NOTES: The Failure to Achieve a Settlement 1646-49

A: Lack Of A Political Settlement 1646-47

1. What were the Newcastle Propositions and why did Charles not agree to them? 
Charles had surrendered to the Scots in Newark (1646) and was then sent to Newcastle. Parliament controlled both the army and Charles's advisors so therefore felt that they had power over him. Whilst he was being held, they sent him the Newcastle Propositions in July. In basic terms, these conditions were a combination of the Nineteen propositions and the Scots agreement of 1643, requiring Charles to agree to: 

• the Solemn League and Covenant
• the abolition of bishops 
• religion to be settled by parliament 
• parliament to agree on how to raise money 
• parliament would take control of the army
• who could not be his advisors

However, Charles was aware that there were divisions within his opponents and therefore he wanted to join with the Scots and try to restart the war to ensure that their religious goals were achieved. Although Charles did not like the strict presbyterianism that the Scots stood by, they might be willing to help restore his power and in the short term he would accept Presbyterianism, but then overturn the religious settlement later. Thus Charles took the opportunity for negotiation and avoided giving an immediate answer. 

Although many people feared radicalisation and saw stability within the restoration of the King's power, there were considerable division between the groups trying to bring about a settlement. Given these divisions, Charles was not willing to play a waiting game, and therefore rejected the Newcastle Propositions. 

2. In addition to Charles, who were the four main groups seeking a settlement in 1646-47 and what did they want?  

1. The Scots: did not like the idea of parliament deciding how the question of religion and the state church would be resolved. Therefore they would later make a separate deal with Charles. 
2. The Levellers: divided among themselves, but had support from the army. They put forward plans that would have democratised England and Wales but that would also have threatened the supremacy of Parliament. 
3. The Parliament Party: divided into the 'Peace Party' and the 'War Party'. They were unpopular because they continued the County Committees and Scottish Presbyterianism. 
4. The Army: divisions among them, Fairfax was not interested in politics and Rainsborough had sympathies with the levellers. 

3. Why was there unrest in the counties and what form did the unrest take? 

Many county gentry had been shocked by the war, but by the end of it they had expected the situation to improve. Instead the New Model Army, County Committees and religious anarchy remained. They expected the army to be disbanded once the war was over, however it remained and the costs of maintaining it continued to rise. The County Committees were often staffed by men of a lower social standing than those who had traditionally ran the counties and their new powers, such as arbitrary arrest, cause discontent. As a result many traditional county rulers resented their loss of status and thus would have welcomed back monarchial rule. 

Radical religious ideas continued to be promoted, which also cause discontent among the counties. The new Presbyterian practice of examining people to see if they were fit for worship also angered many people. Some ministers were also removed, leading to the emergence of radical groups, such as the Ranters who denied the existence of sin . 

These developments soon led to petitions from counties and ultimately revolt, which would lead to the outbreak of the Second Civil War. In 1644 parliament had passed an ordinance which limited religious festivals and in late 1647, the Kent County Committee issued an order emphasising that Christmas had been abolished and that shops were to open as if it was a normal working da. This led to riots in Canterbury of Christmas day and although the rebels were put on trial, the jury would not convict them. 

4. Why did relations between Parliament and the army break down in 1647? 

The Scots handed Charles over to parliament in early 1647 and taken to Holdenby House in Northamptonshie. On May 18 he presented his answers to the Newcastle Propositions:

• the 20 year militia control by parliament reduced to 10 
• discussions about a Presbyterian church 
• his supporters not to be persecuted 
• not to give up his right to choose his ministers or military appointments. 

These demands appeared to suggest that a compromise with parliament was possible, but the political siuation had changed and the army's influence and power had increased. 

In early 1647 the leaders of the 'Peace' group in parliament had sought to increase their control and reduce the radicals by getting rid of the army, which would also help to reduce expenditure, and in 1647 they ordered its disbandment. However, the proposals meant that where regiments were maintained, the officers would be replaced and soldiers would lose sympathisers with radical religious views and that those who would replace them were more conservative. 

At first the soldiers petitioned Fairfax for settlement of pay and indemnity. These requests were dismissed by parliament who, on 30 March, published the 'Declaration of Dislike' declaring that the petitioners were 'enemies of the state and disturbers of the peace', angering the soldiers. On May 25 the Commons voted for an immediate disbandment of the New Model Army and offered on 8 weeks back pay. This changed attitudes among the army as it began to take on more of a political role. The rank and file soldiers believed that their views were being ignored and that parliament was trying to get rid of them because of the radical views that had developed and the financial burden that they had created. On 31 May 2 regiments mutinied as they believed that they were being betrayed by conservative MPs who were willing to come to an agreement with Charles which went against everything that they had fought for. 

5a. The Representation of the Army

In order to prevent the agreement the army seized the King at Holdenby on 4 June and took him to Newmarket. On 5 June the army accepted the Solemn Engagement and agreed not to disband until they achieved a settlement over arrears of pay and an agreement had been reached with Charles I. It also established a General Council of Officers to co-ordinate the campaign. Oliver Cromwell then left London to join the army, making clear his support for the cause. The army published the Representation which outlined the army's political programme: 

• a purging of corrupt MPs 
• Parliament to be dissolved 
• New parliament to be of fixed length
• The church to be reformed 
• Liberty given to 'tender consciences', which allowed those who did not believe that the state Church was the true church to continue to worship in their own voluntary congregations 

The Representation made it clear that any settlement would have to involve the army. These developments caused panic, particularly in London, as mobs came out and were difficult to control. A number of MPs fled and some support shifted from parliament to Fairfax and Cromwell, believing that they could better control the radicals of the army and prevent chaos. 

b. The Heads of Proposals

Although the army now had power, it was divided between moderates and radicals, and there was still the problem of the king exploiting divisions. The officers of the army, led by Fairfax and Ireton, drew up their version of the settlement, the 'Heads of Proposals', which was presented to Charles and published on August 1. It called for:

• biennal parliaments 
• election to the Commons to be in proportion to the taxable wealth of the counties
• the militia to be under the control of parliament for 10 years
• the main officers of the realm to be under the control of parliament for 10 years 
• the authority of bishops to be removed 
• the use of the Common Prayer book to be abolished and the Covenant not to be enforced 
• the royal family to be restored without any other limits 

However the Problem with this solution was that it represented the views of the Officers and not the ordinary soldiers as they believed that it was too accommodating to the King. Charles also felt that he did not need to come to an agreement as he saw the divisions between his enemies as something that he could benefit from. He was also reluctant to hand over control of the militia or religion to the extent that the 'Heads' required. He therefore delayed his his response. 

c. The Agreement of the People

With the 'Heads of Proposals' the divisions in the army became more apparent and radicals within the army offered an alternate solution. They produced the 'Agreement of the People' on 28 October 1647, (a less provocative version of their initial document, the 'Case of the Army Truly Stated'). It stated that:

• abolition of imprisonment for debt 
• taxation in proportion to real or personal property
• abolition of military conscription, monopolies and excise taxes  
• No-one could be punished for refusing to testify against themselves in criminal cases
• Equality of all persons before the law

This was ignored by the King. 

6. Why was it so difficult to achieve a political settlement in the period 1646-7? 

On 11 November, Charles escaped from army custody and made his way to Carisbrook Castle on the Isle of Wight. This gave him access to France and the possibility of renewing the war. 

A settlement had proved impossible for a number of reasons, but mainly due to the King and his actions: 

• He was aware of the divisions among his enemies and planned to exploit them in order to regain his power
• He knew that gentry families feared radicalism and looked to him as the upholder of stability 
• He knew that the Scots disliked the English religious proposals and therefore may be willing to reach an agreement with him that could restore at least some of his power. 
• He knew that there were divisions in parliament with the 'Peace' and 'War' parties, which he wanted to exploit

As a result Charles felt that he could avoid reaching a settlement and that as time passed, his position would be strengthened and eventually restored. This view had been encouraged by the terms of the 'Heads', which were a significant improvement on the earlier terms that parliament had offered him. 

At the same time, Charles's opponents had also miscalculated, as they believed the King would except that his military defeat was final, but he did not. Any settlement would need the Kings approval, he also had Scotland and Ireland which, given time, he might have been able to use against his enemies. Therefore he felt no rush in coming to a final agreement. 

B: The Emergence of Radicalism 

7. Why was religious radicalism important for the emergence of political radicalism? 

Religious radicals were a direct challenge to the concept of hierarchy and obedience. These groups were given encouragement in the years before the outbreak of the Civil War as the attack on bishops in the years 1640-42 led to a collapse of censorship, allowing a free press to develop and radical arguments and ideas to be expressed. Separatist Churches flourished, with the following notable developments:

• 1641: London General Baptists hold a joint conference 
• 1643: Seven Churches of the London Particular Baptists issue a joint Confession of Faith
• 1644: The first Congregational Church founded, in Hull
• 1645: Congregational Church established in Canterbury 
• 1646: Six Congregational churches established in Yorkshire

These groups were demanding that any settlement should grant them the right to worship as they wanted. Any arguments to justify religious toleration resulted in theories about rights and freedoms. Although the actual numbers were small, their ideas worried conservatives. This was given greater credence by two important developments; the emergence of the radical Leveller movement in London in 1646 and the apparent strength of the radical ideas in the New Model Army. 

8. What were the origins of the Levellers and who were their leaders? 

The Levellers emerged from the campaign for religious toleration which had started in London in 1644. The leading figures of the group were John Lilburne, William Walwyn and Richard Overton and they were all religious separatists. They argued for complete freedom of worship and belief as a right. Their activities worried conservatives, who tried to stop them. Lilburne was arrested for slandering the Speaker of the Commons, but complained about imprisonment without a proper trial, accused parliament of tyranny and argued for social and legal equality. He was arrested again for slander against the House of Lords and was imprisoned. Demonstrations and marches followed in London and a petition was presented to the Commons, 'A Remonstrance of Many Thousand Citizens'.  

9. Where did the Levellers gain support and how widespread was it?
The levellers emerged from the campaign for religious toleration which had started in London 1644. The leading figures, men such as: John Lilburne, William Walwyn and Richard Overton who were all religious separatists. The three formed a radical group arguing for complete freedom of belief and worship of as a right. These activities worried conservatives. Lilburne was arrested for slandering the speaker for the commons but complained about about imprisonment without a proper trial and accused parliament tyranny and argued for social and legal equality. He was again arrested for slander against the house of Lords and was imprisoned, but used this to demand further political reform. Demonstrations and marches followed in London and a petition was presented to the Commons 'A Remonstrance Of Many Thousand Citizens'.

Soliders:
Parliament might ignore such petitions, but they were concerned about growing radicalism in the army. Soldiers were often debating amongst themselves and protecting separatists in the areas they were stationed.

Meanwhile Cromwell himself was concerned about the threat to the social hierarchy and order posed by the Levellers as he made clear both during the Putney Debates and afterwards. Parliament had rejected the 'Remonstrance of Many Thousand Citizens' and this encouraged them to look for support elsewhere, with support from ordinary soldiers, they put forward the 'Case of The Army Truly Stated' and then the 'Agreement of the People'. Due to these documents and growing fears among the officers, Cromwell agreed to meet in Putney. This resulted in the Putney Debates which lasted between October 28th to November 8th 1647. With the arguments making no progress, Cromwell called for the entire army to be called together together for consultation. However, in order to split the agitators, there were three meeting-points. At Corkbush Field a mutiny occurred. The army leaders responded by imposing martial law and arresting leaders, shooting one, Richard Arnold. This ended short term trouble.

10. What was the Impact of Radicalism? 
The emergence of radical groups in the period of 1646-1647 made it harder to find a settlement due to the king after the first Civil War. However, the failure was also due to the attitude of the king and the demands made by the Parliament. The ideas of the Levellers and radical within the army simply added another group to the problem. But given Charles view of the monarchy it was unlikely that it would have been possible to reach an agreement even within the influence of radicalism. Radicalism had only influenced only a small number of people and spread only because of the conditions created by the Civil War. Despite these limits, radicalism did raise issues that could not be ignored. Levellers political and social ideas may have been contained, but it was much more difficult to contain religious radicalism. This growth resulted in the rise of a new force which claimed a role in shaping the government and argued that it was justified by the will of God, bringing revolutionary element to the attempts to find a settlement.

C: The Second Civil War 1647-1648:

11. Why did Charles and the Scots agree to the Engagement:

Four days before the events at Corkbush Field that Charles escaped from army control. When charles reached the Isle of Wight he received a Scottish delegation, preferring to ally with them, in hope of gaining some power back, instead of resuming talks with Parliament. The Scots recognised that their best hope of ensuring that Presbyterian worship established was through an alliance with Charles rather then an anti-presbyterian army with parliament. Therefore they signed the Engagement with Charles on 26th December 1647, Charles agreed to:

• There would be Presbyterian worship for three years followed by a free debate on how the church should be governed
• The suppression of radical groups, such as: Anabaptists and separatists.
• Armies would be disbanded, except the Scots army which would be sent to England to preserve religious and protect the monarchy. 

This was a very good deal for Charles as it would unlikely England would convert to Presbyterian in three years and a meeting after three years would overturn the changes. It also provided him with a force which would be able to deal with the new Model army. There was also support for a return to familiar force of government in England supported by Riots in placed such as Canterbury. 

However with Charles's escape, there was a strong feeling that Charles could not be trusted and this was reflected by parliament passing a vote of 'No Further Addresses' meaning there would be no further negotiation with the King in January 1648. 

12. Why is the engagement considered a turning point in relations between the king, parliament and the army? And 
13. What Was the Course of the Second Civil War?
A turning point had been reached. Previously men such as Cromwell, Fairfax and Breton had been committed to negotiations with the King but they viewed his dealing with the Scots as treachery and threw their support behind the views of the rank and file in the army. Therefore a republican solution to the constitutional problem now became a possibility.
Despite the development, it did not quell disturbances and some gentry organised petitions calling for a treaty with the King and the disbanding of the army. There was unrest in London, Norwich and Kent, Essex and South Wales, but these disturbances were put down. These were followed by royalist rising in Cornwall, Yorkshire and Wales, and although most were short lived it was an indication of the polarised views. The New Model Army under Cromwell was sent to deal with the unrest in Wales, while Fairfax besieged Colchester, which had been taken by royalists.
The situation changed further in July when the Scottish Army entered England. Unfortunately Charles their progress had been slow to raise forces. They finally entered Lancashire, which they were further hampered by John Lamprets Yorkshire troops. This delay meant that Cromwell had finished putting down the unrest in Wales and was able to go north. The Scottish army was caught on August 17th and within two days the much large the siege of Colchester continued for a few more days and there were a few pockets of resistance elsewhere. Charles had played no part in the war but had been closely guarded by Carisbrooke. The victory of the New Model Army mean that his fate now depended upon them.

D: The Execution of Charles I

14. Why did the army decide that Charles must be put on trial? 

Although the new Model Army had won the second civil war, which increased both their influence and power and the unrest that had engulfed much of the country indicated that many people did not like the attempts to reform either political or religious life. This was reflected when parliament withdrew its 'no addresses' and in September sent representatives to all to the King. But the army had no intention of allowing to agreement between the King and parliament. It argued that Charles could not be trusted and therefore was no point in trying to reach an agreement with him. More importantly it argued that he had forfeited his right to be regarded as Gods anointed. The army claimed that he had rejected God's verdict through his defeat in the First Civil War and therefore God himself and should lose his divine status and answer for his crimes. 

It is important to understand the significance of the belief in God's providence if the developments that followed in the autumn of 1648. The belief that God directed human behaviour according to his will was not confined to radicals. The task was to work out what that will was and then direct their actions in pursuit of this. Charles's opponents believed that Charles went against Gods will and therefore he should be brought to justice. The second Civil War therefore convinced people that Charles should pay for his crimes and untrustworthiness, but it convinced others that it was Gods will and it gave Cromwell the motive for drastic actions.  

15. Why did Prides Purge take place in December 1648?

Parliament refused to debate the Army Remonstrance and on 5th December voted to continue negotiations with Charles at Carisbrooke, believing his answers were for a basis for a settlement. The armies wishes were ignored and therefore they acted. The following day, at 7am 1000 members if the New Model Army blocked the entrance to parliament and as members arrived Colonel Pride produced a list of those to be prevented from entering. The most prominent supporters of the King were arrested. Cromwell returned to London on 7th December after initially being unsure whether to support the purge. 

The purge did not mean that Charles's trial and execution were guaranteed. After all it was parliament but its actions in agreeing to continue to negotiate with the King, that had precipitated the purge and it could therefore be a defensive measure by the army. It was events in december that brought Charles to trial. Cromwell attempted the persuade Charles to make some concessions but he refused and this appears to have convinced Cromwell of the need for a trial as the King as obstructing God's will. If there was going to be a trial for Charles, it would be public. However this meant that is Charles was found not guilt then a settlement would be harder to come to. As well, if he was found guilt he would be executed, this would cause public storms and unease. 

16. What happened during the trial of Charles I?

The decision to establish a High Court to try Charles was made on January 1st 1645 by the Rump. The remaining Lords objected to this, but the commons simply ignored him. Charles was the first european monarch to be put on public trial. Time was spent establishing a jury and judge for the trial. Te trial finally began on January 20th 1649, with john bradshaw as the lord president of the court., while the barrister, john cook, presented these charges. According to the charges, Charles was:

'A tyrant, traitor and murderer and a public implacable enemy to the commonwealth of England.' 

The court claimed that he had waged war on Parliament, fronted commissions to the Irish rebels and was responsible for all the damage that ensued. Charles respond by:

'Remember i am your lawful king I have trust committed to me by God' 

Disputing that the court had any right to try him, Charles refused to plea and claimed that 'The commons of England was never a court of Judicature.' and that 'I so stand more for the liberty of my people than any here that come to be my pretended judges.'
Charles was brought back for the verdict on January 27th. In a final statements to Charles, Bradshaw stated:

'There is contract between the King and his people for as you are that beige-lord, so they are liege-subjects the one bond his the bond of protection that id due from sovereign. Sir, if this is to be broken, farewell sovereignty! Whether you have been a protector of England let all England judge.'

The was followed by this sentence being read out:

'That she said Charles stuart, as tyrant, traitor and murderer and public enemy shall be put to death by the severing of his head from his body.' 

Charles was denied the right to respond and on the 30th January was taken to the scaffold where he made a speech:

'Truly I desire their liberty and freedom as much as anybody; but I must tell you that their liberty and freedom consists in having of government.. a subject and a sovereign are clean different things. I die christian according to the profession of the church of England.'

Cromwell and his allies might argue that they acred correctly in the eye os of God, but in the eyes of the law their actions had been illegal. It was this that would continue to haunt regimes until the restorations in 1660 make it possible to achieve a settlement.

Charles death was followed by the abolition of the monarchy and the House of Lords. This left a purged commons, the rump to rule alongside a Council in state. The army still remained and they would have to deal with royalists, Presbyterians, Scots, Irish and further leveller unrest. The Republic, known as the commonwealth, face by challenges.