Trial of William Laud facts for kids

The trial of William Laud, who was the archbishop of Canterbury, happened in the early 1640s. It ended with him being put to death for very serious charges against the country. At first, it was an impeachment, which is like a formal accusation by Parliament. Later, it became an act of attainder, which meant Parliament could declare him guilty without a full trial.

Laud was arrested in late 1640. He was held because of the power struggle between King Charles I and the English Parliament. When the charges were finally brought, the main idea was that Laud had created a kind of "church within the state." This was said to have happened when the king ruled without Parliament. The people accusing him believed the state should have more power over the church.

Some people have called the trial a "mockery of justice." They felt Laud was innocent of the main charges. They also believed the evidence against him was not strong and might have been changed. However, Laud himself was not completely honest in defending his actions. Some smaller charges did stick, even though he tried to say he wasn't personally responsible.

Laud's Arrest and Imprisonment

William Laud was arrested at the same time as Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford. Laud would later face the same end as Strafford. Strafford's impeachment happened quickly, but Laud's case was put aside until 1643.

Laud was first held by Black Rod on December 18, 1640. This was the day Denzil Holles started the impeachment process against him. His confinement was not very strict at first. He was even allowed to visit Lambeth Palace to get his papers. Later, he was moved to the Tower of London, a much stricter prison.

Laud was eventually put to death in 1645.

The trial of Laud, by Wenceslas Hollar.

Parliament's Situation in 1641

The accusations against Laud came from the Long Parliament. This was a special Parliament that lasted for a long time. Much of the work was done by a committee led by Sir John Glynne. By mid-1641, the legal efforts against King Charles's "bad advisors" were moving slowly. On July 12, an attempt was made to speed up the trials of Laud and George Ratcliffe. Ratcliffe was a supporter of Strafford. However, this effort failed.

Thirteen bishops had already faced impeachment in 1640. This was because of the new church rules, called the Laudian canons, that Laud had introduced. In October 1641, Denzil Holles asked the House of Lords to move forward with Laud's impeachment.

Charges Against Laud

The accusations against Laud were brought to the House of Lords. At first, they were very general and not very specific. People often say there were 14 clear points, but different sources list them differently. A second, more specific set of charges came more than two years later. It's hard to know exactly what the first verbal charges were. Some published versions might have been like pamphlets or had extra parts added. Besides the English Parliament, Scottish Presbyterians also pushed for the outcome. Their views were shared in a document called The Charge of the Scottish Commissioners against Canterburie and the Lieutenant of Ireland (1641).

First Accusations

This 1645 cartoon shows Archbishop William Laud and Puritan Henry Burton. Burton's ears were cut off for criticizing Laud. Their talk hints at Laud's coming execution.

The first set of charges came in early 1641. Laud was sent to the Tower of London in February or March 1641. This was supposedly based on 14 charges. These charges are recorded in different ways and are not always the same in various documents.

One version is found in the 18th-century State Trials by Francis Hargrave. A version of John Pym's speech to the Lords was also published. Another version from a pamphlet called Accusation and Impeachment (1641) was later included in the Harleian Collection. Here are some of the main points from that version:

• He tried to overthrow the basic laws of the kingdom.
• He supported books that promoted his unlimited power.
• He tried to stop judges from giving fair rulings, especially in the case of ship-money taxes.
• He took bribes and sold justice in the high church court.
• He tried to take too much power for the church. He made new church rules that went against the law and people's freedoms.
• He claimed to have power over the king's subjects, saying his church power didn't come from the king.
• He used false teachings and other bad ways to change the religion of the kingdom. He wanted to bring in Catholic practices and superstitions.
• He used unfair methods to choose ministers for church positions. He only chose people who were not good. He also gave bad chaplains to the king.
• His own assistants, like Heywood and Layfield, did not like the official religion. He gave them power to approve books.
• He tried to bring England back to the Roman Catholic Church. For this, he used a Jesuit (a Catholic priest) and worked with the Pope's agents.
• To stop preaching, he suspended many good and honest ministers. He used illegal ways to make bishops stop them.
• He tried to stop the French Protestant religion here, even though it was the same as England's. He also tried to stop the Dutch church and cause problems between them and England.
• He tried to cause problems between the King and his subjects. He also tried to bring new things into the church, as shown by his actions. He even pushed the king into war with the Scots.
• To avoid being questioned or punished for his actions, he tried to undermine Parliament's rights. He also tried to make the King angry at Parliament.

More Accusations

A second set of impeachment articles was approved by the House of Commons on October 23, 1643. These were then sent to the House of Lords. This was a more serious attempt to build a legal case for a trial. These articles were written in detail in John Rushworth's collections. Daniel Neal also summarized them in his History of the Puritans.

Here are some of the key points from these later charges:

• Laud tried to get rid of Parliament and bring in a government where the king had total power.
• For ten years, he tried to make the King's Council, church rules, and the King's power more important than the law.
• He stopped legal orders that would have prevented church courts from going too far.
• He stopped a judgment against a clergyman who was not living where he should. Laud said he would never let a clergyman be judged without a full defense.
• He had Sir John Corbet put in prison for six months. This was only because Corbet had the Petition of Right read at a local meeting.
• Large sums of money were given to buy church lands to support preaching. Laud had these gifts stopped, saying they were dangerous. This ended a good religious effort.
• He helped and hid many Catholic priests, which was against the law.
• He said that the church needed a big change before it could be united. This showed he wanted to change the Protestant religion in England.
• After Parliament was dissolved in 1640, he held a church meeting. There, new church rules were made that went against Parliament's rights. An illegal oath was also forced on the clergy.
• After the short Parliament ended suddenly in 1640, Laud told the king he was free from all rules. He said the king could use unusual ways to get money.

The Trial Begins

The trial started because Laud refused to give a church position to Edward Corbet. Oliver St John helped restart the stalled case in 1643. He considered the views of the Scots and his own position. Legal steps began in November 1643, but there were delays for several months. On December 28, Isaac Penington, whose father was in charge of the Tower, brought Thomas Weld to Laud's room. Weld "loudly" asked Laud if he regretted his actions.

The actual trial began on March 12, 1644. The impeachment trial continued until July 29. It took place in front of the House of Lords. At this point in the First English Civil War, there were only about a dozen noblemen left in the Lords.

The team prosecuting Laud included Samuel Browne, John Maynard, Robert Nicholas, and John Wylde. William Prynne acted as their lawyer. Laud's legal team was made up of Chaloner Chute, Richard Gerrard, Matthew Hale, and John Herne. For the first 20 days, the trial followed a pattern. The prosecution presented their case in the morning. After a two-hour break, Laud would respond in the afternoon.

Witnesses Against Laud

Many people testified against Laud during his trial. Here are some of them and what they said:

• John Ashe
• Edward Corbet spoke about new church practices forced at Merton College, Oxford.
• Daniel Featley said that William Bray had changed his sermons.
• Thomas Foxley, who had been imprisoned.
• Joshua Hoyle spoke about religious changes at Trinity College Dublin.
• Thomas Hoyle
• George Huntley, a clergyman from Kent, who was imprisoned for not following church rules.
• Thomas Jackson said Laud tried to make people bow towards the altar.
• John Langley spoke about changes Laud made to church rituals as Dean of Gloucester. He also mentioned problems for a lecturer named John Workman.
• Humphrey Mackworth
• Anthony and Henry Mildmay said Laud had Catholic support in Rome. They also claimed he made the Church of England's relationship with the Roman Catholic Church easier.
• Mary Oakes spoke for her late husband, John Oakes, a printer.
• Michael Oldisworth said that Laud had stopped the Earl of Pembroke from choosing royal chaplains.
• Peter Smart spoke about a comment by Augustine Lindsell. Lindsell seemed to think Calvinist clergy were ignorant for not liking Laud's new altar practices.
• Michael Sparke
• Samuel Vassall
• Georg Rudolph Weckherlin
• John White spoke about legal actions against those who bought church lands. He also mentioned actions against Edward Bagshaw. According to Prynne, White also said Laud's supporters changed the writings of Richard Clerke before they were published.
• Thomas Wilson

The case of Richard Culmer was also used as evidence. An example about land rights, the abbacy of Arbroath, was also brought up.

End of the Trial

In the end, the impeachment process was stopped. On October 30, 1644, Parliament heard a sermon from Edmund Staunton. The next day, they moved to the process of attainder. This meant they could declare Laud guilty without a full trial. Sir Samuel Browne was a strong supporter of this.

Laud was put to death on Tower Hill on January 10, 1645.