his companions rescued him, and about a hundred of them surrounded the bishop, hemmed him in, and with a universal shout cried out, No bishops! after which they opened a passage and let his grace go forward to the house. The same day colonel Lunsford coming through Westminster-hall in company with thirty or forty officers, drew his sword and wounded about twenty apprentices and citizens: others walking in the abbey while their friends were waiting for an answer to their petition, were ordered by the vergers to clear the church, lest the ornaments of the cathedral should suffer damage; upon which most of them went out, and the doors were shut, but some few remaining behind, were apprehended and carried before the bishop, which occasioned another skirmish, in which sir Richard Wiseman was killed by a stone from the battlements; after which the officers and soldiers sallied out upon the mob with sword in hand, and obliged them to retire. The news of this being reported in the city, the whole populace was in arms, and resolved to go next morning to Westminster with swords and staves. The lord-mayor and sheriff's raised the train-bands, and having ordered the city-gates to be kept shut, they rode about all night to keep the peace; but it was impossible to hinder the people's going out in the day. On the other hand, the king commanded the militia of Westminster and Middlesex to be raised by turns, as a guard to his royal person and family; upon which several gentlemen of the inns of court offered their service, in case his majesty apprehended any danger +. The house of commons being no less afraid of themselves, petitioned for a guard out of the city of London, under the command of the earl of Essex, which his majesty refused, but told them, he would take as much care of them as of his own children; and if this would not suffice, he would command such a guard to wait upon them as he would be answerable to God for; but the house not being willing to trust to the king's guard, declined his majesty's offer, and not prevailing for one of their own choosing, they ordered halberds to be brought into the house, and resolved, in case of an assault, to defend themselves. The lords exerted themselves to disperse the tumults, by sending their gentleman-usher of the black rod to command the people to depart to their homes; and by appointing a committee to inquire into the causes of them. His majesty also published a proclamation [December 28, 1641] forbidding all tumultuous assemblies of the people. But the commons being unwilling to affront the citizens, were not so vigorous in suppressing them, as it is thought the circumstances of things required; for as the king relied upon his guard of officers, the commons had their dependance upon the good-will of the citizens. Not that the house can be charged with encouraging tumults, for the very next day after Rushworth, part 3. vol. 1 Bishop Warburton is + Ibid. p. 456. 471. assertion, and calls it "a notorious the king's proclamation they sent a message to the lords, declaring their readiness to concur in all lawful methods to appease them; but being sensible their strength was among the inhabitants of London, without whose countenance and support every thing must have been given back into the hands of the court, they were tender of entering upon vigorous measures. While these tumults continued the bishops were advised to forbear their attendance upon the house, at least till after the recess at Christmas; but this looking too much like cowardice, their lordships determined to do their duty; and because the streets were crowded with unruly people, they agreed to go by water in their barges; but as soon as they came near the shore, the mob saluted them with a volley of stones, so that being afraid to land, they rowed back and returned to their own houses. Upon this repulse, twelve of them met privately at the archbishop of York's lodgings in Westminster, to consult what measures were to be taken. The archbishop advised them to go no more to the house, and immediately in a heat drew up the following protestation against whatsoever the two houses should do in their absence, which all present signed with their hands, except the bishop of Winchester. "To the king's most excellent majesty, and the lords and peers now assembled in parliament. "The humble petition and protestation of all the bishops and prelates now called by his majesty's writs to attend the parliament, and present about London and Westminster for that service. "Whereas the petitioners are called up by several and respective writs and under great penalties to attend the parliament, and have a clear and indubitable right to vote in bills, and other matters whatsoever debatable in parliament, by the ancient customs, falsehood." The house, he says, "has been charged by all mankind with encouraging the tumults, though not with publicly avowing that they did encourage them." The truth or falsehood of Mr. Neal's assertion will depend on the expla nation of the word "encourage ;" if it means connivance at, and giving countenance to, the tumults, its veracity may be impeached. For when the lords desired, on December 27, the house to join in publishing a declaration against the tumults, and in petitioning the king for a guard, they waived taking the request into consideration, on the plea, that the hour was too late for it. When the next day came, they adjourned the matter to the succeeding. The mob being again assembled on the 29th, they sent their message to the lords. Mr. Neal does not immediately state these circumstances, but he represents the commons as not acting with vigour in suppressing the riots, and as placing some dependence on the spirit which the people shewed. Mr. Neal therefore, by encouraging the tumults, must be understood to mean, as Rapin expresses it, "taking any resolution to encourage these tumults," or avowing an approbation of them: then his assertion is, in the judgment of even bishop Warburton, just and true. The reader cannot but observe, that Mr. Neal thought that the tumults were not, at first at least, disagreeable to the commons. Yet it should be observed, that Whitelocke, speaking of them, says, "it was a dismal thing to all sober men, especially members of parliament, to see and hear them." Memorials, p. 51.—ED. laws, and statutes, of this realm, and ought to be protected by your majesty quietly to attend and prosecute that great service: they humbly remonstrate and protest before God, your majesty, and the noble lords and peers now assembled in parliament, that as they have an indubitate right to sit and vote in the house of lords, so are they, if they may be protected from force and violence, most ready and willing to perform their duties accordingly. And that they do abominate all actions or opinions tending to Popery and the maintenance thereof; as also, all propension and inclination to any malignant party, or any other side or party whatsoever, to the which their own reasons and conscience shall not move them to adhere. But whereas they have been at several times violently menaced, affronted, and assaulted, by multitudes of people in their coming to perform their services in that honourable house, and lately chased away and put in danger of their lives, and can find no redress or protection, upon sundry complaints made to both houses in these particulars: they humbly protest before your majesty, and the noble house of peers, that saving unto themselves all their rights and interest of sitting and voting in that house at other times, they dare not sit or vote in the house of peers, until your majesty shall farther secure them from all affronts, indignities, and dangers, in the premises. Lastly, whereas their fears are not built upon fantasies and conceits, but upon such grounds and objections as may well terrify men of resolution and much constancy, they do, in all humility and duty, protest before your majesty, and the peers of that most honourable house of parliament, against all laws, orders, votes, resolutions, and determinations, as in themselves null, and of none effect, which in their absence, since the 27th of this month of December 1641, have already passed; as likewise against all such as shall hereafter pass in that most honourable house, during the time of this their forced and violent absence from the said most honourable house; not denying, but if their absenting of themselves were wilful and voluntary, that most honourable house might proceed in all the premises, their absence, or this protestation, notwithstanding. And humbly beseeching your most excellent majesty to command the clerk of that house of peers, to enter this their petition and protestation among their records, "And they will ever pray God to bless, &c. "John Eborac. George Hereford, Godfrey Gloucester, This protestation was presented to the king by archbishop Williams*, who undertook to justify the lawfulness of it; but his majesty declining to appear in so nice an affair, delivered it into the hands of the lord-keeper Littleton, who by his majesty's command read it in the house of lords the next morning. After some debate the lords desired a conference with the commons, when the keeper in the name of the house of peers declared, that "the protestation of the bishops contained matters of high and dangerous consequence, extending to the intrenching upon the fundamental privileges and being of parliaments, and therefore the lords thought fit to communicate it to the commons*." The protestation being communicated to the house of commons, they resolved, within half an hour, to accuse the twelve bishops of high treason, "for endeavouring to subvert the fundamental laws and being of parliaments," and sent up their impeachment by Mr. Glyn, who having delivered it at the bar of the house of lords, the usher of the black rod was ordered to go immediately in search of the bishops, and bring them to the house; the bishops appearing the same evening [December 30] were sequestered from parliament, ten of them being sent to the Tower, the bishops of Durham and Norwich +, by reason of their great age and the service they had done the church of God by their writing and preaching, being committed to the custody of the black rod, with an allowance of 51. a day for their expensest. The adversaries of the bishops in both houses were extremely pleased with their unadvised conduct; one said, it was the finger of God, to bring that to pass which otherwise could not have been compassed. There was but one gentleman in the whole debate that spoke in their behalf, and he said, "he did not believe they were guilty of high treason, but that they were stark mad, and therefore desired they may be sent to Bedlam." Lord Clarendon§ censures this protestation, as proceeding from the pride and passion of archbishop Williams; he admits that the eleven bishops were ill advised, in going into his measures, and suffering themselves to be precipitated into so hasty a resolution, though he is certain there could be nothing of high treason in it. However, their behaviour gave such scandal and offence, even to those who passionately desired to preserve their function, that they had no compassion or regard for their persons. The objections that I have met with against the protestation, are these; First, That it tended to destroy the very being of parliaments, because it put a stop to all laws, orders, votes, and resolutions, made in the absence of the bishops. Secondly, The presence of the bishops is hereby made so essential that no act can pass without them, which is claiming a negative voice, like the king's. Thirdly, The bishops desiring the king to command the clerk of the house of peers to enter their protestation on record, was derogatory to the rights of parliament, as though the king by his command could make a record of parliament. Fourthly, Rushworth, part 3. vol. 1. p. 467. + Morton and Hall. The annulling all laws that might be made at this time, when Ireland was in so much danger from the breaking out of the Irish massacre, was a sort of conspiring with the rebels to destroy that kingdom. Fifthly, It was said, that besides the unwarrantable expressions in the protestation, the form of presenting and transmitting it was unjustifiable. On the other hand it was said on behalf of the bishops, that here was a manifest force put upon them; and a violence offered to the freedom of one member of parliament, is a violence offered to the whole; that therefore they had a right to protest, and guard their privileges, without being accountable for the ill consequences that might follow. Yet surely this manner of asserting their privilege was irregular; should they not have petitioned the lords to secure their passage to parliament, rather than have put a negative upon all their proceedings? I have met with only one learned writer who commends the bishops upon this occasion, and he advances them, in romantic language, to the rank of heroes: his words are these; "Had the bishops done less, they had fallen short of that fortitude which might justly be expected from them. They had reason to conclude the root and branch work would certainly go forward, and therefore to be silent under such an outrage would look like cowardice. When the prospect is thus menacing, and a man is almost certain to be undone, the most creditable expedient is to spend himself in a blaze, and flash to the last grain of powder. To go out in a smoke and smother is but a mean way of coming to nothing. To creep and crawl to a misfortune is to suffer like an insect. A man ought to fall with dignity and honour, and to keep his mind erect though his fortune happens to be crushed. This was the bishops' meaning, and for making so handsome a retreat they ought to stand commended upon record*.” But with due regard to this reverend divine, was there no medium between being silent, and taking upon them in such a crisis to stop all the business of parliament? For if the proceedings of the house of peers are null without the bishops, it is no less certain, that those of the house of commons are null without the peers; from whence it must follow, that the whole parliament was incapable of acting. Mr. Rapint is of opinion, that the king hoped that this affair might occasion the dissolution of the parliament." But if he did, his majesty was much mistaken, for the bishops and Popish lords being now absent, the majority of the whole house of peers was against the court; which vexed the queen and her faction, and put them upon such an extravagant piece of revenge as effectually broke the peace of the kingdom, and rendered the king's affairs irretrievable. 66 His majesty having been assured that the lord Kimbolton, and five of the most active members in the house of commons, viz. Denzil Hollis, Sir Arthur Haslerigge, John Pym, John Hampden, * Collyer's Eçcles. Hist. vol. 2. p. 819. + Vol. 1. p. 405, folio. |