A HISTORY OF NORFOLK 



of war were demanded of Norwich and were refused. Two writs of quo 

 warranto were brought against the city, but were discharged, the citizens 

 ' having proved that they used nor usurped no privileges but what their 

 charters then produced authorised them to do.' ^ That the writ for ship 

 money was constitutional as far as the maritime counties were concerned 

 there can be no doubt, and at first it met with little opposition, and the fleet 

 which its proceeds provided in 1635—6 was eminently successful against 

 the pirates. 



In 1629 the House voted the illegality of tonnage and poundage 

 assessed without Parliamentary authority. Irritated at this the king sent 

 his usher of the Black. Rod to bring away the mace, but the door of the 

 House was closed against him. He next sent his captain of the guards, 

 but one of the Norfolk members. Sir Miles Hobart, locked the door, put 

 the key in his pocket, and held the Speaker down in his chair while the 

 House adopted the historical protests against levying tonnage and poundage, 

 and declared that anyone paying them should be reputed a betrayer of 

 the liberties of England and an enemy of the same. For this, Hobart 

 was apparently sent to prison at the Gatehouse, whence he escaped, but 

 was afterwards tried ' for misdemeanour in his carriage in the House of 

 Commons ' and discharged on giving securities for his good behaviour. 

 It is interesting to note that on his death the Long Parliament voted 

 j^5,ooo to his children in recompense of his services in opposing illegalities 

 in the House. 



By 1638 the movement against ship money was rapidly spreading. 

 Crops had been bad for some time and the whole county was impoverished. 

 This is shown by the petition^ of the citizens of Norwich in 1635 against 

 having to contribute a third part of the setting forth of two ships from the 

 port of Yarmouth, the cost of which will be ^(^3,000. 'They plead the 

 miserable and desolate condition of the city, by inundations of water, the 

 grievous contagion of the plague there and in London, which has caused 

 them severe losses, so that they are so weakened that they can scarcely bear 

 their own taxations for the relief of the poor. Notwithstanding all this they 

 have contributed to the loan of five subsidies, but they beg discharge of this 

 heavy burden.' Had the times been prosperous the tax would probably 

 have been paid and not more grumbled at than most taxes, but now the 

 payment was inconvenient to all and impossible to many. Still there seems 

 to have been little or no disaffection at this time in the county ; the only 

 mention of any disloyalty being a case at Norwich, in 1639. Here a man 

 whose name is not given is said to have been indicted and found guilty, 

 though afterwards respited, for saying that ' the Covenanters have a good 

 cause before God, but an ill cause before men ; that they have spoiled a good 

 cause by the ill managing of it, and that they have a good cause to draw their 

 swords in.' ^ The county seems to have responded very well to the call for 

 soldiers to accompany the king in 1639 on his marching against the Scots, 

 who were seeking a Parliament of their own, for 15,000 men of the trained 

 bands were, according to the reports of the deputy-lieutenants of Norfolk, 

 handed over to Sir Simon Harecourt for service in the north.* Norfolk and 



' Blomefield, op. cit. iii, 374. ' Cal. S. P. Dom. 1625-49, p. 521 (158). 



• Ca/. S.P. Dom. 1639, P- 99 (99)- * Ibid 212 (137). 



506 



