Did the Star Chamber Contribute to Starting the First English Civil War?

[Uncle Joe]

Other reasons are cited but this was an English Institution right up until the year before the war began.

I know this piece of history was an inspiration in drafting the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution so it must have had a major adverse, politically corruptive impact against English society.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_chamber

The Star Chamber (Latin: Camera stellata) was an English court of law that sat at the royal Palace of Westminster until 1641. It was made up of Privy Counsellors, as well as common-law judges and supplemented the activities of the common-law and equity courts in both civil and criminal matters. The court was set up to ensure the fair enforcement of laws against prominent people, those so powerful that ordinary courts could never convict them of their crimes. Court sessions were held in secret, with no indictments, no right of appeal, no juries, and no witnesses. Evidence was presented in writing. Over time it evolved into a political weapon, a symbol of the misuse and abuse of power by the English monarchy and courts.

(snip)

Influence on the U.S. Constitution

The historical abuses of the Star Chamber are considered a primary motivating force behind the protections against compelled self-incrimination embodied in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.<9> The meaning of "compelled testimony" under the Fifth Amendment—i.e., the conditions under which a defendant is allowed to "take the Fifth"—is thus often interpreted via reference to the inquisitorial methods of the Star Chamber.<10>

As the U.S. Supreme Court described it, "the Star Chamber has, for centuries, symbolized disregard of basic individual rights. The Star Chamber not merely allowed, but required, defendants to have counsel. The defendant's answer to an indictment was not accepted unless it was signed by counsel. When counsel refused to sign the answer, for whatever reason, the defendant was considered to have confessed." Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 821-22 (1975).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Civil_War

The English Civil War (1642–1651) was a series of armed conflicts and political machinations between Parliamentarians (Roundheads) and Royalists (Cavaliers). The first (1642–46) and second (1648–49) civil wars pitted the supporters of King Charles I against the supporters of the Long Parliament, while the third war (1649–51) saw fighting between supporters of King Charles II and supporters of the Rump Parliament. The Civil War ended with the Parliamentary victory at the Battle of Worcester on 3 September 1651.

The Civil War led to the trial and execution of Charles I, the exile of his son, Charles II, and replacement of English monarchy with first, the Commonwealth of England (1649–53), and then with a Protectorate (1653–59), under Oliver Cromwell's personal rule. The monopoly of the Church of England on Christian worship in England ended with the victors consolidating the established Protestant Ascendancy in Ireland. Constitutionally, the wars established the precedent that an English monarch cannot govern without Parliament's consent, although this concept was legally established only with the Glorious Revolution later in the century.

[Spider Jerusalem]

1. The Court of Star Chamber held proceedings against the powerful

not against commoners. A commoner wouldn't have been tried in Star Chamber; the impact of things like Star Chamber on the political upheavals of the pre-Civil War period would have been relatively minimal, although non-conformists, dissenters and Catholic recusants among the gentry and nobility were tried in Star Chamber. The abuses of Charles I and his use of Star Chamber proceedings to control the landowning gentry was, probably, a contributory factor which saw a good many of the gentry lining up on the side of the Parliamentary forces; peers of the realm were already subject to separate justice and tried for any offences in the House of Lords, not Star Chamber, and most of them were with a few exceptions Royalists.

[Uncle Joe]

2. When I said corruptive to society, was the lack of justice in the execution of Thomas Wentworth

influenced by Star Chamber precedent, whether he was tried in that forum or not?

In early 1641 Parliament had Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, arrested and sent to the Tower of London on a charge of treason. John Pym claimed that Wentworth's statements of readiness to campaign against "the kingdom" were aimed in fact at England itself. Unable to prove the case in court, the House of Commons, led by Pym and Henry Vane, resorted to a Bill of Attainder.<30> Unlike a guilty finding in a court case, attainder did not require a legal burden of proof, but it did require the king's approval. Charles, still incensed over the Commons' handling of Buckingham, refused. Wentworth himself, hoping to head off the war he saw looming, wrote to the king and asked him to reconsider. Wentworth's execution took place in May, 1641.<31>

Instead of saving the country from war, Wentworth's sacrifice in fact doomed it to one. Within months, the Irish Catholics, fearing a resurgence of Protestant power, struck first, and all Ireland soon descended into chaos.<32> Rumours circulated that the King supported the Irish, and Puritan members of the Commons soon started murmuring that this exemplified the fate that Charles had in store for them all.<33>

[Spider Jerusalem]

3. Probably not, no, bills of attainder had existed since medieval times

and were reserved for cases of high treason. Attainder was the process by which a peer of the realm or other person was stripped of his title and lands (the title being held as a grant from the crown and in the absence of attainder descending in the male line, and the lands being held of the crown in fee simple).

[Uncle Joe]

4. But it did require the King's signature.

In early 1641 Parliament had Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, arrested and sent to the Tower of London on a charge of treason. John Pym claimed that Wentworth's statements of readiness to campaign against "the kingdom" were aimed in fact at England itself. Unable to prove the case in court, the House of Commons, led by Pym and Henry Vane, resorted to a Bill of Attainder.<30> Unlike a guilty finding in a court case, attainder did not require a legal burden of proof, but it did require the king's approval. Charles, still incensed over the Commons' handling of Buckingham, refused. Wentworth himself, hoping to head off the war he saw looming, wrote to the king and asked him to reconsider. Wentworth's execution took place in May, 1641.<31>

So if the Star Chamber poisoned the well of justice in the minds of the powerful, quid pro quo.