HISTORY OF ENGLAND

HISTORY OF ENGLANDPRINCIPALLYIN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURYBYLEOPOLD VON RANKEVOLUME I11

CONTENTS.BOOK XI.THF COMMONWEALTH IN ENGLAND, 1649-1653.PAGECHAP. I. Republican ideas and institutions in England. TheLevellers . . . . . . . . 3,, I Rinuccini and Cromwell in Ireland . . . . 22,, 111. Charles I1 and Cromwell in Scotland. . . . 37, 1 Growth of the power of the Commonwealth by landand sea . . . . . . . . . 58, V. Dissolution of the Long Parliament . . . , 71,, 1 The Little Parliament . . . . . . 85BOOK XII.I.11.111.IV.V.VI.VII.Oliver Cromwell and his elevation to the ProtectorateEmbassy to Sweden. Peace with Holland . .The Parliament of 1654 . . . . . .M~litary government. Religious tolerance . .Rupture with Spain . . . . . . .The Parliament of 1656, 1657. Idea of a CromwellianMonarchy . . . . . . . .The general position of the Protectorate at home andabroadin1657and1658 . . . . .Alliance with France and Sweden . . . .The Parliament of 1658 . . . . . .The War in 1658. . . . . . . .Death of Oliver Cromwell . . . . . .

CONTENTS.CONTENTS.viiBOOK XIII.ROOK XV.FALL OF THE PROTECTORATE AND THE COMMONWEALTH.RESTORATION OF THE MONARCHY, I 658- 1660.INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . .CHAP. I. Attempt to continue the Protectorate . . ., I. Attempt to form a Commonwealth on a new basis ., 1 Royalist movements in the summer of 1659. . .,, I . Supremacy and constitutional projects of the Army ., V. Lambert and Monk. Restoration of the Rump Parliament. . . . . . . . ., I . Anti-republican movement. Monk in the City . .,, VII. Recall of the King . . . . . . .BOOK XIV.THE FIRST FIVE YEARS UNDER CHARLES 11. THERESTORATION OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH.PAGECHAP. I. The state of affairs at the Restoration . . . 311, I. The Convention Parliament in the summer of 1660 . 322,, 111. Foreign policy. Marriages in the Royal Family . 335., IV. Religious differences. The Coronation. A new Par-llament . . . . . . . . 348,, V. The first two years of the Long Parliament of theRestoration. The Act of Uniformity . . . 365, I . Relations with France. Sale of Dunkirk . . . 380,, VII. A scheme for reunion with Rome. Claim to the dis- .pensing power.Personal relations in Court and2'9222"34242251State . . . . . . . . . 393THE DUTCI~ WARS OF CHARLES 11.ESTABLISHMENT OFTHE PROTESTANT AND PARLIAMENTARY CHARACTEROF THE CONSTITUTION 1664-1674.INTRODUCTION - . . . . . . . .CHAP. I. The first war with Holland, in the year 1665 . ., I. Influence of France upon the continuation of war andupon the peace . . . . . . .CHAP. 111. Fall of the Lord Chancellor Clarendon . . .,, I . Convention at the Hague in January 1668. TripleAlliance . . . . . . . . .,, . Government and Parliament in the year 1668 . ., 1 Secret alliance with France, 1669, 1670 . . .,, VII. Parliamentary sessions from 1669 to 1071 . . .,, VIII. The second war against Holland, 1672 . . ., I . Origin of the Test Act . . . . . ., X. Peace with Holland . . . . . . .,, XI. Union of Parliament with the Prince of Orange .,, XII. Movement in literature , . . . . .PAGE415

BOOK XI.THE COMMONWEALTH IN ENGLAND, 1649-1 653.RANKE, VOI.. 111.

CHAPTER I.REPUBLICAN IDEAS AND INSTITUTIONS IN ENGLAND.THE LEVELLERS.IT was not in any old parliamentary pretensions, whichhad gradually risen higher and higher, that the English Republichad its origin, but in a different group of ideas, no lessdecidedly opposed to the Parliament, such as it had hithertobeen, than to the monarchy itself.In order to understand both the events of the time andthe consequences which followed, it is indispensable to realiseclearly this opposition. For those motives which give theimpulse at the foundation of a new state of things incessantlyreact upon it.At the moment when a union appeared possible betweenthe King, the Parliament, and some of the leading officers,on the basis of the old constitution (October 1647), theAgitators in the army conceived the plan of actually carryingout the idea of the sovereignty of the people, sooften invoked before, and of building up anew the constitutionof the country on that basis. This plan is undisguisedlyand expressly stated in the petition which was presentedat the time to the council of officers, in the nameof five regiments of cavalry. 'Forasmuch,' so runs the petition,'as all power is originally and in reality vested in thecollective people of this nation, the free choice of their representativesand their consent is the sole basis of a lawfulgovernment, while the end of government is the commonweal.' Conformably to this, it demanded next the dissolutionof the Long Parli-ment, which had not been derivedfrom these principles, and in its stead the completeestablishment of a fair and equal representation. The6 2

q REPUBLICAN IDEAS AND INSTITUTIONS XI. I.A.D. 1648.election, as a second document explains, was to be accordingto manhood suffrage, and was to take place every two years.The representatives were to have the right to enact laws, toalter them, and to repeal them; to appoint magistrates ofall grades, to call them to account and to depose them; tonegotiate with foreign powers, and to decide on peace andwar. Thus not only legislation and administration, but alsoforeign relations, were to be in their hands. Still they are noton that account to enjoy any absolute power, but to confinethemselves within the limits marked out by those from whomtheir power comes. Three fundamental demands were expresslymade at the time : first and foremost, equality beforethe law, with the inviolable maintenance of the rules ofjudicial procedure ; further, a remarkable demand enough,that no one should be obliged to serve against his will inthe army. Lastly, the representatives are not to have thedecision in matters of religion. The proposed reform wasregarded rather as an obligation imposed by religion; forlawful authority can come from God alone, but the supremepower is entrusted by God to the people, and by them itis handed over to their representatives 1.They were Independents of strong religious convictionsfrom whom these proposals emanated. They wished to constitutethe state according to their own liking, withoutbeing restricted either in their religion or in their personalfreedom. They expressly took their stand on the principlethat the people can be subjected to no single person, andthat the authority of the Lords, which does not come fromthe people, is invalid. In a petition professedly of thousandsof well-affected persons in London and its suburbs, but emanatingalso from one of the most prominent Agitators, Lilburne,it was sought to point out to the Parliament thatits whole procedure presupposed, though it had not expressed,these principles. For how otherwise should it have venturedIn the letter to the Commons we read, that the simple way to peace was themaking clear and secure the power that you betrust to your representatifs, thatthey may know their trust, in the faithful execution whereof you will assist them.Parliaments are to receive the extent of their power and trust from those thatbetrust them.'5XI. 1.IN ENGLAND.A.D. 1648.to raise war against the King, which according to the existing12, the foulest treason, had it not assumed that the.L. ..-~i~~ was merely a servant of the people '.parliament at the time expressed its displeasure at theseproposals ; it declared that they were contrary to the essenceof the parliamentary constitution, and tended to destroy thegovernment of the kingdom. For a long time nothing wassaid about them. When however, towards the end of theyear 1648, the rupture between the King and the Parliamentwas ..-imminent, they were revived in full force. In the councilof held at St. Albans there were still some votesin favour of a reconciliation, but an address from the officersof Rich's and several other regiments gave expression tocounter proposals of a totally different import. They urgedthat the authors of the war should be punished, that a speedytermination should be put to the existing Parliament, andthat the supreme power, including also the relation betweenthe people and its representatives, should be clearlydefined '. And these proposals were carried. In the Remonstrance,which opened the great drama that led to theexecution of the King, the army demanded not only hispunishment but also the immediate dissolution of the Parliament.It was to surrender back its high commission intothe hands of the people, from whom it had received it, sosoon as this could be done with any safety, and to pledgeits word that the government of the state should be basedupon grounds of common freedom and security. The Houseof Commons was to be a true representation of the people,and as such to possess the supreme power in all that concernedlegislation, war and peace, and even the administrationof justice 3. Every one was to be subject to its authority.' The humble petition of thousands of well-affected persons inhabiting the city ofLondon, Westminster, the borough of Southwark, Old Parl. Hist. xvii. 451, copiedfrom the original. It is there ascribed to Henry Martin. But from Lilburne'sPamphlet 'England's new chains discovered,' it is clear that it comes from hishand.The representations and consultations of the general council of the officers atSt. Alhans.The highest and final judgment in all civil things without furthei appeai tocreated standing power.

8 REPUBLICAN IDEAS AND INSTITUTIONS XI. I.A.D. I 649.These were differences destined hereafter to produce manifolddiscussions, but which were purposely disregarded at the time,because it was necessary to avoid all open opposition inorder to establish under republican forms the supreme power,as it had now become.The first blow fell on the House of Lords, the resistance ofwhich to the impeachment of the King was the immediateground on which the principle of the sovereignty of the peoplewas accepted.After the execution of the King, the L6rds reassembledand named a committee to deliberate with a commission ofthe Lower House on the new constitution of the state.Apparently they cherished the intention of proposing therecognition of the Prince of Wales, though with severe limitations.On the 5th of February they added to the numberof the committee and proposed a conference with a committeeof the Commons on the following morning at nine.The Commons however were as determined not to let themselvesbe fettered by conferences with the Upper House.On the same morning they on the contrary embraced theresolution to pay no further regard to the upper House inthe exercise of their legislative authority. This involved asecond resolution. The House of Lords was declared uselessand dangerous : it therefore deserved to be abolished.On this the House of Lords, during this stage of publicaffairs, ceased to assemble '.On the 7th of February followed the abolition of the monarchy.According to the testimony of experience, so ran theresolution, the office of a king, or the exercise of his powexby a single person, is not only useless and troublesome, butmoreover dangerous to the freedom and security, and to thepublic welfare of the nation, and should therefore be abolished2.The constitution had consisted hitherto of King, Lordsand Commons: the last now took it entirely into their ownhands. In the fact that the royal authority was no longerJournals of Lords, 5th February (vol. x.) Journal of Commons, 6th February(vol. vi.)"he office of a King in this nation, and to have the power thereof in any singleperson.XI.IN ENGLAND.I. 9A.D. 1649.necessary to give the force of law to their decrees was involvedthe introduction of the Commonwealth in England. The transitionwas not very surprising, since for some time past theKing had been dispensed with. To laws succeeded ordinances,and to ordinances acts of Parliament, obedience towhich was equally required.At the same time it was not perfectly certain whether theymeet with it. The lawyers for instance, who werecommitted by their profession to the maintenance of existingforms, would they accept the setting aside of the kinglyname so quietly? Yet the nation was accustomed to followtheir lead, and a standstill in the judicial procedure wouldhave caused a general disturbance. The difficulty became apparenteven during the trial of the King, because that trialrendered necessary an extension of the old law term. Thejudges considered that they ought not to allow this, unlessaccording to precedent they were also authorised to do soby the Lords. The Lords were quite prepared to agree; butthe Commons wished to avoid recognising their assistanct,now that they had taken the highest power into their ownhands. At last two of the commissioners, to whom the GreatSeal was entrusted, declared themselves ready at the expresscommand of the House, of which they were members, to publishthe necessary documents under their sole authority.The most prominent of them was BulStrode Whitelocke,one of Coke's school of parliamentary lawyers, a friend andpupil of Selden, who never it is true went so far as to commitwhat was actually illegal, but easily acquiesced in it whenit was once done. He had an irresistible tendency to attachhimself to the ruling powers, and to accept personal promotionfrom them, provided they allowed the system ofEnglish law to remain as a whole such as it had once beenestablished. With his colleague Widdrington he left thecity at the time, in order not to take part in the trial ofthe King : this over however, they returned without a longstruggle and resumed their seats on the woolsack. Byorder of the Commons they brought out the Great Sealstamped with the royal arrns, and allowed it to be brokenin pieces before their eyes in the House. One of the two,

10 REPUBLICAN IDEAS AND INSTITUTIONS XI. I.A.D. 1649.Widdrington, then retired, Whitelocke however consideredhimself bound to serve also as commissioner for the administrationof the new seal.His co-operation was of the greatest service in advancingmatters. When the adjourned proceedings should have recommenced,on February g, six of the twelve judges refusedto continue in office under the altered conditions. The othersix declared themselves ready to do so, but only after a formalabrogation of their oath of allegiance to the King, and on thecondition that the House first declared that the fundamentallaws of the state should be maintained intact and justiceadministered according to them.Thanks to Whitelocke's energy the matter was carriedthrough the Commons the same day, for on him it dependedthat the administration of justice should not be interruptedfor a single day longer : he considered that in securing this hehad rendered no slight service to the Parliament l.It is clear from Whitelocke's Memorials that he was notwithout scruples as to his conduct. By the administration ofjustice, he declared, he had thought to do the best service toGod and his country: God had set him in this way and hemust go on in it, so long as it was permitted him. He mentionsthis consideration in a conversation with Lenthall, whohad expressed his opinion that the soldiers would treat everythingas theirs by right of conquest 2. The participation of thelawyers in the Republic was a sort of protection against thetendencies of the agitators. Then appeared the declaration ofParliament, that it was fully resolved to maintain intact thefundamental laws of the nation for the public good, and expectedthat the law courts would proceed in accordance withthem.WE, may connect with this tendency, so hostile to a generalconvulsion, the fact that at the election of the State Councilwhich followed, men of such radical views as Harrison andeven Ireton, though proposed were not carried.' Whitelocke's Memorials 374.'To claim all by conquest.' Whitelocke 363. In the same place he alsomentions 'the perplexed thought in sober men, who resolved to depend on Godand to go on in the way wherein he had set them.'XI. I. IN ENGLAND.A.D. 1649.The Council of State elected on February 14 was entrustedwith powers very extensive, but most carefully defined.was to resist all attempts to restore the monarchy, tomaintain peace at home, to reduce to subjection Irelandand the islands which had not yet submitted, to preservegood understanding with foreign powers, to protectEnglishmen abroad and to promote their trade. For thesepurposes it was entrusted with the command of the landand sea forces, together with their organisation, and with theto draw from the public revenue the sums necessary forthe public service, for instance for negotiations with foreignpowers; but over and above this the right also to imprisonpersons, and to administer to them an oath in timeof danger in order to discover the truth '.A sufficiently remarkable combination was this of military,diplomatic, police and judicial powers. It comprised allexecutive authority, to a larger extent than any King hadever cnjoyed it, through its connexion with Parliament ancithe influence it in its turn exercised upon that body. TheCouncil of State acquired the appearance of a compactauthority invested with absolute powers.At its first establishment it was thought advisable to includea number of peers as well as several others who hadtaken no part in the late proceedings, with the view, it mightbe supposed, of binding them completely to the Commonwealth.At this point an unexpected difficulty again occurred.Of those who were selected more than half refused to take theprescribed oath, since this contained a formal approval of theexecution of the King, of the abolition of the kingly powerand of the Upper House, and of the supreme authority asresident in the Lower House 2. They declined to countenance' Old Parliamentary History xix. g sqq.a The oath was that they approved what the House of Commons and theirhigh court of justice had done against the King, and of their abolishing of kinglygovernment and of the House of Peers, and that the legislative and supreme powerwas wholly in the House of Commons! From the Journal (vi. 146) it appearsthat Grey of Wark was willing to bind himself to obey both Houses, but notto one only: in the Order Book, No. 2, we find further, 'Mr. Whitelocke saith,he likes the main of it, but excepts of those words which concern the court ofjustice: James IIarrington excepts only at the word fully' (wholly).I I

16 REPUBLICAN IDEAS AND INSTITUTIONS XI. T.A.D. I 649.Two years before, when a like expedition was planned, thearmy had demanded Cromwell as their general. After somehesitation he now declared himself ready to undertake thecommand. But his name no longer had power to win theiraffections. In the pamphlets of the Agitators he was himselfsingled out for attack as the head of the party opposed totheir aims, just as at the time when he appeared to be inleague with the King. But Oliver Cromwell was now toopowerful to let himself make such a mistake. He wouldhave no more conditions prescribed for him ; whoever wasunwilling to go with him was at once discharged. Manywho left their regiments were mulcted of their arrears ofpay. Lilburne and some other spokesmen were arrested.It was easy, thanks to the lack of profitable trade and commerce,to fill up the gaps with new levies.On this however an increased disturbance occurred amongthe rest. The arguments with which they had encounteredthe blandishments of the Parliament on former occasions theyagain brought forward now that it was in league with theofficers.The army, they urged, had taken up arms from a senseof duty and in defence of the rights and liberty of the people.It was now wished to transform them into an army of mercenaries,and blind obedience was required of them. The aimfor a long time past had been to remove all those in whomany sympathy with the common rights was observed. It wasnow maintained that the service in Ireland should comebefore the restoration of freedom in England, and all weredischarged who would not pledge themselves to acts ofbloodshed, before their consciences were quieted or any realfruit of their previous labours had appeared. The designwas to fill the regiments with ignorant, needy and servile .men l. An assembly in Oxfordshire (May 1649) put .fortha proclamation, in which the confederates expressed theirviews in determined and menacing language2. Should asingle hair of the prisoners be singed, it would be avengedPaper scattered about the streets. April 26,1649, in Walker ii. 159.England's standard advanced 168.XI. I. IN ENGLAND. 17A.D. 1649.sevenfold upon the men who under the name of the Parliamcntoppressed the people, who recognised neither lawand justice nor freedom, listened to no cry from the armyand redressed no grievance. For their own part they wereresolved to die as free men rather than live as slaves. It wasand would ever be their purpose to provide a real relief forthe unhappy nation; amongst other things not to allow theassessed taxes and excise to be any longer paid. They promisedto lay down their arms forthwith, and to return homeso soon as the constitution should be established in conformitywith the new design of Lilburne and his friends.This design, judged by its fundamental ideas and by pastexperience, is a great improvement on the former one. Itprovided that the representatives of the people should beelected for one year, that at its expiration a fresh set shouldimmediately come in, among whom no member of the oldbody was to be admitted. This body alone was to have theright of setting on foot an armed force : no paid magistrateshould be allowed a seat in it. But though the genuinelyrepresentative character of the assembly was thus secured,its powers were confined within narrow limits.It was still insisted that no coercion was allowable in religiousmatters : no one ought to be forced to serve in thearmy against his conscience. With reference especially tothe administration of justice, they refused to be dependenton the caprice of a Parliament. No sentence was to be pronouncedwhich did not rest on a recognised law : some oldEnglish legal usages were expressly confirmed; excise, tolls,and especially tithes, were immediately or at least very shortlyto be abolished ; the counties were to elect their magistrates,the parishes their clergymen l.The scheme was one which proposed to reconcile the representativesystem with individual and local rights. It holdsfast to the idea of property, but it is clear what enormouschanges it also contemplated, and that at once. The Parliamentwas to end in August 1649, and the people were toproceed to election without waiting for its summons.' The agreement of Lilburne, Walwyn, Prince, Overton, in Whitelocke 385.RANKE, VOL. 111.C

THE LEVELLERS. XI. I.A.D. 1649.It was asserted at the time that the troops who were unitedin this view entertained the fixed purpose and hope of occupyingsome of the principal towns, York, Oxford, Gloucesterand Bristol, and meant then to raise a green flag at some oneof them, and prepare for the execution of their plans in ageneral assembly.Already armed bands were seen perambulating the countrywith this object : Captain Thomson with 200 horsemen,and his brother Cornet Thomson with a band of 1000 men.In the regiments of Scroope, Reynold, Harrison and Skippon,many were still found who refused to go to Irelandunless Parliament first made good its promises.The Parliament declared Captain Thomson and his adherents,and generally all those who had taken up armswithout orders from the Parliament, to be traitors, and prepared,as formerly against the clubmen, to put an end to theirresistance. But how could single troops have resisted thecombined forces of the state? They were scattered anddisarmed1. Some of their leaders showed repentance ; mostdied with the courage which a strong conviction usually supplies.Captain Thomson, who had taken refuge in a wood,preferred to be shot rather than surrender. He was one ofthe first who shed their blood for the democratic republic.But these ideas already showed themselves in a movementwhich went still greater lengths-the Levelling movementproperly so called. Pamphlets are extant in which, to thosewho would give in their adherence to the new schemes-themass of Englishmen it was hoped-promises reaching farbeyond these were made. There was to be freedom from alltaxes, and care for the personal sustenance of all who wouldwork2. A saying of Lilburne's went furthest in its aims. Hewas chargec with trying to make all things equal, property 'included. He replied that the representatives of the peoplecould not decree that even if they wished, it would only be1 Journals of Commons, May 11, 1649. 'A great fight between the Pa~liamentforces and Levellers on Monday last.' Dated Andover, May 14, 1649.2 The remonstrance of many thousands of the free people of England, togetherwith the resolves of those called Levellers, 1549.XI. I. THE LEVELLZRS. 19A.D. 1649.possible when all and each were agreed upon it: desirable itcertainly seemed to him to be.One day on some hills in Surrey, which were part of thecommon land, a number of persons were seen to make preparationsfor cultivating the soil. The owners of the neighbouringestates resisted them : finally some of Fairfax'ssoldiers appcared and drove off those who had set towork. Quite as remarkable as the proceeding itsclf is thejustification that was offered for it. It is twofold.On one hand its advocates appealed to the right of theEnglish against the Normans. The old laws which wereinvoked against them were merely a result of the NormanConquest-fetters imposed upon one portion of the peoplein order to render them the slaves of the other. The Normanconquerors had violated common freedom and individualrights. The owners of estates were the descendants ofthe Conqueror's captains, just as the last Icing had dcrivcdhis race and his right from this same Conqueror. To resistthat very King the Parliament had called on thc people withthe promise that it would make them free. The peoplehad spent money and blood in the cause; it had a right toask that Parliament too should now fulfil its word and ridit of the arbitrariness of those laws. They did not wish totouch the enclosed property; let that remain if it was desiredunder the shelter of the existing laws, but the unenclosedlands they demanded should be restored to the peoplc.Nor was it their wish, they continued, to redistribute it asprivate property once more. This idea they condemned stillmore strongly, because the carth was created for all. Thesoil that is bought and sold might belong to any third personby as good a right as to the buyer and seller-he who willpossess it let him draw the sword and claim it for himselfalone1: but the land which was now to be cultivated a'ndmade fruitful was to remain common with all the fruit it-' An appeal to the House of Commons, desiring their answer, whether thecommon people shall have the quiet enjoyment of the commons and waste land,or whether they shall be under the will of Lords of Manors. By Gerard (orJerard) Wistanley, John Barker and Thomas Star, in the name of all the pooroppressed in the land of England.C 2

20 THE LEVELLERS. XI. I.A.D. I 649.bore; for the earth is ordained by the Creator to be a greatstorehouse of nourishment, for one as much as another,\vithout respect of persons. In this case there can be notalk of buying and selling, and of all the laws connected withthem.It is especially on religious reasons that they rely.As in each heart, so throughout the earth, love and selfseekingstrive against each other: it is the war of the lamband the dragon ; between them must each man choose. Theyfor their part were determined to honour the spirit fromwhom they sprung, their sire and their mother the earth, andto free her from the serfdom and the bonds in which creationwas confined. God, they said, has ordained the race of meneverywhere to be lords of the earth and the, beasts, but notsome men to be lords and the rest slaves. That was thepoint in dispute between Cain an$ Abel, but Abel must notalways be slain.These Levellers refuse to be referred to Holy Scripture,since it deals with examples since the Fall; but they taketheir stand on the word-of God, that was in the beginning,which dwells in man's heart and by which he was made, eventhe pure law of creation, unto which the creation is to berestored I.Once already in the fourteenth century had tendencies towardsa social revolution subversive of society been activein England. They were then embraced by the Taborites inthe wildest manner ; they filled the mind of Thomas Miinzer,and afterwards reappeared among the German Anabaptistsin the form adapted to city life. I t is in the highest dkgreeremarkable what a shock the idea alike of individual and ofcorporate property received at the time in that very nationwhose circumstances were so peculiarly interwoven with it.In its account of a raid that had occurred on the Scottishborder, the paper which then had. the widest circulation remarkednot merely how lamentable it was that care for thenecessities of human life should come into collision with lawand cause danger to life, but also that property was in realityXI. I. THE LEVELLERS. 2 IA.D. 1649.the origin of all sin. Now that the tyrant was executed, itmight be hoped that despite all opposition from those inpower, this fact would be generally acknowledged, at least ina few years time, and that the people would perceive its pastperverseness I.We may observe in passing that amid these struggles atheory of great celebrity arose. Thomas Hobbes startedfrom the opposite principle to the Levellers, with their rejectionof the written letter, and their appeal to things as theywere at the beginning. He had inquired, he said, for what endit was that man made separate estates and enclosed propertywithin boundaries, and had discovered that the cause lay inthe nature of men. The innate desire of each man to possesssomething for himself is approved by reason. Community ofgoods would bring about a dissolution which would be thegreatest misfortune that the natural order could suffer. Fromthis assumption he proceeds to assert that the security ofproperty and the practice of justice, which protects the relationsof meum and tuum, render necessary a strong government,the concentration of power in a single hand.And how mistaken were those who thought they saw inCromwell a patron of those attempts-who expected in him asecond John of Leyden. If it be true that in great convulsionsdestructive tendencies necessarily make their appearance atthe same time, it is also true that such epochs beget forcescapable of resisting them. Cromwell had the instinct if notthe theory of power. Without destroying the independentattitude of the army, he put an end to the levelling impulsesof the Agitators. In their very struggle with them the armyrallied round him in renewed personal dependence. Theywere perfectly ready after this to encounter the enemies ofthe Commonwealth in Ireland under his leadership.The Moderate, July 31. 'That the propriety is the original cause of everysin, that since the tyrant is taken of, so ought it really to redonnd to the good ofthe people.'A letter to the Lord Fairfax, printed in the Harleian Miscellanies xi. 492.

CHAPTER 11.RINUCCINI AND CROMWELL IN IRELAND.WE must first describe the alterations of fortune in Ireland,and their connexion with those in England.Among the Catholics, no less than among the Protestantsof that country, there were two distinct parties, one of which,consisting of the original English colonists adhered to theinstitutions introduced under the kings of England, eventhose of the schismatic Henry VIII ; while the other, whichincluded the native Irish, desired to restore the absolutesupremacy of Catholicism in the island, and would even havelent its aid towards a separation from England.In order to win over the latter Charles I had allowed offersto be made to them through Glamorgan, which he dared notown to in England. They did not however give satisfactioneven in Ireland, either in form or in substance : it was noticedas an omission that neither the restoration of the monasticestates confiscated by Henry VIII, nor of the bishopricswhich had passed into the hands of the Protestants, was dis-tinctly promised. Fault was found with Glamorgan's powers,because they were issued under the lesser seal only, and theKing consequently remained free to do what he liked.Before this time the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, JamesButler Earl of Ormond, had already negotiated a treaty, inwhich he refused to agree to concessions so extensive as thosegranted by Glamorgan. After the latter's attempted compromisehad miscarried, through becoming publicly known,Ormond virtually concluded his in the summer of 1646. TheCatholics of the original English colony contented themselveswith verbal assurances, for instance, that the penal laws whichOrmond gave should be repealed. Thc conclusion of thisXI. 2. RINUCCINI AND CROMWELL IN IRELAND. 23A.D. 1646.treaty is connected with that combination between the Frenchand the Presbyterians by which Scotlarid was to be freed fromEnglish influence, the Presbyterian party reconciled with theKing, and a limit put to the overweening power of the Independents.By its aid the French endeavoured to anticipatesuch an alliance of the strict Catholic party with Spainas they encountered elsewhere.But it was the misfortune of Charles I that he failed to winover to his side the religious convictions of his different territoriesin Ireldnd no less than in Scotland.An assembly of the Catholic clergy in Waterford not onlyfound the terms of the treaty unacceptable, since it containec'no certain security for the freedom of the Church, but evencalled to account the members of the government whichhad concluded it. Dissatisfied with their explanations tha assemblydeclared its consent to a violation of the oath taken tothe Irish confederacy, and visited them with spiritual censures.The herald, who was to proclaim the peace, was repulsedfrom Waterford : even in Kilkenny the proclamation was onlymade in open opposition to the bishops with whom the peoplesided.All this was mainly the work of the Papal Nuntio, GiambattistaRinuccini, who as early as the year 1645 arrivedunnoticed in Ireland, provided with money and arms, and atfirst cherished the design of rendering Glamorgan's treatyentirely conformable to the Catholic interests, which were atthe same time those of the Papacy I.Immediately on his arrival he was struck with the distinctionbetween the two parties as well as betwzen the tworaces. By the one, the stalwart, uncultivated, confidingnatives, he was, as he tells us, received as a messenger fromGod. They flocked around him and spoke to him always ofthe speedy restoration of the Church, and the vbservance ofthe oath of the confederation. The others, men of less conspicuousstature, but keener ir~tellects, saw in him the treasurerof a prince. They consulted him only in matters of business,Nonziatura in Irlanda di Msgr. G. Battista Rinuccini negl~ anni 1645 a 1649,Pubblicata da Aiazzi 18qq.

24 RINUCCINI AND CROMWELL IN IRELAND. XI. 2.A.D. 1646.and then spoke incessantly of the necessities of war, and ofthe authority which rightly belonged to the King. To themhe mainly attributed the Ormond treaty, which had alreadylong been agreed upon. Its conclusion, he thought, had onlybeen delayed in order to get the money which he had broughtwith him. With a share of that even Ormond would be contented.Sinuccini's mission so far bears upon the general situationof Europe, that Pope Innocent X, who sent him out, inopposition to his predecessor, again inclined to the side ofSpain, and entered into the closest alliance with the Italianprinces. He nevertheless avoided entrusting this nuntiatureto a subject of the King of Spain, who was proposed for thatpost, because it would have clearly proved his partisanship :-Rinuccini, Archbishop of Fermo, was a subject of the GrandDuke of Tuscany, who had contributed most to the electionof the Pope. The first step on his journey secured the confirmationof the good understanding between the two courts.It was the Nuntio's plan, while promoting the purely Catholicinterests, at the same time to withdraw Ireland from Frenchinfluence. In doing this he reckoned upon the assistance ofthe King and Ormond. These however had never maintainedmore intimate relations with French policy than at that verymoment; and on their side were the adherents of the EpiscopalChurch, and by far the greater part of the nobility ofthe old English colony. If Rinuccini wished to effect anything,it was essential to attach the old Irish party to himself.He was an ecclesiastic in mind, an old pupil of the Jesuits,the warmest champion of the Papal prerogative, but at thesame time in secular affairs enterprising and much more ambitiousthan suited the Curia : he now appeared as a greatparty leader in the country.In his letters he cannot lay sufficient stress on the advantageousimpression which the open rejection of Ormond'streaty at Waterford had made in the country: in a momentthe clergy had acquired the mastery, even the soldiery hadsought service with the Nuntio. An attack on Dublinin the autumn of 1646, which he planned, failed, as he maintam,through the treachery of Preston, who belonged to theXI. 2. RINUCCINZ AND CROMWELL IN IRELAND. 25A.D. 1647.old EnglisE. colony: still as yet the failure did no harni tohis prestige. In the general assembIy of the laity, held atKilkenny in the early months of the year 1647, he hadcompletely the upper hand. They even rejected Ormond'streaty ; the members of the former government who hadtaken part in concluding it were arrested. Conditionswere fixed without the fulfilment of which no treaty cov.ldbe concluded, and which moreover ificluded the restorationof the Irish hierarchy as it had been before the schismaticinnovations of Henry VIII. The passing of a definite arrangementwith respect to the monastic estates was furtncr postponed,but in behalf of the secular clergy a claim wasadvar,ced for all the rights which they had enjoyed underHenry VII, and before his time, as well as for the Churchestates, which had passed into Protestant hands. Theyhoped to restore the splendour of the Catholic Church inIreland. A new association was formed with this object, anda new government established by election, composed almostexclusively of clerical members. On account of its clericalcharacter, the Nuntio thought it expedient to undertake thepresidency. He united at the moment in his own handsthe clerical, civic, and even military authority of the Irishconfederation. All his schemes were again directed againstDublin, which, owing to the inability of Ormond to pay histroops, and the reluctance of the exhausted citizens to makeany further contributions, could not apparently hold out long.But what his further aims were is not so clear.It is palpable that he wished to separate lreland as completelyas possible from England. He condemned the oathof allegiance which the clergy took to thecrown, and regrettedthat he had ever used a word which contained an apprwal ofit '. Among the priests the doctrine gdined ground tnat thecrown had long ago forfeited the rights over Ireland onceoffered it by the Popes, and that tne supremacy over theisland rightly belonged to the Roman see itself. Now thatthe King was finally a prisoner, men spoke without reserveRinuccini to Cardinal Pamfilio, March z, 1647 : ' Di non astenelmi da quellefrasi,--dicendo per esernpio che bisognava sollevare, ajutare il re, rnostrarsi buoniSudditi-veggo molto bene, che doveva lasciar di sottoscrivere.' Nunziatura 2oj.

26 XINUCCINI AND CROMWELL IN IRELAND. XI. 2.A.D. 1647.of calling in another prince as Protector of Ireland. The oldEnglish colony thought of the King of France; the Frenchconsidered that the Nuntio would prefer Spain. Yet thatwas not precisely his intention or his position. He wouldhave liked to secure the protectorate for the Pope himself.And since there was some hesitation in Rome about seizingit so directly, the idea occurred to the Nuntio that one ofthe brothers of the Grand Duke of Tuscany might come toIreland to act there as the deputy of the see of Kome.He cherished the hope that he might one day obtain alsothe crown of Ireland, and then be recognised by the twoCatholic powers l.It is singular to what extremes his ambition for his countryand dynasty led him. His great idea seems to have been incombination with the native party to win Ireland in its urholeextent for the Catholic world.Very unexpected however was the effect of his scheme.In the face of this danger, Ormond, who had been all his lifean Episcopalian and a Royalist, forced himself to hand overthe capital which he could no longer defend, to the Parliamentarytroops, Presbyterians though they were. The bloodwhich flowed in his veins, and his Protestant sympathies (forhe would not allow Ireland ever to come into the hands of thenatives and of the Nuntio) 2, enabled him to enter into alliancewith a party which he had opposed all his life, but withwhich he stood on common ground in these respects. Hebetook himself to the King to justify to him his determination.It would be scarcely too much to say that on this actdepended the preservation of Ireland for the Protestant andEnglish interest.The Parliamentary troops, to whom Ormond handed overDublin, knew thoroughly how to defend it. The Irish bandsthat were pressing forward suffered a decisive defeat at Trim,1 Rinuccini to Cardinal Paucirolo, November 1647, Nunziatnra 266 : ' Le qualidovrebbono concordemente aver caro, che questa pezza si smembrasse del parlamentoe cadesse in un principe oggi indifferente.'Rrienne, from the reports of the Commissaries Talon and du Moulin. ' Le Msd'Or~~r.3nd est seul qui etnpCche 1'11lande lonlber entre les mams des Espagnols.'z. RINUCCrNI AND CROMWELL IN IRELAND. 27A.D. 1648.and another in Munster. This disaster, which clearly showedthe impossibility of attaining their proposed end, reacted.generally on the Nuntio's prestige. In the next assemblyat Kilkenny, a con~plete reaction against him took place:a government was installed, from which the clerical elementwas excluded. The Catholics of English descent and moderatesentiments had the superiority over the allied nativesand priests in opposition to the Nuntio, who insisted on theprosecution of the war. A truce was concluded with Lord~nchiquin (who commanded in Munster, and who now passedover again from the Parliament to the King) which led at onceto a close agreement. In consequence, Ortr~ond was recalledby Catholics and Protestants, and the Nuntio, who would nottreat with a government at whose head stood a Protestant,thought it prudent to leave the country. He retired home tohis archbtshopric at Fermo.The return of Ormond, who once more in virtue of his oldpatent entered Ireland as Lord Lieutenant, and his activitythere, are connected with the Presbyterian rising in 1648.While the latter depended on the agreement that the mostextreme demands of the Covenanters should no longer bepressed upon the King, Ormond aimed at bridging over thegulf which separated Catholics and Protestants in Ireland.He conceded that the Catholics should be relieved from thepenal laws which oppressed them, and should not for thefuture be restricted in the practice of their religion. Theywere to be left in possession of the churches which they thenheld, and of the estates connected with them. The Catholics,on their part, gave up the design of replacing their religion inits old supremacy over the island. They merely demanded,and to this Ormond agreed, that a commission should beappointed to secure the observance of the treaty until it couldbe confirmed in a formal meeting of Parliament. After thevarious attempts that had been made to raise one or theother of the two religions to an exclusive supremacy, recourseWas had in this treaty to an equalisation of their respectiveclaims, which deserves greater attention than it has hithertomet with. At Kilkenny Castle, seated in his chair of state,Lord Ormond, as the King's representative, announced the

28 RZNUCCINI AND CROMWELL INIRZLAND. XI. 2.A.D. 1649.royal command to recognise this treaty as valid and to proclaimit.Ormond had hopes at this time of being still able to effectsomething for the King's deliverance, with help of the nowunited Irish. He said indeed, that hell itself could addnothing to the designs which were now formed in Englanda~ainst - Charles I, but also that never was there a nobler or0a more glorious path of action than that which was now opento the Irish, provided they were united among themselves.At that very time the King, for whose defence these planswere laid, was already executed. It appears however thatthe effects of this event were favourable rather than otherwiseto the confirmation of the peace and to the prevailingtendencies in Ireland. In the English and Irish provincesand towns alike Charles the Second was proclaimed withan enthusiasm heightened by sympathy for the executedKing. The treaty was carried out despite the opposition ofa party still constantly devoted to the views of the Nuntio.The Protestants who adhered to the King returned to theirdeserted estates. Ormond even thought that Jones and Monk,who commanded the Parliamentary forces, might be inducedto come over to his side: many deserters from their regimentshad reached him already. In all the garrisons a strongleaning towards the King showed itself. Ormond openlyexpressed the hope of shortly reducing the whole countryto obedience to Charles 11, should he himself appear in theisland.In May 1649 Ormond had 8000 infantry and 3000 cavalryunder arms. He praises the emulation of the English andIrish in the royal cause, which had now taken the placeof the old feud. He warns the young prince against makingconcessions to the Catholics which might bring him intocollision with the Protestants. He hopes to carry the matterthrough with the help of both alike, provided he is suppliedwith arms, to procure which negotiations were opened withSweden, and with the necessary money. His grand ideawas to make the reduction of Ireland the basis of a generalrestoration. The King might prepare the way for it byforeign alliances and by employing his influence in England.XI. Z. IZINUCCINI AND CROMWELL IN IRELAND. 29A.D. 1649.He thought that he might reckon upon the probability thatif Dublin, which was now the centre of attention1, were wonfor the King, a large number of rich traders there wouldthen join him and support with their money an expeditionthe Commonwealth 1.It seemed as if a favourable breeze were filling the sailsof reviving Royalism.Now however all the evil results to the royal cause ofthat forced surrender of Dublin to the Parliamentary forcesfirst became evident. The generals remained unshaken intheir adherence to their party. Ormond's summons to jointhe King's side was met by Jones with so determinedlyrepublican an answer, that Parliament thought good topublish it. George Monk indeed entered into negotiationswith the native Catholics, and promised them concessionswhich Parliament could not accept on account of theirCatholic tendencies. So far were both of them fromraising the standard of Charles 11. An attempt to takeDublin by force was repulsed by Jones, who had meanwhilereceived reinforcements.But Ormond did not lose courage. He occupied Droghedaand Trim, which had already fallen into his hands, thinkingthat, could he only hold these throughout the summer, hewould have made a successful campaign.The Royalists were still by far the strongest party in thecountry. Owen O'Neal, who was deeply injured because, inspite of the real services he had rendered, Parliament neverthelessnow rejected his offers, made advances to his oldenemy Ormond. The officers too of his army, now that theBishop of Clogher had declared the Nuntia's condemnationto be invalid, were prepared to accept the Kilkenny agreement.For the moment Ormond had really united the twonationalities and religions, with the exception of the Inde-pendents, and in opposition to them.-He was master ofCarte's Ormond iii. q46 : The expectation whereof (of the taking of Dublin)the royalists and all that detested the King's murder as Jet in quiet!a He Prays, June 28, ' that your Majesty would consider how the total reductionthis kingdom may be best i~nproved and made use of towards the regaining ofother dominions.' (Carte's Letters ii. 384.)

30 RZNUCCZNI AND CROMWELL IN IRELAND. XI. 2.A.D. 1649.Connaught through Clanricarde, of Ulster through O'Neal,of Munstcr through Inchiquin. The Catholic and Protestantinhabitants of Leinster were equally on his side. Nine-tenthsof Ireland were subject to him, nor was he entirely powerlessby sea, since Rupert's fleet lay at anchor off Kinsale. Howcould he avoid believing it possible to overcome even nowthe comparatively small forces of the Independents ?It is clear enough that the first object of the EnglishCommonwealth must have been to put sn end to this powerfuland dangerous formation of a combination of Royalist forcesso thoroughly hostile to itself.The supposition on which all Ormond's hopes rested, wasthat the army would not so easiiy become master of Englandas to make any important effort against Ireland. Ormonddreaded the arms but still more the money of the Parliament,and the influence it would exercise upon the Irish nation.Already however, in May and June 1649, affairs had reachedthis point. Cromwell had defeated all his opponents andformed an army devoted to himself. Without any regardhaving been paid to Fairfax, on the proposal of the Councilof State, he was appointed not merely Commander-in-Chiefof the forces, but also Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. Themilitary and civil power were united in his hands1. Meanshad been discovered (among others the sale of the estatesof the chapters, which actually found purchasers at fair prices)to furnish him with very considerable supplies of money.It is certain that a large sum was handed over to him forprivate purposes, which he was to have the power of spendingwithout rendering any account of it.In real truth it was not the case that the expedition wasdirected against the Catholics as such. The confederacywhich was to be the object of attack was thoroughly Royalist,and was actually hostile to the strong Romanising tendenciesrepresented by the Nuntio. The late treaty contained apartial recognition only of the Catholic claims, and was rejectedby the Nuntio as ruinous.' Scott, Report from the Council oi State: 'The colnmission of Lientenant-General Cromwell to be Commander in chief over the forces in Ireland andGovernor-General of Ireland! Journal of Commons, June 22.xr. a. RINUCCINI AND CROMWELL IN IRELAND. 31A.D. 1649.gut since there were Catholics as well as Protestantsserving under Ormond, the strongest impulse now as everwas supplied by religious hatred.On the morning of the 10th of July the standards underwhich the army was to march were consecrated by severalministers to the war of God against the deluded Catholicsof Ireland. Officers of the army, and even Cromwell himself,expounded the Scripture 'exceeding well and suitably to theoccasion,' as the old chronicle tells us. Cromwell then mountedhis state-carriage, drawn by six Flemish horses. A bodypard,consisting of old officers, rode at his side. At CharingCross his trumpets were loudly sounded. He appearedalready with the insignia of an office at once priestly andmilitary-and thus he set out for Milford Haven, whence hemeant to cross over to Ireland.While he was making preparations for starting, newsreached him of Ormond's defeat before Dublin. Cromwellannounced it as a special mercy of God, for which it wasimpossible to be too thankful in word and deed. 'Mighthe,' such was his prayer, 'be found worthy by the Lord inwhatever he might call him to do.'In the middle of August Cromwell arrived in Dublin witha hundred sail. This nhmerous fleet, to oppose which theRoyalists had only Rupert's few vessels, made no less impressionthan the army, which, including the troops alreadyin Dublin and those he brought with him, made up a formidablearray: it amounted to 10,000 infantry and 5000cavalry.Cromwell's first step was to bind them to the strictestdiscipline-even his military orders are religious in their tone.He enjoins them to avoid all that is contrary to God's law.The officers are held responsible for the maintenance of themost rigid discipline and order. The troops were for themost part veterans : the fame of their former victories madethem doubly formidable.Ormond had fortified and provided with good garrisonsthe nearest positions, such as Drogheda (which he still successfullydefended against Jones), Trim, and Dundalk. Hewished to hold himself in readiness to come to the assistance

32 RINUCCINI AND CAOMWELL IN IRELAND. XI. 7.A.D. 1649.of those places which might be atiacked. Against Jonesthese tactics might have answered. That they wouldbe successful against Cromwell was regarded as uncertainby the Royalist leaders themselves. It was then debatedwhether they should not rather at once give up these positions,Drogheda included. The decision of the council ofwar was that the latter place must be held, and defended tothe last by a sufficiently strong force. The best soldiers,about 2500 in number, were thrown into it, under a triedand trustworthy leader, Arthur Aston, who was confident ofbeing able to hold out against all attacks until the Royalistarmy should again be strong enough to face the enemy inthe open field.There is good reason :or doubting whether this plan wasthe best-considered. In a half-barbarous country, in a popularand irregular warfare, trustworthy and proved men possessa value inestimably higher than is represented by their merenumbers. To shut up the flower of the army in a singleplace, as was done here, is equivalent to making the issueof the whole struggle dependent upon a single great blow.Cromwell found the troops, on whose destruction everythingdepended, concentrated in Drogheda.an Monday, September 3/13, he appeared before the city.A whole week passed before he had brought up the heavyartillery from the ships, and planted the batteries. TheMonday following they opened fire: by the Tuesday, SeptemberI 1/21, two large breaches had been made, and towardsevening, about five o'clock, the troops advanced to the assault.The Royalist defence was throughout obstinate, and at firstsuccessful ; but afterwards, as they were gradually weakenedand thrown into confusion, though not disheartened, by thedeath of one of their commanding officers, they retired fromthe outer entrenchments, which they gave up to the enemy,into the strongest part of the fortress, a steep height fortifiedwith palisades. 'The governor,' writes Cromwell, in his accountof the battle, 'and divers considerable officers beingthere, our men getting up to them, were ordered by me toput then1 all to the sword. And indeed, being in the heatof action, I forbade them to spare any that were in armsxr. 2. RINUCCrNI AN. CROMWZL IN IRELAND. 33A.D. 1649.in the town1.' The Sunday before, mass had been said forthe Catholic soldiers in the great church of the town. Cromwellrelates with a sort of satisfaction how a thousand ofthem now took refuge there and were put to the sword.The tower of the church was set on fire, and they perishedwith shrieks in the flames. Scenes like this are hardly tobe explained even by fanaticism. Did Cromwell reallyimagine that he was executing the justice of God on thesewhose hands were embrued with innocent blood ?Did he believe that he was, as he expresses it, urged on bya higher divine spirit? But with the heat of his zeal there arethroughout mingled a cold-blooded calculation and a violencewhich is deliberate. In this mixture lies the force and energyof all his actions. It was necessary that these men should perish,since on them the defence of Ireland depended : it was necessaryto revenge upon them their refusal of his first summons :so horrible a punishment would prevent bloodshed hereafter.Thus it was that Cromwell excused an act for which neverthelesshis conscience would otherwise have smitten him.At Wexford, against which the next serious attack wasdirected, the same tragedy was repeated, though not by hisorders.The negotiations were still going on when the citadel wassurrendered unconditionally, and immediately the republicansoldiery pressed into the town. In the market-place the lastresistance of the defenders was crushed, and then rapine andmurder spread pitilessly through the streets and houses.Here too Cromwell sees a righteous judgment of God uponthe inhabitants who had practised the harshest crueltiesagainst the poor Protestants. Now, he adds, are they alleither destroyed or fled ; the houses are empty : it is a placestrong in itself, admirably situated for trade and fishery,where better men can now settle down'.- - -' Ormond, writing to Byron, September a3 (Carte's Letters ii. 412). mentlonsthe story, which has been often repeated since, that quarter was promised:'Officers and soldiers promising quarter to such as would lay down their arms;but, when they had once all in their power, the word no quarter went round, andthe soldiers were many of them forced, against their wills, to kill the prisoners.'' Oliver Cromwell to the Speaker, Oct. 14, in Cary's Memorials ii. 174. Inii. 60 remarks are inserted in the letter.RANKE, VOL. III.D

34 RINUCCINI AND CROM WELI IN IRELAND. XI. 2.A.D. 1649.No doubt the cruelty with which these conquests wereaccompanied impelled commanders or garrisons in one ortwo fortified places to a speedier submission ; but these bloodyhostilities had yet another unlooked-for result. The religiousand national hatred between English and natives, whichseemed destined to disappear-thanks to their union underthe Royal standard-now revived in its full strength. TheEnglish troops under Ormond were alienated by a sort ofinvoluntary instinct from the army which contained so manyIrish elements, and were attracted to the other, which wasformed of their own countrymen, and had now gained thevictory. Their loyalty was not strong enough to resist theimpulse. Before starting Cromwell had already won overLord Broghill to his side by various promises, and, aboveall, by the assurance that he should be required to drawhis sword against Irishmen only. Broghill now exerted hisinfluence over the Protestants of Munster, who were alreadyweary of their alliance with the Confederates. The garrisonof Youghall and most of the others deserted Inchiquin, whowas all but taken prisoner himself, and declared for theCommonwealth. Even in the open field the English crossedover to Cromwell when they encountered him. During thestruggle itself he expanded his Independent cause to aProtestant and national one. But on the other side similarfeelings were now at work among the Irish. They believedthat so long as they were drawn up under Calvinist leadersGod would not bless their arms : they began to suspect theseleaders themselves : they would scarcely endure their presenceamong them. An indication of this feeling is afforded bya manifesto, put out from the abbey of Clonmacnoise towardsthe end of 1649. In it the clergy summoned all the faithfulto the closest union against the English, from whom therewas nothing to be expected but the massacre and destructionof the faithful and the extirpation of religion. I do not believethat a counter-declaration which Cromwell published, forcibleand energetic as it is, changed the convictions of a singleperson. It first placed in its true light the opposition whichlay deeper than any temporary conflicts. Ormond himselfoften thought that he must leave Ireland, where he no longerXI. 2. IZIWCIW AND CROMWELL IN IRELAND. 35A.D. 1649.met with obedience. The fortified places refused to receivehis garrisons : they preferred to govern themselves as freetowns. The heads of the different provinces felt themselvesindependent : here and there the bishops appeared as generals.~t last an agreement was made that Limerick and Galwayreceive Ormond's garrisons, and that on the otherhand all the English troops forming part of them shouldbe dismissed. The remnant of Inchiquin's troops now wentbodily over to Cromwell ; for the rest a free passage out ofthe island was secured. Only three or four trusted officerswere tolerated in attendance on Ormond : to compensate forthis he was obliged to allow the bishops seats and votes inhis council.It is surprising enough, yet easy to explain, that after allthis the Republicans again met with obstinate resistance.In the defence of Clonmel Hugh - O'Neal outdid all thecon~manders of other places. The heat of the assault lastedfor four hours, but it was repulsed. Cromwell was forcedto consel~t to a treaty which provided for the safety of thetown, while O'Neal withdrew unmolested 1.Cromwell was preparing to besiege Waterford, when hewas called away to an expedition against Scotland whichwas now considered more pressing.It cannot be said that he was already master of Ireland.The three places mentioned above, Galway, Limerick, andWaterford, were among the strongest in the country. Besidesthese, Sligo, Duncannon, Athlone, and other fortresses whichhad gained a name in the local war, were also in the handsof the natives. And in every province strong forces wereassembling : in Connaught under Clanricarde, who put 4000men of his own in the field; in Ulster under MacMahon,Bishop of Clogher, who had 6000 men with him, with whomhe took castles and overran the country ; under Lord Castlehavenand Hugh Macphelim Bishop of Drummore in Wic1:lowand Clare.The army, which a few months before had crossed overLudlow 307. 'Cromwell himself said he doubted of getting on the soldiers"ext day to a fresh assault.' Dillingham in Cary aao.D 2

36 RINUCCIrvf AND CROfilWELL IN IRELAND. XI. 2.A.D. 1650.in excellent condition, was greatly reduced by the hardshipsof the campaign, by sickness and war. lreton, who succeededto the command, was likely to find much to do.Still Cromwell had achieved an important and decisiveresult. He had united on the side of the Commonwealththe English and Protestant population which, through theirreverence for the royal name, had been ranked on theopposite side. It was something that he should be able tothink of introducing fresh colonists into the large portion ofthe country of which he was master, and thus to imitateand surpass the example set by Queen Elizabeth and KingJames l. A reaction which could prove dangerous to theConlmonwealth was no longer conceivable in Ireland ; butit was no less necessary to provide against such a dangerfrom the side of Scotland.' 'Fare un intero conquisto di quel regno, cosa che la regina Elisabetta nonpotb fare.' (Disp. Romano. 1/11 Marzo, 1650.)'CHAPTER 111.CHARLES I1 AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND.IT forms at once the charm and the difficulty of this historyto trace out the independent movements which, under the mostvarying forms but following always the old lines of historicaldevelopment, come to the surface within the limits of GreatBritain, and engage with each other in a struggle for life anddeath.At the Hague, where the young King had found refuge anda welcome with his brother-in-law, William I1 of Orange,and had gathered round him the adherents of his father andof the monarchy, and all the leaders of the vanquished parties,whither too now the new Commcnwealth sent its representatives,a horrible event occurred, which revealed all the vehemenceof the Royalist passions.A native of Holland, by name Dorislaus, who had distinguishedhimself in England as a lawyer, had embraced theopinions of the Independent-Republican party, and had renderedlegal assistance at the trial of the King, had at this timebeen sent by the Commonwealth to the Hague to act as colleaguewith the existing ambassador. He was there regardedas representing that regicidal sentiment which, in Hollandas elsewhere, excited general abhorrence. In the breasts ofsome of the Scots there those feelings were awakened whichknit together the clans in the closest alliance with each otherand with their chieftains. They determined to take bloodrevenge~lpon the representative of the regicides. Masked,and effectively disguised, they entered one evening the hotelwhere he lived, extinguished the lights in the entrance, and

38 CHARLES II AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. XI. 3.A.D. 1649.forced their way into the room where he was dining withothers : they bade the rest keep quiet, murdered him, andwent their way.This took place in May 1649. In May 1650 somethingvery similar happened in Madrid. An agent of the Parliamenton a mission to the King, Antony Ayscam (Ascham)was attacked as he sat at table in his hotel with a pair ofpistols by his side, and murdered before he could seize hisweapons. This time they were Englishmen who committedthe murder l, and the act was the more detestable becauseAscham had taken no direct part in the King's execution.The interpreter who accompanied him was killed at the sametime.In Spain even more energetic measures were taken than inHolland for the punishment of the murderers: but even inSpain only the one Protestant of their number paid for hiscrime with his life ; the Catholics were claimed by the Church.The public voice indeed approved of their act: they werealmost envied the honour of having been able to avenge themurder of their King. ' Ha !' exclaimed Don Luys de Haro,'had my king such subjects, he would have conquered theworld with them.'In no man of his time was the sentiment of personaldevotion to his native prince stronger than in James Graham,Marquis of Montrose. We recall to mind that brilliantmoment in his life, when in 1646 men could look tohis arms for the restoration of the monarchy. But he wasdefeated, and immediately left Scotland at the order of theKing himself. Even in exile he had still no other thoughtthan once more to collect an army, by the aid of which hemight restore his King. From France, whose conciliatorypolicy was hateful to him, he turned to the Emperor Ferdinand111, from whom at Prague he procured a commissionwhich gave him full powers. He intended, on the strengthof this, to raise two regiments, and with these once moreto try his fortune in Scotland. He was on his way fromthe Spanish to the United Netherlands, which were at peace--I l\'hftelocke 444. Cp. Guizot, Histoire de la RQpublique et de Cromwell, i..xx 3. CHARLES I1 AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. 39A.D. 1649.at the time, in order to prepare for the execution of his plan,when he received the news of the King's execution. Hisfirst feeling was that he had lost the object of his life, whichwould henceforth be a burden to him. ' How !' said his chaplain,,' die, my Lord ! All brave men must unite to avenge theblood of their royal master on his wicked murderers.' Thisthought seemed to give Montrose new life. He swore beforeGod, angels, and men, that henceforth he would dedicatehimself to this end. He exclaims in a poetic vow-'I'll sing thy obsequies with trumpet's sounds,And write thy epitaph with blood and wounds.'In the combined scheme, which was deemed practicable inthe summer of 1649, for exciting from Ireland as the startingpoint a reaction in favour of monarchy, Montrose was to takean active part. Appointed once more to the chief commandof the Royal forces in Scotland, he formed the design of collecting,by the help of the northern powers and the Germanprinces, an army which, on its appearance in Scotland, wouldattract the whole nation to its side. The German princes, towhom Montrose appealed, received him with sympathy, theQueen of Sweden with that enthusiasm which she alwayslavished upon men of reputation and merit ; but eventhey had neither the means nor the fixed purpose to affordhim much assistance. His hopes chiefly rested upon the HighSteward of Denmark, Corfitz Ulfeld ; but his support tooproved ultimately unimportant. It was a force of not morethan two hundred men that Montrose, as late as the spring of1650, brought over from Gothenburg to the Orkneys, andthere awaited the assistance, trifling as it was, of his friends.But what is more impossible to shake than the confidence ofan exile? Montrose disregarded the advice that Charles Ihad sent him, when recommending him to leave Scotland,that he must either conquer the whole country or be ruined.Or rather he was determined to risk this danger. On hisstandard were inscribed the words ' Nil Medium,' no middlecourse. He would have been disgraced in his own eyes, andin the eyes of all who expected something from him, had heretreated. In spite of the most unfavourable conditions he

40 CHARLES II AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. xr.3.A.D. 1649.ventured, not without an eye to Ireland, to land in Caithness ;but no one obeyed his summons. His tiny army was scatteredin the first encounter with a troop of Parliamentaryhorse, April 16, 1650. The Germans, who had accompaniedhim, determined to re-embark : Montrose himself escaped inthe confusion, but the first Scot with whom he sought sheltergave him up to his enemies for a small reward. But Montroseis of the number of those who are raised above the misfortunethat befalls them by the idea for which they are fighting.The shameful procession in which he was led through thecountry, and then through the streets of Edinburgh, was inhis eyes a sort of triumph. As he passed in front of Argyle'shouse, his enemies, who were collected there, shrank backbefore the accusing loftiness of his look. To the charge thathe had broken the sworn Covenant, he replied that on thecontrary it was the Scots who had transgressed the agreement,while he had held fast to it. He steadily asserted thatall his crime was that he had feared God and honoured theKing. But he was forced to drain the cup to the dregs.The fanatical Covenanters refused him even a knightly death.In the sight of all, Montrose, in his scarlet doublet, ascendedthe steps of the gallows, which had been raised higher thanusual. The head and arms of the dead man were severedfrom the body and exhibited in the chief towns of thecountry l.The feeling to which Dorislaus had fallen a victim waspunished in Scotland by the vilest death : with the Kinghimself the Scottish leaders had no intention of breaking- onthis account. Let us now consider carefully the directionwhich their policy was then following.In Edinburgh the party still ruled which had come intopower through Hamilton's defeat. In May 1649 a generalthanksgiving for it had been celebrated ; the whole year wasoccupied with the execution of the punishments imposedupon the malignants. Whoever refused to sign a prescribeddeclaration was excommunicated. How many were refusedXI. 3. CHARLES 11 AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. qrA.D. 1649.the Sacrament on this ground ! It was now that the Churchmade an attempt to withdraw the ministers from lay patronage.It was the era of the most avowed supremacy ofthe extreme Covenanting clergy.Though however they owed their position above all to thevictories of Cromwell and his army, yet the proceedings ofthese last against the King they by no means approved. TheScottish commissioners who were sent to England, were itis true by no means themselves contented with the concessionsmade at Newport, especially because a portion ofhis power was restored to the King before he had given fullsatisfaction to his kingdom, but still they openly disapprovedof the treatment which he met with from the army. Theycondemned his execution. They even declared it to be abreach of the agreements made at the time of the transfer ofthe King from Newcastle to Holmby I.This difference of opinion has a theoretical significance aswell. The Scottish idea of the sovereignty of the people,which, while securing to the nation as such a high standardof ecclesiastical and political independence, at the same timeadmitted in the case of the throne a divine right transmittedthrough a regular succession, a right which alone gave completevalidity to the decrees of a nation, came into opencollision with the idea of the sovereignty of the people, asit had come to be understood in the army, according to whichall power was originally derived from the people, and wasdependent upon them. The former is more constitutionalin its nature, the latter is in its very essence republican.This difference was clearly at the time as much ecclesiasticalas political. The toleration which the Independents demandedwas an abomination to the Presbyterians. Theymaintained that to them belonged the well-earned right toestablish in England their own ecclesiastical constitution.They insisted continually upon the carrying out of theCovenant, and of the decrees of the Westminster Assembly.As soon as the news of Charles 1's execution arrived,1 Fraser's account of the conducting Montrose in Edinburgh, in Napier, Memoirsof Montrose ii. 733. Diary of Lamont I 7.' The Scots commissioners letters Jan. 6, 22, 1648/9.52a.-Parl. Hist. XI"' '11'. 437.

42 CHARLES II AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. XI. 3.A.D. I 649.Charles I1 was immediately proclaimed in Edinburgh asKing of Great Britain, and also of England, France, andIreland. They did not hesitate to send an embassy to him,and to invite him to return to his kingdom. But at the sametime they were fully resolved that he could not be admittedto the exercise of his authority, before he had recognised theexisting order of things in Church and State. They gavethe ambassador all the documents which expressed theirviews, bound together in a single volume-the original ScottishCovenant, that between the Scots and the English, andthe decrees of the Westminster Assembly as to doctrine andritual. Charles I1 was required to accept these beforehand.For in them were contained, they said, the true means ofconfirming throne and religion, and restoring the kingdomto its former happy state. When they requested PrinceWilliam of Orange to support their proposals, he madethem remark that his brother-in-law might pledge himselfso far as Scotland was concerned, but could not enter intoengagements which would make all non-Presbyterians inEngland and Ireland his enemies, and would alienate theCatholic powers. To this the minister, William Spang, whowas discussing the matter with the Prince, replied that itwas these very arguments which brought Charles I to hisruin. Charles I1 had only to place himself at the head ofthe Presbyterian league, and then Scotland would be on hisside as one man : in England he would assuredly defeatthe Independents, since for one Independent there threePresbyterians could be counted, and for the rest, no onewould side with the traitorous sectaries: only in this waycould he hope to become once more King of Great Britainand Ireland l.The young King's answer turned out to be just what thePrince had expressed. He reserved the right to lay theCovenant before the English Parliament, if he ever got sofar as to be able to summon one. The Scots regarded thisMay 23, June 2, 1649. Report of the Commissioners of the Church in Baillieiii. 519. In a letter to Queen Christina, Charles I1 mentions these negotiations.He stigmatises the demands as ' iniqua, indigne admodum a subditis a legitimc regesuo exigenda!XI, 3. CHARLES I1 AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. 43A.D. 1650.as almost an affront, since both League and Covenant hadbeen accepted long before by the English Parliament.The truth was that Charles I1 dared not go further atthe time. A union with the Scots, agreeably to their extremeCovenanting views, would have for ever alienatedfrom him the Irish, whether Episcopalians or Catholics, towhom he was then chiefly looking for his restoration.But in 1650 Cromwell had already broken the power ofthe Irish. To save them from entire and complete destruition,those who before were strongly opposed to it l, nowadvised him to come to an agreement with the Scots. Nothing,it seemed, but a diversion from Scotland could sustainthe remaining Irish Royalists and revive the zeal of those inEngland. The same advice was given by the EnglishRoyalists, even by those who were known to be sober andcautious men. The claim made by the Scots on the strengthof old agreements for the execution of the Covenant was notdistasteful to them, since it afforded a legitimate pretext forthe expedition. The Queen-mother was decidedly in favourof the plan. With the advice which she had once given herconsort, namely to subscribe the Covenant as the only means ofregaining a strong position and an army, she now approachedher son : at the same time the Prince of Orange expressed asimilar opinion. The good understanding existing between theIndependents and the Spaniards, l~ho were now once more inalliance with the Fronde in Paris, rendered such a combinationdesirable from a European point of view 2. There is evidence,if not of a treaty, yet of a proposal for a treaty, with this object,which was negotiated between Mazarirl and the Prince, andwhich expressly stipulated for the restoration of Charles I1 3.' Secretary Long to the Marquis of Ormond, March 20, 1650. 'There apPears to me no imaginable way how His Majesty can make a diversion of therebels' forces from Ireland but by a conjunction with the Scots.' (Carte's Lettersii. 373.)"ispaccio Romano di Londra, 15 Giulio, 1650. 'I1 solo ambasciatore diSpagna tra tutti i ministri di ~rincipi e favorito e rispettato nella sua casa nei suoiPreti nelle sue lettere!Projet de trait&. Art 3. ' Que le roi et M. le Prince de Orange romperont enmame terns avec Cromwell, et tenteront par toutes sortes de voies de retablir le roid'Angleterre dans ses royaumes.'

44 CHARLES IT AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. XI. 3.A.U. r6jaFor his own sake too William I1 was desirous that any oneshould make head against the dominant faction in England,whose influence was reviving the opposition of the States ofHolland to himself. The closer relations at the time betweenHolland and Denmark may have been the reason why Montrose,who was then starting for Scotland, obtained supportfrom Ulfeld. For efforts were made to link together the mostdistant powers, those most antagonistic were to unite in acommon course of action.It was under the pressure of these influences that Charles 11,in the negotiations with a view to which the Scots had sent afresh commission to Breda, complied with the demands whichhe had previously rejected, and consequently accepted the invitationto return to the throne of his fathers. Above all itwas William 11's support, of the extent of which he onceexpresses himself ashamed, which enabled him to meet thecost of the undertaking.But the King was kept very close to his engagements: atthe mouth of the Spey, while still on board the ship that hadcarried him over, he was obliged to swear to the Leagueand Covenant. He was anxious to add some words in explanation,but the ministers present signified to him that inthat case his oath would be declared worthless. The dayfollowing, June 24/July 4, 1650, he landed on the coast. Hisfirst resting place was an old castle of the Huntlys, held by aParliamentary garrison. Here a committee of the Estatesreceived him, and conducted him to Aberdeen : opposite thehouse in which he took up his residence, was nailed up ahand of the unfortunate Montrose. It was necessary for theKing to disown all connexion with him. The great personswho had come over with him hastened to make satisfaction tothe Church for their share in the last campaign. In thetowns which the King visited on his way, the keys of thegates were handed over to him, but at the same time addresseswere read to him on his duties as Prince which wereunderstood to consist especially in his consenting to beguided, in secular matters by the advice of the ParliamentaryCommittee, in ecclesiastical by that of the Assembly, and tocarry out the provisions of the League and Covenant, whichXI. 3. CHARLES I1 AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. 45A.D. 1650.should include the three kingdoms. In this sense his proclamation~were actually composed I.Thus it was that Scottish Presbyterianism set itself oncemore in complete antagonism to the supremacy af the Independent~and to the Commonwealth in England. The indignationof the latter was naturally roused. In the proceedingsof the Scots they saw rightly enough an enmity of a verydangerous sort. Cromwell was recalled from Ireland, wherethe most important part of the task was already done, and$aced as Lord-General at the head of the army which was tohumble the Scots. It was now that Fairfax finally retired beforethe comrade who had already thrown him into the shade.He found himself in the unhappy position of a man who hasallowed himself to be used as a tool, and is at last obliged tocondemn the results of his own acts. The great drama nowlogically developing itself, passed over his head to its naturalissue. All the other elements inclined to Presbyterianismwere ejected from the army, for it was against their verybirthplace that war was now preparing.It is usual for the opening of a campaign to be inauguratedby manifestos from the governments or the generals. Whathappened on this occasion was in the highest degree extraordinary.Besides the Parliament and the general, the armytoo had its word to say; and it cannot be said that this wasa mere formality: it was a time in which armies deliberated,they had an opinion of their own and they expressed it.In an appeal addressed to all who share in the faith of God'select, the army declared that they entered on their campaignin the fear of God, and with a heart full of love and compassion.They complained that the Scots had not onlywelcomed among themselves, but had further promised torestore to England, the young prince who, well as he mightplay his part, would still be guided by his father's example,and by the influence of his papistical mother. They emphaticallydenied that the treaties had been broken by England ;on the contrary, by the abolition of the monarchy the army' Walker, Journal of several actions performed in the kingdom of Scotland,"350. Historical Discourses 159.

46 CHARLES I1 ALVD CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. XI. 3.A.D. I 650.had observed tne spirit of the Covenant; for that act had beendone solely for the good of the people, of their religion andtheir liberty.It made a very deep impression upon the Scots that :heydere accused of having in their political conduct sulliedthe purity of their religious motives. The ecclesiasticalcommission first of all declared that Scotland only defendedthe King's cause so far as he made God's cause his own, andrenounced the perverseness of his father in opposing the workof God. The officers of the Scottish army next raised theirvoice; for it specially concerned them, since they were onthe point of risking their lives in opposing with the helpof God a treaty-breaking invasion. Their intention was tofight not for the interests of any person whatever, but solelyfor the principles hitherto established, for the Covenant andthe kingdom. They propose the purging of their regiments,of the court, even of the country, of the malignants andenemies of God, who would draw down upon them God'sanger. Already in the nation and church the anxiety hadspread lest the King's intentions should not be honourable.He was required to give a declaration that he made commoncause with them, plainer and fuller than that which was impliedin his acceptance of the conditions prescribed him. Heshowed reluctance. IIe was told that, if he would not completelyattach himself to the Church, the Church in her turnwould separate herself from him. At one moment it appearedas if in the event of his refusal an agreement to hisdetriment was impending. Cromwell was reported to havesaid that he did not wish to quarrel with the Scots, butthat he desired the surrender of the King. In prospect ofthis danger, and hard pressed on all sides, Charles I1 resolvedto subscribe the declaration which was laid beforehim. In it he condemned not merely his own delay inrendering the satisfaction due to the kingdom and Churchof Scotland, but also with deep sorrow lamented his father'sperverse resistance to the work of God, and the idolatry ofhis mother, which had drawn down upon his family theanger qf "rod, who is a jealous God. All the views of thezealous Churchmen he adopted as his own : he stigmatisedXI. 3, CHARLES I1 ANn CROMWX'LL IN SCOTLAND. 47A.D. 1650.as unprincipled the preferring the interests of the King tothose of the Church. Such a declaration as this undoubtedlytended to maintain the alliance between the throne and thebut what a position was it for the young prince whoaccepted outwardly the extreme views of the Church, whilehe hated them in his heart1. A letter from him written duringthis time is extant in which he asserts his unalterable attachmentto the English Church. It is difficult to know whetherto condemn or to pity him. He felt the necessity whichpressed upon him to be a most galling restraint, from whichhe was ready at any moment to escape, but to which heforced himself to conform.Thus confirmed in their purpose, the Scots formed theirarmy in the strictest accordance with their religious ideas.All who on account of their participation in the former campaignwere objects of suspicion, were discharged ; their numbersare estimated at 4000 men-officers and privates. Noregard was paid to the consideration that probably amongthem were the bitterest enemies of Cromwell. Their serviceswere rejected because their religious creed was not founddecided enough to ensure the assistance of God for a cause ofwhich they were to be champions.They were not ordinary armies, but two politico-religioussects which now encountered each other. Their quarrel wasnot about faith and doctrine, for both were alike zealousProtestants, but about the constitution in Church and Statewhetherthere should be a King or not, whether there shouldbe a ruling Church or not, this was the question in suspensebetween them. Both entertained an equally sure convictionof the immediate interference of the Deity in human affairs :their existence as sects depended on their being anxiousto render themselves as worthy as possible of the divinesupport.Cromwell maintained that the cause of the Scots, throughthe man who lived among them, was bound up with unholyand malipant interests. 'If you resolve to fight our army,' heSaid, 'you will have opportunity to do that, else what means-' Walker gives the different declarations in full.

48 CHARLES II AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. XL 3.A.D. 1650.our having come here. We commit both you and ourselvesto him who knows the heart and tries the reins.'The advantage at first inclined to the side of the Scots.Cromwell had invaded Scotland from Benvick. He nowadvanced from Dunbar against Edinburgh ; intending at thesame time to attack Stirling. The Scots however heldstrong positions, by means cf which they protected theirprincipal towns. They made the best use of the advantagewhich the country gave them. Cromwell found himself compelledby want of provisions and by increasing sickness tofall back upon Dunbar. The Scots followed him withoutdelay. Nothing but the mist and darkness of the night savedthe cavalry of the English rear-guard from a decisive loss atHaddington. It was with a discouraged, hungry, scatteredarmy that Cromwell reached Dunbar. He encamped on theopen ground close to the town. The Scots took up a strongposition on the neighbouring hills ; they were far superiorin numbers, and thought that victory was certainly in theirhands.There were however among them two conflicting opinions.The one party were in favour of facilitating rather thanobstructing the retreat of the enemy's army, which theyseemed to be resolved upon. They might let them returnhome with shame for their breach of covenant, and thenpursue them in order to exact compensation for the summerquarterswhich the English had enjoyed in Scotland, bywintering the Scots in England. The others on the contraryrecommended that they should be surrounded stillmore closely. God had delivered the enemy into their hands,as he had delivered Agag the Amalekite into the hands ofKing Saul, they would have to give an account for it shouldthey let them escape2. The Scottish general, David Lesley,inclined to the first opinion. He would rather have maintainedhis position ; in the Committee however the othersHodgson :'a poor, scattered, hungry, discouraged army!' It is singular that Waller, usually no friend to the clergy, ascribes tothem the milder counsels, 'seeing the next day they were like to fall int~ theirhands, I? were better to get a dry victory and send them back with shame for theirbreach of covenant,'XI. 3. CHA2LES I1 AND CKOJIWELL IN SCOTLAND. 49A.D. 1650.gained their point, and the orders of the Committee werelaw. Military considerations were obliged to yield to spiritualimpulses'.In the Independent camp too these spiritual impulsesruled supreme, but with this difference, that the generalsthemselves performed spiritual functions, and were the mostzealous believers. With his faith Cromwell united both militarypromptitude and great strategic skill. When in danger ofbeing surrounded, he expected, as he tells us, a manifestationfrom God for the deliverance of His own; but at the sametime he himself perceived the advantage which the movementresolved upon in the Scottish camp offered him. On the edgeof the marshy glen which separated the two armies fromeach other, the Scots appeared with their line widely extended,now, as formerly at Preston, not without leaving suchgaps between the divisions of the army as allowed them tobe attacked separately, and with too as little regard for consequencesas they showed there. The general welcomed asa confirmation of his view and as an omen of success2, thefact that Major-General Lambert had'noticed the same thing.Lambert then convinced the chief officers of the practicabilityof an attack, and of the probability of its success.In the evening the regiments took up the positions allottedto them. Sermons were preached in the open plain, some byan enthusiastic cornet, whose confident predictions of victoryinspired all with a like feeling.The plan was by a cannonade to direct the attention of theScots to their left wing, which was separated by a good Englishmile from the right, and at the same moment to attack thelatter in full force. In the grey of the morning the attackbegan simultaneously upon the flank and the front of the rightwing : the Independents were already gaining the advantagewhen the sun rose over the sea : ' Now,' exclaimed CromwellCp. Baillie iii. 11 I.So he gives the account himself, and we may thereiore accept it. It is mereembellishment to make him exclaim, as other accounts do, on seeing the Scotsdescend horn their hills, ' God has delivered them into my hands ;' or, as the Venetiananlbassador was told, 'that he told the army of a divine voice which awokehim out of sleep, and foretold the victory to him.'RANKE, VOL. 111,E

50 CHARLES I1 AND CROMWZLL IN SCOTLAND. XI. 3.A.D. I 650.at the sight, ' let God arise, and let his enemies be scattered.'Among the Independents the old thirst for battle, stimulatedby success, was redoubled by a sense of the dangers in whicha defeat would have plunged them, The Scots too were fullof determination and zeal. But as the regiments of the leftwing were set in motion to go to the assistance of the right,they found themselves ill disorder on the narrow space betweenthe heights which they had first occupied and thenleft, and the ravine. If they tried to turn aside to the hills,the victorious English troops at once broke through theirranks. They were unable to form into a compact body ; andso it happened that panic retreat and rout spread along thewhole line, now attacked on the other side as well. Menusually brave were seen throwing away their arms ; theydispersed in the most opposite directions, not only to Haddingtonbut to Dunbar. As many as 3000 were killed, andgoo0 taken prisoners. 'But we,' writes Hodgson, 'returned backto our tents, like Issachar, to return thanks for the deliverancevouchsafed to us on this day by God.'Very remarkable is it how completely these races of WesternEurope have made their own the records of the ancientEastern world. Their Celto-Germanic traditions and legendsare forgotten. For those Eastern records contain at once thehistory of religion and the history of the human race, beforewhich national differences fade into nothing. Nowhere havethe books of the Old Testament exercised a more powerfulinfluence over individuals. The God of Israel is for themtheir own God, under whose eyes they believe themselvesto fight as a second chosen people.After the battle, Leith, Edinburgh and Linlithgow fell intothe conqueror's hands. Edinburgh Castle was then for thefirst time reduced by a hostile force. Cromwell consideredthat by this success the great contest was decided theoreticallyas well as actually. Both sides had appealed to God,who had now manifested himself through the issue of thebattle. He required the Scots to recognise the mightyhand of God, and to bow to the decision that had beengiven.The Presbyterians maintained consistently that religiousXI. -3. CHARLES N AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. 5 iA.D. I 650.truth is not discoverable by a contest with sword and pistol.In the pulpits the preachers were heard remonstrating with-God, because he had given the bad cause the advantageover the good, which yet was his own. Still the event hada great effect on the religious opinions of the Scots. Itcaused a fresh division among them. There were many tooamong them who, while searching for the causes of the defeat,found no other than their alliance with a hypocritical King,a malignant at heart, and with his adherents. It was preciselythe ministers of the strictest Covenanting opinions, suchas James Guthrie and Patrick Gillespie, who were generallydiscontented at the calling in of the King1. They set on footin the western counties an armed association, at the headof which appear some zealous officers, such as Strachan andKer, who refused to serve any longer under David Lesley.It is possible that there may have been adherents of Cromwellamong them, but generally they were but little inclinedto him, and their troops were dispersed by Lambert in a fewweeks. In their Remonstrances, from which they derivedthe name of the Remonstrants, we meet with sentimentsin which they agree with Cromwell. For instance, it didnot satisfy them that hitherto the Scots had resolved tobe content with the King's taking the Covenant beforehis recognition by the nation. Their wish was that heshould be required to have given trustworthy proofs of repentanceand inward agreement before he could be obeyed :and this they demanded on the same religious grounds thatCromwell had put forward. And if, they added further, thereis already sin even in recognising such a King, how far moresinful is it to wish to force him upon another nation overwhich they have no authority2. They withdrew from theprinciples of the old League. England they wished to leaveto herself. Scotland was to be ruled indeed in the King'sname, but by the Committees of the State and the Church,' From Livingstone's Memoirs (Tweedie's Select Biographies i.) it is clear thathe took part in the first assembly at Kilmarnock.' The remonstrance of the gentlemen, commanders, and ministers attending theforces of the West. Balfour iv. 141.

52 CHARLES I1 ANll CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. XI. 3.A.D. 1650.without his having any personal share in the government,and these Committees were to be formed in accordance withtheir sentiments. A characteristic feature in the new partyis the aversion it showed towards the nobility and gentry:all active members of those orders would have been excluded,neither Argyle-.nor Loudon would have found a place amongthem. They would have established an ecclesiastical communitycomposed of the people, the tendency of which hadalready shown itself in the proposal for the abolition ofpatronage '.But these proposals were not accepted by the majority ofthe clergy. The Remonstrance was rejected by the EcclesiasticalCommission, which adhered to the sworn Covenantbetween the two nations. Still less could the nobility, whosaw their ancient influence over the nation endangered, givetheir assent to it. The effect of these agitations was ratherto drive them over to the King's side-they now regardeda King as necessary for the maintenance of the existingrCgime : Argyle himself turned royalist. Charles 11, who hadonce in his difficulties made an attempt to escape, met withbetter treatment. He was allowed to take part in the deliberationson affairs of state and in the sittings of Parliament.He now made his first speech from the throne. And thisparty drew a totally different conclusion from the defeatthey had suffered from that drawn by the other; it wasascribed not to the admission, but to the exclusion, of theRoyalists. The Ecclesiastical Commission consented thatin order to repel the hostile invasion of profligate sectariesthe existing restrictions on admission to military serviceshould be abolished. Those too now reappeared in thearmy who had taken part in Hamilton's campaign ; thecommon soldiers after a slight, the nobility and officers aftera somewhat more conspicuous reparation towards the Church.The Chancellor remarked that the term ' malignants' referredto the fact that the adherents of the ~ing had been' So many and grosse faults was pressed against Argyle, the Chancellour,Louthian, Ualcarras and others, that in all reason they behooved to be laid aside andour state modelled of new, so that no active nobleman should have had any handtherein, and as for England they might rest secure of our armies! Uaillie iii. 119.,I. 3. CHARLES I1 AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. 53A.D 1 ~ 5 ~ .enemies of the Covenant: since the King had declared histo the Covenant the Royalists were no longerrnalignants.On New Year's day 1651 the coronation of Charles I1 tookplace at Scone. It was performed in the ancient manner, inso many kings renowned in legend and history hadbeen crowned. Charles I1 however was obliged to swearto the Presbyterian dogmas. The High Constable handedhim the sword, with the requirement that he should use itfor the defence of the true religion as it was now acknowledgedin the kingdom. Over the crown a prayer was firstoffered up that it might be purifi6d from the transgressionsof those who had formerly worn it : and then the Marquisof Argyle piaced it on the King's head.It is a misconception to regard this act as the climax ofthe pride of the Presbyterian clergy. The officiating ministerdid not belong to the extreme party, which certainly rejectedthis King, but to the moderate party which adhered to theResolutions of the state : the great struggle was now betweenResolutioners and Remonstrants.How con~pletely different might the course of events havebeen had this resolution been embraced at first, and theRoyalists of 1648 not been ejected ! Now that they werereceived back agdin, resistance at any rate became possible.In the spring of 1651 a considerable army assembled underthe leadership of the young King himself, in which there wereas many Royalist as Covenanting officers. The hate whichthey both cherished against the Independents, the former onaccount of their republican, the latter on account of theirreligious tendencies, made them feel that they were servinga common cause. For some time, that is during Cromwell'sillness, they had the superiority in the field. Evenwhen the General was again able to take his place, they heldtheir ground against him. They took up so good and stronga position at Stirling that Cromwell could not have attackedthem without risk.With this bolder attitude however was connected a schemeof general importance.William I1 had been carried off by sudden illness in the

54 CHARLES 11 AND CIZOMWELL IN SCOTLAND. XI..+A.D. 1651.autumn of 1650, but the schemes originated by him were nottherefore given up. In Utrecht first of all, and then at theHague, associations were formed of English Royalists, whichwere in continual communication with those of the same wayof thinking in England. We meet with similar associations inEngland, where the Royalists promised to take up arms assoon as Charles I1 appeared in the country even with onlytwo thousand men. This movement was to be supported bytwo regiments from Holland, which were to land on theKentish coast. Ireland too was drawn into the combination.The ever-restless Duke of Lorraine promised assistance there,and Limerick still held out. All flattered themselves that themere appearance of the King in person would be enough toset in motion for the royal cause the Catholics in Ireland,no less than the Presbyterians and Cavaliers in England.The question was seriously asked whether it were not mostexpedient for Charles I1 at once to carry out the plan whichhad mainly brought him to Scotland, and to attempt aninvasion of England with the forces which he had collected.This idea was strengthened by a second defeat which theScots sustained in an engagement with the Republican troopsin the county of Fife. Cromwell had occupied Perth. Theycould scarcely hope to conquer him where he was in apitched battle. How much better by a rapid march intoEngland at once to extricate themselves from this difficultposition, and to give an entirely different turn to the war.To the young King there was something extremely seductivein the plan of bravely trying his fortune on a large scale.There were many English Royalists in his camp. They allin a body urged the undertaking, and left the Scots freeto accompany the King or not as they liked. Among themajority Royalist sentiments prevailed. To those who wentit appeared that not much was lost in those who remainedbehind.On August 7 Charles 11, who had met with no oppositionon his march through the western counties, crossedthe English border at Carlisle with an army of about I 1,000men. A herald, an Englishman appointed for this purpose,proclaimed him King of England on English land and soil.XI. 3. CHARLES I1 AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. 55A.D. 1651.And to many it seemed that this expedition affordedwell-grounded hopes. It had been necessary to suppressby force the movements of the Royalists and Presbyterians :it was reasonable to expect that on the King's return thesewould revive with double strength. A Howardof Escrick was the first who presented himself with a fewtrusted followers. But the greatest hopes were raised bythe news that one of the foremost English magnates, JamesStanley Earl of Derby, who held the Isle of Man, whichbelonged to him, with defiant independence, was preparingto support the expedition. Would not his example haveits influence on the districts in which his possessions lay.It was hoped that the nobility in Lancashire and Cheshire,and indeed throughout the North, would rise l. The King'sarrival, it was said, would produce a general desertion fromthe Parliament, just as the arrival of Gustavus Adolphus inGermany with a smaller force had once drawn men awayfrom the Emperor.There were others who took a less hopeful view of affairs.If indeed Scotland had been relinquished only because itcould no longer be held, was it not absurd still to grasp atthe highest prize of the war; yet while aiming at all itwas possible to Iose all. ' I do not know,' exclaimed one ofthe generals, 'which is the greater, our hope or our fear:our strongest argument is despair: we must try the fortuneof battle or die 2.'Charles I1 pressed on almost unopposed as far as Worcester,where a majority in town and council declared for him, andadmitted him. Many were anxious that, as his father hadoften done, he should direct his course to London, wherethe Presbyterian preachers entertained a iavourable dispositiontowards him. But that which previously could not becarried out, could not now be undertaken at all. Everywhereduring the civil war a complete military organi.sation had been established under the leadership of Parlia-Robert Lilburne mentions a wicked design, which was laid and hatchedthe whole north of England.' Cary ii. 342.Hamilton to Crofts, August 8. Caly ii. 305.

56 CHARLES II AND CROMWELL IN SCOTLAND. XI. 3.A.D. 1651.mentary and Independent commanders : the first risings,such as that headed by Lord Derby in Lancashire andCheshire, were at once crushed. But who would join himselfto a power which demanded protection but could affordnone, in opposition to one which possessed an enormoussuperiority, and which punished every act of disobedience toits orders with loss of property or of life? Cromwell too nowappeared; the adventurous expedition had come upon himunexpectedly, but he could have wished for nothing better.It was clear that he would much rather find the enemy in anunfortified English town in the middle of a territory subjectto his own authority than to be forced to seek him out inthe strong camp at Stirling or in the Highlands. On hismarch he effected a junction with the troops raised in England.He rushed upon his prey, sure of securing it. AtDunbar he had fought for his existence and his honour.At Worcester his victory was decided beforehand. It isscarcely worth our while to linger over the battle. Charles I1did all that could be expected of a young prince : riding fromregiment to regiment he encouraged the troops, and theseshowed no want of bravery, but they were no match for theenemies who advanced on all sides as if to storm the town :in front of the gates and .within the tewn three thousand fellby the sword, more than six thousand were taken prisoners,among them all the best-known generals ; the King barelyescaped with about sixty followers '.He was soon obliged to dismiss even these ; in one wayor another they fell into the conqueror's hands. The mostimportant question now was whether, since he was thusplaced in a position in which the hostile forces were closelyencircling him in their toils, he would escape himself, orwhether he would meet with the fate of his father.Had the popularity of the Commonwealth been universal hemust have been lost. A high price was set upon his head.For six weeks of unparalleled adventures and dangers heremained in England. About fifty persons distinctly recog-XI. 3. CHARLES II AND CR0MWEL;L IN SCOTLAND. 57A.D. 1651.nised him ; but the words 'the King our master ' exerciseda magic influence over men of all ranks'. At last he founda vessel, which conveyed him to Normandy; to that spotwhence once William had set sail for England with themost splendid fleet of the time-a complete contrast towhat was now happening. The Independent army, beforewhich Charles I1 retreated, had often proclaimed its intentionof putting an end to that constitution of the statewhich dated from the Conquest.'The King of England, my master, your master, and the master of all goodEnglishmen, is near you and in great distress : can you help us to a boat 1 ' ' Is hewell, is he safe l ' ' Yes.' ' God be blessed I' Narrative of the escape of Charles,in Cary 435.' ' Letter written from a prisoner at Chester,' the best account from the Royalistside. Clarendon Papers ii. 562.

CHAPTER IV.THE GROWTH OF THE POWER OF THE COMMONWEALTIIBY LAND AND SEA.THE authority of the Commonwealth was now supremein the three kingdoms : everywhere it had overpowered, atthe very moment when they were anxious to be reconciledto each other, the two forces between which the war hadoriginally broken out, that of the royal authority and that oflocal, parliamentary or religious independence. In Englandthe Parliamentary party with its Presbyterian impulses wasruined from the time that it attempted to make its peacewith Charles I. In the same way Scotland was conqueredjust when the strict Covenanters had made such an agreementwith Charles I1 as could satisfy them. The momentin which they imagined that they had for ever endedtheir old quarrel with the monarchy, and with the episcopacywhich it protected, brought about their ruin. In Irelandthe hostility between the Protestant and the Catholic populationwas in the greater part of the country as good aslaid aside at the moment when Cromwell crushed themboth. It is impossible not to see that it was above all thingsthe fear of the preponderance of the Republican faction whichevoked those approaches to union, approaches which did notlead to any deeper retonciliation, precisely because they weremerely brought out under the pressure of this sentiment.The result was that the predominance which it was wishedto avoid, now first became fully evident.In the history of Great Britain this age of the Commonwealthforms one of the great links which bind together the generalhistorical development. The fact that Cromwell struck theXI. 4. GROWTH OF PO WER OF COMMOA'WEALTH. 59A.D. 1651.decisive blows in the three countries, and secured the victoryfor the Commonwealth, gives him an importance for GreatBritain which secures for him an imperishable memory,whatever judgments may be passed upon his personal servicesand qualities.By his march on Worcester Charles I1 had staked thefate of all three kingdoms as it were upon a single throw.After the Republic by its victory had taken up a position ofsupremacy, it was inevitable that the local efforts at resistancewhich still continued, should succumb.One result among others of the battle of Worcester, sofar as regards England, was the union of the Isle of Man.We are strangely reminded of the state of affairs in themiddle ages, by the manner in which in that island theinsignia of an independent authority, shared with two estatesof clergy and laity, were handed down in regular successionfrom one lord to another. The existing lord, James Stanley,seventh bar1 of Derby, and his wife, had fought bravely forthe cause of the King their liege lord, and after that causewas lost in England had maintained themselves in independenceon their island.No sooner was the royal standard again unfurled inEngland than the Earl held himself bound by his allegianceto join it, but at Worcester he fell into the handsof those enemies whom he had often proclaimed to berebels. He was punished by them with death : at his executionthe antagonism of ideas was brought into strikingprominence. He said that he felt at peace since he wasdying for the King and the laws. A soldier from the crowdreplied, 'We have no king, and will have no lords1.' Theambition of his wife, the defender of Lathom, would nowhave been to hold the island, or at least Rushin Castle,where the leaden crown of Man was kept: but the opinionsto which she was most opposed had already many adherentsamong her own people. At the first appearance of theRepublican troops the castle and island both fell into their1I ' Passages in my Lord going to the scaffold,' in Collins' Peerage, ed. Brydgesiii. 88.

60 GROWTH OF TBE POWER OF THE xr. 4.A.D. 1651.hands. Lady Derby was forced first of all to submit toimprisonment, and then compelled to live for some time onthe charity of her friends.The whole royalist nobility were now included under thefiscal regulations. Lists are extant of an appalling length,containing the names of those who were punished with confiscation.Those were fortunate who had made a tolerablecon~position in time.It was necessary that the old estates of the crown shouldserve for carrying on the war against it. The royal gardensand castles were sold. The incomparable collection of worksof art, which Charles I had got together with judgment andsuccess, was alienated and broken up 1. Especially in Spainadvantage was taken of so favourable a moment for acquiringon easy terms such invaluable treasures. A train of eighteenmules conveyed the purchased works of art from Corunnato Madrid. In England at this time nothing was cultivatedbut a taste for power and war. Since many cathedrals stoodempty, an inquiry was made as to how many could be dispensedwith. It was resolved to pull them down and to sellthe materials. The bells were recast for ships' cannon.The effects of the disaster at Worcester could not be otherwisethan ruinous to the independence of Scotland. Charles I1had carried off the best men to England. Cromwell had leftthere a far stronger force, and moreover under a general fullyequal to his task, George Monk, whom he had brought withhim to Scotland from Ireland. Before matters were decidedin England Monk had already made himself master of StirlingCastle, where the Scots had the bulk of their military stores.He next succeeded in surprising Eliot in Angus, at the verymoment when the two Committees of the State and theChurch were assembled there to discuss the means of resistance.Those who fell into his hands there were among theprincipal men in the country: they were shipped off in a body1 I ought to mention that this was not the- original intention of the Council ofState. We read in the Order Book, February 22, 1649, 'that it be reported to theHouse that the statues, pictures, and public library be referred to the generalcare of the Council of State to preserve and to dispose to the use of the public.'The erection of a national museum was also thought of.. COMMONWEALTH BY LAND AND SEA. 6 IA.D. 1651.to England. Following Cromwell's example Monk gave overDundee, which he had taken by storm, to plunder and a monstrousmassacre : and the same results followed. Thenceforthno other town ventured to offer serious resistance to him.The year following General Deane undertook an expeditioninto the Highlands, in order to reduce these as well. Headvanced with three brigades, horse and foot, which firstdispersed the bodies of armed men. Those who escapedone fell inevitably into the hands of the others. Among themountains the English suffered more from the climate andthe nature of the country, from the sudden alternations of heatand cold, and from the want of fodder for the horses, thanfrom actual resistance. It actually happened that the Scotssurrounded on all sides a pass through which the Englishcould only pass in single file, and then let them go throughwithout having inflicted any loss upon them. It seemed asif they cared only to secure that one of their leaders,perhaps Argyle himself, should not be carried away. Fortswere built on the most important points on the coast tokeep the country constantly in check on the side of thesea as well.Simultaneously with that of Scotland went on the furtherreduction of Ireland. Under Ireton all the military superiorityof the English Republican troops again displayeditself. The Irish never ventured to resist the onset ofthe English cavalry, with their even step, in which themagnificent horses and their riders trained to the use ofthe carbine moved together. The saying ran that the neighingof an English horse would put them to flight. Added to thiscame the reactionary influence of the events in England andof the politico-religious schism. Since too Rinuccini andshortly after him Ormond had left the island, the old feudhad revived between their adherents. The alliance betweenthe native and clerical parties had been renewed and hadopened war upon the partisans of legitimacy and of England.Letters have been found in which the leaders ascribeall the misfortunes of the country to a foolish loyalty. Inthis distracted state of affairs neither Waterford nor evenLimerick, upon which all eyes were turned, offered a pro-

62 GROWTHOFTHEPOWEROFTHE x1.4.A.D. 1652.longed resistance. Within six weeks after the battle ofWorcester, Limerick was taken, and in May 1652 Galway',which at that time held a high rank among the ports ofthe world, fell with all its wealth into the hands of the Republicangenerals. All the forces still in arms now showedan inclination to capitulate. The Republicans refused onthe ground that each and all owed obedience to the Parliament,but they offered pardon to all who had neither satin the High Council of Ireland, nor were guilty of thedeath of an Englishman, with the permission either to remainin the country or to enter a foreign service, underconditions which secured their property. On one occasiona somewhat more liberal agreement was obtained. LordMuskerry held out in Ross, an island-like fortress surroundedby lakes and marshes. The Republican general EdmundLudlow did not hesitate to seek him out there, and preparedto effect a landing on the Earl's territory in largeboats. The latter on this declared himself ready to submitif the free exercise of his religion were secured to him.Ludlow replied that the authority which he representeihad no thought of enforcing its own religious opinions uponothers. On these terms, which certainly implied but little,Muskerry laid down his arms. Others still retained them :we even hear occasionally of petty battles. Ludlow relateshow by pouring in smoke he gained possession of a cave,in which a number of unsubdued Irish believed themselvessafe: 311 in it were stifled except a few, who then came outwith crucifixes in their hands.In the mountain passes, wastes, forests and marshes, somebands of outlaws still held out, and rendered the wholecountry insecure. They form a parallel to the Bandoliers,Heiducks, and Klephts of southern Europe. In Ireland theyreceived the name of Tories. Many resolved to leave theirfatherland and seek foreign service. Among their numberwas Clanricarde, who after Ormond's removal had continuedfor a time to represent the royal authority.Bates: 'Emporium totius Hiberniae nobilissimum, operibus munitiss~mum,structnra, divitiis incolarum, frequenti maris liberi commercio perinsigne.'xi. 4. COMMONWEALTH BY LAND AND SEA. 63A.D. 1651.More than a hundred persons of high rank, specially mentionedby name, including in particular those who ownedthe largest estates, were excluded from all pardon. The confiscationof their estates and many other acts of deprivationwhich followed on later sentences, enabled Parliament tosatisfy with the vacant lands the claims of the victorioussoldiery, and of all those who in hope of this had advancedmoney for the war. The richest booty fell to the share ofthose who had taken part in the last actions. It was a colonisationon a great scale, which finally established the predominanceof the English population over the Celto-Irish.Still, in spite of all, the war of the two parties was not yetended. Defeated by land, the Cavaliers once more acquireda considerable strength by sea.In Jersey, the Governor, George Carteret, collected asquadron, built on the model of the privateers of St. Malo,for sailing in the narrow seas ; he was victorious far and wide.In the Scilly Islands John Grenville unfurled the standard ofCharles 11. Here he was reinforced by Prince Rupert, whohoped to create a second Venice in St. Mary's, strong as theplace was from its natural position, and the works erected byformer kings. The Prince himself we have already met within Kinsale : under his command at the time was that portion ofthe English fleet which had gone over from the Commonwealthto the King. He secured the wavering fidelity of the crewsby giving them as captains Cavaliers who had served with himthroughout the war in England : for in those days the changefrom the land to the sea service was easily enough made.It is known that Queen Elizabeth of Bohemia pawned herjewels in order to enable her son to take up this new position.Thus from these three points this robber warfare was openedagainst the trade of the English Republic. Whatever sailedto or from England, or lay off its coast, was declared fairspoil, let the owners be who they might. The communicationbetween Ireland and England was rendered insecure and sometimescompletely interrupted by royalist privateers.For such a power as England, devoted to the sea by nature,this was an intolerable state of affairs. How the Commonwealthencountered these fresh enemies is the more deserving

of mention because she thus at the same time entered intonew relations with other maritime powers.The man who now performed the most distinguished serviceswas Robert Blake, one of those characters otherwiserare but not uncommon in this period, in whom considerablelearning and pronounced religious convictions were combinedwith great military ability and indomitable energy. He hadparticularly distinguished himself in the western counties ; forexample, by the defence of Taunton: he was already fiftywhen he first trod the deck of a man-of-war, and along withhim a number of tried officers from the land forces transferredthemselves, as the Royalists had done, to the naval service.It cost some trouble to get the vessels once more into aseaworthy condition. The reasonable demands of the crewswere satisfied, and the gaps were filled up with the skilfuland experienced watermen of the Thames.When the newly-formed fleet appeared on the sea, andCromwell became at the same moment supreme in Ireland,Rupert felt that he could no longer maintain himself in Kinsale.With his brother Maurice, now his companion on thesea, as in former days by land, he resolved to carry on hispiratical war against the vessels of the Commonwealth in foreignseas, where he counted upon the support of friendly princesand powers. He steered first of all for the Pyrenean peninsula: many an English merchant vessel sailing from SanLucar to London fell into his hands. Blake without delayfollowed him. Cavaliers and Roundheads carried on theirwar, already decided in England, in the waters of southernEurope.Blake overtook his enemy on the coast of Portugal. Butwhen King John IV, remembering his friendly relations withCharles I, had promised the two princes security in his harboursaccording to the law of nations ', Blake denied that thelaw of nations applied at all in the case, inasmuch as not a singlesquare foot of land belonged to the princes, and their shipswere the property of the English Commonwealth. For some' ' Being assured from his Majesty we should have the law of nations made goodunto us in his ports.' Warburton, Memoirs 300.~1.4. COMMONWEALTHBYLANDANDSEA. 65A.D. 1651.time the Portuguese adhered steadily to Rupert; they evenventured on a hostile encounter with the Republican fleet;but the latter, which had been reinforced from home, gainedthe advantage. In particular it derived great weight fromthe support it had in the actual holders of power in England.The King was forced to submit to the concession that thePrince's fleet should find no further protection in his territories.Leaving Portugal, Prince Rupert endeavoured to makegood on the coast of Spain his profession that he was pursuingrebels, accomplices in the death of Charles I. In theharbour of Velez-Malaga he actually set fire to two Englishships, and there, in the neighbourhood of the straits, he mighthave proved seriously dangerous to English commerce.Among others he captured a large merchantman, sailingbetween Archangel and Leghorn. But it was not longbefore Robert Blake, with full powers, appeared in his rear.For the first time since the days of the Plantagellets anEnglish fleet was seen in the Mediterranean; and it appearednow with the most completely different intentions.The ideas of Church and State which were then dominantwere now rejected and contested. Blake, while protectingEnglish trade, at the same time obtained for his Republicthe recognition which she required. In the harbour of Carthagenahe destroyed the greater part of t!le fleet of thePalatine Princes which lay at anchor there. The Spaniardsaccepted the interpretation of the law of nations which Blakeprescribed. Not only did they not venture to offer anyopposition, but they handed over to the conqueror1 thecannon which had been saved and brought ashore. ThePrinces, with the remnant of their squadron, which had accidentallynot been at Carthagena, retired to Toulon in orderto sell the booty which they had on board. But the Frenchwere as unwilling as the Spaniards had been to break on theiraccount with the English Commonwealth. The Princes becameaware that it was no longer possible for them to remain' Contrary to the law of nations the Spaniard suffered the enemy's fleet to taketheir advantage.' Journal of the Fleet, 317.RANKE, VOL. 111.F

66 GROWTH OF THE YO WER OF THE XI: 4.A.D. 1651.on the coast of Europe. We find them subsequently off theAzores, in the African, and finally in the West Indian waters ;where Maurice perished in a shipwreck.Blake, after having driven his most important enemy outof Europe, returned to Great Britain, where his presence wasabsolutely necessary; for the piratical war carried on thereunder royalist colours had grown to large dimensions. It wascarried on at once from Galway and the Isle of Man, beforethey were conquered, and from Scilly and Jersey. It wasestimated that there were twenty-eight ships of war belongingto various stations. Carteret's frigates made themselvesespecially dreaded. Within sight of Plymouth, under the veryguns of Dartmouth, they carried off richly laden merchantmen.The Scots who were as yet unconquered followedthis example: they sent out vessels of war which inflictedserious damage on the fisheries and trade of the English1.And as can well be imagined, it was not the English onlywho were aggrieved by these disorders. The Dutch entertainedthe idea of taking vengeance for the loss which theysuffered from the ScilIy Islands by occupying them.It was against this group of rocks that Robert Blake nowfirst turned his arms. He is famous as having been the firstpractically to refute the idea, till then generally accepted, thatit was impracticable for vesseIs of war to undertake an attackupon strong forts on the coast. It was against St. Mary's, inScilly, that he first put his maxims into practice2. At the veryoutset, with the guns of the light frigates which he brought upin front of the fortress, through the windings of the channel,he effected a breach in the walls, upon which the gallantCavaliers and their commander John Grenville surrendered,on conditions which proved to be sufficiently endurable. TheEnglish seemed now to become aware for the first time howimportant these islands were for their trade.. Blake garrisonedthem with trustworthy troops, and stationed a squadron offthe Land's End.George Carteret still maintained himself at Elizabeth' Whitelocke, March 15, 1654 Letters that divers Scotsmen of war are set outto the great damage of trade.Dixon : Robert Blake, preface and chap. v.xr.4. COMMONWEALTHBY LAND AND SEA. 6.1A.D. 1651.Castle, in Jersey, with a gallant force picked from manydifferent nationalities, and hoped to hold out till a brighterfortune should shine upon his Prince. The castle was consideredto be the strongest fortress 011 British soil. On theside of the sea it was inaccessible. Carteret however was notstrong enough to prevent the Republicans from landing.Mortars of the heaviest calibre were then brought from Plymouth,guns very different from those which this fort wasoriginally built to resist. They destroyed the houses, thechurch, the magazines. Even Carteret found himself forcedto surrender; yet he did not do so till he had first consultedhis King. The Commonwealth sent a commission to settlethe Channel islands after its own model.In the British world, just as recently in the French, theaction of artillery was decisive. All those castles in whichan independent power could offer resistance to the authorityof the state, whether on the coast or inland, succumbed to theirresistible cannon. The only difference is that the stateauthoritywhich availed itself of them was in France thatof the King, in England that of the Commonwealth. Thecrown and its adherents were condemned in England to sucha mode of resistance as was elsewhere confined to rebels.In this resistance they failed, as was inevitable.Thanks however to these victories, the Republican powernow finally assumed that position of superiority which wehave indicated. The union for which the Stuart kings hadprepared the way by their hereditary right, and which theyhad endeavoured to establish by means of ecclesiastical andfeudal institutions, was completed by arms, and in directopposition to them. Henceforward throughout the wholeterritory all differences of descent, of religion, and of establishedcustom, disappear : for the first time Great Britain wasgoverned by one single mind over the whole extent of herancient boundaries. But at the same moment she awokemore clearly than ever before to a consciousness of the advantageof her geographical position, of the fact that amaritime vocation was that to which she was called by natureherself. In a spirit of self-assertion and conscious power shenow faced the whole world.F 2

68 GROWTHOFTHEPOWEROFTHE x1.4.A.D. 1651.As an expression of this proud self-consciousness we maytake the Navigation Act, passed by Parliament in the courseof these struggles (October 9, 1651). By this it was especiallyprovided that all goods from countries beyond Europe shouldbe imported into England in English ships only; and allEuropean goods either in English ships or in ships belongingto the countries from which these articles originallycame. Of all the acts ever passed in Parliament it is perhapsthe one which brought about the most important results forEngland and the world. Its origin must be sought in thedissensions of the time.The Carribee Islands, Barbadoes especially, had attaineda high degree of prosperity through their sugar plantations;but like Virginia they remained faithful to the King; inBarbadoes the adherents of the Commonwealth were drivenout. The inhabitants formally adopted a resolution giving theDutch the preference in all commerce and exchange. Similarlythe products of Virginia were conveyed to all partsof the world, even to England, in Dutch ships. It was preciselyagainst this alliance of royalist and Dutch intereststhat the provisions of the Navigation Act were in the firstinstance directed. They had however a more general aim :the English traders, to whom even English merchants reluctantlyentrusted their goods, since the Dutch vesselspromised greater safety, had long prayed for some protectionagainst the exportation of goods in foreign ships;such a protection the Act now gave them. It containsa direct attack on the supremacy of the Dutch, who werethen masters of the carrying trade of the world. The BritishCommonwealth wished first of all to shake itself free fromtheir yoke, and then to keep its commercial relations exclusivelyin its own hands. It is palpable that this could not be' done without giving provocation. As early as January 1652matters had come to an open breach. A number of Dutchvessels which were attempting to import foreign goods intoEngland were declared lawful- prizes. The expedition sentout to Barbadoes under George Ascough captured there at oneblow thirteen Dutch ships. In fact it was almost inevitablethat, if the maritime power of the English was to increase, itx1.4. COMMONWEALTHBYLANDANDSEA. 69A.D. 1652.should come into collision with the Dutch marine, which thenenjoyed the supremacy in every sea.Independently of this, the understanding between the twoRepublics was far from good. Inasmuch as Charles I1 wasmainly supported by the house of Orange, the English demandedfrom the States-General such a strict repression ofthese attempts, should they be repeated, as they neither wouldnor could promise; they even required punishment by confiscationl.And to this was attached another demand ofgeneral importance. The English, who claimed to have sufferedgreat damage from the transport of necessaries of warfor the royalists, demanded the right to search for theirenemy's goods in Dutch vessels, even in the ships of war.The Dutch on their side took their stand on the principleof free ships, free goods. They urged that the right of searchwould lead to the injury of their trade and the dishonourof their flag. Both this point, and the disputed questionsarising out of the Navigation Act, were keenly discussed.It was believed that matters could be amicably arranged.Meanwhile however the bitter feeling on both sides increasedfrom day to day. The Dutch determined to send to sea150 men-of-war under Admiral Tromp, to assert their freedomof traffic. In his turn Admiral Blake set out to securethe exercise of his right of search. These measures, in May1652, brought about an engagement, the blame of which eachof the admirals laid on the other. As yet peace was stillconsidered to exist. It was only the actual outbreak ofhostilities that brought about the declaration of war.The wide extent of the Dutch trade gave at the oubet agreat advantage to the English. Everywhere, in the Balticand in the Sound, on the coasts of Portugal, on the routes tothe East Indies or to America, even in the Mediterranean,numberless Dutch trading vessels were captured. Theyare estimated at more than a thousand; so that business inAmsterdam came for the time to a standstill. Meanwhilethe fleets in the channel had on three occasions consecutivelycome into collision ; in August off Plymouth; in' Negotiations given by Aitzema iii 707.

70 GROWTH OF POWER OF COMMONWEALTH. x1.4.A.D. I 653.September OK the coast of Kent; in November in theDowns; in February 1563 at Portland. We shall omit anydescription of these encounters, which would oblige us toenter at too great length into the tactics of naval warfareand their application. A decisive victory on-one side or theother nowhere actually occurred, but the superiority of theEnglish was indubitable. Their advantage lay firstly in thesuperior build of their ships, an art cultivated by themfrom very old times-they were longer and stouter ; but alsoin particular in the bronze cannon which they carried, whichwere of longer range than the Dutch guns, and even beforethe actual encounter inflicted serious injuries on the enemy l.As to the tactics of battle, for instance the formation of line,the English it is true learnt much from the Dutch admirals.It is this naval war which has chiefly laid the foundations ofthe rise and fame of the English navy.Lord Willoughby, disheartened by the news of Charles 11'smisfortunes, had been already forced to surrender Barbadoes.Here, as in Virginia, under the impulse of the general crisis,a party attached to the Commonwealth had arisen. Nowheredid the Navigation Act press more hardly than in Virginia.The colony complained that England neither consumed herproducts nor satisfied her wants ; but she was forced tosubmit.Sagredo's Relatione : ' Mancando le navi Olandesi di cannoni di bronzo e quest0soprabbondxndo agli Inglesi di grandezza estraordinaria nel piimo incontrc delleflotte prima che venissero all urto, il cannone degli Iuglesi di maggior forza, et dimaggior portata ferriva la flotta clegli Olandesi.'CHAPTER V.DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PAKLIAMEKT.IT was still the Republican Parliament under the auspicesof which this power, practically absolute at home, and greatand dreaded abroad, had been won. A political authorityhad been created of such concentrated strength and wideextent as the world had seldom witnessed, and Britain hadnever yet seen.There is the more ground for wonder when we considerthe variety of the elements out of which this authority wasoriginally composed. These were three in number-the oldParliamentarian, the legal, and the military-each of themresting on different principles, but in fact working fairlywell together. The army fought under the impulse of theirreligious and political tendencies ; the Parliament had thedirection of political affairs and provided the means of war ;the participation of the lawyers preserved a state of lawand order which first rendered this possible.As a specimen of their combined action we may take theamnesty which, after long discussions, first took effect inFebruary 1652. Forgiveness was therein proclaimed to theadherents of the King for all political offences previdus tothe battle of Worcester, provided they in turn pledgedthemselves to be faithful to the Commo~lwealth as nowestablished without a King and House of Lords. Withoutsome such agreement the civil war would have been incessantlycarried on in secret. It was the condition whichhad also been imposed upon the conquered in Ireland andScotland ; and on the strength of it a formal union was hoped

DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT XI. 5.72A.D. 1652.for. The acceptance of this pledge was the condition underwhich society existed.But the union of these elements, the work of circumstancesat an urgent crisis, had yet failed to remove their internaldifferences. Between Parliament and lawyers there was agood understanding. The army was at the first, and remainedthroughout, of a different mind: it did not pleasethem that the Presbyterian clergy should be protected inthe enjoyment of the glebe lands and tithes to which theyhad succeeded; though Parliament declared that thisshould only continue till other means for their maintenancewere discovered, yet it made no preparations for any suchdiscovery. The chief objection to the existing laws lay in thefact that they were the offspring of the Norman Conquest,and bore throughout the stamp of oppression. Whitelockedeemed it advisable to trace their history back in a detailedinquiry. He brings out clearly the reasons of the hereditaryright of succession which William the Conqueror established.He derives the name Conquest from later times. He laysstress upon the continuity of the old national legislation,not altogether without reason, as has been assumed inlater times, yet undoubtedly in too strong terms. One pointonly he conceded, that the law of the land should be drawnup in the language of the land, and should be accessibleto all; in the same way had Moses proclaimed to theHebrews the law which he received from God in their ownmother tongue.But these arguments neither convinced his opponents nordid they satisfy the people, who from the great movementto which it had attached itself expected some general measureof relief, such as could only be reached by a thoroughgoingalteration of the laws. It was to the army that men at onceturned with their complaints and petitions.One of the earliest emanated directly from the prisonsof London. It complained of the existence of harsh laws,owing to which it was that the poor especially were castinto prison, and of the yet greater harshness of the treatmentto which they were there subjected. For the rich a prisonwas a place of refuge ; for the poor, who could bribe neitherxr. 5. DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT. 73A.D. 1652.judge nor jailer, it was a place of torture : on the very lawsthemselves was stamped the brand of Norman slavery.Shortly afterwards a second petition was sent in fromseveral counties, complaining of the pressure of the exciseand land-tax, but especially of the numbers, insolence, andavarice of the lawyers and their clerks, and the intolerableburden of the tithes, which, having been introduced merelyto serve the ends of the Papacy, robbed the people of thefruits of the land and reduced them to slaves. Cromwelland the officers were required, since God had not giventhem the sword in vain, to bring about in Parliament therelief of the oppressed.In February followed another petition, addressed to Parliamentfrom the North. Its import was the same :-'Justiceought not to be bought; it should resemble a stream fromwhich the poorest may draw water, but which the richestcannot turn aside into another channel. Care ought to betaken that each man may reap what he sows, and enjoyfor himself the fruits of his own vine.'In June 1652 we have a petition which adds to thesedemands others of a more extreme character: the right ofprimogeniture for example is represented as a mark of theNorman supremacy, and its abolition proposed.It is obvious at first sight how closely these complaintsand proposals accorded with the original ideas of the Agitatorsin the army, and one can understand that they found anecho among them. They would almost appear to have beencalled forth by them. Without recurring to the ideas of theLevellers, the troops demanded a radical reform of the legislation,and an establishment of the liberties which eachEnglishman ought to claim, The officers of the greatestreligious zeal, such as Harrison, took the same side.There were however other grievances which directly concernedthe Parliament. Throughout the country two thingswere especially complained of, the personal advantages whichindividual members derived from the confiscations, so thattheir incomes rose in a few years to a thousand, fifteenhundred, and two thousand pounds, while but slight advantageresulted to the Commonwealth from the sale: and secondly,

74 DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT. xr.5.A.D. I 652.the appointment of unworthy magistrates out of regard torelationship and other ties, so that the country was overrunwith self-seeking and tyrannical men I.These complaints, like the others, found the more echo inthe army because they touched at once religious and politicaldifferences. In outspoken addresses the officers demandedthe removal of vicious and evil-minded persons from the greatinfluential posts, and their replacement by such as wereGod-fearing men and strangers to avarice.To many it gave great offence that the officers interferedin these civil matters and wished to adopt as their owndemands of such a kind. Cromwell was once warned thatit might even prove dangerous to himself. But he not onlydisregarded the warning, but attached himself more closelystill to the movement. He like the others found the burdenof the administrative power which Parliament exercised andallowed others to exercise, its imprisonments and confiscations,intolerable. Not unfrequently a law was passed after actshad been committed, and then made retrospective in its action.He relates that he had once seen a body of forty persons,who had perhaps in justice and reason not forfeited a singleshilling, visited with confiscation, and driven forth like a flockof sheep : this had deeply troubled his soul. He consideredtoo that Parliament was far too closely leagued with thecorrupt interests of the clergy, which at this time was Presbyterian.Those who did the least were rewarded with themost lucrative posts. In every conversation he expressedhimself with vehemence against the leading members ofParliament, their selfishness and ambition, their factious behaviour,the scandalous life of some of the most prominentof their number, but above all against the aim which all, cherished of making their power perpetual, while their rightto sit at all was doubtful in the extreme. Cromwell, whowas incessantly moving about the country, and was in constantcommunication with the persons of greatest note, professedhimself convinced that the nation was weary of the' 'There was nothing but a great cry everywhere.'May 1609, A seasonable word to the Parliament men.Extract from a pamphlet,XI. 5. DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT. 75A.D. 1652.Parliament, and that, if. we may say so, not a dog would barkif an end were put to it.It is easy to see what far-reaching aims were from thefirst involved in these dissensions. They were no others thanthose which it had been found impossible to set aside onthe first establishment of the Republican power. They reappearedin increasing force as those considerations of cautionfaded into the background which had hitherto been renderednecessary by the struggle against the common enemy inBritain itself. The army wished to enjoy the fruits of thevictory, which they ascribed to their own valour- and to aspecial mission from God, which again itself pledged themto a thorough reform.From the first they had dembnded a speedy dissolutionof the Parliament ; but it was essential before this could bedone that a definite arrangement should be made to replaceit; in other words, as to the mode of election for futureParliaments. To this question public attention first directeditself. As early as June 1649 a committee was formed forthis purpose, with Henry Vane as its chairman.Among the revolutionary talents of the time Henry Vanethe younger might well claim to hold the second place.He did not possess Pym's power of carrying along with hima great assembly by force of arguments comprehensible by all.He lived absorbed in his own peculiar religious views and hisown special political tendencies ; but he made an impression,thanks to a singular union of subtlety and depth. In thetransaction of business he proved himself assiduous anddexterous. It is to his activity in the committee for the navythat its rapid improvement, and in great measure its successes,are ascribed. It is worth noticing as affecting his position,that he did not as yet take as his starting-point the doctrineof the sovereignty of the people; for he had no share inthe condemnation of the King, the justification of which wassought in this idea: On the other hand he accepted the viewthat the will of the monarch was virtually embodied in theacts of Parliament. He drew a distinction between the constitutionalsovereign and the individual king, and held consistcntlyenough that Parliament had not been dissolved by

76 DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT. XI. 5.A.D. 1652.the death of Charles I. After a short absence he resumedhis seat in the assembly. Of positive right he had in generalbut little idea ; but with regard to it, he thought that inperiods of great change it was impossible to keep exactlyto the written laws. He even declared, that when he againtook his place he believed himself to be fulfilling his dutyto the King and the kingdom. Ile only acknowledged theCommonwealth so far as he found it 'consonant to the principleswhich have given rise to the law and the monarchyitself in England I.' He recognised in a Parliament, conformingin other respects to the ancient laws, the supremeauthority in the state, whether there were a king at itshead or not. It was now impossible for Henry Vane, if hewished to establish a new method of election, to aim atcarrying out the principle of the sovereignty of the people.He would have been satisfied with a reform which shouldmerely have filled up to its full numbers that assembly, nowbecome defective and incomplete, but which still possessedthe powers of former days. The introduction of universalsuffrage, which if actually realised would have endangered theCommonwealth itself, formed no part of his plan ; what hedesired was a reform in the franchise which yet should notbe able to upset the existing balance of political power.This scheme ought also to be noticed, because the sameprinciples were unconsciously adopted ic a later reform inthe nineteenth century. Henry Vane wished to connect theactual franchise with a fixed amount of property. In determiningthe number of representatives to be sent from eachcounty, the standard was to be the sum total of the contributionswhich it made to the expenses of the state. Anumber of existing boroughs were to be disfranchised, andon the contrary the larger towns were to obtain an increasednumber of representatives. The tendency of the scheme ismodern, and points to an increased preponderance of the' True copy of the prisoner's (Sir H. Vane's) own papers, containing thesubstance of what he pleaded (June 6, 1661, in the State Trials vi. 166). #Sofar as I judged the free Stale consonant to the principles and grounds declaredin the laws of England for upholding that political power which hath given therise in this nation to monarchy itself.'XI. 5. DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT. 7 7A.D. 1652.middle class. Still, even in this respect, Henry Vane wasanxious to prevent any sweeping change. The sittingmembers were to continue as before to represent the townsand counties for which they had once been elected '.The majority of these proposed reforms Henry Vane hadalready brought forward in a report on the sittings of hiscommittee in January 1649/50. It was resolved at oncethat the representative body should consist of four hundredmembers : the arrangement of all further details was reservedfor fresh inquiries. The importance of the matter was fullyrealised; as, a rule Wednesdays were reserved and devotedto its consideration. Unfortunately these deliberations arelost to posterity. Still we can perceive that the prevailingintention was not so much to summon an entirely newParliament as merely to fill up the vacant seats with newmembers according to the proportions established '.We do not imagine that it was merely through love forit that Parliament held fast to this theoretical scheme. Inthe position in which it then found itself it was eq;ivalentto a loss of power to give it up. Vane would scarcely haveremained sure of his influence over the members had he demandedof them such a sacrifice. For his authority it wasa vital question whether an entirely new Parliament shouldbe created or whether there should be merely a continuationof the old one.But it was just on this point that he ran counter at onceto the prejudices of the nation, the army, and the General.Cromwell tells us that he was most urgently solicited, andthat by some of the most prominent members, to give his'That all elections of members which are to be made into this present Parliamentshall be made according to the proportion granted and qualificationsprescribed in the said act for succeeding Parliaments ; that is to say, every countyor place authorised to choose by virtue of the said act, shall have their completenumber, accounting those members now sitting in Parliament and serving in behalfof their counties and places to be part of the said proportion.' See chap. iv. ofthe scheme ~roposed in the name of the Committee, January g, 1650; Journalsof Commons vi. 344.' 'To consider how and in what manner the same (the proportions of elections)may be made practicable for filling the house with members according to thoseSeveral proportions.' (Ib. 486.)

78 DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT. XI. 5.A.D. 1652.aid in filling up the vacant places in the way proposed. Hewas heart and soul opposed to such a course. He refusedto confirm in the possession of their power and the enjoymentof their privileges men whose conduct he condemned l.The army now put in the foremost place the question,which had been dropped for a time, of an actual dissolution ofParliament at a fixed date. Moreover Cromwell and some ofhis friends now obtained seats on the Provisional Committee.On November 13 the question was decided in a full house.Not without a severe struggle, after two divisions, and onlyby a narrow majority, it was enacted that a limit should befixed to the existence of the Parliament. This victory gained,Cromwell appears to have taken no further part in settlingthe date. He allowed a very distant one, the 4th of November1654, to be determined upon. It was enough forhim that the long-cherished purpose of the troops to putan end to the Long Parliament was expressly sanctioned bya decree of the Parliament itself.All the more attention was now attracted to the debateon the law respecting the franchise.The army was discontented with Vane's scheme, not strictlyspeaking because it was far removed from the universalsuffrage, to which the principles adopted by the Agitatorswould have led, but on the contrary because it omitted thosequalifications by which it had originally endeavoured tolimit all participation in Parliamentary functions. It wasespecially noticed that neither Presbyterians nor neutraliwere excluded, nor even such as had been in league withneighbouring nations. With men of such sentiments it wouldbe possible to live in friendly intercourse ;-against that therewas nothing to be said ;--but they could not possibly ventureto intrust the welfare of the Commonwealth to those who hadbeen opposed to it at the first. No one would willingly mounthis enemies on horseback and then implore their mercy.The main objection however arose from the readmissionof the old members into the new legislature, which had at' 'I myself was sounded, and by no mean persons tempted, that the vacantplaces might be supplied by new elections, and so continue from generation togeneration.' Speech XX. in Carlyle iii. 3.53.XI. 5. DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT. 79A.D. 1652.least been silently provided for. Cromwell himself urgeda constitutional consideration in opposition to the proposal.He remarked that the new legislature would in that case bemerely a continuation of the old, and a succession of powerestablished to which the people would be handed over withoutfurther ado ].On the same ground he rejected the proposal, that, in theintervals between the sessions, a State Council responsible toParliament should sit : for, he urged, in that case the highestpower would eventually remain with the Parliament in theseintervals as well.It is impossible to deny the truth of these considerations.For though it might be said on the other side that parliamentarypower once established ought to be regularly continued,so as to prevent a general disturbance, yet it was notthe less true that this power, if it remained long in the samehands, outgrew all restraint, and became a despotic authorityand not merely a deputed one. Parliament became itselfa government.But on neither side can we see in these theoretical considerationsthe ultimate grounds of the antagonism.The army could not any further go along with the Parliament.The latter openly favoured the navy, which was underits control, in preference to the land forces which it dreaded.Already the proposal had more than once been made fora reduction of the land force. What else could be expectedbi~t that such a reduction would be actually decreed by afresh batch of members electzd under the influence of theexisting assembly?But to sum up the case :-the Republican authority hadarisen from a union of the military and parliamentary leaders ;according to Vane's constitution the parliamentary powerwould have secured'the highest authority, and retained itperpetually in their hands. ,The army was of opinion, thatin virtue of their victory and their divine mission, they had a' 'What was the business? It was a conversion from a parliament that shouldhave been and was perpetual, to a legislative power always sitting, and so theliberties and interests and lives of the people not judged by any known laws andPawer.'

80 DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT XI. 5.A.D. 1652.right if not to the supreme rule yet at least to an independentposition.Their intentions showed themselves next i.n the demandthat a council of forty persons chosen from the army and theParliament should be entrusted with the highest power, carrythrough the necessary reforms, give a durable constitution tothe state, and administer the government till a new representativeParliament should afterwards be summoned, consistingof men from whom complete devotion to the Commonwealthmight be expected.Here then, apart from the feuds and various ambitions ofindividuals, lay the real ground of quarrel. The Parliamentwished to mairitain the existing order of things with theestablished administration of justice and the endowment ofthe clergy, and to carry on the power which it possessed intoa 'new Parliament in which the sitting members also couldagain find places, and which should represent especially themiddle classes. The land forces were to be subordinate toit equally with the navy. The army on the contrary wouldnot listen at all to a further continuation of the Parliamentaryauthority, either in the existing assembly, or in one to beafterwards convoked.They were anxious for the establishment of a new sovereignpower, in the formation of which the leading part wouldnecessarily fall to themselves, in order to carry through aseries of reforms answering to their original ideas; a representativeassembly constituted according to their own viewswas to ratify these reforms. All subordination to the Parliamentwas directly contrary to their principle.A struggle was inevitable between these rival powers.Of the higher officers, Lambert and Harrison were amongthe foremost in pressing for a dissolution of Parliament,though from different motives. Lambert regarded himselfas deeply injured by the sitting assembly. As farback as the battle of Wigan, then at Dunbar, and lastly atWorcester, he had rendered services inferior only to those ofCromwell. He might claim to be regarded as the secofidman in the army, which was devotedly attached to him : athorough soldier in disposition, little affected by political and,I. 5. DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT. 8 IA.D. 1653.still less by religious ideals, but penetrated with the convictionthat the army had struck the decisive blow in the greatstruggle, and that to it therefore belonged by right thepreponderating influence. After Ireton's death he was appointedCromwdl's lieutenant in Ireland in his civil as wellas his military capacity. Parliament however seems to havetaken offence at his arrogance and love of display1: at any rateit hesitated to prolong the extensive powers of the generalafter the expiration of the period for which they had beengranted. It was resolved to renew the military authorityonly. Lambert however refused to go to Ireland with powersso diminished. Cromwell, of whom many said that out ofjealousy towards Lambert he had himself secretly initiatedthe measure, allowed his son-in-law, Fleetwood, to undertakethe post. Thus deeply affected himself by the growing antipathybetween the civil and military power, Lambert nowbecame the most determined opponent of Parliament. Noone more fervently upheld the idea of a superiority rightfullydue to the army.Colonel Harrison was a fiery enthusiast, of a naturallycheerful and joyous disposition, who had adopted the doctrinesof the Anabaptists, and knew how to defend thein witheloquence. He was eager for the accomplisl~meat of a radicalreform on religious grounds.Both earnestly solicited the General to break up the Parliament.Though he possessed the power to do so, and hadthe public voice in his favour, yet he declares that his hairstood on end when he considered the consequences. Howshould he not hesitate to do away with an authority which bythe ancient prestige of its name had rendered possible theexisting state of affairs ?But in the spring of 1653 the crisis became more urgent.The House was eagerly engaged in passing the variousclauses of the election bill so detested by the army. Remonstranceswere no longer of any avail. The sense of animpending danger only urged the members forward in thecourse they had begun. They let it be understood that theyBates :' Trajectum parat majore quam pro ratione temporis pomp8 :-procura-.. tores aegre ferebant istiusmodi praeeminentiam.'RANYE, VOL. 111.G

82 DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT. XI. 5.A.D. 1653.were still the Parliament, still masters over their own aye orno. On the 20th of April the bill under discussion was topass the last stage.The army felt that they dare not allow matters to go so farunless they wished to incur the disadvantage of opposing anenactment that had already passed into law.On the evening of the 19th a council was held in Cromwell'shouse, to which some of the lawyers who were members ofParliament were also summoned. No agreement was arrivedat : still it could not fail to make an impression that even ofthe lawyers one, St. John, voted in favour of the dissolution.Many thought that he was simply ambitious of filling an officein the new government which was expected. Cromwell atany rate learnt nothing which could have restrained him.On the morning of the 20th he once more addressed theofficers in the Cockpit in the tone most easily understood bythem. He began by reminding them that the visible assistanceof God, which had been ever present with them, imposedupon them, now that they had beaten their enemies in thefield, the duty of undertaking the ref~rm of the realm; butthis was out of the question with the present Parliament,which thought only of securing the continuance of its ownpower. It allowed the oppression of the people to remainunrelieved ; iniquity still flourished as before ; legislation wasin disorder. To suffer the election of a new Parliament wasmerely to tempt God. The nation would be better served bya smaller number of impartial men, from whom the people ofGod would receive more complete satisfaction l.Shortly afterwards notice was brought that the debate in theLower House was approaching the decisive point. Cromwellentered the House wearing the ordinary dress of a civilian, butthis did not prevent him from surrounding himself with a militaryretinue which occupied the approaches to the House andthe ante-chamber. He sat down in his usual seat, and remainedsilent for a time, till at length the question was put whichWe naturally have no regular historical sketch of this scene. Still we findtrustworthy notices in Ludlow. Leicester, the French ambassadors, in the officialdespatches of the time, and the later speeches, such as those of Haslerig. Theyare not free from contradictions, u hich however do not concern us here.,, ,, DISSOLUTION OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT. 83A.D 1~53'was to bring on the final division. At this moment Olivercromwell - arose. He now told the Parliament itself what hehad before reproached it with when addressing the officers,that it was committing iniquities, and serving its own selfishness.But God, he continued, had already chosen worthierinstruments to carry out his work. A member now rose inthe House to express his astonishment that one who owed- $0 - much to the Parliament should dare to use such languagetowards it. Cromwell however did not regard himself as.wing the slightest obligation to Parliament. Was it notrather the interposition of the army that had brought aboutthe state in which the country now was, and with it the absoluteauthority which the Parliament enjoyed. He becameviolently excited : the full conscious~~ess of his actual superiorityawoke in him. He declared to the assembly that theyno longer formed a Parliament. He was seen, with his haton his head, pacing up and down the centre of the House.From his lips poured abuse against his old friends, the Parliamentarychiefs, whose personal sins had rendered them illcompetentto carry on the government. ' God has fixed abound for you : I tell you, you are no more a Parliament.'At a signal from him two files of musketeers marched intothe House, the rrlembers deserted it. The Speaker was halfforced from, half left his chair. Cromwell himself carried offthe bill on which they were to have voted. The House wasclosed.He now returned to the officers who were still assembledand awaiting the result, and told them that when he sawthat Parliament was designing to spin a thread withsut breakor end, the spirit overcame him : he consulted not with fleshand blood ; but both he and they alike would all be utterlyruined if they did not support what he had done: it wasnecessary that they should go forward hand in hand.For little as he regarded the laws and forms of the constitution,yet he knew how much was involved in the breach ofthem. The afternoon following he entered - with Lambert' ' The spirit was so upon him that he was overruled by it : and he consulted notwith flesh and blood at all, seeing the Parliament designing to spin an everlastingthread.'G 2

a4 DISSOLUTION OF TUE LONG PARLIAMENT. XI. 5.A.D. 1653.and Harrison the room where the Council of State were assembled,to inform them that they could no longer be regardedas anything but a private assembly, since Parliamentwas dissolved. They replied that no power on earth had theright to dissolve Parliament, but Parliament itself. With thisprotest in favour of Parliament and against the power beforewhich it fell the Council of State broke up.Nowhere however was any attempt made at resistance.Such an attempt was perhaps to be looked for in the fleet,but Cromwell had already attached Monk, the conqueror ofScotland, as a colleague to the Parliamentary leaders. RobertBlake.was then cruising in the Scottish waters. When hereceived the account of what had happened at Westminster, hecalled together the captains of his squadron: they wouldhave been strongly inclined to protest against it ; Blake toldthem it was not their business to interfere in state matters,their duty was simply not to allow the enemy to defeat them.And as news came that Tromp had appeared off the Englishcoast in increased force, and had even fired upon Dover, Blakeat once prepared to go in search of him. He took active partwith his artillery in the battle off Newport Head, June 2/12,an engagement which cannot be regarded as undecided. Itcost the Dutch twenty ships of war.The severity of the prolonged naval war prevented the fleetfrom in any way carrying out their inclination to secede.As a whole the fabric of the state remained unshaken, eventhough one of the great elements in it had been overpoweredor expelled by the other. But incalculable was now the difficultyof giving it an appropriate form.CHAPTER VI.THE LITTLE PARLIAMENT.'HOW Cromwell wished this act to be regarded, and howRe regarded it himself, he showed plainly a few weeks afterwards,when some aldermen and sheriffs from town and countryrequested him to summon Parliament again. The King, hetold them, was not beheaded because he was King, nor theHouse of Lords abolished because they were Lords ; and inthe same way Parliament was not dissolved because it wasa Parliament, but all this had befallen them because they didnot perform their trust I. The acts he was speaking of were,he continued, the acts of the army. It was the armythat had brought to pass the abolition of the Lords. theexecution of the King, and had now dissolved Parliament.What power had it to do this? No other than that whichvictory gave them. The ruling idea in the army was the oneso often mentioned, that God, by the victories which he hadgranted them, and the power which had thus been put intotheir hands, had made them responsible for the welfare of thecountry, and laid upon them the duty not to bear withanything that was contrary to the interest of the people of~ d 2. dThe army did not hold itself justified in seizing for itselfthe civil administration. Though the council of war foundSee notice in Tanner MSS. in Oxfofd, vol. lii.a That God by their victories had so called them to look after the governmentof the land, and so entrusted them with the welfare of all this people here thatthey were responsible for it, and might not in conscience stand still while anythingwas done which they thought was ngainst that interest which they judged to bethe interest of the people of God.' Baxter 57.

86 THE LITTLE PARLIAMENT. XI. 6.A.D. 1653.itself indeed compelled to order the continued payment of thewar-tax granted by Parliament only for a limited time, yetthis was done under the excuse that the persons were not yetassembled who should rightly exercise the supreme power.In the most express terms the principle was stated that thesword ought to have no part in the civil power. Still thearmy and the council of war regarded themselves almostas a provisional government. They considered themselvesnot merely entitled, but actually bound to re-establish a civilauthority.In the deliberations in which the character and form of thisauthority were discussed, Harrison, adopting the principlewhich the General himself had laid down, gained the advantageover Lambert, whose proposals tended in another direction.It was resolved to select the new assembly from amongthe most zealous believers, the godly in the land. The verysuccesses of the army whose opinions they shared appearedto justify the preference given them. On the proposal of theseparatist congregations, particularly the Independent, withwhom the council of officers was in correspondence, themembers were nominated by this body all 'God-fearing men,who had given proofs of their fidelity, energy, and devotedzeal for the cause of God.' In determining the number, theyadopted as their standard, as Parliament had done, the relativeamount contributed by each county to the taxes.Yorkshire sent eight members, Devonshire seven, Kent five,Cambridgeshire four, Westmoreland only one. London suppliedseven ; we find mentioned as seventh in the registerPraise-God Barebones ', after whom the assembly was nicknamedby its enemies. Altogether there were 144, amongthen1 six from Ireland and five from Scotland. On the 4thof July they met in tolerably complete numbers in Whitehall.Surrounded by his officers, Cromwell made them a lengthyspeech, chiefly on the reasons for the dissolution of the lastParliament, and then committed to them the charge of thepeace and safety of the country. He delivered over to them,' Leather-seller Barebones appears in 1641 in a meeting of Brownists, in whichhe holds forth against the Book of Colnmon Player.XI. 6. THE LITTLE PA RLIAMENZ 8 7A.D. 1653.as the council of officers had decided, the supreme power andcontrol of the Commonwealth. All were to owe obedience totheir commands.This however can only be understood to mean that thearmy would lend the support of their strong hand to thedecisions of the assembly. They seemed to regard themselvesas an instrument of God for the convocation of theassembly and the execution of its decrees. The assembly itselfassumed the title of the 'Parliament of the English Commonwealth' ; they considered themselves the divinely appointedrepresentatives of the nation. In a solemn proclamation theyrequested all people to pray that God would deign to makeuse of them for the extension of his kingdom, for the establishmentof righteousness, for the breaking of every oppressiveyoke. The members felt themselves to be moved by thespirit as they sat together. They are confident that the spiritof God was never so clearly manifested as in this assembly.The efforts at reform for which they now prepared areremarkable for all time.We know how vehement and loud had long been the protestsagainst the abuses in the administration of justice. Asearly as January 1652 a commission was empowered toinquire into the excesses and irregularities which prevailed,and to suggest means for their remedy. That no results followedfrom this commission was generally attributed to thelawyers, against whose corrupt interests Cromwell himselfinveighed. On the basis of the preliminary work done by theold commission, which was handed over to a fresh one, and atonce inflamed by the most pressing remonstrances and urgedon by its own impulses, the Parliament of the godly now tookup the cause with decisive energy.The English system of justice rests on the common law,which is administered by jury and Courts of Justice, and onthe equity procedure, which includes all that the other doesnot cover, and is represented in the Court of Chancery, thecourt of justice of the Lord Chancellor. In the assembly thensitting the principle of this arrangement was already contested,for, it was agreed, equity owns neither rule nor law, itdepends on the greater or less extent of the Chancellor's

88 THE LITTLE PARLIAMENT. XI. 6.A.D. 1653.knowledge l. The remedy, it was further said, owing to theprocedure observed in the Court, is becoming worse than thedisease. The tediousness and costliness is intolerable. Itwas asserted that there were suits in the course of which morethan five hundred mandates had been issued, and whole propertiesswallowed up : thirty years was not long enough timeto finish them ; and thus there were twenty thousand of themstill pending. The assembly was convinced that the equityprocedure must be carried on in a different fashion. Investedas it was with the supreme power, it deemed it a duty todecree absolutely the abolition of the Court of Chancery 2.Rut the common and statutory law also seemed to theassembly to stand in need of a thorough reform. Many ofthe statutes had ceased to be at all applicable since the alterationof the constitution, for example since the abolition ofthe bishops. Others were contrary to God's law and to soundreason. What could be said in defence of the fact that theftwas punished with death, but not murder? A committee wasappointed to inquire in each particular what was agreeable tothe law of God and to reason, to settle the proportion betweenthe crime and the punishment : in doing which they startedwith the definition of treason which plays so important a partin English history. The style moreover of the laws was foundto be confused, vague, prolix, and unintelligible, and it wasconsequently resolved to draw up a new code in the Englishlanguage, short, concise, and intelligible, after the model ofthat already produced in New England.The spirit in which they worked is shown by their regulationswith respect to debt, in consequence of which severalhundred poor bankrupts were set at liberty, and also bythe fixing the amount of the fees, the smallness of which hasCp. Exact relation of the proceedings of the late Parliament. I How didgood people rejoyce when they heard of that vote (for abolishing and taking awaythe Court of Chancery), and how sad and sorrowful were the lawyers and clerks.'On November 3, after several other previous enactments, the bill 'for takingaway the high Court of Chancery and appointingcommissioners and judges to hearand determine as well causes now depending as also future matters of equity,' &c,.was read the first and second time and referred to the Law Commission, of whichHarrison was made a member. Journals vii. 346.xr. 6. THE LITTLE PARLIAMENI: 89A.D. 1653.excited the ridicule or indignation of later jurists They havenot however withheld their approval from other schemes, ofwhich it is hard to say to which of the two Committees theybelonged. Many improvements in judicial procedure, whichhave since found their way into the courts, appear here forthe first time I.We have then no right altogether to reject, as has oftenbeen done, the labours of this assembly, but they bear theimpress of the politico-religious bias which directed them.As the ideas which were at the root of the representativeconstitution were first developed in a believing army, so itis especially striking to find that a Parliament of zealousbelievers was the first to attempt to introduce reforms ofmodern liberal tendencies Into the home legislation. Onthe same soil flourished the strictest religious fervour andrepublicanism ; they are fruits of the same tree.The Little Parliament of 1653 treated marriage merely asa civil contract. The Justice of the Peace was for the futurenot only to institute the preliminary verifications and inquiries,but also to unite the couple with a very simple formula, bywhich they vowed fidelity before the all-present God. At theexpiration of a fixed period no marriage otherwise concludedwas to be held legal within England and Wales2. Whilethe Catholics regard marriage as a sacrament, the Independentsproceeded to declare all and every participation ofclergy in it to be an abuse which had its origin in theimitation of heathen customs, and not in the Bible. Amongothers John Milton welcomed this enactment with greatapproval. For Milton regarded marriage as a domesticccntract, an institution independent of religion : it neededa priestly benediction as little as the other acts of civil life,which yet ought only to be performed in God's name and forhis honour 3. And so the members of this Parliament assumedThe preambles to the ' several draughts,' eic., in Somer's Tracrs vi. 178 : 'Themore easy recovery of rents, the prevention of fraudulent conveyances, &c.'a 'Nc other marriage shall he held or accompted a legal marriage withinEngland and Wales.' Draughts 180, cp. Parl. Hist. xx. 216.Milton : The likeliest means to remove hirelings from the Church. ProseWorks iii. 22.

90 THE LITTLE PARLIAMENT.XI. 6.A.D. 1653.that their own spiritual awakening would become generalin the nation :-for them the necessity for a priestly orderhad altogether passed away.For the idea of personal honour and duty, which hasthrough all time given its peculiar character to the Romano-German world, this assembly could feel no sympathy. Ascivil and priestly legislation have always endeavoured torestrict duelling, so the Parliament of 1653 loaded it withthe severest penalties. He who goes the length of a challengeis to lose his right hand ; whoever actually fights a duel is inaddition to have his property confiscated and to be banishedfrom England for life: but the man who kills his antagonistin a duel must die a shameful death as a murderer and hisgoods are to be the property of the state.The assembly forbade all taking of oaths on entering upona fief or becoming a member of a corporation, such for instanceas the Universities. They allowed only the oath ofallegiance to the Commonwealth, or the oath of office. Affairsof honour were in their opinion to be settled before themagistrates.They could never in the least understand how the right toappoint to a spiritual office could be regarded as property :and it was proposed in vain to allow the persons presentedto be tested by worthy and pious men. They rejected theright of patronage completely and unconditionally.But above all they were urgent for the settlement of thepetition presented long before in reference to the abolitionof tithes. They pronounced tithes to be an institution of theold dispensation, which the Gospel had already swept away,and which had only been introduced into England throughthe avarice of the Catholic clergy.In the attacks made upon this impost two interests wereinvolved.In the storms which overthrew bishops and chapters the lowerranks of the church establishment had succeeded in holdingtheir ground. Rectors and vicars, whose livelihood mainlydepended on the long-established tithes, lasted through it all.A portion of the livings still remained in the hands of theEpiscopalian clergy, who merely abstained from the use ofXI. 6. THE LITTLE PARLIAMENT.9 IA.D. 1653.the Common Prayer &ok; the greater part had passed tothe Presbyterians. Even under the Republican Parliamentthe Presbyterians had continued to possess the ecclesiasticalauthority. The Independent congregations were toleratedand nothing more. But a legislative body sprung from theranks of these Independents was of necessity bitterly opposedto the supremacy of their old opponents or rivals. It was nottheir object to intrude their own adherents into the possessionof the Church estates: but they would no longer endure thepossession of them by others, and wished. to destroy andbring to nothing their existence which depended on thattenure. And with this was connected yet another popularpolitical design. They hoped by abolishing the tithes toattach to their side for ever the owners of the tithe-payingestates. As in Scotland among the Remonstrants, so inEngland among the Independents, democratical and religioustendencies were directly connected. At the very openingof the session the decree was passed that the lands chargedwith tithes should be exempted from paying them for thefuture I.Not till this decree was in course of execution did its full significanceclearly appear. In the course of time many tithes hadpassed by legal purchase into private property: were these tooto be declared abolished ? But more than this, it was palpablethat the tithb were essential to the maintenance both of theclergy, who still formed an institution recognised by law, and ofthe Universities which depended in great measure upon them.It was this consideration which chiefly impressed the Committeeappointed to investigate the matter. It decided infavour of recognising private rights of property, and steadilymaintained that the sustenance of the clergy ought to bedrawn from the accustomed sources, according to the existingprovisions of the law.On the 7th of December it laid before the House its reporton a definitive organisation of the clergy. Its proposal was' 'Thnt all lands charged with tythes shall be excused from paying any morehenceforward.' The only intelligible account I can find of this is in the letter of.the Dutch ambassador, July zz/Aug. I. In Thilrloe i. 369.

92 TIYE LITTLE PARLIAMENT xr. 6.A.D. 1653.that the useless and scandalous members of the body shouldbe ejected, but the meritorious ones kept and their incomeincreased rather than lessened. This scheme assumed that thetithes were to be left untouched, and a proposal for confirmingthem where they were doubtful was introduced ', which wasbased on the principle that their full value should be paid tothe clergyman to whom they were assigned.No more momentous question could have been laid beforethe assembly. The debate upon it, which lasted several days,was orderly but very earnest. For not a few members of theHouse were impressed by the arguments of the Con~mission,others defended the principle previously adopted with theutmost vehemence : it was still uncertain which party wouldprove the stronger. On the 10th of December a division wastaken on the first clause of the bill. It was rejected by fiftysixagainst fifty-four votes : with it the whole measure fell tothe ground. It was clear that the majority of the Houseadhered to their privious resolution of abolishing tithes.We shall not be wrong in regarding this as the decisivecrisis in the position of affairs.The enactments of the Parliament had already exciteda general commotion in the nation : for the movement, whichhad hitherto always confined itself to the sphere of politicalquestions, now touched the civil order and the arrangementsof society.Though the decree respecting the Court of Chancery metwith approval from the masses, who brought forward numberlesscharges against it, some well grounded and others not,yet there were several who reminded themselves that it was thehighest court in the country, the centre of the whole judicialsystem ; it was being abolished without regard to its ancientrenown, to its undoubted services. What would they put inits stead? The whole of the ancient law, for which so muchblood had been shed, had thus become but a tottering fabric,threatening to fall in, and which it would be necessary to clearaway.1 The value of the said tythes to be paid either in money or land-by him th3twas to have the said tythes; and in case such approved value be not paid-thetythes shall be paid in kind, and shall be recovered in any court of record.'XI. 6. THE LITTLE PARLIAMENT 93A.D. 1653.The original tendency towards a restoration of the old constitutionawoke once more when men saw clearly the abyssinto which these interminable innovations might lead them.And what had they now to expect ? The abolition of patronagewas regarded by many as an open attack on the right ofproperty ; there were members who had withdrawn from theassembly on that account. In addition to this came now theresolution as to tithes, which manifested the same tendency.Parliament seemed to be an assembly of Levellers l.And though Parliament in its proclamations still kept clearof the most extreme conclusions, yet not far from the House,in Blackfriars, there existed a society, including moreoversome members of Parliament, which ignored all considerationsof prudence. There met together the Fifth Monarchymen,who, like the Anabaptists of Munster in former days,started from the assumption that the earth had been givenfor their inheritance to the saints, who would establish theirnew kingdom. The great institutions of the State and theChurch they regarded as the creations of the fourth monarchy,which were therefore destined to perish. We read in theirwritings that the education given at the Universities was of novalue whatever as a preparation for the ministry of God's word.They saw in the clergy and doctors of the Protestant Church thebulwarks of Babylon, which must first of all be overthrown; andit was besides one of their fundamental principles that secularauthority ought to depend on the amount of grace bestowedupon a man 2. All art and science, practical skill and experiencewere as nothing compared with what they termedspirituality and enlightenment : only the enlightened oughtto judge and to govern. All ordinary business was, in fact,religion. It is said that they contemplated establishing asenate, the members of which should regulate the affairs ofthe kingdom with the Bible in their hands. Confoundingreligion and politics, they confused what was universally bindingin Holy Writ with that which applied only to the JewishWilliam Dell, Trial of spirits. Cp. Godwin iv. ch. viii., a chapter whichstands in strong contrast with earlier chapters of this book.a ' Autoritatem secularem fundari in gratia debere.'

94 THR LITTLE PARLIAJIENT. XI. 6.A.D. 1653.nation-a mistake against which the German Reformers hadonce sagaciously protested ; they confused their steadfastsure confidence in their cause with the ambitious desire toremould after their private likings the world which has developedin obedience to historical necessity. They cherishedthe belief that none of them spoke of themselves, but Godthrough them.Now that in the assembly, which called itself a Parliament,and had the assurance from the army of the assistance of thesecular arm, some of the leaders and an actual majority of themembers shared not all these views, but perhaps the generaltendency, matters had indeed reached a point at which completedestruction threatened the English state and kingdom.The sect which had at first given the most powerful impulseto the attack on Episcopacy, which had mainly broughtabout the independence of the army, the execution of the King,and finally the dissolution of the Long Parliament, was nowinvested with the legislative authority in the Commonwealth,and avowed its intention of carrying out its ideas in civil lifeas well. Men found themselves embarked on the career ofthe popular followers of Wiclif and the German Anabaptists.And though it had been found in Germany that the spread ofthese tendencies proved fatal to the religious movement itself,yet that could not be said in England ; for the Commonwealthhad under its new shape already gained so strong a positionthat it was far more dreaded by its neighbours, than itselfin dread of them. The man with whom the final decision ofall matters rested had been under the influence of the samedisturbing ideas that prevailed in the assembly, the convocationof which was due to him. He might be tempted toplace himself decidedly at the head of the Anabaptist democraticalparty, carry out their ideas in England, and thenextend them like a second Mahomet throughout the world.Was he not pledged to this by the fact that he had justifiedhis violent proceedings against the old Parliament by theabuses, to eradicate which was the first aim of the new one.His ideas and theirs seemed to fit together.It is not things so accidental as habits and mode of life,nor single utterances, nor speeches prepared for a specialXI. 6. THE LITTLE PAR L ZA MENT. 95A.D 1653.purpose that display the character of a historical personage :this reveals itself in his actions at great crises. WhateverCromwell may have said as to the alliance of Parliamentwith the corrupt interests of the clergy and lawyers, it wasvery far from being his wish to go the length of destroyingthese two orders and of introducing a social revolution.He had opposed the Agitators when they attempted tointroduce their principle of election into the army. He hadcrushed the Levellers when they violated the idea of property.He could not approve decrees of an assembly which betrayedkindred views. The magistrates and the clergy, whomhe had attacked in April 1653, found their chief support inhim in Dccember when their existence was threatened. TheRoyalists had already noticed this contradiction : they said,reasonably enough, that either Lilburne, who at the time hadreturned of his own accord from exile, must be hanged byCromwell, or he will one day cause Cromwell himself to behanged. For Cromwell, who felt himself to be before allthings general of the army, on which his position entirelydepended, a special motive was now supplied for dislikingthe assembly.A bill was now before the assembly for the continuance ofthe land-tax, destined to maintain the land forces and thenavy. But objection was taken to the unequal and unjustdistribution of the tax. There was a crying disproportionbetween the counties, towns, and hundreds. The city ofLondon complained that it was forced to pay a fifteenth,while according to the true proportion not so much as afortieth would fall upon it. They also considered the totalamount to be too high. Though a few concessions weremade, yet they could not be persuaded to allow the billto pass I.But the army could not tolerate such a delay. How longa time must have elapsed before such a work as the equalisationof ancient differences could be completed and the' According to the account of the ' Exact relation ' the bill was only postponed ;according to that given in 'Confusion confounded,' it was rejected, 'waved' or' stopt.' The distinction is not important.

96 THE LITTLE PARLIAMENT. XI. 6.A.D. 1653.necessary bills passed? The whole positich of the armydepended upon the full and punctual payment of theirwages, failing which they must have maintained themselvesby plunder and violence. Certainty of pay and strict disciplineformed the distinctive novelty in the organisationwhich Cromwell had introduced among his troops. On thisrested their obedience, the peace of the land, in some degreethe whole public order of things. Parliament was warnedof the danger involved in its procrastinating decrees. Severalmembers could not reconcile it with their duty to the armyand the general to vote for them. But the majority of theassembly was already far from being of one mind with thearmy, in which the religious or democratical principle by nomeans exclusively ruled. The soldiers are designated as thejanissaries of that Babylon, which must be destroyed in orderto bring in the kingdom of the saints.Thus in the very heart of the newly established authoritiesa deep split was effected : on one side were the adherentsof the magistrature and the clergy, of the generalorder of things, and of the army; on the other, the pronouncedreligionists belonging to the separatist sects. Theystill had a small majority in the House. But how grievouslywere they deceived if they thought to retain the upperhand by such means ! Only by a stretch of language couldthey be called a Parliament; in reality they were a sort ofAssembly of Notables, such as was recently on two occasionsconvoked in France to support the intentions of thegovernment by the weight of utterances in agreement withthose intentions.This time the General was spared the necessity of takingthe initiative. The minority in the assembly deemed it essentialnot to allow the measures which the majority hadalready advanced to the last stage to become law, but therewas no other means of preventing it except to declare themselvesdissolved. In the next sitting the majority were forcedto bcar the reproach in which they were the least involved,that they were following their own will, and going after theirown desires. Members of the assembly uttered expressionsof most ominous import; 'they were insufficient,' they said,XI. 6. TflE LITTLE PARLIAMENT. 97A.D. 1653.'to do that good that they were called for.' It was thenmoved that they should give back their commission tohim from whom they had received it. Without waiting fora formal resolution, those who were in the secret left theirse'ats to go to Whitehall, and at once carry their proposalinto execution. The Speaker arose, and with him the Sergeant,who bore the mace before him and the Clerk of theHouse; on the way others joined the train, some even whohad come purposely to attend the sitting. In Whitehall itselfthe act of resignation was drawn up, inscribed on parchment,and handed over to the General. In course of time it receivedso many signatures that it could reasonably be acceptedas expressing the mind of the assembly. To finishthe matter completely, it was still necessary, as before, tomarch two files of musketeers into the House, on whoseappearance the remaining members also retired. It waswith many protests that they submitted to the irregular andviolent treatment they underwent. They claimed to enjoythe privileges as well as the name of a Parliament1.What should be the next step could no longer be doubtful.The convocation of the assembly was merely an experimentwhich Harrison had suggested on the dissolution of the LongParliament. It appeared to answer because, outwardly atleast, it established a supreme. civil authority by the side ofthe army. But even then Lambert had made another proposalwhich kept clear of all actual religious aspirations, andsimply adhered to the scheme of concentrating the governmentin a few hands. Lambert now came forward again withthis proposal. He based his plan on the elevation of the LordGeneral to the supreme civil authority.The pamphlet entitled 'An Exact Relation' especially complains of the violenceof this 'overthrow and dissolution of the Parliament and supreme authority.'The answer published in defence merely denies that any violence was used. 'I amconscious of no force, as is intimated, either intended or offered to the Parliamentwhilst the House was sitting.'RANKE, VOL. 111.

BOOK XII.

CHAPTER I.OLIVER CROMWELL AND HIS ELEVATION TO THEPROTECTORATE.ON a certain day in May 1540, the marriage of Henry VIIIwith Anne of Cleve was celebrated by a grand tournament.The main object in this marriage was to bring the King ofEngland into the closest connexion with the German Protestants.The man who had mainly brought about the formalseparation between England and Rome, and had put himselfat the head of the extreme movements for the reformation,the Keeper of the Great Seal, Thomas Cromwell, then Earlof Essex, hoped, among the animosities of a hostile party,to receive from the new Queen, whose marriage had beenhis own doing, support and assistance. At the tournamentheld in Westminster to celebrate these eminently Protestantespousals, no one more brilliantly distinguished himselfthan Richard Williams, a native of Wales, who had adoptedthe name of Cromwell, on account of a family alliance withthe powerful statesman *. On this occasion he was createda knight; the King gave him as a token of his approval, adiamond ring. This Richard Cromwell was the great grandfatherof Oliver the Protector. In the forcible confiscationof the church-lands two rich Benedictine abbeys, Hinchinbrooknear Huntingdon, and Ramsey in the same county, fell tohis share. But the results of Henry's marriage with Annewere very different from those which were looked for. So far--' The origin of R. Williams is known from a notice in his contemporary ,Leland ; his relationship to Thomas Cromwell from one of his own letters. Noble,Memoirs of the Protectoral House of Cromwell i. 308. Carlyle's Letters andSpeeches i. 14.

102 OLIVER CROMWELL AND HIS XII. I.A.D. 1653.from strengthening his position, it led, through the oppositionof the Catholic and aristocratic party, to the downfall ofThomas Cromwell and his execution. Richard WilliamsCromwell was the only person at court who wore mourningfor him ; it was his good fortune to remain in the enjoymentboth of his estate and of the royal favour.It is probable that his pomp-loving and free-handed son ..Henry did not exactly add to this prosperity: but he leftbehind him a numerous family-six sons and five daughters-thanks to whose manifold and honourable alliances thehouse now first took firm root in the east of England. One ofthe daughters married William Hampden of Great Hampden ;another became the wife of Richard Whalley of Kerton ; theformer was the mother of John Hampden ; the latter, ofColonel Edward Whalley. Of the sons, the eldest, Sir Oliver,succeeded to the family property. He ventured to entertainJames I on his arrival in England with festivities at Hinchinbrook.The younger sons however also succeeded in establishingthemselves independently. We find them settled atRamsey or in Huntingdon. In the last-named place settledin particular the second son Robert, in a handsome ancestralmansion, to which was attached a brewery, on the outskirtof the town. He had taken to wife a lady who traced herdescent to the royal house of Stuart, but who neverthelessproved herself an industrious and thrifty housewife. Theyhad ten children; the fifth of these was Oliver, who wasdestined to so high a fortune. He was born on the 25thof April, 1599.Families, like individuals, have a basis of mental associationswhich act upon them-they cling with pleasure to noblememories. If we were to point out the sympathies andantipathies which had the strongest hold in this family ofWilliams-Cromwell, we must take for the first the Protestantprinciples of which the powerful Keeper of the Seal, the' Hammer of the Monks' had once been the champion; forthe latter the enemies who overthrew him. The strugglebetween the two continued incessantly.In the case of Robert's children there was besides the linkwhich connected them with that royal family which had so~11.1. ELEVATIONTOTHEPROTECTORATE. 103A.D. 1653.unexpectedly succeeded to the English throne; and it isnot surprising that all this awoke lofty and mysterious aspirationsin the easily stirred depths of a youthful heart.In the dark days of a diseased and melancholy mood, soruns the story, the young Oliver imagined that he behelda gigantic figure which announced to him that he shouldone day become the greatest man in England1.But let us not linger in this background to his life. Theman as he enters into the world will yet be shaped by thecircumstances of the time and by the conflicts of his owninnate disposition with them.Oliver ~romwell was not without education. He residedfor some time in a college at Cambridge, but these studiesnever exercised any special influence upon him. Placed byhis father's death almost too early in a position of independence,he passed through a stage in which he surrenderedhimself to the distractions of a pleasure-seeking, wild, andprofligate youth. The first serious impression which we canfind in him is traceable to the doctrines of strict Puritanism,which were expounded at the time in Huntingdon by oneof those lecturers who everywhere waged war upon thedominant Church, and whose name was Beard. We findhim next in that violent agitation of spirit which marks thetransition from worldly excess to religious earnestness andrepentance. It was only in the separatist congregations, thecompletest embodiment of the community of the faithful,that he found satisfaction.With these sentiments was allied in him, as in so marlyothers, a political hostility to the policy pursued by Charles I.This in Crnmwell's case shows itself first in local matters. Hewas one of those who resisted the design of the governmentfor altering the municipal constitution of Huntingdon.Everywhere bent on securing greater stability, the governmentdesired to supersede the annual elections to the commoncouncil by elections for life. Cromwell took the leadamong those who upheld the more liberal method of annual1 UTarwick, Memoirs 249. it is clear from Clarendon that this was a generallyaccepted story at that time.

104 OLIVER CROMWELL AND HIS XII. I.A.D. 1653.election, and proceeded in the matter with such unusualrecklessness that he was called to answer for his conduct.In the question of the draining of the neighbouring fens headvocated with equal zeal the rights of the town, which wereregarded as being thus infringed. No great results werc.expected from all this, nor was he satisfied himself. Hebelonged to the number of those who formed the schemeof realising their ideas of civil and religious freedom on thefurther side of the Atlantic, when affairs in England tooka turn which led them to hope for a change in their mothercountryas well. Thanks to the respect in which his familywas held and his personal conduct, he succeeded in beingreturned at the election in the autumn of 1640. So far ascan be made out he had also the recommendation of hiskinsman John Hampden in his favour. He entered theHouse as member for Cambridge.Had everything in Parliament depended upon formal debates,Cromwell, who had been a member of Parliament inthe first years of Charles I without attracting notice, woulddot have played any important part in this Parliament either:owing to his personal appearance, his slovenly dress, fierycomplexion and countryfied manners, he was regarded asan eccentric character. With a piercing voice he threw outremarks which attacked the existing constitution of the state,and on account of which on one occasion it was proposedto summon him to the bar of the House to justify himself.In the very fact however that now at last radical innovationsappeared practicable, lay the motive which urged Cromwellto take the active part he did in parliamentary business. Oneof the leading men in Parliament he certainly was not. Hecould never shine in debate ; he lacked the required readinessand versatility of mind, and the eloquence which carries withit a large audience of different opinions. But it would bea grave mistake to suppose that he was even then withoutimportance and influence.We are familiar with the demands of Parliament which, inthe latter half of the year 1641, rendered a reconciliation withthe King impossible. In drawing up these Cromwell tooka very prominent part. He and Haslerig were the realX I . . ELEVATIONTOTHEPROTECTORATE. 105A.D. I 653.authors of the bill, which required the complete abolition ofthe episcopacy. Cromwell too was the first to move thatthe commanding officers of the militia in the country shouldbe appointed not as hitherto by the King but by Parliament,and that for as long a period as Parliament itself shoulddetermine, thus depriving the King of the right of removingthem1 ; a proposal which- a month later received such anextended application from Haslerlg that it kindled thequarrel respecting the right to the supreme military command.So again it was Cromwell who introduced the motionfor the removal of Lord Bristol from the King's council ; wehave already seen how this scheme, when extended to includeDigby, mainly contributed to urge the King to that attackon the independence of Parliament which was the immediatecause of the rupture between them.But true public life implies far more than mere agitationand incitement of others to action : in Cromwell's case a careersuitable to his peculiar talents was first opened to him whenthe subtleties of controversy were exchanged for the clashof arms.At the moment when the rupture occurred, in Cambridgeas elsewhere, the university took one side, the town, whichCromwell represented, the other. Cromwell immediately procuredpermission for the townsmen to arm themselves, andhimself hastened thither. Some of the colleges wished tosend their silver plate to the King. Cromwell prevented theirdoing it. He was assisted in this by his brothers-in-lawWalton, member for Huntingdon, and John Desborough, aresident in the same place. To what lengths the three wenton their own responsibility may be inferred from the factthat Parliament was subsequently obliged to grant them anindemnity. Very characteristic is the treatment which befellOliver's uncle, who in opposition to the ruling feeling in thefamily incIined to the side of the King. His nephew soughthim out in Ramsey with a small troop of horse ; he showedD'Ewes adds to the entry in the Journals of Nov. 6, 1641, 'Upon Mr. Cromwell'smotion.' See Sanford 435.Forster, Arrest of the five members p. 82.

106 OLIVER CROMWELL AND HIS XII. I.A.D. 1653.him all the respect due to the head of a family; he askedfor his blessing, but carried off notwithstanding the silverand the arms which he found in the house.The gentry in the eastern counties as in the others werethemselves more inclined to sympathise with the King thanwith the Parliament at the outbreak of the war. Cromwellat first endeavoured to gain them over by representing tothem the services which they could render the King in cooperationwith himself. When this failed, and the leadingmen among them met instead and declared themselves Cavaliers,at Lowestoft in Suffolk, he did not scruple to dispersethem by force.It was among a lower class, among the freeholders in thevarious counties, the descendants of the Danes and Saxons,who formed a counterpoise to the influence of the gentry,that he sought his allies. It was on the interest of this classespecially that the association was based which renderedthe eastern counties the most powerful bulwark of the Parliamentaryparty.From the same class it was that Cromwell, when the warbroke out, in virtue of a commission granted him by LordEssex, levied the body of cavalry to which he owed his greatsuccesses. They were men of sufficient means to be independentof pay, and whose bodily powers had been triedand developed by agricultural labour. But it was necessarythat they should also be men of personal courage. Cromwelltested the squadron while yet in course of formation bya sudden surprise, and dismissed those who then showedcowardice. They had to perform the meanest services, tosleep in the straw by their horses, and to groom them carefully:for all depended upon the good condition of their horsesand the brightness and sharpness of their arms. Above allthings they were bound by the strictest discipline. To thecavalry that Prince Rupert had organised among the Cavaliers,which won fame in the several battles and filled theland with the terror of their name, Cromwell desired tooppose a troop as brave, as serviceable, and as eager forvictory. He saw that the strength of his enemies lay chieflyin the principle of honour; a principle which, according toXI.. ELEVATIONTOTHEPROTECTORATE. 107A.D. 1653.medieval notions, is bound up with dutiful service and personalallegiance. This it was essential to confront by another,which should be equally powerful. His followers were allunited by the same religious tendencies which harmonisedwith his own ; they were as zealous separatists as their leaderhimself. They fought not so much for the rights of Parliament,which still left room for doubting whether a mancould bear arms against his hereditary sovereign, as forcomplete religious independence and social equality. It wasa confederation of men inspired by a fanaticism at oncereligious and political, but yet whose minds were schooledby discussion of the great controversies which had engrossedattention in the last few years, respecting the' relations betweenprince and people, between the Episcopal Church andthe sects, and who were now consolidated by a strict disciplineinto a strong military force. Shouting a psalm theythrew themselves upon the enemy in the name of theAlmighty ; they granted no quarter ; at times they were seento retreat, but it was only to return to the attack with thegreater vehemence: none of them would ever have takenrefuge in flight: in most cases they remained masters of thefield. In a short time Cromwell's Ironsides were reckoneda troop of irresistible valour. The fame of their achievementsroused those throughout the country who were like-mindedto join their ranks, and to make their own the cause whichthey fondly believed was the cause of God.Now that the great religious and political struggle wasto be decided by the issues of war, it is clear what a positiona member of Parliament enjoyed who was at the same timethe leader of so powerful and active a force.Are we then to say that from the first it was Cromwell'sdesign to secure for himself the supreme power?-a questionwhich can scarcely be asked, and which certainly cannot beanswered hastily. The consciousness of a high mission whichanimated him may have been strengthened and elevated bysubsequent events; but to trace all his actions in detail toa settled plan is to be guilty of a false pragmatism which onlyobscures the motives which were really most powerful. Hehas himself said on one occasion, 'He goes furthest who

I 08 OLIJ7ER CROMWELL AND HIS XII. I.A.D. 1653.knows not whither he is going.' The directing impulse inall that he did or left undone was supplied in most casesby the necessities of the moment. His intention alwayswas to break through the hostile forces which opposedhim, and to overcome them by stratagem as much as byopen war. To award him the merit of perfect sincerity, apraise which perhaps no single statesman of his day canrightfully claim, would be to over-estimate the value of thegrandiloquent expressions in which he delighted. At timesthe real nature of his opinions is lost in a crowd of antitheses,at others he changes his tactics. The party whichgathered round him and gave him importance in its turnimposed duties upon him, yet not always nor without reservedid he share their views.Speaking strictly, there are three gkeat achievements whichestablished his personal influence. They all bear the stampof self-defence necessitated by circumstances, of promptresolution and a preparedness which was always ready forany reverse.The first is the reorganisation of the army in the years1644-45. It was the moment at which Cromwell, in spiteof, or rather in consequence of, his services at Marston Moor,since these procured him so large a following, was in dangerof being ruined by the Scottish Presbyterian league, to whichbelonged the foremost men in the state and army. To meetthis danger he carried the Self-denying Ordinance. In thiswas found the most effective means of removing the Grandeesfrom the army, and depriving them as well as others of hisopponents of their chief source of irlfluence. We are surprisedand shocked to find that it was necessary to employ a religiouspretext to recommend and carry through a partymeasure. Still more startling is the fact that one man onlywas excepted from its application, and that man the onewho had been its author. Whether or not such was hisconscious intention from the first who can decide? Thereis a foresight of consequences which is more properly apresentiment thhn a deliberate intention.The great exceptional stations in the world are not usuallywon by slow degrees. Ambition fixes its hopes upon themXII. I. ELEVATION TO THE PROTECTORATE. 109A.D. 1653.more from a half-instinctive feeling than with any settleddesign. At the decisive moment they suddenly offer themselvesand are at once grasped. By the victory of NasebyCromwell became the master of England. Who would haveventured to accuse him of a breach of law while he advancedfrom victory to victory and decided the great struggle inwhich the nation had been engaged with all its might andsoul? He was not the commander-in-chief of the army,and in Parliament was nothing more than a simple member ;but he ruled the former through the credit he had gainedwith it and his personal reputation, and through it he exerciseda directing influence over the latter. Thanks to thedouble foundation on which it rested, his position was oneof unrivalled strength. At one blow he had become the mostpowerful man in England.Such an authority as this inevitably struggles to gain foritself a full and free development, which the forces kept insubjection by it, but not as yet entirely crushed, necessarilyoppose. The Presbyterians and the King endeavoured tocombine against him. The second great epoch in Cromwell'spresent career is marked by his dissolution of the allianceand his final defeat of both parties. With the zealous Presbyterians,who regarded him as their sworn foe, he couldnever have come to an understanding : such an understandingseemed more feasible with the King, whose views onreligious tolerance met his own demands. Cromwell showedsympathy for him, made him promises, inspired him withconfidence, engaged in serious negotiations with him. Buttwo conditions were required to bring the matter to a conclusion.In the first place it was essential that the armyshould agree to the advances, and next it was necessary thatthe King should not only promise them security against anyreaction, but also the continuance of their privileged positionin the country. But as we have seen, the General himselfby his negotiations fell under the suspicions of the army,which was deeply penetrated with democratical ideas: hewas thought to be seeking by some agreement to providefor his own greatness and the future of his family. So faras the King was concerned it was no longer possible to

1x0 OLIVER CROMWELL AND HIS YII. t.A.D. 1653.obtain from him a recognition of an independent establishmentfor the army. Whatever promises Cromwell may havemade, he gradually turned from him in open enmity.Cromwell was not without appreciation of the principles ofmonarchy, but he was entirely destitute of sympathy withwhat is called loyalty. He has told us that he would asreadily fire his pistol in battle at the King as at any otherfoe. He did not hate Charles I, but he felt no scruplein destroying him when circumstances made it necessary.In his eyes it was allowable in urgent cases to overthrowthe ruling powers. The ordinance of God he regarded onlyas the source of all authority; what form and fashion itmight take was, he considered, left to human judgment l.Cromwell did not start, like the Agitators, from the idea ofthe sovereignty of the people, but from the requirementsof the common good. As to what was profitable or hurtfulto the state, on that point each might judge for himself.The interest of good people was the common interest of all ;to secure it, it was lawful to overthrow an established government:those whose intentions were perverse could be met bystratagem. These are principles which may serve to justify allrebellion and violence: they are well suited to the positionof a powerful ruler just rising into authority and casting allscruples behind him.If Cromwell however entertained the design of overthrowingthe monarchy, it was necessary that those Parliamentariansshould also fall who had attempted to enterinto an agreement with it, had they been formerly friendsof his own or not. He declared it to be a religious dutyforsolely to their daily increasing fury against the elect ofGod did he attribute their conduct-to purify the Parliamentfrom them. The Upper House was abolished; the Kingbeheaded ; in the Lower House, which now assumed the titleof Parliament, those only were to be tolerated who were likemindedand as devoid of loyalty, and who followed his bidding.1 'Authorities are the ordinance of God. This or that species is of humaninstitution. All agree that there are cases in which it is lawful to resist.' Cromwellto Hammond, Nov. 1648, in Carlyle i. 34a.~11.1. ELEL'ATIONTOTHEPROTECTORATE. 1x1A.D. 1653.But that they should be tolerated for long was not to beFar from obeying his lead, they claimed to bethe supreme authority, to which the army ought rather tosubmit. Thus when Cromwell returned from the campaignswhich had everywhere crushed all resistance to the Commonwealthand secured the recognition of its authority, how washe to allow the possession of the power he had himself foundedto remain in the hands of men who sought to prescribe lawsfor him, and to place restrictions upon his authority?Cromwell openly uttered reproaches which personally affectedthe members, and would have cost them their popularity.But that was not his ultimate reason. There is some truthin the royalist charge, that he had got rid of them in ordernot to be himself overthrown by them: and how, under anyconditions, could a military and a civil authority, with equalclaims, have continued to rule side by side with each other?It was inevitable that they should quarrel ; and in thequarrel the General necessarily gained the advantage, notonly because he was the stronger of the two, but also becausehe had contributed the most to the establishment of thewhole existing arrangements.Here as ever the contradiction manifested itself betweenthe intention as at first avowed and its subsequent results.At the time of the dissolution of the Long ParliamentCromwell had laid stress upon nothing more than on thenecessity for a thorough reform, and the relief of the people,which the Parliament had opposed. With this view heallowcd that separatist Assembly of Notables to meet, whichentered eagerly on the path which he had marked out forthem. It is surprising enough that after a few months hemost distinctly turned his back upon them. It seemed tohim that their mode of proceeding would lead not to areform, but to a revolution accompanied by a chaotic confusion._The law, the magistracies, the constitution of theChurch, were in danger, even in their lowest branches andthose most directly connected with the people. Tn carryingout religious ideas their promoters had come into collisionwith individual rights of property. The regular maintenanceof thc army, and with it its very existence, were called in

112 OLIVER CROMWELL AND HIS XII. I.A.D. 1653.question. Thoroughly to appreciate Cromwell's position,we must listen to the Royalists, who expressed their greatsatisfaction that men of practical ability were excluded fromthe highest posts, while ' giddy-headed' Anabaptists werecalled to the council of the state1. He saw himself forcedto oppose the ideas for which he had fought. And perhapsit was as well to allow their full import to appear first, sincethere could be no danger in doing so, as the substance ofpower remained throughout in the hands of the General andthe army. When the crisis came Cromwell protected againstthe Little Parliament the institutions the continued existenceof which he had made a subject of reproach against the LongParliament.The Little Parliament was not actually broken up ; itdissolved itself and handed over its authority to the General.Singular as this seems, considering that he had convokedit, yet this measure is so far intelligible, that it assertedthe principle that the military powet as such had no rightto carry on the civil government of the country. The divinemission which it claimed only entitled it to abolish agovernment which did not answer its purpose, in order tomake room for another and a more suitable one. The LittleParliament claimed a divine right' to the goverument of thecountry, which could not otherwise have been entrusted toit by the army. By dissolving itself, and of its own accordsurrendering in favour of the General its rights andits mission, which were regarded as the work of providence,it invested him with the functions of civil government whichhe did not possess in himself nor could venture to assume.At least it thus supplied a plausible pretext and facilitatedthe transition to the new regime.On the 13th of December, 1653, there was to be seenin the chambers of the Council of State at Whitehall anassembly of a very mixed and irregular character. At lastthe order was given for all to withdraw who did not belongto the army. Then Lambert introduced a motion respecting'Seeing the present men in power are but a company of giddy-headed men.'Whitelocke's Journal of the Swedish Ambassy i. 50.I . I. ELEVATION TO THE PROTECTORATE. I I 3A.D. 1653.the resignation of the Little Parliament, and also laid beforethe Council the plan of a new constitution. The proceedingswere somewhat disorderly, some entering, others leaving, theroom ; generally however the plan met with approval, andthe next step was to secure its confirmation in detail.During this period the idea had been entertained on severaloccasions in Ireland, and once in England, of creating aProtector who should administer the supreme power. Itwas a title not altogether strange to English ears, since informer times the representatives of princes who were minors,and who ruled with absolute powers, had more than oncebeen called Protectors, and the name in no way implied adefinite renewal of the monarchical form of government.Cromwell was now to be declared Lord Protector of the Commonwealth,but his power was not to be either absolute orhereditary; ,for the chief authority in the realm was investedin the army still more than in the General. A Council-ofState, chiefly composed of military men, was to act as acheck upon him. Together with some other officers Lambertdrew up a sort of charter, called an Instrument of Government,which more exactly defined the distribution of power.In this all appointments and granting of favours were reservedfor the Protector; in the most important affairs ofstate he was to be bound by the opinion of the council.To this a very independent position was assigned. TheProtector could neither admit members to it nor dismissthem on his own authority solely. In the case of all vacancieshe was to follow the suggestions offered by the Council forfilling them up. To the Council moreover was granted theinfinitely important privilege of nominating a successor onthe death of Cromwell. In conjunction with this CouncilCromwell was to have the control of the forces of the nation,the right of making peace and war, and also the prerogativeof suspending laws now in operation until the Parliamentshould meet. For by the side of these two closely relatedpowers there was to be also a popular Parliament. Inconducting its election it was resolved to adhere to theprinciples of a fair and equal representation, provided onlythat all those should still be excluded who had taken partRANKE, VOL. 111.I

I 14 OLIVER CROMWELL AND HIS XII. I.A.D. 1653.in the war against the Commonwealth, even if they haddone so only with counsel and support. But with this restriction,and even in consequence of it, Parliament was allthe more to exercise important constitutional rights. It wasto possess the legislative authority in its fullest extent. Itsacts were to have the force of law in themselves, shouldthe-protector not confirm them within a stated time. Theimposition of taxes was to rest absolutely with the Parliament,and it was to be unlawful for the Protector eitherto prolong or to cut short the time of its sittings.An attempt, undoubtedly incomplete yet well deservingnotice, to separate from each other the executive and thelegislative power1, an anticipation of modern constitutionswhich, like so much else in this age, exhibits the tendenciesof a far later time, the nineteenth century.Cromwell has assured us that he knew nothing of theresignation of Parliament at the moment when the deed washandcd to him written on parchment, nor of the Instrumentof Government when it was laid before him. He acceptedit because he saw that his power would be a limited one.On another occasion he depicts the condition of thecountry which made a change in the constitution necessary.'Many a man,' he says, 'has folded his hands and lookedround him to see whether aught still existed on whichreliance could be placed ; taking their stand on the principlesof the freedom of the subject and liberty of conscience,-grandwords, which are never without some attraction for men,-some have schemed to overthrow the clergy, and to removethe ancient distinctions between classes, and meanwhile thecountry was overrun by its most dangerous enemies, aboveall by swarms of Jesuits. It was involved in war, its commercehad passed into the hands of foreigners, the convictionhad spread that this could not so continue. A remedy wasnecessary,' he exclaims ; ' this remedy has been applied.' It' Ratio reipublicae, a pamphlet published immediately after the establishmentof the new constitution, p. 103 : 'In praesenti constitutione potestas legislatorianb exsequendi potestate segregatur cum illa in parlamentis, haec vero in dominoprotectore ejusqne successoribus, quibus certi in consilio adsunt, collocata sit.'XII.,I. ELEVATION TO THE PROTECTORATE. I 15A.D. 1653.was the acceptance of the Protectorate, the seizure of thecivil authority by the military.If we were to describe in a word the main distinctionbetween the catastrophe in England and the kindred onewhich a century and a half later occurred in France, we mightsay that in France the social revolution was already as goodas completed before a victorious general seized the sovereignty,while in England on the contrary the power of thesword stepped in before that point was reached. It checkedthe progress of the movement directly this began to underminethe foundations of civil society.Cromwell at the head of the army had vanquished andcrushed King, Lords, and Parliament. In opposition to thepolitical constitution of the realm, he appeared as a greatdestroyer. But further than this he would not go. Themoment that the adherents of his party took a directionthat threatened with danger civil institutions and the orderof society, they found in him their most formidable andeffective opponent. For in the possession of power, and thatof the sword in particular, is involved the necessity of upholdingthe foundations of the social order on which itrests itself.Amid the ruin of all authority, political and ecclesiastical,Cromwell stood forth as the champion af the institutions ofsociety, of property, of civil right and of the inferior clergy.In this spirit he seized the supreme power; and it was theresult of his position that he was enabled to do this with theapproval of a considerable portion of the people. The lawyersand clergy had seen their existence threatened by the destructivedecrees of the Independent Assembly. They were rejoicedto hear of its dissolution. Cromwell appeared as theirdeliverer; for them his title of Protector possessed all themeaning implied in the word.On the 16th of December, 1653, Cromwell was solemnlyinstalled in his office. The great act of usurpation- could becelebrated with a certain pomp, even in the place where thelawful King had been condemned, in Westminster Hall. Ona rich carpet was placed the chair of state for the new rulerof the realm. The outer space was filled by the officers ofI 2

116 OL I VEK CK OM WELL AND HIS xu. I.A.D. 1653.the army, and the Lord Mayor and Aldermen in their scarletrobes, that inside by the members of the Council and theJudges . - in their official dress. For on the union of the civilianand military elements all now depended ;-next the chair wereseen on one side Cromwell himself, and on the other theCommissioners of the Great Seal, all uncovered. The proceedingswere opened by Lambert, who had taken thegreatest part in their preparation. In the name of the armyand, as he declared, of the three nations, he offered the LordGeneial the Protectorate, according to the terms more exactlylaid down in the Instrument of Government. The ~nstrumentwas read aloud. Cromwell took the prescribed oath. Hethereby pledged himself not merely to conform to Its provisions,but in everything to govern the nation according toits laws, statutes and customs, to maintain peace and justice.While he next declared that he accepted the high office becausehe recognised' it to be the wish of those assembled and thewill of God, he added, under a powerful impulse of thought, aprayer that his power might endure only so long as it remainedin perfect agreement with the work of God, andtended to the furtherance of the Gospel, and the maintenanceof the people in their rights and property He then coveredhis head and took his seat in the chair. The Commissionerswho carried the Great Seal of England handed it to him, theLord Mayor gave him the sword ; he returned both tothem. The Lord Mayor then with bare head carried thesword before him.The oath imposed upon the councillors of state hithertohad prescribed fidelity to the Republican government withouta king, as single ruler, and without a House of Lords. Theynow merely swore to administer the office entrusted to them tothe best of their ability, and in electing a successor in the Protectorateto proceed without regard to favour, promise, rewardor fear 2. By a special clause in the Instrument the members-I state the words from the pamphlet : ' Declaration concerning the governmentof three nations,' Dec. 21, which agrees in other respects with the ' perfect account'which has been transferred to the Parliamentary Journals, and has onlythis point of difference.a Form of oath in Order Book, 'I. A. B. nominated and appoynted to be one ofthe Council to His Highness the Lord Protector-doe promise in the sight of Godx11.1. ELEVATIONTOTHEPROTECTORATE. 117A.D. 1653.of the house of Stuart were for ever excluded from theProtectorate.For it was clearly felt that the new office bore a resemblanceto the monarchy, and in the hands of a member ofthe exiled family would have led to a restoration.The peculiarity of the scheme lay in the fact that what hadbeen destroyed remained so, while yet the rising power wasmoulded in a form analogous to the old constitution. A monarchywas desired, as limited as the former one, but 'of atotally opposite and radically different nature. Everythingnow depended on the complete amalgamation of the variouselements into a solid political power. Harrison's experimenthad failed; it remained to be seen how far the path pointedout by Lambert would lead them.There were two powerful parties in the country who couldnever be won over to the new institution: the Royalists,whose sympathies were all with the old constitution of therealm, and who had lost their own position by its overthrow,and the Anabaptists, who had hoped to carry out successfullya religious reorganisation of the world, and were now suddenlydisplaced and excluded. The former could not bear tosee the Protector in the room of their King ; the latter couldnever forgive him the opposition which he had offered to theestablishment of their religious order of the world.The Parliamentarian Republicans were embarrassed anddiscontented, but not entirely alienated, because the promisedParliamentary Assemblies with their extensive powers openeda new sphere for their activity.But all those who looked for safety in the maintenanceof the civil order, which they had seen threatened with destruction,joyfully welcomed the Protectorate. They did notdisguise from themselves that it could not be termed legal.They considered however that it was quite enough not tohave shared in the unlawful acts by which this power wasestablished. To obey it they held to be allowable. It seemedthat I will be true and faithfull in my trust according to the best of my knowledge,and in the election of every successive Lord Protector I. shall proceed thereinimpartially, and doe nothing therein for any promise, Ceare, favour, or reward.'

I 18 CROMWELL AS PROTECTOR. XII. I.A.D. 1653.to them worse to assist in what was unlawful under a lawfulpower, than to carry out lawful things under an unlawful one,for to fail in doing this would endanger the public weal '.One of the first acts of the new government was the confirmationof the existing judicial tribunals, which continuedtheir usual course of ~rocedure. Among the judges appointedby Cromwell were men of very independent views.A second act was the completion of the visitation of theChurch left unfinished by the last assembly, and of which wehear that without being vexatious it produced much goodresult. The material basis of the Church remained untouched.The Universities breathed again. To the man whohad tamed savage Ireland and the haughty Scottish clans,they ascribed with a sort of pride the repulse of the attacksupon their privileges and rights.In the capital the proclamation of the new office was receivedby the people with a sort of irony rather than withsympathy. On Cromwell's entry into the city February 8,1654, the Recorder stated Cromwell's own view of the matter,namely, that government is indeed of divine origin, but thatits form is the work of man and subject to change. He saidfurther, that God gives sufficient light for men to perceiveand establish the laws of human society ; but it is for thesword to carry them out. It was, he declared, the wish of thecitizens that the civil sword might in the hand which held itbe as beneficial to the public weal as the military sword hadonce been in the same hand.The new authority entered upon its career and met withobedience. In the public acts appears now the form 'OlivariusProtector' as formerly 'Carolus Rex.' Still it is easy to seethat the new form of government was only regarded as alast resource required by the general confusion and danger.It remained to be proved how far it would stand trial abroadand at home.' 'To continue to act honest and lawfull things, though under an unlawful1power, when they cannot bc done otherwise.' Whitelocke, Swedish Ambassy334.EMBASSY TO SWEDEN.CHAPTER 11.PEACE WITH HOLLAND.EFFECTIVE and successful as the undertakings of theCommonwealth had been, especially in the Dutch war, yetthe isolated position it held in the face of Europe was felt tobe a source of annoyance and even of danger. The States-General found allies : Denmark for instance pledged herselfto refuse not only English men of war, but English merchantvessels free passage through the Sound. They entered intonegotiations with France, which was not willing to permittheir ruin, and even gave them hopes of terminating theirquarrel with Portugal. Lastly, had the Pope and Catholicclergy, among whom the design was incessantly discussed,succeeded in bringing about the peace between France andSpain, Charles I1 could once more have found enough supportamong ithe foreign powers to make him, in spite of thedefeat of his adherents at home, again appear importantand dangerous.On the other hand, the mode in which the English Commonwealthhad been founded had, as the catastrophesin Holland and Spain showed, evoked among high and lowa prejudice against it which rendered a formal diplomaticintercourse almost impossible.One of the most remarkable tokens of respect which themaiden daughter of Gustavus Adolphus, Christina, Queen ofSweden, received from abroad, was unquestionably the gift ofhis own picture from Cromwell. The brow on which time andthe untiring prosecution of a war which had led through thebewildering paths of fortune, and the hard helmet had im-

12c EMBASSY TO SWEDEN. XII. 2.A.D. 1653.printed wrinkles,--this brow bends reverently before her I. Thepolitical motive was, as Crom\vell said, that among all theprinces and states of ~hrktendom there was none with whoman alliance was more possible than with Sweden. Such analliance had been suggested formerly. It was no RepublicanAnabaptist, such as those who were still at the head ofaffairs, but the lawyer, Bulstrode Whitelocke, who had attachedhimself to the Long Parliament, and had been mentionedonce already in it for the post, to whom Cromwellresolved to entrust the embassy.Whitelocke, who was well aware that he was not in favoureither with the Protector or with the leading men, hesitatedto accept the offer, and it is well worth while to watch for amoment the discussions which were held as to its acceptanceor rejection. Conversations between friends and foes, or inthe bosom of the family, acquire a historical value when theytouch upon the questions which are occupying the thoughtsof men.Whitelocke was on a visit at the seat of a friend in Bedfordshirewhen the first indirect report of his appointmentreached him. It shows his feeling, when just afterwards onhis ride, as he gazed upon the scenery and enjoyed thecountry air, he felt himself filled with thankfulness to Godwho had bestowed upon the English for a home, so healthy,pleasant, and fertile an island, and one which none wouldwillingly leave.Some time elapsed before the official notice arrived. Asthere were difficulties connected with an official letter, inwhich neither too much nor too little must be said, Cromwellhimself took the pen in hand and statcd the proposal in a fewenergetic words, calculated equally to express and to inspireconfidence '.In Whitelocke's family opinions were divided. The sonwas for accepting the offer, since he hoped to accompany hisfather, the eldest daughter was on the other side, for shewished to remain with her father, with whom she carried onMiltoni poemata. English Poets xii. 299.2 Whitelocke. Journal of the Swedish Ambassy i. 10.XII. 2. EMBASSY TO SWEDEN. 121A.D. 1653.her studies. The most important verdict was that of thewife, especially as she was near her confinement. She washis third wife, the widow of an alderman who had adoptedPuritan and republican principles, which she also sharcd.She had bestowed her hand upon Whitelocke, who wasadvanced in years and had children already grown up, becausehe might be able in the position he then held asCommissioner of the Great Seal, to do much good, andperhaps she herself might be used as an instrument for theservice of God and of his people. She was terrified at theidea that Whitelocke should now attach himself to the se'rviceof the General, a man who never spared any person or anylaw that stood in his way. Whitelocke, she imagined, whoalways upheld the laws, and refused to have anything to dowith the extinction of the Long Parliament, was disliked bythe General. He wished to get him out of the way, and wouldnot regret it if misfortune befell him on his long and arduousjourney to the extreme north. She adjured him not to doanything at this man's bidding which might prove hurtful tohimself and his family. Whitelocke replied, that if the Generaland his friends really wished him evil, a refusal would onlyserve still further to embitter them, while by accepting theiroffer, he might weaken their hostility, and, it might be, pledgethem to confer benefits on himself and his belongings : besides,the greater the danger, the greater the service ; he who worksfor his country and for God enjoys the protection of Godand need have no fear.But his friends had also to be heard. Most of them thoughtthat'the ruling power was contrary to God and to the laws ofthe land. To attach oneself to it, and to enter its servicewas in itself a reprehensible act, and might one day bringretribution. On the other hand he was reminded that thoughthe ruling power might not approve itself to the people, yetthat every one obeyed it, every one accepted its protection.For according to the Word of God itself it was a duty to obeythe powers that be, and especially in a cause which nearlyconcerned the Protestant religion, and the welfare of thenation; what cause could better deserve this name than theconclusion of a treaty with a foreign power, without regard to

122 EMBASSY TO SWEDEN. XII. 2.A.D. 1653.the convictions one held at the time or might hold in thefuture?Nor must we forget to notice the farmer with whom Whitelocke,on returning to his own property in Bucks, discussed thematter, as they went over the estate together. Whitelocke atthis time maintained the opposite position ; he declared thathe --. was in no wav bound to obey the General, who could haveno hold whatever upon him. The farmer replied, that theGeneral was the greatest man in the country: what was therethat he could not do ? there was more danger in refusing andstaying at home, than in going; if he accepted he mightperhaps find a means of improving his property.It is clear from these discussions what the general opinionof Cromwell was. He was regarded as the lord and master ofthe nation, more absolute than the late kings. Men saw himdo whatever he willed. They feared his long arm ; they endeavouredto make his interests their own. He passed for anall-powerful, dreaded, vindictive, and infinitely ambitious ruler.Twice Whitelocke spoke with him in person. With energeticvehemence Cromwell urged him to accept. He couldnot answer for a refusal before God and men, for it wasessential to counteract the Dutch influence in Sweden; theinterests of Protestantism required it. The embassy wouldbe the real means of settling the relations with Sweden andDenmark. Whitelocke was the best man for the post; evenhis wife would not oppose it I. He knew her. She was areligious woman, and would not put obstacles in the way ofa cause which concerned God and his people.Whitelocke therefore resolved, as he was already inclined todo, to attach himself to the party in power, but it the sametime it was fear of Cromwell that mainly decided him. Hedeclared that he would rather undertake the journey in spiteof all its dangers, than stay at home in greater danger still2.'The Dutch are tampering with the Queen, but she holds them off, expecting tohear from us.' This we find in the first interview. In the second, 'Your goingmay be the most likely means to settle our business with the Dutch and Danes.'Whitelocke, Swed. Amb. 33.'Rather to goe the journey in great daunger, than to stay at home in geater.'Ibid. gzg.XII. A. EMBASSY TO S WEBEN. 123A.D. 1653The sum of the ambassador's instructions was, that heshould arrange with the Queen of Sweden the best means ofsecuring the free passage through the Sound, so that it shouldnot be possible for Denmark or Holland to destroy it. Whitelockeenquired of Cromwell how far he might venture to goin the matter. The answer was, as far as he could, therecould never be more important interests at stake. It wasessential to anticipate the Danes and the Dutch and securethe interests of England. He presented the learned envoy,who had once served in the army, with a sword and a pair ofgilt spurs.A very goodly retinue was given to Whitelocke; one ofthe best frigates in the navy and two other vessels were placedat his disposal ; on the voyage they captured several Dutchfishing boats; then followed a long journey by land. OnDecember 20, 1653, the envoy reached the Swedish court,which was then at Upsala. The Queen gave him audience,seated on her throne, surrounded by her great nobles, but verysimply dressed.When Whitelocke reminded her of her father, and of hiseffort to restore right and justice, and represented the objectof the movements in England to be the same, he found ithard to make any deep impression on the Queen, who waskeenly aware that she had to encounter the opposition in herown country of a similar alliance of Protestantism with popularrights ; but he gained the fullest sympathy from her when, ina private audience, he described the excellence of the Englishmarine, both for commerce and war, in winter as well as insummer, and its superiority to that of the Dutch ; and touchedupon the necessity of not allowing the Danes and Dutch thefree control of the Sound. She now became all attention.She moved her chair nearer to his, for he was lame, andobliged to sit during the interview. She wished to knowwhether, since what he proposed could only be accomplishedby force, Sweden would be assisted by England in such anundertaking. This was in truth the point of contact betweenthe English and ~widish policy. The negotiations couldnow bcgin. The aged chancellor Oxenstiern raised the preliminaryobjection that England was already engaged in war,

124 EMBASSY TO SWEDEN. XII. 2.A.D. 1653.while Sweden was at peace; it was asking a great deal topropose that she should involve herself in a war. He recognisedhowever the great advantages which an Englishalliance offered for the maintenance of the position of Sweden.Tedious as it was, he went through the proposals with theenvoy article by article. Meanwhile the Queen had thrownherself with all her natural enthusiasm into the matter. Theold Swedish hatred of Denmark revived in her breast. Shehoped to receive from England sufficient supplies of moneyand men to enable her to fit out a considerable squadronherself. An English fleet would attack the Danes and Dutchfrom the other side. She flattered herself with the hope ofmaking large conquests. She would then, for already shespoke much of her abdication, take up her abode in Zealand,if Cromwell agreed. Her conquests she would divide withEngland '.Residing at her court at the time was Corfitz Ulfeld, whodetested King Frederick I11 of Denmark as a personalenemy, and had been banished by him. He fanned theflickering flame. With Whitelocke, who took a liking to him,as the learned always do to those whom they teach, he frequentlydiscussed the state of the North, and the best meansof attacking Denmark. The Spanish ambassador, Don Pimentel,enjoyed the greatest influence with the Queen. Hethought the moment favourable for effecting an alliance betweenSweden, England, and Spain; and no proposal couldhave been more welcome to the Queen herself. It did notescape her that there was a confederation also being negotiatedbetween Denmark, France, and Holland, which itwas necessary to oppose. The conflict between the variousEuropean powers centred themselves for a time in the extremeNorth.It is perfectly true that an alliance between Denmark,France, and Holland, was much discussed at the time. Theintention was to offer definite conditions to the Protector, andXII. 2. EMBASSY TO SWE'BEN. 125A.D. 1653.in the event of his rejecting them, to declare war against him,in which case the adherents of Charles I1 would also be incitedto rise. Nevertheless Cromwell could never dream ofconfronting a league directed against himself by another,which would but have strengthened the first. His plan wasrather to prevent its ever reaching maturity.To secure this however the alliance with Sweden wasclearly the best means. Holland as well as Denmark wouldnot fail to see with anxiety an alliance between two powersalready their superiors in strength, and in fact negotiationshad long been begun with Holland.It was only an instance of the con~prehensive but impracticableideas which seized men's minds at the time of theLittle Parliament that the English, not satisfied with a closealliance, which had been often discussed, proposed an anialgamationof the two states, a coalition in the most literalsense of the word ; for the future they were to form but onestate, one republic, one nation-a single government selectedfrom the two peoples was to exercise the sovereignty. Thedifference of nationalities was to disappear within the twocountries : even Cromwell himself entered into the idea. Onone occasion he told the Dutch envoys that God had decidedagainst them ; nothing remained for them but to join themighty English Commonwealth, and in conjunction with it tospread abroad the kingdom of God and set the nations freefrom their tyrants 1.The envoys treated the proposal as unheard of, impracticableand absurd. How could any one entertain the ideaof uniting sovereignties different in kind ? In the assemblyof the States-General it was emphatically rejected. Theenvoys were commissioned for the future to treat only fora close alliance for the preservation and defence of thefreedom of both peoples.The republic of the Netherlands sorely needed peace, andwas now forced to accept many of the conditions she had' 'If Zealand could be taken from the Dane, and the Protector agree with myliving there, it should be the place of my retirement.' Whitelocke, Swed. Amb.i. 369.' From the unprinted Journal of one of the ambassadors, Beverningh, inGrovestin's Histoire des luttes et rivalities politiques entre les puissances maritimeset la France i. 205.

126 PEACE WITH HOLLAND. XII. 2.A.D. 1653formerly rejected. She was obliged to acknowledge the supremacyof the English flag in the British seas. It was thefirst time that this had been done, and the greatest importancewas attached to it at the time'. She was further compelledto consent to the Navigation Act ; other conditionsshe rejected, and she even succeeded in obtaining some fewproposed by herself. The chief of these was the inclusionof Denmark in the peace, since it had been one of the mainprovisions of the last treaty with this power that neithershould make peace with England without including the other.This was exceedingly difficult to carry: once it seemed asif everything must be broken off on account of it. The Neth-erlandenvoys were already on their way .home : at ~rav;senda despatch from Cromwell overtook them, offering termswhich they could accept.For the Protector too was interested in an agreement. Hehad stated a condition necessary to it, which he on his sideadhered to with unshaken consistency. He maintained thatthe English government could not rely on peace with theUnited Netherlands, so long as a house most intimately alliedwith that of the Stuarts continued to administer there the importantaffairs of peace and war. In the same way that hehad once in Scotland insisted on the exclusion of Hamilton'sfriends, he now demanded in the Netherlands the exclusionof the house of Orange and its adherents. For from no otherhouse in the world had the English Commonwealth suffered somuch opposition and injury as from the house of Orange.In the person of William 11's son he dreaded the grandsonof Charles I.It was impossible to propose this condition in the firstinstance to the States-General ; they would assuredly haverejected it ; but even in the republic of the Netherlands Cromwellmet with an interest similar to his own. The UnitedProvinces had been thrown into the most lively state offerment by the popular manifestations in favour of the youngPrince, who was still a child. The Province of Holland inIn Penn's Memorials, Appendix G, it is stated that the later stipulations ofthis sort (in 1662, 1667) were merely repetitions of this original one of 16j3.XII. 2. PEACE WITH HOLLAND. 127A.D. 1653.particular had taken the opposite side. It was with thispowerful Province and its leader, the real holder of power,John de Witt, that Cromwell made common cause, as hehad done in Scotland with Argyle and his party. It is notour business to inquire here whether or not there is any truthin the charge that the Dutch oligarchy supported Cromwellhimself in his demand : it is enough that on this point theirinterests completely coincided with his. The Estates of theProvince first of all passed the Act of Seclusion, by whichthey bound themselves not to elect the Prince of Orangeeither to the office of admiral or to that of Stadtholder ofthe Province, and as far as lay in their power to prevent hisbeing elected captain-general of the forces of the States-General. To secure the consent of the Estates of Holland,the votes of which were decisive in the States-General, wasequivalent to securing that of the.Republic.. Cromlvell refusedto ratify the peace till the act was handed over to him I. Hepledged his powerful word to this, so that no other estateventured to oppose it.It is easy to see how little this agreement possessed of thecharacter of an ordinary treaty of peace. It involved alsothe alliance of the Protector with the leading men of thcneighbouring republic for the advancement of an importantcommon interest, which was at once hostile to the Stuartsand to the house of Orange.At the same time that the Seclusion Act was passed inHolland, the negotiations at Upsala were brought to aconclusion.The Queen conceived the singular idea of making theobservance of the concessions promised on her retirementfrom Sweden a condition of the treaty with Cromwell. Thisneither Ulfeld nor Whitelocke considered advisable. Nor sinccthe peace with Holland could the execution of their projectsagainst Denmark be any longer thought of; but the destinedOn this is based the main charge against the conduct of De Witt and his pa: tyin the matter. In a subsequent letter of Clarendon's to Downing we find that' when the order of the States was sent to withhold the Act of Seclusion, it was sentall in cipher to Youngstall, and whilst he was deciphering, Beveringue, by advise ofDe Witt, delivered it to Cromwell. This we can prove.' In Lister iii. 172.

I 28 PEACE WITH HOLLAND. XII. a.A.D. 1654.heir to the throne, Prince Charles Gustavus, unreservedly gavein his adhesion to the friendly relations which had been seton foot. He visited Whitelocke in his house ; their conversationtreated of the progress of Catholicism, and the necessityof a union of all Protestants to oppose it.Without further difficulty a treaty was also concludedwith Denmark, which in the matter of the tolls secured tothe English the same privileges that the Dutch enjoyed.In short, Cromwell in the summer of 1654 had brokenthrough the circle that seemed to enclose England, andalready the two great powers were eagerly competing forhis favour. 'The French,' wrote Thurloe in March, 'areanxious to conclude a treaty with his Highness, and makeliberal offers. The Spaniards hope to win him over to theirside and to form an alliance with him; in reality, they arethe more trustworthy friends of the two.' This importantquestion was still undecided, when Cromwell, in order nextto establish the existing order of things at home, summoneda Parliament.CHAPTER 111.ON several occasions during the negotiations with foreignpowers, for example with Sweden, the question had beenraised by what title Cromwell held his authority. TheQueen simply imagined that Cromwell would shortly setthe crown upon his head; finally to renounce it in his positionwould require more than human forbearance. TheChancellor Oxenstiern went deeper into the question : hedisliked the mode of Cromwell's elevation to the Protectorate,since it was more or less an election by the power of thesword and of a political faction. That in the new constitutionwhich most pleased him was the security it gave forthe maintenance of the existing laws; ' one thing however,'he added, 'is still wanting to the Protector; he must casehimself in steel on back and breast.' 'What means myfather ?' asked Whitelocke of the old man, in thc familiarlyrespectful tone usual in conversation in those days. ' I mean,'he replied, 'the confirmation of the Protectorate by Parliament; that will be his best support. From whom comesthe power which he exercises? who binds over the peopleto obey him ? 'These words in fact touched the real point at issue in thewhole matter. Cromwell possessed absolute power. He pronouncedthe old declarations of allegiance to a republicanconstitution to be no longer binding, and declared on thecontrary that it was a state offence to question the lawfulnessof his government. In conjunction with his Council ofState, which adopted parliamentary forms, he issued directionsfor the continued payment of the taxes necessary toRANKE, VOL. 111.K

130 THR PARLIAMENT OF 1654. x~r. 3.A.D. 165~.support the army. But this could not last long. The Instrumentof Government required besides the convocationof a Parliament, and it was necessary to endeavour tochange the present provisional arrangement into one definitelyfinal. On the 1st of June ~romweli, in his capacity asLord Protector, issued the writs for the elections, with theadditional caution that none of those elected should havethe right to alter the existing form of government as vestedin one person and the Parliament. In other respects theelections were conducted according to the redistributiondetermined upon in the scheme of the Long Parliament.The census then proposed for the voters, and the qualificationswhich excluded the Royalists, were retained. Of the400 members, 250 belonged to the counties ; the rest to thetowns and corporate bodies. Representatives were also summonedfrom Scotland and Ireland, and the governmentexercised a very marked influence upon the elections. Butgovernments do not always gain their objects by suchmeans.On the 3rd of September, 1654, Parliament was opened.Cromwell greeted them as such an assembly as Englandhad never yet seen, on whose shoulders rested the welfareof three great nations, nay the welfare of the whole Christianworld. After a reproachful reference to the last Parliament,he expressed the hope that the new House would put thefinishing stone on the rising fabric. Not by a single worddid he express a doubt whether it could separate its owninterests from his.And yet such a separation occurred at the very outset.The proposal which Cromwell's adherents introduced, thatParliament must first of all give its sanction to the governmentin its present form, found little support. Objection wasat once taken to the term 'sanction,' on the ground that theform of government ought rather to be in the first instancedetermined by the House. When this question was discussed,a deep-seated opposition to the views of the Protector's partisanswas revealed. Not that there was any wish to abolishthe Protectorate, or the rule of a single person ; but a formulawas suggested which deprived it of its independence. 'TheXII. 3. THE PARLIAMENT OF 1654. 1.31A.D. 1654.government,' so it ran, 'shall be vested in the Parliament ofthe people of England, and in a single person furnished withinstructions by it.' The inference was avowedly drawn fromthis, that the highest power rested with the people, andshould be exercised by the Parliament as representing thepeople ; that the Protectorate therefore must be subordinateto Parliament: two coordinate powers would be perpetuallyat feud yith each other. In this had lain the abuse of theold regime; but this the nation had now rejected : as it hadonce before exercised its own rightful authority through themedium of Parliament, so it must be for the future. Whenmembers were reminded that the election which had beenconducted in obedience to the Protector's summons was avirtual recognition of his power, they replied, that sucha restriction could not bind them, because the people committedthe supreme authority to its representatives unconditionally.They were prepared, as a proof of their devotion,to leave the executive authority to the Protector under certainrestrictions ; the legislative authority, which necessarily embracedmilitary and religious matters, they claimed for themselves.It was a conflict of principles of the greatest significance,and one which reopened the old differences thathad led to the dissolution of the Long Parliament.Cromwell was anxious not to allow the evil to take root.On the 12th of September he interrupted the debate whichwas already growing warmer, and convoked the assembly ina different place, where he laid before the members his ownviews in answer to theirs. Every government, he said, assumescertain fundamental principles, while others may be moreincidental; in the present case, the principle on which alldepended was that the government consists of a single personand the Parliament. He held his power by a title valid inthe sight of God and men : he demanded that this shouldbe recognised. As further fundamental axioms he laid downthat Parliament ought not to make itself perpetual ; that itshould not have the absolute control of the military forces, forwhat could then resist it ? Lastly, he named liberty of conscience.He also asserted the necessity of the Council ofState, which conducted the affairs of the CommonwealthK 2

132 THE PA RLIAfVEiVT OF I 654. XII. 2.A.D. 1654.when Parliament was not sitting. A mode of governmentwhich like this had been acknowledged of God, sanctioned bymen, and was beneficial to the people, he could not allowto be set aside. He would sooner be laid in his grave andburied with infamy1.On the table lay a declaration not merely of a simplerecognition of the existing constitution, in the terms prescribedat the elections, but also of allegiance to the LordProtector.There were still a considerable number who refused to sign ;all Republicans and Anabaptists, and with them severalofficers of the army. The address signed by three colonels, inwhich they explained their refusal, is important in so far as itconnects the questions then under discussion with the oldconstitutional controversies. There were two things particularlywhich it had been endeavoured from the outset to claimfor the Parliament as representing the people-the control ofthe militia, and the responsibility of every person, be he whohe might. The claim of the King to a divine right and toexemption from such accountability had been the source ofall his tyrannical acts. But by the new constitution theProtector, who was master of a large standing army, wasrendered more powerful than the King had ever been. Whatbecame of the right to impose taxes if they were compelledto maintain and pay a fixed number of troops? Thanks tothis army and to his position of equality with the Parliament,a Protector was rendered so formidable that it would never bepossible for the English people to summon him to account.While they promised Cromwell to support him in all lawfulundertakings they nevertheless rejected any fresh declarationof allegiance '.Most of the others subscribed the declaration because itWhether this speech has been transmitted word for word is certainly doubtful.The short extract which the French envoy sent to his court contains passageswhich are wanting in the full account, 'The last speech of his IIighness,' and inthe printed copy of the day. These latter also differ in many points.2 I have no hesitation in ascribing to the year 1654 the undated fragment 'Thehumble address of several colonels of the army' given in Thulloe and Rymerii. a 53, because of the refusal of the oath contained in it.XII. 3. THE PARLIAMENT OF 1654. '33A.D. 1654.agreed with the condition laid down in the election-writs, andbecause they shrank from plunging the country into freshconfusion, But even these had no thoughts of accepting thewhole Instrument of Government as it stood ; they insistedon testing each article in it. Far from allowing themselvesto be restricted to actual legislation, they on the contraryasserted a claim to form a constituent assembly limitedonly by the conditions already laid down and accepted.It is well worth our while to put before ourselves thearguments with which Cromwell's partisans, who were termed'the court-party,' and their Parliamentary opponents foughtone another l.The former narrated how the most zealous of these very opponents,in the days when the army first refused to allow itselfto be disbanded, and interposed in the Parliamentary strife,had acknowleged its divine mission. To this was traceableall that had since happened ; why then reject now what wasthen admitted? To the general moreover of this army belongedin consequence an original authority independent ofthe Parliament. The nation had acknowledged the newgovernment, first by paying the taxes it had imposed withoutfurther sanction, next by submitting to the judgeswhich the government appointed ; and lastly by the electionswhich had been conducted in obedience to the writs issuedby the Protector, and under the restrictions imposed byhim.But their opponents in turn produced arguments whichwere not without their force. They began with the assumptionthat the struggle with the King had been undertaken inorder to restore the rkghts and liberties of the people. Thearmy could not exclusively claim the glory of having securedthese. Many others had rendered services no less important,and merited therefore equal privileges. If Cromwell wishednot to recognise this he should have reserved the power tohimself and proclaimed the English to be his serfs. A Parlia-Goddard, Report of the debates in the Parliament of 1654, for which Igenerally follow the Introduction to Burton's Diary, vol. i.

I34 THE PARLIAMENT OF 1654. XII. 3.A.D. 165~.ment existing only by his favour, a Parliament dependent asit were on charity-this they would not consent to be.In so far as Cromwell took his stand upon the absoluteand divine right of his military power, to which fortunehad given authority, his position was in some respectsanalogous to that of a legitimate monarch. So long as themembers, reluctantly it is true, acknowledged this position,and merely wished to uphold on their side the rights inherentin a Parliament, the controversy between them, though wagedon revolutionary ground, resembled tolerably closely theconstitutional proceedings of other times. Under this aspectthe discussion of the various articles connects itself wit11considerations of more than temporary importance. Theruling power had drawn up these articles according to itsown wishes; it was the object of Parliament to impose suchlimitations upon them as agreed with its own ideas.They began with limiting first the right to confer dignitiesand honours accorded to the Protector by the Instrument ofGovernment, by deciding that these should not be hereditary;and secondly they narrowed his right of pardon by exceptingthe crimes of murder and treason.All acts and ordinances issued as binding by the Protectorand his Council of State, and also several laws passed by theLittle Parliament, the legality of which they refused to recognise,such for instance as the law respecting civil marriage,were again dragged before their tribunal.The Council of State had never, owing to Crom\vell'sovenvhelming personal influence, obtained active importanceas an institution. The Parliament paid but little regard toit: of the right of co-optation, which had been part of theoriginal scheme, no more was said. The resolution waspassed that the Council of State should be nominated by theProtector and approved by Parliament. Many indeed wishedto reverse the order and to have instead nomination byParliament and approval by the Protector. The questionwas long debated, and it was not without difficulty that thefirst-mentioned arrangement was carried.To leave the right of making nrar and peace in the hand?of the Protector and his Council, as the Instrument directed.xrr. 3. THE PARLIAICIENT OF 1654. r35A.D. 1654.appeared to the Parliament especially unsatisfactory ; for inthis right was involved the power of raising levies, enforcingpayments of money, and proclaiming martial law. But it wasabove all the care for personal liberty and security that wasthe peculiar duty of a Parliament. In opposition to thisconstitutional right no weight was attached to the objectionthat the necessity of summoning a Parliament, and the tediouslength of its deliberations, might easily cause the right momentto be lost for beginning a war. It was resolved that no warshould be undertaken without the consent of Parliament.They were more ready to allow the right of concluding peace,if Parliament were not sitting at the time, to rest with theProtector and his Council.Long and warm was the discussion on the determination ofthe cases, in which the Protector should have the right ofveto upon decrees of Parliament. There were four cases, asfollows :-an alteration of the form of government, a prolongationof the parliamentary sessions beyond six months,the control of the army, and religious liberty. With regardto those points which Cromwell in his second speech ,haddeclared to be fundamental, it was conceded that at least nochange should be made without his consent. But in decidingon these cases, especially upon the two last-named, they deviatedwidely from the provisions laid down in the Instrument.This had abolished the penalties directed against the Protestantsects which dissented from the established worship,but Parliament contemplated renewing them. It was theold Presbyterian spirit of exclusive orthodoxy recognised bythe state that again predominated in the present House. Thenext step was to enumerate those forms of heresy which itwas impossible to tolerate. Against one of these, which partookof Socinianism, repressive measures were at once to betaken. Nor did Parliament unconditionally confirm the militaryauthority enjoyed by the Protector. It drew a distinctionbetween the local militia and the regular army. As to theformer, it enacted that it could not be called out without anact of Parliament, or, to use the exact words, of the peopleassembled in Parliament-a proposal nearly identical withthat which Cromwell had once brought forward in opposition

136 THE PARLIAMENT OF 1654. XII. ,q.A.D. 1654.to monarchical government. The strength of the regular army,the dangers of which were much talked of, and also theestimated cost of its support, were seriously reduced. TheProtector's partisans, though a special conference had beenheld with him, had been already so thoroughly disgusted bythe discussion that they declarcd they could no longer takepart in the assembly.The Parliament however proceeded to still more extrememeasures. The privileges which were at any rate granted to theexisting Protector, whose merits were great, and whose characterwas known, were yet not to hold good for his successors.It reserved to itself the right, on the death of Oliver Cromwell,of disposing of the army as it should think fit, and even ofdisbanding it. It was objected that without the army anyfuture Protector would be nothing better than a man of straw.The reply was, that so long as the army existed Parliamentwould be nothing but a helpless puppet ; according to Englishideas the chief of the state should stand not at the head ofthe army but at the head of the law.The suggestion had once been made in Parliament thatthe Protectorate should be declared hereditary in Cromwell'sfamily; but it is easy to see that the tendency of the viewsnow prevalent was unfavourable to such a measure. Cromwellhimself was opposed to it. He said that even had the continuationof the office to his heirs been offered him, he wouldhave rejected it in the words of Isaiah, 'God will restorethy judges as at the first, and thy counsellors as at thebeginning.' It was resolved in Parliament without a singledissentient voice that the office of Protector should be electiveand not hereditary. Nor could it dream of entrusting somomentous a choice to the Council of State. It reservedit exclusively to itself. For from the earliest times theelection or recognition of the princes by the people hadbeen an established rule. Thc Parliament, which was entrustedwith the exercise of the original rights of the people,could not resign this right in favour of any one else.Clearly Parliament, though it had yielded to necessity, andhad recognised the Protectorate as once established, was veryfar from sanctioning so extensive an authority as that of OliverXII. 3. THE PARIZLIA~JIELI'T OF 1654. 137A.D. 1654.Cromwell, or from wishing to continue it in his family for thefuture. The principle of the sovereignty of the people, beforewhich every other right but that of the asscmbly of representatives,disappears, could not acknowledge a power which wasnot derived from itself. Nothing could be more evident thanthat a perfectly free election would have produced a differentresult; that in short the present Parliament was the offspringof the present Protectorate ; still a union of the two was nonethe less unattainablc.The declaration which the members subscribed had admittedin general terms Cromwell's claim to a prerogativeunfettered by any extraneous legislation, a prerogative whichhe termed divine ; but the secret convictions of the memberswere opposed to it, and they contested it at every point'.Cromwell had expected that they would confirm his position,which had first made their own possible, by suitablclaws, and above all would sanction the land-tax necessary forthe support of the army. For the necessity to which he wasreduced, of imposing taxes unsanctioned by Parliament, gaveto all his acts, and even to his situation as rulcr, accordingto the views now predominant in England, a savour ofusurpation. But such a course was never once suggested. Inthe stead of laws confirming his authority, formal acts werepassed against him which ran counter to his Instrument ofGovernment in most of their provisions ; and which, thoughthey only restricted his own personal power, placcd the Protectoratefor the future in subordination to Parliament. Andrnoreovcr thc stipulation was almost imperatively added, thatnone of the articles now pa~sed should be valid unless themeasure were accepted as a wholc.It was a conflict of theory with theory, system with system,but also of force with force. Cromwell believed that theywished to restrict him, to entangle him in contradictions, tomake his position impossible. The consciousness of the absolutepower which was actually his, and which he now saw' Treatise by Ilobart 16j8: 'They were so careful not to pass any act, until1 theliberty of the nation were first provided for, and did nothing: in all their sittingwhe~eby they inight seelne to owne his tyranny' (MS. Tanner.)

138 THE PARLIAMENT OF 1654. xrr. 3.A.D. 1654.assailed in its most fundamental principles by an assemblyconvoked by himself, was aroused within him. He hadhitherto kept aloof from their proceedings, and was almosthurt that they had not consulted him ; for any restrictionthat was compatible with the public good he would haveapproved, but those recently enacted were not of this nature.They weakened the Protectorate to such an extent that itwould be unable to resist the encroachments of Parliament,which would be able to prolong its sittings at pleasure,and to impose upon the nation any religion it thought fit.Since no provision was made for the maintenance of thearmy, there was reason to fear that the army would a secondtime maintain itself by living at free quarters, and the nationbe thus thrown into disturbance. There is no doubt that onall sides murmurs were heard. The dissensions of theirenemies gave the Royalists courage for fresh attempts. Inthe capital itself Royalist sentiments were heard. Cromwellthought that he ought not to allow matters to go further.Parliament, which had been summoned for five months,would have had still twelve days to sit, and it was even nowproceeding with a measure which should make it impossiblefor succeeding Protectors to override the conditions imposed.But Cromwell reckoned the months which he allowed fortheir sittings by the months according to which the armyand navy received their pay. On the day when these fivemonths of eight and twenty days were completed, on the~2nd of January, 1655, he dissolved the Parliament.Like the Long Parliament first of all, and afterwards theLittle Parliament, so now that which had been convokedunder the authority of the Protectorate, and was to all appearancebound by an acknowledgment of its rights, came'into collision with the military element in the governmentwhich had monopolised all real authority. One after anotherfell before the iron hand which they refused to recognise.By Cromwell himself this result was by no means wished for.He required the sanction of a legislative power, not merely inorder to establish his footing more firmly in general, butespecially for collecting, in a mode acknowledged by the Englishto be legal, the takes necessary for the maintenance ofx~r. 3. THE PARLZdJfENT OF 1654. '39A.D. 1654.the army. This difficulty, which was pointed out to himbefore the dissolution of the Long Parliament, proved to bemore real than he had imagined. He could not evade it.In his last speech he laments the harsh necessity which compelledhim to levy taxes without Parliamentary sanction. Heexpects however that the people will pay them, just becauseit was a necessity and was done for their good.

MILITARY GOVERNMENT.CHAPTER IV.RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE.THE course which events had taken, the complete collapseof a scheme which depended on the co-operation of Parliament,and the continued rule of a power unrecognised by law,afforded in itself a fresh stimulus to all party-efforts.The Republicans found it intolerable that after twelveyears of struggle in behalf of justice and liberty, which haddeluged the country with blood, these liberties should lie atthe mercy of a usurper. If it were true, as he asserted, that heheld by divine right a power the limits of which he alonemight fix, then was England but a pensioner on his bounty :it was the duty of every true Englishman to take care thatmatters should never go so far as to allow any single man tomake himself master of the Parliament, and to secure theirancient liberty.And in a similar way the party of the so-called saints andelect of God complained of the light esteem in which the fruitof their prayers was held, the marvellous works that God hadmanifested ; the country was still to be loaded with the fettersof the Norman law. They denounced Cromwell as the manof sin, who set himself up as the temple of God, even as Godhimself.But if such was the feeling of Cromwell's old partisans,what must that of the Cavaliers have been, who held obedienceto be due to none but the hereditary prince, and consideredit a point of honour to obey no other. Incessantlythey pressed upon Charles I1 the easiness and probability ofa restoration. That on the occasion of his last expeditionthey had not more unanimously and effectively assisted him,XII. 4. MILITA XY G 0 VERN.MEATT. 141A.D. 1654.was, they said, attributable simply to his alliance with thePresbyterians, whose influence was incompatible with the oldconstitution in Church and State. The majority of thenobility and gentry adhered to the Episcopate; were theKing now to show himself as the defender of true principles,they would risk in his cause life and limb, goods andchattels.By the Act of Amnesty they had regarded themselves asbound to the Republic-when it was transformed into a monarchythey considered themselves released from all obligation.All their personal feelings revolted against doing homage toan upstart like Cromwell, as their lawful prince.The Protector was continually threatened with destructionfrom one quarter or the other.In May 1654 a conspiracy was detected of Royalist partisansof an inferior rank, Gerhard, Powell, and Fox, theobject of which was to seize the Protector, when, as was hishabit, he rode with a small escort to Hampton Court, and atthe same moment, by means of armed bands, to raise a disturbancein the city and the suburbs. The plot was connectedwith a rising which occurred at the same time in Scotland.The Highlands, the islands, and several counties had beenthrown into ferment by the arrival of the old Royalist leaderthc Earl of Middleton: considerable bodies of cavalry andinfantry were put in the field, in expectation of the arrivalof the King himself or of foreign aid. The conspira~y inEngland was intended to act in concert with the undertaking,or at least to aid it by creating a diversion. So far its detectionand suppression were important to the whole ofBritain.George Monk conquered the Highlands a secondtime and drove out Middleton. The Royalist troops now firstpassed under the name of Tories1 in Scotland, as they hadpreviously done in Ireland.In January 1655 Major-General Overton, one of the firstgenerals of the English army, a zealous republican and a friendof Milton, was arrested in Scotland, on the charge of havingformed the design of making himself master of a few fortified-' Baillie iii, 255, speaks of ' discussing of the northern Tories' in Scotland,

142 MILITARY GOVERNMENZ'.XII. 4.A.D. 1655.places, and then pressing forward into England and overthrowingthe government. It is certain that his plan includedalso the assassination of Cromwell, Lambert, and a numberof other important personages '.These disturbances in the army, and the growing discontentwhich the dissolution of Parliament excited among the Republicans,encouraged the Royalists and Cavaliers to reneweddemonstrations.We are reminded of the attempt of the French nobilityupon Amboise, when we read that on March I 2, 1655, about200 Cavaliers appeared in Salisbury, where the assizes wereto be held, seized the principal men, threw open the prisonswhere their friends and adherents were pining, and proclaimedCharles I1 King. Their leaders were Wagst9ff andPenruddock : the latter was fortunately a sensible man, whochecked a wild outbreak of party spirit, in which it wasproposed to put to death the judges who had fallen into theirhands, when they halted triumphantly in the market-place.But after the first moment of success it became clear thatthey could effect nothing. Several of the more importantpersons in the neighbourhood, on whose assistance they hadespecially calculated, had been put under arrest by the everwatchfulCromwell. As the Cavaliers rode off to seize anotherplace they were met and dispersed by a handful of Cromwelliantroopers. Every attempt in the North no less than inthe West was suppressed at the very outset. Charles 11, whohad actually succeeded in reaching Zealand, in order to beat hand should events take a favourable turn, returned toCologne, where he was residing at the time. He was forcedto content himself with the royal honours with which theGerman princes received him if he entered their territorieson a journey. At Konigstein near Frankfurt he met Christinaof Sweden, who had resigned her crown and all her designs,in order to live in quiet. With Charles the case was reversed-hewas striving with every energy to regain his lostcrown.Cp. the later reports of the Judge Advocate, who was employed to search thePapers. Burton's Diary iv. 156.XII. 4. MILITARY GO VERNMENT.A.D. 1655.I43As the Guises had formerly done in the affair at Amboise,so Cromwell now took occasion from this demonstration atSalisbury to let those who had dared to rise in rebellionagainst his authority feel its full weight for the first time.Not merely were those captured obliged to expiate theiroffence with their lives-Penruddock, who had rescued thejudges at Salisbury, among the rest-but whole troops ofhumbler people were sent to the West Indies, and forced tolabour as slaves, like the negroes in the sugar plantations ofBarbadoes, but especially it was considered essential tosecure the government against similar attempts in the future:with this object England was divided into thirteen militarydistricts, placed under the command of officers who eitherhad at the time or received the rank of major-general, andwere invested with a combined military and police authorityunknown before in England. They were especially chargedwith the execution of two measures which were in the highestdegree unpopular. One was the imposition upon the Royalistsof an extraordinary tax, the tenth of their incomes, the otherthe application of the additional revenue to the organisationof a new provincial militia.Against the first of these measures it was urged that it wasunjust to punish by a special penalty persons against whomno offence could be proved. The acts with which the Royalistswere charged had been committed either before their reconciliationwith the Republic and the passing of the Act ofAmnesty, or afterwards. If before, they had been alreadyatoned for ; if afterwards, they deserved a fair trial I. But couldtheir evil intentions be proved? At the outset the Presbyterianshad approved of the punishment of their old opponents; subsequently however, remembering that a similar fatemight overtake themselves, they remonstrated vigorouslyagainst it.Still more energetic if possible were the protests excitedby the organisation of the militia under the major-generals,The report of the Swedish Ambassador, in Puffendorf, Carolus Gustavus ii. 89(1655): Cum jam odium imperii regii exolevisset, populo in factionem Stuarticamet Cromwellianam diviso, duris modis iste in officio continendus erat ;-plus quamdecem millia e primoribus populi in cnstodiam data erant.'

144 MILITARY GO VERNMENT.XII. 4.A.D. 1655.who conducted the enlistment with a somewhat arbitrary disregardfor the established practice: but, as was natural, itwas precisely on this measure that the Protector mainly relied.It had been the wish of the late Parliament to render themilitia independent of him, and on the ground of the people'srights to place it under the immediate control of Parliament.It had then been pointed out how important an addition itwould form to the power of those in whose hands it should be.Cromwell took it absolutely into his own. All opponents weredisarmed. The militia formed a species of national guardwhich the Protector established in his own interest, andplaced under the command of his most devoted officers.It was to procure the necessary means of support for thisnew institution that he imposed upon the Cavaliers the taxof a tenth. It is asserted that no one was included under thiswho had not openly avowed by word or deed his hostilityto the Republic. Cromwell made no secret of the fact thathe regarded them collectively and individually as dangerous.In his eyes they were a society by whose innate bias theindividual members were irresistibly swept along. Thechildren drank in the poison from their parents.But it is plain that from this time his position necessarilyrested on simple force. Ah official record was kept ofsuspected persons and of their conduct. Each man washeld responsible for his servants : only the inns required forthe entertainment of travellers were permitted. The tavernsto which the country people resorted were almost all suppressed.The laws against drunkenness, swearing and cursing,were renewed on political as well as religious grounds, andthe justices of the peace were instructed to enforce them.Not only horse-racing and cock-fighting, but theatrical representationsand farces were prohibited '. Throughout thecountry a state of siege was virtually proclaimed, and thusthe local forces in every county and district were all organisedunder a central authority.-Instructions given to Cromwell's Major-Generals, No. 4-6. An attempt wassubsequently made to replace them by exhibiting 'repraesentatione moralesvirtutum et vitiorum item rituum variarum gentium ;' and by music of a graveand serious kind. (Correspondence of the Brandenburg envoy Schlezer, 1656.)XII. 4.RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE.A.D. 1655. 145Every two miles troops were posted : the roads between wereincessantly watched by patrols. The guards in the capitalwere doubled, especially in the neighbourhood of Whitehall.Day and night the soldiers were actively employed.In the army itself the strictest discipline was observed.Not only did they not dare to commit any act of violence,for such acts never went unpunished ; more than this, nounseemly word was ever heard. Cursing and swearing werepenal offences. Outrageous cases of blasphemy were punishedby death. But what chiefly insured this discipline was thefact that the men were well paid : an Italian tells us thata private in England drew a larger salary than a captain inItaly. They were welcome guests in the villages and towns,because they were good customers and preserved order l.It was during this period that standing armies were establishedin the continental states, in all cases in the serviceof the lawful rulers, but with far inferior discipline as well aswith far inferior power to that in England. Here it hadformerly been a matter of surprise to foreigners that the Kinglived unguarded by arms and troops among a population byno means either accustomed or inclined to an unconditionalobedience : but now it was the military exterior which thestate and the realm displayed that first caught the eye. Thestanding army in England amounted perhaps to 50,000 men.The extraordinary burdens which the country was forced tobear served mainly for its support. The people paid thetaxes because they enjoyed peace and order, because thetaxes themselves were strictly applied to the object for whichthey were contributed-not in a single particular could therebe any complaint of waste and personal extravagance. TheLord Protector held indeed a sort of court, but his expenditurewas extremely moderate. The generals and officerswere forced to practise that discipline and orderliness whichthey enjoined upon their men.From a paper in the Dresden Archives, 'An account of the present governmentin England' 1655. ' The soldiers spend their money among the natives of thetowns and villages, where they have their quarters, without occasioning the leastinconvenience, hence it happens that everywhere the people welcome them withopen hands, and call them protectors, liberators, good pleasant guests '.RANKE, VOL. 111.L

146 MILITARY GO VERNMENT. XII. 4.A.D. 1655.Such are the distinctive features of this CromwellianCommonwealth. It was a government of soldiers; for theGeneral had obtained the supreme power merely as the commanderof the victorious army. On the other hand, thisarmy was held tightly in check by his military authority.He never allowed himself to commit an act of violenceexcept as a means to the end he had immediately in view.But within these limits he paid no further regard either torank or to legal obstacles. We find men of the highest rankconveyed without resistance, and under a slight guard only,to their appointed place of custody. How persistent hadbeen the resistance offered in the case of Charles I to thisright of imprisonment ! We remember what efforts wererequired to force him to concede that on every warrant thereasons for it should also be stated. Cromwell's warrantswere not countersigned, nor was any reason given ; theywere everywhere absolutely obeyed.But if we inquire whether it was simply the unsurpassedgood conduct of this military power, and the strictness ofthe supervision it exercised, that secured the obedienceof the country, we are forced to admit that it was not so.I will not repeat the commonplace that it was the successof Cromwell's foreign enterprises, of which we shall shortlyspeak, that kept alive in the nation a feeling favourable to hisauthority. This was not so much the case as is generallybelieved. The obedience which Cromwell met with restedalso upon a want universally felt in society. We havealready noticed that all those supported him who expected ageneral overthrow of the laws and of the social system, in theevent of his death. The Presbyterians especially were indebtedto him in this respect. Had the designs of the lastassembly been carried out, their ecclesiastical system mustirretrievably have perished. The establishment of the Protectoratehad been their salvation : since then too they hadbeen well treated. In the commission which regulatedecclesiastical matters several Presbyterians enjoyed a seatand a vote. The influence of the Protector upon the clergyhad been decidedly beneficial.But even among the Presbyterians there were some whoseXII. 4. XELIGIO US TOLERANCE.'47A.D. 1655.advice it was to venture on the extremest measures ratherthan submit to a usurped authority resting, as Cromwell'sdid, solely on force. The majority however, even among theministers, took a different view. They adhered steadily tothe position that the King was their only lawful ruler, andwould have refused to take the oath of allegiance to theusurper: but they did not consider it to be their duty, inorder to overthrow the latter, and reinstate their rightfulmonarch, to cause a general disturbance and go the lengthof open revolt. On the contrary, they believed that sucha course would be prejudicial to the public good, which isafter all the ultimate aim in the conduct of politics. For theprobable result would be that the Protector would yield tothe counsels of a destructive party. He would demolish theuniversities, destroy the churches, alienate the church lands,and either sell the tithes or distribute them among individuals,so that they would be irrecoverably lost; he would abolishthe ministers of the Church. Moreover they would thusinflict a serious loss upon the King, for they would raze to theground a house which belonged to him, and-assist in destroyingthe community, the head of which he was destined oncemore to be. Without violating the allegiance they owed tohim, it was possible for them to acquiesce in the existinggovernment, and accept justice at its hands, in accordancewith the new laws 1. And in fact this was all that Cromwelldesired and needed : it was of inestimable importance to himnot to have the Presbyterians for his enemies : for they werestill powerful in the middle classes, and with them it restedwhich side the city of London favoured.We occasionally find foreign ambassadors writing wordhome that Cromwell himself had turned Presbyterian. Inmatters of doctrine there was no difference, ,but in all thataffected the constitution he was far from admitting theirexclusive claims.In the pamphlets published in defence of Cromwell'sgovernment, the doctrine was laid down that for the happinessof a people it mattered little what form of govern-Baxter, Life p. 71.L 2

148 MILITARY GO VERNMENT. XII. 4.A.D. 1655.ment it had, but that all depended on 'the justice andrighteousness of those that govern1.' It was maintainedthat the present government was the best that could befound for the nation. Should the Royalists succeed to power,they would in turn put upon their opponents the pressureunder which they themselves had groaned. They wouldseize and sequester their estates. Were the Presbyteriansonce in power they would in their old fashion imprison orotherwise persecute the adherents of other and dissentientreligious views. Whatever there might be to regret or tocensure in the present government, the answer was alwaysready-'we have not to complain of religious persecution,we enjoy liberty of conscience.'When dissolving the last Parliament Cromwell had himselflaid the greatest stress on this point. There was nothingwith which he more bitterly reproached it than with havingwished to interfere with the conscience of its brethren, andto oppress it. In Cromwell's eyes the principal and themost justifiable ground of the whole struggle with the Kingwas the desire to shake off the unjust authority of the bishops,which had driven so many to seek a refuge in foreign landsor in the wilds of North America, and the attainment of thisend he regarded as its noblest fruit. He pronounced it tobe a crime to seek liberty for oneself and then to refuse itto others.We should not however be correct in inferring from thisthat the religious liberty which he granted was universal andabsolute.In the first place no attempt was made to solve the olddifficulty of reconciling the just claims of the Catholics withthe authority of the state. It is true that with the fall of theepiscopacy the penal statutes, compelling them to attend theepiscopal churches, had also fallen to the ground; hut theCatholic ritual was still prohibited. The Venetian ambassador,Sagredo, tells us, that owing to the increasing rush ofRichardson, Apologie for the present Government: $The happiness of apeople lieth not in the having this or that government, but in the justice andrighteousness of those that governe, in the faithful and righteous dispensing ofthe same.'XII. 4. RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE: I49A.D. 1655.Catholics to his chapel; it was proposed to oblige him toexclude all English subjects from the service held in his house.Cromwell rejected the proposal, because it would have alsooffended other ambassadors. Any one who wished mightenter, but when mass was over, the English as they left thechapel were seized by guards posted at the street corners, andobliged to ransom themselves by payment of a fine. A greatsensation was caused by so unexpected a severity as theexecution of a Catholic priest during Cromwell's rule. It waspart of the Protector's policy to vindicate for his administrationan exclusively Protestant character.Again, under his government the use of the Episcopalianritual in a form altered so as to resemble the Presbyterian,and in some places with the retention of the Prayer-book, wastolerated; but after the attempt at revolt in 1655, which wasin the main the work of Episcopalians, this concession wasrecalled. In November of the same year a proclamationappeared prohibiting the ministers of that Church fromappearing in the pulpit or teaching in a school. The nextChristmas seemed like the burial day of the English Episcopalianliturgy. How bitterly did its adherents complain thatthe sacraments could no longer be administered according toEnglish rites, except in rooms and conventicles l, and thatwhile the parish churches were occupied by the sectaries,sermons from Anglican clergymen were only to be heard inthis or that private house. But they noticed at the sametime that never had the zeal of the faithful been so fervent.In order to maintain satisfactory relations with the Presbyterians,in Scotland especially, it was essential that thelatter should relinquish those institutions through which theirinfluence over the State was exerted. How was it possiblethat the Scottish General Assembly, which had originated theattempt to establish a sort of Presbyterian monarchy, couldbe tolerated by those who had raised themselves to power bycrushing that very scheme? On July 20, 1653, the Assemblyhad once more met as usual in Edinburgh, and the Moderatorhad offercd his prayer, when a lieutenant-colonel of the army,1 'So sharp was the persecution.' Evelyn, Diary i. 316.

150 MIL ZTA RY GO VERlVMENT. XII. 4.A.D. 1655.who had appeared outside the Assembly Hall with a fewcompanies of cavalry and infantry, demanded admission, andasked the Assembly under whose authority they met there,that of the English Republic, the English army, or the Englishjudges. The Moderator replied, that their authority camefrom God and from the laws of the land, which were still infull force. The lieutenant-colonel rejoined, that his orderswere to dissolve them : guarded by soldiers, and amid acrowd of astonished and disheartened inhabitants, whose fearskept them quiet, they were forced to leave the city. A distancewas marked outside the town within which they werenot to come. They were warned that any fresh attempt toassemble in larger numbers than three at a time would bepunished as a breach of the public peace. On the otherhand Church sessions and synods were allowed. Cromwellsided with the Protesters against the Resolutioners, hardlyfrom any preference for their doctrines, but because the latterupheld the State Church, which was hostile to himself.Cromwell found it no easy task to hold in check thoseProtestant sects, to which his own rise to power was due.Most of the Independent congregations had gone over tothe Anabaptists ; both avowed principles which were noteasily reconcileable with civic obedience l. One of these was,that man must do nothing contrary to conscience and to theinner light vouchsafed him, but must also hold back fromnothing which this internal monitor urges him to do. Allthat was not faith they pronounced to be sinful. TheEnthusiasts were divided into Calvinists and Arminians. Atthe head of the former stood that Hake who has been alreadymentioned. In his sermons he denounced not only unlawfulbut lawful magistrates. God would destroy them all in Franceand Spain as much as in England, where the good work wasalready begun : in Holland too the same fate awaited theArminian aristocracy. Hake declared that monarchy andaristocracy were equally displeasing to God. Cromwell consideredhimself justified in placing Hake himself and some ofhis leading disciples in custody.Iviney, History of the English Baptists ii. 169.XII. 4. RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE. 1.51A.D. 1655.It is at this time that we first meet with the Quakers, whoto many other principles of the Anabaptists and Agitatorsunited a theory peculiarly their own, that of the inner reve-lation, to which they subordinated the written word. Theybelieved that in order to realise their ideas there would beno further need of Acts of Parliament and laws, but, nowthat the victorious army had crushed the tyranny of theold ecclesiastical institutions, they on their side were toenjoy full liberty I.The impetuous zeal with which they preached their doc-. -trines, and the personal influence which some of them acquiredover the masses, excited anxiety in the Parliament of 1654lest they should be planning a general convulsion and bloodshed,an anxiety which was also very seriously expressed inScotland, and which Cromwell himself seems to have shared.When the patriarch of the Quakers, George Fox, whomsheriffs and assizes were at a loss how to treat, appearedbefore him, he made him first of all sign a declaration that hewould not take up the sword against himself and his government=. But, this done, Cromwell became his friend. For thedeep-seated and genuine inwardness of his disposition andteaching was calculated to lead merely to dissent both ecclesiasticaland social, and to a strict and secluded mode of life,not to power or to a struggle for power.Such were the limits of the tolerance practised by OliverCromwell. It by no means extended to the old systems,which had formerly been supreme, that of the Roman Catholics,and that of the English Episcopalians. But neither werethe Presbyterians nor even the Independent sects, to whomhe had a secret leaning, allowed any share in the governmentof the state.Only in so far as any religious doctrine put forward noclaim to a share of political authority, and neither destroyednor disturbed that public peace, the maintenance of whichCp. Naylor's Apology. 'You have been long time under dark forms. It wasthe desire of my soul that this nation should be redeemed from such forms. Godhath done it for you.' Burton's Diary i. 47.a 'Not to take a carnal sword or weapon against him or the government, as itthen was.' Fox's Journal 126.

152 MILITARY GO VERNMENT. x11. 4.A.D. 1655.Cromwell regarded as his first duty, was it allowed to havefree scope for itself.But within these limits Cromwell seems to have sincerelywished to see a certain diversity of forms. On one occasionhe quoted in support of it the words of Isaiah, 'I will plantin the wilderness the cedar, the shittah-tree, and the myrtle,and the oil-tree; I will set in the desert the fir-tree, and thepine, and the box-tree together '-implying that the variousforms of faith were so many trees of God : yet they were allto acknowledge a supreme power above them.In a letter professedly written to the Protector himself, thedifferent formularies of faith were declared to be imitations ofthe Romish religious system, the end and aim of which wasto depose and keep in subjection the secular authorities. Itwould be far better to abolish all these varieties, and to conductthe exercises of religion in general assemblies, where thewisest should be heard. God had entrusted the magistratewith the duty of protecting the good against the wicked, andthat among men of all kinds, who must all be tolerated.The sword would never be fully respected till it was wieldedwithout any respect to one-sided doctrines, each claimingabsolute predominance '.These utterances acquire a certain significance when wefind in the titles of old copies that the letter is attributedto Cromwell's trusted chaplain, Hugh Peters. It was not somuch addressed to Cromwell as addressed by a friend ofCromwell's to the public.The fundamental idea throughout is the complete separationof the supreme state authority from the religiousinstitutions with which it had been allied for so many centuries.The toleration we have described is based alike intheory and in practice on this idea. Clearly from this pointof view it was possible to propose that some rights should beconceded to the Jews. They had proved of use to Cromwellin both political and commercial matters. He secured themadmission into the country and permission to build a synagogue.But in doing this care was nevertheless taken thatXII. 4. RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE.A.D. 1655.I53the character of a Christian state should not suffer. Noprivilege was permitted them which might lead to the desecrationof any Christian institution, such as the Sunday, andthey were never to be appointed to any public office in theCommonwealth l.For neither through its relations to Judaism nor to Catholicismought the character of a Protestant Christian Commonwealthto suffer injury.Proposals of Manasse ben Israel, in Ellis' Letters, second series, iv. 5. Paperof the divines for admitting the Jews with limitations, in Collier, Eccl. Hist. ii.869.Peter Cornelius to the Protector. In Somer's Tracts vi. 487.

CHAPTER V.RUPTURE WITHSPAIN.PROTESTANTISM was supreme at home, and abroad it wasdecisive in questions of peace and war.The leaders of the Long Parliament, who encouraged thefriendly relations with Spain, and carried on the war againstHolland with the utmost energy, had already by so doinggiven offence to the Protestant Churches. A common dangerto the Protestant creed seemed to be imminent when thetwo most powerful states which adhered to it, the two ProtestantRepublics, were plunged in war, and were weakeningeach other.Peace was as much for the interests of the Protector as forthose of England. It gratified the Protestant sympathiesof the nation. The English Presbyterians joyfully welcomedit. It was under the influence of these sentiments that theSwedish negotiations had been entered upon and the peacewith Denmark concluded.The example of Germany showed how injurious to thecommon cause of Protestantism were the feuds of the variousdenominations, and the English government in consequencegave renewed support and attention to the efforts of thegreat apostle of Protestant union, John Dury. He wasattached to the embassy which was now sent to Switzerland,and which had in view also the relations with Germany andthe learned there, especially George Calixtus at Helmstadt.The news that England had formed an alliance with Switzerlandand maintained a consul at Zurich, created a generalsensation, and in France by no means a pleasant one, sinceit was to English influence that the French now attributedxrr. 5.RUPTURE WITH SPAIN.A.D. 1654.I55the obstacles which prevented the renewal of their league withthe cantons.In pursuance of the same policy the English governmentprivately promised the adherents of the reformed faith inFrance that they would protect them1. But how this wasto be done was not stated. It was mixed up with the greatquestion that, as we have seen, was before Cromwell in thesummer of 1654, as to which of the two great powers thenengaged in a protracted struggle, France and Spain, he shouldside with.But it was impossible that religious partiality alone, howeversteadily kept in view, could control the decision. Verydifferent motives ultimately settled the question.As far back as the year 1652 the Commonwealth had intimatedto each of the two powers the price at which its assistancemight be secured. This was the possession of a fortifiedplace on the Continent. From the Spaniards they demandedCalais, which it was necessary to retake from the French :from the latter they demanded Dunkirk, which must beseparated from the Spanish Netherlands. Mazarin showedless reluctance to agree to such a proposal than did theArchduke Leopold of Austria, who then commanded in theNetherlands, and the Spaniards. They objected for two reasons: firstly, because England, if she gained possession ofCalais, would command both coasts of the Channel, and beable on some future day completely to intercept all communicationbetween Spain and the Netherlands ; secondly,because such an attempt would lead to an immediate unionof parties in France, whereas it was in their present dividedstate that their opponents' advantage chiefly lay2.In the year 1654 the position of affairs was somewhataltered, since the Spaniards, being allied with both CondC,who led their forces, and with Harcourt, who hoped to establishFrench letter from Pell, in Vaughan, The Protectorate i. 48.a 'Reduciendofe la desunion que tienen a la satisfacion de cadaun-muy probableqne por el bien comun de estado se compusiesen.' Letter of the Archduke1.eopold to Icing Philip IV, dated February G, 1652, in the archives at Brussels.The letter relating to the proposal made to France is dated February 5, so thatthey coincide in time.

156 RUPTURE WITW SPAIN. XII. 5.A.D. 1654.himself independently in Alsace, and also counting with certaintyupon the sympathy of a large party in the capital andin the southern provinces, conceived the hope of bringingabout a revolution in France by a successful attack, and ofoverthrowing Mazarin himself. It would have been of inestimablevalue to them to have secured the assistance of England.They offered Cromwell a million reals if he would make coalmoncause with them against France. They intended to launchupon the French a storm for which they were unprepared,and which they were not in a position to resist '.In the spring of 1654 an alliance between Spain and Englandwas regarded as imminent. The French were indeedafraid that Holland, now at peace with England, Swedenand Switzerland, would also join the alliance.Mazarin, while he prepared to resist with all the forces athis command the attack of Spain upon the eastern frontier, inLorraine and Artois, deemed it equally necessary to dispersethe general political storm that was gathering over France.He caused subsidies to be offered to the Protector as magnificentas those of the Spaniards; but he added to thesepromises which Spain could not hope to rival. He proposedthe joint conquest of Dunkirk. This fortress, if taken, wasto remain in the possession of the English; France wouldnot put forward the slightest claim to it; let the Protectoronce break with the Spaniards, and all the conquests whichhe might make at their expense in both the Indies shouldbe secured to him. Mazarin did indeed express a wish tosee an English squadron in the Mediterranean which shouldsupport him in any enterprise he might undertake in thatquarter. These were proposals and demands which madethe greater impression upon the Protector, from the fact thatthey reached him at the moment when insuperable obstacleshad occurred in the way of the negotiations with Spain.Cromwell demanded from the Spaniards that they shouldtreat the English as friends in South America ; and in regard1 Leopold's letter to Philip IV, March 19, 1654: 'Yo le he respondido-queconcluia aunque sea por un millon de reales a ocho al anno con que, si lanzaresobre Franceses aquella tempestad, comprariamos varado el hacerles una, que eratan en el centro y indefensible de sa parte.'XII. 5. RUPTURE WITH SPAIN. 157A.D. 1654.to the trade in Spain, that a clause should be struck outof the last treaty which made it still possible for the Inquisitionto molest English merchants. But these were proposalswhich seemed to the Spaniards little else than insults. Theexclusive trade with their colonies, and the exclusive supremacyof Catholicism, were the two main pillars on whichtheir monarchy rested. How unreasonable to require themto allow the English free trade in their colonies and to suspendthe action of the Inquisition in their favour! The ambassadorCardenas received positive orders not to concede the demands.To use his own words 'it was as if they had demandedthe two eyes of his King.'Cromwell had also another ground of quarrel with thispower. Ever intent, throughout the troubles which hadarisen between England and France, on regaining whathad been lost, by maintaining or renewing long-standingclaims, the Spaniards had several times ventured on openhostilities against the English settlements in the West Indies,which had already reached a fair degree of prosperity. Theyhad surprised and destroyed the colonies of St. Catalina andSt. Christopher, and declared that in doing so they had butrecovered what was formerly theirs. The English repliedthat these islands had never been previously cultivated, noreven regularly colonised. The Spaniards could rest theirclaim on no better ground than the original division of futureconquests between the Spaniards and Portuguese made byPope Alexander VI. But to the English, at the time, thiswas rather an additional reason for defiance than an argumentfor recognising the claim l.Cromwell, who was furnished with fresh despatches fromAmerica pointing out the military weakness of the Spanishsettlements, and urging him to an attack upon them, determinedin this as in other matters to return to the path whichhad been followed under Queen Elizabeth. It seemed asthough he were anxious to avenge the fall of Walter Raleghat once upon the Stuarts and the Spaniards, as though the' Extracts from Gage's Survey of the West Tndies, in Bryan Edwards, Historyof the British Colonies in the West Indies i. 37.

158 R UPTZYRE WITH SPAIN. XII. 5.A.D. 1654. -.mariti~~le and religious instincts of the nation were secretlyhurrying him forwards.In carrying out his resolution he exercised the prerogativeof a sovereign to the full. He was not authorised by Parliament;in the Council of State he was opposed by members 'of considerable weight. The English merchant-service, whichwas chiefly employed over the wide extent of the Spanishmonarchy, was threatened with the most serious losses themoment that Spain replied to the attack by declaring wai..But Cromwell hoped that, if only his attack was successful,he need have no fears on any side.In the commission given by Cromwell to Admiral WilliamPenn, who was to command the fleet, it was stated that whereasthe Spaniards had cruelly destroyed lawful possessions of theEnglish in America, and treated the latter as their naturalenemies, and whereas also from their reference to the giftof the Pope it could only be inferred that they meant todestroy all the English possessions in those parts, he haddetermined to attack the King of Spain and his subjectsin that quarter. He empowers the Admiral to commit everysort of hostility and aggression, either with the fleet aloneor with the aid of the troops who were to accompany him.These were placed under General Robert Venables, whoreceived more minute instructions than were given to theAdmiral. It was left to his judgment and that of the othercommanders to decide what should be their first point ofattack, whether one ot the islands or the mainland of SouthAmerica, Domingo, Juan de Porto~ico, or perhaps, after firstseizing an island, Carthagena itself. Only in any case it wasessential for him to establish a firm footing in the Spanish'West Indits.it might - be thought that Mazarin's offers, which had referenceprecisely to these points, had confirmed Cromwell inhis decision, for he thus felt himself secure in any case ofa powerful ally. But these offers had not been as yet decisivelyaccepted : on the contrary, in Penn's instructions wefind a clause in which that commander is directed to attack,capture and sink any French ships he might meet with. Forthe French, like the Spaniards, had inflicted similar injuriesXII. 5. RUPTURE WITH SPA TN. = 59A.D. 1655.on the English traders, and as yet no compensation had beenobtained l.At the same time Robert Blake with another squadronsailed for the Mediterranean. The reason for this was notthat the French wished it, nor could any one have said certainlywhether Blake might not ultimately declare againstthem. The French admiral at Brest did not venture to sailthrough the Straits while this fleet was near; Guise, who hadat the time made a fresh attempt upon Naples, retreatedon its approach. It was generally thought that Blake wouldside with the Spaniards rather than the French.Neither Blake nor Penn enjoyed Cromwell's full confidence.With the former he associated Montague, on whom he couldrely more entirely. Penn and Venables were accompaniedby Commissary Butler, who was suspected of serving asinformer against them for the Protector. But there was noreason for fearing desertion and faithlessness on the partof either. Their enterprises suited the great interests of thenation, to which the admirals were already devoted, and towhich they subordinated their political antipathies.The West Indian expedition however, which set sail inDecember 1654 and steered direct for Barbadoes, did notproduce the results expected.an April 14, 1655, the troops landed in Hispaniola, in goodheart. They hoped to take St. Domingo as easily as SirFrancis Drake had once done, and not to relinquish it so easily :they contemplated a permanent acquisition ; all plunderingwas forbidden. But the place where the best troops were disembarkedwas much too far from the town. The long marchthrough trackless forests under a burning sun, and the intoierablescarcity of water-for all the springs were dried upexhaustedthe soldiers. The Spaniards, conscious of their advantage,were ready and eager to fight. For a second timehad they won a complete victory over the English there.'Never,' wrote the English commander, 'have I seen troopsmore discouraged l.'' Instructions given unto William Penn, 4 I I. Memorials of William Penn ii. 23.a ' Never did my eyes see mel: more discouraged.' Venables to Montagut, inCarte ii. 50. journal and Correspondence of Penn ii.

I 60 R UPTUR E WITH SPAIN. XII. 5.A.D. 1655.It was only with the greatest reluctance-for they dreadedwhat would be said of it, especially in England, and theyfelt how the Spaniards would exultingly proclaim everywheresuch a success-and in obedience to what was almost a necessity,for the troops refused to advance a second time againstSan Domingo, that the leaders relinquished the attempt.After hdving, to use their own words, sought counsel of God,they punished the most signal cases of cowardice and insubordinationthat had occurred: among others an officer wasdegraded, and his sword broken over his head. They thengave the strictest orders for the future and directed theircourse to Jamaica.This attempt was not actually included in their instructions.It was an expedient adopted on their own responsibility inthe moment of perplexity, but its results belong to the hiytoryof the world. For in Jamaica they found the Spaniardsunprepared to defend either the fortress on the coast or eventheir capital: they retreated with all their goods to themountains. Of all these islands Jamaica has the climate bestsuited for strangers. It had been the practice with theSpaniards to keep there for several months the negroesimported from Africa, in order to accusto~n them to theair of the West Indies. It was of the greatest imporiancefor the English to have gained a footing here; theyfound the island far better cultivated than Hispaniola. Afterthey had recovered from their fatigues, they easily believedthat God had led them thither.But in the mother-country, as had been anticipated, thefailure of the original enterprise created the most unfavourableimpression. It was attributed to the blunders of thosein command. There was still less readiness to forgive thelatter, because they had returned home with a portion oftheir fleet, for it was thus that the extent of the disaster firstbecame fully known. Penn and Venables were thrown intothe Tower. For the first time the Protector found himselfthe victim of a calamity over which his enemies could rejoice.At the time the opinion was expressed that the true policyfor the Spaniards would have been to drive out or destroythe two thousand men who had been left behind in Jamaica.XII. j. RUPTURE WITH SPAIN. 161A.D. 1655.England would then have regarded it as the ilatural consequenceof the e~lterprise she had attempted, and haveacquiesced in it. But the Spanish government felt itselfdeeply injured. It declared that it had been groundlesslyand unjustifiably attacked, and laid an embargo on theEnglish vessels in the Spanish harbours, the recognised modeof reprisal in such cases.So thought the Spanish ministers in Madrid, but not sothose in the Netherlands. The latter considered that atleast it would have been better to have waited till freshsupplies of troops and money had been brought to theNetherlands, for what would be the position of that countrywere Cromwell to proceed to open hostilities1? He wouldintercept the communications between the Netherlands andSpain, and would make himself master of the defencelesscoasts.The Spanish government had expected to produce areaction in England, by the injurious effect which the embargowould have upon English commerce. Not only wasa heavy loss thus inflicted upon trade, but the manufacturers,who found the best market for their produce inSpain, were deeply affected by the stoppage of the usualtraffic ; and it is undeniable that a certain indignation againstthe Protector was thus excited. But it would have been fatalto him to pay any regard to this feeling. With redoubledenergy he put the political situation before them. He remindedthem that had his fleet succeeded in taking Hispaniola,Spain would never have dared to lay an embargoupon English vessels; but now that this hostile step hadbeen taken, it was impossible to give way to her. Whatthey had failed to win at the first blow might be gainedby a second. Even Caesar was not always victorious. Healso appealed to the merchants to assist him in a murevigorous prosecution of the war.In spite of.this the negotiations with Spain were continued' Archduke Leopold to Cardenas, Oct. 16, 1653 : ' Si Cromwell toma esteembargo por una rotura como es de temer v. s. puede considerar a que miserableY peligroso estado estaran reducidas estas provincias.'RANKE, VOL. 111.M

162 RUPTURE WITH SPAIN. XII. 5.A.D. 1655.for some time. Once more the old plan was revived ofregaining Calais for the English, but an insuperable obstaclewas created by the Protector's two demands relating to freetrade and the restriction of the powers of the Inquisition.The Spanish ambassador was instructed, should Cromwell,as proved to be the case, insist upon these, to ask for hispassports l.Under these circumstances it was inevitable that Mazarin'sproposals should be finally accepted by Cromwell.Cromwell drew a distinction between such Catholic powersas owed unconditional allegiance to the Pope and those whodid not. Among the latter he recognised the Frenchmonarchy, which had moreover frequently and decisivelysided with the Protestants in the great European struggles.Mazarin too had now no scruples about granting to Englishtraders the religious liberty which Spain denied them. Hedid not even reject absolutely Cromwell's intercession inbehalf of the French Huguenots. It is true he refused, asRichelieu had done, to allow such a concession to form partof a treaty, for to do so would have been to establish fartoo close ties between the numerous and energetic Protestantpopulation of France and the Protector: but he entered intoa moral obligation. He gave the Protector a solemn assurancethat the edicts of pacification granted to the ReformedChurches in France should be maintained inviolate 2.Even now men's feelings were still susceptible of a fiercereligious hatred, and at this juncture an event occurred whichstirred to its depths the whole Protestant world.In the valleys of Piedmont the Waldenses, compelled tochoose between exile and conversion to Catholicism, weregiven up by their Duke, at the instigation of a branch ofthe propaganda lately established in Turin, to be the victimsof a military eviction which led to a horrible massacre. Thecatastrophe made the deeper impression in England fromthe fact that some Irish regiments had taken part in it.1 Instnictions pour Don Alonzo de Cardenas, in Guizot ii. 549.a Qne le roi ne souffrira point, qu'il soit fait dans son royaume I leur prejudiceaucune contravention aux Qdits de pacification.' Such is unquestionably the truereading, Instructions secrbtes' in Guizot ii. 481.XI[. 5. RUPTURE WITH SPA IN.A.D. 1655. 163Cromwell called upon the whole Protestant world to remonstrate.The fate which had overtaken one was in store for all,so soon as occasion should offer. He would gladly have seenthe Protestant cantons of Switzerland compel the Duke ofSavoy by force of arms to do justice to the Waldenses. Butthey were restrained by the fear lest they themselves shouldbe invaded by their Catholic confederates. The Swiss atlast had reason to rejoice in the divided state of theirconfederacy, which prevented it from entangling itself inthe general politics of Europe.But was it not possible for Cromwell, in spite of thedistance between them, to protect his persecuted fellow-Protestants? Blake's presence in the Mediterranean with asplendid fleet had made the English name dreaded throughoutItaly. He forced the Grand-Duke of Tuscany to paya heavy fine for having once permitted Prince Rupert to sellhis prizes in the harbour of Leghorn. The Pope was obliged,it is said, to remove the treasures of the shrine of Lorettoout of the reach of these heretics. Blake had already broughtto reason the corsairs of Tunis. He appeared in a threateningattitude off Malta and off Toulon. It was not withoutgood reason that the Duke of Savoy was warned that hetoo was immediately menaced with danger from the samequarter: it is certain at any rate that Cromwell suggestedthe seizure of Nice and Villafranca. The objection was,not that it was impracticable, but that it would not servehis purpose, since he could not even then advance furtherinland I.Any permanent result could only be attained throughthe influence of France; her troops had taken part inthe evictions, and on her the ducal court entirely depended.Cromwell made the settlement of this matter a condition ofhis alliance with Mazarin. Again the Cardinal acceded tohis wishes. It was through the representations of the Frenchambassador Servien at Turin that the Waldenses were restoredto most of the places from which they had beenexpelled, and again allowed the free exercise of their religion.I Bourdeaux to Brienne, Aug. 26, 1655. In Guizot ii. 534.M 2

164 RUPTURE WITH SPAIN. x~r. 5.A.D. 1655.These terms did not, it is true, satisfy Cromwell's demands,but they rendered possible a closer alliance with France.The interests of Protestantism had thus materially contributedtowards a good understanding between Cromwelland France, and at the same time towards a rupture withSpain. When, in course of the renewed negotiations withSpain, the impossibility of a satisfactory settlement becameevident, the French ambassador was secretly informed thatthe moment had arrived for bringing the much-talked-oftreaty to a conclusion. For it did not suit the Protector totake the initiative himself, since to do so after the recentdisaster to his arms might have seemed humiliating. TheFrench ambassador lost no time in acting on the hint hehad received. At the very time that the Spanish ambassadorwas actually leaving England he concluded his treaty. Thiswas by no means that offensive alliance of which so much hasbeen said ; on the contrary, at the outset it amounted merelyto a restoration of peace and of security for trade, with thestipulation however that neither power should assist theenemies of the other, even if it should itself enter into treatywith them. But it immediately became clear for how closea relationship this treaty paved the way. Mazarin promisedthat twenty persons, specially named, and among themCharles I1 and his brothers, the nearest relations of hisown king, should no longer be permitted to reside inFrance '.From this treaty the French expected to derive a decidedadvantage. For the alliance with the Protector would beas serviceable to them in their struggle against Spain astheir support of the rising Republic in the Netherlands, andthe diversion created by Gustavus Adolphus had formerlyproved.As regards Cromwell, it is palpable that even in his attackon the Spanish colonies he had not as yet in view a warwith Spain and an alliance with France. Rather, he wishedto take advantage of their hostility to establish an inde-xu. 5. RUPTURE WITH SPAIN. 16 jA.D. 1655.pendent footing iri their midst, and to promote the maritimeand Protestant interests of England in spite of both. Hadhis conquest of Hispaniola succeeded, he would have heldSpain in check, and at once strengthened his authority athome, and made it respected by the rest of Europe. Nowhowever, when that had failed, he would have endangeredhis reputation in the world had he gone back from andrelinquished his former demands. He had no choice butto go forwards. But in that case it was also absolutelynecessary for him to have no further disagreement withFrance, and to ally himself with her. It was a step of thegreatest importance, to which neither the Stuarts nor theRepublicans had been able to make up their minds, andone which, while it gave a new form to all the politicalrelations of Europe, also powerfully reacted upon the internalcondition of England. That the Spanish governmenthad the courage to throw down the gauntlet, or perhaps wemight say to take up the gauntlet that had been throwndown, was owing to the fact that the Protectorate was farfrom securely established at home. At the very beginningcf these differences Spain had lent an ear LO the overturesof an Anabaptist, Colonel Sexby, who in the name of thtEnglish Commonwealth promised the restoration of all theconquests that Cromwell might make1. Now too she enteredinto close relations with the exiled King. Cromwell foundhimself obliged to prepare for war on all sides.As early as Sept. 20, 1655, we find a proposal for a treaty discussed betweenCount Olivarez and 'El Senor Coronel en nombre de la republics d'Inglaterrasuvo y de sus aliados y arnigos.' In the Archives at Brussels.Trait6 de paix entre le royaume de France et la rbpubiique d'Angleterre, deNov. 1655. Dumont vi. ii. 121, Art. ii.

CHAPTER VI.THE PARLIAMENT OF 1656/57. IDEA OF A CROMWELLIANMONARCHY.IT was specially with the view of enabling himself to prosecutethe war he had undertaken, that Cromwell resolved tosummon a Parliament.Already the revenues were far from meeting the currentexpenditure, which exceeded them by more than a third.The amount of debt had considerably increased since theclose of the Long Parliament : it nearly equalled the yearlyincome1. But now that war had been declared against Spainan immense outlay was necessary. Two fresh fleets had tobe equipped, and at the sole cost of England. For there hadbeen no mention of French subsidies in the last treaty, whichhad reference only to the restoration of commercial intercourse.In the spring of 1656 we find that the major-generalsmet in London, and consulted with the Council of Stateas to the best means of covering the deficit. It was proposedeither to raise by half the land-tax imposed upoilthe Cavaliers, or else, following the old practice of themonarchy, to decree a forced loan from private persons ofwealth. The first scheme the Generals regarded as im- 'practicable, from the second they expected but small results,considering the prevalent state of feeling and the decay' 'In 1654 the total income was estimated at ~z,zoo,ooo, but of this the exciserevenues, L~O,OOO, and one half of the customs were applied to paying off thedebt, so that about [1,703,050 remained. The government cost ~200,000, thenavy over Lgoo,ooo, the land army, amounting to 57,000 men, about Lr,qoo,ooo.So that in 1656 there was a deficit of ~800,ooo.' Burton lxxxviii.XII. 6. THE PARLIA&IENT OF 1656/57.'67A.D. 1656.of trade. They fell Lack upon a general tax, to be assessedaccording to property, as the only resource open to them ;a scheme which we are told that Cromwell long and obstinatelyresisted, but finally yielded to the representationsof the members 1.Cases had already occurred in which individuals hadrefused to pay the tax imposed, and the courts of justicedid not venture to punish them ; to press matters furthermight possibly have occasioned a general refusal. The Major-Generals, who knew the country, were opposed to it. On theother hand they confidently hoped, if a new election shouldbe resolved upon, to exercise a decisive influence upon it.No sooner did the rumour spread in the country of a newParliament than, as was inevitable, a11 the parliamentarianand republican ideas which had been for a time repressedagain revived. What their tendency was is nowhere moreclearly seen than in a pamphlet put forth at the time bySir Henry Vane, in which he too now starts from theprinciple of the sovereignty of the people, though only itmust be confessed in the sense in which he himself understoodit. Royalists and Cavaliers he excluded from all sharein it. He conceded such a share to those only who by theirunion had won the victory in this cause, and had recoveredwhat rightfully belonged to them. By their election, andfrom among them, a representative body was to be selectedwhich should be flesh of their flesh, bone of their bone. Hegranted that the executive authority might be entrusted toa single person or to a Council of State, provided that theyboth acknowledged the right of the sovereign representatives,and submitted themselves to the legislative authority. Thatthe army should claim a special prerogative for itself, meantin his eyes anarchy. In this way Vane hoped to put anend to the schism which had taken place among the adherentsof republican ideas. With the crisis caused by the' So we are told by Francesco Giavarino, the Venetian Secretary, June 29:' Quanto recalcitrava et s' opponera il consiglio altrettanto persistera e si mostravaimmutabile il protettore. Alla fine dopo vsrie prudentissine considerationi delconsiglio lutte volte a1 hene e preservatione di S. Altezza s' e anche essa piegataalla lor parte;-e resto rejetta in fine.'

68 THE PARLIAMENT OF 1656/57. XII. 6.A.D. 1656.impending struggle the right moment for a reunion seemedto have arrived. He sent his pamphlet to Cromwell. ButCromwell's council decided that Vane wished to alter thegovernment, and resolved to remove him to a distance. Forsome time he was confined in Carisbrook Castle in the Isleof Wight. A future was in store for the ideas which headvocated, but as matters then stood the jeading men codsideredthat they were more likely to attain their object bysuppressing than by favouring them.Many hesitated to take part in the elections, because theParliamentary constitution seemed to be no longer the formwhich God approved. On the other hand it was urged thatGod had as yet revealed no other which he would favourmore highly. The opponents too of the government heldit to be their duty to take part in the elections. Despiteall the efforts of the Generals to prevent it, many republicanssucceeded in getting elected. It seemed as if Cromwell'sposition in the face of such an assembly would be as difficultas it had ever been.But the Instrument of Government still remained in force,and contained provisions for such emergencies as the present.By the twenty-first article the Council of State had the right oftesting the elections, and that not merely with respect to theirform, but also to the observance of the necessary personalqualifications. No one could take his seat in Parliamenttill the approval of the Council had been given. And on thisoccasion the Council made the most ample use of their right.Of the members returned as elected, more than a hundredwere rejected. They complained, but a majority of the restdeclared the proceedings to be lawful. Those only whosubmitted to the existing regime were recognised as depositariesof the legislative authority.On the 17th of September, 1656, Cromwell opened thesession in a speech which bears the marks of a sudden burstof feeling. It is long, confused and discursive, but at the sametime it clearly betrays his deep sense of his position.However true it might be that the outbreak of the Spanishwar had been of use to his opponents and had rendered itnecessary to summon a Parliament, yet it gave him onexrI. 6. THE PARLTAJIENT OF r656/57. 169A.D. 1656,advantage at least, in enabling him to evoke in his o:Jn favourthe old hatred of Spain. He declared the Spaniards to bethe natural and ordained enemies of England, whom to fightwas a duty both to country and to religion. Charles 11'sgrowing intimacy with Spain was treated as one of thestrongest motives for keeping him at a distance. With greatsatisfaction Cromwell repeated an expression from thesermon they had just heard, in which it was said that theexiled King mould be the leader to conduct the Englishback into the darkness of Egypt. While urging Parliamentto be on its guard against this design, for the promotionof which an army was already collected to invade England,he reminds them of the confederates whom the enemyhoped to find in the country itself, not Royalists merely,who were as such justly burdened with the cost of the war,but also Anabaptists, whom he denounced as traitorousapostates destitute of all religion whatsoever. He touchednext upon the only question which possessed a new interest,the fears about the public freedom which had estrangedmany from him. 'They believed that were civil liberty oncesecured, the safety of religion would follow as a matter ofcourse.' Cromwell treats them as men who fail properly tounderstand the crisis ; whose indecision rendered them uselessin great emergencies. 'Could we have carried it thus far, ifwe had sat disputing in that manner? Doubting hesitatingmen, they are not fit for your work-much less such as aremerely carnal, natural : the chosen instruments of such a workare honest hearts engaged to God, strengthened by Providence,enlightened in his words. To quarrel over trivialpoints would lead us away from our glorious work. I beseechyou to do so no longer. I think every objection that arisethis not to be answered ; nor have I time for it. I say, lookup to God ; have peace among yourselves. You must knowthat this cause is mine also, for I am by the voice of thepeople the supreme magistrate. I know somewhat that mightsatisfy my conscience if 1 stood in doubt. Were I seekingany peculiar interest personal to myself, I should cursemyself, for God will curse me. I dare be bold with men,not with God.' His main argument against all failure is

170 TBE PARLIAMENT OF 1656/57. XII. 6.A.D. 1656.:hat he is defending the cause of religion, the cause of God.So penetrated is he with this conviction that lie recites thewords of the Psalm from which is taken the hymn, 'Einefeste Burg ist unser Gott.' He calls it Luther's Psalm I.It is undoubtedly true that among zealous Catholics thehope was excited that Charles I1 might in the present positionof-affairs be brought back to the bosom of their church,for in that case the Pope would collect money for him,and within six months he would again sit on the throneof England. An English priest, who not unfrequently appearsin these transactions, Father Talbot, added thatKing Charles would then marry the Infanta of Spain ; thelady who subsequently made over her hereditary right toFrance.Rut there is no evidence that Charles I1 acceded to suchproposals : he knew too well that they would prove fatal tohim ; but possibilities which the situation admits of are easilymistaken for realities. The dread of their Catholic tendencies,always so ruinous to the Stuarts, revived directly Charles I1was observed to be on good terms with Spain, and againshowed itself to be influential. Cromwell identified his personalposition with the cause of religion and of the country.Parliament supported him in doing so.Once more were the claims of Charles I and his family tothe throne of England formally declared void, and at thesame time the titles borne by his sons annulled. On theother hand a bill was approved for the personal safety of hisHighness - the Lord Protector, which was at the same timetermed a bill for the maintenance of peace and the safety ofthe nation. The declaration was unanimously adopted thatthe war against Spain was necessary and just, and undertakenfor the good of the nation 5 The Parliament resolvedformally to support his Highness in prosecuting it.In the meantime the war with Spain had begun in theThe text of this speech must be read in Carlyle, who has been at great painsto make it intelligible.a For the good of the people of this commonwealth.' The expression howeverexcited some surprise, as Giavarino says '(il Parlamento) gli da titolo di nationale aqnesta guerra, stante la protectione che porge (la Spagna a1 re Carlo) '.XII. 6. THI? PARLIAMENT OF 1656 57. 171A.D. 1656.European waters as well. Cromwell had left Blake and Montague,who had at length received a formal declaration againstSpain, to decide for themselves whether they would attackGibraltar or Cadiz. They had steered for Cadiz Bay, but hadfound it impracticable to attack either the Spanish fleet whichlay in the harbour or the town itself. Despairing of any immediateresult, they had already withdrawn with the greaterpart of their fleet to a Portuguese harbour, when a part of theSpanish silver fleet was captured, not by the admirals themselves,but by a squadron left behind under Captain Stayner.Encouraged by false intelligence, the galleys were quietly ontheir way to Cadiz, when their active enemy, weaker innumbers but better equipped, caught sight of them, andimmediately set all sail in pursuit. The Viceroy of Mexicowas on board with his family, and was taken prisoner. Aboveall, the silver, which was to help in carrying on the waragainst the English, became the prize of these very Englishthemselves. The amount was over a million sterling ; it wasconveyed shortly afterwards in a long train of waggons fromPortsmouth to the Tower, to be at once coined. It was apiece of good fortune, which was regarded as providential,and which not only quickened the general zeal for the war,but also relieved the anxiety as to the imposition of furthersubsidies.In the discussions which followed a remarkable differenceof opinion manifested itself, affecting the very principles ofthe state. The military party wished to continue the tax ofa tenth imposed upon the Cavaliers ; others, on the contrary,appealed to the Act of Amnesty passed by Parliament in1652, by which all exceptional measures had been formallyrenounced. They were anxious that those only who hadactively participated in the insurrectionary movement shouldpay the penalty for it, and not the Cavaliers generally. Atfirst, in December 1656, the military party carried their point,a bill in accordance with their sentiments, passed the firstreading; in January, however, their opponents were thestronger. A subsidy of ~400,000 was voted, the cost ofwhich was to be borne equally by all parties. During thedebate on the mode of Ievying it, a poll tax, or a tax upon

XII.172 THE PARLIAMENT OF 1656/57.6.A.D. 1657.the municipalities was proposed, which would not press tooheavily upon any one.Among the members of the assembly were some of themost prominent of those who had already in the LongParliament contended for a regime which should be accordingto law : Whitelocke was one of them. They were hostile tothe Major Generals, who deeply felt the abolition of thetenths, the collection of which was their special duty '. Inconnexion with this breach between the two we find the mostfar-reaching schemes proposed.If we place ourselves in the position of the Englishmen ofthat day who were not entangled in its party differences, wecan easily understand that they anticipated with terror themoment when Cromwell should be no more. For it was heafter all who had repressed the destructive tendencies of theAnabaptists, and in contrast to the violent conduct of theGenerals had never lost sight of the welfare of the peacefulpopulation. What had they to expect, if one of theseGenerals succeeded him? Which of them would be capableof maintaining peace in the country, or of checking theavarice, the ambition, the unconstitutional excesses of hiscomrades? Each illness of the Protector caused a panic inthe country: how much more now that attempts upon hislife recurred incessantly. A pamphlet entitled ' Killing noMurder' was then in circulation: which represented the assassinationof the Protector, as a lawful and even a meritoriousaction. In January 1656/7 a fresh attempt upon his life wasdiscovered. The design was to explode some gunpowder inWhitehall, near the apartment where CromwelI slept, whichshould either actually kill him, or at any rate cause a confusion,during which he might be attacked. Sindercomb, afriend of Sexby's, a resolute Republican, who had been dismissedfrom the army for his violent opinions, was the authorof the plot, and paid for his crime with his life. Thedetection of the attempt was celebrated by public thanksgivings,which were for the most part spontaneous. With--'The reason of the opposition to this hill is the feare that it will establish themajor generals, which they seeme to disrelish.' Thurloe vi. 8.x11.6. IDEA OFA CROMWELLIANMONARCHY. 173A.D. 1657.those who feared that the victory of the Anabaptists wouldbring an entire subversion of public order were now alliedthose who felt anxious lest the return of the King shouldlead to the Restoration of Catholicism. It was declared thatnot merely in the three kingdoms of Britain, but throughoutthe world, Cromwell's escape had been the saving of theReformed religion.Since from both these points of view it seemed desirable toplacc the existing system or, a more secure basis, the ideaeasily suggested itself of giving a stronger position to the manwho had created and who now upheld it, by both conferringupon him a higher rank such as was elsewhere usuallyassociated with the tenure of the supreme authority, and alsoby definitely fixing the line of succession.In the very first debate (January 19) upon the sympathywhich should be expressed with the Protector for his dangerand his escape, John Ashe, member for Somerset, urged theHouse to add something further, which would greatly contributeto his support and the quieting of the country.Cromwell was to be requested to accept the governmentaccording to the forms of the old constitution. The leadersof the military party were indignant. One of the mostzealous of them, Luke Robinson, declared that the old constitutionwas the interest of Charles Stuart-did they wish tomake the Protector his viceroy? On the other hand GeorgeDowning, member for Carlisle, a man who always followed themost pronounced tendencies of the time, accepted the proposal.With a side glance at the Instrument of Government,which had been the work of one or two individuals, whom thepeople were expected to follow, he explained that a governmentought rather to accommodate itself to the wants of thepeople. It ought to act according to tried forms, alreadyknown by experience, so that the people may know theextent of its liberty, and the supreme magistrate that of hisprerogative. The debate blazed up, flickered fiercely, anddied out again.But so it was. The idea took root that the proper coursewas to abolish the Instrument of Government, put an end tothe military despotism, and purify the supreme authority from

174 IDEA OF A CROMWELLIAN MONARCHY. XII. 6.A.D. 1657.that taint. To do this it would be necessary to change thetitle of Protector, which was associated with the power of thesword, for the dignity and rank of King ; intimately connectedas this was in England with the notion of freedom, security,and law. It was in the city especially that these considerationshad weight. The member for the city, AldermanChristopher Pack, on the 23rd of February, 1657, brought ina proposal for the alteration of the constitution on this plan.The adherents of the military party resisted the motionwith vehemence; it deserved, they said, to be torn up andburnt by the common hangman. At the head of a hundredofficers, Lambert, the chief author of the Instrument ofGovernment, visited Cromwell and appealed to him to maintainit, as established by oath ; and, sooner than violate it, todissolve Parliament which was meditating an alteration of theconstitution.Cromwell however replied that in fact the Instrument ofGovernment did require improvement. In proof of this healleged what had happened in the case of the fanaticalAnabaptist James Naylor. Parliament, thinking his teachingblasphemous, had condemned him without consulting theProtector. Cromwell pointed out as a defect in the constitutionthe inability of the supreme authority to control thedecrees of Parliament. He reminded the officers that asimilar judgment might one day be passed against them,since they were hated in the nation. He recognised in theirremonstrance the expression of the antagonism between themilitary and civil parties which he dared not allow to cometo an actual rupture'. Without directly approving the proposedscheme, he impressed upon the officers the fact that agovernment must have the voice of the people in its favour.Thus confirmed in its intentions, Parliament proceeded withthe work it had undertaken. The scheme, the so-called'petition and advice,' was accepted after long debate butwithout any material alterations. Since the majority in the1 It must be established 'corn consensu totius populi.' Brandenburg despatch,March 6. ' The Protector,' we are told in another despatch, 'is as little inclinedto give way to the hasty whim of the Parliament as to that of the army.'x11.6. IDEA OF A CROMWELLIANMONARCHY. 175A.D. 1657.House were men who, though Parliamentarians in theirsympathies, acknowledged the ruling authority, the attemptwas made to combine the two rival powers, the Protectorateand the Parliament upon a secure basis. The doctrine wasrevived that the liberties of Parliament were the birthright ofthe nation, that even under the new ruler a Parliament shouldbe regularly summoned at least once in three years, andshould form his great Council ; but with this democraticprinciple they contrived, as Henry Vane had done, to reconcilethe stipulation, that no one who had borne arms againstthe Parliament in the late disturbances, should have a seat inthe new assembly. Catholics and Royalists were excluded,but in other respects the elections were to be free; and noone who might be elected was to be rejected, unless condemnedby Parliament itself. It was to be unlawful for thesupreme magistrate to dissolve or prorogue it at his pleasure.Acts of Parliament alone were to have the force of laws.By the side however of this restoration of the rights ofParliament, the assembly placed an equally comprehensiverecognition of the higher prerogative of the supreme power.They were far from asserting its dependence upon Parliament,as maintained by Henry Vane. They even released itfrom the controlling influence of the Council of State ; Cromwellhimself was to name his successor. They acquiesced inthe establishment of a Second Chamber, and granted to theProtector the right of nominating the members, with thereservation that they should approve them, and in futureassist in filling up the vacancies. They conceded a mostimportant point by permanently granting a fixed sum forthe maintenance of the army and navy, so that freshgrants would become necessary only to meet extraordinarydemands. The assembly has always been reproached withhaving thus surrendered the control of the militia, which hadSO long been a s~bject of dispute, for this in fact dependedupon the free disposal of the necessary supplies of money.The introduction of a confession of faith, as Charles I hadonce proposed, was to depend upon the consent both ofthe supreme magistrate and of Parliament ; and at the sametime they prohibited all coercive measures and all penal

176 IDEA OF A CROMWELLZAN MONARCHY. XII. 6.A.D. 1657.legislation against Dissenters, so long as they did not disturbthe public peace ; still however they asserted the exclusiveright of the conquerors even in religious matters. Not onlythe adherents to the Papacy, but also the Episcopalians wereto be excluded from the enjoyment of this toleration1.It was a thoroughly remarkable attempt to reduce to asystem the state of affairs which had resulted from all thelate ruinous disturbances; to reconcile the power of theProtector with the claims and rights of Parliament, and thusto return to the old political forms. The House had put offto the very last the enactment of a decree respecting themost momentous point of all, the renewal of the kingly title.On March 25 the closing debate on this question occurredunfortunatelyour information respecting it is but scanty:the religious fanatics among the Republicans regarded as aprofanity the wish to set up again what had been alreadypulled down, and to restore the crown, which had ever persecutedthe people of God, and which the judgment of God hadcondemned. The Protector would be thought the greatesthypocrite in the world should he consent. These argumentswere doubtless all repeated in the debate2; many bitterthings were said on both sides, but the majority was resolute :by 123 votes to 61 the resolution was carried that the Protectorshould be requested to accept the title, dignity, andoffice of King of England, Scotland and Ireland, and toexercise these according to the laws of these nations. Togive greater weight to their request, it was again determinedthat no clause should be held binding unless all were accepted.On March 31 the scheme was solemnly submitted to theProtector. The Speaker added an explanation of eachclause. He showed that the proposed plan brought the royalauthority into harmony with the liberty of the people. Helaid the greatest stress on the offer of the crown.The humble petition and advice (orig. remonstrance) of the knights citizensand burgesses now assembled in the parliament of this commonwealth. Parl.Hist xxi. I zg.Morland, in a letter to Pel1 (March zG), mentions 'several bitter speeches'which were delivered, Vaughan ii. 133. This is all that we learn about thedebate.XII. 6. IDEA OF A CROMWELLZAN MONARCHY. 177A.D. 1657.To such a length had matters come. Oliver Cromwellsaw the dream of his youth, that he should be the foremostman in England, not merely fulfilled but surpassed. Thecrown founded by the descendants of Cerdic in Wessex, andraised to the highest pitch of power by the early Normankings,-the crown, the rights of which the Plantagenets hadin the first generation extended and amplified, and had afterwardsat least preserved intact through the storms of threecenturies, and which the Tudors had restored to its ancientsplendour ;-this crown, which had fallen to the earth withthe head of Charles I, Cromwell, the chief author of that lastcatastrophe,.was to raise up once more, and to set upon hisown head. He took a few days to deliberate, during whichhe might take counsel with God and with his own heart.When he replied, on April 4, 1657, his answer was still indecisive.He declared his approval of the scheme, as showinga care for religious and civil liberties, and expressedhis sense of the honour done him by the offer of a titlewhich contained all that the world thought desirable-thesovereign authority: but as yet, he added, he could not discoverthat his duty to God and to Parliament itself requiredhim to accept the office of supreme magistrate under thistitle.It was an answer which still allowed the Parliament to hopethat he might yet be won over. It appointed a commissionwhich, by expounding the reasons for the scheme in greaterdetail, might remove his scruples. It consisted of ninemembers of the highest reputation in the House ; such asWhitelocke, who had just returned from Sweden, and thetwo other commissioners for the Great Seal, the two headsof the law, the former Speaker, Lenthall, now Master of theRolls,-all men who from conviction as well as from naturaldisposition, were anxious to accommodate the old laws tothe altered condition of affairs. On April 16 these conferenceswere opened, conferences unparalleled in history,and which were designed to persuade the actual ruler toaccept a title usually regarded as the final goal of aspiringambition. One after another took up the discussion in thehope of removing the scruples which stood in the way ofRANKE, VOL. 111.N

I 78 IDEA OF A CROMWELLIAN MONARCHY. XII. 6.A.D. 1657.a step which they on their part regarded as the fundamentalrequisite for an orderly and lawful commonwealth.Their chief argument was borrowed from the ancientconnexion subsisting between the title of king and the laws.The law, they said, is nothing but usage consecrated byreligion and accepted by the people : to these laws only, andto the authorities recognised in them, did the people believethat they owed obedience; the title of king however wasmost closely interwoven with these very laws, and moreoverunder that title was the supreme magistrate known whostood at the head of the laws and represented the people.The person of the prince had often been changed, but neverthe dignity; only with a king do Parliament and law stand inany generally recognised relation.Among the old laws was moreover the statute of the firstTudor king, which provided that the defence of the actualpossessor of the crown for the time being, and obedience tohim, should never be regarded as treason. It had on severaloccasions been appealed to by the adherents of Charles Iin their defence. Cromwell was reminded how advantageousit would be for him to deprive his opponents of this handleand gain it over to his side.Cromwell replied, that even under its present title hisgovernment had met with obedience and administered justiceas well as any of its predecessors. Ancient as the designationof the highest power by the word 'king' might be, yet atsome time it must have had a beginning, and have requiredtoo the consent of the people: a fresh title might be nowbut beginning, yet would this in time establish itself in thelaws. The title which he bore he had accepted less inorder to secure a good than to remedy an evil. To establisha secure order of things in the nation was, he shouldhave thought, the most important point. He was ready toaid this good work not as king, but as a constable to preservethe peace. He knew many good men to whom this title wasintolerable : they have, he said, no right to resist the decisionof Parliament, but it is right that their feelings should be re-spected. They have done good service, and will do yet more.God will bless him who upholds their interests. He hadxu. 6. IDEA OF A CROMWELLIAN MONARCHY. I 79A.D. 1657.110 scruples about a name, but he could not help declaringthat Providence after twelve years of struggle had set asidethis title together with the family that bore it. We oughtnot, he concluded, to endeavour to put up again that whichGod's providence has destroyed I.Among other arguments Cromwell was told that in refusingthe offer of the Parliament he was doing what was completelyunprecedented, and what no king had ever done. He repliedthat those princes who had succeeded to the kingly dignityby act of Parliament had yet in all cases possessed a hereditaryclaini to it, and had not owed their elevation tothe authority of Parliament exclusively: his own case wasdifferent ; he had no claim to the government of this country,but had taken upon himself the office of supreme magistratein a special emergency; by the grace of God he had hithertopreserved peace in the nation. Should Parliament succeed inestablishing without his aid a firm constitution, which wouldsecure the welfare of the nation, he was ready to retire.These were considerations so striking, so suitable to thecrisis, that they must necessarily have been sincere. Theyindicate a determination to avoid accepting the title withoutdefinitely giving an open refusal, but at the same time tocarry out the remaining provisions of the scheme.To the same purport was Cromwell's speech on the followingday. He examined elaborately the reasons for thedissolution of the Long and of the Little Parliament, showingthat a civil faction in the former and a religious one in thelatter would have destroyed all the liberties of the nation.But it was all-important to uphold the ideas in defence ofwhich the war had been undertaken and carried through,the freedom of the people of God and the rights of the nation,things perfectly compatible with each other. Each manought to be secured in the possession of what he justlycalls his own2. He approves of the scheme becausc itI have used for this speech of April ~o/zo the Harleian MS., No. 6846,in the British Museum. It is complete, and I prefer it, as much simpler, to theversion printed in the Somers Tracks, and by Carlyle.'TO enjoy the things we have declared for,-that which will give the nationto enjoy their civil and religious liberties,-and not to rob any man of wnat isN 2- -

I SO IDEA OF A CROMWELLZAN MONARCHY. xn. 6.A.n. 1657.involves the establishment of a firm government upon thisbasis, and proposes several amendments, which however donot touch the main question. With respect to the qualifyingconditions attached to the right of voting, he wishes to seesome made stricter and others relaxed. He points out someomissions in detail. He especially calls attention to thecontrast between the known wants of the state and the grantmade, and demands an extension of the latter. Of themonarchy he says nothing in this speech; his attention isdirected exclusively to the provisions for government.The suggestions he made were at once discussed, andso early as the 1st of May the Committee were able to laythe amended schemes before the Protector. Many of hisproposals had been adopted, others not ; but these differencesof detail mattered little : in the foreground they put therequest that he would now give a definite decision upon thewhole. Cromwell must, once for all, either accept or rejectthe crown. His own family, whose whole future dependedon it, wished him to accept it, The story is that they hadalready prepared a crown. He himself seemed still tohesitate. We learn that from time to time he held interviewsprivately with some of the leading members of Parliament.Tobacco was produced, and he indulged in jokes as usual.They amused themselves by making verses1 : suddenlyhowever he passed to the great questions, and especially tothe most momentous of all, the acceptance or rejection ofthe kingly dignity.If we examine the provisions of the petition which wasto recast the government, we find a certain truth in Cromwell'sremark, that the title would merely be a new featherin his cap. Still however the difference was immense.The title of king was a connecting link with all thelegitimate authority of the past. It contained in itself aconfirmation of the old laws and of immemorial usage, butat the same time it evoked the sense of allegiance due tojustly his.' Lord Protector's Speech, April ar, in 'Monarchie asserted,' in Some~svi. 390.' Whitelocke, May z, 1657 ; p. 647.xrr. 6. IDEA OF A CROMWRLLIAN MONARCHY 181A.D. 1657.the royal house now more decisively exiled than ever. Itinvested the act of usurpation with a more personal character.On the other hand, were the title itself avoided, the newlyfounded rhgime would prevail. The Protectorate couldrest on its natural basis, and gain only a stronger positionand a better-founded claim to the civil authority whichit exercised.We are told that the Royalists would have greeted withpleasure the acceptance of the title, since it would have arouseda general hostilit~r to Cromwell, and resulted in his ruin l.But the old Republicans and the army were opposed toit. From the first it had been solemnly declared that themonarchy was incompatible with the welfare of the nation;its restoration would have directly contradicted those principleswhich for ten years had been regarded as comprisingthe essentials both of politics and religion. The two factionsamong the officers, the authors of the Instrument of Government,such as Lambert, no less than the men of the LittleParliament, such as Harrison, were equally excited. On themorning of the 8th of May a petition was presented to theHouse by the officers, in which they inveighed against thosewho were pressing their General to accept the title andprerogative of a king, with the sole intention of ruining himand leading back the nation once more to its old bondage2.As to the navy we are informed that Cromwell could nothave relied upon its fidelity in such a case: it would havemutinied against him.But now that he had the alternative either, by acceptingthe title, of arousing expectations which tended to restorethe old vanquished regime, or, by refusing it, ofestablishing the present one more securely; seeing toothat there was imminent danger of a rupture with his old' Giavarina: 'Li fautori del re Carlo lo vedlanno con loro estremo giubiloinalzato a questo posto di re, imaginandosi che habbia a causargli la propria ruina;stimano che sudditi non vogliono soffrirlo in quel grado e gridando contro di luie contro quelli, che ne l'havran elevato richiamiqo il legitimo e natural loroprincipe.'a Ludlow gives the contents, ii. 590, but makes no mention of the actualnegotiations.

182 IDEA OF A CROMWELLIAN1KONARCHY. x11.6.A.D. 1657.colleagues in the battlefield and in opinion, by whose aid allhad hitherto been done, Gromwell could no longer hesitateas to his proper course.On the very same day, immediately after the receipt ofthe address, the assembly was summoned before the Protector.Once more he commended their proposed form ofgovernment, one point alone excepted, the title which wasdesigned for him. Every man must give an account to Godfor his actions, and must have the approval of his own conscience.He declared that he could not accept the governmentwith the title of king '.Some wonder was felt that he had so long delayed hisdecision, and he himself attempted to explain it; for hehad certainly no need of addresses in order to learn thesentiments of the officers. But to have refused sooner wouldhave prevented the completion of the scheme of government~hich he earnestly desired. The very men who hoped tomake him king had pressed the matter so far that they couldno longer draw back. Now that they were asked whetherthey meant to give up their whole project or merely thetitle, they could not hesitate for long. On the 19th of Mayit was resolved that the title of king should be dropped :on the zznd that the Lord Protector of the Commonwealthshould undertake the office of supreme magistrate in the same,and carry on the government according to the provisions ofthe proposed scheme, so far as it extended, and in other respectsaccording to the laws of the three nations; so muchand no morez.It is obvious what a great advantage was thus gained forthe Protectorate. The title of king would have placed Cromwellin a position which was not rightly his. He would havebeen placed in a higher, but at the same time in a falseone. So long as he remained Protector, but with the consentof Parliament, he was released from the control which amilitary council ventured to exercise in virtue of the In-' His Highnesses Speech in the banquetting house, Monarchie asserted 406:$1 have a little more experienced than every man what troubles and difficultiesbefall me under such trusts.'a Rurtbn, Diary ii. I 19.strument of 1653. The supreme magistracy, which he hadhitherto held as an office allotted him by chance and circumstances,now became a genuine sovereignty, possessingthe essentials of all state authority. It was a union of theoriginal military power with the parliamentary constitution,almost an agreement between them, remarkable enough initself, and from the future development of which it seemedprobable that the old monarchy would gradually be forgotten.As illustrating the prevalent tendencies, the debates areinstructive which now took place on the form of a new oath,which was prescribed in the petition.It was proposed at first that Cromwell should swear torespect the privileges of Parliament and the freedom of thepeople. It was decided instead, in the course of the debate,that Cromwell should pledge himself to maintain the establishedrights and privileges of the people and to rule accordingto the laws, to the best of his knowledge and ability.Cromwell voluntarily added the pledge to preserve the peaceand security of the nation; but this implied no fresh restriction,but rather the legal right to adopt without moreado the necessary means to that end.To supplement this, an oath to be taken by future membersof Parliament was also required, since otherwise they wouldhave the right to undo all that had as yet been done, andeven to abolish the Protectorate. All mention of the privilegesof Parliament was again avoided, on the ground thatit was no longer possible to define them exactly. The oathmerely bound them to maintain the rights and liberties of thepeople, so far as lay in each man's power-an expressionwhich means much or little according to the interpretationput upon it-to be faithful to the Lord Protector, and toundertake nothing against his government and lawful authority.These oaths were to be taken by the representatives of thethree countries alike. The Protectorate, as it developed, wasin this respect, as in others, far inore strongly constituted thanthe monarchy. It embraced the three countries in a commonobedience.On June 26 the new constitution was inaugurated by a

184 IDEA OF A CROMWELLIAN MONARCHY. xu. 6.' A.D. 1657.grand ceremony. A singular and remarkable sight it musthave been to see the former country gentleman of Huntingdonenter Westminster Hall; before him the great dignitariesof the state, and the Garter King at Arms ; the Earl of Warwickwith the sword of the Commmonwealth ; the Lord Mayorwith the sword of the city : Cromwell himself clad in a richrobe, the train of which was carried by three generals. Hetook his place upon a raised platform, on which had been alsoplaced, appropriately enough, the old marble throne of thekings of Scotland ; for the complete subjection of that countryhad been first accomplished by Cromwell. The Speaker ofthe Parliament declared that his Highness had long bornethe title of Protector, but that it was now first confirmed bythe people of the three nations assembled in Parliament.Xe presented to him among the insignia of sovereignty notonly the sceptre and sword, but also a magnificent Bible ;and repeated to him the verses from Deuteronomy givingthe law to be observed by the king, bidding him have thebook by him and read therein every day, neither lift up hisheart above his brethren, nor turn aside from the commandmentto the right hand or to the left, in order that he shouldreign long, he and his sons. Never in reality had the OldTestament played so important a part in founding a sovereignty,as it had done in setting up this rule of the Protector.Cromwell then took his oath, of which the words referringto the maintenance of Protestantism were the most important.They were also inserted in tht form of oath administered tothe members of the State Council and the Parliament. Itwas this idea which, if it had not solely originated, had yetinspired, the whole movement, which owed all its strengthto having asserted and carried it o~t. Before Parliamentbroke up it petitioned the Protector to contrive a union ofthe Protestant Churches.CHAPTER VII.THE GENERAL POSITION OF THE PROTECTORATE AT HOMEAND ABROAD IN 1657 AND 1658.Alliance with France and Sweden.THE close of the session was enlivened, as the beginninghad been, by the news of a great victory over the Spaniards.It ranks among Blake's most wonderful achievements thaton April 20, 1657, he attacked and destroyed the Spanishfleet from the West Indies, as it lay in the harbour of SantaCruz at Teneriffe, protected by the castle and a chain of forts :sixteen galleons and other vessels, with a large portion of theAmerican goods which they had on board, were lost. Onlythe silver and jewels were safely carried on shore. Thenews reached London at the end of May. It could not failto strengthen the public confidence in the Protector and inhis lucky star.The same fleet had already on a previous occasion performeda service of great political importance. It had putan end to the delays of the Portuguese in ratifying the commercialtreaty which was now ready prepared. There toothe clergy and the court were indignant because the treatysecured religious liberty to English sailors and merchantscontrary to the usages of the country. When Blake andMontague appeared off the coast, they offered the Portuguesethe choice of either using their fleet, the best manned and thebest equipped then afloat, against the Spaniards their commonenemies, or on the other hand of being themselves attackedby it. The last act of John IV, the founder of the new state

186 GENERAL POSITION OF PROTECTORATE XII. 7.A.D. 1657..of Portugal, was to choose the fotmer alternative, and to signthe treaty. Nothing suited his interests better than the hostilityof England, formerly to the Dutch and now to theSpaniards, since these were the very enemies whom he hadhimself to encounter. But it was also an advantage forCromwell to have the assistance of the house of Braganzain his struggles with the Austro-Spanish dynasty, which hadnow taken Charles I1 under its protection.Meantime the full importance of the alliance with Swedenhad first become evident when Charles Gustavus succeededto the throne of Queen Christina, and shortly afterwardsbegan the war with Poland. The good fortune that attendedhis enterprise Cromwell welcomed as promising advantageousresults to Protestantism. In his youth, he said, he had beena great admirer of Gustavus Adolphus, and could not forgiveCharles I for not having more effectually supported him. Hehoped that Charles Gustavus would complete the work whichGustavus Adolphus had begun.Nowhere perhaps was this union of interests so soon perceivedand made known as at the court of Charles 11, whichwas still held at Cologne.In the German journals of the day we read that the exiledKing paid a visit to Frankfort to see the fair. Near Frankforthe met Queen Christina; but his chief object was tospeak with the Elector John P'nilip of Mainz, a man whowas at the very centre of the European political system,and possessed an able adviser in Boineburg. Charles I1 representedto them that the movements of Cromwell againstSpain, and of Charles Gustavus against the Poles, were carriedon in concert. He believed it to be their plan to overthrowthe house of Austria, with whose enemies both wereallied. Boineburg lost no time in warning the Imperial ministerCount Auersburg of the danger '.This became clear to every one in 1656; for how coulda consolidation of the Austrian power ever have been accomplishedhad the Swedish King succeeded in his design ofsecuring the greater part of Poland for himself, and por-' Carta de S. Md. Nov. zg, 1655.In the Brussels archives.XII. 7. AT HOME AND ABROAD.'87A.D. 1657.tioning out the rest in fiefs, one of the most important ofwhich was designed for Prince Racoczy of Transylvania.In the spring of 1657 Charles Gustavus and Racoczy met atThrzistopora near Sendomir : 24,000 Hungarians were servingin Racoczy's army. The possession of Cracow and Brzest,which Charles Gustavus relinquished in his favour, appearedto secure him a strong independent position. Cromwell wasregarded as his great friend and well-wisher, who had aspecial sympathy for him. With Charles Gustavus, Mazarinand Cromwell incessantly corresponded, in order to securethat his arms should be immediately directed against thehereditary dominions of Austria.The aspect of Europe was singular in the extreme whenthe three great upstart powers thus threatened the oldestablishedorder:-Cardinal Mazarin, whose fixed purposeit was to make his pupil Louis XIV the first power on theContinent; the Protector, who moved heaven and earth todeprive the Spaniards of their colonies, and the King, towhose position he had succeeded though without the title,of all support ; and the Palatine Count-King, one of thesmallest among the small potentates of the German empire,who suddenly appeared at the head of the most veteranarmy in Europe, and by a lucky campaign had almost madehimself master of north-eastern Europe.In the correspondence of the time we detect the feelingthat the great religious struggle was not yet over. TheProtector zealously upholds the interests of the Protestants,and at the same time insists on their union. The Swedish King,who had not a few quarrels with his neighbours of the samepersuasion, was less concerned in this project, but he toogladly displayed his Protestant zeal: for in his alliance withEngland his first thought had been to resist the renewedencroachments of Catholicism. The Cardinal's designs werenecessarily different. He was forced to take into considerationthe sympathy of the French clergy with the injurywhich the supremacy of Sweden in Poland inflicted onCatholicism. With him the political situation was all-important.It was observed in Paris that the Pope, weakenedby his losses in Poland, would bc unable to oppose the

188 GENERAL POSITION OF PROTRCTORATE XII. 7.A.D. I 657.French in Italy 1. But above all, this great league strengthenedhim in his struggle against the house of Austria. Theattacks of the English made it almost impossible for theKing of Spain to assist the Emperor as he had often donebefore, with money: on the other hand, the Emperor, threatenedon his frontiers and in Hungary, could not any longerso energetically assist the Netherlands with German troops.These provinces still continued to be always a militarycentre of great importance both for the defence of thoseattacked and for actual offensive movements. The motleyforce, selected from all nations, who fought there under theSpanish flag, was now joined both by the English who hadfled from Cromwell and by the French driven out by Mazarin.The illustrious exile, the Prince de Condk, was their leader.In the summer of 1656 he inflicted a decisive defeat on theFrench army in the Lines of Valenciennes, which redoubledthe cry for peace in France and the difficulties of Mazarin'sposition.With the cause of Spain in the Netherlands, that of Charles I1was now united. After the rupture with England the Spanishcourt lent a willing ear to the proposals of Charles 11, whichthey had formerly rejected. In 1656 this Prince venturedto fix his residence in Bruges, because his proximity therewould encourage his friends in England. By the interventionof Cardenas a treaty was concluded with him, by which hewas promised an auxiliary force of 6000 men, should he eversucceed in gaining an entrance to an English harbour. Itwas considered certain that in that case the nobility andgentry of England would rise in his favour. It was regardedas an important advantage gained, when a harbour such asthat of Dunkirk was opened to the privateers fitted out underletters of marque from the King. It was believed that forthwitha considerable portion of the English fleet would assemblethere and join the King2.1 Extract from a letter on the state of feeIing in Paris, Autumn 1655 : 'On n'yest pas fach6 des progrbs du roi de Suede en Pologne, parce qu'on croit, que plusle partie du pape sera affaibli et moins il voudra faire le maistre et s'opposer auxdesseins qu'on a en Italie.'Cp. Copia de carta de Don Eduardo de Hyde a Don Luis de Haro, AugustXII. 7.AT HOME AND ABROAD.A.D. 1657. 189It was accordingly no less for Cromwell's own intereststhan for those of France, that the long-talked-of offensivealliance between the two powers was now actually concluded(March 1657). It was based on mutual concessions of greatimportance. Botb united to take Gravelines and Dunkirkwith their combined forces. The French were to have theformer place, the English the latter, with Mardyke. By thisarrangement Cromwell distinctly renounced the old establishedEnglish policy which persistently regarded the growthof French power in the Netherlands as a loss to itself. Hecould not have overlooked the advantage which France mustgain on the Continent by the humiliation of Spain. But onMazarin's part it was also a bold venture to allow an importantharbour in the immediate neighbourhood of Franceto fall into English hands. He was well aware of the freshunpopularity he should thus incur with the clergy, whowere tired of his Protestant alliances. Though he stipulatesfor the maintenance of the Catholic Church, yet he alsoaccepts a clause which left the English considerable libertyin this respect l. Both sides in fact regarded it as necessaryto overlook these considerations, in face of a powerful enemywho threatened their very existence. Such a course wasrequired to confirm the Cardinal no less than the Protectorin his own position.In May 1657, 6000 English troops, trained in Cromwell'swars, appeared on the continent. The discipline andconduct of the men, the sagacity and zeal of their commanders,made a deep impression in France. At firstthey were merely employed to threaten the coast, in orderto leave the French free for another enterprise, an attackupon Cambray, which however came to nothing. It wasnot till late in the year that Turenne turned his attention31; the same letter as that in the Clarendon State Papers iii, but the SpanishCopy is fuller and more connected than the English.The words are in Article 11 (Guizot ii. 80 j) : ' Les ecclesiastiques qui n'auraientrien tram6 contre le gouvernement Btabli y jouiront,' etc. In Latin, Nihiladversus regnum cui submissi fuerint molientes! Lockhart, who quotes them, laysthe greatest stress upon them He notices that the Pope is not styled ' pontifex,'absolutely, but ' pontifex romanus!

go GENERAL POSITION OF PROTECTORATE XII. 7.A.D. 1657.to the coast, too late indeed to attempt the investment ofDunkirk. Urged by the impatient zeal of the English hethrew himself upon Mardyke, and aided by some Englishmen-of-war, captured it in a few days. He would havepreferred to blow it up as the Spaniards had shortly beforethought of doing, but the English insisted that it shouldbe spared and handed over to them. It is true it was merelyan outwork of Dunkirk, and might easily be retaken, butthe acquisition of it was a result which necessarily gavesatisfaction in England and disturbed the Spaniards. Itwas impossible to attack Dunkirk, and Gravelines was easilydefended ; but on the other hand the Spaniards failed torecover Mardyke.In spite, or rather perhaps in consequence, of this disaster,the Spaniards resolved in the early part of the next year,in January or February, to make some effort for KingCharles. Mazarin declared that he knew from a trustworthysource that they intended to make a descent uponthe English coast with 3000 infantry and 1000 cavalry,led by Charles himself or his brother1. They hoped togain admittance into Bristol or perhaps Hull. It wasbelieved that they might reckon not only upon the oldadherents of the King, but also upon the Anabaptists. Wehave already mentioned that some time before some oftheir discontented leaders, such as Sexby, had applied tothe Spaniards. They now renewed their appeal for assistance,in return for which they offered to surrender a seaport :for they believed themselves to have powerful connexions inthe garrisons and even in the navy. In contrast to Cromwell'spresent attitude they represented that every form of religiouscoercion was contrary to their principles. They hoped bylegally abolishing it to satisfy the Catholic claims, whichthe Spaniards devotedly upheld. The latter were at firstuncertain whether to ally themselves with the Anabaptistsor with the King. They considered it however the wisercourse to make common cause with the King, and then tobring about an alliance between the two. For the Ana-l Lockhart to Thurloe. Clarendon State Papers iii. 377.AT HOME AND ABROAD.'91A.D. 1658.baptists were no longer unconditionally opposed to the King,provided only he would consent not to be the master of thelaws, but merely their administrator; they thought that thiscondition granted, a free Parliament summoned by themwould overturn Cromwell and restore the King '. Moreoveron the other side we have a declaration of Charles 11, inwhich he promises to any troops that would join him, pardon,payment of arrears, and even rewards: the only conditionwhich he exacts is that they should declare for King andParliament. He expresses his determination to rule accordingto the known laws of the land, and by the advice ofsuccessive Parliaments 2. Whether this would have satisfiedevery one may well be doubted, but it seems certain that itsatisfied some of the chief leaders of the party Y. Their soleanxiety was that something serious should be attempted assoon as possible. It was said that in the capital, whereAlderman Robinson was in their confidence, 20,000 menwere ready to rise in the King's cause. Among the Royaliststhere was a secret association, which extended throughout thecountry, but very few of those who joined it were known toeach other. They obeyed a central committee which sat inLondon.XII, 7.The Pardiawe%t of 1658.To encounter these dangers Cromwell felt it necessary, andwas perhaps all the more determined, completely to securethe position which the last Parliament had assigned to him.He could not but be aware that he would meet with muchopposition from his old friends and supporters. Lambert hadat last refused to take the oath of fidelity required from themembers of the Council of State. He resigned his appointment,and preferred, in the enjoyment of domestic happiness,to take no part whatever in political affairs. Cromwcll, hearingthe murmurs of other officers, had one day challenged themLanglade and Talbot to the King. Clarendon State Papers iii, 272.a Declaration to the Agitators, ibid. iii. ,341.So Talbot declares, Nov. 3 ; from Wildman, ibid. iii. 373.

192GENERAL POSITION OF PROTECTORATE XII. 7.A.D. 1658.to show him in what the Commonwealth consisted : it wouldbe clear that he sought nothing for himself. James Harringtonfelt that an opportunity was given him of setting forth hisviews as to a republican constitution and laying them beforethe Protector. Cromwell never repeated his challenge. Hemust have learnt that, by promoting the welfare of the communityin his own fashion, he had not compensated for theabsence of the outward forms of a republic. His old comradesin the struggle would not recognise a master even under suchconditions.Without regarding their opposition, Cromwell graduallydeveloped his position more fully. Now that the neighbouringkings treated him as their equal, it is not surprising thatmany leading peers thought it a privilege to ally themselveswith his family. In November 1657 one of his daughters wasmarried to the grandson of the Earl of Warwick, and anotherto Viscount Fauconberg. In the daily papers these eventswere announced with all the ceremony with which the personaldoings of royalty are usually invested.He next busied himself with the formation of the House ofLords. Some of the old peers of the Parliamentary opposisition,Manchester, Wharton, even Warwick, did not refuse, atfirst at any rate, to take their seats in the new I-Iouse, thoughthey afterwards stayed away. A second class was formed bythe sons, stepsons, and numerous relatives of Cromwell's ownfamily; then followed the lawyers, who supported the newgovernment, a number of officers, among them some who hadworked their way up from the respectable trades which theyformerly followed to a high rank in the army; all men ofwhom nothing could be predicted but the most absolute devotionto the will of the Protector l. A consolidation of theProtectorate was generally expected, and as its consequence,a more decisive manifestation on Cromwell's part. He wouldshow the haughty grandees and the upstart sectaries whatthey owed to God and to Caesar, that is, to government.1 Giavarino : Parura caduta 1' elettione in soggetti ch' altrono tramano ni sospirano,che di uniformare i lor0 arbitrii con li voleri e dispositioni del protetto.'XII. 7. AT HOME AND ABROAD.A.D. 1658.193When Parliament met it became evident that there wasactive agitation on the one side, and lively anxiety on theother l. It seemed very possible that the Royalist and Anabaptistfactions, now both in alliance with the exiled King,organised by the old Spanish party, and stimulated byagents from Flanders, would proceed at once to some openmanifestation. In many parts of the city the guards weredoubled, the houses of all those who had formerly borne armsagainst the Commonwealth were searched, others who hadnever taken any part in the disturbances were neverthelessbound over to hold themselves in readiness to appear at anymoment before the magistrates when summoned. Cromwelltook every precaution on the coasts and seaports against aninvasion, and in the interior against any corresponding movement.But his chief danger did not lie here. It lay rather in theuncertainty whether the constitution accepted by Parliamentin the previous spring could be carried out or not accordingto the original provisions. In return for the concessions thenmade to him Cromwell hsd expressly forborne to excludethose members from the Parliament who had been dulyelected. All those who had been turned out at the openingof the first session were invited to take their seats at theclose of the recess.Many even now considered it advisable to decline this permissionto enter: they regarded the prescribed oath as anintolerable restriction : 'it were better to leave that tyrantand his packed convention to stand upon his sandy foundation2.' The majority however thought otherwise. For thisoath contained two pledges, one requiring fidelity to theProtector, which merely meant that they should abstainfrom violence against his person; the other requiring themto preserve the rights and liberties of the English people : but' Giavarino: 'All' apertura della camera resto qualche ombra a1 governo cherisvegliandosi li spiriti di malcontenti e di non affettionati possono generare nellaplebe qualche ma1 humore.''To leave that tyrant and his pack'd convention to stand upon his sandyfoundation is the greatest good as the things now are, which any secluded membercan doe in discharge of his public trust.' John Hobard, Tanner MSS. Oxford cii.RANKE, VOL. 111. 0

194 GENERAL POSITION OF PXOTECTORA TE. XII. 7.A.D. 1658.these were the important words; though the elections had,been held in obedience to a writ of Cromwell's, yet they restedon the ancient popular right of the English people. Far thegreater proportion of the excluded members resumed their seats.In this manner the monarchical authority, which Cromwellhad founded upon the ruins of the old system, was broughtinto direct contact with a popular assembly; the importantquestion now was, would they come to an understanding?would they work together amicably?At the very outset an open quarrel broke out betweenthem. On January 20, 1658, Parliament was opened; onthe 23rd a message reached the Commons from the new socalledHouse of Lords, proposing the appointment of a fastday.This was quite enough to evoke a storm against it.It was remembered that the House of Lords had once beenformally abolished by act of Parliament, that by the ordersof Parliament allegiance had been sworn to a governmentwithout King and House of Lords. Was such a House tobe recognised now? Strictly speaking it had in the natureof things no existence at all. The other House was as littlea House of Lords as the Little Convention had been aParliament. They hesitated, in drawing up a declarationpromising a fuller answer, even to use the expression 'theother House,' for thereby they would acknowledge them tobe the same that called themselves the House of Lords1.Very laconic was the resolution passed: 'The House ofCommons will send an answer by its own messenger.' ArthurHaslerig, Cromwell's old comrade, had refused to be a memberof the new House. On the 25th he took his seat in theCommons, to which he had been originally elected. At firstthere was some hesitation in giving him the oath, because todo so was again to reject the new House, but it was finallyresolved to tender it. Haslerig took his oath, and swore allegiancenot merely to the rights and liberties of the people,but of the people of England, as if he wished to express thatThe objection came from Colonel Mildmay: ' Though you do style them theotlier House, yet you do thereby acknowledge them to be the same that call themselvesLords.'XII. 7. AT HOME AND ABROAD.I95A.D. 1658.he would not be sathied with the abstract conception ofrights, but would fight for the liberties of England, won inthe recent struggles, in his capacity of member of the Commons,which he preferred to any other.Cromwell determined to meet the threatened movement bya decisive manifesto. On the same afternoon he addressedboth Houses. Once more he connected the danger of Protestantismwith the danger of the country; he now laidespecial stress on the leanings of the Dutch towards theSpaniards, whom they would assist in an invasion of England.The Episcopalian and Cavalier party only waited for this tokindle afresh the flame of insurrection, while among the resta religious or a political sect equally strove to overpower theothers, and get the authority into their own hands. Cromwellholds that only escape from a civil war and a generalconvulsion lies in the maintenance of the constitution asrecently established ; in a good understanding between thevarious parties, the only means of preserving freedom. Thepresent system was his strongest justification for serving theCommonwealth in the place he held. Who could honestlyventure to discuss matters which could not be settled byreason or by scripture, and to overlook that on which forsix years the peace and ,gelfare of the nation had rested?If they again fell into their old foolish ways, what confusionand ruin would be the consequence! He had sworn togovern according to the laws as at present established. Hewould keep this oath. His hope is that neither pride norenvy will destroy a union so full of promise. He will servethe Commonwealth, but on the principles laid down in theArticles of Government '.The point at issue between himself and his opponents wasthis-that with him the great problem to be solved was themaintenance of the system once established against foreignpowers, and the preservation of peace at home, while themembers of Parliament insisted on putting the assertion ofthe political liberties they had acquired in the foreground.His speech was not calculated to convince or convert hisMy lord Protector's speech. See Burton ii. 351.0 2

196 GENERAL POSITION OF PROTECTORATE x11.7.A.D. 1658.opponents. The prevalent opinion was that the previousassembly had no right to conclude a new arrangement,without having been urged to do so by a single petitionor having been asked by a single county. Those membersespecially who had been excluded felt hurt that such weightydecrees should have been passed in their absence, and demandeda fresh debate in which they might share. Thesecond House that had been placed by their side they absolutelydeclined to recognise.Cronlwell showed his vexation when he was waited uponby a deputation from the Commons alone, without referenceto the other House, to request that his speech should beprinted. He had more than once spoken of it by name asthe House of Lords. He now declared that he was boundby his oath to maintain the privileges of both Houses, andannounced, at least so he was understood, that he shouldlay the estimates of the expenditure before the one Houseas well as the other. The expression itself is doubtful, butthere can be no doubt that he wished to secure for the newHouse a coordinate authority with the old.For since he had tolerated in the Commons a party hostileto his views, his parliamentary position would have beenuntenable, had he not had besides another House on whichhe could rely. In this his intentions were by no meansstrictly speaking reactionary. When men read the namesof the members of his new House, it seemed almost absurdto believe that they were to pass for peers, but this very disatinction lay in the nature of the case. R body composedas the former one had been was out of the question. Thenew House formed a sort of first chamber, as understood bythose modern states which have undergone revolution.But it excited the opposition of a11 those who objectedaltogether to a strong Protectorate. The memory of theLong Parliament, the most advanced members of which tookthe lead in the present House, was revived. All beneficialchanges, and even the success of the war, were attributedto it. Pym and Hampden appeared as the great men ofthe time. The aim of the past disturbances was seen notmerely in the abolitiod of the abuses of the previous rule,xr~. 7. AT HOME AND ABROAD.A.D. 1658.but in the alteration of its forms. All the evil consequenceswere enumerated which had formerly flowed from the existenceof the House of Lords, still they declared that it wasbetter at any time to tolerate such a House which at any ratein its property represented an interest that included halfEngland, than the present one which represented nothing ofthe sort. They denounced the establishment of any authoritypossessing a right of veto, since to the Commons' decreesrightfully belonged the force of law. 'What have we foughtfor,' exclaimed Scott, 'if not for the right of the people togive laws to itself? for this we have shed our blood. Theprovidence of God himself has set the people free from allsuch restrictions. The blood, which for ever abolished thatveto (the blood of Charles I), the blood too of Mary Queen ofScots yet stained the door of the House. Could they callKing Charles back to life? True, it was urged that it wasan ancient usage to have a House of Lords : the same mightbe said of popery, prelacy, and atheism. By granting a coordinateauthority to the new House, they granted it a controlof the supplies, of peace and war, the right too of makinglaws and of appointing magistrates to carry them out. Thepeople of England did not ask for chains: like the people ofIsrael in old times, it wished to govern itself. The people bythe will of God had control over everything I.'In the presence of this wish for the independence of thepeople, even the hatred felt for the Cavaliers relaxed. Whena message was received from the other House, proposinga law for the removal of delinquents and priests to a distanceof twenty miles from the capital, it was declared that sucha proposal was only worthy of them, a direct attack upon therights of the free people of England : but the Parliament wasentrusted with the preservation of personal as well as politicalliberty. It was bound to guard the interests of the Cavaliers,however hostile their dispositions might be, as carefully asthose of others. 'This sentence of banishment,' exclaimedHaslerig, ' may easily be one day turned against ourselves.'The House regarded the proposal as a fresh encroach-In Scott's speech, Jan. ag, Burton's Diary ii. 390.

198 GENERAL POSITION OF PROTECTORATE XII. 7.A.D. 1658.ment upon the lawful supremacy of Parliament. They avoidedsending an answer to the other House, which might be interpretedas a recognition of one or the other of their claims.It is said that they were. also occupied with some furtherdecrees hostile to the Protector, and had meditated associatingwith him a commander of the forces who shouldbe subject to Parliament. But however that may have been,it is undeniable that the attitude of Parliament was altogetherantagonistic to the Protector's authority. The .argumentsused against the Lords might be turned against the Protector,even though he avoided the title of king.The theory that the Commons represented the sovereignpeople, and as such rightfully claimed the highest authorityin the nation, was revived in full vigour, and declared warupon any power which asserted an independent validity.Cromwell was the more indignant because he held thathe had not gone beyond his own prerogative. How couldthey repeal in a second session what they had enacted in theprevious one? He felt that the attack already threatenedhimself. It was while in this mood that the news reachedhim of an address which was to be moved in Parliament thenext day. It did not, it is true, propose the appointmentof a general as his colleague, but it demanded that for thefuture no officer should be dismissed from the army withoutconsulting the council of war, that the local militia shouldbe placed in trustworthy hands, and, above all, that oneHouse of Parliament only should be recognised as the'supreme judicature of the nation ;' all of them proposalswhich ran directly counter to his power, resting as it didupon his personal authority over the army, and upon thecontrol of the militia; they were also fatal to his House ofLords. He determined to prevent the introduction of suchan address, which would naturally have been followed by acorresponding resolution.According to the account of a trustworthy witness, Cromwellmerely told his secretary that he meant to go down to' 'That one House of Parliament be the supreme judicature of the nation;'Hobart's account. It is confirmed by the French ambassador (Feb. XI, 1658),Guizat ii. 627.XII. 7.A.D. 1658.AT HOME AiVD ABROAD.199the House, without giving his reasons. He ordered the firstservant he met to put the horses to his carriage. He set outwith a very slight escort ; in the ante-room, which he enteredfirst, he was seen to drink a glass of beer, and then proceededto the chamber where the Lords were assembled. Fiennesand Fleetwood asked him what he meant to do. 'I mean,'he replied, 'to dissolve this House.' They remonstrated.' By the living God,' he exclaimed with vehemence, ' I willdissolve it.'It was now the 4th of February, 1658. In the LowerHouse, during the morning, some members had advocated,and more opposed the recognition of the House of Lords:the debate was still in progress, when they were informedthat the Black Rod was at the door. Many seemed inclinedto take no notice of it, but all obeyed when it was announcedthat the Lord Protector wished to speak with both Housesin the House of Lords.Cromwell now told them, that it had been no wish of hisown to accept the form of government laid before him in thelast session. If he were not prevented by necessity, he wouldprefer to sit by the side of a wood and tend cattle. But afterhaving thrust this form upon him, they now disputed it inthe same assembly, he too therefore felt himself releasedfrom his obligation. 'The young man,' he continued, 'callinghimself the King of Scots, has considerable forces : ourneighbours lend him ships : with the first favourable wind hecan land. In spite of this we cannot unite, but amuse ourselveswith petty quarrelling. The revenues are not sufficientto support the army, but we take no steps to meet a suddenemergency, and to serve the interests of the nation. Godjudge between us. I dissolve this Parliament I.'Two days after he summoned the officers to a banquet.He told them that he again found himself in a position toprotect them all. But should any one of them enter intotreaty with his enemies, he should punish such conduct astreachery. If any one was discontented with the governmentas now established, let him say so. No one replied.Letter to Hobart, February 1657/5, in Tanner MSS.

aoo GENERAL POSITION OF PROTECTORATE xrI. 7.A.D. 1658.This much we may at least infer, that he had lost himselfin the path which he had recently entered upon, and wasstrongly inclined to return to the old one.The War in 1658.But matters took a course far more favourable to his wishes,where the result depended upon the issues and fortune ofwar.The Protector was successful in maintaining his conquestsin Jamaica against a serious attack.The chief source of difficulty was the condition of thetroops, who soon began to regard themselves as exiled, anddesired nothing more earnestly than to return home. Theyrefused either to cultivate the country, or to submit to theirstrict discipline; dangerous epidemics broke out, which carriedoff large numbers both of officers and soldiers. It wasunder the Protector that for the first time the forces of England,Scotland, and Ireland co-operated in maintaining aremote British possession. In December 1656 some Scottishvessels, in January 1657 some Irish, reached Jamaica. AnEnglish squadron had arrived shortly before. The colonistsof Barbadoes sent men, those of New England provisions.Colonel D'Oyley, who had been originally superseded byCromwell's orders, but had succeeded to the command on thedeath of his predecessor, proved himself more competent thanthe latter to keep the troops together, and repel the attackwhich the Spaniards had at last commenced. The governorof Cuba and the viceroy of Mexico united their forces inorder to restore the exiled governor of Jamaica, and effecteda landing at Porto Nuevo. Before they had firmly establishedthemselves, D'Oyley's small but efficient body of troops attackedthem, and forced them to leave the island. TheSpanish settlers, who held out in the forests, were betrayedby their negro slaves, a few only escaped death by flight.In the very heart of the Spanish colonies an English onearose, which first gave their value to the other West Indianpossessions of England.XII. 7. AT HOME AND ABROAD. 201A.D. 1658.It was however on the neighbouring continent that the warwith Spain had chiefly to be fought out.In the spring of 1658 Cromwell renewed his alliance withFrance. He increased the strength of his forces, to enablethe siege of Dunkirk to be undertaken in earnest. Whenthis was commenced, under Turenne's directions, the Spanisharmy, following the regular tactics of the time, advanced toits relief. Turenne was sufficiently strong to be able to meetthe enemy in the field without being forced to relinquish thesiege. An engagement took place on the sand hills of theDunes, which must be considered as having decided the warbetween France and Spain. The English on both sides displayedthe greatest energy. Lockhart, Cromwell's ambassadorin France, himself led the troops at the right momentto an assault upon the Spanish lines before these were completelyformed. The Spaniards were first thrown into disorderby the vehemence with which the English attacked the mostimportant of the hills they occupied, at once on the flank andin front : on the side of the Spaniards, Charles 11's brother,James, Duke of York, commanded a detachment in person.He tells us that he rallied the scattered forces and, aidedby large reinforcements, led them against Cromwell's Englishand routed them in their turn. Their obstinacy proved almostindomitable-not a man asked for quarter1. However muchthese statements may require qualification, yet the fact remainsthat the troops of the Protectorate and the Royalistforces led by a prince of the house of Stuart encounteredeach other, and satiated in blood their party-hatred withoutregard to their common nationality. The battle which decidedthe struggle between the rival monarchies of Franceand Spain, was at the same time a victory for the Protectorand his party over the King and the Royalists 2.Dunkirk was now occupied by the English. Their firstcare was to fortify the place more strongly, not with banksof sand, but with solid blocks of stone: their second, to fixupon a site for a Protestant church, and to find a minister toMQmoires du dnc de York, in Ramsay's Turenne, p. 478.given there seem more authentic.Lockhart to Thurloe, June 4/14,The memoirs as

202 GENERAL POSITION OF PROTECTORATE XII. 7.A.D. 1658.perform the service. A Fleming was discovered, who in spiteof the vigilance of the Catholic priests had administered thesacrament at night to a faithful few. They persuaded themselvesthat everywhere remnants of Protestantism survived,which might be again quickened into fresh life.We are reminded how closely events in history are linkedtogether by remarking that the course of affairs in the Northhad materially contributed to this success. The Frenchambassador expressly attributed the capture of Dunkirk tothe diversion which the movements of Sweden created inGermany, and to the danger which threatened Austria fromthat quarter I.But it was against the German house of Austria itself thatthe designs of the allied powers were directed. NeitherCromwell nor Mazarin, who controlled the votes of the ecclesiasticalelectors, wished to allow a prince of the house ofAustria to succeed to the vacant empire of Germany. Thathouse was but a branch of that of Spain : it was consideredthe chief support of the hostile Catholic party, over which itexercised the greatest influence. A determined advance onthe part of Charles Gustavus might easily have preventedsuch an election. But this prince was by no means inclinedseriously to exert all his strength against Austria. He saidtruly enough that France and England merely wished to makehim useful, to have him for their slave, and that he would gainnothing from Germany himself, except perhaps practice inthe art of war. It was far more important for him first toestablish his supremacy in the North. In spite of all remonstranceshe threw himself with all his overpoweringstrength upon Denmark. By the mediation of the Englishand French ambassadors, a peace was concluded on termsmore favourable than ever before to Sweden. But meanwhilethe election to the German empire had been decided. WhileAustria not merely escaped attack, but also became thecentre of an alliance between the northern powers threatenedby the Swedish King, which was joined by the most powerfulProtestant princes of the empire, such as Brandenburg, itXII. 7. AT HOHE AND ABROAD.A.D. 1658. 203was mainly owing to their influence that Leopold I obtainedthe imperial crown. It is clear that the power of the Austro-Spanish House was thus materially increased. In consequenceof this, and also of the alliance formed between theDanes and the Emperor, Charles Gustavus in the summerof 1658 determined on a second attack, with the object ofconquering Denmark and incorporating it in the Swedishkingdom, no doubt according to the express design of QueenChristina, but without assistance from England.The English were not perfectly agreed in their opinion ofthese schemes. Many, and those the most energetic, approvedof the enterprise. They argued that the enemies ofSweden were also the enemies of England. The former wereto be the missionaries of Protestantism eastwards, the lattertowards the west. So long as Charles Gustavus was indanger from Denmark, he could not turn his arms againstAustria. Ci-omwell himself however hesitated. He declaredthat the time was past when one kingdom could be swallowedup by another. He was unwilling to allow either Denmark,or Brandenburg, which was equally threatened, and both ofwhich were Protestant states, to be destroyed or conqueredby Sweden.' Bourdeaux to Brienne.Guizot, Richard Cromwell.

CHAPTER VIII.DEATH OF OLIVER CROMWELL.SUCH was the position of the Protector in the spring andsummer of 1658. He enjoyed an unbounded prestige inEurope, and held the supreme power in Britain ; yet inneither respect had he fully attained his object.In England he had hitherto overpowered and crushed everyenemy-the Scottish and the Presbyterian system, the peersand the King, the Long Parliament, and the Cavalier insurgents: but to create within the very, party which owed itsexistence, or at any rate its supremacy, chiefly to his assistance,an organisation consistent with the authority whichhad fallen to his own lot, was beyond his power.Even among his old friends in the separatist congregations,his comrades in the field, his colleagues in the establishmentof the Commonwealth, he encountered the most obstinateresistance.He was resolved not to tolerate it. To none of the officerswho had declared against him did he show any mercy. Themost determined were thrown into prison, the rest dismissedfrom the army. Some among them had belonged to theoriginal company of which Cromwell had been captain. Theycould not conceive that it was a crime to refuse the title of .House of Lords to a house which did not consist of lords.But Cromwell now demanded unconditional submission.Formerly it had been necessary to form his troops of believersin order to encounter the Royalists. He now sawin every independent opinion an ally of the Royalist cause.Republican and Anabaptist doctrines had penetrated toonear the very heart of his authority. He would toleratethem no longer, at least in the army.XII 8. DEATH OF OLIVER CROMWELL.205A.D. 1658.Till now it had been a means of promotion in the army,in Scotland for instance and Ireland, to embrace Anabaptistviews. Things were much changed when Cromwell nowendeavoured to rid the army of Anabaptists.He thus excited against himself a very powerful party, andone which was influential from the number of its adherentsand the resolute zeal of the individual members. The Anabaptistsreminded him that they were very numerous : ' Wefill thy towns and castles, thy provinces and seats, thy armyand navy.' They added, that formerly at Dunbar he hadspoken as an Independent and an Anabaptist, where would hehave been had not they been his friends? They had throughoutbeen faithful to the Commonwealth and to himself, andwere only determined not to allow their rights as free-bornEnglishmen to be torn from them. They had more right tobe in the army than he to be in his exalted position. Theywere at least as much entitled to overthrow him as he wasto expel them from the army. Had he not declared himselfthat he would always protect the righteous, however he mightdisagree with some of their views ? But he now pronouncedin favour of the accursed principle of persecution in theChurch. He had changed from the better to the worse side.It was for him to say whether his conscience was not quieter,more secure of heavenly things, while he' loved the Anabaptists,than now when he hated them l.When Cromwell turned a deaf ear to them, they laid theircomplaints and wishes before the King himself. We werestrong enough, they declare in their address, to destroy, butwe are too weak to build up again. To whom should we lookfor help ? Should we turn to the Parliament ? It is but abroken reed that is tossed in the wind. To the army whichis flesh of our flesh and bone of our bone? It has proveditself a rud of iron which may crush us, but which will notsupport us. Or to the man who has treacherously assumedthe authority over us ? He answers us in his pride, 'Ye arefactious; if your burden is heavy I will make it yet heavier.To His Highness the Lord Protector, after the attack on St. Domingo, whichit often alludes to, in Iviney, History of the English Baptists i. zax.

206 DEATH OF OLIVER CROMFVELL. x~r. 8.A.D. 1658.Thus are we driven like the partridges from hill to hill,from mountain to mountain.'They prayed the King to guarantee the religious libertywhich his father had once contemplated establishing. Hedid not refuse 1: for the future before him was still dark anduncertain. In order to effect the overthrow of Cromwell,he would have gladly accepted the assistance even of theAnabaptists.How often had Cromwell sought to convince minister afterminister of the justice of his cause, by pointing to the marvelloushelp which God had granted them in their foreignrelations. He was answered by laments over the fall of theold monarchical constitution of the country.The Episcopalians had continued at times to perform theirservice. It was prohibited because in it they prayed, not itis true for Charles I1 by name, but for all Christian princes,thus including both Charles I1 and also the King of Spainwith whom the country was at war. The Episcopalianscollected funds to maintain the exiled and distressed membersof the Anglican clergy in the hope of better times.Still more severe was the persecution inflicted upon theavowed Royalists and Catholics. In the middle of Marcha short time was fixed within which they were to leave 'London. And woe to any one who was found there after thetime had expired, for each man was known to the government.They were torn from their beds and hurried to prison.We find it stated in the accounts of foreign ambassadors,that the growing oppressiveness of the government, and theiranxiety for life and limb, drove the Royalists in May, 1658, tothe desperate plan of overpowering the patrols by a suddenarmed rising, and firing the city at the same moment inseveral places, in the hope of effecting a revolution. But thistime too, as our accounts tell us, there was a traitor amongthe confederates, and the system of supervision and repressionbecame stricter than ever. At no time were the prisons fuller:the number of political prisoners was estimated at 12,000.An address sent by the Anabaptists to the King.Rebellion, vi. 63r.Clarendon, History of theXII. 8. DEA TH OF OLIVER CROMWELL.207A.D. 1658.On the basis of the act passed for the safety of the Protectorin the beginning of the session of 1656, a high court ofjustice was instituted, with powers similar to those granted inthe trial of the King. On one occasion a split occurred in itsmidst which threatened to break it up, but a sufficient numberof members always remained to pronounce valid sentences.A general expression of sympathy was evoked when two menclosely connected with Cromwell's family were brought beforethe court as an example to deter others. The two were SirHenry Slingsby, a relation of the Protector's youngest stepson,who was charged with having gained adherents for the King inthe garrison at Hull; and Dr. Hewitt, who had performed themarriage alluded to '. Slingsby demanded to be tried beforea jury according to the law of the land. He was told that theadministration of justice was determined by act of Parliament;if Parliament resolved to alter the established form,every one was bound by its decision, all English subjects mustobey that authority '. With as little success Hewitt pleadedhis character as a clergyman-they were both condemnedand executed. Many others shared their fate.This policy undoubtedly served to ward off immediatedangers, but the old dislike to the Protector and his governmentgrew stronger in spite of all.When we consider the subsequent results of the conquestof Jamaica, it is difficult to imagine that it did not giveuniversal satisfaction; but such was in fact the case. TheProtector was continually reproached with having undertakena war on his own responsibility, without having previouslyconsulted Parliament, a war which it was said had wasted theresources of the country, and had brought no advantage.It is certain that the trading class had not as yEt been ableto recover from the losses which it had suffered from theSpanish embargo 3.Thurloe, April 27 : 'We have a very clear discovery of a most dangerous plot.Some examples of justice will be made. The persons to be tryed Bre not yetagreed. I think Sir H. Slingsby and Dr. Hewitt may be some of them.'Diary of Sir H. Slingsby 421.Public Plea, a pamphlet dated May 1659 :' Dying disappointed of his utmostdesigns, he left the statebankrupt of treasure honour or interest by unprofitablewars without advice of Parlian~ent, and the Commonwealth impoverished by

208 DEATH OF OLIVER CROMWELL. XII. 8.A.D. 1658.Even in matters of the most urgent importance in financialquestions, Cromwell began to feel the effects of this discontent.He appealed to the Common Council for a loan,but the city, which had always supplied money for Parliament,had as little now for Cromwell as formerly forCharles I. Already instances had occurred of contumacyin collecting the taxes voted by the last Parliament, on theground that their legality was doubtful. Was it probablethat taxes would be paid, which were sanctioned by noParliamentary vote ?It was the old principle which had lasted for centuries,and was deeply impressed in the mind of every Englishman,that no taxes unapproved by Parliament should be paid ; itwas the principle which had once been the strength of theopposition to Charles I, and which was now arrayed againstthe Protector.Cromwell proceeded at once to summon a new Parliament; a commission was appointed to consider how it shouldbe composed. Recourse was apparently had to the old formsof election, which allowed the government to exercise considerableinfluence ; and who could positively deny that hewould have succeeded and have obtained even a more yieldingassembly ? But who on the other hand could assert it withconfidence ?In contrast to the growing spirit of opposition at home,the position of the relations with Europe seemed far morefavourable-but settled and satisfactory it was not. Thehouse of Austria, against which Cromwell's chief efforts weredirected, stood once more at the head of a powerful confederacy:it was the champion of the ideas of legitimacyand Catholicism, ideas which had grown up with the oldEuropean system, and exercise an incalculable influence overmen's minds. Nor was he sure of his own allies, at leastdecay of trade.' In a discourse on the present state of England (in the BrandenburghArchives, 1659) we find the complaint that the war had brought but littlebooty, and that on the contrary great loss had been incurred by the confiscation ofEnglish property in all Spanish territories some years before, which was a directresult of the rupture, and by the consequent loss of Spain as their chief market.XII. 8. DEATH OF OLIVER CROMWELL. 209A.D. 1658.of the Dutch, who were only restrained from deserting him bythe terror of his name ; nor even of the King of Sweden, whowent too far for him ; nor of the Cardinal. The French hadalready intimated to the Spaniards the price at which theywould grant them peace. They had promised to restore allconquests, on the sole condition that Spain should allowthe marriage of the Infanta, who had the eventual rightof succession to the Spanish throne, with their own youthfulKing. Philip IV had as yet refused these terms, but it wasreasonable to expect that under the impres$ion of the defeathe had suffered he might again yield, as in fact he did yield.Charles I1 might in that case reckon on powerful assistancein Europe, as well as on corresponding support in England, .not merely among his old adherents, but also among his previousenemies. The greatest danger of all lay in internaldisunion. Thurloe once remarked that he feared the Stuartinfluence less than the disruption of his own party,-but whatif both coincided ?This situation of affairs was not encouraging to Cromwell'simmediate relations. His younger son, Henry, who was entrustedwith the government of Ireland, asks in one of hisletters, whether all did not still depend upon the personalcharacter of the Protector, upon his skill and his personalinfluence in the army, whether too his death would not involvethem in a bloody struggle.But even within the Protector's family division had penetrated.His brother-in-law Desborough, and his son-in-lawFleetwood, adhered steadily to the Anabaptists, to whichbody they belonged. Fleetwood and his wife avoided herfather's house. His other children, and the connexions ofthe family who were engaged in the government of the state,were inclined to conciliate the civil authority, which promisedthem continued enjoyment of their privileged position. Cromwellhimself considered an agreement with the Anabaptistsimperatively necessary. He once vehemently exclaimed, ' Wemust satisfy them, or we shall be involved in a fresh civilwar.'While his foreign and still more his domestic position wasthus critical, while the eyes both of friends and foes wereRANKE, VOL. 111. 1'

210 BEATH OF OLIVER CROMWELL. XII. 8.A.D. 1658watching for his next measures, measures which could never beanticipated, but which had always proved energetic and successful,he was overtaken by the common lot of mortals.Nothing is more misleading than to search for the psychologicalcauses connected with the death of great men, and toattribute to them a decisive influence. One of Cromwell'sconfidential attendants ventures to assert that the attemptto carry on an unparliamentary government had exhaustedhis vital powers. And certain it is that the failure of hisplans soured and disturbed him. In his own family circle,from which he used never to be absent at breakfast anddinner, for he was an excellent father, he was latterly neverseen for weeks together. The discovery of constantly renewedattempts upon his life filled him with disquiet. It issaid that he took opium, which could not fail to increase hisagitation. To this was added the illness and death of hisfavourite daughter, Lady Claypole, whose last ravings wereof the religious and political controversies which harassed herfather-the right of the King, the blood that had been shed,the revenge to come. The Independent ministers again foundaccess to him. When his growing indisposition was succeededby fever, and assumed a dangerous character, they still assuredhim that he would yet live, for God had need of him. Meantimehe grew worse and worse. We all know how themental feelings and the bodily organs react upon each other.Cromwell suffered from excessive fullness of the vessels of thebrain, and an internal corruption of the bile'. They attemptedto check the disease by a panacea, which gave him some relief,and brought him back from Hampton Court to Westminster,to the palace of the old kings at Whitehall. There he diedimmediately, on the 3rd of September, the anniversary of hisvictories of Dunbar and Worcester which had gained him thislodging. The people declared that he was snatched awayamid the tumult of a fearful storm, a proof that he was inleague with Satanic powers. Others saw in it the sympathyof nature with the death of the first.man in the world. But' Bates: 'In naturalibus fons mali comparuit : aliene licet ad adspecturn sane,intus tamen tab0 instar amurrae referto!XII. 8.A.D. 1658.DEA TH OF OLIVER CROMWELL. 211gales and storms follow their own laws-in reality the stormhad raged the night before. It was not till the afternoon thatCromwell died.But this belief was not confined to the common people.The next generation execrated Cromwell as a monster ofwickedness, while posterity has pronounced him one of thegreatest of the human race.To him was granted the marvellous distinction of breakingthrough the charmed circle which among the European nationshems in the private man. Invested with sovereign authority,and needing no higher sanction-for he was not compelled,like Richelieu, to convince his king by argument, or to pryinto cabinet intrigues-he forced his way into the history ofthe world. The King who reckoned a hundred ancestors inScotland, and held the throne of England by that hereditaryright, on which most other states rested, was overthrownmainly by the armed force which he created, and was thensucceeded by him.Yet Cromwell had the self-restraint to refuse the crownitself; that which he was, the general of the victorious army,invested with the highest civil authority, that he resolved toremain.For when once Parliament had stripped the monarchy ofthe military authority, the army displayed a tendency tosubmit no longer even to Parliament. The civil authoritybecame dependent upon the military. Cromwell took itin hand and resolved to uphold it against all opposition.Above all he was forced to suppress those institutions whichwere most nearly allied with the old order of things. Thearistocracy or the episcopacy could not be suffered to exist anymore than the monarchy itself. Least of all dared he tolerateCatholicism. Political and religious opposition to all theseelements were for Cromwell the end of his existence. Inthis he discerned the welfare of the country, the advancementof religion and morality, but also his own justification, if inpromoting his own cause he went so far as to resist thoseopponents, who sprang from the very heart of his party.He deemed it essential to bring all the active forces in thecountry into obedience to his will. Thus it was that heP 2

212 BEA TH OF OLIVER CROMT'ELL. XII. 8.A.D 1658.established a power which has no parallel and no appropriatename. It is true that the noble sentiments which flowedfrom his lips were also the levers of his power, and he didnot allow them to interfere with it; but no less true is itthat the supreme authority in itself was not his aim. Itwas to aid him in realising those ideas of religious liberty,as understood by Protestants, and of civil order and nationalindependence, which filled his whole soul. These ideas heregarded not as merely satisfactory to himself, but as actuallyand objectively necessary.Cromwell's was in fact a nature of deep impulses, restlessoriginality and wide comprehensiveness, at once slow andimpatient, trustworthy and faithless, destructive and conservative,ever pressing on to the untrodden way in front:before it all obstacles must give way or be crushed.If we ask what of Cromwell's work survived him, we shallnot find the answer in particular institutions of the state and theconstitution. We are never certain whether he contemplatedthe continuance of the power which he possessed himself:neither his House of Lords nor his Commons were destinedto endure ; nor yet the army of which he was the founder,nor the separatist movements with which he started. Timehas swept all this away. Yet he exercised nevertheless aninfluence rich in important results.We have seen how the germs of the great struggle are tobe found in the historical and natural conditions of the threecountries of Britain, and we have traced the part played bythe republican system in subjecting to England the twoother members of the British Commonwealth But it wasCromwell's victories which made this possible. The vision ofthe union of the three kingdoms in and through Protestantism,~hichad floated before the eyes of his predecessor Somerset,he brilliantly realised. His rise was associated from the firstwith a genuinely English theory, opposed equally to the encroachmentsof the Scots and to Irish independence. Hewon a place for it by force of arms, and then first, irregularlyenough it is true, admitted the Irish and Scottish representativesinto the English Parliament. We can scarcely believethat a parliamentary government of the three kingdoms wasXII. 8. DEATH OF OLIVER CROMWELL.A.D. 1658. 213possible at the time. The course of events tended rathertowards a military monarchy. It is Cromwell's chief merit tohave ruled the British kingdoms for a succession of years ona uniform principle, and to have united their forces in commonefforts. It is true that this was not the final award ofhistory: things were yet to arrange themselves in a verydifferent fashion. But it was necessary perhaps that the mainoutlines should be shaped by the absolute authority of a singlewill, in order that in the future a free life might developwithin them.But for the general history of Europe nothing is of moreimportance than the fact that Cromwell directed the energiesof England against the Spanish monarchy. It was the ideawhich was most peculiarly his own; the Commonwealth wouldhardly have done it. We are not considering the politicalvalue of this policy, against which there is much to be said ;it is only with its results that we are concerned. These consistedin the fact that the European system which had grownup out of the dynastic influence of the Burgundo-Austrianhouse, and had since been dominant for nearly two centuries,was driven out of the field and forced to open a new pathfor itself. To the English people itself, and especially totheir navy an important part was thus at once allotted.Cromwell did not create the English navy. On the contrary,the views of its chiefs were hostile to him; but hegave it its strongest impulse. We have seen how vigorouslyit rose to power in all parts of the world. The coasts ofEurope towards the Atlantic and Mediterranean especiallyfelt the weight of the English arms. The idea was morethan once suggested of effecting settlements on the Italianand even on the German coasts. Such a settlement wasactually gained in the Netherlands, and was to be graduallyenlarged. It was said that Cromwell carried the key of thecontinent at his girdle. Holland was compelled howeverreluctantly to follow the impulse given her by England.Portugal yielded in order to preserve her own existence.England could calmly await any future complications whichmight arise on the continent.It was Protestantism on which the internal unity of England

214 DEATH OF OLIVER CROMIVELL. XII. 8.A.D. 1658.was based, and a Protestantism moreover unexpectedly freefrom any flavour of sectarianism ; it was the same idea andthe necessity of upholding it, which was the motive powerin establishing her foreign greatness, and which reached itsfull development in that greatness. The influence of Francehad rescued Protestantism from destruction, but it had at thesame time kept it subordinate. On the other hand, it wasthrough Cromwell that Protestantism took up an independentposition among the powers of the world, and dispensed withall external aid The secession from the old doctrine andconstitution af the Western Church rose in importance withthe rise of those who supported it, and even acquired agreater and more pregnant significance.SO far as home government was concerned, Cromwellpossessed two qualities very opposite in themselves, yetsupplementing each other, a certain pliancy in matters ofprinciple, and great firmness in the exercise of authority.Had he allowed the tendencies of the separatists and thedemocratic zeal of the army, in conjunction with which herose to power, to run their course unchecked, everythingmust have been plunged in chaotic confusion, and the existenceof the new state would have been impossible. Utterlyopposite as he was to King Charles in disposition and character,and in the general bent of his mind, yet Cromwell exerciseda very similar influence upon the English constitution. TheKing upheld the idea of the English Church : in defence ofthis he died. Cromwell was the champion of civil law andpersonal property. He broke with his party when it attackedthese fundamental principles of society and of the state. Itwas of the most lasting importance for England that he didthis without fettering himself with the idea of the kingly power,and relying simply on the necessity of the case. But it wasbeyond his power thus to consolidate a tolerably durablepolitical constitution. His was at best but a de facto authority,depending for its existence on the force of armsand his own personal character. Such as it was it was feltto be an oppressive burden, at home no less by those wholonged for a return to the old legitimate forms, than by hisown party, whom he excluded from all share in ~ublicXI[. 8. DEATH OF OLIVER CIZOMWELL.-4.~. 1658.authority: abroad by those who feared him, and by those whowere his allies. In Amsterdam this feeling was grotesquelyenough expressed. When the news was received of Cromwell'sdeath, there was a momentary cessation of business. Peoplewere seen to dance in the streets, crying 'The devil isdead1 !' And so in London the mob were heard to uttercurses when Richard Cromwell, Oliver's son, was proclaimedProtector.What would or could be the next step? The generalbelief was that a sweeping revolution was imminent in theWestern world, and first of all in England. The Royalistsconsidered that such a revolution would turn out to theiradvantage.CuIpepper to Hyde, Amsterdam, Sept. ~o/so: 'The young fry dance in thestreets at noonday; the devil is dead, is the language at every turn!ClarendonPapers iii. 4x2.

BOOK XIII.FALL OF THE PROTECTORATE ANDTHE COMMONWEALTH. RESTORATION OF THEMONARCHY, 1658-1660.

THERE had been a time in England when the crown hadbeen as powerful, the hierarchy as firmly established, as in anyof the Western kingdoms. The nobility and the towns, unitedwith Church and King in Parliament, formed a constitutionof lasting and, so long as they were of one mind, of vigorousvitality. In such constitutions there can be no lack of disputes.Again and again in England were they actuilly foughtout with the sword, yet the Commonwealth remained essentiallyintact. It was otherwise in the struggles which broke outtowards the middle of the seventeenth century, in which allBritain was involved. In the course of these, under the influenceof religious, political and military impulses, deeplyingforces manifested themselves which broke the power of themonarchy and the aristocracy, and strove to replace themby a republic, though of a kind hitherto unknown.It is true that elsewhere in the manifold currents of Europeanpolitical life, republican institutions had now and thenappeared,-notably within the limits of the old Germanempire, on both sides of the Alps, in Upper and finally inLower Germany. It was still fresh in men's memories howthe Republic of the United Netherlands had been foundedand successfully upheld. But these free states were all ratherdetached territories than complete nationalities, and were ofmoderate extent, enjoying only an imperfect political independence,and internally aristocratic and conservative. Fundamentallydifferent in character was the new English

Commonwealth. It rested on the idea of the sovereignty of thepeople, which it endeavoured to realise by h system of representativegovernment. In such a system there was no roomfor aristocracy and church, nor even for such a representationof the local districts in the Lower House as had hithertoexisted. It could as little tolerate the magistracy and theold laws, as the inferior clergy and their necessary endowments.What must have been the results had a politicalorganisation of such thoroughgoing socialist tendenciesestablished itself firmly in the great maritime state of England?had Great Britain, now first united, awoke to theconsciousness of its unity and strength under republicanforms such as these ? It would have planted similar statesin every corner of the world.But in the three kingdoms, and especially in England, the oldnative system was so deeply rooted that men whom particularencroachments on the part of the King had driven to revolt,in their dread of further violations of the constitution, wouldnot break loose from it altogether. The lawful King was anexile, but from across the sea he incessantly influenced hisadherents, who had been weakened but by no means destroyed.Among them were the Cavaliers of all ranks who had foughtfor the father, and who saw in the son their only hope of regainingtheir position and preserving their estates. Amongthem too were the faithful members of the Anglican Church,which like all other forms of faith had drawn fresh strengthout of persecution ; numberless good Englishmen of the oldschool in the towns as well as in the country missed theauthority of the kingly name which their forefathers hadhonoured. The lawyers too regarded it as indispensable.England was almost divided into two distinct worlds, one ofwhich held fast to the institutions of the past, while the otherstrove after an unknown future ; worlds opposed in disposition,in conviction, in intention-each, if we may use the expression,with a political religion of its own.It is not necessary to inquire to which of the twoCromwell belonged, but in the heat of the struggle hegained a position which was distinct from either. No onewas more keenly alive to the strength inherent in the feelingof sympathy for what is ancient. Never did he lose sightof the exiled King and his allies at home and abroad. Yetwith the Republicans, who sought to impose a law of theirown upon the victorious power of the sword, the successfulgeneral who wielded it could never be perfectly in harmony :as little did he dare to carry out to their conclusions the destructivedoctrines of the fanatics, for these would have underminedthe ground on which he stood. He clearly saw thenecessity for a regular and simple government, and perfectlycomprehended its conditions. He knew how to remain masterof the forces which had raised him to power, and to governthem. Thus he contrived to render harmless and to keepunder the most antagonistic elements : he banished themto depths where they were powerless.It was because he did all this that his death was amomentous event. When the hand was no longer therewhich ruled both parties with its iron sceptre they breathedagain. The Royalists took heart, for they had regarded theProtector as their chief oppressor; but they were far too weakto move, so long as their enemies, who still retained exclusivepossession of political power, remained united. Everythingdepended on the possibility, now that the great holder ofpower was dead, of framing a strong union and discovering adurable and satisfactory form for the Commonwealth. Thedifficulty lay not merely in the comparative competency ofindividuals, but in the nature of the case itself. The greatcontroversies between monarchy and republicanism, betweencivil and military authority, between the rule of one denominationand tolerance, which have occupied men's minds inevery century, once more reappeared on this arena. On thepossibility of their solution depended the existence or the ruinof the party which had hitherto been victorious, and theultimate revival of their vanquished opponents : it involvedthe future of Britain and the nature of her influence uponthe world.

CHAPTER I.ATTEMPT TO CONTINUE THE PROTECTORATE.A GREAT statesman can never be properly estimated byhis contemporaries. They are easily blinded by his brilliancy,or else they feel his proximity and the conditions of his ruleto be oppressive. Cromwell, like most extraordinary men,died little known, and hated rather than loved. The worldsaw only the darker side of his career.Subsequent generations can appreciate the advantage whichEnglish trade has gained through Cromwell's West Indianconquests. The mercantile class of the day merely observedthat great immediate losses had followed from the rupturewith Spain. They counted up the number of merchant-vesselsthat had thus been destroyed and the millions of pounds thattheir cargoes were worth. Cromwell had forced the Dutch,however unwillingly, to attach themselves to him in generalmatters of policy, and thus early indicated the attitude whichafter many interruptions has been finally accepted. But itwas reserved for later history to appreciate this. His contemporariesregarded the Dutch above all as rivals, and assecret or open enemies. They disliked the treaty made withthem, and ignored the Navigation Act, which was in theirown favour. Cromwell's home-administration was even moreloudly blamed. In those points which had caused therupture with Charles I he had afforded even stronger groundof complaint, he had openly collected taxes on his ownauthority, had again and again dissolved Parliaments of themost different kind, had been guilty of insolent encroachmentsupon the course of justice and personal liberty. Howmany innocent persons had he involved in pretended plots,A TTXlWT TO CONTINUE THE PROTECTORA TE. 2223A.D. 1658.and then shut them up in prisons, banished to remote islands,or transported to the West Indies ? His tyrannical SupremeCourt of Justice had itself shed innocent blood. In thecounties his major-generals were little better than pachas.The Cavaliers, to whom Parliament had by solemn agreementgranted an amnesty, he had nevertheless harassed with oppressiveburdens, a violation of the law worse than any committedby a tyrant l. So unpopular was the Protectoratethat even Republicans could reproach it with the oppressionof their common foes.Those however were most indignant and discontented whohad aided in establishing the commonwealth under the influenceof religious motives, and had since found themselvesthrust aside : Crornwell died just when a fresh storm was imminentfrom that quarter.But in spite of this his son succeeded him without opposition.In 1657 the power of nominating his successorhad been conferred upon the Protector. Not till the very daybefore his death, during the paroxysm which preceded it,did he announce his choice, and nominate his eldest sonRichard as his successor, though in vague and doubtful terms2.But on the strength of it Richard Cjomwell was immediatelyproclaimed Protector of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland,and Ireland, and of the territories pertaining to them.From all sides the new Protector received addresses of congratulation.Yet the Protectorate was still very far from being a constitutionwith definite forms. Oliver's power had been in allrespects personal. It was nothing but what his innatequalities, his achievements in peace and war, his victoriesover his enemies, his authority over friends and allies, hadbeen able to make it. Was it probable that a young man,who, if not inferior to and weaker than most men, was certainlyno better, would be capable of perpetuating such a'The remonstrance and protestations of the well-affected people of the cities,London, Westminster, and others (Oct. 1659): A folio pamphlet which states allthis in greater detail.a 'If there were any, it was a puzzled nomination, and that very dark andimperfect.' Goddard, in Burton, Diary iii. 160.

224 A TTEMPT TO CONTINUE XIII. I.A.D. 1658.power. If it was to exist, it was necessary first of all formallyto constitute it.AS originally established it involved a contradiction whichhad not yet been solved. Cromwell's power had originatedin the command of the army. The civic authority had beenjoined to it under the title of Protector-but the Protectorand the General were none the less distinct. The officerswere not unwilling that Cromwell's son should succeed to theProtectorate, but it was no part of their theory that thegeneralship should also be hereditary. The first step whichRichard took on this assumption, when there was a vacancyin the army, to which he wished to appoint a naval officer,they openly opposed. They declared that no appointmentcould be made in the army without the knowledge ofthe Council of War, and they also desired to see a generalspecially nominated to command them in the room of himwho was dead. Richard Cromwell objected that he couldnot be really Protector unless he also possessed the militarypower; he could not otherwise fulfil the obligations whichthe law imposed upon him, he would burden himself withan intolerable responsibility, and resign all actual power toanother. But his arguments were unavailing. The officers heldregular meetings at Wallingford House, and Lambert, whoseretirement had been mainly due to similar views, reappearedamong them. The man who enjoyed their confidence wasCromwell's son-in-law Fleetwood, who was regarded as representingthe extreme religious party in the army and thecountry '. While desiring that he should be their general,they also requested the Protector to commit the posts ofconfidence, such as the Council of State, to none but menof pious principles, and zealously to carry on the good oldcause, the acconlplishment of secular and religious reform.Thus the old theories as to a complete reconstitution of the' Giavarilla (Secr. Ven.) : ' Portatisi alcuni d'essi con concetti non interamenteproprii facendosi osservare che era loro intentione d' havere per generalissimo il loroluogotenente Flitud e che 1' Altezza s. non potesse disponere di qiialsisia caricamilitare senza un consiglio di guerra. Dal canto di Flitud si trova il desgratiateLambert, qua1 sotto mano va fomentando et acomdendo gli animi di quellicl~e sono disystati.'x111. I. THE PROTECTORATE. 225A.D. 1658.state, according to the views of the godly and the separatists,came once more to light now that he who had kept themunder was dead. We know the division which this questionhad long before caused in Cromwell's family ; it now becamehistorically important. Cromwell's brother-in-law Desborough,and his son-in-law Fleetwood, strenuously advocated the religiousviews which coincided with the ambitious claims ofthe army. On the other hand, Cromwell's two sons sidedwith the civil power. Henry on one occasion, in a letter toFleetwood, declares that the separatist clergy would imposeas heavy a yoke upon the country as the bishops had done.He reminds him that the duty of the army was not to governbut to fight. Let us, he exclaims, avoid all arbitrary power,and establish a government according to the well-known lawsof the land *. Henry Cromwell, young, energetic, and notdevoid of ability, hoped by limiting its powers to strengthenthe Protectorate, and to secure his family in the enjoymentof it. Fleetwood was inspired by the conviction that nothingbut the renewal of the old religious zeal could enable thecountry and the army to carry-out the purposes of God. Hehad bent his knee before his father-in-law, the soldier andhero ; to his brother-in-law, who had no personal ciaims, hewould not yield an inch.But now reappeared the great question of the mutual relationsof the civil and military power, a question of life anddeath for all republics, if not for all states. The officersclaimed for the army not merely an independent position, buta decisive voice in the state. The young Protector held it tobe his duty to maintain the independence of the civil powerwhich had been entrusted to him and to keep the army insubjection. Among his confidential counsellors were men ofdistinction, such as Thurloe and St. John, who confirmed himin his resolution. They hoped that under the son it would beeasier than it had been under the father to establish the lawsand constitutional forms on which the safety of the new orderof things depended. Oliver had rejected their counsels with' Lord Depu'ty Cromwell to General Fleetwood, Oct. 20, 1658. Thurloe'sState Papers vii. 454.RANKE, VOI,. 111.Q

226 A TTEMPT TO CONTINUE XIII. I.A.D. 1659.a prompt decision that was almost arbitrary : Richard followedtheir advice.But for the attainment of their object only one course waspossible, that of summoning a Parliament. The financial difficultiesthemselves made it desirable. The precarious position ofthe government rendered it absolutely necessary. The courtof Whitehall, for so the Protector and his personal adherentswere called, took every precaution to secure the return ofdesirable candidates. They had recourse once more to thoseboroughs which had been superseded at the last election, asbeing most accessible to influence. Nor had they any reasonto fear the return of declared Royalists, since the qualificationswhich excluded them were still in force. The recognisedprinciple was, as was said at the time, that they wanted nota King, Lords, and Commons, but a president, a senate,and a popular assembly. The constitution which Oliver hadattempted to establish without any definite result was nowto be completed, in order to confirm and secure the interestswhich the manifold storms of the last twenty years hadcalled into existence.On the 27th of January, ~659, Richard CromweIl openedthe Parliament. In a stately barge, accompanied by an imposingretinue, he arrived at the steps of the Houses ofParliament. The sword was carried before him as he proceededfirst of all to hear the sermon and thence to theHouse of Lords. Like the kings of old, Richard causedthe Commons to be summoned by the Black Rod. A tribunedecorated with royal splendour had been erected forhim: from this he delivered his 'speech from the throne1.'In the course of it he alluded to his departed father as the'great peacemaker in the three kingdoms,' thanks to whomeach man lived securely in them, and could now hope toenjoy the fruits of that which he had sown. For himself,Richard claimed the right to succeed him in virtue of theacts passed in 1657, in confornlity to which he pledgedhimself to govern with the assistance of the counsel of Par-Publick Intelligencer, Jan. 24, 1653,XIII. I. THE PROTECTORATE. 227A.D. 1659.liament, which he had called together out of the three nationsnow united in a single commonwealth.As yet however it was not proved whether Parliamentwould recognise even his civil authority and accept the Protectoratein its present form.This the Republicans, a considerable number of whom hadsucceeded in getting themselves returned, definitely opposed.They urged that the acts of 1657 were the work of an assembly,which the arbitrary exclusion of some of its members had robbedof all claim to be a true Parliament, and had only then beencarried by a small majority. The constitution thus establishedwas thoroughly unacceptable : it gave the Protector rightsmore extensive than those of the old kings, and especiallythose very rights which had been the ground of dispute withthe last monarch-the control of the militia and the powerof veto through the establishment of a second House. Theydecided that the new system was inconsistent with the theoryof representative government, and was ruinous to England 1.They even went so far as to ask whether, since it was uncertainthat the late Protector had really nominated his successor,and God had interfered to prevent it, it was the duty andthe wish of the assembly itself to set up such a successor.It is worth our while to notice how Henry Vane in oneof his speeches combines the leading ideas. He reminds theHouse of the importance attached to the idea of the sovereigntyof the people in the recent struggle with the King.The King had refused to accept it, but it had been sealedwith his blood : unless it were true, it must be doubtfulwhether his execution had been an act of justice or a murder.The original right which Parliament then assumed in thename of the nation it still possessed. The executive authorityin the state had, it was true, been entrusted to the Protector,and with ample rights. They had even empoweredhim to nominate his successor; but in doing so it wasnever expressly declared that his successor should also inheritSpeech of Mr. St. Nicholas in Burton's Diary iii. I 19 : ' I know not what themessengers of the people shall answer at their return, to such as shall ask what wehave done for their liberties, but only 'I ruina Angliae." '

228 ATTEMPT TO CONTINUE XI^. r .A.D. 1659.this authority for his lifetime: and lastly the nominationitself was doubtful. Vane proposed that they should reversethe order of proceeding, and first verify the right and titleof the new Protector and then acknowledge him : he was theson of a conqueror; it was possible to make him the heir byadoption; for it was necessary to establish the constitutionon a firm basis if they would exclude the old line1.The wish of Vane's party was to retain the Protector atthe head of the Commonwealth as President, but with powersexactly defined and restricted. The House of Lords thathad been summoned on the plan laid down by Oliver theywould not hear of for an instant, but wished to replace itby an elective senate. The chief power was to rest withthe House of Commons because it was composed of therepresentatives of the people.The speeches in which these ideas are expounded are acuteand logical, and display talent and experience : but they werewithout effect, because the conclusions to which they led wentgreater lengths than was considered desirable, and mighteasily have again immersed the country in the confusions ofa civil war. The interests of the Protectorate, which theyattacked, were too strongly represented in the House forthem to accomplish anything against it. The presence, forinstance, of the Irish and Scottish members-thirty from eachcountry-against whose interference the Republicans vainlyprotested, secured a majority for the government on everyimportant question. Others felt themselves bound by theoath of allegiance which they had taken on entering Parliament.Richard Cromwell was actually acknowledged asLord Protector and Supreme Magistrate of the Commonwealth.There was no mention in his case of the kingly dignity, asthere had been in his father's; and more than this, a debatewhich was begun upon the rights and liberties of the nation,with the view of limiting his power by defining them, led' The old family,' 'the old line,' Burton iii 180. In the Old ParliamentaryHistory xxi. 289, we find that Charles I1 was termed Prctender, but I venture tomaintain that the preceding words 'the Pretenaer's designation . . . with' etc.refer to Richard, who claimed to be first acknowledged, and not to the old family,who cannot be spoken of there.XUI. I. THE PROTECTORATE. 229A.D. 16590to no result. The government did not establish its claim onall the points mooted in the course of discussion, but generallyit kept the upper hand. The full authority which had beenpranted to the father by the acts of 1657 passed to the son,b -and this extended far beyond the powers of a president. Itrested on the principle that it was derived from God and sacred.All the more importance now attached to the remainingquestion of the proper relation between the Protector andthe army.The officers were already in a state of great excitement.They felt themselves not merely overlooked, but actuallythreatened, so far as Parliament displayed an inclination toresent the acts of violence which had occurred under OliverCromwell; for they had been the very persons by whom thoseacts had been committed. In a long address to the LordProtector they complained that their rights had been slighted,and the good old cause neglected, which involved the libertyof the nation. ' For this cause,' so runs a special remonstrancefrom the inferior officers, 'we have covered ourselves withblood; we shudder when we think of the account which wemust one day give, if we suffer the blood-bought liberties ofthe people to be again destroyed.' The troops were confinedto but a limited circle of ideas: they held that by what theyhad done and by what had happened they were justified, if notmorally bound, in adhering to the ideas which they had onceadopted, and to defend them against all who at any timewished to restore the old bondage.At the same time the army openly advocated the proposalfor separating the suprenie command from the Protectorate.It was asaerted in various ways that the Protectorate hadbeen appended to the generalship, not the generalship tothe Protectorate. Oliver Cromwell had been in command ofthe army before he took in hand the civil government andwas declared Protector. In so declaring him, regard hadbeen paid to his personal qualities, his genius, his honesty;but the combination of the two offices was not necessary'.An Expedient for the Preventing of any Difference, by a Lover of his Country.Feb. 26, 1658/9. Let the officers of the army choose their general, and let himhave his commission from the Protector and Parliament.'

230 ATTEMPT TO CONTlNUE XIII. I.A.D. 1659.Their demand was that Richard should exercise the dutiesof supreme magistrate in the three kingdoms, but that thearmy itself should chose its general. It was thought thatthe connecting link between the military and civil powerwould be satisfactorily provided if the officer so selectedshould then receive his commission from the Protector andParliament. It was even doubted whether at present therewas any lawful commander of the army at all.The Protector laid the address of the officers before theHouse of Commons. On the 18th of April the debate uponit commenced.Several of the most distinguished officers were membersof the House. An understanding was effected between themand the Republican leaders, and the question was seriouslydiscussed whether the Protector ought to be considered asgeneral, or whether it would not be better to appoint anothergeneral, or possibly several others. Little as the Republicanssympathised with all the views of the army, yet it wasessential for them not to allow the principle which lay atthe root of the Protectoral government, and which threateneddestruction to themselves, to be finally established. Theyeven warmly supported the claims of the army, and carefullyavoided giving them offence, for thus they would have revivedthe courage of their bitterest opponents, the Cavaliers, andperhaps caused fresh bloodshed. It was a policy which foundsympathy and support in the House of Lords, which waschiefly composed of officers.In the Lower House however the opposite party were farthe stronger. The majority there were perfectly willing thatprovision should be made for the support of the troops andthe payment of the arrears due to them. But at the sametime they thought it unbearable that the army should wishto erect itself into a separate estate, should hold assemblies,and pass decrees in opposition to those of Parliament. Theyconsidered that the honour and safety of the country, no lessthan the interests of the service, required on the contrarythat the assembled officers should return to their garrisons.' It would fare ill,' they declared, 'with Parliament if it couldno longer order them to return to their posts.' The Lower~111. 1. THE PROTECTORATE. 231A.D. 1659.House denounced all assemblies of officers held without theprevious sanction of the Protector and Parliament as illegal.~t was resolved,-for London was already crowded with disorderlybodies of troops which threatened its liberty,-thatevery officer should pledge himself in writing never to interruptthe sittings and subsequent deliberations of Parliament.- After these preliminary enactments, to which the House-chiefly trusted for its safety, it proceeded on the 21st of Aprilto discuss the all-important question of the position whichthe military power should hold. The Republicans urged thatfar too much scope would be given to the Protector if theygranted him the control of the militia, even in conjunctionwith Parliament. They alleged instances of supreme magistrateswho enjoyed no control of the armed forces-such asthe Doges of Genoa and Venice. But they failed to convincethe majority, who could not hope to carry through their plansof civil reform except with the assistance of a strong Protectorate.It would be absurd to join with the supreme legislativemagistrate another with whom should rest exclusivelythe execution of the laws. And as regarded any claim ofthe army to a share in the supreme power, the House wasfar from recognising anything of the sort. It had alreadydeclared that the army was an army of the Protector andthe Parliament, and that these should therefore share themilitary authority between them. No decree had as yetbeen passed, but there could be no doubt that RichardCromwell would be proclaimed general of the army on thefollowing day 1.It was a critical moment for the existence of the systemwhich had sprung out of the rebellion. If it was to bemaintained and completed, this was only possible on thecondition that the army submitted : but strong in its ownposition and in the support of a party in Parliament, thearmy clung obstinately to its claims for independence. Itdisregarded equally the parliamentary majority and theirLudlow's assertion that this had been already done cannot be reconciled withthe Journals, so far as they have been preserved.

232 A TTEMPT TO CONTlNUE XIII. I.A.D. 1659.parliamentary chief: in defiance of their orders fresh regimentswere summoned to the capital. On the news ofthe debates held on the 21st, the troops assembled thatevening at St. James's: Desborough then proceeded with adeputation of officers to Richard at Whitehall, to demandthe immediate dissolution of Parliament on the followingday. At Whitehall counter - preparations had been made.The government, who were supported by the CommonCouncil of London and the Presbyterians, had also gainedover some officers, and ordered them to concentrate theirtroops at Whitehall. Richard delayed acceding to theofficers' demands: apparently he wished to await the issueof the impending struggle. What was to decide the result ?The officers who had gone over to Richard could not controlthe subalterns and the common soldiery, who sympat$isedwith the separatist and Republican ideas expressed in theaddresses to the Protector and Parliament: they refused todesert their old companions in arms. Instead of to Whitehallthey marched to St. ~irnes' and joined the rest. The Protectorwas forsaken even by his own guard; he had barelyzoo men with him : resistance was impossible under thecircumstances.In this difficulty it was suggested to Richard that he shouldthrow himself into the city of London, rally the Royalistsround him, and proclaim the lawful King and a free Parliament.He would thus permanently secure a position ofimportance and honour for himself and his family. ButRichard was not the man to embrace so extraordinary aresolution : and who could have answered for the results?The city might have given him up, or the army have seizedthe city, and his own life have been endangered. There wasreason to fear that the Royalists would take advantage ofthe confusion to rise: it was their anxiety on this last headthat mainly induced those about Richard's person to advisehim to yield.The officers waited in a house near, till, early the nextmorning, the Secretary of State handed over to them theorders requisite for effecting the dissolution. The Commonsadjourned before the announcement could be made, but whenXIII. I. THE PROTflCTORA TE. 233A.D. 1659.they returned to resume the sitting they were turned backby the troops '.So ended Richard Cromwell's attempt to establish the authoritywhich he had inherited from his father on a firmerbasis, by allying it with a moderately free Parliament. Atthe moment when he seemed to have attained his object, hewas forced by the army to dissolve an assembly in whichhe had a majority in his favour.It did not immediately follow from what had been donethat Richard' should cease to be Protector. The colonelswould have allowed him to remain, provided he acceded totheir proposals. But both the inferior officers and the privatesoldiers thought differently. The Protectorate had neversatisfied them, from a political point of view, and still lessfrom a religious one. The army in its assembly declared fora pure Republic, without the presidency of a single person;in other words, without a Protector.No compromise was any longer practicable. It had beenpossible for the victorious general who had seized the civilauthority to unite it with the military, but when once a splithad taken place between them, the alliance could never berenewed. Under Oliver the military power had been thebasis of the whole system. Under Richard the civil powerwould have preponderated; but this the army would notallow. Strictly speaking, Richard never possessed the supremepower. He was overthrown before he succeeded inacquiring it.' Cp. Ludlow ii. 641, but the account of the French ambassador, who was nearthe Protector's person, is, I think, more trustworthy. It is given in Guizot i. 366.I have followed it even more closely than he has done.

CHAPTER 11.ATTEMPT TO FORM A COMMONWEALTH ON A NEW BASIS.THE monarchical authority which had arisen on the basisof the new system had been shattered by dissensions betweenthe very elements out of which it was composed. Therestoration of the Commonwealth followed as a matter ofcourse ; but what form could it assume?The astonishment felt was general, when the army, whichhad once forcibly dispersed all that remained of the LongParliament, now resolved to restore it. But in reality itwas not so surprising as it seemed. For during the lastsession the leaders of the two parties had come to an understandingwith each other. Together they overthrew the Protectorate,which had attempted to subject them to the disciplineof the old civil laws. They united in advocatingthe doctrines of the separatists, which once more found freescope upon English soil.The army, which had played the decisive part in the recentrevolution, now took the initiative in the work of reconstruction.A declaration drawn up at Wallingford House states'that they recollect that the members of the ParliamentaryAssembly which sat until April 20, 1653, had been championsof the good old cause, and had been throughout favouredwith God's assistance. They therefore felt it to be their dutyto summon them once more to a renewed exercise of theirformer rights and powers.' This step was mainly due tothe influence of John Lambert, who had upheld the causeof the army from his seat in Parliament, and had in doingso allied himself with the Republican leaders. He enjoyedat this time the greatest reputation with both sides. After.4 TTEMPT TO FORM A NEW COMJION WEAL 2''.235A.D. 1659.some preliminary discussions, which however failed to bringabout a satisfactory agreement, he proceeded on the eveningof the 6th of May to Chancery Lane, to the house of theMaster of the Rolls, the former Speaker Lenthall, where themost prominent members of the Parliament dissolved in 1653were either already met or appeared -shortly afterwards1,and presented to them the declaration. They could haveno hesitation in accepting it, and obeying the summons toresume their old seats. For six years they had been disregardedand overlooked, and were now by a sudden turn offortune invested with the authority which was confessedlythe highest in the Commonwealth. The next day they proceeded,forty-two in number, from the Painted Chamber wherethey had met, to St. Stephen's Chapel, headed by Lenthall,before whom the mace, the badge of the Speaker's office,was borne. There they resumed their old seats. The firstannouncement of their restoration was contained in a declaration,in which they promised to give the Commonwealth sucha constitution that not only the property but the personaland religious liberty of each man should be secured, withoutthe rule of a single person, without monarchy, and withouta House of Peers.Such was the formula which was now generally adoptedas distinctive of republicanism. It is true that the Commonwealthassumed a shape which was far from implying a freeparticipation of the people. It was in fact an alliance betweentwo parties, formerly opposed, and which had now made commoncause against a third which .held them in subjection. Theexecutive authority was at first entrusted to a committee ofsafety, in which, along with eight generals, the three principalRepublican leaders, Vane, Haslerig, and Scott, obtained seatsand votes. A Council of State was subsequently established,in which more importance was assigned to the civil element :we notice among its members Bradshaw, Ashley Cooper, andWhitelocke-in all there were sixteen civilians and fifteen' Such is the account given in the weekly paper 'Mercurius Politicus,' No. 566,which gives the fullest details. According to the statements made in Parliamentitself the members were already present.

236 ATTE&IPT TO FORM A COMMONWEALTH XIII. 2.A.D. 1659.officers. The Great Seal of the Protector was broken inhalf, as that of the King had been, and the Seal of 1651,on which the current year was styled the third of restoredliberty, came again into use.For appearance sake it seemed desirable that the neworder of things should be accepted by Oliver Cromwell'ssons. They were offered the payment of their debts, andan establishment proportionate to their father's services, asuitable residence, and an income which in those days wasconsiderable. Richard yielded at once ; adapted by naturefor a private station only, he demanded nothing of theCommonwealth but its protection. Henry might well havefelt tempted to make himself independent in Ireland, buta precautionary measure which his father had adopted forhis own security, made such a course impossible. OliverCromwell had stationed no officer in Ireland who had notlanded property in England, in order to be able to preventor to punish any attempt at desertion by confiscation oftheir property. Thus it happened that the Irish army wasdependent on the newly-established government in England ;they followed at once the example set by the army in England.Henry was finally forced to submit I.With the Protector's family fell also all those connectedwith it: the lawyers who had endeavoured to assimilate itto the monarchy, the advisers who had guided its homepolicy.In proportion to their former power they now encounteredhate and persecution.The separatists who had seen themselves excluded froma share in the government, the officers who had seen themselvespassed over, and were now masters once more, didnot leave it long doubtful on what principle they meant toconduct the administration.As early as the 12th of May a fresh address was issuedfrom Wallingford House, enumerating the points which wereessential in the present crisis. They were chiefly the follow-XIII. 2. ON A NEW BASIS. 237A.D. 1659.ing:-the recognition sf the Republican constitution as a meansof securing personal liberty and the rights of property; theestablishment of a system of justice neither oppressive norvexatious, but which should protect the people; religiousfreedom for the various Christian sects, with the exceptionhowever of Papists and Prelatists; the reconstitution of theUniversities and of the liturgy in accordance with the strictestreligious views ; the appointment to state-magistracies of menof tried religious and republican views ; the unconditional exclusionof all who adhered toethe royal cause; but on the otherhand indemnity for all who had taken part in the acts ofthe government since the dissolution of the Long Parliament,and the confirmation of these acts: and lastly the establishmentof a constitution in which the legislative authorityshould be vested in the people as represented by two Houses,and the executive in a Council of State composed of competentand trustworthy persons devoted to the good cause.These articles merely reflect the old avowed religious andpolitical views of the army. They promise a complete reformof the state, almost such as the Little Parliament had warmlydesired : that which neither they nor the Protector could accomplishthey hoped to carry out by means of the restoredLong Parliament. Their own independence they took forgranted in its full extent. They did not demand that aspecial leader should be given them, but simply declaredthat they recognised Charles Fleetwood their general ascommander-in-chief of the English army. At the headof the list of those who signed the address is Lambert'sname 1.On many important points Parliament agreed with theofficers. It proceeded at once to discuss the address, andas early as the 20th of May unanimously accepted theclauses relating to the republican constitution, the administrationof justice, the Church and the Universities. It wasresolved to entrust posts of confidence and authority to' *No officer would stir to defend his power and government, when Lambertand Fleetwood turned out Dick, because they feared the sequestration or the lossof their lands in England.' Harley MSS. 991, p. 94.It has been often printed, e. g. in the Old Parl. Hist. xxi. qoo. We have onlythe scantiest notices of the actual proceedings. The best account is in theMercurius Politicus, NO. 567-569.

238 ATTEMPT TO FORM A COJfMONWEALTH XIII. 2.A.D. 1659.none but those who had given proofs of their attachmentto the Republican cause. The next question was all-importantfor the preservation of peace, and had formed themain argument for the immediate re-establishment of aParliamentary power l. Parliament took measures for payingthe army, and even raised the daily pay of the commonsoldiers. It solemnly and distinctly announced that allarrears due to the army-and these had again become considerableduring the recent troubles-should be paid in full;and declared itself ready to adopt the most extraordinaryways and means for this purpose, for instance the sale ofthe palace of Whitehall and Somerset House with all theirappurtenances 7 A commission was appointed to inquireinto the state of the Treasury, in other words, into thegeneral condition of the public revenue. It ordered notonly the further payment of the existing imposts, but thecollection of all customs, excise duties and monthly taxeswhich still remained unpaid.The eKect of these measures and of their success wasthat the army on its side did not insist upon its claim toindependence so obstinately as might have been expected.Parliament enacted that the commissions of all officers bothin the army and the navy should be renewed, and signedby the Speaker in the name of the Commonwealth. Theycontained an emphatic declaration that the regiments towhich each officer belonged, had been formed and wouldbe maintained for the service of Parliament; that eachofficer was bound to obey the orders of Parliament,or of the Council of State appointed by Parliament, andfurther to be subordinate to his superior officers accordingto the rules of military discipline. The proposal of thearmy with reference to Fleetwood was at best but partially' Some reasons humbly proposed to the officers of the army, April 28, 1659.'First because the present great necessities and pressures of the army and navyrequire it, there being no other visible authority for raising money. If moneyshould be raised it would but more enrage the people and come short ofexpectation.'a 'For and towards the satisfaction of the great arrears and pay due unto theXIII. 2. ON A NEW BASIS. 239A.D. 1659.accepted. Parliament nominated him commander-in-chiefof the forces in England and Scotland, but hesitated togive him the title of general, a title under which Essexfirst of all, and subsequently Cromwell, had exercised anauthority over the army. He was styled merelylieutenant-general. The army felt itself insulted by these~rdinances, but did not consider it advisable to oppose them,and thus in all probability endanger their chances of pay.The commissions were distributed in a manner calculatedto display the majesty of Parliament. Colonels and officerswere summoned in turn to the table at which the Speakersat ; before handing them their commissions, he pointedout to them how great was the confidence which Parliamentreposed in them, and how justifiable therefore was the expectationthat they would prove faithful. Together withthe rest Fleetwood and even Lambert received theirs. Theyquietly listened to the exhortation to be obedient and loyalto the Parliament and the Commonwealth'. All kinds ofrumours of impending dissensions were already afloat. Theofficial paper was careful to contradict them. It prophesiesthe failure of all hostile conspiracies, thanks to the good understandingbetween the army and Parliament. And in fact socomplete was this understanding that the Commonwealth wasonce more quickened into life. The judges, like the officers,swore to serve it without a single ruler, without King andLords, with steadfast loyalty. The clergy were promised thecontinued payment of the tithes which supported them. Itcontributed not a little to the preservation of peace thatParliament at the desire of the army fixed a not very distantdate for the expiration of the session, May 7, 1660, afterwhich the republican constitution based on the representativeprinciple was to come into operation more or less as the armyhad proposed.As so frequently happens in England, everything yieldedto authority. From all sides declarations of allegiance pouredin. This government, like its predecessors, met with obedience,' ' That the Parliament expected faithfulness and obedience to the Parliamentand Commonwealth.' Mercurius Politicus, June I I.

240 ATTEMPT TO FORM A COMMONWEALTH XIII. 2.A.D. 1659.but in its very nature it involved a contradiction, different itis true from the former one, but in some degree analogous toit, which for a time was repressed, but broke out suddenlywith full vehemence.Parliament, while acctpting several of the articles proposedby the army, declared that for others a searching inquiry bya large committee was necessary. Every week the officialpaper announced that the discussion was proceeding ; on the5th of July it reported that the amendments adopted incommittee would be shortly laid before the House; andfinally on the rath, that the bill was completed. It alsogave the provisions which had been agreed upon. Theywere enactments of decisive importance for all public andprivate relations, but at the same time of a nature whichconfirmed the view which had been expressed from thefirst, that the army would be no better treated by Parliamentthan Parliament had formerly been by the army.They were directly and avowedly hostile to the wishesof the army.The army had demanded the recognition of all laws andproclamations issued since the dissolution of the Long Parliament,and also an amnesty for all acts committed by individualsin the service of the state. Comprehensive as thisdemand sounds, it involved even more than the actual wordsimply. It assumed that the Protectorate had been lawful :its acts were placed on the same level with those of any otherEnglish government, and all retrospective inquiries were precluded.But this the members of the old Parliament wouldnot concede. They had themselves suffered from the violenceof the army under Cromwell's command. All the self-respectthey possessed shrunk from recognising the validity of suchillegalities. The judicial proceedings alone were accepted inthe new bill, but not, for instance, the distribution of dignitiesand offices, an omission which was most keenly felt. Thedecision with respect to these was reserved to Parliament.The indemnity was granted but with certain limitations; itextended only to acts connected with the great politicalchanges, and not to those which, as the petition comprehensivelyexpressed it, were directed to the maintenance of peaceXIII. 2. ON A NEW BASIS. 241A.D. 1659.and order. It was difficult to say what this category mightnot have included. Those in particular who had assistedin the collection of excise duties, customs, rents, and freshimposts, were declared liable for all arrears which had notbeen previously cancelled l.The old animosities revived once more. Both Parliamentand army were after all but flesh and blood; they had oftenbeen enemies, and had for the present been reconciled by thepressure of circumstances. The soldiers had restored themembers of Parliament to their seats. That the latter now,justifiably or not, claimed to be the only lawful power, andassumed a position of authority, was intolerable to the others.They would not submit to be threatened by the men whomthey had raised to power. ' I do not see,' exclaimed Lambert,'why the officers should 'be at the mercy of the members ofParliament, and not rather the members at the mercy of thearmy '-a remark which expresses the whole point at issue.The two parties which composed the existing state were stillat heart opposed, perhaps irreconcileably, to each other. Anopen collision between them was inevitable, had not a moreextended movement disclosed itself, which equally threatenedboth and thus rendered union for the time indispensable.' That all offices and places of trust pretended to be given and granted, sinceApril 19, 1653, and before May 7, 1659, shall be and are to the disposal1 of theParliament.'Cp. Ludlow, 1677 : 'I know not why they should not be at our mercy, as wellas we at theirs.'RANKE, VOL. 111.

CHAPTER 111.LIKE all crises in revolutionary epochs, the overthrow ofthe Protectorate materially altered the position of parties.In the first place it did more to revive the hopes of theRoyalists than even the death of Cromwell. Not only didthe whole system, which had crushed them and deprivedthem of their rights as citizens, seem to be tottering to itsfall, but they found allies whom otherwise they could neverhave hoped to gain.The Presbyterians, whom Oliver Cromwell had conciliatedand all but won over to his side, were naturally opposed tothe new government, from whose Anabaptist leanings theycould expect nothing but oppression and persecution. Asa party they were still numerous and influential. Theyreckoned among their adherents the great majority of thetowns, and above all the capital, which was only preventedfrom declaring itself by the prudence of the authorities.Those members of Parliament who had been forcibly expelledin 1648 now formed a rallying point for the agitators.The restoration of those who had enjoyed their seats downto 1653 reminded them that they too had rights which hadbeen violated. Some few even made the attempt to establishtheir claims single-handed: they pleaded that if it were thegood old cause that was in question, it was most adequatelyrepresented by the majority of the old Parliament, which hadbeen violently dissolved at the very moment when they contemplateda reconciliation with the King, and not by thefactious minority, through whose excesses it was that theprivileges of Parliament had been violated. In the capital'I . ROYALIST MOVEMENTS IN 1659. 243A.D. 1659.the excluded members were as numerous as those who hadbeen admitted, while in the country there were more thana hundred of them. They all demanded to be restored tothe exercise of their powers. The opposition was furtherstrengthened by the accession of the Cromwellians, who hadsat in Parliament under the Protectorate or had been membersof the government during the last few years. Theirfear was that the party now in power would treat this complicityas a crime, and would take vengeance on them fortheir own expulsion. In short the comparatively conservativeparty in the late disturbances was now impelled, both by theconsciousness of its former importance, and by its dread ofthe revolutionary and hostile tendencies of the new administration,to look about for some means of resistance ; but onlyfrom the monarchy and its adherents could any such behoped for.It is impossible to ascertain exactly how the union of thevarious parties was effected ; without any warning a widespreadcombination disclosed itself, which had been long andsecrctly prepared. We are told that the 1st of August hadbeen appointed as the day for the expulsion of those Cavalierswho had not made their peace with the Commonwealth1. Thevery same day was selected for a Royalist rising by the differentparties now allied against the government. Throughoutthe western and eastern counties the old friends of the King,now once more invested by him with full powers, rose in arms.They were joined by some of the most distinguished of thosewho had formerly been their bitterest opponents. It wasarranged that General Massey should seize Gloucester, Willoughbyof Parham, Lynn, and George Booth, one of theexcluded members, the city and castle of Chester. Plymouthand Bristol, Shrewsbury and Exeter were to be attacked.A general seizure was contemplated of the most importantplaces on the coast and inland. General Montague was to' Gregory, Narrative of remarkable affairs of Great Britain, a MS. recentlyadded to the British Museum: 'The day appointed by the Rump for the banishmentof the Cavaliers out of England who had not before compounded for theirestates.'R 2

244 ROYALIST MO VEMENTS XIII. 3.A.D. 1659.bring the fleet home from the Sound to support the insurrection: assistance was also expected from the Continent.Peace had not yet been concluded between the two greatpowers of the day, Spain and France, but hostilities hadalready ceased, and both were at liberty to turn their attentionto English affairs. It was in fact a moment whenboth seemed inclined to favour Charles 11. The Spaniardswere actually in alliance with him, and had secured advantageousterms in the event of their helping to procure hisrestoration ; in the Spanish Netherlands there was a strongfeeling in favour of supporting an expedition, consistingchiefly of Irish troops, under the command of the Duke ofGloucester, which should sail from Ostend and effect a landingin one of the eastern counties. The French were lessdecided in their sympathies. Through their ambassador theystill maintained friendly relations with the Republicans ; butit is certain nevertheless that the minister in power, CardinalMazarin, expressed his approval when Marshal Turenne promisedthe Duke of York, who visited him in Amiens, thathe would convey him across to the English coast, with a sufficientforce and even with the necessary artillery l. Charles 11,who was kept fully informed of all that went on, only waitedfor a first success to cross over. He was anxious to be nearat hand, and set out for Calais under the escort of a Frenchgeneral 2.But this effort for his restoration was doomed, like theformer ones, to utter failure. The suspicions of the Republicanswere aroused by vague rumours and a premature ostentationof confidence ; letters were next intercepted, revealingwith tolerable distinctness the extent of their enemies' combinationsand their objects ; on this discovery a11 dissensionswere for the moment postponed, and only self-defence wasthought of. The Council of State sat day and night 3. In' Lettres de Turenne i. 199.Letter from Lord Taafe, St. P. 0. : ' The King was not resolved to cross thesea until1 he received a full knowledge of the grounds his friends should have toinvite him.'The Gazette of July 29 gives Lady Mary Iloward, daughter of the Earl ofBerkshire, as the person who betrayed the correspondence of the conspirators.These sheets supply many facts hitherto overlooked.XIII. 3. IN THE SUNMER OF 1659. 245A.D. 1659.the capital all important or suspected posts were secured.The main roads in the suburbs were guarded by regimentsof cavalry; in all the counties the militia were called out andplaced under trustworthy officers. The whole civil and militaryauthority belonged absolutely to the Comm~nwealth, andnumerous as the Royalists might be in the country, yet soscattered were they, that their efforts, wherever they attempteda rising, were in appearance merely the work of a weak andfactious minority. In anticipation of an attack upon London,they had selected Tunbridge and Redhill in Surrey as theirrallying points; arms had been collected there for the youngrecruits whom they expected from the country round andfrom London ; and here, on the borders of Kent, Sussex, andSurrey, the gentry who were in the secret were to assemble.But even these meeting-places were already known to theCouncil of State. When the Earl of Lichfield appeared withsome eighty Cavaliers in Redhill Wood, he was instantlyattacked by the Surrey militia, who were strengthened byreinforcements of regular troops, and driven from the field. InTunbridge they failed to collect even so insignificant a forceas this. Willoughby of Parham was seized in his own house.Massey had been already made prisoner, but escaped underc?ver of a dark and stormy night. Lord Byron and ColonelWhite appeared in Sherwood forest with a considerable bodyof men, only to find themselves confronted by the militiasupported by some troops of the line, at the sight of whomthe Cavaliers dispersed. In Nottingham the inhabitants tookup the Royalist war-cry of the fugitives, but nothing furtherresulted. In the great towns generally no movement wasmade; the members of the separatist sects were to have beenfirst attacked, and in Gloucester a list was to have been madeof them, and the whole number condemned to death. Theseintended severities had the effect of driving the separatistsinto closer union with the Commonwealth. They formedthemselves into regiments under colonels approved by theCouncil of State, and commanded by Sir Henry Vane andSkippon.In one district, it is true, the Royalist movement gainedthe upper hand; in Cheshire and Lancashire, where the

246 ROYALIST MO VEI~~ENTS XIII. 3.AD. 1659.influence of Derby and Booth excited the inhabitants of allranks to open hostilities. But even in these counties theinsurgents never established their supremacy : Chester castlewas successfully held for the Parliament by the commandant.The expectation too that the neighbouring counties wouldassist or even openly join the Royalist cause was disappointedby the precautions taken by the Commonwealth and the successwhich attended them. Sir George Booth, who at the outsethad been cheerful and full of hope, soon became depressedand anxious. He could not even be sure of the Cheshiregentry who followed him. Meanwhile he was attacked bythe Republican troops under the command of their ablestleader, General Lambert ; they were in all only 6000 strong,but their skill and experience more than compensated fortheir numerical inferiority. Booth expressed his astonishmentthat he who demanded nothing but a free Parliament shouldbe assailed by an armed force. In his proclamations heactually avoided mentioning the name of the King, and, asfar as he could, enforced the same reserve in his army. Butthis precaution failed to save him. Lambert replied that hisorders required him to fight all whom he found in arms againstthe Commonwealth. The engagement took place betweenWeaverham and Nantwich on the g/~gth of August. Boothand his Royalists retreated from one position to another ; notuntil they reached Winnington Bridge, where they were thestronger, did they attempt a stand. But here too the Republicanswere animated by the consciousness of their superiority-they hoped once more to experience the visible assistanceof God. With all their old enthusiasm they stormed theenemy's position and gained the bridge. As the Royalistsretreated up the slopes of the neighbouring hills they wereagain attacked : once more they rallied, and then broke andfled. In an admirable despatch Lambert does them fulljustice1. 'The horse,' he says, 'on both sides fought likeEnglishmen, but ours got the better. I cannot take creditto myself for any great victory, but I regard the enemy as' Letter froin Lambert to the Speaker, Xorthwich, Aug. 10: 'That of the horsewas perfo~med on both sides like Englishmen, but ours got the better.'XIII. 3. IN THE SUMMER OF 1659. 247A.D. 1659.crushed.' And in fact he was right. Many escaped ; otherswere taken prisoners ; among them Sir George Booth himself,who had attempted to escape disguised as a woman. Theprisons were filled with those who had been captured orwho were suspected of complicity, and whose conviction wasthought possible. Their estates were confiscated. The Republicansregained the complete mastery over the two counties.It had been part of the Royalist scheme that, while theforces of the Commonwealth were engaged with Booth, anattack should be made upon London from Kent'. Turennehad himself approved of the plan ; but no opportunity everoffered for making even a single attempt to carry it out.When Charles I1 left Brussels, those with him were in greathopes of shortly dating their letters from London. But thesedreams were dispelled by the unfavourable accounts whicharrived. The most zealous Royalists admitted that it wasimpossible under the circumstances for the King to attempta landing in England.They now directed their plans to a different quarter. Inorder to conclude the negotiations for peace a personal interviewwas arranged on an island in the Bidassoa, between theprime ministers of the two great powers, Cardinal Mazarinand Don Luys de Haro. Encouraged by those indicationsof friendliness which have been mentioned, the EnglishRoyalists indulged a hope that along with peace an alliancemight be concluded between the two powers for the restorationof the monarchy in England, a cause in which their owninterests were directly involved. They relied mainly on theKing of Spain, the ally of Charles 11, to gain over his futureson-in-law Louis XIV. The restoration of the King was tobe the subject of a general agreement, and would thus bevery easily accomplished. The recent attempt, unsuccessfulas it had been, had disclosed a deep-rooted antipathy to theRepublican re'gime, and a general leaning towards the hereditaryKing. Should the two powers declare for him and' ' Afin d'attirer les troupes qui sont aux environs de Londres et de donner aussilieu B cette ville d'appuyer ce meme dessin.' Bourdeaux to Turenne, Lettres deTurenne i. 297.

248 . ROYALIST MO VEMENTS XIII. 3.A.D. 1659.assist him with an adequate force, the struggle would atonce be decided. Their plan was that the Prince of Conde,who was connected both with France and Spain, and was atthe head of a formidable army, should throw his forces intoEngland. The Prince was very favourable to the enterprise,which would have suited the far-reaching ambition of hisearlier years. Charles I1 was implored to appear at the congress,and to use his personal influence for the advancementof his own cause.The ill-starred attempt to raise the royal standard had notbeen without its effect upon both powers. The Commonwealthhad proved to be stronger than was expected, and a rupturewith it might be dangerous. More than this, the wholeRoyalist scheme rested on a misconception.It was a prevalent error to suppose that the object of thetreaty was a final adjustment of the differences between thetwo powers. The condition upon which the French mainlyinsisted, the marriage of the young King of France with theeldest Infanta of Spain, was designed, in spite of the formalrenunciation which it involved, to give the house of Bourbonan hereditary claim to the Spanish crown. Though the renunciationhad been expressly made, the general convictionhad in it no really binding force. Next in importance tothis condition of peace was the promise given by France nolonger to protect Portugal against Spain. But this Mazarinregarded as applying only to open assistance. He was fullyresolved, as the event proved, in spite of his promise, to protectPortugal secretly, and not to allow her to fall into Spanishhands. But it was clear that if no definite alliance was concludedbetween the two kingdoms, any joint support ofCharles 11's interests was out of the question. It was allimportantfor the French, in prospect sooner or later of arenewal of the war, to have England upon their side : butEngland meant the Commonwealth as yet, and not the King.Proposals had been made to the Cardinal for marrying hisniece Hortense to Charles 11. She was one of the beautiesof the day, and Charles was strongly inclined to give her hishand, provided only that Mazarin in return should bringabout his restoration to his throne. It was Mazarin's singularXIII. 3. IN THE SUMMER OF 1659. 249A.D. 1659.good fortune to have his niece sought in marriage by theKings both of England and France. The latter alliance itis certain he refused from a feeling of loyalty, but neitherdid circumstances allow him to accept the former. It wouldhave alienated his friends in England and, if things went aswas intended, would have given his most powerful enemyin France, the Prince de Conde, a position in which he mighthave been dangerous to the Cardinal himself. The ambassadorof the English Commonwealth, Lockhart, who was atSt. Jean de Luz, ridicules the ungrounded hopes expressed bythe Royalists1. Through Lockhart's influence a stipulationwas introduced into the treaty which was directly opposedto the interests of Charles I1 and to the designs of his party.This is Article 80 of the Treaty of the Pyrenees. It bindsthe Prince of CondB, whom the King of France again receivesinto favour, sincerely and entirely to disband all hisforces, without making them over to any prince or potentate,whether friend or foe 2. Its importance cannot be appreciatedwithout remembering its bearing upon England.Should Conde consent to return to France he would beforced to give up all idea of assisting Charles 11 with histroops, whether they were commanded by himself or not.At length Charles I1 appeared at the congress. Mazarinhad one interview with him, but spoke with great reserve,and their conversation produced no result. The Spaniardsevinced the liveliest sympathy for the King, but neverseriously thought of assisting him. Their main object wasthe recovery of Jamaica and Dunkirk : to attain this they hadalready opened negotiations with the Republicans, throughwhom alone it was possible to gain their purpose.According to his promise Montague had sailed from the' Letter dated August 1/11, St. P.O. 'They have still the vanity to think theKing of Spain will be able to embark France in their quarrel. I have proposedto the Cardinal, and am not without great hopes to carry it, that by a particulararticle in this treaty the Prince of Cond6 may be obliged to disband all his forces,and that it may be not in his power to make them over either in whole or in partto any foreign prince or person whatsoever.'a 'De bonne foy, sans transport au vente vraye ou simulke ir d'autres princes oupotentats quelqu'ils puissent dtre.'

2 50 ROYALIST IJIOVENENTS IN 1659. XIII. 3.A.D. 1659.Sound with a portion of his fleet. When he reached England,the enterprise in which he was to join had already been defeated,and his fleet served only to promote the designs of theRepublicans.It happened at the moment that the two Republics ofHolland and England were endeavouring to dictate terms ofpeace to the belligerent powers in the North. The conditionshad been arranged at the first meeting at the Hague, withthe approval of France. The Republics, without further consultingthe French, now took the first steps towards enforcingthem. Holland had hitherto sided with Denmark, Englandwith Sweden. They now agreed to disregard all offers madeby Sweden ; not to allow that power the exclusive controlof the Sound, and to prevent it from annihilating Denmark.At the head of the Republican embassy was Colonel AlgernonSidney. ' What paper is that in your hands ? ' exclaimedCharles Gustavus, as the ambassadors entered his tent. ' Itcontains,' replied Sidney, 'the wishes of the two powers.' 'Youmake your proposals ' retorted Charles, ' in reliance upon yourfleet ; I enforce my decrees with my sword. Are Republicsto give laws to Kings ? ' ' Sire,' answered Sidney, ' the acceptanceof these conditions is the price of the friendship of England'.' Such a mode of negotiation displeased the King, andEngland herself did not adhere to it. But it is not the lessclear that the Commonwealth avowedly claimed the positionof superiority which Cromwell had won for Great Britain.1 Bourdeaux to Mazarin, September 29 ; Guizot 439. Compare Carlson, Hist.of Sweden iv. 341. The exact words used are not known certainly.CHAPTER IV.SUPREMA\CY AND CONSTITUTIONiIL PROJECTS OFTHE ARMY.THE men who had overthrown the Protectorate had thusbeen equally successful in crushing a widespread combinationin favour of the monarchy, which had enlisted sympathy bothat home and abroad. They excited respect and even fearamong foreign powers.It may be taken as significant of the state of affairs afterLambert's victory, that on the 3rd of September Parliamentissued a fresh ordinance, compelling every one to swear neverto recognise, not Charles Stuart only, but any of the descendantsof King James, and to oppose all attempts at restoringa House of Lords in any shape whatever. Republicanism waseverywhere exclusively predominant.At the same time, however, its supporters were anythingbut united among themselves. Their joint victory revivedthe antagonism which had -formerly set Oliver Cromwell atvariance with Parliament, and had finally destroyed the Protectorateso soon as this allied itself with the civil power.Whatever form the civil authority in the Commonwealthassumed, the army was resolved not to submit to it. Theoutbreak of the recent disturbances had for the time suppressedthe feud : this quelled, the flames again burst out asfiercely as before.The army considered it absurd that a mere lawyer, like theSpeaker, because he had delivered their commissions to theofficers, a duty formerly entrusted to the commander-in-chief,should behave as if he himself held that office. They suspectedmoreover, that in virtue of these commissions Parliamentreserved to itself the right of disbanding the army when it

252 SUPREMACY AND COIVSTITUTIONAL XIII. 4.A.D. 1659.thought fit. With this subordinate position the troops wereno longer satisfied, now that they had once more drawn thesword and saved the Commonwealth by their blood. Fromthe field of battle itself Lambert's army issued a manifestodemanding the appointment of Fleetwood as general andLambert as major-general ; and though it recognised Parliamentas the supreme authority in the nation, gave free vent toits anarchical ideas. More than this, the leading officers hada lively recollection of the annoyances with which the recentresolutions of Parliament had threatened them on accountof the share they had taken in the previous government.They had not defended the Commonwealth merely to sufferwrongs at its hands. They considered that the moment hadarrived for ridding themselves of all that threatened and endangeredtheir liberties, and finally assuming that positionwhich they claimed as their due. The soul of the movementwas Lambert, who had returned to the capital with the greaterpart of his troops.In the beginning of October the officers at his suggestionpresented a petition to Parliament, in which they complainof the disfavour shown them, solemnly avow their attachmentto republicanism, and demand the punishment of those maliciouspersons who had cast suspicion upon it l. They insistmost strenuously upon the appointment of the commanderin-chiefas the sole means of preventing disturbance in thearmy. In the next place, no one was to be admitted into thearmy unless presented by a committee to be appointed forthe purpose ; and no one, whether officer or soldier, was to bedischarged without having been formally tried and condemnedby a court-martial.It is evident that the army demanded a very large degreeof independence. Regarding themselves almost in the lightof an independent corporation, they are resolved themselvesto fill up as far as possible the vacancies in their body, tosecure themselves against all change in the manner of theircomposition, and preclude the possibility of any charges thatThe humble representation and petition of the officers of the army to the Parliament,October 6. Parl. Wist. xxi. 461.XIII. 4. PROjECTS OF THE ARMY. 253A.D. 1659.might be brought against their generals. They took up aposition independent of Parliament, leaving it only the dutyof providing for their maintenance and the payment of theirfuture services. Under their own commanders, all whose actshowever were dependent on the approval of the other officers,they would have permanently gained the power of obeying ornot, as they might choose, the ordinances of Parliament.But Parliament took a different view of its position andInsignificant as its numbers were-for it consistedmerely of the remnant of the Lower House elected nineteenyears ago, which had been decimated again and again-andill-recognised and questionable as were its claims, it adheredto them with ever-increasing energy. It regarded itself asthe representative of all civil authority in the nation, whichtherefore the army was lawfully bound to obey. This principle,which had been already laid down in previous sessions,and which the army had.- then formally accepted, it was nowunwilling to abandon, all the more because there were someofficers even in England who recognised its authority, whilethe Scottish army under George Monk had given in its allegianceto it. In the House itself the foremost champion ofthe principle was Arthur Haslerig, a stern Republican of sullenexterior and reckless disposition. The personal reputationwhich his strict adherence to his own views had gained forhim added irresistible force to his clear and logical reasoning.Far from acceding even in a single point to the officers'petition, Parliament resolutely and decidedly opposed it. Therequest that Fleetwood should be appointed general, withwhich some other promotions were joined, it at once rejected.It declared its readiness to give the officers proofsof its goodwill, but only in proportion to their merits and, aswas afterwards added, to their loyalty. It asserted its rightto receive all information affecting the public safety, let itconcern whom it might, and to decide according to circumstances.As to the question of right of petition which the armyhad alluded to, it gave no decided answer. It was impossibleto allow it to such an extent as to endanger the honour ofParliament, or give room for unlawful agitation. While thearmy demanded an independent position, Parliament on the

254 SUPREMACY AND CONSTlTUT(ONAL xrrr. 4.A.D. I 659.contrary claimed for itself the undisputed control of militaryaffairs. Directly afterwards, on the I ~ th of October, in thevery face of the impending storm, it advanced a step further.The first address from the army had proposed that the actspassed during the Protectorate should be confirmed, and Parliamenthad hitherto merely insisted on a few exceptions:it now not merely rejected it altogether, but passed a resolutionof exactly opposite import. All acts passed betweenthe violent dissolution of Parliament in 1653, and the day onwhich it reassembled in 1659, whether issued by a singleperson or by his Privy Council, or by a convention claimingparliamentary powers, were to be considered null and voidunless confirmed by the present Parliament. The army haddemanded that these acts should be valid until actuallyrepealed : Parliament pronounced them invalid until renewedor confirmed,-a distinction of immense importance. Theresolution now adopted threatened to undo all that hadbeen done under Cromwell, including the union with Scotland,which, as the official journal informs us, was thesubject of a protracted debate. The system of governmentestablished in Ireland, the agreements made with the Englishdelinquents, the grants of money which had been made tovarious individuals, the proposed reforms in the Churchaffecting both persons and property, all was endangered : thewhole legal system of the three kingdoms was thus destroyedat a blow. No othcr political authority but that of this solcalled Rump Parliament, which itself represented only aminority from which all antagonistic elements had beenexcluded, which had been dispersed by force and again restored,was to be recognised, and its decrees alone were tobe lawfully binding ;-a principle eminently flattering to theegotistic vanity of its members. Following the exampleoccasionally set by legitimate princes when restored to theirthrones, this parliamentary body denounced as unlawful allthat had been done during its exile from power. Sucha course was perhaps inevitable if it wished to secure afirm footing in its struggle with the army. But it wasequally certain that the latter, now that the ground was cutaway from under its feet, would be roused to as vigorousXIII. 4. PROJECTS OF THE ARJlY. 255A.D. 1659.aThis Parliament seems to have foreseen, and evento have anticipated an impending defeat. It passed a resolutionintended to meet such an emergency. Every attemptto raise money, directly or otherwise, by customs, excise,or imposts, unless approved by Parliament was prohibitedfor the future and declared unlawful. We shall discuss hereafterthe constitutional principles connected with the sovereigntyof the people on which this resolution was based1.The immediate objest was to prevent the army from everassuming a legitimate position of independence apart fromParliament.Both parties were ready for the struggle. The first step toward~a declaration of open hostilities was taken by theParliament.The occasion was afforded by a despatch signed by Lambert,Desborough, and seven other officers, and forwarding.the petition of the army to a regiment at a distance forsignature. This Parliament regarded as an act of disobedience,and at once declared all those who had signed tobe deposed from their respective posts, which were givento those next in command in each regiment. It also recalledthe general powers granted to Fleetwood by hiscomn~ission, and entrusted them to a committee, consistingbesides himself of six trustworthy members, and amongthem the chief promoter of the whole business, ArthurHaslerig.On the first news of these resolutions Lambert summoned ameeting of the superior officers. He represented to them thewrong inflicted upon the army in return for its services inrestoring and again saving Parliament. The enactment forbiddingthe further raising of money, which would haveeffectually hampered their action, excited their indignation :it would have forced them to supply their wants by vialentmeans, and for ever alienated the nation from them.They were unanimously of opinion that a Parliament sodisposed ought not to be tolerated by brave soldiers. Officersand men alike declared themselves ready to follow Larnbert-. .' Act against raising money; Act for governing the army by commissions.&t. 467, 469.

256 SUPREMACY AND CONSTITUTIONAL XIII. ,+.A.D. 165~.to the death. The regiments at once marched upon Westminster.This was on the evening of October I 2. The soldiersdestroyed the drums intended to call the citizens to arms. Afew regiments had been appointed to protect the Houses ofParliament; but no sooner did Lambert encounter a detachmentof the Parliamentarian horse-guards than the influencewhich a victorious general possesses was fully manifested ; athis orders the commanding officer dismounted, and gave thesignal for deserting the Parliament : others of the troops thathad joined the Parliamentarians showed greater firmness, butthey could not prevent Lambert from closing up all the entrancesto St. Stephen's Chapel '.The following morning, when the members attempted toenter, they were repulsed. Lenthall, the Speaker, who hadsigned so many officers' commissions, asked with astonishment,whether they did not know him. He required theirobedience as their commander-in-chief. The soldiers repliedthat they might know him had he marched at their headat Winnington Bridge. His carriage was forced to turnback.Some Italians who were present express their surprise thatsuch events could take place, and yet not a drop of bloodbe shed. They ascribe it to the phlegmatic character of thepeople, since they by no means lacked courage. The true explanationhowever lies in the natural tendency of an armyunited by long service and the joint' achievement of greatdeeds, to hang together for the future. A few officers hadbeen gained over by Parliament ; but when a collision wasimminent they were swept away by the esprit de corps oftheir men, or in some cases themselves. NotwithstandingLambert's deposition by the Parliament, yet his order of theday, commanding all troops to disperse to their respectivequarters, was readily obeyed even by those who were hostileto him.Lambert remained absolute master of the field, and atonce hastened to make use of his advantage.The Official Journal (No. 591) passes lightly over this scene. I have foIl0wedBordeaux's and Ludlow's accounts.XIII 4. PROmTS OF THE ARMY. 257A.D. 1659.The first act of the army was to constitute itself independentaccording to its previous scheme. Fleetwood wasdeclared general. Lambert was made majorgeneralof the forces in England and Scotland. The officerswho had sided with Parliament were suspended till theycould be tried before a court-martial. A commission wasappointed to decide upon the admission of new officers. Theproposals which Parliament had rejected the army now putinto execution itself. The last decrees of Parliament, whichhad occasioned the outbreak, they pronounced to be null andvoid.But this very abrogation of Parliamentav authority involvedthe victors themselves in endless difficulties. They proclaimedto the nation that they had no thoughts of imposing uponthem a military and arbitrary power, but that all their effortswere rather directed towards securing to each individualhis rightful liberty, both as a man and as a Christian. Butbetween a system based on usurpation, and one resting onlaw, a gulf is fixed which no human ingenuity can bridgeover. The officers even had thought it necessary, in order toestablish a civil power, to restore the Parliament, in spite ofits known hostility to themselves. This Parliament they hadagain overthrown, and it was difficult to see what could beset up in its place.In order to form an administration in some degree regular,a Committee of Safety was appointed, consisting of twentythreemembers, which should enjoy not only the powers ofthe late Council of State, but, as the act somewhat vaguelyexpresses it, the whole civil and executive authority. Itsmembers were appointed as follows : a smaller council ofofficers proposed the names, which were then discussed andaccepted by a larger body, which met in Wallingford House.The work of nomination was accomplished in a lengthysitting, lasting beyond midnight. Thirteen of the membersbelonged to the army, among them the leading generals,Fleetwood, Lambert, Desborough, Ludlow, and the mostinfluential of the officers, Sydenham, Berry, Hewson, Lilburne.Ten were civilians, Whitelocke and Henry Vane being themost prominent,-WaristonRANKE, VOL. 111.and Harrington were also included.S

258 SUPREMACY AND COA7STITUTIONAL XIXI. 4.A.D. 1659.That this body was intended as a substitute for Parliamentis inconceivable. The committee was on the face of itnothing more than a delegacy of the army itself. The writswere drawn up in the name of the General Council. OnOctober 26 the members met and received their instructions; on the 27th they entered upon their duties.Within the Committee a special commission was formed,consisting of Whitelocke, now Keeper of the Great Seal,Henry Vane, and generals Fleetwood and Ludlow, for thepurpose of drawing up such a constitution as best suited afree state. But it was no easy task to reconcile the militarypower, now in virtual possession of the supreme authority,with the requirements of a nation long accustomed to parliamentarygovernment: the attempt to do so disclosed thewildest schemes.By many it was considered enough merely to give a morepopular form to the military power as it now existed. Theywished to institute a senate, and a great council of the nation,the first to be simply nominated, the latter to be selected bythe army and nominated by the senate. But thus all authoritywould have still remained with the army. By the side of thisarmy a militia was to be organised, of men perfectly of onemind, well-affected and pious, from which the vacancies inthe standing army, which was never to number less thanthirty thousand, should be filled up. The army and themilitia were represented to be the true people of England.What they jointly decided upon was to be absolutely bindingas law.A similar principle is the basis of another scheme, devisedby Henry Stutte, a friend and confidant of Vane's.It proposed that all who had assisted in suppressing therecent insurrection should for ever hold a privileged position.They were to bear the title of Liberators, and enjoy an exclusiveclaim to posts of confidence and influence. They wereto meet frequently for reviews and festal ceremonies, like theold Cretan phiditia, and to admit within their' ranks such asproved themselves by good service to be worthy of thehonour. From these Liberators a senate of nine or thirteenpersons was then to be chosen, to which some of the mostXIII. 4. PRO]ECTS OF THE ARMY. 259A.D. 1659.important departments of public business, the care of thearmy, of religion and of public instruction, were to be entrusted.Every two years they were to render an accountto a syndicate specially appointed for the purpose. Not onlyPapist* and Episcopalians, but even Presbyterians were tobe excluded from the senate: but the four sects, the Independent~,Anabaptists, Fifth Monarchy men and Quakers,were represented.By this scheme however further provision was made for theestablishment of a parliamentary constitution. By the sideof this half-military half-religious organisation, a Parliamentwas to be placed, which should be elected once in every twoyears from the whole people-only under certain restrictionsthose,in other words, being excluded who did not accept theexisting regime. It was always to sit for three months, andto possess the legislative and executive authority, exceptingonly the departments already reserved to the senate. It wasto decide on war and peace, taxation and finance, to award alllucrative posts, and to appoint the justices of the peace, butnot the sheriffs, whose appointment was to rest with thesenate.In the intervals between its sessions a Council of State wasto exercise the functions of Parliament. There were alwaysto be some members of the senate sitting both in Parliamentand in the Council. There is no evidence that it was illegalto be at once a member of the senate and of the Council ofState. The government of the Commonwealth would thushave been concentrated in a few hands.Prominent as was the part which religious tendencies playedeven in these schemes, yet in others we find them hdldingeven more decidedly the first place.There were many who refused to allow the civil power anycoercive authoritl in matters of religion, and demanded notonly complete religious liberty for all Christians, of whateverpersuasion-a fact which enables us to explain the goodunderstanding which existed between the Catholics and thearmy-but also security from molestation for all who believedin the eternal God. That this referred only to the Jews isimprobable ; it was intended to extend toleration even tos 2

260 SUPRZMA CY OF THE ARMY. xn~. 4.A.D. 1659.those who though not accepting the Christian creed were yetnot atheists l.The ruling idea in the case of others was that of a theocracy.They looked forward to a time not far distant, the date ofwhich they had calculated, when after a severe struggle, akingdom of righteousness and of earthly blessings should beset up. Vehemently they protested whenever mention wasmade of recalling the son of the beheaded King. Christ, theysaid, is the sole rightful heir to the English as to all otherthrones : he is coming now to claim them, the blessed workshall first begin in England. They accepted the mysticdoctrine that to the saints was granted a mysterious part inthe divine government of the world. Their prayers exercisedan active influence upon its affairs, 'they are guided by aspirit of prophecy to seek for those very things which Christis about to 'We are reminded of the representations of the treasureof the saints' merits, and of their distribution by the HolyFather at Rome. But the intermingling of the earthly withthe heavenly is so far more complete in the first instance, thatan influence on the government of the world is ascribed tothe saints. In one way or another man strives to overstepthe limits marked out for him by nature. In the present casethe aspiration is the more noticeable, because the supportersof these dreams of a new order attained to high power ina great state; but they were not on that account actuallydangerous. With their claim to an independent authority,a claim in itself incompatible with an orderly system such ashuman life requires, there was joined a wild fanaticism whichcould never find acceptance in the world as it is at presentconstituted.* The Christian Commonwealth, by Mr. John Eliot, Oct. I, 1659.a Thomas Godwin, A sermon of the fifth monarchy (1659) : 'that the prayers ofa few saints have a mighty prevalence to turn the state of affairs in the world.And though the saints know not what Christ will do next, yet they are guided bya spirit of prophecy to seek for those very things which he is about to do.'LAMBERT AND MONK.CHAPTER V.RUMP PARLIAMENT.RESTORATION OF THEIT is surprising to find that a man like Lambert, insteadof openly opposing these tendencies, became instead theirmouthpiece.John Lambert was a man of brilliant and versatile genius.He possessed a soldier's eye for the battle-field and for thetactics of blockade. Cromwell considered it a favourableomen when Lambert's views coincided with his own. Hevalued nothing more highly than bravery, even in a foe. Itwas long remembered how on one occasion he allowed sixsoldiers of a hostile garrison, whom his instructions requiredhim to hand over to the executioner, to force their waythrough and escape. He shared with his own men the bootythat fell to his share, and the gifts with which his militaryachievements were rewarded. In the victories gained by theCommonwealth over the Royalist and Presbyterian insurgentsin Scotland and England, a great portion of the glory belongsof right to him. He ranked next to Cromwell as the secondman in England. To him is due the idea, and in great measurethe establishment of the Protectorate ; for he possessedthe faculty of discovering the proper expedients in political,no less than in military emergencies, and of persuadingothers to adopt them. But just as in the first fundamentalmeasure which he originated he was careful to assert theindependence of the military element in the political system,SO he would never acquiesce in its subordination to the civilauthority. It was on this ground especially that he opposedthe elevation of Cromwell to the dignity of king, as tending

262 LAMBERT AND MONK. XII~. 5.A.D. 1659.to this result. He preferred instead to resign his post, whichsecured him a large income, and to withdraw with his wifeto his home and garden, with the care of which he amusedhimself, as so many other distinguished men have donein retirement from business. He never opposed the Protector,nor could such opposition have been otherwise thanfruitless. He even accepted at his hands a pension of whichhe stood in need, for in truth he was not of the stuff out ofwhich political martyrs are made. But after Cromwell'sdeath he reappeared with all his original theories, and wehave seen how he realised them. The only difference wasthat he showed a stronger leaning than before towards religiousideas-the result of the position of parties-whichranged the Anabaptist and military element in the Commonwealthagainst the civilian and Presbyterian. With HenryVane he was on terms of the most intimate alliance-his wifeattended Vane's congregation.Whether however Lambert sincerely belonged to the separatists,and regarded the future of the country and his ownas dependent on their success, must still remain extremelydoubtful. It has been said of him that he wished to makehimself Protector : this he always emphatically denied, andthe line of policy which he adopted, and the dislike whichhe in great part excited to that form of government, indicatethe opposite. He probably cherished far other hopes andideas.We occasionally meet with the statement that a marriagewas projected at this time between Lambert's daughter andKing Charles 11. This is not exactly true, but it is the factthat a scheme closely akin to this existed.Among those who fled from England after Sir GeorgeBooth's defeat, was Lord Mordaunt, who had taken an importantpart in the Royalist rising. He was generally recognisedas the most active, devoted and unselfish of allCharles 11's partisans. He travelled incessantly betweenEngland and the Netherlands; and whether he was in Englandor in France, his letters contained the threads whichconnected the King and his adherents. They are extant inthe collections left by the Chancellor Hyde or SecretaryXIII. 5. LAMBERT AND MONK. 263A.D. 1659.Nicholas. The secretary, indefatigable, resolute and reserved,but of boundless activity, was for some time engaged togetherwith Mordaunt in a correspondence which was keptsecret even from the Chancellor. From one of these letterswe learn that Viscount Mordaunt, after his unexpectedescape, proceeded from Calais to the Duke of York, withproposals for a marriage, which even after the recent disasterstill offered a substantial hope of the restoration of his houseto the throne. The intended bride was a young,hdy of goodfamily, whose father could render him decisive assistance.After some hesitation he mentioned Lambert's name, whosewife came of a family of distinction in the North of England,and was said to be a woman of high culture l. It was supposedthat Lambert would shortly obtain the highest post in theRepublic, and would then be inclined to promote the King'srestoration, if this were for his safety and advantage2. TheDuke of York was ready to accede to the proposal, providedhis brother wished it, since he would do all that he bade himfor the attainment of their great object. With the utmostsecresy, and without informing the Lord Chancellor, Nicholaswrote on the subject to Ormond, who acconlpanied the Kingon his journey to the Pyrenees. Mordaunt wrote to the Kinghimself, and sent also his confidential envoy Herbert Baron,who had conducted the business with the Duke. Charles I1considered the proposal premature, and was anxious notto incur the charge of entering upon an affair of such importancewithout good reason : but he did not altogetherreject it, he thought that the negotiation might be continued.Mordaunt had already been recalled to England by theKing's friends. It was noticed with astonishment that inspite of their insurrection and defeat these suffered no actualShe was the daughter of Sir W. Lister, of Thornton, and Mary Bellasys. JohnLambert, born 161~. at Calton Hall, in the parish of Kirkby Malham Dale, inYorkshire, married her (her name was Frances) in 1639. Collins' Peerage viii.Notes to Pepys.Nicholas to Jones, Oct. 1/11. If Lambert get himself to be chief magistratein England, he may (not do) anything so securely and advantageously for him andhis . . . . nor his country, as to be a means for, upon some marriage of his onlychild, to restore his Maj. to his throne.'

264 LAMBERT AND MONK. XIII. 5.A.D. 1659.~ersecution ; that Booth himself was treated with respect ;that Mordaunt had not only escaped with ease, but wasable to return in safety. Mordaunt had at starting expressedhimself with great reserve as to the source of his proposal,and the worthy Nicholas is at great pains to clear himselffrom the suspicion that he, the secretary, had suggested anidea so entirely outside his proper department. At lastMordaunt made it known that the offer had come from aconfidential friend of Lambert's2. It is clear from this thatit emanated not from the Royalist, but from the oppositeparty, and it is scarcely conceivable that Lambert himselfknew nothing of it. His whole conduct had aroused the suspicionof the two friends Fleetwood and Desborough. Hemust have been aware, that so long as he remained connectedwith them he could never hope to gain a position of dignityor security, while on the other hand such a position wasplaced within his reach by an agreement with the King, andan alliance with the royal house such as that now proposed.Nor was it necessary for this that he should definitely breakfaith with the separatists, since even Charles I1 had morethan once given them assurances. As for the independenceof the army, this was more easily provided for under a kingthan under the Rump Parliament, or a Protector who wasunder the control of civilians.Later on we find several indications of direct intercoursebetween Lambert and the court; but at the time of whichwe are speaking it was of the last importance for him tosecure the complete success of the party whose leader he was,for until he should get the power into his own hands he couldnot hope to effect anything permanent whatever.It was at this stage of affairs that he found himself confrontedwith a man as ambitious as himself, but utterlydifferent in mind and character-with George Monk, hisancient rival.' ' It is certain,' writes Nicholas to Mordaunt, on Sept. I, ' that there has notbeen any proceeding against any of the King's friends other than the sequesteringtheir estates.'In a letter from Nicholas who was only gradually let into the secret the proposalis spoken of as ' an intimation you had from an intimate friend of Lambert.'x~rr. j. LAMBER1' AND MONK. 265A.D. 1659.George Monk belonged to the gentry of Devonshire, a bodyclosely knit together by old ties of blood. Like most otheryounger sons of noble families he sought a livelihood in theDrofession of arms. The best military training of the daywas to be found in the Netherland wars and under thestandard of Frederick Henry of Orange. With him Monkserved for ten years, and acquired a knowledge not onlyof the art of war as then practised, but of the necessary discipline.He returned to England an accomplished soldier,just as the disturbances there broke out. A thorough soldierof fortune-he was nothing more. He had no tinge eitherof political partisanship or religious bigotry. He served theKing against the rebels in Scotland, in Ireland, and for ashort time in England. On being made prisoner there hedid not hesitate to go over to the captor's side, and evenafter that changed his colours without scruple. He attachedhimself first of all to the cause of Parliament, then to theCommonwealth, and lastly to the Protector. To the last herendered important services in the final subjection of Scotlandto England, and gained a position of importance for himself.From Dalkeith House, near Edinburgh, where he had establishedhis head-quarters in the park, he maintained unbrokenpeace in Scotland. The statement that his successesaroused Cromwell's jealousy rests on an' improbable tradition.Cromwell, anxious to be safe at all points, had exacted fromhim a promise that he would never act against himself orhis family: and Monk always declares that he would havestood by Richard as faithfully as he had done by Oliver, hadnot Richard himself consented to resign the Protectorate1.We have no need to inquire whether Monk was reallya Royalist at heart: on one occasion the King wrote to himwith his own hand. At the time of Booth's rising his friendssent his brother, a clergyman, to visit him, and we are toldthat Monk received him cordially and gave him an attentivehearing. It is impossible to conjecture what he would haveMonk declared ' Richard Cromwell forsook himself, else had I never failed mypromise to his father on regard to his memory! Broderick to Hyde, Clarendonpapers 619.

266 LAMBERT AND MONK. XIII. 5.A.D. 1659.done had the rising succeeded; as it was, it failed beforeMonk had betrayed the slightest sympathy. He still actedas an enemy of Charles 11. He ordered the arrest of someScottish nobles who hesitated to subscribe a declarationagainst the claims of the hereditary monarch.The difficulties which as commander-in-chief in Scotlandhe had to encounter were of a very different kind. Hebelonged to the party which recognised the majority inRichard Cromwell's Parliament as their mouthpiece, and wasthus an open enemy of the Anabaptists and anxious for theestablishment of the civil authority. The overthrow of theProtectorate was a severe blow to his hopes, since it gave theupper hand in England to the views which were most directlyopposed to his own. But he resented most keenly the extravagantpretensions of his brothers in arms. Fleetwood,who was the centre of the Anabaptist movement, asserted hisclaim to the supreme command of the forces in the threekingdoms. Was it possible for Monk, who since Richard'sdownfall held an independent position in Scotland, to consentto be his subordinate?His line of policy was marked out for him by the circumstancesof his position. In hesitating to grant Fleetwood'sdemand, or to gratify Lambert's ambition, Parliament wonMonk's fullest approval. In the congratulatory address whichhe and twenty-five other officers presented to Parliament,after praying them to maintain peace and justice, he proceedsto warn them against those ambitious spirits who love topursue their own selfish aims. He urges Parliament to becautious in appointing the commander-in-chief by land and sea,and not to invest any one with a greater measure of powerthan is compatible with the nature and being of the Commonwealthl. He expressly declared his assent to the principleadopted by Parliament that the army should owe obedienceto the civil power. His next step was to strengthen his positionin Scotland; with this object he not only repudiated' 'We desire you to be very carefull-touching the measure of that power youentrust with the management of the armies and navies of this commonwealth.that it may be adequate to the nature and being of the commonwealth.'XI11 5. LAMBERT AND &IONK. 267A.D. 1659.as invalid the ordinances affecting the method of governmentand the administration of justice issued by the new rulersin England, but further resolved to reconstitute his army inconformity with the views to which they were most opposed.1t contained a considerable number who adhered to Lambertand the Anabaptists; he proceeded at once to get rid ofthem. The first to be removed were the lieutenant-coloneland the major of his own regiment; their places were filledby two captains devoted to himself. Commanding officerswere arrested while on the march and cashiered. He clearedthe garrisons in the various forts of all whose devotion couldnot be relied upon1. These measures not only left himsupreme in Scotland, but enabled him to exercise a powerfulinfluence upon England. His proclamations sustained thecourage of the members of Parliament, even after their exclusionfrom their House.It was essential to Lambert, if he wished to secure his ownsafety and to carry through the enterprises he was engagedin, first of all, by one means or another, to disarm this opponent,to prevent his entering England, which he was preparingto do, and where possible to render his position inScotland insecure. With this object in view Lambert startedfor the northern counties with all the troops that could bespared from London, and established his head-quarters inYork.On the borders of England and Scotland the two antagonistsmet: Lambert restless, excitable, and ardent, Monkcalm, clear-sighted, and taciturn. The one enterprising, ofboundless ambition and high aspirations, yet unselfish in hisaims : the other engrossed in the business of the moment,cold and calculating, and not free from a taint of avarice. Itseemed at the time as if Lambert were the more nearly connectedwith the King of the two. He was engaged in a negotiationwith him, which was intended to unite them by theclosest ties, while Monk carefully avoided all communicationwith him even in secret, and had recently openly renouncedPrice, The mystery and method of H. Majesty's happy restauration.' MaseresTracts ii. 732.

268 L AMBERT AND MONK. XIII. 5.A.D. 1659.him before the assembled troops. But apart from this Monkhad undoubtedly the better cause. The truth of the principlewhich he advocated, that there must be a civil power towhich the army ought to be subordinate, had been provedby the experience of every age. Lambert's alliance with thefanatics threatened nothing but disorder, should he gainthe day: Monk inclined to the Presbyterians, who assumedan increasingly conservative. attitude. Lambert was the moregenial and brilliant of the two : Monk had the sounder judgment.It was of inestimable importance to him that he hadsucceeded in awakening the religious as well as the politicalsympathies of the Scottish people. A convention summonedby him, to which he announced his intention of putting anend to the existing rule of force in England, granted hima subsidy for the support of his army, while he promised inturn to watch over the interests of Scotland in the restoredParliament I. It was far otherwise with Lambert. At Yorkhe found himself compelled to raise taxes month by monthon his own authority, and even to take free quarters, a measurewhich threw the whole of the county and the neighbouringdistricts into the greatest ferment. The Scottish peoplewere to a man in favour of Monk; the people of Englandopenly declared against Lambert.Once more there were negotiations between the two parties.Three commissioners from Monk appeared at Westminster.They entered into conference with the same number of plenipotentiariesfrom the English army, and concluded an agreement,by which a committee chosen from both parties wasto arrange the preliminaries for the election of a Parliament,and submit them for final acceptance to a general assemblyof officers from all the regiments in the three countries.Such an agreement was better suited to the views of theEnglish army than to those of Monk. His commissionerseven went so far as to promise that he would reinstate theofficers who had been cashiered. From the first however no' I will procure from the Parliament what may be good for the government ofthis nation.' Extract from a Scottish account which excited the greatest atte~~tionin England. See Mercurius Politicos, Dec. 10.XIII. 5. LAMBERT AND MONK.269A.D. 1659.one really believed Monk to be in earnest about the negotiation.When the conditions agreed upon were laid beforehim, both he and his council of officers rejected them.But without any interference on his part affairs in Englandtook a turn favourable to his interests. The encroachmentsof the army had roused the general feeling of the nationagainst them. It was asked whence they derived the rightto convoke and dissolve parliaments, to impose and collecttaxes. Their conduct was declared to be illegal, and insultingto the majesty of the laws; their dissolution of Parliamentwas denounced as treason; they were required in nomild terms to restore to Parliament perfect liberty to holdits sittings. Now that Monk's refusal had made a generalassembly impossible, the army found itself obliged to announcea Parliament on its own responsibility for the followingFebruary. It was to consist of two Houses, the membersof which were to be elected by the free choice of the people,and was to secure the ancient liberties of the nation. Especialstress was laid upon the separation of the executive andlegislative authority, which formed a part of the scheme.The Committee of Safety was henceforward to be styledConservators of Liberty. The right however of the armyto be independent and to govern itself was stipulated forin the clearest terms l, and this of itself prevented the schemefrom satisfying any one in the capital or in the country. Thediscontent gathered strength daily. The repressive measuresadopted by the Committee of Safety-it for instance prohibitedall meetings which were held without its permission-merely serve to indicate the amount of opposition it encountered.In some places even the taxes approved by thelate Parliament could only be collected by force. It is remarkablehow the general discontent reacted upon the membersof the government, who now saw the fruitlessness of theirefforts. The sittings of the Committee of Safety were veryirregularly attended. Sir Henry Vane absented himself forsome time, in order as it was said to be nearer Lambert.' 'That an army may be continued, nor disbanded, nor the conduct altered, butby consent of the conservators appointed.'

270 LAMBERT AND MONK. XIXI. 5.A.D. 1659.The leading members at Wallingford House entertained suspicionsof both. Fleetwood and Desborough began to havedoubts as to the policy they were pursuing; they werenow themselves inclined to attempt a reconciliation withParliament I.For the peculiar strength of public opinion in a nation liesin its power to influence and carry along with itself eventhose whom it attacks. The army, which had assailed Parliamentwithout scruple, was now, thanks to the reactionwhich its conduct produced, impressed with the sense thatit had committed an injustice.It was at Portsmouth that this feeling first openly showeditself. The garrison there, and their commander Morley, hadfrom the first resisted the impulse given from Westminster.The General Council at Wallingford House had found itnecessary to send a portion of the army to invest Portsmouthand prevent the defection from spreading. In themeantime however Haslerig, whom Fleetwood had forced toleave London, had entered Portsmouth: and not only confirmedthe garrison in their convictions, but obtained aninfluence even among the besieging forces. The troops, whowere sent to isolate the town from the rest of England, themselvesfell under the influence of the sentiments which prevailedthere; they made common cause with the garrison,and prepared to march on Westminster and London withHaslerig at their head.A similar change however had also occurred in London;it had been mainly the work of Colonel Markham, encouragedby signs of yielding in Fleetwood, attributable to his jealousyof Lambert. The view gained ground that the suspensionof Parliament had been advantageous to no one but thecommon enemy, the Royalists. On December 24 the greaternumber of the regiments met in Lincoln's Inn Fields, andresolved to make their peace with the Parliament. Theargument which perhaps carried most weight was that theI learn this from a remarkable letter of John Hobart's, dated Nov. 29, in theTanner MSS. vol. 51. 'Lambert,' are the words, 'of whom and whose partyWallingford House is mistrustful.'XIII. 5. LAMBERT AND MONK.271A.D. 1659.soldier was never better paid than he had been under theparliament. A general shout arose, 'Let us rive and diewith Parliament.' The resolution was immediately carriedinto execution. The troops marched to Chancery Lane, tothe official residence of the Speaker Lenthall at the RecordOffice, and drew themselves up in front of it. His lordship,for they now accorded him his rightful title, was invited toappear at the porch of the house, where the officers expressedto him their sorrow for having suspended the sittings of Parliament.The soldiers expressed their agreement with shoutsof approval. They recognised the Speaker as representing theauthority of Parliament in his military capacity. They hailedhim as their general, as the father of their country l. For themoment Lenthall could enjoy the reflection that he wasthe most powerful man in England. In virtue of his officeas Speaker he issued edicts for the preservation of the publicpeace, which the troops now obeyed.On the news of what had happened the members of theRump Parliament who were in London resumed their seats.They were sufficiently numerous, according to the establishedrule, to pass a valid resolution. They at once proceeded tochoose from among themselves a commission, which was entrustedwith the command of the troops and the suppressionof insurrections. Haslerig and the other leaders in the movementthere hurried to London from Portsmouth: no soonerhad they dismounted than they went down to the Houseof Parliament and took their old seats. A new Council ofState, consisting of fourteen civilians and seven militarymen was established, with Arthur Haslerig for president.Haslerig indeed takes the lead throughout. His republicanfriend Thomas Scott was made a Secretary of State.Lambert, whose plan had been to press steadily forwardfrom Newcastle towards Scotland was now in a criticalposition. Indignant at his arbitrary measures and his free' ' Owning him in words also as their general and the father of their country.'The account of these half-forgotten incidents is published by authority in thejournal of the time, Mercurius Politicus (or ' publicus'), which appeared everyThursday (Dec. 24).

272 LAMBERT AND MONK xrn. 5.A.D. 1659.quarters the county gentlemen of Yorkshire rose againsthim in arms. Between Fairfax, who commanded them onone side, and Monk on the other, his situation was perilousin the extreme. At this juncture a messenger from WallingfordHouse arrived at Newcastle with a report of whathad happened in London. The officers were summoned toa council of war, but now at last their courage failed them.Parliament had expressly included the northern regimentsunder the authority of the newly appointed commission.Unable to face the general change of feeling, which was notwithout its effect even here, they relinquished the causewhich they had hitherto defended, and deserted their general.We find Lambert soon after at Northallerton with only fiftyadherents. He too had no other course left but to recognisethe Parliament, which banished him to his estate in the countyof Durham.Lambert's wife, whom we have already mentioned, sharedapparently her husband's ambitious desire to ennoble theirfamily by a matrimonial alliance. As is often the case, shewas more deeply imbued than her husband with religiouszeal, and had long cherished high hopes with regard to boththese objects. When the crisis came Vane one day asked herwhether she was so far advanced in grace as to be able toremain unmoved were Lambert to die for the Commonwealth.Tears were her only answer.During all this time Monk was still encamped at Coldstream,upon Scottish soil. His troops were reduced to thesorest straits. A room in a cottage served the general both asbed-room and sitting-room, and there he gave his audiences.But his halt here made him a great man. He was visitedthere by the secret or avowed opponents of his rival. Hewas in communication with both Haslerig and Morley. fiehad conquered Lambert without having drawn the sword.On New Year's Day, 1660, a cold clear winter's day, he crossedthe borders. On January I I he joined Fairfax in York, whoat once disbanded his volunteers. From a military point ofview Monk was now Master of England as well as of Scotland.CHAPTER V-I.ANTI-REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT.MONK IN THE CITY.THUS much had been gained, that there was once more inEngland a civil power independent of the army. This howeversatisfied no one. It was commonly said that Lambertand his barty had first of all oppressed the Parliament, andthat now the Parliament was uppermost and was persecutingits oppressors, and that the change was no great improvementafter all. But the struggle between the two parties gavebreathing time to those who hated both of them impartially.The dislike so recently entertained for the army was nowdirected against Parliament itself. It owed the general supportwhich it had received, not so much to its declaration that alllevying of taxes without its sanction was illegal, as to its admissionthat such levying required the consent of the nation asexpressed in an Act of Parliament. But it had scarcely foreseenthe consequences of such an admission. It was palpable thatthe surviving fragments of the old Parliament were very farfrom representing the feeling of the nation. Associations hadalready begun to be formed for protecting the privileges ofParliament against the army, but even these now becameaware that if Parliament was to have the power of imposingtaxes, it must, on its own showing, be entirely reconstituted.It was at least incumbent upon it to receive back the excludedmembers ; or failing this it would be necessary to elect a freeParliament. But a free Parliament, if it meant anything,meant a Parliament unfettered by the existing restrictionswhich had served to maintain the Commonwealth under oneform or another.There was already a deep-seated feeling of hostility to theCommonwealth in the mind of the people. In the capitalRANICE, VOL. 111.T

274 A NTI-REPUBLICAN MO VEMENT. XIII. 6.A.D. 1659.the most pressing grievance was the unsettled state of theadministration of justice. It arose from the fact that thecommissions of the judges required to be renewed by somerecognised supreme authority, and this, in the confusion andturmoil which raged, was no longer possible. No alternativewas left but to accept either the rule of the army, or thatof untrustworthy and greedy politicians, who clothed theiractions in the disguise of political or religious orthodoxy.The citizens dreaded every kind of violence. The goldsmithsin Lombard Street concealed their jewels and money.To complete the distress there was a general stagnation oftrade, abroad as well as at home. ~ach man felt himselfinsecure and defenceless, and threatened with danger bothto his person and his property. Matters had reached sucha pitch that the government could no longer fulfil theirplainest duties in protecting private persons. It was nowremembered that at the first the republican system hadbeen imposed upon the country and the capital againsttheir will. It was determined to endure its rule no longer.As constantly happened in this period, motives of religionwere added to the sense of public and private injuries.On December 2, 1659, the city ceiebrated fast-day toimplore the mercy of God at a time when the foundations ofgovernment were destroyed. The Committee of Safety wasstill in existence, and naturally resented this language asan insult. But though it took some precautionary measures,it did not venture to prohibit the ecclesiastical ceremonies.These, it is true, confined themselves within the proper sphereof religion; but at the same time they acquired a certainpolitical significance since the preachers, in both the Presbyterianand Episcopalian churches, impressed upon theircongregations, and these in the Presbyterian churches wereeverywhere numerous, the divine command to obey the powersthat be for the love of God'. Their exhortations fell uponfruitful soil. The perplexity and distress wf ich prevailed now' Letter from Rivot to Wakefield, Clarendon MSS. Bodleian, Oxford : ' Whenthe city fast was, Dec. 2, and the citizens were under deliberation what to do, thenall the pulpits possessed either by the Episcopalian or the Presbyterian party withone voice called them to return to their obedience.'XIII. 6. A NTI-REPUBLICA N 1MO VEMENT. 275A.D. 1659.began to be regarded as a punishment for disobedience to thelaws of God and man. A different doctrine was preached in theAnabaptist congregations ; but since they had been in powerthey had lost the support of the Presbyterians. The lattershowed an inclination to join the Episcopalians, together withwhom they formed a large majority in the capital and controlledpublic opinion.It is unnecessary to enumerate all the collisions which nowbecame inevitable between the city and the Committee ofSafety or the army. The apprentices now,, as formerly, werethe chief aggressors, though on the opposite side. The troopsheld a few positions in the town, but they were not sufficientlynumerous to strike terror into the mob, which was no longerheld strictly in check by the magistrates. In pressing emergenciesthey were reinforced, and once at least they fired uponthe crowd, killing two persons. The Mayor and the Generalthen combined once more to restore order, and the reinforcementswere withdrawn '. A seditious demonstration whichhad been planned was prevented by the General, who wasinformed of it in good time. The importance of all thislies in the fact that the city throughout was graduallyestablishing a new organisation for itself, suited to its presentfeeling. It assumed that an interregnum had begun, duringwhich the city had the right, according to established precedent,of providing for its own safety under the guidanceof the Lord Mayor. Under the very eyes of the regulartroops, and without consulting their generals, it proceededto reorganise the city militia, from which the adherents ofthe sects were carefully excluded. Still more significantwas the remodelling of the Common Council, which hadfrom time immemorial determined the policy of the city.The members of the sectarian congregations were excludedon the ground that they were the recognised supporters ofthe now detested government2. But care was also taken' 'The reins of the government were let loose to the multitude.' MercnriusPoliticus, Dec. 5.a Very instructive in this connexion are fourteen letters from Bordeaux.(Guizot ii.) My authority for the rest is the Nicholas Correspondence. A thoroughinvestigation of the city archives is most desirable.T 2

276 A NTI-REPUBL ZCA N JfO J7E~fA2VT. XIII. 6.A.D. 1660.to shut out the interests which were unfavourable to arestoration, and we consequently find that those were excludedwho had shared in the purchase of the confiscatedestates. The restoration of the Rump Parliament producedno change in the direction which public feeling had taken.Its leaders tried in vain to check it. So far from beingdaunted, the city made a proposal to Vice- AdmiralLawson to appoint a joint commission of the city and ofthe military and naval forces, which should lay before Parliamenta scheme for a definite settlement of the state1.Lawson positively declined, and even required the city toobey the Parliament as he did himself, and to take care thatthe party of Charles Stuart did not meet with actual supportin their midst. Both the army and navy once more madecommon cause with the Rump Parliament. But the cityremained unshaken ; it persisted in refusing to recognise Parliament: nor did it stand alone ; a large party throughout thecountry were on the same side.On his march towards London Monk was everywhere metby two demands, one that the numbers of Parliament, in whichonly a very few counties were now represented, should be filledup, another that writs should be issued for a free Parliament.Monk replied that the decision of such questions, relatingas they did to civil matters, belonged exclusively to Parliament,and that he as a soldier had no business to meddlewith them. On one occasion however he seems to have thoughtit advisable to express himself more clearly, and his modeof doing so is remarkable enough. He said that Parliamentwas already taking measures for filling up its vacancies, butthe readmission of those excluded in 1648 was not desirable,since they would refuse to recognise the legality of all thathad been done in the interval, and they would even wish torestore the monarchy. But the monarchy, Monk declared,with the old union of Church and State was no longerpossible in England. It was hopelessly incompatible withthe various newly created interests, with the religious in-' To agree of some things to be offered to the Parliament for the settlementof the nation.'XI~I. 6. A NTI-REPUBLICA ill0 VEMENT. 27 7A.D. 1660.terests of the sects no less than the personal ones of thosewho had purchased the confiscated estates. It would beequally ruinous to set aside the qualifications now requiredfor voting, and to summon a freely elected Parliament.Such an assembly would set its face against those interests,without some recognition of which the establishment of astrong government in England was out of the question l.It has often been supposed that Monk had neverthelessa secret understanding with the Royalists ; but the argumentswhich he urges against them are too sound and too muchto the point for us to assume that they were merely intendedto mask his real intentions.Monk was appointed Lieutenant-General of the Commonwealth.In this capacity he made arrangements for quarteringthe troops about the town, which were agreed to. On February3 he entered London. He rode at the head of his ownregiment of horse and immediately behind his trumpeter; hisprincipal officers followed him. He was received with admirationno doubt, but also with feelings of mistrust and anxiety.At Somerset House he was met by the Speaker, wearing theinsignia of his office. The Speaker left his carriage, Monkdismounted and saluted him in soldier-like fashion. Oncemore a powerful general recognised the authority of Parliamentas supreme in the Commonwealth.But the old question, the importance of which extendsbeyond the immediate troubles of the time, was now revived,whether the two could remain for long on such a footing.Monk had, it is true, acted in concert with the ruling power,but he had also acted independently. It was not till afterwardsthat it recognised his acts, and then only because theyhad been favourable to itself. On the other hand, he haddeclared obedience to the civil authority to be his rule ofaction, because he thus gained a powerful weapon in hisstruggle with his opponents. Hitherto they had worked inLetter of George Monk dated Leicester, Jan. 23, and directed to Mr. Rolle,to be communicated unto the rest of the gentry of Devon. Mercurius Politicus 605.It was answered in a Royalist pamphlet entitled 'Animadversions upon G. Monk'sletter.'

278 AlOA'K IN THE CITY. XIXI. 6.A.D. 1660.harmony but from different points of view, and there wasconsequently no identity of principle. By many, perhapsby the majority of the members of Parliament, Monk wasregarded as unfavourably as by the city.They felt offended that the troops which had been theimmediate instruments of their recent restoration shouldhave been obliged to resign the best quarters in favour ofhis soldiery. They declared that the commission which Monkheld had expired the moment that he set foot in London,and began to address him merely as commissary and nolonger as general. They had already formed plans for areorganisation of the army, which should provide for its disbandmentwhen no longer required, and should permanentlysecure its obedience.Monk was appointed a member of the Council of State,and took his seat there on the 4th of February. Here toohowever he displayed an unexpected reserve. The predominantfaction had prescribed an oath to be taken by theCouncil in which the claims of the King and the wholehouse of Stuart were solemnly repudiated. Several of thecounsellors-elect had already refused to take it, because theydid not wish to pledge themselves irrecoverably to opposean event which was still possible. Monk joined them. Hesaid that in his army the taking an oath was held to bea very serious matter; he felt obliged at least to wait tillthe advocates of each side had discussed the matter: inhis own case the oath was unnecessary, since without itthe Commonwealth was safe so far as he was concerned I.In spite of this refusal Monk was solemnly received inParliament on February 6. He was greeted with extravagantpraises as the saviour of Parliament. It was expected thathe would in return recognise the cause. of Parliament as hisown: a suggestion to that effect was in fact made to him2.To the praises heaped upon him Monk replied with modesty;but in all that he said besides he revealed the difference' Skinner, Life of Monk, p 2oj.'This is asserted by the first complete account, which is the work of a skilfulhand.' Baker, Chro~iicle 704.XIII. 6. MONK IN THE CITY. 279A.D. 1660.of opinion which separated him from the majority. Hereminded them how he had referred the petitions with referenceto the future Parliament, which met him on theroad, to the decision of one that was now sitting : and wehave seen that he steadily maintained the necessity for somequalifications : but now, he continued, he felt bound to tellParliament that they would the more easily succeed inpacifying the country the less numerous and irksome thesequalifications were. It ,was their policy to extend rather thannarrow the limits of the party attached to them. The morerational and soberminded of the gentry would, in that case,gladly join them. They would have to be on their guardonly against the Cavaliers and the fanatics, their own properenemies. Conformably to his promise, he then mentionedthe services rendered by the Scots, and recommended thatthey should be promised some alleviation of the existingtaxation and a reform in the government. He emphaticallyprotested that nothing would more shock him than that theScots should be persecuted with fanatical notions.Such a speech is not that of a man who is awaiting orderswhich he is to carry out. It was the speech of a generalalready in possession of power, who comprehends in his viewthe whole extent of the kingdom, and from his exaltedposition delivers himself of counsels scarcely distinguishablefrom commands. His words excited astonishment, displeasure,and anxiety.The Rump Parliament was now divided into two partiesthemen of moderate views both in politics and religion, andthe Republican and Anabaptist faction. Monk sided heartilywith the former. His idea seems to have been to give themthe preponderance in the House, and thus to secure a decisiveinfluence for himself. His first act, after Richard'sfall had left him independent, had been to eject the Anabaptistsfrom his army, and he now directed the whole weightand point of his speech against them. Still it was uncertainwhether, after all, they would not prove victorious.It was this party which insisted on subjecting the comingelections to the strictest conditions ; they desired, for instance,to disqualify all those who wished to establish not

280 MONK IN THE CITY. XIII. 6.A.D. 1660.indeed a House of Lords, but merely a power co-ordinatewith that of the House of representatives. Monk vigorouslyopposed them, and proposed qualifications of greaterlaxity and mildness. In the divisions however which followedthe stricter conditions were carried.The prominent question in these parliamentary contestswas not strictly speaking that between republicanism andmonarchy. The immediate object of the General's effortswas to bring under his control the fanatical party in England,in the same way as he had already done in Scotland.That his efforts would be successful was by no means clear.The officers, who had submitted to Parliament, steadily adheredto their religious opinions, and might as easily takeup the cause of the civil power against Monk, as he hadagainst themselves. Their opinions were moreover sharedby several regiments, and it seemed not impossible that anunderstanding should be come to between them and the pureRepublicans. That Monk would succumb at once to sucha combination was very generally believed '.So deep was the religious and political schism whichdivided the parliamentary and military authorities. But beforeany open rupture could occur, the feud between the cityand the Parliament entered upon a new andjmportant stage.In its struggle with Lambert the Rump Parliament, inorder to strengthen its own cause, had vigorously assertedthe rights of the people, whose representative it was. Ithad required obedience from the army in the name of the.people, to whom belonged the right of making war, and hadalso justified its decision that no taxes should be paid butthose imposed by itself, by the right of the people to givetheir consent to taxes in Parliament 2. We have alreadynoticed that this measure had a twofold effect: it gainedfor Parliament the general support of the nation, but it alsoShaw to Nicholas, Feb. 5/15: 'I have no hopes of Monk, who will in a shorttime be outed again by the sectaries. You will find Vane, Hasilligg, I.ambert,and the rest of that party will compose their animosities.''That no person shall, after the first day of October, assess, levy, etc. anyimposition whatsoever upon the people of this Commonwealth, without theirconsent in Parliament!XIII 6. MONK IN THE CITY. 281A.D. 1660.encouraged the doctrine that Parliament had the power toapprove taxes only in so far as it really represented thenation. But we have seen how many counties complainedto Monk that they were unrepresented in Parliament. Thecapital, which had not a single member of its own choicein the House, drew the natural inference that it was notbound to pay the imposts decreed by Parliament, Afew cases of refusal had already occurred, but without anyfurther result : the matter however became serious in the extremewhen the capital, which contributed the largest share,and whose lead the country was accustomed to follow, tookup the same ground. On February 8 the Common Councilresolved unanimously that the city was not bound to payany imposition whatever until the vacant seats of their representativesin Parliament should have been filled up.It is surprising that the city should thus have venturedto confront Parliament single-handed. It is possible that thereport of the renewed dissensions in Westminster gave themfresh courage; but it was from a different quarter, from theRoyalists, that the decisive impulse came.The movement in favour of the King, which had beg-un -so successfully, had long since come to a standstill ; the fearthat his restoration would be followed by a political andreligious reaction, aroused a feeling of coldness and mistrusteminently unfavourable to the supporters of Charles 11. Itwas generally reported that Charles I1 had turned Catholicduring his exile, and a proof of it was found in his recentvisit to the Pyrenees, on which Lord Bristol, who had actuallybecome one shortly before, accompanied him. No reportcould have been better calculated to excite the sensibilitiesof the city, the Royalist agitations in which had been seton foot and fostered by the Protestant preachers. TheKing's adherents discovered that it was imperatively necessaryto allay this anxiety, if they were to make any wayat all. They could answer, reasonably enough, that the Kinghad only taken Bristol with him because he spoke Spanish,and had dismissed hinl the moment he avowed himself aCatholic ; that he had left the King in disgrace. The worthyNicholas assured his correspondents that no one suffered

MOXK IN THE CITY. XIII. 6.A.D. 1660.more for the Anglican faith than the King: attempts wereincessantly made to convert him to Catholicism, but he hadalways remained unshaken. ' He is,' he writes, 'as firmlyattached to the doctrines of the English Church as couldbe wished.' No opportunity was lost of contradicting thereport in fly-sheets, which even then found credence. Buta more direct denial was necessary to allay the politicalalarm which was especially serious in the capital, since it hadbeen so deeply implicated in the rebellion. What had itto expect should the old laws of treason be revived againstthe city as a whole, or against individuals? The King senthis envoy, Mordaunt, an 'Instruction' well calculated to removesuch fears'. In this document he declared that hewould not only confirm the privileges which his ancestorshad granted to the capital, but would promote its honourand its prosperity by further concessions. He wished to owehis restoration to nothing but the courage and devotion ofthe city. All that had been done against him would, inthat case, be forgotten. It is not merely matter for conjecture,it is positively certain that this manifesto producedall the effect that was expected. Mordaunt laid it beforethe two aldermen who enjoyed the greatest reputation inthe city, Robinson and Langham, and declares that it hadremoved all their scruples. It may be looked upon as thedeed which united the city to the King, and which reallyinaugurated the Restoration 2. Mordaunt had also interviewswith other leading citizens, and boasts of the explicit declarationswhich he got from them. Still more importantwas his success in gaining over to the royal cause the greatPresbyterian nobles, Manchester and Northumberland. Heventured to promise them very definite marks of favour.Their influence with the clergy and the citizens proved agreat assistance to all his efforts.Thus it was that the city, secure of its future under the-' Instruction for the City of London, sent by Lord Mordaunt, Jan. 12. LordMordaunt was himself the chief of the commissioners.a Lord Mordaunt to the King, Jan. 24. 1660. 'I had the city in my eye, andlooked on it as the master-wheel by whose motion the successive rotations of allthe lesser must foll~w.' Clarendon Papers iii. 659.XIII. 6. AIONK IN THE CITY. 283A D. I 660.restored monarchy, assumed so resolute an attitude in oppositionto Parliament. It is certainly somewhat startlingto find that the Royalist movement first disclosed itself byan appeal to the rights of the people, which might leadfurther than could be wished. But this involved nocontradiction for the present. The object was to oppose, asenergetically as possible, the military and republican combinationon which the Rump Parliament rested ; and for thispurpose no measure could have been more effectual. It atonce deprived Parliament of the means of paying the troopswhich supported it. The first instance of refusal to pay taxescame into operation against the Commonwealth, and in concertwith the King. It was inevitable that the neighbouringcounties, which were similarly placed, and held the same views,should have gladly joined the capital.It was impossible however that the Parliament, whichdespite its own words, which it already had reason to regret,regarded itself as the supreme legislative power, and as alonepossessing the right to impose taxes, should tolerate suchcontumacious conduct, which implied an attack upon thevery essence of its own power. Orders were given to Monkto march into the city and reduce the citizens to obedienceto the Parliament.Sonie astonishment may be felt that Monk should haveundertaken such a duty. For in his struggle with his principalopponents, the Anabaptists, he was openly in alliancewith the city magistrates, the aldermen, and the CommonCouncil. His troops had felt this to be the case from thefirst, and had clearly expressed their feeling. Could he againthrow open the city to the fanatics whom it had voluntarilyejected, and draw his sword in defence of the very partywhose hostility in Parliament he had himself reason to fear?He declared, and there is no doubt that it was the case,that he did so merely that the duty might not be entrustedto his opponents. At the same time he could hardly failto have noticed the Royalist turn which public feeling wastaking. It is possible that he had already this considerationin view when he refused to take the oath. He could notventure to allow the Royalist party to become his enemy

284 MONK IN THE CITY. XIII. 6.A.D. 1660.and gain an independent power, such as might have endangeredhis own position.On the 8th of February, late in the evening, the Councilof State indicated to the General those citizens who hadbeen the principal authors of the. resolution taken by thecity. He was to arrest them, and bring them as prisonersof state to the Tower. Furthermore, the city as a wholewas to be chastised ; the chains, which according to ancientcustom were drawn across the streets, as well as the poststo which they were fastened, were to be removed, and thegates of the city to be demolished. For the future Londonwas to be an open place.On February g Monk prepared to execute the orders ofthe civil power, the authority of which he had recognised.Early in the morning he marched into the city, which was unableto resist his advance. He established his head-quartersat the Guildhall, arrested the citizens whose names hadbeen given him, sent them to the Tower, and removedthe chains and posts. Respecting the gates he consultedthe Council once more, urging that it was advisable not toirritate the city unnecessarily, and expressing his beliefthat the Common Council, when it met on the followingmorning, would consent to pay the taxes. Parliament howeverinsisted that its commands should be literally carriedout. It ordered absolutely the demolition of the gates; and,to remove all fear of any resistance, it resolved on Haslerig'sproposal, to treat the Common Council as already dissolved,and that a new one should be elected according to the formsnow to be established. The dominant party hoped by thesemeans permanently to secure their own supremacy: theywished to impose upon the city restrictions similar to thosedevised for the next Parliament ; a policy, the adoption ofwhich may be regarded as marking the crisis at this stageof events. Should it succeed, Parliament would maintain itsmonopoly of the supreme power; the only authority whichventured to oppose it, that of the city, would be destroyed;the Commonwealth would reign unopposed.On the morning of the 10th of February the commandsof Parliament were carried. out, and the city gates brokenXIII. 6. MONK IN THE CITY, 285A ~ 1660. .down and destroyed. The soldiers obeyed their orders, butwith indignant murmurs. Several officers sent in their resignationsto the General. He appeared to take no noticeof what was done or said-he chewed tobacco as usual.Once only, on the appearance of Colonel Alured, a fieryAnabaptist, whom he regarded as a spy, he gave vent tohis disgust '. When the work was done, the troops returnedin the evening to Westminster.The General seems to have hoped throughout to bringParliament over to his own views. In order not to arousea more determined resistance, he had while in London givena solemn assurance that Parliament would at once proceedto fill up the vacant seats. But what subsequently happenedin the House must have convinced him that this wasimpossible. The very next day Barebones, who had givenits name to the Anabaptist convention, introduced a petition,which reiterated the views of the convention, and finallywarned Parliament that attempts were being made to stripit of its military authority, the loss of which would inevitablylead to that of the civil authority as well. The petition wasreceived with approbation. It was once more proposed toplace the army under a commission. Henry Vane was in theneighbourhood. It would be interesting to know the detailsof Haslerig's negotiations with him and with Lambert inorder to secure their services against Monk. All aroundhim combined to impress on the General the necessityof not waiting till matters had gone further, but of adoptingsome decided course at once. The execution of the ordersof Parliament with reference to the city had been entrustedto him merely to alienate from him both London and theother towns, which were his only support against his real foes,and whose cause was generally the better of the two. Thecouncil which he summoned included, besides the ministersand colonels already there, a few other officers. -They resolvedunanimously that the General ought to renounce hisallegiance to Parliament, and make common cause with thecity which he had so recently opposed.1 Price, who was present, p 762.

286 MONK IN THE CITY. XITI. 6.A.D. 1660.During the night a detailed statement was drawn up, andin the morning it was signed by Monk and several of hischief officers. It reproached Parliament with its Anabaptisttendencies, and with its intention to impose an oath uponthe nation. Former pledges, it was well known, had neverbeen kept, and such a measure would alienate all intelligentpeople. The army, they proceeded to say, had taken uparms, not merely in order to reinstate Parliament, but alsoto save the falling liberties of the nation. But the grievancewhich it felt most keenly was that it remained for the mostpart unrepresented in Parliament. It wished to have no perpetualParliament, and was anxious to see instead a regularsuccession of Parliaments duly elected. These demands theGeneral and the army now put forward. They peremptorilyrequire Parliament to issue the writs for the vacant seatswithin eight days, and punctually to observe the time whichit had itself announced for its dissolution, the 6th of May.This document, which in fact laid down the programmeadopted by the army for the future, reached Parliament atthe moment when the General, at the head of a few squadronsof cavalry, had set out for the city which he meant to makehis head-quarters. A deputation was hurriedly sent after him,to appease him and come to some agreement with him. Aconference was held for the purpose at the Mansion House,but it served only to place in a clearer light the irreconcileabledifferences which separated the two parties. Parliament thenproceeded at once to appoint the much-talked-of militarycommission, which was to consist of five members. Monkwas one of the five, but so also were Haslerig and Alured,the latter of whom had been elected in preference to a moremoderate candidate. It had also been proposed that thethree, whose consent was necessary to pass valid decrees,must always include Monk, but this too was rejected l. Itwas finally decided that his commission as lieutenant-generalof the forces had expired, and a bill was read, by which thecommission was transferred to Fleetwood '.Price : ' Though his commission was not formally voted from him, but virtuallyit was.' p. 768.Journals, Feb. rr : 'Afternoon; an act constituting Charles ~leetwoodlieutenant-general and commander-in-chief of the forces raised by order of par-XIII. 6. MONK IN THE CITY. 287A.D. 1660.While Parliament was thus quietly setting aside its ownGeneral, that General himself was making common causewith the city against the Parliament. At his request, thoughwith some hesitation, the Cammon Council, which Parliamenthad formally dissolved, was convoked, and he himself addressedthem. He excused his recent conduct by his anxietyto prevent the execution of the business from falling into thehands of the enemies of order in the nation. He then informedthem of the peremptory demand he had sent to Parliament,to issue the writs for the vacant seats within eightdays. In this he was heartily supported by the city, withwhose newly adopted policy such a demand was perfectlyin accord. That the General should not merely have assentedto a resolution, on account of which the city had been threatenedwith a penalty, which he himself had inflicted only theday before, but should have enforced it upon Parliamentwasbeyond all expectation. Throughout the assembly adeep sense of satisfaction prevailed, such as all feel who seeviews long cherished by them, amid opposition and persecution,suddenly meet with general acceptance. The citizensgreeted the news with shouts of joy ; the bells were rung, bonfireswere lighted. The soldiers were welcomed with open arms,and the citizens exchanged tokens of the closest sympathywith them. Parliament was ridiculed under its nickname l,and already a cheer was here and there given for the King.How far all this really promoted the royal cause had yetto be proved. In the meantime it was clear that the General,whose troops held the city and whose sentries guarded thedoors of Parliament, without reference to the new commission,was master of the situation.liament, was read.' Gumble denies these facts, in his anxiety to make theRoyalist resolutions of Parliament appear freer than they really were.Rump Parliament does not exactly give the meaning. Giavarino explainsit to his Signorie : 'Vuol dire l'ultima parte del tergo, e esseudo questipochi membri che sedono il residuo del gia lungo parlamento, gli i: Stato appropriatoun titolo se ben osceno, e per questo il pop010 rostiva ahbruciava e laceravali rump d'animali per palesare l'odio e rancore verso il congresso.'- --

CHAPTER VII.RECALL OF THE KING.AS yet no understanding existed between General Monkand the royal court. We possess in full the correspondencebetween Hyde and the Secretary Nicholas, and not merely isthere no mention anywhere made of such an understanding,but the letters express mistrust and the liveliest anxiety.At the time of Monk's advance into England the Secretaryobserves that it was clear he had some great object in view,but whether it were favourable or not to the King no oneknew. This the event might perhaps show. As Monk approachedthe capital, the Royalist leaders seriously consideredthe advisability of combining with the fanatics, whomight perhaps be induced, in the confusion of a riot, to callfor a King and a free Parliament I.Advances had been made to Monk at the instance of theKing, who invariably endeavoured to gain over those of hisold opponents who became powerful, even for example HenryCromwell and Lambert. Monk's reply was characteristic.He did not reject the proposal absolutely, but the attitudewhich he assumed after his entry into London was far fromsatisfactory to the court at Brussels. In answer to a correspondentwho had written confidently, the Chancellor tellshim that he deceives himself, or perhaps is intentionallydeceived. Those who were further from the scene of actioncame to the same conclusion. Colepepper, one of the oldest' Hyde to Burnet, Feb. I, Clarendon Papers iii. 679. Unfortunately in theedition of these papers, the Old and New Style are not accurately distinguished.The letter quoted must be dated in the New Style, and therefore is of Feb. 4, sinceon the 14th it was already known in Brussels that Monk had entered London.XIII. 7. RECALL OF THE KING. 289A.D. 1660.supporters of the Stuart cause, who was at the Hague at thetime, writing in February, expresses his belief that Monkwould be more ready to suppress than to further the newRoyalist movement. He rests his hopes of a restoration ona rising of the people, aided by veteran French troops, againstMonk and the Parliament I. Even after the occurrences inthe city, the Royalists were far from depending upon him ;they continued to consider by what means a man of hisdisposition might be won 2.But they fell, in doing so, into the common error whichleads men in times of great disturbance and agitation toexpect or fear too much from individual actors. The mightycurrent of a popular movement carries along with it eventhose who seem to direct it. We have no right to assert thatMonk, when he rode out of Westminster, foresaw the fullconsequences of his resolve. All that was essential for himwas, that he should extricate himself from the machinationsof his opponents in Parliament, and gain a vantage groundfrom which to overawe them. And it is true that this wasthe immediate result of his step. The Rump Parliamentpaid more regard to their General now that he was in oppositionthan they had done while he remained obedient. Forthe form of abjuration, which he rejected, they substituteda simple oath of allegiance to the Commonwealth. They pronouncedagainst Vane and Lambert, and made every effortto arrange the qualifications within the appointed time. Inthe divisions on the remaining clauses the moderate partydefeated the Anabaptists, though by a majority of only one.Parliament felt that they were in the hands of one strongerthan themselves, and hoped to gain him over by judiciousconcessions, and thus at the same time to secure their ownsafety. The filling up of the vacancies once accomplishedin accordance with the established restrictions, they intendedto renew the old law, which provided that Parliament could' Colepepper to Nicholas, Feb. 27: ' A little of that well trained force, HisMaj. at the head of them, would multiply the strength of the others as muchas a well placed figure the value of cyphers.'a Mordaunt to the King, Feb. 17 : 'If I hear his character right he is covetous,Surly, and proud, and if this be his nature he will be malleable.'RASKE, VOL. 111.U

290 RECALL OF THE KING. XIII. 7.A.D. 1660.only be dissolved by its own consent. On this point thejudges had been consulted, but did not venture to give anydecided answer. Since too the date fixed for the expirationof the present assembly had been observed, Monk had nogrounds for complaint. On the very day which he had himselffixed, the writs were ready to be sent out to all partsof the country.But the simple fact of his entry into the city had broughtMonk into connexion with a party among the people, whichwas deeply penetrated with Royalist sentiments, and heartilyaverse to the further continuance of the Republican r6gime.Nothing could be more directly opposed to its wishes thanan election, fettered by the existing qualifications.Again and again had Monk been obliged to listen to thedemand for a free Parliament. Both in the northern andsouthern counties associations had been formed to resist alltaxes except those imposed by a free Parliament, or one atleast which again included the ejected members. A renewalof the present Parliament, such as it wished for itself, wouldin all probability be resisted, and would have deprived theGeneral of the support on which he depended. Fortunatelyfor him, his own interests and the general feeling coincided :after some delay he resolved to give up the elections for thevacant seats, which he had himself so strongly urged, andto devote himself instead to the restoration of the ejectedmembers, as the easiest and most regular method of furtheringby lawful means the movement which had begun. Monkhad formerly opposed the measure, in the fear that were itcarried all would be undone that had taken place since theexclusion ; the sale for instance of the confiscated property.He now, before giving his consent, came to a definite agreementwith the leaders of the ejected members. They didnot concede all that he asked : they refused for instance toconfirm at once the acts of confiscation, but reserved themfor future discussion. Both the points however on which helaid most stress they gave up to him. They promised toprotect the interests of the army, and to assist in bringingabout a formal dissolutioll of Parliament. The latter pointMonk regarded as most important. It was the most earnestXIII. 7. RECALL OF THE KING. 291A.D. 1660.desire of the nation once more to secure a regular successionof freely elected Parliaments ; and his own professions, vagueas they were, were yet regarded as pledging him to open thewav to that end. It was impossible for him to contradictthem without danger. He is still the General, endeavouringto retain and fortify the position which he has taken up, andthe strength of which lay for the moment in the support ofthe people. By the recall of the ejected members Monkgratified the Presbyterians, who controlled public opinionin the capital. The work of restoration was not difficult;all that was required was that his troops should offer noobstacle to the return of the members. But here too thecrisis was urgent: it was important to get it over beforethe writs, which were now ready, could be issued. Beforethis was done, on February 21, 1660, the members ejectedin December 1648 re-entered the House of Parliament andresumed - - their old seats.It was now that the catastrophe of the last few days wasfinally completed. The Commonwealth had begun with theejection of the members; their restoration implied its over-throw. The returned members formed the majority in theHouse, and thus had a decisive voice in its debates. Theauthority of Parliament during this period has been oftencompared to a ball thrown from hand to hand. The Geheral,with whom the power virtually rested, now threw it to thosein whose grasp it had been at the first.The first act of the new majority was to repeal the actspassed by the former minority since their dissent from themeasures of the 5th of December, 1648. This dissent wasdeclared illegal. All that depended upon it was treated asthe work of a usurping minority. The old majority resumedtheir rights. They had been ejected by one general and werenow restored by another.They had however as yet no thoughts of pressing theseclaims to their utmost consequences. In order to re-establishthe lawful authorities it was sufficient at present to repeal thelast acts of the Rump Parliament. The military commission,which had been appointed but had never actually got towork, was first of all abolished, and George Monk declared

292 RECALL OF THE KING. xnr. 1.A.D. I 660.Commander-in-chief of all the forces in the three kingdoms.The old Council of State was broken up, and a new onechosen, to which only a few of the members of the old onewere admitted. The official journal gives the names of thosewho were to constitute it in the future. At the head, andstretching across the column, appears Monk's name, like thatof a general in command above the names of his officers. TheCommon Council, whose resolutions had given the first impulseto the movement, and which had on that account been declareddissolved by the late government, appears in all the gloryof its success and of a recognised legal position. To its ownefforts it was chiefly due that the very men who had contestedits rights were themselves thrust out of their seats as guiltyof unlawful acts. The citizens who had been arrested werereleased. Measures were taken for rebuilding the gates. Theorganisation of the militia was left to the city. It .presenteda list of the officers, all citizens of known honesty and ofpersonal influence in the town, and the list was immediatelyapproved. In return the city promised a loan, to be repaidfrom the taxes imposed, to meet the wants of the army, whichwere now recognised as lawful.At this moment the Presbyterian party had once more theupper hand, and was fully determined to keep it. Parliamentenacted that the record of the Solemn League and Covenantshould be hung up in the House, and should be read aloudand posted up in every church. Presbyterian ministers, suchas Calamy and Reynolds, were once more in favour. TheGeneral himself declared that he thought a mild Presbyterianismwas the ecclesiastical system most suitable to England.On the most important of the questions under discussionat the time Monk's own wishes were speedily gratified. Onthe 1st of March it was unanimously resolved that Parliamentshould be dissolved at the latest on the 15th ofthat month or even earlier. It thus devolved upon theLong Parliament to dissolve itself, a point of great importanceif the lawful parliamentary succession was to remainunbroken. It moreover refused to prescribe restrictivequalifications for the forthcoming elections. A few weredesigned to secure the claims of the army, which howeverXIII. 7. RECALL OF THE KING. 293A.D. 1660.they failed to satisfy. What they contained was of less importancethan what they omitted, and generally speakingit is the omissions that distinguish them from the previousconditions. It is obvious that there could be no questionof any abjuration of the Stuarts or of any republican exclusiveness: the important point is that the oath of allegianceto a government without King and Lords was abandoned.The commonwealth was thus given up if not abolished.The future assembly had it in their power, if they wished,to recall the King and restore the House of Lords. Such infact had been from the first the real meaning of the demandfor a free Parliament. In opposition to the usurped authorityof republicanism there was a general wish to return to theancient forms of the constitution. For the accomplishmentof this wish the oath was now opened by the disappearanceof the Republican oath of allegiance.And such was universally felt to be the case. The Royalistswere in high glee. In a letter from a leading ~o~alist-datedMarch 16, we read, 'The votes by which the House of Lordswas once abolished, are now abolished themselves. The oathof allegiance to the Commonwealth is null and void ; accordingto their own law, to the decree of the members of theLong Parliament, we have once more King and Lords, thoughwe do not see them yet in their old splendour. Yesterdaythe inscription "The Tyrant is gone l," which was placed bythe regicides where his statue had stood in the Old ~xchan~e,was publicly and by authority removed in the light of day."Long live the King," was written up in its stead, and bonfireskindled in the square. From pulpit, press and people,from city and county there is an urgent cry for the King,and with the King for security and peace. Those in authorityof all degrees-incline to the same side. It is the opinion ofmany capable judges that General Monk is reserving tohimself the honourable duty of restoring the King as hisown right.'But to do so was not entirely in Monk's power. The city,' 'Exit Tirrannum.' So the author, who calls himself Dannemann, writes it.He was certainly no scholar. His letter is scarcely intelligible, but it well repaysthe trouble of deciphering it. March 16/26, in the Record Office in London.

294 RECALL OF THE KING. XIII. 7.A.D. 1660.which had taken the initiative throughout ; the peers, whohad assisted in upsetting the old government ; and, after thedissolution of Parliament, the Council of State which it hadappointed, had all a word to say in the matter. Even shouldthe feeling in favour of recalling the King prove decisivelythe stronger, yet the further question remained to be decided,whether his recall should be conditional, and if so what theconditions should be.In view of the course which events had taken it seemednatural that since the monarchy owed its recognition to theejected members of the Long Parliament, it should now bebound by the conditions which they had formerly suggested,and to which Charles I had so far acceded, that a decisivenegotiation respecting them was on the point of being openedwith him, when the violent interference of the Republicansbroke off the proceedings. It was proposed to make theconcessions agreed to by Charles I in the Isle of Wight thebasis of a treaty with Charles 11. Such an arrangementwould have placed the Presbyterians in a position not merelyof safety but of temporary supremacy. The Presbyterianpeers especially were favourable to the scheme; their demandshowever were throughout political fully as much as religious,and in both cases were zealously insisted upon. Mectingswere held at Suffolk House, in which Lords Manchester andNorthumberland took the lead, but which were also attendedby Bedford and Wharton, by Hollis and Ashley Cooper. Inthese meetings they discussed the limitations which it wasnecessary to impose upon the royal authority which theywere about to recall. They were the old much-debatedconditions. The control of the militia, the distribution ofthe high posts of confidence and power, were to be exercisedsubject to the consent of the two Houses of Parliament. Itwas said that for safety's sake the King ought not evento write a letter without the knowledge of Parliament.Charles 11's friends were astounded to find how many noblemenshared these views : they scemed to aim at an aristocracyrather than a monarchy1. The Presbyterians saw in this' Samboner to I-Iyde, March 23; Clarendon State Papers, iii; Moldaunt toITyde, April 19, iL. 720.XIII. 7. RECALL OF THE KING. 295A.D. 1660.scheme the salvation of their faith and of their ecclesiasticalsystem. Their ministers advocated it from the pulpit.Even however in the city, where they had once been sopowerful, they failed to carry their point : men reflected withthemselves that a King was wanted who should be able bothto maintain his own position and protect others. Was itreasonable to tie the hands of one to whom they looked forp-otection? Was it wise to render him dependent upon thePresbyterians, who in 1648 had failed to save his father,though in power at the time? It seemed as though theywished to recall him merely afterwards to ruin him. TheKing had his rights as much as any other man, and theserights he should be permitted to enjoy: the more honourablethe position they granted him, the more securely would theyattach him to their interests. EccIesiasticaI questions wouldbe best decided by a convocation of ecclesiastics l.Agreeably to these views the city, on the 25th of March,presented a memorial to the Council of State. It remindsthe Council of the necessity of a constitutional basis ofgovernment to prevent further confusion. It asks that aninvitation should be at once sent to Charles 11, requestinghim to return and exercise his kingly functions. It will notprescribe any conditions, but wishes to see petitions presentedto him. These petitions were to treat of three points: thedeclaration of a general amnesty, the payment of the arrearsdue to the army and a consideration of its other demands ;lastly, the reference of religious differences to an assembly oflearned and pious men chosen according to the laws. Thusright would be done and in the right way. The city requeststhe Council of State to join it in this petition2. The Councilat once took the matter into consideration. Among its memberswas St. John, who had now attached himself to thePresbyterians, at least we hear of him occasionally at SuffolkHouse, but in the Council his influence was gone. He leftthe sitting in rage and indignation. The rest were onlyThis document I found in Oxford (Bodleian Library, Tanner MSS. 49. 2). Ifmy reading is correct it was drawn up on March 20, and discussed on the 25th. Ithas no title.' The city of London to the Council of State, March 25 ; Tanner MSS. 49. I.

296 RECALL OF THE KING. XIII. 7.A.D. 1660.doubtful what they should do first, convoke Parliament orrecall the King. It was decided that if Parliament were firstto assemble and open a negotiation with the King, as thePresbyterians wished, the business would be unduly protracted,and their opponents roused to renewed resistance:it would surely be sufficient if the King gave satisfaction withregard to the three points named by the city. The settlementof the first and second required only moderation and discretion,the ecclesiastical question would present the greatestdifficulties. It was thought that the King's best course wouldbe to take some Presbyterians into his confidence and thensummon Convocation, not perhaps in its old form, but leavingmore to open election, and perhaps with the addition of someforeign divines. The idea was that the next Parliamentshould merely recognise the King and that then a new oneshould be immediately summoned under the royal authority.Above all things it was essential to avoid giving rise to anysuspicion that their real intentions were at variance with thepromises they had given and the hopes they had excited.By showing favour to his enemies the King would convincehis friends that he would show favour to them as well. ' TheKing is King not of a faction but of England. Authorityand justice can alone save us I.'A statement is extant, written by Speaker Lenthall, inwhich he warns the King against the Presbyterians, whomhe declares to be no true friends to the monarchy, and whomight at any moment ally themselves with the sectaries.Hostility towards the latter, and dread of the efforts of theformer to secure the supremacy of their own system, equallyengrossed and perplexed those who contemplated the situationof affairs from an impartial point of view.But on the whole everything was favourable to a Restoration.Monk alone hesitated to give the decisive word.Urged by the increasing dangers of their position, theAnabaptist party in the army had proposed to the Generalto invest him with the civil authority, in other words to confer' Of this sitting the Col1ect:on in the Bodleian gives us a detailed account,which was before unknown.xm. 7. RECALL OF THE KING. 297A.D. 1660.upon him that very Protectorate which they had themselvesdestroyed. Their influence was still powerful in the army,the interests ofwhich as yet remained unsecured in spite of themade in the last session of Parliament. A conferencewas arranged between ten officers and ten members of Parliament,at which the former made two principal demandsindemnityfor their past actions, and confirmation of their&are of the confiscated estates. The demands were warmlysupported by the General himself, but Parliament would notaccede to them ; it pleaded that in doing so it would exceedits powers, its sanction would not be perfectly valid, and thedecision would finally rest with the new Parliament. But souncertain a prospect did not satisfy the officers. To manyof them the turn which affairs had taken was altogether distasteful.They neither wished to abandon the Republicanform of government, nor to acquiesce in the supremacy of thePresbyterians, nor to leave their title to their possessionsdoubtful. Even the General himself incurred some risk froman agitation, which however he managed to suppress in Englandas promptly as he had done a similar one in Scotland.The refractory officers were summarily ejected. Whole regimentswere disaffected, and it happened more than once thata regiment which had been reduced to obedience was immediatelymarched off to restore order in another which hadbroken into open mutiny. Military discipline was moststrictly enforced, and its claims fully recognised for the firsttime. Early in April an address was presented to the Generalby most of the regiments, both of infantry and cavalry, inwhich the principle was laid down, that it was the duty ofan army not to discuss the orders of their sup'erior officers,but to obey them unconditionally. This victory of theGeneral's authority over so violent an agitation marks anepoch in the history of discipline. In achieving this Monkcontinued what Cromwell had begun; but he went beyondCromwell in recognising the further principle that the Generalhimself must obey the civil power.That Monk should, like Cromwell, take the civil powerinto his own hands and make himself independent wascontrary to his whole nature. Starting as he did from the

298 RECALL OF THE KING. XIII. 7.A.D. 1660.Independent point of view, Cmmwell had considered himselfjustified in opposing and destroying any power hostile tothe Independent doctrines. He was without a trace of anyfeeling of loyalty. His was a self-reliant, creative mind.Monk was cast in a different mould. He had consistentlyprotested against the doctrines held by those who offered himthe supreme power. In the heart of the old soldier there stilllingered a feeling of attachment to the lawful monarch, underwhose standards he had once served. So far he agreed withCromwell that he refused to place himself at the mercy ofthe vacillating resolutions of a deliberative assembly. It wasthis feeling that broke down his original determination toobey Parliament. It is impossible not to perceive the intrinsicdifficulty of his position. If the theory of the subjection ofthe military to the civil power was to be carried out, the civilpower must be one of more stability than the Commonwealthhad proved to be. Nothing but the idea of personal allegiancecould reconcile the dissensions which would probably againbreak out. It would seem mere cowardice for the Generalto pledge himself to execute any order whatsoever that mightbe issued by an assembly of men who were at best but hisequals. Into what painful perplexities and dangers had asimilar attempt plunged CromweH ! how lamentable was nowthe position of his family. There was nothing in his exampleto incite Monk to follow it: constituted as Monk was, he farpreferred to secure an honourable, secure, and influential,if not an independent position, under the lawful King. Hisviews were shared by the city and by the majority of theCouncil of State.Placed as he was amidst Royalist agitations in the city, thenation, the Parliament, and even among some of his ownofficers, Monk had yet kept aloof, almost ostentatiously, fromany connexion with the King. He now resolved to placehimself in communication with him in his own fashion. Hecommissioned, though still with the greatest secresy, hiscountryman John Grenville, one of the most distinguishedof the Cavaliers, to convey his proposals to the King in theNetherlands. The terms were read out to Grenville, andas soon as he seemed to have thoroughly got them by heartXIII. 7. RECALL OF THE KING. 299A.D. 1660.they were burnt: Monk would not yet pledge himself toanything in writing. As far as we know they were preciselysimilar to those contained in the petitions of the city. TheKing was required to grant an amnesty and toleration, andto confirm the sales of the crown estates which had beeneffected. Further, since England and Spain were still at war,Monk thought it inexpedient that the King should date hisconcessions from Brussels, which still belonged to the Spanishcrown, and was therefore practically in a hostile country. Hedemanded that the King should immediately remove toDutch territory-a course which was advisable for anotherreason, namely that in many quarters the suspicion stillsurvived that Charles I1 had turned Catholic '. He badeGrenville tell the King that he had always remained faithfulto him at heart, but hitherto circumstances had not permittedhim to do him a service. He was now ready not merely toobey the King's commands, but to sacrifice his life in hisservice 2.The court at Brussels, in spite of the numerous communicationsfrom London, or rather perhaps in consequence of theirconflicting character, had no clear appreciation of the positionof affairs at home. Beyond the fact that there was a generalreaction in favour of the King, they knew nothing, and werechiefly anxious not to offend or alienate any one, not even theadherents of the fanatical party, far less the Presbyterians.In the fleet Lawson's efforts had been neutralised by theenergy of the Royalist agents, and the King could securelycount upon the support of the navy. It is clear from theChancellor's letters that almost as much was expected fromFairfax, who was again stirring in the northern counties, as'' Para desmentir la accusation que sus enemigos le hazian de que era catholico.'The King alleged this to the Spanish ambassador Gamarra, as the motive whichhad impelled Monk and other friends. The word 'accusation' would itself implythat the supposition was false.' In the appendix to Lister's Life of Clarendon, iii. 500. there is a fragmententitled 'The General's Paper,' written in May, and produced in the course of thenegotiation. For the original proposals we have nothing but the notices given byClarges and Price, which are incorporated in the histories of Gumble and Skinner.Kennet gives their dates, whether rightly or not I cannot say; verbal transactionsdo not admil of such exactitude.

300 RECALL OF THE KING. XIII. 7.A.D. 1660.from Monk himself, in whom they now began to place someconfidence1. The Royalist plan still was, in the event ofa demonstration being anywhere made in favour of the King,to back it up with the assistance of foreign powers, and thenwhen public opinion had decisively declared itself, to accomplishthe Restoration. By one party in the court theKing was urged, in compliance with his mother's request, towithdraw to France, and to regain his throne with the helpof that power, which would certainly be given him. TheFrench ambassador declares that the Presbyterians countenancedthe proposal2 : the Catholics, who were in communicationwith the court, could have wished for nothing better.At this juncture John Grenville appeared bearing theGeneral's proposals, and with him Mordaunt, who was wellinformed of the intentions of the city. From their reportsthe court first learnt the details of the critical events whichhad taken place. The Chancellor it is true objected that thepetitions, which claimed the King's favour, contained conditions,the fulfilment of which might lead to endless complicationsin the future, and we can easily understand that hefelt some scruple in granting them. But the real questionto be decided was, whether they should take advantage ofthe position of affairs in England, which had resulted underMonk's influence from the struggle of parties, or shouldinstead attempt to restore the King independently and onpurely Royalist principles. The first course was safe, wellprepared, and certain; the second was ill-considered, extravagantin its aims, and the most opposite results mightfollow from it. The advocacy of the Queeen-Mother, whomhe rightly regarded as his enemy, was enough to render thelatter distasteful to the Chancellor. I can hardly believe thathe hesitated long as to his decision. It wa; too clearlymarked out for him by circumstances. Edward Hyde, whothrough all the troubles of the last few years, and in spite ofthe Queen's influence, had retained the full confidence of hisIn a letter of Hyde's, which has often been printed (April 6/16), he merelysays, 'I am persuaded that Monk in the end will appear to have proceeded likea sober man.'Bourdeaux speaks of the ' parti PresbytQrien' as 'dispos8 pour la France.'XIII. 7. RECALL OF THE KING. 301A.D. 1660.prince, decided in favour both of accepting Monk's proposalsand of granting the petitions of the city. He merely addedthe condition, suggested in a despatch from London l, that oneach point the consent of Parliament should still be necessary.He himself drew up the declaration, which after a few moreconfidential discussions was signed by the King. In this theKing promised amnesty to all who would ask for it, with suchexceptions only as Parliament should think necessary. Hedeclares himself ready to accept such an edict of tolerationas Parliament, after mature deliberation, should draw up.The confirmation of the sale of property he also leaves tothe decision of Parliament. To satisfy the claims for whichthe General had pledged himself, he promised to take thetroops into his service and to pay all their arrears, a matterin which the co-operation of Parliament was absolutely indispensable.The urgent request of the General that theKing should immediately leave the Spanish Netherlandscaused not the slightest difficulty either to the King or tothe Chancellor. For they already suspected the Spaniardsof intending to make use of the opportunity for recoveringtheir lost territories. Charles I1 sent the governor-generalword of his intended departure, but set out sooner than hehad led him to expect. His fear was that he might be detained,in order to compel him to cede Jamaica and Dunkirk.The declaration and the necessary despatches were got readyon the road. They are dated from Breda, but were given toGrenville, who was to convey them to England, before thatplace was reached.Meanwhile the elections for the new Parliament had beencompleted. Absolutely unrestricted they were not. Amongthe qualifications which were retained was one which excludedfrom the new assembly all who had borne arms againstParliament. But Royalist sentiments were already so predominantin the people that no regard was paid to this' It came apparently from the old Speaker Lenthall. According to a letterfrom Lady Mordaunt, March 30, 'he (Lenthall) would have the proposals such ashe believes the people would accept, but would have them proceede from the Kingas a free act of grace, which he offers to confirme to them by a free parliament.'Clarendon Papers iii. 71 a.

302 RECALL OF THE KING. XIII. 7.A.D. 1660.restriction. In every county men were elected who hadborne arms against the Commonwealth. In the towns a considerablenumber of Presbyterians were returned. Submissionto the government and not hostility to it was now the bestrecommendation l. As far as possible those were avoidedwho had taken any part in the purchase of the confiscatedestates.The state of public feeling left no room for doubting thatthe recall of the King was imminent: it was not howeverdestined to be accomplished without a slight disturbance.The Republicans and Anabaptists found themselves virtuallyexcluded in the new elections. Hitherto they hadkept in their own hands the two great keys of power, themajority in Parliament, and the command of the army. Theywere now deprived of both, and felt that for the future theywould no longer command, but would have to dread thevengeance of their opponents.There are few motives more stimulating than the consciousnessof a power which has only recently been lost.The defeated party had no thoughts of abandoning theircause at once ; they hoped to save themselves by one determinedeffort. In every county they rose in arms. Lambert,who had succeeded in escaping from his confinemeut in theTower, appeared soon after at Daventry, at the head of sometroops devoted to their general. His force consisted of foursquadrons of regular cavalry and a few irregular bands ofseparatists. He could never have expected to gain any realsuccess with so insignificant a body of men; but his secrethope was to find partisans in the rest of the army who woulddeclare for him, and then once more to raise the adherents ofhis party in London.When Colonel Ingoldsby advanced against Lambert's troops,with a force which though not large was far superior to thatof his opponents, the latter requested a conference, which wasgranted them. They then proposed the re-establishment ofXIII. 3. RECALL OF THE KING. 303I 660.the Protectorate, not under Monk, from whom they expectednothing further, but under Richard Cromwell, who would bestsecure the interests of the faithful and of the army l. Alreadyhowever a directly opposite tendency had become prevalenteven in the army. The reply to the proposals was ascornful reminder that their authors had themselves forcedRichard Cromwell to abdicate. As Ingoldsby's troops advancedwith drawn swords, Lambert's men lost heart. Someof them deserted to Ingoldsby, others sought safety in flight.Lambert had taken up his position in a ploughed field, wherethe good horse which he rode could be of no service to him.He in vain entreated to be allowed to ride off the field.Ingoldsby himself took him prisoner, and brought him backto the Tower.It is remarkable that within an army which had onceupheld its opinions by deeds of bloodshed and valour, itshould have subsequently become impossible to form a partywilling to appeal to the chances of war against their opponents.The army had in truth become almost a politicalcorporation, in which the minority had simply to follow thelead of the majority. Even Haslerig had at the last usedhis influence in reducing his adherents among the troops toobedience.For a time indeed an opposite result had been feared.Monk declared that should a general desertion take placeamong his troops, he would raise the King's standard anddeclare at once for Charles 11. The royalist nobles promisedthat they would join him. At a great review of the regimentsof the city militia, in which the Royalist aldermen held theposts of colonels, the most enthusiastic Royalist demonstrationstook place. Monk, and a number of private personsof all ranks, who were of the same way of thinking, wereanxious to check them. They might easily have ended ina tumultuous proclamation of the King. The same eveninghowever Lambert was brought a prisoner to London. TheGiavarina, April g: 'Tutti li popoli del paese tengono fissa la mira pernominar parlamentari che nodriscono humili sensi, in molti luoghi lasciando fuorili principali delle provincie solo perche dubitano, che aspirano a conditioni.'' The business they did strive at was, under pretence of security to all interests,to persuade a readmission of Lord Richard to his Protectorship.' See the fullaccount in the Mercurius Politicus, April a3.

304 RECALL OF THE KING. XIII. 7.A.D. 1660.next day, the 25th of April, the new Parliament met, andthings went on as before.It was in Monk's power to have insisted on the observanceof the qualifications. The Presbyterians fully expected thathe would do so, and the matter was actually discussed ; butthe time for such restrictions had passed : even those memberswho had been elected contrary to the prescribed conditionswere admitted. They amounted to about a hundred andfifty.In the meantime the peers of the Upper House met as ifby their own right. They elected their Speaker, and enteredinto a mutual alliance with the Lower House.Two of the elements of the constitution were thus reestablishedaccording to the ancient forms of the Englishstate: the third element was alone wanting,-the King. Itwas at this moment that Grenville reached Westminster. Hebrought letters from the King to Monk, to the Houses of Parliament,to the army, and to the city. It was part of Monk'spolicy that he refused to accept the letter addressed to himself,until Parliament had expressed its sentiments. Hestudiously appeared not to know Grenville. He wished thatthe King's declarations should seem to be his own unsolicitedact. The members of the Lower House received them standing,and with uncovered heads. The parliamentary tonewhich pervaded them produced, as was inevitable, the mostfavourable impression. They were listened to by the Lordswith the same marks of respect. The Upper House thenproceeded to a resolution which virtually implied the restorationof the monarchy. It simply declared that, in conformitywith the ancient fundamental laws of the realm, the governmentconsists and shall consist of King, Lords, and Commons.The authority of the old laws on which the constitutionrested, which had once been used to oppose the encroachmentsof the crown and of irresponsible ministers, was now appealedto against the arbitrary violence of the Commonwealth.'And whereas,' so runs a second resolution, 'all the troublesof this realm, since it was attempted to destroy its ancientconstitution, have been caused by the separation of the headfrom the limbs, it is necessary first of all to heal this breachx!:I. 7. RECALL OF TNE KING. 305A.D. 1660.and to restore the King to his people.' The abrogation ofthe old constitution had been declared when the proposal ofthe Lords for a conference between the Committees of the twoHouses was rejectcd ; the first step was now taken towards itsrestoration when such a conference was actually held on thissame first day of May. Lord Manchester spoke in behalf ofthe Lords. He laid especial stress on the fact that it was theattempt which had been made to devise new political formswhich had first caused justice to be done to the ancient constitutionof England. It was now proved to be the best inthe world : 'Where the word of a King is, there is power.'These views and resolutions were joyfully accepted by theLower House.But this unanimity by no means implied that all partyfeelingand party-views, even those hostile to the declarationswhich had been accepted, had disappeared. In the LowerHouse the Royalists betrayed their intention of effecting animmediate restoration of the confiscated estates. In theUpper House, conformably to the views of the Presbyterianpeers, those conditions were revived which it had beenpreviously attempted to impose upon the crown. Mentionwas made of the control of the militia, of a ParliamentaryCommission for the administration of the Great Seal. Manywere anxious to draw up terms of capitulation, which shouldbe laid before the King. But Monk decidedly opposed alldiscussion of the point. He declared that he could not beresponsible for the peace of the nation and the army if theKing's return were delayed. Charles I1 would arrive withouteither money or men, and so could neither overawe nor corruptany one. It would be just as easy to treat with him after hisreturn as before it.It was this view of the crisis which had decided Monk'sconduct during the last few weeks. No one ventured seriouslyto oppose him. All idea of negotiation was abandoned, andmeasures were at once taken for proclaiming the King and forinviting him to return. The proclamation is remarkable forthe deliberate way in which it renounces the principle of thesovereignty of the people. It contains the acknowledgmentthat immediately on the death of Charles I the crown hadIZt\KKE, VOL. 111.X

306 RECALL OF THE KZArGC;. XIII. 7.A.D. 1660.descended by right of birth and undisputed succession to hisillustrious Majesty, Charles 11, and that he was. by the providenceof God King of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland.The Lords and Commons, with the city magistratesand other citizens present, promised obedience tp the Kingand to the royal line, for themselves, their children, and theirdescendants, for ever. Unconditional as this submissionsounds, yet it is clear from what has been already related,that a reservation was made in favour of individual rights andclaims. And to the last there was a party in Parliamentwhich would gladly have postponed the King's return.Charles I1 appealed to Monk for aid in putting an end tofurther delay 1.Charles I1 had moved to the Hague at the invitation ofthe States of Holland, when a formal deputation from the twoHouses of Parliament, consisting of twelve peers and sixcommoners, reached him, with an invitation to return to hisParliament and to resume the exercise of his kingly duties.The spokesman for the Lower House was Denzil Hollis.His speech gave general satisfaction; but it was impossibleto forget that he had been one of the five members whomCharles I had wished to arrest on the occasion of his illstarredvisit to Parliament 2.It was curious too that the fleet which was anchored offSchcvening, in readiness to carry back the King, was commandedby Edward Montague, who had, it is true, been fora considerable time in con~munication with Charles 11, butwho nevertheless had been among those who had hoped toset the crown upon Cromwell's head. On the 22nd of May theKing reached the coast. Ile was greeted with a general salutefrom all the guns in the fleet. The next day he embarkedin company with his brothers York and Gloucester, the firstof whom he had raised to the post of Iligh Admiral. Theroyal arms had been already substituted for those of theCommonwealth, but the King noticed with surprise that theships still bore names associated with the Commonwealth,such as Naseby, Durham, and Lambert. Almost the first act- - - -- -- -Letter Lo Morrice, May lo/zo, in Thurloe vii. grz. a Pepyb' Diary i. 2. 12.XIII. 7. RECALL OF THE K m . 307A.D. 1660.of his reign was to replace them by names of royalist sound.The Naseby, on board of which he found himself, he rechristenedthe Royal Charles. It was his policy thus toendeavour to govern under the standard of the monarchythat Great Britain which the Commonwealth had united andstrengthened. As he paced the deck of the vessel, which wasto carry him to England, surrounded by all the homageusually offered to royalty, he spoke of his flight from Worcester,of his distress, and of his adventures and escape.Tears of sympathy with his misfortunes filled the eyes ofmany who heard him. In the evening the sailors spoke ofnothing else. At midday on the 25th of May the Kingonce more touched English soil. His landing-place wasDover, where he was received by General Monk. It wasexpected that the General would have betrayed some senseof his own power and services; but nothing of the sort wasvisible in his demeanour. It was that of a subject humblyimploring forgiveness for his past derelictions of duty. Hewelcomed in the King the true holder of the civil authority,at whose feet he laid his own military power. Hiswhole attitude breathed only loyalty. The troops receivedthe King in the same spirit. In the address which theypresented to him they dwelt only on the services which theyhad been able to render in restoring him, and declared theirreadiness to shed their blood for him in the future. We aretold that the sight of the disciplined and high-spirited troopsdrawn up on Hlackheath made a deep impression on Charles 11'.Thus assured, by the promises of their generals and the aspectof affairs, of the loyalty of the army and navy which hadonce fought against him, he made his entry into the capitalon the 29th of May, his thirtieth birthday.Indescribable was the pomp and unbounded the joy 'withwhich he was received2. But he could not for a moment' 'For indeed they seemed all men of one age and one mind.' (Baker'sChronicle 733.) Undoubtedly the source of the account of Monk's life givenby Gumble and in Skinner.a Coventry writes to Orniond in Carte ii. 337, to hasten the King's return 'toprevent the town's running mad, for betwixt joy and expectation the people hardlysleep.'X 2

308 RECALL OF THE KIArG. xnr. 7.A.D. 1660.avoid seeing that he had entered into the midst of a life fullof independence and activity. On his way through the cityhe was met by the Presbyterian preachers. They greetedhim with shouts, and presented him with a Bible. He repliedthat the Bible should form the rule of his life: thus hereached Westminster. The Lower House had sat that dayand passed two resolutions of different import, which werecombined. The first provided that the old oath of allegianceand supremacy should be renewed, the second that theKing should be requested to confirm Magna Charta, thePetition of Right, the Statute respecting the power of Parliamentto approve taxes, and the other privileges of Parliament.They were presented in the evening, and in the veryhall from which Charles I had passed to the scaffold. Thecheers of the day were still ringing in the King's ears whenthe Speaker, with great ceremony, laid the measures beforehim. He replied that in all that concerned the maintenanceof the laws and of religion he was as ready to grant as thepeople to ask : his whole wish was to make then1 as happy ashe was himself '.' Giavarina. 'Con acclamationi. e benedittioni inexplicabili incontrato dalmaggiore e magistrati della citt8, che gli resero gli consuett tributi di soggettionee vasallaggio, e traversando da una parte all' altra questa lunghissima rnetropolinel mezzo di soldati a piedi, che tenevan spallierate le strade andava alzando gliocchi alle finestre, riguardando tutti, levando il capello.'BOOK XIV.THE FIRST FIVE YEARS UNDER CHARLES 11.THE RESTORATION OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH.

TIiE STATE OF AFFAIRS AT THE RESTORATION.NATIONS arc not guided by con~prehensive views, theyare rather impelled by powerful feelings. Charles I hadrendered. himself unpopular by his encroachments upon thefundamental rights of the people, by undermining the constitutionof Parliament, and by an apparef;t leaning towardsCatholicism. But during the struggle with him the arrny andthe bigoted sectaries had together established a rule far moredistasteful still to the convictions and feelings of the nation.It was the dislike felt to a mode of government which disguisedviolence and oppression under the cloak of freedomthat led to the restoration of the old constitution. The cryfor a free Parliament, which was the first raised against theCommonwealth, was implicitly a demand for the monarchy.It was on this state of feeling that the General relied, whohad sided with the Commonwealth in its struggle with hisfanatical rivals, but had since found that its own sectariantendencies threatened danger to himself. Thoroughly soberminded,always prompt and resolute, and far-sighted enoughto discern the course of affairs, and thus to retain the lead inhis own hands, he secured free play for the general wishesand feelings of the people, Monk did not beget the Restoration,but he may be said to have assisted at its birth.While constantly engaged with the foes nearest at hand,he at the same time accomplished a higher duty, and obeyedthe necessity of things, and, supported by the common consentof the nation, inaugurated a new era in the history ofEngland I.

312 STA TE OF AFFAIRS XIV. I.A.D. 1660.But what the character of that era would be, how far itwould link itself on to past centuries, or how far it gavepromise of something new, was as yet veiled in obscurity.So far as we can see, no one had any exact idea of whatcould and should happen. In the struggle of conflictingelements each man cherished those hopes and schemes whichbest suited his own position.There were not wanting some who thought that the timehad come for once more raising the English sovereign to therank of an absolute monarch. They argued that an unsuccessfulrebellion left the King more completely king, andhis subjects more entirely subjects than before. There isextant among the records of this time a mfemorial', in whichthe King is advised to revive all his prerogatives under theprotection of the old penal laws. Above all however he wasto resume possession of the crown domains. Trustworthypersons in each county were to discover the amount theyproduced, which must have risen considerably, and the newrents were to be fixed accordingly. Moreover, since thosecrown-lands which had been assigned to the Queen-Motherfor her jointure would bear rating at a far higher value thantheir present one, the King might appropriate this additionalrevenue to the treasury. Some of the crown-lands had lapsedto other hands, these the King might lawfully reclaim. Bythese means he would undoubtedly obtain an income threetimes as great as that which his father had enjoyed ; and inhis wealth, so urged the writer, lay his real power. By strictlaws the nobility of all ranks might be at once elevated abovethe masses, and rendered permanently dependent upon thecrown. Men were more securely attached by the prospect ofsafety for their property than by consciousness of duty. Thecommons should be prohibit:d from acquiring landed estatesbeyond a certain amount. It would be better for them toturn their capital to trade. It is part of the writer's schemeto connect with the new organisation of the domains a sort offief-system; each domain was to equip a certain numberof infantry and cavalry. In this way the King would be ableRecord Office: State Papers, Domestic Series : Charles XI, vol i. no. 8 I (no title)XIV. I. A T THE RESTORA TION. 313A.D. 1660.to dispense with the assistance of the people, which couldnever be purchased except at the cost of relinquishing hismost valuable prerogative. Their secular jurisdiction was tobe restored to the clergy, but in return they were- to be boundto conformity. They were to inculcate from the pulpit theduty of loyal obedience.The object of the scheme was to render the King independentin matters of administration and finance; to securefor him a military force of his own, and to separate carefullyfrom each other the various orders in the community. Thereis no doubt that it was modelled upon the great continentalmonarchies. France especially excited attention at the time,where the power created by Henry IV was being graduallyconsolidated-an example which was incessantly before theeyes of Charles I. It was not more than eight years sincethe youthful Louis XIV, a grandson of Henry IV, afterhaving been excluded from his capital by the revolutionaryoutbreaks of the Fronde, between.which and the movementsin England there was a certain affinity, had returned thitheramid the applause of the people, and had at once begun toestablish the absolute authority of the crown. Why shouldnot the restoration of the monarchy in England lead to resultslike those which it had produced on the other side ofthe Channel ?But the analogy between the two cases is merely superficial,while the differences between them are radical and important.Henry IV had made himself master by force of his capital,which was the stronghold of his enemies. He had entered it asa conqueror. Charles I had been worsted by the rebellion, andhad been executed by its most resolute leaders. He hadfallen a victim to the idea of the sovereignty of the people.So too Louis XIV owed his return to a victory gained underthe walls of the capital, to a military success, of which thesubsequent revulsion in popular feeling was merely the effect.Charles I1 had no military force at his disposal. Such a caseas that assumed in the memorial had never occurred. Therehad been no suppression of a rebellion. Even the King'sown adherents had merely assisted in restoring him. Thercal cause at work had been an internal change of relations

314 STATE OF AFFAIIZS XIV. I .A.D. 1660.anlong the rebellious forces : the strife between the one whichhad succecdcd in making itself suprcme and the rest. TheEnglish Restoration was essentially a parliamcntary revolution.The chief reason for recalling Charles I1 was the impossibilityof establishing parliamentary government without the King.Rut though the conditions under which the rcstoration hadbeen effected precluded the possibility of establishing an absolutemonarchy of the continental type, yet this by no meansimplied that the monarchy would quietly sink into a merelyparliamentary position. The recall of Charles I1 would havesignified but little had he not been recognised as posscssingcertain inborn imperishable rights. Thc authority of theusurper had been based upon the idea of the sovereignty ofthe people: it was impossible that the same idea could bethe ruling one in the restored monarchy. In later times theAmerican Republic has invested it with world-wide importance;but it was hostile to the whole spirit of the EnglishRestoration. Lords and gcntry, the lawyers and the clergy,regarded the restoration of an authority whose prerogativcshad from time immemorial been bound up with their ownas the best means of preserving their own existence. Truc,these prerogatives did not create their right, but thcy impliedit. It was the hereditary King whom the people had welcomedback with such enthusiasm. That a young and helplessprince, with scarcely an effort of his own, and unaidedby any neighbouring power, should have gained the victoryover a haughty, powerful and stubborn foe, was universallyattributed to the irresistible force of lawful rights. The rightof hereditary succession which had shortly before unitedScotland with England and Ireland, was once more hailedas the keystone of that ideal arch, which is called the constitutionof the realm.It followed from this that all the proposed alterations in thecomposition of Parliament could no longer be thought of. Atrue and complete representative body would have been toopowerful to have permanently tolerated the existence by itsside of either Lords or King ; it would have in all probabilityplunged thc country again into those confusions from whichit was so anxious to escape. Those elective powcrs mustXIV. I. AT THE RESTORATION. 375A.D. I 660.necessarily remain in force which the privileged corporationshad inherited as an heirloom from the past. It followed toothat the Lords must resume their ancient rights. It wasmerely the natural consequence of the restoration of the royalfamily that the King's brothers should again take their appointedseats in the Upper House.Now however that the various powers of the old constitutionhad been re-established, while their mutual relationsto each other remained as ill-defined as before, it was inevitablethat there should also be a revival of the old controversies.The newly-restored King had as lively a sense ofhis prerogative as any of his predecessors, more especiallysince this prerogative was closely bound up with that hereditaryright which had recently been so brilliantly established.Rut this feeling was equally strong among both Lords andCommons. So long as the conflict lasted they had unitedagainst the common foe. They agreed in repealing muchthat the late legislative assembly had enacted, and in declaringit null and void : but they would not carry this policyso far as to affect in any essential point the parliamentarysystem. It is to an eminently royalist Lower Housc thatwe owe the chief provisions which for ever securely establishedthis system. What the restoration achieved was merely thereturn to the ancient basis of the constitution, which led inevitablyto a revival of the ancient disputes ; however much inthe main the crisis had enforced union. But the reconciliationof these differences was rendered even more difficult than ofold by the presence of new elements which it was necessaryeither to expel, to pacify, or to accept, and which had distinctrelations alike with King, Lords, and Commons.The religious question itself presented infinite difficulties.The maintenance of the Anglican Church was a duty whichCharles I had inherited ; and in the attempt to perform it hehad lost his life. Nine bishops of that Church were still living,and besides them a considerable number of those who had beenejected from their offices in it. That all these must be reinstatedwas obvious : the problem was how to reconcilesuch a measure with the claims of the Presbyterians, towhose assistance the King's rcstoration was chiefly due. We

3"5 SiAIh U1' AI*%'AIKS XIV. I.A.D. I 660.are in possession of a scheme for the settlement of the realm,published in Scotland1 : which after acknowledging the lawfulheir to the crown, joins to this the demand that the Presbyteriansystem should be maintained ; firstly, because it isdivinely appointed ; and secondly, because in the League andCovenant lay the chief security for all the political libertiesof the three countries.Again, on what footing should the three nations themselvesstand with regard to each other? Cromwell had unitedthe three Parliaments: but in Scotland especially the unionhad been regarded as an act of violence, and was as suchheld to have ended with Cromwell's fall.On his way from Dover to London, the King was metat Canterbury by the leading Royalists. The warmth oftheir mutual congratulations was however damped by thepetitions which they presented to the King respecting thelosses they had incurred. He was irritated at being thussolicited the moment that he left his carriage. On theother hand, he received immediately after from GeneralMonk a list of persons qualified to be mtmbers of the PrivyCouncil. They were the leaders of the popular party, whohad opposed Charles I from the moment of his rupture withthe Parliament 2. Thus, even before he reached London, theKing found himself face to face with the old feud betweenthe Cavaliers and the Parliamentarians, which had filledEngland with war for so many years.On the evening of the King's entry the Earl of Manchesterwelcomed him in the name of the Lords, expressingtheir hope that he would do justice to the various parties,would reconcile their differences, and moderate the moreextreme 1. A hard task for the young Prince, who duringhis exile had only judged men according to the extentof their devotion to himself, and their power of aiding his' 'Paper concerning the settlement of the government in the three nations,' inWodrow's History of the Sufferings of the Church of Scotland. Introduction I?;.continuation of the Life of Edward, Earl of Clarendon, 5, 6. Unfortunatelywe possess no other account of these events.Speech of the En11 of Manchester in the contemporary account given by Kennet,Register 164.XIV. 1. A T THE XESTORA TION. 317A.D. 1660.return; and from this point of view had formed his likings,had concluded agreements, and given promises.~t was clearly necessary to form the Council of State, atleast in the main, in accordance with Monk's suggestions.BY the side of the leading Cavaliers, who were extolled asmodels of unshaken loyalty, we find the Presbyterian peerswho had renounced the King, such as Northumberland, Say,Manchester, and even some of those who had borne armsagainst him, such as Lord Roberts. With these were joinedCromwell's old followers who had mainly assisted in reducingthe army and navy to obedience, such as Monk and Montague.Even Ashley Cooper had formerly belonged to thesame party, till Cromwell refused him his daughter 1. Hisrecent services in restoring the King procured both for himand Hollis the entry into the Privy Council. Both werein the most intimate alliance with Monk. Lastly, some ofthose who belonged to the Queen-Mother's party, and hadbeen carefully excluded from the court at Brussels, were nowadmitted to the Council of State.So motley and numerous a body could never be trustedwith the actual conduct of affairs. This was concentrated inthe hands of the old confidential advisers of Charles I, whomhe had bequeathed to his son :-Ormond, who enjoyed all thatinfluence over Charles I1 which able men of the highest rankusually exert over young princes ; Southampton, who unitedto a strong sense of duty a deep devotion to the royal cause,and round whom the friends of that cause had secretly rallied.Next to these came Edward Hyde, the Chancellor, whonaturally continued after the King's return to prepare mattersfor his decision, as he had previously done on the Continent.It seems to have been thought desirable to relieve him ofthe judicial duties of his office, into actual possession of whichhe now entered, in order that he might be able to devotehimself entirely to the conduct of strictly political businessas Prime Minister. This arrangement he at once rejected,on the ground that the King would' feel it an encroachment,and that the nation wished the government to be in the hands' Compare the note in Carlyle's Cromwell iii. 151.

318 STATE OF AFFAIRS XIV. I.A.D. 1660.not of a powerful minister, but of the King himself. Colepeppertoo was spared to have a seat and a voice amongthe most intimate advisers of the restored King. Hyde andColepepper had both been among those who-at the timeof the great Remonstrance towards the end of 1641, whenthe dispute with Scotland was still pending, as to whetherthe Royalist Episcopalian system should be established, orthat of the Presbyterians accepted with its accompanyingprovisions, limiting the royal prerogative-stoutly advocatedthe former course, and were on that account summoned byCharles I to his Privy Council. Hyde's conduct during thenegotiations at Uxbridge, where the same religious andpolitical questions had assumed a form still more unfavourableto the Royalist views, confirmed Charles 1's confidence inhim. When shortly after it was thought advisable, in compliancewith the wish of the western counties, to entrust thePrince of Wales with an independent sphere of action there,and to form a Privy Council for him, Hyde, Colepepper andSouthampton, who had already been engaged in the conductof affairs at Oxford, were appointed members of it. On thedecline of the royal cause in England, which began in 1646,Hyde and Colepepper accompanied the Prince to Jersey.When, after Charles 1's execution, a Royal Council was formedround Charles 11, they were its most prominent members.After the defeat at Worcester, and Charles 11's flight toFrance, Ormond became their constant ally both in court andcouncil. He formed the closest friendship with Hyde, andwe have frequently noticed instances in which they acted inconcert. After all that they had previously been and done,after all their services and sufferings, they naturally attainedon the restoration of the throne to the highest posts.Secretary Nicholas was their inseparable ally ; up to theflight of Charles I to the Scottish camp he had remained athis side, and had since served the son as zealously as he hadserved the father. Together they represented the principle ofLegitimacy in its purest form. The more recently establishedinterests, the school naturally alien to the monarchy, founda spokesman in Monk, who had however done more thanany one else to restore them to their allegiance to the King.XIS 1. AT THE RES1'ORATIOAT. 3'9A.U. 1660.with Monk, his chief confidant William Morrice was admittedinto the highest circle of government as assistant secretary toNicholas. While still in the Netherlands the Chancellor hadmade offers of friendship to him and asked for his confidence.In the alliance between Monk and Hyde, Nicholas andMorrice, we see the alliance of elements originally opposed,and which approached each other from opposite sides.It was thus that within the Council of State a sort ofcabinet was formed, such as is wont to grow up almost spontaneouslyround the persons of new princes : a cabinet composedof men personally trustworthy, who scarcely requireany formal appointment, much less any formal definition oftheir sphere of action. Before the Council Board, for suchwas the name given to the smaller body, came all questionsthat necessarily affected the establishment of the new systemand required the most prompt determination.It had been already agreed in Holland previous to theRestoration, that the King should employ only men of undoubtedhonesty in the most important affairs; and it wasexpected of them that they should devote themselves to theirwork with zeal and dexterity, without regard for their personalinterests, until the prevailing disorder should be suppressed,and the new order of things firmly established.Some fugitive notes are still extant in Nicholas's handwriting,from which we can learn what took place at thesittings of these leading men, whose secretary he was l. Thesittings begin on June 15, in the third week after theRestoration. On the 18th it was resolved, in the presenceof the King, that their meetings should be held every Mondayand Thursday at ten in the morning, in the Chancellor's room.If we glance over this scarcely decipherable protocol, we arestruck at once by the difficulty to which the possession ofDunkirk gave rise. It was debated what troops should besent to garrison it, whether they should be commended tothe special care of Parliament, or should be thrown for theirsupport up011 the contributions which they could levy uponthe country round. Especial attention was paid to the returnsRecord M:e: State Pa~ers, Domestic Series : Charles 11, "01. i.

320 SZATE OF AFFAIRS XIV. I.A.D. 1660.of custom and excise, which canle next under discussion.Estimates were made of the amount they had formerlyproduced, and of that which they now yielded, and also ofthe modes by which to increase them. The King relinquishedhis privilege of being exempt from them. Ormond calledin a skilful man to introduce a more economical expenditureat court. The treasury was especially embarrassed by thearrears due to the navy. The possibility was long discussedof permanently relieving the distress by raising and payingdown a large sum. During the first few months, beforeSouthampton's appointment as treasurer, all the importantbusiness of the treasury came before this Board. It also,though the Chancellor had already entered upon the dutiesof his post, debated how to fill up the great judicial offices,and in discussing this the question arose whether those lawyers,who had been appointed by an authority other than that ofthe King, should be promoted or not. Of the affairs of theAnglican Church we hear nothing; but the continued agitationsof the Anabaptists excited the most serious attention.Information was given of congregations into which no onewas received who had not absolutely abjured the authorityof the civil magistrate, and precautions were taken againstthem. Ashley Cooper was sent to the Tower to examine theprisoners. A list of Anabaptists, who were thought dangerous,was laid before the General. Search was made for hiddenarms. Prisoners who were released were bound over notto create any disturbances. Under such circumstances it wasdoubly important to entrust the government of the countryto trustworthy hands. Great care was taken to discoverdevoted sheriffs. It was resolved that the municipal magistratesshould take the oath of allegiance. For Guernsey theyendeavoured to secure a man who was a landed proprietorand would live on the island, for it was a post of trust. Theaffairs of the sister-kingdoms also came under the considerationof the Board; but it was thought desirable, when for instancea deputation arrived from Ireland, that the King shouldbe present in person when it was received. Charles I1 preferredto receive the deputation alone; but he informed theBoard that he had promised at once to appoint a com-XIV. 1. AT THE RESTORATION. 321A.D. 1660.rnander-in-chief for Ireland and generally to establish a firmsystem of government. A few days later the Board foundit necessary to remind him of the urgency of such a resolution.Nicholas was entrusted with the duty. The Kingsoon after made his appearance at the Board, and told themthat he had appointed Roberts Lord-Deputy of Ireland.He then asked what they advised with respect to Scotland.TO prevent any outbreak of party-spirit there, they proposedto retain the troops in the country for the present, but theydid not insist on the subordination of Scotland to England.They allowed the Scots to hoId their own Parliament, oncondition of their promising to organise the government insuch a way as should recognise the ancient rights of the King.The existing taxes were still to be paid until further notice.It is consistent with the nature and constitution of theCouncil Board that it should have abandoned with so littlescruple the legislative union of the three kingdoms. Monkwas in favour of the scheme. He had mainly paved theway for the re-establishment of Scottish independence byconcluding that agreement, which enabled him to marchinto England. Foreign affairs were discussed by the Boardnot unfrequently, though less constantly l. It was stilldoubtful whether, by receiving the Portuguese ambassadors,the King would not destroy the existing friendly relationswith Spain. General discontent was expressed at the hostileattitude assumed towards the King by the French ambassador,Bordeaux. Claims for compensation on account of some shipswhich had been captured were sent to the Dutch, from whomhowever a loan was hoped for.But, extensive as the sphere of action of the Council Boardwas, its actual power was small. On every question it requiredthe co-operation of Parliament.In Clarendon's Apology to the House of Lords (Life ii. 459) greater stressis laid on the foreign business of the Council Board than is warranted by theseprotocols.RANKE, VOL. 111.

CHAPTER 11.THE CONVENTION PARLIAMENT IN THE SUMMEROF 1660.IT had originally been intended that the Parliament chosenat the last elections should do nothing more than formallyacknowledge the King ; this done, the King was at onceto issue writs for a fresh election, as only a Parliamentsummoned by the King himself could be considered a lawfulone.But it was now urged that a fresh election if held at oncewould arouse all the evil passions in the country, and wouldendanger the conciliatory position assumed by the government.One of the first acts of the newly-restored King wasto recognise as lawful that Lower House which had beenelected without his writs, though it was true that such ameasure did not completely satisfy the legal conscience ofthe nation. The power of dissolution alone he expresslyreserved to himself.More than this was impracticable, inasmuch as the LowerHouse, without waiting for the King's return, had, in obedienceto his proclamation, proceeded at once to settle thepoints touched upon in the manifesto issued from Breda,and which had been first mooted in London. A proclamation,dated the 8th of May, states that the Commons assembledin Parliament were busied with certain measuresof the greatest importance for the country-an act namelyfor the security of the Protestant religion, an act of amnesty,and lastly, one for the payment of the arrears due to thearmy and navy.The most important, or at any rate the most urgent, ofx,v. 2. THE CONVENTION PARLTANENT. 323*.D. I 660.these was the second-the act, as it was entitled, of amnesty,indemnity, and free pardon ; for on this act it depended howfar all those who had taken part in the rising against the Kingshould, on his return, be secured or not against the operationof the laws anciently enacted for the protection of the crown.The manifesto from Breda had already declared that ageneral pardon would be granted. But, in the first place,this announcement required to be confirmed by the formalsanction of Parliament; and secondly, the King had himselfannounced that certain exceptions would be made. All thosewho had had a hand in the condemnation and execution ofhis father were to be excluded from all hope of pardon.Their punishment was in fact almost the condition on whichthe rest were forgiven. As early as May 12 a debate on thisquestion took place in the Commons, which was of thegreatest importance for the political future of the country.A member remarked that, between those who had taken partin condemning Charles I and those who had drawn the swordagainst him, no real distinction could be drawn. But if theamnesty had any object, it was surely that of protectingagainst the vengeance of the laws all those who during theLong Parliament had declared against the King, or offendedhim : only those were to be left to their fate on whoseshoulders rested the burden of the King's death-the leadersof the Republicans and fanatics. His words excited remonstrancesfrom all sides of the House. It was urged inreply that it was impossible to put on the same level suchan act as the execution of the King, which excited generalabhorrence, and participation in a war, which aimed at bringingdelinquents to punishment and defending hardly-wonliberties. While the Commons thus maintained the generallegitimacy of the principles laid down by the Long Parliament,they handed over to the serjeant-at-arms a list of those concernedin the condemnation of Charles I, with orders to arrestthose named therein. But even in this point they wereanxious to observe moderation. It was resolved that sevenonly of those who had sat in judgment on the King shouldbe excepted from the amnesty. After the King's return thesemerciful intentions still prevailed. On the proposal of theY 2

324 THE CONVENTION PA RLIA MELVT XIV. 2.A.D. 1660.Comn~ons a proclamation was issued ordering all the King'sjudges, as well as the officers of the court, to surrender themselveswithin fourteen days on pain of being excluded fromthe amnesty, thus implying that they might, by so doing,obtain its benefits. They next proceeded to name the sevenwhose lives were unconditionally forfeited. They were theleaders of the vanquished factions : Harrison, the Anabaptist ;the rigid Republican, Scott, and five others who had madethemselves generally detested by their violent conduct. Theywere to be sacrificed in expiation of the death of the Kingand of the peers who had followed him to the scaffold. Theother members of the court were not to enjoy the full benefitsof the amnesty, but their lives were to be spared.For a second list of excepted persons was now drawn up,including in addition twenty other persons, who had takena prominently active part in the late disorders. The nameswere read out one by one, and the extent of their guilt wasdiscussed '. Prynne had, for instance, denounced Whitelockeas deserving punishment. He was defended by Annesleyand Palmer. It might be advisable, they urged, to disgracehim and to inflict a moderate fine, but not to confiscate hisestates: for this reason, if for no other, that he had a largefamily. It was proved that he had also done the King goodservice, and on these grounds his name was struck off. Itseemed however as if the House would not be satisfied withso small a number as twenty. The arrest of the authors whohad written in defence of the King's execution was demanded; among others of John Milton the poet. The listof accused, its prescribed limits once passed, grew longer andlonger. From the King's judges it passed on to the membersof the other high courts of justice, then to those who hadabjured the King and who had petitioned against him; itattacked next the major-generals and those who had assistedthem in collecting the taxes, the officers and commissionerswho had thus enriched themselves. The well-filled sponge,We learn this from an extract out of a fragmentary journal which was in thehands of the author of the Old Parliamentary History, and which well deservesto be again brought to light.XIV. a. IN 2X.E SUMMER OF 1660. 325A.D. I 660.so it was said, must be squeezed dry. The members of theparliament of 1648 brought forward claims for compensationagainst those who had then arrested, imprisoned, or ejectedthem.Meanwhile the same question had already been discussedin the Lords. That House had, during the month of May,again filled up its numbers. At the request of the King, andon the ground that it is the King's prerogative to awardhonours and dignities, the House had confirmed the muchdisputedappointments made by Charles I after his departurefrom London. We find more than sixty lords, at least asmany barons, and a corresponding number of viscounts, marquises,and dukes assembled in the Upper House, so thatmore room had to be provided. Lord Chancellor Hyde tookhis seat on the woolsack. On July 13 George Monk, raisedby the King to the dignity of Baron I'otheridge, Earl Torrington,and Duke of Albemarle, entered the House. Escortedby two other peers, he handed his patent to the Lord Chancellorkneeling, and was then conducted to his seat by GarterKing at Arms. The Commons had granted hiA an imposingescort; the peers expressed their thanks to the King for hisappointment. He was still the hero of the day. In the restoredHouse of Lords the feelings which had produced theRestoration, and the animosity against those who had beenin power during the last few years, were far keener andlivelier than among the Commons. A committee was appointedto inquire into the injuries which the Lords hadsuffered in their persons and in their privileges. They wishedto make all responsible who had offended most grosslyagainst the King by word and deed, and to bring up fortrial those who had assisted in the execution of the greatpeers, Capell, Holland, and Hamilton. The 13ill of Indemnity,in the form in which it finally came up from the LowerHouse, by no means satisfied the Upper. 'I am consumedwith rage,' exclaimed Lord Bristol I, 'when I think that theblood so cruelly shed of so many noble persons of all degrees' The Earl of Bristol's speech in the House of Lords, July 20, upon the Bill ofIndemnity. Somers Tracts vii. 460.

326 THE CONVENTION PARLIAMENT XIV. 2.A.D. 1660.cries aloud for vengeance, and can find none; that wickedmen decked out in spoils taken from the most loyal membersof the nobility and gentry are to enjoy their triumph undisturbed:who is there that can think on such things and notfeel his heart burning with rage?' He however advised theLords, for the sake of the public good, to repress these feelings.For already the accounts of what had passed in thetwo Houses had given rise to a feeling in the nation thatthe Bill of Indemnity would, through the number of exceptions,more resemble a bill of pains and penalties than a measureof reconciliation and forgiveness. In the capital especiallyit excited disturbance. Not only could the governmentno longer hope to obtain an advance of money which it sorelyneeded from the city, but care was taken to embarrass it inevery way ; in the collection of the taxes, in the payment ofthe troops, and in the maintenance of public order. In thisdifficulty the King, on July 27, appeared, at the specialrequest of the Council Board, in the House of Lords, andadjured them to lay aside all animosity, all thoughts ofrevenge, all recollection of their past wrongs, and to acceptthe amnesty without excluding from it any but the murderersof his father. He read to them the words of his declarationfrom Breda, which announced that intention. Without sucha promise, he told them, neither they nor he would havebeen sitting in that place. Thus pressed, the Lords resolvedthat punishment should be inflicted on none but those whohad been concerned in the trial of Charles I, but on all ofthem. The Commons remonstrated. They wished to makegood the promise held out in the Proclamation to those whovoluntarily surrendered themselves. The Lord Chancellorreplied that neither the King nor the Lords understood thisto imply a promise of pardon. Blood could only be atonedfor by blood. Shipwreck was imminent unless some fewwere thrown overboard. To spare the chief offenders wouldbe to rob the pardon of the rest of all its value. No onewould regard himself as bound to serve a king who forgaveall offences. He added that these men would always bedangerous in the extreme, whether they remained at homeor were banished from the country, since they could carry onXIV. a. IN THE SUMMER OF 1660. 32'1A.D. 1660.their intrigues from a distance; and pamphlets were alreadycirculated in the country, justifying the execution of Charles Iby arguments which would apply equally well to Charles 11.With happy tact the Chancellor related that once, on theoccasion of his mission to Spain, the King had pledged himto the declaration that neither the nation nor Parliament wereresponsible for the murder of his father: that had been thework of a small band of wicked and misguided men I. Thisstatement produced the most favourable impression : it succeededthoroughly in gaining its object. For it was of essentialimportance, and the Commons had from the first aimed at this,to separate the guilt attaching to the murder of the King fromall other grounds of charge. It was conceded that even thosewho had voluntarily surrendered should, ' on account of theirabominable treason and murder,' be summoned to stand theirtrial, but that the execution of the sentence which might bepronounced upon them should be reserved for further Parliamentarysanction. On the remonstrance of the Commonsthe Lords abandoned their intention of bringing to trial theassessors in the other courts of justice. The Commons intheir turn gave up, in deference to the wishes of the Lords,the second list of persons to be excepted. Only men likeLambert and Vane owed their destruction to their name andreputation. It was said that Vane must die for the kingdomrather than for the King2. They were both reserved for finalpunishment.It was a case of civil war. The most deeply compromisedleaders of the Republican and fanatical party, who hadattempted to overthrow the monarchy, were to pay for theirattempt with their lives, now that the monarchy was restored.Strange as it seems, it was only natural, as affairs stood, thatin the court of justice which was formed to try the regicides,not only Royalists but the old Presbyterian peers, Manchester,Viscount Say and Sele, and Roberts, took part, as well asMonk, Montague, and Cooper, who had been formerly mem-Aug. 22. Report of Sir Heneage Finch, Old Parl. Hist. xxii. 435.'Mr. Thomas moved, to have somebodie die for the kingdom as well as forthe King, and named Sir H. Vane! Journal, in Old Parl. Hist. 443.

328 THE CONVENTION PARLIAMENT XIV. 2.A.D. 1660.bers of the Protector's government. Their common hostilityto the fanatics had brought them all round to the side ofmonarchy.At the opening of the trial in Hick's Hall before the GrandJury of Middlesex, on October g, 1660, the president, SirOrlando Rridgeman, rested his case on the theory of theEnglish monarchy, which though not absolute, for it governedaccording to the laws, was yet bound by no conditions, andwas derived immediately from God ; so that no one possessedany coercive power over the King. Such was the meaninghe gave to the expression 'the imperial crown of England.'In the subsequent hearings of the case the accused basedtheir defence mainly on two points. They maintained thatfor conscience sake they had fought for a cause which Godby visible proofs had declared to be his own, and also thatthey had acted in honest reliance on the lawful authority ofParliament. The first plea Sir Orlando refused to admit, asbeing an excuse which might be used to justify any crimewhatever. The second he declared to be utterly groundless,since Parliament consisted of the King himself and the twoHouses. No one could imagine that a small fraction of theLower House, being scarcely an eighth part of the members,could justify them in sitting in judgment on the King, towhom each of them had on admission taken the oath ofallegiance, and whom no power on earth was entitled tojudge. This is not the place to examine the grounds onwhich each of the accused was defended or condemned. Thegreatest impression was made by john Cook, an experiencedlawyer, who had been for some time chief justice in Ireland.He relied upon the statute of Henry VII, according to whichobedience to the King de facto could not be treated as acrime, and argued that what held good of an actual king,must in equity hold good also of all actual political authority.The court disallowed the argument on the ground thatthe statute of Henry VII was conceived throughout in aRoyalist spirit. The accused were all condemned, withoutconsidering whether they had taken part in the execution asmembers of the court of justice or not. In consequence ofthe agreement we mentioned above, those who had voluntarilyXIV. z. IN THE SUMMER OF 1660. 329A.D. 1660.surrendered themselves were sent back to the Tower. Therewere still ten on whom the sentence of death was executed.They died in the assurance that theirs was the good cause.Harrison said that God's spirit bore witness to his; menwould soon perceive that there was something divine in thecause for which he was dying. ' Farewell,' wrote Cook to hiswife ; 'though I am dead, my blood will cry out for revenge.'Hugh Peters alone, like Thomas Miinzer before him, lost allfortitude. He was scarcely so thoroughly convinced of thetruth of his doctrines as were the laymen to whom he hadpreached them. He staggered on to tl;e scaffold like onedrunk. His death was greeted by the crowd with wild shoutsof applause. Later writers have taken him under their protection.The executions took place at Charing Cross, ona spot from which the part of Whitehall where the Kinghad been executed was visible l. It was to be clear to everyone that the sentence was one of requital. The shade of themartyred monarch was to be appeased by the blood of hispersecutors. It was blood for blood: but at the same timeit established a political principle. At the close of the proceedingsOrlando Hridgeman once more brought forward thepassages from the statutes in which the King was declared tobe the head of the people, the head of the commonwealth,and directly subject to God alone and to no other power.He also quoted the forms of the oaths of allegiance andsupremacy which pledged the accused to act in accordancewith them. He pronounced it to be the fundamental law ofEngland that no authority, either of a single person such asthe Pope, or of a community, nor yet the people, either collectivelyor through its representatives, could exercise anycoercive power over the King of England. He went on toremind them that at the accession of King James I, Lordsand Commons, as the representatives of the whole nation,swore to obey and defend him and his heirs with their bloodand life. It was because they had violated these fundamental' The journal of Oct. 13 describes the 'railed place where Charing Cross stoodwithin which rails a gibbet has been set up, whereon he (Harrison) was hangedwith the face towards the banqueting house at Whitehall.'

330 THE CONVENTION PARLIAMENT xrv. 2.A.D. I 660.principles that the King's judges suffered the penalty ofdeath. Were the law otherwise, they would be in truth themartyrs which their adherents believed them to be. But inall this there was no proclamation of absolute power. WhileBridgeman enforced the doctrine that by the law of Englandthe King can do no wrong and is exempted from personalresponsibility, he at the same time laid stress on thefact that the laws afforded a remedy against those who didwrong at the command of the King1. It is this contrastbetween the inviolability of the King and the responsibilityunder the law of those who execute his commands, which isthe foundation and corner-stone of the English constitution.The events of the last few years had awakened in men'sminds a sense that it was above all things necessary to establishthe first beyond the reach of doubt ; but how to reconcilethe second with the activity and independence of theprince, which were recognised as indispensable, and whatthe law ought to be and could be in each case, was a problemthat remained to perplex men for the future as it had donein the past.The regicides excepted, the amnesty was very comprehensive.It declares that all and every treason and felony,or abetting of the same, all crimes and offences against theorder of the state, which any one had either advised orordered, or himself committed, whether singly or in concertwith others, in the time between January I, 1637, and June24, 1660, should be forgiven and forgotten 3. So wide aperiod was taken, in order to include all that had happenedfrom the first combinations between some English magnatesand the Scots, down to the complete accomplishment ofThe extracts from this speech given in Echard and in the Somers Tracts arenot entirely trustworthy. The concluding speech (State Trials v. 1226) runs asfollows : 'Remember that no power no person no community or body of men, notthe people either collectively or representatively, have any coercive power over theperson of the King by the fundamental laws.'' The law in all cases preserves the person of the King to be authorised, butwhat is done by his ministers unlawfully, there is n remedy against his ministersfor it.' State Trials v. 1228.a An act of free and general1 pardon, indemnity, and oblivion.XIV. a. IN THE SUMMER OF 1660. 33iA.D. I 660.the Restoration. In the course of the long disturbances andwars, so the King declares in the preamble, many of hishad rendered themselves liable to punishment. Hewould abstain from any further prosecution of them. Nocrime committed against himself or his father should anymore be made a ground for judicial proceedings, or entailany loss of life, or estate, or honour, or social position.The King hoped, since with certain exceptions he hadso liberally refrained from putting into force the old laws,to secure the observance of them for the future. He maintainsthat for the whole community such observance isabsolutely necessary, but that it was impracticable so longas each individual felt that the law menaced him with destruction.While giving his sanction to the Bill of Indemnity,he declared that should any one in future give utteranceto revolutionary sentiments, he was resolved, in spite of hisnatural inclination to mildness, and simply from a sense ofduty, to visit the offence with the most unsparing severity.The old law of high treason had seemed to many like asword hung over them. Its suspension, so far as the revolutionaryperiod was concerned, revived a sense of securityin English society: it was the condition of the successof the Restoration. Moreover, in the matter of the confiscatedestates the greatest lenity was shown. The estatesof the Crown and the Church, and finally of the exiledRoyalists, were restored ; a matter easily accomplished.Those only who had come to terms with the Commonwealth,at however great a loss, received no compensation.It was now possible to discuss in earnest the proposedsubsidies, which were absolutely indispensable. They hadreference chiefly to two objects, the disbanding of the armyand the endowment of the crown. They had already comeunder notice, but had always been postponed.We may ask what reason there was to hope that the army,which had once been the holders of power, and could atany moment seize it again either for themselves or for theKing, would be willing to allow themselves to be disbanded,and so reduced to a nonentity? That it was so, resultedfrom the attitude which Monk had assumed towards them.

332 THE CONVENTION PARLIAMENT XIV. 2.A.D. 1660.Tke moment that the declaration from Breda had beenreceived, which left the final arrangements to the decisionof Parliament, the army had also accepted it. The councilof officers assured the General that, out of gratitude for thediscipline which he had introduced, they were ready to obeyhim, and also the authority which God should set over them ;in other words, 'to acquiesce in whatever decision the Lordshould bring about from the deliberations of the presentFarliament '. They saw, as they imagined, in the declarationthe settlement of all the points on account of which theyhad originally taken up arms; the maintenance of the Protestantreligion, the privileges of Parliament, the liberties ofthe subject, the fundamental laws of the land, and even thedignity of the King, whose loyal subjects they professed tobe. In its tone the address reminds us of that which wasput forth when they first took up arms under Essex, beforethe rise of the Independents. Since the officers had in theinterim taken the oath of allegiance, it might have beenthought that no further objection could be taken to them.But it did not suit the plans either of the King or of theParliament that they should continue to exist. The latterdid not wish it, because a standing army and a Parliamentare not easily compatible. Colonel Birch remarked that hewas himself a member of the army, but he felt bound tosay that the liberty of the people was not safe so long asthe army existed. In the minds of the King and his government,and even of the General who commanded it, the natureof the elements of which it was composed excited anxiety.No sooner was the Bill of Indemnity passed than the reportof a Committee specially appointed for the purpose was read,together with a scheme drawn up by Monk. A short debatefollowed, in the course of which the old constitutionalobjection to the army was once more revived. Morrice,Monk's confidant, declared that it kept the nation in asort of perpetual earthquake. It was finally resolved that1 'The humble address of the officers of your Excellencie's (the Lord GeneralMonk's) army in the name of themselves and their brethren.' Baker's ChronicleXIV. 2. IN THE SUMJIEII OF 1660. 333A.D. 1660.the whole English army should be disbanded as soon aspossible.There was no longer any difficulty in finding the necessarymoney. A Committee of both Houses was entrusted withthe task, and the treasurer made his payments under theirdirection. Not merely were the arrears paid in full, but asmall present was added, to the amount of a week's pay.In England and Wales sixteen regiments of infantry, eachof them 1000 strong, and thirteen regiments of cavalry, eachconsisting of 600 men, were selected by lot to be disbanded.Fifty garrisons were treated in the same way. Most of thosedischarged acquiesced in their fate, recognising in it the handof God. Many of them resumed the trades which they hadformerly followed, with a view to which Parliament voted somerelaxations of the law. Many who had served as superiorofficers and colonels in the army were seen to take up againthe handicrafts to which they had been brought up as boys.It is true that others considered themselves betrayed byMonk, and treated with ingratitude by the King. Theylooked forward to an opportunity of hereafter giving vent tothe inward wrath which they were now obliged to suppress.Together with the claims of the army the King alsourgently insisted on his own, after the acceptance of the Billof Indemnity. That ancient subject of dispute, the tonnageand poundage duty, was readily conceded to him; but heprotested that the income derived from it was entirely swallowedup by the weekly payments to the navy. He hadreceived nothing but what the Parliament had at first senthim in Holland : on this he had lived till now; his brothershad not as yet received a shilling from him. He could noteven entertain those who visited him in Whitehall l.The arrangements for the public administration, the costof which was then defraye4 from the same fund as that ofthe court, rendered it additionally necessary to secure theKing a fixed income. In order to arrive at some estimateof the fixed sum required, it was resolved that Charles I1should have an income secured to him equal to that which' Journal of Lords xi. 184.

334 THE CONVENTION PARLTAMENT. xrv. 2.A.D. I 660.his father had enjoyed, and besides that this should besomewhat augmented. It was calculated that in times ofpeace Charles I had received ~900,000, partly, it is true,from unlawful sources, but that his expenditure exceededthis amount by f;200,0001. It was thought sufficient, andthere was some difficulty in bringing the House to consent,to resolve that the King should have a yearly income ofjt;1,2oo,000. In presenting the Bill the Speaker remarkedthat they hoped thus to enable him to support the splendourof his crown 2.It is clear, however, that for this the sum was inadequate.The income which the King already received was estimatedat ~800,000. It was, it is true, now augmented by A~;~c)o,ooo ;but in the Council Board it was noticed that the expenditurewas in excess of the receipts by a million, and that anadditional grant of ,t;6oo,ooo would be necessary to equalisethem. During his exile the King had incurred debts tothe amount of three millions, and had been obliged to payexorbitant interest upon them. It was a burden which hefelt to be intolerable: for any extraordinary demands he hadnot a penny at his command : financially he was completelydependent upon Parliament 3. Charles I1 deeply felt hisembarrassed position. He loved pleasure, was a bad housekeeper,and extravagant. His old Royalist friends madeincessant claims upon him ; he wished to respond to themliberally. More than this, he secretly cherished extensivedesigns, to execute which he required an independent income.He determined by some means or other to make himselfindependent of Parliament; this was the ruling idea of hislife, and decisively influenced his foreign policy.' The sums from 1637 to 1641 are L895,819 5s. and L210,ooo.'Supporting and upholding that grandeur and splendour which is due to yourMajesty.' Grimstone's Speech, Sept. 13.Ralph, a consistent opponent of the court (Hist. of England i. 30, note) :!They did not undertake to saddle the people with the whole load of government,they took care to continue the (king's) purse in their own power; it was nevertheir design to pot him above dependence.' I can find no trustworthy evidencefor the assertion that Lord Clarendon had it in his power to secure the King anadequate grant.FOREIGN POLICY.CHAPTER 111.MARRIAGES IN THE ROYAL FAMILY.WERE it allowable to use such a phrase as a negative event,I should say that among the most important of such eventswas the fact that the restoration of the monarchy in Englandwas accomplished without the direct interposition of any of thegreat continental powers. The political independence of therealm of which the Tudors had laid the foundations, whichunder the Stuarts had been extended so as to include thewhole of Great Britain, and which had recently under Cromwelldisplayed its full strength to the world, was now confirmedby the manner in which the return of the exiled royalline had been effected.But the evil which had been avoided during the crisis itself,became again imminent as soon as that crisis was past. KingCharles 11, long accustomed to look abroad for support, felthimself compelled, by the insecurity of his authority even afterhis restoration, to seek the assistance of foreign powers inhis domestic policy.He applied first of all to Holland and Spain. In July 1660the States-General suggested to Charles I1 the possibility ofrenewing their old alliance with England. Ormond and Hydereplied, that the promise of protection against external foes,which would have formed the main point in the terms ofagreement, was of no value to the King of England ; cutoff as he was from the rest of the world he needed p.rotectiononly against his foes at home. It was the timewhen the possibility of disbanding the army was still doubtful; and when an attempted reaction was expected on the

FOREIGN POLICY. XIV. 3.A.D. 1660.part of the fanatics. The King told the Dutch ambassadorthat he should consider himself eternally indebted to the Republic,if it would lend him two millions for this object1. TheRepublic did not at once reject the proposal. The GrandPensionary on one occasion declared it to be practicable. Thescheme failed, because the King shortly after allowed himselfto be persuaded by the city of London and by the LowerHouse to renew the Navigation Act of 165 I. The impressionthus created in the States-General was so unfavourable thatit was found impossible to persuade them to support hisgovernment by a large loan.The King disclosed his sentiments still more openly ina conversation with an old friend, who came to him as plenipotentiaryfrom the court of Spain.The Spanish ambassador at the Hague, Don Estephan deGamarra, had succeeded in being the first foreign ministerto offer his congratulations to King Charles, on his wayfrom Breda to the Hague. He did not allow himself to bedeterred, by the suspicious and offensive haste of Charles'sdeparture from Brussels, from so important a duty as thatof counteracting at the earliest opportunity the intrigues ofFrance or even of Portugal. His anxieties were set at restby a cordial reception, and he accompanied the King to theHague. In the course of the political conversations intowhich Charles readily entered, he manifested a strong leaningtowards Spain. He declared with truth that he was inalliance with Philip IV, and wished to remain so2.No more definite negotiations however took place until September1660, when he was visited at Westminster by GeneralMarsin, an old friend from the Netherlands. Marsin was onthe most intimate terms with Fuenseldaiia, the Spanish ambassadorin France, to whom he supplied an account of his conversationwith the King. Charles I1 did not deny that he hadfrequently suffered mortifying insults at the hands of the highLetters of Nassau to the Rathpensioner J. de Witt, July 16, a3; Sept. 14, 17,and Witt's answers, Sept. 24, Oct. 8, in the Dutch Collection of De Witt's Letters.Letters from Gamarra, May 20, 1660, in the archives of Simancas. (Archive5de l'empire, at Paris.)XIV. 3. FOREIGN POLICY. 331A.D. 1660.Spanish officials in the Netherlands ; he declared that but forthe kindness shown him by Don Luys de Haro he should bethe enemy of Spain. In the course of the interview the rivalproposals from France and Portugal were again touched upon.The King remarked that the offers of money which had accompaniedthem, though he had not as yet accepted them,had made a great impression upon him. Nothing was said ofthe disbanding of the troops-since the work had alreadybegun. But Charles disclosed to his old and trusty frienda far more extensive scheme: he told him that, so long as thePresbyterians retained possession of all the important postsin the state, he could not feel himself safe. His intentionwas to dissolve the present extremely Presbyterian Parliament,as soon as the disbanding had been effected, and then toorganise an army for himself from his own resources-inother words, without the consent of Parliament l. He hopedfor Spanish assistance, not through the Netherland government,but through the King of Spain, and perhaps under themanagement of Marsin himself: above all however he wantedmoney. Marsin replied that money he should have, if hewould restore Jamaica and Dunkirk. The King answeredthat such terms would not satisfy him : if the Spaniardswould decide to support him in his design, he would acceptsuch assistance more readily from that power than from anyother, since he was anxious to be the friend and ally of theKing of Spain.One step leads to another. The King was discontentedwith the obviously inadequate grant made him by Parliament ;but when he cherished ideas such as he now expressed, it wasinevitable that the suspicions of the other side should bearoused, and that their fears should impel them td make their' Necessitaba mucho de tenir algun dinero suyo sin haverlo menester pedir a1reyno. Porque aunque para despedir 10s exercitos le habian ya concedido el bastante,era su intento luego que 10s hubiera despedido y licentiado el parlamento,formar un exercito de dinero suyo que uniendo 10s protestantes con 10s catholicosvaiar (baxar) 10s presbyterianos, que oy con las plazas y puestos que tenian erandueuos del reyno y que mientras que estubiesen en el estado en que estaban, el nose hallava seguro-Si Espaiia se viera en estado de ayudal-le en este rlesiiio quericeveria de mejor gafia su assistencia que de otro ninguno, porque su deseo era deestrechar amistady aleanza con el rey.' Fuensaldaiia, September 21, 1662.RANKE, VOL. 111.z

338 MARRIAGESINTHEROYALFAMILK x1v.3.tA.D. 1660.grant as meagre as possible : this parsimony in turn confirmedhis resolution of emancipating himself from such restrictions.The foreign and domestic circumstances of a country mustin the nature of things modify each other. We have alreadyseen in the case of the Commonwealth and of Cromwell howthe necessity of crushing their foes at home determined theirrelations with the European powers. But the case is verydifferent where foreign relations are used for purposes ofdomestic policy. Charles I1 did not scruple to ask as theprice of his political alliances for help in elevating the kinglypower at the expense of Parliament. From the very commencementof his reign he never shrank from using foreignmoney thus earned in pursuance of his schemes at home.Fuensaldaiia, the Spanish ambassador at the French court,who regarded the alliance with England as the best hope ofthe Spanish monarchy, and would have desired nothing betterthan that his court should have acceded to Charles' terms,now proposed a marriage between Charles I1 and the InfantaMargaret, the second daughter of his own King; connectedwith which was a scheme for marrying Charles 11's sisterHenrietta to the German Emperor Leopold. His proposalhowever came too late. The Infanta Margaret, in whosebehalf her friends had already put forward a claim to theSpanish succession, had been previously betrothed to theEmperor Leopold himself. Fuensaldaiia's idea seems tohave been that by holding out the prospect of this doublealliance it would be possible to attach the King of Englandat least for some time to the side of Spain. But the Spanishcourt had a lively recollection of the unpleasant complicationsin which similar overtures to Charles I had plunged them.Philip IV would have nothing further to do with any suchnegotiation1. He would nevertheless have gladly seen adynastic alliance between the Austro-Spanish house and theStuarts : the widowed Empress Leonora was at his instancesuggested to Charles. She was still young, a lady of greatbeauty, and had borne children to her late husband.' Such was the opinion of the Council of State ' que se hablasseu en el casamientode la sefiora Infante, dicese claramente que estava ajustado con el emperador.'. MARRIAGES lili THE ROYAL FAMILY. 339A.D. 1660.It is remarkable that Charles I1 should have addressed hisfirst appeals for money, and the accompanying offer of hisalliance, to Holland and Spain-countries against which heafterwards displayed such vehement hostility. This tendencyof his early policy is singular enough. Marsin asserts thatOrmond, no less than Hyde, and also Lord Rristol, had expressedto him views exactly coinciding with those of the King.Meanwhile however France also had made advances tothe King of England. Bourdeaux, who was ambassador atthe time, and who had in fact, though he stoutly denied it,made proposals to Monk, at any rate through a third person,for the exclusion of Charles I1 from the English throne, wasrefused an audience. It was impossible for him to remainlonger in England. Cardinal Mazarin however, who stilldirected the policy of France with absolute authority, wasby no means inclined to take up his cause or to make it aground of quarrel with the English ministers : on the contrary,he made every effort to establish friendly relationsbetween himself and Ormond, and Hyde. By means of aconfidential emissary, Crofts, who stood high in Charles 11'sfavour, he intimated to the latter that he was anxious to bethe friend of the men who were honoured by the King's confidence.Crofts, on the King's authority, communicated thisto the two ministers, who were much gratified. Charles I1declares in one of his letters that not only was he himselfdevoted to the Cardinal, but so also were those to whomhe chiefly entrusted the conduct of his affairs1.France too, like Spain, had matrimonial alliances to offerto the house of Stuart. A proposal was made to the Kingwhich nst only suited his own fancy, but promised him considerablepecuniary advantage. He had formerly thoughtof marrying Mazarin's youthful niece, Hortense Mancini,whose talents attracted and whose beauty fascinated him,on the condition that the Cardinal should then spare no effortto bring about his restoration. Mazarin had refused his' Extract of a letter from I

340 MARRIAGES Zi THE ROYAL FAMILY. XIV. 3.A.D. I 660.consent at the time, because he was anxious not to be hamperedin his general state policy by personal considerations.Now however that this alliance fell in with his political aimshe yielded. The King's mother, whose chief desire was insome way or other to attach her son to France, heartily approvedof it. She hoped that she might thus regain herinfluence over him, and at the same time, agreeably to theoriginal idea with which she had gone to land,- procurerelief if not complete liberty for the Catholics. Her arrivalin England in November 1660 excited in one party a hope,and in the other a fear, that she would acquire as great aninfluence over the son as she had done over the father. Butit was just this possibility which put Charles 11's ministers,Hyde and Ormond, who knew how she disliked them, on theirguard against her. With the proposal which the Queen madewas coupled the offer of a large dowry, it was said of fourmillion francs. It is certain that such an offer made a greatimpression at the English court1; but the arguments againstit carried even more weight. Charles I1 decided that sucha marriage would degrade-him in the eyes of his people; hewas offended at the confident assurance of success- which hismother displayed. He complained that she treated him likean infant, whereas he was thirty years old. What respectcould Cardinal Mazarin feel for him if he submitted quietly:finally, he declared positively that he would marry but onlyas suited his inclinations and his interests? Montague, theCardinal's confidential correspondent, advised him to suppressthe report. The matter was either kept a secret or contradicted,and thus soon ceased to occupy public attention.Far from gaining her point it was the lot of the Queen-Mother to witness the consummation of another alliancewhich she thoroughly disliked, between her younger son theDuke of York and the daughter of the Chancellor Hyde.When we are told that in the autumn of 1659 the DukeLetter from Montague to the Cardinal, July 7. In a letter to his mother theKing declares, ' qu'apr8s avoir toutes les raisons de son mariage, il se conformeroitB son sentiment pour votre niece.' In October the King asks, ' si Mlle. Hortensedtoit embellie, et si elle avoit de l'esprit.''Par son propre choix et par des interests convenables'3. MARRIAGES IN THE ROYAL FAMILY. 341A.D. I 660.of York acceded without difficulty to the proposal that heshould marry John Lambert's daughter, we are apt to inferthat he was at the time bound by no other engagement. It iscertain however that he was in some way pledged to AnneHyde, whom as maid of honour to his sister, the Princessof Orange, he had frequent opportunities of seeing, and whoseyouthfill grace and lively interest in the questions of thetime had won his heart. It is possible that his proposedmarriage with a stranger contributed to awaken in thePrince his old passion, and in Anne the wish to secure himpermanently. Shortly afterwards the marriage of JamesDuke of York and Anne Hyde was concluded and consummated,secretly it is true, but under the sanction ofthe Church. The King had been told of it, and with somereluctance gave his consent. The Chancellor declares thathe knew nothing of it: it is difficult to believe that hiswife was equally unconscious. Her friends who visited thehouse thought that they noticed in her behaviour to herdaughter something that betrayed her knowledge of herhigh rank. Beyond this however the matter was kept acomplete secret, and the world was not a little surprisedwhen in October 1660 Anne Hyde, who was near her confinement,declared that she was the Duke's wife, and in thepangs of travail solemnly protested that she had known noman but him. The Chancellor declares that the news excitedin him the liveliest displeasure towards his daughter,and a presentiment of the difficulties in which so high analliance would involve him : in how many minds was thefear awakened that he would thus acquire an authority farexceeding that proper to an official of the state, and wouldestablish it permanently. Moreover, for the present, sincethe King was still unmarried, the new-born child, a boy, wasthe heir-apparent to the throne. The Queen-Mother, whohad throughout opposed the Chancellor, came to Englandwith the avowed object of saving her family from such am6salliance. Scandalous accounts were circulated respectingAnne's previous conduct: they originated among the Duke'snearest friends, and were disseminated by those about theQueen. The Duke himself was shaken for the time. On

342 MARRIAGES IN THE ROYAL FAMILY. XIV. 3.A.D. 1660.the King, who was importuned to declare the marriage invalid,they made no impression. He knew too well theuntrustworthiness and the interested motives of those whohoped to make the daughter's disgrace the means of overthrowingthe father. Rut Charles I1 would not sacrifice theman who held all the various threads of his policy in hishand, to an animosity of which his mother was the chiefsource. It was at this time that he raised the Chancellorto the peerage, which made his social inferiority less conspicuous.He created him baron Hyndon, and shortly afterEarl of Clarendon. But inferiority of birth in the wife hasnever been so much thought of in England as on the Continent.To this may be added another and decisive consideration.All the due formalities had been observed inthe marriage. The King declared that it seemed as if hisbrother had taken especial care to make it indissoluble. Itwould have been necessary to bring the case before Parliament,and it is easy to imagine what an unseasonable outcryit would have raised and how it would have revived all thedormant party controversies l. Charles I1 had an additionalmotive for opposing such a course in his anxiety to preventany interference of Parliament in the matrimonial affairs ofthe royal family. While however he still hesitated to givehis decision, his former passion revived in all its old strengthin the Duke of York. By the confession of the accuser himself,the falsehood of the reports that had been circulatedwas proved beyond doubt. The Duke determined, in spiteof the presence of the Queen, who persevered in her oppositionto the last, to recognise the validity of his marriage.Before the year was ended the Chancellor saw his daughterrecognised as Duchess of York. Her appearance and mannerswere those of a born princess. During the ceremony ofcongratulation, which all but the avowed opponents of themarriage attended, the Chancellor, in spite of his gout, remainedstanding throughout, in order not to fail in the respect' Letter from Bartet, Nov. 10. The King tells his mother 'les presbytkrienqvoudroient se servir de cette affaire pour brouiller, si on l'apporteroit au parlement.'XIV. 3. MARRIAGES IN THE ROYAL FAMILY. 343A.D. 1660.which he owed to the .blood royal. The Duke and Duchesstook up their residence in St. James's. Their son soon afterdied, but several children followed. Two great English queensthe result of this marriage.The Queen-Mother had come to England in order to breakoff one marriage, which she had failed in doing, and to concludetwo others, one at least of which she succeeded inbringing about. It was that between her daughter, the- Princess Royal Henrietta, and Louis XIV's brother Philip,-then Duke of Anjou, but who subsequently took the title ofOrleans. Now that the scheme for marrying the Princessto the Emperor had been frustrated by the betrothal of thelatter to the Infanta, the Queen's proposal met with approvalin England. The King declared emphatically that he preferredsuch an alliance for his sister to the other. Themarriage contract was immediately signed.NO opposition was offered by the English ministers, whowere not averse to an alliance with France, provided it gavethe Queen no influence in England. They even contemplateda marriage for the King himself, which suited the interestsof France, and ran directly counter to those of the houseof Austria.Among the political questions of that day there was nomore momentous one than the question whether the Spanishmonarchy would or would not succeed in reconquering Portugal.With the conquest of Portugal, Spain had attainedto the of her power; its defection had destroyedher preponderance in the world. Both Philip IV and DonLuys de Haro had acquiesced in the distasteful conditionsattached to the treaty of the Pyrenees, merely because theythus hoped to be enabled to reconquer Portugal, and theFrench had at least apparently consented to it.Unable to resist single-handed the threatened attacksof a superior power, the Portuguese turned for aid toEngland. Even before the King's restoration they hadopened negotiations with Monk l, who was the more ready' Account of the match, from a MS. of Kubert Southwell, in the KennetRegister 394.

344 MARRIA GES IN THE ROYAL FAMILY. x~v. 3.A.D. I 660.to entertain them because the Spaniards were in communicationwith his enemies the Republicans. The subsequentrecall of the King revived their hopes of an alliance withEngland ; since the first monarch of the house of Braganzahad been on the most friendly terms with Charles I andhad rendered him important services. While Charles I1 wasstill at the Hague, he was visited by the Portuguese ambassador,Don Francisco de Mello, with proposals for arenewal of the alliance. Don Francisco followed him toLondon.It was at this time, in the summer of 1660, that a marriagewas proposed between the King and the Infanta Catherine,daughter of the first king of the house of Braganza and sisterof the second, who was at the time under the guardianshipof her mother. Portugal offered important political and commercialadvantages : the cession of Tangiers and of a fortifiedharbour in the East Indies, and also perfect religious libertyfor English subjects in all Portuguese territories,-offers whichmade a great impression, especially upon the London merchants,who however took for granted that it would also bepossible to maintain their relations of peace and their tradewith Spain l.It was the prospect of this alliance which impelledFuensaldaiia to make those advances to England whichhave been already described. Marsin told the King thathe must not reckon.upon peace in that case. The Spanishmonarchy would break with him as certainly as it had previouslybroken with Cromwell.It is very probable that Charles I1 would have preferredan alliance with the Austro-Spanish house to one withthat of Portugal, but his advances were in fact rejectedmuch as those of his father had been in 1623. TheSpaniards failed to appreciate thoroughly the importanceof a dynastic alliance with England. For the second timethey preferred a renewal of their relations of affinity with,. MARRIA GES IN THE ROYAL FAMILY 345A.D. I 660.the German line to alliance with the Stuarts Charles I1henceforward turned his thoughts to some other quarterthan Spain.~t is true that he had previously promised King Philip IVthat, if he were restored to his throne by Spanish assistance,he would aid him in the reduction of Portugal. But sincethe Spaniards had not contributed in any way to his resto-&on, and had on the contrary united with his opponents,he considered himself under no obligation to them.NOW too that it was impossible for other reasons to entertainthe proposals made on Mazarin's behalf, the Englishcourt fell back upon the offers of Portugal. The personalrelations of the most influential personages did much to determinethe course of the negotiations. As to the necessityof keeping the Queen-Mother at a distance, all were agreed,Ormond and Hyde no less than Bristol and Monk. Bristolhowever would have preferred the Spanish match, or, sincethat was impossible, at any rate in its stead a similar onewith some Italian princess. On the other hand Ormond andHyde preferred the Portuguese, which Monk also advocated.For in Monk still survived the old Protestant hatred of Spain,against which country he had formerly served. He wished tosee Cromwell's policy maintained, not perhaps with respect toFrance, but certainly in all dealings with Spain and Portugal.A further consideration, and one which carried the greatestweight, was the prospect held out by Portugal that she wouldgive a large sum, two million crusados, such a dowry as noprincess had ever before brought with her.In the autumn of 1660 the ambassador Mello received 2favourable answer to his proposals I. With this he hastenedto Lisbon, where, in spite of the large demands which accompaniedit, it was welcomed with the utmost joy. Theywere expecting a fresh attack from the Spaniards both byland and sea in the next spring; an attack which threatenedto prove especially dangerous, because while the numerousIn September Charles I1 mentions the offers to General Marsin : 'La plazade Tanger con puerto fortificado de la? Indias, el libre commercio en ellas, yel uso de su religion en todas partes.'' From a note of Nicholas, it is clear that it was some time before thetreaty was agreed to, the main obstacle being the assistance demanded. 'if theKing shall not ratifye the treaty entirely, he then desires leave to be gone.'

346 MARRIAGES IN THE ROYAL FAMILY. XIV. 3.A.D. 1660.supporters of the Inquisition were in favour of reunion withSpain, the population generally, oppressed by the excessiveburden of a protracted war, could with difficulty be rousedto resistance so long as resistance appeared to promise nosuccess, but merely destruction. The King was a minor andincompetent. The lawfulness of the regency exercised byhis mother had been questioned. This lady, Donna Luizade Guzman, was a woman who had done more than anyman for the liberation of Portugal from Spain. When Melloarrived she exclaimed that no angel from heaven could havebrought her better news. The whole nation breathed morefreely, for the English fleet would protect their harbours andcoasts, while the ancient strength of Portugal would itselfbe sufficient to face the Castilians on the inland frontier.Before this strong national feeling all religious antipathiesgave way. Any one who protested against the marriage ofthe Infanta with the Protestant King was regarded as anenemy to his country, and even, it was said, as a heretic.The importance of the concessions by which the Englishalliance had to be purchased, especially that of a harbour inthe East Indies, was not overlooked in Lisbon, but they werethought to be more than counterbalanced by the decisive advantageswhich such an alliance offered. The Queen-Regentdeclared that it would be worth while to sacrifice all theirpossessions in the East Indies for them I.On the return of the ambassador to London in January1661, in spite of his satisfactory assurances, a further difficultyoccurred. The Spanish ambassador remonstratedofficially. He suggested to the King other princesses whowere younger, fairer, and to all appearance more likely tobear him children than the Portuguese Infanta. The Spanishcourt pledged itself to provide any of these with a dowryequal in amount to that offered by Portugal. Lord Bristol,who acted in concert with him throughout, undertook at amoment's notice and with Charles's consent, a journey to Italy,. MARRIA GES IN THE ROYAL FAAIILY. 347,.D. ;660.;, .- order-to ascertain the personal charms of the ladies of thehouses of Medici and Farnese, and thus induce the King toalter his choice I.For the ministers it was an all-important question whetherLord-Bristol would succeed in making the King change hismind. In a queen devoted to Spain, the Spanish interest,to which they were hostile, would have a representative atwhitehall itself, whom they could not have resisted. In conjunctionwith her, Rristol would have exercised a decisiveinfluence over the King. Moreover other counter-schemeswere already disclosing themselves. The Queen-Mother re-,ived her old design of placing by her son's side on thethrone of England some French lady, who would have beenunder her own control2. The ministers used every effort tohold the King to their scheme. They represented to him thathis government would be utterly discredited were he to withdrawfrom an affair in which he had gone so far. Thev hadmoreover public opinion on their side. The King was persuadedto recall Bristol before his report had been received.In consideration of the great political importance of thismatch the ministers were anxious to assure themselves of theconsent of Parliament, which however was no longer the samebody that had voted the recall of the King.In his account of George Digby Lord Bristo1,Clarendon tells us that 'p~ivatelyhe prevailed so far with the King to send him incognito into Italy, lo see thoseladies, with a promise not to proceed farther in treaty with Portugal till his return;but upon a short reflection upon the dishonour of this design, His Majesty put aquick end to it.'a 'The Earl of St. Albans was very unwilling to give over the hope of bestowingsome French lady upon thl King, which would have better complied with otherends.' Lord Chancellor to Bastide vii. In Carte (Life of Ormotld iv. log) theposition of the Queen-Mother is misconceived, and the match is treated far tooexclusively as a design of the Catholics.' Besides the letters printed in Lister, we also find in the English RecordOffice several other letters from Maynard, the English consul in Lisbon, whichhave been used here.'

CHAPTER IV.RELIGIOUS DIFFERENCES. THE CORONATION.A NEW PARLIAMENT.AFTER the settlement of the Indemnity Bill, by far themost important question before the Convention Parliamentwas undoubtedly the religious one. The Restoration had beenthe joint work of the Presbyterians and the Episcopalians ; butbeyond this nothing had as yet been decided as to their subsequentrelations, first of all with each other, and then withthe separatist sects whom they had ousted from power,.andabove all with the'catholics whom they had excluded fromany direct share in bringing that event about. The Europeanmind was still steeped in religious ideas. As the result of theintimate connexion which had subsisted from the earliesttimes between Church and State, religious questions wereeverywhere, but particularly in England, the very kernel ofthe political. We may fairly ask whether this is not still thecase in our own day; though the fact is less noticed.In order to understand the controversies which were thenpending it will be necessary to look back a few years.When first the King's restoration was discussed in London,a friend of Monk's, hitherto regarded as a zealous Presbyterian,mooted in conversation the kindred question of the reinstatementof the bishops. Monk however objected that the estatesof the Episcopal Church had been sold. He doubted whethersuch a measure would be approved by the nation ; finally hesaid that at any rate he would not pledge himself to opposeit, but would leave the matter to providence; it would beeasier to ascertain the feeling of the country when the nextParliament met.RELIGIOUS DIFFERENCES. 349XIV. 4.A.D. 1660.reality the issue could not be doubtful. Charles I hadlost his life because he would neither consent to the demolitionof the Church, nor sanction it by his authority: clearlyhis son could not resume his throne without also re-establishingthe church. Nine of the bishops who had been ejected duringthe storm of the rebellion were still alive, and had hitherto sofar maintained the ecclesiastical authority of the lawful king, asto hold ordinations by stealth. These bishops themselves, withthe clergy who adhered to them, gave the most efficient aid tothe restoration of the monarchy, which, as they saw, involvedtheir own.On the other hand, Charles I1 had already, when in Scotland,solemnly subscribed to the League and Covenant, andthe Scottish zealots had still hopes of keeping him to his word.We cannot be certain that these hopes and wishes wereshared by the English Presbyterians. The resolutions adoptedby the capital, in which they still formed the majority, weredirected merely to a settlement of the ecclesiastical differencesby means either of a lawfully summoned Convocation or ofa national religious assembly.It was generally thought that a union must be effectedbetween the moderate Presbyterians and Episcopalians. Asearly as April 1660 the question was, through Monk's agency,made the subject of negotiations between representatives fromthe ministers of both parties l.BY the General's desire, the Scottish minister, Sharp, visitedthe King before he left Breda. He was the first of all theclergy of the three kingdoms who did so. His reception wasmost flattering He was followed soon afterwards by adeputation from the clergy of London, who have also recordedtheir satisfaction at the consideration with which they weretreated by the King, and their admiration of his ability andlearning. No one however could imagine that the expectationsof the Scots would be realised, and that a rule ofconformity agreeable to the spirit of the Covenant would beestablished. Even if the King, wrote Sharp, wished it, heSharp (who was at the time in attendance on Monk) to Douglas, April 5, inWodrow's History of the Church of Scotland i. 18.

350 RELIGIOUS DIFFERENCES. XIV. 4.A.D. 1660.would be unable to carry it through. There were but few whodesired it, and scarcely one who would have openly advocatedit. On one occasion during the negotiations between KingCharles I and the Presbyterians, Archbishop Usher had proposeda scheme for uniting the two denominations, whichwas rejected at the time by the Presbyterians. Thcir leaderswere now induced to adopt it, and declared that a limitedepiscopacy would be acceptable to them.By the King's restoration the sequestrations inflicted uponthe episcopal clergy on account of their royalist leanings losttheir force. The Presbyterians resigned without remonstrancethe livings which they occupied : in some cases they voluntarilyrecalled their predecessors. Ordinances were issued byParliament, declaring the restoration of the confiscated estatesboth of Church and Crown to be compatible with the Declarationof Breda. Little regard was paid to the loss incurredby the purchasers. The surviving bishops returned to theirposts and resumed their official duties.In their congratulatory address to Charles I1 after hisreturn, the bishops reminded him of the close relation whichhad existed between the Crown, more especially in his father'scase, and the Church. He replied that he desired nothingmore than to see the bishops restored; but in the existingstate of party-feeling he could not directly interfere ; he wasforced to leave the decision to Parliament '.But the difficulty of the question manifested itself at thevery first debate (July 9 and 16) held by the House inCommittee. Many, like Heneage Finch, whose speech wasperhaps the best, would have been contented with a decisionthat matters of doctrine should be determined by the letterof Scripture, matters of discipline by the laws. But thiswas far from satisfying others. They demanded an expressrecognition of the Thirty-nine Articles, which, as all Europeknew, embodied the true Protestant religion, and secondly,the restoration of prelacy. They argued that the episcopal1 Gregory. *Considering the several1 interests and animosities he intimatedthat it were fit he should be adviscd by the Parliament therein and gain theirconsent.'XIV. 4. R EL IGIO US DIFFERENCES. 3.5'A,,. I 660.system had merely been interrupted for the time by SUS-,ension, as the monarchy had been by rebellion : all mustr-be re-established as before. On the other side the Presbyterianviews also found advocates, though the advocacy was lessvigorous than might have been expected. They chieflydirected their arguments against the assumed divine right,f prelacy, urging that were this claim allowed it wouldbe more absolute than the monarchy. The opinion of themajority, to whibh the King himself inclined, was that alimited episcopacy would most easily unite both'. But to determine what these limits should be wasimpossible for the present: the religious question was interwovenwith too many other interests, and was besides scarcelyripe as yet. Ashley Cooper, who expressed this view, proposedand carried an adjournment of the debate for threemonths. The King was requested in the meantime to discussthe religious question with an assembly of clergy.The Parliamentary road had thus at last led back to theKing, who manifested a deep personal interest in the matter.He had appointed several Presbyterians to be his chaplains,occasionally listened to their sermons, and conversed withthem. When they expressed a wish for a reconciliation withthe Episcopalians, he told them plainly that it would be impossiblefor one party to draw the other over to its own side :each must advance some part of the distance, and they wouldmeet half-way. He gave the same advice to the episcopalparty. But the first attempt at such an amalgamation, ascheme presented to him by the Presbyterians at his ownrequest, and answered by the Episcopalians, made it clearthat their object would be hardly gained by such a method.It seemed more advisable to secure the preservation of peaceby a declaration from the King, which should however belaid before both parties for their consideration.It was a momentous crisis in the annals of the English-Bunckley said, 'he thought a moderate episcopacy might take in the good ofparties, and urged the King's present inclinations and endeavours for it; thatxxii. 386.in its extent was mole boundless than monarchy.'Old Parl. Hist.

352 RELIGIOUS DIFFEREIITCES. XIV. 4.A.D. I 660:Church and State when, on October 23 the King met theassembled theologians at the Chancellor's residence, finallyto discuss the declaration. He was accompanied by Manchesterand Hollis, Albemarle and Ormond. On one sidestood the new bishops, Sheldon of London, Morley of Worcester,and three others, with a few Episcopalian doctors ; onthe other the Presbyterian leaders, such as Reynolds, Calamy,Baxter. The declaration was once more read and discussed.It declared that the bishop should in the exercise of hisjurisdiction be bound both by the laws of the land, and alsoby the advice and consent of the Presbytery, the authority ofthe clergy was confirmed, the revision of the Common Prayerbookpromised, and the ministers were released from the oathof canonical obedience and the observance of certain ceremonies.It was in reality a most important step towards reconcilingthe two parties, and it met with their consent. Who couldforetell what might not be built on such a foundation? Itmight have been the beginning of a real system of comprehension.But the King had not yet gained his object.Pledged to the Catholics by his own promises, he wasanxious, at the same time that he reconciled the two greatparties, to secure toleration for the rest. A petition was readfrom the Independents and Anabaptists praying for freedomof religious worship ; and it was proposed to add a clause tothe declaration, promising religious liberty to all, so longas the public peace was not disturbed l. The Catholics werenot mentioned by name, but it was felt by every one thatthe clause was principally meant for their advantage. Thebishops sat silent; the Presbyterians for some time did notventure to speak, fearing to incur the King's displeasure.Baxter was secretly admonished not to do so; but it wasimpossible for Richard Baxter.to remain silent where mentionwas made of papists and sectaries. For in him still livedall the orthodox zeal of the old Protestants, who used theirarnis impartially against either side. He was no respecter' Baxter's own account, Life 276..--RE15 IGIO US DIFFEB ENCES.A.D. 1660.nr men. With him it was a matter of conscience to oppose"A ---+,." the -- face the unexpressed intention, of which he thoroughlyfelt the importance. He declared that there were partieswhich could be tolerated, and others which could not. Amongthe --- - latter he included both the Socinians, who had beennlenti~ned by name, and the Papists. No Presbyterian couldask for toleration for them. The King replied, that the-lawprovided safeguards enough against the Papists. But thequestion is, retorted Baxter sharply, whether the law is tobe put in force or not. The King, finding himself unsupportedby the others present, allowed the matter to drop.The declaration was published without the additional clause,and for that very reason probably produced a favourableimpression. Dr. Reynolds felt no scruple about acceptinga bishopric under these conditions ; and even Baxter decidedthat it involved no recognition of the old prelacy. That henevertheless refused the bishopric which was offered him wasmainly because he wished first to see whether the declarationwould become law by the sanction of Parliament '.In opposing the proposed clause Baxter had on his sidethe sympathies both of the Presbyterians and also of theEpiscopalians, who shared his fear lest its acceptance shouldopen the door for the re-establishment of Catholicism. Forit was at this crisis that the Queen-Mother arrived in England,all whose thoughts and efforts were, it was well known,directed towards bringing back her children and the kingdomitself to the Catholic Church. The Bishop of Worcesterremarks in one of his letters, that the declaration recentlyadopted must serve to unite both parties against the Catholics.The moderate Episcopalians and the moderate Presbyteriansmade common cause against the zealots in eitherparty and also against the Catholics 2.Parliament, which had been adjourned on September 13,' Life of Baxter 281. ~ 1the 1 doubt bvas, whether this declaration would bemade a law, as was then expected.'a 'The declaration will give satisfaction to the honest and peaceably minded menof. both parties, and make them cease to be parties any longer, but ~nanimouslyloin against the common enemy the Papists,' October 23, Lister, Life of Clamdoniii. I 10.

354 XEL ZGZOUS DIFFERENCES.XIV. 4.AD. 1660.decreed on the first day of its reassembling, November 6,a formal vote of thanks to the King for his declaration. Abill was brought in to make it law, and it came on fordiscussion on November 28. It was generally expected thatit would pass, since it coincided so exactly with the viewsof the House. To the objection that by an expression in itthe consideration of a synod was deferred, it was answeredthat an amicable settlement would be more likely to bearrived at in Parliament than in an assembly of clergy embitteredby misiortune. The honour of Parliament demandedthe decision of a question of such infinite importance for thepeace of the nation. The members could not count upona favourable reception in the counties unless they could reportthat it was done. B~it the event showed that the extremeEpiscopalian party was also strongly represented in Parliament.It was said that the proposed concessions virtuallydeprived the episcopacy of all power, and while gratifying -the opposite party rendered real conformity impossible. Thesuccess of the bill depended entirely on its being supportedby the influence of the King and the court. Its advocatesreckoned upon this, and thought that, as the measure hadoriginated with the King, they were performing at thesame time an act of loyalty. In the end however it provedthat even the members of the government spoke against it.The Secretary of State, Morrice, remarked in cold andgeneral terms that what was expedient yesterday might befor that very reason inexpedient to-day. Even doctors variedtheir treatment according to circumstances. Many diseaseswere most easily healed by time. It was necessary not merelyto do a thing, but to do it in the right way l. When thequestion was put whether the bill should be read a secondtime or not, 157 members voted for it, and 183 against it.The attempt to make the declaration law had failed. Thereis every reason for believing that the King himself was notdispleased that his declaration, now that the additional clausewas struck out, should obtain only a provisional validity.' Old Parl. Ilist. xxiii. 28; unfortunately the only extant account of thisimportant affair, and a very incomplete one.REL ZGZO US DIFFERENCES. 355XIV. 4..,D. 1660.if to propitiate the old Presbyterian feeling in anotherway, a bill was passed for the stricter observance of the Sunday.The objection that it was identical with a measure ofCromwell's was disregarded. G. Booth repeated the old saying,that even the devil could quote scripture.~h~ Convention Parliament next occupied itself with otherquestions of high importance, such as the abolition of therights of guardianship belonging to the feudal monarchy, towhich Charles I1 offered no opposition-a marked changesince the days of his grandfather, who firmly adhered tothem ; and an indemnification for the loss of the incomederived from them ; and lastly and especially, the control ofthe militia. But the bill relating to the last point containedprovisions so oppressive that Parliament shrank from passingit. Every day already brought accounts of acts of violencecommitted in the provinces by the lord-lieutenants and theirsoldiers. The fear was expressed that the bill, if passed,would impose an iron yoke on the neck of the country.It was apparently the feeling manifested by the LowerHouse on this very question which mainly contributed tobring about its dissolution. At any rate the King interrupteda debate upon it with the announcement of such a resolution.It was plain throughout that this assembly, adhering as itdid to the original principles of the Long Parliament, wasscarcely likely to recede from the most important decisionsof that body. The leading members however also welcomedthe dissolution of the Lower House. They were anxious thatthe Rill of Indemnity, on which the public safety depended,should be confirmed by a Parliament generally recognisedas lawful. But no Parliament could claim to be so whichhad not been summoned by royal writs according to theestablished usage. The theory of the Restoration, whichaimed above all things at re-establishing a constitutionalparliamentary form of government, rendered such a measuredesirable.On December 29 the Convention Parliament was closed.It must rank among the most importaant of English Parliaments.By the restoration of the King and tht Bill ofIndemnity it founded the England of our own day. It isAa2

356 RELIGIOUS DIFFERENCES. XIV. 4.A.D. 1660.not true to say that it displayed an excessive royalism.Neither the restoration of the confiscated estates, nor thesettlement of the income of the crown, nor yet its treatmentof the proposed scheme for the organisation of the army,fully met the wishes of the King and his adherents. Itrepresents the union of the Episcopalian and Presbyterianparties, to which the Restoration owed its success. But permanentlyto consolidate this union by the establishment ofa moderate system of episcopacy was beyond its power. Thesolutiotl of the ecclesiastical difficulty it was forced to leaveto a subsequent assembly.In one matter especially, the repression of the sects, withwhich theof the regicides and the disbandingof the army were intimately connected, the two parties inParliament had acted in harmony with each other and withthe government. But the difficulty by no means ended here.It was in the highest degree improbable that the vanquishedfaction which had so recently been in power would at once acquiescein their fate. They persistently refused to acknowledgethe authority of the state. They shared the hopes in whichthe regicides had died. They imagined that they saw theirfigures shining with light in the cloudy heaven above them.Never had the agitation in the Anabaptist congregations beenso strong and deep. They exulted moreover in the consciousnessthat they were still powerful. Major White, one of theofficers of the disbanded army, who was among those whowere secretly indignant at their discharge, declared that hecould, within twenty-four hours, raise a force of zoo0 cavalryas well as a large body of infantry. In December a widespreadconspiracy was detected, the intention of which wasto seize the Tower and Windsor Castle, and overthrow thenew government. ~eneral Monk was an especial object ofdetestation : his orders were to be torn from his body, andhis life destroyed I.In the Public Intelligencer of December lz, in Kennet, Register 327, and inNicholas' notes, dated December 14, the number is given at 2060 horses. On thetestimony of Hall, whose name is mentioned in the list, Montnguz writes toMazarin I1 est trks vrai qu'entre eux ils parloient souvent de tuer le General Monk,de tuer le roi, de briiler Whitehall.'RELIGIOUS DIFFEREDCES. 337XIV. 4.A.D. 1660.The government took measures of precaution and repression.All discharged soldie~s and non-resident personswere ordered to leave London and Westminster. The lawsprohibiting unlicenscd assemblies were extended to the religiousmeetings of the separatists. These were now, likethe rest, to take the oath of allegiance and supremacy.The immediate effect of these measures was to producean outbreak of insane fanaticism as wild as. any that hadpreceded it.The mere act of taking an oath, as for instance to confirma promise, the sects regarded as sinful. To take an oathof allegiance to the King was an act which shocked theirdeepest convictions. They regarded it as an unlawful encroachmenton the part of the secular power upon the sphereof the spiritual. No security was offered by the King forthe most sacred possession of man, his professed religion ;how then could they swear allegiance to him? Among themen of the Fifth Monarchy who, like the Anabaptists atMunstcr, believed themselves called to establish an imaginarykingdom of Christ in the place of the powers of this world,the feeling of indignation encouraged the delusion that allthis persecution had been inflicted upon the faithful simplybecause they had remained content with preaching, andhad never been resolute enough to act. Were they but onceto draw the sword, they believed that all earthly powerswould fall before them ; their foes would fly in thousandsat the approach of ten of the faithful. So taught ThomasVenner, a cooper, who had become a disciple of Hugh Peters,and had lately returned from New England, in a congregationwhich met in a private house. He persuaded hishearers, who were about sixty in number, there and thento seize the arms, which were kept close at hand, and todraw the sword of Gideon in the cause of Christ their King.He had no lack of accomplices. On that very morningOpen demonstrations were made at the doors of the churches.With the stealthy cunning that not unfrequently accompaniesthe most insane delusions they had not failed to notice thatit was the Fcast of the Epiphany (January 6), and that theKing, who was escorting his mother on her departure, had

358 RELIGIOUS DIFFEXENCES. XIV. 4.A.D. 1660.gone to Portsmouth. They hoped that his absence, and thefestivities which usually marked Twelfth Night, would enablethem to overpower the guards at Whitehall, once in possessionof which they could soon collect their partisans fromthe various parts of the kingdom. But the incidents of themorning, and the information given by the landlord of thehouse where they met, had already put the authorities ontheir guard. Two companies of the city militia, in whichthe insurgents had no longer any partisans, were orderedout. When Venner appeared no one ventured to join him.Deceived in his hopes, he retired to Kenwood. then still aforest, in the neighbourhood of Hampstead. Disturbed in thisretreat, he and his followers once more attempted an outbreakon the Tuesday night. Their plan was to seize theLord Mayor in his house, and thus render all authorisedresistance impossible, and at the same time to release theirfriends, a large number of whom had been imprisoned. Hadthey been able to collect only a thousand men, we are assuredby a well-informed witness that a general disturbance wouldhave followed l. But the cavalry were already under arms,who had been accustomed to hunt them out on previousoccasions at Monk's orders. Monk indeed almost regardedthem all as his personal enemies, and he considered it hisduty to watch their motions. His troop of horse drove theFifth Monarchy men back from street to street, till theyreached a beer-house, which they barricaded. In the meantimethe Lord Mayor had also appeared on the scene, anda body of militia had been collected. The assailants howeverhesitated to attack the house with fire-arms for fear ofrousing the mob : they forced their way into the house fromthe roof. The insurgents thus surprised defended themselveswith the double energy inspired by despair and fanaticism.One man alone asked for quarter, but, as he did so, anotherwho lay wounded by him, attempted to strike hirn with his'It might have had an kfluence much further.' Philipps, in Baker's Chronicle757, in all respects a good account of the matter. The notes of the Duke of Yorkare also suggestive. Some useful notices are supplied by the account of theVenetian Resident.REL ZGZOUS DIFFERENCES. 359SIV 4.A.D. I 660.slvord, to ~unish him for craving pardon from the wicked.~ 1 was 1 already over when Monk and the Duke of Yo&,accompanied by a few of the gentry, arrived at the spot.Venner received nineteen wounds before he was taken : heand several others perished on the scaffold.1t was the same party which had once rallied round~~~mwell, which had raised him to power, and had then beendifficulty kept in order by him, which after his deathhad again risen, and had during the last days of the Commonwealthheld for some time a high position. The assault whichits most fanatical members had made upon the state whenit was gradually reassuming its old form was inevitably.unsuccessful, but it is not without significance. The republicanismwhich is inspired by religious enthusiasm has neverpined for itself an independent position on this side of theAtlantic. Its future lay in America, but nevertheless it longcontinued to keep Europe, and especially England, in a stateof ferment.For the moment the insurrection could have but oneeffect, that of establishing the government more firmly andstrengthening the already powerful reactionary movement '.All the prisons were filled with suspected persons, amongthem thousands of Quakers. The proclamation prohibitingreligious meetings not licensed by the clergy was extendedin its application and strictly enforced. It was ordered thatno one should be allowed to remain in London who had nottaken the oath of allegiance. No one was to have arms inhis house who was not enrolled in the city militia.Escorted by the militia, King Charles I1 returned fromPortsmouth to London. A body-guard was organised forhim, in which were incorporated a number of old refugeeswho now ventured for the first time to return from Flanders,Stout and practised veterans of unbounded loyalty 2. TheLetter to De Vic, Jan. zj, 1660/r (Record OEce) : 'Our late disturbances are"OW very well over, and have been so far of use to his Majesty's service, as that'hey have left the kingdom in a better posture to secure its own peace and hap-~illess than they found it.'a ' Gli officiali che sono in Fiandra et i suldati, che supravivono dalle miseriesofferte.'

360 RELIGIOUS DIFFEREi\li\lCES. XIV. 4.A.D. 1660.dissolution of some of the bodies of troops which had notbeen previously disbanded, was characteristically enough followedimmediately by their reorganisation. Monk's regimentwas marched out of its barracks, and ordered to lay down itsarms and disband itself. After it had received its pay it wasreassembled and ordered to resllme its arms. It was toldthat it would in future be called the King's regiment I.While the limbs of the leaders of the late outbreak whohad been executed were exposed on the four gates of thecity, two carts carrying the coffins containing the bodies ofCromwell, Ireton, and Bradshaw, were seen on their way toTyburn. The corpses were taken out and hung up at thecorners of the gallows erected in front of Tyburn. Therethey remained for the day, which was the anniversary of theKing's execution, and for the day following. They were thentaken down, the heads were severed from the trunks andcarried to Westminster Hall. There they were placed on~oles where once the Court of Justice had sat to try Charles I.firadshaw's head, already green with decay, was set in themiddle, for by a ghastly irony he was once more allowed topreside, and those of Cromwell and Ireton on either side2.They had once been buried with great pomp and ceremonyby their adherents, to whom the future yet seemed to belong.The insults offered to the wretched remains of the bodiesindicated how complete since then had been the ruin of thewhole party. In the course of the May following the ScottishParliament passed sentence on the Marquis of Argyle, tothe effcct that he should be executed as a traitor and hishead exposed where once the bleeding head of Montrosehad been placed.Let us glance once more at Scotland. The revulsion inpublic feeling had been more rapid and complete than inEngland. The nobility and gentry took a less active partin the progress of the religious movement when they found' I have taken this from the account of the Brandenburg Resident, Christoph.von Brand, in the Berlin archives.a Kennet Register 367, 371. Why has Heine never trcated this in his ownstyle?RELZGIO US D1FPERENCE:S. 361XIV 4.A.D. I 660.their own rights threatened by the Protesters. The Res,lutionerssteadily adhered to the League and Covenant,and to its propagation in England, but in this they met withno even among the Scots themselves. The electionst~ the magistracies, which took place in September1660, had gone against them. The leaders of the partieshitherto predominant were excluded. This was the caseto a still greater extent at the elections for the Parliamentwhich met on January I, 1661. It will be rernemberedhow in the year 1648 a popular movement beganin Scotland in favour of Charles I, and in opposition tothe extreme Kirk party, and that this ended with the defeatat Preston and the Whiggamores' raid. The feeling whichhad animated that movement, after so many vicissitudes, nowregained the upper hand. It wished to connect itself notwith Charles 11's visit to Scotland when Argyle had beenin power, but with the earlier movement which he had opposed.Lord Middletoun, who had been at that time alieutenant-general in the army, was now a3 royal commissionerentrusted with the presidency of the Parliament.One of his measures implicitly sanctions the oath of allegiancethen taken, by repudiating the counter resolutionspassed by the extreme clerical party and Argyle1. Butthis did not satisfy the Scottish Parliament. It laid downthe principle that the prosperity of the nation depended onits respect for the royal prerogative ; and indicated as elementsof that prerogative the right to appoint the officers of state,the control of peace and war, and the convocation and dissolutionof Parliament. But since the right of concludingalliances and taking up arms belonged to the King alone,the League and Covenant, which was to have led to a revolutionin England, with all that it involved, was declaredlonger binding. The declaration was couched in themildest terms, for most even of those on whose support itsauthors relied had probably accepted the Covenant, but itWas published. The other acts passed by the Presbyterianassemblies in connexion with the Covenant were pronounced1 c''reamble to the thlrd act of the Parl~ament ' Wodrow, Eccles. Hist, i. 94.

362 X EL IGIO CIS DI~'PEL?E~~.~CES. XIV. .I.A.D. 1660.intolerable; a general illeasure of repeal abrogated all thatParliament had done since the very beginning of the disturbancesin the year 1633. The endeavour was madeto regain at one blow all that had belonged to Charles Iin the early part of his reign and to James I. It naturallyfollowed that the restoration of Episcopacy was once morerendered possible, though it was not yet expressly proposed.In England no less than in Scotland this reaction wasgreeted with applause alike by the pulpit and the press.Even the Scottish preachers commonly spoke of the crimeof the Rebellion, in which they boldly included the Covenantto which so many had subscribed, of the sinfulness ofarmed resistance to the King, and of the extension of theroyal prerogative. That was now censured which had beenpreviously praised, and that was praised which had formerlybeen censured. The current of public opinion still set stronglyagainst the violence and disorder of the Republican epoch.The memory of Charles 1's execution was revived. Those,whether Scots or English, who had suffered in his cause werehailed as martyrs. Monarchy and Episcopacy were againidentified. We find an author styling himself at once Philobasileusand Philoclerus. It was at this time that Hooker'swork first appeared in a complete form, including the previouslyunpublished seventh book on episcopacy, which itrepresented as the primitive apostolic form of the constitutionof the Church.Thus favoured by public feeling the reconstitution of theEnglish Church was successfully carried out. The first stepwas to fill the bishoprics with deserving and devoted men.Conformably to ancient usage, on the reception of thecon&-d'elire from the government the election was carriedout agreeably to its wishes. Men were elected who in thetimes of persecution had helped to sustain the spirit of theChurch, as Sanderson had done by his printed sermons, Cosinby a skilful defence of its character and constitution. Theolder bishops consecrated the new ones, and themselves roseto higher dignities. Juxon for instance, the bishop of Londotl,became Archbishop of Canterbury. He was succeeded in thesee of London by the sagacious and politic Sheldon.XIV. 4.THE COX OlVA TIOIV.A.D. 1660.The coronation of the King had been deliberately postponedto show that the King of England could govern,ithout having been crowned and without having taken thesolemn pledges attached to the coronation. When in Aprilit was finally decided to celebrate it, it was purposelyso arranged by the revival of all the customary pomp, andespecially of the religious ceremonial of former times, as tothrow the innovations of the last few years more completelyinto the background. The wealth of England once moredisplayed itself in a procession, at the sight of which manya spectator declared that he had never seen its equal in gorgeousness'.Even the ordinary formalities acquired a significancefrom the circumstances of the time: such for instanceas the question addressed to the crowd around who representedthe people, whether they swore allegiance to theKing proposed to them. It was answered by acclamationfrom all sides-a great contrast to the scene at Charles 1'scoronation. Equally significant was the oath taken by theKing to maintain the evangelical religion planted in thecountry, and the liberties of the nation; for many doubtedhis sincerity in this respect. Next followed the anointingwith the holy oil, as Samuel had once anointed David tobe king, signifying that he derived his power from God;then the King took his seat in St. Edward's chair, theofficiating bishop took St. Edward's crown from the altarand placed it upon his head, thus linking the restored dignityof the throne with the earliest times and with the greatestnames '. Throughout the whole proceeding the closenessthe tie which united the monarchy with the nobility andespecially with the hierarchy struck every beholder.There was no doubt that all this, and particularly therevived importance of the bishops, produced an effect differentfrom that which was expected. In consequence of the violentanimosity which was thus aroused, it turned out that atthe new elections in the capital the Independents gained theI pep~~' Diary.the official account by Elias Ashmole, Windsor Herald at Arms, inBaker's Chronicle 758.--

364 NEW EL EC TIOXS. XIV. 4.A.D. 1660.day. The court began to be alarmed for the result everywhere.But this time the example set by the capital was notfollowed. The very fear lest such should be the case provedof service1. Had a majority of the elections terminatedin the same way it must have led to a renewal of the oldcontroversies and disputes, perhaps to war. The influenceof the government and the revived sentiment in favourof legitimacy combined with the need felt for a quiet andregular order of things, and with the self-interest of individuals,to secure that the choice of the elections should inmost cases fall upon men who were royalists in politics andAnglicans in religion. In the country a great number ofold Cavaliers were returned 2.' Christoph von Brand, April 12 : 'Dicjenige, welche ohne das gut kiinigischscin, hahen auf ihre Schanze besser Achtung gehabt, die andern haben lieberihrer eignen Sicherheit als des Sieges wider die Bischofliche versichert seinwollen.' Berlin archives.a Letter from Nicholas: &The elections of members for the future parliamentprove everywhere very good and assare us of a perfect affection in the peopleto his Majesty's person and government.' Record Office, Domestic Series, ii.vol. 35.CHAPTER VTHE FIRST TWO YEARS OF TIIE LONG PARLIAMENT OFTHE RESTORATION.THE ACT OF UNIFORMITY.ON May 8, 1661, the new Parliament was opened. Atseven o'clock in the morning the King's Master of the Ceremonies,the Duke of Ormond, appeared as of old in the Courtof Requests, in order himself, or by a deputy whom heappointed, to receive the oaths anciently imposed upon themembers elected to the Lower House. These were theOath of Supremacy, as it had been drawn up in the firstyear of Queen Elizabeth, and the Oath of Allegiance datingfrom the seventh year of King James, both of them religiousas well as secular in their import. For it was thought desir,rbleto link together the present and the old system withits union of loyalty and religion. Those who had takenthe oaths withdrew first of all to their own House, andthence, on the usual summons, to the House of Lords, wherethe King was present in person, surrounded with all thetraditional pomp of earlier times. Arrayed in the royalrobes and wearing the crown on his head he delivered thespeech from the throne *It is not merely by successive governments, but also, andthis especially since the latter have become so powerful,by successive Parliaments that we distinguish the variousepochs of English history. However great the influence1 r Parliamentum i,1ceptum et tentum apud civitatem west-Monasterium dieMercurii, octavo scilicet die Maii anno regni domini nostri Caroli 11, D. G.Angliae, Scotiae, Franciae, et Hiberniae regis, fidei defensoris, xiii O. annoquedomini 1661.' Journals of Commons viii, 245.

366 FIRST TWO YEARS OF THE LONG xrv. 5,A.D. 1661.exercised by all governments upon the elections, yet theycan never wholly suppress the elements of independence,which in the course of the sessions invariably grows instrength.The new Lower House might have been fairly taken asrepresenting royalist principles. The first Speaker chosenby it, Edward Turner, was intimately connected with theDuke of York. In entering upon his office he alluded interms of exaggerated loyalty to the newly restored rightsof the monarchy ; but this did not prevent him from alsoreminding the House of the privileges of Parliament, oftheir liberty of speech, their immunity from arrest, theirfreedom of access to the King. The Chancellor, in promisingsatisfaction on these points, took occasion in his turn to extolemphatically the excellence of the parliamentary constitution.He assured the House that the King in every case asked himselffirst of all what Parliament would think of it.The most important question with which Parliament hadto deal was the confirmation of the Act of Amnesty. Thatit should be so confirmed by a Lower House elected accordingto the proper constitutional forms, was allowed onall hands. It was in fact the condition on which the lastassembly had so readily consented to retire. There was nolack among the newly-elected members of objections andscruples. The Ca~aliers were in no hurry permanently tosecure the opponents, at whose hands they had suffered, fromthe vengeance of the old laws. Once more the King wascompelled to interpose his authority in behalf of the amnesty.He reminded the Cavaliers of the offers of reconciliationwhich they had made during the crisis itself. Headjured them not to involve him in a breach of faith, butrather to let the bill pass in its original form, for to thishe had pledged his word. At last the bill was again presentedto the King as one which had been confirmed bythe sanction of a full, free, and lawful Parliament.Thus the foundation on which the whole fabric restedremained unshaken. In all other respects the Parliamentgave free scope to its royalist and ecclesiastical leanings.On May 28 the Serjeant of the Lower House appearedxrv. 5A.D. lh6"~ARLIA~MENT OF THE RESTORA TION. 367in westminster Hall. He held in his hand the parchmentcontaining the act for the establishment of a court of justiceto try Charles I. He gave it to the hangman, who burnt it inthe centre of the Hall.on the same day, on the Exchange, at the hour when it wasfullest, the same fate befell the two acts by which England,vas declared a Commonwealth, and an oath of allegiance tothat form of government prescribed.way of contrast to this the 29th of May, the King'sbirthday, was celebrated in every church by a solemn de-,-laration of fidelity to the anointed of the Lord, and to hisheirs for ever. It was consistent with this, that on the sameday the acts deposing Charles Stuart and providing forcromwell's safety were burnt by the hangman in WestminsterHall.Scarcely a year had elapsed since, at the suggestion ofthe members in the Rump Parliament, copies of the greatcharters of Presbyterianism, the League and Covenant, hadbeen hung up in the House of Commons and in the churchesthroughout the country. How different had the course ofevents bcen from what was then expected! The ScottishParliament had already declared these ordinances to be nolonger binding. The English Parliament thought it necessaryto go further. In order to manifest its abhorrence of thereligious and political princi~les xvhich they contained, itordered them to be burnt by the hangman.In the new Parliament those considerations had no placewhich restrained the previous one from repealing the decreesof the Long Parliament. It condemned its principles inthe most emphatic way possible. In particular it declared itto be treasonable to wage war against the King, to makehim prisoner, to wish to depose him, or lastly to put himto death. Any one expressing any such intention in speechor writing was to be condemned as a traitor. It was pronouncedto be a punishable offence to attribute to the Kinga wish to introduce Popery into the country, or to chargehim with heresy. In the case of the head of the state noOne had a right to assume that he professed anything butthe orthodox Anglican doctrine. The maxim on which the

368 FIXST TWO YEARS OF THE LOW x~v. ;.A.D. 1661.claims of Parliament had in recent times mainly rested,that the two Houses of Parliament even without the Kingpossessed an inherent legislative authority, was condemned.The disputed question of the military authority was speedilysettled. It was decided to belong exclusively to the crown ;the opposite view, that it belonged to the people or to theirrepresentatives, was denounced as an error of that time whichcould no longer be tolerated. The attitude of Parliamentclosely resembled that of an ecclesiastical council which visitsheretical principles with its anathema. It returned to thepolitical religion which monarchical England had from timeimmemorial professed, and condemned the regicides as nobetter than unbelievers.But not only political'questions which assumed a religiousaspect, .but those also which were strictly ecclesiastical, cameultimately before this assembly for decision.In April 1661, shortly before the meeting of Parliament,and in consequence of a royal commission, the proposedscheme for a synod which should arrange a compromise betweenPresbyterians and Episcopalians, was carried out. Inthe old palace in the Strand, which has perpetuated in Londonthe name of its builder, a Count of Savoy, the brotherof Henry 111's wife, a chamber was fitted up. Here thecommissioners appointed by the crown met, twelve fromeach side.For the Episcopalians the chief spokesmen were BishopsMorley and Cosins, the former of whom, a friend of BenJonson, possessed real literary abilities and was a fluentand impassioned speaker; the latter was celebrated for histhorough knowledge of Christian antiquities, the fathers ofthe Church, as well as the canon law. The other side wererepresented in the discussion by two of their most eloquentpreachers, Bates and Baxter, the latter of whom seemedspecially suited for the task, because the presence of thedignitaries of the Church, which overawed the rest, neverfor an instant discomposed his keen and logical argument.Their discussions savour somewhat of scholasticism. Theyconstantly use the syllogistic form, and thus merely formalobjections attracted as much attention as those whichXIV 5. PARLIAMENT OF THE RESTORA TION. 369A.D. I ~ ~ ~ 'materially affected the case. The lengthy investigation ofpoints of detail forced the main questions into the background.But it is only with these last that we are concerned.rn order to understand what happened it is essential to givesome account of them.The first deals with the authority of the episcopacy. Thepresbyterians wished to recognise the bishops merely aspresidents, and demanded that their powers should be limitedby the presbyteries. The Episcopalians insisted that thebishops should be unrestricted in the exercise of theirauthority, as the original theory of the office required. Inallowing the institution of the presbyteries, or the establishmentof chapters on the Presbyterian principle, they stipulatedthat these should have merely a deliberative voice. Thisdid not satisfy the Presbyterians, since it left the bishopsfree on all occasions to adopt or reject as they liked theadvice given them. They asked that it should be enactedthat the bishop should do nothing without the consent ofthe presbytery. They wished for episcopal presidents, notfor prince-bishops. The bishop was to be the first amongequals, not a lord over subjects. Closely connected with thiswas the second point of dispute, which turned upon certainceremonies recognised in the English Church. The Presbyteriansopposed them, mainly because they feared thusto fall once more under the yoke of canonical obedience tothe bishop of the diocese. They demanded greater freedomfor the minister of the word. In pronouncing the enforcementof the ceremonies to be a sin, Baxter merely meantto imply that the clergy would thus be prevented fromincluding in the administration of the sacraments those whosincerely desired them, but who would not recognise theceremonial 1.With reference to the Common Prayer-book, the Episcopaliansdemanded a declaration of entire agreement. TheOne of his arguments was: 'To enjoin ministers to deny the communion toall that dare not kneel in the reception of the sacrament, is to enjoin them tothe communion to such as the Holy Ghost hath required us to receive tothe communion.' Life of Baxter 347.RANKE, VOL. III. s b

370 FIRST TWO YEARS OF THE LONG xrv. 5.A.D. 1661.Presbyterians, who still disapproved of much that it contained,offered only a general assent.The Anglicans throughout laid stress upon ceremonial andconformity as of value in themselves. The Presbyteriansadvocated inward holiness and conviction as more important.They took their stand on the simple letter of Scripture, andwished to realise the idea of religion in the same form asthat adopted by all the Protestant Churches of the Continent.The others appealed to the usage of the first centuries andto the precedents established in England.The appointed time had passed away amid correspondenceand discussion. The moment for decision was imminent.But at the very first question, the first of nine, touching theact of kneeling in receiving the communion, it became evidentthat no agreement was practicable. Both parties declaredas much to the King. Anxious, they said, as both were togive him satisfaction and to restore the liberty of the Church,they were nevertheless unable to agree upon the means bywhich it should be effected. The conference then broke up.It ended at the very moment when resolutions were passedin Parliament reinstating the bishops in their temporal privileges,their seats and votes in the Upper House. Charles I1was personally opposed to the measure, because he foresawthat the bishops would oppose his schemes of toleration inthe House. His prime minister, however, heartily supportedit. During the Parliamentary recess, in July, the bill becamelaw, and at the re-opening of Parliament on November 20the King himself expressly welcomed it as a happy omenthat he again saw the Lords spiritual and temporal unitedwith the Commons, and Parliament thus restored to all itsold position and glory.It was inevitable that everything should tend to the reestablishmentof the old ecclesiastical system, which was aloneregarded as lawful.Previous to the recess a bill had already been introducedenforcing conformity in the public services and in the useof the sacraments I. It had been handed over to a committee,It was introduced June ag, passed July g. Journal of Commons vii. 296..D. 1661.and passed with their amendments. Following the old,ractice, a convocatio~l of the Church had already been:iLblished side by side with Parliament, arid to this bodywas entrusted the task of revising the Common Prayer-book.Among the clergy elected a few Presbyterians had been- ; for instance Baxter and Calamy in London. The-bishop however who possessed the ancient right of approvingthe passed these names over. The Convocationwas exclusively composed of Anglicans. The latter howeverwere not so rigid as to reject everything that had a Presbyterianorigin. It is well known that some of the mostimpressive collects in the Common Prayer-book, that forinstance for the conversion of unbelievers, are the work ofpresbyterian ministers. All their objections however onspecial points were disregarded. On the contrary someadditions were made which are thoroughly imbued with theexclusiveness of Laud's time. The Presbyterians declaredthat not until now had the acceptance of the Prayer-bookbeen positively distasteful to them.In all quarters the feeling of hostility ro them gainedstrength daily. The course of events and, to use an expressionof the schools, the logic of circumstances provedtoo strong for them. The interference of the Scots in thedisturbances in England, an interference prompted by theirmissionary zeal in the cause of Presbyterianism, had helpedto bring about the ruin of Charles I. The rise to power ofthe Anabaptists, which the Presbyterians in both countriesregarded with aversion, had been among its consequences.When however, in their anxiety to be rid of such a yoke,they gave their assistance in restoring the monarchy, theythus indirectly promoted the cause of the Anglican doctrineswhich were so inseparably associated with it. These hadgained the upper hand. To this must be added theviolent zeal of the dominant party in the Lower House,which saw clearly the necessity of using the favourablewhen public feeling was still strongly opposed tothe disorders of the last years, in order to re-establish theOpposite doctrines and the old order of things.In December 1661 a bill was passed which made theBb2

372 THE .4 CT OF UNIFORMITY. XIV. 5 .A.D. 1662.taking of the communion according to the Anglican ritual,as well as the formal repudiation of the Covenant and ofthe doctrine that war could lawfully be waged against theKing, the condition of admission into the municipal corporations.Neither Catholics nor zealous Presbyterians wereto be tolerated in the municipal magistracies.King Charles 11, who still retained distinguished Presbyteriansnear his own person, and felt himself pledged tothe Catholics, by no means countenanced this increasingstringency : on the other hand he was not prepared to involvehimself in a serious dispute with a Parliament which was inthe main so devoted to him. Not only did circumstancesrender such a step unadvisable, but the position of his financesmade it impossible.At the opening of the session he had again referred tothe embarrassed state in which he still found himself, in spiteof the grants already voted him, and which arose from the intolerableburden of his debts. He professed himself ready toallow Parliament to inspect the accounts of his receipts andexpenditure, since it could thus see for itself that he could notdefray the necessary expenses of the state, and that it was necessaryto make some more adequate provision for its dignity,welfare and safety than had been done in fixing his income.The Lower House took the matter into consideration, butshowed no alacrity in coming to such a final settlement of itas should satisfy the King. It was engrossed with its ownmeasures in favour of the State Church, in the case of whichit felt by no means certain of the King's consent. IfCharles I1 wished to attain his object, it was clearly necessaryfor him to accede to the wishes of Parliament on these points.On March I, 1662, the King once more made a statementof his money-difficulties to the Commons, whom he summonedto meet him at Whitehall. He complained of theirslackness in a matter which concerned their interest no lessthan his own, since there was still a strong Republican partywhose extravagant hopes were fostered by the weakness ofthe crown I--an argument which however had been frequently1 The king's particular speech. Chandler, Debates i. 51.. vrv. - i..,v. 1662.THE A Ci" OF L7NIFOX~1fITY. 373used and without effect. A stronger reason was the declarationmade by the King that he would be amenable totheir wishes in ecclesiastical matters. He was, he said, asunwilling to be taken for a Presbyterian now, as he had beento be taken for a Catholic during his residence abroad. He,,, a member of the Church of England, and was as anxiousfor as any member of Parliament could be. Hethe Common Prayer-book, in its present form, to betaken as the standard.The prolonged continuance of the discussions had alreadybeen made a subject of reproach against Charles personally.~~w that, after these had terminated so satisfactorily, he gavehis assent to them, he won golden opinions on all sides, andall hesitation was at an end.A few days afterwards the House imposed, for the King'sbenefit, a tax which was inevitably most unpopular, as muchbecause it was a burden on poor as well as rich, as from thenature of the supervision which it required. It was a renewalof the old hearth-tax of the Norman kings. Each householdwas to pay two shillings to the King and his descendants. Provisionwas also made for the immediate wants of the King, anda sum was set aside for the relief of impoverished Cavaliers.On the other hand progress was also now made with theBill of Uniformity. The Upper House too gave its assentto the Common Prayer-book in its new form. The Lord-Chancellor, in the name of the House of Lords, thanked thetwo Houses of Convocation. There was no longer any doubtthat the acceptance of the book would be declared a necessarycondition of participation in the services of the Church.But the peers and the King with them felt no doubt thatthey would still be able to soften its rigour in some points.Above all, they would have wished thrit the Presbyterianministers who did not conform to the Prayer-book, and whoconsequently be obliged to resign their benefices,have reserved to them out of the revenues sufficientto support life1. The act too should, they urged, apply onlyJournals, April 7. It is this apparently which is referred to in what Baxter(P 4'9) mentions with some reserve.

374 THE ACT OF UNIFORAIITY. XIV. 5.A.D. 1662.to the clergy themselves, and not to schoolmasters as well.They brought prominently forward that consideration fortender consciences which had been already promised atBreda.But all this had no effect upon the Commons. The lastexpression they wished to see entirely avoided, as likely tolead to manifold misinterpretations. They again insistedthat the promise made from Rreda was conditional uponthe assent of Parliament, and the necessity of maintainingpeace. They rejected all provision for the dissidents fromthe estates of the Church, on the ground that only he whoserves the altar should live by the altar. The income of thebenefices would also otherwise be so small that the clergywould be unable to keep up the dignity of their order. Topermit exceptions would be to lay the foundations not ofuniformity but of dissension. The objection that what isindifferent may be surrendered, they declared to be frivolous,for it was for this purpose precisely that human authoritywas ordained: namely, to lay down a rule in indifferentmatters. With great fervour they demanded the extensionof the Act of Uniformity to schoolmasters and even toteachers in private houses ; for all depended on the educationof the young. The hostile conduct of so many members ofParliament during the disturbances was attributable solely tothe fact that they had been wrongly educated: if now adifferent disposition predominated in the younger generation,the cause lay in this, that education had been neglected bythe usurping government. This fault must be avoided forthe future ; the acceptance of the Prayer-book by the masterswas nearly the most essential point l.These considerations were brought forward by SerjeantCharlton on May 7, in a conference with the Lords. Onthe 8th the Lords agreed to them in all important points.The first point was the applicability of the act to the masters; on this they divided, but after it had been accepted,the rest created no difficulty.We possess no account of the debates of the two HousesReport in Journal of Lords xi, May 7, 1662, above in Kenne t./YIV. F.THE ACT OF UNIFOIZAIITY. 375,.D. 1662.on the bill, but even the communications between them showhowand narrow were the tendencies whichpervaded it. They embraced at once the present and thefuture.The bill contains some provisions which gave the Churchof ~ ~ ~ a l national ~ n and d political character such as noother church possessed. In the first place, no one was toobtain an ecclesiastical benefice or be entrusted with a cureof souls who had not been ordained by a bishop. It wasobserved truly enough that they thus renounced all con-,,exion ~ ith the Protestant Churches of the Continent; theydeclare that they were only bound to have regardto England itself. The exclusive character of the Englishepiscopacy, which had fallen away from the papacy, butwould on the other hand recognise no communion withother Protestants, was thus most forcibly expressed. Atthe same time Parliament sought to impress on the Churchalso the stamp of that royalist spirit which inspired itself.The oath which it had for the same reason enforced onthe corporations was now imposed on the clergy in a stillstronger form. They were required to declare the Covenantto be illegal, and by signing their names expressly torenounce the doctrine of the Long Parliament that armscould be borne against the King: that is to say, on thestrength of the royal authority eve11 against the person ofthe King, or against those entrusted with a commissionby him.On May rg the Bill of Uniformity, with its various clauses,became the law of the land. The ministers who should nothave declared their submission to it by August 24 were atOnce to be treated as deposed, and their places to be filled upexactly as if they were dead.Against the carrying out of the Rill in all its rigour, asthe appointed day approached, opposition was once moreOffered in the King's Privy Council. Supported by a petitionthe London ministers, Lord Manchester and Generaltook up the cause of rneir old co-religionists. Theirefforts made a great impression on the King ; but the lawyersandwhom it was necessary to consult held him fast

376 THE ACT OF UNIFORMITY. XIV. 5.A.D. 166~.to the resolution he had once embraced. The most activeamong them was Sheldon, Bishop of London, who set his faceagainst any softening of the terms of the act, or any delayin its execution, as energetically as if the safety of the worlddepended on it '.The state of feeling prevalent in the ruling party displayeditself in this, among other facts, that the two energetic men,John Lambert and Henry Vane, who though implicated inall the republican movements had yet been spared, becausethey had taken no direct part in the King's execution, werenow nevertheless accused of high treason, and condemned :Lambert, who loved life, appealed to the King's mercy, andobtained it. On one occasion subsequently he extols themagnanimity of the Duke of York. Far from affairs of state,which were not in his eyes the only things worth living for,he lived on for twenty years, at first in Guernsey, withpermission ' to range throughout the island ',' afterwards at.St. Nicholas' Island, in Plymouth Sound, where his wife anddaughter joined him.For Henry Vane, on the contrary, there was no life outsidethe obscure and yet withal deep system of religious and politicalideas the prophet of which he had announced himself tobe. For him death was a necessity of nature, by which the soulfreed from prison and bondage attained to complete existence.He saw in the act of laying down this earthly life a fulfilmentof a duty, if by so doing he could promote the welfareof his country: of imploring the King for mercy he neverdreamed. On his trial he confessed to the very doctrines whichthe latter most detested-that Parliament was lawfully inexistence even after the death of Charles I, and that againsta King who was not in possession it was also impossible tocommit treason; on himself no other court than the old Parliamenthad the right to pronounce sentence. He assertedthe distinction between the individual king and the king inthe abstract, in other words the authority of the state which' Parker, De rebus sui temporis 27, Kennet Reg. 742.' Warrant dated August 12, 1664. Lister, Clarendon iii. 311. Compare a notein Pepys iii. 452.THE ACT OF UN~FORIWTY, 377xrv. 5.A.D. 1662.represents him, and affirmed the right in a given case to obeythe latter-a view proscribed by the new Parliament and whichthe hereditary King could never tolerate'. The latter wastold that he did not owe mercy to any one who showed norepentance. Even God forgave only those who repented.There was no wish to allow the man to live who was recognisedas the most active representative of the republicanopinions, the revival of which was momentarily dreaded. Sovane had to die, and to die too on the spot where oncestrafford had been beheaded, to whose condemnation he hadchiefly contributed. Undisturbed by this or any other rccollection,Vane ascended the scaffold with an almost joyousmien ; with one hand resting on the balustrade, and holdingin the other a sheet of paper on which he had put down theheads of his speech, he began once more to unfold his viewsbefore all men. But it was not intended that he should beallowed to do so. At the first objectionable passage thetrumpeters interrupted him ; when he recommenced and struckthe same note, they again broke in. He complained thatliberty of speech was refused to a dying man, tore the sheetof paper in half and gave it to a friend who stood behindhim: then hc knelt down and prayed aloud. He was remindedthat he had not prayed for the King. He repliedthat he was praying to God that He would show the KingHis holy ways, and suffer him to know the right.It was the combination of religious with political opinionswhich had given the Rebellion its distinctive character ; it wasthe same now with the Restoration. It has been said thatthe Presbyterians would easily have submitted to canonicalobedience and the revision of the Liturgy, had not politicaldeclarations been demanded of them at the same time. Fromtheir apologies we gather the objections, from their point ofview well-founded ones, which they urged against the purelyecclesiastical enactments : they were in earnest about thematter; the fact that religious motives determined men's.I He was however glad to let the responsibil~ty fall upon others. In his letter,'Iven in FOrster, Life of Vane az4, he says 'if he has given occasion-if we callPut him out of the way.' Besides the State Trials, I have used here theaccOllnt given by ~~~~d

378 THE ACT OF UNIFORM/TY: xIV. 5.A.D. 166~.conduct in moments of difficulty, still kept up the credit of religionin the world. But it is true nevertheless that the politicalsprings of action co-operated. While the ministers were requiredto renounce beforehand all attempts in the future tomake a change in Church and State, they on the contrarydeclared it to be their duty to seek after such a change so faras it should be necessary; each however merely in his ownpost and sphere of action. That it should in all cases be heldtreason to bear arms against the King and his ministers wasincomprehensible to them. It was very possible that a RoyalCommission might be in contradiction to the law of theland, in which case every free Englishman must range himselfon the side of the latter. Were the Chancellor to havethe right to appoint commissions which every one was forcedto obey, where would freedom be? Men's persons and propertywould in that case be handed over to the capriceof any one who might claim to hold a comnlission from theKing. And it was possible too that some day a papisticalfaction might gain the mastery over the King and wring fromhim commissions the execution of which would be ruinousto Church and State. Self-defence was in such cases anatural right I.It was these and similar motives, religious and political,which impelled by far the largest part of the Presbyterianclergy to refuse to subscribe the prescribed oaths. Theirnumbers are estimated at two thousand, but this numberincludes those who had voluntarily withdrawn on account ofthe invalidity of the sequestration. Among them a comparativelylarge proportion were men of learning, talent andconscientiousness. In the service preceding the day fixedlor final acceptance or rejection they bade farewell to theircongregations. They earnestly protested that it was noaccidental fit of spleen which held them back from compliance,but that deliberation and prayer left them no otherchoice open. The churches were very full, the sympathyof the congregations deep and sorrowful 2./Grounds of Nonconformity, in Calamy, Abridgement i. 260.Calamy against Walker. The Church and the Dissenters compared as to thePersecution, 1717, p. 86. The controversy which then began was renewed, andXIV. 5. .THE ACT OF UNIFORMITY.,.D. r 662.ln this manner was the old controversy, which had so oftenfurnished material for lengthy discussion, decided by the turnof events. Parliament had been formerly Presbyterian, nowit was ~~isco~alian in feeling. Then the Covenant had beenintroduced, now it was withdrawn. Edward Hyde, the manlvho had even then brought about the alliance between themonarchy and the episcopacy, in whom the Presbyterians re-,,gnised their most resolute opponent, now stood honoured,ith a feudal title at the head of the administration and theministry. Whatever too his occasional utterances may havebeen, it was inevitable that he should use the power whichin his hands for the restoration of a regime which heregarded as the only lawful one in England. But it was alsounavoidable that he should thus awaken a widespread discontent.The Restoration rested on the union of the twogreat religious parties. What would be the effect if, asseemed likely, they again separated from each othercarried on with vigour in various controversial pamphlets in the year 1862, on thetwo hundredth anniversary of the exclusion of the Presbyterians. It did not however,so far as I could notice, make any special impression on the Episcopal Church,or even excite due attention. Nor do I find much that adds to our historicalknowledge; the old ground is maintained throughout. We have the usual accusatio;isand recriminations.

CHAPTER VI.RELATIONS WITH FRANCE.SALE OF DUNKIRK.IT is now time to return to the negotiations with Portugal,with which we broke off above.Francisco Mello, who had returned to England for the purposeof carrying through the marriage, met, to his delight,with a very favourable reception there. He was given thekey of the palace gardens, where the King could be mosteasily and confidentially spoken with. But during Marchand April 1661 he was still under constant apprehensions ofthe failure of his design l. He dreaded the counter intriguesof the Queen-Mother and her friends, the remonstrancesof the Dutch, the machinations of the Spanish ambassadorVatteville, who had a strong following at the court and inthe country, and was able to make rich presents. His threatthat Spain would treat the conclusion of the marriage as anact of hostility was not without its influence on Charles 11.For to the Spanish monarchy still attached the prestige ofa great power, and the trade with Spanish dependencies stillformed the chief support of English commerce. How wouldmatters stand should the young King of France combinewith his father-in-law Philip IV? One of the first occasionson which Louis XIV actively interfered in general Europeanpolitics was now when he empowered Fouquet, who was stillin his employ, to assure the King of England of the contrary2.Under cover of the deepest secresy Fouquet communicated1 'As intrigas e os tempos me matam.' Letter by Mello dated March 11.Quadro elementar xvii. 165. Vatteville. Baron Vatteville figures as ambassadorof Castile.' Cornbury's Notices of Lord Clarendon's son, who was brought in because aforeigner would not have been believed. In the Appendix to Clarendon's StatePapers iii. No. I.A.D. 1662.to the Lord Chancellor the information that in Francecharles 11's marriage with the Infanta Catherine and generallyhis alliance with Portugal, was regarded with favour.Louis XIV even promised through Fouquet that not onlywould he never oppose the alliance of England with Portugal,but that he would on the contrary support it, provided itcould be done secretly '. Relying on this promise, of whichhowever the Portuguese envoy knew nothing, Charles 11venture,--and he frequently declared that he would notllave done so without it,-to proceed with negotiations whichnecessarily lead to a rupture with Spain. But hetl,ought it advisable, since it was impossible to foresee whatsuch a rupture might lead to, to assure himself also of thegeneral consent of his people. Contrary to the usual practicea sitting of the whole Privy Council was arranged. At thismeeting Charles I1 brought forward for free discussion thewhether the Portuguese marriage was advisable inspite of the opposition of Spain. The Council found theclaims of the Spanish ambassador, who spoke as if his Kingwere so completely supreme in the world as to be able todispose at will of the hands of foreign princesses, as little totheir taste as his warlike menaces. England, it was said, hadno wish for war with Spain, it had had war enough; but itflared not shrink fro111 such a war, for to do so would beto place herself in the position of a vassal of Spain. Eightand twenty members were present ; they unanimously recommendedthe Portuguese match to the King.Such was also the feeling in Parliament, to which at theopening of the session, in May 1661, the King announcedas a piece of news which would please them, that he thoughtof marrying the Infanta of Portugal. The announcementwas received with such lively acclamations that he wascompelled to repeat it once more2. For the King, no less'The King of France doth not only like that alliance, but on the contraryif it be need, assist the King of England with all his power, so that it be donesecret way.' Note of Bastide, April 2.' letter from Nicholas, May 10. Carta de Marquez de Sande a Regente. QuadroXvii.The opening speech of the Chancellor is very instructive for thenegotiations.

382 RELA TIONS WITH FRANCE. XIV. 6.A.D. 1662.than for his minister, it was unquestionably of great importancethat the two Houses united in assurances of supportby their shouts of congratulation: should he meet withobstacles in carrying out his intention, he could reckon upontheir assistance.They fell in with a political tendency in foreign affairs, asto which we may well doubt whether it really Correspondedwith their sentiments. For by this act Charles I1 secretlyreturned in foreign affairs to the footsteps of Cromwell ; justas the Restoration was in reality by no means a thoroughgoingreaction, but a reconciliation of the monarchy withthe opposite elements in society which had grown up duringthe disturbances.The contract of marriage signed, a characteristic festivitywas held in Whitehall. The Portuguese ambassador was conveyedin a royal carriage to dine with the King. They werealone at the table, both with heads covered ; the ambassadorsitting at a little distance from the King on his left. TheEarls of Ormond and Manchester were in waiting. Severalhealths were proposed ; among them that of the future Queenof England. At this toast, though at none of the others, theKing rose and stood uncovered while it was drunk. For therecognised rule was that a sovereign could yield precedenceto no one in the world; except, as was natural, to the ladyto whom he gave his hand '.The Spanish ambassador was deeply chagrined. On oneoccasion, when indisposed, he replied to an inquiry as to hishealth, that he felt as a man could feel who had met withfailure in his prince's business. He was reproached withnot having shown himself liberal where he should havedone so. He endeavoured to better his position by attachinghimself to the opposition party in Parliamellt ; in order tobring about a reaction he had printed and circulated theaddresses in which he had dissuaded the King from thePortuguese match. He did not relinquish the hope of postponingit by agitation, even after it had been concluded.And even still the Spaniards were, at least in London, moreJuly 5, 1661. Christopher van Brand's RelationcsEcrl. Archives..LD. 1662.popular than the French. This was shown on the day whenthe two ambassadors came into collision at the reception ofa ne,ly-arrived envoy, the Swedish, a mock-important incident,which was regarded at the time as an event of world-,ide significance. A scuffle took place in which the Spanishambassador gained the upper hand. He drove on at once intriumpll to the Swedish ambassador. The populace greetedhim wit11 shouts of joy. The French ambassador even declaredthat he had had to deal with disguised soldiers and themob of London '.~t tile outset Charles 11 behaved with tolerable impartiality ;but the French told him incessantly that he was nourishing aviper in his bosom : under the mask of friendship the envoywas exciting the people against him. After some time theyhad the satisfaction of seeing that Charles insisted on Vatteville'srecall.Though contrary to first expectations friendly relations hadthus been entered upon between the French and Englishcourts, yet there still existed many differences between them.How energetically did Louis XIV protest against the claimof the English to their old supremacy over the sea ! Charles I1was finally forced to concede that it should not extend beyondCapc Finisterre.A high place among the King's friends was held by Cardinallietz, who though at a distance still exercised consider-able influence over the French clergy. Charles I1 wouldgladly have procured him a position at the Romish court,with which the Portuguese match had brought him into acertain connexion. Louis XIV vehemently protested, urgingagainst it that Retz had been guilty of acts for which hedeserved to be accused of high treason. The intention wasconsequently dropped in England. Charles I1 required theCardinal, on penalty of losing his friendship, to avoid all thatI The official account, which was sent to France (printed in the Appendix tois tolerably colourless. The state of feeling is clearly enough seen fromthe'True relation of the manner of the dangerous dispute, kc. By theheroic gallalltry of the Spanish pany they became tl-iumphant, and repelled thehfonsieurs, allho~lgh they exceeded in numbre.' Cp. my FI-ench Hist. iii 277.(~~orks x. tlo,)

384 RELATIONS WITH FRANCE. XIV. 6.A.D. 1662.could occasion fresh disorders in France. Louis XIV hadpromised in return to observe the same prudence with regardto Charles 11's discontented subjects,-a point of far greaterurgency for the newly restored King of England than for theFrench monarch.What most displeased the English was, that Louis XIV,in a treaty which he concluded at this time with the Republicof the United Netherlands, guaranteed to them the rightof fishing as one that was well-grounded, while the Englishwould not allow it on their coast. Louis excused his conductby urging the necessity of preventing the Dutch fromcoalescing with the Spaniards, and on the other hand hisacquiescence in the large profits which would accrue tothe English from the treaty with Portugal.For at that time the advantages which England obtainedthrough it were rated very high. Tangiers was regarded asthe place where the English fleet would be stationed in orderfrom thence to control the trade with both Indies and alsothe traffic in the Mediterranean. As holding Jamaica in theWest Indies, and now Bombay as well in the East Indies, theEnglish would inevitably get into their hands the trade withall the nations of the world. Charles I1 devoted much zealto the maritime interests of the nation. Louis XIV found itexpedient at present at any rate to abstain from all interferencewith him.The events which give an age its distinctive character appearfirst of all in slight outlines, now in one now in another transaction.Though it was not yet generally talked off, yet themost intelligent foresaw that Louis XIV would take the firstopportunity of conquering the Spanish Netherlands. Fromthe traditional point of view of English policy Charles I1 hadlittle reason to object. He allowed the death of Philip IV tobe indicated in France as the period at which he could ventureto show himself a not unprofitable ally to France. Theywere both enemies to Spain in ordev to rob her, the one of hercontinental, the other of her naval power. So too they wereboth the allies of Portugal. This alliance with Portugal againstSpain gave both governments a common interest, whichformed a link between them, without any public avowal of it.XIV 6. XELA T ' WITH FRANCE.*.D. 1662. 385-&hen Charles I1 was making his first preparations forhelping Portugal, for which the Parliamentary grants wereinsufficient, two million francs were paid him secretly, forparliament was to know nothing of it. But for the year1662 still greater preparations were necessary. Already inthe previous year the Spaniards had invaded Portugal, notwithout success ; in the following spring a great and decisiveattack was expected under Don Juan of Austria. Fearswere entertained for the existence of the Portuguese throne.The French had told Charles I1 that now he was once alliedwith Portugal (since the princess who was destined to becomehis wife came from the House of Braganza, and therefore fromPortugal), his reputation in the world depended on the efficiencyof the support which he gave to that country. Charles I1replied, that it concerned his honour no less than his interestto protect it. His exertions would be such as to satisfy theworld. Ten men of war were despatched to the Portuguesecoast for its defence. About three thousand veterans from theScottish garrisons were transported thither to meet the attackson the land side. But the King declared, and his assurancewas confirmed by the French ambassador, that he could notattempt, far less carry out, all this, unless he could rely uponthe close co-operation of France. What he required was notmerely assistance and support for the moment, but a firm andclose alliance I.There can be no doubt that in these negotiations there wereother motives also at work.It is true that the Chancellor rejected an offer of moneywhich was made to him personally; but he subsequentlyhimself urged the pecuniary needs of the King, at least undercover of a request for a loan. It looks still more suspiciouswhen we find the French ambassador promising money, andfor the precise object of promoting the Portuguese cause inParliament, on the ground that it was necessary to disheartenD'Estrades to Turenne, Feb. ax, 166a : 'A moins qu'il ne se fasse quelqueliaison plus 6troite entre les deux rois et qui les fasse agir plus fortemeut dans unecause commune, les affaires de Portugal seront soutenwes lentement.'Turenne i. 345.RANKE, VOL. 111.C CLettres de

XIV. G.386 XELA TIOIW WITH FRANCE.A.D. 1662.those who were opposed to it, and strengthen those whowere for it. Louis XIV once gavc it to be understood thathis treasury was exhausted, but that in the position in whichEngland was placed he would use every effort to overcomcthis difficulty l. That which Charles I1 had in vain sought atthe hands of Holland and Spain, the means of becomingindependent of the grants of his Parliament, this Franceoffered him. It was a relation which in other respects tooagreed with his policy: he wished to render it permanent.The Chancellor was led by his personal position to share thiswish. In this and no other way arose the idea which hasdone most to bring both of them into disrepute, the idea ofhanding over to France one of Cromwell's important acquisitions,Dunkirk.Nothing is so fatally damaging to a good name, bothamong contemporaries and with posterity, as the conjunctionof personal aims, which are often somewhat petty, withan enterprise of general importance. The true and propermotives of the latter are in such cases misunderstood, and thepersonal interest is regarded as the only real ground of action.The historian is astonished when on a closer investigation ofthe negotiation he stumbles upon causes which possess acertain significance of their own.In support of the design of alienating Dunkirk in one wayor another, reasons were advanced at the time which deserveconsideration even from the point of view of English policygenerally.It was remembered that the proposal to garrison Dunkirkalready made under Queen Elizabeth had been then rejectedon good grounds2. A settlement upon foreign soil was to beapproved only when it supported itself either by the produceof the soil, or by supplying some staple of trade. At Dunkirkhowever such was not the case, it would lead to nothingbut expense. It would never be possible to establish therea trade with the neighbouring population, owing to the dislike1 Bastide to Clarendon : ' IIis Majesty will make as we say an effort in this conjuncture,wherein the King of England is so much concerned.'I have used here a MS. pamphlet 'touching the late rendition of Dunkirk,'Nov. 3, 1662, which I found in Oxford.XIV. 6.A.D. 1662.SALE OF DUNKIRK.of the latter for the English. The harbour would be of inoreuse in foreign hands than in their own, so long namely as itcontinued to be of any use at all. The roadstead betweenMardyke and Dunkirk was merely formed by the depositscarried by the currents from the English coasts. From whateverquarter the wind might blow, vessels would be always indanger there.Added to these considerations came that urged by theEnglish ministry at the time, who had no control of anyspecial grants for Dunkirk, which was not strictly speakingincorporated with England at all, but had to meet the costof maintaining the garrison out of its own very inadequatemeans. Even after the recent grants voted by Parliamentthere still remained to be covered a yearly deficit of Az50,ooo.To the Lord Treasurer it seemed a most desirable relief, ifhe could strike the ~;I~O,OOO, which the garrison of Dunkirkcost, out of his budget, and enrich the treasury by the priceof the sale. Admiral Montague, Earl of Sandwich, was alsoin favour of it. He at times indicated himself as the foremostauthor of the sale of Dunkirk'.Montague would have liked it to be restored to theSpaniards. Clarendon, on the other hand, reminded himthat they were not in a position to pay the sum which itwas necessary to ask. The alliance with France, which hadthriven so greatly, suggested to him on the contrary theidea of using this affair to complete it. In conversationwith the French ambassador, Estrades, who was on thepoint of returning to France in order to undertake theembassy in Holland, he had already assured himself thatLouis XIV was strongly inclined to take up the matter beforehe brought it before the English ministers for discussion.Nor was there any want of objections to it. He was toldthat it would be better to rase to the ground Mardyke andDunkirk and fill up the harbours than to hand them over tothe French, whom the possession of Calais and Dunkirk would' According to Pepys he declared .if it should in Parliament be inquired intcthe selling of Dunkirk, he will be found to have been the greatest adviser of it'Pe~~s' Diary ii. 357.C C 238 t

388 SALE OF D UNKZRK.xrv. 6.A.D. 1662.enable to hold a knife to the throat of the English govcrnment.If Dunkirk was too costly, it was proposed to movein Parliament for a special grant for it, which would be forthcomingif it were formally incorporated '.These considerations however made no impression eitheron the King or on the Chancellor. They did not think thatthe loss of Dunkirk would involve either injury or evendanger to England. For Cromwell the possession of thisfortress had been important, because he aimed at exercising aninfluence upon the continent, and at arousing in his own behalfthe sympathies of Protestants generally. Not only didCharles I1 give up all idea of this, but on the contrary hewas anxious to isolate the English Church from continentalinfluences. For dealings with Parliament he had still lessinclination ; he would have seen in it an extension of itsauthority, which he held it expedient to avoid 2.Meantime the negotiation with France was already on foot.What the views were which prevailed in it we can see fromthe manner in which it ended 3.Estrades was still in Paris, and busy with the arrangementgf his domestic affairs, when a confidental agent ofthe Chancellor's, named Belling, called upon him in orderto claim his assistance in the accomplishment of the matterhe had mentioned with the King of France. The words arereported as follows : that if a treaty for the sale of Dunkirkcould contribute to bring about a close alliance between the' Letter from Estrades to Turenne, Aug. ZI ; and in particular an autograph letterto the Ring, written on the same day, which is not printed with the other.Louis XIV says, 'La memoire des derniers troubles du royaume est assezfratche, pour faire connaitre au roi (d'Angleterre) combieu il est dangereux d'htendrel'antoritk du parlement en diminuant la sienne.'9 Estrade to Lyonne, July IS, Lundi, au soir: ' J'ai par16 & l'homme que vousscavez (Belling's alrival had been announced the day bcfol-e). I1 n'a autre ordreque de me dire de la part du chancelier, que si le trait6 de Dunquerque peust servird'une liaison 6troite entre le roy (de France) et le roy d'Angleterre, et clueS M. soit pelsuad4e que ce consentement esl une des plus grandes marques de lapassion qn'il (Charles 11) a d'avoir son amitie (de Louis XIV), qu'il (le Chancelier)se fait fort cl'ajuster l'affaire, & quai il travaillera aprPs avoir sceu les intentions desa MajestB.' This is the allusion in a note of Louis, printed in Lister iii. 206.* La manikre dont M. le Chancelier en use m'oblige fort, et il lui sera bien aidde lier une amiti6 estroite e.~tre le ray man frbre et may.'XIV. 6.A.D. 1662.SALE OF DUNKIRK.two Kings-and it was clear that Charles I1 could give nostronger proof of his earnest desire to gain the friendship ofthe King of France than this-the Chancellor pledged himselfto bring the matter to a settlement as soon as he couldlearn the intentions of his Majesty of France1. . Louis XIVreplied at once that he felt the strongest wish to enter intothe closest friendship and alliance with the King his brother,and that by the mediation of the Chancellor, to whom he feltdeeply indebted for the manner in which he had conducted theaffair. As Estrades, who was crippled by the after-effects ofold wounds, could not go at once to Saint Germain, where theKing was, the latter came himself to the Palais Royal, whitherEstrades had himself carried. There the agreement was concludcd,that Estrades, as soon as he could move, should onhis way to Holland once more visit England in order to finishthis affair, if it was meant seriously, and if too high a pricewere not asked for it.In the latter half of August we find Estrades again inEngland. The King, who acted in concert with Clarendon,had expressly invited him. Clarendon paid him a visit inperson, which he only did in extraordinary cases. It was duringthese same days that the decisive deliberations were heldbetween the English ministers. The critical position of Portugalsilenced all other objections; she had lost some strongplaces of importance to the Spaniards, and had to expecta military catastrophe unless she was energetically supported,and that again was impossible, unless an agreement wereeffected between France and England. All depended onwhether they would agree as to the purchase-money.The Chancellor had at first demanded far more; finally hedecided, with the Treasurer's approval, to fix the sum at fivemillions. Estrades, who had at the outset offered only twomillions, was afterwards empowered to go as high as four.It was not so much in his despatch to the King himselfas in his letter to Turenne, that Estrades insisted with thegreatest energy upon the granting of the English demand;for were this not granted Charles I1 would not assist theAmbassade et ndgotiations du Comte d'Estrades, 1718.

SALE OF DUNKIRK. XIV. 6.A.D. 1662.Portuguese, but would leave them to their fate ; how bitterlywould the King of France one day repent it if, for the sake ofso trifling a difference, he abandoned Dunkirk, and with it thedefence of Portugal. Turenne, who at the time had a handin all affairs. of importance, and enjoyed the confidence ofboth courts, was also appealed to by the Duke of York. Hewould, he declared, have never permitted the sale of Dunkirk,were it not for the interests of France: it was undoubtedlyworth the price ; but what he chiefly hoped for was by thesemeans to promote the union of the two crowns, a union whichwould be in all respects so advantageous for both. Charles 11.no less than himself and the Chancellor, was inspired solelyby the wish to gain the King's friendship, and to fuse intoone their respective interests1. No sooner had the five millionsbeen agreed to, than fresh difficulties arose on the questio~lwhether the payment should be made imnlcdiately or byinstalments,-difficulties which threatened to be fatal evennow to the scheme. Estrades, who had already once preparedto leave, sided however now wit11 the English, whodemanded immediate payment. There was no money topay the English troops in Portugal, and yet each fresh despatchshowed that the resistance which was offered to theSpaniards there depended upon their presence and aid. Evenat the very last difficulties were still encountered, as to thepayment first of all, which was finally undertaken by anAmsterdam house; then as to the appointment of trustworthypersons to receive the money; lastly, as to the formof the treaty. Early in November however Estrades receivedthe order issued under the Great Seal to the commander ofDunkirk, to hand over the place to the King of France.At last, wrote Estrades to Lyonne on November 28,-at lastwe have got Dunkirk ; all has gone off as well as possible,above all, the result has produced a favourable impression :in the Netherland towns preparations are being made forgiving the King a welcome when he ccmes there. The withdrawalof the Protestant English from the orthodox Catholic' ' La plus forte passion, la mienne, et celle de M, le Chancelier itait de formerune Btroite liaison et lier un int8r;t avec lui.' Turenne's Letters i. 552.XIV. 6.SALE OF BUNKIXK.A.D. 1662.provinces paved the way for the further acquisitions whichFrance hoped to make there.It was precisely on this ground that the Protcstant worldon its side was offended. The Elector of Brandenburg expressedhis regret at the loss of a place which might have~erved as a citadel against France and Spain, as a bulwarkof the Orange interest. The English replied that Dunkirkwas only useful as a nest for pirates: as a naval station itwas valueless. The King would spend the money whichhad been paid for it in an annual reinforcement of his fleet.Without Dunkirk England would be in a far better positionto maintain their common interests. The Elector's ambassadorfinds the real reason in the traditional bclief of theEnglish, their mistake as he calls it, of treating Great Britainas a separate world, and inferring that it was useless to spendmoney on a position abroad : at the same time he recognisesthe pressing want of money. The King of England could notpay his own guards. He could now appropriate to them thetaxes which had been hitherto set apart for the garrison ofDunkirk. Moreover the Portuguese war made a close alliancewith France an absolute necessity.It has been constantly said that the Chancellor wasbribed to consent to the sale of Dunkirk. Even the sumswhich he had received were named. The palace which hethen erected for himself was nicknamed Dunkirk House. Hisdaughter, the Duchess of York, had in fact received smallpresents of some value, caskets containing articles of Frenchworkmanship, among them, for instance, a watch set withdiamonds, which at the time excited general admiration inEnglish society. As to the Chancellor, even in his privatepapers, in which everything else is mentioned, there is notrace of his having been bribed. He declares himself thathe did not receive a single half-crown. His personal andgeneral motives lay far deeper; they originated in the lineof policy upon which he had entered and the general attitudewhich he had assumed at home and abroad. Amongthe motives for the sale we read that the money would bebetter spent in maintaining ' a military strength ' for the

SALE OR DUNKIRK. xiv. 6.A.D. 1662.suppression of the threatened insurrection l. Clarendon promisesthat a part of the money paid by France should bereserved for such an emergency, which every one dreaded.'The &r3o,ooo that went to maintain those soldiers in Dunkirk would be betterspent at home to breed up and maintain a military actual strength for securityof prince and people against all civil insurrections.'CHAPTER VII.A SCHEME FOR REUNION WITH ROME.DISPENSING POWER.AND STATE.CLAIM TO TI-IEPERSONAL RELATIONS IN COURTWE possess a report of Henry Bennet, dating from thedays when the question as to the Bill of Uniformity wasdecided. He was a man who even then enjoyed to a highdegree King Charles's confidence, and was destined beforelong to attain to the highest positions. It is evidentfrom this document how serious was the anxiety felt atcourt lest the general discontent should lead to an outbreakof disturbances and a fresh civil war. Bennet was ofopinion that it would be by no means safe to dispense withthe precautionary measures already adopted, since to do sowould be to encourage factions and weaken authority. Itwas necessary on the contrary to carry them out energetically,and with this object to strengthen the military force, inLondon by recalling thither the troops from Dunkirk, andthat in the counties by the precautions of the lord-lieutenants:in a few months every movement might be suppressed, andthen the King could think of milder measures 1.Stimulated by the rupture which had occurred between theEpiscopalians and Presbyterians, the Baptist and Republicansects, whom they had defeated when united, were in a stateof eager rebellious commotion. The speeches of the regicidesespecially, which had been printed singly or collectively andwere widely read, kept their minds in a state of ferment.The words which they had uttered when about to die were' Sir Henry Bennet to Charles 11. Lister iii. 198.

394 A SCHEME FOX REUNION WITH ROME. XIV. 7.A.D. I 662.readily believed, and their speedy return to life was seriouslyexpected. It was reported of Harrison's wife that she hadreserved for his return his clothes, which she had boughtfrom the executioner. Tales of signs and wonders, such aswe find in Livy, were cherished, and were as widely and asfirmly believed. In November 1663 the government surprisedand arrested on one occasion six hundred adherentsof these doctrines at an open-air meeting. While drivenrather than led through the streets of London, they loudlyproclaimed their doctrine that no earthly king possessedany lawful authority. The citizens who ridiculed them theysummoned to answer for it at the last judgment. It appearsfrom the reports of the trial that a committee existed of thedifferent sects. Anabaptists, Fifth Monarchy men, and theresolutely refractory party of the Quakers, called the Fighters,with the object of preparing for a rising. After some hesitationthe Independents joined them. They hoped to win *over the most extreme Presbyterians, the Covenanters. Thewildest schemes, such as Venner's, reappeared once more.The danger lay in the possibility that even Cromwell'sfollowers, who had as a rule no decided religious bias, andamong them many soldiers of the disbanded army, mightunite with the Anabaptist enthusiasts. The unpopularitywhich the Court and Parliament had incurred, the one byits immorality and extravagance, the other by the burdenswhich it imposed, seemed to render possible even now thesubversion of the new government, and the restoration ofthe Commonwealth I.With the justification of the proceedings taken againstCharles I, on the ground that the sovereign was responsibleto the people and could be tried by them, was united anappeal to treat the son like the father, and sweep him fromthe earth with all his sin-stained followers.And this might easily have happened had the Presbyterianslistened to the appeals of the sects. For the adherents ofPresbyterianism in the towns, and especially in the capital,still formed the majority. The associations formed to secure' See the trial of Thomas Tonge, State Trials vi. 226.XIV. 7. A SCHEME FOR REUNION WITH ROME, 395A.D. 1662.the maintenance of the preachers who had been driven fromtheir churches, were a link which held together the faithfulthroughout the kingdom. It is scarcely probable that theallied Royalists and Anglicans could have resisted a combinationof both forces. To encounter it an increase of militaryforce and the assistance of the King of France wouldhave been necessary. The Presbyterians however stood aloof.They still possessed co-religionists near the King's person,who made them promises; but what chiefly restrained themwas the recollection of the direction which affairs had takenin the last disturbances, the dread of a renewed supremacyof the Anabaptists and of the Con~n~onwealth, which seemedeven more distasteful to them than Anglicanism, so long asthis last held fast to the principles of Protestantism.It was thus a question of vital importance for the politicaland religious situation whether the King, the head of theAnglican Church, had not himself secretly gone over toCatholicism. It was often said at the time, and it has beenconfidently reasserted more recently, that Charles I1 hadactually gone over while in exile: before the historian canpass judgment upon him he is bound to ascertain the factsas far as possible from the outset.It is undeniable that for some years Charles displayeda strong inclination to go over, inasmuch as he constantlyassociated with priests, and was perhaps once seen himselfkneeling at the mass '. A natural son, born in his early years,he committed to Catholic care and teaching 2. ~oreovkr notonly did he in conversations with his mother, as appears fromlater letters, allow his conversion to appear possible, but in hisnegotiations with Spain he pledged himself to it, provided hewere restored to the throne by the help of that power. It was,it would seem, the price which he offered to pay for effectiveaid towards gaining this end. At the same time however heSee Carte's account, which he refers to Ormond (Life of Ormond ii. 254; iv.109). Lister finds it 'grossly improbable.' Life of Clarendon i. 396.'Angela Correr, Relatione 1661, mentions this early son, of whom Acton hasshortly before told us something: from this, and from his friendship for Arundeland Aubigny, Correr merely infers, ' che il re noclrisca non poca inclinatione a1Cattolicismo.'

396 A SCHEME FOR REUNION WITH ROME. XIV. 7.A.D. 1662.cherished another project, and one more easily carried out.After his flight from Worcester he entered into communicationswith Pope Innocent X, which were carried on by theGeneral of the Augustines, who declared that he was authorisedto do so'. In these he promised that he would in future, asKing of England, show favour to his Catholic subjects, if thePope energetically supported him. The Pope answered by thedemand that he should first avow himself a Catholic, and fixa definite period for doing so. But to that length Charles I1was neither able nor willing to go. He would by so doinghave permanently alienated the Protestant element, haveperhaps abandoned the Catholic party itself to destruction,and rendered impossible his own restoration to the throne.After the death of Innocent X similar negotiations were againentered into with his successor, Alexander VII. They wereconducted through the medium of two German princes, theDuke of Pfalz Neuburg, and the Elector of Mainz. Charles I1then promised, if once King, not to permit his Catholic subjectsto be subjected to any disabilities on account of theirreligion, but on the contrary to place them on a footing ofequality with the rest of his subjects. But this offer too hadlittle effect in Rome. At the needy exiled court it wasmatter of complaint that not even a present of money wasmade in return for its advances. In short it is absurd to speakof a formal conversion completed at that time. That mattersnever went so far cost Charles I1 many a day of poverty.But, it may be asked, did it not happen somewhat later?For in the last moment of his life Charles actually,-we shallsee under what circumstances,-accepted the Catholic confession.That very fact however ought to have proved thathe had not done so previously. The reigning Pope, Innocent XI,was not really satisfied with the account of it, though twotreatises were sent him, containing considerations which hadat an earlier time convinced the King of the superior claimsof the Catholic Church. It has been doubted whether theyemanated from the King in the first instance; but they werein his handwriting, and contained sentiments which he ap-' Edward Hyde to Msr. Clement, State Papers iii. 291.x~v. 7. A SCHA'ME FOR REUNION WITH ROME. 397A.D. 1662.proved. The Pope thanks James I1 for communicating them,and for the account of the proofs of the Catholic faith whichCharles I1 himself had given on his deathbed. He expressesthe hope that he has obtained the divine mercy1. We seewith what caution the head of the Catholic Church even thenexpresses himself as to this conversion : there is no doubtthat in Rome nothing was known of a confession previouslymade, or of any such dissimulation throughout his reign.The account of the conversion seems to have been unexpectedthere.Charles I1 was far more nearly connected with Catholicismthan his grandfather, who contemplated a union of theChurches, and than his father, who hoped by a reconciliationwith Kome to transform the Catholics into good subjects;but even he was not unfrequently heard to ridiculeCatholic ceremonies and doctrines. He laughed at thosewho were really in earnest about a confession. He wasnot exactly an infidel, he had no doubts respecting a futurelife, but he framed for himself conceptions of God andof divine mercy in harmony with his natural disposition.Like many others of his contemporaries he rejected the confessional.He imagined that behind professions of spiritualmotives he constantly discerned worldly views. He acceptedthe Anglican form of belief as involving his ownclaims as King, and therefore he adhered to it : but in hisinmost heart he wavered between disbelief in any creedand Catholicism. When we find him so frequently avowinghis intention of procuring relief for the Catholics, the reasonfor it must be sought not only in the services which theyhad rendered him, but also in the sympathy which he feltfor them. So again, though he had not formally gone over,yet we find Charles I1 soon after the commencement of hisreign in alliance with the Romish See. Some considerablenegotiation for instance took place with Rome as to the' Innocent XI to King James 11, June 7, 1685 : 'A quo (the envoy) intelliges,9uam grata acciderunt nobis, quae de editis a Carolo rege catholicae fidei signis,quaeque de eadem scripserit documents ad nos retulit : in spem enim ea nos adducunt,regem ipsum a Deo rnise~icordiam consecutum esse.' Collection of RomanCorresl)ondence in the British Museum, No. 15. 396.

398 A SCHEME FOZZ REUNION WITH ROME. XIV. 7.A.D. 1662.appointment of a Catholic bishop. The King wished merelyto be assured that the man whom he might nominate wouldreceive ecclesiastical institution from Rome. In the Anglicansystem the King himself appears as the supreme head ofthe national bishops who had seceded from the Papacy, asthe representative of the now legalised secession. It wasa glaring inconsistellcy that he wished at the same time toestablish a bishopric, which would have received its spiritualauthorisation from the Pope. But even the idea of going overhe certainly never abandoned. Those around him labouredearnestly to effect a reconciliation with the Romish See. Aremarkable document of the time is still extant which showshow far their designs in this respect went.It is a paper addressed to the Romish See in the nameof Charles 11, offering to renounce the communion of theProtestant Churches, and return to the Romish Church'. Init Charles I1 declares his readiness to accept the confessionof faith put forth by Pius IV, the decrees of the Council ofTrent, and the decisions given by Innocent X and AlexanderVII in the Jansenist controversy. But along with thiscomplete adhesion on points of doctrine, there was to benot merely the reservation but the further developmellt ofa highly independent national hierarchical system. TheArchbishop of Canterbury was to be raised to the dignityof Patriarch of the three realms : in his hands the administrationof the Church in them all was to be vested,excepting only a few reserved rights of the Apostolic See2.In the same way had the Sorbonne revived the memoryof the ancient Gallican liberties in accordance with the ideasof the Council of Basle : in the disputes between Alexander VIIand the French crown the idea of a French patriarchate hadreappeared on the surface. In precisely the same spirit itwas designed to establish an English Church. The existing' ' Oblatio ex parte Caroli I1 Magn. Britanniae regis pro optatissima triumsuorum regnorum cum sede apostolica Iiomana unione.' (Dated du mois deF&vr. 1663, in the Archives at Paris. Angleterre, No. 81.)a Ab eo in ecclesiae negotiis, certis quibusdam sedi apostolicae reservatis duntaxatexceptis, tria regna guberuabuntur.'XIV. 7. A SCHEME FOR REUhTI0N FVITII ROME. 399A.D. I 662.bishops and archbishops were to remain, but they wereto be reconsecrated by three apostolic legates specially appointedfor this duty alone. A Roman legate was to reside inGreat Britain, to exercise merely the reserved rights securedto the Pope. He was to be a native of one of the three kingdoms.Ry the side of the legate and the patriarch there wasto be a provincial synod held every year, and at fixed periodsa national council. Together with the privileges of the Church,the right of the King to nominate to the episcopal sees,and the rights of property in the Church estates formerlysold were secured. Above all, neither the present nor anyfuture English King was to be forced to treat harshly thoseof his subjects who at the risk of their souls wished to remainin the Protestant faith. They were to enjoy the free exerciseof their religion, though at their own expense. They wereto be reclaimed if possible by good teaching alone, withoutthe least coercion. The bishops and clergy who acceptCatholic ordination are not merely to retain their benefices,but even to keep their wives: celibacy was not to be reintroducedtill later'. The Eucharist was to be administeredin both kinds to those who wished it, the mass was to becelebrated in Latin, but accompanied with English hymns.A summary of doctrine based on Holy Scripture was to bepublished. The Catholic preachers were to dispute with theProtestant, but to refrain from the narration of miracles, andmoreover not to speak of a material purgatory. Some of theorders were to be revived, the Benedictines of St. Maur forpsalmody, others on account of their secluded life, others forthe care of the sick, even the Jesuit fathers for the schools;but all were to be subject to the ecclesiastical hierarchy, andto avoid the faults which their friends censured in them. Themost disputed questions, as to the infallibility of the Pope, hissuperiority over councils, his right to depose kings, were notto be discussed either in the pulpit, or in printed writings, orin any other way.'S. R. M. exceptum vult, ne vel sibi vel suis successoribus injungi possit, utillos subditos suos, qui in suis protestantium religionibus permanere suo animarumPericulo voluerint, vi inde depellant illisque hac de causi molestiam creent.'

400 A SCHEME FOR REUNION WITHROME. xrv.7.A.D. 1662.This scheme is mainly remarkable as showing what wasthe real nature of the design for bringing England back toCatholicism, which was so much talked of under Charles 11.It aimed not at a complete restoration of the Papal authority,but at removing the schism, while it retained as far as possiblethe independence of the Anglican Church. Its authors expectedto succeed in restoring the Episcopal hierarchy tocommunion with Rome. It was hoped that the Presbyterianswould be satisfied with such a position as that stillenjoyed by the Protestants in France. From the exampleof that state they thought themselves justified in inferringthat Catholicism and Protestantism could exist togetherunder one rule1.It is not perfectly clear how far the King was privy to thisscheme, and whether he took any steps for carrying it out.It agrees however both with his views'and with his position.If he felt any scruple, it was because that Church whosesupreme head he was, advanced claims which he regardedas ungrounded, and even took upon itself to decide pointsof doctrine. And just as in former times the interferenceof Rome had been irksome to the kings, so it now appearedeven desirable as a counterpoise to that system of authorisationecclesiastical and secular by Parliament, which wason the point of establishing itself. But it was not to beexpected that the matter could have been successfullycarried out. The concessions in church organisation andchurch ceremonies which were demanded from the RomishSee, were far too directly opposed to established usage inthe Catholic Church, for it to have been able to grant them.We can as little imagine that the Anglican episcopate hadapproved these projects. In the days of trial its championshad always fought as determinedly against the Papists asagainst the Independents and Presbyterians. In the worksof Sanderson and Taylor we may see with what care andfirmness combined the lines of Anglican orthodoxy, as fixedUn Acrit sur l'ktat de l'Angleterre par le Sr. Bataille contains the remark bearingon this point: 'Qu'il lear est permis chez les catholiques d'avoir des Bglisespubliques.' Bataille, Jan. 1663.xrv. 7. CLAIM TO THE DISPENSING POWER. 401A.D. 1662.in the sixteenth century, are maintained. That they shouldtake an undoubtedly Protestant confession of faith as theirbasis was the one indispensable condition of their restoration.And at no price whatever would the Presbyterians, whosezeal was directed against Catholicism above everything else,have suffered that faith, under whatever limitations, to havebecome once more the creed of the crown. They could notin such a case have restrained the masses who adhered tothem. A powerful impulse would have been given to thespread of Anabaptist doctrines ; there would have been realcause to dread a fresh outbreak of the civil war.To avoid incurring the danger that was most feared, theproject, though not finally laid aside, was abandoned for thepresent. The idea had been already conceived of providing forthe Catholics in a different fashion, and one more in harmonywith the state of affairs in England; yet one which like theformer involved consequences of incalculable importance.When on previous occasions it had been proposed to grantrelief to the Catholics, Lord Clarendon had always remindedthe proposers that in England the King can repeal no law,but had added the declaration that he had the power todispense with the execution of the laws'. This view heagain expressed when the Act of Uniformity was passed.He said by way of comfort, that the execution of sevele lawsrests with a noble and gracious prince. But while the rightof dispensation was held already to belong to the King invirtue of his prerogative, a very peculiar view was taken upwith regard to the powers which had been transferred fromthe Papacy to the King in virtue of his spiritual supremacy,one of the most important of which was the right to suspendthe jurisdiction of the lower courts, and to grant relaxationfrom the penalties they imposed 2. It was considered to bewithin his powers to issue a declaration, in favour not perhaps-.' Letter to Clement: 'Yon know well that though the King hath in himselfPower to pardon and dispense with the execution of laws, yet that to the repealof them there must be the consent of others.'The King's power in matters ecclesiastical: in the Acts oi the year 1660,Record Office. ' What the bishop of Rome could lawfully doe in relaxation of thepenalty or suspension of the inferior ecclesiastical jurisdiction, all that is nowinvested in the King.RANKE, VOL. 111.D d

402 CLAZMTOTHEDZSPENSINGPOWER. x1v.7.AD. 1662.of the Catholics only but of all parties, and which should onthe basis of this kingly right secure them an endurable existenceby the side of the Anglican Church. It appeared asearly as December 1662.In it the King declares that it must necessarily be hisfirst care to secure the genuine Protestant faith, the disciplineand constitution of the English Church. Now that this hadbeen done by the Act of Uniformity, he would, agreeably tohis declaration from Breda, bethink himself of those who forconscience sake do not conform to the Church, and protectthem from molestation in their position. He did not wish toviolate the rights of Parliament, but would in the next sessionuse every effort to carry through an act, which will, such arehis words, ' enable us to exercise to the satisfaction of all thedispensing power, which we consider belongs to us.' For thepeace of the realm it was necessary to deprive the ill-disposedof the means of inflaming the passions of the massesunder the pretext of conscience. The King found it compatiblewith his scheme for reunion to give the strongestand most explicit assurances that he was far removed fromanything like Popery. He did not hesitate to publish adenial of intentions, of which the world knew nothing. Withgreater truth he added, that his Roman Catholic subjects hadrendered him so many services, for which indeed the EnglishChurch was under obligation to them, that he was anxiousthat this indulgence might be of service to them as well.The bloody laws which had been promulgated against themmight perhaps have been necessary in earlier times. Hecould never bring himself to execute them. It was nothowever strictly speaking toleration nor an equalisation ofthe two creeds at which he aimed. He too meant always toobserve the distinction which existed in every we!l-orderedstate between those who dissented from and those whoprofessed the state-religion.The original compiler of the declaration, which indeedformed part of his plan from the first, was Henry Bennet.It was also laid before the Chancellor, who madc somecomments upon it, without however concealing that he cxlxctedno result from it.XIV. 7. CLAIM TO THE DISPENSING POWER. 403A.D. 1663.On February 18, 1663, the King opened the new sessionwith a speech from the throne, in which he urged the acceptanceof his declaration. It excited surprise that theLord Chancellor did not also speak, especially since therewere besides many other questions of policy and internaleconomy which required elucidation. It was accepted as aproof of what every one conjectured, that he did not approveof the declaration. The Lower House replied to theKing in an address which utterly rejected his proposals,and which was remarkable in other respects. In oppositionto his intimations respecting the right of dispensation, itasserted that the King had no right whatever to makepromises, since uniformity was an old law sf the land,dispensation from which could only be granted by Act ofParliament. Every one was subject to the law, for throughelection each man was represented in Parliament l. Itadded that the result of the indulgence would be so greatan extension of dissent that it would be impossible to carryon the government of the Church or maintain peace inthe country. It implied its anxiety lest in such a caseCatholicism should once more obtain the supremacy. Farfrom following the lead given by the King, it requested himto order all priests of the Roman Church, the Jesuits in particular,to leave England, those alone being excepted whowere in attendance on the two Queens and in the houses ofthe foreign ambassadors.In the Upper House a bill was introduced by LordsCooper and Roberts, as announced in the declaration ; itempowered the King to dispense with the laws which prescribedobedience to the discipline and doctrine of the Church.But such a bill could not pass so long as the bishops continuedto sit in the Upper House. The Chancellor, whohad once expressly defendcd the dispensing power, on thisoccasion opposed it. The measure was thrown out by theLords.- -' 'The laws of uniformity then in being could not be dispensed with, but byact of Parliament. They who pretend a right, put their light into the handstheir representatives, whom they choose to serve for them m Parliament.'Journals of Cummons viii. 443.Dd2

XIV.404 PERSONAL RELATIONS IN 7.A.D. 1663.The astonished King found that among the very instrumentsof his restoration he encountered an invincible resistanceeven to his most cherished designs. How surprisingwas it in particular that the chief minister, Lord Clarendon,deserted the ideas whose champion he had hitherto alwaysbeen, and surrendered the prerogative of the crown in this,perhaps the most important point of all.The only possible explanation is that the advisers whomthe King now followed were hostile to him. It was sorelyagainst his wish that Henry Bennet became Secretary ofState in place of Nicholas, who retired at the King's request.Ashley Cooper stood at the head of the young men whosystematically opposed the Chancellor. Lord Uristol wasstill a man of importance. He was supported by a largemajority of the Catholics. The needy courtiers too, whothought themselves slighted by Clarendon, rested their hopeson him.And shortly before this an intrigue had occurred at court,which gave all opponents and rivals, open or concealed, ofthe Chancellor a support near the King's person. In orderto understand the factious intrigues which powerfully influencedthe administration of the state, we must glance fora moment at the most intimate personal relations of theKing.Charles I1 had in his early years abandoned himself toa licentiousness, which was more under restraint abroad thanafter his return to England. It was hoped that he would renouncethese habits if he were once married. His marriagewith the Infanta Catherine was solemnised in May 1662, atPortsmouth, according to the rites of the Anglican Church, asbefore according to those of the Catholic. It was expectedthat the King would for the future live a regular and orderlydotnestic life, in harmony with the sentiments of the Engtisl~nation. He had in a sort of way pledged his word todo so. When mention was made in confidential circles ofLouis XIV's behaviour in this respect, Charles I1 highlydisapproved of his permitting Madame de la Vallicre to beseen at his queen's court. He even declared it to be rtXIV. 7. COURT AND STA TE. 405A.D. 1663.proof of a bad character, and asserted his determination tobe a good husband.The young queen, though small in person, was not withoutbeauty. In her Spanish dress, with long flowing hair, aserene and quiet mien, and dark deep eyes, she might wellcreate a favourable impression. The King, who was able toconverse with her in her mother-tongue, was charmed withher genial and gentle disposition, so much in harmony asit was with his own. He was kind to her; he taught herto utter her first words of English, and in the meantimeacted as interpreter even when she was addressed in French,which she did not understand, for she had been reared inthe loneliness of a cloister, and only for a life of religiousdevotion. Even now she disliked to be seen in the courtcircle, she never seemed to be happy till the time came whenthe King took her hand to lead her back to their apartments.She felt for him the passionate devotion of the firstyouthful love of an innocent heart. He expressed himselfwell contented with her.In spite of all however he was an extremely bad husband.He had till now been fascinated by the charms of LadyCastlemaine, then considered the most beautiful woman inEngland: wherever she appeared she drew upon herselfwondering or even envious eyes ; the charm of her love washeightened by her light and brilliant conversation-she wasanirnated by the spirit of ambitious intrigue, which in thisform will ever aim at the mastery over those who are broughtinto contact with it. Even indifferent spectators who sawher shortly before the wedding, at which she wore an aspectof sorrow and deep care, felt a sympathy for her approachingdismissal. She was however resolved to hold her ground inspite of all, and carried her point with the King. He didprecisely that which he had found fault with Louis XIV fordoing. The conduct he had censured now served him asa precedent. He too resolved to keep the lady at his courtand assign her a position in the household of his Queen.That this was not done without some inward struggle maybe inferred from the vehemence with which, in a letter to the

406 PERSONAL RELA TIOATS IN xrv. 7.A.D. 1663.Lord Chancellor, he denounces with asseverations, indicatinga passion resisted for a time but finally victorious, all thoseas his enemies who should oppose him in this matter. TheChancellor himself was against it, but all opposition was nowsilenced. Lady Castlemaine was received into the newQueen's household : on one point only the King was scrupulous,that his wife should learn nothing of the actual relationbetween them, and of its continuance. Members of thehousehold who were considered as likely to inform her wereruthlessly dismissed. The English who had come over withthe Queen in hope of gaining a position through her patronage,not only found themselves mistaken in this, but wereeven forced to return to Portugal, together with nlcst of thePortuguese ladies.The bad example set by the King exercised now as beforea demoralising influence upon the whole court. The immorality,which seemed almost a reaction against Puritan strictness,became a sort of fashion which, to their friends' surprise,carried away even men of high character, and caused thedeepest uneasiness to those who were attached to the crown.The sermon was succeeded by the theatre, which gratifiedthe passions which the former had denounced '.In the encouragement of the physical sciences, then justrising into prominence, Charles I1 took the liveliest interest;and used every effort to promote them, chiefly no doubtbecause they put an end to the exclusive supremacy of thetheological and ecclesiastical tendencies till then predominant.Even in the administration of the state he was attractedby what was new, because it was new, though he easilyacquiesced if he failed to carry it out. He was pleasureloving,careless in his conduct, always entangled in somefresh love-affair, a bad householder ; not without industry,when circumstances compelled him to be industrious, butin other respects very ill-fitted for the regular management1 I avoid using the Recollections of Hamilton in the M6moires du Comte deGrammont. In genela1 they are trustworthy, they are based on facts; hut In particularpoints, for instance the marriage of the Duke of Yolk, they must give wayto more rellable documents.XIV. 7. COURT AND STATE. 407A.D. 1663.of current business, and indifferent to the praise or blameof thoughtful men provided he had his fill of the day'spleasures.All the more prominently loomed the figure of the Chancellor,who literally lived and moved amid business. Hecommanded a hearing in the Privy Council when he madea proposal, through his natural eloquence and the superioritywhich a perfect acquaintance with the subject always gives.He seemed to be instructing the rest in a light easy manner :no one would have ventured to contradict him. His idea wasto restore the English constitution, which had during thedisturbances deserted its old grooves, exactly to what it hadbeen at the time of the change from the Tudors to theStuarts, and to develop it further from that basis. He hadgot into his own hands an immense amount of patronage inall branches of the public service. In England as well asin Ireland the episcopate as a whole was indebted to him forits restoration, and most of the bishops also owed him theirnomination. The reorganisation of the judicial bench wasstill more palpably his work. He was the most prominentrepresentative of the old-fashioned loyalty. Moreover hisinfluence extended also to the treasury. For long no extraordinarypayment was made there without his previousknowledge. He had the most intimate relations with thebankers, who advanced money to meet the wants of the state.In foreign affairs the initiative and the maintenance ofsecresy, an all-important point, rested with him. Withoutdoubt in the conduct of those affairs he had the highest interestsof the country in view; still, as we saw in the Portugueseand French negotiations, he was at the same timeconstantly endeavouring to keep opponents at a distance,and to gain personal support for himself. He considered itperfectly justifiable, by all possible means, to secure himselffriends both at home and abroad. The family alliance intowhich he had entered, through his daughter's marriage withthe Duke of York, gave him a decisive pre-eminence, evenamong the nobility, to whom he belonged since his elevationto the peerage.

408 PERSONAL RELA TIONS IN XIV. 7.A.D. 1663.It was only natural that this colossal power should exciteenvy and jcalousy, but it was obviously not unassailable.Though the kind-hearted Queen remained throughout gratefulto the Chancellor1, as she had promised to be at the first, yetthis was of little importance. Far more serious was the factthat Lady Castlemaine used against him the influence whichshe still exercised over the King. Those opponents whomwe have mentioned rallied round her. They were alreadycalculating how many posts would become vacant throughhis fall, and be available for distribution. Some of themClarendon managed to win over by promotion, the rest werethe more bitter against him. They relied upon the supportof the King, whom the Chancellor had crossed in his mostfavouritc schemes.Out of all these elements a movement was formed whichcame to an outbreak in the summer of 1663, in the attackwhich Lord Rristol made upon Clarendon '. It was only indirectlydue to Catholicism. Bristol was then a Catholic, butthe reverse of devout. He was more under the influence ofthe general idea of toleration, of which he now wished to be thcchampion. He was a man of energy, talent, and enterprise,but just as his eloquence, for which he was celebrated, wastoo florid and theatrical, so throughout his career he overshotthe mark he aimed at. He never clearly realised to himselfthe difficulties to be encountercd. His was rather a blindimpetuosity than a steady courage. In the present instancehe was at least as much a tool in the hands of others as theirleader. The King, whom he told of his intention, warned him,for he appreciated the situation more correctly. He told himthat he would burn his wings. Bristol howcvcr may havebelieved that he was sure of the sccret approval of the King.' Manchester writes to the Chancellor: 'I have received that assurance fromher, that she owned your kindness, and esteemed you so much, as your counsel1and your advise should steer her actions.'a Nathaniel IIodges to Dean Ilodges, Oct. 10, 16G3, among the Uodleian hlSS. :Although he was a Catholic, yct he was of a public spirit, and rather a statesmanthan a devotary.' 1Ie fixes the blamc on some party behind the scenes rather that1on Bristol himself. Fit agents were employed to give hopes of liberty to thePapists and Sectaries.'XIV. 7.COURT AND STATE.405,A.D. 16~3-He considered that in the attempt to overthrow the Chancellorlay the sole means of reviving his declining reputation.On July 10, 1663, he came forward with a long-prepared andformal impeachment l. It declared especially that the Chancellor,by slanderous reports as to the King's life, and by proposalscontrary to the interests of England, was seeking toalienate from him the affections of the people. Among theseproposals he did not scruple to bring forward the one relatingto a treaty with the see of Rome respecting the Catholicbishopric mentioned above, because he considered it the mosteffective charge. He asserted that the Chancellor promotedsuch measures in order to make it appear that he was himselfthe sole support of the newly-introduced religion, and to getthe whole management of affairs exclusively into his ownhands. He accused him of high treason. After the articlesof impeachment had been read the Duke of York rose atonce to inform the Lords that the King highly disapproved ofthis impeachment. Bristol tore open his doublet, and exclaimedthat he received this blow from the brother of hisking with uncovered breast ; there in Parliament, as a peer ofthe realm, he was his equal 2. At this point the Chancellortook up the debate, not so much with the view of refuting theseparate charges, as to attack his assailant himself. Heasked him, how it came about that he, who was known asa Catholic peer, was now undertaking the defence of Protestantism.Bristol retorted, that he was a Catholic, but noadherent of the Romish court; as a good patriot, he couldnot suffer it once more to gain a footing in England. Hehad expressed himself to the same effect shortly before at thebar of the Lower House, where he had been obliged to justifyhimself for another imprudent remark as to the influencewhich the King could acquire by gaining over individuals.To remove every objection, he shortly afterwards received thesacrament according to Anglican rites. But flaws were also' Journal of Lords xi. 555.a This scene, which is omitted by the Engliil~ author~ties, is ~lcscribcd by 111,Brarldenburg Resident, in his Report.

410 PERSONAL RELATIONS INXIV. 7.A.D. 1664.discovered in the form of his impeachment. The judgesdeclared that it ought not to be permitted to go on. AndBristol, while profesdng to defend the King's cause, hadnevertheless excited his displeasure. How could Charleshave possibly allowed the motives for the slanders of whichRristol had spoken to come under public discussion? Hetreated the impeachment as a personal insult to himself, andwas easily induced to issue a warrant for Bristol's arrest. Heonce told the latter himself, that he would be a pitifulKing indeed if he could not gain the better of an Earl ofBristol.The position which Rristol took up excited, owing to thecelebrity of his name, general interest and surprise. The:e isa Latin epigram extant in which the question is asked whetherhe would not still remain master, whether the Earl of famousname would not be Mazarin, in other words, first minister.This possibility excited the most hopeful expectations in allthose whom the existing system kept in a position of inferiorityI. But this only contributed to rouse its defenders toa more determined resistance. When at the opening of thenew session in April 1664, Bristol, still bent on carrying outhis old scheme, appealed to the Lords by a letter, given toone of the peers by his wife herself, he was compelled to sufferthe indignity of having the paper sent up unopened to theKing by the House, who expressed his thanks for it, but wassecretly surprised that Bristol did not find more support inthe Upper House. The Chancellor's triumph in this disputcwas complete.His main strength lay in the support that he gave to theAnglican system, which then possessed the predominance inParliament. In the Lower House it suited the interests ofthe country gentlemen and older Cavaliers, who would havenothing to say to the Presbyterianism of the towns-in theUpper House it was represented by the restoration of thebishops, which restored to it its ancient character. Let usxrv. t.COLTh'(r AND STATE.A.D. 1664.not forget that this sentiment was more than a merelytemporary one. Anglicanism, as we have said, unites the01d tcndency to separation from the Papacy with the inclinationto cling to ecclesiastical institutions which haveonce taken root. The historical significance of Clarendon'sadministration lay mainly in this, that he not only reinstatedthose ideas themselves, but at the samc time restored theirancient connexion with parliamentary govcrnment, which thusacquired fresh life.Clarendon was, it is true, forced to struggle with it himself,but none the less is he to be regarded as one of the chieffounders of that systcm in Church and State on which theEnglish constitution tllcnccforward rested.Hdges, Oct. 3 : 'The Sectaries, especially the Anabaptists, mett more confidentlythan before ; the recusants likewise splendidly apparelled.'

BOOK XV.THE DUTCH WARS OF CHARLES 11.ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PROTESTANT ANDPARL1,IMENTARY CHARACTER OF THE CONSTITUTION,1664-1674.

AnouSr the middle of the seventeenth century, during aperiod answering in length to a man's life, the majority ofEuropean states underwent those searching reformations bywhich their future character was to be determined. Then,after a long and bloody war, had the equal recognition ofreligious beliefs and the independence of territorial powersbeen established in the German kingdom. Then had theabsolute authority of the royal power in France and the preponderanceof aristocratic tendencies in Poland been definitelywrought out. The mutual relationships of the Scandinavianconfederacy, and also the position of the govcrnmentin each kingdom, had been firmly settled. In the one, whichhad been exposed to invasion, the result had been thestrengthening of the royal power through the necessities of rcsistance; in the other, of which the policy had been aggressive,but was so no longer, the preponderance of the aristocracyhad been established. Next to these, the autocracy in Russiaarose in connexion with the Greek Church, and thc dominionof Austria over Bohemia and Hungary in connexion withRoman orthodoxy. In the other kingdoms also, even in theOttoman, similar antagonisms produced in their conflict permanentand decisive results.In Great Britain also, after the prevalence for a time ofrepublican forms, or the absolute dominion of an individualwill, and of the Presbyterian or the Anabaptist church governmcnt,hereditary monarchy with parliament by its side, and

the supremacy of the Anglican Church, had been newlyestablished. Still no stable condition had been attained. Thismay be regarded as the most important question,-How farthe three kingdoms might be governed from one centre; forwith the Restoration Scotland and Ireland had returned totheir former legislative independence. The forms of theAnglican Church, although an attempt was being made toextend them over the neighbouring kingdoms, encountered inEngland itself the most violent opposition from the Catholics,the Presbyterians, and the supporters of those sects whichwere called fanatical. Was she capable of resisting it or not?Parliament had indeed identified itself with Anglicanism, theKing was most closely united to both ; but even so he wouldnot suffer Parliament to gain the preponderance. Alreadythere rose up again between them the most extensive questionsas to the limits of the prerogative and of parliamentaryrights; each side meant to hold fast what its predecessorshad possessed.At the same time a foreign war broke out. It was thesame which had already occupied the Commonwealth and theProtector, the war with Holland ; it was concerned with themost important of all English interests, the supremacy atsea. Great as was its intrinsic importance, it was equallyimportant in relation to home affairs. It might help to unitethe diverging interests, but the contrary was also possible;it might first bring the antagonism clearly into view. Whatmight not be expected from the prospect of political changeunder a King to whom every means was right which wouldfurther his own ends ?CHAPTER I.AFTER the collision with Cromwell the maritime powerand trade of Holland had most vigorously revived. Theresult of a glance over her roadsteads and harbours wasastonishing. In Flushing the West Indian, in Amsterdamthe East Indian trade of Europe seemed almost to centralise.Dort and Rotterdam were enlivened by the Anglo-Scottishtrade, Enkhuypen by the herring-fisheries, Saardam by shipbuilding.The East Indian Company formed as it were arepublic which stood forth as a sovereign power. On thegoods brought in its ships depended the trade with southern,as well as with northern Europe, and with Germany.The English remarked that this world-wide commerce, bywhich they themselves were injured and thrown into theshade, in reality rested upon England itself.The whole wealth of the Dutch, it was said, was foundedupon the fisheries in the English and Scottish seas; theirgains from these amounted to several millions; the Englishwool which, mixed with Spanish, constituted the material fortheir manufactures, was sold to them too cheap: even Englishmanufactures had to serve them, in so far as Englishwork was first offered for sale in Holland. They drew theirlargest gains from the still continued sale of foreign productsin England,-principally on account of the higher value ofEnglish money, which was not rated on the continent accordingto its true proportion to foreign coinages ; if prices wereanywhere raised by the English, the Dutch were the soonest athand to take advantage of them'. The old commercial jealousy' Two questions proposed by a friend, with reference to the re-establishment ofthe Magnus intercursus.RANKE, VOL. III.E e

418 THE FIRST ?fill? WITH IIOLLAll'D. XV. r.A.D. 1662.allied itself to the feeling that England need o~lly make use ofher natural supremacy to crush her inconvenient neighbour.In addition to this the King had his own dynastic quarrelwith the aristocratical government then existing in Holland.Since the marriage of Prince William of Orange witha daughter of Charles I, to which that monarch had consentedat the time of the beginning of the disturbances, thehouses of Orange and Stuart had been most closely united ;the Stuarts rcceived from the Orange family the greatestsupport which anywhere fell to their lot. IIcnce it resultedthat their opponents in both countries, Cromwcll and theLowenstein party, made common cause. The expulsion ofthe Stuarts involved the exclusion of the house of Orange,after the early death of William 11, from the Statholdership,and from the high posts of military service on sea and landwhich it had formerly possessed. William 111, the offspringof William 11's marriage with the Stuart princess, was thcfirst person affected by this. Charles I1 had undertakcnthe office of guardian, together with the grandmother of thcprince and the husband of his father's sister, the Elector ofUrandenburg. It was his intention to reinstate his nephewand ward in the position of his forefathers, an intentionbrought about by the complex course of events after hehimself had been restored to the throne. He said his honourrequired that he should do in the Netherlands the oppositeof what Cromwell had done. The aristocratic party in Hollandhad in the King of England an antagonist who onllawaitedthe time to stcp forward and openly declare hisenmity.Under these circumstances the approaches, which were atfirst made by the two governments in turn, could lead to noreal understanding; we may rather wonder that in Scptember1662 an agreement was once more come to, which at leasthindered the open outbreak of the strife. If we read thecorrespondence between Lord Clarcndon and the Englishambassador in Holland at that time, Gcorge Downing, itappears that the real motive which induced the Englishgovernment to enter into this agreement lay in the difficultiesin which thcy were afraid of being involved at homc. It wa.;. THE FIRST WAR WITH HOLLAND.419.D. 1662.the time of the passing of the Act of Uniformity, and aof disturbances was consequently expected. It wasa remark of Clarendon's that nothing could help more tocalm men's minds than the conclusion of an agreement withHolland. For the republicans in Holland stood in a naturalconnexi~n with the malcontents in England, as almost inevitablyresulted from their sympathy in religious matters.Now however that the Act of Uniformity had been carried,it might be looked on as a means for the further establishmentof the royal power and the union of parties if thedynastic and national questions were bound together, and thewar with Holland, which the nation wished for, were mergedin the attack upon the existing Dutch government, whoseposition depended upon their anti-Orange and at the sametime upon their actively Protestant attitude. Lord Bristol,in confidential conversation, called the King's attention tothe advantages which might thus accrue to him. He repeatedwhat he had heard from some members of the former government,that Cromwell himself before his death had been onthe point of a breach with Holland, so as to give scope,without any further consideration, to the national interestsof the English against her. A great national act taken inhand by the King would to all appearance unite the separateparties firmly with him.In the meanwhile the misunderstanding between the twonations had gone on increasing. In the treaty of 1662 muchhad remained undecided. Differences of the most offensivenature were reserved for further discussion, about even theform of which no agreement had been made ; as, for instance,it was left to the proprietors of two English ships, confiscatedtwenty years before, to continue their case, although it hadnever been decided whether the matter should come beforea court, and, if so, before what court, or whether it shouldbe submitted to political negotiation1. The jealousy of the' The expression litem inceptam persequi,' itself awoke later the most violentcontest. Clarendon's instructio~is to Downing, ' making no mention of those particularswhich will raise present dispute, and which may be taken up u7heneverwe think fit to do so.' Lister iii. 167.

420 THEFIRSTWAR WlTHHOLLAND. xv.1.A.D. 1664.Dutch East Indian Company had been strengthelled by theacquisition of the nominal possession of Bombay,-actualpossession it could not become on account of the refractorinessof the Portuguese commandant and the clergy of theplace ; the English were shut out all the more carefully fromintercourse with the natives: an island which had been promisedto them in the treaty, Polaroon, was either never givenover to them or else was soon again taken away. The Englishraised loud and passionate complaints; but the opinionof the Dutch was, that if they gave in, the demands of theiropponents woufd only grow larger; and on their side alsothey had a thousand injuries to complain of. Negotiationswere entered upon which only inflamed the passions of eachside. Downing's letters betray an increasingly hostile impatience.He says at last plainly, that nothing more was tobe expected from diplomacy; the Dutch must be paid backniith their own coin, and reprisals must be made; onlythose who inflicted injury upon them would meet with considerationI.Under the impression produced by these communicationsand by the complaints received from several trading companiesabout Dutch encroachments, Parliament decided, inApril 1664, to ask the King for redress. It promised at thesame time to support him with life and property against allopposition which he might meet with in so doing. The Kinghad hitherto been held back by the fear that the need ofparliamentary support might be prejudicial to his authority :the initiative taken by Parliament put an end to his apprehensions.He answered that he would try once more theway of negotiation ; should it be impossible for him thus toobtain justice for his subjects, he would reckon on the fulfilmentof the promise made by Parliament.Whilst however the negotiations proceeded, and many stillhoped for the maintenance of peace, he at the same timepermitted, according to Downing's advice, the commencement1 According to Van Gogh, the King, the bishops, the most considerable membersof the government, and the Chancellor Ormond, ' ende meererideel van devermogenste Koopluyte,' were inclined to peace. Brieve 309.xv. I. THE FIRST WAR WITH HOLLAND.421A.D. 1664.of hostilities on the English side, though not in the King'sname '.Always liberal in granting lands in America, Charles I1had given up to his brother James, with all rights of government,Long Island and the opposite coast, from the westernbank of the Connecticut river to the eastern side ofDelaware Bay. For the last forty years however this territoryhad been colonised by the Dutch West Indian Company;by the side of New England a New Netherlands hadbeen founded, which already possessed many flourishingsettlements on the island and on the coast,-amongst others,on a spot acquired by purchase from the natives, a NewAmsterdam, which stood in uninterrupted communicationwith the old city. The English crown on its side had alwaysdeclared these settlements to be unauthorised, for long agoJames I had taken possession of this district. Charles I1 hadno scruples in investing with it his brother and some Cavalierswho were attached to him.It was, in this case as in others, not actually the Dutchgovernment, but rather the Dutch West Indian Companywith whom the English came into collision.A little while before, Charles I1 had revived an older company,established for trade with Africa, and placed his brotherat its head. The enterprises of this company were especiallydirected to Guinea ; out of the gold brought back by its shipsfrom the Gold Coast the first guineas were struck. Theslave-trade diverted one sure source of profit to Barbadoesand other colonies. Even in Africa however the Dutch hadthe advantage. The manufactures of Leyden suited the tasteof the natives: at peace with some, at war with others, theyalways encroached further; at that time they had acquiredPossession of perhaps the best place on the whole coast, CapeCorso, the station of Cape Coast Castle; on all sides theEnglish saw themselves excluded or damaged.II They love nor honour none but them that they think both can and dare bitethem.' Downing to Clarcndon, September 1663 ; Lister, Life of Ciarendon, iii.In addition to the letlers quotccl by Lister there is amongst the ClarendonMs~. at Oxford still much to be gleaned.

422THE FIRST WAR WITH HOLLBA7D. xv. I.A.D. 1664.Against these two regions the English now directed theirattacks, which they designated as rcprisals for injuries eitherreal or imagined. A little squadron belonging to thc AfricanCompany, to which also the King added a couple of vessels,led by Robert Holmes, seized Cape Corso ; another, providedwith a sufficient number of land troops, directed its courseagainst the New Netherlands, and made itself master of NewAmsterdam without much trouble. The leader, ColonelNicholas, a member of the household of the Duke of York,in whose name both these enterprises had been undertaken,gave the town the name of New York'.If we observe that immediately after this the English fellupon and seized Tabago, which had been taken possessionof by a few merchants of Zealand, and which, thanks to thesheltered position of its harbours against the fury of thehurricanes, was the best port in the Antilles, we shall measurethe full extent of this breach of peace. We are almost inclinedto ascribe it to a settled plan proceeding perhaps fromadvice given by the Committee of Commerce established byCharles 11. For these enterprises agree most perfectly together.It was as if England, whilst taking the NorthAmerican coast exclusively into hcr hands, wished at thesame timc either to take possession of the wide ocean higliwaywhich opens out between the two continents in sight ofEngland, or at least with one blow to clear it of hcr hatedrivals.Although Charles I1 affirmed that it was not the Republicbut only the West Indian Company that was attacked bythis, and so proposed negotiation on the strength of a clausein the last treaty, by virtue of which quarrels between theCompanies were to be referred to friendly arbitration, it stillis clear that the undertakings in question extendcd far beyondanything that could have been contemplated by the treaty.The Republic saw herself attacked in her great maritimeposition generally. De Kuyter, who was cruising beforeMalaga, received orders to betake himself to the African' In the Dnke's notes, in Macphcrsan's Stale Papc~s. ~t is sa~d expressly, ' Colollc1N~cholas remained there and then called ~t New York.' p. a7.sv. 1. THE FIRST FUR WITH HOLLAND.AD. 1664.coast, expel the English, and then strike a blow at their WestIndian and North American settlements.The negotiations which in the meanwhile were set on footwere concerned principally with the demands for moneymade upon the Dutch by English seamen on accountof losses which they had incurred'; but in this point therewas great disagreement. King Charles found the offers ofthe Dutch very unsatisfactory. One day the ambassador,Van Gogh, admonished him to keep the peace, for this reasonamongst others, that otherwise they would not be able topray for him any longer in Holland; the King said that hecould not care much about the Church prayers for him inHolland, where lampoons against him were written withimpunity. 'Fewer prayers but more money, that might beattended to.' On their side the Dutch found the demandsof the English much too large; added together they amountedto sixty million gulden. How could so large a sum evcr becollected? And, if collected, it would not hinder the enemyfrom making war. but would rather provide the means forso doing. The rumour that Charles I1 wished at the sametime to bring about the restoration of the Prince of Orangeexcited all their feeling of independence. 'We are,' so theywere heard to say, 'a free state; as regards the Prince weshall do as we think right, but we will not endure compulsion.'If war must some time come, the present seemed tothem the best timc for it. 'We have more and better shipsthan the King, we have more credit than he, and we havepeace in our land.' It sometimes appeared as if Gogh werecommissioned to make conciliatory proposals ; and such wasthe case, but afterwards instructions arrived whicll recalledthem. The same thing was remarked in the negotiations atthe Hague. If it seemed at one time as if De Witt did notmean to put aside, at all events not entirely, the demandsof England; when the conversation was next taken up his' The 'Cntalogue of Gamages,' wh~cli Rapln looked for In vam, has been publlshcdby IZalpli The most ~nslluctlre matte1 howeve1 1s contamed In the lettersDowning, printetl In the thllcl volume of L~ztc~, In spltc of all lhe~r onc-Sldedness.

424 THE FIRST WAX WITH HOLLAND. xv. I.A.D. 1664,utterances were again all the other way. The considerationin which he was held was still increasing ; even the Provinceswhich had hitherto resisted him were now found willing toprovide the requisite contributions.The old misunderstandings, about which negotiations werepending, now first became really irremediable on account ofthe new ones; the English government was even offendedthat the Dutch interposed so directly in the quarrel betweenthe two Companies, seeing that she on her side kept up theappearance of avoiding to do so. Political were added tomercantile motives ; motives of home policy sharpened thoseof foreign policy. By a kind of natural necessity the twomaritime powers were once more drawn into war. Theywere both filled with eagerness for it. The Dutch wished tomaintain what they possessed, the English to conquer whatin their opinion belonged to them.On the 24th of Novenlber, 1664, King Charles opened thefifth session of his second Parliament with a reminder of itslast promise to him, for the fulfilment of which the time hadnow come. One of those rare periods commenced, the onlyone in fact which Charles I1 experienced, during which thetemper of the administration, of the legislature, and of themajority of the people worked together. The governmenthad calculated how much the last war with Holland hadcost in one year: with the sums already expended itamounted to more than two million sterling. An independentmember, speaking on the side of the government,placed the demand at two and a half millions: far as thatsurpassed anything that had ever been granted hitherto, yetit was voted on the spot. One condition however Parliamentmade ; the payment of the sum was spread over three years,for no one disguised the fact that it would not be very easyto raise it; the express stipulation was added that it shouldbe expended exclusively on the Dutch war. This howevercould not lessen the impression made by the largeness of thesum : £2,500,000 amounted to 25,oco,ooo Dutch florins ; howwas Holland ever to reach this sum with her 'two hundredthpenny '?At one with Parliament and with the nation Charles I1xv. 1. THE FIRST CVAX kF'I'ITH HOLLAIVI).425A.n. 1665.was inspired with thc proudest designs. He said to theambassador of Brandenburg that the concession of his formerdemands could no longer satisfy him : he must denland compnsationfor the expenses of war, even the cessio~l of sorueplaces as guarantees ; for he could not run the risk of leavingit again to the pleasure of the rcgents or the Cornpanics ofthe Republic to ill-treat English subjects. The Chancellorgave utterance to the same ideas: for the security of commercewith both the Indies the cession of some Dutch placeswas necessary; but he added that the King of England wasthe king of the seas as well, his dominion ovcr the British seasmust be recognised, and this included the right of visitingforeign ships, and even of escorting them through the Channel;the question also about the fisheries must be settled.And whilst it was presumed that the obstinacy of De Wittwas caused by his hope that the war against the uncle of thePrince of Orange would draw the popular hatred upon thePrince himself, in England without doubt the restoration ofthe Prince was looked upon as one of the most importantobjects of the war. The King regarded it, as we have shown,almost as a personal duty: as Cromwell had demandcd theexclusion of the Orange party through hatred of the houseof Stuart, so he thought himself obliged to demand its recalland the restoration of the Prince his nephew.Under these impulses the greatest activity was shown ingetting the fleet into readiness. It was especially hoped thatthe Dutch would be overpourered by strongly built and largefrigates provided with metal guns : already in February 1665nearly a hundred were ready. When Charles I1 appeared inWoolwich to convince himself of the progress of the preparations,many captains who had served under Cromlvcll andthe flag of the Comrnonwcalth, presented themselves to him.Charles I1 did not consider himself in a position to refusetheir services ; he looked upon them as people who had beenaffected by a pestilential contagion, but were now cured.The old captains, such as Lawson and Penn, attained againto high positions. Penn was appointed couilsellor to theAdmiral, thc Duke of York; but Lawson, who liked tobehave lilte a common sailor, produccd a still stronger im-

426 THEFIRSTWAR Ii'ITHHOLLrlND. xv.1.A.D. 1665.pression that he understood his business thoroughly. Theold Cavaliers were not quite content that they were again toreceive orders from men of the popular party. Charles I1intended however by so doing to follow the example of hisgrandfather, Henry IV of France, who had united both partiesin his service; above all things he mast have able men, andtheir fidelity was not to be doubted, if he only made real useof them, for their honour depended upon the successful resultof his undertakings l.In the meanwhile in Holland new sourccs of money hadbeen discovered; for instance, a quota had been put on theshares of the East Indian Company, annuities had been founded,and the fleet had been increased by an extraordinary equipage(such was the expression used) of men-of-war of the firstclass. The chief command was undertaken by Jacob VanOpdam-Wassenaar, himself one of the most important mcmbcrsof the aristocratic party opposed to the house of Orange :for this very reason he had risen most quickly in the maritimeservice, to which he had not originally dcvotcd himself; bythe most fortunate expeditions in thc north and south ofEurope he had acquired for himself the fame of one of thefirst seamen in thc world. Now he carried the flag at themaintop, and was followed by six other stately squadronsbesides his own, partly under men whose famc vied with his ;such as Jah Everts and Egbert Kortcnaar, from whom in theiryouth even more had becn expected than from himself.The English fleet assembled in March 1665 at Gunfleet.It had been impossible to exclude the Dulte of York fromthe chief command, for he thirsted for warlike fame; helooked upon the undertaking as his own especial affair. Thcfleet, which numbered, like the hostile force, about a hundredmen-of-war, was divided into three squadrons, which weredistinguished according to the old custom, by red, white, andblue flags. The first was commanded by the vice-admiralLawson, the second by Prince Rupert, the third by the Earlof Sandwich. They had provided themselves with provisionsfor five months, so as to command the Channcl in case the- -Courtm's letter, May 14,. ,. THE FIRST WAR PVITB IIOLLAND. 427A.D. 1665.~~tc11 should not venture out of their harbours; but it wasthe universal wish that they should do so, and that the mattershould be decided by a great action. As soon as it was inany way possible, at the beginning of May, the Englishdirected their course upon the Dutch coast ; when near to itthey were driven back by a change of wind, and they thentook up their station in Southwold Bay; but if it was theirfirst object to entice the enemy into the open sea this wasattained; besides, the Dutch were of the opinion that theycould only obtain lasting peace through a victorious action ;their eagerness.was more especially spurred on by this threattheir coasts. Jean de Witt appeared at Texel withthe delegates of the States-General, to bring about the unionof the separate squadrons, and to hasten their departure. Heshewcd an impatience which almost threw his judgmentinto the shade. There was an eagerness to retaliate upon theEnglish this visit to their coasts. Wassenaar was ordered toengage.It was, as it were, an affair of honour between two combatantswho are inflamed by a long-restrained animosity,each of whom believes himself to be the strongcr.The first encounter took place on June 3/13 in thc ncighbourhoodof the roadstcad of Harwich; the thundcr of theartillcry was heard in Westminster. In the morning the twofleets manceuvred to obtain the advantage of position, undercontinued cannonading; at noon, each in a long line, theystood opposite to one another and opened fire-for a timewith equal results. On the one side Lawson, on the othcrside Kortenaar, was mortally wounded ; by the side of theDuke of York, his friends Lords Falmouth and Muskerry werekilled by one ball; but by degrees the English artilleryshowed itself superior, as usual ; the Royal Charles, with theDuke on board, who was making trial of his artillery, cameto close quarters and greeted the hostile Admiral's ship.Opdam sat on deck in his chair and gave his orders, cool anduntouched, when one of the first shots from the Royal CharlesStruck his powder magazine and blew him and his ship into-' Eslracles' letlcr June I I. Lcttlcs iii. 181.

428 THE FIRST WAR WITH HOLLAND. xv. 1.A.D. 1665.the ai.r. At sight of this the Dutch fell into confusion. The unfavourablewind hindered them from coming to close quarterswith the English by boarding their ships. To escape theoverpowering effect of the hostile guns they con~menced theirretreat, during which they suffered very considerable loss l.The Dutch punished several of their captains because theydid not do their duty, while the English also attributed it toforgetfulness of duty by some of theirs, that the pursuit didnot have still greater results.The victory filled the English with satisfaction and pride.The Dutch ascribed their defeat to untowarp occurrences,and would not allow that the enemy were really superior.A great part of their vessels had been led back in good preservationby Cornelius Tromp; De Witt hurried to Texel,so as to prepare the whole fleet as soon as possible for seaagain. Cannon of greater calibre were cast, the pay of thecrews was raised, and steps taken to increase their number.Every one took heart when De Ruyter, who had been recalledfrom his enterprises in the West Indies (having in the meanwhileconquered fortified places on the coast of Guinea andcaptured English ships), arrived in Delfzyl, after a circuitousvoyage by the coast of Norway, laden with rich spoil andglorious trophies of victory. It is easy to imagine the rejoicingswith which he was welcomed by the whole people.On the proposal of the town of Amsterdam the command ofthe newly-equipped fleet was entrusted to him. He tookhis way into the northern waters out of which he had justcome 2.For thither all the merchantmen from the Mediterraneanand both the Indies, whose cargoes were valued at more than300 tons of gold, had taken their course and had found refuge1 I make use of the oldest account, Kort verhael van de victorye, etc., printedat London in the Dutch language : ' Sulcks dat wy in een linie geralckten, ende alswy tegen haer naedede, so weeken sy af, niet te min stuyrende, so dat niet en waseen gevecht boord an boord, maer defenderende d'een gegen den anderen met grootpschut.' A detailed account, which is found in Aitzema in Dutch, is by Coventry:;yet in Pepys we see that Sandwich made many objections to it.2 Gilbert Talbot to Arlington, in Lister iii. 389-409. Echard already drewfrom a manuscript (written by G. Talbot), which probably contained the accountas he gives it.xv. 1. THE FIRST WAR WITH HOLLAND.129A.D. 1665.in the harbour of Bergen. Lord Sandwich, who had taken thecommand in the place of the Duke of York, for it wasnot thought advisable to expose the heir to the throne to theperils of another sea-fight, hastened to pursue then1 there.For this reason he had made a compact with Frederic 111,King of Denmark and Norway, in the existence of which itwould be impossible to believe, were there not the most unmistakableproofs. The King, who was engaged in variousbitter contentions with the Republic, and had already threatenedto go over to the side of the English, had promisedto look on quietly at the attack on the Dutch in the harbourof Bergen, provided only that half the booty should fall tohis share'. But the good fortune of the Dutch decreed thatthe English should make their attack before the necessaryinstructions had reached Bergen from Copenhagen. Thecommander of the place had pledged his word to the Dutch,and when the English, too impatient to wait, pressed forwardto the attack, he had no scruples in directing his guns againsttheir frigates. They were driven off with considerable loss:still the Dutch would have been lost had they attempted toput to sea in sight of the hostile fleet. It was then thatRuyter appeared on the coast near Bergen, to carry themback under his protection. In escaping they had more tosuffer from contrary winds than from the enemy; but stilltwo East Indian and four other ships fell into Lord Sandwich'shands ; the remainder brought their cargoes safely toTexel or Vlie.Had they not returned, the popular movement in favourof the house of Orange, which was already stirring, might havebecome dangerous for the Grand Pensionary and for thearistocratic government. For even on land, in their immediateneighbourhood, they had to endure a troublesome if not adangerous opponent in the Bishop of Munster, who by agreementwith Charles I1 attacked Zutphen and Overyssel.In the first act of the great naval duel the Republic hadfought well, but in so doing she still had suffered sensibleThe attack upon Bergen was on August 12, N. S.; the Dutch fleet went outOn ~ugust xl.

430 THE FIRST WAR WIT! HOLLAND. xv. I.A.D. 1665.loss. How long shc would be able to endure the war handto hand with England, which was naturally so much morepowerful, was indeed very doubtful. But it was alreadyenough that in the first onset she had not been crushed. Theclose connexion of relationship between all European statesmade it impossible that in the long run she should be wantingin confederates. CIHAPTER 11.INFLUENCE OF I:RANCEUPON TIIE CONTINUATIONOF WAR AND UPON TIIE PEACE.TI~English government would not have undertaken thcwar so lightly in the beginning, had it not thought itselfjustified in reckoning upon the neutrality of the King ofFrance, who indeed on his side wished nothing more thanto free his kingdom from the superiority of Holland in shippingand commerce. He was credited with thc opinion thatthe strife of the two ncighbouring naval powers was advantageousto him, and we pcrceivc from one of his instructionsthat such an idea had indeed occurred to him; but this wasmore than counterbalanced by the opposite consideration,that England if she crushed Holland would attain to a navalpreponderance which must bc unbearable to all other states '.liesides, in his last treaty he had pledged his word to theDutch to come to their assistance should they be attacked.He declared without hesitation to the English, that hc mustlcccp his word if the war went on.It was an embassy of mediation sent by him to Englandimmcdiately on the outbreak of the war which made thisdcclaration. Charles I1 answered that England, not 1301-land, was thc party attacked. He made special mentionof the assurance of friendship which Louis XIV had sooften given him; he represented it even as a political duty' MQmoire du roi pour servir d'inslruction & Ms. le Dnc de Verneuil et nu Sr.comte cle Cominges et Courtin, nmhss. extraordinaires de S. Maj. SAnglcterre. I1est h crnindre que-les provinces ne fusseut n8ccssiti.s de subir le joag ct de recevoirles conditions, qne le parti victorieux leur vouclroit imposer, aprbs quoi il seroittri.s-difi~ile nux nntres puissnnces de contester aux Anglois cet empire dc In mer.

INFI, UENCE OF FR A ATCE xv. 2.A.D. I 665.to support a neighbouring kingdom against the Republicans.That however made no impression upon the French; theyexamined the questions at issue with cool impartiality,and at last proposed this solution: that Holland should renounceher American possessions, notwithstanding that shehad an undoubted right to them; and that England on theother hand should renounce the island of Polaroon in theEast Indies; that Cape Corso in Guinea should be rased,and the rest of the coast divided between England and Holland.The fact could not be disguised that the rejection ofthis proposal would lead to the participation of the Frenchin the war.This was the position of the political question when Parliament,in October 1665, on account of a raging pestilence,met at Oxford instead of in London. It was the Plague,which for the last quarter of a century had appeared inEurope, first in one country then in another, and now visitedEngland as it had visited Holland a short while before. Butit did not produce peaceful thoughts in the governments ofthese countries. Even now Charles I1 and his ministers werenot in the least inclined, out of regard for the French mediation,to give up their claims to the East Indies and to theAfrican possessions which lay on the way to India,-aboveall, the acquisition of that high naval position which theyaimed at. In his speech from the throne the King made nosecret of the fact that the sum granted for three years hadalready been spent; he added, that he now not only needednew assistance, but such assistance as would enable him todefend himself and them against a more powerful neighbourthan the Dutch, if that neighbour should prefer the friendshipof the Dutch to his. The Chancellor insisted especiallyon the danger which arose out of the connexion into whichthe King's enemies at home had entered with the Dutch;he also laid great emphasis on the losses which the adoptionof the French propositions as to the East Indies andAfrica would bring with it for the English naval power.Both speeches were, as it were, inquiries whether the governmentshould accept the proposals of mediation, or whetherthey should allow a breach with France to ensue. With loudXV. 2. UPON WAR AND PEACE: 433A.D. 1665.acclamations the assembly made it known that the latter wastheir opinion.The French ambassador, who had managed to obtain admissionsecretly to the sitting, remarks that this acclamationwas the natural expression of the prevailing humour, andnecessarily must have prevented the King from agreeing toany except the most advantageous conditions of peace.The next resolutions corresponded to this statement. Thetwo Houses joined in an address, in which they expressed tothe King their resolution to assist him with their lives andfortunes against the Dutch, or any others that should assistthem'. The Lower House did not delay taking into considerationthe demands for supply. Without allowing themselvesto be misled by the fact that the former grant, givenfor three years, had been expended in one, they decided onincreasing it by half, LI,~~O,OOO for the next year: the sumwas to be collected by a direct monthly tax 2.With all this readiness of the Parliament, it still becamevisible that the continuation of the war might involve internaldifficulties. Above all there was fear of the Dissenters, towhom sympathy with their Dutch co-religionists was ascribed:resolutions were taken against them of a severity that borderedon cruelty, and that could not but lead to an undesirablereaction; this we shall consider later. An immediateembarrassment was caused by the difficulty there was incollecting the sum that had been voted. George Downing,who had come back from Holland, proposed a change in themethod of contracting loans, by which the intervention of thegoldsmiths who collected the money from individuals, andso made a considerable percentage, should be abolished, andthe Treasury itself be transformed into a kind of bank; justas the Republic raised her own loans directly, the interestupon which could then be more easily reduced. The unavoidablecondition for this was, that the sum intended primarilyfor the war should not be diverted to any object other thanthe war for which it was intended. The King, who suspected' Journals of the House of Lords xi. 688.a Journals of Commons viii. 614.RANKE, VOL. III. F f

INFLUEKE OF FRANCE xv. 2.A.D. 1665.the importance that the English loan system might gain inthis way, was won over. Through his personal influence,in spite of the opposition of the Lord Treasurer and theChancellor, the measure was carried through Parliament. Butthe objection made by the old officials, that a change in themanner of procuring money always acted unfavourably, showeditself likewise to be well-founded ; the first results of theoperation did not answer to the expectations which had beenentertained of it: yet that was the least important of theeffects of this attempt. Downing filled a subordinate postin the Treasury; it was a noticeable event that he gainedthe victory over the Lord Treasurer. The Chancellor, whofelt himself mortified through his friend, and who saw inthe proposal an attempt to curtail the independence of theadministration, made representations about it which displeasedthe King. In Parliament the opposition turned itself againstanother of the leaders of the Kestoration movement, theAdmiral Lord Sandwich. He had indulged in arbitraryconduct in the distribution of the last prizes, on account ofwhich the captains whom he neglected raised loud complaints,and these again influenced Parliament. He was obliged togive up the chief command of the fleet: all that Clarenclon,who saw 11imself already attacked, could do for him, was toprovide him with the place of ambassador in Spain.In the midst of these agitations, which issued from thehighest, and reacted upon the lowest circles,-for every onefelt the pressure of the taxes levied by Parliament for thewar,-it came to pass that the hostility against Hollandbrought about European complications which could not havebeen foreseen in the beginning.Louis brolte off the negotiations in which, as his ambassadorstold him, the only object of the English was to preventhim from supporting the Dutch. Declarations of war followedon both sides, guardedly worded indeed, but seriously meant,and accompanied by offensive operations at sea.First of all the Icing of France, with all his political weight,came to the help of the States-General in their transactionswith the European and German powers.Charles I1 had given the King of Denmark to understandXV. 2.UPON WAR AND PEACE.a.r). 1666.his dissatisfaction, such was the word used, about the occurrencein Bcrgen ; with so much the more ease therefore didthe Dutch and French an~bassadors find a hearing with~redcric 111. In February 1666 seven different treaties wereat once concluded between Denmark and Holland, the firstof which contained a defensive alliance, and the remainder didaway with all kinds of less important points of dispute; thelast however promised an immediate participation of theDanes in the war against England. Not even the ProvincialEstatcs of the Republic heard anything of this ; it was thesccrct of De Witt and his nearest confidants, but Louis XIVwas initiated and gave his guarantee for it.Always accustomed to take the opposite side to Denmark,thc Swedes were thrown into agitation; they wouldhave been inclined to support from Bremen, which they stillposscsscd, the 13isl1op of Munster in his encroachments uponI-Iolland ; but cvcn here France interfered. Thc French ambassaclorknew his Icing too well not to grant of his ownaccord, without being crnpowered to do so, a written assurancein the Icing's name that the Danish naval force, whichwas being equipped forthwith with Dutch assistance, shouldnot be turned against Sweden.The Elector of Ijrandcnburg had at the outbreak of thewar entreated the King of England to take into considerationhis differences with the Republic, and Charles had made theattempt to bring hi? over entirely to his side, for they eachhad a common interest in the Orange family. To go so faras that was impossiblc for the Elector, on account of theposition of his possessions in Clevcs. He seized the favourablemoment to make a conlpromise about the most importantpoint of dispute, the toll at Gcnnep. By the interpositionof thc Frcnch ambassador, Colbcrt Croissy, he entered intoa defensive alliance with thc Republic.1,ouis XIV's policy was not calculated by any means onlywith a view to the advantage of the Dutch; he wished toPrepare everything for the undcrtaking against the Spanishmonarchy, which he decidedly contemplated after the deathof King Philip IV, and which was foreseen in Europe.what could havc appeared more natural than that the two~ f 2

436 INFLUENCE OF FRANCE XV. 2.A.D. 1666.powers who were both threatened at the same time, Englandand Spain, should unite against him? Such also was thcopinion of the provincial government in Brussels, at whosehead at that time stood the Marquis of Castelrodrigo, andof the English minister who was sent to him, Sir WilliamTemple. They indulged often in the most comprehensiveplans against the aspiring power of France. To keep downthe French trade in the Mediterranean, the Island of Sardiniawas to be given up to the English; they wished to awakenagain in Guyenne the Protestant antipathy to the crown;the English wcre to mediate peace between Spain and Portugal'.They even made preparations to do so. But thecentral government in Madrid was blinded and trammelledby those exclusively Catholic tendencies from which Portugalhad freed herself. For this reason they accepted theoffers of the most Christian King to treat with Portugal,which at least at the moment were seriously meant, andrefused the mediation of England, to whose own advantageit would now have conduced to bring about the peace. Evenwhilst Louis XIV was seriously threatening Spain, he gainedin Spain itself the upper hand over the English policy.England was isolated on all sides when, in the spring of1666, she proceeded to continue the war. She could noteven count on the Bishop of Munster; through French influenceand the altered position of his German ncighbours,he had been obliged to withdraw his troops from the capturedplaces, and lay down his arms.The two fleets were tolerably equal in force when theyappeared on the water in May. The Dutch had strongervessels, some eighty-eight in number, and better artillery thanin the year before; they were led by Ruyter, who enjoyed theconfidence of the entire liepublic. The English fleet wascommanded by General Monk and Prince Rupert. The impatientmilitary ardour of the old leader of the Cavalierson land and sea was to be moderated by association withthe General, the old Cromwellian in whose mind formervictories awakened an exalted self-satisfaction, and who still* Temple, Nov. 20, 1665, in Courtenay i. 72.xv. 2.UPON WAR AND PEACE:,.D. 1666.enjoyed the greatest consideration amongst the pcople andthe soldiers : victory undcr him was lookcd upon as certain.Louis XIV did not as yet take any immediate part in thewar. Rut the simple fact that attention must be paid tohis equipmcnts, and to the movements of his flcct, had arrreat influence even at the first encounter. What terrorwas in London when the thunder of the cannon of thefleets, which had encountered one another off the NorthForeland, was heard, and it was known also that part of theEnglish force under Prince Rupert was not there ! Upon thenews that the French flect, which was coming from Toulon,had already rcached Bclle-isle, he had undcrtakcn to go andmeet it. Rather cncouraged than held back by this-forhe wished to acquire alone the honour of victory-Monkhad pressed on to an attack, but had been mct by the mostvigorous resistance. There ensued the four days' battle, socelebrated in the annals of naval warfare. The first day (JuneI/I I) brought no decision ; the second was unfortunate forthe English ; Monk had to retire towards thc Thames, andwas in danger of suffering a defeat, when on the third daythe Prince, who had encountered no enemy, returned withhis frcsh squadron. On this the English plucked up courageagain for the attack, but even then on the fourth day, theywere at a disadvantage; they wcre obligcd to break off thebattle and retire to the Thames, a large numbcr of theirships were sunk, or fell into the hands of the enemy.As the last year's battle had roused the Dutch, so thisyear's battle roused thc English to arm with the greatestenergy. The flcct which after the lapse of some weeks theyput to sea was, in the opinion of those who could judge, thebest in regard to ships, artillery and crews that they hadever possessed. In the next encounter, on the 4th of August(N.S.1, the Dutch had the worst of it. A number of theirbest and most trustworthy captains perished ; they wereforced to retreat. Still De Witt found means in a short whileto bring the fleet a third time to sea in perfect readiness ; and"OW the French flect had alrcady appeared in the Channel,Estmde~, August 12, 1666. Lettres vi. 345.

438 INFL UELIICE OF FRd NCE :iv. 2.A.D. 1666.to unite with the Dutch. The English thought it wise toavoid an open battlc. Not only at sea but politically wercthey at a disadvantage. The Icing felt himself called uponto make overtures of peace to the Republic.The war affected equally deeply the party movements ofboth countries. Sometimes the Dutch sought to land inEngland so as to enlist on their side the religious and politicalopponents of tlie government. On the other hand theEnglish effected a landing, by which thcy hoped to bringabout a rising of the Orange partisans, but which led tonothing except a devastation of the country. The Dutchascribed the loss which they suffered on the 4th of Augustto tlie treachery of the Vice-Admiral Cornelius Tromp, whoinclined to the Orange party. From this party, which stoodin continued comnlunication with England, Dc Witt fearedan untimely partiality for pcacc. He opposed this tendencywith the recltless energy of a republicall faction-lcadcr. Aformer page of the Prince, Dc nuat, who cngagcd in anattempt to form a pcacc party according to thc I'rincc'staste, and who kept up comm~~nications with England, hadto suffer for it with his life. Cornelius Tromp, on accountof the suspicion against him, was dismissed from his command.On the other sidc Monk ascribed his losses in the fourdays' battlc to the insubordination of some of his captains.Through the elder I'enn many who cherished sectarian andAnabaptist sentiments had obtained appointments. I-Iowshould they with heart and soul engagc in a war, the fortunateissue of which must establish more firmly the powerof those whom they regarded as thcir bitterest enemies?King Louis XIV had gone so far as to enter into conncxionwith the republicans in England, the Presbyterians in Scotlandand the Catholics in Ireland. For these last also, onaccount of the division of land recently determined upon, bywhich thcy remained cxcludcd from thcir possessions, viereroused into hostile excitement against the English govcrnment.In Scotland we find an expert French emissary whoimagined it possible to rouse to arms again the anti-episcopalScots. Algcr~lon Sidney came to Paris and acceptedXV. 2. UPON WAX AND PEACE. 439,,D. I 666.pcc~~niary support from Louis XIV. The banished regicidesand their adherents assemblc~d in Holland.It was during this critical state of affairs that London fella prey to the great firc, which reduced the greater part ofthe old city to ashes. The firc broke out on the night ofthe 2/12 September, in a narrow street of wooden housesfilled with inflammable materials: driven by a strong eastwind it spread unexpectedly to distant quarters and thenleapt from street to street. The high-lying part of the townsoon appeared like a burning mountain, before which theflames threw an arch as high as the heavens from one sidcof the Thames to the other. For four days it was impossibleto master it. Men occupied thcmsclvcs less with attemptsto check the fire, which seemed to them impossible, thanwith rescuing their possessions. To the agitation caused byit a terrible suspicion was added. As the fire was ragingon the 3rd of September, people would not be persuadedbut that it was kindled .by the Anabaptists, as a funeralsacrifice to Oliver Cromwcll on the day of his victory andhis death ; others accuscd the Catholics ; the idea grew thatthe Dutch and the Frcnch were accomplices it1 it. Once, onthe rumour that these cncmics werc already a1)proachingto talie advantage of the favourablc moment for an attack,an excited mob armed with anything that could be calleda weapon, rushed in the direction pointed out to them.Woe to those who by thcir spccch were recopi\cd asforeigners. Public authority had to intcrfcrc to rcscuc themfrom the fury of thc multit~ldc. Only outsitlc the wallshad it bcen possiblc to hinder the flames from spreading anyf~~rthcr, by blowing up a numbcr of houscs. 13ut two thirdsof the town had already been rcduccd to ashes,-as thememorial inscription says, 400 streets, more than 13,ooodwelling houscs, 89 churches, amongst otliers St. I'nul'sCathedral, and a large numbcr of other public buildings.Gold and silver had for thc most part bcen saved. Andas the wealth of a commercial city depends almost leastVan what it contains at any one moment, this firc hadno vcry extensive effect upon the trade of London. Stillfor the moment the loss suffcrcd was vcry considerable.

440 INFL UENCE OF FRANCISxv. 2.A.D. 1666.Masses of stores heaped up in the warehouses and in themagazines were destroyed, amongst them also many necessariesof war. The destruction of the custom-houses withtheir papers caused a pernicious confusion in the accounts,and even a loss to the revenue. The chimney-tax, whichconstituted one of the most important resources of thegovernment, could not possibly be collected in the desolateruins. And if all exertions must first be directed to therebuilding of the town, how could the war be continued ?In the next session of Parliament, which was opened atthe end of September, it was however determined to continueit, and indeed with all the more exertion because theenemies' military ardour might have increased through themisfortune : the Lower House voted again a considerable sum(~1,800,ooo). But nevertheless every one felt that it wouldprove very difficult to collect it ; the resolution seemed ratherto be an expression of British pride1 than real earnest; forafter all they were come now to the point which had beenforeseen in Holland, when the cost of the naval equipmentsthreatened the internal welfare of the English nation 2. Theconviction gained ground that peace was necessary.The King had already, after a reply from the Dutchagreeing in tone with his overtures for peace, given them tounderstand on what it depended with him, namely, not onadvantages for the house of Orange, but especially on securityfor the English trade in the East Indies, and had incitedthem to send now, as they had formerly done in Cromwell'stime, their plenipotentiaries to London.It still seemed possible to separate the interests of Franceand Holland. For the Dutch on their side feared nothingmore than the conquest of the Spanish Netherlands by LouisXIV, who in that case would come much too near them withhis irresistible power. In fact, with a view to this they thenconcluded a quadruple alliance with Denmark, Liineburg andBrandenburg, in which they only scrupled to include the1 Chr. von Brand : ' des englischen IIumeurs.'a Memoires de J. de Witt, ch. 7, taken from the 'Interest van Holland,' which,though not composed by De Witt, was yet published by him.xv. 2. UPON WAR AIVB PRACE:A.D. 1666. 441Emperor and the King of Spain because they were alliedwith France against England. It would have served greatlyto strengthen the anti-French policy could a peace betlveenHolland and England have been brought about, by means ofthe power threatened by Louis XIV. This object was alsopursued for a time by the Imperial and by the Spanish ambassadors;but they never entered at that time into a realunderstanding with the government of Charles 11. Theyfancied they saw that, if the King of England did have peace,he would not think of interfering in the continental complications,but would occupy himself with the establishment ofhis own power at home. Under such circumstances the continuationof the war seemed to them even more advantageous,because it kept France and England at variance withone another l.If Charles I1 wished to have a peace with Holland thereremained nothing for him but himself to apply for themediation of the Dutch ally, the King of France. But, asthings stood, that could be acquired only under the conditionof not opposing the projects of Louis XIV with regard to theSpanish Netherlands. In Charles's present disposition, thatcaused him little scruple ; besides his position at the timemade it necessary, since this is the advantage of an overpoweringmight, which strives after a distinct aim, thateverything which needs its co-operation must be serviceableto it.The first approach was made in a most circuitous mannerby a letter of St. AIbans (Jermin) to Henrietta Maria, whowas again living in France. Through her intervention LouisXIV was to be intreated to use his influence in procuringthe acceptance of Charles 11's proposed negotiation forpeace in London. The Queen discharged her comn~issionby communicating the letter to the former ambassador,Ruvigny, who laid its contents before the King : to him Louis' Chr. von Brand: '\Vie sie nber bemerkt dnss die Absicht des Kdnigs vonEngland dahin gehe, sich in keinen weitern Krieg zu verwickeln, urn des Parlamcnts"icht zu bedurfen, haben sie ihre Politik veriin&rt und den Friedcn zuverhindern gesucht.'

442 INF'L UENCE OF FBA NCE xv. 2.A.D. 1667.confided his answer'. This answer, with regard to the propositionmade, was in the negative, because there were so manyreasons against it ; but on the other hand its form wasso friendly, that England was moved to make further approaches.St. Albans replied to the Ambassador, that hisKing was not disinclined to allow the negotiations for peaceto be held in a neutral place; to this he added howeveranother proposal of wider bearing. He represented a pre-liminary understanding between France and England asdesirable before there was any meeting '. ' We do not proposeany secret treaty so as to deceive : it is our sincere intentionand desire to bring the war with Holland to an end, andthen to attain to a true understanding with France.' Ina second letter he calls on the Queen-Mother to speak withRuvigny, and to talk him out of his suspicion that itwas not seriously meant : Charles I1 would agree to thoseconditions which Louis XIV approved of: his object wasto put an end to the war by a firm friendship with Francebefore any official transactions ; but an undcrstanding mustbe come to about the opinions which might be held on bothsides. With this intention he came himself, in February 1667,to Paris, under the pretext that he was summoned by theQueen's affairs, and took up his abode with her. His negotiationsconcerned primarily the conclusion of the generalpeace with the two powers with whom England was at war.The proposal, which at first emanated from France, that eachparty should keep all that had come into its possession,was accepted with regard to the differences with Holland,but he demanded that France should give back to EnglandSt. Christopher and some smaller West Indian islandswhich she had seized. This was a difficulty for Louis XIV,because he had in the meanwhile founded a companyfor the West Indian trade, in doing which he had countedupon these possessions : however he took into considerationthat the most important thing for him was to gain, byan agreement with England, free scope for his further1 Lettre, qne le roi desire que Mr. de Ruvigny escrive au Sr. de St. Albans, 30Oct. 1666.' French archives.1 xa/az Nov. de nous entre entendre devant que de venir 18.XV. 2.UPON WAR AND PEACE.A.D. 1667. 443designs ; he was ready to resign the island, if in return hecould be assured of the connivance of England at the undertakingsin which he was engaged. At this point the formationof an alliance between the two Kings came under consideration:it was principally deliberated between St. Albansand Turenne. According to the first sketch, Charles I1 wasto enter into no connexion during the whole current year,1667, with the house of Austria; he gave an assurance thathe had not as yet formed any such. On the other handa most intimate understanding with France was suggestedto him ; Louis XIV was to support all interests that KingCharles might have in or out of his kingdom1. 'Even inhis kingdom!' With these words there appeared on thehorizon designs which had been formerly cherished and whichsome years later were to prevail. They corresponded to thoseintentions which the Queen-Mother always kept in view inreligious politics. Even now the official ministry in Englandtook no part in them. Clarendon was in favour of anunderstanding with France : he wrote an instruction forSt. Albans ; but there was no notice taken of these plans init. Also matters did not go so far as had at first been intended.In the declarations which the two Kings interchangedwith one another-they were autograph letters from both toHenrietta Maria, which they had before agreed to regard asbinding--there is only a general mention of the purpose tobring about hereafter a closer alliance. First each pledgedhimself to enter within a year into no alliance contrary to theintcrcsts of the other. Louis XIV reserved free discretion forhis campaign ; in return he promised for the present to detainhis fleet, by which the Dutch hoped to be supported, in theharbours where it lay.Betwcen the two powers an agreement about the mostimportant point had been arrived at in this manner, whenthe peace congress opened in May 1667 at Breda, the placewhich Charles I1 had chosen out of those proposed to him.The decision that each party should keep what was in1 1 Que le roi mon frEre veut entrer dans tous lcs interests que jc pourrais avoirdedans et dehors mon royaume.' Lettres de Turenne i. 664.

444 INFL UENCE OF FRANCExv. 2.A.D. 1667.its possession became now the main foundation of the peacebetween England and Holland. Rut about this a greatdifference arose. The Dutch wished to keep both what thcyhad taken during the war, and what thcy had taken beforeit, namely the island of Polaroon : Charles I1 would not giveup his old claims, which were in part the claims of the EastIndian Company. In the course of June it scetncd as ifeverything might still be wrecked upon this1.And how would it be now if the war just broken out inthe Spanish Netherlands, into which Louis XIV marched atthe beginning of this month, changed the intcrests still furtherand drove France quite over to the side of England? DeWitt did not deceive himself about the fact that the way waspaved for an alliance between the two. At this crisis of thecoincidence of so many tendencies, different in kind and asyet not standing out clearly, but still recognisable, John DeWitt decided upon the boldest undertaking that the Republichas perhaps at any time carried out. The proposed conditionhe could not and would not accept, because by so doinghe would have countenanced the differences out of which thewar proceeded : he wished to do away with them for ever.But the Republic must have peace, because she would havebeen able to exert no influence over the disturbances justbreaking out were she entangled in war in another quarter.He decided to extort peace for himself, and that immcdiately,by means of an attack on England, who at that time,as we shall soon see, had neglected the rcpairs of her fleet.Even without French help the Dutch held the supremacy atsea. On those very days when the French pushed victoriouslyinto the Netherlands the Dutch fleet, sixty-one men-of-warstrong, put out to sea against England. On June 7/17 itwas off the mouth of the Thames. On board, as Commissaryof the States, was the Ruwaard, Cornelius De Witt, thebrother of John, and fully entrusted with his thoughts andplans, so that with his co-operation such measures as seemed1 De Witt to Beuningen, June 16: ' Les Anglois persistent B pretendre opiniatrement,que les anciennes pretentions-doivent subsister. . . . Les ministres deFrance au lieu de noos secourir-se declarent contre nous.'xv. 2.UPON WAR AND PEACE.445A.D. 1667.advisable could be taken without further instructions. There,at an assembled council of war, it was considered feasibleto enter the Thames with the lightest men-of-war, and tothreaten the proud enemy in the heart of his power. TheEnglish were not in the least prepared for such an attempt.The Dutch succeeded in taking Sheerness ; then they sailedon to Chatham : here at any rate they were received withcannonading, but in spite of that they burst the chain whichwas drawn across the river on pulleys, set on fire one afteranother three English men-of-war, captured a fourth, andsailed on to Upnor. It was thought that, could they havegone further, they would perhaps have been able to demolishthe arsenal of England ; but what they had accomplished wasenough to satisfy themselves, and on the other hand to makethe English blush with shame, at such a spectacle as hadnever been seen since the English flag had waved on theseas.We shall discuss later the effects of this occurrence onthe internal affairs of England : for the peace it was decisive.After one of the two English plenipotentiaries had once morein person taken counsel with King Charles 11, the agreement,drawn on all essential points in accordance with the wishesof the Dutch, was signed1. Each of the two parties was toremain in possession of the territories and places as well asof the ships and goods which they had seized before andduring the late war. All claims made in the negotiationsof 1662 were expressly disannulled. Even with regard to theNavigation Act the English assented to the interpretationthat Holland could import German goods into England.The peace gave the English one advantage of immeasurableimportance. It left the New Netherlands in her hands, whichgave a continuity to her North American dominion, withoutwhich it would never have been able to develope. Whatwas the loss of Polaroon to set against that? De Witt,whilst he recognised the greatness of this acquisition, and\Already on July 7 De Witt writes, ' L'extinction entibre de toutes les prerentionspasskes, sans en excepter une seule, sernble une chose accordke.' Lettres'V. '94.

INFL UENCE OF FRANCE.xv. 2.A.D. 1667.removed the old causes of dispute out of which the warhad proceeded, thought that he was securing peace for ever.But the English did not look upon it as conclusive for amoment. The real cause of hostilities, which lay in maritimejealousy, had in fact been strengthened by the enterprisewhich brought about the peace. An attack, whichendangered the safety of London, could not be forgiven theDutch either by the government or the nation.CHAPTER 111.FALL OF THE LORD CHANCELLOR CLARENDON.FIRST of all however the internal agitation became prominent,increasing in proportion as the settlement of externalaffairs failed to correspond with the cxpectations which hadbeen cherished.On the one side the Presbyterians, who had been till nowsuppressed, rose up again in great force. Amongst otherthings the pestilence helped them, in so far as it providedscope once more for the spiritual activity of their preachers.Their old religious zeal revived; the public need and thenatural duty of religion seemed in themselves to abolish theinterdict under which they languished; for no law promulgatedby mortal man would excuse them if they shouldwillingly neglect the care for the immortal soul of a dyingbrother. Whilst the Anglican clergy fled, the Presbyterianpreachers mounted once more the pulpits, to announce tothe people, ere they were snatched away, the words of eternalsalvation ; never had they spoken so convincingly, never beenlistened to so reverently. The consideration which they againwon by this means, their growing consciousness of strength,and the fear of their co-operation with the enemy without in anyemergency that might occur, caused the Parliament in Oxford,under the impression produced by conspiracies recently discovered,to establish a formula-a shibboleth, as it was calledinorder to distinguish those who were dangerous amongstthe Nonconformists, from those who could be tolerated I.1

448 FALL OF THE xv. 3.A.D. 1666.They were, in the oath administered to them, once moreto declare it illegal for any one, whatever the circumstancesmight be, to take up arms against the King or his deputies,and to pledge themselves not to think of any change inChurch and State: whoever did not take the oath wasforbidden under a heavy penalty to approach nearer thanfive miles to any place where he had formerly taught, toany town with municipal rights, or to any borough whichreturned members to Parliament. The object may have beento obviate a possible danger, but at the same time it alsotended entirely to rob the doctrines of the Covenant of allpolitical influence, and to furnish the Act of Uniformity witha new bulwark. But Church and State in their existingcondition were still not strong enough to carry out this regulationin all its strictness. After the first interdict had beenonce transgressed, the Presbyterians did not look upon themselvesas bound any longer to obey. And having throughthe war abroad, entirely by their own means, gained an importantposition, they would not now renounce their oldprinciples. They repeated that the obedience demanded ofthem might easily extend to a case like that which had onceoccurred, when John Lackland had received the kingdom asa fief from the Pope. And how would it be if Parliamentitself forbade obedience to a deputy of the King ;-which ofthe two should in that case be obeyed? The Presbyteriansmaintained that the oath imposed upon them ran contraryto old English right and law. The president of the court ofjustice during the trial of the regicides, had himself declareda limitation of obedience to be the law of England. The newact, which already by its severity made a bad impression,contributed rather to give the Presbyterians political importancethan to deprive them of it. They made the doctrine, thatresistance under certain circumstances was permissible, peculiarlytheir own ; it was a thesis which hzl a great future.On the other side, at least in some cot heads, the idea ofelevating the monarchical power above all other considerationsrevived. After the burning of London, which hadalways offered an asylum to these doctrines, the King wastold, ' Now are they thrown down, these walls of the rebelliousxv. 3. LORB CEIANCELLOX CLAREATION.449.D. 1666.city: the King must never allow them to be built up again ;l1e has an army in the country to which London must remainopen, since the intractable mob can only be governed byforce. Ile must show courage and realise the advantage ofhis position, he must not suffer the city to become againa curb and a bridle in his mouth.'It would not however have been possible in such a positionof affairs to awaken the strife between these oppositeextremes; another difference had broken out in the midst ofthe dominant party, between the royalist Parliament and thegovernment, which was not so extensive, but which touchedupon questions of the greatest importance and drew universalattention to itself.The grant of ~1,800,000 which Parliament had agreed toin October 1666, had been carried before the Lower Househad been fully assembled. The country gentry, as theygradually arrived, regarded it as excessive, since it drainedthe counties of the currency hquisite for internal traffic andfor the sale of agricultural products. Many plans for raisingit were considered, amongst others an extended cxcise, butno permanent burden was to be imposed, and at last a directtax, a land-tax and a poll-tax, were again agreed upon.Though the very sensible pressure of these burdens wasborne, a very strong impression was made by the considerationof the large sums the country had already collected,and the little it had accomplished with them; theBpinion gained ground that the moneys had been mostly usedfor other purposes, on which they ought not to have beenwasted. It is true that the officials of the treasury and theadmiralty themselves found the account books unsatisfactory,and were embarrassed when they thought of the possibilityof being obliged to give account of them. But this was justwhat the country gentry wanted, whose temper may bestill more clearly perceived amongst other things, by thezeal with which they opposed the introduction of Irish cattle,because it would have lowered the price of English ; neitherwould they hear of any royal right of dispensation, as thatwould after all have benefited only the higher officials. Thegovernment and their officials seemed untrustworthy andRANKE, VOL. III.G 6

4 50 FALL OF THE xv. 3.A.D. 1666.even rapacious ; the country gentry, who formed the majorityin the Lower House, felt themselves oppressed and injuredby them; they did not wish to hand over the produce ofagricultural labour into the hands of courtiers and membersof the government in the form of taxes. The oppositionbetween a country party and a court party began to appear;and this became especially important because it was fosteredby aspiring members of the government. On the motion ofRobert Howard, who filled a post in the treasury, a provisowas however inserted into the Poll-tax Bill, according to whicha parliamentary commission should be appointed to lookthrough the books of the officials concerned in the expenditure,and to examine them personally on oath about it. At thisthe court and the high officials fell into great alarm, forhow disgraceful it would be for the King to permit others toinspect accounts kept in his name. They had thought ofgaining over the leaders of the malcontents by personalfavours, but had reflected that that would only call up freshopponents. The decisive division followed on December 7.The court did not fail to call together its friends whereverthey might be found, and that was not always in the mostdecent localities; still it remained in the minority. Theproviso was accepted by I I 9 votes against 83.It was an important day in the history of the parliamentarysystem in general. For if forces which are meant to worktogether are still to be kept apart, it is a decision of themost important nature that the administration, which is theaffair of the crown, should be subject to the interference ofparliamentary control. Lord Clarendon expressed himselfon the subject with the most lively indignation, for that wasjust the path along which the Long Parliament had proceededto rebellion. He was besides highly dissatisfied with thecourse which matters were taking in Parliament. The UpperHouse thought only of asserting its privileges; in generalmatters it waited for the suggestions of the Lower House.Even the King yielded much too much to it; in matterswhich concerned peace and war he allowed it to hold conferenceswith him, and accepted its advice, and so it encroachedfurther every day. What caused him the most serious concernxv. 3. LORD CHANCELLOR CLARENDON. 451A.D. 1666.was the close union into which some discontented membershad entered with the leaders of the opposition in the LowerHouse. The Duke of Buckingham, who was at one timein the highest favour with Charles 11, and at another timein disgrace, (we shall presently learn to know him better,)was their leader, kept them together, and guided theirsteps.Clarendon formed the resolution of breaking this combinationof systematic opponents, by engaging the King tomake use of his constitutional rights, and to dissolve theLower House.It was the regular way prescribed by the parliamentaryorder of things for reconciling the government and the LowerHouse, if their tendencies diverged too widely. But on theother hand it must be especially rememberedthat, under thecircumstances of the time, it was to be feared that the resultof the elections might prove contrary to the wishes of therestored monarch. Clarendon would have had courage toventure upon it. But in this question he had the bishopsagainst him, to whom a strong Presbyterian element in theLower House appeared dangerous. The King, who regardedthe Presbyterians as decided though moderate opponents,and who looked on them as half republicans, would notconsent to the dissolution.As in the career of many other remarkable men, so alsoin that of Clarendon, a contradiction becomes manifest betweenlater intentions and the results of previous actions. Hehad put the Presbyterians aside that he might establish theAnglican Church ; for her sake he had even put himself intoopposition to the King ; but in consequence the Parliamentbecame so strong, that it no longer recognised the prerogativeof the King when Clarendon wished to maintain it ; he himselfhaving given it up in one point, could not now assertit in others. The only means which could have led to thisend were refused him by the bishops, whom he himself hadPromoted to their power, and by the King, whose rights hewished to maintain.But when the members of Parliament saw that a dissolutionwas dreaded, how must their sense of importance

452 FALL OF THE xv. 3.A.D. 1667.consequently have increased, and at the same time their illwillagainst the man who had proposed it!Lord Clarendon found himself already in this doubtfulposition, when the misfortunes of the summer of 1667 occurred.They were caused by the resolution which originatedwith Coventry, who might already be looked upon as anopponent of Clarendon, to fit out no ships of the first or secondclass'. Clarendon had agreed only hesitatingly. Still lesscould he be charged with the carelessness of the admiralty,which had made the undertaking of the Dutch possible. Thenavy depended on Monk, who no longer stood in the friendlyrelations of former years with the Chancellor. But it is thenatural fate of a man who is entrusted with the supreme directionof state affairs, that for all misfortunes which occur heis made answerable by the public voice. In the popular excitement,caused by the attack of the Dutch upon Chatham,the people indulged in loud outcries against Clarendon.Parliament had been prorogued till October 1667 ; butevery one demanded that it should be immediately convened.It was not exactly the friends of Clarendon who insisted uponit in the Privy Council. Many members agreed, becauseotherwise the troops, which had been levied for the defenceof the coasts, could not be paid or kept in order. Clarendonreminded them that this could be effected better by taxesupon the counties. He opposed altogether the conveningof Parliament during the term of prorogation, he once morerecommended a dissolution, but he was in the minority;Parliament was convoked at once.And the members assembled in greater numbers than couldhave been expected in the middle of summer. It would havebeen unadvisable for any one to stay at home, the whole nationwished to see Parliament assembled. If however the motivefor summoning it had lain in the need of a grant of moneyfor the troops, it became manifest at the first preliminarymeeting that this was not to be thought of.Men were indeed confounded by the disgrace suffered inthe Thames, but at heart they did not fear the Dutch ; appre-Evelyn's Diary, July 29, 1667.xv. .z. LORD CHANCELLOR CLARENDOI\;.453A.D. 1667.hension was directed to quite another point. It was thoughtthat the sole object of the land army was to makc the Kingabsolute master. For in the meanwhile the distasteful words,by the fiery adherents of absolute monarchy, hadpassed from mouth to mouth; it was quoted as the repeatedlyexpressed opinion of the lady who ruled the King by hercapricious favour, that he could only govern by force. Peoplewere not a little displeased with Lord Clarendon, because hehad maintained the possibility of keeping the army in thefield without parliamentary grants. The King put off theopening a few days to allow the still missing members timeto arrive; but that did not hinder those who were presentfrom proceeding to discuss the principal grievance of theday, the maintenance of the standing army; the countrydid not want it any longer, it thought itself amply protectedby the county militia. One of the members ofthe Privy Council present protested that it was the King'sintention to disband the land army as soon as peace shouldbe signed,-as it actually was in these very days,-but theywould not venture to trust this hasty speech, for the King'sopinion might easily be changed by his surroundings. Theproposal was made, that the express wish of the House forthe disbanding of the army immediately on the conclusionof peace, should be carried to the King by those membersof the Privy Council who were also members of the House :and this was agreed upon unanimously, as it expressed withoutdoubt the wishes of the country. However repugnantto some the hostile bearing of Parliament towards the governmentmight be, yet its apprehensions were universally shared,and Charles 11's speech at the beginning of the session wasawaited with suspense ; every one hurried to Westminster onthe day fixed for the proceedings, July 29. Amongst otherswas a Quaker girded like St. John, with a bowl of burning fireon his head, who in a loud and penetrating voice called uponmen to repent. In the meanwhile the King addressed bothHouses. He informed them that peace was now concluded,Journal of Commons: Jovis, 25 die Julii : viii. 692, From this De Foe appearsto have constructed his Solomon Eagle. (Memoirs of the Plague 148.)

FALL OF THE xv. 3.A.D. 1667.and upon acceptable conditions ; but he then continued,that if it had been a proof of his affection that he summonedthem in his embarrassments, he would give them anotherby now dismissing them on the spot, as their presencewas desirable at home. He added only one thing; he expressedhis astonishment at the opinion, which made thepeople uneasy, that he intended to govern by means of astanding army: he was too much of an Englishman to wishthat; he wished to maintain nothing but the laws, thosewho observed them had nothing to fear. To these words,which breathed steadfast severity and even a threat, the Kingadded a renewal of the old prorogation until October.But how great was the excitement which must ensue uponthis amongst the members of Parliament. Some of them hadcome from a great distance, travelling under the difficulties ofthat time in the heat of summer, when they would have beenmore useful at home; they were dismissed without anythinghaving been transacted, without thanks for their trouble.We learn that one of the reasons for this rapid procedurelay in the apprehension that Parliament, instead of approvingthe peace, might rather demand a renewal of the war; thevictorious progress of the French awakened Englard's oldjealous antipathies1. By a letter from the French headquartersintercepted in the Netherlands, it was learnt thata proposition of decided co-operation with France in theNetherlands was to be made to the King of England, in returnfor the promise of some seaport or other-a propositionwhich gave reason for supposing that the Lord Chancellorwas in its favour. The Spanish ambassador did not fail tomake use of this discovery; it filled the members of Parliamentwith deep irritation, all the more because they sawthemselves shut out from all power of opposition. They hadbeen summoned by the opponents of the Chancellor; hestill possessed sufficient power to dismiss them. It standsto reason that all their indignation was directed against him.' Ruvigny, October 3: ' Le parlement auroit fait une declaration de guerre perpetnellecontre la France et la Hollande, si le roi d'Angleterre ne l'efit promtements6par6.'xv. 3. LORI) CHANCELLOR CLARENDON. 455A.D. 1667.And over all hovered the apprehension that the externalcomplication and the alliance with France were to help onthe extension of the prerogative, perhaps with the aid ofmilitary force. It was the commencement of a situation notunlike that which had been caused under Charles I, by thedissolution of the Short Parliament.Now, as then, a number of lords expressed themselves onthe impending question l. The Presbyterian peers held ameeting in Guildford. Northumberland, who came fromthence to Westminster, seems to have been the first who declaredplainly that Clarendon must be impeached ; he saidso to the Duke of York himself on a visit to St. James';he added that the nation would not be contented unlessother grievances were remedied, and particularly, unless theguards were disbanded. The Duke objected that the wantof troops had formerly brought about the rebellion. StillNorthumberland held to his opinion; he said he woulddeclare it to the King himself.Clarendon was still confident in his power of mastering hisenemies in Parliament, if only the King did not withdraw hissupport. Parliament, he said, was only important so far asthe King wished it to be important; but if it should perceivethat it had gained the upper hand, no one could knowwhat might follow.But already the King was no longer on Clarendon's side.His policy of tolerance had been thwarted by the Chancellor,who had opposed him also in his financial policy, namely asto the removal of the Lord Treasurer, Southampton, whichthe King wished. Those who knew, asserted that the Kingnever forgave him this. Southampton had died a short timebefore: in spite of the representations of Clarendon, whodeclared that the high offices of state were essential to themaintenance of the crown, the King had put the office intocommission, and that too to men whom the Chancellorlooked upon as his opponents, namely William Coventry andhis friends. For the King wished altogether to free himself' Pepys iv. 12a. Communicated by Coventry, who wrote a journal, which is'ell worth being looked for and published.

456 FALL OF THE xv. 3.A.D. 1667.from the great men who till now had held him as it werein tutelage. Personal differences also may have co-operated ;it had especial influence that Coventry, whom the King regardedas a trustworthy man, singularly free from the universalparty feeling, advised the dismissal of Clarendon.Coventry told him that he ought to take a step of his ownaccord to which otherwise Parliament would force him.Consequently there then occurred, as has so often occurredin the course of English history, an open breach betweenthe First Minister and the Lower House. It was not exactlya repetition of Strafford's case, for he had placed himself inabsolute opposition to Parliament ; Clarendon and the existingParliament, on the other hand, were united on main points.But between the old right of the prerogative, on which theadministration of the state depended, and the demands ofParliament which grew out of its right of granting money,no reconciliation was possible. The King, who himself hada different ideal of monarchy from that of the Minister, andwho did not like the independent authority of the administration,which was maintained by Clarendon even againsthimself, allowed him to fall without scruple. The Duke ofYork himself was obliged to undertake to inform his fatherin-lawthat the King had determined to dismiss him from hisoffice.On the 30th of August the Chancellor resigned the GreatSeal, which was given to Orlando Bridgeman as Keeper, aman who himself also maintained the authority of the crownin nearly as comprehensive a sense as Clarendon.A part of the troops had been alrcady disbanded whenParliament re-assembled on the 10th of October. Their firstresolution, after the declarations which occurred in the speechfrom the throne, was to thank the King for what he haddone since their last meeting, particularly for the dismissalof the Chancellor.However the King's concessions did not even now satisfythe Lower House. It took up again the bill about the inspectionof the account-books of the public service, whichhad not been brought to a conclusion during the last session,and appointed one commission to examine the bad manage-xv. 3. LORD CHA LVCELLOX CLARENDON. 1.57A.D. 1667.ment of the last war, and another to examine the circumstancesconnected with the sale of Dunkirk. Thev dis-~ussed the plan of having subsidies granted for a future warmanaged by Parliamentary comrnissioncrs, who should alsopay the troops employed I.Especially however was it manifest that Parliament wasfar from being satisfied with the simple dismissal of Clarendonfrom his office. What till then had principally servedto strengthen the consideration in which he was held, hisfamily connexion with the royal house, now doubled thezeal of his opponents against him. His near relationship tothe Duke of Yorlc would secure for him a lasting - influenceeven under the existing government; then how would it beif anything happened to the King, and the Duke himselfshould ascend the throne? Clarendon was by nature revengeful; they and their families would be sacrificed .to hisrevenge.A great part of the members of the Lower House joinedin this opinion with Buckingham, who at that moment ledthem with overwhelming influence ; but other high authoritiesof state came over to it, Coventry as well as Arlington. Thedecision of the different factions was that the Chancellor mustbe arraigned for high treason. I find that the basis of thearticles of accusation against him was framed in that officein which he himself had hitherto been chief.It was represented to the King, who would have prei'erredto save his old confidant in fair fortune and foul, and whoseobject in dismissing him had been to save him from a trial,that such a course might turn out to his own hurt. For theChancellor was energetic and malicious, mysterious andcunning; he would easily persuade his son-in-law to opposethe King, even to take up arms against him; nay, even moremight be expected from him; he might well be capableof poisoning the King so as to procure the throne for hisson-in-law. But more than this, should the King protect' 'Que pour cet effet il sera ordonnb un fonds d'argent, qui sera administre par desPersonnes nommQes par le Parlement, lesquelles seront commises pour le payementdes troupes, qui passeront la mer.' Rnvigny.

458 FALL OF THE xv. 3.A.D. 1667.the Chancellor, he would fall out with Parliament, and wouldbe able to do nothing with it; his policy ought much moreto be to unite himself in all things with Parliament, andthis would make him as powerful in the world as onlythe usurper Cromwell had been1. It is undeniable thatClarendon's presence in Parliament and in the governmentsecured for him a strong support which would have beenvery troublesome even to the King ; after some hesitationhe consented. The articles of the impeachpent in an extendedand enlarged form were laid before the Lower Houseon the 6th of November.In these the Chancellor was accused of every possiblecrying illegality, committed through tyranny and avarice :it was even said that he made the earth groan under hisbuilding, (the monument of his greatness,) as men had doneunder his oppression. Further the old complaint of Bristolwas renewed, that he had declared that the King was atheart a Papist; he had done this only to conceal the evilwhich he had committed himself; he had expressed himselfwith great freedom about Parliament, and above all hadadvised the King to establish an army, which could besupported by contributions and free quarters, and to subjectEngland to a military government. The man who hadgained for himself the greatest merit in the restoration ofparliamentary monarchy and the construction of the existingHouse of Commons, and who had ever been talking of themaintenance of the old laws of the country, was accused ofwishing to organise a regiment of Janissaries and to establishhimself as Grand Vizir.It is true that once, in the heat of a discussion about Parliamentand the maintenance of an army, Clarendon hadexpressed himself in a manner opposed to the parliamentaryprinciple. But even that could not be proved unless the'Le Duc de Buckingham remontra B son maitre le peu de secret, qu'il y avoitde sa personne, si l'on ne travailloit diligemment B la perte d'un homme, qui par sesartifices et par sa fille, possedoit entierbment M. le Duc de York et de telle manikrequ'il luy inspiroit des pensees violentes et capable de renverser toute l'Angleterre,qu'il falloit le prevenir et que pour cet effet S.M. devoit se mettre B la tete duparlement.' Ruvigny 19/29 October.,v. 3. LORD CHANCELLOR CLARENDON. 459A.D. 1667.members of the Privy Council were examined on the matter.~t was not on this article but on another, namely that thechancellor in the course of the war had betrayed the King'scounsels to the enemy, that it was finally agreed to rest thecharge of high treason. The question presented itselfthis information did not proceed from a foreigner,who also could not be examined upon oath. The Houseof Commons expressly exempted the impeacher, who wasthe young Lord Vaughan, from answering this question ;still it was not thought wise to ground the impeachment inthe House of Lords on this point. As it was brought forward,it turned quite in general terms on treason and otherhigh crimes and misdemeanours, the proof of which was tobe produced later. The demand made to the Lords wasthat Clarcndon might at once be taken into safe custody.Clarendon complained that he did not find in the Houseof Lords as many friends as he had expected, but still theywere not entirely wanting. Only at the King's wish had theLords declared themselves for his dismissal. The m,ijority didnot mean to lend their hands to any further prosecution,for it was obvious that the impeachment generally was ofa factious character. Others were unwilling to allow Buckingham'sreputation to be increased by this proceeding. TheUppcr House refused to allow the Lord Chancellor to bearrested for an impeachment not resting on definite articles.This led to active negotiations between the two Houses,which threatened results equally pernicious to both.The Con~mons took their stand on the precedents inStrafford's trial; for though it had been decided that thiswas not to serve as an example, yet that decision referredonly to the procedure by attainder, not to what had occurredbefore ; also this trial did not belong to the years of disturbanceand rebellion, but to the first year of the LongParliament, when it still laid claim to wisdom and worth. Nowalso, as had been the case then, emphasis was laid on thefact that their impeachment was made altogether in the nameof the Commons of the land, whose representatives they were ;the latest precedent was always the best.The Lords denied this; they would not let themselves be

460 FALL OF THE xv. 3.A.D. 1667.guided by a precedent which was not supported by an olderone, they judged that these years also had been full ofdisturbance. Above all, they thought that this proceedingwould be contrary to the contents of the Petition of Right,according to which the crime must be expressly specifiedbefore arrest. Should they give way they would no longerbe judges, but mere instruments to carry into execution thewill of the Commons. What would be the result should theCommons once be seized with the spirit of faction? Thatthis was perhaps already the case, no one would have daredopenly to say. The negotiations were protracted from the12th to the 28th of November. On the 29th the Lordsdefinitely rejected the proposal for Clarendon's arrest '.But on this very day Clarendon had decided to leaveLondon and England.From many sides it had been made clear to him, that thiswas the only means of preventing a dispute which mightbe dangerous to the country. On receiving a letter whichcontained excuses that were almost insulting, the King said,as he burnt it, that he did not understand it, he felt surprisedthat Clarendon did not go away; he informed him thathe would secretly-openly it would not be possible-favour hisescape. Rut at the same time another motive appeared whichcould not but prove decisive.A number of Lords under Buckingham's leadership hadadopted the views of the Commons, and had formally protestedagainst the poceedings of the Upper House. Anxiety wasfelt lest the King should, as he would have had a right to do,appoint a jury of peers to judge Clarendon, and shouldinclude in it the protesting Lords themselves. But into theirhands Clarendon did not choose to fall. He wrote a letter inhis justification which he addressed to the Upper House, then,accompanied by his two sons and some friends, he left London.He found a boat at Erith which after many hardships landedhim at Calais 2.' Report on the last conference, Journals of the Lords, Nov. ag.I have in this followed less Clarendon's own account, which was written later,than a letter from his son Henry Cornbuiy, who was on most confidential termswith him, written at the very time, on the 8th December 1667, to Ormond. ‘Beingxv. 3. LORD CHANCELLOR CLAXENDON. 461A.D. 1667.Thus volcanic England threw on to a foreign shore the man~ h had o given her a royalist and ecclesiastical organisation.The historical merit of the Chancellor consists in this, thathe united after the most violent revolutions the new Englandto the old. But to lead it onwards quite in the oldway was contrary to the temper of the time, of the nation, andof the King himself. Clarendon's idea was to combine theprerogative of the hereditary monarchy, exercised by meansof the high dignitaries of the crown and the Episcopal.Churchwith the parliamentary constitution, and to thrust into thebackground all contradictory elements. But the King himselfwas opposed to the exclusive dominion of the Church ; hedid not like to see authority confined to an old order, ofwhose use and worth he had no experience ; he strove after achange which alone, he thought, would enable him to obtaina comprehensive power. He was not entirely unfavourable tothe tendencies which had made their appearance in the timesof confusion. At the first serious collision between Parliamentwhich attacked his prerogative, and the minister who defendedit, he allowed that minister to fall. He was indeed congratulatedon it, because he now had become King in reality.What a mistake! The real advantage remained with theParliament. It was victorious over the minister who hadopposed its claim and laboured for its dissolution. Its weaponagainst this was its royalist temper, which in no othercombination would have been found to a like extent. Evenwith this restriction the defeat and fall of the Chancellorconstitute a very important epoch in the history of thedevelopment of parliamentary government.The dispute between the two Houses was allayed by thefact, that the banishment of Clarendon was decreed with theapprobation of the House of Lords. His return was to betreated as high treason, nor should he ever be pardonedwithout the consent of both Houses of Parliament.informed from very credible hands, that there was a design to prorogue theParliament on purpose to try him by a Jury of Peers, by which means he mightfall into the hands of the protesting Lords, he resolved to withdraw.' Carte v. 38.The recollections of his brother Lawrence (Correspondence i. 645), dated 1675, arealready less exact.

462 I;jlLL OF THE XV. 3.A.D. 1667.It was at this time that a French ambassador, Ruvigny,on the conclusion of peace again arrived in England. Hewas commissioned to call to remembrance the gratitude earnedby Louis XIV during the course of the war as well as duringthe negotiations, and on this foundation to form a close andnlost confidential alliance, such as had always been projected.It is curious what importance was given in it to home affairs.The two Kings were to promise to support one another, evenin case their subjects caused difficulties at home, and thattoo with a considerable body of troops. Louis XIV declaredhimself quite prepared to undertake such an engagement, andalso to agree to other conditions which Charles I1 mightdemand.These were propositions which had reference to the stateof universal excitement preceding the fall of the Chancellor; now they were no longer suitable. The Ambassadorwas once tempted, whilst in conversation with Charles 11, tobring them forward, but his tact told him that it would beinopportune. An alliance for external affairs however wascontinually discussed. The King let it be understood that inhis heart he was in favour of it ; but in his Privy Council andin Parliament another opinion prevailed. France must makepropositions which should convince them that the alliancewould prove to the advantage of England. Ruvigny wasoccasionally visited by members of the government and of theadministration ; they came at night, without torches, envelopedin great cloaks so as not to be recognised ; they all expressedthe same views.The fall of the Chancellor, whose favourable dispositiontowards France had been exaggerated and even charged tohim as a crime, was necessarily accompanied by the prevalenceof the inclination towards Spain. In the Spanishstate council this event was welcomed as most fortunate forSpain. They found means to send to the AmbassadorMolina a supply of money, which to them at least did notseem inconsiderable, to be distributed amongst friendlymembers of Parliament. These presents of money were eventhen already usual in Parliament. Molina relates that he hadpawned his wife's last jewels to satisfy a member, throughxv. 3. LORD CHANCELLOR CLA RENDON.A.D. 1667. 463whose interposition the exportation of horses to France hadbeen prevented'. And many others are likely to haveattached themselves to the Ambassador out of hatred for theChancellor or for France. This Molina possessed power inthe English Parliament. In the days in which the decisionagainst Clarendon still wavered, and his opponents at timeseven felt themselves in danger, he had promised Arlington tosupport him with the votes which were at his disposal, butonly on the condition that the minister would not then stopat simple neutrality in the French and Spanish differences,but would resolve to obtain assistance for the SpanishNetherlands.How powerfully the positions of parties reacted upongeneral politics ! This was precisely the great question whichat that time occupied Europe.Molina to the Queen of Spain, 28th Nov. 1667, in the archives at Simanas :'Dare quenta assimismo a V. May., como he conseguido con un parlamentario,que dicesse a Milord de Arlington para assegurarle de lo riesgos que le amenazaronles acusasiones que sabia tenia resuelto hazerle el canciller y que el le pudiese asistircon 10s de su seguido sera forcoso que se empesasse, en apoyar la resolucion deasistir alos psyses bassos, pues todos 10s que hasta aora havian aprovado laneutralidad, ya conocian era la total ruyna del regno y que. bien veya no podia estarunido con el qoando no estuviesen conformes en un sentimiento tanimpartante.'

CHAPTER IV.CONVENTION OF JANUARY 1668 AT THE HAGUE.THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE.ALL the world was terrified by the rapid progress of theFrench arms in th- Spanish Netherlands : there was a generalconviction that England would as little endure this occupationnow as ever before. And as the Republic of the UnitedNetherlands was also openly threatened by the occupation ofthe Belgian province, an alliance between the two seemed tobe perfectly natural. Amongst English statesmen there wasone who even in a subordinate position became important,because he made it the especial object of his life to carry outthis aim-William Temple, Resident at Brussels. At theCongress of Breda he had become convinced by conversationwith the ambassadors, especially with the ambassador ofFrance, that after the conclusion of the peace, England andHolland must enter into alliance, for their interests were thesame. He observed that it was the only means of looseningthe alliance bctwecn Holland and France, and of resisting theFrench, who were not only powerful, but had a spirited andenergetic government ; their ambition embraced Europe,bounds must be set in time to their usurpations, or theywould care for no one and would recognise no other poweras their equal. He was never tired of urging this upon hisgovernment. In September 1667 he found an opportunity oftalking about it to the leading statesman of the Republic,John de Witt. Nominally for his amusement, more particularlyto please his sister, who wished to see Holland, heundertook a journey thither: when he came to the Hague,he visited the Grand Pensionary. De Witt was still held toxv. 4. CONVE'NTIOAJ AT THE HAGUE. 465A.D. 1667.be French in his opinions. The intention of sharing theBelgian provinces with France was imputed to him. De Wittdid not deny that this had been the subject of negotiations,but in conversation with Temple he expressed his aversion toit ; he described such a solution as offensive and disgraceful ;he would infinitely prefer to come out of the affair in anhonourable manner, and this seemed to him only possiblethrough open opposition1; on that however, he said, theRepublic could not resolve unless it had the support ofEngland ; England and Holland were united by ties of blood,manners of life, and religion, as if by nature herself; they werethreatened in like manner by the supremacy of France ; peaceonce concluded, all old hostility should also be put away.De Witt asked whether Charles I1 would not be inclinedfor the sake of the preservation of the Spanish Netherlands,which formed a bulwark for his kingdom as well asfor Holland, to conclude an alliance with the Republic.Temple replied that the matter concerned Holland very muchmore nearly than England. De Witt rejoined that Hollandalso risked much more ; for the nloment war was declaredFrench troops would enter the state of Brabant, the Bishopof Munster would again take up arms ; still in alliance withEngland, the Republic would venture; the two united wouldeither conclude an easy peace or wage a glorious war. Hereckoned, at the same time, on the Emperor and the princesof the German realm, who would all attach themselves toHolland and England 2.In the moment of the opening crisis, the future combinationsof great affairs were already visible in the ideas of thestatesmen, who had before their eyes the general situationof the world.But England as yet was a long way from consenting 'tothese proposals. Arlington, the Secretary of State, to whomTemple owed his appointment, and to whom he sent hisreports, received his remarks and the exhortations of the' 'While they had any hopes de sortir de cette aKaire par la voye honneste, ils."e le feroient jamais par la scandaleuse.' Temple's letter of Nov. 22.Temple to Arlington, Oct. 5, N. S. 1667, in Courtenay's Life of Temple i. 1x8.RANICE, VOL. III. ~h

466 CONVENTION AT THE HAGUE. XV. 4.A.D. 1667.Spaniards to the same effect, with much coolness. Muchmight be said about the demands of honour and generosity,and about the duty of maintaining the balance between thetwo European powers', but more imperative incentives werenecessary before entering upon a matter of such wide extent.No gratitude was due to Spain for her conduct in the latecomplications, and if it was such an important matter for theRepublic, let her first break the ice. The English offeredtheir mediation to the belligerent powers, but even after thefall of Clarendon their sympathies inclined more towards theFrench than towards the Spaniards. The latter were refusedall assistance ; the government allowed without scruple aScottish regiment to return to the French service fromwhich it had been called away after the declaration of war;also a part of the guards, which had been disbanded at thedesire of Parliament, took service under the King of France.When the Spaniards and Dutch attempted to act upon thegovernment through Parliament, or to acquire personal influenceover the ministers, Arlington declared to them thatit had been determined in all consultations to keep in sightonly the true and real interest of the kingdom '.Whither this tended he did not explain. At that time,in view of the general excitement in Europe, Louis XIV hadproposed an alternative for the restoration of peace. Hewould either keep what he possessed, or he would exchangeit for Franche Comte and three fortresses in the Netherlands.It also was important for him to obtain at the same time alimited recognition at least of his wife's claim on Spain, ashe was already concerned in momentous negotiations onthat point with the prince who was next in the hereditaryline. The terms of his proposal made it evident that hemeant at any rate to hold it in reserve.Then for the first time appeared in distinct form the ideawhich was to plunge the world into war for half a century,' The Earl of Arlington, Letters to Sir William Temple, Oct. 4, 0. S. i. 183:'Generosity and the keeping the balance even between the two crowns would bepoints that might by witty men be talked out of doors.'' Dat alle de deliberation souden gaen op het waere ende reele interesthet Kyk! Meerman to De Witt, 5th December, Rrieven iv. 559.xv. 4. CONVENTION A T THE IfA G UE.467A.D. 1667.and to transform Europc. Thc renunciation made by theQueen of France of the great inheritance of the Spanishmonarchy, was, in spite of the Peace of the Pyrenees, to bedeclared invalid. Not only the actual demand, but also thefuture claim, created general excitement. The honour ofhaving taken the initiative in the great affairs of Europebelongs to the Provincial States of Holland and West Friesland,who took them into consideration in December 1667.They were all agreed in thinking that to look on idlywould be the most ruinous course, but more than one opinionarose about the steps to be taken. The first was, that allthe powers concerned should unite in a great alliance, andcompel France to re-establish the stipulations settled in thePeace of the Pyrenees. This was the decisive course : salutaryperhaps for France herself, it would have been of inestimableimportance in the history of the world, but it was no longerpracticable. The Republic felt itself too closely united withFrance to be able to break with her at once ; the weakness,indecision, and poverty of the other powers would havethrown upon her shoulders the whole burden of the war;the Emperor was even less to be counted upon than wasimagined ; from Spain, whose interest was at stake, hindrancerather than help might be expected. There remained nothingfor it but to agree to the alternative offered by Louis XIV,and on that foundation to bring about peace as soon as possible.For this however two things were needed ; first tokeep the King of France to his offer, secondly to persuadethe Spaniards, whose cause was looked upon as of Europeanimportance, to accept it. This expedient seemed to be theonly one practicable ; for by it a war was avoided, which, asmatters stood, would have occasioned a still greater extensionof France, and it involved no open breach with that old ally I.Hut would it not be possible to unite to this a confirmationof the renunciation made by the Queen of France? It wasdiscovered that even this could not be attained without war:it seemed enough to avoid anything which might imply' The resolution dates from Dec. 1/11.De \Yirt's to Meermali Dec. 6/rG and 13/23.~ h z\Ve lea111 the motives from letters of

468 CONVEATTION A T THE HA GUZ. xv. 4.A.D. 1667.a recognition of this claim. And even with these restrictionsthe Republic decided not to prosecute this object singlehanded;it fixed its eyes on the King of England, the onlyone amongst all the princes of the world whose co-operationmight bring about a favourable decision.In the meanwhile the alternative had been communicatedto England also. Ruckingham and Arlington held a seriesof conferences about it with the Spanish, as well as with theDutch ambassador; sometimes, when Buckingham was unwell,at his private house. The Dutch remarked that theEnglish ministers answered questions with questions, andeven positive proposals with other questions, and avoidedevery explanation on which it would have been possible todepend. They declared that they hesitated especially, becausethe intention was to keep France to its proposals, by promisingto compel Spain to accept them ; and the like had never beenknown either in ancient or in modern times. This touchedthe great question whether, in hostilities between two independentpowers, neutrals might intervene. A short timebefore, in the year 1659, it had already been done in the caseof the politics of the north, but it was in vain that the Englishwere reminded of this ; they remained steadfast to their refusal,and declared their opinion that a general league againstFrance was the best thing. It was not that they were determinedto consent to such a league, but it did not liebeyond their horizon.To learn certainly whether Holland might not be persuadedto this was the most important object of the missionwith which Temple was entrusted, in consequence of hisfriendly relations with De Witt. -It had long been intended,but had been delayed ; now haste seemed all the more necessary.On the zo/3oth of December we find Temple at theHague. His journey had been very troublesome; for, ashe says, the frost was too severe to admit of the use ofboats, and not hard enough to allow the use of sledges;in spite of his fatigue he still saw De Witt late-at I I o'clock-that same evening; next morning a second conferencefollowed. His instruction was to insist once more on thenecessity of protecting the Spanish Netherlands against thexv. 4. CON VENTION A T THE HA G CrE. . 469A.D. 1667.attacks of France, and to propose the question to the GrandPensionary, whether it would be possible to prevail upon theRepublic to conclude, for this purpose, an offensive and defensivealliance with England against every other power, butespecially against France. Temple proposed the questionat once with all exactness; he insisted especially upon thewords 'offensive alliance against France.' But this failed toproduce much effect, because he was not in a position to givea definite answer to the question asked in return,-what inthat case did his King intend to do in the affair of theNetherlands ? he could only indicate warlike intentions as beingthe most probable. Dc Witt replied that the conclusion ofsuch general treaties in any case was not after the custom ofthe Republic. Least of all would she consent to conclude oneagainst France before she herself had been offended by thatpower. He adhered to the resolution formed by the ProvincialEstates of Holland, and in the meanwhile adopted bymost of the others, to hold France to the proposed alternative,and in common with Great Britain to carry it into effect ; forwhether Spain agreed to it or not, still the Spanish etherlandsmust not be allowed to fall entirely into the handsof France. Rut at the same time Temple's opinion, thatCharles I1 would take the matter into his hands, if only hewere assured that Holland would not oppose him in so doing,produced a great in~pression on De Witt. He still thoughtthat would be the best plan; the Republic would gladly seeit accon~plished, even if she could not prevail upon herselfto undertake it '.Temple's presence at the Hague had as yet decidednothing. The question still remained whether an attemptshould not be made to force Francc back within the limitsof the Peace of the Pyrenees, in which casc England musthave taken the initiative; or whether the altcrnativc pro-Posed by Francc should be carried out according to the' Sir W. Temple's conference with Mr. De Witt, in Arlington's Letters i. 183.Later letters of Temple's, such as for instance those to Bridgeman, Works i. 328,additional information. On the other side De Witt's report, whichsent to the ambassador in Englatlcl 8th Jan., B~ievell iv. 609, must not beOverlooked.

470 CON VENTI0,V A T THE Hi4 G UE. xv. 4.A.D. 1667.proposal of Holland. De Witt was very eager to see whateffcct his conversation with Temple would produce, and howthe English court would resolve.But the English court had in view at this moment anentirely different issue, of which there was no suspicion inHolland.Whilst King Charles invited Holland to make an offensivealliance against France, he had already proposed to theFrcnch an offensive alliance against Holland. Perhaps thepredominant feeling with a part of the nation, but certainlyin the government circles, and above all with the King himself,was hatred against Holland. ' Us,' says Ruvigny, ' theydistrust ; they dcspise Spain ; Holland they hate.' That Parliamentdeclared for Spain was an additional reason whyCharles 11, who very well knew that his connexion withFrance had not been a single-handed work of the Chancellor's,should hold to the French alliance. Ruvigny, accorclingto Isola's assertion, had said to him that he must notallow himself to be ruled by Parliament l. And to developehis connexion with Louis XIV into a perfect community ofinterests was moreover his old idea. His new ministersagreed with him on that point. Buckingham and Arlington,who conducted the negotiations with Spain and Holland,offered the French ambassador, in the beginning of December,an offensive and defensive alliance against all otherpowers, but especially against Holland: France was to cometo the assistance of the English should there be a breachbetween them and the Republic, just as England would makecommon cause with King Louis were he to come into conflictwith Holland. But how easy would it have been for themto bring about another breach with Holland. At the firstovertures in the matter, Ruvigny-eminded them thatLouis XIV was closely allied with Holland and would not' 'Sig niet soude moeten laten inaistriseren van het parlement.' Meerrnan.19 Nov.a IIe makes a comn~unication about it on i/r zth Dec. : ' 11s m'ont propod ulleligne offensive et dhfensive envers tous et contre tous, et se sont expliqui.~ 11onlmementcontre la Hullan(1e.' Detailed ififonnation about the further overtulcs canbe found in Mignet ii. 53 5XV. 4. THE TRIPLE 11 L LIA NCE. 47 1A.D. 1667.wish to break with hcr ; he wished at the beginning to strikethis condition ; the English insisted upon it. But then thedemand was inevitable that England must also make commoncause with France in her hostilities against Spain. Buckinghamthought that this might be managed. It was suggestedthat in this case the supremacy across the Atlantic in SouthAmerica, should fall to the English, and that on this sideOstend and Nicuwpoort should also be given over to then^.For England two great lines of policy appeared possible:either alliance with France to the destruction of the Spanishmonarchy, on the condition of a great incrcasc of her mercantileand maritime power ; or resistance to France for themaintenance of Spain, and preservation of the balance ofpower on the continent. Charles I1 wavered between the two;he was determined to choose the one which should offer himthe greater advantage. With a view to this he was engagedin extensive negotiations with the Spaniards also.In December 1667 the English ambassador, Lord Sandwich,offered the Spanish court a close alliance for the protectionof the monarchy, and mentioned the conditions under which itmight be concluded. He demanded first of all the paymentof a considerable sum, a million piastres,-for the King ofEngland could not burden his subjects with the expenses ofthe mar-and secondly, concessions of a comprehensive naturefor the English trade, that is to say, the permission to sendevery year a fixed number of ships to Mexico, I3uenos Ayres,and the Philippine Islands for unrestricted traffic ; privilegesin Antwerp, whither the Dutch trade was to be removed, evenfree trade with Germany through the influence of the Emperorupon the Hanse Towns, were taken into consideration1.These things give us our first insight into the character ofCharles 11. He was capable of proposing offensive alliancessimultaneously to the three neighbouring powers, to the Dutchagainst France, to the French against Spain and IIolland, tothe Spaniards against France to the detriment of Holland;but in these propositions two fundamental views alwaysI fapel qoe entl-ego el Cde. cle San(lwich al Sr. Dun Juan.'ecbr. 1667. i\rchi\es at Silnnllcns.1';~ ~-cLil-o zy (10)

THE TRIPLE ALLIAnlnlCE. xv. 4.A.D. 1668.recur - demands for money - supplies, and assurance ofworld-wide commerce to England.And now in the first days of 1668 (N. S.) Temple happenedto return from the continent with communications from theHague, and at the same time an answer arrived from France.In the council of King Louis the offers of Charles I1 hadbeen seriously considered but had been rejected. For it wasnot exactly co-operation against Spain which the Englishoffered, but only neutrality: that in return they should demandpart of the spoil seemed to King Louis like a proposalto take the lion's share; he did not see that he need buytheir inactivity. And still less would he hear of the proposalagainst Holland, for by that he would violate confidence andgood faith and his own honour. Amongst the politicalmaxims of 1,ouis XIV almost the most important was thathe must fulfil engagements which he had concluded ; on thissupposition his influence in Europe seemed to depend, forwho would unite with him, were he once to show himselfuntrustworthy? Turenne suggested that such a breach betweenFrance and Holland ought to be represented to Charles I1as probable, and that this possibility should be so referred toas to prevent him from allowing himself to be carried awayby the impulses of the Parliament against France. But theFrench Cabinet rejected this also. The King declared thathe would be faithful to his defensive alliance with Hollandas long as the Dutch themselves observed it1. To this indeedwere added eventual proposals for an alliance against theRepublic, but they depended on the contingency that I-Iollandherself should have broken the defensive alliance by givingaid to the enemies of France.Probably Louis XIV was not indisposed at this momentfor peace, on the basis of the alternative. He reserved everyfurther undertaking for the event of the death of the youngKing of Spain, a weakly child; with this in view he wasthen engaged in the most active negotiations with theEmperor. A definite purpose always hovered before him,' ' Mon trait6 d'alliance defensive avec les Qtats subsiste et devra toujours subsistertant queles dits Qtats n'en feront aucune contravention.' Mignet, Nhgociations ii. 542.xv. 4.TflE TRIPLE ALLIAll'CE.473A.D. 1668.for the execution of which he endeavoured to prepare the wayby negotiations of every sort. How was he voluntarily tobreak his treaty with Holland, by which he had hoped toattach that country to his interests whatever happened ?In England the concurrent declarations of France and ofHolland produced the deepest impression. Almost in thesame words as those used by Louis XIV, De Witt had alsodeclared in the name of the Republic that the defensivealliance must be maintained, as long as it was not broken bythe other side. The English inferred that there was a closeunderstanding between Holland and France. The opinionarose that they really might intend to divide the SpanishNetherlands between themselves, to the exclusion of England.At court, rumours of a new alliance were circulated ; it waseven thought possible that they might unite for a commonundertaking against England I.The French answer was obviously entirely in the negative.King Charles felt himself offended, because he found so littleacceptance for his propositions; it was just as if Francethought herself strong enough to carry out her projects withoutEngland2.The Spanish Council of State also had found Charles' propositionsunacceptable: it seemed to them as if this Princeonly sought to dlaw advantage for himself out of the embarrassmentsof the monarchy. Their answer had not yetarrived, but it might be conjectured, and without the mostdecided assurances Charles I1 would not have declared himselfopenly for Spain. It appeared, from Temple's negotiations,that Holland, though she might have looked on quietly, wouldnever have lent her active support.There remained nothing but to accept the offer, on whichDe Witt had taken his final stand, to enter into union withHolland for the maintenance of the alternative on both sides.For this at least made possible a firm resistance to any further' Ruvigny I 2 Jan. (N. S ) 'Que ~ous ne partagez pas seulement les pays bas catholiquesensemble, mais aussl toute I'Angleterle '' Challes I1 to his sister, January 23, 1668. 'Finding my propositions to FlanceIeceave so cold an answer, whlch In effect was as good as a refusall, I thought I]lad no other way but this to scare myself.' Dalrymple 11. 5.

47 4 TZZE TXZPLE ALLIALITE.xv. 4.A.D. 166s.one-sided encroachment by France, and rendered futile forthe present, perhaps interrupted for ever, the close union bctweenFrance and Holland1. Anxiety lest Holland, if sheshould come to no agreement with England, should not onlydo nothing in the matter, but should even again unite withFrance, was the decisive motive. Difficulties were no longerfound about going to work without previous consultation withSpain. The final resolutions were concealed from the Imperialand Spanish ambassadors, just as much as from the French.Not all the members of the committee for foreign affairstook part in the decision ; the Duke of York for instance wasexcluded; he at no price would have offendcd the King ofFrance, from whom he hoped for protection for his fatherin-law. Neither did the French ambassador give Buckinghamcredit for it ; but later the Duke always laid claimto the honour of having helped to bring it about. ResideAr!i~~gton, Secrctary of State, the Lord Keeper Bridgeman,who had hardly learnt anything of the negotiations in theother directions, was especially active in the matter. The Kinghimself showed the eagerness which he bestowed on matterswhich interested him ; he personally laboured to carry it out.After a few days William Temple received an instruction,which now agreed with the proposals of De Witt, in whichhe was given considerable latitude, on the one condition that,besides the chief treaty, an agreement for mutual defencecould be brought about as well; he was at once providedunder the Great Seal with full powers for its conclusion; hehurried back to Holland, for which purpose a royal yacht wasput at his disposal.John de Witt was surprised, and even astoundcd, that theKing of England had made up his mind at once, and hadfallen in so completely with the Dutch proposals He nowseemed less decided himself. Even at the last moment heagain felt scruples about separating the Republic from its' 'De vrese ende apprehensie, die men hier nae het rapport van den Heer Templegekregen heeft, dat Haer 1x0. Mop. met Vranckryck souden aenspannen ende debuyt tesae~nen deelen, de oorsaecke it van deese groote ende schiclgcke veranderinge.'hleerman an de Witt : Brieven iv. 631.XV. 4.THE TRIPLE A L L1AA7CE.A.D. 1668. 475tried friendship with France, and allying it to England, withwhom it had just been at war. Rut in this direction tendedwithout doubt the resolution already formed, which now forthe first time attained its full significance through the concurrenceof England.A change in the internal affairs of Holland may have hadmore effect upon the decision than Temple perhaps observed1.A short while before, an ordinance had been passed in theprovince of Holland, that the Statholdership should thenceforthand for ever be separated from the chief command byland and sea. Upon the connexion of the two the importanceof the house of Orange had hitherto depended ; by theirseparation it seemed as if the enmity of the Icing of England,who had always so eagerly taken up the rights of his nephew,must be awakened. Instead of that, Temple was commissionedto assure the Grand Pensionary that the King's friendshipfor the Prince of Orange should not stand in the wayof a union between the two countries, in their own interests.'hat Charles 11, at a moment of such high importance, shouldlet drop all opposition to De Witt and the aristocratic party,might be reckoned as the price for the conclusion of theagreement. The two facts taken together gave De Witt oneof the grandest positions that any republican chief has everoccupied in Europe. But did it not become insecure preciselyon account of its greatness, in the midst of the conflicts andvacillating positions of the great powers? At first this wasnot taken into consideration.William Temple had the rare good luck to be entrustedwith a negotiation, which agreed at once with his own politicalsentiments, with the momentary tendencies of the twostipulating states, and with the great interests of Europe.It could not give him much trouble; for in fact it was onlyconcerned with the acceptance of a proposal, which originatedfrom the power with whom he had to treat. One difficultyhowever lay in the constitution of the Union, accordi~lg towhich treaties must be laid before the separate assemblies oftllc Provinces and be approved by them. If this form were' Ilr his letter of January 14, 1668 (\\'arks i. 313)~ hc passes it over liglltly.

476 TflE TRIPLE ALLTANCE. xv. 4.A.D. 1668.now to be observed, there was fear of a delay which mightgive occasion to adverse action from the side of France, andeven cause a change in the temper of England. Templeinsisted that this must not take place, and fortunately therewas a possibility of quicker despatch. During the last warwith England there had been established in the Republic,for the maintenance of unity and energy in the conduct ofbusiness, a general Conlmission of the Provincial States, towhich the rights of the States, as far as wars and treatieswere concerned, had in a great measure been transferred. Itconsisted of eight members, two from Holland, and one fromeach of the other Provinces. De Witt's authority dependedprincipally on the influence he possessed in this Commission,the resolutions of which had hitherto always been carriedout. Tcmple insisted that it must suffice in this case also,and that the ratification of the States-General must follow,without the Provincial States being formally consulted Somuch for the form. As to the matter, the objectioll was madethat the Republic was not safe from the Swedes, who wereencamped in Bremen in strong force. Count Dohna, who hadbeen appointed Swedish ambassador for England, was atthat time still at the Hague. Temple had no orders to negotiatewith him and did not know him ; but putting aside allceremony, (for he was unwilling to allow even the sn~allestdelay to occur,) he hastcned to him. He was delighted atmeeting with a friendly reception, entirely corresponding tohis desires. Dohna was provided with an instruction whichcould be applied to the existing question ; he expressedhimself even with more eagerness than the Dutch ; his declarationof consent and assurance contributed not a little toput an end to all wavering. Temple insisted on promptnesson this ground also, that there were in England ~owerfulmen who were opposed to the design, and who would welcomeevery obstacle. How would they answer for it if byxv. J. THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE.a.~. 1668. 477unseasonable hesitation they should lose the important offersof Charles 11, which aimed at the welfare of the Republic?He succeeded beyond all expectation ; his treaties were concludedwithin five days. The first is a defensive alliance, inwhich each of the two parties pledges itself, in case the othershould be attacked, to come to its assistance, with a fixednumber of forces by land and on sea. This was important,inasmuch as Charles I1 had hitherto considered a commonattack from France and Holland as possible; but now, incase of an attack from France, he secured for himself the supportof Holland. But the real importance lay in the secondtreaty, in which England and Holland bound themselves torestore peace between France and Spain upon the basisproposed by the first. The point of the contract lies in thefourth article, in which they agree that if the Spaniards couldnot be persuaded to accept the alternative by exhortations,they would employ means of greater cogency. In the firstdraft actual force had been formally mentioned1; Charles I1had wished to avoid this word, from a certain feeling of therespect due to an independent king ; the expression actuallyaccepted, which meant the same thing, originated withTemple. There remained still another question, which wasindeed the most considerable of all ; namely, how the King ofFrance was to be kept to the conditions which he had laiddown. In case he broke his promise, the two powers returnedto the more extensive proposition which Temple had firstbrought to the Hague; they promised at once to take theside of Spain, to wage war against the King of France, andif possible to restore the state of things established by thePeace of the Pyrenees. Count Dohna declared, in a specialact, that the King of Sweden, under certain conditions, wasminded to join in these agreements.The convention is to be looked upon as a union of theproposals interchanged between Temple and De Witt, onTemple's second visit to the Hague; it went beyund the1 I infer this proposal from a later letter of Temple's, March 31, 1676, in theRecord Office. I am surprised that a complete collection has not been madeof th~s statesman's letters, which in style and composition might even now s@,eas models.' 'For the undecency of the word force.' Marginal note of Charles I1 to theInstruction in Courtenay ii. 386. Temple substituted, first ' moyens plus dur,' thenmoyens plus efficaces, media majoris efficaciae.'

THE TRIPLE IILLIA RCE. XV. 4.A.D. 1668.point of holding the King to the alternative ; a restoration ofthe previous legal condition was eventually contemplated.That either of these should ever come to pass was indeednot to be expected. For how was Louis to withdraw froma proposal which he himself had made? How little desirethere was on the other side to vex him, is obvious from thefact that all reference to the renunciation was avoided ;at this moment he could not expect more.Yet the convention, which was not as yet the Triple Alliance,but which laid the foundation for it I, is of great importallcein general Europcan history. In the midst of theopposing interests of the various powers the general interestsof the Europcan community here found expression. The wayin which this idea originated, grew up, was at one timepredominant, and then again lost ground, would be worthyof a separate narrative. In the two powers who then unitedit found, during a century, its most important manifestation.In the S,\.erlish Act of January 13/23 it was first spoken of as definitely intencled,' ut foedus jam dictum con-equatur qualm primurn suhstnntiam atque formxlnpacti tripliciter conventi.' The French distingui5h between the ' trail4 clela llaye' al~d the ' triple alliance faite en cons4quence du tl.aitJ dt: la 1Inye.'CHAPTER V.GOVERNMENT AND PARLIAMENT IN TI1E YEAR 1665.IT was not exactly these considerations which determinedthe decisions of Charles 11. The temper of Parliament mayhave had a certain influence upon them, but this must notbe rated too highly. In spite of the antipathy of Parliamentto France, Charles I1 would have concluded a new alliancewith that power, if it would have agreed to his proposals.His decisions, which were of an entirely independent character,sprang especially from his wounded self-conceit, andhis wish to separate France and Holland.Although at the time of the fall and impeachment of theChancellor he had allowed Parliament free action, and hadgiven way to it, yet he had not intended, in so doing, torecognise the subordination of his ministers to Parliament,or generally to make his administration dependent uponparliamentary opinion : on the contrary, his new ministerscared even less for Parliament than the Chancellor had done ;under their influence the King returned to the plans whichhe seemed already to have given up.It is characteristic of the time and of the King, that a manlike the Duke of Ruckingham, George Villiers, son of thefavourite of James I and Charles I, should have had a decidedinfluence over the state: for no one seemed to be less bornfor business. He neglected the meetings of the Privy Councilif any pleasure called him away; for days he could not befound, and when he again appeared, he had meanwhilechanged his opinion. He was one of the first in England *

480 GOVERNMENT AND PA RLZAMENT xv. 5.A.D. 1668.who turned night into day, and day into night I. He woundedmortally in a duel the Earl of Shrewsbury, with whose wifehe had an intrigue ; it is said that the lady, dressed as a page,held her lover's horse during the combat ; the death of theEarl did not interrupt the connexion, although Buckinghamalso was married. And it was easy to get a pardon fromthe King for what had happened: Charles I1 thought hehad done enough when he added to it a strict prohibitionof duelling for the future. Buckingham, an old friend of theKing's youth, sometimes in disgrace and then again taken intofavour, accompanied him on his hunting expeditions, to theraces in the country, to the play in town, and seasoned hisevening banquet with biting wit, especially with his mimicry,for which he was famous. The King allowed everythingthat surrounded him, even what was estimable and important,to be turned into ridicule. Buckingham, for his part, entertainedthe company which gathered round his table with thcrecital of the liberties which the King allowed himself at hisown. Even the turmoil of pleasure did not cool his ambitionto have important matters under his control; for these hepossessed an inborn talent. Ruckingham is a forecast ofthe Regent and Dubois. In natures of this kind everythingworks together, amusement and labour, distraction and exertion,good and bad; the most refined culture can go withintolerable insolence; for such men have every kind of ambition,they must be first in everything, and remain first.Social considerations and sympathies caused by hatred ofpredecessors, determine their political action or inaction.Like the King, Buckingham also was inclined to the Frenchalliance, on the condition that he should share in the increaseof power so to be acquired ; like the King he also kept inview before everything else the rise of the naval power. Ifthey now both turned away from the French alliance, it wasbecause they wished particularly to prove to their mightyneighbour that they were worthy of greater consideration.Huckingham resembled the King also in his dislike to theRuvigny, January 26: *I1 veille quand les autres dorment, il dine quand lesai~tresoupent, il perd sourent les conseils qu'il aime moins que ses plaisirs.'xv. 5. 1 7 THE YEAR 1668.A.D. 1668.Anglican Church : but his inclination was towards the Protestantsects. He even once took a fit of seeking God in theAnabaptist manner. As soon as he could exercise influence,without consideration for statutes established or sentencespassed, he had the prisons opened, in which the so-calledfanatics and some of Cromwell's old officers languished.Major Wildman and Colonel Salloway appeared again instate favour. Buckingham, who liked in all things to do thecontrary to Clarendon, caused favour to be shown to thePresbyterians also, whom the Chancellor especially oppressed.Everywhere their assemblies for public worship were reopened,first in the counties, then in the capital ; the odious acts passedagainst them were no longer carried out.At the same time there existed an intention of rescindingthese acts in every shape. The idea of tolerance again revivedvery seriously in the King's mind. The Keeper of theGreat Seal entered into a formal negotiation with some ofthe leading Nonconformists, as for instance with Baxter andManton, about a scheme of comprehension, which was to befounded on a modification of prescribed oaths and ceremonies,and on a milder formula at ordination. The Presbyterianswere then at once to be recognised as members of the StateChurch; to the adherents of other sects, who would notconform, an indulgence, for three years, was at first to begranted. Their conventicles were to be allowed. There werehopes of succeeding in such views as these more easily thanbefore, since the political course now taken, if it did notoriginate in the inclinations of Parliament, yet in generalagreed with them; for the government, as it was composed,could not be accused of any Catholic tendency; rather aunion of the two great Protestant parties seemed to bequite natural.With this another purpose was connected. In Parliamentthere were still a number of the former partisans of Clarendon: some of the most considerable men among them, whomBuckingham looked upon as his enemies and whom hewished to remove, maintained themselves in their high positionthrough the support which they found in Parliament;in the King's brother, the Duke of York, they had an allyRANKE, VOL. 111.I i

482 GOVERN1MENTAb7DPARLIAJfENT xv.5.A.D. 1668.who gave them a certain confidence. It was the intentionof the influential members of the government to strike a blowat this party, which was also High Church, by accepting thecomprehension Bill. The tendency towards religious liberalitywas also a continuance of the hostility against Clarendon, whowas attacked in the persons of his followers.When the King re-opened Parliament, on February 10 '20166718, his communication about the negotiations in thcHague met with greater favour because they had alreadyattained their object, and the treaties might be described asconcluded; it may be that the haste with which the matterwas pursued at the Hague was also inspired by the wishto meet Parliament with the news. But if he hoped in thismanner to make way for his religious and monarchical projects,his calculations were found to be very mistaken.Private comnlunications had made known the clauses evenbefore Parliament was actually opened ; they were talkedabout immediately on assembling, and awakencd universalexcitement. It seemed to the Lower House as if the groundon which it stood was going to be taken away from underits feet, and as if the principles, which were its honour andsecurity, were to be controverted.To meet at once the anticipated measures, a commissionwas given to those members who had seats also in the PrivyCouncil, to sue the King for a proclamation to enforce theAct of Uniformity, which was openly ncglccted. But whenthe King appeared, and, while demanding a grant of money,also expressed a wish that means might be devised to bringabout a better understanding among his Protestant subjects,so as to induce them not only to obey his government but alsoto give it a willing support, it was felt that he was announcinga scheme tending towards comprehension, and so he awakenedall the feelings of opposing parties. Adherents of the courtproposed that the recently appointed con~mission about theAct of Uniformity should be suspended ; but this was thrownout with violence ; 'whoever proposed changes in the laws ofEngland ought to present himself with a cord round his neck,as in one of the ancient republics.' Hitherto Parliament hadbeen in complete disunion : great was the astonishment whenxv. 5. IN T 'E YEAR 1665. 493A.D. 1668.its sudden return to unanimity was realised. It was as if ithad been called upon by name.The Presbyterians, it is true, found advocates e-?en now.Many were willing to attribute their defection to the innovationsintroduced at a later period into the ReformedChurch ; but in this assembly arose also defenders of ArchbishopLaud; old men who had been in Rome at that timepretended to know that nothing had been more feared therethan his victory over the Puritans, and that at his deathdemonstrations of joy had been made. The principal argumentwas that the repeal of the laws would produce anarchy,and that tolerance would make an army necessary for themaintenance of order. The proposal that the King shouldbe empowered to arrange a new conference was rejected bya great majority l, and a new and more rigorous law againstconventicles was projected.Far from breaking up the Chancellor's party, the governmentfirst gave it new coherence through this proposal aboutreligion. It seemed often to the King as if the Parliamentwas led from a distance by his old minister in opposition tothe new ones. It was sometimes suggested that the Parliamcnt,which had banished him during a sudden disturbance,might also call him back again. And certainly, just as theComprehension Bill emanated from party considerations, soalso it owed its rejection to them. The new government wasopposed by the universal sentiment of the whole Anglicanorganisation which the Chancellor had founded, and in whichecclesiastical and secular forces worked together. The Anglicantendencies gained especial strength by the relations withIreland, where the organisation which secured the dominionof Protestantism had been carried out by the Chancellor'sinfluence, and where Ormond, the Lord Lieutenant, Clarendon'sfriend, guided the administration according to the Chancellor'sideas. As these arrangements at the same timemaintained the preponderance of the English part of thePopulation, and secured their landed property, they were ofgreat importance for the internal construction of the English176 against 70. Grey's Debates i. 13a.I i 2

484 GO VA'RAVJfEiVT AXD PARLIAMEiVT xv. 6.A.D. 1668.State in general, and found powerful support in Parliament.Ormond regarded Buckingham as a personal enemy ; tooppose him he prepared at once to come to England, wherehe arrived before the close of Parliament. Rut whether hewere present or not, he was reckoned as the chief of theClarendon faction. That any serious effort was made forthe recall of Clarendon is not very probable; it would notat all have fitted in with the position of affairs. The existingParliament rather united the ideas which the Chancellor hadmaintained with those which he had opposed. It was contentto rest on the exclusively ecclesiastical foundation, whichit owed to him, but at the same time it made an attack onthe indcpendence of the administration and the prerogative ingeneral, in which he would never have taken part. In the oppositionClarendon's adherents now joined his old antagonists.An understanding between Ormond and Coventry began.The King's demand for subsidies could not be rejected, yetthe grant was only small ; it was restricted to ~300,000 : andthe means of collecting it were discussed with endless detail.The examination of the past extravagance was renewed ; thecauses of the misfortunes suffered during the last war wereinvestigated, and found to lie in personal misconduct ; preciselythose who thought they had been most energetic, sawthcmselves most actively threatened.But the attack was especially directed against certainmembers of the government who had already filled highand confidential posts. It was asked how it was possiblethat men who had hitherto advised the King badly shouldnow advise him better. Parliament must show him theirtreacheries and weaknesses, so that he might learn to knowthem, and give redress by their dismissal. That great claimof all parliamentary government, the claim to decide whetherthe nlinisters should stand or fall, was asserted all the morestrongly because it had received confirmation from Clarendon'sdismissal and impeachment. Even if Parliament, aswas now said, had been carried away by surprise in thematter, it still held fast to this claim, especially as an expressdeclaration in its favour had been made by the new ministers,who however were now attacked with great violence. 'Wexv. 5. Ill7 THE YEAR I 668. 485A.D. 1668.shall remain unhappy,' Seymour exclaimed in the House, 'aslong as the King retains his counsellors.'It was suggested that the treaty which had been concludedmust be submitted to the House before a money-grant weremade; a demand was made that a definite portion of theroyal revenues should be annually devoted to definite purposes.To obviate the possibility of an unparliamentary government,a new law was introduced to ensure the frequentholding of parliaments ; it enacted that the Chancellor shouldbe authorised, in case the King should delay, to issue thewrits on his own authority. The remark was made thatthe King must be subjected to legal compulsion I. To whichit was answered that a lion confined in a cage did not on thataccount leave off roaring. The proposal was finally rejected,principally because it had been irregularly introduced.Thus the strife with Parliament at home entered upon acareer of which no one could foresee the end. It was fortunatefor the government that it was supported by thesuccessful results of its foreign policy.The King of France, after the conclusion of the agreementat the Hague, had taken possession of Franche Comte, buthe declared that all the same he remained true to his alternative.This new loss and the declaration of the two powersinduced the Spaniards to accept it. The Marquis of Castelrodrigo,to whom the choice was left, decided on demandingthe restoration of the province just lost, as it seemed to himindispensable for the cohesion of the monarchy; in return hewould leave in the hands of the French the strongholds whichthey had occupied in the Netherlands. His motive was, thatthis course involved a certain danger for Holland. He didnot give up the hope that the two powers might once moredecidedly take up the cause of the Spanish monarchy.This expectation helped to induce the Spaniards, froma desire to have their hands free in that case and to see all' Compelling the King by law.' Littleton, who actually said this, was thoughtat the time to have said ' the thing,' but this was afterwards proved to be untrueGrey's Debates i. 83.

488 GG VERNMENT AICrB PARLIAIIIBNT, xv. 5.A.D. 1668.of the contracting powers with Spain, so as to be able to offerdefiance immediately with united forces to any attempt ofthe French to overstep the limits assigned to them, and thento return to the re-establishment of the Peace of the Pyrenees.These had indeed for the most part been the ideas of the Kinghimself. But now they were so no more ; he would not overstepthe position of mediator which he had taken up. Thisalone gave him a very important position in the world ; heseemed to be the man on whom the peace of Europe depended ;it procured for him also other very considerable advantages.Such privileges as Sandwich had proposed as the price of adefensive and offensive treaty could not be attained throughthe Triple Alliance, but after many evasions that can easilybe understood, the Spaniards were ultimately induced to giveup their claim on Jamaica, the loss of which they had felt sodeeply, and in general on all existing English possessions inthe West Indies and in America. This was the masterpieceof Godolphin, then English ambassador in Spain. LordArlington expressed to him his acknowledgement and admirationof it1.We are reminded of Mocenigo's remark when we realisethat, just as a short while before a war, which cannot be calledfortunate, had under the influence of European complicationseffected a great extension of the English colonial system, sonow the simple demonstration made by the Triple Alliancesecured the emancipation of Portugal and the possession ofJamaica.And perhaps it might have been expected that thesefortunate results would react on the temper of Parliament.But such was not the case.At the conclusion of the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, theministers had plucked up courage to prorogue Parliament(May 9) : in August and again in November 1668 this prorogationwas repeated. But the antagonism of parties continuedincessantly, although Parliament was not then sitting.For as Ormond, in spite of his hostility to Buckingham, couldArlington to Sir William Godolphin. Arlington's letters ii. 300.1667 instead of 1670.The datexv. 5. Illr TJIE YEAR 1668.A.D. 1668.not be quite removed from the old confidence of the King, soalso other adherents of Clarendon, men like Lord Cornbury,the son of the Chancellor, found support again at court; theministers had to abstain from talking openly of his dismissal.A dispute arose between Buckingham and Coventry, whichled to a challenge, for giving which Coventry was sent to theTower : every one took his part ; never had more carriagesbeen seen driving to the Tower than now went to expresssympathy with the prisoner.There was no doubt that, had Parliament now met in thistemper, it would have proceeded to an impeachment of theministers, by which their lives might have been endangered.Buckingham and Arlington returned to the idea which hadruined Clarendon ; they thought of dissolving Parliament andissuing writs for a new election. They imagined that a goodresult might be expected from it, and that they might bedelivered from their enemies without endangering the existingarrangements in Church and State. Ruckingllam counted onhis connexion with the leaders of the sectaries, and thoughtthey would be entirely submissive; he is said to have wonfrom them a promise that they would be content with simpleindulgence and would pay money to the King. With thePresbyterians, to whom the government showed much consideration,negotiations were once more opened in the autumnof 1668. They protested that it would always be their workto preserve amongst the people the reverence for the throne.The King, who saw at Arlington's house a Presbyteriandeputation which presented to him an address of thanks, inaccordance with his own wish, reminded them not to misusethe liberty which he gave them, especially not to holdnumerous assemblies : he expressed once more the wish tosee them received into the national church ; some restrictionshowever would be necessary, for public peace must also bemaintained. Hopes were entertained, and Arlington especiallywas of that opinion, that the Presbyterians might sofar give way that a stronger representation of their partyin Parliament would not endanger episcopacy. With theseviews and anticipations it was considered possible to proceedto a dissolution.

Of all the leaders of the restoration movement Albemarlealone still enjoyed uninterrupted consideration ; he howeverset himself decisively against this plan. He felt sure that anew Parliament would take up a thoroughly hostile positionto the King and the administration, that those who hadbeen oppressed would, on coming to power, seek to take vengeanceon their oppressors'. He said that in that case hewould leave England rather than fall into the hands of hisopponents.It had already been publicly said that the property of theChurch must be appropriated to pay the King's debts. Butwould not he himself fall into danger if he separated fromthat Parliament, which from the first had been united tohim ?Lately also even tumultuous disturbances had often occurred.First, in the spring, some students and some of Cromwell's oldsoldiers had united ; a kettlk served them for a drum; withcries of hatred and moral aversion they had made an attackon Whitehall; they had been dispersed, but not got rid ofor destroyed. The memory of Cromwell was as active as ever.Men turned their eyes to Lambert in his prison.Who would secure the King another time against a stormof this kind? Having fallen out with the Parliament of theRestoration, and distrusting the Protestant Dissenters, heonce more reverted to his Catholic policy.' Ne voyant pas ancune surete poor leur tctes, puisqu'il faudroit nhcessairementtomber entre les mains d'un autre parlement, qui seroit compose de leurs ennemis.'Ruvigny, whose despatches in general give the best information about this.CHAPTER VI.SECRET ALLIANCE WITH FRANCE, 1669-70.THE King's return to his Catholic policy was not causedonly by inrernal, but also by external considerations.As has been shown, it had been Sir William Temple's idcato elaborate the TripIe Alliance into a European confederacyfor the preservation of the Spanish monarchy and of thebalance of power. The intention was, to include in it Lorraineand Switzerland, the principal Protestant princes, and eventhe Emperor as well ; all were to pledge themselves to mutualdefence, and the maintenance of the renunciation made inthe Peace of the Pyrenees. In these moveil~ents against theschemes of Louis XIV, ardent Huguenots saw ground forsome hope that their old independence might be restored.An old soldier, Roux de Marcilly, who had served among theWaldensians, and kept up a chain of communications withthe whole of southern France, appeared as early as thesummer of 1668 in London, to call the attention of the Englishministers to whom he had access, to the great prospect thatopencd before them ; he asserted that Provence, Languedoc,Guyenne, even Normandy, would rebel at the first opportunity;he sought to direct the ambition of Charles and the Duke ofYork to the acquisition of these provinces '.And now that the home relations developed in such away, that the ministers were on the point of uniting withRuvigny, Oct. 29, who secretly in a hiding-place listened to the conversation ofthis man. Roux knew of the proposal of a 'liye offensive et defensive contre laFlance, entre I'Espngne, I'Angleterre et les provinces unies;-il s'assure fort del'Esl~agne, mais nullement de I'Angleterre.' There is an instructive article aboutRoux and his hor~iblend L I IIaag, ~ France Protestante ix.

492 SECRET rlLLIAA7CE WIT13 FRANCE. XV. 6.AD. 1669.Presbyterians and Independents, to oppose and dissolve theParliament with which the King had fallen out on account ofhis prerogative as well as of his religious schemes, it almostseemed as if the restored monarchy might just as well takeup a Protestant attitude as the Protectorate had done before ;and indeed more decidedly and grandly, as the Catholic ideanow centred in France, which also threatened the peace ofEurope. To resist this power at the head of the minor statesseemed a worthy task for a King of England ; the idea of theTriple Alliance seemed to tend in this direction.But we know how entirely different were the considerationsfrom which resulted the convention at the Hague, and the participationof Charles I1 in this alliance : he still cherished thesame intentions, which for the time had been thrust into thebackground; far from offering his hand to a confederacy,which would have united him still closer to the Republic,he on the contrary entered secretly into a negotiation of anentirely opposite character. For in spite of all this externalgood understanding, he cherished the deepest repugnance tothe Dutch, from whom he still wished to get satisfaction asjn an affair of honour, and with whom the interests of hispeople with respect to trade and colonies again clashed onevery side. In Surinam a sort of war continued between theEnglish and Dutch settlers. And if the English commercialundertakings were directed, after thr peace of Breda, withgreater confidence than before to the East Indies, yet now, asbefore, they everywhere encountered the rival efforts of theDutch, who still had a decided preponderance in those parts.Mocenigo follows undoubtedly the universal judgment whenhe expresses the opinion that England must either give upthe trade with the East Indies or the peace with Holland '.The African Company had been ruined by the failure of itsundertaking on the coast of Guinea ; this was also felt in theWest Indian colonies, which just then rose into importancethrough the importation of slaves. From time to time theold dispute was renewed about the lowering of the flag. If' Non essere a durare per lungo tempo questo commercio all' Inghilterra o lapace all' Olanda.'xv. 6. SECRET ALLIAXCG R'ITH FRA A'CE. 493A.D. 1669.the King of England, who in his foreign policy always keptcommercial considerations in sight, now looked round todiscover how he might at last obtain liberty of action againstHolland, the means were easily found. In spite of the TripleAlliance he had not given up for a moment his friendshipwith Louis XIV. On Ruvigny's return he expressly causedproposals to be made for the renewal of a personal connexion.On his side Louis XIV also was now much enraged against theRepublic. He thought it was under an obligation, by reasonof the advantages which the French crown had gained forit, to support his claims : instead of this it opposed them, andsought to form a European alliance against them. Louis XIVreplied to Charles 11's approaches with the declaration, thatnow the considerations were removed by which he had beforebeen hindered from allying himself with England againstHolland. At first Charles I1 refused to fall in with this overture,because he considered himself on his side to be bound.By degrees however the old antipathies again won the upperhand with him. In a curiously naive manner he expressesthem in a letter to his sister in the summer of 1669. 'Royand King,' so he says there, will, he doubts not, agree verywell to come forward against Holland, as it has used themboth very scurvily : King (that is, himself) will never be satisfiedtill he has had his revenge, and is very ready to enter intoan agreement upon that matter as soon as Roy pleases.So little was Charles I1 disposed to enter into that coalitionagainst France, of which the Republic must always have beenthe centre, that he rather negotiated an alliance with Franceagainst the Republic, and indeed with better prospects ofsuccess than ever before. Louis had first declared himselffor the Republic, at all events so far as to refuse proposals toits disadvantage ; now he offered to co-operate in its ruin.But as far as the Presbyterians were concerned, Charles I1was still less inclined to espouse their cause.The times were then favourable to Catholicism ; it againraised itself most mightily. That it had remained master inSpain and Italy was the work of the former epoch ; at thattime its connexion with the Bourbon monarchy, which wasjust approaching the zenith of its power, was of great service

494 SECRET ALLJAKE WITH FRA A7CE xv. 6.A.D. I 669.to it. We are not speaking of dogma, the inward cohesion ofwhich always produces a strong impression, nor of the machinationsof the Jesuit fathers, although they are undeniable:in the European nations other influences of an impalpablekind are also at work; those forms of life which come intostrongest prominence exercise an irresistible attraction uponall others. Catholicism was then represented in three greatkingdoms-in Spain, which although it connived when Francemet with opposition from the religious side, yet for its ownpart held fast by the traditional belief-in France itself, and inAustria, which was just rising into importance ; it had still itssupports in the hierarchical constitution of the GermanEmpire and of Poland. But more than this, the great nationalliteratures belonged to it, the outcome of the age and of itsculture : such were the Italian, which, thanks to the works ofnoble style which it possessed from old times, and even thosemannered works which it now produced, exercised a widespreadinfluence ; such again was the Spanish literature, thenin its full bloom; and such also was the French, still moresympathetic with the temperaments of other nations, whichtook its rise together with the monarchy. That there weretwo prominent literary parties in France (for in literature asin the Church the schcol of Port Royal played an importantpart) was no disadvantage, since they both took their standon the Catholic basis. So also art in its most importantbranches was a product of the Catholic world. Through theseinfluences, which quietly prepared men's minds, and throughthe agreement in the Catholic forms of life of the two greatstates, which were at discord on other points, it was madeeasy for an active priesthood to make conversions on all sides.Never were they more numerous and striking, especially inthe higher classes.The Protestant world in consequence became justly alarmed :with sure instinct, it saw in the rise of France its chief danger.But Charles I1 was not the man to put himself at its headand reassure it.The Restoration in England was in itself agreeable toCatholicism, in so far as it had set aside the most powerfulexpression of Protestantism which had ever yet appeared inxv. 6. SECRET ALLZAAiVCE IVZTH FRANCE. 495A.D. 1669.political power, the Protectorate of Cromwell and the AnabaptistRepublic. Although the Anglican Church rose again,this was balanced by the fact that she had preserved, andnow restored to its full authority, one of the most importantforms of the ancient Church, the episcopal constitution.Charles I1 intended, as we know, to bring about a restorationin doctrine also, and even a conditional recognition of thePapacy, if only certain concessions were made, and exceptionsgranted, to the Anglican Church. He wished to attach himselfand his kingdom to the great confederacy of the religionand Church to which it had once belonged.His difference with the Parliament, which had now uniteditself with the Anglican Church, was principally caused byits opposition to his Catholic tendencies. His ministers mightthink of supporting themselves by means of the Presbyteriansand the adherents of the other sects, but the wishes of theKing could never tend in this direction. Should there be anew election, he must at least be sure of the active sympathyof the Catholics, who had shown him during his exile thatthey were by no means unimportant, but had at their disposalconsiderable wealth, and exercised a certain influence. Hefelt himself bound to be grateful towards them, and in themalone had unconditional confidence. Not only his convictions,about which in his case there is not much to say, but also hissympathies, belonged to Catholicism. During his sojourn inFrance, Belgium, and Catholic Germany, he had imbibed themthe more easily because his opponents were precisely themost active adherents of Protestantism. Once more he contemplated,and indeed more decisively than before, the possibilityof declaring himself a Catholic.It has often been thought that the influence of his brother,the Duke of York, who had already really joined the RomanChurch, determined him to this step ; but serious doubts, as weshall show, suggest themselves against the truth of this, not tomention that Charles I1 says distinctly that his brother wasfirst attracted to the project at a later time. In the web ofpolitical engagements and intentions in which he was now involved,the King himself thought that the time for it was come.But for that also he needed the support and protection of

496 SECRET ALLIAXCE WITH FRANCE. xv. 6.A.D. 1669.France. For if already on the introduction of the Act ofUniformity tun~ultuous disturbances had been feared, howmuch more were these to be dreaded the moment he tooksteps towards a restoratio~l of Catholicism ! It was Charles 11'sidea to carry out his change of religion with the assistance ofan armed force, which he still kept together, and, in hispresent temper, increased. Even to gain the requisite suppliesan understanding with Louis XIV was necessary; forwho else could have provided them?In January 1669 the King, his brother, and some of theprincipal Catholics, Clifford, Rellasis, and Arundel of Wardour,with Arlington's acquiescence, took counsel together and cameto a resolution1. Arundel himself went to France; in thedeepest secrecy he saw Louis XIV. His proposal extendednot only to friendship and alliance, but to the most intimaterelations between the two Kings, for an object which in greatnessand importance has had no equal in the world's annals.He expressed Charles 11's determination to be reconciled withthe Catholic Church; and to carry out this, he requested thehelp of the most Christian King, which was at first to consistin supplies of money. Charles I1 let him know that to provideagainst every possible danger, he was fortifying his mostimportant towns, as for instance Portsmouth and Chatham,for naval purposes. In the main everything seemed to him todepend on securing from all anxiety the possessors of churchlands, the reclamation of which was dreaded now, as it hadbeen in the time of Mary Tudor. He expected the counten-ance of the Presbyterians and Dissenters, to whom the AnglicanChurch was more odious than the Catholic. And evenamongst the Anglicans, at least so says the Duke of York,there were many who were inclined to Catholicism, so thatthe resistance would not be too formidable.In the fortresses of Scotland, as well as in those of England,Catholic or other trusted commanders were placed. The Irishtroops were also counted on ; for Ormond, though Protestant,was too loyal to resist, and should he do so, the Earl of Orrerywould put himself at their head. Charles I1 made no secretJames 11's notes, in Macpherson i. 48.xv. 6. SECRET ALLIANCE WITH FRANCE. 497A.D. 1669.of the fact that it was not only his conscience which drovehim to this step; he said, his kingdom was in such confusionthat he saw no other escape l.The negotiations in detail are hard to ascertain. Theywere carried on by word of mouth, or the letters to whichthey were committed have been burnt. They could not encountergreat difficulties, for the French court did not deceiveitself as to the enmity of the zealous Protestants. We havea letter of assent from Louis XIV (June 1669), with whichhe dismissed Arundel. Upon this, not exactly to Charles 11'sliking, the new French ambassador, Coltert Croissy, was firstadmitted into the secret2. Moreover, in consequence of this,the negotiations also about an alliance against Holland weretaken up again ; the schemes, although different in themselves,had yet a like aim, which afforded a common ground. Thetwo Princes united in the closest friendship; with commonforces they desired to re-establish the Catholic Church inEngland, and to destroy the Republic, which was hateful tothem both alike.It was and remained the presumption that Louis XIVshould undertake nothing against Spain, and that Charles I1should not be obliged to withdraw from the Triple Alliance.Only this was not to extend to future cases, especially not tothe case of the vacancy of the Spanish crown. Charles I1acknowledged expressly that the King of France was notbound by the renunciation made by his wife; he even promisedhis co-operation for the establishment of her claims,and only sought to secure for himself a corresponding shareof the profits. As usual he kept in view the consequent extensionof his position at sea. The nations of South Americamust be made to submit to himS ; he was to receive Minorcaand Ostend.- -Whitehall, June 6, 1669. in Dalrymple 27. I have looked through the correspondenceof St. Albans in these years in the State Paper Office ; so far as I canunderstand allusions, which are often obscure, it contains nothing of importance.' In his despatch there is the tiresome note, 'Le memoire (d'Arundel) et lalettre de M. Lionne manquent.'' S. M. T. Ch. promet, les droits sur la monarchie d'Espagne lui Qtant Pchus,d'assister le roi de la GI. Brgne. se rendre maitre des conrr6es et places enAmBrique.'RANICE, VOL. 111. ~k

498 SECRET ALLIANCE WITH FRANCE: xv. 6.A.D. 1669.The exccution of these agreements lay in the far distance;in immediate proximity on the other hand stood the war withHolland and the declaration of Catholicism.Quite at the beginning, Colbert Croissy made a remarkvery much to the point on this subject. The declaration ofCatholicism would, he said, if it came first, cause so great anexcitement in England and in the whole Protestant world, thatthe war with Holland would scarcely be any longer possible.Far better begin with the war against Holland; for as thenation was injured in her East Indian trade by the Republic,it would be easy to excite her jealousy, she would grantconsiderable subsidies for the war ; at the same time, withhelp from France, the King would become strong enough forhis undertaking, and then also with greater security mightadvance to the change of religion. The war would affordhim opportunity for employing elsewhere such troops as hecould not rely on, and for surrounding himself only with thoseon whom he could most entirely depend, and at the sametime also would provide him with an excuse for fresh levies :thcn, were he well armed by sea and land, and had he atthe same time the help of the King of France on his side,no one would dare to take his declaration as an occasionfor rebellion ; as he would be engaged in war with the Republic,he might punish every kind of intercourse with itas high treason.Upon King Charlcs this proposal, which ultimately decidedthe whole character of the undertaking, made at the firstmoment a great impression ; but he still reserved for himselfthe right of accepting or rejecting it.But still another important point, concerning the conditionsunder which Charles would be willing to undertake the war,remained for discussion. He demanded that in war, as wellas in pcace, regard should be had for the Prince of Orange.Further he came forward with the idea, with which he hadpreviously begun thc first war, of acquiring a firm positionin the United Provinces; he claimed as a condition thecession of Walchercn, Sluys and Cadsand to the Englishcrown. But principally he demanded, for he would not enduredependence upon Parliament, very considerable sub-xv. 6. SECRET ALLIANCE Ifl(TH FRAXCE. 499A.D. 1669.sidies. Colbert says that when he heard the sum, +-Soo,ooo,he was thunderstruck, and gave up all hope of bringingthe matter to a conclusion. Louis XIV answered, that wasto offer an alliance and then refuse to enter into it. Afterlong negotiation he at length consented to allow thirtyFrench men-of-war to join fifty English, and also to pay~300,000 as well. In return for this concession he reservedto himself the power to fix, according to his own discretion,the time when war should be declared, for he wished toprovide on all sides for the great undertaking so well asto ensure its success.In this negotiation, which was carried on in the deepestsecrecy, no one took a more active part than the daughter ofQueen Henrietta Maria (who had dicd a year before), HenriettaAnne of England, Duchess of Orleans : she was so far morefortunate than her mother had been, that she possessed toa much greater extent the confidence of Charles 11. Sheis the child who came into the world at Exeter, just as herfather's fortunes took an unlucky turn ; after adventures anddangers of every kind she was carried safely to France ; thereshe shared her mother's exile, who though in the neighbourhoodof the court stil! led a private life with limited means,till after a short visit to England she was married to thebrother of Louis XIV, Duke Philip of Orleans: she wasyoung, beautiful, and charming, a little delicate, but full ofintelligence; what gave her life colour is not so much apassion of the kind thcn fashionable at both courts1, as herambition to play a part in politics, and to maintain a goodunderstanding between France and England. Her brothcrCharles perhaps devoted to no other human being a morereal and disinterested affection than to his sister; Louis XIVliked her society. Her consideration at the French courtrose or fell according to the degree of the understandingbetween the two kings. On this understanding it seemedSo at least might be inferred from the following sentence out of a letter of herbrother's to her : 'If you were as well acquainted with a little fantastical1 gentlemancalled Cupide as I am, you would not wonder.' Dalrymple ii. 6. MadameLa Fayette indeed says that she learnt something very different from her.~ k 2

500 SECRET ALLIANCE WITH FRANCE. xv. 6.A.D. 1669.to her that the welfare of both, even the eternal salvation ofher brother, depended. For nothing had been more deeplyimpressed upon her by the Capuchin, who instructed her inreligion, than that the Catholic Church was the sole way tosalvation ; from this point of view, he represented to her evenher exile as fortunate for her soul l. She lived and movedin the Catholic sentiments which then prevailed ; with joyshe welcomed the thought that both her brothers werewilling at last to declare themselves Catholics, as indeedher mother had always wished. She hated Holland as theprincipal seat of Protestantism, and she hated its dominantaristocracy, which was wronging her nephew, the Prince ofOrange. It caused her infinite satisfaction, that she was themeans of bringing about the alliance in favour of Catholicismand of the Dutch war. To her the first overtures were made :it was she who received and looked after the answers; evenabout money matters and the inmost details of business,memoranda went to her; she removed the final difficulties.As Charles I1 had already long ago expressed the wish toreceive a visit from her, without any political object at all,it can easily be understood that she cordially assented, soas to finish in England the work she had begun in France.But her husband was not inclined to give his consent;doubtless from jealousy, but of a kind which is by no meansthe most common 2. Duke Philip of Orleans knew the objectof the negotiations which were being carried on, thoughhe did not quite see through them. He thought that thehonour of mediating between the two great powers was dueto himself. But in general from many other causes, andespecially through the fault of the favourite who ruled theDuke, the husband and wife stood on bad terms ; Charles I1had on one occasion been obliged to recommend his sisterto the protection of Louis XIV, and when a breach actuallyoccurred, had much difficulty in prevailing on his brother-Notes of the Father Cyprian Gamaches, Court and Times of Charles I, ii. 412.Louis XIV to Colbert, March 29 : 'Comine ma soeur en diverses rencontresa park h mon frbre de la substance de notre negociation, hors du point le plus secret,il a commis son honneur ne permettre pas que sa femme en reportast tout l'honneur.'He would at least have wished to accompany her, which Charles I1 declined.xv. 6. SECRET ALLZAATCE IVZ'ITH PRAIVCE.A.D. 1670.50 Iin-law to be reconciled to his wife, and to return to thccourt which he had forsaken. The authority of Louis XIV,and the pressing intercession of Colbert the minister, inducedthe Duke at last to give his consent, but then onlyfor a journey to Dover and for a limited time. He refusedwith stiffnecked obstinacy to allow his wife to go to London,nay even to Canterbury l.On May 16/26, 1670, the Duchess reached Dover : theKing received her with all the devotion which he felt. Justthen it was remarked that she had more power over him thanany one else in the world ; it was said that she would governEngland, if only she stayed by his side. Through her influencethe stipulations were signed, and the King was inducedto promise that they should be ratified within a month. Therewere present also Queen Catherine, the Duchess of York,Buckingham and Arlington,whose discord, though again highlyinflamed, she knew how to allay. Last of all appeared theDuke of York, who however was not satisfied by the courseaffairs took under his sister's influence. He desired nothingbut that the King should publicly go over to Catholicism;from the war against Holland he foresaw complications withParliament similar to those in the last war.Still things were not all arranged when the Duchessagain left her brother. She undertook to bring about theaccomplishment of the treaties as well as their conclusion.Charles I1 had once more recommended her, in the mosturgent manner, to the favour of Louis XIV; a stipulationwas under consideration for the purpose of prevailing on herhusband to treat her well for the future, by joining to asubsidy to be granted to him the condition that no breachshould occur between him and his wife. She seemed stillto have a happy future before her; the homage offered herwas due rather to her personal qualities than to her rank.She is renowned for the gift of interesting in herself andher doings any one upon whom she deigned to bestow herColbert, May 27. Madame tells him, 'qu'elle ne ponvoit pour quelqse raison,que ce peut Btre, passer Douvres, soit pour aller B Londres ou seulement B Canterhury.-hlme.est en parfaile santb.'

502 SECRET ALLIANCE WITH FRANCE. xv. 6.A.D. 1670.attention : to the enjoyment of youth, beauty, and a highsocial position, there was added a political importance whichaccording to all appearance must endure. She had succeededin uniting the houses of Stuart and Bourbon in acommon political and religious interest ; already a paper ofcyphers for future correspondence was on the way to her,when, scarcely a week after her return from England, shedied in the chiteau of St. Cloud, after a few hours' violentillness.She had just attained the ideal object of her life ; but whata state of things surrounded her ! She was not yet dead whenher husband hurried to her rooms to put himself in possessionof all her letters, which had been kept secret from him ;she herself only thought of her brother, for whose sake aloneshe regretted not living longer ; she thought she had beenand that by her husband's favourite, the Chevalier ofLorraine. The French maintained that by an unseasonablebath in a river, she had brought upon herself a most virulentattack of cholera. The result of the dissection seems to confirmthis ; even in England it allayed the suspicions that hadbeen at first awakened I.This was a catastrophe of inauspicious omen for the resultof the projected intimate alliance.From a personal and dynastic point of view this alliancemight be justified ; to the nature of things in general it wasentirely opposed. How was France, which had just entered onthe epoch in which the renovated Catholic system became completelypredominant, to unite with England, where the Protestantidea had taken possession of men's minds, and all themore because it was expressed in the most varied forms? Howcould a despotic crown, which possessed the most absoluteauthority over all the institutions of the state, join with one' Letter of Lyonne in Mignet. A doubt might be raised by a letter of Temple'sto Arlington (the Hague, July 15) in which he remarks that the suspicion hadagain increased there, 'after so general a possession, which has been much increasedby the Princess Dowager's c~uiosity, to ask her physician's opinions uponthe relation transmitted hither to one of them from his brother, who is the Dutchsecretary at Paris, and pretends it came from Dr. Chamberlain, though somethingdifferent from what he transmitted into England.' To pronounce a medicalopinion, this contrary statement ought to be seen.xv. 6. SECRET ALLIANCE WITH FRAA'CE.5.03A.D. 1670.established to carry out the system of parliamentary government; and a power which itself threatened by its establishmentthe independence of the European states and kingdoms,with one whose task it had been from all times to maintainthe Balance of Power on the Continent?In one of its most essential points the treaty could not beconfided even to one, who had hitherto been the most confidentialof the King's counsellors, the Duke of Buckingham.He had always wished for, and in fact first suggested, apolitical alliance with France; and only of this was he informed.It is very curious to see how he imagined that hewas proceeding with perfect freedom and independence in thematter, whilst the most important point had been arrangedlong before. Of something however he was informed ; to theacquisitions which England was to make, Goree and Voornewere to be added, so as to include the most important of theoutlying islands on either side of Zealand. The subsidy of£~OO,OOO, promised for the declaration of Catholicism, wassilently added to the £300,000 granted for the war. Thistreaty was discussed by Buckingham, Lauderdale, and AshleyCooper, under the supposition that no other existed. Nextto them Clifford and Arlington signed ; they alone wereinitiated into the Catholicising schemes.To what extent not only these schemes, but every inclinationtowards the Catholics, every relation with them, wastreated as a personal secret, is clearly seen in the account of avisit paid by the Papal Nuncio at Brussels to Whitehall inNovember, 1670 l. By the Venetian ambassador he wasintroduced to Arlington, whom they found in his office ; it ischaracteristic how he procured them an audience with theKing. He led them into his sitting-room, and first of alllocked the doors with the joking remark, that now they werehis prisoners; then he went up a secret flight of stairs tothe upper apartments, from which he conducted the King,carrying the light before him : they stepped softly so as to' IZelalione dello stato, nel quale era, la religione cattolica in Inghilterra l'ao16;0, fatta da Mons. Airoldi internuncio apostolico in Brusselles. Corsini Lihraryat Itorne; dated Brussels, ~gth November, 1670.

504 SECRET ALL [A NCE WITH PRANCE. xv. 6.A.D. 1670.awaken no suspicion. After the first greetings, in whichthe King inquired after the health of Pope Clement IX,the conversation turned on the condition of the Catholics.The King said that he had always found the Catholicsfaithful, and, if he showed them favour, he expected to findthem still more so in the future. The Nuncio protested,that from Rome the Catholics were imbued with no otherthoughts than those of the deepest devotion to the King ;if it sometimes happened that some priest or another behavedhimself thoughtlessly and insubordinately, or went too far, thatonly arose from the fact that there was no superior in Englandto keep them within bounds. The King rejoined that in sucha case he helped himself, by having priests of this kind sentout of the country without further ado. Whilst they spoke,the Venetian ambassador remained at a respectful distance.After some time the Duke of York entered also, havin, comedown the same staircase; but his remarks turned only uponindifferent generalities. The Duke had not at that time asyet gone over ; he is only represented as inclined towards theCatholics. The most decided sympathy for them was shownby the Duchess, whose conversion was completed before theend of the year. About the consultations with France, asmay easily be understood, not the slightest mention could bemade to the Nuncio.CHAPTER VII.WHILST this union with the Catholic world and the negotiationswith France, which were as much religious as political,were being arranged and furthered through strange gradationsof secrecy, the question about the dissolution of Parliamenthad been once more discussed in the Privy Council.Buckingham and the two Secretaries of State, Arlington andTrevor, were in favour of it ; Albemarle, the Duke ofYork, and the Lord Keeper Bridgeman, were opposed to it.Bridgeman demonstrated that, in spite of all the promises ofthe Dissenters, a Parliament in which they had the majorityoffered no security either for the crown or for the peaceof the country. This opinion was also shared by the King,who now already conceived the hope of approaching thematter better at some other time, after the conclusion ofthe agreement with France. As he now stood on betterterms with his brother, he hoped to moderate the oppositionby a personal understanding with its leaders. He enteredinto a formal negotiation with them, which was concernedprincipally with two points ; on his side, that he should desistfrom his alliance with the Dissenters, on the side ofthe Parliament, that it should make an arrangement forthe payment of the King's debts, and above all that itshould not proceed to those direct attacks on the ministerswhich it had so long and so seriously threatened. TheKing took them under his protection, for he was himselfinsulted if those to whom he gave his confidence were

506 P.4 RLIA AIENTA RY SESSIONS xv. ;.A.D. 1669.attacked1. He did not neglect, by the distribution of offices,pensions, and other favours, as far as the power of the crownextended, to strengthen the court's party.On the 19th October, 1669, the ninth session of the secondParliament of Charles I1 was opened.The King this time made no mention of Comprehension;on the contrary, he issued proclamations against the Nonconformists,for which the two Houses thanked him ; on theother hand, Parliament also did not proceed to an impeachmentof the ruling ministers. On the whole however itdid not show itself very tractable. The inquiry about theformer administration was again taken up most actively.G. Carteret, who could not deny that as Treasurer to theAdmiralty he had conducted the expenditure in a mannerto which he had not been entirely authorised, was subjectedto a trial in the Lower House, of which he was a member,which ended in his suspension from taking part in itssittings. He still was one of Clarendon's adherents whoon their side took his part ; it was only very small majoritieswhich on the different points gave the decision against him.The suspension was only pronounced by a majority of threevotes (100 against 97).A similar fluctuation was also noticeable in the matter ofthe opposition between Ormond and his rival Orrery, who hadalso come to England, and who, advanced by Ruckinghamand in favour with the King, began to play a great part.Ormond had at last lost his high office in Ireland. It wasintended to subject him to parliamentary impeachment, onaccount of the arbitrary actions of which he was accused.The Clarendon party was still strong enough to prevent it;on the other hand, Orrery was placed in the position of. having to defend himself before Parliament for some despoticacts which he had committed, and some thoughtless words.Hardly recovered from the gout, he presented himself forthis purpose, on December st, at the bar of the House.There were many who were not satisfied by his answers;Colbert Croissy, 18th August, 1669 : '11 espbre aussi les porter B lui con>plairedans tous les autres points qui regardent l'affermissement de son autoritb. etl'avantage de sa couronne.'xv. 7. FROM 1669 TO 1671.A.D. 1669.but he also had a numerous party on his side, who proposedto transfer his case to the ordinary court of justice, the King'sBench ; for this at last a small majority was gained ; itamounted also only to three votes I.Still some occasions occurred in which there was decidedunanimity. It was alleged as a crime against the Nonconformiststhat they sought to dissolve Parliament and tochange the government. The resolution was passed to supportthe King against all opponents in the maintenance ofthe government in Church and State as then established-aresolution which obviously expressed the sense rather of theHouse than of the King himself. In the question of subsidies,only the unsatisfactory decision was come to, that the grantshould not amount to more than ~400,000, and should bedrawn neither from the excise nor from the land-tax. Thathowever was of little use to the King. On the I ~ th December,the day after Carteret's exclusion, he prorogued the session tillFebruary, in the undisguised expectation that by that timemany of his supporters who were still missing might havearrived, and that the general temper might have changed.Just then a change had taken place in the Scottish Parliament,which strengthened him in this hope.In Scotland the motives, actions and results which appearin England are repeated; but they always stand out moresharply and decidedly.The sympathies of the Dissenters with the Dutch, whichin England were only conjectured, appeared quite openlyin Scotland. By means of secret and ambiguous influencesfrom abroad2, in November 1666 a rising of the most activeJournals, 1st December; 'to be persecuted at law ;' explainedin the Debates zor :'to the King's Bench.' It is justly said, ' the charge had not been brought againstLord Orrery, if one had been brought against Lord Ormond.'It is a curious coincidence that at that time a preacher, Gabriel Semple, hadby means of his sermons a great share in the first consolidation of the rebellionin Galloway (Woodrow, who speaks of him at length, iii. 267. passes rapidly overthe youth of this goodman'), and that we read in the report of a French emissary,Mr. de Rethreford (Rutherford?) the following remark : ' I1 y a 6th bien des gens,qui n'estoieut pas ce qu'ils professoient ; parmi eux il a At6 un JQsuite de DouayEscossais de nation, qui a BtA 18 en qualit6 de Puritaiu, et passa sous le nom degoodman : son nom est Semple.' Was Gabriel Semple really a disguised Jesuit 1Or is it a Will-o'-the-wisp which teases us l

508 PARLIAMENTARY SESSIOXS Xv. 7.A.D. 166~.Presbyterians had taken place. The Covenant was once moreproclaimed in Lanark : but government was better equippedthan the insurgents ; they were immediately dispersed withoutdifficulty on the Pentland Hills. Hereupon the reaction sprangup with corresponding energy. Amongst the nobility andthe episcopal clergy, who here also were united in the closestmanner, the resolution was taken, not only to demand theabjuration of the Covenant from the ministers and officials,but to make it a universal law for the country. But at andafter the fall of Lord Clarendon the government of Charles11, in Scotland as well as in England, withdrew a step fromthe system hitherto pursued ; the assembled troops weredismissed ; on the rebels, only the obligation of keeping thepeace was imposed. The man who conducted Scottish affairsas secretary, John Maitland, Lord Lauderdale, was moreentirely at one with the King than any of the English ministers,in the object of rendering possible for the crown a freeraction than was permitted by the preponderance of theepiscopal system. What was avoided in England occurredin Scotland : in June 1669 a royal decree was published,signed by Lauderdale, in consequence of which a largenumber of Presbyterian ministers, who had been expelledfrom their posts, were restored. And during the impressionmade by this decree, the elections to Parliament were activelyundertaken in Scotland, where there was no republican tendencyto be feared ; the opposition of parties, neither of whichcarried away the entire victory, procured for the governmenta preponderance over both. Lauderdale went himself toEdinburgh as royal commissioner, and opened the sessionon the same day on which it was opened in England. Wesaw how doubtful everything remained at Westminster ; inEdinburgh Lauderdale had a complete success. He calmedthe Presbyterians, but at the same time avoided exciting theantipathy of the prelates and of their party. He found ahearing in the whole nation, because he brought into considerationthe idea of a union with England, which waseagerly desired by the Scots, because it comprised an equalshare in trade also. In this way he was enabled to carryresolutions, such as could hardly have been expected as yet.xv. 7.FROM 1669 TO 1671.A.D. 1670.A recognition of the royal supremacy was carried through,which gave to the crown an almost absolute authority over thechurch. In it the organisation of the external governmentof the church was granted to the King and his successors,as a right inherent in the crown, and indeed to such anextent that, without exciting opposition, it comprised thedispensing power : the Parliament did not hesitate to declarethe right of calling out the militia also to be inherent in thecrown ; it promised that 20,000 armed men should stand atthe disposal of the King when and where he desired.That all this together was calculated to make in Englandalso an impression favourable to the King, there can beno doubt: Lord Lauderdale, before he went to Scotland,said so expressly. It was intentional that, in the Scottishact about the militia, Charles I1 was also styled King ofEngland. The English pretended to laugh at it, for inbattle with the Scots they had till now always remainedvictorious. Still it was disagreeable to them to see the Kingassured of an auxiliary force which was independent of them,and might possibly be directed against themselves. Of thenature of the negotiation with France no one had any informationor even suspicion ; but a rumour that an alliancewas being formed could not but spread abroad, and contributedto weaken the confidence of Parliament and tostrengthen the courage of the King.At the opening of the tenth session of this Parliament,February 4, Charles I1 appeared with the pomp of a militaryretinue, and expressed himself with unusual self-confidence.I-Ie had during the recess taken under his own supervisionthe inspection of the accounts, about which there had beenso much complaint, and in so doing had called to accountrather the Parliamentary commissioners ' than the officialsconcerned. He declared that he had personally examinedthe papers, and had convinced himself that not only thesubsidies granted by Parliament, but in addition a large part- -Ralph gives a memorial presented by them in which they seek to justify themselvesas to their intentions. Privately the King says, 'Que l'accusation contreMr. Carteret et autres est un pur effet de l'envie de ceux, qui veulent avoir leurscharges.'

5'0 PARLIAMENTARY SESSIONS xv. 7.A.D. 1670.of his other revenues, had been expended on the war. Howentirely was this opposed to the claim of Parliament to controlthe administration! The King opposed it with the assertionof his absolute power over public officials.In their former conferences the members of the opposition,which was led by Robert Howard, who was held by hisadherents to be the ablest man in the English kingdom, haddiscussed and come to an understanding as to the principalpoints at dispute; at the next impending debate about thesubsidies, which the King demanded with great emphasis,it must be proved whether they were still masters. Theirfirst motion was weaker than was expected, as its only objectwas to put off altogether the debate on the King's speech ;they seemed to wish above all to gain time. The proposalwas rejected by a small majority: they came forward witha second, still to put off at least the discussion about thesubsidies, but that was also rejected. On February 18 theyhad already got so far as a debate about supplies, which mustbe decisive in the existing situation ; Arlington said it wasthe day of the great crisis. In the existing position of parties,it was at the same time a decision about external affairs.The House resolved itself into committee : after a livelycontest it was decided by a majority, which had alreadyincreased to thirty-seven votes, to grant subsidies to the King.It was counted as a great victory that a fixed sum, notto be exceeded, was not again voted, but that a tax wasestablished out of which the necessary supply was to come ;it was a wine-tax for seven years, which it was calculatedwould bring in annually about £3oo,ooo.The King had conquered once more, and was in consequencehappy. He expressed his gratitude to the friendswho had supported him, being well-satisfied that now therewas no need for a dissolution of Parliament.Another source of revenue also, which might be made verylucrative, was put in his power; it was the sale of his feudalestates. He also succeeded in allaying by his word a disputebetween the two Houses, which already in the last sessionhad led to the most violent contests. In one point only hefailed. In the discussion about a rigorous bill against thexv. 7. FROM 1669 TO 1671.511A.D. 1670.Dissenters, a clause was proposed for the extension of thesupremacy in England as had been done in Scotland. Itcontained a reservation of all the rights and prerogatives whichthe King had ever asserted. This clause was rejected, forit would render doubtful the laws upon which the constitutionof the state depended, even the Magna Charta itself. On theother hand, the Conventicle Rill, which forbade all meetingsof the Dissenters under penalty of heavy fines, was passed.This indicates once more the perfect understanding betweenChurch and Parliament, on which the condition ofthe kingdom in general depended ; opposition was made tothe extension of the royal prerogative and the consequentfavour shown to the Dissenters. But what else could havebeen expected? No serious disputes were occasioned eitherby this or even by foreign affairs.Parliament was in favour of the Triple Alliance, andwould gladly have seen the proposal to include the Emperor,on the condition of the mutual defence of all partiesconcerned, agreed to. Some weight was attached on theother hand to the representations of the ministers that theKing might in consequence be easily drawn into remotecomplications. They were very careful not to say anythingagainst the Triple Alliance, which indeed was retained in thesecret agreements with France, and also not to injure theinterests of Spain, with whom so profitable a treaty had justbeen concluded ; they respected the sympathies of the nationwhich inclined in that direction ; though they refused to extendthe alliance, no one would have been able to foreseefrom their expressions an impending change of policy.At the re-opening of Parliament, which this time was onlyadjourned, on October 24, 1670, the contradiction betweenwhat was intended and what was said appeared in an ambiguitythat could no longer be disguised. Lord KeeperBridgeman praised the Triple Alliance, and made mention ofthe further treaties for the benefit of trade and the marine,which were already conducted or still being negotiated. Atthe same time he referred to the advance of the navalpower not only of Holland but also of France. From theneccssity of keeping pace with these powers, and of fulfilling

512 PARLIAMENTARY SESSIONS xv. 7.A.D. I 670.the obligations entered upon, he drew the conclusion tharEngland must be better equipped at sea, and demanded subsidiesin order that she might appear next year on the seawith a powerful fleet.This doubtless was the fleet with which it was intended,according to the treaty with France, to attack the Republicof Holland ; for it was at that time the intention of the Englishministry to begin the war in the spring of 1671. But LordKeeper Bridgeman was ignorant of this intention. He hadbeen for some months excluded from the committee forforeign affairs, and might be of opinion that the policy stillprevailed, in the formation of which, at the time of the introductionof the Triple Alliance, he himself had assisted.He expressed himself with all the greater caution : Parliament,which on its side was still as well disposed as it had beenin the last session, passed unanimously the resolution to supportthe King according to prevailing circumstances; or, asthe phrase runs, ' proportionable to his present occasions.' Theproposal was made, that the subsidies should be appropriatedexpressly to the object of maintaining the Triple Alliance;but against this it was urged that this restriction would, asfar as the King was concerned, have a hateful sound l, andthe formula was thought sufficient, that the continuationof the policy introduced by the Triple Alliance was expected.This might be explained in many ways, but however explainedno one could have a suspicion that the ships whichwere being built were to serve against Holland, with whoman alliance had just been concluded. Parliament and ministersmove side by side as yet without quarrel ; they evenstill sometimes act together, but in so doing they followoppos~te directions.Sometimes the temper of Parliament seemed so favourablethat Arlington formed the hope of winning it over to aunion with France, and even to the idea of Catholicism ; butwhen these points were once seriously touched upon, it becameevident that that nould never be attained.' ' La restriction parut odieuse et dbsavantageuse au roi et B son royaume,' asCulbert expresses himself in his despatch.XV. 7. FROM 1669 TO 1671. 513A.D. 1670.By the occupation of Lorraine (September 1670) Louis XIVhad especially excited all old anxieties about his encroachments; the Dutch, who affirmed the necessity for an extensionof the Triple Alliance1, found a hearing with Parliament ; evenin the debates about the subsidies there was already shown,as soon as taxation of French products was approached, anespecial disaffection towards France ; no minister would havedared to confess that he was on good terms with that power.And still more strongly, almost in the feeling of the oldElizabethan times, was the aversion to the Catholics expressed.Complaints arose about the increase of the Catholic chapelsand places of worship, about the great number of priests andJesuits in London and the counties, their convents, fraternities,schools, the spread of their religious books and the favourshown to recusants ; the King was called upon, in an elaborateand urgent address, to put an end to these evils. The appearance,in Ireland at least, of Anglican bishops side by sidewith Roman Catholic bishops produced a great impression.Father Talbot was consecrated archbishop of Dublin, andwas accompanied thither, and received there, with all thereverence due to this dignity. From the Irish Catholics aroseagain the bitterest complaints about the injustice done themby the new regulations, and with the ministers, especiallywith Buckingham, they found a hearing; but as that wasascribed to his old hostility against Ormond, Ormond's party(which was the old Clarendon party) set itself with thegreatest energy in opposition : in this matter it had on itsside the majority of the House of Commons, which wasalready influenced by the renewed oppression of the reformedChurches in France.Nobody would be deceived on the point ; the least suspicionof the Catholic scheme would have kindled Parliament intoa blaze. Arlington also and the zealous Catholics, who hadwished at first that the declaration of Catholicism shouldprecede the war against Holland, now acknowledged that thiswas impossible. In February I 67 r Arlington confessed to' ' Qu'il Btait de la dernikre importance pour le bien des deux nations d'estendrela triple ligue et d'estre prit h s'entresecourir.'RANKE, VOL. 111. L 1

514 PARLIAMENTARY SESSIONS 1669-1671. xv. 7,A.D. 1671.the French ambassador, that the King could not think ofthat declaration, if he had not first found an opportunity inthe war of providing himself with good troops and fortifyinghis strong places.In April 1671 Parliament was again adjourned, and indeedfor a whole year, till April 1672 ; time was wanted to carryout in the meanwhile the great stroke which was projected.CHAPTER VIII.THE expression ' Cabal ministry,' which is used in Englishhistory only with hatred and contempt, is not quite intelligible.The five men, the initial letters of whose titles formed thisname, were only a commission for foreign affairs, from whichthe members of the Privy Council, who at other times wereadmitted to consult about these affairs, were at this time excluded.Their common action consisted in regularly meetingto take measures for carrying out the French treaty whichthey had concluded, and in being in the King's confidence onthat point. Amongst themselves they were very different.Thomas Clifford must be looked upon as the soul of theCatholic project. The names of his forefathers appear fromthe time of the Conquest, fighting for the King againstWales, Scotland, and France; similarly Hugh Clifford ofUgbrooke, who belonged to the younger and less wealthy line,took part in Charles 1's war against the Scots in the year1639, as commander of a foot regiment ; he died of an illnesswhich he then contracted. His son was Thomas, who alreadyhad made himself remarkable at the University by a fieryinsubordination of conduct and even of mind ; and afterwardsin Parliament, where he represented Totnes, he introducedthe knightly spirit, with which he was filled, into civil affairsas well. He spoke well and made an impression. His personalconsideration was increased by the bravery he showedin the naval war against Holland ; this paved his way to thePrivy Council ; at least this motive was brought forward in~ 1 2

5 I 6 THE SECOND WAR AGAINST HOLLAND. xv. 8.A.D. 1672.the Gazette which announced his elevation1. Still it was notto the Anglican party that he attached himself; Clifford wasone of the most zealous Catholics at court ; only in the combinationof religious freedom and royal despotisn~ did he seesalvation for the state. He thought that the King fulfilled theobligations of his office, if he procured right and justice forhis subjects; by other parliamentary laws he was not bound ;especially was it one of his duties to care for the freedomof conscience of the different creeds. In this he agreed withthe secret intentions of the King, who took pleasure in hisspirit and in his bold partisanship, and on Arlington's recommendationadvanced him from post to post in his household.Clifford had not great means; he was therefore esteemed allthe more highly because in money transactions he kept hishands clean ; he was passionate and inconsiderate, but goodnatured,amiable, a true friend2; and if he cared for thechase above all things, he still showed himself receptiveof the literary and social culture of the time; we hear ofliterary societies which met at his house. His horoscope hadbeen drawn, and foretold him fortune and power, but an earlyend : he accepted both, if only he could again make way forCatholicism. He was most closely united with the Duke ofYork ; like him he abhorred the Triple Alliance, and generallyall connexion with the Republic, about whose leaders hespoke with insolent contempt. He was present at the firstconsultation in which the declaration of Catholicism wasdecided upon. He also had at first thought that it wouldsuffice for that purpose, if the King kept London and thecountry in order by some new fortifications, and quietly increasedhis troops; then no one would dare to move : butsooner even than the Duke of York himself, he went over tothe opinion that the war against Holland must precede thedeclaration of Catholicism.Henry Bennet, Earl of Arlington, who promoted this noble-xv. 8. THE SECOND WAX A GAINST HOLLAND. 517A.D. 1672.man of ancient stock, was himself a citizen by birth; he issaid to have been originally destined to be vicar of the smallplace from which he afterwards took his feudal title'. Butthe royalist impulse which seized the youth of Oxford, when'Charles I stayed there, led him to take arms ; he was wounded ;a deep scar whicl, he carried on his face daily reminded theprince, whose exile he shared, of his determined loyalty. Hehad been drawn into politics by the Earl of Bristol, and likehim had gone over to Catholicism ; but he never showedhimself very zealous in his religion ; he sought above all toshow his gratitude to the King, who had not been able, withoutdifficulty and expense, to make a vacancy in the office ofsecretary of state, which he wished to give him. Arlingtonwas one of the ministers of the old stamp, whose chief objectwas to serve their prince, to give him counsels according tothe state of affairs, and then to carry out his commands. Hewas thought to be Dutch or Spanish in his sympathies, buthe took without hesitation the French side when the Kinginclined that way. We find him changing as all the cornplicationsof the time and of its politics changed, doing sodefinitely, prudently, and with good sense2. He differed fromClarendon in this, that he promoted others more disinterestedly,which, as in Clifford's case, was of use to him after-,wards. To maintain himself in a position of authority andactivity, in the midst of all the powerful persons at court andin the state, in church, and in parliament, amongst all the manifoldinfluences brought to bear upon the King, required noless flexibility and tenacious cleverness than did the conductof foreign affairs. Arlington was regarded as the man inEngland who least overstepped the line of good conduct. Hepossessed the culture of European society of that time ; bythe excesses which were in fashion at the court he was littleaffected ; his hours of leisure he dedicated to the study ofthe literary products of that fruitful age. One passion he did1 $He had made it his choice to take the share in the warmest part.' Lodge,Portraits v. 258.' 'A valiant, incorrupt gentleman, ambitious, not covetous, generous, passionate,a most constant, sincere friend.' Evelyn, Diary, ii. 86.Evelyn's Diary ii. I 14.a Mocenigo: 'Conoscendo con sna rafinata prudenza l'inconstanza del paese,quanto B maturo nel consultare, tanto i: lento nell' essecutione caminando con passidubiosi in tutti li negozi.'

518 THE SECOND WAR AGAINST HOLLAND. XV. 8.A.D. 1672.feel-that was for building. He and his wife, who was relatedto the house of Orange, wished to have everything aroundthem not only good and comfortable, but also rich, magnificentand princely. The foreign ambassadors found themselves ingood quarters at his house.With the repose and circumspection which characterisedArlington, it would be interesting to know more of his opinionabout the return to Catholicism than can be discovered withcertainty. It may be believed without hesitation that he remainedstedfast to that scheme, which had been worked outa few years before. An understanding with the Roman seemust necessarily come first, and Louis XIV wished to takethis upon himself; he proposed to the English that a Frenchbishop, whom he was just sending to Rome, should be entrustedwith the matter. Arlington thought it would be necessary inthat case to join with him at least one well instructed Englishdivine. In conversation he suggested three conditions : thesecurity of the appropriated ecclesiastical estates, the cup forthe laity, and the introduction of English hymns at mass.Charles I1 besought the King of France to send him a learnedtheologian, who was however also to know something aboutphysical science, so that he might see him without difficulty.Above all the man must be familiar with the Fathers andthe Councils, so as to do away the scruples which he still felton the controverted points. It is evident the matter wasseriously meant, but it was still far from being settled. TheDuke of York, who since the death of his wife, who had diedin the Catholic faith, had gone on increasing in zeal, appearedoccasionally very impatient. Arlington remarked, that evenif the King were just as zealous in the matters of religion asthe Duke, which was far from being the case, he still wouldnot dare to advance a step bef6re he had armed and hadtaken the necessary measures against such a rising as might beexpected. He was astonished to find the Catholics weaker,especially in serviceable men and good heads, than he hadexpected1.. On the other hand the Protestant animosity grew' Letter of Feb. 28: ' Que les catholiqnes Qloient plus faibles et en nombred'hommes et en bonnes testes et gens dont on se puisse servir, qu'aucune autre secte.'xv. 8. THE SECOND WAR AGAINST HOLLAND. 519A.D. 1672.from day to day. When the French ambassador spoke ofthe matter, Arlington told him with great decision that itwould be rash to step forward with the declaration of Catholicism,before the war with Holland had begun, and beforethe King on this pretext had fortified his strongholds, andprovided himself with good troops1. It was the originalopinion of Colbert himself, to which now Arundel and Clifford,as well as Arlington, and at last the Duke, agreed.Buckingham still fluctuated as before, between friendshipand antagonism for Arlington. But he was no longer thecentre of all affairs. To expel him from that prominentposition had perhaps been an ulterior object with Arlington,when he took the Catholic project in hand ; for he thereby inthe chief matter got the better of his old rival, who was notinformed of it. After the death of the Duchess of Orleans,Buckingham had undertaken an embassy of condolence toFrance. The honours which Louis XIV 6ffered him, hehad eagerly snatched at ; he considered himself the principalmediator of the alliance between the two courts, of whoseultimate object he was however ignorwt ; in this light he wasalso regarded on his return to England ; people thought himbribed by France, as the Chancellor had formerly been 2. Heendeavoured to dispel this rumour, and was even heard todeclaim against France. Indeed he took up the war againstHolland, by preference, as an English war : France was not byany means to be regarded as the principal power to whomhelp was to be given. Especially he remained stedfast to hisintention, on which he was very seriously bent, of freeing theDissenters from the yoke which the Anglican Church had laidupon them 3.To aid in this attempt especially, Ashley Cooper, thenChancellor of the Exchequer, attached himself to him ; he' Qu'on ne puvoit plus avec prudence songer iL cette affaire, qu'aprbs que 1'Angleterreseroit entree en guerre avec la Hollande, et que le roi son maftre sous ceprktexte auroit de bonnes troupes sur le pied et ses places bien fortifibes.'Qiroldi: ' I1 pop010 odiando il nome, non che la natione francese, crede alleprime impressioni che formo il grido publico, che egli era guadagnato dallaFrancis.'Compare his speech about tolerance in the year 1675.

520 THE SECOND WAR AGAINST HOLLAATD. xv. 8.A.D. I 67 2.had himself within the last few years written a treatise ontolerance I. It was the great idea, which immediately sprangup, as soon as a state church with extensive and exclusiverights was established. It is in this sense that, in conibinationwith his friend John Locke, he designed in the year 1670 theconstitution of Carolina, in which toleration occupied an importantplace : Shaftesbury was one of the eight Englishmento whom the colony was granted. It was part of the natureof this statesman, whose character appears only later in itsfull light, that he seized the ideas which had the greatestfuture ; hence his versatility and gradual rise. As tolerancethen appeared, it had a very monarchical and at the sametime a highly popular appearance ; it depended only on theconnivance of the King, and might yet procure for him whodefended it an influential patronage in the capital, where theNonconformists were in great force. They held at thattime meetings, at which sometimes 1000, sometimes even 2000citizens were present. Out of consideration for the King, themagistrates of the towns allowed this to take place. RichardFord, Lord Mayor of London, though a zealous Anglican, didnot think it wise to take steps against it.Lauderdale also agreed to this ; he had already carriedout analogous changes in Scotland, and was in correspondencewith the Presbyterians in England about thefurther extension of these changes. He was one of themost learned ministers who have ever lived, perfectly acquaintedwith, and clearly determined about all questionsof religious politics which came up, absolutely devoted tothe King, to whom he had attached himself simply becausehe deviated from his father's system, otherwise rough anddomineering to every one, obstinate in his views; he was aman of a disagreeable appearance,-his red hair hanging indisorder over his forehead.These five men agreed in wishing to strengthen the royalprerogative by moderating the uniformity laws, with thehelp of France, and during the excitement caused by a foreignwar ; but otherwise they were attached to widely differentLife of Lock, Works i. 7.xv. 8. THE SECOND WAX AGAINST HOLLAND. ,521A.D. 1672.principles. Lauderdale was a Presbyterian, Ashley Coopera philosopher, Buckingham, if he had any opinions at all,an Independent, Arlington a moderate Catholic, Clifford azealous one. Only the two last were in possession of thesecret ; the three others were all the more securely excludedfrom it, because they had been initiated into a part of it, andthought they knew the whole. With the idea of restoringCatholicism were united in the minds of its champions themost extensive schemes against Parliament. The Duke ofYork spoke out without reserve that the war must be carriedon without parliamentary help; Parliarnent must only besummoned again, when the war had been successfully finished,and Catholicism had been declared, when it had becomepossible to acquire by force what could not be acquiredamicably. In his eagerness he even hinted, that it wouldnot be possible for a king and a parliament to exist anylonger in England side by side1. That Buckingham andAshley Cooper agreed in intentions of this kind cannot besupposed ; their position depended entirely on Parliament, forthey were powerful in its assemblies, the one by his personalinfluence, the other by his eloquence. Of Lauderdale thatcould not be so unequivocally asserted. To his influence wasascribed a pamphlet, which at that time awakened generalattention ; it was the thesis written by a Scot, Hamilton, forhis doctor's degree, which argued that the legislative powerand the right of imposing taxes had been lent by the Kingsto Parliament and might be resumed by them '. Lauderdaleregarded Parliament only as an instrument of power.What was the opinion of the King? The undertakingagreed with all his sympathies and antipathies, with hishatred against Holland and the exclusive rights of Parliament,with his inclination toward France and Catholicism.' Que les affaires sont ici dans un Qtat, & faire croire, qu'un parlement et un roine peuvent plus subsister ensemble, qu'il ne falloit plus songer qu'b faire fortementla guerre aux Hollandais sans le secours du parlement, auquel on ne devoit plusavoir recours qu'aprbs un heurenx succks de laguerre et de la catholicit6 et lorsqu'onseroit en Qtat d'obtenir par la iorce ce qu'on ue pouvoit avoir par la douceur.'Colbert, 14th July, 1671.a Baxter's Life, iii. 88, cannot be othera,ise inlcrpretd.

522 THE SECOND WAR AGAINST HOLLAND. xv. 8.A.D. 1672.This did not prevent him from lending his ear also to the representativesof the opposite tendencies. But he was at home inschemes .hidden from the world, and always retreating deeperinto secrecy : in the main points they were even his own work,and he approved of steps being taken for their accomplishment.We must recognise this as undoubtedly the greatest mistakeinto which the monarchy of the Restoration had fallen, andone of the most momentous mistakes for the monarchy ingeneral. For it brought about a conflict with Parliament,which included all great questions of the present and future,and in which the crown at that time needlessly attemptedwhat was impracticable. Parliament had become more tractablesince the year 1669; it had desisted from attacking theministers, and from the exercise of control over the expenditure; it was prepared to make considerable grants ; it onlyheld fast to two points, religious uniformity, and aversion toFrance l. And these were the very points attacked. Butwas it not the interest of the whole of Europe to resist theencroachments of the French ? And the King, in disregardingthe ecclesiastical laws which he himself had ratified, threatenedthe foundation upon which the public order of English affairsin general depended. We know how deeply the developmentof the state had been impregnated with Protestantism, andmoreover how the Restoration had come about without anyreal assistance from the Catholic powers, by means of a unionof the two great Protestant parties in a parliamentary way.To this the idea of now joining the Catholic world, andadopting the principles of absolute monarchy, was directlyopposed. If rightly understood this was not the example setby Louis XIV. For undeniably he was in unison with thegreat interests of France, when he made it his object tosecure the eastern boundaries of his kingdom against everyforeign influence, and not so much to overpower as to absorbthe Spanish power, with which Valois and Bourbons had con-I find this in a Dutch memoir, 'Discours sur les affaires d'Angleterre 167a,'where it is said of the ministers, 'en faisant entrer le roi leur maltre dans uneBtroite alliance avec la France, ils le portkrent en meme temps h douner une libertegBnArale de religion, qui estoient les deux seuls points, sur quoi il resta quelquefermet6 au Parlement tout soumis d'ailleurs B l'autoritg royalle.'xv.8. THESECOND WAR AGAINSTHOLLAND. 523A.D. 1672.tended for two centuries. To this all precedents led him, onthis the later position of France in the world has depended.Arlington himself once said that Louis XIV strove afteruniversal monarchy, and that his wings must be clipped intime. Instead of this an alliance was concluded with him.The maritime advantages, which were demanded as conditions,lay in the far distance, and were besides uncertain ; on theother hand, to annul an alliance which opposed his claimswas of immediate advantage to Louis XIV. The King ofEngland gave up to destruction the foremost bulwark of theEast-European, the Germanic, world, which could offer himresistance : that in so doing he took revenge upon the Dutchcould afford him only a subordinate satisfaction, for in themeanwhile the navy of France grew, and Louis XIV formedhis decision never to suffer the weaker of the two other seapowers to be crushed. This was disregarded, in order thatan undertaking might be entered on, which was opposedto the nature of things. For one of the most importantobjects, if not the most important of all, was always thatof becoming master of Parliament ; but the means taken forthis object were rather likely to bring about the contrary.The impartial must exclaim that the English monarchy, inso doing, transgressed the limits of its rights. The dissolutionof Parliament was a constitutional procedure, and mightperhaps have been of use to the crown in England, althoughnot in the same degree as it had been in Scotland ; so at leastwe might think on looking back, but to allow Parliament toremain as it was, and to adopt measures which tended towardsan entire change of the state of things, and for this cause todemand the help of a foreign power,-was an undertakingwhich must lead to the most difficult complications.The Dissenters themselves, though they owed their meetingsto the royal lenity, were yet greatly disturbed when, inthe beginning of the year 1672, the preparations of LouisXIV against Holland, and the probability that Englandwould assist him in his undertaking became known. 'All Protestanthearts trembled1.' For the Republic was regarded as' ' The great preparations of the Frenche . . . . . do make now the protestanthearts to tremble.' Baxter, Life i. 89.

524 THE SECOND WAR AGAINST HOLLAND. xv. 8.A.D. 1672.the great bulwark of Protestantism. The same idea was expressedby the Elector of Brandenburg at the first indicationgiven by the. French of their project ; there was only oneopinion about it in all the Protestant world.Still the last word was not uttered, still negotiations wenton with the Republic. The charges against it did not seemsufficient to justify a new war1. Downing had been expresslysent to Holland, on the ground that he was thought to bethe man best fitted to promote hostilities; but even he didnot this time find sufficient pretext. Inclined to give way asmuch as possible, the Republic sent a new embassy to London,at the head of which was Meermann, who was well knownin England and, as may be imagined, found friends amongthe English ; a number of eminent members of Parliamentdid their best to bring about a reconciliation ; Ormondespecially exerted his influence for it, he indeed was countedone of the principal supporters of Protestantism. At courtthere were men in the most confidential positions, who opposedthe design. All were against it who had been excludedfrom the commission for foreign affairs ; amongst others,Prince Rupert appeared as a zealous antagonist of the French.The French ambassador feared that the King, pressed on somany sides, would consent to the mediation offered by theSpaniards2. But it was just these influences which hastenedan opposite decision. Louis XIV had at last fixed the springof 1672 as the time for the common undertaking; on theEnglish side also the preparations were complete. Those whohad taken part in the matter would have been lost had theyattempted to draw back ; war or a peaceful settlement wasthe very point of controversy between the two political parties.Arlington said, in the beginning of March 1672, that an endmust be put to the agitation, and the idea that it was stillpossible to bring about an understanding with Holland mustbe abandoned. The order was issued to the commander' Apporter au plustost une matiere propre declarer la guerre.' Colbert, June 4.Colbert, March 21 :' Les Cabales, que presque toute la cour et ce qu'il y a dansla ville des meulb~es du parlement font, pour en detourner le roi, me donnerent unemortelle apprehension, qne les offres d'Espagne ne fus:ent II la fin resue..'xv. 8. THE SECOND WAR AGAINST HOLLAND. 525A.D. 1672.of the fleet at Portsmouth to put to sea with such sail as werein readiness, and to seize all Dutch ships that they might meet.The war broke out even before it was declared.The Dutch fleet from Smyrna, swelled on its voyage by theSpanish and Portuguese merchantmen, lay just then at anchorwith a rich cargo. off the Isle of Wight. It was on March13/23 that the same captain who had opened the former war,Robert Holmes, steered towards them. Jealous lest anothershould share the booty which he hoped to gain, and the honourwhich he expected to acquire, he abstained from summoningto his aid a passing squadron. As soon as he reached thefirst Dutch vessel, without allowing much time for overtures,he fired a volley into it. The Dutch were secretly prepared,and answered with a heavy fire from both decks. A battleensued, in which the English after all only captured twowell laden ships, one of which came from Messina, the otherfrom Smyrna, and on their side suffered heavy loss. Holmeshimself was seriously wounded ; but he had gained his mostimportant object ; once more, as eight years before, he hadopened the war between the two naval powers.Only after this, and hastened by it, did the declaration ofwar, in which Buckingham had a hand, appear on March 18.Two motives are expressed in it which are worthy of noticetheopposition of colonial interests especially in the EastIndies, and the expression of wounded honour. The occurrenceat Chatham had been represented at Dort in honourof Cornelius De Witt, in a painting which was insulting tothe English. Allusion was also made to medals of like import; certainly this kind of ~llonumental vainglory madebad blood in England, as it had done in France. Rut theEnglish nation did not at the time allow that that justifiedthe recommencement of the war. The manifesto, when itwas published on the following day, was rather condemnedthan approved.Just at this time, March 15, the new Declaration of Indulgencehad appeared. In it the King protested that hewished to maintain the institution of the Anglican Churchunimpaired and in itself untouched, but at the same timehe declared all penal laws against Nonconformists to be

526 THE SECOATD WAR AGAINST HOLLAND. xv. 8.A.D. 1672.suspended ; he promised to appoint places for the divine servicesof the Protestant Dissenters; the Catholics were to remainrestricted to private worship. It is affirmed that the originalintention was to put the Catholics on the same footing as theProtestant Dissenters, but that this was prevented by the refusalof Bridgeman in such a case to affix the Great Seal tothe ordinance. But it still seemed to the Protestant Nonconformistsas if the Catholics were better treated than theywere themselves, in so far as the favour shown to them beganat once, whereas in their own case it was restricted to placeswhich were to be hereafter appointed, and was made dependentupon the approval of the magistrates. The declarationwas received by the Catholics with rejoicing, in whichthe Protestant Dissenters hesitated to join. The first proposal,which was for an unconditional expression of thanks,was set aside by them, neither could they agree on a moremoderate one. At last, introduced by Arlington, they expressedtheir gratitude verbally to the King. Old Presbyterianslike Baxter would far rather have seen a union withthe State Church, under the conditions which they had proposed; they thought that now, with their scattered congregations,they were no longer distinguished from the Independents; the former connivance even seemed to them betterthan permission on official approbation, by using which theyfeared to come into conflict with Parliament1. How oftenbefore this had Pariiament rejected the claim, which the Kingnow established without more ado! In other matters alsoParliament was set aside. Proclamations about the controlof political publications appeared, authorised only by theapprobation of the Privy Council. The army, against whichparliamentary antipathy was directed with especial activity,was increased, and assembled in the neighbourhood of London.But the greatest excitement was caused by a measure whichwas adopted in the Treasury. The bills for the repaymentof advances made by the bankers upon the revenues of theyear 1672, were not to be honoured in the course of that year,-'Some were for avoiding terms of approbation, lest the Parliament should fa11upon them.' Baxter, Life i. 99.xv. 8. THE SECOND WAR AGAINST HOLLAND. 527A.D. 1672.but the total sums that came in from the taxes were to beused solely for the necessities of the war. The Treasury wasclosed against the creditors of the state. This was excused,on the ground that the King paid as much as twelve per cent.interest, and it was computed that on the whole, by thesetransactions, he was deprived of the fifth part of his revenue ;in future only six per cent. was to be paid, and an entirechange in the management of the state debts in general wascontemplated, somewhat in the way of the French administration.But now, not only the banks which had providedthe advances, but also the private persons who had placedtheir money in them, amongst whom were many who possessednothing besides, were most seriously affected. Againsttheir claims, which might be pursued at law, the bankersdemanded security ; that the Lord Keeper Bridgeman refusedto put the seal to a declaration for this purpose1 was thereason of his fall. It is a disputed point which of the two,Clifford or Ashley Cooper, had the greater share in themeasure ; both were impelled by personal ambition as well ;Clifford, who arranged it, was raised to be treasurer; Ashley,Earl of Shaftesbury, for he appears now with this title, to bechancellor of the kingdom.Probably no government ever stood in a more stronglymarked antagonism to the nation or the estates, at the beginningof a foreign war, than did the English government atthis moment. Not that the nation would have objected totake retaliation on the Dutch, but the combinations, by meansof which it was to be done, seemed to be an attack on itsown laws, ordinances, and institutions ; the French ambassadorhad the assurance to write to his sovereign, that butfor fear of him and his power all England would be in a disturbance,that the King himself would draw back were he notbound by interest and honour to the promises he had given.Colbert, November 21 : ' Les banquiers, aux quels le roy a trouv6 B propos d'osterla jouissance de ses propres revenues en payant l'interest des sommes pour lesquellesils en jouissoient rl raison de 6 P.c., ayant demandir au dit roi, qu'il luypleust leur accorder une declaration par laquelle leurs crbanciers ne les puissentpoint contraindre pour le principal, le garde de sceaux a refuse de sceller cettedhclaration, en la disant contraire aux loix du royaume.'

528 THE SECOND WAR AGAINST HOLLAND. xv. 8.A.D. 1672.Only when the schemes which he had formed under othercircumstances, and had afterwards developed further (for heloved them and Loped much from them), were on the pointof being actually carried out, did Charles I1 perceive thedangers to which he was exposed in consequence. But theywere his old ideas, and he also could now no longer retreat.The squadrons of France and England had joined, and layin Southwold bay; it was on Whit Sunday, June 7, that DeRuyter induced the somewhat unwilling captains of theRepublic to take a step which may be looked upon as theculminating action of the Dutch navy, namely to venture anattack upon the fleet of the two great powers. The Frenchwere easily driven to one side, and the actual battle appears asthe continuation of the former naval duels between Hollandand England, Like the previous ones, this was especiallymomentous for the commanders. Admiral Ghent, who hadled the fleet to Chatham, and had refused most obstinatelythe honour of the flag to the English, was determined thistime either to conquer or to die ; he was shot in the first halfhour; on the other hand, the vessel of the Admiral LordSandwich was set on fire by the Dutch captain Daniels ; inattempting to save himself the Admiral perished. Again theDuke of York held the chief command; he also was obligedto change his ship, and that more than once. The Dutchhave always maintained, and in the state of affairs it is easilycredible, that their men were much more eager to engage thanthe English. The upshot of all was, that this time again itwas impossible to say on which side the advantage remained.But whilst the Republic held its ground on its own element,'the wild element' as one of their historians calls it, it succumbedall the more entirely to the superior strength of theFrench forces in the war by land, for which in its existingcondition it was unprepared. In a few weeks forty strongplaces fell into Louis XIV's hands; he took Utrecht andthreatened Amsterdam. What was his motive, and whatthe original motive of Charles 11, in undertaking the war?Mainly without doubt their hatred of the leaders of thearistocratical government, which in Charles I1 WEIS causednaturally by the affairs of the Orange family, and in Louisxv.8. THE SECOND FVAK AGAIA7S7 HOLLAND. 529A.D. 1672.XIV by the opposition which they had made, and were stillmaking, to his great European schemes. It happened that thepeople, or1 whom they were making war, themselves carriedout their wishes. During a party tumult that suddenly brokeout, they murdered the two De Witts, who were anlong thegreatest men of that time, and the greatest aristocratic Republicansof all ages.Still the object pursued by the two powers was not herebyfully attained. For it was not only the men who were to beoverthrown, but their system also ; the desire was to makean end of the independence of the Republic, of the supportwhich it gave to Protestantism, and of its opposition to monarchicalprinciples. It seemed to fall in with this wish, that 'upon the ruins of the aristocratical government the authorityof the Prince of Orange was established, by means ofthe goodwill of the people and the state's instinct of selfpreservation; but in none did this pulse beat more stronglythan in the Princc himself: he was indeed far from consentingto proposals which might have been personally advantageousto himself, but which would have cost the Republic its independence.As in the last days of the old governmentproposals had been made to the King of France, so now bythe new government proposals were made to the King ofEngland, to which he might well have agreed ; and probablya more advantageous peace for both powers might have beenattained. But Charles I1 was of opinion that his nephew,whose elevation he hailed with joy, still depended too muchupon Bevernigk and Van Beuningen. He insisted, for thisreason also, upon the accomplishment of the conditions whichhe had put forward, because otherwise th: advantage andglory would fall only to the share of the King of France, andthat must necessarily awaken the jealousy of the English.Buckingharn and Arlington betook themselves together tothe continent ; their embassy, which created a great sensation,appeared as a joint one, and the first place was given to theman of older title ; but in reality nothing depended on whatBuckingham might say in the way of peace or compliance;Louis XIV was informed by his ambassador that only Arlingtonwas in possession of the secret, and of the resolution thatKANKE, YOL. 111. M m

530 THE SECOND WAR AGAINST HOLLAND. xv. 8.AD. 1672.had been come to. They met the King at his head-quartersin the neighbourhood of Utrecht, and concluded with him acontract with the object of holding fast to the conditionspreviously agreed to, that is to say, the demand of the placesstipulated for England, and the continuance of the war tillthey were granted (Heeswyk, July 16). This was even morethe wish of the English than of the King of France. Arlingtonbrought forward two arguments ; the first was that Charles 11,unless he finished the war with glory and attained full satisfaction,could not think of the accomplishment of the Catholicproject1. He was in this the interpreter of the zealous Catholicparty, to which he had been attached for years. But the secondargument was necessarily still more efficacious ; he told theKing, that if the war were not continued, all the partiality ofthe English for the Dutch would make itself felt2 : this it wasthat especially decided Louis XIV, for nothing would havebeen less to his mind than alienation from England. Thetwo powers put forward their new demands, on the foregonesupposition that the Republic would reject them.On the English side it was principally the consideration ofinternal relations that contributed to this. The summoningof Parliament could not now be put off for very long, butthen the continuance of the war, and the prospect that itoffered, was the principal inducemcnt to persuade the Houseto make a considerable grant of money, of which there wasnow absolute need. A fortunate end to the war might alsomake the accomplishment of the further schemes possible.Lord Clifford persisted that if the Republic would not acceptthe conditions proposed to it, the war against it must becarried on until its entire annihilation3. It seemed to him asif in this war both external and internal objects might beattained.' (Arlington) m'a advou8, que pour rhussir dans leur grand dessein il iallait continuerla guerre jusqu'h, ce qu'ou la puisse finir glorieusement.' Colbcrt, June 20.He represented to Louis XIV ' la pente qu'il aroil cognue clans la nation angloiseii faroriaer secrbtement la IIollande.' Letter of Louis XIV, dated August 29.' I1 ne feint pas de dire, qu'il faut continuer la guerrc jusques & l'entier anhantissementdes &tats gendraux, B moins qu'ils n'accordent & 1'Angleterre la BrillevFlessingue, l'isle de Cnssant avec YEscluse.' Colbert, July g.CHAPTER IX.ORIGIN OF THE TEST ACT.AFTER having been twice prorogued, Parliament at lastmet again on the 4/14 February, I 672/3.The Speaker Turner had been promoted : in his place one ofthe secretaries of state recommended Serjeant Job Charleton ;the House accepted him without hesitation, but respectfullyput off all further business till he should have been confirmedby the King. When this had been done, the King made hisspeech from the throne, in which he referred to the necessityof the important but expensive war in which he was engaged,and to the good results of the declaration of Indulgence;Lord Shaftesbury followed with a fiery exhortation to carryon the war l. He justified it on the ground of the apprehension,that otherwise France would have united with Hollandagainst England ; for the Republic saw in England its onerival in trade and maritime power : since it aimed at universaldominion, it was the natural enemy of all monarchies, butespecially of the English ; from interest and aversion, itcherished an inextinguishable enmity towards England. Thepresumption in Holland was that the English nation wouldno longer support their King against it, but the King had nodoubt of the devotion of Parliament, and he only needed itssupport to render the old enemies no longer dangerous :' delenda est Carthago,' he exclaimed.That the war must be carried on under circumstances whichwere still very favourable was the universal conviction. Theproposal to grant £70,000 monthly for eighteen months, thatJournals of Commons ix. 245Mm2

532 ORIGI~L~ OF THE TEST ACT: xv. 9.A.D. 1673.is to say, ~1,z6o,ooo, was supported by the former opponentsof the crown and passed without challenge.But if Parliament, with regard to the war, united once tllorewith the King, it at the same time still reserved to itself thefree discussion of measures taken for home affairs. When theKing referred in his speech to the Indulgence, he emphasisedhis intention to maintain it : his words were, 'I shall take itvery very ill to receive contradiction in what I have done,and I will deal plainly with you; I am resolved to stick tomy declaration.' He lived in hope that the straightforwardexpression of his personal will would stifle all opposition.This indeed did produce a certain impression. When onthe 10,zo February the declaration of Indulgence was to betaken into consideration, at first every one was silent; forthere were still scruples about opposing the strong expressionof the royal will : the proposal was even made rather to passto another subject1. But Parliament was, not without reason,likened to waters which are all the deeper the calmer theyappear. The beginning once made, the opposition broke outall the more violently. It was said, that by his declarationthe King repealed more than forty acts of Parliament; thejudges and officials, who had taken their oath to carry themout, he ordered not to do so ; their appointment was sanctionedby the Great Seal, the declaration was not ; on what groundwas obedience due to it? At the publication of the declarationneither lawyers nor theologians had been consulted. If theKing had been led astray by his Privy Council, it was theduty of his Great Council, the Parliament, both to himselfand to the people, to inform him of it. Parliament wasalmost unanimous on this point. The question only was,whether the anxiety which the declaration awakened, shouldbc set forth to the King in an humble address, or a definiteresolution be passed on the matter. The first course wasrecommended, amongst others by Sir Thomas Osborne, as themore considerate ; the last by Meres and Lee, as decisive andnecessary. Their opinion was accepted by the House. ByFebruary 10. Grey's Debates ii. 13. With mole detail in ' Deling's I'roceedingsin Palliament 1670-1672,' MS. in the Glitish Bluseum.xv. 9. ORIGIN OF THE TEST ACT.A.D. 1673.a considerable majority the resolution was passed, that penalstatutes in matters ecclesiastical cannot be suspended exceptby Act of Parliament. It was a resolution by which Parliamentafter all openly opposed the King and his views : in anaddress, which was otherwise respectfully worded, this wasverbally adopted. Charles I1 answered shortly that the addresswas of importance, and he would take it into consideration.At court there was an uncomfortable feeling, since thegrant of supplies? which had been regarded as expressing theacquiescence of Parliament in the policy recently adopted,became in consequence doubtful. For only after furtherdivisions, and then together with the other acts, could the billbecome law.There was still hope of avoiding further opposition by aconciliatory movement. The King let it be understood,that he had not meant to use his spiritual authority in anydifferent sense from his forefathers; still less to disturb anysecular law ; if Parliament, which doubtless agreed in hisobject, would suggest another bill which attained it better, hewould gladly accept it.The impression at first made by this message was veryfavourable. On the first day the resolution was passed, thoughwith some opposition, that the King be thanked for hisdeclaration. Hut already on the following day there was achange of temper. It was thought that although the Kingdeclared that he wished to advance in a parliamentary way,he still reserved to himself another alternative ; he might saythat his right in spiritual matters had never been called inquestion, but to see how often in reality this had been done,it was only necessary to recall the abolition of the High Commission.An address was drawn up and accepted, in whichthe King was told without circumlocution, that he was verymuch misinformed if he thought that in matters ecclesiasticalhe could suspend penal statutes ; the crown had never exercisedsuch a right, it was opposed to the idea of the legislativepower. He was asked to give a more satisfactory answer.The King thought fit, as the difference of opinion was ona constitutional question, to take the advice of the UpperHouse, which at that time he visited aln~ost daily; for in so

534 ORIGIN 01" THE TEST ACT. xv. g.A.D. 167~. .-important a matter he was not inclined to proceed without theLords. They received his advances favourably, but when itcame to a decision, they still did not enter upon the questionof right. They only expressed their approval of the King'sintention to decide the question in a parliamentary manner.The King found no support in the Upper House.Resides these principal points of dispute, others also hadcome into consideration, likewise of great importance. Duringthe recess, the Chancellor had ordered some fresh elections,and thereby managed to carry some acknowledged adherentsof the prerogative : they were rejected in a body by theLower House, which denied the right of the Chancellor toissue new writs. Moreover the Chancellor saw himself threatenedwith impeachment, because he had affixed the GreatSeal to the declaration of Indulgence, which the House allegedto be illegal.This might have been expected from the position of parties,the anti-parliamentary bearing of ministers, and the deep indignationwhich the conduct of the court, at the outbreak ofthe last war, had awakened in Parliament. Notwithstanding,the King was much confounded. In confidential circles heexpressed his opinion that, were he to give way as his fatherhad once done, the same fate would await him : he could nottherefore give way ; but then he would be obliged to dissolveParliament, and that would at once make the continuanceof the war impossible.More seriously than ever the dissolution of Parliamentwas taken into consideration. Shaftesbury, who felt himselfthreatened by it, and Clifford with his anti-Protestant impulses,were in favour of the dissolution ; of Buckingham itwas asserted, that he had pledged himself to carry throughthe attempt in which Charles I had failed, to remove theopposing members from both Houses, and at the sametime to keep the town in order by calling out troops 2. It was' The Marquis de Fresno recounts conversations, in which his own opinion, thatthis was a very similar situation, was expressed also by other witnesses of theformer events.Burnet says, 'Sir Ellis Leighton assured me '-and if it is certain that Leightonsaid that, (and I think there is no doubt of it,) it cannot be easily disregarded.xv. 9. ORIGIN OF THE TEST ACT.A.D. 1673.for such a crisis that Lauderdale had prepared the help ofthe Scots ; he advised that Newcastle should be occupiedby them; what had been destructive to Charles I, the interventionof the Scots, would now be helpful to Charles 11.Rut had not Charles I cherished the same hopes and yetfallen? Ceaselessly the father's shade hovered over the son,who saw precipices on each side of his path. And at leastone of the ministers, and he the most farseeing, the Earl ofArlington, warned him, under existing circumstances, againstthe dissolution, to which he had formerly been favourable.For by it he would draw upon himself the unquenchablehatred of the people: Parliament would be worshipped.Enough, that Parliament already promised subsidies ; it wasnot so far wrong, when it maintained that the Indulgence Actcould not be looked upon as legal. For him the continuationof the war was all-important; upon its result depended thequestion, whether a future Parliament might not grant himwhat the present one refused '. Charles I1 wavered. Hefeared, on the one side, that Parliament would go furtherand impeach his ministers, on the other side, he was afraidof losing his subsidies, and, as in that case hc must concludepeace, of losing also the support of France.So matters stood, when the French ambassador put into hishands a lettcr from his ally, advising him to submit for awhile to the demands of Parliament. I do not discover thatArlington had instigated him, but his principal argumentwas repeated by Louis XIV. He remarks that, if Charleswere to give way at first to the pressure of Parliament inreligious matters, it would be possible for him to carry onthe war; this done, he could return to his former schemesure of the result; he, the King of France, would then beready, not only according to the wording of the treaties, withsome 6000, but with 12,000, with 15,000 men, even with allhis might, to support him in his schemes and establish hisauthority.' ' Pour casser ce parlement et convoquer un autre et reparer ce que celay-cy,seprdvalant des conjunctures et terns, aura extorqub du roi.' Colbert Croissy,March 9.

536 ORIGIX OF THE TEST A CT. XV. 9.~.h. 167~.Charles I1 assuredly still had some feeling for the independenceof his crown ; French help in home affairs he hadformerly heard mentioned with great unwillingness ; only incautious terms did the ambassador express himself about it;but the King had now come to such a point that, in oppositionto Parliament, he had a still more sensitive feeling ofself-respect: if he gave way to it, he could only do s.0 withthe secret reservation, that he would upon some future daystill assert his authority. He might be determined to makeuse of French help only in the most extreme case, but he didnot reject it. He replied to the ambassador, that the goodadvice of his King had more weight with him than the wordsof his most faithful minister; he would accept it withouthesitation, and was glad that another expedient was offeredto him. The next morning he caused the Commons to besummoned to the Upper House. With hts crown on his head,sitting on the throne, in regal robes, he declared that what hehad said in reference to the penal statutes should have nofurther consequence, and should never serve as a precedent:he insisted at the same time upon his demand for a grantof subsidies. The Chancellor added that the evening before,the King had caused his declaration to be cancelled, in presenceof him and of other members of the Privy Council,so that it could never have any consequences, and could neverbe brought forward as an example. This declaration nowsatisfied the Commons; the members of the opposition remarkedthat, if in the former answers an element of fa1se:lesshad appeared, the present answer was as full as possible, anddeserved likewise all possible gratitude. Already violenceand the outbreak of new disturbances in the town had beenfeared ; the news of the King's compliance filled every onewith satisfaction, and bonfires were lighted to celebrate it.That this decided the question about ecclesiastical authorityand the right of dispensation, was probably the opinion of noman, least of all of the King himself; he desisted in consequencefrom carrying out his Declaration, and indeed alsofrom asserting expressly his right so to do, but he did nottherefore give it up ; secretly he reserved its establishment fora better opportunity in the f~~turc.xv. 9. ORIGIN OF THE TEST dC7:537A.D. 1673.Just on such points, it may often be remarked in Englishhistory, the intentions of one party, even when kept secret,call out the opposite views of the other. As against the King,the Lower House passed resolutions with the object of preventingfor ever machinations of this kind. Whilst it tookthe Indulgence Bill into its own hands, it pursued the object,as Nicholas Carew expresses himself, of making the ProtestantChurch so strong, that it should never stand in need oftolerance from the Catholic Church l. Complaints were made,that the King's favour was abused by the Catholics; everywherethey were to be found in motion ; no law was carried outagainst them ; they were seen in the highest civil offices, aboveall in the highest military ones. A petition was addressed tothe King, in which he was once more entreated to banish theRoman Catholic priests, and above all the Jesuits. Whilstexcluding the Catholics from Indulgence, there was still anidea of receiving the Protestant Dissenters, if not into theChurch, at least into the State, which was allied with it.The first of these plans was scarcely taken into seriousconsideration. For the Church required ceremonies; in itsorganisation, once established, nothing could be changed ;but the Presbyterians would not submit to this, and theacceptance of the doctrines only of the Church was notsuficient. Nor did the zealous Dissenters themselves demandthis. Their principal representative in Parliament wasAlderman Love, of London ; he declared it to be an impertinencefor men of his party to lay claim to prefermentin the Church2; they did not even desire to be exemptedfrom tithes or the poor-rate of the parishes. This was, as wehave indicated, the view of a great number of Dissenters. Anindulgence issuing from Parliament would meet their wishes ;in return for this, they submitted to exclusion from theChurch. To this the Lower House agreed. After a longdebate it decided to deliver from the penal laws imposed byformer Acts of Parliament all who, even if they deviatedI EIen~y Herbert ; Grey's Debates ii. 3s.a ' He has no kindness for them that desire so immodest a thing as preferment Inthe Church.' Grey's Debates il. 40. Even in the debates of the year 1703 Burnetlays great weight upon this proceeding..-

538 ORIGIN OF THE TEST ACT. xv. 9.A.D. 1673.with regard to the constitution, yet professed the doctrineof the Anglican Church, and took the oaths of allegianceand supremacy. It was objected that a Parliament ought notto repeal laws enacted by itself; the answer was, that theposition of things was changed ; now they must obviate thedanger of being swallowed up by the Catholics, or, as WilliamCoventry, who in the whole of this matter exercised a decisiveinfluence, said, it was necessary to act on the defensive againstPopery and political intrigues.With this the question arose, whether it would not be necessaryfor the Church to exclude the Dissenters at least fromParliament. Many voices expressed themselves loudly infavour of this, for whilst giving the Nonconformists liberties,the government ought not to be plunged into confusion; itwould not be good to let them take part in the legislativepower, and so put into their hands authority over theChurch itself, which they so hated. Rut the opinion of themajority was opposed to it: for the exclusion would make themenemies of the Church, which much rather had need of friends.Coventry remarked, that it was necessary to be caref~~l not tokeep good Protestants out of Parliament, whilst Catholicswho made up their mind to take the sacrament accordingto the Anglican ritual might make their way into it '.The apprehension which Coventry exprcsscd, and thcuniversally prevalent wish to exclude the Catholics unconditionallyfrom Parliament, led to the most memorable determinationof this kind which has ever been taken: it wasdecided to make not only the taking of the sacrament, but alsothe acceptance of a certain view respecting a transcendentaldoctrine connected therewith, the stamp and condition of anyshare in the legislative power in the kingdom.On March 12/zz, the bill against the increase of Catholicism,already agreed to by the Lords, was brought up forthe third reading. At this moment a member, otherwise littleDebate on March I I : 'If Papists will take the oaths and abandon their principles,making nothing of the sacraments, shall not Plotestants sit here on thesame terms.' Grey's nehates ii. 94. The debate is wanting in the Parliamentary1Iistory.xv. 9. ORIGIN OF THE TEST ACT.A.D. 1673. 539distinguished, of the name of Harwood, proposed still toinsert the proviso, that in future no one should be admittedto any office or public position unless he abjured the doctrineof transubstantiation, and confessed that in the sacramentmerely the substance of bread and wine remained l. Manyopposed altogether this scholastic and ecclesiastical oath ;others declared it useless to associate it with eligibility forParliament, for the Catholic who took the oath of supremacymight also be brought to deny transubstantiation. Coventryrejoined that he had gathered information on that point; fortaking oaths like that of supremacy the Pope could grantdispensation, because they were forbidden by papal bulls,but the doctrine of transubstantiation was one of the articlesof faith ; from these the Pope could not absolve. There wasa further change made in the words, that is, the word ' merely'was struck out because it might offend the Lutherans, andit was made a matter not of oath but of subscription \ butthere was no objection taken to the main point, since whatwas wanted was once for all a distinction between Protestantsand Catholics; there was no other to be found from whicha dispensation could not be obtained. Although the provisohad appeared as an amendment, in which case it was notusual to insert it at once, this time it was so inserted. Theproviso was added to the act whilst on the table of theHouse, and in this way it was sent back to the Lords on thefollowing day .I.With the Lords also the antipathy to Popery carried theday ; some amendments were made, which however did notaffect the main point.According to Dering the proposal was worded, ' That all persons, that were tohave any office or employment, should abjure the doctrine of transubstantiation,and swear, that in the sacrament after consecration there is merely the substanceof bread and wine.'The debate relates to these words, which are also wanting inGrey ii. 97.' The form is said to have originated with Thomas Meres. ' Th. M. tendered anamendment to the proviso, where instead of " swearing" was put in " should declare "(subscribe), and the word "merely" was left out ;' so that Hanvood and Meres arethe originators of the Test Act.' ' An act for preventing dangers, which may happen by Papist recusants,' aname which it now for the first time received.

540 ORIGIN OF THE TIST ACT. Xv. 9.A.D. 1673.On this question again the Catholic and aristocratic sentimentsof the fiery Clifford flamed up. He came to the sittingof the Lords with no intention of speaking; but the prcsumptionof the Commons, in drawing into their debate anecclesiastical doctrine, and establishing a formula as a standardof faith, impelled him irresistibly into opposition ; he characterisedthe bill as the 'Nfonstrum horrendum informe ingens' ofVirgil; he added that, if it were adopted, everything wouldbecome uncertain, even the right - of the Lords to sit in Parliament,and the stability of the Anglican Church, about whichthe Commons would take upon themselves to make laws.In the Lower House the news of these utterances produceda considerable excitement. Although it was not quite in order,and did not quite accord with the consideration which was dueto ancient usage, still the Commons took notice of the speech ;it was also thought that they must put together their grievances; the old saying was heard, that the greatest grievancewas the bad advisers of the King, the originators of all thescdisturbances.But in spite of Clifford's speech the Lords yielded in alldisputed points ; the Queen, whose household they wished toexempt from the law, because her right depended upon astate treaty, had to be satisfied with not being mentionedby name in the new act.In the meanwhile the Subsidies Rill had also reached itslast stage; in accepting it the King at the same time gavehis consent to the new religious bill, which was called theTest Act.It was not condemned by all Catholics ; for it containedno prohibition of their private religious services; they werenot persecuted, they were only excluded from public offices,and from the favours of the monarch; and this might beexpected from the nature of human society. The majoritynow sought to make it, once for all, impossible for the antagonisticminority to increase its power, and perhaps evento gain the preponderance; who could deny that they hadgood reason for it?And now the next step would have been, to unite together,on the other side, the State Church and the Protestant Dis-sv. 9. ORIGIN OF THE TEST ACT 54 rA.D. 1673%senters. This aim had not been lost sight of; a bill withthat object passed through the Commons. But even thenit met with opposition from the bishops, and that too, as wassaid at court at least, in spite of a promise already given.It was sent back from the Lords with a number of amendments,which the Lower House was not disposed to accept.On March 29 a conference took place between plenipotentiariesfrom both sides ; the King, who had already reachedthe Upper House, waited till it was finished : it led howeverto no results. At seven o'clock in the evening he closed thesession.Even without this the result of the session was extremelyconlprehensive and far-reaching. The King's intention hadalways been to unite Catholics and Anglicans, and to opposethem to the Presbyterians. The result of the sessions in1672/73 was, that the Anglicans and Presbyterians, if theywere not united, had yet advanced much nearer to oneanother, whilst the Catholics had been as good as excludedfrom the state '.This was the consequence of the scheme for the restorationof Catholicism in England. Let us now consider the resultsbrought about by the war with Holland, undertaken in commonwith France for the furtherance of this object.Journal of Lords xii. 584. So Colbert affirms, 'Les Protestans (Anglicans)qui avoient tout promis aux sectaires, pour en Btre secourus dans leur communepoursuite contre les catholiques, ayant obtenu ce qu'ils dhsiroienl, ont form6 tantd'obstacles et de difficult& au dit acte de comprehension, qu'il n'a pas 618 passibleaux presbyteriens de les surmonter.' April 10, 1673.

CHAPTER X.PEACEWITH HOLLAND.THE grants of Parliament made it possible to resume inthe summer the war against Holland ; but its other decisionssubjected the conduct of the war to considerable restraints.As the Test Act prevented the Duke of York from filling thepost of admiral, the chief command of the fleet was assignedto Prince Rupert, expressly because he was a zealous Protestant', for which faith his family had suffered so much.He thus obtained a high and brilliant position, such as hehad always desired, at the head of the great squadrons ofEngland and France, which numbered I50 sail. But the op-posite party in the King's Council was still very powerful;the powers granted to the Prince were restricted ; he didnot enjoy, for example, the right of nominating even oneof his officers, and the accustomed authority of the Dukewas not at one stroke set aside. The manning of the flcetwas made difficult by the exemptions which the watermenhad acquired ; all preparations advanced slowly and provedinsufficient.In the Dutch Republic, on the other hand, the conflict ofthe two parties was not at this time noticeable: the experiencedDe Ruyter, who belonged to one party, and thestout-hearted Tromp, who belonged to the other, workedtogether most admirably; the motives of religion, of patriotism,of honour and advantage, animated the whole peopleIn the reports we read, how the crews in the sight of the-' Exact Relation : ' His tried constancy to and zeal for the reformed Protestantreligion.'xv. 10. PEACE WITH HOLLAND. 543A.U. 1673.enemy said their prayers, after which each sailor and soldiertoolc his glass of brandy; then full of good courage they gotready to await and repulse the impending attack.So it happened on May 28, 1673 (0. S.), some miles to theE.S.E. of West Kappcl, a united squadron of the separatedivisions of the Anglo-French flcet made, in spite of the unfavourablecharacter of these waters, an attack upon the Dutchfleet, in the hope of finishing the matter with one blow. Aftera long and bitter struggle, in which the ships on both sidessuffered severely-it is impossible to say which suffered most-the allies found themselves obliged to draw off. After twofurther encounters of a less serious character, Prince Rupertthought it advisable to withdraw to the English coast torepair his ships '.By land the French succeeded in taking Maestricht, whichwas looked upon as the key to the Spanish as well as to theUnited Netherlands. The King of England was far fromfeeling jealous of this; he ordered the repair of the shipsto be all the more urgently carried on, in the hope that, ifhe could on his side obtain a decided advantage, the Dutchmight be brought to a satisfactory peace.At the congress of Cologne also, which was then assembledfor the establishment of universal peace, Charles I1 persistedin his former demand for concessions. Even the Swedes, whohad undertaken to mediate, rejected them ; for if England hadformerly remonstrated against Sweden having possessionson both sides of the Sound, how much more inadmissiblewas it that England should lay claim to fortified places onthc Dutch coast; it would have the most prejudicial resultsfor all the northern powers2. And why, added the Dutch,did Charles I1 demand towns as securities? They oughtmuch rather to be granted to themselves, who had now forthe third time been unjustly attacked by the King. StillCharles I1 persisted in his demand, and indeed, as weknow, not solely on account of the great position which thoseExtract from the daily register kept on board the Golden Lion : Valkenier ii.APP. 5.Colbert, July 3 : ' Les mddiateurs la croient de dnngereuse conskquenee pour leroi lenr mnitre et pour toutes les puissances du No~d.'

544 PEACE WITH HOLLAND. XV. 10.A.D. 1673.acquisitions would have given him, but also because he thoughtit especially necessary with a view to Parliament ; for hisgovernment would be reduced to an untenable position, if it,as well as the French, did not on its side also acquire a con-siderable advantage.He said he wished to hold fast to theFrench alliance, because that was most conducive to the royalauthority, but, should France alone reap the profit therefrom,it would be impossible1. The Swedes at the timeproposed a truce, and even let fall threats in case it wererejected ; but this made no impression in England. On thecontrary, Charles I1 formed once more the plan of an invasionof Holland.The intention was again to effect a landing on the Dutchcoast with the land force, which had been collected and whichwas being rapidly increased, either when the fleet was makingits attack, or as soon as it should havc gained a considerableadvantage \ in this way the Republic would be compelled toaccept the conditions of peace offered to it :'. First the Dukeof York was fixed on for this undertaking, then Buckingham,who desired it most earnestly, was mentioned ; at last it wasdecided to take into service for this special object the Frenchgeneral Schomberg, a Protestant, who by his generalship inPortugal had acquired a great name ; for a man was requiredwho knew how to inspire the troops with the spirit and disciplineof war. About 12,000 men were collected at Yarmouth,and awaited the favourable moment for their transport; assoon as that had been effected, Schomberg was to have thesole command.Better provided with all necessaries, and also furnished withcomprehensive powers, Prince Rupert put to sea again inJuly ; the King, whose plans and ideas were concentrated onthis undertaking, had accompanied him for a part of the way.He again joined theFrench undervice-Admiral Jean d'Estr6es.' ' S'il n'avoit aucune place pour son partage.'Colbert, May zg : ' AussitGt que la flotte aura obtenu quelque avantage considerablesur les ennemis, le Duc de York s'embarquera avec toutes les troupesquisont propres pour une descente.'' De forcer les I-lollandais par une vigoureuse descente ir donner A la France eta 19Angleterre la juste satisfaction qu'ils prhtendent.' (27th July.)XV. 10. PEACE WITH HOLLAND. 545A.D. 1673.Both sides were looking eagerly forward to what might occur.All felt that it was a moment of decisive coqsequence.On the I 1/21 of August, in the morning, the English andFrench squadrons fell in with the Dutch fleet at ~Texel, whichadvanced with a favourable wind and eager for the fight.Edward Spragge, who enjoyed perhaps the greatest reputationamongst the English seamen, and who at that time ledthe blue squadron, hove to, against the Prince's will, when hesaw Tromp bearing down upon him, whom, it is said, he hadpromised to take back to the King as a prisoner. The twoadmirals' ships lay broadside to one another and exchangedshots for seven hours without a sail being touched '. Duringthese long wars the Dutch also had thoroughly learned the useof artillery; Tromp praises his men because they had firedthree times before the English had fired once. The Englishship first became unserviceable; the main-mast fell overboard: when Spragge stepped into the boat to go on boardanother ship, the boat too was struck by a cannon ball-Spragge perished as Lord Sandwich had done. Round thiscombat between the blue squadron and Tromp the wholebattle gradually centred ; on the one side the Prince tookpart in it, De Ruyter on the other. Towards evening thePrince thought he had the advantage and might strike adecisive blow, were he supported by the French squadron,which in the meanwhile had held aloof: but his signals toattack were in vain ; DIEstr&es was not to be prevailed uponto take any part in the engagement. At sunset the Englishsaw themselves obliged to draw off from the battle and towhome their damaged ships 2.Though it cannot be considered a defeat, this naval battlewas decisive for Charles 11. For now the accomplishment ofthat project of invasion, on which so much of his externalas well as of his internal policy depended, was no longerpossible ; and moreover the behaviour of the French vice-Letters of Captain Tobias and of Admiral 1,ieutenant Cornelius Tromp, inValkenier v. loo.The Prince's account, with the remarks by D'EstrBes, in Sue, Histoire de laMarine iii. 37.RANKE, VOL. 111.N n

546 PEACE WITH HOLLAND. XV. 10.A.D. 1673.admiral in this battle had filled the English with indignation,and rendered generally doubtful the continuance of the alliancewith France, which formed the corner-stone of the policy ofthat time.The conduct of Count d'EstrCes was blamed not onlyby the English but also by his own officers. In a letter ofthe Marquis de Martel, he is said to have dishonoured thenation, and brought upon the English every possible evil.A later collection of secret information confirms this : he isnot charged with any cowardice, but with self-will; and theworst of it was, that the English supposed that, in so doing,he had acted according to secret instructions from his King.It is evident that France could not take any pleasure in seeingeither the establishment of England upon the Continent,or the ruin of the Dutch navy, for then the sole naval supremacyof England, which no one desired less than Louis XIV,must be expected. And it might also seem as if D'~str&eshad had directions from the King to this effect. At least,after the battle, he said, as an excuse, to his officers, that theKing of France did not wish his fleet to be endangered,and he had hinted that he distrusted the English '.So in the decisive moment, in the heat of the battle, the oldnatural jealousy between England and France interfered tobreak the alliance which they had concluded for the ruin ofHolland.It is not worth our while to follow the contradictory statements,the excuses, con~plaints and evasions, which were nowinterchanged; the only question is, what was the opinion ofKing Charles I1 and the English nation upon the matter.The King seems to have believed in the excuses, if we mayinfer his thoughts from his utterances. He was too closelybound to the French alliance to wish to break it on accountof a still doubtful act of neglect ; as, just at that time, Spainallied itself with Holland, he would himself have been inclined' Memoire pour servir B l'information secrbte, in Sue iii. 65. ' M. le Vice-admirala donrib u entendre aprks le combat et surtout B M. la Gramccy, que le roi nevouloit pas que l'on hazardit ses vaisseaux dans le pEril, et it m&me fait connaitre,que l'intention (rtoit que l'on se m(.fiit des Anplais.'xv. 10. PEACE WITH HOLLAND. 547A.D. 1673.to make common cause with France against Spain. But atcourt and in the country there was only one voice of indignationagainst France. The subsidies paid by this power wereregarded as a disgrace to England. She was chained bythem to the triumphal car of France; Vice-admiral d'Esrr6eshad only wished to see whether the English fleet was earningits pay; he was present at the battle as at a duel betweengladiators. Prince Rupert formed around him an anti-Frenchparty; his friends took care to animate absent members ofParliament with the same feelings as excited those who werepresent.On the 20th of October Parliament assembled for its eleventhsession. The marriage of the Duke of York with a Princessof Modena, in the Catholic and French interest, which wasthen announced (we shall consider it later in its proper place),was well calculated to excite Protestant feelings and anxieties;it then caused a short prorogation : the real opening did nottake place till the 27th of October, when the speech fromthe throne called attention to foreign affairs. The King cornplainedof the contemptuous manner in which his proposalsof peace had been rejected by the Dutch : he demanded suppliesfor the continuation of the war; for, as the Chancellorsaid, 'England would no longer be a free country if sheallowed herself to be robbed of her dominion at sea; with justjealousy she watched the growing greatness of any prince atsea.'The King had a number of unwavering adherents ; it wasthought that some of the leading members of the opposition,such as Robert Howard, Littleton and Garroway, had beenwon over by personal favours ; Arlington and the King didnot neglect to speak with others besides, and trusted theyhad convinced them ; the court awaited the result of the parliamentarydebates with a certain amount of hope.But against the prevailing temper of a great assembly,attempts of this kind to gain influence will never produce anyresult. The very first introductory debate went against thegovernment. Formerly, in granting supply, it had often occurredthat the principal question as to whether a grant shouldbe made, had been decided affirmatively before the HouseNn2

548 PEACE WITH HOLLAND. XV. 10.A.D. 167~.went into committee on the question ; this time also the proposalwas made, but it was rejected, and that expressly on theground of a desire to discuss at the same time grievances,and above all religious grievances. In Committee, Coventry,who after Clarendon's fall had been looked upon as a possibleminister, and who now appeared at the head of theopposition, opened the debate ; he enjoyed the reputation of aperfectly well-informed man of business in all matters of tradeand marine. It is curious how he connected maritime andreligious questions with political ones, for the purpo.qe ofopposing the alliance with France, which was harmful forboth, for religion as well as for trade. 'In former days'--it was in these words that he expressed himself-'Spainwas more rigorous in religion, now it is France; Spain nowassists Holland ; France in the last war would conclude nocapitulation with any town unless the priests were consideredin it; it becomes thereby powerful amongst the Catholics;and we read in the French Gazette that the Papal nuncio hasreceived the order not to oppose the progress of the Frencharms. But that is not in the interest of England : she maycarry on war against Protestants, but not against Protestantism.And it is falsely maintained that the Dutch hinder thegrowth of our trade. They may have some advantages inthe East-Indian trade ; in other places, since the NavigationAct, we get the better of them. In distant and barbarouscountries, it may be of some use to us.to acquire a harbour,but not in Europe ; is it probable that through war we shallgain the world's commerce? The Dutch compete with us byindustry, parsimony, and by underselling us. From them, whowill come to us, thus divided as we are in jealousies and fearsof Popery, and even of the Inquisition? He that knows leasthas most fears ; a stranger does not know what you have inyour heart. This is enough to confirm my opinion thatwe should grant no money. It is curious that England andHolland are kept apart by a Prince who is destructive to both.If we follow only our national interests, we can in all probabilityobtain a satisfactory peace. But on that account theHouse must not put it out of its power to assist the Kingonce more ; for we cannot so entirely trust the sincere desirexv. 10. PEACE WITH HOLLAND. 549A.D. 1673.of the Dutch for a peace ; we shall be certain of it if we areprepared to grant money for a good reason'.' In this wayCoventry brought forward his motion, that they should refuseto pay the supplies, unless the obstinacy of the Dutch in thepeace negotiations made it necessary.This motion was accepted verbally by the House. SOthis new condition was added, besides the previous demandfor religious security.It was thought, from the very first moment, that in thisan extensive political scheme might be perceived; for bya conditional grant, the judgment on the negotiations withHolland, and in fact on the conduct of external affairs ingeneral, would be conceded to the House. I cannot discoverwhether this was the original intention ; but after the exerciseof the prerogative had brought the country into such imminentdanger, it lies in the nature of things that a tendencyshould arise towards restricting it, at least in the present case.Misuse led to restriction.But this motive of principle influenced the King as well;it seemed to him necessary for the dignity of his crown toresist Parliament. And already the Lower House proceededto other antagonistic resolutions. It declared the existenceof a standing army, and even the retention of certain ministers,to be grievances. But these were precisely the points aboutwhich the King was most sensitive ; he would not allow mattersto go so far as a formal decision on this question. Just as thename of the most hated minister, the Scottish Lauderdale, wasbeing uttered, Black Rod knocked at the door and the pro-.rogation of the session was declared, although it was onlythe ninth day of the debates.In favour of this decision no member of the Privy Counciland no minister, out of care for himself, would have daredto give his advice ; the French ambassador, Colbert Croissy,undertook to represent its necessity to the King2. It hadCoventry's speech is in Grey's Debates ii. 203. It is there in oratio obliqua,which would weary the reader as well as the author. I have not added a word tothe contents, the sequence of the ideas is obvious.' Colbert, November 13; a letter already co~nmunicated by Mignet ii. 221.

5 50 PEACE WITH HOLLAND. XV. 10.A.D. 1673.come to this, that the French ambassador interfered, actingas if he were an English minister; he had a secret understandingwith the principal advisers of the crown ; he was lessscrupulous than they, only because he had no responsibilityto fear.The motive was that, even without a Parliamentary grant,means could be found to keep a fleet at sea, which, unitedwith the French fleet, would rule the Channel, frustrate allthe efforts of the Dutch, and oblige them to agree to peaceon favourable conditions.This calculation was founded on the prizes taken from theDutch, which had already yielded a very considerable sumreckonedat half a million-and on the receipts from theregular revenues. Charles I1 caused Pepys, whom he hadtaken into his immediate service, to make a computation ofthe requisite expenditure for a new armament in the ensuingsummer, and of the revenue still available: The deficitamounted to £1,400,000. Colbert Croissy was of opinionthat the sum was purposely exaggerated, so as to make anunderstanding between the two crowns impossible, and endeavouredto persuade the King that a much smaller onewould suffice. It was not the King himself, but Arlington,who agreed to this remark; Colbert pledged himself, if theywould content themselves with a moderate sum, to do everythingin France to procure the grant, and to labour for thatpurpose not like a French ambassador, but like an Englishminister '.But whatever he might say or promise, the hope of obtainingan honourable peace, without the help of Parliament, hadto be given up. The only thing to be thought of was, toobtain a better basis for new negotiations.On the ground that the King was deserted just by thoseupon whom he had most counted, it was determined to deprivethem of their lucrative positions. These were some' Colbert, December 7: ' S'il me faisait connnitre, que le roi son maitre vonlustbien se contenter d'une somme modique, je me chargerais $ representer B s. M.plustot comme un ministre d'hngleterre que comme votre ambassadeur toutes lespuissantes raisons, qni les forcent, de vous demander cette assistance.'xv. 10. PEA CE WITH HOLLrlND. 551A.D. 1673.members of Parliament, like Robert Howard, who had receivedoffices with a salary of £5000; also Littleton andGarroway; but it made the greatest sensation that the samefate befell the Chancellor, the Earl of Shaftesbury. TheKing thought that he was bribed by Spain : only thus muchis evident, that, through the mediation of the Spanish ambassador,a favour relating to affairs in Carolina-the deliveranceof some prisoners-was granted to him, and it was hopedhe might be won over in consequence1. But in general hepassed for untrustworthy, crafty and deceitful. The Duke ofYork ascribed the opposition, which his marriage met with,to the influence of the Chancellor. To all those who weredecidedly attached to the Duke, and to the French alliance,it seemed like a deliverance of the government, that theyshould get rid of these men from amongst them. Still the-French ambassador did not accept the congratulations offeredhim upon it : he judged that a discharged minister, cleverand malicious as this one was, in perfect freedom, might, ina country like England, become very dangerous.Shaftesbury laid aside the robes which he wore as Chancellorof the kingdom, bucltled on his cavalier's sword, andproceeded to the Exchange, where every one was assembled :he, who had but now been feared and hated, was receivedwith all the greater joy. He had no scruples in going over,the very moment he left the ministry, to the most violentopposition. It may serve for his excuse, if it be true, as theFrench ambassador declares, that Shaftesbury had obtainedinformation about the secret treaty, about which Arlington, inthe internal conflicts of the ministry, had informed him, for thepurpose of winning him over against Clifford : both ministershad demanded the Test Act, to get rid of Clifford, who couldnot take the oath. The discovery of a plan, which had beenkept concealed from him, which was opposed to all his ideas,and in which he was still compelled to co-operate, wouldMarques de Fresno ta the Spanish Counc~l of State, December 6, 1672 : ' Quese diese libertad a Juan Rivers su pariente y otros compaGeros, que se hizieronprisoneros en la playa de S. Catalina en la Florida, a donde aportaron llevandosn rernato a Virginia a {ma plantadon (Carolina), en qne el y otros cavalteres destereyno son interressadas.'

552 PEACE WITH HOLLAND. XV. 10.A.D. 1673.at least justify his indignation, even though this plan hadnow been given up. Clifford's removal might already belooked upon as the caiastrophe of the entire system constructedfor the re-establishment of Catholicism. When hedeparted, Evelyn said to him, ' I hope I shall see you often,and as great a person again.' ' No,' answered Clifford ;' I shallnever see this place, this city, or court again.' The predictionof his horoscope might seem to him to be accomplished. Notlong afterwards, he died at his country seat. He is said tohave committed suicide : a deep melancholy, which had seizedhim, led to this end. Without doubt he was in earnest aboutCatholicism, but with this feeling his ambition, even his enjoymentof life, was united. Life was no longer worth anythingto him, as it had neither a personal, nor an ideal, aim.Evelyn, who alone gives any information about him, certainlybelieves in the suicide '.That it was impossible any longer to think of the Catholicscheme, was declared by Arlington himself, who was convincedby the sight of the general Protestant agitation, although, onlya year before, he had founded upon this scheme the renewalof the French alliance. The King said no more about it. TheFrench ambassador, with whom it had not originated, butwho had devoted to it all his energies, entreated his King torecall him. It was not as if the secret schemes had becomeknown in words, but with sure instinct the intentions whichhad prevailed in them were discovered ; in several pamphlets,statements coming pretty near the truth might be read.Colbert was assured by his friends in Parliament, amongstwhom was the poet Waller, that it was the general opinionthat the French alliance was intended to bring about there-establishment of Popery; there were not four members ofParliament to whom peace with Holland did not appear tobe the sole means of maintaining Protestantism. Clifford'ssuccessor at the treasury, Osborne, avoided returning thevisit paid him by the French ambassador. Under these circumstances,Colbert thought it advisable to withdraw ; heDiary ii. 87. His authorities for the horoscope are Shaftesbury and SirE. Walker, Garter King-at-arms.xv. 10. PEACE WITH HOLLAND. 553A.D. 1673.said, 'as if he had been standing before God,' that he couldbe of no service to his King in England. In his place herecommended his predecessor Ruvigny, because he was aProtestant.If anything was still to be done with Parliament, andif a separate peace with Holland was to be avoided, itcould only be by divesting the alliance with France of itsreligious and monarchical tendency. Ruvigny came overprovided with money for presents to influential members, soas to dispose them in favour of France. Moreover, he toldthem that Louis XIV was far from intending to bring abouta change in the mode of government in England, on thecontrary he had advised Charles I1 to allow Parliament todirect the expenditure of the supplies it granted. KingCharles expressed himself in the same way; he declaredhimself ready to entrust the expenditure of the money toParliament. In the Privy Council, the proposal was made tolay before Parliament the treaty with France, since only thatone was known, which had no bearing on religion. Arlingtonbade the King observe that this might some day be lookedupon as a very harmful precedent for the rights of thecrown. Still Charles I1 decided upon it ; for his habit alwayswas, to labour for the nearest end with every means in hispower. ' I shall,' he said to Ruvigny, ' give up somethingof my rights to maintain the alliance with the King.' Andto escape the necessity of a separate peace with Holland,he published proclamations against the Catholics, in accordancewith the last resolutions of Parliament, though he wasmuch opposed to them in his own heart. And always inclinedto believe what he wished, he thought he already perceiveda fresh change of temper in favour of the Frenchalliance, which he still hoped to maintain. In this hope,when Parliament was re-opened on January 7/17, 1673/4, heonce more asked for supplies, not so much to carry on waras to bring about peace, for which purpose it was necessaryto take up a strong position. The new Lord Keeper, Finch,followed with an elaborate explanation about the peace negotiationsat Cologne, the failure of which he ascribed tothc insulting and imperious behaviour of the Dutch ; at the

PEACE WITH HOLLAND.xv. IC.A.D. 167~.beginning of the debate, the Secretary of State reverted to thedanger, which the trade and the colonial relations of Englandwould run, if the navy were not put into a condition tocommand respect.But it was perceived at once, in both Houses alike, thatno effect was produced by acts of compliance and representationssuch as these. The unexpected prorogation had excitedan increased hostility against the advisers of the crown. TheLower House concluded, from the conditions of peace submittedby the French, according to which Catholic churcheswere to be erected in the conquered Dutch towns, thatEngland was after all to help in the establishment of Catholicism:it declared it a matter of conscience no longer topersevere in such an alliance. But more than this ; for fortyyears the Catholics had not shown themselves so undisguisedlyin London as they did at this moment; the TestAct must be extended ; religion must be secured against thecontingency of the King's death '. The extreme seriousness ofthe anxiety expressed is hardly comprehensible to posterity.If Shaftesbury is to be believed, there were, in and roundLondon, hosts of Catholics, ready to use force against Parliamentand its Protestant leaders. From the discontentedCatholics, amongst others Lord Hristol, to whom Clarendon'sfollowers were just as obnoxious as he had 'been himself, thismet with no contradiction. The King was thanked for his lastanti-~apal enactments, but an attempt was made to carry himmuch further. The Lords demanded that he should banishall Catholics, who were not householders, ten miles fromLondon, and during the session should permit none of themto come thither without special permission. The Commonsadded, that the militia should be kept in readiness to resistany tumultuous movements of the Papists or other malcontents,in one hour after summons had been given inLondon and Westminster, in other places in twenty-fourhours; as though the whole body of Catholics had been sogreatly stirred up by the connivance hitherto shown, followedby the present repression, that they were now determined' Speeches of Birch, Clarges, Jones, January 12. Grey's Debates ii. 218.xv. 10. PEA CE F'ITH HOLL.4 ND. 555A.D. 1674.and ready, with the support of France, and in the expectationof a successor to the throne of their own faith, to proceedto open violence. In the later years of James I, and in thetime of Charles I, the agitation had been directed at thesame time against prelates and Popery; now it was different,for the prelates were agreed with the Commons against thePapists : the agitation was inside the Anglican Church, whichfrom her alliance with Parliament derived new vital power,inclining her as much in this direction as formerly she hadbeen inclined in the opposite one.Face to face with a wavering government, which was atvariance with itself, Parliament renewed its attacks upon thcministers.The Lower House resumed proceedings with the impeachmentof Lauderdale, in which it had been interrupted by itsprorogation. It treated as criminal his conduct in Scotland,by which he had threatened England herself; also his zealfor monarchy in general, and especially a remark which hewas said to have made in the Privy Council, that a royal edictwas to be reckoned higher than an act of Parliament. Onthis ground the King was requested to deprive Lauderdaleof office, to exclude him from the Privy Council, and neverto see him again. Buckingham and Arlington were arraignedon account of their share in home and foreign politics. Theyboth appeared in person to defend themselves. Articleswere formally drawn up about which they were examined.Their answers waver between evasion and half-confession ; itwould be useless to try and learn the truth from them.The accusers knew too little positively to be able to putquestions which might have gone to the mark; the accusedonly tried to prove themselves on every point free from responsibility.But what a condition for authority to be in, whenits management of affairs is treated as a crime, if the resultsare unfavourable. The same sentence was pronounced uponBuckingham as upon Lauderdale. He himself acknowledgedthe principle, that none ought to sit in the council of theKing, of whom the nation did not have a good opinion.Arlington obtained, through his friends and through theDutch party, a majority in his favour. A petition for his

556 PEA CE WITH HOLLAND. XV. lo.A.D. 167~.dismissal was thrown out, but the impeachment was stillsuspended over his head '.If already there was hardly any longer a doubt aboutthe responsibility of ministers to Parliament, it was nowestablished beyond recall ; this proceeding contained a precedentwhich lent new strength to the constitutional principle.The opinions, which Arlington and Buckingham had maintainedagainst Clarendon, were now put into operation againstthemselves. Matters had not yet advanced so far that theKing would give way at once, but still he did not reject thedemand as unjustifiable; he said he would take it intoconsideration.Hand in hand with the humiliation of the power of thenlinisters went the attempt to limit its exercise. An endwas to be put to the prevailing practice, according to whichaccused persons might be sent to prisons out of England,to Scotland or the colonies. The Habeas Corpus Act, whichis reckoned a second Magna Charta, was carried in its chiefpoints and sent to the Upper House.Of no less importance was the zeal shown in attackingthe military force which had been increased during the war.Many defended it, for a time might come when it mightbe needed to repel a hostile invasion ; Venner's insurrectionalso had been quelled by regular troops. But the majoritystill regarded a standing army as a dangerous weapon forthe overthrow of religion and law. For the troops werepledged to obedience, even in case of a breach of the law;a King at the head of troops was not wanted, but, as it wasstrikingly enough expressed, a King at the head of the laws.Charles I1 was called upon to disband the troops which hehad taken into service since January I, 1664.These resolutions were not as yet laws, but in themselvesthey had a great deal of weight ; they expressed a prevailingtendency which admitted of no compromise. Far from beingable to cherish the hope that Parliament might be inducedin one way or another to take a further share in the DutchRuvigny, February I, maintains that it was the notification of the King'swill, made in a speech on the subject, that saved him.xv. lo. PEACE WITH HOLLANB. 557A.D. 1674.war, the King, on the contrary, had to expect every day thathe would see his alliance with France declared. a nationalgrievance.That was precisely the chief object which both parties keptalways in view. The matter stood thus : after long hesitationSpain had decided to make common cause with Holland;to this the capture of Maestricht, by which both were equallyendangered, had especially contributed. But on the conclusionof this alliance it was remarked, that its object wouldnot be obtained so long as England continued to be alliedwith France against Holland. Spain promised therefore toundertake a mediation between the States-General and theKing of Great Britain, upon conditions which were at onceannounced ; but if that could not be attained, Spain pledgeditself to break with England as well as with France1.It might be doubted whether this promise were seriouslymeant. For how was Spain to venture once more upon thestruggle with England in which hitherto it had suffered suchheavy loss? But whatever may be asserted, discord in thelegislative bodies will always react upon external relations.There are extant some reflections by the Marquis of Fresno, .from which it is evident that Spain was in favour of warwith England, because the English King, thougn he mightreceive subsidies from France, still would shortly be obligedto have recourse again to Parliament, over which he wasnot supreme. The English Parliament now seemed to Spainto be a support, of European importance, for its policy andits existence. Like the French, like the King himself, Spainalso distributed money among the members; with all itsembarrassments, the Spanish Council of State still knew howto make a few thousand doubloons available for that purpose ;to accept money was as yet looked upon as no disgrace inParliament. But the matter had still another side. Sinceit had once become apparent that the King's French alliance' ' Toutes sortes de raisons font voir, que si le dit roy de la Grande Bretagne s'attacheB ne point vouloir faire la paix avec les itats gbnBraux, l'on ne peut attendrel'effet, que l'on peut d6sirer des armes de S. M. Catholique, B moins qu'elles agissentavec celles des dits &tats.' Dumont vii. zqa.

558 PEACE WITH HOLLAND. XV. 10.A.D. 167~.had also a Catholic tendency, Parliament saw in unjon withSpain a religious support. At times Fresno was orderedfrom Madrid to interest himself for the Catholics in England ;but he refused to do so. For Parliament's inclination toward --Spain depended upon no other consideration than its apprehensionthat, by the King's alliance with France, its religionand liberties might be injured; he himself regards it asremarkable, that the Catholic kingdom should be allied withboth Lutherans and Catholics, but he does not think itoffensive, since it proceeds from the complication of affairs.To defend Catholicism, and at the same time to keep thepopular good-will in England, he declared to be impossible,and an attempt to do so even dangerous; for if the holdon Parliament were lost, certainly nothing could be accomplishedat court.The alliance between Spain and Holland, with its intentionsregarding England, awakened at first great disgust atthe English court; Lord Arlington even declared it to beinfamous. But the temper of Parliament was so decided, andthe situation was so dangerous, that at last he even offeredto agree to the mediation of Spain. Early in February 1674,the King came forward, to lay before the two Houses theDutch proposals of peace, which had been transmitted to himthrough the Spanish ambassador, and to ask their opinionwhether he should accept them or not.The French were surprised that he said nothing about hisalliance with France, and did not even put in a word aboutthe armaments which would be necessary. In the LowerHouse it was also remarked, but from an opposite point ofview, that no mention had been made of France; they werediscontented that the King did not in plain terms declarethe alliance with France to be dissolved. The oppositionwished first to know whether it was a peace in common withFrance, or a separate peace, about which the King wishedto take their opinion. To this it was replied that the King'swhole speech indicated the intention to form a separate agreement.After these explanations, the Houses gave their votes.They advised the King under existing circumstances to agreeto the proposals of the Dutch, and to negotiate for suchxv. 10. PEACE WITH HOLLAND. 559A.D. 1674,conditions as might .secure him an honourable peace. .Thenegotiation was carried on by the Marquis de Fresno, wholooked upon the office as a great honour; it led, after fewconferences, to a conclusion in accordance with the agreementsmade between Holland and Spain ', and at the sametime turned out more favourable for England than couldhave been expected. Important concessions were made tothe English flag, the Dutch at the same time pledging themselvesto a considerable payment of money; such possessionsand districts out of Europe as either party had seizedfrom the other, were to be restored" The French were notexpressly mentioned, but, as a secret article was added to thetreaty, forbidding either of the stipulating parties to supportthe enemies of the other, the alliance with France was herebyvirtually annulled. The French ambassador, to whom thisarticle also was made known ultimately, did not fail to complainof it. The King said that the Spanish ambassador hadproposed it quite at the last, and had declared decidedly thatif it were not accepted, the peace could not be concluded ;the matter had already gone too far to admit of new difficultiesbeing raised ; he had been deceived by the Spaniards,but would remember it against them. But by this he didnot secure the friendship of Spain, he only felt the necessityof giving way to Parliament.Of all the results of this conflict the most important wasthe increased strength of position which Parliament won. Asyet none of all its constitutional claims had been fought out,but it had given to the English administration an entirelyProtestant character, and had interfered almost independentlyin the complications of Europe.' Treaty of August 30, 1673 ; Dumont vii. 242.- a Treaty of Westminster, February 9/19, 167~ ; Ib. a jq.

CHAPTER XI.UNION OF PARLIAMENT WIT11 THE PRINCE OF ORANGE.CHARLES 11, against whom these exertions were directed,and from whom these results had been wrung, was not onthat account absolutely hated ; the great majority forgavehim even his moral faults, for he was easily accessible andaffable; a thousand witty sayirgs of his were passed frommouth to mouth, which won for him a reputation of superiorintellect ; however much his Dutch undertakings might beobjected to, still with one interest of the nation they were inaccordance ; in their ultimate results they were not disadvantageous,and in other points he at least did not proceedto extremities ; he always knew how to give in at the last.What above all secured for him men's esteem and consideration,was apprehension of his successor, who, as regards moralconduct was no better than the King, but was at the sametime inflexible and obstinate. Whilst Charles I1 allowedmerely an inclination towards Catholicism to appear, theDuke of York had gone over finally with all due form. Thishad occurred immediately before the outbreak of the waragainst Holland in the spring of 1672 ; under the directionof Father Redingfield, a Jesuit, the Duke observed in thestrictest manner' the ordinances of the Church; he mightbe seen to accompany the King to the door of the chapel,where the sacrament was to be administered according to theAnglican ritual, and then, in the eyes of all, leave the processionand go away. No representation of the inconveniences,which by this means he drew upon himself or his brother,produced any effect upon him. He preferred to resign hisoffice as Lord High Admiral, rather than take the oathxv. rr. UNION WITH THE PRINCE OF ORANGE. 561A.D. 1673.against transubstantiation prescribed in the new Act l. Theunion of parliamentary and Protestant principles, which wasregarded as the salvation of England, made it appear thegreatest of all dangers, that a prince of such decidedlyCatholic opinions should ever ascend the English throne and,by possession of the royal prerogative, attain to the exerciseof its rights.The hope which had at one time not been without foundation,that Queen Catherine might give the King and thecountry an heir who should live, now no longer existed. Itcreated great excitement when she began to show signs ofweakness, which seemed to indicate approaching death ; this,in the opinion of a French doctor who examined hercondition, was to be expected with certainty, within a fewmonths. It was thought that the country would, with oneaccord, entreat the King to marry again without delay; forevery one wished to see an heir of his body; it was evenmentioned to the King himself, who in his sensual way letfall the remark that, if he was to marry a lady of equal birth,she must be beautiful, indeed very beautiful.Queen Catherine, who never was anything but a foreigner,in her retirement can hardly have learnt anything of all this ;she always showed the same submission to her husband, andsurvived him severaI years. She herself had no enemies, butthe enemies of the Duke of York were the opponents of hermarriage. They had recommended to the King a marriageof kin, which was not forbidden in the Holy Scriptures, butit could not be concealed that, according to human laws, thechildren of such a union would not have an undoubted rightto the succession. The necessity of a separation was againbrought forward, and Charles 11, by the active interest whichhe showed in the debates about the divorce of Lord Roosin the Upper House, seemed to betray a certain inclinationfor it. Buckingham always used his influence in that direction.During the late crisis, this thought reappeared withincreased strength. The leading members of Parliament told' ' Relatione circa la conversione del duca di York.'Rome.RANKE, VOL. 111. 0 oIn the Altieri Library at

562 UNlON OF PARLIAMEA-T xv. 11.A.D. 1673.the King that they would so arrange the affair that the successionof his children by a new marriage should be secured.Shaftesbury, who at that time was still Chancellor, couldhave made use of the authority of his office for the legalaccomplishment of this object, and doubtless would have doneso1. The intention was, to marry the King to a Protestant.princess, so as to put an end, once for all, to the anxiety aboutthe succession of a Catholic. But it can be said with certainty,that with Charles I1 this was not feasible. With allhis faithlessness he was not without consideration for hiswife ; he said that to separate himself from her would be asbad as giving her poison. Besides he was involved as deeplyas ever in an illicit connexion. A French lady, whoseacquaintance he had made in his sister's suite, Mdlle. deQuerouaille, had then returned to England ; the King ofFrance himself had encouraged her to listen to the passionwhich Charles 11 displayed for her; even the serious Arlingtonand his wife interested themselves in it, for they wishedto disengage the King from other connexions into whichBuckingham allured him. The lady was raised to be Duchessof Portsmouth, and gained the greatest influence overhim.But if the Duke of York kept his rights in this way, itseemed to his friends that, although he had daughters, itwas yet desirable that he should have a son sprung from anentirely equal marriage, who might some day be his heir.They sought eagerly for a new wife for him. The King alsoconsidered the selection very important ; he knew that hisbrother in all his actions was dependent upon priests andwomen.There were again some thoughts of bringing about analliance between the house of Stuart and the Austro-Spanish house; as mat,ters then stood, it would have beenagreeable even to Parliament. By a Spaniard of the well-' Colbert, April 17, 1673, accorditig to the commucications made by the Icinghimself and the Duke of York: 'Le chnncelier s'est joint iL ceux, qui veulentromlxe le mariage du roi, et M. le Duc de York me dit, que ce munistre et sesadh81eus avaient dessein, rle faire esponser au roi une princesse l>rotestanle.'These letters of the ambassador are thc source of the following information.xv. 11. WITH THE PRINCE OF ORAATGE. 563A.D. 1673.known name of Oiiate, the attention of the English courtwas directed to the blooming Archduchess Claudia Felicitas,daughter of the Archduke of the Tyrol, Charles Ferdinand,who had died a few years before. Not without giving informationto the Court of Madrid, to which at that time theCatholic project was also communicated, the King sent, inFebruary 1672, the Abbate Guasconi, a Florentine, who wasacquainted with the young lady's mother, Anna, of the houseof Medici, to Innsbruck, and afterwards to Vienna, to introducethe matter. But on the part of the house of Austria, conditionswere made which could not well have been reconciledwith the Anglo-French alliance. It seems as if the Duke hadwished to agree to them, while the King would not withdrawone hair's breadth from his great ally. And so no kind ofunderstanding had been come to when, in March 1673, theEmpress Margaret died, and the Emperor formed the ideaof marrying the Archduchess himself: it is no wonder thatshe preferred the reigning Emperor to the Duke of York.The Duke was then offered one of the still unmarried sistersof the Emperor, but he did not think it very becoming toaccept the hand of the sister of his successful rival. This timealso the union of the two houses was frustrated.Attention was again directed to ladies connected with theFrench court. The first was Maria Anna, the daughter of aprince of Wurtemberg, a brave commander who had distinguishedhimself in various military services, and amongst othersin the service of France ; her mothcr, Isabella of Aremberg, wasat that time in Paris ; the young duchess was being educatedin a convent. Here the Duke's confidential chamberlain, LordPeterborough, saw her at the grating ; he thought her handsome,well-educated, gentle and serious, and well adapted forhis prince. But her mother was looked upon as an intrigante ;Mdlle. de Querouaillc especially did not wish to see her atcourt. But when she then herself proposed a French friendof her own, a princess of Elbcruf, it was objected that shebelonged to the house of Lorraine, and might open theway at the English court for the enmity of that house againstLouis XIV. I mention in passing these circumstances, becausethey reveal the personal side of the politics of the0 0 2

564 UNION OF PAXLZA MENT XV. I I.A.D. 1673.time l. King Louis now proposed a daughter of the CountPalatine, Philip William, of Neuburg, who at that time wason better terms with him than any other German prince.The information obtained about her did not sound so favourableas to determine the Duke in her favour. At last thePrincess Mary of Modena was taken into consideration ; her.mother was one of Mazarin's nieces. Lord Peterborough, whoat once hurried to the spot, gave a very favourable report ofher personal appearance ; though she was only fourteen yearsold, she was perfectly developed and tall for her age : hepraised her dark eyes and raven hair. Still other difficultiespresented themselves in this case. The Roman court, whichitself inclined rather to Spanish than to French politics, didnot wish to see the consideration of the house of Este iccreasedby such a brilliant union; and the Princess, who hadalready dedicated herself to the cloister, required a papaldispensation. Against this Cardinal Barberini urged that theEilglish Catholics most earnestly desired the Duke's marriagewith a Catholic princess, and that no other but this one wasavailable ; he even remarked that there was no need to be somuch troubled about the objections made by the Romancourt ; the marriage ceremony had already been accomplishedby proxy before the Roman court issued its dispensation,which it then did, as the Pope said, for the sake of the advantageswhich in time might grow out of it for the Catholicreligion 2.The principal reason for the haste shewn was the approachingmeeting of Parliament, which, if once it wereassembled, would not allow the marriage to take place: atthe time when the matter was decided on officially, theFrench ambassador calculated that there would still be timebefore then. Peterborough, in his proposal, had made its immediateacceptance a condition. Cardinal Barberini believedBesides tie French despatches, I make use of Halstrade's ' Succintes Genealogies,'1685 ; they contain authentic information about Henry Mordaunt, Earl of Peterborough,which is of importance in this matter.'Per i vantaggi, che la religione cattolica in progress0 del tempo ne poterarecevere.' See also the actual document in the Altieri Library, ' Circa il matrimoniotra la duchessa Maria d'Este ed il Duca di York.'xv. 11. WITH THE PRTNCE OF OXAATGE. 565A.D. 1673.that he was furthering the cause of all Catholics when hehastened it by his recommendation'.Parliament, which assembled on the 20th of October, 1673,decided, even before the actual opening, to petition the Kingnot to allow the intended marriage of his brother with thePrincess of Modena to take place, and further not to let himmarry any one but a Protestant. The King interrupted thedebate by a short prorogation ; then he answered that hisbrother's marriage with the Princess of Modena was notmerely proposed, but was already concluded. Soon sheherself, accompanied by her mother, arrived at Dover. Thistime no new religious ceremony was thought necessary. TheBishop of Oxford only asked Lord Peterborough about thewedding, and then declared the marriage to be valid. Asearly as November the newly-married pair appeared inLondon.Even at the last the King had been entreated to delay themarriage; but it was opposed to his dynastic principles toallow Parliament any influence in the matrimonial affairsof the royal family; and moreover the matter had alreadygone too far for him possibly to withdraw without dishonour.He risked the consequences whatever they might be. Butwhat could they be?The marriage was the work of the King of France, whohad proposed it and carried it through on both sides ; it wasthe most complete expression of the alliance with France:the antipathy towards France, identical before this with thedread of Catholicism, must now be doubled. We have alreadyshown how closely connected with this was the oppositionwhich the King found in Parliament.But above all the Duke of York, the heir-presumptive tothe throne, became the object of general dislike. He hadformerly not been disliked; his union with the Clarendonparty had won for him a position in Parliament ; but theseties were loosened by the gradual progress of his conversionto Catholicism, and his old opponents gained ground against' ' Perche aprendosi il parlamento redeva impossibilitati ogni matrimonio conprincipessa catholica.'

566 UNION OF PARLIAMENT XV. I I.A.D. 167~.him. A princess of the house of Austria, for which the nationthen felt sympathy, would, although Catholic, have been lessdispleasing. But that the Duke should marry, under the influenceof the King of France, a Catholic lady, who also belongedto the French party in Europe, brought him into completeopposition to the feelings of the great majority of the nation.Men do not only live in the present ; they wish to be secureof their future. But what could be expected from a prince whowas the offspring of such a marriage, and would be broughtup and formed under influences equally distasteful ?If the restoration of the house of Stuart rested on a combinationof hereditary right and parliamentary principle, thena decisive contradiction was contained in the fact that Parliamenthad become entirely Protestant, whilst the Stuartsthreatened to bring back Catholicism.Just at the moment that this marriage came distinctlyinto sight, it had been mooted that the crown of Englandshould be bound by Acts of Parliament to the Protestantfaith, which should be made the condition of its possession 1.But how much was necessary before such a plan could beaccomplished! In the first place men's thoughts and wishestook another direction. There was living a member of theroyal family who, in fact, if the female succession were tobe disregarded, might be looked upon as the next heirthiswas the Prince of Orange, whose personal characteranswered to all the wishes and expectations of the nation :all eyes were directed to him.Amongst the children of Charles I, the Princess of Orangeand the Duke of Gloucester, who both died young, representeda different mixture of character from Charles I1 andthe Duke of York; they seemed to be more serious, to havea firmer hold on morals and religion. The young PrinceWilliam of Orange made a good impression when he appearedin England, and every one perceived his likeness to his motherthe Princess; at his first meeting with his two uncles, whoseOn July 10, 1673. the King said that he expected these resolutions from theParliament : ' L'exil de M. le Duc d'York est une acte, qni exclurroit pour jarnaistout Prince Catholique d'Angleterre.'xv. 11.WITH THE PRINCE OF ORANGE. 567A.D. 1673.Catholic tendencies he disliked, he showed himself to bea confirmed and immoveable Protestant. From extravagances,clothed as they were with the charm of wit andintellect, he likewise naturally kept aloof. He liked bodilyexercises because they fatigued him, especially hunting ; hewent early to bed; a good drink of beer was dearer to himthan an exciting banquet. In the difficult relations intowhich his descent and legal claim to the highest officesof the Republic brought him from the first, he developeda calm, sensible bearing. Prince William I11 of Orangewas one of the rare men of early moral maturity who, attheir entrance upon the stage of human affairs, are alreadyall that they ever will be, and perhaps ought to be. Manya high-flown speech is ascribed to him in which, when anunexpected fate elevated him at once to the position whichhis forefathers had occupied, he refused proposals of thetwo neighbouring kings, which aimed at the debasement ofthe Republic. I am unwilling either to give credence tothem or to reject them. But in reality the grand actionwith which he makes his entrance into history, is that heput far from him an elevation and establishment of his ownposition, which was offered him at the price of loss to theState. His inward pride would not allow him to be therepresentative, even though it were the hereditary representative,of a degraded and dependent country. He refusedeven to take the proposals of Louis XIV into consideration ;to his uncle he answered with conditions which, thoughtroublesome, would still have been bearable ; and even fromthese what was most burdensome was afterwards struck out.When we saw how closely the interests of Parliament andthose of Spain at that time coincided, the Prince formeda third party to this alliance : the direction of that courseof foreign policy of the Republic, in the conduct of whichthe De Witts had failen, he now took in hand, but withmuch greater ability ; he was their successor in relation tohome affairs as well. The comnlission for secret affairs,upon which the authority of De Witt depended, rcmaincdin existence. The Secretary of the States-Gcneral, GasparFagel, a former adherent of De Witt's, was advanced by the

C'NZON OF PARLIAMENTA.D. 1674.Prince's express wish, to be Grand-Pensionary, and in thismanner became head of the commission, only with the instructionalways to impart the most important matters firstof all to the Prince. By this arrangement the Prince, withwhom Fagel stood in the most intimate relations, becamemaster of the commission, and to a certain extent headof the State. With considerate circumspection, for whichthe learned statesmen found an example recorded by Livyin Roman history, they knew how to satisfy the people inthe midst of revolution, without undermining the respectdue to those in authority. On this double foundation thePrince's power grew up. The misfortunes of the times whenthere had been no Statholder had everywhere called forththe conviction, that the return of such times must be forever prevented. At first, in the Assembly of the States ofHolland, the proposal was made by one town to declare hereditarythe office of Captain-General and Statholder, and itwas accepted by the towns and the nobility. In accordancewith this, on February 2, 1674, the United States of Hollandand West Friesland determined to grant to the Prince ofOrange and his male heirs the offices of Statholder, Captain-General and Admiral-General. Not only did Zealand andEast Friesland support this, but they expressly extendedthe right of inheritance to later descendants. Some daysafter there followed in the States-General a resolution, thatthe office of Captain-General and Admiral of the UnitedNetherlands should be hereditary in the Prince's male line.Every one exerted himself to show him sympathy. Richpresents followed, the richest being from the East IndianCompany. Especially he was entreated to marry as soonas possible and so establish the statholder dynasty. It iscurious how, in the midst of the Republic, an hereditaryprincedom arose in the form of a supreme magistracy.This result, which had a certain affinity to the restorationof monarchy in England, now made the greatest impressionupon Charles I1 ; he began to value his nephew more highly.Till now the Prince had stood in close connexion with Parliament; Shaftesbury, Halifax, Coventry's nephew, andRobert Howard, are named as his friends: but he wasA.D. 1674.also connected with those who opposed the French alliance,such as Ormond and his son Ossory. Since they one andall thought how to secure themselves against the vengeanceof the Duke of York and his friends of the French party,it seemed to them a desirable expedient to marry one of theD'uke's daughters to the Prince. And to this idea Charles I1now also consented. The Prince had the highest reputationin England; he might some day become all the morcdangerous, because many ascribed to him personally aneventual right of succession. The marriage of the Princewith the Duke's eldest daughter seemed to the King tocontain a security for the Duke himself during his lifetime,and for the throne generally.Negotiations were entered into about this affair beforeit was mentioned to the Duke. The French indeed warnedhim, that by it he would rush headlong into evident danger.But present considerations seem to have overbalanced concernfor the future. He at last agreed not to object, shouldthe Prince ask for the hand of his daughter.It agrees again exactly with Charles 11's character that hedetermined to prorogue Parliament still longer, because itwould have insisted upon entering into the great allianceagainst France, and yet that at the same time he allowed anintimation, which must bring about the most complete understanding,to be made to the Prince of Orange, whose wholeinterest tended in that way. The prorogation was arrangedwith Lauderdale, who in spite of Parliament remained in office,without Arlington's knowing anything about it. Arlingtonwas entrusted with the mission to Holland, and of that Lauderdaledid not hear a word. Arlington even had only tocarry out the political side of the mission ; the dynasticquestion was entrusted to young Lord Ossory, who was sentas his companion.In December 1674 we find the two ambassadors at theHague. The grounds of the political agreement were discussedwith Arlington. The Prince complained that Charles I1allowed Englishmen to takc service with France, but notwith the great Alliance; for his own part he declared that,if he had formerly stood in connexion with members of the

570 UNION OF PARLIAMENT xv. 11.A.D. 1674.opposition, this was no longer the case. Ossory, who cameto the Prince in a particularly confidential relation, did notexecute his commission literally; instead of awaiting a demand,he advanced with a kind of offer. The Prince answered that,however grateful he might be for the honour which was intendedfor him, he could not accept it at once, but wouldcome to England and introduce himself to the Princess ; hewould first learn from her whether his person was disagreeableto her or not. He was in the midst of war ; the Princesswas still very young; he meant without doubt what he said,although the Duke, somewhat indignant with Ossory, professedat least to regard the answer as a refusal.Indeed everything was as yet doubtful. Among the Prince'sparliamentary friends there were some who dissuaded himfrom agreeing to the marriage. They assured him that theywould exclude the Duke's children from the succession,and would declare him, the Prince of Orange, grandson ofCharles I, to be the next heir to the throne1.This was the result of Charles 11's attempt, when once theparliamentary constitution and the Anglican Church hadbeen established in close connexion, to restrict their dominionby the unrestrained exercise of the prerogative. His ideaof reintroducing Catholicism into England, and of givingfree scope to the great neighbouring kingdom for its proceedingson the Continent, although under certain conditions,proved itself to be the most disastrous which an Englishgovernment had ever entertained. For even in the thoroughlyRoyalist Parliament there survived a religious conviction anda political tradition, which uncontrollably opposed him. Atthat time the prerogative was beaten back on all points,the alliance with France annulled, and Protestantism securelyestablished. To avoid the risk of like dangers in the future,the possibility was contemplated of placing on the thronea prince who in all points answercd to these principles. Butmuch was still wanting before this could be attained ; ofall the pending questions, as has been shown, not one had,xv. 11. WITH THE PRINCE OF ORANGE. 571A.D. 1674.as yet, been altogether definitely determined. Whilst King,Parliament, and Church, all three indeed forming only oneparty, strove with one another, other elements arose whichopposed in principle all of them together, and interferingin their conflict, themselves endeavoured to rise independentlyinto prominence. In every other point also men'sminds were in a state of eager excitement.For this paragraph also I have been able to derive much from the correspondencebetween Holland, England, and France.

xv. 12. MO VBMEflT IN LI TERA Tl rRB. 57 3CHAPTER XII.hlOVEMENT IN LITERATURE.THERE was still living the philosopher of the epoch,Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, whose incisive sayings hadfor more than a generation set all minds fermenting. He hadformerly devoted himself in Oxford, with as much zeal asany one else, to the scholastic doctrines as they were theretaught, but later had entirely put them aside, at first duringhis travels on the Continent, where he thought he sawthat the world was occupied with entirely different problemsfrom those which were proposed in Oxford, and then after hisreturn, by renewed study of the old classical literature,particularly the poets and historians. A decisive influenceover his education was exercised by the political occurrencesof the time. During many years he enjoyed the peacewhich Richelieu's supreme authority had produced, and thefree literary intercourse which it favoured ; he loved theintellectual atmosphere in which strangers moved in Paris.On his return to England, the first outbreak of the civildisturbances, which affected all men's thoughts and actions,terrified him and moved him to return to Paris. Betweenthe opposite impressions of salutary repose under a monarchy,and wild civil war, caused by the attempt to limit the Prince'spower, his theory about state power, I will not say originated,because it hangs toge'ther with all that he perceived andthought, but at least ripened and attained a form in whichit could be expressed. Still perhaps the conditions ofFrance did not satisfy him ; from the bottom of his soul heAuctarium Vitae Hobbianae.Opera, ed. Molesworth i. xxiv.hated the preponderance of Catholicism on which the stabilityof France depended. Hobbes is one of the greatestopponents of hierarchical influences in the state who has everexisted. In the combination of absolute civil power and itsprotection from all religious influences lies the peculiarityof his system. According to him, the state originates in auniversal consent, independent of all opinions, reposing on thenecessity of peace, which is needed by all, and which existsby the transfer of every personal right to one supreme power.This power he ascribes to the chief magistracy, in spiritualas well as in secular affairs. He not only emancipatesit from the religious element, by which it has supported ,itself from the earliest times, but he makes the religiouselement subject to it. For, from the inlpossibility of controllingreligious aspirations, he deduces the mischief whichhas befallen England and the confusion of the world ingeneral '. He claims for the supreme power the right toexclude those doctrines which are not compatible with obedience,and even to determine what is to be reckoned as goodand what as bad. Not that he questions the moral law ofnature or revelation, but the one he wishes, by the declarationof the state, to withdraw from the. domain of individualopinion 2, to the other he gives an entirely transcendentalmeaning. He interprets literally the words 'the Kingdo111of God is not of this world.' He ascribes to the state theright of k re paring for it, but also the right to determine theway and manner in which that shall be done. In the greatstruggle between Church and State, which was caused by theirvery union, Hobbes, without loosening their connexion, placeshimself in the front rank of the champions of civil power.And doubtless it is good that great contrasts should appearfrom time to time in all their sharpness. Hobbes attacks thedivine right which the various parties, whether Episcopalianor Presbyterian, assert, as well as the claim of the fanatical1 Leviathan c. xviii. ' Actiones ab opinionibus ortum habent; in harum ergoreylatione consistit regulatio civium;' or as it stands in English, 'in the wellgoverning of opiuions consisteth tht well governing of men's actions.''Non quaerimus, an furtum sit peccatum; quaerimus, quid furtum dicendumsit.'

574 MO VEMENT IN LITERA TURE. XV. 12.sects to personal inspiration. But his principal antipathyis directed against the Catholic idea which, though banishedfrom England, may come back any day, and will then be morepernicious than ever. It would be worth discussion how farthis hostile impulse has ilifluenced his philosophical system,even when it seems independent of it ; his attacks on Aristotleare evidently connected with it. In one passage he hasinvestigated at great length, which of the doctrines of thatphilosopher it can have been that had procured for him anentrance into the universities patronised by the Papacy, and inwhat connexion they stand to it. In so doing he comes intoopposition with the elementary conceptions on which theentire modern view of the world depends; that is to say, hecombats the doctrine of the individual rights, for according tohim everything proceeds from the conception of the collectivebody. He derives political society from the right of all mento all things, the consequent war of all against all, and thenecessity of founding, for their protection, a supreme authorityarmed with the sword of justice, to which each voluntarilyresigns his original right ; and so he is led to the assumptionof an absolute authority before which every individual andcorporate right vanishes. Even the modified form in which,after the example of the Scots, the doctrine of nationalsovereignty was then taught, namely, that the Prince wasof more consequence than each individual, but of less thanthe community, he rejects unconditionally, for in that casetwo sovereigns would be set one against another. But besidesthe Prince, who represents the universal will, there can, accordingto Hobbes, bc no further represcntation of that will ;to divide the civil power would be to contradict its idea.From this abstract theory, the truth of which lies in theassumptioli that the individual depends, for his rightful existenceand his security, on the state whose original foundationsmay never be injured, Hobbes advances immediately to theconsideration of the concrete questions then under discussion.According to his view, the Lower House represents theboroughs and counties by which it is elected, but in no respectthe nation. IJarliament is summoned for a definiteobject; to go beyond that lies outside its competence. TheSV. I?.disputed rights of the militia, of taxation, of justice, and evenof legislation, he claims for the Prince. Who would deny thateven here polemical considerations influence him? Sometimeshe allows his intention to appear, of maintaining unimpairedfrom his point of view the rights of the Stuarts, withwhom he stood in close connexion, just as he endeavoured tobring into agreement with his fiction of a contract the rightof conquest out of which the English monarchy had arisen.This however does not affect the sum of his teaching, whichonly aims at representing the origin of civil power in general ;its form might just as well be aristocrati'c, and even democratic,as monarchic; it being premised, that the power itselfis regarded as the representative of the nation and the expressionof its universal will, and is subjected to no limitation.From the beginning no one was beguiled into thinking thatthis doctrine of absolutism corresponded to the old idea ofthe monarchy. Hobbes had given the young King in Parisinstruction in mathematics, but even then he was excludedfrom the court. His principal book, the Leviathan, could onlyappear under the protection of the Commonwealth ; when,under its rules, all spiritual censorship of the press had beenabolished, he returned to England. But his book won him nofriends, and he was attacked on all sides with violence. WithCromwell's administration the ideas of Hobbes have a certainaffinity; but Cromwell never separated himself so far fromhis religious sympathies as to form any connexioli withHobbes, who on his side regarded-the Protector as a craftyhypocrite. After the Restoration Charles I1 treated thephilosopher with personal friendship, and gave him a pension.But the publication of the Behemoth, an historic dialoguein which Hobbes represented the occurrences of the last tenyears from his own point of view, was forbidden by the King.For Hobbes stood in open antagonism to the religious ideasas they had taken form after the Restoration. As formerlythe Presbyterian Parliament under Cromwell, so now alsothe Anglican Parliament threatened him with religious censure.From the two universities, which he had wished fundamentallyto rcform, he met with bitter hostility. Into theRoyal Society, of which he approved, he still could not gain

576 ill0 VEfMENT IN LZTEIIA TURE. xv. 12.admittance ; amongst its members also his paradoxes andviolence had made him enemies. The King once remarked,Hobbes' hand is against every man, and every man's handagainst him'. Hobbes found a refuge in the family of Cavendish,Earl of Devonshire, to which he had for many years beenattached. His books are for the most part dedicated to one orother of its members; he accompanied them to their countryhouses, for instance to Chatsworth; there in the morning hetook long walks over the neighbouring hills, in the afternoonhe buried himself in his studies ; he was supplied with all thathe wanted, tobacco and lights, and then left alone. Ilobbesattained the greatest age that nature grants to man ; still everyyear he published something. But even in the Cavendishfamily he was looked upon as an eccentric character whoseopinions no one shared.The world withdrew from him because he had taken upa position outside its passing struggles, and even the ideasamongst which it lived. But in spite of this estrangementfrom the world around him, Hobbes continues to possess anincreasing historical importance. Men and things change,but ideas expressed in words and in writing can soar abovethis change, and exercise an influence over the most distantepochs. We know that the idea of a Republic ruling unconditionallywas constructed in France upon Hobbes' doctrines; that the greatest ruler of modern times has declaredhimself the representative of the nation almost in the wordsof Hobbes. Scientifically also Hobbes exercised, even in hisown time, the greatest influence ; he stood in active connexionwith the most remarkable intellects of the time; many ofthem recognise the impulse they received from him.In England already by the side of the old philosopherarose a young man who, with many points of connexion withhim, but still more of difference, was destined to be placed atonce, by the judgment of all, pre-eminent above him. Thiswas John Locke. Let us glance at their relationship.In his theory of the State, Locke also sets forth a primitive' SorbiEre, Relation d'un voyage en Angleterre, 80: ' S. M. le compara trbs bienh Yours, contre leqocls il fait battle les dogues pour les exercer.'-xv. 12. 310 J'E1fEN-T IN LITERA TURE. 577condition, out of which men passed, by means of a contract, tocivil and political society; this is not far removed from thewar of all against all ; but by the side of the hostility of oneagainst another he also recognises, in accordance with theimplanted law of nature, a condition of peace which, for thevery purpose of avoiding war, is next worked out into societyand the state. This, according to him also, is brought aboutby the individual's resignation of his right to help himself infavour of the community, or of those who are esteemed themost fitted for the maintenance of public order, but this withreservation of the individual rights of each, which no one canresign, and of property. Hobbes had always before him theabsolute power of the state, Locke a closely-limited monarchy.Hobbes lays the emphasis upon unconditional obedience tothe sovereign, Locke upon the mutual obligation between Princeand people. In one of his earlier writings he characterises thePrince as the person in whom the people have bound up theirfreedom, their property, and their safety ; whoever attacks thePrince offends the people: but even a prince may not breakthis consecrated chain. Hobbes opposes the constitutionaltheory; Locke is its champion, and has materially advancedits development.The historical impulses from which these two philosophersreceived their bent were entirely different.Hobbes constructed his system when the rush of sectarianopinions was undermining the state ; Locke, on the other hand,constructed his when the restored Church system was makingpreparation to suppress all divergence of opinion. He alsogreeted the King's restoration with joy, because by it camesecurity from the ambition of the professing children of God ;but from the first moment he busied himself with the admissionof the Presbyterians into the State-Church. One of his earliestcompositions is concerned with this question ; he regards it assoluble, if only the fewest possible ceremonies are introduced.This was also the opinion of the moderate Presbyterians.Letter of a person of quality, 1675 : ' Every individual subject is under the fearof the King and his people ;-the whole people have bound up in the prince andderive from him all their liberty, property and safety.' (Locke, Works x. 222.)R INKE, VOL. 111.

Already also latitudinarianisnl wit11 reference to speculativedoctrines makes itself felt, and Locke was one of its disciples.Only how was it then possible to attain moderation? episcopacy,in its connexion with monarchy, against which Locke'sfather had once borne arms in the army of the Long Parliament,advanced to a dominion which might become intolerable.In the midst of this conflict Locke conceived the idea, thatChurch and State in general ought to be separate from oneanother.We have a treatise of his in which he makes clear to himselfthe differences of the twofold society, the civil and thereligious, in which man lives1. The aim of the one he seesto be the enjoyment of the present life, that of the other theacquisition of future salvation ; he is of opinion that the onehas laws which originated in its own bosom, and has the rightto punish those who transgress them, and thereby disturb thewell-being of their fellows ; in the other case, on the contrary,the legislator stands abovc the society, his punisl~ments arethose of eternity; the socicty has no other chastisement for thetransgressor than exclusion from its number.The two authors coincide in assigning to the religiouselement a transcendental domain ; but with Hobbes, oppositionto religious influences is the stronger; he ascribes tohis sovereign the right, and even the duty, of pronouncingconcerning the worship of God : with Locke, antagonism tothe influence of the temporal power over the religious societyhas the upper hand; he leaves to this its own justification.Locke, like Hobbes, secularises the civil power; but far frotnsubjecting the Church to it, he rather refuses it the right ofexercising any influence over the religious society.But Hobbes penetrates deeper into the original strife of theelements which constitute the world, when he assumes a stateof things in which property did not yet exist. The division ofpossessions is, according to 11in1, the work of the civil power,which therefore always reserves a right over them. Lockeon the other hand ascribes to the right of property, whichhe derives principally from labour, a more individual basis;' In King's Life of Locke.XV. 12. NO 1761MENT 113'LITER A TURE, 579according to him it precedes the state, which is an institutionestablished for the preservation of property, and its object isthe peaceable enjoyment of the good things of this world.Hobbes sees in money thc measure of all possessions, as itwere the blood of the state, in the same way as he comparesthe treasury to the functions of the heart, since the statepresents itself to him as a living organism ; Loclce declaresmoney to be merchandise as much as any other goods; hemakes personal property his basis.Hobbes has been reproached with caring too little forothers ; even when he was travelling nothing occupied him somuch as the excogitation and construction of his theory.Locke's journals show that he kept his eyes wide open tothe reality of things. He shone in the witty society of theday ; through his connexion with Shaftesbury and William ofOrange he was concerned all his life with political transactionsand occurrences, in which he took part by many pamphlets.Hobbes was a dogmatist who would endure no contradiction; his strength consists in the clearness of his definitions,his sharp-cut conclusions, and the convincing logic of his trainof thought ; to him the individual disappears before the universal,freedom before necessity, subjective morality beforeobjective law; when we read him we cannot escape beingprofoundly impressed ; he is deep and bold, pithy, austere,and even terrible. Locke on the other hand takes his standdefinitely upon the right, that is upon the spiritual and moralneeds, of the individual ; he purposes to unite the mystery ofrevelation, to which he holds fast, with the reason of theindividual ; he could not be called profound, but he is by nomeans superficial ; he is sometimes lengthy, but never tedious ;he keeps to that moderate elevation of flight which contentsthe majority, he never loses himself in clouds ; we follow himwith easy and quiet assent; it is as though we listened tothe arguments of the healthy human intellect. Hobbes belongsto the great agonies of the seventeenth century; Lockeappears as one of the chief forerunners and founders of theeighteenth.While these philosophers, each in his own way, combatedthe central idea of the Anglican Church, whose existence* PPZ

580 MO VEMENT IN LITERA TURE. XV. 12.depends on forming an alliance with the State while preservingher hierarchical character, that Church had again establishedherself in full possession. Without doubt she owes this alsoto her intellectual merits. Never had the English Churchmore active bishops, more intelligent preachers, more learnedtheologians, than in the ten years after the Restoration. Theworks of Pearson, Sparrow, Hammond, Bull, have won forthemselves almost a canonical authority. The political positionof the Church however also contributed to this result. JeremyTaylor, who in a comprehensive work seeks to remove ail thedoubts which were raised about her doctrines and position,refers sometimes in the course of it to political questions also.The doctrine of the original compact meets with no approvalat his hand; he derives the royal authority from paternalpower and the will of God. He denies the right of resistance,and the right of calling the King to account if he break thelaw. But he holds fast to the view that the King, if not boundby the law, still by virtue of the oath which he has taken, isbound to the law. In general the English Church did notforget for a moment how closely she was united with theparliamentary system, but only so far as this was in harmonywith the course of English history, in which the monarchyalso occupied an important place. Upon the co-operation ofthese elements her original foundation rests, and also herrestoration at that time; Church and constitution are wovenmost closely together.This union was attacked not only by the philosophers, butalso by those who were separatists through religious conviction,most strongly by the Quakers, the sect which at thattime bestirred itself most actively.Originally the Quakers shared with the Anabaptists notonly their principles, but also the intensity of their impulses ;peaceful men dreaded possible violence at their hands. Butby degrees they grew calm. The man who in this matterexercised most influence was without doubt George Fox, whoin curious apparel, clothed entirely in leather, a man of tall' Raillie, 1656, iii. 323 : 'If their partie goe on in its grouth, their fury is lyketo goe to immercei~~ll killing of all their opposers.'xv. 12. lllO VEMENT IN LITERA TURE. 58 1and vigorous frame, wandered from place to place, and everywherecxercised over the lower classes, especially the artisans,being himself one, an irresistible power of attraction by hisfiery exhortations, his fervent prayers, and occasiollally byhis sensible words. He however declared himself against thepresumption of identity with the Divine nature, to which someof the enlightened gave themselves up, eveh to the contemptof all law ; he also opposed all violence and self-assumption.Revolutionists, he exclaims, instigators of disturbances, allsuch as take up the sword, belong to the world; our armson the other hand are only spiritual. 'He imagined that hesaw in the restoration of the King the mighty hand of God ;it was not as yet all that should come, but it helped inGod's cause. By means of the united action of the enthusiasticFox and the learned young Barclay, the sect ceasedto be dangerous to the state. Only one thing it would not endure,the interference of public authority with its assenlblies.Through their doctrine of inward light, which contained initself a share in the Divine Being, their claim to full freedomof worship became doubly strong; for man is the abodeof God ; the relation between men and God, or betweenmembers of the same faith, could not be submitted to theinterference of a magistrate *. They did not consider thatthy owed any obedience to the Conventicle Bill. But theywere not merely content to establish their spiritual claim.Once, in August 1670, young William Penn, whose conversionto the Quakers had caused the greatest sensation, because inthis way he had renounced a glorious future in the service ofthe state, had spoken in the assembly in Gracechurch Street,and had been on that account arrested. When before thejury, he derived freedom of conscience from the fundamentalrights of Englishmen ; he denied the right of the legislativepower to make the enjoyment of its privileges dependent uponany confession of faith. When it was suggested, as it was atthis trial, that Parliament would make submission to the Actof Uniformity a condition for legal ~rotection, he declared itto be a national impossibility; for no Englishman could be

582 JfO VEMENT ZIN LZTERd TURE. xv. 12.so perverted as to allow those liberties which, before thestrife between Catholicism and Protestantism-between Uniformityand the Dissenters, had been his recognised rights,to be attached to a religious confession '.It is remarkable that the recognised omnipotence of Parliament,united as it was with the Church, should have metwith limitation from this side. The claims of the spiritualidea found a basis in the constitutional principles of Englishliberty. The jury could not be brought to declare thatmeeting illegal.There were still men in England who werc occupied neitherwith the supremacy of the Church, nor yet with the enthusiasmof the sects. In reality it was thc feeling of weariness aboutpolitical and religious disputes which produced, even duringthe civil war, the reunion from which the Royal Society proceeded.Its first rule was, that amongst its members thereshould be na mention made of religious and political disputes;the advance of mathematical and physical sciences, at which inthose days intellects of the first rank in all nations labouredtogether, seemed to promise better food for the mind andbetter results for its activity 5 But neither the Universitiesnor London offered a secure abode to these 'scientific nonconforn~ists,'as they were happily called. Gresham College,where the members had assembled from time to time, wastaken as quarters by the troops of the Protector and theCommonwealth. What would happen if the Anabaptists, asseemed very likely, were to keep the upper hand in thestate? All hope of a fostering care for science must inthat case be given up.On this account also many wished for the restoration oflegitimate monarchy. For indeed under the Stuarts therehad already been frequent mention of the establishment of' 'No Englishman can be so sottish as to conceive, that his right to liberty andproperty' (amongst other things the taking away of books was looked upon as acrime) ' came in with his profession of the Protestznt religion ; or that his naturaland human rights are dependent on certain religious apprehensions.' From theappendix to the report of the proceedings, State Trials vi. ggr.Sprat, Ilistory of the Royal Society 53. They wisl~ed to arm themselves withsober knowledge against ' the enchatitements of enthusiasmc. Spiritual frenzies cannever stand long before a clear and a deep skill of nature.'xv. 12. AfO VEMENT IN LITERA TUX&'. 583a school of science, entirely independent of all other considerations.The Lord Chancellor Bacon had given expressionto this feeling in his Ncw Atlantis ; there he had establishedthe ideal of a scientific institution, which should befounded only for scientific purposes, and should be providedwith every possible means for their attainment; hecalled it Solomon's House : this idea, upheld by Bacon'sfame, hovered before all minds. No one deceived himselfabout the fact that Bacon's knowledge, notions and attemptshad still been very defective ; the influence of his writingson posterity lay in the confidence with which he pointed tothe study of nature as the key to the knowledge of objectivetruth, and expected the completion of a philosophical scienceas the result of empirical investigation. On the King's restorationmen were much occupied with kindred schemes. Somehad in their minds a philosophical monastery, others a comprehensiveand free educational institute ; sometimes theestablishment of a mathematical and physical college wasspoken of. Probably the plan which had the greatest dimensionswas that advanced by a Swede at that time in London,of the family of Skytte, in which the enthusiasm for learningseemed hereditary. It was the same Skytte, who.some yearslater proposed to the Elector of Brandenburg the selection ofsome definite town exclusively for the advancement of liberalscience. At that time King Charles took his proposals intoconsideration, but the English nevertheless thought it moreadvisable to stay in the path which they had already entered I.The members of the older association, Boyle, Wilkins,Goddard, Petty, Wren, formed themselves, with other menof the same disposition (amongst whom were many, likeRobert Moray, who had returned with the King) into abetter organised society, pledging themselves to make regularcontributions for scientific purposes ; the King, who affirmedthat he himself was one of the Virtuosi (for this expressionwas then applied to science also), assured them of his especialprotection; after some time, he gave them corporate rights,From a letter of Hartlieb. Kennet Reg. 870.Memorandum in Weld, History of the Royal Society, 65.

584 A10 VENENT IN LITERA TUXE XV. 12.and bestowed on them the title of the Royal Society. Henceit has been called 'the King's Privy Council for philosophy,'or his 'Parliament in the affairs of nature' ; so highly wasthis authorisation of the Society valued.According to Bacon's model, the object of the Society wasdirected to the establishment, in the future it is true, of asystem by which the causes of things should be explained,but for the present it was content to abstract itself from alltheorics, and merely to investigate facts. When a foreignscholar, who had visited the Society, said shortly afterwards inprint that the greater number of its members were in favourof Gassendi, but that the mathematicians were for Descartes,his remark gave no little offence, for the Socicty had no connexioneither with the one or with the other, nor had it madelectures its object, as he irnplicd, but rathcr investigations andexperiments.This was precisely what the times required. The Society,which at first included in its number many members ofmedical colleges, acquired for itself the merit of putting beyondall doubt by its experiments Harvey's theory of thecirculation of the blood. In consequence of the improvementof the telescope, the most important astronomical discoverieshad been made during the last years; good and continuallyimproving instruments were procured ; consequently one daySaturn's ring, or as it was still called, his belt, was observed inthe presence of the King. It was in astronomy that Charles I1took the most lively intcrest, on account of its relation tonavigation. He foundcd'the Observatory of Greenwich which,by observations regularly and uninterrupedly made and recorded,has become of the greatest importance for astronomy;the first Astronomer Royal was a member of the Socicty, whichprovided him with his instruments. The discovery of the airpumpwas taken up by Robert Boyle with such zeal, that ithas even been inscribed to him by his fellow-countrymen.The Magdeburg hemispheres and Boyle's vacuum are indissolublyconnected. Of the older members of the Society, noone rendered it greater service than Boyle. But of the questionswhich occupicd natural philosophers throughout theworld, those were without doubt the most important whichxv. 12. NO VEikf'NT IN L ZTERA TCIR E. 5%related to the laws of niotion. The Society had the merit ofperceiving their importance and of keeping them underdiscussion, and then enjoyed the great good fortune thatamongst its members appeared the genius who solved them,Isaac Newton. Rising above all isolated attempts, there wasestablished a secure and unalterable theory, which all laterattacks only confir~ned, and which embraced the universe.It is true that the Society intended to deliver scientificinvestigation as well from the machinations of the sects asfrom the superintendence of the Church ; amongst its memberswere Socinians and freethinkers; but the majority wereattached to the established Church, even those who did notagree with all her Articles. On the whole Bacon's point ofview was maintained, that the domain of natural should beseparated from that of supernatural knowledge : Ncwton protestsagainst the mixture of physics and metaphysics ; two ofhis most important works conclude with a lofty rccognition ofthe Creator of the world, as distinct from the world itself '.To those laws of nature also, upon which human socictyrests, investigations were directed. A simple citizen of London,John Graunt, conceived the happy idea of deducing from thelists of mortality, and the information given there .as to theage and disease of those who died, general results2, whichthrew unexpected light on the eternal economy of naturewith regard to human life, and which pointed out a law inwhat seemed to be chance ; the further investigation of theseresults has occupied succeeding generations in all countries.At the same time, a basis was thus gained from whichthe actual population, their proportion in town and country,as well as in the different counties, might be reckoned.One of the first founders of the Society, William Petty, whopossessed the peculiar faculty of laying hold of material' From Sprat we see that the following is the opinion of the Society as awhole :-'It is a religion which is confirmed by an unanimous agreement of 311sorts of worship.' Cf. Evelyn's Letter to W. Wotton respecting Boyle. Diaryiii. 346.a 'Natural and ~olitical observations on the bills of mortality . 98 - ; the foundationof this honest harmless policy is to understand the land and the hands of theterritories.'

JfO VEAIENT IN LITBRA TURE. xv. 12.things in their intellectual relations, and of turning themto public use, took in hand the register of taxes and thereturns of receipts from the direct and indirect taxes, and soadvanced one step further in the calculation of the stateresources in general l. He calculates first those of England,and then those of foreign countries, as far as they furnished .similar materials. It was of immediate importance that thecomparison with France could be made on a more extensivescale. We see here the science of statistics in its beginning,still feeling its way, and attaching too much importance tocalculation, but on a better foundation than hitherto ; in thecompetition of nations, the care for internal prosperity, whichis the origin of all national strength, is introduced with fullerconsciousness. With regard to trade, a similar point of viewhad been adopted long before. The first impulse in this, asin many other matters, was communicated from Italy. InTuscany especially, a peculiar combination of improvementin the country and in commercial policy was observed;amongst other things, it had great effect on a question whichwas also much considered in England, namely that, whereverthe export of precious metals was allowed, rcady money wasalways to be had, whilst in Spain, where the export was forbidden,the greatest scarcity of it was felt. To this was addedthe example of Holland. There were clear-sighted merchantswho, from their experience on all sides, had inferred ruleswhich England need only follow to attain its great destiny.Every one seemed imbued with the idea that England couldand must become the greatest emporium, the universal warehouseof the world2. The growing science had its origin ina practical interest, and nourished the sense of nationality.It is not our province to enter into the learned labours ofthis epoch; it is enough that they were not discontinued' 'Two essays in political arithmetick, concerning the people &c. of London andParis,' and others of his essays.a Lewis Roberts, ' The treasure of traffik, 1641,' is very thorough and instructiveon this point; not less curious is Henry Robinson, 'England's saretie in trade, 1641' :for example, the recommendation of a bank. Erecting a hank or grand cash onsuch foundation and security as all men may think more sure there, than in theirhouses.'XV. 12.during its storms ; but the mighty movement with whichthe English mind was occupied, entirely concerned as it waswith the contests of the present, yet containing the germs ofthe future, could not promote calm contc~nplation of whatwas remote and bygone; what was attempted in this way,even by men of genius, has proved of no great importance.I must reserve for another place the estimate of the works oncontemporary history, and examine their trustworthiness as tomatters of fact. By far the most important are Clarendon'stwo works, about the times of the Rebellion and of his ownadministration ; they are the labours of his first and secondexile, filled with the sentiment of passing events; the mirrorof his position, of his efforts and ideas, written with the samecontinued and easy-flowing eloquence which characterised hisspeeches ; they express the impression left upon him by menand things, and are thrown upon the paper almost withoutrevision, as can be observed from the neatness of the manuscript,which exists at Oxford ; they are memoirs and historyin one, a splendid memorial of the time, especial!y of all thosemen who defended in the kingdom of England its ancientlaws and the Anglican Church. It marks thc literary characterof the epoch, that men occupied themselves so much and soseriously with contemporary history. Hobbes himself madethc attempt from his philosophical point of view, if notactually to represent, at least to judge it, and to subject itto his theory. On the other hand the naked facts appearin various diaries, as they presented themselves to the unprejudicedeye, with frcsh local colouring. We find diplomaticrecords of rare truthfulness. Burnet soon made his appearance,who not belonging to the same party as the Chancellor, tookup a different and a lighter tone. The events, which at twoepochs led to great but opposite results, compelled contemporariesto treat them as of historic importance.And can it not be said of the poetical literature of thistime, that it represents principally the impression producedby prevailing circumstances ?The theatre was principally an affair of the court ; it waseven obliged to serve those in power in their most privateanimosities. Lady Castlemainc once caused Mrs. Hervey

588 MO VEAIENT IN LITERA TURE. XV. 12,to be brought upon the stage, as she was in real life, havingbeen displeased by her freedom of speech, and all the morebecause she paid no heed even to the King's presence, andthis served to attract him. The actress who undertook this,and who succeeded very well in it, was punished for it by ashort imprisonment ; that was all. Similarly Buckingham 'revenged himself for the opposition, which he encountered inthe sittings of the Privy Council from Coventry, by causinghim to be put upon the stage in a way that could easily berecognised. I have mentioned above, how the antagonism,which arose in consequence, ended in Coventry's losing hishigh position, and that again contributed to throw him intothe opposition, where he played such an important part1.In other ways also the theatre reacted powerfully upon life.The director of the Duke's theatre, William Davenant, whohad the strange fancy that he was Shakspeare's natural son,had indeed a great influence upon the externals of the drama ;he introduced shifting scenes and caused female parts to berepresented by women. But that again contributed to thedisorders of the court, for it was precisely towards actressesthat Buckingham directed the King's inclinations ; his connexionwith Moll Davis and Nell Gwyn, and the offencewhich they gave, date from this; on the occasion of ademand for money, they were once mentioned even in Parliament,and for this on the other side an outrageous revengewas taken. A mere imitation of the French style was notto be seen on the English stage. The French, who came toLondon, were struck by the difference between the two; theycould not reconcile themselves to the neglect of the unitiesof time and place, but they considered the more powerfuldelineation of character as even worthy of imitation 2. Therewere a number of older pieces which always attracted thepublic ; the two theatres had as it were divided them. In therepresentations of the time it is particularly the indecency,About both these matters I only find mention made by the French ambassador.St. Evremond: de la comddie Anglaise. CEuvres iii. 275 The [lest criticof this literature, Macaulay, has made admirable use of the co'uediani tu gain sview of the private life of the time.xv. 12. MO VEMENT IN L ZTERA TLTRE. 589in many places rathe; sought for than avoided, which hasstruck posterity. That this was then regarded as right orproper cannot perhaps be said, as the ladies through a certaindread of it, only came in masks to the first representations ;but the play served for amusement, and corresponded at thesame time to a political sentiment. As the Puritanism andRepublicanism faction had entirely destroyed the theatre, theRoyalists, in opposition to this exaggerated strictness, threwthemselves with a distinct purpose into the opposite extreme.A similar opposition also appeared in lyrical and didacticpoetry, most strongly in the poetical remains of young Wilmot,Lord Rochester, who already, through his father, belonged to-the court, and was looked on as the man in England whohad the most intellect and the least decency l. It may wellbe that Hobbes contributed by his philosophy to make theyoung men at court deny the value of moral ideas. Rochesterdesignates the colleges and schools which adhered to themas respectable mad-houses ; he sees hypocrisy in virtue,cowardice in decency, and a kind of morality in the rejectionof all restraint ; and, as he thought, so he lived ; in a few yearshe had ruined himself. For he who withdraws himself frommoral law must incur the penalty of nature.The most effective and most celebrated work of thereaction against Puritanism is Butler's Hudibras. In theoutline of the story we recognise a not very happy imitationof Don Quixote, but otherwise the work possesses an originalityof conception, diction and metre, in which again everyimitation has failed. And if Butler has held up the religionists,who aspire to power, to the derision of centuries, yet he hasnot fallen into the other faults which have just been mentioned.He has similarly lashed, in his way, the extravagances of thecourt. Of the poets who attached themselves to the Restoration,he has most of the old English sentiment.One merit the others possessed to which Butler did notaspire; they sought to bring poetical utterances into accordance' In speaking of Rochester's 'Upon Nothing,' Johnson has called to mindPasserat's Nihil (Johnson, Lives of the Poets i. 299). But how much higherRochester stands !

xv. 12. 111O 17EdIEhTT IN L ZTERA TUX E. 59'with the speech of daily life and society. A form was aimedat, which we may designate as the n~odcrn classical for111,and which then attained a certain perfection in France; thefoundation in England of an institution like the FrenchAcademy was even taken into consideration. AbrahamCowley has the credit of having contributed most to remodel .the pedantic manner of his predecessors, in the style whichafterwards remained prevalent in England. He is full ofgeniality, and in the lighter styles has sometitnes succeededmost happily. Still Rochester, who took his stand withdecision upon the new ground, (if a foreigner may expresshis opinion on the point,) would, as regards form, deserve theprize. The accompanying tendency towards an imitation ofthe poets of antiquity, and principally of the Augustan age,was especially appropriated by Dryden. Horace, and hisinterpreter Boileau, were regarded upon both sides of theChannel as the law-givers for poetical productions. Drydenhimself shows in his prefaces a delicate feeling for theappreciation of the ancient poets. But original works couldnot, at this stage of cultivation, be produccd in England asthey had been in France. For the value of the French poetryof this time cannot be ascribed to imitation. It was muchmore the temper which was formed in that epoch, andremained victorious and still genuinely French, that wasexpressed by Corneille and Racine ; their works rest upona feeling common to the nation and society, which they promotewhile they express. Rut in England things had notadvanced so far. The ideas of the Restoration were far fromruling the nation. In the general disunion each had to seekhis own way, there was nothing but the effort of talent, thesuccess of which depended on the favour of the moment.Of Dryden's works those only in reality possess the powerof attracting and interesting us, in which he followed nomodel ; such as the Keligio Laici, which carries the directconviction of truth, and his satires : the characteristics hegives us of public men, as they were or as they were lookedon by the party to which he belonged, have even an historicalvalue.Amongst the poets of the time thcrc was but one whocarried his world in'himself, and attained to that ripenessof intellect without which the production of great works isimpossible; this was John Milton. We know him as themost intellectual champion of the freedom of the press. Inall the changes of'political and religious movement, in thetimes of the Commonwealth and the Protectorate, he tookan active part; he hoped even in its last moment still tomaintain the falling Republic. Then those very men came topower, against whom he had fought his whole life long ; hewas in danger of being implicated in the ruin which overtookthe regicides; only in consequence of the amnesty did herecover the freedom he had already lost. But as the eventhad been irretrievably accomplished, and for him there couldno longer be any question of taking active part in the movementof the time, he turned back from the struggles of theday to the studies of his youth, and undertook to finish thoseworks which he had always had in mind. It seemed to himworth while to lay down in a thesaurus the knowledge ofantiquity and the classics, which he had acquired by theunwearied labour of long years. How often in his life hadhe read from beginning to end the Holy Scriptures, whichwith simple faith he looked upon as God's word revealed lHe thought of showing the world what they actually contained,with regard to those points about which opinion wasdivided. Milton belonged to those who went still furtherthan the first reformers ; much that these had left standing,he looked upon to be an outcome of tradition and of thetheological schools ; especially he deviated from the Athanasiandoctrine, which maintained the upper hand in the Greekand Latin Churches, to the side of the Arian conceptions ;for the co-essentiality of the Son and His independent Godheadhe could find no warrant in the words of Scripture.He wrote down a system of biblical theology, which he providedin the most learned manner with all its references,which however was not printed till a century and a half afterhis death1. But by the side of these learned special works,Joannis Miltoni Angli de cloctrina christiann ex sncris duntaxnt libris petitadisquisitionu~ilibri duo.

MO VEMENT ZN LITERA TURE. XY. 12.he was engaged in quite another occupation. Milton triedhis hand from his earliest youth in poetical productions inthe Latin, as well as in the English tongue ; he could in thisrespect enter into the lists with any contemporary; but-andthis was wanting to the others-he had also formed for himselfby serious and ceaselcss studies, especially in theology,a poetic intuition of the world, which coincided with hisreligious convictions. He was now far advanced in years,comforted by no domestic happiness, rejected by the world, asit then was and as it was becoming ; afflicted with gout, struckwith complete blindness; for him there was, as he bewails,no longer any difference between morning and evening; hewas surrounded by unbroken darkness. But in this conditionhe received, if we may adopt his metaphor, the visit of hisMuse, who inspired him in his sleep, and put into his mindverse not conceived before. As in his life in general, so alsoin the Epic poem which he composed, he discarded all conventionality;he wished, by rejecting rhyme, to restore to Epicpoetry its old freedom : the iambic which he uses is sonorousand varied, solemn as in public worship, and confidential asin quiet talk ; for him there was no meaning in striving after aform of expression suited to the times ; he held by Spenser, asSpenser had held by Chaucer ; obsolete forms, which he doesnot scorn, do not interfere with his in-telligibility, and correspondto the dignity of the subject which he has chosen for himself.It is the fall of the first man, the loss of Paradise, but aboveall the transcendental world with which the religious ideahas surrounded human life. Often already had this subjectbeen treated poetically; from Czdmon the Anglo-Saxon, inaccordance with the conceptions which had taken rootamongst the Germanic peoples in general, down to Du Bartasthe didactic poet of Protestantism. The same regions are thedomain also of the immortal poet of the Divine Comedy, andof many successful attempts of modern Latin poetry. Onhis Italian journey Milton had seen even dramatic representationsof his subject, which had not failed to producesome impression upon him. The learned poet knew all this,and kept most of it in his remembrance, but the independenceof his poem was not disturbed by it. For whilst heXV. 12. MO VEEVENT IN LITERA TURE.studied biblical theology, the spirit of poetry breathed bymost of the books of the old covenant and by some of thebooks of the new, had touched and impressed him wonderfully; upon this foundation his images arose. He stroveto form them in accordance with Scripture; and even forhis gigantic fable of the combat between the good and the badangels, he finds some authority in the Apocalypse; heestablishes by a passage of the Scriptures his transcendentalanthropomorphism. He then interweaves boldly into thosesupernatural battles recollections of ancient history. Everywherewe feel that the poem originated in a mind that wasoccupied at once with classical studies and with a theologicalwork. The figure of the Messiah corresponds to the author'sdogmatic conception; the divine nature of the Father ismanifested in the Son ; against Him therefore is directed,contrary to the idea of those who had gone before, therebellion of Satan and his satellites. We recognise in thispoem Milton's point of view with regard to theologicalcontroversies, how he discards the doctrine of an absolutedecree, distinguishes between knowledge and predestination,and maintains the idea of the freedom of the will ; he ascribeshuman guilt only to man himself; the Atonement, whichis at least announced, depends with him upon the satisfaction,foreseen from the beginning, of the Son, who wasmade man1. Theology and poetry have never been moreintimately blended. I do not know whether Milton's theologydoes entire justice to the profundity of the Christiandogma ; for his poem his conception was no misfortune, itis thereby brought all the closer to the general comprehension.Doubts and contradictions disappear before thegrandeur of the forms represented, before their terror, theirsplendour and their grace. Milton first with entire successrescues Satan and his habitation from the popular distortionthat still prevailed ; but he did not on that account diminishtheir terrors ; to how many has not the depths of the infernal-' Compare the introduction and notes to Summer's translation of the theologicalworks. Prose Works iv. and v.We see this best if ne compare him nlth h~. contemporary Cowley (Da\~drisBk. i).RANKE, VOL. 111 Q 9

M 0 VEMENT IN LITERA TC'RB xv. 12.regions as described by him appeared too horrible! Webreathe again when, led by his hand, we rise out of night andhorrors to the bright Empyrean where the eternal Godheadrules: with all his anthropomorphism Milton avoids toonear an approach; he keeps firm the boundaries betweenhis worlds. The poetical charm of the work lies in thischange ; we feel quite at home even with Milton only on earth.Over the representation of Paradise there is poured outa mist of repose and satisfaction, of innocence and idyllichappiness, such as otherwise can only be caused by a happilydepictedlandscape ; all that the dazzled reader has ever seen,all the happiness that he has ever dreamt of, passes beforehis inward eye, in words both charming and profound, andfull of ideal truth. It is above all to these representationsthat the popular fame, which Milton has acquired, is due ; butthe most general imprcssion depended even in these pointson the religious and poetical intuition of the world, at whichall ages have laboured, and which now again appeared ina form original in conception and grand in treatment.The world still lived in these intuitions, but it had begunto estrange itself from them, as had already occurred inFrance, and as the other poetical productions foretold forEngland also. What contrasts there are in this literature!Hobbes and Locke; William Petty and George Fox; thescientific dogmatism of the Universities and the free researchof the Royal Society; Clarendon and Burnet; Rochester,Drydcn, and Milton. As in the state, so in literature, therewas separation and rivalry, and yet they were not simplystruggles of different individual minds. 'CVe see as if withour eyes how two ages are separated from one another.END OF VOL. 111.