71-7566 SHIMP, Robert.Everett, 1942- THE PARLIAMENT OF 1625. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1970 History, modern University Microfilms. A XEROX Company , Ann Arbor, Michigan 0 Copyright by Robert Everett Shimp 1971 I THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED THE PARLIAMENT OF 1625 DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University | i 3y Robert Everett Shimp, B*A.t M.A* | I ****** The Ohio State University 1970 Approved Ljr CSfUjicrri fij&'&JVitZ- Q Adviser Department of History PREFACE This study of the first Parliament of Charles X, the 1625 Parliament, is an attempt to cast additional light on the relationship of Parliament and the early Stuarts, and therefore, to provide a better understanding of the causes of the Civil War. Dae modern study of he early Stuart Parliaments began with Professor Gardiner's monumental ten volume History of England from the Accession of James I. to the Outbreak of the Civil War. Writing in the late 19th century, Professor Gardiner viewed the political and religious events of this period as leading inevitably to the Puritan Revolution. However, he saw little value in examining the effects of the broader social and economic aspects of the period on England's political life* It was these social and economic aspects that Professor Neale, working on Elizabethan Parliaments, and Professor Namier, working on 18th century Parliaments, brought into sharp focus. They demonstrated the necessity of analyzing the parliamentary elections and the composition of the House of Commons if one was to understand the actions of any one Parliament. New kinds of evidence now came under the scrutiny of the historian and the old kinds were sought out more eagerly. ii The writing of parliamentary history began anew* It was with this new approach in mind that I began this study of the Parliament of 1625* All spelling in the quotations have been modernized* In the preparation of this study I incurred many obligations which I would like to acknowledge here* Ity researches in England were facilitated by generous assistance from The Ohio State University* I am also grateful to the staffs of the Public Record Office, the British Museum, the Institute of Historical Research, John fylands Library, the House of Lords Record Office, and The Ohio State University Library who have furnished me with much needed aid and innumerable courtesies. I should also like to thank the Earl of St. Germans for permission to use the papers of Sir John ELiot in his possession* Special gratitude I owe to Professor Clayton Roberts whose guidance and insights has furnished me with invaluable guideposts* Finally, I wish to thank my friend Valdimir Steffel for commenting on the first five chapters, and iqy wife Lyn and son Gregoxy for their endless patience and encouragement* Special thanks also to lyn for typing the dissertation* iii VITA. March 1, 19^2 Born - Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 196** . B.A., Thiel College, Greenville, Pennsylvania 1 9 6 5. M.A., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1965-1968 . • Teaching Associate, Department of History, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1968-1970 . • Instructor, Department of History, Ohio Wesleyan University, Delaware, Ohio FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: History Tudor-Stuart England, Professor Clayton R* Roberts Medieval Europe, Professor Franklin J. Pegues Modern Ehgland, Professor Philip P. Poirier Early National Period, United States, Professor Harry L» Coles Colonial America, Professor Paul C. Bowers iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PREFACE................................................ ii VITA ............................................... iv ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE FOOTNOTES . ............... vi Chapter I. THE NEW R E I G N .............................. 1 II. THE ELECTIONS............................... 44 III. THE COMPOSITION OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS....... 82 IV. THE HOUSE OF L O R D S ......................... 97 V. THE WESTMINSTER MEETING.................... 113 VI. THE OXFORD MEETING . ....... 162 VII. CONCLUSIONS...................................... 202 APPENDIX A. THE PRIVY COUNCIL IN 1 6 2 3 ......................... 217 B. GRIEVANCES PRESENTED TO JAMES I BY THE 1624 PARLIAMENT AND ANSWERED BY CHARLES I ON JULY 4, 1625 ........................... 219 BIBLIOGRAPHY.......................................... 223 v ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE FOOTNOTES Add. MSS: Additional Manuscripts Alumni Cant.: John Venn and J. A. Venn, eds., Alumni Cantabrigienses. .to 1751 Alumni Qxon.: Joseph Foster, ed., Alumni Qxonienses: the Members of the University of Oxford. 1500-1714 A. P. C.: Acts of the Privy Council B. I. H. R. s Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research B. M.: British Museum C. J.: Journals of the House of Commons C. S. P. Dorn.: Calendar of State Papers. Domestic C. S. P. Ven.t Calendar of State Papers. Venetian Commons Debates. 1625: Samuel R. Gardiner, ed., Debates of the House of Commons in 1625 D. N. B.: Dictionary of National Biography E. H. R.: English Historical Review Gardiner, History: Samuel R. Gardiner, History of England from the Accession of Jame3 I to the Outbreak of the Civil War H. M, C.: Historical Manuscript Commission H. of L. MSS: House of Lords Manuscripts J. M. H.: Journal of Modern History L. J.1: Journals of the House of Lords P. R. 0.: Public Record Office S. P. D.: State Papers Domestic V. C. H.:. The Victoria History of the Counties of England vi CHAPTER I THE HEM REIGN June 22, 1625 Sir Benjamin Rudyard To say this is the first Parliament of the King is no great matter, but that the first Parliament of the King should have temperate proceedings and prosperous success is a matter of extraordinary consideration and consequence; for it is commonly seen that the same influence which governs in the beginning of an action influences itself throughout and continues to the end* • No one in England could have more accurately prophesied the future course of King Charles I's relations with his Parliaments than Sir Benjamin Rudyard did in his speech made so early in the opening Parliament of the reign* That this opening Parliament, the Parliament of 1625, was turbulent and defiant is well known, but the crucial question to be answered is why it proved so turbulent, so defiant* Charles I had been on the throne only eleven weeks when he met Parliament* The future of England appeared very bright; Is* R. Gardiner (ed.). Debates in the House of Commons in 1625 (Camden Society, 1873), VI, 9* 1 his accession had been greeted on all sides with exclamations of joy. "All fears and sorrowes are swallowed up in joy of so hopeful a successor", remarked one contemporary.2 Even Sir John ELiot, the prominent parliamentarian, rejoiced; "a new spirit of life and comfort possessed all men as if the old Genius of the Kingdom, having with Endymion slept an age, were now awakened again. Most Englishmen who expressed such feelings probably based them upon sheer speculation, for little was known of the new King who, unlike his father, was withdrawn, had few friends, and preferred silence to talk. One thing was certain, he would be a welcome change from James. Possessing a dignified carriage, he cut a more regal figure than James I; and popular rumor portrayed him as diligent in the conduct of his private and public affairs, frugal in his expenditures, and zealous in the profession of his religion. But the principal reason for the joy expressed at his accession lay in the fact that since 1623 he had been a leading proponent of a war with Spain. Charles's actions in the first weeks of his reign only seemed to confirm these 2Sir Henry Ellis (ed.), Original Letters Illustratiye__of English History. 2d series (London, 1827), III, 244. 3sir John ELiot, Negotium Posterorum (1881), I, ^1. rumors. It assuredly appeared that "God hath sent him over this ii Kingdom as a blessing." King James "of Blessed and Glorious memory" had died at his favorite hunting lodge, Theobalds, on March 27, and his son wasted no time in taking up the reins of government. Arriving at St. Jame3 Palace on the following day, Charles ordered the Lord Keeper, Bishop John Williams, to continue using the old Great Seal until a new one could be designed, and called for the Privy Councillors of his father to be sworn in as his own. Sir Humphrey May, the talented Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, was the only addition to the old council, while two Catholic lords, Wotton and Baltimore were dismissed. The Council met this same day to authorize the issuance of new commissions and patents to all Crown officials, and to make preparations for informing the world of James't death, for burying the old King, and for the Coronation.-^ There was widespread hope, at least in Court circles and possibly in all political circles, that Charles would rule ^H. M. C., R. R. Hastings Esq. MSS (London, 1930), II, 6?; A. C. Edwards (ed.). English History from Essex Sources. 1550-1750 (Chelmsford, 1952). p. 69; C. S. P. Ven.. i6z5-ZZz6 (London, 1913)* XIX* 4; Thomas Birch (ed.J. The Court and Times of Charles the First (London, 1848), II, 8-10. Henry Hallam presents the opposite view of Charles's reception to the throne. Hallam, Constitutional History. I, 367* 5p. R. 0., S. P. D., 16/1«5; B. M., Add. MSS 17,994, f. 40; B. M., King's MSS 1 3, 6 ff. 69-69v; C. S. P. Yen.. XIX, 12; John Hacket, Sorinia Reserata (1693), part II, 4. See Appendix A for the Privy Council in 1625. through the Privy Council and be his own chief minister, consequently not relying on any one favorite as his father had done. But, if this were so, what did the future hold for James's favorite, Qeorge Villiers, Duke of Buckingham? Many men did ponder Buckingham's fate, fondly recalling the early disagreements he had had with Charles, but the King's actions immediately made it apparent that the Duke's position and power were not to be curtailed.