IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS
Cromwell's death was an epoch in Marvell's history. Up to that date he
had, since he left the University, led the life of a scholar, with a
turn for business, and was known to many as an agreeable companion and a
lively wit. He was keenly interested in public affairs, and personally
acquainted with some men in great place, and for a year before
Cromwell's death he had been in a branch of the Civil Service; but of
the wear and tear, the strife and contention, of what are called
"practical politics" he knew nothing from personal experience.
Within a year of the Protector's death all this was changed and, for the
rest of his days, with but the shortest of occasional intervals, Andrew
Marvell led the life of an active, eager member of Parliament, knowing
all that was going on in the Chamber and hearing of everything that was
alleged to be going on in the Court; busily occupied with the affairs of
his constituents in Hull, and daily watching, with an increasingly heavy
heart and a bitter humour, the corruption of the times, the declension
of our sea-power, the growing shame of England, and what he believed to
be a dangerous conspiracy afoot for the undoing of the Reformation and
the destruction of the Constitution in both Church and State.
"Garden-poetry" could not be reared on such a soil as this. The age of
Cromwell and Blake was over. The remainder of Marvell's life (save so
far as personal friendship sweetened it) was spent in politics, public
business, in concocting roughly rhymed and bitter satirical poems, and
in the composition of prose pamphlets.
Through it all Marvell remained very much the man of letters, though one
with a great natural aptitude for business. His was always the critical
attitude. He was the friend of Milton and Harrington, of the political
philosophers who invented paper constitutions in the "Rota" Club, and of
the new race of men whose thoughts turned to Natural Science, and who
founded the Royal Society. Office he never thought of. He could have had
it had he chosen, for he was a man of mark, even of distinction, from
the first. Clarendon has told us how members of the House of Commons
"got on" in the Long Parliament of Charles the Second. It was full of
the king's friends, who ran out of the House to tell their shrewd master
the gossip of the lobbies, "commended this man and discommended another
who deserved better, and would many times, when His Majesty spoke well
of any man, ask His Majesty if he would give them leave to let that
person know how gracious His Majesty was to him, or bring him to kiss
his hand. To which he commonly consenting, every one of his servants
delivered some message from him to a Parliament man, and invited him to
Court, as if the King would be willing to see him. And by this means the
rooms at Court were always full of the members of the House of Commons.
This man brought to kiss his hand, and the King induced to confer with
that man and to thank him for his affection, which could never conclude
without some general expression of grace or promise, which the poor
gentleman always interpreted to his own advantage, and expected some
fruit from it that it could never yield."
The suspicious Clarendon, already shaking to his fall, goes on to add,
"all which, being contrary to all former order, did the King no good,
and rendered those unable to do him service who were inclined to
it."[77:1]
It is a lifelike picture Clarendon draws of the crowded rooms, and of
the witty king moving about fooling vanity, ambition, and corruption to
the top of their bent. That the king chose his own ministers is plain
enough.
Marvell was at the beginning well disposed towards Charles. They had
some points in common; and among them a quick sense of humour and a turn
for business. But the member for Hull must soon have recognised that
there was no place for an honest quick-witted man in any Stuart
administration.
Marvell and his great chief remained in their offices until the close of
the year 1659, when the impending Restoration enforced their retirement.
Milton used his leisure to pour forth excited tracts to prove how easy
it would still be to establish a Free Commonwealth. Once again, and for
the last time, he prompted the age to quit its clogs
"by the known rules of ancient liberty."
These pamphlets of Milton's prove how little that solitary thinker ever
knew of the real mind and temper of the English people.
The Lord Richard Cromwell was exactly the sort of eldest son a great
soldier like Oliver, who had put his foot on fortune's neck, was likely
to have. Richard (1626-1712) was not, indeed, born in the purple, but
his early manhood was nurtured in it. Religion, as represented by long
sermons, tiresome treatises, and prayerful exercises, bored him to
death. Of enthusiasm he had not a trace, nor was he bred to arms. He
delighted in hunting, in the open air, and the company of sportsmen.
Whatever came his way easily, and as a matter of right, he was well
content to take. He bore himself well on State occasions, and could make
a better speech than ever his father was able to do. But he was not a
"restless" Cromwell, and had no faith in his destiny. I do not know
whether he had ever read _Don Quixote_, in Shelton's translation, a very
popular book of the time; probably not, for, though Chancellor of the
University of Oxford, Richard was not a reading man, but if he had, he
must have sympathised with Sancho Panza's attitude of mind towards the
famous island.
"If your highness has no mind that the government you promised should
be given me, God made me of less, and perhaps it may be easier for
Sancho, the Squire, to get to Heaven than for Sancho, the Governor.
_In the dark all cats are gray._"
The new Protector took up the reins of power with proper forms and
ceremonies, and at once proceeded to summon a Parliament, an Imperial
Cromwellian Parliament, containing representatives both from Scotland
and Ireland. In this Parliament Andrew Marvell sat for the first time as
one of the two members for Kingston-upon-Hull. His election took place
on the 10th of January 1659, being the first county day after the
sheriff had received the writ. Five candidates were nominated: Thomas
Strickland, Andrew Marvell, John Ramsden, Henry Smyth, and Sir Henry
Vane, and a vote being taken in the presence of the mayor, aldermen, and
many of the burgesses, John Ramsden and Andrew Marvell were declared
duly elected.
Nobody to-day, glancing his eye over a list of the knights and
burgesses who made up Richard Cromwell's first and last Parliament,
would ever guess that it represented an order of things of the most
recent date which was just about to disappear. On paper it has a solid
look. The fine old crusted Parliamentary names with which the clerks
were to remain so long familiar as the members trooped out to divide
were more than well represented.[79:1] The Drakes of Amersham were
there; Boscawens, Bullers, and Trelawneys flocked from Cornwall; Sir
Wilfred Lawson sat for Cumberland, and his son for Cockermouth; a
Knightly represented Northamptonshire, whilst Lucys from Charlecote
looked after Warwick, both town and county. Arthur Onslow came from
Surrey, a Townshend from Norfolk, and, of course, a Bankes from Corfe
Castle;[79:2] Oxford University, contented, as she occasionally is, to
be represented by a great man, had chosen Sir Matthew Hale, whilst the
no less useful and laborious Thurloe sat for the sister University.
Anthony Ashley Cooper was there, but in opposition, snuffing the morrow.
Mildmays, Lawleys, Binghams, Herberts, Pelhams, all travelled up to
London with the Lord-Protector's writs in their pockets. A less
revolutionary assembly never met, though there was a regicide or two
among them. But when the members found themselves alone together there
was some loose talk.
On the 27th of January 1659 Marvell attended for the first time in his
place, when the new Protector opened Parliament, and made a speech in
the House of Lords, which was pronounced at the time to be "a very
handsome oration."
The first business of the Commons was to elect a Speaker, nor was their
choice a very lucky one, for it first fell on Chaloner Chute, who
speedily breaking down in health, the Recorder of London was appointed
his substitute, but the Recorder being on his deathbed at the time, and
Chute dying very shortly afterwards, Thomas Bampfield was elected
Speaker, and continued so to be until the Parliament was dissolved by
proclamation on the 22nd of April. This proclamation was Richard
Cromwell's last act of State.
Marvell's first Parliament was both short and inglorious. One only of
its resolutions is worth quoting:--
"That a very considerable navy be forthwith provided, and put to sea
for the safety of the Commonwealth and the preservation of the trade
and commerce thereof."
It was, however, the army and not the navy that had to be reckoned
with--an army unpaid, angry, suspicious, and happily divided. I must not
trace the history of faction. There is no less exalted page in English
history since the days of Stephen. Monk is its fitting hero, and Charles
the Second its expensive saviour of society. The story how the
Restoration was engineered by General Monk, who, if vulgar, was adroit,
both on land and sea, is best told from Monk's point of view in the
concluding chapter of _Baker's Chronicle_ (Sir Roger de Coverley's
favourite Sunday reading), whilst that old-fashioned remnant, who still
love to read history for fun, may not object to be told that they will
find printed in the Report of the Leyborne-Popham Papers (_Historical
Manuscripts Commission_, 1899, p. 204) a _Narrative of the Restoration_,
by Mr. John Collins, the Chief Butler of the Inner Temple, proving in
great and highly diverting detail how this remarkable event was really
the work not so much of Monk as of the Chief Butler.
Richard Cromwell having slipped the collar, the officers assumed
command, as they were only too ready to do, and recalled the old,
dishonoured, but pertinacious Rump Parliament, which, though mustering
at first but forty-two members, at once began to talk and keep journals
as if nothing had happened since the day ten years before, when it was
sent about its business. Old Speaker Lenthall was routed out of
obscurity, and much against his will, and despite his protests, clapped
once more into the chair. Dr. John Owen, an old parliamentary preaching
hand, was once again requisitioned to preach before the House, which he
did at enormous length one fine Sunday in May.
The Rump did not prove a popular favourite. It was worse than Old Noll
himself, who could at least thrash both Dutchman and Spaniard, and be
even more feared abroad than he was hated at home. The City of London,
then almost an Estate of the Realm, declared for a Free Parliament, and
it soon became apparent to every one that the whole country was eager to
return as soon as possible to the old mould. Nothing now stood between
Charles and his own but half a dozen fierce old soldiers and their
dubious, discontented, unpaid men.
It was once commonly supposed (it is so no longer), that the Restoration
party was exclusively composed of dispossessed Cavaliers, bishops in
hiding, ejected parsons, high-flying _jure divino_ Episcopalians,
talkative toss-pots, and the great pleasure-loving crowd, cruelly
repressed under the rule of the saints. Had it been left to these
ragged regiments, the issue would have been doubtful, and the result
very different. The Presbyterian ministers who occupied the rectories
and vicarages of the Church of England and their well-to-do flocks in
both town and country were, with but few exceptions, all for King
Charles and a restored monarchy. In this the ministers may have shown a
sound political instinct, for none of them had any more mind than the
Anglican bishops to tolerate Papists, Socinians, Quakers, and Fifth
Monarchy men, but in their management of the business of the Restoration
these divines exposed themselves to the same condemnation that Clarendon
in an often-quoted passage passed upon his own clerical allies. When
read by the light of the Act of "Uniformity," the "Corporation," the
"Five Mile," and the "Conventicle" Acts, the conduct of the
Presbyterians seems recklessness itself, whilst the ignorance their
ministers displayed of the temper of the people they had lived amongst
all their lives, and whom they adjured to cry _God save the King_, but
not to drink his Majesty's health (because health-drinking was forbidden
in the Old Testament), would be startling were it not so eminently
characteristic.[82:1]
The Rump, amidst the ridicule and contempt of the populace, was again
expelled by military force on the 13th of October 1659. The officers
were divided in opinion, some supporting, others, headed by Lambert,
opposing the Parliament; but _vis major_, or superior cunning, was on
the side of Lambert, who placed his soldiers in the streets leading to
Westminster Hall, and when the Speaker came in his coach, his horses
were turned, and he was conducted very civilly home. The regiments that
should have resisted, "observing that they were exposed to derision,"
peaceably returned to their quarters.
Monk, in the meanwhile, was advancing with his army from Edinburgh, and
affected not to approve of the force put upon Parliament. The feeling
for a Free Parliament increased in strength and violence every day. The
Rump was for a third time restored in December by the section of the
London army that supported its claim. Lenthall was once more in the
chair, and the journals were resumed without the least notice of past
occurrences. Monk, having reached London amidst great excitement, went
down to the House and delivered an ambiguous speech. Up to the last Monk
seems to have remained uncertain what to do. The temper of the City,
which was fiercely anti-Rump, may have decided him. At all events he
invited the secluded, that is the expelled, members of the old Long
Parliament to take their seats along with the others, and in a formal
declaration addressed to Parliament, dated the 21st of February 1660, he
counselled it among other things to dissolve legally "in order to make
way for a succession of Parliaments." In a word, Monk declared for a
Free Parliament. Great indeed were the national rejoicings.
On the 16th of March 1660 a Bill was read a third time dissolving the
Parliament begun and holden at Westminster, 3rd November 1640, and for
the calling and holding of a Parliament at Westminster on the 25th of
April 1660. This time an end was really made of the Rump, though for
many a long day there were parliamentary pedants to be found in the land
ready to maintain that the Long Parliament had never been legally
dissolved and still _de jure_ existed; so long, I presume, as any
single member of it remained alive.
Marvell was not a "Rumper," but on the 2nd of April 1660 he was again
elected for Hull to sit in what is usually called the Convention
Parliament. John Ramsden was returned at the head of the poll with 227
votes, Marvell receiving 141. There were four defeated candidates.
With this Convention Parliament begins Marvell's remarkable
correspondence, on fine folio sheets of paper, with the corporation of
Hull, whose faithful servant he remained until death parted them in
1678.
This correspondence, which if we include in it, as we well may, the
letters to the Worshipful Society of Masters and Pilots of the Trinity
House in Hull, numbers upwards of 350 letters, and with but one
considerable gap (from July 1663 to October 1665) covers the whole
period of Marvell's membership, is, I believe, unique in our public
records. The letters are preserved at Hull, where I hope care is taken
to preserve them from the autograph hunter and the autograph thief.
Captain Thompson printed a great part of this correspondence in 1776,
and Mr. Grosart gave the world the whole of it in the second volume of
his edition of Marvell's complete works.
An admission may as well be made at once. This correspondence is not so
interesting as it might have been expected to prove. Marvell did not
write letters for his biographer, nor to instruct posterity, nor to
serve any party purpose, nor even to exhibit honest emotion, but simply
to tell his employers, whose wages he took, what was happening at
Westminster. He kept his reflections either to himself or for his
political broadsheets, and indeed they were seldom of the kind it would
have been safe to entrust to the post.
Good Mr. Grosart fusses and frets terribly over Marvell's astonishing
capacity for chronicling in sombre silence every kind of legislative
abomination. It is at times a little hard to understand it, for Hull was
what may be called a Puritan place. No doubt caution dictated some of
the reticence--but the reserve of Marvell's character is one of the few
traits of his personality that has survived. He was a satirist, not an
enthusiast.
I will give the first letter _in extenso_ to serve as a specimen, and a
very favourable one, of the whole correspondence:--
"_Nov. 17, 1660._
"GENTLEMEN, MY WORTHY FRIENDS,--Although during the necessary absence
of my partner, Mr. Ramsden, I write with but halfe a penn, and can
scarce perswade myselfe to send you so imperfect an account of your
own and the publick affairs, as I needs must for want of his
assistance; yet I had rather expose mine own defects to your good
interpretation, then excuse thereby a totall neglect of my duty, and
that trust which is divided upon me. At my late absence out of Town I
had taken such order that if you had commanded me any thing, I might
soon haue received it, and so returned on purpose to this place to
haue obeyed you. But hearing nothing of that nature howeuer, I was
present the first day of the Parliament's sitting, and tooke care to
write to Mr. Maior what work we had cut out. Since when, we have had
little new, but onely been making a progresse in those things I then
mentioned. There is yet brought in an Act in which of all others your
corporation is the least concerned: that is, where wives shall refuse
to cohabit with their husbands, that in such case the husband shall
not be liable to pay any debts which she may run into, for clothing,
diet, lodging, or other expenses. I wish with all my heart you were no
more touched in a vote that we haue made for bringing in an Act of a
new Assessment for six moneths, of 70,000li. _per mensem_, to begin
next January. The truth is, the delay ere monyes can be got in, eats
up a great part of all that is levying, and that growing charge of the
Army and Navy doubles upon us. And that is all that can be said for
excuse of ourselues to the Country, to whom we had giuen our own hopes
of no further sessment to be raised, but must now needs incurre the
censure of improvidence before or prodigality now, though it becomes
no private member, the resolution having passed the House, to
interpose further his own judgment in a thing that can not be
remedied; and it will be each man's ingenuity not to grudge an
after-payment for that settlement and freedome from Armyes and Navyes,
which before he would haue been glad to purchase with his whole
fortune. There remain some eight Regiments to be disbanded, but those
all horse in a manner, and some seauenteen shipps to be payd of, that
haue laid so long upon charge in the harbour, beside fourscore shipps
which are reckoned to us for this Winter guard. But after that, all
things are to go upon his Majestye's own purse out of the Tunnage and
Poundage and his other revenues. But there being so great a provision
made for mony, I doubt not but ere we rise, to see the whole army
disbanded, and according to the Act, hope to see your Town once more
ungarrisond, in which I should be glad and happy to be instrumentall
to the uttermost. For I can not but remember, though then a child,
those blessed days when the youth of your own town were trained for
your militia, and did, methought, become their arms much better than
any soldiers that I haue seen there since. And it will not be amisse
if you please (now that we are about a new Act of regulating the
Militia, that it may be as a standing strength, but not as ill as a
perpetuall Army to the Nation) to signify to me any thing in that
matter that were according to your ancient custome and desirable for
you. For though I can promise little, yet I intend all things for your
service. The Act for review of the Poll bill proceeds, and that for
making this Declaration of his Majesty a Law in religious matters.
Order likewise is giuen for drawing up all the votes made during our
last sitting, in the businesse of Sales of Bishops' and Deans' and
Chapters' lands into an Act, which I should be glad to see passed. The
purchasers the other day offerd the house 600,000li. in ready mony,
and to make the Bishops', etc., revenue as good or better then before.
But the House thought it not fit or seasonable to hearken to it. We
are so much the more concernd to see that great interest of the
purchasers satisfyed and quieted, at least in that way which our own
votes haue propounded. On Munday next we are to return to the
consideration of apportioning 100,000li. per annum upon all the lands
in the nation, in lieu of the Court of Wards. The debate among the
Countyes, each thinking it self overrated, makes the successe of that
businesse something casuall, and truly I shall not assist it much for
my part, for it is little reason that your Town should contribute in
that charge. The Excise bill for longer continuance (I wish it proue
not too long) will come in also next weeke. And I foresee we shall be
called upon shortly to effect our vote made the former sitting, of
raising his Majestie's revenue to 1,200,000li. per Annum. I do not
love to write so much of this mony news. But I think you haue observed
that Parliaments have been always made use of to that purpose, and
though we may buy gold too deare, yet we must at any rate be glad of
Peace, Freedom, and a good Conscience. Mr. Maior tells me, your
duplicates of the Poll are coming up. I shall go with them to the
Exchequer and make your excuse, if any be requisite. My long silence
hath made me now trespasse on the other hand in a long letter, but I
doubt not of your good construction of so much familiarity and trouble
from, Gentlemen, your most affectionate friend and servant,
"ANDR: MARVELL.
"WESTMINSTER, _Nov. 17, 1660._"
Although this first letter of the Hull correspondence is dated the 17th
of November 1660, the Convention Parliament began its sittings on the
25th of April.
In composition this Convention Parliament was very like Richard
Cromwell's, and indeed it contained many of the same members, whose
loyalty, however, was less restrained than in 1659. All the world knew
what brought this Parliament together. It was to make the nation's
peace with its king, either on terms or without terms. "We are all
Royalists now" are words which must often have been on the lips of the
members of this House. One can imagine the smiles, half grim, half
ironical, that would accompany their utterance. Such a right-about-face
could never be dignified. It is impossible not to be reminded of
schoolboys at the inevitable end of "a barring out." The sarcastic
comment of Clarendon has not lost its sting. "From this time there was
such an emulation and impatience in Lords, Commons, and City, and
generally over the Kingdom, who should make the most lively expressions
of their duty and of their joy, that a man could not but wonder where
those people dwelt who had done all the mischief and kept the King so
many years from enjoying the comfort and support of such excellent
subjects."[88:1]
The most significant sentence in Marvell's first letter to his
constituents is that in which he refers to the Bill for making Charles's
declaration in religious matters the law of the land. Had the passing of
any such Bill been possible, how different the history of England would
have been!
The declaration Marvell is referring to was contained in the famous
message from Breda, which was addressed by Charles to all his loving
subjects of what degree or quality, and was expressed as follows:--
"And because the passion and uncharitableness of the times have
produced several opinions in Religion by which men are engaged in
parties and animosities against each other (which, when they shall
hereafter unite in a freedom of conversation, will be composed or
better understood) we do declare a liberty to tender Consciences, and
that no man shall be disquieted or called in question for differences
of opinion in matters of Religion which do not disturb the peace of
the Kingdom; and that we shall be ready to consent to such an Act of
Parliament as upon mature deliberation shall be offered to us for the
full granting of that indulgence."
It is only doing the king bare justice to say that he was always ready
and willing to keep this part of his royal word--but it proved an
impossibility.
A Roman Catholic as a matter of creed, a Hobbist in conversation, a
sensualist in practice, and the shrewdest though most indolent of cynics
in council, Charles, in this matter of religious toleration, would
gladly have kept his word, not indeed because it was his word, for on
the point of honour he was indifferent, but because it jumped with his
humour, and would have mitigated the hard lot of the Catholics. Charles
was not a theorist, all his tastes being eminently practical, not to say
scientific. He was not a tyrant, but a _de facto_ man from head to heel.
For the _jure divino_ of the English Episcopate he cared as little as
Oliver had ever done for the _jure divino_ of the English Crown. Oliver
once said, and he was not given to _braggadocio_, that he would fire his
pistol at the king "as soon as at another if he met him in battle," and
the second Charles would have thought no more of beheading an Anglican
bishop than he did of sending Sir Harry Vane to the scaffold. Honesty
and virtue, on the rare occasions Charles encountered them, he admired
much as a painter admires the colours of a fine sunset. Above everything
else Charles was determined never again, if he could help it, to be sent
on his travels, to be snubbed and starved in foreign courts.
Sir Thomas Urquhart of Cromartie, the first and best translator of
Rabelais, is said to have died of laughing on hearing of the
Restoration; Charles did not die, but he must have laughed inwardly at
the spectacle that met his eyes everywhere as he made his
often-described progress from Dover to London, and examined the gorgeous
beds and quilts, fine linen and carpets, couches, horses and liveries,
his faithful Commons had been at the pains and at the expense of
providing for his comfort.
A few years afterwards Marvell wrote the following lines:--
"Of a tall stature and of sable hue,
Much like the son of Kish, that lofty Jew;
Twelve years complete he suffered in exile
And kept his father's asses all the while.
At length, by wonderful impulse of fate,
The people called him home to help the state,
And what is more they sent him money too
To clothe him all from head to foot anew;
Nor did he such small favours then disdain,
Who in his thirtieth year began his reign."[90:1]
The "small favours" grew in size year by year.
Why it was impossible for Charles to keep his word may be read in
Clarendon's _Life_, and in the history of the Savoy Conference, and need
not be restated here. In the opinion of the Anglican clergy, the king's
divine right stood no higher than their own. They too had suffered in
exile. They had been "robbed" of their tithes, and turned out of their
palaces, rectories and vicarages, and excluded from the churches they
still called "theirs." Their Book of Common Prayer was no longer in
common use, having been banished by the "Directory of Public Worship"
since 1645. So late as July 1, 1660, Pepys records attending a service
in the Abbey, and adds "No Common Prayer yet." If we find ourselves
wondering why the Anglican party should have been so powerful in 1660,
our wonder ought not to be greater than is excited by the power of the
Puritan party when Laud was put to death. Both parties were, on each
occasion, in a minority. Though England has never been long
priest-ridden, it has often been priest-led.
The Convention Parliament did all that was expected of it. It was,
however irregularly summoned, a truly representative assembly. Its
members all swore--what will not members of Parliament swear?--that the
king was supreme in Church and State, the only rightful king of the
realm and of all other his dominions, and that from their hearts they
abhorred, detested, and abjured the damnable doctrine that princes,
excommunicated or deprived of the Pope, might be murdered by their
subjects. They proceeded to pass a very useful Act of Indemnity and
Oblivion, agreeing to let bygones be bygones, except in certain named
cases. They ordered Mr. John Milton to be taken into custody, and
prosecuted (which he never was) by the Attorney-General. Later on the
poet was released from custody, and we find Mr. Marvell complaining to
the House that their sergeant had extracted L150 in fees before he would
let Mr. Milton go. On which Sir Heneage Finch, afterwards Lord
Chancellor, laconically observed that Milton deserved hanging. He
certainly got off easily, but, as he lived to publish _Paradise Lost_,
_Paradise Regained_, and _Samson Agonistes_, he may be said to have
earned his freedom. All his poetry put together never brought him in a
third of the sum the sergeant got for letting him out of prison. General
Monk, the man-midwife, who so skilfully assisted at that great Birth of
Time, the Restoration, was made a duke, and Cromwell's army, so long the
force behind the supreme power, was paid its arrears and (two regiments
excepted) disbanded. "Fifty thousand men," says Macaulay, "accustomed to
the profession of arms, were thrown upon the world ... in a few months
there remained not a trace indicating that the most formidable army in
the world had just been absorbed in the mass of the community."[92:1]
After this the House of Commons fell to discussing religion, and made
the sad discovery that differences of opinion still existed. In these
circumstances they decided to refer the matter to their pious king, and
to such divines as he might choose. They then voted large sums of money
for the royal establishment, and, it being the very end of August,
adjourned till the 6th of November. As for making constitutional terms
with the king, they never attempted it, though Sir Matthew Hale is
credited with an attempt to induce them to do so. Any proposals of the
kind must have failed. The people were in no mood for making
constitutions.
Having met again on the 6th of November, Marvell, in a letter to the
Mayor and Aldermen of Hull, dated the 27th of the month, reports that
"the House fell upon the making out of the King's revenue to L1,200,000
a year." "The Customs are estimated toward L500,000 per annum in the
revenue. His lands and fee farms L250,000. The Excise of Beer and Ale
L300,000, the rest arise out of the Post Office, Wine Licenses,
Stannaries Court, Probate of Wills, Post-fines, Forests, and other
rights of the Crown. The excise of Foreign Commodities is to be
continued apart until satisfaction of public debts and engagements
secured upon the excise."
This settlement of revenue marks "the beginning of a time." Cromwell, as
Cowley puts it in his _Discourse_, by far the ablest indictment of
Oliver ever penned, "took armes against two hundred thousand pounds a
year, and raised them himself to above two millions." It is true.
Cromwell spent the money honestly and efficiently, and chiefly on a navy
that enabled him to wrest the command of the sea from the Dutch, to
secure the carrying trade, and to challenge the world for supremacy in
the Indies, both East and West. In doing this, he had the instinct of
the whole nation behind him. But it was expensive.
Had Charles been the most honest and thrifty of men, instead of one of
the most dishonest and extravagant, he must have found his financial
position a very difficult one. He was poorer than Cromwell. The feudal
taxation had fallen into desuetude. To revive wardships, etc., was
impossible, to recover arrears hopeless. There was nothing for it but
scientific taxation. One of his first Acts contains a schedule of taxed
articles extending over fifteen double-columned pages of a quarto
volume. To raise this revenue was difficult--in fact impossible, and the
amount actually obtained was always far below the estimates.
Marvell's letter concludes thus:--
"To-morrow is the Bill for enacting his Majesty's declaration in
religious matters and to have its first reading. It is said that on
Sunday next Doctor Reynolds shall be created Bishop of Norwich."
The rumour about Reynolds's bishopric proved to be true. The new bishop
was a very "moderate" Anglican indeed, and his appointment was meant as
a sop to the Presbyterians. Richard Baxter and Edmund Calamy refused
similar preferment.
On the 29th of November Marvell's letter contains the following
passage:--
"Yesterday the Bill of the King's Declaration in religious matters
was read for the first time; but upon the question for a second
reading 'twas carried 183 against 157 in the negative, so there is an
end of that Bill and for those excellent things therein. We must
henceforth rely only upon his Majesty's goodness, who, I must needs
say, hath hitherto been more ready to give than we to receive."
It is a noticeable feature of this correspondence that Marvell seldom
mentions which way he voted himself.
The letter of the 4th of December contains some interesting matter:--
"GENTLEMEN,--Since my last, upon Thursday, the Bill for Vicarages
hath been carryed up to the Lords; and a Message to them from our
House that they would expedite the Bill for confirmation of Magna
Charta, that for confirmation of marriages, and other bills of
publick concernment, which haue laid by them euer since our last
sitting, not returned to us. We had then the Bill for six moneths
assesment in consideration, and read the Bill for taking away Court
of Wards and Purveyance, and establishing the moiety of the Excise
of Beere and ale in perpetuum, about which we sit euery afternoon in
a Grand Committee. Upon Sunday last were consecrated in the Abby at
Westminster, Doctor Cossins, Bishop of Durham, Sterne of Carlile,
Gauden of Exeter, Ironside of Bristow, Loyd of Landaffe, Lucy of St.
Dauids, Lany, the seuenth, whose diocese I remember not at present,
and to-day they keep their feast in Haberdasher's hall, in London.
Dr. Reinolds was not of the number, who is intended for Norwich. A
Congedelire is gone down to Hereford for Dr. Monk, the Generall's
brother, at present Provost of Eaton. 'Tis thought that since our
throwing out the Bill of the King's Declaration, Mr. Calamy, and
other moderate men, will be resolute in refusing of Bishopricks....
To-day our House was upon the Bill of Attainder of those that haue
been executed, those that are fled, and of Cromwell, Bradshaw,
Ireton, and Pride, and 'tis ordered that the carkasses and coffins
of the four last named, shall be drawn with what expedition
possible, upon an hurdle to Tyburn, there (to) be hanged up for a
while, and then buryed under the gallows....
"WESTMINSTER, _Dec. 4, 1660_."
Marvell's cool reporting of the hideous indignity inflicted upon his old
master, and allowing it to pass _sub silentio_, is one of the many
occasions that stirred Mr. Grosart's wonder. Nerves were tough in those
days. Pepys tells us unconcernedly enough how, after seeing Lord
Southampton sworn in at the Court of Exchequer as Lord Treasurer, he
noticed "the heads of Cromwell, Bradshaw, and Ireton set up at the
further end of Westminster Hall." It is quite possible Lady Fauconberg
may have seen the same sight.[95:1]
The Convention Parliament was dissolved on the 29th of December 1660.
On 1st April 1661 Marvell was returned for the third and last time for
Hull, for Charles the Second's first Parliament was of unconscionable
long duration, not being dissolved till January 1679, after Marvell's
death. It is known in history as the Pensionary or Long Parliament. The
election figures were as below:--
Colonel Gilbey, 294
Mr. Andrew Marvell, 240
Mr. Edward Barnard, 195
Mr. John Ramsden, 122
Marvell was not present at or before the election, for on the 6th of
April he writes:--
"I perceive by Mr. Mayor that you have again (as if it were grown a
thing of course) made choice of me now, the third time, to serve for
you in Parliament, which as I cannot attribute to anything but your
constancy, so shall I, God willing, as in gratitude obliged, with no
less constancy and vigour continue to execute your commands and study
your service."
A word may here be said about payment of borough members. The members'
fee was 6s. 8d. for every day the Parliament lasted. The wages were paid
by the corporation out of the borough funds. It was never a popular
charge. Burgesses in many places cared as little for M.P.'s as do some
of their successors for free libraries. Prynne, perhaps the greatest
parliamentary lawyer that ever lived, told Pepys one day, as they were
driving to the Temple, that the number of burgesses to be returned to
Parliament for any particular borough was not, for aught Prynne could
find, fixed by law, but was at first left to the discretion of the
sheriff, and that several boroughs had complained of the sheriff's
putting them to the charge of sending up burgesses.
In August 1661 the corporation paid Marvell L28 for his fee as one of
their burgesses, being 6s. 8d. a day for eighty-four days, the length of
the Convention Parliament. Marvell continued to take his wages until the
end of his days; but it is perhaps a mistake to suppose he was the very
last member to do so. It was, however, unusual in Marvell's time.[96:1]
This Pensionary Parliament, though of a very decided "Church and King"
complexion, was not in its original composition a body lacking character
or independence, but it steadily deteriorated in both respects.
Vacancies, as they occurred, and they occurred very frequently in those
days of short lives, were filled up by courtiers and pensioners.
In the small tract, entitled _Flagellum Parliamentum_, which is a highly
libellous "Dod," often attributed to Marvell, a record is preserved of
more than two hundred members of this Parliament in 1675. Despite some
humorous touches, this _Flagellum Parliamentum_ is still disagreeable to
read. But the most graphic picture we have of this Parliament is to be
found in one of Lord Shaftesbury's political tracts entitled "A letter
from a Parliament man to his Friend" (1675):--
"SIR,--I see you are greatly scandalized at our slow and confused
Proceedings. I confess you have cause enough; but were you but
within these walls for one half day, and saw the strange make and
complexion that this house is of, you would wonder as much that ever
you wondered at it; for we are such a pied Parliament, that none can
say of what colour we are; for we consist of Old Cavaliers, Old
Round-Heads, Indigent-Courtiers, and true Country Gentlemen: the two
latter are most numerous, and would in probability bring things to
some issue were they not clogged with the numerous uncertainties of
the former. For the Old Cavalier, grown aged, and almost past his
vice, is damnable godly and makes his doting piety more a plague to
the world than his debauchery was, for he is so much a by-got to the
B(ishop) that he forces his Loyalty to strike sail to his Religion,
and could be content to pare the nails a little of the Civil
Government, so you would but let him sharpen the Ecclesiastical
Talons: which behaviour of his so exasperates the Round-Head, that
he on the other hand cares not what increases the Interest of the
Crown receives, so he can but diminish that of the miter: so that
the Round-Head had rather enslave the Man than the Conscience: the
Cavalier rather the Conscience than the Man; there being a
sufficient stock of animosity as proper matter to work upon. Upon
these, therefore, the Courtier mutually plays, for if any Ante-court
motion be made he gains the Round-Head either to oppose or absent by
telling them, If they will join him now he will join them for
Liberty of Conscience. And when any affair is started on behalf of
the Country he assures the Cavaliers, If they will then stand by him
he will then join with them in promoting a Bill against the
fanatics. Thus play they on both hands.... Wherefore it were happy
that he had neither Round-Head nor Cavalier in the House, for they
are each of them so prejudicate against the other that their sitting
here signifies nothing but their fostering their old venom and lying
at catch to stop every advantage to bear down each other, though it
be in the destruction of their country. For if the Round-Heads bring
in a good bill the Old Cavalier opposes it, for no other reason but
because they brought it in."[98:1]
Such was the theatre of Marvell's public actions for the rest of his
days, and if at times he may need forgiveness for the savagery of his
satire, it ought to be found easy to forgive him.
The two members for Hull were soon immersed in matters of much local
importance. They began by quarrelling with one another, Marvell writing
"the bond of civility betwixt Col. Gilby and myself being unhappily
snappt in pieces, and in such manner that I cannot see how it is
possible ever to knit them again." House of Commons quarrels are usually
soon made up, and so was this one. The custom was for _both_ members to
sign these letters, though they are all written in Marvell's hand--but
if this was for any reason inconvenient, Marvell signed alone. No
letters, unless in Marvell's writing, are preserved at Hull, which is a
curious fact.
One of these bits of local business related to a patent alleged to have
been granted by the Crown to certain persons, authorising them to erect
and maintain _ballast wharfs_ in the various ports, and to make charges
in respect of them. This was resented by the members for the ports, and
on Marvell's motion the matter was referred to the Committee of
Grievances, before whom the patentees were summoned. When they came it
appeared that the patent warranted none of the exactions that had been
demanded, and also that the warrant sent down to Hull naming these
charges was nothing more than a draft framed by the patentees
themselves, and not authorised in any way. The patent was at once
suspended. Marvell, like a true member of Parliament, wishes to get any
little local credit that may be due for such prompt action, and
writes:--
"In this thing (although I count all things I can do for your service
to be mere trifles, and not worth taking notice of in respect of what
I owe you) I must do myself that right to let you know that I, and I
alone, have had the happiness to do that little which hitherto is
effected."
The matter required delicate handling, for a reason Marvell gives:
"Because, if the King's right in placing such impositions should be
weakened, neither should he have power to make a grant of them to you."
Another much longer business related to a lighthouse, which some
outsiders were anxious to build in the Humber. The corporation of Hull,
acting on Marvell's advice, had petitioned the Privy Council, and were
asked by their business-like member "to send us up a dormant credit for
an hundred pound, which we yet indeed have no use of, but if need be
must have ready at hand to reward such as will not otherwise befriend
your business." Some months later Marvell forwards an account, not of
the L100, but of the legal expenses about the lighthouse. He wishes it
were less, but hopes that the "vigorous resistance" will discourage the
designers from proceeding farther. This it did not do. As a member of
the bar, I find two or three of the items in this old-world Bill of
Costs interesting:--
To Mr. Scroggs to attend the Council, L3 6 0
" " " again for the same, 3 6 0
Spent on Mr. Scroggs at dinner, 18 0
To Mr. Scroggs again, 3 0 0
Fees of the Council Table, 1 10 0
Fee to Clerk of the Council, 2 0 0
For dinner for Mr. Scroggs and wine after, 1 0 0
To Mr. Cresset (the Solicitor), 20 0 0
To Mr. Scroggs for a dinner, 1 0 0
The barrister who was so frequently "refreshed" by Marvell lived to
become "the infamous Lord Chief Justice Scroggs" of all school
histories.
A week before the prorogation of Parliament, which happened on the 19th
of May 1662, Marvell went to Holland and remained there for nine months,
for he did not return until the very end of March 1663, more than a
month after the reassembling of the House.
What took him there nobody knows. Writing to the Trinity House about the
lighthouse business on the 8th of May 1662, Marvell says:--
"But that which troubles me is that by the interest of some persons
too potent for me to refuse, and who have a great direction and
influence upon my counsels and fortune, I am obliged to go beyond
sea before I have perfected it (_i.e._ the lighthouse business). But
first I do thereby make my Lord Carlisle (who is a member of the
Privy Council and one of them to whom your business is referred)
absolutely yours. And my journey is but into Holland, from whence I
shall weekly correspond as if I were at London with all the rest of
my friends, towards the affecting your business. Then I leave Col.
Gilbey there, whose ability for business and affection to yours is
such that I cannot be wanted though I am missing."
It is plain from this that Lord Carlisle is one of the powerful persons
referred to--but beyond this we cannot go.
Whilst in Holland Marvell wrote both to the Trinity House and to the
corporation on business matters.
In March 1663 Marvell came back in a hurry, some complaints having been
made in Hull about his absence. He begins his first letter after his
return as follows:--
"Being newly arrived in town and full of business, yet I could not
neglect to give you notice that this day (2nd April 1663) I have been
in the House and found my place empty, though it seems, as I now
hear, that some persons would have been so courteous as to have
filled it for me."
In none of these letters is any reference made to the debates in the
House on the unhappy Bill of Uniformity, nor does any record of those
discussions anywhere exist. The Savoy Conference proved a failure, and
no lay reader of Baxter's account of it can profess wonder. Not a single
point in difference was settled. In the meantime the restored Houses of
Convocation, from which the Presbyterian members were excluded, had
completed their revision of the Book of Common Prayer and presented it
to Parliament.
In considering the Bill for Uniformity, the House of Lords, where
Presbyterianism was powerfully represented, showed more regard for those
"tender consciences" to which the king (by the new Prayer Book called
for the first time "our most religious King") had referred in his Breda
Declaration than did the House of Commons. "The Book, the whole Book,
and nothing but the Book" was, in effect, the cry of the lower House,
and on the 19th of May, ten days after Marvell had left for the
Continent, the Act of Uniformity became law, and by the 24th of August
1662 all beneficed ministers and schoolmasters had to make the
celebrated subscription and profession, or go out into the wilderness.
There has always been a dispute as to the physical possibility of
perusing the compilation in question before the day fixed by the
Statute. The Book was advertised for sale in London on the 6th of
August, but how many copies were actually available on that day is not
known.
The Dean and Chapter of Peterborough did not get their copies until the
17th of August. When the new folios reached the lonely parsonages of
Cumberland and Durham--who would care to say? The Act required a verbal
avowal of "unfeigned assent and consent to all and everything contained
and prescribed in and by the Book of Common Prayer, and administrations
of the Sacraments and other rites and ceremonies of the Church according
to the use of the Church of England, together with the Psalter, and the
form of manner of making, ordaining, and consecrating Bishops, Priests,
and Deacons" to be made after the service upon "some Lord's day" before
the Feast of St. Bartholomew, _i.e._ the 24th of August 1662. The Act
also required subscription within the same time-limit to a declaration
of (_inter alia_) uniformity to the Liturgy of the Church of England "as
it is now by law established."
That this haste was indecent no layman is likely to dispute, but that it
wrought practical wrong is doubtful. The Vicar of Bray needed no time to
read his new Folio to enable him to make whatever avowal concerning it
the law demanded; and as for signing the declaration, all he required
for that purpose was pen and ink. Neither had the incumbent, who was a
good churchman at heart, any doubts to settle. He rejoiced to know that
his side was once more uppermost, and that it would be no longer
necessary for him, in order to retain his living, to pretend to tolerate
a Presbyterian, or to submit to read in his church the Directory of
Public Worship. Convocation had approved the new Prayer Book, which was
in substance the old one, and what more did any churchman require? As
for the Presbyterians and others who were in possession of livings, the
failure of the Savoy Conference must have made it plain to them that the
Church of England had not allowed the king to keep his word, that
compromise and comprehension had failed, and that if they were to remain
where they were, it could only be on terms of completely severing
themselves from all other Protestant bodies in the world, and becoming
thorough Episcopalians. No Presbyterian of any eminence was prepared to
make the statutory avowal. Painful as it always must be to give up any
good thing by a fixed date, it is hard to see what advantage would have
accrued from delay.
When the day came, some two thousand parsons were turned out of the
Church of England. Among them were included many of the most devout and
some of the most learned of our divines. Their "coming in" had been
irregular, their "going out" was painful.
Save so far as it turned these men out, the Act was a failure. It did
not procure that uniformity in the public worship of God which it
declared was so desirable; it prevented no scandal; it arrested no
decay; it allayed no distemper, and it certainly did not settle the
peace of the Church. Inside the Church the bishops were supine, the
parochial clergy indifferent, and the worshippers, if such a name can
properly be bestowed upon the congregations, were grossly irreverent.
Nor was any improvement in the conduct of the Church service noticeable
until after the Revolution, and when legislation had conceded a somewhat
shabby measure of toleration to those who by that time had become rigid,
traditional, and hereditary dissenters. Then indeed some attempts began
to be made to secure a real uniformity of ritual in the public worship
of the Church of England.[104:1] How far success has rewarded these
exertions it is not for me to say.
Marvell did not remain long at home after his return from Holland. A
strange adventure lay before him. He thus introduces it in a letter
dated 20th June 1663:--
"GENTLEMEN, MY VERY WORTHY FRIENDS,--The relation I have to your
affairs, and the intimacy of that affection I ow you, do both
incline and oblige me to communicate to you, that there is a
probability I may very shortly have occasion to go beyond sea; for
my Lord of Carlisle being chosen by his Majesty, Embassadour
Extraordinary to Muscovy, Sweden, and Denmarke, hath used his power,
which ought to be very great with me, to make me goe along with him
Secretary in those embassages. It is no new thing for Members of our
House to be dispens'd with for the service of the King and Nation in
forain parts. And you may be sure that I will not stirre without
speciall leave of the House; that so you may be freed from any
possibility of being importuned or tempted to make any other choice,
in my absence. However, I can not but advise also with you, desiring
to take your assent along with me, so much esteeme I have both of
your prudence and friendship. The time allotted for the embassy is
not much above a yeare: probably it may not be much less betwixt our
adjournment and next meeting; and, however, you have Colonell Gilby,
to whom my presence can make litle addition, so that if I cannot
decline this voyage, I shall have the comfort to believe, that, all
things considered, you cannot thereby receive any disservice. I
shall hope to receive herein your speedy answer...."
What was the "power" Lord Carlisle had over Marvell is not now
discoverable, but the tie, whatever it may have been, was evidently a
close one.
A month after this letter Marvell started on his way.
"GENTLEMEN, MY VERY WORTHY FRIENDS,--Being this day taking barge for
Gravesend, there to embark for Archangel, so to Muscow, thence for
Sweden, and last of all Denmarke; all of which I hope, by God's
blessing, to finish within twelve moneths time: I do hereby, with my
last and seriousest thoughts, salute you, rendring you all hearty
thanks for your great kindnesse and friendship to me upon all
occasions, and ardently beseeching God to keep you all in His
gracious protection, to your own honour, and the welfare and
flourishing of your Corporation, to which I am and shall ever
continue a most affectionate and devoted servant. I undertake this
voyage with the order and good liking of his Majesty, and by leave
given me from the House and enterd in the Journal; and having
received moreover your approbation, I go therefore with more ease
and satisfaction of mind, and augurate to myselfe the happier
successe in all my proceedings...."
It was Marvell's good fortune to be in Lord Carlisle's frigate which
made the voyage to Archangel in less than a month, sailing from
Gravesend on the 22nd of July and arriving at the bar of Archangel on
the 19th of August. The companion frigate took seven weeks to compass
the same distance.
Nothing of any importance attaches to this Russian embassy. It cost a
great deal of money, took up a great deal of time, exposed the
ambassador and his suite to much rudeness and discomfort, and failed to
effect its main object, which was to secure a renewal of the privileges
formerly enjoyed in Muscovy by British merchants.
One of the attendants upon the ambassador made a small book out of his
travels, which did not get printed till 1669, when it attracted little
notice. Mr. Grosart was the first of Marvell's many biographers to
discover the existence of this narrative.[106:1] He found it in the
first instance, to use his own language, "in one of good trusty John
Harris' folios of _Travels and Voyages_" (two vols. folio, 1705); but
later on he made the sad discovery that this "good trusty John Harris"
had uplifted what he called his "true and particular account" from the
book of 1669 without any acknowledgment. "For ways that are dark" the
old compiler of travels was not easily excelled, but why should Mr.
Grosart have gone out of his way to call an eighteenth-century
book-maker, about whom he evidently knew nothing, "good and trusty"?
Harris was never either the one or the other, and died a pauper!
A journey to Moscow in 1663-64 was no joke. Lord Carlisle, who was
accompanied by his wife and eldest son, although ready to start from
Archangel by the end of September, was doomed to spend both the 5th of
November and Christmas Day in the gloomy town of Vologda, which they had
reached, travelling by water, on the 17th of October. Some of this time
was spent in quarrelling as to who was to supply the sledges that were
required to convey the ambassador and all his _impedimenta_ along the
now ice-bound roads to Moscow. It was one of Marvell's many duties to
remonstrate with the authorities for their cruel and disrespectful
indifference; he did so with great freedom, but with no effect, and at
last the ambassador was obliged to hire two hundred sledges at his own
charges. Sixty he sent on ahead, following with one hundred and forty on
the 15th of January 1664. It was an intensely cold journey, and the
accommodation at night, with one happy exception, proved quite infamous.
On the 3rd of February Lord Carlisle and his _cortege_ found themselves
five versts from Moscow. The 5th of February was fixed for their entry
into the city in all their finery. They were ready on the morning of
that day, awaiting the arrival of the Tsar's escort, but it never came.
Lord Carlisle had sent his cooks on to Moscow to prepare the dinner he
expected to eat in his city-quarters. Nightfall approached, and it was
not till "half an hour before night" that the belated messengers
arrived, full of excuses. The ambassador was hungry, cold, and furious,
nor did his anger abate when told he was not to be allowed to enter
Moscow that night, as the Tsar and his ladies were very anxious to
enjoy the spectacle. The return of the cooks from Moscow and the
preparation of dinner, though a mitigation, was no cure for wounded
pride, and Lord Carlisle, calling Marvell to his side, and with his
assistance, concocted a letter in Latin to the Tsar, complaining
bitterly of their ill-treatment _inter fumosi gurgustii sordes et
angustias sine cibo aut potu_, and going so far as to assert that had
anything of the kind happened in England to a foreign ambassador, the
King of England would never have rested until the offence had been
atoned for with the blood of the criminals. When, some forty years
afterwards, Peter the Great asked Queen Anne to chop off the heads of
the rude men who had arrested his ambassador for debt, he had, perhaps,
Marvell's letter before him.
On the 6th of February Lord Carlisle and his suite made their public
entry into Moscow; but so long a time was occupied over the few versts
they had to travel, that it was dusk before the Kremlin was reached.
The formal reception of the ambassador was on the 11th of February.
Marvell was in the ambassador's sledge and carried his credentials upon
a yard of red damask. The titles of the Russian Potentate would, if
printed here, fill half a page. All the Russias, Great, Little, and
White, emperies more than one, dukedoms by the dozen, territories,
countries, and dominions--not all easy to identify on the map, and very
hard to pronounce--were read out in a loud voice by Marvell. At the end
of them came the homely title of the Earl and his offices, "his
Majesty's Lieutenant in the Counties of Cumberland and Westmorland."
The letters read and delivered, the Tsar and his Boyars rose in their
places simultaneously, and their tissue vests made so strange, loud, and
unexpected a noise as to provoke the ever too easily moved risibility
of the Englishmen.[109:1] When Marvell and the rest of them had ceased
from giggling, the Tsar inquired after the health of the king, but the
distance between his Imperial Majesty and Lord Carlisle being too great
for the question to carry, it had to be repeated by those who were
nearer the ambassador, who gravely replied that when he last saw his
master, namely on the 20th of July then last past, he was perfectly
well. To the same question as to the health of "the desolate widow of
Charles the First," Carlisle returned the same cautious answer. He then
read a very long speech in English, which his interpreter turned into
Russian. The same oration was rendered into Latin by Marvell, and
presented. Over Marvell's Latin trouble arose, for the Russians were
bent on taking and giving offence. Marvell had styled the Tsar
_Illustrissimus_ when he ought, so it was alleged, to have called him
_Serenissimus_. Marvell was not a schoolmaster's son, an old scholar of
Trinity, and Milton's assistant as Latin Secretary for nothing. He
prepared a reply which, as it does not lack humour, has a distinct
literary flavour, and is all that came of the embassy, may here be given
at length:--
"I reply, saith he, that I sent no such paper into the
Embassy-office, but upon the desire of his Tzarskoy Majesty's
Councellor Evan Offonassy Pronchissof, I delivered it to him, not
being a paper of State, nor written in the English Language wherein I
treat, nor put into the hands of the near Boyars and Councellors of
his Tzarskoy majesty, nor subscribed by my self, nor translated into
Russe by my Interpreter, but only as a piece of curiosity, which is
now restored me, and I am possessed of it; so that herein his
Tzarskoy majestie's near Boyars and Councellors are doubtless ill
grounded. But again I say concerning the value of the words
_Illustrissimus_ and _Serenissimus_ compared together, seeing we must
here from affaires of State, fall into Grammatical contests
concerning the Latin tongue; that the word _Serenus_ signifieth
nothing but still and calm; and, therefore, though of late times
adopted into the Titles of great Princes by reason of that benigne
tranquility which properly dwells in the majestick countenance of
great Princes, and that venerable stillness of all the Attendants
that surround them, of which I have seen an excellent example when I
was in the presence of his Tzarskoy majesty, yet is more properly
used concerning the calmness of the weather, or season. So that even
the night is elegantly called _Serena_ by the best Authors, Cicero in
Arato 12, Lucretius i. l. 29. '_Serena nox_'; and upon perusing again
what I have writ in this paper, I finde that I have out of the
customariness of that expression my self near the beginning said, And
that most serene night, &c. Whereas on the contrary _Illustris_ in
its proper derivation and signification expresseth that which is all
resplendent, lightsome, and glorious, as well without as within, and
that not with a secondary but with a primitive and original light.
For if the Sun be, as he is, the first fountain of light, and Poets
in their expressions (as is well known) are higher by much than those
that write in Prose, what else is it when Ovid in the 2. of the
Metamorphoses saith of Phoebus speaking with Phaethon, _Qui terque
quaterque concutiens Illustre caput_, and the Latin Orators, as
Pliny, Ep. 139, when they would say the highest thing that can be
exprest upon any subject, word it thus, _Nihil Illustrius dicere
possum_. So that hereby may appear to his Tzarskoy Majestie's near
Boyars and Counsellors what diminution there is to his Tzarskoy
Majesty (which farr be it from my thoughts) if I appropriate
_Serenissimus_ to my Master and _Illustrissimus_ to Him than which
_nihil dici potest Illustrius_. But because this was in the time of
the purity of the Latin tongue, when the word _Serenus_ was never
used in the Title of any Prince or Person, I shall go on to deale
with the utmost candor, forasmuch as in this Nation the nicety of
that most eloquent language is not so perfectly understood, which
gives occasion to these mistakes. I confess therefore that indeed in
the declination of the Latin tongue, and when there scarce could be
found out words enough to supply the modern ambition of Titles,
Serenissimus as several other words hath grown in fashion for a
compellation of lesser as well as greater Princes, and yet befits
both the one and the other. So there is _Serenissima Respublica
Veneta_, _Serenitates Electoriae_, _Serenitates Regiae_, even as the
word Highness or _Celsitudo_ befits a Duke, a Prince, a King, or an
Emperour, adjoyning to it the respective quality, and so the word
_Illustris_. But suppose it were by modern use (which I deny)
depressed from the undoubted superiority that it had of _Serenus_ in
the purest antiquity, yet being added in the transcendent degree to
the word Emperour, the highest denomination that a Prince is capable
of, it becomes of the same value. So that to interpret
_Illustrissimus_ unto diminution is to find a positive in a
superlative, and in the most orient light to seek for darkness. And I
would, seeing the near Boyars and Counsellors of his Tzarskoy Majesty
are pleased to mention the Title given to his Tzarskoy Majesty by his
Cesarian Majesty, gladly be satisfied by them, whether ever any
Cesarian Majesty writ formerly hither in High-Dutch, and whether then
they styled his Tzarskoy Majesty Durchluchtigste which is the same
with _Illustrissimus_, and which I believe the Caesar hath kept for
Himself. But to cut short, his Royal Majesty hath used the word to
his Tzarskoy Majesty in his Letter, not out of imitation of others,
although even in the Dutch Letter to his Tzarskoy Majesty of 16 June
1663, I finde Durchlauchtigste the same (as I said) with
_Illustrissimus_, but out of the constant use of his own Court,
further joyning before it Most High, Most Potent, and adding after it
Great Lord Emperour, which is an higher Title than any Prince in the
World gives his Tzarskoy Majesty, and as high a Title of honour as
can be given to any thing under the Divinity. For the King my Master
who possesses as considerable Dominions, and by as high and
self-dependent a right as any Prince in the Universe, yet contenting
Himself with the easiest Titles, and satisfying Himself in the
essence of things, doth most willingly give to other Princes the
Titles which are appropriated to them, but to the Tzarskoy Majesties
of Russia his Royal Ancestors, and to his present Tzarskoy Majesty
his Royal Majesty himself, have usually and do gladly pay Titles even
to superfluity out of meer kindness. And upon that reason He added
the word most Illustrious, and so did I use it in the Latin of my
speech. Yet, that You may find I did not out of any criticisme of
honor, but for distinction sake use it as I did, You may see in one
place of the same speech _Serenitas_, speaking of his Tzarskoy
Majesty: and I would have used _Serenissimus_ an hundred times
concerning his Tzarskoy Majesty, had I thought it would have pleased
Him better. And I dare promise You that his Majesty will upon the
first information from me stile him _Serenissimus_, and I
(notwithstanding what I have said) shall make little difficulty of
altering the word in that speech, and of delivering it so to You,
with that protestation that I have not in using that word
_Illustrissimus_ erred nor used any diminution (which God forbid) to
his Tzarskoy Majesty, but on the contrary after the example of the
King my Master intended and shewed him all possible honor. And so God
grant all happiness to His most high, most Potent, most Illustrious,
and most Serene Tzarskoy Majesty, and that the friendship may daily
increase betwixt His said Majesty and his most Serene Majesty my
Master."
On the 19th of February the Tsar invited Lord Carlisle and his suite to
a dinner, which, beginning at two o'clock, lasted till eleven, when it
was prematurely broken up by the Tsar's nose beginning to bleed. Five
hundred dishes were served, but there were no napkins, and the
table-cloths only just covered the boards. There were Spanish wines,
white and red mead, Puaz and strong waters. The English ambassador was
not properly placed at table, not being anywhere near the Tsar, and his
faithful suite shared his resentment. Time went on, but no diplomatic
progress was made. The Tsar would not renew the privileges of the
British merchants; Easter was spent in Moscow, May also--and still
nothing was done. Carlisle, in a huff, determined to go away, and,
somewhat to the distress of his followers, refused to accept the costly
sables sent by the Tzar, not only to the ambassador, Lady Carlisle, and
Lord Morpeth, but to the secretaries and others. The Tzar thereupon
returned the plate which our king had sent him, which plate Lord
Carlisle seems to have appropriated, no doubt with diplomatic
correctness, as his perquisite in lieu of the sables; but the suite got
nothing.
The embassy left Moscow on the 24th of June for Novgorod and Riga, and
after visiting Stockholm and Copenhagen, Lord Carlisle and Marvell
reached London on the 30th of January 1665.
During Marvell's absence war had been declared with the Dutch. It was
never difficult to go to war with the Dutch. The king was always in want
of money, and as no proper check existed over war supplies, he took what
he wanted out of them. The merchants on 'Change desired war, saying that
the trade of the world was too little for both England and Holland, and
that one or the other "must down." The English manufacturers, who felt
the sting of their Dutch competitors, were always in favour of war. Then
the growing insolence of the Dutch in the Indies was not to be borne.
Stories were circulated how the Hollanders had proclaimed themselves
"Lords of the Southern Seas," and meant to deny English ships the right
of entry in that quarter of the globe. A baronet called on Pepys and
pulled out of his pocket letters from the East Indies, full of sad tales
of Englishmen having been actually thrashed inside their own factory at
Surat by swaggering Dutchmen, who had insulted the flag of St. George,
and swore they were going to be the masters "out there." Pepys, who
knew a little about the state of the royal navy, listened sorrowfully
and was content to hope that the war would not come until "we are more
ready for it."
In the House of Commons the prudent men were against the war, and were
at once accused of being in the pay of the Dutch. The king's friends
were all for the war, and nobody doubted that some of the money voted
for it would find its way into their pockets, or at all events that
pensions would reward their fidelity. A third group who favoured the war
were supposed to do so because their disloyalty and fanaticism always
disposed them to trouble the waters in which they wished to fish.
The war began in November 1664, and on the 24th of that month the king
opened Parliament and demanded money. He got it. Clarendon describes how
Sir Robert Paston from Norfolk, a back-bench man, "who was no frequent
speaker, but delivered what he had a mind to say very clearly," stood up
and proposed a grant of two and a half million pounds, to be spread over
three years. So huge a sum took the House by surprise. Nobody spoke;
"they sat in amazement." Somebody at last found his voice and moved a
much smaller sum, but no one seconded him. Sir Robert Paston ultimately
found supporters, "no man who had any relation to the Court speaking a
word." The Speaker put Sir Robert Paston's motion as the question, "and
the affirmative made a good sound, and very few gave their negative
aloud." But Clarendon adds, "it was notorious very many sat silent."