The beginning of the Long Parliament in England. Convening of the Long Parliament and the beginning of the English Revolution

The Stuart dynasty, which began to rule in 1603, played a decisive role in protecting the old system. Her first representative on the English throne, James I, not wanting to take into account her rights English Parliament, entered into a long conflict with him. His domestic and foreign policies outraged the bourgeoisie and the new nobility.

After the death of James I (1625), the throne was taken by his son Charles I (1600-1649). Frivolous and self-confident, he further strained relations with parliament. He soon dispersed parliament and established a regime of his “personal domination” (1629-1640). However, this left Charles I without money, since taxes in England were approved by Parliament. Seeking funds, Charles I and his assistants began to grossly violate the customs and traditions of the country. This contributed to the growth and strengthening of the opposition (resistance) to royal power.

Having started a war with Scotland with his “advisers” and being defeated in it, Charles I was forced to convene parliament. He was called "Long" because... Having met in the fall of 1640, it sat for 12 years. The opening day of its meetings (November 3, 1640) is considered the day of the beginning of the English Revolution.

The first two years of the Long Parliament can be called “peaceful”. With the active support of the people, the bourgeoisie and the new nobility (they formed the majority in the lower house of parliament - the House of Commons) adopted a number of laws that made it impossible for the king to rule without the cooperation of parliament. It was forbidden to collect taxes not approved by parliament. The punitive bodies of absolutism (the “High Commission” and the “Star Chamber”) were destroyed, and the king’s main advisers (Earl of Strafford and Archbishop Laud) were sent to the scaffold.

An important point in the activity of parliament was the adoption of the “Great Remonstrance” (protest), in which, in 204 articles, the king’s abuses were listed. The document was aimed at substantiating the bourgeois principle of the inviolability of a person’s personality and his property. It also spoke about the right of parliament to control the activities of the king’s ministers, which was already an element of a constitutional monarchy.

At the beginning of 1642, Charles I left unruly London and went to the north of the country (most of the old nobility sat there) and began to form an anti-parliamentary army from his royalist supporters. Parliament began to assemble its army. The country split into two camps. The king's supporters were called "cavaliers" (from the English word cavalier horse). In the royalist army, the main striking force was the cavalry. Supporters of parliament were called "roundheads" (for the shape of their hairstyle).

In the first battles of the civil war that began in the fall of 1642 (a war between citizens within one state), the parliamentary army, formed from mercenaries, began to suffer defeats. This was explained not only by the superior military skills of the royalists. The parliamentary motley army was led by noble generals. Although they were opponents of absolutism, they did not want the complete defeat of Charles I. Their goal was a compromise (agreement) with the king on concessions in favor of the bourgeois nobility. Their defensive strategy (waging war) threatened parliament with defeat.

The sale of monopolies, as well as the exorbitant various taxes imposed despite their ban by Parliament, ruined wide circles of industrialists and merchants, causing emigration to Holland and America. As Marx pointed out, Charles I's direct attacks on free competition increasingly undermined the trade and industry of England315. The ferment of the peasants and urban lower classes intensified. The impetus for the revolution was the Scottish rebellion of 1640. Needing money to wage war, Charles was forced to convene parliament in the spring of 1640. Parliament put forward a number of demands constitutional order, but did not give money, and Charles dissolved it. However, in the fall of the same year, he was forced to convene parliament again, to which, despite all the machinations of the government, the majority of opposition elements from the new nobility and bourgeoisie were elected. The “Long Parliament” (1640-1653), supported by the movement of peasants who opposed feudal exploitation and for land reform, and by the democratic strata of the urban population, led a decisive struggle against the king. Charles was forced to agree to the execution of his favorite Lord Strafford, and to a number of parliamentary demands concerning the rights of its dissolution and the introduction of taxes 316. The majority of parliament took vigorous measures against the extraordinary courts, which were hated by wide sections of the population. On June 25, 1641, the “Long” Parliament issued an act by which the Star Chamber and a number of other courts created under the Tudors and which especially increased terrorist activity under the Stuarts were abolished317. In this act, which was called "An Act of the Privy Council and the abolition of the court commonly known as the Star Chamber", the actions, decisions and decisions of the Star Chamber were recognized as intolerable and leading to the arbitrariness of the government. It also says that the Privy Council encroached on the property and freedom of the subjects, contrary to the law of the land and the rights and privileges of the people. Further, the Act extensively quotes laws such as the Magna Carta and statutes issued during the reign of Edward III (on guarantees of justice - M. Ch.). Therefore, the act continues, “no court, council or judicial institution shall henceforth be established, organized or appointed for the good subjects of our kingdom of England and the principality of Wells, which would practice such actions as the said Star Chamber allowed, and if anyone violates this law and does anything contrary to its meaning, then he is obliged to pay a fine of 50 pounds to the offended party, its representatives or administrators for such an offense.”* The powers of the Star Chamber to control the courts were transferred to the Court of the King's Bench. Trial in criminal cases, jurisdictional, exclusive courts passed to the courts of common law, which tried them in the manner prescribed by law. The act of abolishing the Star Chamber required the issuance by the Court of the King's Bench and the Court of Common Pleas of a writ of Habeas Corpus to any person arrested or detained by order of the King, his officers and other officers to verify the lawfulness of the arrest or detention. Article b of this act read: “If anyone is arrested, restricted in his freedom or subjected to imprisonment by personal order or order of the royal majesty” of his heir or successors, or by order or order of the council, or of any member of the royal Privy Council , then in all such cases, every person thus arrested, confined or imprisoned, at the request or petition of his attorney or other person, brought before the Courts of the Queen's Bench or the Courts of Common Pleas, shall without delay, under any pretext whatsoever, and for the usual fee in such cases, a writ of Habeas Corpus may be issued against the sheriff, jailer, or any other person in whose custody the arrested or prisoner is.” The following articles deal with the obligation of the person receiving the order to bring the arrested person to court. The “response to the order” must indicate the “true reason for the conclusion.” Upon submission of the review, the court must, within three present days, consider the review and determine whether the reason for imprisonment presented in the review is valid and legal or not, and decide on the issue of releasing the prisoner on bail or leaving him in custody. The final resolution of the act stated that judges and prison guards who maliciously violate the provisions of the act and act contrary to its true meaning must pay triple damages to the victim for the claim on his part. However, this act had a significant gap in terms of the reality of guaranteeing the right of the arrested person to verify the grounds for the arrest: it did not set a deadline for bringing the arrested person to court. Namely, the delay in executing the order was a constant abuse. On July 5, 1641, an act was issued abolishing the High Commission. The revolutionary movement was growing in the country. Feudal public and political system became an obstacle to the further development of the country's productive forces. Bourgeois-capitalist relations of production could only be established as a result of revolution. The striking force of the revolution were the peasantry and urban plebeian elements. But the leader of the revolution was the union of the new nobility, the big and middle bourgeoisie, which received all the benefits from the breakdown of feudal relations. A feature of the English revolution was the religious shell in which various classes 318 put forward their demands. The feudal lords acted as defenders of the Anglican Episcopal Church, and some of their groups even gravitated towards Catholicism. Most of the new nobility and bourgeoisie acted as moderate Puritans (Calvinists), demanding the establishment of a Presbyterian church governed by a synod. Part of the middle and petty bourgeoisie, as well as the peasants, demanded complete independence of church communities. Hence their name - independents. The big bourgeoisie and part of the nobility, which carried on capitalist agriculture, were afraid that the revolution would not take on too great a scale. Hence the constant vacillations of the “Long” Parliament led by these groups in the first years of the revolution, and repeated attempts to come to an agreement with the king on strengthening the rights and privileges of the bourgeoisie. But the king, supported by the feudal aristocracy and the Anglican episcopate, did not make concessions. In November 1641, parliament developed and presented to the king a document known as the Great Remonstrance. Its 204 articles listed in detail the abuses of Charles I and the measures taken in this regard and the further political and economic demands of the bourgeoisie. These demands mainly boiled down to the establishment of free trade, the organization of a bourgeois Presbyterian church, and the creation of a government responsible to parliament. These demands, of course, were incompatible with absolutism and royal prerogative. Charles made an attempt to get rid of the opposition leaders in order to behead the hated parliament. On January 3, 1642, the royal attorney general appeared in parliament demanding the arrest of 5 members of the chamber accused of high treason. The Chamber did not release them. The next day, the king, accompanied by 400 soldiers, himself appeared in the chamber to arrest the leaders he had accused. But they managed to escape. The king's attempt to win over the top of parliament failed, and on January 10 he left London in search of support in the north of England. For a number of years, Charles I waged war on parliament, organizing “his own” parliament in Oxford and appointing his own judges. The king was supported by the feudal aristocracy, the episcopate of the Church of England, the economically backward nobility and part of the peasantry. Parliament in its struggle against the feudal-absolutist government was supported by wide circles of the bourgeoisie, the new nobility, the urban petty bourgeoisie, the plebeian elements of the city and the overwhelming majority of the peasantry. The wealthy and middle part of it became the support of the army of Parliament, and then of Cromwell in his struggle with Parliament. Two currents dominated in parliament at this time. The right (Presbyterians) represented the large urban bourgeoisie and the new nobility and were inclined to come to an agreement with the king on the basis of the demands of the Great Remonstrance, and the more radical left (Independents), based on urban bourgeois and petty bourgeois elements, and partly on the middle and wealthy peasant masses. The Independents demanded an energetic struggle with the king to defend the rights and privileges of parliament and the independence of the parish community. The Independents were a minority in Parliament, while they were the majority in Parliament's army. In the decisive battles with the king, the army of Parliament, led by Cromwell, won, defeated and captured the king. The right wing of parliament, believing that the army had done its job, tried to disband it in order to negotiate with the king the terms of Charles's return to the throne. However, the army opposed this decision. In addition to the material side of the matter (non-payment of salaries), the army council discussed the issue of consolidating the rights and freedoms won by the victory over the king. An unsuccessful coup attempt carried out by the Presbyterians in order to return the king led to the fact that some of them were expelled from parliament (the Pride purge) and an independent majority was established in it. Meanwhile, a split had long been evident in the army between the independent elite of the army - the “grandees” and the bulk of the soldiers, who sympathized with the Levellers. The Leveller Party had its own political program, set out in the “People's Agreement” and “Army Cause” agriment. The Levellers were the most revolutionary party; their program for the first time put forward the abolition of royal power, the abolition of the House of Lords, the declaration of England as a republic, broad suffrage and the formal equality of all before the law. In the economic field, they demanded freedom of trade and industry, the transformation of copyhold into full peasant property, and the abolition of fencing. The draft of the new constitution turned England into a democratic republic. However, the Levellers, even the most radical ones, were not genuine representatives of the interests of the working people. The Levellers reflected the political views and interests of the most revolutionary part of the English bourgeoisie, mainly the petty one. In response to their accusations of striving for equalization of property and anarchy, they objected: “... Those who do not know us at all are spreading the most incredible rumors that we want to equalize the fortunes of all people, that we do not recognize any government, but We strive only for general anarchy... We declare that it has never been our intention to equalize the conditions of people and our highest desire is such a state of the republic when everyone enjoys his property with the greatest possible security... We therefore consider differences in rank and merit necessary, that they stimulate virtue, and are also necessary for the maintenance of authorities and government... We stand for government, and not for anarchy... and although tyranny is exceptionally bad, anarchy is the worst of the two extremes...” * . Political Views the leader of the Levellers, Lschlburn, are very interesting in the sense that they were a program for further partially carried out bourgeois-democratic transformations. These ideas found their classic expression in the declarations and constitutions of the American and French bourgeois revolutions of the 18th century. In the “People's Agreement,” the Levellers pay a lot of attention to protecting the rights of citizens, and in connection with this, organizing the judiciary319. “From now on, all privileges, exclusions of any persons from the laws or the ordinary course of judicial process, by virtue of any holding, grant, charter, patent, title, or by virtue of birth or residence, or in the power of the right of asylum, parliamentary privilege, etc.” Along with this, the Levellers put forward a demand to prohibit arbitrary trials that are not based on a previously issued and published law. Thus, they formulated for the first time the principle of bourgeois criminal law, which was subsequently usually expressed by the words nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege. “Future parliaments have no power to punish - or cause to be punished - anyone for refusing to answer questions against themselves in criminal cases,” reads one of the main demands of the Levellers for guarantees of personal freedom. This requirement formulates in the most categorical way the provision that is considered one of the principles of the English criminal process: the prohibition of interrogation of the accused as a means of incriminating him. Further, the authors of the “People’s Agreement” put forward demands for the speed of the criminal process, conducting it exclusively on English language and recognition of the right of the accused to present his own witnesses, to defend himself in person or through the assistance of others 320. “Parliament shall not make or continue to enforce such laws as shall take the life of any person except those convicted of murder or other similar heinous crimes.” crimes harmful to human society, or for attempting to destroy this Agreement of ours by force; laws can only impose punishment that fits the crime; so that no human life, as well as members of the body, freedom and property, are taken away for empty and unimportant reasons, as has been the case until now; that special attention be paid to preserving all layers of the people from corruption, poverty and beggary; that the property of the criminal shall not be confiscated except in cases of proven treason, and in all felonies the retribution shall be proportionate to the injury done, both in respect of the property of the offender and the deprivation of life by the verdict of a jury.” “Parliament shall make no law, or maintain any law, for any other court to impose deprivation of life, limb, liberty, or property, than that of twelve juries, neighbors, who shall be freely chosen by the people, and shall serve until the end of the next parliament, and so that they are not expelled and fined, as has been the case so far in many places.” This article formulates two most important principles of the English process: the breadth of powers of the court and jury and the principle of freedom of their internal convictions. The highest officers of the army (the so-called “grandees”) for some time tried to cooperate with the Levellers in order to direct their movement from the demands of social order to issues of professional army. In June 1647, the Army Council was formed, in which representatives elected by ordinary soldiers sat next to the officers and decided on political issues. During this period, the army and parliament existed side by side as rival powers in the state. Fearing that the dominant group of the nobility and big bourgeoisie (Presbyterians) in parliament would come to an agreement with the king behind the back of the army, the leaders of the Army Committee captured the king who had been captured somewhat earlier. After this, the army marched on London, which forced the main Presbyterian leaders to leave the House of Commons and actually transfer the real power into the hands of the army. political power . Having come to power, the independent leadership of the army, led by Cromwell, tried to stop the further development of the revolution. Faced with resistance from the Levellers, they declared their movement a riot; which was pacified by brutal military measures*. However, the independents were forced to carry out the demand of the Levellers, supported by the broad masses of the army, for a trial of the king and the abolition of royal power. On January 1, 1649, the House of Commons declared the king the main culprit of the civil war against Parliament, an ally of the Irish and Scots in the fight against the English state, and proposed the creation of a special Supreme Court of Justice for the trial of Charles. On January 2, the House of Lords, meeting among 16 members, rejected the proposal of the House of Commons, pointing out that the king has more rights than the chambers that he can dissolve, and that the king cannot be a traitor to parliament. Then the House of Commons passed a resolution in which it declared itself, as the representative of the people, "the supreme power, the decrees of which have the force of law without the consent of either king or lords." England effectively became a republic. On January 6, the House of Commons formed a Supreme Court of Justice to try the king, consisting of 135 commissioners, which included members of the chamber, senior army officers led by Cromwell and Fairfax, prominent lawyers, and members of the London City Council. Many of the commissioners, including members of the London City Council and a number of senior officers, withdrew from the trial. But the House of Commons had earlier decided that the court would be competent even if there were 20 of its members. On January 20, open sessions of the court began under the chairmanship of Bradshaw, an eminent lawyer who had been a judge in London for many years and known as a resolute opponent of the monarchy. When Charles was brought into court and took his place opposite the barrier, an indictment was read out, which stated that Charles had sworn to rule for the good of the people, but in his desire for unlimited tyrannical power, he had neglected his promises and committed terrible crimes, unleashing a civil war and disrupting the peace and peace of the country. Without answering the accusation, Karl asked by whose name he was brought here. Bradshaw replied: "In the name of the commons and people of England." Charles did not recognize the competence of the court, saying that he was not a king by choice and was answerable only to God. Many members of the court doubted their right to judge the king as "God's anointed." Only a few speeches by Cromwell convinced some of the hesitant of the need to execute the king *. Before pronouncing the verdict, Karl asked that he be given a meeting with both houses of parliament, but the court refused this. Chairman Bradshaw then made a closing speech in which he rejected the king's claim that the court was incompetent. Judges stand on the basis of the law, for them the law is above the king, and parliament is above the law, since parliament, speaking on behalf of the people, itself creates laws. The king is superior to the individual, but inferior to all the people; therefore he cannot consider himself above the law. At the same time, Bradshaw referred to the authority of the 13th century lawyer Bracton, who argued that God, law and the judicial curia are above the king, who is limited in his power by them. After Bradshaw's speech, the secretary announced the verdict, signed by 59 commissioners, in which it was decided that “Charles Stuart, as a tyrant, traitor, murderer and enemy of the state, should be executed by beheading.”321 On January 30, 1649, Charles I's head was cut off on a scaffold erected in front of Whitehall.

22.Convocation of the Long Parliament and the beginning of the English Revolution. Constitutional stage of the revolution.

Short Parliament

The years of non-parliamentary rule (1629-1640) were characterized by complete arbitrariness of royal power. To replenish the treasury, Charles I single-handedly introduced new levies and fines, suppressing discontent in the country with the help of emergency courts. One of the results of such rule was an armed uprising in Scotland, which created the threat of a Scots invasion of England. Military failures and lack of funds forced Charles I to convene parliament. This parliament, which worked from April 13 to May 5, 1640, went down in history under the name of the Short Parliament. The House of Commons did not satisfy the king's request for a subsidy to wage war with the Scots. Instead, she began to examine the policies of Charles I during his sole reign. The result was a statement that, until reforms were carried out to eliminate the possibility of future abuse of the rights of the prerogative, the House of Commons did not intend to vote any subsidies to the king. After the dissolution of the obstinate parliament, the position of Charles I became even more critical. Realizing that without parliament it would not be possible to resolve the military and political crisis, the king in November 1640. convened a new parliament, which turned out to be Long: it lasted until 1653. In October, elections for a new parliament were held, and on November 3, 1640. its meetings opened. With the beginning of the sessions of the Long Parliament, essentially a new chapter of English history began - the history of the Great Social Revolution.

Long Parliament

Begins with the activities of the Long ParliamentThe first stage of the revolution is constitutional. The elections to the Long Parliament did not produce a parliament favorable to the king: the Presbyterians took a dominant position in it. During 1640-1641. Parliament obtained from the king the approval of a number of important legal acts. First of all, on the initiative of the House of Commons, the main advisers of Charles I - the Earl of Strafford and Archbishop Laud - were convicted. Thus, the right to impeach senior officials was approved. To protect itself from unexpected dissolution, the Long Parliament was held on February 16, 1641. adopted the Triennial Act, according to which parliament was to be convened at least once every three years, and if the king did not agree to do this, it could be convened by other persons (peers, sheriffs) or assemble independently. These provisions were supplemented by a law that prohibited the interruption, adjournment and dissolution of the Long Parliament except by an act of Parliament itself. This excluded the possibility of a return to unparliamentary rule. In July 1641, two acts were adopted that limited the powers of the Privy Council in the field of legal proceedings and provided for the destruction of the system of emergency political tribunals, primarily the Star Chamber and the High Commission. A series of acts adopted in the summer of 1641 proclaimed the inviolability of the property of subjects and deprived the king of the right to arbitrarily impose various fines. December 1, 1641 Parliament adopted the Great Remonstrance, which set out the program of the allied classes in the revolution, as they saw it at this stage. The Remonstrance began by pointing out the danger looming over the kingdom, the source of which was the “malicious party” in its desire to change the religion and political system of England. The actions of this “party” explained the wars with Scotland, the uprising in Ireland, and the constitutional conflict between the king and parliament. The Remonstrance demanded that bishops be removed from the House of Lords and their power over their subjects reduced. For this purpose, it was proposed to carry out a complete reformation of the church. Many articles of the Remonstrance are devoted to issues of the inviolability of property, both movable and immovable. The illegality of fencing off communal lands and the ruin of the cloth industry were also noted. A number of articles pointed to the destruction and impossibility in future of arbitrariness in the collection of taxes on the part of royal power and unparliamentary rule. The House of Commons approved the Great Remonstrance by a majority of just 11 votes. The discussion of this document in parliament showed how deep the differences were within the House of Commons itself on issues not related to the direct existence of parliament itself. The Great Remonstrance contained a new requirement that the king henceforth appoint only those officials in whom Parliament had reason to trust. This meant, in essence, the political responsibility of officials to parliament and was perceived by the king as an invasion of his prerogative, the executive power. The king refused to approve the Great Remonstrance. During this period, the Long Parliament abolishes the jurisdiction of the Privy Council and limits its competence in general. It is legalized that no tax and no duties can be collected without the consent of parliament. The independence of judges from the crown and their irremovability are proclaimed. All documents adopted by the Long Parliament limited royal power and contributed to the establishment of a constitutional monarchy. Charles I approved all (except the Great Remonstrance) constitutional acts, which was explained by his fear of a crowd of armed Londoners. The threatening behavior of the crowd was the decisive argument of the House of Commons in carrying out the most important acts of the constitutional period of the revolution. In a desperate attempt to stop the revolution, Charles I personally appears in the lower house demanding the extradition of opposition leaders, but fails. From mid-1641 In view of the ever-increasing confrontation of forces, the Long Parliament takes over government functions. Parliament arbitrarily disposes of the treasury and military affairs. The Long Parliament declares the royal army dissolved and creates a parliamentary army. A galaxy of talented generals emerged in the parliamentary army. One of the most prominent was Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658). Acts of Parliament 1641 were aimed at limiting the absolute power of the king and meant a transition to a certain type of constitutional monarchy. However, in fact, this form of the bourgeois state did not have time to establish itself with the outbreak of civil wars between the king and parliament (1642-1647 and 1648-1649).

At the beginning of the 17th century. England was more a bourgeois country than a feudal one. Capitalist relations become dominant in all economic spheres - industry, trade, agriculture.

The main classes of bourgeois society are being formed in the country:

· bourgeoisie (industrial, commercial, financial),

· proletariat (urban and rural),

· farming,

· the nobility (feudal class) is divided into the old nobility - landlords, running their households in the old fashioned way, and the “new nobility” - gentry, actively engaged in commercial and industrial activities Savin A. N. Lectures on the history of the English Revolution. M., 1937

Politically, England was also different (in better side) from the majority European countries, where absolutism reigned at that time, characterized by the unlimited power of monarchs, the absence of representative institutions, the suppression of the bourgeoisie and the dominance of the nobility. English absolutism, established in the country during the Tudor dynasty in the 16th and early 17th centuries, is defined as “unfinished”:

a) the parliament continued to exist, with the acts of which the monarchs were forced to take into account;

b) there was virtually no standing army (the main support of absolutism) due to its isolated, island position, England made do with the navy (and, as is known, democratic sentiments are traditionally strong in the navy);

c) the bureaucratization of the state was insignificant. The system of local government continued to exist (in fact, it was independent of the monarch, since all positions in local government bodies were unpaid).

However, in the first half of the 17th century. In English society, contradictions begin to grow between royal power (semi-feudal, semi-absolute) and parliament, expressing the interests of the bourgeoisie and the “new nobility”. The reasons for the discontent (which subsequently led to the revolution) were as follows:

a) collection by the royal power of taxes inconsistent with parliament, forced government loans, the royal circumvention of the constitutional principle (enshrined in the Magna Carta of 1215) of “taxation by representation”;

b) constant dissolution of parliament, persecution of leaders of the parliamentary opposition, long non-parliamentary rule (in 1628, Charles I Stuart dissolved parliament and did not convene it until 1640)

c) arbitrariness of royal officials and judges, abuses of royal favorites (Duke of Buckingham);

d) the extension of wartime laws to peacetime, army billets in the homes of private individuals;

e) restrictions in the trade and industrial spheres (state monopolies);

f) the desire to restore Anglican Catholicism, which is hated by the majority;

g) the orientation of the Stuart dynasty (James I, Charles I) towards the Catholic states of continental Europe (France, Italy) - traditional trading rivals of England.

In its development, the English bourgeois revolution went through several stages:

1. 1640-1642 - a peaceful, constitutional stage, when the main battles took place in parliament, insisting for now on minimal restrictions on royal power;

2. 1642-1649 - Civil War between supporters of the king and supporters of parliament;

3. 1649-1653 - period of the republic;

4. 1653-1658 - Cromwell’s protectorate (military dictatorship);

5. 1660 - restoration of the monarchy, invitation to the throne of Charles II Stuart (the son of Charles I executed in 1649 by decision of the parliament) - return to the old on a higher basis (establishment of initially dualistic, and then - by the beginning of the 18th century - constitutional, parliamentary monarchy) Lavrovsky V.M., Barg M.A., English bourgeois revolution, M., 1958; .

The English bourgeois revolution had a number of features that distinguished it from subsequent bourgeois revolutions (for example, the Great French Revolution of the 18th century)

These features include:

a) the “religious” nature of the revolution - one of the main tasks was to cleanse the Anglican Church of the remnants of Catholicism; political “parties” of the revolutionary period (Independents, Levellers, etc.) often had different attitudes towards certain religious issues;

b) relative bloodlines, explained by the king’s lack of powerful support in the form of bureaucrats and a standing army (even during the civil war, which accompanied virtually any revolution, the main losses were not among the civilian population, but among soldiers and officers);

c) the actual non-interference of the European powers in the course of the English revolution (most states were drawn into the 30-year war; by 1640, the European monarchs actually had no strength left; England’s isolated island position and strong fleet made foreign military intervention impossible).

The main objectives of the revolution were:

a) the establishment of a new, more advanced form of government (not necessarily republics), taking into account the interests primarily of the bourgeoisie, and not the feudal class;

b) elimination of the remnants of feudalism in industry, trade, and agriculture;

c) cleansing the Anglican Church from the remnants of Catholicism.

In order to protect itself from an unexpected order of dissolution, the Long Parliament passed two important acts: the so-called triennial act, providing for the regular convening of parliament every three years, regardless of the will of the king, and also an act according to which this parliament could not be dissolved except by its own decision.

In the summer of 1641, parliament dispersed the political tribunals of absolutism - the Star Chamber and the High Commission. The jurisdiction of the Privy Council is abolished and its competence is limited in general.

It is legalized that no tax and no duties can be collected without the consent of parliament. The independence of judges from the crown and their irremovability are proclaimed. In a desperate attempt to stop the revolution, Charles 1 personally appears in the lower house demanding the extradition of opposition leaders, but fails. From mid-1641 In view of the ever-increasing confrontation of forces, the Long Parliament takes over government functions. Parliament arbitrarily disposes of the treasury and military affairs.

The Long Parliament declares the royal army dissolved and creates a parliamentary army. A galaxy of talented generals emerged in the parliamentary army. One of the most prominent was Oliver Cromwell (1599 - 1658). In 1646 Charles 1 was forced to surrender to the Scots, and they handed him over to parliament.

Parliament's victory in the civil war did not give the dispossessed masses access to land. Nothing has changed in public - legal status grassroots As before, only freeholders with an annual income of 40 shillings enjoyed the right to vote in parliamentary elections in the village, and in the city - a narrow circle of full-fledged city corporations, and in other cases - tax payers.

Consequently, the broad masses of the urban lower classes remained outside the framework of the officially recognized “people of England”, i.e. represented in parliament. In the same way, the system of justice and legal proceedings with its high cost, bribery and red tape remained unchanged, as well as the completely archaic system of law, extremely confusing and, moreover, fixed in a language alien to the people - in Latin. History of state and law of foreign countries. Zheludkov A.V., Bulanova A.G. Lecture notes. "Prior", M., 2002..

However, having deceived the expectations of the broad democratic grassroots, the parliament did not take into account one thing - the revolution awakened them from political lethargy.

By the summer of 1646 The basic constitutional demands of the Levellers emerged. The document, called “Remonstration of many thousands of citizens,” contained a detailed program for the democratic stage of the revolution: 1. destruction of the power of the king and the House of Lords; 2. the supremacy of community power; 3. the responsibility of this house to its voters - the people of England; 4. annual parliamentary elections; 5. unlimited freedom to parliament; 6. constitutional guarantees against abuse of state power by fixing the “innate” rights of citizens, which are inalienable and absolute.

At this stage of the revolution, the Levellers acted as heralds of republicanism based on the principles of democracy, and thereby pointed the way to deepening the democratic content of the revolution. The victory in the first civil war and the defeat of the monarchy stimulated the isolation of different ideological and political trends in the circles of parliamentary supporters. The Presbyterian majority of Parliament sought to reach an agreement with the king on the basis of the historical constitution and the confirmation of the Great Remonstrance. The Independents, who constituted a minority in parliament, sought to consolidate the supremacy of parliament, including even the possibility of establishing a republic. According to Independent ideology, freedom of conscience was considered a natural human right, the same as freedom of thought in general; Parliament was only supposed to head a system of independent and free communities that would decide matters in a representative manner. During the years of the rise of the revolution in the army and among the urban lower classes, a new movement emerged - the levelers, whose leader was D. Lillburn. The Levellers were guided by the recognition of popular supremacy and free government of the people on the basis of universal suffrage.

In May 1647, at the gathering of the army, a special body was formed - Army Council, which was engaged not only in military affairs, but also gradually became an institution government controlled. Differences grew between the various currents of parliamentary opposition when the Second Civil War broke out in 1648. With the support of the Levellers, the army resolves its conflict with the Long Parliament. In December 1648 she occupies London. Parliament is being forcibly purged. In the end, there remain about 100 deputies obedient to the army.

The culmination of the revolution was the trial of King Charles 1 (January 1649), organized by decision of parliament, as a result of which Charles 1 was recognized as “a tyrant, traitor, murderer and enemy of the state.” The court sentenced him to death. January 30, 1649 Charles I's head was cut off in front of a huge crowd of people on the London market square. The execution of the king was the final, formally legal completion of the establishment of a republic in England. The revolution triumphed - the feudal monarchy was overthrown. Act of Parliament dated March 17, 1649 royal power was declared destroyed as “unnecessary, burdensome and dangerous for the good of the people.” After 2 days, her fate was shared by the House of Lords. On May 19, England was solemnly declared a republic. All legislative power in the country now belonged to a unicameral parliament represented by the House of Commons. Executive power was formally vested in the State Council, elected by parliament for a term of 1 year, but of its 41 members, only 11 were not simultaneously members of parliament. In the State Council, all power was officially exercised by the top of the army, led by Cromwell. Thus, the so solemnly proclaimed republic was in fact a dictatorship of independent generals, only covered with a parliamentary façade. The political system of power was unstable. As part of the Long Parliament after 1649. about 80 members remained (the so-called “rump”). Even fewer took part in the meetings and decisions of cases. Most of them were simultaneously members of the State Council and the Army Council. O. Cromwell's authority and personal military power increased enormously.

By the autumn of 1651, 11 years had passed since the election of the Long Parliament. Meanwhile, the “rump” that remains from him is clearly in no hurry either to dissolve himself or to set a deadline for his meetings. When it became obvious that the “rump” was preparing an electoral law that would ensure the return of its members to the new parliament, its time had come.

April 20, 1653 Cromwell, accompanied by a military detachment, came to parliament and dissolved it with his authority. At the same time, the State Council was dissolved. Its functions were taken over by a council of officers, supplemented by civilian members. In July 1653 The so-called parliament of saints (or “small parliament” - about 140 people) gathered, whose members were either named senior officers or delegated by church communities. However, the mood of parliament seemed dangerous to Cromwell. As long as parliament was dealing with the issue of replacing church marriage with a civil one or planning judicial reform, he was still tolerated, but when he swung at church tithes, the patience of the officer elite came to an end. Not without her “advice” the moderate majority of the “small parliament” on January 12, 1654. came to Cromwell and resigned. With the dissolution of the Small Parliament, the republic was virtually liquidated. Within 4 days, the country’s new constitution, the so-called “Instrument of Governance,” was ready. The new constitution, formally most concerned with the “separation of powers,” in fact led to the complete concentration of power in the hands of the protector. Cromwell was the commander-in-chief of the army and navy, he controlled finances and the court, led foreign policy and during the breaks between parliamentary sessions he issued ordinances that had the force of law.

The idea of ​​a written constitution was new to England. Constitution of December 13, 1653 established an outwardly republican, but, in fact, dictatorial system of power. The legislative power of the “free state of England, Scotland and Ireland” was concentrated in a dual institution - parliament and the newly established Lord Protector. Parliament had exclusive powers to change, suspend, introduce new laws, and establish taxes or taxes. Parliament had to convene regularly (every 3 years) and independently. Parliament was to be composed of at least 60 members "known for their integrity, fear of God and good behavior."

The election for the post of Lord Protector was made State Council(whose members, in turn, were elected by parliament). The Lord Protector had the power to approve or defer laws of Parliament. He enjoyed virtually unlimited power in government matters. The protector was considered the commander-in-chief of the army, he fully owned the rights in the field foreign policy. All appointments of officials were henceforth made in his name. He had the right to pardon. A special article of the constitution assigned the powers of Lord Protector to O. Cromwell for life. Publication of the constitution and reorganization of the upper crust political system far from eliminating the contradictions between society and the independent leadership. The contradictions were all the more significant because the political, administrative and moral terror established by the independents under the slogans of the revolution was much more difficult for broad layers than the regime of the former monarchy, which, despite all its sins, was still a secular state. The Independents, in their Protestant zeal, began to strive to build a state - a church.

The first Parliament of the Protectorate met on September 3, 1654. included a considerable number of Republicans who did not want to put up with the essentially unlimited power of the protector. January 22, 1655 Parliament was dissolved by Cromwell. This was his obvious political mistake: he was now forced to share power with the army generals. The idea of ​​military despotism was increasingly gaining strength. Under pressure from the generals, principles military organization were transferred to the administrative-territorial structure. Summer 1655 the country was divided into 17 military districts led by major generals.

The second Parliament of the Protectorate opened on September 17, 1656. The first act of this parliament was the destruction of the regime of major generals. Instead, in July 1657 Cromwell was asked to assume the royal title. The proposal was strategic: its goal was to restore the historical constitution. However, the Army Council and the generals intervened and regarded the proposal “as scandalous.” Changes, however, followed on May 22, 1657, but in the spirit of a compromise between the traditional way of life and the military dictatorship. Cromwell received the right to appoint his own successor. At the same time, the House of Lords was restored, the exclusive rights of parliament to vote taxes were confirmed, and freedom of conscience was guaranteed.

This is how the secret dream of the bourgeoisie and nobility manifested itself to restore the monarchy in England. With all this, the protectorate regime was associated with the personality and authority of Cromwell. Death of Cromwell on September 3, 1658 accelerated the collapse of the protectorate regime. Richard Cromwell, appointed as his father's successor, failed to retain power and became a political toy in the hands of the generals. In 1659 he was forced to renounce his title and restore the conditional republic. Public discontent with both the independent regime and the powerless republic simultaneously became so significant that the issue of restoring the monarchy and the historical constitution in the country became a matter of practical politics. The revolution has exhausted itself. The political crisis at the end of the protectorate was not caused by a coincidence. The state order established as a result of the revolution was unstable; it did not correspond to the existing updated social structure. Political initiatives of an independent parliament, not balanced by any others government institutions, aroused justified fears of a wide layer of large owners - both the old land lords, and the “new nobility”, and the financial and commercial bourgeoisie, which received the necessary privileges in colonial trade and legislative support. In search of stability, the return to the throne of the Stuart dynasty began to seem like a way out.