Another reason why the relationship declined between Charles 1 and parliament was money. There were lots of things to do with this reason, for instance, in 1634; Charles invented an illegal tax called ‘ship money’. He made people living in coastal areas pay this tax to fund the navy. Charles had to agree to certain conditions in order for parliament to give him more money. As well as being an example for the problems with money, Charles was desperate for money so was forced to call his parliament back. This was an important reason why their relationship got worse because as he invented illegal taxes, Parliament were furious because it was illegal. Also, they knew that for all taxes, the king should get permission from parliament. They refused to give him permission but he collected it anyway. Finally, parliament was still worried that Charles could not be trusted.
Additionally, one reason why the relationship declined between Charles 1 and Parliament was religion. When Charles was crowned King of England in 1625, he declared his belief in the ‘Devine Right of Kings’ which meant he believed he had total power and was God’s representative on earth. In the same year, he married a Catholic French Princess Henrietta Maria. In the early 1630’s, Charles made many changes to the church. He decorated them and made them look more like Catholic churches. This was an important reason why their relationship got worse because Parliament were concerned by Charles’ attitude as this was something his father, James I, had also believed in. They wanted more control over running the country. When he married a Catholic, Parliament was very angry as they were very afraid that his wife might persuade him to make England a Catholic country again. Finally, for this point, Parliament was furious with Charles’ church changes as many members of parliament were Puritans (strict Protestants). They wanted churches to stay plain and simple.
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
Charles I did not go along with the parliament. He took a serious hit during his 22 years as king. He began to give into extra parliamentary resorts such as, new tariffs and duties and collection of discontinued taxes. This angered the parliament as taxes were being illegally collected for an already unfortunate war and one that involved France…
- 637 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
James I was an absolutist ruler who emphasized the divine right of kings and sought to restrain Parliament under his will. Consequently, conflicts were inevitable as James I, and ensuing rulers, often found himself deficient of funds, and Parliament served as the gateway to the money. James I and his successor Charles I called Parliamentary meetings solely to ascertain the issue of funds. During this period, Parliament was rarely called upon and after these debates for money, Charles I and James I completely dissolved the Parliament. I did so because he agreed to admit the illegality of his taxes in turn for funding from Parliament. Afterwards, he abolished the Parliament to pursue his own endeavors. Furthermore, during Charles tenure, the English Civil War took place as a result from the lack of amity between Charles and Parliament. The Scottish invaded England, but Parliament refused to allow Charles to raise an army, because they feared he would abuse his powers and assail English citizens who opposed him. Charles I was eventually defeated and executed by Oliver Cromwell. Following the inadequacy of Cromwell, Charles II rose to power and was keyed the "merry monarch" for his easy-going nature. He imposed the Cabal system, a group of five individuals who handled the political issues of England; the term Cabal stems from the initials of each official member. This system acted as a type of Parliament in its methods of governing. During this period as a whole, it is evident that Parliament often conflicted with the ideals of the ruling monarch.…
- 540 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
When King Charles I dismissed Parliament in 1629, he was set on the idea of a personal rule without any help from Parliament. This he could manage, as long as he avoided war. His aim was to sort out the country's finances, and with the help of Strafford and Laud, impose a 'Policy of Thorough'. This policy was the idea of a fair and paternalistic government with no corruption. However, within 11 years, Charles' personal rule had failed and England was drifting into war. There are mixed opinions on whether this failure was solely due to the actions of the King, or those of third parties, for example, Strafford or Laud.…
- 1052 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
In January 1649, King Charles I was executed after being charged with high treason due to political and religious reasons, some of which contributed to his refusal in accepting the peace settlements given to him by Parliament. Charles’ refusal to compromise was supported by the division that had emerged within Parliament on how to fight the civil war between the Political Presbyterians and Political Independents. The main factors of the failure to reach a settlement were religion, politics, Charles’ intransigence, the New Model Army and the emergence of radical ideas; all of which eventually concluded to Charles’ execution.…
- 1416 Words
- 6 Pages
Good Essays -
Charles’s led the country without calling parliament for 11 years from 1629 – 1640. He initiated personal rule for many reasons. Firstly his close relationship with Buckingham alienated Parliament and caused resentment by Parliament. Secondly Charles had very strong believed in divine right and therefore saw no need for Parliament. Furthermore Charles religious policy’s led many to believe of a Catholic Conspiracy, which further distanced the King from Parliament. Lastly the King wasn’t getting substantial financial help from Parliament and decided that he would try and raise the finance without him.…
- 1197 Words
- 4 Pages
Powerful Essays -
Charles the First became king in England, (also in Scotland) in 1625. He caused many problems with the Parliament because he believed in absolute monarchy. At one point Parliament limited Charles The First's power and he went along with a petition they had made but soon dismissed the Parliament.…
- 370 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
His childhood left a mark on Charles's behaviour as king. Like James he was a believer in the divine right of kings. Unlike James, he was absolutist and tried to put it into practice. Given his belief in divine right, he saw all parliaments privileges as being subject to the approval of the monarch, not as liberties that had existed without the judgement of the monarch. Also unlike James He saw all criticism and anyone who questioned him as disloyal. An example of these in combination is when Charles I dissolved parliament because he was being criticized by Parliament as he felt he didn't need them as long as he could avoid war. This began the 11 year period known as the Personal Rule where he ran the country through royal prerogative instead of in cooperation with parliament.…
- 611 Words
- 3 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
The first factor that led to Charles I losing the First Bishops War was the lack of funding. This was because Parliament had taken control of taxes before the civil war and enjoyed a substantial financial advantage, which also leads to the next factor of the lack of support and discipline from the Parliamentarian forces. Following the outbreak of the Scottish Revolution and Hampden’s case, the ship money yield fell dramatically from 90% collection to 20%. Charles tried to deal with the Scots, without recourse to Parliament. Facing financial problems and not wanting to recall Parliament, Charles negotiated the Truce of Berwick in 1639 agreeing to a meeting of a Scottish assembly as Edinburgh and Parliament as well as disbandment of both armies. On his return, Wentworth tried to advise Charles to call an English Parliament as the only means of raising money to fight the scots. However, Charles refused to compromise when he met with the Parliament and he dissolved it determined to face the Scots in the field. Alongside the attempt to collect the ship money, Charles had called for a coat and conduct money which was a tax to support the county-trained bands when they had to serve outside their country. It was supposed to provide for food and other expenses such as transport however there was widespread opposition to this.…
- 652 Words
- 3 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
finances. Charles decided from 1629 not to call Parliament, due to the new type of intelligent…
- 757 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
Both Charles I and James I tried to rule without parliament’s consent, but parliament’s control at the time was so great that neither Charles nor James were able to successfully decrease its role in English government. In the Bill of Rights, it is declared by parliament that certain actions are illegal without consent of parliament. For example, “The king’s supposed power of suspending laws without the consent of parliament is illegal” (James Madison). The English were not ready to give all the power of government to a single person because they had been under the combined rule of both the king and the assembly for such an extended time. Parliament, where members could be elected and changed as necessary, as opposed to an absolute monarch with no restraints, was supported by land-owning nobles and merchants. In 1642, differences between parliament and Charles I sparked England's civil war, which was partially caused by the refusal of parliament to give up their power in government and partly by royal stubbornness to share control of the country. This was the chief turning point for absolutism in England. Beginning with Charles II, monarchs realized the amount of power Parliament had and knew that instead of working against one another, they had to work with each other. Since parliament was so centralized and so stalwartly entrenched into the…
- 949 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
In the document The Petition of Right, Parliament was bringing up their concerns to King Charles I. Parliament first brought up the problem of taxes, and how they believed that they should not be unfairly taxed, and in such an event should not be punished for not complying with unlawful taxation. Parliament also brought up their concerns of people being punished unlawfully, without first being allowed a trial by their peers. Finally, they brought up their concerns that in the case that a person be imprisoned, that they be allowed to be told what it is that they are being charged with. In this document, Parliament used past examples of statutes, and decrees of former kings to push back against the king, and to back up what they desire. They…
- 291 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
James I's belief in "divine right" of kings, which meant God had chosen him to be ruler, led him not to rely on Parliament. Rather than depend on Parliament, James I and his successor, Charles I looked for other ways to acquire funds such as illegally levying taxes. Parliament was rarely called on during this period. In response to Charles illegal taxation, Parliament passed the Petition of Right which stated that, to pass any law the ruler must consent to Parliament. In order to continue ruling without Parliament, Charles used Ship Money to collect taxes as revenue. He might have been able to rule indefinitely without Parliament if not for his religious policies which provoked war with Scotland and forced Charles to call Parliament into session. This session, known as the Long Parliament was determined to limit the power of the king. It resolved that Parliament would meet at least every three years. Parliament later split with Charles I and declared war on him. Both James I and Charles I fought to suppress Parliament during their reigns and claimed absolute power due to the "divine right" of kings.…
- 642 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Louis bribed the provincial governors to elect him. He did this to ensure loyalty to the kings at all levels of government. He also had a three year term so that any governors, who were not loyal, would not remain in power. Louis centralized the government, and had absolute control over them. During the constitution in England, Charles I was the king in 1625 with limited powers. He followed his father’s footsteps; James I, and was a stubborn man where the Parliament disliked him. Charles suspended the Parliament when the Parliament did not grant him to raise the taxes. But Charles had to recall the Parliament for its support to finance the war in Ireland. This led to many problems. When the parliamentarians captured Charles I, they tried to negotiate with him, but he refused to compromise. The parliamentarians had no choice but to behead him. Therefore, Absolutism in France was much more secure than Constitutionalism in…
- 718 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
The English Civil War began in 1642 between King Charles I and Parliament. Wealthy nobles, known as Royalists, supported the king. Supporters of Parliament included Puritans, who were led by Oliver Cromwell. Cromwell eventually became commander-in-chief of Parliament’s army. A number of battles took place between the king’s troops and Cromwell’s army, some of which are shown on the map below. The first battle, which took place at Edgehill, did not gain ground for either side. After a series of victories, however, Cromwell and Parliament took control of London and, eventually, England. In 1649 Charles I was publicly beheaded, and Parliament alone ruled England.…
- 321 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
Charles was able to exile Monmoth to the Netherlands in September 1679, use his prerogative powers to dissolve the exclusion parliaments 3 times and prorogue parliament 7 times and attend sessions in the house of Lords to secure support as well as allowing James back into the Privvy council in 1684. It also created greater stability for the elite with respect to property right. The fact he was able to defeat exclusion would have proven that Charles II was a strong monarch and able to stand up to parliament. Furthermore his success would have given Charles and much of the country including Torys confidence in the security of the monarchy which explains why 1681 was a turning point and seen by historians as a royalist recovery. The period between 1681-1685 is seen as a period of growing absolutism where Charles successfully got rid of his opposnents such as Shaftesbury and Monmoth during the Rye house plot and manipulate local government using charters and also manipulate the judiciary. He also used the Church for propaganda made sure that his decleration was read out from pulpits. Therefore Charles’s successful defeat of the exclusion crisis and growing absolutism is evidence that he was in a stronger…
- 1227 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays