forced upon for their parliament in March, 1629.1 Undaunted, however, by that rebuke, Laud moved steadily on with his purpose to force the Puritan element within the church to conform to both creed and ritual as expounded by him, an undertaking that involved the substitution, for that phase of religion dear at the time to the mass of Englishmen, of a more ceremonial system, which as viewed by its adversaries counterfeited the pomp of Rome. Before the close of 1631, Laud gave the Puritan clergy to conformity understand that they must conform to the last tittle or sur- the Puritan render their livings, and when an effort was made to keep clergy; them in office by buying up impropriations of livings to be held for their benefit,2 the feoffees were cited to appear in the exchequer chamber, where in February, 1633, a decree was rendered dissolving the feoffments and declaring that all such feoffments patronage should be placed at the king's disposal. And after benefit his appointment as archbishop, which took place in that year, Laud also made it impossible for the Puritan clergy to escape conformity in the rôle of lecturers or chaplains by taking away forbidden from the country gentlemen the right to have chaplains at all. lecturers or The "thorough" system of coercion thus employed within the chaplains; church was extended with even greater severity to the sepa- persecution ratists, who were dragged before the high commission from tists; their hiding-places in the woods, where they vainly sought immunity from mandates by which even private meetings for prayers or preaching were strictly prohibited. Under the pressure of such a ruthless system of persecution, carried on with the aid both of the star chamber and high commission, the tide of Puritan emigration to the New World, which began to Puritan rise with the departure of Winthrop, soon reached such a to the New emigration height that in February, 1634, an order in council was adopted World; prohibiting the sailing of any more vessels. While the church 1 See above, p. 278. It was as a member of the committee upon that subject that Cromwell made his first speech in parliament. For a statement of the matter from the Arminian point of view, see Blount, Reform. of the Church of Eng., pp. 497-500. 2 "The originator of this scheme was 'the famous' Dr. Preston, a Puritan College Doctor of immense 'fame' in those and prior years."— Carlyle, Cromwell's Letters and Speeches, p. 44, 8 Exchequer Decrees, vol. iv. p. 88. 5 See Laud's letter to Windebank, 6 A week later this order was so modified as to permit emigration under certain conditions. State Papers, Dom., cclx. 17; Council Register, February 21, 28. Cf. Gardiner, vol. vii. pp. 317, dissolved; to act as of separa the new Laudian clergy; his system attacked by the unlicensed press; was thus being emptied of bishops and ministers, who refused to accept Laudian standards, the archbishop was careful to supply their places by a new clergy, whose corporate influence he attempted to enhance by breathing a fresh life into the ecclesiastical courts, and by elevating in 1636 Juxon, bishop of London, to the great post of lord high treasurer, an office which, as Laud states in his diary, "no churchman" had held "since Henry the Seventh's time." 1 At this stage of his caLaud and reer it was that Laud and his system were subjected to bitter attacks from the unlicensed press, whose Parthian arrows now pierced him from every side. Chief among the offenders were Prynne, Bastwick, and Burton, pamphleteers of the old Martin Mar-Prelate type,2 who in June, 1637, were brought before the star chamber, charged with libels against the bishops in which were contained denunciations of the entire system of innovation that had been brought about under Laud's direction. Two of the three were then suffering imprisonment for past offences. In 1634 Prynne, a bigoted Puritan lawyer, had been punished by the star chamber for publishing a ponderous and stupid book called "Histriomastrix," in which he denounced with the virulence of that time all innocent human recreations in general, and female actors in particular.8 Bastwick, who was a physician, had been punished by the high commission in 1635 for an argument in favor of presbyterianism published Bastwick's under the name of "Flagellum Pontificis."4 Prynne and BastPontificis ;" wick then committed new offences, which brought them before the star chamber in 1637, with Burton, who the year before had published two sermons under the title of "For God and the King," in which he attacked directly or indirectly the entire episcopal system. So sharply was Laud assailed that he felt called upon to defend himself in an elaborate speech 5 before the star chamber, which rewarded his zeal by a cruel sentence against all three prisoners, who were condemned to lose their by the star ears and to suffer heavy fines, in addition to life imprisonment.6 But when the time came for the first part of the sentence "Histriomastrix;" "Flagellum Burton's "For God and the King;" all three condemned chamber; 318, as to the "increase of emigration 1 Laud's Works, vol. iii. p. 226. had taken part in a little play called The Shepherd's Pastoral. 4 State Papers, Dom., cclxi. 178. 5 See Works, vol. vii. p. 355. 6 State Trials, vol. iii. pp. 711 3 It was supposed that this assault was directed against the queen, who 770. to be carried out, the widespread manifestations of sympathy with the prisoners unmistakably revealed the fact that the tide of popular indignation was rising. The quick response from the government was a star chamber decree, which sharpened the censorship of the press by reducing the number of the licensed printers to twenty, and by providing that any one not sharpened. censorship of that number who should dare to print a book or pamphlet was "to be set in the pillory and whipped through the city of London." 2 attempt upon the kirk; While Laud, thus aided by the heavy hand of the law, was Laud's forcing uniformity upon all within the realm, whether within to force or without the pale of the state church, he entered upon the uniformity more difficult task of subjecting to the same process that tur- Scotch bulent kirk across the northern border which, at the beginning of the Reformation, had adopted not only the dogmatic theology, but the entire system of church government devised by the organizing genius of Calvin. The attempt has already been made to explain how difficult it was for James to force upon this democratic and aggressive body, with its kirk sessions, presbyteries, and general assembly, the yoke of the episcopal system, which was entirely incompatible with the principles of its organization. So limited was James' success James' in building up the rule of bishops in his Scottish kingdom, that establish when Laud in his earlier days tried to induce him to go a step the rule of farther by stripping the kirk of its presbyterian character, in Scotland; order to drive it into conformity with the English canons and ritual, he waved him away as a foolish man who "knows not the stomach of that people." 4 Instead of attempting any doctrinal changes, James contented himself with establishing in himself 1609 a court of high commission,5 by means of which he forced with estab the kirk to bow in many particulars to the royal authority. court of But if the mind of Laud was narrow and bigoted, it was firm mission; and persistent in its concentration upon a single object. The Laud's scheme which James contemptuously rejected, Laud was able put to a practical to put to a practical test in 1636, when upon the sole authority test in 1636; 1 Strafford Papers, vol. ii. pp. 99, 114. Cf. also Brodie, Hist. Brit. Empire, vol. ii. p. 334. 2 Rushworth, vol. ii. p. 450, App. 306; State Papers, Dom., ccclxiv. 111. 8 See above, pp. 212, 214. 4 Green, Hist. of the Eng. People, vol. iii. p. 179. 5 This court, established without any authority from parliament or assembly, was abolished in 1638. failure to bishops in contented lishing a high com scheme in 1637; tumult at of the crown1 a book of canons inspired by the archbishop was put in force, by virtue of which the government of the Scotch kirk was placed completely in the hands of the bishops, while the old form of worship contained in Knox's Book of Common Order was by the same authority superseded by a new liturgy based upon the English Book of Common Prayer. When the Scots attempted to reject the new liturgy upon the ground that it was both popish and English, Charles responded by a proclamation, issued in December, ordering every parish to adopt it and to procure two copies before the next Easter.3 Not, however, until the end of July, resisted by 1637, was an actual attempt made to force the clergy of Edinthe clergy of Edinburgh burgh to introduce it into their churches, in the hope that its acceptance by the capital would be followed by the rest of the country. The result was that the tumult at St. Giles was St. Giles; followed by riot after riot, until the tide of opposition, which first gathered the remonstrants around the "Tables" at Sterling, finally crystallized into the covenant, signed in the Grey Friars' Church at Edinburgh on the 1st of March, 1638,4 wherein the subscribers bound themselves "to continue in the profession and obedience of the aforesaid religion, that we shall defend the same and resist all these contrary errors and corruptions, according to our vocation." 5 When the marquis abrogation of Hamilton was sent by Charles to end the troubles thus brought about, he was met by a demand for the withdrawal of the obnoxious canons and liturgy, the abolition of the high commission, and for the calling of a free assembly and a free parliament. After the threat of war with which Charles met this demand had broken down for want of money to execute swept away it, a general assembly was summoned by the king's permission, assembly at that met at Glasgow in November, in which, despite HamilGlasgow, in ton's effort to dissolve it, Laud's whole work was swept away November; and the episcopal superseded by the presbyterian system. In the face of such a menace, which the Scots followed up by raising an army under the command of Leslie, Laud stood covenant signed at the Grey Friars', March 1, 1638; of the Laudian system demanded; by general 1 Burton, Hist. of Scotland, vol. vi. The king to the council, October 4 Rothes, pp. 71, 79. 5 Large Declaration, p. 57. 6 Baillie, vol. i. p. 165; Peterkin's Records, p. 128; Hamilton Papers, p. 62; Hardwicke Papers, vol. iii. p. 124. 1639, an army Berwick again undaunted. As a "man to carnage and the Koran given," his voice was for war, and in that resolve he was firmly supported by Wentworth, whose one great aim had been to transform Ireland into an arsenal, from which Charles could draw both money and men in an emergency. The time had February, now arrived for action, and when, in February, 1639, the news Charles came that Charles was gathering an army at York, Leslie gathered suddenly assumed the offensive, and, after seizing the strong- at York; holds of Edinburgh and Dumbarton, he moved to the border, taking up his position in June near Berwick, almost in sight of the king's camp, some twelve miles distant. Rather than risk an engagement, Charles there signed, on the 18th of June, the treaty of treaty of Berwick,1 in which the Scots agreed to give up the signed strongholds, to disband their army, and break up the "Tables" June 18; and all unlawful committees, upon Charles' guarantee that they should have both a free assembly and a free parliament, in which were to be settled all matters in dispute as well ecclesiastical as political. In the assembly opened at Edinburgh episcopacy on the 12th of August, episcopacy and all its consequences abolished were again abolished as they had been at Glasgow, while in by general the parliament which met at the end of the same month were in August; proposed serious constitutional changes.2 How to undo results such as these, forced upon him by rebellious subjects, became the one subject of Charles' thoughts; and when he was convinced that the end could be attained only through war, he set himself to work to make preparation. Wentworth, who Wentworth returned to England in September, now became more emphati- chief cally than ever before Charles' chief guide and counsellor. minister; On January 12, 1640, he was made earl of Strafford, and a week later he exchanged the title of lord deputy for that of lord lieutenant of Ireland. Although the new earl was firmly for war in the last resort, he had already advised the king that advised the he should first call a parliament. While Charles was hesitat- call a ing and looking for means by which the dreaded alternative parliament; could be avoided, a letter fell into his hands, subscribed by letter from seven of the principal covenanters and directed to Louis XIII., nanters to from which he thought he could prove that under the cloak Louis XIII. 1 State Papers, Dom., ccccxxiii. 107; Burnet's Hamiltons, pp. 140, 141; 50. Rushworth, vol. iii. p. 94. 2 Cf. Gardiner, vol. ix. pp. 49, assembly now became king to the cove |