Tuesday, April 13, 2004

Kings Personal Rule

Charles I

Charles I  saw his Personal Rule as exercising the divine right of Kings, to rule by Royal Prerogative, a process that allowed the monarch to exercise executive power without the authority of Parliament. The latter regarding this as going against the principles established in the Magna Carta.

 In July 1628 Charles had appointed Sir Richard Weston (later Lord Portland) as his Lord Treasurer. Weston was an efficient administrator who addressed the financial problems facing the King. [1]  To reduce the largest area of  expenditure, foreign wars, the  Lord Treasurer  persuaded Charles to sign peace treaties with France and Spain. [2] The Treaty of Susa was signed with France 14th April 1629 [3] and the Treaty of Madrid with Spain 15th November 1640. [4]

The peace treaties also brought stability and opportunities for trade and commerce. This resulted in increased monies flowing to the Crown from the poundage and tonnage customs duties, though it was levy that was not authorised by Parliament. [5] Weston increased revenues further by reviving ancient and long forgotten taxes and duties. [6]


Sir Richard Weston (later Lord Portland)
Lord Treasurer

Following the death of the Duke of Buckingham,  Charles formed an inner cabinet of advisers. Richard Weston as Lord Treasurer was appointed [7] just before Buckingham's death.  Sir Francis Cottingham was made Chancellor of the Exchequer in April 1629, and Sir Frances Windeback Secretary of State in June 1632. [9] All three members were catholic sympathisers, creating suspicion of Charles religious intent.

Another key advisor appointed was Sir Thomas Wentworth(later Lord Stafford) who was given the position of Lord Deputy of Ireland in January 1632 [10], the person charged with governing Ireland on behalf of the King.


Sir Thomas Wentworth (later Lord Stafford)
Lord Deputy of Ireland


Charles through his cabinet of close advisers had created the mechanism by which he would discharge his Royal Perogative in affairs of State. He then sort to exercise his control over the Church by appointing a new Archbishop of Canterbury (the primary bishop in the Church of England),  William Laud, in August 1633. [11] 


William Laud
Archbishop of Canterbury


Laud's religious doctrine was based on Arminianism, an anti-Calvinist theology which  was opposite to the views of the Church of Scotland and Puritans. Laud favoured the concept of a state controlled church with a hierarchy of bishops and uniformity across religious denominations. Many people thought his doctrine as pro catholic.

The Thirty Years War within the Holy Roman Empire was still in  progress. The conflict between the French and Dutch with Spain  had seen a build up naval power which was regarded as a possible threat to English maritime interests. In response King Charles directed that the Royal Navy be re-armed with a new fleet to safeguard peace and neutrality. [13] To fund the  initiative it was proposed to levy 'Ship Money'. This was a method of raising monies by requiring coastal towns to pay for the upkeep of naval defences in times of emergency. [14] The use of 'Ship Money' in a time of peace was unprecedented , as was the King imposing the levy without recourse to Parliament.


Writs were issued to the sheriffs of the coastal counties in October 1634 requiring them to collect the monies. [15] A year later in October 1635 further writs were issued, however, this was to all counties, including inland counties who had never been required to pay 'Ship Money' . Once again, Charles I had taken unprecedented actions. [16] The following year Charles looked to impose 'Ship Money' as a general form of taxation levied annually against all the counties of England. [17] 

Sovereign of the Seas one of the Royal Navy's new ships

The levying of 'Ship Money' had transformed from a levy against coastal counties in time of war that needed the approval of Parliament, into an annual tax levied on all counties with no recourse to Parliament. 

This deeply unpopular form of taxation led to a campaign of non payment. [18] One disgruntled citizen was John Hampden, a landowner from the inland county of Buckinghamshire who had been required to pay ' Ship Money'. He brought a test case to the Court of Exchequer maintaining it was an illegal tax. The twelve judges of the court voted seven to five in favour of the Crown, and although defeated, Hampden together with his lawyers Oliver St John and Robert Holborn were brought to national prominence as defenders of liberty against the Kings tyranny. [19]



Charles I unpopularity at ruling through the Royal Perogative with his catholic sympathetic advisers and  his imposition of taxes without seeking Parliamentary approval was further increased with his support of the religious doctrine of his Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud.

In July 1637 Laud introduced a new common prayer book and attempted to bring the Churches of England and Scotland closer together in a shared liturgy. This he extended to Ireland and the American Colonies. Many viewed his Arminian doctrines as being close to Catholicism. Laud was intolerant of opposition to his reforms, imprisoning and torturing dissidents. [20]

In Scotland there was strong opposition to Lauds proposals which were being introduced without the consultation of the Scottish Parliament or the Assembly of the Kirk [21] In Edinburgh riots broke out which escalated into a national movement against the interference in Scottish religious and state affairs by the King and his bishops. [22] 


Edinburgh Riots

The protests developed into a campaign across Scotland denouncing the introduction of the new common prayer book and criticising the power of bishops in the affairs of the Scottish Church. The points of protest manifested into a National Covenant which documented commitment to the protection of religious affairs in Scotland. In February 1638 the document was signed by Scottish noblemen, gentry, clergy and officials at a ceremony in Grey Friars Kirk, Edinburgh. The Covenant was supported throughout Scotland with the exception of remote areas of the western highlands and Aberdeenshire. [23]


Signing of National Covenant Greyfriars Kirk Edinburgh 


The unrest in Scotland raised concerns in Newcastle that the disgruntled Covenanters could take military action and invade England threatening the town. The magistrates of Newcastle ordered a levy  to raise £600 (2017: £70,500) to prepare for the defence of the town. [24] 

Charles reaction to the actions of the Covenanters was to subdue the rebellious Scots through military action. As it took time to assemble an army be made ready for the campaign, the King initially sought to resolve the disagreement through negotiations between the Covenanters and his Commissioner in Scotland, the Marquis of Hamilton. A proclamation was made convening the  Grand Assembly of the Kirk, which sat in Glasgow, November 1638.   Hamilton proposed an alternative "King's Covenant", which was rejected by the Covenanter dominated assembly. The acrimonious proceedings led to the Duke of Hamilton dissolving the Assembly. The Covenanters in defiance continued to sit passing resolutions to reject the Archbishop's of Canterbury's doctrine, and defying his authority by excommunicating his Bishops. [25]




The King now looked to resolve the situation by the use of military force and marched north in June 1639. The resulting conflict, the First Bishops War, ended in victory for the Covenanter army resulting in a treaty, the Pacification of Berwick. [26]


Pacification of Berwick 1639


King Charles was still determined to subdue the Covenanters by force to bring Scotland back under his control. he was determined to mount a second campaign. In order to finance the forthcoming operations against the Scots, Lord Stafford who had taken charge of the war effort persuaded the monarch to  summon Parliament to raise the necessary monies. [27]  

In April 1640 Parliament convened for the first time in 11 years bring an end to the period of King Charles Personal Rule. [28]


NEXT:

---------

[1] http://bcw-project.org/church-and-state/the-kings-peace/personal-rule
[2] Kenyon, J.P. Stuart England Penguin Books 1990 reissue p.126 
[13] Gill, Alison Ann McKay (1990) Ship money during the personal rule of Charles I : politics, ideology and the law 1634-1640. PhD thesis, University of Sheffield. Page 32 
[15] Gill, Alison Ann McKay (1990) Ship money during the personal rule of Charles I : politics, ideology and the law 1634-1640. PhD thesis, University of Sheffield. Page 57
[16] ibid Page 157-160 
[24] Eneas Mackenzie, 'Historical events: 1585 - 1676', in Historical Account of Newcastle-Upon-Tyne Including the Borough of Gateshead (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 1827), pp. 23-46. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/newcastle-historical-account/pp23-46 [accessed 4 January 2022].