Relations between the early Stuart monarchs and their many successive Parliaments had never exuded a spirit of cooperation in the national interest, but they had stumbled along for almost three decades before reaching a head on March 10th, 1629. On this day in history, Charles I dissolved Parliament marking the start of his personal rule (or eleven year’s tyranny, as some Parliamentarians called it).
The main reasons for the dissolution were several related financial issues. Charles I believed it was his royal prerogative to collect duties in the form of tonnage and poundage. He was discontented when, in 1625, Parliament had forbidden him from collecting revenue in this way after a year, against long – standing custom. When the King effectively ignored Parliament’s demands, they presented him with the more forceful Petition of Right in 1628.
A second group of issues which were to be discussed in the 1629 session of Parliament were those concerning religion. The King was a supporter of the Arminian faction within the Church of England, and had filled eight prominent sees with Arminian bishops since the start of his reign. This was unpopular in Parliament, where a prominent Calvinist faction opposed the “Popish” nature of Arminianism.
Owing to the actions of radical MPs like Eliot, the King realised that it was very unlikely that he would receive the concessions he desired from Parliament, and he decided to adjourn the session. This was not unusual, as he had done so three times already since his accession. The reasons the dissolution of 1629 is particularly notable are twofold: firstly, the scenes that ensued in Parliament were little short of riotous; secondly, Parliament would not be recalled for more than a decade.
In order to adjourn Parliament on the King’s command, the Speaker, Sir John Finch, rose to speak. Before he could do so, he was held in his chair by Sir John Eliot, Denzil Holles, and Benjamin Valentine as the Commons passed three motions against the growth of Arminianism, and the collection of duties without Parliament’s consent.
After the prorogation, Charles I arrested, and imprisoned without trial nine of the most radical MPs for what the King termed “undutiful and seditious carriage in the lower house.” Their arguments about parliamentary privileges providing total freedom of speech in the House were not accepted by the King, and only those who confessed were released – Eliot died in the Tower.
While it cannot be said that the prorogation set the nation on an irrevocable path toward civil war, it was certainly indicative of the sovereign’s attitude towards cooperation with Parliament. The King viewed them as secondary, and only a means to acquire funds, which proved to be his great folly in dealings with his parliament after recalling them in 1640.
–
UK Parliament (2019). Charles I and the Petition of Right. [online] UK Parliament. Available at: https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/parliamentaryauthority/civilwar/overview/petition-of-right/.
Coward, B. and Gaunt, P. (2017). The Stuart age : England, 1603-1714. Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, Ny: Routledge, An Imprint Of The Taylor & Francis Group.