Unfortunately for the Royalists, among Rupert’s horse were some raw

levies, and although his own old troops were the bravest and most

brilliant cavalry then in this country, they were lacking in that

virtue in which Cromwell’s “Ironsides” excelled, namely discipline;

and discipline now told its tale. This cavalry contest is said to have

lasted an hour. Before the end of it Cromwell had returned to the

field. The issue still seemed doubtful, when Sir David Leslie’s horse

came up and attacked the Royalists in the flank, which at last wavered,

broke and fled, “Cromwell scattering them before him like a little

dust,” says Watson with bombastic exaggeration. Anyhow, in the end, the

cavalry on the right wing of the Royalist army was thoroughly routed.

On the Royalist left Goring, after defeating the enemy’s cavalry,

had followed the usual custom of attacking the flank of the enemy’s

infantry with his victorious horse; but he could rally only a few

troops for this purpose. The greater part of Newcastle’s cavalry

had galloped far out of sight in pursuit of the vanquished Scottish

fugitives. Another part had cantered up the hill and was busily engaged

in looting the Parliament’s wagons and stores.

But another General was adopting the same tactics on an opposite

side of the field with much greater success. Cromwell, having routed

the Royalist cavalry with his own, had nearly the whole of his

well-disciplined horse in hand, wherewith to attack the right flank

of the Royalist infantry, and that attack Newcastle’s infantry were

unable to resist. They were soon in confusion, regiment after regiment

was charged and dispersed, and the King’s infantry became a rabble of

scattered fugitives.

But not all! And now we come to the most heroic incident in the whole

battle, an incident which did great and lasting honour to the army of

Newcastle. It is thus described in a book which was published only

thirty-two years after it took place.[110]

[Footnote 110: _A Chronicle of the Late Intestine War_, etc., by James

Heath. London: Thomas Basset. 1676.]

“There was yet standing two regiments of the Lord Newcastle’s, one

called by the name of his Lambs [or Whitecoats]: these being veteran

soldiers, and accustomed to fight, stood their ground, and the fury

of that impression of Cromwell, which routed the whole army besides;

nor did the danger nor the slaughter round them make them cast away

their arms or their courage; but seeing themselves destitute of their

friends, and surrounded by their enemies, they cast themselves into a

ring, where though quarter was offered them, they gallantly refused

it, and so manfully behaved themselves, that they slew more of the

enemy in this particular fight, than they had killed of them before.

At last they were cut down, not by the sword, but showers of bullets,

after a long and stout resistance, leaving their enemies a sorrowful

victory, both in respect of themselves whom they would have spared, as

in regard of the loss of the bravest men on their own side, who fell in

assaulting them. A very inconsiderable number of them were preserved,

to be the living monuments of that Brigade’s loyalty and valour.”

William Lilly says, in his Diary, that the Whitecoats, “by mere valour,

for one whole hour kept the troops of horse from entering amongst

them at near push of pike: when the horse did enter they would have

no quarter, but fought it out until there was not thirty of them

living. Those whose hap it was to be beaten down upon the ground as the

troopers came near them, though they could not rise for their wounds,

yet were so desperate as to get either a pike or a sword, or piece

of them, and to gore the troopers’ horses, as they came over them or

passed by them. Captain Coventry, then a trooper under Cromwell, and an

actor,”—it is curious that there should have been a “play-actor” among

the troops of Cromwell—“who was the third or fourth man that entered

amongst them, protested he never, in all the fights he was in, met with

such resolute brave fellows, or whom he pitied so much, and said he

saved two or three against their wills.”

Heath says: “Night ended the pursuit: for it was eleven o’clock before

the fight ceased, else more blood had been shed.... Here were slain

to the number of 8,000 and upwards in the field and flight; which at

certain was divided equally between both armies: for what slaughter

was made by the prince upon the Scots and Fairfax, was requited by

Cromwell on the left wing as aforesaid, and the fight was furious and

bloody there. It must needs be a great carnage;” and then some horrible

details follow.

Newcastle remained on the field to the end. The Duchess says:—

“His two sons had Commands, but His Brother, though he had no Command,

by reason of the weakness of his body; yet he was never from My Lord

when he was in action, even to the last; for he was the last with my

Lord in the Field in that fatal Battel upon _Hessom-moor_,[111] near

York; and though my Brother, Sir Charles Lucas, desired My Lord to

send his sons away, when the said battel was fought, yet he would not,

saying, His sons should shew their Loyalty and Duty to His Majesty, in

venturing their lives, as well as Himself”.

[Footnote 111: Marston Moor was sometimes called Hessom Moor.]

The three Generals of the Roundhead army state in their official

dispatch that the Royalists lost “all their ordnance to the number of

20 (pieces), their ammunition, baggage, about 100 colours and 10,000

arms”. Whitelock says (89): “From this battle and the pursuit, some

reckon were buried 7,000 Englishmen, all agree that above 3,000 of the

Prince’s men were slain in the battle, besides those in the chace and

3,000 prisoners taken, etc.”

To the “chace,” as Whitelock calls it, an end was put by darkness.

Rupert escaped being taken prisoner by dismounting and hiding in a

field of standing beans. Afterwards he succeeded in getting into York,

as also did Newcastle. Just outside the town Newcastle met Rupert, to

whom he exclaimed: “All is lost!” As well he might. Marston Moor was a

defeat from which the Royalist cause never recovered, and it was one of

the greatest battles ever fought on English soil.

There was little disgrace in being overcome, after an exceptionally

hard-fought battle, by such a General as Cromwell, to whom the honours

of Marston Moor are chiefly due. And Newcastle can scarcely be

considered a defeated General in this case, for Rupert was in supreme

command. His was the defeat. Newcastle had been opposed to risking the

engagement; yet, finding himself in it, although against his will, he

exhibited exceptional courage as also did his men.

But Marston Moor saw the destruction, almost the annihilation, of his

army, the loss of his prestige, the blasting of his hopes, the ruin of

his fortunes.

CHAPTER XIV.

“No, I will not endure the laughter of the Court,” said Newcastle,[112]

when, on the following morning, Rupert asked him to make an effort to

recruit his forces. “I will go to Holland.”

[Footnote 112: Warburton’s _Rupert_, II, 468.]

“And I will rally my men!” said Rupert.

Before we blame Newcastle for deserting the King’s service and leaving

England without his permission, we ought to remember that he was in

a position widely different from that of most defeated Generals. He

had been publicly proclaimed a traitor by the Parliament. When any

indemnity had been proposed he had been specially excepted from it by

name. If he fell into the hands of the enemy, the Tower and the block

were almost inevitable; although, if he had been taken prisoner in

such a great battle as that of Marston Moor, there is just a bare, but

unlikely, possibility that he might have been liberated in an exchange

of prisoners.

The most important evidence in his favour is a letter from Charles I,

dated 28 November, 1644, that is about four months after Newcastle had

fled the country; for, if the King excused his conduct, no one else had

a right to complain.

“CHARLES R.

“Right trusty and entirely beloved Cousin and Councellor Wee greete

you well. The misfortune of our Forces in the North wee know is

ressented as sadly by you as the present hazard of the losse of soe

considerable a porcion of this our Kingdom deserves: which also

affects us the more, because in that losse so great a proporcion fals

upon your self, whose loyalty and eminent merit we have ever held, and

shall still, in a very high degree of our royall esteeme. And albeit

the distracted condition of our Affaires and Kingdom will not afford

us meanes at this present to comfort you in your sufferings, yet we

shall ever reteyne soe gracious a memory of your merit, as when it

shall please God in mercy to restore us to peace, it shalbe one of our

principall endeavours to consider how to recompense those that have

with soe great an affection and courage as yourself assisted us in the

time of our greatest necessity and troubles. And in the meane time if

there be any thing wherein we may ex-presse the reality of our good

intentions to you, or the value we have of your person, we shall most

readily doe it upon any occasion that shalbe ministred. And soe we bid

you very heartily farewell. Given at our Court at Oxford the 28th day

of November, 1644.

“By his Maʲᵉˢᵗʸ’ˢ command

EDW. NICHOLAS.

“TO OUR RIGHT TRUSTY AND ENTIRELY

BELOVED COUSIN AND COUNCELLᵒR.

WILLIAM, MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE.” [113]

[Footnote 113: Ellis’s _Letters_, Series I, vol. III, p. 303.]

The Duchess says, that before leaving York Newcastle had asked Rupert

“to give this true and just report of him to his Majesty, that he had

behaved himself like an honest man, a Gentleman, and a Loyal subject.

Which request the Prince having granted, my Lord took his leave;

and being conducted by a Troop of Horse, and a Troop of Dragoons to

_Scarborough_ went to Sea, and took shipping for _Hamborough_; the

Gentry of the Country, who also came to take their leaves of My Lord,

being much troubled at his departure, and speaking very honourably of

him, as surely they had no reason to the contrary.”

Quite true, in the main; but something said by Sir Hugh Cholmley in his

private memoirs[114] has a bearing upon his last remark. “After the

battle of Hess Moor, the Marquis of Newcastle came to Scarborough, and

lodged at my house two days, till I had furnished him with a ship to go

beyond sea; at his departure, he thanked me for my entertainment, and

told me ‘he had some fear I should have stayed [stopped] him’; which I

suppose he conceived would be some countenance to his: my answer was

‘I wish he could stay; that if he had committed an error, I knew my

duty so well, I was not to call him to account, but obey, he being my

general; that for my own part, though the place was in no defensible

posture, I meant not to surrender till I heard from the King, or was

forced to it’.” This was a broad hint to Newcastle as to Cholmley’s

opinion of his conduct in flying from the country.

[Footnote 114: _The Memoirs of Sir Hugh Cholmley._ 100 copies.

Privately Printed. 1870, p. 41.]

In continuing her story, the Duchess says that Newcastle, when

“preparing for his journey, asked his Steward How Much Money he had

left? Who answer’d, That he had but 90£. My Lord not being at all

startled at so small a Summ, although his present design required much

more, was resolved too seek his Fortune, even with that little; ... he

embarqued with his Company, and arrived in four days time to the said

City, which was on the _8th of July, 1644_.”

Half a dozen lords, a bishop, and a good many of his relations and

friends, including his brother and two sons, sailed with Newcastle.

“But before My Lord landed at _Hamborough_ his eldest Son _Charles_,

Lord _Mansfield_, fell sick of the Small Pox, and not long after his

younger Son, Henry, now Earl of _Ogle_, fell likewise dangerously ill

of the Measels; but it pleased God that they both happily recovered.”

Here is some news of Newcastle after he had been only a few days in

Holland.

[115]“JOHN CONSTABLE TO HIS FATHER, SIR HENRY, VISCOUNT DUNBAR,

AMSTERDAM.... For the news that is here stirring, first Prince Rupert

is here mightily condemned for his rashness, but the Marquis of

Newcastle much more for coming away.”

[Footnote 115: S. P., Charles I, July 25, 1644, vol. DII, No. 70.]

[116]“JOHN CONSTABLE TO HIS FATHER, SIR HENRY, VISCOUNT DUNBAR

(Rotterdam).... The Marquis of Newcastle is still at Hamburgh in poor

condition; both his sons have had the measles; I believe he now repents

his folly.”

[Footnote 116: S. P., Charles I, Dom., July 30, 1644, vol. DII, No. 72.]

Luckily for Newcastle, much of the blame which was due to him was

thrown upon Ethyn. Clarendon says:[117] “The strange manner of the

Prince’s coming, and undeliberately throwing himself and all the

King’s hopes into that sudden and unnecessary engagement, by which

all the force the Marquis had raised, and with so many difficulties

preserved, was in a moment cast away and destroyed, so transported him

with passion and despair that he could not think of beginning the work

again and involving himself in the same undelightful condition of life,

from which he might now be free. He hoped his past meritorious actions

might outweigh his present abandoning the thought of future actions and

so, without farther consideration, he transported himself out of the

Kingdom, and took with him General King” (Ethyn); “upon whom they who

were content to spare the Marquis, poured out all the reproaches of

infidelity, treason, and conjunction with his country-men (the Scots),”

an accusation which Clarendon declares to have been “without the least

foundation”.

[Footnote 117: _Hist._, vol. II, part II. p. 510.]

In the next paragraph Clarendon says that “the loss of England,” which

soon followed, made the loss of York comparatively little spoken of,

and that Newcastle’s patient endurance of his subsequent losses “so

perfectly reconciled all good men to him, that they rather observed

what he had done and suffered for the King and for his country, without

inquiring what he had omitted to do”.

Henrietta Maria remained a steadfast friend to Newcastle, even when

he had fled from his country and from her husband’s service. I “shall

assure you,” she wrote to him from Paris (20 Nov., 1644), “of the

continuance of my esteem for you, not being so unjust as to forget

past services upon a present misfortune. And therefore believe that I

shall always continue to give proofs of what I tell you, and you will

see how I shall behave, and with what truth I am, Your very good, and

affectionate friend,

“HENRIETTA MARIA R.”[118]

[Footnote 118: _Letters of Queen Henrietta Maria_, p. 261.]

* * * * *

Of what happened to the remains of Newcastle’s army at York, Heath

tells us:—[119]

“The victor enemy being come again before York, summoned the city

again: they had used before their utmost endeavours, by mines and

assaults, (in one whereof they lost nearly one thousand men, and

were beaten off) to have entered; to which the Governor returned

answer, that he was no whit dismayed with their present success;

yet nevertheless on equal conditions he would come to a treaty and

surrender; which in nineteen days after the battle was concluded on.”

The garrison was allowed to “march out according to the honourable

custom of war”.

[Footnote 119: P. 61.]

If there was still a sufficient garrison at York to hold out for

nineteen days—and there is nothing to show that it could not have held

out longer—was Newcastle justified in deserting it? True, there was no

prospect of any adequate force coming to his relief; and, in any terms

of surrender, he, as a proclaimed traitor, might not have been allowed

to march out, a free man, either with or without the honours of war.

On the other hand, if he had held York, what honour would have been

his in the case of the success of the King’s army in the South and the

total defeat of the army of the Parliament, a contingency which, at

that time, was still apparently possible, and would have been rendered

more probable if a large portion of the army of the Parliament had been

occupied in the siege of York.

To sympathisers with Newcastle, it may be consoling to reflect that

recriminations and reproaches for neglect of duty or courage, at or

after the battle of Marston Moor, were not confined to the Royalist

side, as both Rushworth and Clarendon bear witness. Manchester and

Cromwell disliked each other; and another General, Crawford, a bitter

enemy of Cromwell, pretended that Cromwell, after receiving a very

slight wound in the neck given accidentally by one of his own men, at

the beginning of the battle of Marston Moor, had made it an excuse to

escape from the field until the fighting was practically over.[120]

Cromwell seized opportunities of bringing counter-charges against both

Crawford and Manchester, accusing the latter of disaffection to the

Parliamentary cause.

[Footnote 120: “Lieutenant-General Cromwell had the impudence and

boldness to assume much of the honour of that victory to himself.... My

friend Cromwell had neither part nor lot in the business. For I have

several times heard it from Crawford,” [Crawford was Major-General

to the Earl of Manchester’s Brigade] “that, when the whole army at

Marston Moor was in a fair possibility to be utterly routed, and

a great part of it was still running, he saw the body of horse of

that brigade standing still, and to his seeming doubtful which way

to charge, backward or forward, when he came up to them in a great

passion, reviling them with the names of poltroons and cowards, and

asked them if they would stand still and see the day lost? Whereupon

Cromwell showed himself, and said in a pitiful voice: ‘Major-General,

what shall I do?’ Crawford replied: ‘Sir, if you charge not, all is

lost’. Cromwell answered that he was wounded and was not able to charge

(his great wound being a little burn in the neck by the accidental

going-off behind him of one of the soldier’s pistols), then Crawford

desired him to go off the field, and sending one away with him ... led

them on himself, which was not the duty of his place and as little for

Cromwell’s honour.”—_Memoirs of Denzil Lord Hollis._]

Welbeck, Newcastle’s home, received a visit from the enemy, about a

month after its owner had sailed from England. The guest shall tell his

own story:—[121]

“EDWARD EARL OF MANCHESTER TO THE COMMITTEE OF BOTH KINGDOMS.... Upon

my coming near Welbeck, I sent a summons to the place and they with

great civility sent to parley with me. The next day, Friday, they

rendered the house to me upon composition. I was willing to give them

large terms, because I was not in a condition to besiege a place so

well fortified as that was. I therefore gave the officers and soldiers

liberty to march out with all their arms and colours flying; but when

I came to take possession of the house most of the soldiers came to

me to lay down their arms, desiring tickets of me to return to their

own homes, the which I granted them, so as I had 350 muskets in the

house, 50 horse arms, 11 pieces of cannon great and small, whereof

the Governor had liberty to carry away one: I had likewise 20 barrels

of powder and a ton of match. The house I preserved entire, and put a

garrison into it of Notts men, until I know your Lordship’s resolutions

whether you will have it slighted or no. The place is very regularly

fortified; and the Marquis of Newcastle’s daughters and the rest of

his children and family are in it, unto whom I have engaged myself

for their quiet abode there, and to intercede to the Parliament for a

complete maintenance for them; in the which I beseech your Lordships

that they may have your favour and furtherance.”

[Footnote 121: S. P., Charles I, Dom., Aug. 6, 1644, vol. DII, No. 82.]

[Illustration: TRAINING WITH THE RIGHT HAND.]

Manchester seems not only to have “engaged” himself for the quiet abode

of Newcastle’s children in the home at Welbeck, but eventually to

have left it ungarrisoned by Parliamentary troops; for, some thirteen

months later, Welbeck entertained a very different visitor, in the

person of the King himself. Charles went there under most depressing

circumstances. There was no banquet costing £5000 awaiting him there

now, nor a masque of welcome written by Ben Jonson. The total defeat

of his army in the North at Marston Moor had recently been followed by

as complete a defeat by Cromwell of his army further South at Naseby,

when his baggage was captured and his compromising letters to and

from the Queen and the Irish rebels were seized and published by the

Parliament. Newcastle’s late General, Goring, had been defeated by

Fairfax at Langport; and Rupert had surrendered Bristol to the enemy.

The last battle fought in the open field on behalf of the King was lost

at Rowton, near Chester, on 23 September.

Charles’s only hope now lay in succour by Montrose, whose only hope,

again, lay in succour from the King. Wandering from place to place,

Charles, Clarendon tells us,[122] “had made haste from Ludlow, that the

Scottish army might no more be able to interrupt him; and with very

little rest, passed through Shropshire, and Derbyshire, till he came to

Welbeck, a house of the Marquis of Newcastle in Nottinghamshire, then

a garrison for his Majesty; where he refreshed himself and his troops,

two days”. But what a contrast must such gloomy refreshment have been

to the magnificent hospitality which he had received there on two

former occasions.

[Footnote 122: _Hist._, vol. II, part II. book ix.]

This was probably one of the saddest visits ever paid to Welbeck.

The Governor of Newark and the Royalist gentry of Nottinghamshire,

Lincolnshire, and Yorkshire waited upon the King during his short visit

at Newcastle’s home. At first it was decided that Charles should

proceed direct to Scotland and join Montrose; but afterwards it was

thought better that he should take up his quarters at Doncaster and

raise troops in Yorkshire. However, it is no part of our duty to follow

the footsteps of that ill-fated King.

Here is a pathetic letter from Newcastle to the Prince of Wales:—[123]

“W. MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE TO (THE PRINCE OF WALES).

“1644(5) FEBRUARY 4. HAMBURG.—After the great misfortunes and

miseries I have suffered, the first joy and only comfort I received

was to hear of your Highness’s health and your being a general, both

which I congratulate with my soul, and I dare say your Highness

believes me. And it is no small comfort to me and mine that we have

lived to see you a man; and could I see but peace in our Israel, truly

then I care not how soon death closes my eyes. But whilst I crawl

here in this uneven world your Highness must be troubled with me as

my first master, and now it is your turn to take care of me. Could

your Highness forget me, I would forgive you, and my last breath would

be a prayer for your happiness, and glory that I fell ruined in your

service!”

[Footnote 123: Portland MSS., at Welbeck Abbey.]

One of the first things that Newcastle had had to do, on reaching

Hamburg, was to raise money—no easy task under the circumstances.

He was so short of cash that, as the Duchess tells us, “when his

occasions drew him abroad,” he was obliged to travel in a wagon, “for

want of a coach”. Having succeeded in borrowing some money, a little

later, he bought nine horses for £160, and he also purchased a coach.

Of his subsequent proceedings, the Duchess has this to tell us:—

“After my Lord had stay’d in _Hamborough_ from _July 1644_, till

_February 16_, he being resolved to go into _France_ by Sea went

from _Hamborough_ to _Amsterdam_, and from thence to _Rotterdam_,

where he sent one of his Servants with a Complement and tender of his

humble Service to Her Highness, the then Princess Royal, the Queen

of _Bohemia_, the Princess Dowager of _Orange_, and the Prince of

_Orange_, which was received with much kindness and civility.”

After describing the rest of his journey, she says:—

“My Lord being arrived at _Paris_, which was in _April, 1645_,

immediately went to tender his humble duty to Her Majesty, the

Queen-Mother of _England_, where it was my Fortune to see him the first

time, I being then one of the Maids of Honour to Her Majesty.”

Upon this seeing of Newcastle by one of the Maids of Honour to Her

Majesty a good deal depended, and it will be best to deal with the

matter in a fresh chapter.

CHAPTER XV.

Of the Duchess of Newcastle’s writings we have already seen a good

deal, and the time has now arrived for introducing her in person.

Perhaps it may be best to begin by quoting Cibber’s statement[124] that

the future “Duchess herself in a book entitled ‘Nature’s Pictures,

Drawn by Fancy’s Pencil to the Life,’ has celebrated both the exquisite

beauty of her person and the rare endowments of her mind”. False

modesty is a vice from which the Duchess was perfectly free.

[Footnote 124: _Lives of the Poets_, II, 162.]

[Illustration: MARGARET DUCHESS OF NEWCASTLE

From an engraving by Alais, after a painting by Diepenbeck]

Margaret Lucas was a daughter of Sir Thomas Lucas, of whom she says:

“though my father was not a peer of the realm, yet there were few peers

who had much greater estates, or lived more noble therewith”. She does

not mention the fact that her great-grandfather had been town-clerk

of Colchester.[125] Her two brothers, Sir John, who was created Lord

Lucas by Charles I in 1644, and Sir Charles, were both distinguished

cavaliers; and she mentions another brother, Sir Thomas, of whom

Burke—not the Duchess—says he “was illegitimate, having been born

prior to the marriage of his parents”. For this trifling confusion

of dates, the excellent Lady Lucas endeavoured to atone by the

prudishness upon which she insisted in her children. The Duchess tells

us that—

“She was of a grave Behaviour, and had such a Majestic Grandeur, as

it were continually hung about her, that it would strike a kind of an

awe to the beholders, and command respect from the rudest.... She had

a well favoured loveliness in her face, a pleasing sweetness in her

countenance, and a well-temper’d complexion, as neither too red nor too

pale.... Also she was an affectionate Mother, breeding her children

with a most industrious care, and tender love, and having eight

children, three sons and five daughters, there was not any one crooked,

or any ways deformed, neither were they dwarfish, or of a Giant-like

stature, but every ways proportionable; likewise well featured, cleer

complexions, brown haires, but some lighter than others, sound teeth,

sweet breaths, plain speeches, tunable voices, I mean not so much to

sing as in speaking, as not stuttering, nor wharling in the throat,

or speaking through the nose, or hoarsely, unless they had a cold, or

squeakingly, which impediments many have; neither were their voices of

too low a strain, or too high.” Negatively, a truly remarkable family!

[Footnote 125: Burke’s _Dormant and Extinct Peerages_, 335.]

Of her father the Duchess says: “He unfortunately killed one Mr.

Brooks in a single Duel; for my father by the Laws of Honour could do

no less than call him to the field, to question him for an injury he

did him, where their Swords were to dispute, and one or both of their

lives to decide the argument, wherein my Father had the better; and

though my Father by Honour challenged him, with Valour fought him, and

in Justice killed him, yet he suffered more than any Person of Quality

usually doth in cases of Honour; for though the Laws be rigorous, yet

the present Princes most commonly are gratious in those misfortunes,

especially to the injured. But my Father found it not, for his exile

was from the time of his misfortunes to Queen Elizabeth’s death; for

the Lord Cobham being then a great man with Queen Elizabeth, and this

Gentleman, Mr. Brooks, a kind of a Favourite, and as I take it Brother

to the then L. Cobham, which made Queen Elizabeth so severe, not to

pardon him: but King James of blessed memory graciously gave him his

Pardon, and leave to return home to his Native Country.”

The description of the education and family life of herself and her

sisters, given by the Duchess, is not altogether uninteresting.

“As for tutors, although we had for all sorts of vertues, as singing,

dancing, playing on musick, reading, writing, working, and the like,

yet we were not kept strictly thereto, they were rather for formality

than benefit, for my Mother cared not so much for our dancing and

fidling, singing and prating of severall languages, as that we should

be bred virtuously, modestly, civilly, honourably, and on honest

principles.”

As to the habits of this edifying family, she says:—

“But to rehearse their Recreations. Their customs were in Winter

time to go sometimes to Plays, or to ride in their Coaches about the

Streets to see the concourse and recourse of People; and in the Spring

time to visit the Spring garden, Hide park, and the like places; and

sometimes they would have Musick; and sup in Barges upon the Water;

these harmless recreations they would pass their time away with; for

I observed, they did seldom make Visits, nor never went abroad with

Strangers in their Company, but onely themselves in a Flock together

agreeing so well, that there seemed but one Minde amongst them: And

not onely my own Brothers and Sisters agreed so, but my Brothers and

Sisters in law, and their Children, although but young, had the like

agreeable natures, and affectionable dispositions; for to my best

remembrance I do not know that ever they did fall out, or had any angry

or unkind disputes. Likewise, I did observe, that my Sisters were so

far from mingling themselves with any other Company, that they had

no familiar conversation or intimate acquaintance with the Families

to which each other were linkt to by Marriage, the Family of the one

being as great Strangers to the rest of my brothers and Sisters, as the

Family of the other.”

How far such an education and such surroundings would be conducive to

breadth of mind, sociability, and success in the world, the reader

must judge for himself.

Although she had been exceedingly anxious to become a Maid of Honour,

Margaret does not appear to have enjoyed the two years which she spent

in that capacity. She says: “I had heard that the world was apt to lay

aspersions even on the innocent, for which I durst neither look up with

my eyes, nor speak, nor be any way sociable, insomuch as I was thought

a Natural Fool”. Being “fearfull and bashfull, I neither heeded what

was said or practic’d, but just what belong’d to my loyal duty, and

my own honest reputation; and, indeed, I was so afraid to dishonour

my Friends and Family by my indiscreet actions, that I rather chose

to be accounted a Fool, then to be thought rude or wanton; in truth,

my bashfulness and fears made me repent my going from home to see the

World abroad”.

Ballard says:[126] “Her person was very graceful, her temper naturally

reserved and shy, and she seldom said much in company, especially among

strangers”. She herself confesses and deplores her own bashfulness; but

she declares it to be a better thing than rudeness on the ground that

“a rude nature is worse than a brute nature, by so much more as man

is better than beast, but those that are of civil natures and gentle

dispositions, are as much nearer to celestiall creatures, as those that

are of rude or cruell are to Devils”.

[Footnote 126: _Memoirs of British Ladies, Celebrated for their

Writings_, _etc._, p. 213.]

This particular “celestiall creature” favours us with some more details

of her own character. “I am gratefull, for I never received a curtesie

but I am impatient, and troubled untill I can return it; also I am

Chaste, both by Nature and Education, insomuch as I do abhorre an

unchast thought; likewise I am seldom angry,” yet “when I am angry, I

am very angry, but yet it is soon over, and I am easily pacified, if

it be not such an injury as may create a hate”;—a highly significant

reservation—“neither am I apt to be exceptious or jealous; but if

I have the lest symptome of this passion, I declare it to those it

concerns, for I never let it ly smothering in my breast to breed a

malignant disease in the minde.” “I am neither spitefull, envious nor

malicious; I repine not at the gifts that Nature or Fortune bestows

upon others.” “My God,” she would almost seem to have said, “I thank

Thee that I am not as other women are.”

Newcastle had heard a good deal of Margaret Lucas before he met her. He

had been a friend and a patron of her brother, whom Charles I had made

a peer. Lord Lucas had been in Newcastle’s army, and when Newcastle had

asked him in what manner he could best serve him, Lucas had replied

that he had no desires on his own account, being ready to suffer exile

or death in the royal cause; but that he was anxious about his sister

Margaret, at Queen Henrietta’s little Court in Paris, as her beauty

exposed her to danger, and, owing to his losses through the civil war,

he had no dowry to bestow upon her. At the same time he expatiated

upon her character and virtues to such an extent as to arouse the

curiosity of Newcastle.[127]

[Footnote 127: _Biog. Brit._, Kippis’s Ed., vol. III, 337; Cibber’s

_Lives_, II, 162-3.]

With the paragon of perfection self-described in the preceding pages,

the exiled Newcastle fell in love. The lady herself shall describe what

happened:—

“My Lord ... was pleased to take some particular notice of me, and

express more than an ordinary affection for me; insomuch that he

resolved to chuse me for his Second Wife; for he, having but two Sons,

purposed to marry me, a young Woman that might prove fruitful to him

and encrease his Posterity by a Masculine-Offspring. Nay, He was so

desirous of Male-Issue, that I have heard him say, He cared not (so

God would be pleased to give him many Sons) although they came to be

persons of the meanest Fortunes; but God (it seems) had ordered it

otherwise, and frustrated his Designs”—here the Duchess becomes very

plain-spoken—“which yet did never lessen his Love and Affection for

me.”

Several of Margaret Lucas’s love-letters are in existence at Welbeck

Abbey.[128] Let us look at a few of them.

[Footnote 128: Welbeck MSS.]

“MARGARET LUCAS TO THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE.

“(1645, NOVEMBER.) I fear others foresee we shall be unfortunate

though we see it not ourselves, or else there would not be such pains

taken to untie the knot of our affection. I must confess that as you

have had good friends to counsel you, so I have had good friends to

counsel me and tell me they hear of your professions of affection to

me, which they bid me take heed of, for you had assured yourself to

many and were constant to none. I said my Lord Newcastle was too wise

and too honest to engage himself to many. I heard the Queen would take

it ill I did not make her acquainted before I had resolved.”

From this it is evident that Newcastle’s friends had been trying to

dissuade him from the marriage, and that Margaret’s friends were also

trying to prevent it. It is not surprising that they should have done

so. Newcastle was then living entirely on credit and was borrowing

wherever he could. However agreeable a man’s conversation may be, if it

ends in his saying, “By the way, I wonder whether you would kindly lend

me £... for a few days,” he is not likely to be very popular.

As Margaret writes that the Queen would take it ill unless informed

before Margaret “resolved,” the engagement was probably not yet

definitely made. In her next letter Margaret begins to fear that she

may have been immodestly forward in her flirtations with Newcastle.

Yet, under cover of ostentatious bashfulness, she takes the opportunity

of asking Newcastle to propose his suit to the Queen.

“THE SAME TO (THE SAME).

“(1645, NOVEMBER.) My Lord Widdrington in his advice has done as a

noble and true affectionate friend would do.

“I do not send to you to-day, for if I do, they will say I pursue you

for your affections, for though I love you extremely I never feared my

modesty so small as it would give me leave to court any man. If you

please to ask the Queen I think it would be well understood. I thank

you for the fear you have of my ruin.” Let us hope that this was not

written in the same spirit in which people say: “I thank you for the

fear you have of my damnation”: but it has rather that look.

In another letter she says: “Saint Germains is a place of much slander,

and thinks I send too often to you”. From the next letter it would seem

that Newcastle had been a little jealous of Porter; but no courtship

would be complete without a lover’s quarrel!

“I hope you are not angry for my advice about Saint Germans. I gave it

simply for the best. As for Mr. Porter he was a stranger to me, for

before I came to France I never saw him or at least knew him to be Mr.

Porter or my Lord Newcastle’s friend. I never speak to any man before

they address themselves to me nor look so much in their face as to

invite their discourse, and I hope I never was uncivil to any person of

whatsoever degree; but to-morrow the Queen comes to Paris and then I

hope to justify myself.”

In one letter she seems annoyed at hearing that Newcastle had announced

the engagement before it was quite settled:—

“It was said to me you had declared your marriage to Lord Jermyn. I

answered it was more than I could do.”

In an earlier chapter, Sir Philip Warwick told us that Newcastle “had

the misfortune to have somewhat of the poet in him”. This misfortune

impelled him to write poems to Margaret, who replied:—

“Your verses are more like you than your picture, though it resembles

you very well”.

From a later letter, she would seem to have been at St. Germains and

Newcastle in Paris, and that she feared to go with the Queen to Paris

lest she should be supposed to be doing so with the object of flirting

with Newcastle:—

“I hear the Queen comes to Paris next week to the solemnities of

Princess Mary’s marriage, and I am in a dispute whether I should come

with her if I can get leave to stay. My reason is because I think it

will stop their discourse of us when they see I do not come. My Lord

let your eye limit your poetry.” Possibly Newcastle’s verses may have

begun to savour too strongly of the Song of Solomon. The question of

the poems crops up again in a later letter, and they would seem to have

been the cause of a slight misunderstanding:—

“I am sorry you should bid me keep the verses you sent me, for it looks

as though you thought I had flung away those you sent before.”

But perhaps Newcastle may only have been anxious that his verses should

be carefully preserved, in order that, at some future date, he might

publish them in a book of his “Collected Poems”. Poets are not totally

destitute of eyes to business. Anyhow, no maker of verses would like to

think that they had been “flung away”. The next letter hints at more

troubled waters:—

“I never said any such thing as you mentioned in your letter about

your picture, nor even showed it to a creature before yesterday when

I gave it to mend; but I find such enemies that whatever is for my

disadvantage, though it have but a semblance of truth, is declared.

“It is not usual to give the Queen gloves or anything else, but if you

please I will give them to her.”

Presently comes another letter which looks as if, even then, all was

not quite smooth between the lovers.

“I am sorry you have metamorphosed my letter and made that masculine

which was efemenat. My ambition is to be thought a modest woman, and to

leave the title of a gallant man to you.”

Five affectionate letters follow, but they contain nothing of

world-wide interest. The last states Margaret’s intention of going to

Paris, and in a sixth she says:—

“There is nothing will please me more than to be where you are, and I

begin to admire Paris because you are in it.”

Both Newcastle and Margaret were afraid of the Queen, for in the next

letter she says:—

“I know not what counsel to give concerning the Queen, but I fear she

will take it ill if she be not made acquainted with our intentions. If

you please to write a letter to her and send it to me, I will deliver

it the day you send for me. I think it no policy to displease the

Queen, for though she will do us no good she may do us harm. I send

my maid about some business, and she and Lady Brown”—the wife of the

English Ambassador—“shall agree about the other thing you spoke of.

“Pray consider that I have enemies.”

From the following letter it would appear that the Queen had been

informed of the proposed marriage and that she was very angry.

Obviously Margaret was expecting a wigging:—

“I have not been with the Queen yet. I hear she would have me

acknowledge myself in a fault and she not to be in any, but it will

be hard for me to accuse myself and to make myself guilty of a fault

when I am innocent, but if it be the duty of a servant to obey all the

commands of a mistress though it be against myself I will do it, if it

be but to bring myself to the use of obedience against I am a wife. For

the hindrance of our marriage I hope it will not be in their power. I

am sure they cannot hinder me from loving.”

From the next missive it is clear that there had been an encounter

between the Queen and Margaret and that a truce had been patched up

merely for appearance’ sake. It is also pretty evident that the Queen

would have stopped the marriage altogether if she had had the power to

do so.

“I hope the Queen and I are friends. She saith she will seem so at

least, but I find if it had been in her power she would have crossed

us. I heard not of the letter, but she said to me that she had it in

writing that I prayed you not to make her acquainted with our designs.

My Lord since our affections are published, it will not be for our

honours to delay our marriage. The Queen intends to come on Monday. I

will wait on her to Paris and then I am at your service.”

In another letter she says:—

“I hope the Queen and I shall be very good friends again, and may be

the better for the differences we have had. It was reported here that

you would be with us before we could be with you, and be assured I will

bring none to our wedding but those you please. I find to satisfy the

opinion that we are not married already we must be married by one of

the priests here, of which I think Cousens is the fittest. We shall not

come till Monday.”

The marriage received the approval of Margaret’s mother; for she

wrote:—[129]

“ELIZABETH, LADY LUCAS, TO THE EARL OF NEWCASTLE.

“1645. DECEMBER 20. You have been pleased to honour me by your letter,

my daughter much more by marriage, and thereby made her extremely

happy. The state of the kingdom is such that her mother cannot give

unto her that which is hers nor can I shew my love and affection

towards my daughter as I would, in respect of the great burdens we

groan under.”

[Footnote 129: Welbeck MSS.]

Margaret thus analyses her love for Newcastle:—

“He was the onely Person I ever was in love with;

Neither was I ashamed to own it, but gloried therein, for it was not

Amorous Love, I never was infected therewith, it is a Disease, or a

Passion, or both, I only know by relation, not by experience; neither

could Title, Wealth, Power, or Person entice me to love; but my love

was honest and honourable, being placed upon Merit, which Affection

joy’d at the fame of his Worth, pleas’d with delight in his Wit, proud

of the respects he used to me, and triumphing in the affections he

profest for me.”

This sounds rather an arctic sort of love; but, be that as it may, the

wedding took place, and, according to Evelyn, in the chapel of Evelyn’s

father-in-law, Sir Richard Brown, the English Ambassador.

Although married to one who had been among the wealthiest of English

noblemen, the bride found herself in poverty. Her husband was unable to

obtain a penny from England; the Parliament had taken possession of his

estates and he was living with money borrowed upon, what looked at that

time, exceptionally bad security. The Duchess says that “the ordinary

Use” was then “at Six in the Hundred,” i.e. that the usual interest on

good securities was 6 per cent. Then what rate of interest were lenders

in Holland and France likely to have charged an exile whose chance of

ever regaining his property seemed very remote? The question summons up

visions of something nearer sixty than “six in the hundred”.

The bride thus describes the financial position:—

“After My Lord was married, having no Estate or Means left him to

maintain himself and his Family, he was necessitated to seek for

Credit, and live upon the Courtesie of those that were pleased to Trust

him; which although they did for somewhile, and shew’d themselves

very civil to My Lord, yet they grew weary at length, insomuch that

his Steward was forced one time to tell him, That he was not able to

provide a Dinner for him, for his Creditors were resolved to trust

him no longer. My Lord being always a great master of his Passions,

was, at least shew’d himself not in any manner troubled at it, but

in a pleasant humour told me, that I must of necessity pawn my

Cloaths to make so much Money as would procure a Dinner. I answer’d

That my Cloaths would be but of small value and therefore desired my

Waiting-Maid to pawn some small toys, which I had formerly given her,

which she willingly did.”

One cannot help admiring Newcastle for being so far “master of his

Passions,” as to overcome any desire to pawn his own clothes in order

to get a dinner, and for conceiving the happy idea of telling his

wife to pawn hers. When he had fortified himself by eating the dinner

provided by pawning the toys belonging to his wife’s maid, Newcastle

paid his creditors a visit and, by “perswasive arguments,” induced them

to lend him some more money, with which he got the toys out of pawn for

his wife’s maid, and provided her with means to go to England with the

object of endeavouring to obtain some money from his brother-in-law.

Soon afterwards, Newcastle had “proffers made him of rich matches in

England for his two sons,” whom he dispatched there forthwith, “hoping

by that means to provide for them _and himself_”—the italics are not

in the original. Somehow these matches failed to come off; but at least

one of his sons made a good marriage a little later.

It may seem that, when Newcastle himself married a girl who was not

an heiress, he must have lost the match-making instincts which he had

inherited from his grandmother; but in justice to his memory let it be

remembered that no heiresses were then to be had at the impoverished

Court of the English Queen in France; and that, as Margaret’s father

had been a very wealthy man, in the case of a royal restoration it was

just possible that there might yet be some useful pickings.

CHAPTER XVI.

Although Queen Henrietta Maria had disapproved of Newcastle’s marriage

with her maid-of-honour, she showed him considerable kindness. She

invited him to a great Council which was held at St. Germains, attended

by the Prince of Wales, Prince Rupert, the Marquesses of Worcester

and of Ormond, the Earl of St. Albans, Lord Jermyn and others. At

the Council, Newcastle[130] “delivered his sentiment, that he could

perceive no other probability of procuring Forces for His Majesty, but

an assistance of the Scots; But Her Majesty was pleased to answer my

Lord, That he was too quick”. An unpleasant expression; but Her Majesty

was quite right! For the King, unfortunately, _did_ seek “an assistance

of the Scots,” with a result only too well known.

[Footnote 130: _The Cavalier in Exile_, p. 59.]

The Queen did Newcastle a much greater service than the empty

compliment of an invitation to a Council at which he was snubbed. She

gave him £2000! Fortunately at that time, she still had some money. She

received 12,000 crowns a month from Anne of Austria, and she obtained

help from some of her relations; but she sent very large sums to her

husband in England, and she made handsome donations to distressed

cavaliers—such as Newcastle—in France and Belgium, selling her jewels

for the same purposes. When the wars of the Fronde began, those who

were helping her became in want themselves, and they could do nothing

more for her. She then found herself in sore straits.

Mademoiselle de Montpensier says in her _Memoirs_: “The Queen of

England appeared, during a little while, with the splendour of royal

equipage, she had a full number of ladies, of maids of honour, of

running footmen, coaches and guards. All vanished, however, by little

and little, and at last nothing could be more mean than her train and

appearance.” And so things went on, from bad to worse, until, about

three years after the time with which we are now dealing, Cardinal de

Retz found her, with her last loaf eaten, her last faggot burned, and

her little daughter in bed at mid-day, because there was no fire on the

hearth and snow was falling heavily.

Things were a long way from being so bad as that, however, when she

gave Newcastle £2000. Having got that money, and having squeezed

a little more cash out of his creditors, instead of economising,

Newcastle left his lodgings and took a good house, resolving, as his

wife says, “for his own recreation and divertisement in his banished

condition, to exercise the Art of Mannage, which he is a great lover

and Master of”. He gave £160 for one horse, and what is now vulgarly

termed an “I.O.U.” for £100, for another. To estimate these prices as

£480 and £300 of our money would be to undervalue them. But men in debt

always seem to buy the longest-priced horses.

Soon after he had made these purchases, the Queen desired Newcastle

to go to the Prince of Wales in Holland; but his ungrateful creditors

made a difficulty about their debtor leaving Paris, whereupon the Queen

most generously made herself responsible for his Parisian debts. On

the morning of the day on which he left Paris, his creditors, says his

wife, showed “so great a love and kindness for him” that they came to

“take their farewell of him”. No wonder! It is easy to understand that

they would be anxious, to have a few words with him—perhaps a good

many words—and to come to a very clear understanding, before losing

sight of him. Love and kindness indeed!

For about six months Newcastle lived at Rotterdam, as his wife tells

us, “at a great charge keeping an open and noble table for all comers”;

although he was heavily in debt and seemed to have little prospect of

ever repaying his creditors.

In addition to the large sums he owed in Holland and in Paris, he

borrowed £2000, while in Rotterdam, from Lord Hertford and Lord

Devonshire, all of which he spent there, as well as another £1000 which

he borrowed; “his expense being the more, by reason he lived freely

and nobly,” which, of course, he had no business to do.[131]

[Footnote 131: About this time Lady Newcastle lost her brother,

Sir Charles Lucas, a very brave Cavalier, who, as she says, “was

most inhumanly murthered and shot to death” at Colchester by the

Parliamentary army.]

While at Rotterdam, he made visits to the Prince of Wales at the Hague.

Finding that he could be of no help to the Prince, and probably also

finding that he could borrow no more money in Rotterdam, he went to

Antwerp, where he took a house[132] “that belonged to the widow of a

famous Picture-drawer, Van Ruben”. Here, however, was a difficulty, for

the Widow Rubens’s house was “to be let unfurnished,” and Newcastle had

no cash with which to buy furniture. Happily he was a past-master in

the art of borrowing.

[Footnote 132: _The Cavalier in Exile_, p. 63.]

His wife says:—

“About this time my Lord was much necessitated for Money, which forced

him to try several ways for to obtain so much as would relieve his

present wants. At last Mr. _Alesbury_, the onely Son to Sir _Th.

Alesbury_, Knight and Baronet, and Brother to the now Countess of

_Clarendon_, a very worthy Gentleman, and great Friend to my Lord,

having some Moneys that belonged to the now Duke of _Buckingham_, and

seeing my Lord in so great distress did him the favour to lend him

200£. (which money my Lord since his return hath honestly and justly

repaid).” No doubt! But that was some dozen years later, and the delay may

have been inconvenient to the Duke of Buckingham. “This relief came

so seasonably, that it got my Lord Credit in the City of _Antwerp_,

whereas otherwise he would have lost himself to his great disadvantage;

for my Lord having hired the house aforementioned, and wanting

Furniture for it, was credited by the Citizens for as many Goods as

he was pleased to have, as also for Meat and Drink, and all kind of

necessaries and provisions, which certainly was a special Blessing

of God, he being not onely a stranger in that Nation, but to all

appearance, a Ruined man.”

While at Antwerp, Newcastle was exempted from all taxes and excise

dues. In 1650 he was made a member of the Privy Council of Charles II,

and he urged the King to make an agreement with Scotland on any terms

and to go there in person. Hyde opposed the Scotch policy advocated

by Newcastle, whom he describes in one of his letters “as a most

lamentable man, as fit to be a general as to be a bishop”.[133] Yet

Hyde and Newcastle remained on good terms, and, when Hyde was accused

in 1653 of betraying the King’s Councils, Newcastle wrote him “a very

comfortable letter of advice”.[134]

[Footnote 133: _Clarendon State Papers_, II, 63.]

[Footnote 134: _Ibid._, 280.]

At Antwerp Newcastle’s chief amusement was riding the two horses which

he had bought for £160 and £100, until they both, unfortunately,

suffered premature death. This is remarkable; for tittupping

round a riding-school was a gentle form of exercise more likely to

lengthen than to shorten a horse’s existence. Being desperately hard

up, it might naturally be expected that he would give up riding and

economise. Not a bit of it! On the contrary, finding himself horseless,

“though he wanted present means to repair these his losses, yet he

endeavoured and obtained so much Credit at last that he was able to buy

two others, and by degrees so many as amounted in all to the number

of 8. In which he took so much delight and pleasure, that though he

was then in distress for Money, yet he would sooner have tried all

other ways, then parted with any of them; for I have hear’d him say,

that good Horses are so rare, as not to be valued for Money.” He had

excellent offers for two of these horses; but, poor as he was, nothing

would induce him to sell either of them.

So difficult did Newcastle find it to keep eight horses and himself,

to say nothing of his wife, with scarcely any money in hand, and a

rapidly diminishing credit, that it became necessary, not to reduce

his stud, but to send his wife to England to try to raise the wind.

He could spare her, but not his horses. With Lady Newcastle went

Newcastle’s brother, Sir Charles Cavendish, whose property, which had

been sequestered since he left England, was to be sold outright if he

did not quickly compound for it.

Lady Newcastle and Sir Charles had so little money for their journey

that they were obliged to stay at Southwark, until Sir Charles had

pawned his watch to pay for their night’s lodging and for the very

short remainder of their journey into London, where they found lodgings

in Covent Garden. The Duchess’s book relates what followed.

“Having rested our selves some time, I desired my Brother the Lord

_Lucas_, to claim, in my behalf, some subsistence for my self out

of my Lords Estate (for it was declared by the Parliament, That the

Lands of those that were banished, should be sold to any that would

buy them, onely their Wives and Children were allowed to put in their

Claims:) But he received this Answer, That I could not expect the least

allowance, by reason my Lord and Husband had been the greatest Traitor

of _England_ (that is to say, the honestest man, because he had been

most against them).”

Newcastle had felt some compunction about compounding with traitors to

his King. Henrietta Maria very kindly wrote to him, saying that she

had heard of his scruples from Lord Jermyn, adding: “I am sufficiently

assured of your affection and fidelity to tell you, that I think the

king cannot be displeased that you should do what the late king his

father”—it was after the death of Charles I—“permited those to do who

had served him, when he was not in a condition to assist them.... And I

cannot forbear pitying you, knowing well your repugnance to treat with

these abominable villains.”

The Duchess continues:—

“Then Sir _Charles_ intrusted some persons to compound for his Estate;

but it being a good while before they agreed in their Composition, and

then before the Rents could be received, we having in the mean time

nothing to live on, must of necessity have been starved, had not Sir

_Charles_ got some Credit of several Persons, and that not without

great difficulty; for all those that had Estates, were afraid to come

near him, much less to assist him, until he was sure of his own Estate.

So much is Misery and Poverty shun’d!” No novel discovery.

“But though our Condition was hard, yet my dear Lord and Husband, whom

we left in _Antwerp_, was then in a far greater distress than our

selves.”

In fact his creditors had become very “impatient”—who can wonder?—and

he wrote to his wife that, unless some money were sent to him

immediately, he would starve. With very great difficulty Sir Charles

Cavendish raised £200, which he sent out at once to his brother. We

need not enter into the details of Sir Charles’s compounding for his

estates, or of his saving Welbeck and Bolsover for Newcastle.

During her stay in England, Lady Newcastle consoled herself in her

anxieties with pens and paper, of which we shall hear a good deal later.

It was probably not very long before Lady Newcastle’s visit to London

that King Charles I was beheaded, an incident unmentioned in her

memoirs. But perhaps she regarded it as a tragedy too well known to

require notice.

After being in England a year and a half, having heard that her husband

was “not very well,” and having but “small hopes” of raising money out

of his estates, Lady Newcastle returned to him. Sir Charles Cavendish

was prevented from accompanying her by ague, and she had reached her

husband only a short time, when news came of Sir Charles’s death.

Clarendon[135] describes Sir Charles Cavendish as Newcastle’s “brave

brother, who was a man of the noblest and largest mind, though the

least, and most inconvenient body that lived”. Almost the only words

at all approaching disparagement of her husband, occurring in the

Duchess’s story of his life, are in her already quoted statement that

he had “not so much of scholarship and learning as his brother Sir

Charles Cavendish”.

[Footnote 135: _Hist._, vol. II, part II. bk. viii.]

As we have seen, Newcastle had written to his wife, in England, that

unless she or his brother sent him money immediately, he would starve;

therefore it might be reasonably supposed that he had sold the last of

his horses. Such was very far from being the fact. When Lady Newcastle

returned, she found her starving husband with “the Mannage of his

horses,” as she calls it, so splendid that “all strangers that were

Persons of Quality” came to see it.

It was at Antwerp that Newcastle wrote his famous book on horsemanship,

which we will notice when we consider his literary works in a later

chapter.

Ben Jonson had written, concerning Newcastle’s horsemanship:—

When first, my Lord, I saw you back your horse,

Provoke his mettle and command his force

To all the uses of the field and race,

Methought I read the ancient art of Thrace,

And saw a Centaur past those tales of Greece,

So seemed your horse and you both of a piece!

You showed like Perseus upon Pegasus,

Or Castor mounted on his Cyllarus,

Or what we hear our home-born legends tell,

Of bold Sir Bevis and his Arundel;

Nay, so your seat his beauties did endorse,

As I began to wish myself a horse;

And surely, had I but your stable seen

Before, I think my wish absolv’d had been,

For never saw I yet the Muses dwell,

Nor any of their household, half so well.

So well, as when I saw the floor and room,

I looked for Hercules to be the groom;

And cried, Away with the Cæsarian bread!

At these immortal mangers Virgil fed.

_Underwoods_, lxxii.

Of his book on horsemanship, Newcastle wrote to Secretary Nicholas

from Antwerp, on 15 February, 1656: “I am so tormented about my book

of horsemanship as you cannot believe, with a hundred several trades

I think, and the printing will cost above £1,300, which I could never

have done but for my good friends, Sir H. Cartwright and Mr. Loving;

and I hope they shall lose nothing by it, and I am sure they hope

the like”. Only the impecunious can afford to embark upon literary

extravagances of this sort.

Lady Newcastle’s return had one very inconvenient effect. It had been

generally known at Antwerp that her expedition to England had been for

the purpose of raising money to pay her husband’s debts, and it was

naturally, though most erroneously, assumed that she had returned with

that money. In consequence, there was a general rush of Newcastle’s

creditors to his house, crowding and clamouring for a settlement

of their little accounts. Wonderful to relate, when Newcastle “had

informed them of the truth of the business, and desired their patience

somewhat longer,” they were “willing to forbear”. This, says the pious

Duchess, “was a work of Divine Providence”. Undoubtedly it was; but did

not Newcastle tempt Providence very hard, when he lived in what she

admits to have been “so much Splendor and Grandure” on borrowed money,

with only a very problematical prospect of ever being able to repay it?

It would seem, from the following letter, written by Buckingham, that

Newcastle had asked him to beg on his account from Charles II; that

Charles had promised some money, and had been persuaded to break his

promise by Newcastle’s enemies. Buckingham also advises Newcastle to

make the best terms he can with the Government of the Commonwealth

about his property.[136]

[Footnote 136: Portland MSS. at Welbeck Abbey, HIST. MSS. COM., 13th

Rep., App., part II. vol. II. 137.]

“G. DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM TO THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE.

“(1650) DECEMBER 5. ST. JOHNSTONE’S (PERTH). Your Lordship’s kindnesse

to mee has beene ever soe great, and you have beene pleased to lay

soe many obligations upon mee that, I showld bee a very unworthy

person if I did not take all occasions of acknoledging them to your

Lordship....

“I am very sorry that I have not beene able to serve your Lordship at

this present as I desired, but the gentleman that delivers this to you

will lett you know how earnestly I have solicited his Majesty in your

lordship’s business.

“I had once gott a promise from the King to doe it, but the death of

the Prince of Orange, and—as I beleeve—letters from some that are

not your friends, have perswaded the King to change his resolution.

Hee sayes that when hee receives a just accownt of the somme my Lord

Culpepper bringes with him, hee will lett your Lordship have as much

as his occasions will give him leave to spare. But what that will bee,

or how long before it bee received, is soe uncertayne that withowt

doubt your Lordship ought not to rely upon it.

“The best cowncell that I am able to give you, considering your owne

condition, and the present state of owr affayres, is to make your

peace if it bee possible, in Ingland, for certaynly your Lordship’s

suffering for the King has beene great enoughf to excuse you if you

looke a little after your selfe now, when neither hee is able to

assist you, nor you in a possibility of doing him service.”

Some time later the Royalist affairs were going very badly.[137]

[Footnote 137: Portland MSS. at Welbeck Abbey, _Hist. MSS. Com._, 13th

Rep., App., part II. vol. II. 139.]

“G. DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM TO THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE.

“(1652) FEB. 18. THE HAGUE.

“I doe extreamly longe to have some discowrse with you concerning all

our late misfortunes, and am therfore resolved to stay five or sixe

dayes at Anwerp only to wayte upon your Lordship. The consequence of

owr miscarriages is soe sad, that it is hard to thinke of them without

affliction, and yett I am confident your Lordships naturall good

humour joyned to the rediculousnesse of many passages which I have to

tell you, will goe neere to make you laugh, but I shall deferre the

giving you that satisfaction till I have the honour to see you, and

at the present only protest to you, that there is noebody I have a

greater value or respect for then your Lordship.”

Among other correspondence of Newcastle’s of the same period, is a

letter from Clarendon, then Sir Edward Hyde, asking him to try to

prevent a duel.[138]

[Footnote 138: Portland MSS. at Welbeck Abbey, _Hist. MSS. Com._, 13th

Rep., App., part II. vol. II. 140.]

“SIR EDWARD HYDE TO THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE.

“1652, DECEMBER 14. PARIS.

“We are all here exceedingly troubled, that that old quarrelling

humour still rages amongst those of our miserable nation in all

places, and if your authority hath not already prevented the mischeive

which must probably attend that duell betweene the Earl of Oxford

and Colonell Slinger, any commands from his Majesty will come too

late, and indeed if they doe contemne your Lordships interposition,

there may be reason to beleive that they would not obey his Majesty

himselfe if he were upon the place, for if they consider themselves

as Englishmen, and will pay obedience to the lawes and constitution

of their country, they must acknowledge that your Lordship as a Privy

Councellour hath authority over them; and if they will decline it

because they are out of his Majesty’s dominions, they might have the

same obstinacy, if the King himselfe were at Antwerpe. His Majesty

desires you if it be not too late, to use his name in any way you

thinke necessary to prevent this mischeive, and will conclude that

if they refuse to be ordered by your Lordship that they would not

have obeyed his owne person, if he had been there. The King uses all

endeavours to put himselfe into a readynesse to remove from hence,

when there shall be occasion, which I pray God he may be able to doe.

God preserve your Lordship and keepe me in your favour.”

Newcastle appears to have called himself, or at least to have had some

idea of calling himself, by the title of Prince on the Continent.

A letter from so high an authority as Garter-King-at-Arms, at the

Herald’s College, asserted him to be justified in so doing.[139]

[Footnote 139: Portland MSS. at Welbeck Abbey, _Hist. MSS. Com._, 13th

Rep., App., part II. vol. II. 142.]

“SIR EDWARD WALKER, GARTER, TO THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE.

“1657, AUGUST 20, BRUGES.—Giving his reasons why he held the opinion

that the Marquis of Newcastle was justified in assuming the title of

Prince.”

Towards the end of his exile, Newcastle put his son, who had succeeded

in obtaining an income, probably by his marriage, into his old home at

Welbeck, as will be seen by the following letters.[140]

[Footnote 140: Portland MSS. at Welbeck Abbey, _Hist. MSS. Com._, 13th

Rep., App., part II. vol. II. 143.]

“ROBERT DEANE (THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE) TO (VISCOUNT MANSFIELD).

“1659, OCTOBER 11.

“Now, for what is in our power, I pray you live at your own houses,

We(lbeck) and Bo(lsover), which will much conduce to your health. The

next is for the goods, which troubles me much, that so long gathering

by your ancestors, should be destroyed in a moment. This is my earnest

advice to you. First they are appraised, and goods are never appraised

at a third part of their value; and then you may buy them and no ill

bargain if you took the money at interest or your father-in-law laid

out the money and had all the goods in his hands for his security. My

intention is but to save the goods for you, that is all the design my

wife and I have in the business, for she is as kind to you as she was

to your brother, and so good a wife as that she is all for my family,

which she expresses is only you.”

“THE SAME TO THE SAME.

“1659, OCTOBER 25.—I can write no more about the goods except that I

and my wife give all our interest therein to you wholly and totally.

There are many good pictures besides Vandykes and ‘Stennickes’. Pray

leave your dovecot where you are now and live at Wel(beck), which will

conduce much to your health and your Lady’s and the little Ladies.”

“THE SAME TO (THE SAME).

“1659, NOVEMBER 15.—I give you hearty thanks for preserving the

remnants of those goods.... The pictures there are most rare, and if

you think they are a little spoiled I will send over the painter to

you again.

“If ever I see you I will make W(elbeck) a very fine place for you.

I am not in despair of it, though I believe you and I are not such

good architects as your worthy grandfather. If I am blessed with the

happiness of seeing you it will be many thousand pounds a year better

for you than if I should die before.”

The change of title from Duke to Prince, if he ever made it, did not

soften the hearts of Newcastle’s creditors. Their generosity steadily

decreased, until the poor men appeared to be losing their nerve

altogether. Newcastle, says his wife, “was put to great plunges and

difficulties”. Her chief fear was that her husband “for his debts

would suffer imprisonment, where sadness of mind, and want of exercise

and air, would have wrought his destruction”. However, when the yet

unrestored Charles II “was pleased to accept of a private dinner at”

Newcastle’s house in Antwerp, “he did merrily and in jest” tell Lady

Newcastle “that he perceived her Lord’s Credit could procure better

Meat than His own”.

The Newcastles also gave Charles something more than “a private

dinner”. Sir Charles Cotterell wrote to Nicholas:—[141]

“At the ball at Lord Newcastle’s was the Duchess of Lorraine and

her son and daughter, with the King and his brothers and sister,

several French people, and some of the town. The King was brought

in with music, and all being placed, Major Mohun, the player, in a

black satin robe and a garland of bays, made a speech in verse of his

lordship’s”—Newcastle’s—“own poetry, complimenting the King in his

highest hyperbole. Then there was dancing for two hours, and then my

Lady’s Moor, dressed in feathers, came in and sang a song of the same

authors, set and taught him by Nich. Lanier. Then was the banquet

brought in, in eight great chargers, each borne by two gentlemen of the

court, and others bringing wines, drinks, etc. Then they all danced

again two hours more, and Major Mohun ended all with another speech,

prophesying his Majesty’s Re-establishment.”

[Footnote 141: S. P., Feb. 1657-8, pp. 296, 311, quoted in Mr. Firth’s

splendid and admirably annotated ed. of _The Life of Newcastle_.]

The report of all this magnificence must have made Newcastle’s

creditors feel a little anxious.

Shortly afterwards, with the help of the remainder of his brother

Charles’s estate, Newcastle “sprinkled something amongst his Creditors,

and borrowed so much of Mr. _Top_ and Mr. _Smith_ (though without

assurance) that he could pay such scores as were most pressing,

contracted from the poorer sort of Tradesmen, and send ready mony to

Market, to avoid cozenage (for small scores run up most unreasonably,

especially if no strict accounts be kept, and the rate be left to the

Creditors pleasure) by which means there was in a short time so much

saved, as it could not have been imagined”.

Thus, by borrowing from new creditors to pay old ones, the Newcastles

contrived to live in luxury for a good many years; in short until the

Restoration.

Newcastle’s correspondence with Nicholas, among the Egerton Manuscripts

in the British Museum, reveals his alternate hopes and fears as to the

probability of that event. It is amusing to find a General, who rightly

or wrongly fled from his country, cavilling at others for doing the

same thing. In January, 1659, he wrote from Antwerp to Nicholas: “There

are many noblemen, or at least lords, that are comed over to Paris,

it is true, but those lords that can take such sudden apprehensions

of fears so far off, I doubt will hardly have the courage to help our

gracious Master to his throne—woful people—and the next generation of

lords they tell me are fools. It will be a brave Upper House!”[142]

[Footnote 142: Firth’s _Newcastle_, p. 358.]

CHAPTER XVII.

At last the long-looked-for Restoration actually took place, and

Newcastle determined to sail for England, which he could then do in

perfect safety, as he would now be a loyal subject in that country

instead of a traitor specially excepted from any possibility of pardon.

The only difficulty in returning to his country was the objection made

by his creditors to his leaving Holland until his debts were paid. But

Newcastle was a resourceful debtor; and he surmounted the difficulty by

the very simple expedient of pawning—not his wife’s clothes this time,

but his wife herself! Being in another part of Holland, says that lady,

“my Lord declared his intention of going for England, withal commanding

me to stay in that city (Antwerp), as a Pawn for his debts, until he

could compass money to discharge them”.

“Being in another part of Holland!” Yes! It is certainly pleasanter to

express desires of such a nature to one’s wife by letter rather than in

person.

Having left his wife in pawn at Antwerp, Newcastle started in excellent

spirits for England.[143]

[Footnote 143: _A Cavalier in Exile_, p. 83.]

“My Lord (who was so transported with the joy of returning into his

Native Countrey, that he regarded not the Vessel) having set Sail from

_Rotterdam_, was so becalmed, that he was six dayes and six nights

upon the Water, during which time he pleased himself with mirth, and

pass’d his time away as well as he could; Provisions he wanted not,

having them in great store and plenty. At last being come so far that

he was able to discern the smoak of _London_, which he had not seen in

a long time, he merrily was pleased to desire one that was near him,

to jogg and awake him out of his dream, for surely, said he, I have

been sixteen years asleep, and am not thoroughly awake yet. My Lord lay

that night at _Greenwich_, where his Supper seem’d more savoury to him,

than any meat he had hitherto tasted; and the noise of some scraping

Fidlers, he thought the pleasantest harmony that ever he had heard.”

It is gratifying to learn that thoughts of his absent wife in dreary

exile did not lessen the spirits, the merriness, or the transports of

joy, of the Marquess.

Collins[144] gives us the following information about Newcastle after

the Restoration. Newcastle, on his return to England, “finding his

estate much entangled, was obliged to borrow £5,000 whereof his cousin,

the Earl of Devonshire, lent him £1,000.... His Lordship lived at

Dorset House, during his stay in London.”

[Footnote 144: _Historical Collections_, etc., by Arthur Collins, ed.

1752, p. 41.]

“The King had made him a Knight of the Garter on Jan. 12, 1651; but he

does not appear to have received the insignia until ten years later. By

a warrant of April 10, 1661, the King ordered Lord Sandwich, Master of

the Great Wardrobe, to give Newcastle ‘18 yards of blue velvet for an

upper robe, 10 yards of crimson velvet for an under robe or surcoat,

together with 16 yards of white taffata to line them both’. The King

also ordered Sir Gilbert Talbot, Master of the Jewels, to give him a

collar of gold, ‘containing the usual number of garters,’ ‘likewise one

rich George on horseback’. After the Restoration, his Majesty made him

one of the Gentlemen of his Bed-Chamber.”

Lady Newcastle says that her husband “at last” borrowed enough money

to redeem her out of pawn; or rather nearly enough; for even then the

amount he sent over was £400 short, and she had to borrow that sum from

a Sir John Shaw, in Antwerp, to make it up. After sundry adventures,

she sailed for England in a Dutch man-of-war. When she had joined her

husband, she was rather disappointed at finding him in circumstances

which she did not consider befitting his rank. “After I was safely

arrived at _London_, I found my Lord in Lodgings; I cannot call them

unhandsome; but yet they were not fit for a Person of his Rank and

Quality, nor of the capacity to contain all his Family: Neither did I

find my Lord’s Condition such as I expected.”

Some historians hint that her ladyship found herself mocked and derided

by the gay ladies and the flippant gallants at the licentious Court

of Charles II, where she felt out of her element, and that this was

her chief reason for wishing to retire to Welbeck. She continues:

“Wherefore out of some passion I desir’d him to leave the Town, and

retire into the countrey; but my Lord gently reproved me for my

rashness and impatience”.

She got her way, however, before long; and Newcastle obtained the

King’s leave to retire to Welbeck. The only account we have of his

financial affairs, after the Restoration, is that of his wife;

therefore, part of it shall be given here; although even that part

is wearisome, lengthy, and far from lucid; indeed it may be skipped

without serious loss.[145]

[Footnote 145: _A Cavalier in Exile_, p. 88 _seq._]

Newcastle “kissed His Majesty’s hand, and went the next day into

_Nottinghamshire_, to his Manor-house call’d _Welbeck_; but when he

came there, and began to examine his Estate, and how it had been

ordered in the time of his Banishment, he knew not whether he had left

any thing of it for himself, or not, till by his prudence and wisdom

he inform’d himself the best he could, examining those that had most

knowledge therein. Some Lands, he found, could be recover’d no further

then for his life, and some not at all: Some had been in the Rebels

hands, which he could not recover, but by His Highness the Duke of

_York’s_ favour, to whom His Majesty had given all the Estates of

those that were condemned and executed for murdering his Royal Father

of blessed memory, which by the Law were forfeited to His Majesty;

whereof His Highness graciously restor’d my Lord so much of the Land

that formerly had been his, as amounted to 730£ a year. And though

my Lord’s Children had their Claims granted, and bought out the life

of my Lord, their Father, which came near upon the third part, yet

my Lord received nothing for himself out of his own Estate, for the

space of eighteen years, viz., During the time from the first entring

into Warr, which was June 11, 1642, till his return out of Banishment,

_May 28_, 1660; for though his Son _Henry_, now Earl of _Ogle_, and

his eldest Daughter, the now Lady _Cheiny_, did all what lay in their

power to relieve my Lord their Father, and sent him some supplies of

moneys at several times when he was in banishment; yet that was of

their own, rather then out of my Lord’s Estate; for the Lady _Cheiny_

sold some few Jewels which my Lord, her Father, had left her, and

some Chamber-Plate which she had from her Grandmother, and sent over

the money to my Lord, besides 1000£ of her Portion: And the now Earl

of _Ogle_ did at several times supply my Lord, his Father, with such

moneys as he had partly obtained upon Credit, and partly made by his

Marriage.

“After my Lord had begun to view those Ruines that were nearest,

and tried the Law to keep or recover what formerly was his, (which

certainly shew’d no favour to him, besides that the Act of Oblivion

proved a great hinderance and obstruction to those his designs, as it

did no less to all the Royal Party) and had settled so much of his

Estate as possibly he could, he cast up the Summ of his Debts, and set

out several parts of Land for the payment of them, or of some of them

(for some of his Lands could not be easily sold, being entailed)....”

From this we learn that, so soon as he was able, Newcastle sold

property to pay the large debts which he incurred during his sixteen

years of exile. With cumulative interest their amount must have been

very great.

“His two Houses _Welbeck_ and _Bolsover_ he found much out of repair,

and this later half pull’d down, no furniture or any necessary Goods

were left in them, but some few Hangings and Pictures, which had

been saved by the care and industry of his Eldest Daughter the Lady

_Cheiny_,[146] and were bought over again after the death of his eldest

Son _Charles_, Lord _Mansfield_; for they being given to him, and he

leaving some debts to be paid after his death, My Lord sent to his

other Son _Henry_, now Earl of _Ogle_, to endeavour for so much Credit,

that the said Hangings and Pictures (which my Lord esteemed very much,

the Pictures being drawn by _Van Dyke_) might be saved; which he also

did, and My Lord hath paid the debt since his return.”

[Footnote 146: Or, as we should now say, Lady Jane Cheiny, or Cheney,

the wife of Charles Cheney, Esq., of Chesham-Boys, Bucks.]

After giving a number of figures, including the former rent-roll of all

his estates, she says: “The Loss of my Lords Estate, in plain Rents, as

also upon ordinary Use, and Use upon Use, is as followeth:—

“The Annual Rent of My Lords Land, viz. 22,393£. 10s. 1d. being lost

for the space of 18 years, which was the time of his acting in the

Wars, and of his Banishment, without any benefit to him, reckoned

without any Interest, amounts to 403,083£. But being accounted with the

ordinary Use at Six in the Hundred, and Use upon Use for the mentioned

space of 18 Years, it amounts to 733,579£.”

Six in the hundred, or six per cent. and use upon use, or cumulative

interest, sounds fairly high.

Farther on, she says: “The Lands which My Lord hath lost in present

possession are 2,015£. per annum, which at 20 years’ purchase come to

40,300£. and those which he hath lost in Reversion, are 3,214£. per

annum, which at 16 years’ purchase amount to the value of 51,424£.

“The Lands which my Lord since his return has sold for the payment of

some of his debts, occasioned by the Wars (for I do not reckon those he

sold to buy others) come to the value of 56,000£. to which out of his

yearly revenue he has added 10,000£. more, which is in all 66,000£.

“Lastly, The Composition of his Brothers Estate was 5,000£. and the

loss of it for eight years comes to 16,000£.

“All which, if summ’d up together, amounts to 941,303£.

“These are the accountable losses, which My Dear Lord and Husband

has suffered by the late Civil Wars, and his Loyalty to his King and

Country.”

Certainly her ladyship had “an eye to the main chance,” nor did she

wish her husband to lose credit for one penny that he had sacrificed

in the loyalist cause; but even if we allow for considerable

exaggeration in her statement and object to six per cent. at “use upon

use,” his sacrifices must still have been enormous.

To descend from very great matters to very small, it may be remembered

that we found Newcastle having a quiet pipe immediately before the

battle of Marston Moor; and, from the following extract from a letter,

he evidently intended to solace his retirement at Welbeck by the use of

tobacco.[147]

[Footnote 147: Welbeck MSS., p. 143.]

“FRANCIS TOPP TO THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE, AT WELBECK.

“1661, NOVEMBER 16. BRISTOL.

“I send some wine, tobacco, and other commodities, the best that can

be had. I shall soon have some excellent tobacco, as many ships are

expected every hour from Spain.”

An important post was given by the King to Newcastle, namely, that

of Chief Justice in Eyre north of the Trent. Originally Justices in

Eyre, or _in itinere_, were delegated with power from the King’s great

Court to visit the counties assigned to them and hear all pleas. Their

functions were to protect the King’s interests and to try law-suits

and indictments. But the trial of law-suits and criminals by Justices

in Eyre had become practically obsolete before Newcastle’s time, and

what his duties may have been is somewhat doubtful; very likely they

may have been principally honorary or even nominal. They would appear,

however, to have included the defence of his large district; for, in

1662 and 1663, there were rumours of disaffection north of the Trent,

as the following extracts from letters to Newcastle, among the Welbeck

MSS., will show.

“LETTER TO THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE.

“1662, AUGUST 6. TORMARTON. Every day there is preaching and rumour of

rebellion,”—preaching and rebellion seem to have been synonymous at

that time—“and until that be over, which I hope will be soon after

the dismantling of our neighbour, the city of Gloucester, and others

in the west that withstood the late King, then men will buy land,

which they will not do now.”

“SIR THOMAS OSBORNE TO THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE, AT WELBECK.

“1663, OCTOBER 9. KEETON (KIVETON). Though I had some former

notice of this designe, I was unwilling to trouble your Lordship

till my being at Yorke hath confirmed the truth of this inclosed

intelligence.... Wee have an account of their principall agents in

most countries. One Paumer a silenc’t minister—who is most about

Nottingham—is their agent for intelligence in your Lordship’s county,

and Collenel Hutchinson, Collenel Wright, and Captain Lockeir—not of

Barlbrough—is to head the soldiers, and Hutchinson is thought to have

a thousand armes. One Francs of Nottingham is also ingaged with them.

Ludlowe is their Generall.”

“(1663), OCTOBER 14TH. PONTEFRACT. I am commanded by my Lord Duke of

Buckingham to give your Lordship this intelligence, that his Grace

is now at Pomfrett, with 1500 foot, and 500 horse, which consists of

trained bands and volunteers, all but the two troops under my command.

Sir George Savill, and the rest of the most considerable persons of

this country are here, and the confirmed intelligence both from the

west and north of Yorkshire gives assurance that a party of rebels are

drawing together, and Skipton is one place of their rendezvous, and

North Allerton another. These parts are all in arms, and I believe

your Lordship will put Nottinghamshire speedily into defence.”

The threatened risings, however, subsided, and Newcastle had leisure to

turn his mind to matters of a more domestic nature.

Newcastle’s son seems to have inherited his taste for overspending

himself.[148]

[Footnote 148: Welbeck MSS., p. 145.]

“VISCOUNT MANSFIELD TO HIS FATHER (THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE).

(c. 1663). Giving a brief account of how he came to be 8000£. in debt.

Among the items are 500£. for his own and his wife’s linen, and 700£.

for two coaches and eight Flanders mares.”

Here is a significant entry among the Welbeck manuscripts.

“THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE.

“1662(-3), JANUARY. An account of the money owing on a balance

of account, from the King to the Marquis of Newcastle, amounting

altogether to 9240£.”

But this must have included interest at a very high rate, which no

doubt Newcastle had had to pay himself; for a year later we find this

letter:—

“W. MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE TO HIS SON, VISCOUNT MANSFIELD, IN LONDON.

“1663(-4), JANUARY 20. WELBECK. I have heard from Mr. Loving that he

cannot promise any allowance for the money due to me from the King,

but only the principal money, which is 3500£., and that I must have

a privy seal for so much as some others have, and no allowance for

interest, which I have paid ever since the debt was contracted. I have

ordered him to forebear taking out any such privy seal.”

Apparently one of the King’s idiosyncrasies was a prejudice against

“six per cent. at Use upon Use”. Finding that he could not get repaid

even a comparatively small sum lent to the King, much less any of the

larger losses which he had suffered for the Royalist cause, Newcastle

would seem to have bethought him that a Dukedom might be better

than nothing, and, from the following letter written by the King,

it is quite clear that Newcastle must have asked for one in so many

words.[149]

[Footnote 149: Welbeck MSS., p. 145. The date June 7, 1664, must be

wrong, unless the Patent was drawn up for a considerable time before it

was issued, as it is dated 16 March, 1664.]

“KING CHARLES II. TO THE MARQUIS OF NEWCASTLE.

“1664. JUNE 7. WHITEHALL. I have received yours by your son, and am

resolved to grant your request. Send me therefore word what title

you desire to have, or whether you will choose to keepe your old and

leave the rest to me. I do not tell you I will despatch it to-morrow;

you must leave the time to me, to accommodate it to some other

ends of myne; but the differing it shall not be long, nor with any

circumstance that shall trouble you. I am glad you enjoy your health

for I love you very well. _Signed. Signet._”

Newcastle was that year advanced to the dignities of Earl of Ogle and

Duke of Newcastle.

Charles II must have found this a cheap method of settling accounts

with, what he calls in the preamble to the Patent, his “most beloved

and faithful cousin and councillor,” and of preventing that cousin and

councillor from worrying him with any more requests for repayments

of money. As he had now promoted Newcastle to the same position on

which he was soon to place some illegitimate children, what more could

Newcastle want?

There is an extraordinary entry in the list of the Welbeck

manuscripts:—

“H. EARL OF OGLE.

“1665, December 1. An engagement not to marry again so long as he had

a son by his present wife, and to settle all his property on his wife

and children as soon as he should be free to do so after the death of

his father. _Signet._”

It is scarcely conceivable that a son should be asked solemnly to bind

himself, in the case of his wife’s death, never to marry again so long

as a son of hers should be living! Yet, if this summary of the document

in question is correct, so it must have been.

It is clear that Newcastle arranged, or endeavoured to arrange, all the

marriages and matchmakings of his children and grandchildren. In reply

to one of his attempted bargains, in the marriage market, he received

the following gentle snub.[150]

[Footnote 150: Welbeck MSS., p. 149.]

“E. COUNTESS OF NORTHUMBERLAND TO THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE.

(c. 1671). I have received your Lordship’s letter full of obliging

expressions to our family which I am very sensible of, and for the

offer you are pleased to make of your grandson. I can only say I have

no present exceptions to make against so noble an alliance, but that

it is too early days to think of disposing of my grandchild [Baroness

Percy], whose tender years are not yet capable of distinguishing what

may most conduce to her future happiness. And when she is of age to

judge I must be so just as to give her the choice of all those who

shall then offer themselves, and possibly none may be more acceptable

to her than this young Lord.”

As a matter of fact, when she was “of an age to judge,” the sole

heiress of the eleventh and last Earl of Northumberland (of the old

Percys) did marry Newcastle’s grandson. And “the age to judge” was

fourteen. Her husband died in the following year; so she was a widow at

fifteen, which she only remained for two years, as she married a second

time at the age of seventeen,[151] and she had been engaged also to

another suitor[152] in the interval; but he was assassinated.

[Footnote 151: Burke’s _Extinct Peerages_, p. 425.]

[Footnote 152: “Thomas [Thynne] known as ‘Tom of Ten Thousand,’

who succeeded to Longleat [subsequently the home of the Marquesses

of Bath], and lived there in great magnificence. He was basely

assassinated, while in his coach in Pall Mall, 12 Feb., 1682, by the

connivance, it is thought, of Count Königsmark, a Swedish nobleman, who

was tried for the crime, but acquitted; his associates, who actually

committed the murder, were hanged.” Burke’s _Peerage, Baronetage and

Knightage_, see “The Marquess of Bath”. Count Königsmark invented the

blade of a small-sword once fashionable, called the “Clichernarde”. See

_Schools and Masters of Fence_, by Egerton Castle, p. 239.]

Later still, some very elaborate and most business-like matrimonial

arrangements were under discussion.[153]

[Footnote 153: Welbeck MSS., p. 151.]

“THE EARL OF OGLE, TO HIS FATHER, THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE.

“1675, JULY 11. “I most humbly acquante your Grace, that when I was

at London Mr. Robert Buttler desired to know of me wheather I would

assent of my Lord Lexington for one of my daughters. I made answer if

his Lordship would be contented with three thowsand pound portion and

marry my second daughter, and upon those termes, I should take it for

a friendship from any friend that procured it, soe the young people

liked each other. After this discourse, my sister Bolingbrooke was

desired by my Lady Sellinger to offer her grandson my Lord Lexington

to me, I wayted with my sister Bolingbrooke upon my Lady Sellenger and

Sir Anthoney her husband, and before my sister I told them I desired

them to expect but 3000£. portion, and if thay weare contented with

that I would acquante your Grace, and that I did hope your Grace would

approove of it. Thay was very well contented and offered me my Lord

Lexington should come, downe with me. My Lord is fourteen years of

age next January; then I wish he was marryed, and soe doe thay too.

There can be no settlement of his esstate upon his childeren untill

he be one and twenty yeares old, and soe noe portion paid till that

time, but security thay will expect for the payment of it. If my Lord

Lexington should die before he be of age my daughter hath the thirds

of his esstate, and thay are not to live togeather till he be eighteen

yeares of age. He keepes him selfe, and I keepe my daughter, and my

wife and I thinkes it a very good fortune for such a portion, and my

wife and I most humbly desire to know your Graces pleasure concerning

this offer.”

Here we see a little of his celebrated match-making great-grandmother

exhibiting itself in Ogle. The Lexington match, however, never came

off. Ogle’s second daughter married John, second Earl of Breadalbane.

The next entry in the _Historical Commission’s Report_ of the Welbeck

MSS. shows that even daughters, like other worms, will turn if tried

too hard.

“THE COUNTESS OF OGLE TO HER DAUGHTER, ELIZABETH.

“1674(-5), MARCH 24.” A letter of reprimand for ill behaviour and for

“one of the unkindest, undutyfullest letters that ever was writ to a

mother”.

That graceful epistle seems to have been written more than a year

before Ogle’s letter to his father; but probably it had been provoked

by the family habit of daughter-dealing.

The best short account of the life of the Duke and Duchess of

Newcastle, after the Restoration, is to be found in Sir Egerton

Brydges’s Preface to the Duchess’s “True Relation” of her own life.

“After the Restoration, peace and affluence once more shone upon them

amid the long-lost domains of the Duke’s vast hereditary property.

Welbeck opened her gates to her Lord; and the castles of the North

received with joy their heroic chieftain, whose maternal ancestors,

the baronial house of Ogle, had ruled over them for centuries in

Northumberland. But Age had now made the Duke desirous only of repose;

and her Grace, the faithful companion of his fallen fortunes, was

little disposed to quit the luxurious quiet of rural grandeur, which

was as soothing to her disposition, as it was concordant with her

duty. To such a pair the noisy and intoxicated joy of a profligate

Court would probably have been a thousand times more painful than all

the wants of their late chilling, but calm, poverty. They came not,

therefore, to palaces and levees; but amused themselves in the country

with literature and the arts. This solitary state, this innocent

magnificence, seems to have afforded contempt and jests to the

sophisticated mob of dissolute wits, who crowded round King Charles

II. These momentary buzzers in the artificial sunshine of the regal

presence, probably thought that they, who having the power to mix with

superior wealth, in the busy scenes of high life, could prefer the

insipid charms of lonely Nature, were only fit to be the butt of their

ridicule!”

All very true, except on one point. This account, as well as one or

two other accounts, of the post-Restoration life of the Newcastles

might lead a reader to suppose that during the latter part of their

existence they never went to London. Any such supposition would be most

erroneous. They may have gone there very seldom; but, when they did

go, they took good care to make their presence felt. As Pepys will tell

us in a later chapter, they made a great show of splendour, and the

Duchess became the talk of the Town!

[Illustration: THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF NEWCASTLE AND THEIR FAMILY

By Diepenbeck

_Thus in this Semy-Circle wher they Sitt,

Telling of Tales of pleasure & of witt.

Heer you may read without a Sinn or Crime,

And how more innocently pass your tyme._]

CHAPTER XVIII.

Newcastle, after spending sixteen years in exile, lived to spend about

the same length of time in England.

It might be expected that he would have taken up the position of a

great Cavalier who had made larger financial sacrifices in the Royalist

cause than almost any other of the King’s subjects, or that he would

have posed as the hero of many battles. Instead of assuming any such

position, however, Newcastle chose to figure as a man of letters, an

author, a poet, and a playwright.

As an author, he had some claims to the position he desired; for he had

written a standard work. During his exile he produced a book entitled

_A New Method and Extraordinary Invention to Dress Horses, and work

them, According to Nature by the Subtlety of Art_. This is mainly an

exposition of what is known as the _haute école_ of horsemanship;

thus the most ponderous volume on what we now talk of as the French

style of riding was written by an Englishman. It is a gorgeous folio,

beautifully printed, splendidly illustrated; and a good copy is worth

about ten guineas at the present moment. If it were a new book, modern

booksellers would doubtless advertise it either as an “édition de

luxe,” or as “a sumptuous volume”.

One of the best editions is that by J. Brindley, London, 1743. That the

book was a success, and a great success, the most malignant caviller at

Newcastle cannot fairly deny.

The work is illustrated by Diepenbeke, whose representations in it

of the Welbeck of those days, and of Bolsover Castle, have a special

interest. Editions were published in London, Paris and Nuremberg,

both in English and in French. In this magnificent volume the reader

may learn how to train his horse to make curvets, pirouettes,

demi-pirouettes, passades, voltes and demi-voltes, terms which may also

be found in modern French books upon horsemanship.

Men who fancy that they know all about hunters may be surprised at

their own ignorance when they read that “Your Hunter ... need not be

kept ... to an exact regimen of diet: any clean food is fit for him”.

If a horse’s wind is broken, it is a simple matter to mend it again

by feeding him on fat bacon, sweet oil, and brandy figs, or by dosing

him with small shot, pounded in a mortar and mixed with sulphur. Among

other remedies for the horse will be found “A receipt for ruined

nerves,” as well as “A remedy for the head-ach,” a malady seldom

complained of in modern stables.

No notice of the life of Newcastle would be complete without a few

quotations from the book with which his name is chiefly associated.

Let us begin with a description “Of the true Seat and the necessary

Actions of a good horseman.[154] Before a horseman mounts, he ought

first to take care that all his horse’s furniture be in order, which

is soon done, without prying into every minute circumstance, to show

himself an affected connoisseur in the art. When he is seated (for I

take it for granted that everyone knows how to mount a horse)”—a large

assumption—“he ought to sit upright upon the twist, and not upon the

buttocks, though most people think they were made by nature to sit

upon; however it is not so on horseback.

[Footnote 154: P. 29.]

“When he is thus placed upon his twist in the middle of the saddle,

he ought to advance, as much as he can, towards the pommel, leaving a

hand’s breadth between his backside and the arch of the saddle, holding

his legs perpendicular, as when he stands upon the ground, and his

knees and thighs turned inwards towards the saddle, keeping them as

close as if they were glued to the saddle; for a horseman has nothing

else but this, together with the balance of his body, to keep himself

on horseback. He ought to fix himself firm upon his stirrups, with

his heels a little lower than his toes, so that the ends of his toes

may pass about half an inch beyond the stirrup, or something more.

He should keep his hams stiff, having his legs neither too near, nor

too distant from the horse; that is to say, they should not touch the

horse’s sides, because of the aids which shall afterwards be explained.

“He ought to hold the reins in his left hand, separating them with his

little finger, holding the rest in his hand, having the thumb upon the

reins, which should be held strait over the horse’s neck.

“He should have a slender switch in his hand, not too long, like a

fishing rod, nor too short, like a bodkin; but rather short than long,

because there are many useful aids with a short one, that a long

one will not admit of. The handle of it ought to be a little beyond

the hand, not only for the sake of caressing the horse with it, but

likewise to hold it the faster. The right hand, that holds the switch,

ought to advance a little before the bridle hand, with the small end of

the switch pointing to the inside.

“The rider’s breast ought to be in some measure advanced, his

countenance pleasant and gay, but without a laugh, pointing directly

between his horse’s ears as he moves forward. I don’t mean, that he

should fix himself stiff like a post, or that he should sit upon a

horse like a statue; but, on the contrary, that he should be in a

free and easy position, as it is expressed in dancing with a free

air. Therefore I would have a Gentleman appear on horseback without

stiffness or formality, which rather savours of the scholar than the

master, and I could never observe such a formality, without conceiting

the rider to look awkward and silly.

“A good seat is of such importance, as you will see hereafter, that

the regular movement of a horse entirely depends upon it, which is

preferable to any other assistance; therefore let it not be despised.

Moreover I dare venture to affirm, that he who does not sit genteely

upon a horse, will never be a good horseman. As to the management of

the bridle-reins and caveson, I will teach you more concerning them in

the following discourse than has been hitherto known.”

Here is some safe advice.[155]

[Footnote 155: P. 105.]

“The Way I took to reduce a Horse, that was extreamly Resty.

“A Horse’s restiness, when it is in a high degree, does not consist

only in his refusing to advance, but also in his opposition to the

rider, in every thing he possibly can, and with the utmost malice....

One must endeavour therefore to gain the horse; for the perfection of

a well-managed horse consists in his following the will of his rider,

so that the will of both shall be the same.... Violent methods will not

do. For when the horseman thinks himself victorious, he is deceived,

etc., etc. If the rider begins again to beat and spur the horse will

resist again; it is not the beast then that is vanquished, but the man,

who is the greater brute of the two.... The whole therefore is to make

the horseman and his horse friends.

[Illustration: “ART AVAILS MUCH MORE THAN THE BRIDLE”

_Terre a terre la reste contre la muraille a Main droite_

From Newcastle’s book on horsemanship]

“If you can’t gain your point one way, you must have recourse to

another. You would make your horse advance, and he to defend himself

against you runs back; at that instant pull him back with all your

strength, and if to oppose you he advances, immediately force him

briskly forwards. If you would turn to the right, and he endeavours to

turn to the left, pull him round to the left as suddenly as possible:

if you would turn him to the left, and he insists on the right,

turn him as smartly to the right as you are able.... If he would

rise,” probably the author means rear, “make him rise two or three

times.” A very, very dangerous piece of advice! “In a word, follow

his inclinations in everything, and change as often as he. When he

perceives there can be no opposition, but that you always will the same

thing as he, he will be amazed, he will breathe short, snuff up his

nose, and won’t know what to do next.”

In these days, we are apt to consider good hands and the skilful use of

the bridle of the utmost possible importance in horsemanship. Newcastle

was of a different opinion.

“The bridle,” he says,[156] “I confess, is of some use, tho’ but

little; art avails much more, as all your excellent riders well know;

for I have managed a horse with a halter only, and he went as well as

with the bridle.... I have also managed an English one with a scarf,

and made him curvet and vault very justly.”

[Footnote 156: P. 27.]

Yet he tells us, later, that, in addition to his favourite curb, with

a high port and rings on it, and appallingly long cheeks to the bit—a

bridle about which the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

would have something to say, were it used in these days—he liked to

have a caveson on his horse’s nose, with the reins fastened to the

pommel of his saddle. By the way, in an illustration, the saddle which

he says cannot possibly be improved upon, looks more like an elephant’s

howdah than the saddle of a horse.

Here is some queer anatomy with some still queerer inference from it.

The horse’s[157] “fore-legs are made like those of a man, having his

knee bending forward; and his hind-legs like a man’s arm, having the

sinews of his ham bending backwards, which is diametrically opposite

to the former. If the hind-legs of a horse bent in the same manner

as those before, he would walk upright like a man; but his hind-legs

bending contrary, they resemble the arm of a man, and his fore-legs

bend as ours, which makes him go upon all four; and there is no other

reason for beasts going upon all four, with their bellies to the

ground.”

[Footnote 157: P. 63.]

Newcastle apparently did not realise that a man’s wrist corresponds to

a horse’s knee, and a man’s heel to a horse’s hock.

The following extract will show hunting-men how little they know about

leaping:—

“For Leaping-horses, there are four several airs, which are Croupades,

Balotades, Caprioles, and a Step and a Leap....

“Croupades is a leap where the horse pulls up his hinder legs, as if he

drew or pulled them up into his body.

“Balotades is a leap where the horse offers to strike out with his

hinder legs, but doth not, and makes only an offer or half strokes;

showing only the shoes of his hinder legs, but doth not strike, only

makes an offer, and no more.

“Caprioles is a leap, that when the horse is at the full height of his

leap he yerks, or strikes out his hinder legs, as near and as even

together, and as far out as ever he can stretch them, which the French

call _nouër l’aiguilette_, which is, to tie the point.”

It is a pity that the Duke does not inform his readers which of the

“four several airs” of “the leaping-horse” are respectively most

suitable for the negotiation of oxers, bulfinches and brooks.

In training the horse to make demi-pirouettes, demi-voltes, etc., not

content with the powerful curb, the caveson with its reins fastened

to the pommel of the saddle, and having the horse’s head tied by a

rope to a pole fixed in the ground, Newcastle would have his rider

wear terrible spurs on his heels and carry a _poinson_, which was a

“short stick with an iron point at one end of it,” in his hand. And,

as if even all this were not enough, he would have two men on foot to

“help” the horse, one with a switch in his hand and the other with a

“Scourge”. By these gentle means, he tells us, horses may acquire “airs

built only of art”.

Let us next learn something about curvets.[158]

[Footnote 158: P. 65.]