A History of the British Army, Vol. 1: First Part—to the Close of the Seven Years' WarFortescue, J. W. (John William), Sir
History
A History of the British Army, Vol. 1: First Part—to the Close of the Seven Years' War
Fortescue, J. W. (John William), Sir
Great Britain -- History, Military; Great Britain. Army -- History
The campaign in the north was speedily ended by the advance of
the Scots and by the rout of the small English detachment that
guarded the fords of the Tyne at Newburn. The Scots then occupied
Newcastle, and England to all intent lay at their mercy. Nothing
could have better suited the opponents of the king. A treaty was
patched up at Ripon which amounted virtually to an agreement to
subsidise the Scotch army in the interest of the Parliament. The
Scots consented to stay where they were in consideration of eight
hundred and fifty pounds a day, failing the payment of which it was
open to them to continue their march southward and impose their own
terms. Charles could not possibly raise such a sum without recourse
to Parliament, and the assembly with which he had now to do was
that which is known to history as the Long Parliament. Within seven
months it had passed an Act to prevent its dissolution without its
own consent, and having thus secured itself, it allowed the English
army to be disbanded, while the Scots, having played their part,
retired once more across the Tweed.
[Sidenote: 1641-2.]
[Sidenote: 1642.]
It would be tedious to follow the widening of the breach during
the year 1641. Both parties saw that war was inevitable, and both
struggled hard to keep the militia each in its own hands. The
scramble was supremely ridiculous, since it was all for a prize
not worth the snatching. Charles has been censured for throwing
the whole military organisation out of gear because he wished to
employ it for other objects than the safety of the kingdom, but it
would be difficult, I think, for any one to explain what military
organisation existed. By the showing of the Parliamentary lawyers
themselves, there was no statute to regulate it except the Statute
of Winchester; in strictness there was no legal requirement for men
to equip themselves otherwise than as in the year 1285. It was to
the party that first made an army, not to that which preferred the
sounder claim to regulate the militia, that victory was to belong.
Strafford had perceived this long before, but three years were yet
to pass before Parliament should realise it. The few movements
worth noting in the scramble may be very briefly summarised. The
king reluctantly consented to transfer the power of impressment
to the justices of the peace with approval of Parliament, and
abandoned his right to compel men to service outside their
counties. But he refused to concede to Parliament the nomination of
lord-lieutenants or the custody of strong places, and Parliament
therefore simply arrogated to itself these privileges without
further question. In July the Commons resolved to levy an army of
ten thousand men, in August the King unfurled the Royal Standard at
Nottingham; and so the Civil War began.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account