A_Brief_Study_of_the_1628-9_Parliament

Parliament & the nation A brief study of the 1628-9 parliament What was the role of parliament in early 17th century England' • The English parliament in the early 17th century comprised of two houses as it does today: • The House of Lords was made up of Lords Spiritual (archbishops and bishops) and Lords Temporal (dukes, marquesses, counts, barons etc.), each requiring written invitation to attend dependent on the monarch. By the time of the Stuart monarchy, their attendance was seen as more of a right than a privilege. • The House of Commons was made up of two members from every county and borough in the land (one for each Welsh county/borough). The boroughs were far more numerous, having increased greatly under the Tudors, and had vastly differing electorates and voting regulations. Perhaps up to a third of adult males could vote. In this time, elections were becoming more contested (albeit this still represents a minority of seats). Consilium et curia • One key role the English parliament played was in the field of law. No distinction was made between judicature or legislation, and the body was thus the highest court in the land, a key role it had played for centuries. • An extension of this legislative power was its key role in sanctioning royal ‘extraordinary’ income. England’s fiscal system was much the same as it had been in the fourteenth century (and during this period its anachronisms became increasingly stressed). Taxation was the main short-term reason parliaments were called. • This legislative tradition of a ‘parliamentary trinity’ was unusual in Europe. Bills could be initiated by either house, although there were some exceptions (e.g. subsidy bills could only originate in the House of Commons). Parliament was also responsible for a lot of ‘private’ bills, in a similar manner to its role as the highest court, it could pass legislation that would affect only a small demographic. • Parliament’s other key role was its consideration as the Great Council to the king. The Privy Council was often made up of members of both houses, offering a good line of communication between King, court, council, and the two houses. The question of whether parliament had a duty or a right to provide advice to the king was to become especially contentious during the Stuart monarchy. • It should be noted that there had been another Petition of Right in 1621 regarding exactly this issue (over James’ intentions to marry Charles to a Spanish princess), though it was much more limited in scope than the 1629 petition. In what ways did Charles I and his critics disagree on the position of parliament in English political life' • Charles considered the position of parliament to be almost an extension of the royal prerogative, that the High Court of Parliament would be considered an agency of royal government, and not a counterweight to it. • He often manipulated events to try to ensure that this is how parliament would function: o Before calling the 1626 parliament, Charles had promoted men in opposition to his rule as sheriffs (making them ineligible). He also appointed a number of new peers to the House of Lords, and failed to call up Arundel and Bristol to the House of Lords (seen as a breach of ancient privilege). o The parliament tried to impeach the duke of Buckingham. As a result Charles had Digges and Eliot arrested from the House of Commons (under trumped up charges). • In 1627 in the face of further military action against France following the support of the Huguenots at La Rochelle, Charles ordered the billeting of troops, and the collection of forced loans. Although the latter was declared illegal by the courts, he replaced the Lord Chief Justice, and encouraged the Anglican clergy to promote these loans (replacing the Archbishop of Canterbury with a commission of bishops headed by William Laud when he refused to cooperate). • The Five Knights’ Case illustrated the extent to which Charles had grown to believe in self rule, as his newly appointed Lord Chief Justice Sir Nicholas Hyde upheld the royal prerogative for Charles to detain persons without charge and without the right to post bail. Why had parliaments become so contentious by 1628-9' Who was to blame' • The 1628 parliament was called on the back of a poor military campaign to support the Huguenot rebels in La Rochelle. Again Charles made some new peers before calling parliament. • The royal revenue was split between ‘ordinary’ and ‘extraordinary’. The former included a number of sources (e.g. direct land rents, court charges) which it was expected would be sufficient for the crown during ordinary times (i.e. peacetime). o These ordinary revenues normally included tonnage and poundage, despite the requirement for them to be established by parliament. o Extraordinary revenues required an act of parliament to be initiated, and were commonly levied during wartime. o But the cycle of inflation that hit Europe during the later 16th and 17th centuries resulted in royal revenues dropping by an estimated 40% in relative terms during this period. o The levying of the fifteenth and tenth was generally abandoned in the mid-1620s as they were charged with ‘pinching the poor’. o Additionally, the lay subsidy began to provide less revenue in real terms over the period. This was a result of payees who had moved or died in particular areas not being replaced, licensed commissioners showing favouritism and collecting lower revenues, and the compounding effect of multiple subsidies resulting in lower and lower totals. o The king held the right to levy impositions (essentially temporary tariffs) to regulate trade within the kingdom. As the royal sources of revenue continued to dry up, it saw increasing usage, a contentious issue with parliament, and one listed in their grievances on numerous occasions. o Another source of revenue for the king, tonnage and poundage, had been granted to Charles for just one year by the House of Commons on his coronation, but parliament had been dissolved before it could be passed as an act. Charles ignored this fact, and interpreted the right to tonnage and poundage is had been in the time of his forebears: he collected it for fifteen years. Parliament however considered this to be illegal, having granted it to Charles for a year whilst an alternative system was developed: his collection of the duty was considered illegal as it was collected without due representative consent.  In 1629 the House of Commons went as far as to consider anyone paying tonnage and poundage ‘a betrayer of the liberties of England’. Charles considered this reaction perverse, as though parliament had called for a war and then said it would not pay for it. • There had been a tradition for parliaments to execute a ‘redress before supply’ policy, whereby parliament bartered the redress of grievances on the part of monarchs in exchange for the levying of subsidies and other taxes as requested. Despite this, it had been seldom used during the Stuart reigns, and the Petition of Right excluded, its attempted execution had led to the dissolution of parliament in 1614, 1626 and would do so again in 1640. • With the continually dropping revenues each subsidy provided, the parliament’s usefulness to the monarch dropped correspondingly. The danger to parliament’s mere existence was acknowledged as early as 1628. • The war in Europe had fared badly: parliament believed poor leadership was to blame (especially in the guise of the hated Duke of Buckingham), Charles considered the problem to be inadequate funding (perhaps correctly). • With parliament being in session every year bar 1627 during Charles’ reign, an opposition group had been allowed to coalesce, leading to the heightened tension of confrontation in the latter years. What was at issue in the Petition of Right debates' • The Petition of Right was drawn up tentatively to avoid another dissolution of parliament, so avoiding the main areas of contention. o It included only old laws, reciting from Magna Carta and other medieval statutes to highlight that certain privileges were buried in the country’s traditions. • Charles deliberated in providing royal assent, and when ultimately informed ‘no supply without assent’, conceded with the traditional ‘soit droit fait comme est désiré’. However, before it was written in the statute books, the bill was modified by Charles such that its later interpretation would be confused. • It sought to redress the following key points: o Charles’ levying of forced loans, and the forced billeting of troops in cases where payment of loans was not forthcoming o The suspension of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum, and its entailed arbitrary arrest and the imposition of martial law o Exemption of certain officials from due process of law What kind of case did Charles I make in dissolving parliament in 1629' • Following the Petition of Right, parliament tried to draw up a Remonstrance against the duke of Buckingham, and subsequently one to show the illegality of the collection of tonnage and poundage. • On Buckingham’s assassination, the remaining issue of tonnage and poundage was again brought up in the 1629 session. Charles responded in typical measure, by confiscating the lands of John Rolle, MP, but parliament claimed this was also illegal according to parliamentary privilege. • The latter half of 1628 had seen some alarming new promotions on the back of many anti-Calvinist promotions throughout the 1620s (seen as ‘popery’). In particular the promotions of William Laud and Richard Montagu were seen as damaging, and so religious issues headed the agenda in the 1629 sessions. When Charles tried to have parliament adjourned, members held the speaker in his chair as three resolutions against Charles were read out (including the charge against those paying tonnage and poundage). • Charles subsequently dissolved parliament: o His reasons laid out blamed it on the seditious and undutifulness of the House of Commons (in recognition of the tempered activities of the House of Lords at this time). o This had resulted from a minority of poisonous ‘vipers’ within the body, corrupting the majority. o Declared his intensions to maintain the established Church of England in its current form and glory, and to uphold the established rights and privileges of the land. • Despite these declarations, nine members of the House of Commons were detained, and moved around whilst charges could be drawn up (violating habeas corpus). Whilst some were subsequently released, Eliot was detained until his death in 1632 on charges of sedition.