Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 3.djvu/169

Rh king's right hand, and Lindsey, archbishop of Glasgow, at his left, bishop Laud took Glasgow and thrust him from the king with these words:—'Are you a churchman, and want the coat of your order?'—which was an embroidered coat, which he scrupled to wear, being a moderate churchman—and in place of him put in the bishop of Ross at the king's right hand."

This question of the embroidered robes of the Roman hierarchy, which Laud had again introduced, with the high altar, the tapers, chalices, genuflections, and oil of unction, was speedily introduced into parliament, and forced on the reluctant Scots, to whom the whole were abominations. They had voted supplies with a most liberal spirit, and laid on a land tax of four hundred thousand pounds Scotch for six years; but when the king proposed to pass a bill authorising the robes, ceremonies, and rites just mentioned there was a stout opposition. The venerable Lord Melville said plainly to Charles, "I have sworn with your father and the whole kingdom to the confession of faith in which the innovations intended by these articles were solemnly abjured." And the bishop of the Isles told him at dinner that it was said amongst the people that his entrance into the city had been with hosannas, but that it would be changed, like that of the Jews to our Saviour, into, "Away with him, crucify him!" Charles is said to have turned thoughtful, and eaten no more. Yet the next day he as positively as ever insisted on the parliament passing the articles, and pointing to a paper in his hand, said, "Your names are here; I shall know to-day who will do me service, and who will not."

Notwithstanding this, the house voted against it by a considerable majority, there being opposed to it fifteen peers and forty-five commoners; yet the lord-register, under influence of the court, audaciously declared that the articles were accepted by parliament. The earl of Rothes had the boldness to deny this, and to demand a scrutiny of the votes; but Charles intimidated both him and all dissentients by refusing any scrutiny unless Rothes would arraign the lord-register of the capital crime of falsifying the votes. This was a course too perilous for any individual under the circumstances: Rothes was silent; the articles were ratified by the crown, and parliament was forthwith dissolved on the 28th of June.

Having thus carried his point with the parliament, Charles took every means, except that which had brought upon him so much odium in England, namely, imprisoning and prosecuting the members who opposed him, to express his dissatisfaction with them. He distributed lands and honours upon those who had fallen in with his wishes, and treated the dissentients with sullen looks, and even severe words, when they came in his way. They were openly ridiculed by his courtiers, and dubbed schismatics and seditious. Lord Balmerino was even condemned to death for a pamphlet being found in his possession, complaining of the king's arbitrary conduct in these concerns; but the sentence was too atrocious to be executed.

Charles and Laud erected Edinburgh into a bishopric, with a diocese extending even to Berwick, and richly endowed with old church lands, which were surrendered by nobles who held them for a consideration. A set of singing men were also appointed for Holyrood chapel; and Laud, who had been made a privy councillor, preached there in full pontificals, to the great scandal of all good presbyterians. Thence Charles and his apostle made a tour to St. Andrews, Dundee, Falkland, Dunblane, &c., to the singular discomfort of the little churchman amongst the rough fastnesses of the Highlands.

Immediately after this, Charles posted to London in four days, leaving Laud to travel more at leisure. No doubt, both master and man thought they had made a very fine piece of work of this forcing of the Scottish consciences: they were destined in a while to feel what it actually was, in rebellion and the sharp edge of the axe.

Scarcely had they reached London, when they heard the news of the death of archbishop Abbot, and Charles was thus enabled to reward Laud for all his services in building up despotism and superstition by making him primate, which he did on the 6th of August, 1633. It was a curious coincidence that about the same time Laud received a second offer of a cardinal's hat, and he seems to have been greatly tempted by it. He says that he acquainted his majesty with the offer, and that the king rescued him from the trouble and danger; for he adds there was something dwelling in him which would not suffer him to accept the offer till Rome was other than she was. To have accepted a cardinal's hat was to have gone over to the church of Rome, and the church of England was for him a much better thing now he was primate. The only wonder is, that as he had restored the high altars, tapers, confession, the crosier, and the crucifix, he did not introduce a race of Anglican cardinals.

There undoubtedly did at this precise time take place an active but private negotiation betwixt the courts of Rome and England on this topic. The queen was anxious to have the dignity of cardinal conferred on a British subject. Probably she thought that the residence of the English cardinal at London would be a stepping-stone to the full restoration of Catholicism. Towards the end of August, immediately after Laud's elevation to the primacy. Sir Robert Douglas was sent to Rome as envoy from the queen, with a letter of credence, signed by the earl of Stirling, secretary of state for Scotland. His mission was this proposal of an English cardinal, as a measure which would contribute greatly to the conversion of the king. To carry out this negotiation, Leander, an English Benedictine monk, was despatched to England, followed soon after by Panzani, an Italian priest.

From the despatches of Panzani, we find that there existed a strong party at the English court for the return to the allegiance of Rome, amongst whom were secretary Windebank, lord chancellor Cottington, Goodman, bishop of Gloucester, and Montague, bishop of Chichester. He was informed that none of the bishops except three—those of Durham, Salisbury, and Exeter, would object to a purely spiritual supremacy of the pope, and very few indeed of the clergy.

Douglas was followed to Rome by Sir William Hamilton, to prosecute this secret business, but it all came to nothing, for the king, who was seeking absolute power, was not likely to listen to any proposal for submitting again to the