John 1584-1643 Pym

Long Parliament.

When the king was forced to call the Long Parliament (Nov. 3), Pym was its acknowledged author and leader. On Nov. 7 he moved for a sub-committee to examine into Strafford's conduct in Ireland. The latter's sudden arrival at Lon don on the 9th with the intention of instantly impeaching the popular leaders of treason was met by Pym with corresponding quickness and resolution. On the nth, after a debate of four hours in the Commons, by his directions with locked doors, he carried up Strafford's impeachment to the Lords, and rendered him at once powerless.

On Dec. 6 he moved the impeachment of Laud. He was the chief promoter of the case against Strafford, while the attempts of the' queen to gain him over were without result, and Jan. 28, 1641 he brought up to the Lords the list of charges. To the attainder, which was at this stage resolved upon, he was opposed (since he clung to the more judicial procedure by impeachment), but when overruled he supported it, at the same time procuring that the legal arguments should not be interrupted. He delivered his final speech on April 13, a great oratorical performance, when he again appealed to the Elizabethan political faith and to that of Bacon, who had so severely censured any action which divided the king from the nation. The man who violated this union was guilty of the blackest treason. "Shall it be treason," he asked, "to embase the King's coin though but a piece . . . of sixpence . . .

and not to embase the spirits of his subjects; to set a stamp

and character of servitude upon them?" Towards the end of his tre mendous indictment of Strafford, Pym broke down, fumbled among his papers, and lost the thread of his argument. But his temporary failure did not diminish the force and effect of his words, all the more impressive because actually spoken in the presenge of the sovereign. "I believe," wrote Baillie (Letters, i. 348) "the king never heard a lecture of so free language against his idolized prerogative." Attempts were now once more made to gain over Pym to the administration. He had two interviews with the king, but without result, and Charles again determined to resort to force. On May 2 he endeavoured to get possession of the Tower. On the 3rd the Protestation, on Pym's motion, was taken by the Commons within closed doors, and afterwards circulated in the country, and on the sth Pym disclosed the army plot. These incidents decided the struggle and Strafford's fate. Pym also took the lead in the re ligious controversy. During the dispute between the two houses on this question on Feb. 8-9, 1641, while supporting the London petition for the abolition of the bishops, he had declared his opinion that "it was not the intention of the House to abolish episcopacy or the Book of Common Prayer, but to reform both wherein offence was given to the people." This, no doubt, ex

pressed his real intentions and policy. When, however, it became clear that the bishops were merely the nominees of the king to carry out "innovations in religion" and preach arbitrary govern ment, Pym was easily persuaded to support their abolition, and voted in opposition to the moderate party for the Root and Branch Bill of May 1641, and again for taking away their votes in Oc tober. But in his "Vindication," published in March 1643, he especially states that his action with regard to the bishops in "no way concluded me guilty of revolt from the orthodox doctrine of the Church of England." The first act in the great political struggle had ended in the complete triumph of Pym. His chief care now was to defend the parliament from violence, since this was the only method of re taliation left at the king's disposal, and on Nov. 2 2 he made a great speech on the Grand Remonstrance, of which he was the chief promoter, when he referred to plots "very near the king, all driven home to the court and popish party." Charles returned on the 25th. He immediately substituted a force commanded by Dorset for the guard already placed at Westminster, but was compelled to withdraw it, and on Pym's motion the house appointed its own watch. Charles appointed Lunsford to the Tower, rejected the Grand Remonstrance and the Impressment Bill, and began to assemble an armed force. In consequence Pym urged, but unsuccessfully, on Dec. 3o the sum moning of the train-bands to guard the parliament, and moved the impeachment of the bishops, who had declared the proceed ings of the parliament to be sinful and illegal. At the critical moment, however, Charles wavered. He renewed his offer to Pym of the exchequer on Jan. 1, 1642, and on his refusal, he determined on the impeachment of the five members on Jan. 3. But these had been forewarned of the king's plans, and when on the 5th he entered the House of Commons with an armed band to seize them, they had removed themselves in safety. (See LENTHAL, WILLIAM.) Charles's first look on entering was for his great op ponent, and he was greatly disconcerted at not finding him in his usual place. To his question "Is Mr. Pym here?" there was no answer, and nothing remained but to retreat with his mission completely unachieved. The second act in the great national drama had thus, as the first, ended in a victory for Pym. On the with the other members, he was escorted in triumph back to Westminster, and while the other four stood uncovered, Pym returned thanks from his place to the citizens.