576 



BRITAIN. 



Britain. 



v 



CRLE3 I. 



1C35. 



Trial of 

 Lord Bal. 

 merino. 



Emigration 

 el the Pu- 

 ritans pre- 

 vented. 



lohn 



Hambden 

 prosecuted 

 for the 

 payment of 

 ship- 

 money. 



1637. 



tjharles 

 attempts to 

 force a li- 

 turgy into 

 the Scotch 

 church. 



they had dissented. But when the design was inti- 

 mated to Charles, and the royal displeasure was sig- 

 nified, the petition was abandoned even before it was 

 subscribed. A copy retained by Balmerino, was, 

 however, surreptitiously transcribed, and communi- 

 cated to Hay of Naughton, the personal enemy of 

 that nobleman. Hay remitted it to the archbishop 

 of St Andrews, and Balmerino was imprisoned and 

 brought to trial for its contents. He was not the 

 author of the paper ; he had interlined, with his own 

 hand, the passages which he had thought not suffi- 

 ciently humble in a submissive and inoffensive peti- 

 tion. A jury, industriously selected of such men as 

 were thought desirous of Balmermo's death, were set 

 upon his trial ; yet even these were not unanimous. 

 By a majority of suffrages, he was found guilty of 

 having concealed the paper, and sentence of death 

 was immediately pronounced upon him. The Scotch, 

 however, were in such a ferment, that fear extorted 

 a pardon, which justice and clemency would have de- 

 nied. The people of Edinburgh had held consulta- 

 tions for his release. It was determined to burst 

 open the prison, or, if that attempt should miscarry, 

 to take revenge on his judges, and the eight jurors 

 by whom he had been convicted. Traquair, who 

 had been foreman of the jury, terrified at the danger, 

 soon pleaded at court the policy of sparing Balmeri- 

 no. While the Scotch were thus suffering violation 

 in their religious rights, the Puritans of England were 

 discontented at the prospect of civil as well as religi- 

 ous oppression, and would have gladly sought a re- 

 fuge among the deserts of North America, from their 

 restraints and persecutions. Some of them did es- 

 cape to the new world, and laid the foundation of a 

 free government, which has lasted ever since. But 

 even the liberty of emigration was refused, and eight 

 ships, ready to sail with emigrants from the Thames, 

 were detained. In one of these ships were John 

 Hambden and Oliver Cromwell. In the absence of 

 parliament, the arbitrary principles of the court con- 

 tinued to be put in practice, by the violation of the 

 petition of rights in every article ; and when men 

 were selected for imprisonment by the king and coun- 

 cil, they were refused bail or releasement. 



John Hambden had been rated at twenty shillings 

 of ship-money, for an estate which he possessed in 

 Buckinghamshire. The judges had already declared, 

 that the king might impose the tax of ship-money, in 

 cases of necessity, and that he was sole judge of that 

 necessity. Hambden, not dismayed by this illegal de- 

 claration, nor by all the power of the crown, resolved 

 to stand a legal prosecution, rather than submit to 

 the imposition. The case was argued during twelve 

 days in the exchequer chamber. The prejudiced 

 judges (four excepted,) gave sentence in favour of 

 the crown. Hambden, however, obtained by the 

 trial, the end for which he had generously sacrificed 

 his safety and his quiet. The nation was roused from 

 its lethargy, and their indignation was thoroughly 

 awakened against the arbitrary designs from which 

 the tax had proceeded, and the prostitution of judi- 

 cial authority, which gave sanction to those designs. 



We have already seen in what state of mind Charles 

 had left his Scottish subjects. By an unfortunate at- 

 tempt to force a liturgy into their national church, 



Bri 



1C 



he called their secret discontents into open action. 

 The liturgy destined for Scotland was a little differ- "*"" 

 ent from the English^ but in receding from that ser- * 

 vice, it approached more to the forms of popery, a 

 religion which was never named in Scotland without 

 horror. During the whole week before the new ser- 

 vice was to be performed in the churches of Edin- 

 burgh, the people were agitated by discourses and 

 pamphlets. On Sunday the 23d of July, the dean Oppc 

 of Edinburgh prepared to officiate in St Giles's, and to thi 

 the bishop of Argyle in the Grey Friars' church ; serv '< 

 and to increase the solemnity, each was attended by 

 the judges, prelates, and a part of the council. The 

 congregation in St Giles's continued quiet till the 

 service began, when an old woman, impelled by sud- 

 den indignation, started up, and exclaiming aloud 

 against the supposed mass, threw the stool on which 

 she had been sitting at the dean's head. The service 

 was interrupted by wild uproar, and but for the 

 interposition of the magistrates, the bishop might 

 have been sacrificed at his own altar. When most of 

 the people had retired, and the turbulent had been ex- 

 cluded, the doors were locked, and the service was 

 resumed ; but was soon overpowered by the people 

 from without, who burst open the doors, broke 

 the windows, and rent the air with exclamations of, 

 "A Pope, an Antichrist, stone him, stone him !" 

 With a few exceptions, the prelates were equally un- 

 successful throughout all Scotland in imposing the 

 liturgy. 



The Scottish privy council plainly perceiving the Rem 

 resolution of the whole nation, represented to Charles strarl 

 the difficulty of enforcing the new rites. Their re- the il 

 monstrance had no effect, but to produce a threat P" v p 

 from the sovereign of removing the seat of govern- ', ^f 

 ment from Edinburgh. In the mean time, a conflux 

 of supplicants against the liturgy, from all Scotland, 

 arrived at Edinburgh ; and an accusation against the 

 prelates was subscribed by all ranks, from the peer to 

 the peasant. The citizens of Edinburgh, exasperated 

 at the threat of the seat of government being remo- 

 ved, surrounded the town council house, and demand- 

 ed the replacing the ministers who had been ejected 

 for refusing the liturgy. In this tumult, the princi- 

 pal citizens, and even the wives and sisters of the ma- 

 gistrates, took a share. 



The council, uninstructed by Charles, conceded a 

 most important point to the supplicants, in permit- 

 ting the celebrated Tables, a representative body of 

 nobles, gentry, clergy, and burgesses, to sit perma- 

 nently in Edinburgh, while the multitude dispersed to 

 their homes. An evasive answer from court was in- 

 sufficient to satisfy the public mind. A formal revo- 

 cation of the liturgy was required, and the accusation 

 of the prelates proceeded to be urged by the Tables. 

 A royal proclamation was issued, denouncing the 

 supplicants as traitors ; but the effect was only to sum- 

 mon once more the whole body of those men around 

 their chiefs, and the proclamation was every where 

 met by a protest, held equally legal and sufficient to 

 counteract its effects. 



But the great sera in this religious union of the Thitot 

 Scotch, was the renewal of the national covenant, first renf 4 

 framed at the Reformation, when the lords of the *"< 

 congregation, by their bond or corenant, undertook cov *' 



