Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:38:09.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Charles I, the Privy Council, and the Forced Loan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2014

Richard Cust
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Forced Loan of 1626–27 has traditionally been regarded as one of the milestones of early seventeenth-century politics. The great nineteenth-century Whig historian S. R. Gardiner saw it as the product of “new counsels” by which Charles I came increasingly to rely on the royal prerogative, and he depicted the opposition to this as a principled defense of Englishmen's liberties. Others writing in the same tradition have generally echoed these views. Thus the loan has been presented as the climax to a first stage of struggle between “Court” and “Country” or as a staging post on the “high road to Civil War.” Latterly, however, this verdict has come into question.

With the work of “localist” and “revisionist” historians we have come to appreciate more clearly the extent of attachment to the local community and the continual striving toward consensus in relations between king and subject. This has led to a general revaluation of what have traditionally been regarded as clashes of principle. Local historians have stressed that opposition to taxes generally owed far more to backsliding and provincial inertia than to any concern for constitutional propriety. And a greater understanding of the problems of administration—particularly in wartime—has led to a recognition that government decision making was often a reflex action, prompted by the immediate need to make ends meet. These insights have been incorporated into the work of Conrad Russell, who has provided the most recent assessment of the loan.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 24 , Issue 2: Politics and Religion in the Early Seventeenth Century: New Voices , April 1985 , pp. 208 - 235
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Gardiner, S. R., History of England (London, 1884), 6:122–33, 156–57Google Scholar (hereafter, unless otherwise noted, city of publication is London).

2 Zagorin, P., The Court and the Country (1969), pp. 109–10Google Scholar; Barnes, T. G., Somerset, 1625–1640 (Berkeley and Oxford, 1961), p. 168CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Morrill, J. S., The Revolt of the Provinces (1976), pp. 13–30Google Scholar; Fletcher, A., A County Community in Peace and War: Sussex, 1600–1660 (1975), pp. 202–15Google Scholar.

4 Russell, C. S. R., “Monarchies, Wars and Estates in England, France and Spain, c. 1580–1640,” Legislative Studies Quarterly 7, no. 2 (1982): 205–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hirst, D. M., “The Privy Council and Problems of Enforcement in the 1620s,” Journal of British Studies 18, no. 1 (1978): 46–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Russell, C. S. R., Parliaments and English Politics, 1621–1629 (Oxford, 1979), pp. 331–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Rabb, T. K. and Hirst, D. M., “Revisionism Revised: Two Perspectives on Early-Stuart Parliamentary History,” Past and Present, no. 92 (1981), pp. 55–99Google Scholar.

7 Calender of State Papers, Venetian (CSPV), 1625–26, pp. 547–48.

8 Gardiner, 6:140; CSPV, 1625–26, p. 548; Acts of the Privy Council (APC), 1626, p. 268.

9 APC, 1626, p. 268.

10 Gardiner, 6:138; Ashton, R., The Crown and the Money Market, 1603–40 (Oxford, 1960), pp. 129–31Google Scholar; Dietz, F. C., English Public Finance, 1558–1641, 2d ed. (New York, 1964), pp. 233–55Google Scholar.

11 Williams, R. F., ed., The Court and Times of Charles I (1848), 1:148Google Scholar.

12 Ashton, p. 32.

13 Russell, C. S. R., “Parliamentary History in Perspective, 1604–1629,” History 61 (1976): 17CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Russell, , Parliaments and English Politics, p. 326Google Scholar.

15 Public Record Office (PRO), State Papers (SP) 16/37/5, 52.

16 Journals of the House of Lords, 3:682Google Scholar; CSPV, 1625–26, p. 462.

17 Laud, W., The Works (1853), 1:82–83Google Scholar; Howell, James, Epistolae Ho Elianae: Familiar Letters, 11th ed. (1754)Google Scholar, 1.4.18.

18 “To his sacred majesty, Ab Ignoto,” in Cabala Sive Scrinia Sacra, 3d ed. (1691), pp. 255–57Google Scholar.

19 CSPV, 1625–26, pp. 461–62.

20 Rymer, T., Foedera, 20 vols. (1704–1735), 18:221Google Scholar.

21 PRO, SP 16/30/2.

22 A Declaration of the true cause which moved His Majestie to assemble and after inforced him to dissolve the two last meetings in Parliament (1626), pp. 19–20Google Scholar.

23 CSPV, 1625–26, pp. 462, 508.

24 Williams, ed. (n. 11 above), 1:149. Mandeville was a member of the Council of War rather than the Privy Council. He had already demonstrated an inclination toward Parliaments in the latter stages of the 1626 meeting (Russell, , Parliaments and English Politics [n. 5 above], pp. 319–21Google Scholar). I am grateful to Christopher Thompson for drawing my attention to this letter and its implications.

25 Williams, ed., 1:149; CSPV, 1625–26, p. 558.

26 CSPV, 1626–28, p. 342. For discussion of the subject on other occasions, see British Library (BL), Harleian (Harl.) MS 390, fol. 132; Williams, ed., 1:224.

27 The council register records Charles as attending on ten occasions between September 1626 and July 1627: September 14; October 25; December 10, 16, 21, 22; January 4, 28; March 16; and May 4 (APC, 1626, pp. 268, 328, 399, 414, 430, 431, and 1627, pp. 2,36, 140). However, it seems that his actual attendance was more frequent than this since some appearances mentioned in other sources went unrecorded: September 12 and November 28, 1626 (CSPV, 1625–26, p. 548; Williams, ed., 1:175). For his attitude toward day-to-day administration, see PRO, SP 16/73/94. This is not intended to imply that Charles was idle when it came to the work of government. Where a particular matter engaged his attention he displayed considerable energy in pushing his councillors to greater efforts, as was the case with the loan (Cust, R. P., “The Forced Loan and English Politics, 1626–1628” [Ph.D. diss., University of London, 1983], pp. 143, 153, 189–90Google Scholar).

28 BL, Harl. MS 390, fol. 132.

29 Historical Manuscripts Commission (HMC), Report on the MSS of H.D. Skrine (1887), p. 84Google Scholar.

30 Nottingham University Library (NUL), Ne.C. 15,405, p. 153; BL, Egerton MS 784, p. 128.

31 PRO, SP 16/67/28; 70/45, 96; 71/44; 72/28. For a general discussion of the problems facing monarchs at this time, see Parker, G., Europe in Crisis, 1598–1648 (Glasgow, 1979), pp. 54–59Google Scholar.

32 See below.

33 APC, 1626, and 1627, passim.

34 CSPV, 1625–26, p. 558.

35 This was reminiscent of Buckingham's attempts to appeal both to the ultra-Protestants and to the Arminians in the period 1624–25 (Tyacke, N. R. N., “Puritanism, Arminianism and Counter-revolution,” in The Origins of the English Civil War, ed. Russell, C. S. R. [1973], pp. 131–32Google Scholar).

36 NUL, Ne.C. 15,405, p. 126; Rushworth, J., Historical Collections (1680 ed.), 1:455Google Scholar; Whitaker, T. D., ed., The Life and Original Correspondence of Sir George Radcliffe (1810), p. 142Google Scholar.

37 Cust (n. 27 above), pp. 77–80.

38 Tyacke, pp. 132–33.

39 Sharpe, K., “The Earl of Arundel, His Circle and Opposition to the Duke of Buckingham, 1618,” in Faction and Parliament, ed. Sharpe, K. (Oxford, 1978), pp. 233–35Google Scholar; Cust, pp. 26–31.

40 Russell, , Parliaments and English Politics (n. 5 above), pp. 13, 105, 339Google Scholar; Lockyer, R., Buckingham (1981), pp. 40, 67–68, 76, 100, 277Google Scholar; Rushworth, 1:454.

41 PRO, SP 16/94/88.

42 Gardiner (n. 1 above), 6:110; CSPV, 1625–26, p. 560.

43 PRO, SP 78/79/64 (I am grateful to Tom Cogswell for this reference).

44 NUL, Ne.C. 15,404, p. 207.

45 CSPV, 1625–26, p. 528.

46 Williams, ed. (n. 11 above), 1:117, 131–32; PRO, SP 16/44/3; Birmingham Reference Library (BRL), Coventry MSS, Commissions 1625–40, no. 8 (I am grateful to Conrad Russell for this reference).

47 CSPV, 1626–28, p. 342.

48 Cust, pp. 35–43.

49 Harriss, G. L., “Aids, Loans and Benevolences,” Historical Journal 25, no. 2 (1982): 5–9Google Scholar, and “Medieval Doctrines in Debates on Supply, 1610–29,” in Sharpe, , ed. (n. 39 above), pp. 75–78Google Scholar.

50 BL, Additional (Add.) MS 34,324, fol. 256.

51 Ibid.

52 Instructions directed from the King's most excellent Majestic unto all the Bishops of this Kingdom and fit to be put in execution agreeable to the necessitie of the time (1626); PRO, SP 16/36/42–43.

53 PRO, SP 16/36/42–43.

54 Cust, pp. 37–43.

55 Rymer (n. 20 above), 18:764.

56 PRO, SP 16/49/8, 55/1; Williams, ed. (n. 11 above), 1:325.

57 Swales, R. J. W., “The Ship Money Levy of 1628,” Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research 50, no. 122 (1977): 174–76Google Scholar.

58 Instructions … unto all the Bishops …, B–B2; PRO, SP 16/36/4.

59 PRO, SP 16/36/4.

60 Harriss, , “Aids, Loans and Benevolences” (n. 49 above), pp. 14–15Google Scholar.

61 PRO, SP 16/31/30–31.

62 Williams, ed., pp. 154, 157, 164; CSPV, 1625–26, p. 576.

63 HMC, Buccleuch I (London, 1899), p. 264Google Scholar; CSPV, 1626–28, pp. 107–8.

64 APC, 1627, pp. 387, 492–94; PRO, SP 16/71/28.

65 Rushworth (n. 36 above), 1:434–35, 454–56.

66 BL, Add. MS 34,324, fol. 256; BRL, Commissions for the Loan, no. 12; Cust, R. P., “A List of Commissioners for the Forced Loan, 1626/7,” Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research 51, no. 124 (1978): 203–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67 Ibid.

68 PRO, SP 16/37/5, 91.

69 PRO, SP 16/526/10.

70 Somerset Record Office (SRO), Phelips MS 219/35.

71 Cust, , “A List of Commissioners for the Forced Loan, “ pp. 203–4Google Scholar.

72 Ibid.; CSPV, 1625–26, p. 480.

73 PRO, SP 16/36/43.

74 Gardiner (n. 1 above), 6:149; Williams, ed. (n. 11 above), p. 172; PRO, SP 16/41/3; HMC, Buccleuch III, pp. 307–8Google Scholar.

75 HMC, Buccleuch III, pp. 312–15Google Scholar; PRO, SP 16/39/55.

76 HMC, Buccleuch III, p. 312Google Scholar.

77 HMC, Buccleuch I, p. 264Google Scholar; Williams, ed., 1:177.

78 Cust, , “The Forced Loan and English Politics” (n. 27 above), pp. 142–45Google Scholar.

79 SRO, Phelips MS 219/35.

80 Williams, ed., 1:164.

81 HMC, Buccleuch III, p. 312Google Scholar; NUL, Ne.C. 15,405, pp. 124–25.

82 Williams, ed., 1:177.

83 Ibid.

84 Ibid.

85 APC, 1626, p. 388.

86 Johnson, R. C.et al., eds., Commons Debates, 1628 (New Haven, Conn., 1977–1978), 2:279–81Google Scholar.

87 Williams, ed., 1:149.

88 CSPV, 1625–26, p. 576.

89 PRO, SP 16/38/23.

90 The two occasions on which it was used were in London in October 1626 (APC, 1626, p. 313) and in Northamptonshire in January 1627 (PRO, SP 16/49/8).

91 PRO, SP 16/56/100, 89/4.

92 PRO, SP 16/57/1; APC, 1627, p. 102.

93 Williams, ed., 1:208. Mead is the only source I have found for this debate, although the council register confirms that the matter was discussed and that all those mentioned as speaking were present. It also records the final outcome of the discussions (APC, 1627, p. 140).

94 APC, 1627, p. 140.

95 APC, 1626, p. 328, and 1627, pp. 39–40.

96 Whitaker, ed. (n. 36 above), pp. 137–38; HMC, Report on the MSS of H. D. Skrine (n. 29 above), p. 110Google Scholar; NUL, Ne.C. 15,405, p. 132.

97 Whitaker, ed., pp. 142, 150, 152.

98 Williams, ed., 1:220.

99 Whitaker, ed., p. 144; The Earl of Strafforde's Letters and Dispatches, ed. Knowler, W. (1729), 1:37Google Scholar.

100 PRO, SP 16/60/10, 66/17, 67/87.

101 Cust, , “The Forced Loan and English Politics” (n. 27 above), pp. 361–71Google Scholar.

102 Williams, ed., 1:241; NUL, Ne.C. 15,405, pp. 147–48.

103 PRO, SP 16/60/10.

104 Ibid.

105 Williams, ed., 1:195.

106 Sibthorpe, Robert, Apostolike Obedience (1627)Google Scholar; Manwaring, Roger, Religion and Allegiance (1627)Google Scholar; Bargrave, Isaac, A Sermon Preached Before King Charles March 27th 1627; Being the Anniversary of His Majestie's Inauguration (1627)Google Scholar.

107 Gardiner (n. 1 above), 6:209; Rushworth (n. 36 above), 1:437–38.

108 PRO, SP 16/55/29.

109 PRO, SP 16/71/46, 78.

110 Folger Shakespeare Library, V.b.70, fol. 73V.

111 Johnson, G. W., ed., The Fairfax Correspondence (1848), 1:68Google Scholar; PRO, SP 16/72/28.

112 APC, 1627–28, p. 58.

113 Williams, ed., 1:280; PRO, SP 16/85/53 (I am grateful to John Guy for this reference).

114 Guy, J., “The Origins of the Petition of Right Reconsidered,” Historical Journal 25, no. 2 (1982): 291CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

115 Russell, , Parliaments and English Politics (n. 5 above), pp. 334–37Google Scholar.

116 Cust, , “The Forced Loan and English Politics” (n. 27 above), pp. 97–115Google Scholar.

117 PRO, SP 16/93/87; Johnson et al., eds. (n. 86 above), 2:9–10.

118 Russell, , Parliaments and English Politics, pp. 321, 330–31, 338–40Google Scholar.

119 A similar insistence on Charles's part was evident during the discussions over the Petition of Right (Guy, pp. 306–7) (I am grateful to John Guy for drawing my attention to this tendency).

120 Barron, C., “The Tyranny of Richard II,” Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research 41, no. 102 (1968): 1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

121 Tyacke (n. 35 above), pp. 119–43.

122 Russell, C. S. R., “The Parliamentary Career of John Pym, 1621–9,” in The English Commonwealth, ed. Clark, P., Smith, A. G. R., and Tyacke, N. R. N. (Leicester, 1979), pp. 160–64Google Scholar.