fresh apprentices, with swords, cudgels, and other weapons, crying, "Slash us now! Slash us now!" And this was renewed by thousands the next day, December 28th, with the same "Slash us now, whilst we wait on the honourable house to request an answer to our petition." Some of the youths were shut into the abbey and brought before Williams, whilst those without cried, that if they were not released, they would break in, and pull down the organs. This, however, they were prevented doing, by numbers of the bishop's men coming out on the abbey leads, and flinging down stones upon them, by which many were injured; and Sir Richard Wiseman, who happened to be passing, was so much hurt, that he died of his injuries.
Williams, the archbishop, was so incensed at the cry against the bishops, that he forgot his usual cunning, and got eleven other bishops to join him in an address to the king, declaring that the bishops could not get to their places for the riotous crowds, and from fear of their lives from them; and therefore, as bishops had at all times formed part and parcel of the upper house, that house, so long as they were detained from it, was no longer a competent house, and that all its acts, of whatever kind, would be utterly invalid. This was supposed to be a manœuvre of the king's to get rid of the authority of parliament for the present, and thus of his unfortunate surrender of the powers of adjournment; but the lords, taking no other notice of the protest of the bishops, desired a conference with the commons, and then denounced the protest of the bishops as subversive of the fundamental rights of parliament. The commons, on their part, instead of contenting themselves with passing a resolution condemnatory of the folly of the bishops, at once declared them guilty of high treason, and called on the lords to apprehend them, which was at once done, and ten of the bishops were committed to the Tower, and two, on account of their age, to the keeping of cha usher of the black rod.
On the last day of this eventful year, Denzell Hollis waited on his majesty, by order of the commons, to represent to him, that whilst his faithful parliament was ready to shed the last drop of its blood in defence of his majesty, it was itself daily exposed to the danger of plots and ruffians who had dared to shed the blood of the people coming to petition at the very doors of the house. They demanded, therefore, a guard. Charles had taken care to surround his own palace day and night since the commotions. Such a guard was reluctantly granted three days after.
But if 1641 had been an astonishing year, 1642 was destined to cast even it into the shade, and its very opening was with nothing short of the first trumpet note of civil war. On the 3rd of January Charles sent his answer to the commons respecting the guard, acceding to the request, but immediately following it up by a demand that electrified the houses, and was soon to electrify the nation. Whilst the commons were debating on the royal message, the king's new attorney-general, Herbert, appeared at the bar of the house of lords, and presented articles of high treason against six leading members of parliament, one peer and five commoners. These members were, lord Kimbolton in the peers, and Hollis, Hazelrig, Pym, Hampden, and Strode, of the commons. There were seven articles exhibited against them of high treason and other misdemeanour. These were stated in the following words:—"1st, That they have traitorously endeavoured to subvert the fundamental laws and government of the kingdom of England, to deprive the king of his royal power, and to place in subjects an arbitrary and tyrannical power over the lives, liberties, and estates of his majesty's liege people. 2nd, That they have traitorously endeavoured, by many foul aspersions upon his majesty and his government, to alienate the affections of his people, and to make his majesty odious unto them. 3rd, That tiny have endeavoured to draw his majesty's late army to disobedience to his majesty's commands, and to side with them in their traitorous designs. 4th, That they have traitorously invited and encouraged a foreign power to invade his majesty's kingdom of England. 5th, That they have traitorously endeavoured to subvert the rights and the very being of parliaments. 6th, That for the completing of their traitorous designs, they have endeavoured, so far as in them lay, by force and terror, to compel the parliament to join with them in their traitorous designs, and to that end have actually raised and countenanced tumults against the king and parliament. 7th, And that they have traitorously conspired to levy, and actually have levied war against the king."
Now, setting aside some of the usual technicalities of such impeachments, it cannot be dented that there was a great deal of truth in these charges. It is not to be denied that the commons had by this time far overstepped their ancient and hereditary functions, had obviously and extensively invaded the prerogatives of the crown; had seized on the right to adjourn or to sit in defiance of the king; had seized on his majesty's right to raise, direct, and employ the army and the militia; had charged him with treasonable practices against the parliament and people; had beheaded one of his ministers; still held in durance another; and had driven others from the realm for executing his commands. It was true that they had called on the Scots with an army to hold him in check, and make war on him if necessary; any one of which acts, or a mere design of such an act, in Henry VIII's time, would have brought them to the block long ago. We have been going on, step by step, from one aggression of the commons to another, for these sixteen years, till we do not recognise, in any lively degree, the strange ground on which we now stand, and it is necessary to look back a little in order to see how it has come about. Charles began with insisting on the right to levy tonnage and poundage and ship-money without permission of parliament; in fact, to make the right of raising taxes at pleasure, in defiance of parliament, the right of the crown. Then its commons were on just and constitutional ground; they fought the battle bravely, and compelled the king to give up his claim. Here, then, with a wise king, there would have been an end of trouble; but Charles was not that wise king. It was soon seen that with the most solemn assurances of his faith, he never for a moment abandoned the idea of wresting this right still from the parliament and people. His advisers, Wentworth and Laud, pointed out the army as the means of putting down the parliament, and that system of the "Thorough" was adopted by them, which was to raise the supremacy of the army, backed by the church, and enable
