New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-07-20
4 Cold BlOOded Study Of the
Stuart Kings.

THE POLITICAL HISTORY OF ENGLAND
Edited hy William Hunt. D, Lift. and Reginald
poole. N. \. Vol. Wild svo, pp. xix 514
Longrnans, Green & CO.
The folly Of rulers is sometimes more pro-
ductive than their wisdom" In this sentence
Professor Montague may be said 10 have
summed Up the history of the Stuart kings in
England Familiarity with the main lines of
English history during the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries is apt to obscure the i'm
-rnense debt that the whole English speaking
world owes TO the Stuart dynasty 1t cannot
indeed be said that James I and his son and
grandsons consciously bequeathed TO ENGLAND
and Indirectly to the United States the great
gift of democratic government; and there need
lie no overwhelming feeling Of gratitude TO these
involuntary benefactors of the human race Yet
had Elizabeth been succeeded by another Tudor
sovereign, as thoroughly English and as much
n sympathy with the nation as herself or her
great father, there is little doubt that the crown
would soon have prevailed over the still weak
forms of parliamentary and representative GOV
eminent, and another century might have seen
England among the absolute mOnarchies of
Europe
Il needed many years of constant exaspera-
ton and mutual dislike, distrust and i'll will 10
bring the English people 70 the point Of rebel
lion against their sovereign. Rebellion was not
unprecedented in English history; but the rising
of the whole nation against a legally constituted
sovereign with an undsputcd title TO the throne
absolutely new departure. In an former
instances OF violent changes OF dynasty there
was a disputed title and new king claiming
the crown Of his opponent. Even in the case OF
King John, which most nearly parallels the case
az Charles 1. the opposition to the KING was
laised not by the nation at large. but by 4 party
Of his nobIes and the first act OF the barons was
10 find a candidate TO whom they could offer
the crown and TO whose standard they could
rally When Henry Of Lancaster snatched the
crown from Richard II, and again wnen Edward
Of York succeeded by violence TO the throne o.
E-.-4a- 7-FrFl eF Gls
Of the House OF York, there was IL each case d
rival claimant to the throne; and the nation ioi
he most part looked passively on while princes
ard mobiles fought out their quaTreis
There were, ~ IS true, in English history, two
L-ecedents for widespread popular rislngs--Nat
Irylers rebellion in 1881. and JACK Cade's rising
r. 1850. but these expressions OF discomfort ana
popular distress lacked the representative -
IioraI character Of the opposition TO Charles l.
In these Two carly rebelli0ns the causes q COM
rlairr were economic. and the line Of cleavage
was sociaI-they were er1Dhatically rls11gS 81
the lower classes against oppression by thelr
superiors Ia the great rebellion Il lo+-, Pro-
fsssCr Montague is careful 10 point out that the
causes Of the war were political and ecclesasli-
cal and thai the line of cleavage in the nation
was vertical rather than hoTsZont24- II Vas not
The reasautry against the nobility, nor the IN
Moved against the employer. on the s-ce OF the
Parliament were TO be found Representatives OF
every class and rank in the natLor--no5Iity,
gentry. clergy. merchants and traders, working
men and peasants. L IS true tEat the miC0-A
classes generally We're with the Parliament while
on the whole the nobility and the peasantry re
rnained loyal TO the King, but much the same
difference would still he found in the personnel
Of the two great political parties into which
England IS diyided-the Conservatives still on
the whole correspond TO King Charles's Cavaliers,
while the Liberals are the modern counterparts
OF the RoUndheads@a word which, by the way,
Professor Montague refrains from using from
beginning 10 end Of his volume.
He lays stress on the fact that there was no
widespread material distress during the reign
Of Charles none Of the wretchedness which
predisp0ses men 70 rebel During the forty years
from The accession Of James TO the outbreak
Of The Civil War. Professor Montague writes.
England enjoyed profound peace: taxation was
not heavy: justice fairly administered &C
between man ard mar; ard the government
showed reasonable consideration for the welfare
Of the common people. Trade fourished, and the
tokens q wealth and luxury were seen on every
side" Under these c!rcurns stances there vas but
one motive that could have been strong enough
20 goed the nation into rebellion. Those who
valued the principles Of free constitution might
abhOr the precedelts that King Charles and HIS
ministers we're making. and might reflect how
easily mild despotlsm might become q re
morse-ess tyranny. hut men who could grasp and
reflect upon political principles were then rare
rarer even than in modern tinles-and without
some far stronger motive 70 rebellion in the
ton AZ large than academic dislike OF Charles
rs political theories, the King might have ended
hss reign in peace, and beqUsathed an almost
sut0cra-ic kingdom to his children.
The only motive. besides starvation, which
could then have -tirred the inextinsuishabe in
dignation Of the people religion, and the
Civil War really represents the popular reformQ-
ton of England's ecclesiastical system. as dis
rngushed from the peculiar royal reformation
impressed On the country by Henry VIII and
Elizabeth That the assertion Of the right OF the
nation 70 choose its religion brought in its
train assertion OF the principle Of democracy
was q ccroilaTy rather than principal issue
N the contest. CurOusly enough il was by the
sFIay-so often IN. weapon OF absOlUtism-tlat
tbs basic principle Of denlocracy-the principle
efterward adopted as the very essence Of Amer
icanisu-was first promulgated. In l647 the
army drew Up z manifesto. which was presented
70 Fairfax the commander in chief, in which II
vas asserted that ''ali power is in the whole
BODY % the people. and their free consent is the
only foundation Of just government" Yet IL Is
u the many paradoXes Of the Stuart period
that the statesmen and generals-Over Crom-
well incIuded-who were most democratic in
principle, were obliged 20 act IN manner quite
contrary 70 their political convictions; for they
saw plainly that democratic policy. consistently
carried out. would quickly end IN the destruction
Of all democratic government, and in the resto-
ration by the democracy OF those forms OF gov
ernEleat which the democrats most abhorred.
Next 10 the irony OF fate that gave the people
OF England King Stork, when they called James
Stuart from Scotland 10 be their King Log. and
that made the Stuarts the involuntary benefac-
tors Of the English speaking race by arouslns
N the nation the spirit Of resistance TO tyranny
ana absolutfsrn was the irony OF Oliver Crom-
wells position as an almost despotic ruler, de-
PENDENT on the army for his authority, when MS
whole tendencies and principles were in favor OF
orderly representative government. with large
measure OF religious freedom and liberation
Throughout the whole volume IT is PROFESSOR
avoid