Description:The Sutherland Papers include a copy of the Petition sent by the House of Lords and the House of Commons to the King on 8th September 1642.
Written just after the outbreak of war, the Petition featured above describes Parliament’s objections to the King’s actions against Parliament, providing an insight into the conflict from the Parliamentarian perspective.
The Petition appears to be in answer to an address made to Parliament by the King. The Petition indicates that Parliament refused to negotiate or deviate from the resolutions in their ‘former answer’, making the document very interesting in terms of analysing the political conflict which led to the Civil War.
The Petition opens by stating that ‘the Lords and Commons’ have used ‘endeavours’ and made ‘expressions’ to the King ‘to prevent those distractions and dangers…likelie to fall vpon this kingdome’.
The Petition goes on to describe Parliament’s objections to the King’s ‘proclamacons and declaracons whereby you haue declared the Actions of both your houses of Parlianment to be treasonable and their persons traytors’.
The Petition states that Parliament would only be prepared to negotiate ‘if your Maiesty shall then vpon this our humble peticon leaving your Forces, Returne to your Parliament’. The document assures the King that ‘your Maiesty will finde such expressions of our fidelity and duety as shall assure your safety honor and greatnesse can onely be found in the affecon of your people and the sincere Councell of your Parliament’.
Although the Petition refers to negotiation, Parliament offer no compromise on their part. It is important to note that the offer that Parliament are making to the King involves the King accepting Parliament’s ‘sincere Councell’. This is followed by an assertion that Parliament’s ‘constant and undiscouraged endeavours and consultations have passed through difficulties vnheard of, onely to secure your kingdoms from the violent mischiefe and danger now ready to fall vpon them’. This comment reflects a subjective Parliamentarian view of the political dispute.
The Petition concludes by asserting ‘it is our hopes your Maiesty will in your reason belieuie there is noe other way then this to make your selfe happie and your kingdome safe’. It is significant that the Petition ends by firmly defining Parliament’s reluctance to compromise, stating ‘there is noe other way than this’.
It is intriguing when examining these documents to consider the ways in which they are written and the impact that this has on how their content is conveyed to the reader. The Petition is written in a way which portrays Parliament as defending the country’s liberty and King Charles as the aggressor willing conflict by refusing to listen to his Parliament.