Charles I and Parliament
Well before Charles I inherited the crown of England, it had been established that the King could not levy taxes upon the populace without the consent of parliament. Thus, it was expected that a Parliament would be summoned at least every few years when the monarch was in need of funds. However, much like his father before him, Charles I did everything he could to avoid summoning parliament. Charles believed in the divine right of kings, and saw little need to consult with anyone about any of his decisions. In addition with the passage of time, various parliaments had continued to push for more and more power at the expense of the king. This left Charles with something of a dilemma, he needed money, but he didn’t want to summon parliament to authorize a tax.
Charles I’s money measures
Instead of a tax, Charles searched for older powers of the king that could be used to raise money. His first move was to resurrect an old law requiring anyone who owned £40 of property to come to London and take up a knighthood. Since £40 no longer represented a huge deal of wealth, many people qualified. However, most people found it easier to pay a penalty than to bother travelling to London. Next, Charles went back through the records to establish his ownership of vast tracts of royal forest and imposed heavy fines on anyone who had encroached on this land. While these two moves irritated many, it was his third scheme that really brought matters to a head.
Charles I’s ship money
In 1634 Charles called upon his ancient prerogative to request ships for the defence of Britain in time of war. While Britain was technically at war with Spain, the Iberian country certainly offered no threat of invasion. Instead of providing ships, all of the counties that bordered the sea, paid a fine instead. The move proved so successful that Charles tried it again the next year, but this time he applied it to all the counties of England, even the land-locked ones. This proved too much for some!
The Case of John Hampden
In Buckinghamshire, the landowner, Justice of the Peace, and former parliamentarian, John Hampden refused to pay, claiming that ship money was a tax without the consent of parliament. Eventually the case went to court, where teams of lawyers debated all facets of the case. Although the court finally found in favour of the king, it was neither a unanimous nor a clear-cut decision. Charles I got his money, but more and more of the landowners were turning against him and his heavy-handed policies.
Taken in isolation, the case of John Hampden and the ship money is just a minor quibble between the king and his subjects, but, as history would later show, the case proved another step down the road to Civil War.
Sources
The English Civil War by David Clark, Pocket Essentials, 2008
God’s Fury, England’s Fire by Michael Braddick, Allen Lane 2008
Joseph Allen McCullough - Joseph A. McCullough was born in the town of Greensboro, NC, site of the Battle of Guildford Courthouse. In 1994, he graduated from the ...
Join the Conversation