the Court in consequence of the refusal of the King to grant him the nomination of a new baron, which would have placed a few thousand pounds in his pocket. On the 16th an enigmatical letter written by him to Essex, in which the Aug. 16. Reading of a existence of danger was not obscurely hinted at, was read in both Houses.2 The immediate result was a Report from report from the Committee of Defence, recommending that 'some authority should be given to some person, in the absence of the King, to put the kingdom in a state of defence.' letter from him. the Com mittee of Defence. No government in Charles, in short, had left England without a recognised Government. The Elector Palatine, Lennox, and Hamilton had alone accompanied him on his journey. The Privy Council, with all its varied elements, had none England. of Charles's confidence, and was utterly incapable of acting with decision in any one direction. A body of commissioners, indeed, had a limited authority to pass certain Bills, but there was not even a Secretary of State to carry out the King's orders, as Vane joined the King in Scotland not long after his arrival. One of the clerks of the Council, Edward Nicholas, a diligent and faithful servant, remained behind, with orders to forward news to Edinburgh, and to carry out any instructions that he might receive; but he was in no position to command authority. The Queen, having conducted her mother to the sea-coast on her way to the Continent, had returned to Oatlands, angrily brooding over her fallen fortunes. She declared that, unless times changed, she would remain in England no longer.3 Suggestion that Parlia ment an issue ordinances. Before the end of the day on which Holland's letter was read, a suggestion was made in the House of Commons, which led to a far more daring innovation on established usage than anything that had yet been done. A difficulty had arisen in procuring formal authority for the Parliamentary Commissioners who were to 2 The Lord of Holland's Letter from York, 1621, 100. • Giustinian to the Doge, Aug. 20, Ven. Transcripts, R. O. 30 proceed to Edinburgh nominally to treat with the Scottish Parliament. The Lord Keeper was asked to pass their commission under the Great Seal. This Lyttelton positively refused to do without directions from the King. A proposal was made to order him to do it. D'Ewes-who earlier in the session had discovered that, though it was immoral and irreligious to pay interest, it was perfectly innocuous to pay damages-now informed the Commons that, though the Houses could not make the order which was proposed, 'an ordinance of the two Houses in Parliament' had always been of great authority; and he then cited from the Rolls of Parliament an ordinance of the year 1373. It is true that the citation had no bearing whatever on the point in question, as the ordinance of 1373 had been made by the King, though it had been announced to Parliament in answer to a petition of the Commons. 2 1 Aug. 20. The first The House caught at the idea, and the first ordinance of the Long Parliament was sent up to the Lords. On the 20th the Lords adopted it. From henceforth the term ' ordinance' would be taken to signify, not, as it had done in the Middle Ages, a declaration made by the King without the necessary concurrence of Parliament, but a declaration of the two Houses without the necessary concurrence of the King.3 ordinance. Its character. As far as this first ordinance was concerned, the assumption of authority by Parliament was not very outrageous. It con veyed to Bedford and Howard of Escrick, in the name of the Lords, to Fiennes, Armyn, Stapleton, and Hampden, in the name of the Commons, authority to attend his Majesty in Scotland, in order to present to him the humble desires of the two Houses according to certain annexed instructions. Parliament did no more than appoint a com 1 D'Ewes's Diary, Harl. MSS. clxiv. fol. 32 b. It was 'faite en mesme le Parlement,' which perhaps led D'Ewes astray, but it was on the petition of the Commons, and the last clause begins Mes voet le Roi.'—Rolls of Parl. ii. 310. 3 Professor Stubbs, to whom I naturally applied on the subject, informs me that he is unable to recollect any case in the Middle Ages in which ordinances were made by the two Houses without the Royal authority. mittee to reside in Scotland, instead of appointing one to meet at Westminster; but the idea that the Houses could act alone, when it had once been thrown before the world was certain to gather strength. It would not be long before the House would grasp the reins of executive government which the King had dropped in his pursuit of military support.' Practically, indeed, this had been already done. The Houses shrank from ordering the Lord Keeper to set the Great Seal to a commission, but they had not shrunk from ordering Holland to secure Hull and that store of munitions which had been gathered there to supply the army in the last war, or from ordering Newport, the Constable of the Tower, to take up his residence in that fortress, and to see that it was safely guarded.2 Aug. 17. Hull to be secured, Aug. 18. and the Tower. That these measures were taken against the King there can be no reasonable doubt. They were the same in kind as those which brought about the Civil War in the following year. Yet they passed both Houses without the faintest opposition. Aug. 13 The excited feeling of apprehension which had given birth to these measures, did not last long. It was soon known that the King had passed through both armies without causing any stir amongst them. At Newcastle he nad been magThe King at nificently entertained by the Scottish commanders, Newcastle. had reviewed their troops and had expressed his high satisfaction at their military bearing. To Leslie he was especially courteous, and he promised an earldom to the rough soldier of fortune.3 It was not on an immediate military revolt that Charles was calculating. He knew that he must satisfy the Scottish Parliament before those sturdy peasants would draw sword in his cause. On the 14th Charles rode into Edinburgh. On his first visit to the Parliament he offered to touch with the sceptre, and so to convert into law, all the Acts which he had so long resisted, and was somewhat disappointed to find that at least a show of more mature consideration was Aug. 14. He arrives at Edin burgh. 1 L. 7. iv. 372. 2 Ibid. 367, 369. Vane to Nicholas, Aug. 14, Nicholas MSS. Acts. Aug. 23. Death of Rothes. Confidence of Charles. 1 required by formality. Before many days passed he was allowed to perform this part of his work with as cheerful a Aug. 17. Ratifies the countenance as he was able to assume. Now that the Scots had all that they wanted, he might expect something from them in return. One man, on whom he had counted, was no longer able to render him any aid. Rothes died in England on the 23rd. Still Charles wrote to the Queen in high spirits. Everything appeared to him to be going well. Leslie's professions of service had been all that could be desired.3 For the first time in his life Charles laid himself out to win the affections of the people. He diligently attended the Presbyterian service, and listened without wincing to Presbyterian sermons. Henderson was as constantly at his side as Laud had been in the days of his power. It was much in Charles's favour that his coming had been coincident with the termination of military effort. "This kingdom," wrote Vane, "speaks of nothing with so much heartiness as of the blessedness of this peace and of the joy and comfort thereof!" The English The English army was at last slowly disbanding-as quickly, at army begins least, as money could be furnished. The Scottish to break up. army broke up from Durham and Newcastle. On Aug. 25. the 25th Leslie re-crossed the Tweed. The northern counties were glad to see the last of the hungry strangers, who had quartered themselves on them so long. The Scots, too, were glad to be on the tramp for home. It was, indeed, proposed that a force of 4,000 foot and 500 horse should be kept under arms till the English troops were entirely paid off, and Charles's hopes of military assistance. Charles found grounds for believing that a still larger force would be placed at his disposal. He wrote to the Queen that the Scots had resolved to maintain in his service 5,000 foot and 1,000 horse, to be used wherever he MSS. The Elector Palatine to the Queen of Bohemia, Aug. 17, Forster Nicholas to Vane, Aug. 24, Nicholas MSS. Giustinian to the Doge, Aug. 27, Ven. Transcripts, R. O. Sept. 6 Vane to Nicholas, Aug. 23, Nicholas MSS. wished, and against any enemies that he might choose. If these were not enough he should have more. Charles added that he had gained over, by assurances of office and promotion, those who had been his bitterest enemies. "This," he wrote, "will be enough to dispose them to support my interests with all their power, and to make them depend on me without exception."1 Charles's with the lics. Charles's hope of support from the Scottish Presbyterians was accompanied by a continuance of his hope of support from the Irish Catholics. Twice had messengers crossed the negotiations sea with communications from the King to Ormond Irish Catho- and Antrim, the one of them a Protestant royalist of Strafford's school, the other a weak and inefficient Catholic peer. These two were to gather into one body the Irish army which was being disbanded, and to seize Dublin Castle in the King's name by the authority of the Irish Parliament, in order to make it a basis of operations against the Parliament at Westminster. The Irish Catholics, it was hoped, would be easily won to the royal cause by the grant of religious liberty.2 'The King's letters to the Queen have been lost, but Giustinian reports of this one that it sta'ed that the men were to be offered to Charles 'da valersene dove e contro chi troverà più aggiustare la propria convenienza con una generale eshibitione in appresso di prontamente somministrarle quel numero di gente maggiore che l'occasione ricercasse.' Giustinian to the Doge, Aug. 27, Ven. Transcripts, R. O. Giustinian was on good terms with the Queen. Sept. 6 The evidence for this has hitherto been a statement made by Antrim in 1650, printed in Cox, Hibernia Anglicana, App. xlix. The King is there said to have sent two mes ages: the one whilst the Irish Parliament was sitting, that is to say, between May 11 and Aug. 7; the second when he was at York, or about Aug. 12. The chief difficulty in accepting the story has been the occurrence of Ormond's name in it. There seems, however, to have been an impression amongst the Irish after the rebellion that he ought to have been on their side. The author of the Aphorismical Discovery (i. 12) says that 'my Lord of Ormond, though then a Protestant, was one of seventy-eight persons sworn to secure each his town or fort,' and he afterwards (ii. 21) speaks of him as a traitor to the Irish cause, 'unmindful of his sworn covenant, and ungrateful to His Royal Majesty.' It will be seen that there is evidence of a third message sent from Scotland. Ormond may have been willing to support the King's authority against the |