1

the House of Commons than fresh subjects of contention arose between the two Houses respecting the votes of the Bishops. On the 27th of October the Commons desired a conference with the Lords, the object of which was to require that the thirteen Bishops impeached for making the late canons should be excluded from their votes in Parliament, and that all the Bishops should be suspended from their votes upon the bill which concerned their exclusion from the exercise of temporal power. The Lords debated on the report of the conference, and ended with an order that the matter should be further considered; "but," says Lord Clarendon, "the House of Peers was not yet deluded enough or "terrified (though too many amongst them paid an implicit devotion to the House of Commons) to comply in this unreasonable demand."3

66

2

Five Bishops' sees had now become vacant, and the King intended to fill them up on his return from Scotland. On the 29th of October a motion was made in the Commons to demand a conference with the Lords, the object of which was to desire their concurrence in a petition to His Majesty to delay making any new bishops till the controversy was over respecting the government of the Church. A Committee was named to draw up reasons for the proposed petition, and amongst those named to be on that Committee were

Four days later than the introduction of the " Bill for depriving the "bishops of their votes in Parliament, and disabling all in holy orders "from the exercise of all temporal jurisdiction and authority."

2 Parl. Hist., vol. ii. p. 922.

Clarendon's Hist. of the Rebellion,' vol. ii. p. 29.

• Parl. Hist.

Lord Falkland and Mr. Hyde.' Mr. Hyde, who appears to have spoken in the name of both, said "they "could be of no use, having given so many reasons

66

2

against it that they could not apprehend any could "be given for it;" and he suggested" that those who "had come to a different conclusion were better fitted "to convert other men." The piteous exclamation of a country gentleman, who was strongly in favour of the bill, addressed to Lord Falkland and Mr. Hyde, of— "For God's sake be of the Committee; you know none "on our side can give reasons," provoked a smile from those who heard it, but may be taken as a proof how highly their talents and their honesty were valued, even by an opponent. It was certainly not very probable that the Lords would join with the Commons in this petition, considering that they were already at issue on the point of the Bishops' votes; and Lord Clarendon states that, after the appointment of the Committee was carried in the Commons, "that stone moved no further." Petitions, numerously signed, had been presented in favour of the Bishops, but still the popular feeling visibly increased against the exercise of their secular power and their votes in Parliament.

On the 13th of November the Londoners agreed to lend money on certain securities and conditions, and amongst the latter was distinctly stated "the taking

66

away of Bishops' votes." On the 1st of December a Committee of the House of Commons presented their

Clarendon's Hist. of the Rebellion,' vol. ii. p. 27.

2 Mr. Bond, of Dorchester.

* Clarendon's ' Hist. of the Rebellion,' vol. ii. p. 26.

petition and remonstrance to the King. The evil of the Bishops' votes in Parliament, and the want of conjunction between the Lords and Commons owing to the number and power of Bishops and recusant Lords to thwart their measures of reform, was strongly put forward. On the 28th of December there were riots about the Houses of Parliament. Loud cries of "No Bishops No Bishops!" were uttered. Swords were drawn by gentlemen of the opposite party, and some of the mob wounded. The Bishops were attacked in their carriages, their lives and houses threatened with destruction, and they only escaped the fury of their assailants, who waited to renew the attack on their return from the House of Lords, by retreating through secret passages or by placing themselves under the offered protection of unobnoxious peers. At the hasty instigation of the Archbishop of York' twelve Bishops instantly determined to withdraw from their attendance in Parliament, and signed a petition to the King protesting against all proceedings during their forced absence from Parliament. The King, with no less indiscreet haste, immediately delivered the petition to the Lord Keeper to read to the Lords (October 30th). The Lords, on hearing the petition, instantly sent a message to the Commons desiring a conference "touch"ing matters of dangerous consequence." The Cominons lost no time in impeaching the Bishops, and on that day they were accused by the Commons of high treason, summoned to appear at the bar of the House

of Lords, and after each appearing there, kneeling as delinquents, ten were sent to the Tower, and two, on account of their age, given in custody to the Black Rod. How far the Bishops were justified in thus abandoning their posts may be questioned as a matter of duty, and the King's precipitancy in acting on their behalf certainly proved injudicious as a matter of policy; but their petition was neither unreasonable in its plea nor illegal in its form, and the conduct of Parliament towards them bore the stamp of that violent and unconstitutional legislation which now too frequently marked their acts.

On the 5th of February the bill for taking away the Bishops' votes was read for a third time in the House of Lords and passed. The Commons expressed by message their satisfaction at this concurrence between both Houses, and their hope that the bill would be sent to receive the royal assent without delay. This was accordingly done, and on the 8th of February the Earl of Monmouth delivered for answer from the King," that "it was matter of weight which his Majesty would take "into consideration and send an answer in convenient "time." On the same day both Houses again addressed the King, who was then at Windsor, assigning their reasons for hastening this bill. Sir John Culpepper urged upon the King the necessity of giving his consent; but the King asked if Ned Hyde was of that opinion, and, hearing that he was not, the King declared himself to be of the same opinion with him, and said

Parl. Hist., vol. ii.

2 Clarendon's Hist. of the Rebellion,' vol. ii. p. 246.

CHAP. III. THE BISHOPS DEPRIVED OF THEIR VOTES. 77

"that he would run the hazard." In the mean time Sir John Culpepper urged also upon the Queen the necessity of yielding, and represented that her journey to the Continent' would be endangered by this refusal.* This contingency alarmed the Queen, and she never ceased importuning the King to yield till she succeeded in obtaining his reluctant consent, and the bill was passed by commission when the King and Queen were on their way to Dover. Sir John Culpepper's counsel was given when alone with the King; and of the three counsellors, Falkland, Hyde, and Culpepper, it was the latter only who seemed to have tendered this advice. Lord Clarendon admits it to have been given upon the purest motives of fidelity and duty to the King, though, he adds, "he quickly found he was "deceived in the good he had expected from it."3

Lord Falkland rightly estimated the growing spirit of demand, the unstable character of the King, and the danger of yielding to pressure what might be conceded

'The Queen's journey to Holland was ostensibly undertaken to convey thither her daughter, the Princess Mary; the more real object was the raising money on the Continent by the sale of Crown jewels.

Clarendon's Life,' vol. i. p. 100.

'Life of Lord Clarendon,' vol. i. p. 92. On September 10th, 1642, the provisions of the Root and Branch Bill' were again renewed in an Answer 'to the Declaration of the General Assembly of Scotland about Church 'Government,' in which it was declared, "That the government by arch66 bishops, bishops, their chancellors and commissaries, deans, deans and "chapters, archdeacons, and other ecclesiastic officers depending upon "the hierarchy, is evil and justly offensive and burthensome to the king"dom, a great impediment to reformation and growth of religion, very "prejudicial to the state and government of this kingdom, and that we are resolved that the same shall be taken away."-Lords' Journal, vol. v. p. 350.

66