosse del Rè et i rissentimenti di lui procedessero da consigli della Regina, deliberarono perciò di accusarla in Parlamento di conspiratione contro la libertà publica, e di secreta intelligenza nelle sollevationi d' Irlanda, il che tutto penetrato dalle Maestà loro prese espediente il Rè di abandonare l'uso della disimulatione, e dichiarare al Parlamento della Camera Alta colpev li di tradimento cinque Parlamentarii della Bassa ed uno della Alta.'-Giustinian to the Doge, Jan. 2, Ven. Transcripts. Heenvliet says much the same thing: 'qu'ils 17' commencèrent à parler, comm' on m'a dit, de mettre la main sur la Royne, et que ce n'estoyent que ces six surnommés.'--Heenvliet to the Prince of Orange, Jan. Groen van Prinsterer, 2me sér. to me iii. 497. An English letter reports that it is said Parliament have been treating of something concerning the Queen, et hinc illæ lacrymæ.'--Berners to Hobart, Jan. 10, Tanner MS., lxvi. fol. 234. All this bears out Clarendon's statement (iv. 280). On Jan. 20 Stapleton informed the Commons that the fear. No one knew better than Henrietta Maria what a crushing case could be made out against her. Army plots and Irish The Queen's plots, intrigues with the Pope and intrigues with the Prince of Orange, must have stood out clearly in her memory, to be recalled not with shame, but with regret. In such a mood she may well have given ear to the intemperate Digby, who was in the same case with herself. Since his declaration that Parliament was not free, impeachment stared him in the face. The assailants to be impeached. To impeach the impeachers of the Queen was the course which recommended itself to that impetuous counsellor.1 It was what Strafford had urged Charles to do, fourteen months before, and to Strafford's rejected advice Charles came at last. Hesitating and irresolute as he was, he could hesitate no longer. The danger of his wife touched him more nearly than his own. To save her from insult and ruin he had sacrificed his most faithful minister. For her dear sake he was ready now to stake his throne. The charge against the five mem bers. Five members of the House of Commons-Pym, Hampden, Holles, Hazlerigg, and Strode-were selected as the main offenders. There can be no doubt that, if by the fundamental laws of England was meant that constitutional arrangement which had prevailed in the days of Elizabeth, they were guilty of treason at least as much as Strafford had been guilty. If he had done his best to reduce parliaments to a cipher, they had done their best to reduce the Royal authority to a cipher. The true defence of both Strafford and Pym was that the old constitution had broken down and Queen told Newport that articles had been preferred to her which should be put into Parliament against her.'-D'Ewes's Diary, Harl. MSS. clxii. fol. 339. Afterwards the Queen said she never saw any articles in writing,' which does not necessarily clash with her former statement.—An Exact Collection, 68. ' Clarendon's assertion about Digby seems to me entirely in accordance with probability, in spite of Mr. Forster's argument, as the latter was not aware of the strength of the evidence on the proposed attack on the Queen. The quotation at p. 137 from Bates's Elenchus motuum, to the effect that the King's course was taken by the advice of some of the Privy Council who were themselves members of the House,' is hardly sufficient authority. VOL. X. · K needed reconstruction; but this argument, if it had been made at the time, would not have been likely, so far as Pym was concerned, to find favour with Charles. to the AttorneyGeneral. In conducting these operations, the utmost secrecy was to be maintained. Of the law officers of the Crown, the AttorneyInstructions General, Sir Edward Herbert, was alone consulted. He received instructions, written in the King's own hand, directing him, as soon as the charge was laid before the peers, to ask for a secret committee to examine evidence. If Essex, Warwick, Holland, Saye, MandeJan. 2. ville, Wharton, or Brooke were named as members of it, he was to object, on the ground that the King intended to call them as witnesses. Subsequently, Mandeville's name was scratched out of this list, and orders were given to impeach him together with the five members of the Lower House.1 Digby, it was said, had offered to prove that when the rabble appeared at the doors of Parliament, Mandeville had bidden them to go to Whitehall. As a point of tactics, as great a mistake was made by this resolution as had been made in the protest of the bishops. It called on the Lords to sacrifice a member of their own House. The impeachment was fixed for the next day, January 3. As soon as the Lords met, Herbert appeared to charge with treason the six persons designated in his instructions. They had traitorously endeavoured to subvert the fundamental laws and government-to deprive the King of his legal power, and to place in subjects an arbitrary and tyrannical power over the lives, liberties, and estates of his Majesty's liege people. They had endeavoured, by many foul aspersions. upon his Majesty and his government, to alienate the affections of his people.' They had 'endeavoured to draw his Majesty's late army to disobedience to his Majesty's commands, and to side with them in their traitorous designs.' They had 'traitorously invited and encouraged a foreign power to invade his Majesty's Kingdom of England.' They had 'traitorously en deavoured to subvert the rights and very being of Parliaments.' They had endeavoured, as far as in them lay, by force and Notes by the Attorney-General, Nicholas MSS. Clarendon, iv. 155. Jan. 3. The impeachment. terror, to compel the Parliament to join with them in their traitorous designs, and to that end had actually raised and countenanced tumults against the King and Parliament.' Lastly, they had 'traitorously conspired to levy, and actually had levied, war upon the King.' 1 As soon as the charge had been recited, Herbert asked for the arrest of the incriminated persons, and for the appointment of a committee to examine into the accusation against them. Under ordinary circumstances, the House of Lords would have rallied round the throne. On that day four bishops were Feeling of present, and fifty-five lay peers, of whom only twentythe Peers. one afterwards opposed Charles in the Civil War.2 Yet, the Lords were in no mood to encourage an act of violence, even when it took a legal shape. Digby, who had undertaken to move for Mandeville's arrest as soon as the Attorney-General had done his part, whispered to Mandeville that the King was ill-advised, and hurried out of the House.3 He doubtless Committee named. demand for gathered from the looks of the peers that he would of inquiry fail to carry his motion. As soon as he was gone the Lords appointed a committee to inquire whether the Attorney-General's procedure had been according to law. Already, before the news of the impeachment reached them, the Commons were in considerable excitement. The King's The King's answer to their petition for a guard had just reached answer to the them. "We," said Charles, "are wholly ignorant of a guard. the grounds of your apprehensions; but this we do protest before Almighty God, to whom we must be accountable for those whom He hath entrusted to our care and protection, that had we any knowledge or belief of the least design of any violence, either formerly or at this time against you, we would pursue them to condign punishment, with the same severity and detestation that we would do the greatest attempt upon our Crown, and we do engage unto you solemnly the word of a King, that the security of all and every one of you from violence, is, and shall ever be, as much our care as the preservation of us and our children; and, if this general assurance 2 House of Lords' Minute Book. Clarendon, iv. 154. 1 L. J. iv. 501. shall not suffice to remove your apprehensions, we will command such a guard to wait upon you as we will be responsible for to Him who hath charged us with the safety and protection of our subjects." The words were written on the 31st, before the impeachment of the members had been determined on. Yet, even now, there was nothing in them which Charles would care to disavow. In his own mind he was meditating a legal process against traitors, not a deed of violence. To the Commons his mons appeal proceedings might bear another aspect. After some to the City. conversation on the dangers in the midst of which they were walking, a message was sent to the City to ask that the trained bands might be made ready. The Com Members' studies sealed up. By this time the news of the impeachment had probably reached the House. Then Pym rose to say that his own study, as well as those of Holles and Hampden, had been sealed up by the King's directions. It was at once. resolved that to do this without leave from the House was a breach of privilege. In this the Lords were asked to concur, as well as in a resolution that the assemblage of soldiers at Whitehall was a breach of privilege. The Commons also requested the Peers to insist on having a guard to be approved of by both Houses. The arrest of the five members demanded. Before anything could be done, the Serjeant-at-Arms appeared with orders from Charles to arrest the five members. A committee was named to acquaint the King that the demand concerned their privileges, and that they would send a reply as soon as they had given it full consideration. In the meantime, the gentlemen named would be ready to answer any legal accusation. That this might be made plain, the five members were ordered to appear in their places from day to day. Offence Whether the King's attempt to arrest the members was justifiable or not, it was one more offence given to given to the the Lords. They had hitherto been in the habit of Lords. deciding on the arrest of impeached persons, and they had just appointed a committee to inquire what was the 1 Rushworth, iv. 471. |