Ship money

Petition of Right
Petition of Right
	The Petition of Right
Created	8 May 1628
Ratified	7 June 1628
Location	Parliamentary Archives, London
Author(s)	Sir Edward Coke
Purpose	The protection of civil liberties
Full text
	Petition of Right at Wikisource

Last updated April 06, 2024

Ship money was a tax of medieval origin levied intermittently in the Kingdom of England until the middle of the 17th century. Assessed typically on the inhabitants of coastal areas of England, it was one of several taxes that English monarchs could levy by prerogative without the approval of Parliament. The attempt of King Charles I from 1634 onwards to levy ship money during peacetime and extend it to the inland counties of England without parliamentary approval provoked fierce resistance, and was one of the grievances of the English propertied class in the lead-up to the English Civil War.

Traditional practice

The Plantagenet kings of England had exercised the right of requiring the maritime towns and counties to furnish ships in time of war, and this duty was sometimes commuted for a money payment.^[1]

Although several statutes of Edward I and Edward III, notably their confirmations of Magna Carta, had made it illegal for the Crown to exact any taxes without the consent of Parliament, the prerogative of levying ship money in time of war had never fallen wholly into abeyance. In 1619 James I aroused no popular opposition by levying £40,000 of ship money on London and £8,550 on other seaport towns.^[1]

Opposition

In 1628, Charles I, having prorogued Parliament in early summer and after his assent to the Petition of Right, proceeded to levy ship money on every county in England without Parliament, issuing writs requiring £173,000 to be returned to the exchequer. This was the first occasion when the demand for ship-money aroused serious opposition,^[1] in view of the declaration in the petition that

[Y]our subjects have inherited this freedom, that they should not be compelled to contribute to any tax, tallage, aid, or other like charge not set by common consent, in parliament.

Charles' requests to sheriffs were rejected by the overburdened inland populations; Lord Northampton, Lord-Lieutenant of Warwickshire, and the Earl of Banbury in Berkshire, refused to assist in collecting the money; and Charles withdrew the writs.^[1]

In 1634, Charles made a secret treaty with Philip IV of Spain to assist him against the Dutch. To raise funds for this, William Noy, the Attorney-General, suggested that further resort should be had to ship money. Noy investigated such legal learning as there was in support of the demand, and unearthed old records of ship money in the Tower of London; some historians, such as Hallam, have seen Noy's findings as evidence that, before Charles' use of it, the tax had been disused for centuries.^[1]

The King obtained an opinion affirming the legality of the writ from Lord Keeper Coventry and the Earl of Manchester, whereupon the writ was issued in October 1634 and directed to the justices of London and other seaports, requiring them to provide a certain number of ships of war of a prescribed tonnage and equipment, or their equivalent in money, and empowering them to assess the inhabitants for payment of the tax, according to their substance.^[1]

Three writs

The distinctive feature of the writ of 1634 was that it was issued, contrary to all precedent, in time of peace. Charles desired to conceal the true aim of his policy, which he knew would be detested by the country, and he accordingly gave as a pretext for the impost the danger to commerce from pirates, and the general condition of unrest in Europe.^[1]

The citizens of London immediately claimed exemption under their charter, while other towns argued as to the amount of their assessment; but no resistance on constitutional grounds appears to have been offered, and £104,000 was collected.^[1]

On 9 October 1635 a second writ of ship money was issued, directed to the sheriffs and justices of inland as well as of maritime counties and towns, as in the revoked writ of 1628. £208,000 was demanded, to be obtained by assessment on personal as well as real property, payment to be enforced by distraint.^[1]

This demand gave rise to popular discontent, which now began to see a determination on the part of the king to dispense altogether with parliamentary government. Charles responded with a written opinion, signed by ten out of twelve judges consulted, to the effect that in time of national danger, of which the Crown was the sole judge, ship money might legally be levied on all parts of the country by writ under the Great Seal.^[1]

The issue of a third writ of ship money on 9 October 1636 made it evident that the ancient restrictions that limited the levying of the tax to the maritime parts of the kingdom and to times of war (or imminent national danger) had been finally swept away, and the king intended to convert it into a permanent and general form of taxation without parliamentary sanction. The judges again, at Charles's request, gave an opinion favourable to the prerogative, which was read by Lord Coventry in the Star Chamber and by the judges on assize.^[1]

Refusal, then repeal

Ship money enabled Charles to meet peacetime government expenditures in the 1630s.^[2] Payment was, however, refused by John Hampden, a wealthy Buckinghamshire gentleman landowner. The case against the latter ( R v Hampden )^[3] was finally heard before all 12 judges in the Court of Exchequer Chamber in 1637,^[4] after Denham had expressed his doubts to Davenport, who was wary of the four-judge panel which would have sat in a less unusual case.^[5] Hampden was defended by Oliver St John and Robert Holborne.^[1] The Solicitor-General, Sir Edward Littleton, and the Attorney-General, Sir John Banks, prosecuted. Hampden's lawyers argued that the taxation was the king going around Parliament and attempting to squeeze money out from the people of England, while defenders of the king suggested that these taxes were necessary for the defense and safety of England.^[4] Hampden lost the case, seven judges to five:^[6]

For the King:
For Hampden:

Aftermath

Despite the trial case being won by Charles the opposition to ship money continued.^[7] In 1640 a group of citizens of London petitioned Charles directly and at the top of their grievances was against the tax:

The petition starts off by attacking the tax: The pressing and unusual Impositions upon Merchandize, Importing and Exporting, and the urging and Levying of Ship-money, notwithstanding both which, Merchants Ships and Goods have been taken and destroyed both by Turkish and other Pirates.^[8]

The narrowness of the case encouraged others to refuse the tax. By 1639, less than 20% of the money demanded was raised. As matters deteriorated in England and Scotland starting with the Bishops' War, ship money proved to be insufficient to finance the king's military needs. It was later stopped by the Long Parliament when they voted the Ship Money Act 1640 (16 Cha. 1. c. 14). Hampden went on to Parliamentary and Civil War leadership, only to die early on at the Battle of Chalgrove Field. Finally, half a century later, in the aftermath of the Glorious Revolution, the Bill of Rights 1689 prohibited all forms of extra-parliamentary taxation.

Related Research Articles

Charles I was King of England, Scotland, and Ireland from 27 March 1625 until his execution in 1649.

The Long Parliament was an English Parliament which lasted from 1640 until 1660. It followed the fiasco of the Short Parliament, which had convened for only three weeks during the spring of 1640 after an 11-year parliamentary absence. In September 1640, King Charles I issued writs summoning a parliament to convene on 3 November 1640. He intended it to pass financial bills, a step made necessary by the costs of the Bishops' Wars against Scotland. The Long Parliament received its name from the fact that, by Act of Parliament, it stipulated it could be dissolved only with agreement of the members; and those members did not agree to its dissolution until 16 March 1660, after the English Civil War and near the close of the Interregnum.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of the constitution of the United Kingdom</span>

The constitution of the United Kingdom is an uncodified constitution made up of various statutes, judicial precedents, convention, treaties and other sources. Beginning in the Middle Ages, the constitution developed gradually in response to various crises. By the 20th century, the British monarchy had become a constitutional and ceremonial monarchy, and Parliament developed into a representative body exercising parliamentary sovereignty.

John Pym was a politician and administrator from London, who played a major role in establishing what would become the modern English Parliamentary system. One of the Five Members whose attempted arrest in January 1642 was a major step in sparking the First English Civil War, his use of procedure to out manoeuvre opponents was unusual for the period. Though this meant he was respected by contemporaries rather than admired, in 1895 historian Goldwin Smith described him as "the greatest member of Parliament that ever lived".

The Petition of Right, passed on 7 June 1628, is an English constitutional document setting out specific individual protections against the state, reportedly of equal value to Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights 1689. It was part of a wider conflict between Parliament and the Stuart monarchy that led to the 1638 to 1653 Wars of the Three Kingdoms, ultimately resolved in the 1688-89 Glorious Revolution.

Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford,, was an English statesman and a major figure in the period leading up to the English Civil War. He served in Parliament and was a supporter of King Charles I. From 1632 to 1640 he was Lord Deputy of Ireland, where he established a strong authoritarian rule. Recalled to England, he became a leading advisor to the King, attempting to strengthen the royal position against Parliament. When Parliament condemned Lord Strafford to death, Charles reluctantly signed the death warrant and Strafford was executed. He had been advanced several times in the Peerage of England during his career, being created 1st Baron Wentworth in 1628, 1st Viscount Wentworth in late 1628 or early 1629, and, finally, 1st Earl of Strafford in January 1640. He was known as Sir Thomas Wentworth, 2nd Baronet, between 1614 and 1628.

The Short Parliament was a Parliament of England that was summoned by King Charles I of England on 20 February 1640 and sat from 13 April to 5 May 1640. It was so called because of its short session of only three weeks.

John Hampden was an English landowner and politician whose opposition to 'arbitrary' taxes imposed by Charles I made him a national figure. Allied with Parliamentarian leader John Pym, and cousin to Oliver Cromwell, he was among the Five Members whose attempted arrest in January 1642 helped to spark the First English Civil War. All 5 are commemorated at the State Opening of Parliament each year.

The Parliament of England was the legislature of the Kingdom of England from the 13th century until 1707 when it was replaced by the Parliament of Great Britain. Parliament evolved from the great council of bishops and peers that advised the English monarch. Great councils were first called Parliaments during the reign of Henry III. By this time, the king required Parliament's consent to levy taxation.

Sir William Brereton, 1st Baronet, 13 September 1604 – 7 April 1661, was an English religious Independent, author, and landowner from Cheshire. He was Member of Parliament for Cheshire at various times between 1628 and 1653, and during the First English Civil War, commander of Parliamentarian forces in the North Midlands.

Sir Oliver St John was an English judge and politician who sat in the House of Commons from 1640-53. He supported the Parliamentary cause in the English Civil War.

The Personal Rule was the period in England from 1629 to 1640 when King Charles I ruled as an autocratic absolute monarch without recourse to Parliament. Charles claimed that he was entitled to do this under the royal prerogative and that he had a divine right.

Sir Robert Heath was an English judge and politician who sat in the House of Commons from 1621 to 1625.

John Finch, 1st Baron Finch was an English judge, and politician who sat in the House of Commons at various times between 1621 and 1629. He was Speaker of the House of Commons.

Edward Littleton, 1st Baron Lyttleton, from Munslow in Shropshire, was a Chief Justice of North Wales. He was descended from the judge and legal scholar, Thomas de Littleton. His father, also Edward, had been Chief Justice of North Wales before him.

The history of the English fiscal system affords the best known example of continuous financial development in terms of both institutions and methods. Although periods of great upheaval occurred from the time of the Norman Conquest to the beginning of the 20th century, the line of connection is almost entirely unbroken. Perhaps, the most revolutionary changes occurred in the 17th century as a result of the Civil War and, later, the Glorious Revolution of 1688; though even then there was no real breach of continuity.

Events from the 1630s in England.

The Five Knights' case (1627) 3 How St Tr 1, is a case in English law, and now United Kingdom constitutional law, fought by five knights in 1627 against forced loans placed on them by King Charles I in a common law court.

Edmund Dunch, 1st Baron Burnell of East Wittenham (1602–1678) was an English Member of Parliament who supported the Parliamentary cause before and during the English Civil War. During the Interregnum he sat as a member of parliament. In 1659, after the Protectorate and before the Restoration, regaining his seat in the Rump he also sat in Committee of Safety. After the restoration of the monarchy he was not exempted under the Act of Pardon and Oblivion but the titles granted to him under the Protectorate were not recognised under the restored monarchy of Charles II.

Sir John Denham (1559–1639) was an English-born judge who spent part of his career in Ireland. He is chiefly remembered now as one of the "Ship-money judges" who decided the so-called Ship Money case, Rex v. Hampden. He was the father of the poet Sir John Denham.

References

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain : McNeill, Ronald John (1911). "Ship-money". In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica . Vol. 24 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 982.
↑ Gross, David (ed.) We Won’t Pay!: A Tax Resistance Reader ISBN 1-4348-9825-3 pp. 9–16
↑ Thomas Bayly Howell (1816). State Trials. Vol. 3. pp. 825–1316.
1 2 Kahn, Victoria (2004). Wayward Contracts: The Crisis of Political Obligation in England, 1640–1674. Princeton University Press. pp. 90–95.
↑ C. V. Wedgwood The King's Peace Collins (1955)
↑ Salmon's State Trials, vol 1, p. 698
↑ "The National Archives | Civil War | Why did people go to war in 1642? | 1637–39 | Source 2". www.nationalarchives.gov.uk. Retrieved 2 May 2019.
↑ "The National Archives | Civil War | Why did people go to war in 1642? | 1640–42 | Source 1". www.nationalarchives.gov.uk. Retrieved 2 May 2019.