Read Online The King's Revenge by Michael Walsh, Don Jordan - Free Book Online Page A
Authors: Michael Walsh, Don Jordan
Ads: Link
had not recognised more than eight faces. We can be sure he at least recognised
those of Cromwell, Ireton, Harrison and Vane.
The following day, a Tuesday, the court met in the Painted Chamber. Analysing their predicament, they agreed the king should
be given yet another chance to plead. To encourage him, it was decided that Cook should ask the court to proceed speedily
to judgment. That, they reasoned, should focus the royal mind. And so they trooped off to Westminster Hall and the king was
sent for.
Once Charles was seated, Cook launched into a strenuous argument against any more time-wasting. Bradshaw asked Charles for
his final answer – guilty or not guilty?
It was hopeless. Charles announced that he wished to defend the ‘ancient laws of the kingdom’ and claimed that there was no
law that permitted his trial. He was almost right, except that he had not grasped the full nature of what was taking place.
The laws of England were being reinterpreted to allow the people to try a tyrant. The absolutist views of the Stuarts were
in direct conflict with previous ideas about the order of good government. Almost a hundred years before, a member of Queen
Elizabeth’s council had described England as a ‘commonwealth’ with a government made up of monarch, Council of State and Parliament. 20
Bradshaw wrapped up the public proceedings for another irksomeday. The court retired to the Painted Chamber. By now, their resolve had hardened.
On Wednesday, 24 January, the court sat in private in the Painted Chamber to take evidence from witnesses against the king.
A procession mainly of ordinary soldiers and civilians reported that they had seen the king raise his standard in declaration
of war or had seen him with his army at various battles. One witness described how the king had shown bad faith during the
negotiations at Newport by secretly trying to contact the Prince of Wales to raise an army. Evidence continued into the following
day.
On Friday morning, the commissioners met in private to discuss the draft sentence. Sixty-two commissioners answered the roll
call. Discussions over the exact form of the sentence continued until nightfall. In its final form, the sentence condemned
the king as a ‘tyrant, traitor, murderer and public enemy to be put to death by the severing of his head from his body’. It
was agreed that the court would reassemble in public in Westminster Hall at ten in the morning and read the sentence to the
king.
When the court assembled, Charles once again took everyone by surprise. Without waiting for Bradshaw to open the proceedings,
he began, ‘I desire a word to be heard a little and I hope I shall give no occasion for interruption.’
Bradshaw was taken aback. He was now dressed in red robes which made him look as if he were playing the role of a pope in
a bad charade. Mustering his dignity, he told the king he might be heard but first he had to hear the court. It was well known,
he said, that the king was charged with treason and other high crimes in the name of the people of England. At this, a woman
in one of the public galleries shouted out, ‘It is a lie – not half the people.’ 21 Colonel Daniel Axtell, commander of the halberdiers guarding the king, reacted swiftly, ordering his men to direct their
guns at the woman. He shouted, ‘What whore is that who disturbs the court?’ It was later claimed that this was Lady Fairfax
once more. Although this is likely, there is no real evidence. The galleries were searched butthe woman had disappeared. Order restored, the court continued. Bradshaw informed the king that the court would hear anything
he had to say in his defence. Charles replied that he wished to speak in the Painted Chamber before both the House of Commons
and the House of Lords. At this, one of the commissioners, John Downes, spoke out. In all the hearings, he was the only commissioner
to break the rule agreed from the outset
those of Cromwell, Ireton, Harrison and Vane.
The following day, a Tuesday, the court met in the Painted Chamber. Analysing their predicament, they agreed the king should
be given yet another chance to plead. To encourage him, it was decided that Cook should ask the court to proceed speedily
to judgment. That, they reasoned, should focus the royal mind. And so they trooped off to Westminster Hall and the king was
sent for.
Once Charles was seated, Cook launched into a strenuous argument against any more time-wasting. Bradshaw asked Charles for
his final answer – guilty or not guilty?
It was hopeless. Charles announced that he wished to defend the ‘ancient laws of the kingdom’ and claimed that there was no
law that permitted his trial. He was almost right, except that he had not grasped the full nature of what was taking place.
The laws of England were being reinterpreted to allow the people to try a tyrant. The absolutist views of the Stuarts were
in direct conflict with previous ideas about the order of good government. Almost a hundred years before, a member of Queen
Elizabeth’s council had described England as a ‘commonwealth’ with a government made up of monarch, Council of State and Parliament. 20
Bradshaw wrapped up the public proceedings for another irksomeday. The court retired to the Painted Chamber. By now, their resolve had hardened.
On Wednesday, 24 January, the court sat in private in the Painted Chamber to take evidence from witnesses against the king.
A procession mainly of ordinary soldiers and civilians reported that they had seen the king raise his standard in declaration
of war or had seen him with his army at various battles. One witness described how the king had shown bad faith during the
negotiations at Newport by secretly trying to contact the Prince of Wales to raise an army. Evidence continued into the following
day.
On Friday morning, the commissioners met in private to discuss the draft sentence. Sixty-two commissioners answered the roll
call. Discussions over the exact form of the sentence continued until nightfall. In its final form, the sentence condemned
the king as a ‘tyrant, traitor, murderer and public enemy to be put to death by the severing of his head from his body’. It
was agreed that the court would reassemble in public in Westminster Hall at ten in the morning and read the sentence to the
king.
When the court assembled, Charles once again took everyone by surprise. Without waiting for Bradshaw to open the proceedings,
he began, ‘I desire a word to be heard a little and I hope I shall give no occasion for interruption.’
Bradshaw was taken aback. He was now dressed in red robes which made him look as if he were playing the role of a pope in
a bad charade. Mustering his dignity, he told the king he might be heard but first he had to hear the court. It was well known,
he said, that the king was charged with treason and other high crimes in the name of the people of England. At this, a woman
in one of the public galleries shouted out, ‘It is a lie – not half the people.’ 21 Colonel Daniel Axtell, commander of the halberdiers guarding the king, reacted swiftly, ordering his men to direct their
guns at the woman. He shouted, ‘What whore is that who disturbs the court?’ It was later claimed that this was Lady Fairfax
once more. Although this is likely, there is no real evidence. The galleries were searched butthe woman had disappeared. Order restored, the court continued. Bradshaw informed the king that the court would hear anything
he had to say in his defence. Charles replied that he wished to speak in the Painted Chamber before both the House of Commons
and the House of Lords. At this, one of the commissioners, John Downes, spoke out. In all the hearings, he was the only commissioner
to break the rule agreed from the outset
Similar Books
