[Footnote 1: Clar. Pap. iii. 704. Ludlow, 364, 365. Price, 773.]

[Footnote 2: Gumble, 270. Two offers of assistance were made to the

general, on the supposition that he might aspire to the supreme power; one

from the republicans, which I have mentioned, another from Bordeaux, the

French ambassador, in the name of Cardinal Mazarin. On one of these offers

he was questioned by Sir Anthony Ashley Copper in the council of state. If

we may believe Clarges, one of his secret advisers, it was respecting the

former which Clarges mentioned to Cooper. With respect to the offer from

Bordeaux, he tells us that it was made through Clarges himself, and

scornfully rejected by Monk, who nevertheless consented to receive a

visit from Bordeaux, on condition that the subject should not be

mentioned.--Philips, 602, 604. Locke, on the contrary, asserts that Monk

accepted the offer of the French minister; that his wife, through loyalty

to the king, betrayed the secret; and that Cooper put to the general such

searching questions that he was confused, and, in proof of his fidelity,

took away the commissions of several officers of whom the council was

jealous.--Memoirs of Shaftesbury, in Kennet's Register, 86. Locke, ix, 279.

See note (K).]

[Sidenote a: A.D. 1660. March 10.]

and of the property which they had acquired, as the infallible consequences

of the restoration of the royal exile; and they so far wrought on the fears

of the officers, that an engagement to oppose all attempts to set up a

single person was presented[a] to Monk for his signature, with a request

that he would solicit the concurrence of the parliament. A second

council of officers was held the next morning;[b] the general urged the

inexpediency of troubling the house with new questions, when it was on

the point of dissolving itself; and by the address and influence of his

friends, though with considerable difficulty, he procured the suppression

of the obnoxious paper. In a short time he ordered the several officers

to join their respective regiments, appointed a commission to inspect and

reform the different corps, expelled all the officers whose sentiments he

had reason to distrust, and then demanded and obtained from the army an

engagement to abstain from all interference in matters of state, and to

submit all things to the authority of the new parliament.[1]

Nineteen years and a half had now elapsed since the long parliament first

assembled--years of revolution and bloodshed, during which the nation had

made the trial of almost every form of government, to return at last to

that form from which it had previously departed. On the 16th of March,

one day later than was originally fixed, its existence, which had been

illegally prolonged since the death of Charles I., was terminated[c] by

its own act.[2] The reader is already acquainted with its history. For the

glorious stand

[Footnote 1: Philips, 603, 606. Price, 781. Kennet's Reg. 113. Thurloe,

vii. 852, 859, 870. Pepys, i. 43. Skinner, 279-284.]

[Footnote 2: Journals, March 16.]

[Sidenote a: A.D. 1660. March 14.]

[Sidenote b: A.D. 1660. March 15.]

[Sidenote c: A.D. 1660. March 16.]

which it made against the encroachments of the crown, it deserves both

admiration and gratitude; its subsequent proceedings assumed a more

ambiguous character; ultimately they led to anarchy and military despotism.

But, whatever were its merits or demerits, of both posterity has reaped the

benefit. To the first, we are indebted for many of the rights which we

now enjoy; by the second, we are warned of the evils which result from

political changes effected by violence, and in opposition to the habits and

predilections of the people.

Monk had now spent more than two months in England, and still his

intentions were covered with a veil of mystery, which no ingenuity,

either of the royalists or of the republicans, could penetrate. Sir John

Grenville, with whom the reader is already acquainted, paid frequent visits

to him at St. James's; but the object of the Cavalier was suspected, and

his attempts[a] to obtain a private interview were defeated by the caution

of the general. After the dissolution, Morrice, the confidential friend

of both, brought them together, and Grenville delivered to Monk a most

flattering letter from the king. He received and perused it with respect.

This was, he observed, the first occasion on which he could express with

safety his devotion to the royal cause; but he was still surrounded with

men of hostile or doubtful sentiments; the most profound secrecy was still

necessary; Grenville might confer in private with Morrice, and must consent

to be himself the bearer of the general's answer. The heads of that

answer were reduced to writing. In it Monk prayed the king to send him a

conciliatory letter, which, at the proper season, he might lay before the

parliament; for himself he asked

[Sidenote a: A.D. 1660. March 10.]

nothing; he would not name, as he was desired, his reward; it was not for

him to strike a bargain with his sovereign; but, if he might express his

opinion, he advised Charles to promise a general or nearly general pardon,

liberty of conscience, the confirmation of the national sales, and the

payment of the arrears due to the army. As soon as this paper had been,

read, he threw it into the fire, and bade Grenville rely on his memory for

its contents.[1]

By Charles at Brussels the messenger was received as an angel from heaven.

The doubts which had so long tormented his mind were suddenly removed; the

crown, contrary to expectation, was offered[a] without previous conditions;

and nothing more was required than that he should aid with his pen the

efforts of the general; but when he communicated the glad tidings to

Ormond, Hyde, and Nicholas, these counsellors discovered that the advice,

suggested by Monk, was derogatory to the interests of the throne and the

personal character of the monarch, and composed a royal declaration which,

while it professed to make to the nation the promises recommended by Monk,

in reality neutralized their effect, by subjecting them to such limitations

as might afterwards be imposed by the wisdom of parliament. This paper was

enclosed[b] within a letter to the speaker of the House of Commons; another

letter was addressed to the House of Lords; a third to Monk and the army;

a fourth to Montague and the navy; and a fifth to the lord mayor and the

city. To the general, open copies were transmitted, that he might deliver

or destroy the originals

[Footnote 1: Clar. Hist. iii. 734-736. Price, 785. Philips, 605. Clar. Pap.

iii. 706, 711. From the last authorities it is plain that Mordaunt was

intrusted with the secret as well as Grenville--also a Mr. Herne, probably

a fictitious name.]

[Sidenote a: A.D. 1660. March 26.] [Sidenote b: A.D. 1660. April 2.]

as he thought fit. Notwithstanding the alterations made at Brussels, he

professed himself satisfied with the declaration, and ordered[a] Grenville

to keep the papers in his custody, till the proper season should arrive.[1]

In the mean while, the writs for the new parliament had been issued; and,

as there was no court to influence, no interference of the military to

control the elections, the result may be fairly taken to express the sense

of the country. The republicans, the Cavaliers, the Presbyterians, all made

every effort in their power to procure the return of members of congenial

sentiments. Of the three parties, the last was beyond comparison the

most powerful, had not division paralyzed its influence. The more rigid

Presbyterians, though they opposed the advocates of the commonwealth

because they were sectaries, equally deprecated the return of the king,

because they feared the restoration of episcopacy. A much greater number,

who still adhered with constancy to the solemn league and covenant, deemed

themselves bound by it to replace the king on the throne, but under the

limitations proposed during the treaty in the Isle of Wight. Others, and

these the most active and influential, saw no danger to be feared from

a moderate episcopacy; and, anxious to obtain honours and preferment,

laboured

[Footnote 1: Clar. iii. 737-740, 742-751. Price, 790. Monk had been

assured, probably by the French ambassador, that the Spaniards intended to

detain the king at Brussels as a hostage for the restoration of Jamaica and

Dunkirk. On this account he insisted that the king should leave the Spanish

territory, and Charles, having informed the governor of his intention to

visit Breda, left Brussels about two hours, if Clarendon be correct, before

an order was issued for his detention. The several letters, though written

and signed at Brussels, were dated from Breda, and given to Grenville the

moment the king placed his foot on the Dutch territory.--Clar. 740.]

[Sidenote a: A.D. 1660. April 10.]

by the fervour of their present loyalty to deserve the forgiveness of their

past transgressions. These joined with the Cavaliers; their united efforts

bore down all opposition; and, in most places, their adversaries either

shrunk from the contest, or were rejected by overwhelming majorities.[1]

But the republicans sought for aid in another direction. Their emissaries

penetrated into the quarters of the military, where they lamented the

approaching ruin of the good old cause, regretted that so many sacrifices

had been made, so much blood had been shed in vain, and again insinuated to

the officers, that they would forfeit the lands which they had purchased,

to the privates, that they would be disbanded and lose their arrears.[2]

A spirit of discontent began to spread through several corps, and a great

number of officers repaired to the metropolis. But Monk, though he still

professed himself a friend to republican government, now ventured to assume

a bolder tone. The militia of the city, amounting to fourteen thousand men,

was already embodied under his command; he had in his pocket a commission

from Charles, appointing him lord-general over all the military in the

three kingdoms; and he had resolved, should circumstances compel him to

throw off the mask, to proclaim the king, and to summon every faithful

subject to repair to the royal standard. He first ordered[a] the officers

to return to their posts; he then directed the promise of submission to the

new parliament to be tendered to

[Footnote 1: Thurloe, vii, 866, 887. Price, 787. Carte's Letters, ii. 326.

Clar. Pap. iii. 705, 714, 726, 730, 731, 733. It appears that many of the

royalists were much too active. "When the complaint was made to Monk, he

turned it off with a jest, that as there is a fanatic party on the one

side, so there is a frantic party on the other" (721, 722).]

[Footnote 2: Thurloe, vii. 870.]

[Sidenote a: A.D. 1660. April 9.]

the privates, and every man who refused to make it was immediately

discharged.[1] At the same time, the friends of the commonwealth resolved

to oppose Lambert, once the idol of the soldiery, to Monk. Lambert, indeed,

was a prisoner in the Tower, confined by order of the council, because he

had refused to give security for his peaceable behaviour; but, with the aid

of a rope, he descended[a] from the window of his bed-chamber, was received

by eight watermen in a barge, and found a secure asylum in the city. The

citizens, however, were too loyal to listen to the suggestions of the

party; he left his concealment, hastened[b] into Warwickshire, solicited,

but in vain, the co-operation of Ludlow, collected from the discontented

regiments six troops of horse and some companies of foot, and expected in a

few days to see himself at the head of a formidable force. But Ingoldsby,

who, of a regicide, was become a royalist, met him[c] near Daventry with

an equal number; a troop of Lambert's men under the command of the younger

Hazlerig, passed over to his opponents; and the others, when he gave the

word to charge, pointed their pistols to the ground. The unfortunate

commander immediately turned and fled; Ingoldsby followed; the ploughed

land gave the advantage to the stronger horse; the fugitive was overtaken,

and, after an ineffectual effort to awaken the pity of his former comrade,

submitted to his fate. He was conducted[d] back to the Tower, at the time

when the trained bands, the volunteers, and the auxiliaries raised in the

city, passed in review before the general in Hyde Park. The auxiliaries

drank the king's health on their knees; Lambert was at the moment driven

under Tyburn

[Footnote 1: Clar. Pap. iii. 715.]

[Sidenote a: A.D. 1660. April 11.]

[Sidenote b: A.D. 1660. April 13.]

[Sidenote c: A.D. 1660. April 21.]

[Sidenote d: A.D. 1660. April 24.]

and the spectators hailed with shouts and exclamations the disgrace of the

prisoner.[1]

The Convention parliament (so it was called, because it had not been

legally summoned) met[a] on the appointed day, the 25th of April. The

Presbyterians, by artful management, placed Sir Harbottle Grimstone, one of

their party, in the chair; but the Cavaliers, with their adherents, formed

a powerful majority, and the new speaker, instead of undertaking to stem,

had the prudence to go along with, the stream. Monk sat as representative

of Devonshire, his native county.

To neutralize the influence of the Cavaliers among the Commons, the

Presbyterian peers who sat in 1648, assembled in the House of Lords, and

chose the earl of Manchester for their speaker. But what right had they

exclusively to constitute a house of parliament? They had not been summoned

in the usual manner by writ; they could not sit as a part of the long

parliament, which was now at least defunct; and, if they founded their

pretensions on their birthright, as consiliarii nati, other peers were

in possession of the same privilege. The question was propounded to the

lord-general, who replied that he had no authority to determine the claims

of any individual. Encouraged by this answer, a few of the excluded peers

attempted to take their seats, and met with no opposition; the example was

imitated by others, and in a few days the Presbyterian lords did not amount

to more than one-fifth of the house. Still, however, to avoid cavil, the

peers who sat in the king's parliament at Oxford, as well as those whose

patents bore date after the

[Footnote 1: Kennet's Reg. 120. Price, 792, 794. Ludlow, 379. Philips, 607.

Clar. Pap. iii. 735.]

[Sidenote a: A.D. 1660. April 25.]

commencement of the civil war, abstained for the present from demanding

admission.[1]

Monk continued to dissemble. By his direction Grenville applied to a

member, who was entering the council-chamber, for an opportunity of

speaking to the lord-general. Monk came to the door, received from him a

letter, and, recognizing on the seal the royal arms, commanded the guards

to take care that the bearer did not depart. In a few minutes Grenville

was called in, interrogated by the president as to the manner in which he

became possessed of the letter, and ordered to be taken into custody. "That

is unnecessary," said Monk; "I find that he is my near kinsman, and I will

be security for his appearance."

The ice was now[a] broken. Grenville was treated not as a prisoner, but a

confidential servant of the sovereign. He delivered to the two houses the

letters addressed to them, and received in return a vote of thanks, with a

present of five hundred pounds. The letter for the army was read by Monk

to his officers, that for the navy by Montague to the captains under his

command, and that for the city by the lord mayor to the common council

in the Guildhall. Each of these bodies voted an address of thanks and

congratulation to the king.

The paper which accompanied the letters to the two houses,--1. granted a

free and general pardon to all persons, excepting such as might afterwards

be excepted by parliament; ordaining that every division of party should

cease, and inviting all who were the subjects of the same sovereign to live

in union and harmony; 2. it declared a liberty to tender consciences, and

that no man should be disquieted or called in

[Footnote 1: Lords' Journ. xi. 4, 5, 6.]

[Sidenote a: A.D. 1660. May 1.]

question for differences of opinion in matters of religion which did not

disturb the peace of the kingdom, and promised moreover the royal assent to

such acts of parliament as should be offered for the full granting of

that indulgence: 3. it alluded to the actions at law to which the actual

possessors of estates purchased by them or granted to them during the

revolution might be liable, and purposed to leave the settlement of all

such differences to the wisdom of parliament, which could best provide for

the just satisfaction of the parties concerned: lastly, it promised to

liquidate the arrears of the army under General Monk, and to retain the

officers and men in the royal service upon the same pay and conditions

which they actually enjoyed. This was the celebrated declaration from

Breda, the royal charter on the faith of which Charles was permitted to

ascend the throne of his fathers.[1]

Encouraged by the bursts of loyalty with which the king's letters and

declaration had been received, his agents made it their great object to

procure his return to England before limitations could be put on the

prerogative. From the Lords, so numerous were the Cavaliers in the upper

house, no opposition could be feared; and the temper already displayed

by the Commons was calculated to satisfy the wishes of the most ardent

champions of royalty. The two houses voted, that by the ancient and

fundamental laws of the realm the government was and ought to be by king,

lords, and commons; they invited Charles to come and receive the crown to

which he was born; and, to relieve his more urgent necessities, they sent

him a present of fifty thousand pounds, with ten thousand pounds for his

brother the duke of York, and five

[Footnote 1: Lords' Journ. xi. 7, 10.]

thousand pounds for the duke of Gloucester. They ordered the arms and

symbols of the commonwealth to be effaced, the name of the king to be

introduced into the public worship, and his succession to be proclaimed

as having commenced from the day of his father's death.[1] Hale, the

celebrated lawyer, ventured, with Prynne, to call[a] upon the House of

Commons to pause in their enthusiasm, and attend to the interests of the

nation. The first moved the appointment of a committee to inquire what

propositions had been offered by the long parliament, and what concessions

had been made by the last king in 1648; the latter urged the favourable

opportunity of coming to a mutual and permanent understanding on all those

claims which had been hitherto subjects of controversy between the two

houses and the crown. But Monk rose, and strongly objected to an inquiry

which might revive the fears and jealousies, the animosities and bloodshed,

of the years that were past. Let the king return while all was peace and

harmony. He would come alone; he could bring no army with him; he would

be as much at their mercy in Westminster as in Breda. Limitations, if

limitations were necessary, might be prepared in the interval, and offered

to him after his arrival. At the conclusion of this speech, the house

resounded with the acclamations of the Cavaliers; and the advocates of the

inquiry, awed by the authority of the general and the clamour of their

opponents, deemed it prudent to desist.[2]

Charles was as eager to accept, as the houses had been to vote, the address

of invitation. From Breda he had gone to the Hague, where the States,

anxious to atone for their former neglect, entertained him with

[Footnote 1: Journals of both houses.]

[Footnote 2: Burnet, i. 88. Ludlow, iii. 8, 9.]

[Sidenote a: A.D. 1660. May 7.]

unusual magnificence. The fleet, under Montague,[1] had anchored in the Bay

of Scheveling; and Charles, as soon as the weather permitted, set sail[a]

for Dover, where Monk, at the head of the nobility and gentry from the

neighbouring counties, waited to receive the new sovereign. Every eye

was fixed on their meeting;[b] and the cheerful, though dignified,

condescension of the king, and the dutiful, respectful homage of the

general, provoked the applause of the spectators. Charles embraced him as

his benefactor, bade him walk by his side, and took him into the royal

carriage. From Dover to the capital the king's progress bore the appearance

of a triumphal procession. The roads were covered with crowds of people

anxious to testify their loyalty, while they gratified their curiosity. On

Blackheath he was received[c] by the army in battle array, and greeted with

acclamations as he passed through the ranks; in St. George's Fields the

lord mayor and aldermen invited him to partake of a splendid collation in a

tent prepared for the purpose; from London Bridge to Whitehall the houses

were hung with tapestry, and the streets lined by the trained bands, the

regulars, and the officers who had served under Charles I. The king was

preceded by troops of horsemen, to the amount of three thousand persons, in

splendid dresses, attended by trumpeters and footmen; then came the lord

mayor, carrying the naked sword, after him the lord-general and the duke of

Buckingham, and lastly the king himself, riding between his two brothers.

The cavalcade was closed by the general's life-guard, five regiments

[Footnote 1: Montague had long been in correspondence with the king, and

disapproved of the dissimulation of Monk, so far as to call him in private

a "thick-sculled fool;" but thought it necessary to flatter him, as he

could hinder the business.--Pepys, i. 69.]

[Sidenote a: A.D. 1660. May 23.]

[Sidenote b: A.D. 1660. May 25.]

[Sidenote c: A.D. 1660. May 29.]

of horse, and two troops of noblemen and gentlemen. At Whitehall Charles

dismissed the lord mayor, and received in succession the two houses, whose

speakers addressed him in strains of the most impassioned loyalty, and

were answered by him with protestations of attachment to the interests and

liberties of his subjects. It was late in the evening before the ceremonies

of this important day were concluded; when Charles observed to some of his

confidants "It must sorely have been my fault that I did not come before;

for I have met with no one to-day who did not protest that he always wished

for my restoration."[1]

That the re-establishment of royalty was a blessing to the country will

hardly be denied. It presented the best, perhaps the only, means of

restoring public tranquillity amidst the confusion and distrust, the

animosities and hatreds, the parties and interests, which had been

generated by the events of the civil war, and by a rapid succession of

opposite and ephemeral governments. To Monk belongs the merit of having, by

his foresight and caution, effected this desirable object without bloodshed

or violence; but to his dispraise it must also be recorded, that he

effected it without any previous stipulation on the part of the exiled

monarch. Never had so fair an opportunity been offered of establishing a

compact between the sovereign and the people, of determining, by mutual

consent, the legal rights of the crown, and of securing from future

encroachment the freedom of the people. That Charles would have consented

to such conditions,

[Footnote 1: Whitelock, 702. Kennet's Reg. 163. Clarendon's Hist. iii. 772.

Clarendon's Life by Himself, Continuation, p. 7, 8. Evelyn's Diary, ii.

148.]

we have sufficient evidence; but, when the measure was proposed, the

lord-general declared himself its most determined opponent. It may have

been, that his cautious mind figured to itself danger in delay; it is more

probable that he sought to give additional value to his services in the

eyes of the new sovereign. But, whatever were the motives of his conduct,

the result was, that the king ascended the throne unfettered with

conditions, and thence inferred that he was entitled to all the powers

claimed by his father at the commencement of the civil war. In a few years

the consequence became manifest. It was found that, by the negligence or

perfidy of Monk, a door had been left open to the recurrence of dissension

between the crown and the people; and that very circumstance which Charles

had hailed as the consummation of his good fortune, served only to prepare

the way for a second revolution, which ended in the permanent exclusion of

his family from the government of these kingdoms.

* * * * *

APPENDIX.

NOTE A, p. 117.

Nothing more clearly shows the readiness of Charles to engage in intrigue,

and the subtleties and falsehood to which he could occasionally descend,

than the history of Glamorgan's mission to Ireland. In this note I purpose

to lay before the reader the substance of the several documents relating to

the transaction.

On the 1st of April, 1644, the king gave to him, by the name of Edward

Somerset, alias Plantagenet, Lord Herbert, Baron Beaufort, &c., a

commission under the great seal, appointing him commander-in-chief of three

armies of Englishmen, Irishmen, and foreigners; authorizing him to raise

moneys on the securities of the royal wardships, customs, woods, &c.;

furnishing him with patents of nobility from the title of marquis to that

of baronet, to be filled up with names at his discretion; promising to give

the Princess Elizabeth to his son Plantagenet in marriage with a dower of

three hundred thousand pounds, a sum which did not much exceed what Herbert

and his father had already spent in the king's service, and in addition to

confer on Herbert himself the title of duke of Somerset, with the George

and blue ribbon.--From the Nuncio's Memoirs in Birch's Inquiry, p. 22.

This commission was granted in consequence of an understanding with the

deputies from the confederate Catholics, who were then at Oxford, and its

object is fully explained by Herbert himself in a letter to Clarendon, to

be laid before Charles II., and dated June 11, 1660. "For his majesty's

better information, through your favour, and by the channel of your

lordship's understanding things rightly, give me leave to acquaint you

with one chief key, wherewith to open the secret passages between his late

majesty and myself, in order to his service; which was no other than a

real exposing of myself to any expense or difficulty, rather than his just

design should not take place; or, in taking effect, that his honour should

suffer; an effect, you may justly say, relishing more of a passionate and

blind affection to his majesty's service, than of discretion and care of

myself. This made me take a resolution that he should have seemed angry

with me at my return out of Ireland, until I had brought him into a posture

and power to own his commands, to make good his instructions, and to reward

my faithfulness and zeal therein.

"Your lordship may well wonder, and the king too, at the amplitude of

my commission. But when you have understood the height of his majesty's

design, you will soon be satisfied that nothing less could have made me

capable to effect it; being that one army of ten thousand men was to have

come out of Ireland through North Wales; another of a like number, at

least, under my command in chief, have expected my return in South Wales,

which Sir Henry Gage was to have commanded as lieutenant-general; and a

third should have consisted of a matter of six thousand men, two thousand

of which were to have been Liegois, commanded by Sir Francis Edmonds, two

thousand Lorrainers, to have been commanded by Colonel Browne, and two

thousand of such French, English, Scots, and Irish, as could be drawn out

of Flanders and Holland. And the six thousand were to have been, by the

prince of Orange's assistance, in the associated counties; and the governor

of Lyne, cousin german to Major Bacon, major of my own regiment, was to

have delivered the town unto them.

"The maintenance of this army of foreigners was to have come from the pope,

and such Catholick princes as he, should have drawn into it, having engaged

to afford and procure thirty thousand pounds a month; out of which the

foreign army was first to be provided for, and the remainder to be divided

among the other armies. And for this purpose had I power to treat with

the pope and Catholick princes with particular advantages promised to

Catholicks for the quiet enjoying their religion, without the penalties

which the statutes in force had power to inflict upon them. And my

instructions for this purpose, and my powers to treat and conclude

thereupon, were signed by the king under his pocket signet, with blanks for

me to put in the names of pope or princes, to the end the king might have

a starting-hole to deny the having given me such commissions, if excepted

against by his own subjects; leaving me as it were at stake, who for

his majesty's sake was willing to undergo it, trusting to his word

alone."--Clarendon Papers, ii. 201, 202.

But his departure was delayed by Ormond's objections to the conditions of

peace; and the king, to relieve himself from the difficulty, proposed to

Herbert to proceed to Ireland, and grant privately to the Catholics those

concessions which the lord-lieutenant hesitated to make, on condition of

receiving in return an army of ten thousand men for the royal service. In

consequence, on the 27th of December, Charles announced to Ormond

that Herbert was going to Ireland under an engagement to further the

peace.--Carte, ii. App. p. 5.

1645, January 2nd. Glamorgan (he was now honoured with the title of earl of

Glamorgan) received these instructions. "First you may ingage y'r estate,

interest and creditt that we will most really and punctually performe any

our promises to the Irish, and as it is necessary to conclude a peace

suddainely, soe whatsoever shall be consented unto by our lieutenant the

marquis of Ormond. We will dye a thousand deaths rather than disannull or

break it; and if vpon necessity any thing to be condescended unto, and yet

the lord marquis not willing to be seene therein, as not fitt for us at the

present publickely to owne, doe you endeavour to supply the same."--Century

of Inventions by Mr. Partington, original letters and official papers,

xxxv. Then follows a promise to perform any promise made by him to Ormond

or others, &c.

January 6. He received a commission to levy any number of men in Ireland

and other parts beyond the sea, with power to appoint officers, receive the

king's rents, &c.--Birch, p. 18, from the Nuncio's Memoirs, fol. 713.

January 12. He received another warrant of a most extraordinary

description, which I shall transcribe from a MS. copy in my possession,

attested with the earl's signature, and probably the very same which he

gave to Ormond after his arrest and imprisonment.

"CHARLES REX

"Charles by the grace of God king of England Scotland France and Ireland

Defender of the Fayth, &c. To our Right trusty and Right well beloved

Cossin Edward Earle of Glamorgan greetinge. Whereas wee haue had sufficient

and ample testimony of y'r approued wisdome and fideliti. Soe great is

the confidence we repose in yo'w as that whatsoeuer yo'w shall perform as

warranted only under our signe manuall pockett signett or private marke or

even by woorde of mouthe w'thout further cerimonii, wee doo in the worde of

a kinge and a cristian promis to make good to all intents and purposes as

effectually as if your authoriti from us had binne under our great seale of

England w'th this advantage that wee shall esteem our self farr the moore

obliged to yo'w for y'r gallantry in not standing upon such nice tearms to

doe us service w'h we shall God willing rewarde. And althoughe yo'w exceed

what law can warrant or any power of ours reach unto, as not knowinge what

yo'w may have need of, yet it being for our service, wee oblige ourself not

only to give yo'w our pardon, but to mantayne the same w'th all our might

and power, and though, either by accident yo'w loose or by any other

occasion yo'w shall deem necessary to deposit any of our warrants and so

wante them at yo'r returne, wee faythfully promise to make them good

at your returne, and to supply any thinge wheerin they shall be founde

defective, it not being convenient for us at this time to dispute upon

them, for of what wee haue heer sett downe yo'w may rest confident, if

theer be fayth or truth in man; proceed theerfor cheerfully, spedelj, and

bouldly, and for your so doinge this shal be yo'r sufficient warrant. Given

at our Court at Oxford under our signe manuall and privat signet this 12 of

January 1644.

"GLAMORGAN.

"To our Right trustj and Right well beloved cosin

Edward Earle of Glamorgan."

Indorsed, "The Earle of Glamorgan's further authoritj."

Feb. 12. Glamorgan had left Oxford, and was raising money in Wales, when

Charles sent him other despatches, and with them a letter desiring him to

hasten to Ireland. In it he acknowledges the danger of the undertaking,

that Glamorgan had already spent above a million of crowns in his service,

and that he was bound in gratitude to take care of him next to his own wife

and children. "What I can further thinke at this point is to send y'w the

blue ribben, and a warrant for the title of duke of Somerset, both w'ch

accept and make vse of at your discretion, and if you should deferre y'e

publishing of either for a whyle to avoyde envye, and my being importuned

by others, yet I promise yo'r antiquitie for y'e one and your pattent for

the other shall bear date with the warrants."--Century of Inventions, p.

xxxiv. On the 18th of August, 1660, the marquess of Hertford complained

that this patent was injurious to him, as he claimed the tide of Somerset.

Glamorgan, then marquess of Worcester, readily surrendered it on the 3rd of

September, and his son was created duke of Beaufort.

On March 12, the king wrote to him the following letter:--

"HERBERT,

"I wonder you are not yet gone for Ireland; but since you have stayed all

this time, I hope these will ouertake you, whereby you will the more see

the great trust and confidence I repose in your integrity, of which I have

had soe long and so good experience; commanding yow to deale with all

ingenuity and freedome with our lieutenant of Ireland the marquess of

Ormond, and on the word of a king and a Christian I will make good any

thing which our lieutenant shall be induced unto upon your persuasion; and

if you find it fitting, you may privately shew him these, which I intend

not as obligatory to him, but to myselfe, and for both your encouragements

and warrantise, in whom I repose my cheefest hopes, not having in all my

kingdomes two such subjects; whose endeauours joining, I am confident to be

soone drawen out of the mire I am now enforced to wallow in."--Century of

Inventions, xxxviii.

What were the writings meant by the word "_these_" which Glamorgan might

show to Ormond if he thought fitting? Probably the following warranty dated

at Oxford on the same day.

"CHARLES R.

"Charles by the Grace of God King of England Scotland France and Ireland

Defender of the Fayth &c. To our right trusty and right welbeloved Cosin

Edward earle of Glamorgan Greeting. We reposing great and espitiall trust,

and confidence in y'r approved wisdome, and fidelity doe by these (as

firmely as under our great seale to all intents and purposes) Authorise

and give you power to treate and conclude w'th the Confederat Romaine

Catholikes in our Kingdom of Ireland, if vpon necessity any thing be to be

condescended vnto wherein our Lieutenant can not so well be seene in as not

fitt for vs at the present publikely to owne, and therefore we charge you

to proceede according to this our warrant w'th all possible secresie,

and for whatsoever you shall engage your selfe, vpon such valuable

considerations as you in y'r iudgement shall deeme fitt, we promise in the

word of a King and a Christian to ratifie and performe the same, that shall

be graunted by you, and vnder your hand and seale, the sayd confederat

Catholikes having by theyr supplyes testified theyre zeale to our service,

and this shall be in eache particular to you a sufficient warrant. Given at

our Court at Oxford, under our signett and Royall signature the twelfe day

of Marche in the twentieth year of our Raigne 1644.

To our Right Trusty and right welbeloved Cosin,

Edward Earle of Glamorgan."

Some writers have attempted to dispute the authenticity of this warrant,

because though it was inserted verbatim in Glamorgan's treaty with the

confederates, he did not produce it at the requisition of the council at

Dublin, under the excuse that he had deposited it with the Catholics at

Kilkenny. But that this was the truth, appears from the Nuncio's Memoirs:

"a sua majestate mandatum habuit, cujus originate regiâ manu subscriptum

Glamorganae comes deposuit apud confoederatos Catholicos," (fol. 1292, apud

Birch, 215); and if better authority be required, I have in my possession

the original warrant itself, with the king's signature and private seal,

bearing the arms of the three kingdoms, a crown above, and C.R. on the

sides, and indorsed in the same handwriting with the body of the warrant,

"The Earle of Glamorgan's espetiall warrant for Ireland." Of this original

the above is a correct copy.

April 30. The king having heard that Rinuccini had been appointed nuncio,

and was on his way to Ireland, sent to Glamorgan a letter for that prelate

and another for the pope. The contents of the second are unknown; the first

is copied in the Nuncio's Memoirs, "Nous ne doubtons point, que les choses

n'yront bien, et que les bonnes intentions commencés par effect du dernier

pape ne s'accomplisseront par celuys icy, et par vos moyens, en notre

royaume d'Irelande et de Angleterre."--Birch 28. He then requests the

nuncio to join with Glamorgan, and promises to accomplish on the return of

the latter, whatever they shall have resolved together.--Ibid.

The king, on his return to Oxford, after the disastrous campaign of 1645,

still placed his principal reliance on the mission of Glamorgan; and, to

induce the court of Rome to listen to the proposals of that envoy, wrote,

with his own hand, the two following letters, of which the originals still

exist in the Archivio Vaticano, one to the pope himself, the other to

Cardinal Spada, requesting of both to give credit to Glamorgan or his

messenger, and engaging the royal word to fulfil whatever should be agreed

upon by Glamorgan, in the name of his sovereign:--

"BEATISSIME PATER,

"Tot tantaque testimonia fidelitatis et affectus consanguinei nostri

comitis Glamorganiae jamdudum accepimus, eamque in illo fiduciam merito

reponimus, ut Sanctitas Vestra ei fidem merito praebere possit in quacumque

re, de qua per se vel per alium nostro nomine cum Sanctitate Vestra

tractaturus sit. Quaecumque vero ab ipso certo statuta fuerint, ea munire

et confirmare pollicemur. In cujus testimonium brevissimas has scripsimus,

manu et sigillo nostro munitas, qui nihil (potius) habemus in votis, quam

ut fevore vestro in eum statum redigamur, quo palam profiteamur nos.

"Sanctitatis Vestrae

"Humilimum et obedientissimum servum,

"Apud Curiam nostram, CHARLES R.

Oxoniae, Oct. 20, 1645."

_Superscription_--

"Beatissimo Patri Innocentio decimo Pontifici Maximo."

"Eminentissime Domine, Pauca scripsimus Beatissimo Patri, de fide adhibenda

consanguineo nostro comiti Glamorganiae, et cuilibet ab eo delegato, quem

ut Eminentia vestra pariter omni favore prosequatur, rogamus; certoque

credat nos ratum habituros quicquid a praedicte comite, vel suo delegato,

cum Sanctissimo Patre vel Eminentia vestra transactum fuerit.

"Eminentiae Vestrae,

"Apud Curiam nostram, Fidelisimus Amicus,

Oxoniae, Oct. 20, 1645." CHARLES R.

_Superscription_--

"Eminentissimo Domino et Consanguineo nostro, Dño Cardinali Spada."

After the discovery of the whole proceeding, the king, on January 29th,

1646, sent a message to the two houses in England, in which he declares

(with what truth the reader may judge) that Glamorgan had a commission to

raise men, and "to that purpose only;" that he had no commission to treat

of any thing else without the privity and directions of Ormond; that he

had never sent any information of his having made any treaty with the

Catholics, and that he (the king) disavowed him in his proceedings, and

had ordered the Irish council to proceed against him by due course of

law.--Charles's Works, 555.

Two days later, January 31, having acknowledged to the council at Dublin

that he had informed Glamorgan of the secret instructions given to Ormond,

and desired him to use his influence with the Catholics to persuade them to

moderate their demands, he proceeds: "To this end (and with the strictest

limitations that we could enjoin him, merely to those particulars

concerning which we had given you secret instructions, as also even in that

to do nothing but by your especial directions) it is possible we might have

thought fit to have given unto the said earl of Glamorgan such a credential

as might give him credit with the Roman Catholics, in case you should find

occasion to make use of him, either as a farther assurance unto them of

what you should privately promise, or in case you should judge it necessary

to manage those matters for their greater confidence apart by him, of whom,

in regard of his religion and interest, they might be less jealous. This is

all, and the very bottom of what we might have possibly entrusted unto the

said earl of Glamorgan in this affair."--Carte's Ormond, iii. 446. How this

declaration is to be reconciled with the last, I know not.

With this letter to the council he sent two others. One was addressed

to Ormond, asserting on the word of a Christian that he never intended

Glamorgan to treat of any thing without Ormond's knowledge and approbation,

as he was always diffident of the earl's judgment, but at the same time

commanding him to suspend the execution of any sentence which might be

pronounced against that nobleman.--Carte, ii. App. p. 12. The second, dated

Feb. 3, was to Glamorgan himself, in these words:--

"GLAMORGAN,

I must clearly tell you, both you and I have been abused in this business;

for you have been drawn to consent to conditions much beyond your

instructions, and your treaty had been divulged to all the world. If you

had advised with my lord lieutenant, as you promised me, all this had been

helped. But we must look forward. Wherefore, in a word, I have commanded

as much favour to be shewn to you as may possibly stand with my service or

safety; and if you will yet trust my advice--which I have commanded Digby

to give you freely--I will bring you so off that you may still be useful

to me, and I shall be able to recompence you for your affection; if not,

I cannot tell what to say. But I will not doubt your compliance in this,

since it so highly concerns the good of all my crowns, my own particular,

and to make me have still means to shew myself

Your most assured Friend,

CHARLES R. Oxford, Feb. 3, 1645-6." _Warner_, 360.

In this letter Charles, in his own defence, pretends to blame Glamorgan;

probably as a blind to Ormond and Digby, through whom it was sent. Soon

afterwards, on February 28th, he despatched Sir J. Winter to him with full

instructions, and the following consolatory epistle:--

"HERBERT,

I am confident that this honest trusty bearer will give you good

satisfaction why I have not in euerie thing done as you desired, the wante

of confidence in you being so farre from being y'e cause thereof, that I

am euery day more and more confirmed in the trust that I have of you, for

beleeve me, it is not in the power of any to make you suffer in my opinion

by ill offices; but of this and diuers other things I have given so full

instructions that I will saye no more, but that I am

Yor most assured constant Friend,

CHARLES R."

_Century of Inventions_, xxxix.

April 5th he wrote to him again.

"GLAMORGAN,

I have no time, nor do you expect that I shall make unnecessary repetitions

to you. Wherefore, referring you to Digby for business, this is only to

give you assurance of my constant friendship to you: which, considering the

general defection of common honesty, is in a sort requisite. Howbeit, I

know you cannot but be confident of my making good all instructions and

promises to you and the nuncio.

Your most assured constant Friend,

CHARLES R."

_Warner_, 373.

On the following day the king sent him another short letter.

"HERBERT,

As I doubt not but you have too much courage to be dismayed or discouraged

at the usage you have had, so I assure you that my estimation of you is

nothing diminished by it, but rather begets in me a desire of revenge and

reparation to us both; for in this I hold myself equally interested with

you. Wherefore, not doubting of your accustomed care and industry in my

service, I assure you of the continuance of my favour and protection to

you, and that in deeds more than words, I shall shew myself to be

Your most assured constant Friend,

CHARLES R."

_Warner_, 374.

If after the perusal of these documents any doubt can remain of the

authenticity of Glamorgan's commission, it must be done away by the

following passage from Clarendon's correspondence with secretary Nicholas.

Speaking of his intended history, he says, "I must tell you, I care not how

little I say in that business of Ireland, since those strange powers and

instructions given to your favourite Glamorgan, which appears to me so

inexcusable to justice, piety, and prudence. And I fear there is very much

in that transaction of Ireland, both before and since, that you and I were

never thought wise enough to be advised with in. Oh, Mr. Secretary, those

stratagems have given me more sad hours than all the misfortunes in war

which have befallen the king, and look like the effects of God's anger

towards us."--Clarendon Papers, ii. 337.

It appears that the king, even after he had been delivered by the Scots

to the parliament, still hoped to derive benefit from the exertions of

Glamorgan. About the beginning of June, 1647, Sir John Somerset, the

brother of that nobleman, arrived in Rome with a letter from Charles to

Innocent X. The letter is not probably in existence; but the answer of the

pontiff shows that the king had solicited pecuniary assistance, and, as an

inducement, had held out some hint of a disposition on his part to admit

the papal supremacy and the Catholic creed. Less than this cannot be

inferred from the language of Innocent. Literae illae praecipuam tuam

alacritatem ac propensionem ad obediendum Deo in nobis, qui ejus vices

gerimus, luculenter declarant ... a majestate tua enixe poscimus, ut

quod velle coepit, mox et facto perficiat ... ut aliquo id aggrediaris

argumento, quo te te ad Catholicam fidem recepisse intelligamus.

Undoubtedly Charles was making the same experiment with the pontiff which

he had just made with his Presbyterian subjects; and as, to propitiate

them, he had undertaken to study the Presbyterian doctrines, so he hoped

to draw money from Innocent by professing an inclination in favour of

the Catholic creed. But the attempt failed. The answer was, indeed,

complimentary: it expressed the joy of the pontiff at the perusal of his

letter, and exhorted him to persevere in the inquiry till he should come to

the discovery of the truth; but it disposed of his request, as Urban

had previously disposed of a similar request, by stating that it was

inconsistent with the duty of the pope to spend the treasures of his church

in the support of any but Catholic princes. This answer is dated 29th June,

1647.

NOTE B, p. 136.

1. The ordinances had distinguished two classes of delinquents, the one

religious, the other political. The first comprised all Catholic recusants,

all persons whomsoever, who, having attained the age of twenty-one, should

refuse to abjure upon oath the doctrines peculiar to the Catholic creed.

These were reputed papists, and had been made to forfeit two-thirds of

their real and personal estates, which were seized for the benefit of the

kingdom by the commissioners of sequestration appointed in each particular

county. The second comprehended all persons who were known to have fought

against the parliament, or to have aided the royal party with money, men,

provisions, advice, or information; and of these the whole estates, both

real and personal, had been sequestrated, with the sole exception of

one-fifth allotted for the support of their wives and children, if the

latter were educated in the Protestant religion.--Elsynge's Ordinances. 3,

22, et seq.

2. These sequestrated estates not only furnished a yearly income, but also

a ready supply on every sudden emergency. Thus when Colonel Harvey refused

to march till his regiment had received the arrears of its pay, amounting

to three thousand pounds, an ordinance was immediately passed to raise

the money by the sale of woods belonging to Lord Petre, in the county of

Essex.--Journals, vi, 519. When a complaint was made of a scarcity of

timber for the repairs of the navy, the two houses authorized certain

shipwrights to fell two thousand five hundred oak trees on the estates

of delinquents in Kent and Essex.--Ibid, 520. When the Scots demanded a

month's pay for their army, the committee at Goldsmiths' Hall procured the

money by offering for sale such property of delinquents as they judged

expedient, the lands at eight, the houses at six years' purchase.--Journals

of Commons, June 10, 24, 1644.

3. But the difficulty of procuring ready money by sales induced the

commissioners to look out for some other expedient; and when the sum of

fifteen thousand pounds was wanted to put the army of Fairfax in motion,

it was raised without delay by offering to delinquents the restoration

of their sequestrated estates, on the immediate payment of a certain

fine.--Commons' Journals, Sept. 13, 1644. The success of this experiment

encouraged them to hold out a similar indulgence to such persons as were

willing to quit the royal party, provided they were not Catholics, and

would take the oath of abjuration of the Catholic doctrine.--Ibid. March

6, August 12, 1645; May 4, June 26, Sept. 3, 1646. Afterwards, on the

termination of the war, the great majority of the royalists were admitted

to make their compositions with the committee. Of the fines required, the

greater number amounted to one-tenth, many to one-sixth, and a few

to one-third of the whole property, both real and personal, of the

delinquents.--(See the Journals of both houses for the years 1647, 1648.)

NOTE C, p. 241.

On the day after the king's execution appeared a work, entitled [Greek:

EIKON BASILIKAe], or the Portraicture of his Sacred Majesty in "his

Solitude and Sufferings." It professed to be written by Charles himself;

a faithful exposition of his own thoughts on the principal events of his

reign, accompanied with such pious effusions as the recollection suggested

to his mind. It was calculated to create a deep sensation in favour of the

royal sufferer, and is said to have passed through fifty editions in the

course of the first year. During the commonwealth, Milton made a feeble

attempt to disprove the king's claim to the composition of the book: after

the restoration, Dr. Gauden, a clergyman of Bocking, in Essex, came forward

and declared himself the real author. But he advanced his pretensions with

secrecy, and received as the price of his silence, first the bishopric of

Exeter, and afterwards, when he complained of the poverty of that see, the

richer bishopric of Worcester.

After the death of Gauden his pretensions began to transpire, and became

the subject of an interesting controversy between his friends and the

admirers of Charles. But many documents have been published since, which

were then unknown, particularly the letters of

Gauden to the earl of Clarendon (Clarendon Papers, iii. App. xxvi.-xxxi.,

xcv.), and others from him to the earl of Bristol (Maty's Review, ii. 253.

Clarendon Papers, iii. App. xcvi.; and Mr. Todd, Memoirs of Bishop Walton,

i. 138). These have so firmly established Gauden's claim, that, whoever

denies it must be prepared to pronounce that prelate an impostor, to

believe that the bishops Morley and Duppa gave false evidence in his

favour, and, to explain how it happened, that those, the most interested to

maintain the right of the king, namely Charles II., his brother the duke of

York, and the two earls of Clarendon and Bristol, yielded to the deception.

These difficulties, however, have not appalled Dr. Wordsworth, who in

a recent publication of more than four hundred pages, entitled, "Who

wrote[Greek: EIKON BASILIKAe]" has collected with patient industry every

particle of evidence which can bear upon the subject; and after a most

minute and laborious investigation, has concluded by adjudging the work

to the king, and pronouncing the bishop an impudent impostor. Still my

incredulity is not subdued. There is much in the[Greek: EIKON BASILIKAe]

itself which forbids me to believe that Charles was the real author, though

the latter, whoever he were, may have occasionally consulted and copied the

royal papers; and the claim of Gauden appears too firmly established to be

shaken by the imperfect and conjectural improbabilities which have hitherto

been produced against it.

NOTE D, p. 276.

_The Massacres at Drogheda and Wexford_.

I. Drogheda was taken by storm on the 11th of September, 1649. Cromwell, on

his return to Dublin, despatched two official accounts of his success, one

to Bradshaw, president of the council of state; a second to Lenthall, the

speaker of parliament. They were dated on the 16th and 17th of September;

which probably ought to have been the 17th and 18th, for he repeatedly

makes such mistakes in numbering the days of that month. These two

documents on several accounts deserve the attention of the reader.

I. Both mention a massacre, but with this difference, that whereas the

earlier seems to confine it to the men in arms against the commonwealth,

the second towards the end notices, incidentally as it were, the additional

slaughter of a thousand of the townspeople in the church of St. Peter. In

the first, Cromwell, as if he doubted how the shedding of so much blood

would be taken, appears to shift the origin of the massacre from himself to

the soldiery, who considered the refusal of quarter as a matter of course,

after the summons which had been sent into the town on the preceding day;

but in the next despatch he assumes a bolder tone, and takes upon himself

all the blame or merit of the proceeding. "Our men were ordered _by me_

to put them all to the sword."--"I forbade them to spare any that were

in arms." In the first, to reconcile the council to the slaughter, he

pronounces it a "marvellous great mercy;" for the enemy had lost by it

their best officers and prime soldiers: in the next he openly betrays his

own misgivings, acknowledging that "such actions cannot but work remorse

and regret without sufficient grounds," and alleging as sufficient grounds

in the present case--1. that it was a righteous judgment of God on

barbarous wretches who had imbued their hands in so much innocent blood;

and 2. that it would tend to prevent the effusion of blood for the future.

2. Now the insinuation conveyed in the first of these reasons, that

the major part of the garrison had been engaged in the outbreak of the

rebellion and its accompanying horrors, was in all probability a falsehood;

for the major part of the garrison was not composed of native soldiers,

but of Englishmen serving under the marquess of Ormond, the king's lord

lieutenant. This is plain from the evidence of persons who cannot be

supposed ignorant of the fact; the evidence of the royalist Clarendon

(History, vol. iii. part i. p. 323), and of the republican Ludlow, who soon

afterwards was made general of the horse, and became Cromwell's deputy

in the government of the island (Ludlow, Memoirs, i. 301). But, however

groundless the insinuation might be, it served Cromwell's purpose; it would

array in his favour the fanaticism of the more godly of his party.

For the massacre of the townspeople in the church he offers a similar

apology, equally calculated to interest the feelings of the saints. "They

had had the insolence on the last Lord's day to thrust out the Protestants,

and to have the mass said there." Now this remark plainly includes a

paralogism. The persons who had ordered the mass to be said there on the

9th of September were undoubtedly the civil or military authorities in the

town. Theirs was the guilt, if guilt it were, and theirs should have been

the punishment. Yet his argument supposes that the unarmed individuals

whose blood was shed there on the 12th, were the very persons who had set

up the mass on the 9th.

3. We know not how far this second massacre was originated or encouraged by

Cromwell. It is well known that in the sack of towns it is not always in

the power of the commander to restrain the fury of the assailants, who

abuse the license of victory to gratify the most brutal of their passions.

But here we have no reason to suppose that Cromwell made any effort to save

the lives of the unarmed and the innocent. Both the commander and his

men had a common religious duty to perform. They were come, in his

own language, "to ask an account of the innocent blood which had been

shed,"--to "do execution on the enemies of God's cause." Hence, in the case

of a resisting city, they included the old man, the female, and the child

in the same category with the armed combatant, and consigned all to the

same fate.

4. Of the proceedings of the victors during that night we are ignorant; but

it does not suggest a very favourable notion of their forbearance, that

in the following morning the great church of St. Peter's was filled with

crowds of townspeople of both sexes, and of every age and condition. The

majority of the women and children sought protection within the body of the

church; a select party of females, belonging to the first families in the

town, procured access to the crypts under the choir, which seemed to offer

more favourable chances of concealment and safety. But the sacred edifice

afforded no asylum to either. The carnage began within the church at an

early hour; and, when it was completed, the bloodhounds tracked their prey

into the vaults beneath the pavement. Among the men who thus descended into

these subterranean recesses, was Thomas Wood, at that time a subaltern,

afterwards a captain in Ingoldsby's regiment. He found there, according

to his own narrative, "the flower and choicest of the women and ladies

belonging to the town, amongst whom a most handsome virgin, arrayed in

costly and gorgeous apparel, kneeled down to him with tears and prayers to

save her life; and being strucken with a profound pitie, he took her under

his arme, and went with her out of the church with intentions to put

her over the works to shift for herself; but a soldier perceiving his

intention, he ran his sword up her belly or fundament. Whereupon Mr. Wood,

seeing her gasping, took away her money, jewels, &c., and flung her down

over the works." (See the Life of Anthony a Wood, p. xx., in the edition by

Bliss, of 1813. Thomas was the brother of Anthony, the Oxford historian.)

"He told them also that 3,000 at least, besides some women and children,

were, after the assailants had _taken part, and afterwards all the towne_,

put to the sword on the 11th and 12th of September, 1649. He told them

that when they were to make their way up to the lofts and galleries of

the church, and up to the tower, where the enemy had fled, each of the

assailants would take up a child, and use as a buckler of defence,

when they ascended the steps, to keep themselves from being shot or

brained."--Wood, ibid. These anecdotes, from the mouth of one who was an

eyewitness of, probably a participator in, the horrors of that day, will

enable the reader to form an adequate notion of the thirst for blood which

stimulated the soldiery, and of the cruelties which they exercised on their

defenceless victims.

5. The terms of indignation, and abhorrence in which the sack of Drogheda

was described by the royalists of that period are well known. I shall add

here another testimony; not that it affords more important information,

but because I am not aware that it has ever met the eye of more recent

historians; the testimony of Bruodin, an Irish friar, of great eminence and

authority in the Franciscan order. "Quinque diebus continuis haec laniena

(qua, nullo habito locorum, sexus, religionis aut aetatis discrimine,

juvenes et virgines lactantes aeque ac senio confecti barbarorum gladiis

ubique trucidati sunt) duravit. Quatuor milia Catholicorum virorum (ut

de infinita multitudine religiosorum, foeminarum, puerorum, puellarum

et infantium nihil dicam) in civitate gladius impiorum rebellium illa

expugnatione devoravit."--Propugnaculum Cathol. Veritatis, lib. iv. c. 14,

p. 678.

6. Here another question occurs. How did Cromwell obtain possession of

Drogheda? for there appears in his despatches a studied evasion of the

particulars necessary to give a clear view of the transaction. The

narrative is so confused that it provokes a suspicion of cunning and

concealment on the part of the writer. The royalists affirmed that

the place was won through promises of quarter which were afterwards

perfidiously violated, and their assertion is supported by the testimony of

Ormond in an official letter written from the neighbourhood to Lord Byron.

"Cromwell," he says, "having been twice beaten from the breach, carried it

the third time, all his officers and soldiers promising quarter to such as

would lay down their arms, and performing it as long as any place held

out, which encouraged others to yield; but when they had all once in their

power, and feared no hurt that could be done them, then the word no quarter

went round, and the soldiers were, many of them, forced against their wills

to kill their prisoners. The governor and all his officers were killed

in cold blood, except some few of least consideration that escaped by

miracle."--Sept. 29, Carte's Letters, ii. 412. It is possible, though

not very probable, that Ormond suffered himself to be misled by false

information. It should, however, be observed, that there is nothing in his

account positively contradicted by Cromwell's despatch. Cromwell had, not

forbidden the granting of quarter before the storm. It was afterwards, "in

the heat of the action," that he issued this order. But at what part of the

action? On what account? What had happened to provoke him to issue it?

He tells us that within the breach the garrison had thrown up three

entrenchments; two of which were soon carried, but the third, that on the

Mill-Mount, was exceedingly strong, having a good graft, and strongly

palisaded. For additional particulars we must have recourse to other

authority, from which we learn that within this work was posted a body of

picked soldiers with every thing requisite for a vigorous defence, so that

it could not have been taken by force without the loss of some hundreds of

men on the part of the assailants. It so happened, however, that the latter

entered it without opposition, and "Colonel Axtell, with some twelve of

his men, went up to the top of the mount, and demanded of the governor the

surrender of it, who was very stubborn, speaking very big words, but at

length was persuaded to go into the windmill at the top of the mount, and

as many more of the chiefest of them as it could contain, _where they were

disarmed, and afterwards all slain_."--Perfect Diurnal from Oct. 1 to Oct.

8. Now Cromwell in his despatch says "The governor, Sir Arthur Ashton, and

divers considerable officers, being there (on the Mill-Mount), our men,

getting up to them, were ordered by me to put them all to the sword." In my

opinion this passage affords a strong corroboration of the charge made by

Ormond. If the reader compare it with the passage already quoted from the

Diurnal, he will find it difficult to suppress a suspicion that Axtell

and his men had obtained a footing on the Mill-Mount through the offer of

quarter; and that this was the reason why Cromwell, when he knew that they

had obtained possession, issued an order forbidding the granting of quarter

on any account. The consequence was, that the governor and his officers

went into the mill, and were there disarmed, and afterwards all slain. The

other prisoners were treated in the same manner as their officers.

7. Ormond adds, in the same letter, that the sack of the town lasted during

five days, meaning, probably, from September 11 to September 15, or 16,

inclusively. The same is asserted by most of the royalists. But how could

that be, when the storm began on the 11th, and the army marched from

Drogheda on the 15th? The question may perhaps be solved by a circumstance

accidentally mentioned by Dr. Bates, that on the departure of the army,

several individuals who had hitherto succeeded in concealing themselves,

crept out of their hiding-places, but did not elude the vigilance of the

garrison, by whom they were put to the sword.--Bates's Rise and Progress,

part ii. p. 27.

II. 1. It did not require many days to transmit intelligence from Dublin to

the government; for the admiralty had contracted with a Captain Rich, that

for the monthly sum of twenty-two pounds he should constantly have two

swift-sailing vessels, stationed, one at Holyhead, the other at Dublin,

ready to put to sea on the arrival of despatches for the service of the

state.--Lords' Journ. ix. 617. From an accidental entry in Whitelock, it

would appear that the letters from Cromwell reached London on the 27th

of September; on the 28th, parliament, without any cause assigned in the

Journals, was adjourned to October 2nd, and on that day the official

account of the massacre at Drogheda was made public. At the same time an

order was obtained from the parliament, that "a letter should be written to

the lord lieutenant of Ireland, to be communicated to the officers there,

that the house doth approve of the execution done at Drogheda both as

an act of justice to them and mercy to others, who may be warned by it"

(Journals, vi. 301), which are the very reasons alleged by Cromwell in his

despatch. His conduct was now sanctioned by the highest authority; and from

that moment the saints in the army rejoiced to indulge the yearnings of

their zeal for the cause of God, by shedding the blood of the Irish enemy.

Nor had they long to wait for the opportunity. On the 1st of October he

arrived in the neighbourhood of Wexford; on the 9th he opened a cannonade

on the castle, which completely commanded the town. On the 11th, Synnot,

the military governor, offered to capitulate; four commissioners, one of

whom was Stafford, the captain of the castle, waited on Cromwell to

arrange the terms. He was dissatisfied with their demands, pronounced them

"abominable," and detained them till he had prepared his answer. By that

answer he granted life and liberty to the soldiers; life, but not liberty,

to the commissioned officers, and freedom from pillage to the inhabitants,

subject, however, to the decision of parliament with respect to their real

property. He required an immediate acceptance of these terms, and the

delivery to him of six hostages within an hour.--(Compare the letter of

October 16 in the King's Pamphlets, No. 442, with the document published

by Mr. Carlyle, ii. 79, which appears to me nothing more than a rough and

incorrect draft of an intended answer.) But Stafford was a traitor. In the

interval, being "fairly treated," he accepted, without communication with

the governor, the terms granted by Cromwell, and opened the gates of the

fortress to the enemy. From the castle they scaled an undefended wall in

the vicinity, and poured into the town. A paper containing the terms was

now delivered to the other three commissioners; but "their commissioners

this while not having hearts to put themselves into the town again with out

offer."--Ibid. Letter of October 16. Thus Synnot and the other authorities

remained in ignorance of Cromwell's decision.

2. At the first alarm the garrison and burghers assembled in the

market-place, to which they were accompanied or followed by crowds of

old men, women, and children. For a while the progress of the enemy was

retarded by barricades of cables. At the entrance of the market-place they

met with a "stiff resistance," as it is called by Cromwell. The

action lasted about an hour; but the assailants receiving continual

reinforcements, obtained at last fell possession of the place, and put

to the sword every human being found upon it. The governor and the mayor

perished with the rest.

3. But how could these bloody proceedings be reconciled with the terms of

capitulation which had been already granted? If we may believe Cromwell's

official account, a matchless specimen of craft and mystification, _he_ was

not to blame that they had been broken. He was perfectly innocent of all

that had happened. Could he not then have ordered his men to keep within

the castle, or have recalled them when they forced an entrance into the

town? Undoubtedly he might; but the pious man was unwilling to put himself

in opposition to God. "His study had been to preserve the place from

plunder, that it might be of more use to the commonwealth and the army."

But he saw "that God would not have have it so." The events which so

quickly followed each other, were to him a proof that God in his righteous

judgment had doomed the town and its defendants to destruction; on which

account he "thought it not good, nor just, to restrain off the soldiers

from their right of pillage, nor from doing of execution on the

enemy."--Letter of 16th of October. He concludes his despatch to the

government with these words:--"Thus it has pleased God to give into your

hands this other mercy, for which, as for all, we pray God may have all the

glory. Indeed, your instruments are poor and weak. and can do nothing but

through believing, and that is the gift of God also."--Cary's Memorials,

ii. 180. Did then the fanatic believe that perfidy and cruelty were gifts

of God? for at Wexford he could not plead, as at Drogheda, that his summons

had been contemptuously rejected. It had been accepted, and he had himself

dictated the terms of capitulation. Was he not obliged to carry them into

execution, even if, as was pretended in defiance of all probability, his

men had taken possession of the castle, and forced an entrance into the

town without his knowledge or connivance? Would any honest man have

released himself from such obligation under the flimsy pretext that it

would be acting against the will of God to recall the soldiers and prevent

them from doing execution on the enemy?

4. Cromwell's ministers of the divine will performed their part at Wexford,

as they had done at Drogheda, doing execution, not on the armed combatants

only, but on the women and children also. Of these helpless victims many

had congregated round the great cross. It was a natural consequence in such

an emergency. Hitherto they had been accustomed to kneel at the foot

of that cross in prayer, now, with life itself at stake, they would

instinctively press towards it to escape from the swords of the enemy. But,

as far an regards the atrocity of the thing, it makes little difference on

what particular spot they were murdered. You cannot relieve the memory

of Cromwell from the odium of such murder, but by proving, what it is

impossible to prove, that at Wexford the women and children were specially

excepted out of the general massacre.

5. I have already copied Bruodin's description of the sack of Drogheda;

here I may transcribe his account of the sack of Wexford. "Ipse strategus

regicidarum terrestri itinere Dublinium praetergressus, Wexfordiam (modicam

quidem, et maritimam, munitam et opulentam civitatem) versus castra movet,

occupatoque insperate, proditione cujusdam perfidi ducis castro, quod

moenibus imminebat, in civitatem irruit: opposuere se viriliter aggressori

praesidiarii simul cum civibus, pugnatumque est ardentissime per unius

horae spatium inter partes in foro, sed impari congressu, nam cives fere

omnes una cum militibus, sine status, sexus, aut aetatis discrimine,

Cromweli gladius absumpsit."--Bruodin, Propag. 1. iv. c. 14, p. 679. The

following is a more valuable document, from the "humble petition of the

ancient natives of the town of Wexford," to Charles II., July 4, 1660. "Yet

soe it is, may it please your Majestie, that after all the resistance they

could make, the said usurper, having a great armie by sea and land before

the said toune, did on the 9th of October, 1649, soe powerfully assault

them, that he entered the toune, and put man, woman, and child, to a very

few, to the sword, where among the rest the governor lost his life,

and others of the soldiers and inhabitants to the number of 1,500

persons."--Gale's Corporation System in Ireland, App. p. cxxvi.

6. My object in these remarks has been to enable the reader to form a

correct notion of the manner in which Cromwell conducted the war in

Ireland. They will give little satisfaction to the worshippers of the

hero. But his character is not a mere matter of taste or sympathy. It is a

question of historic inquiry. Much indeed has been written to vindicate

him from the imputation of cruelty at Drogheda and Wexford; but of the

arguments hitherto adduced in his defence, it will be no presumption

to affirm that there is not one among them which can bear the test of

dispassionate investigation.

NOTE E, p. 338.

The following pensions were afterwards granted to different persons

instrumental in facilitating the king's escape. Unless it be mentioned

otherwise, the pension is for life:--

£.

To Jane Lane (Lady Fisher) . . . . . . . . . 1000

Thomas Lane, the father . . . . . . . . . 500

Charles Gifford, Esq. . . . . . . . . . . 300

Francis Mansell, Esq. . . . . . . . . . . 200

Thomas Whitgrave, Esq. . . . . . . . . . 200

Catharine Gunter, for 21 years . . . . . 200

Joan Harford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Eleanor Sampson . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Francis Reynolds . . . . . . . . . . . . 200

John and Anne Rogers, and heirs male . . 100

Anne Bird . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Sir Thomas Wyndham, and heirs, for ever . 600

William Ellesdun, during pleasure . . . . 100

Robert Swan, during the king's life . . . 80

Lady Anne Wyadham . . . . . . . . . . . . 400

Juliana Hest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Clarendon Corres. i. 656.

NOTE F, p. 358.

_The Act for the Settlement of Ireland_.

Whereas the parliament of England after expense of much blood and treasure

for suppression of the horrid rebellion in Ireland have by the good hand of

God vpon their vndertakings brought that affaire to such an issue as that

a totall reducm't and settlement of that nation may with Gods blessing be

speedily effected. To the end therefore that the people of that nation may

knowe that it is not the intention of the Parliament to extirpat that wholl

nation, but that mercie and pardon both as to life and estate may bee

extended to all husbandmen, plowmen, labourers, artificers, and others of

the inferior sort, in manner as is heereafter declared, they submitting

themselves to the Parliament of the Commonwealth of England and liveing

peaceably and obediently vnder their governement, and that others alsoe of

a higher ranke and quality may knowe the Parliament's intention concerning

them according to the respective demerits and considerations under which

they fall, Bee it enacted and declared by this present Parliament and by

the authority of the same, That all and every person and persons of the

Irish nation comprehended in any of the following Qualifications shal bee

lyable vnto the penalties and forfeitures herein mentioned and contained

or bee made capable of the mercy and pardon therein extended respectively

according as is heereafter expressed and declared, that is to saye,

1. That all and every person and persons who at any time before the tenth

day of November, 1642, being the time of the sitting of the first generall

assembly at Kilkenny in Ireland have contrived, advised, counselled, or

promoted the Rebellion, murthers, massacres, done or committed in Ireland

w'ch began in the year 1641, or have at any time before the said tenth

day of November 1642 by bearing armes or contributing men, armes, horses,

plate, money, victuall or other furniture or habilliments of warre (other

then such w'ch they shall make to appeare to haue been taken from them by

meere force & violence) ayded, assisted, promoted, prosecuted or abetted

the said rebellion murthers or massacres, be excepted from pardon of life

and estate.

2. That all and every person & persons who at any time before the first day

of May 1643, did sitt or vote, in the said first generall

assembly, or in the first pretended counsell comonly called the supreame

councell of the confederate Catholiques in Ireland or were imployed as

secretaries or cheife clearke, to be exempted from pardon for life and

estate.

3. That all and every Jesuitt preist and other person or persons who have

receaved orders from the Pope or Sea of Rome, or any authoritie from

the same, that have any wayes contrived, advised, counselled, promoted,

continued, countenanced, ayded, assisted or abetted, or at any time

hereafter shall any wayes contriue, advise, councell, promote, continue,

countenance, ayde, assist or abett the Rebellion or warre in Ireland, or

any the murthers, or massacres, robberies, or violences, comitted against

ye Protestants, English, or others there, be excepted from pardon for life

and estate.

4. That James Butler earl of Ormond, James Talbot earl of Castelhaven,

Ullick Bourke earl of Clanricarde, Christopher Plunket earl of Fingal,

James Dillon earl of Roscommon, Richard Nugent earl of Westmeath, Moragh

O'Brian baron of Inchiquin, Donogh M'Carthy viscount Muskerry, Richard

Butler viscount Mountgarrett, Theobald Taaffe viscount Taaffe of Corren,

Rock viscount Fermoy, Montgomery viscount Montgomery of Ards, Magennis

viscount of Iveagh, Fleming baron of Slane, Dempsey viscount Glanmaleere,

Birmingham baron of Athenry, Oliver Plunket baron of Lowth, Robert Barnwell

baron of Trymletstoune, Myles Bourke viscount Mayo, Connor Magwyre baron of

Enniskillen, Nicholas Preston viscount Gormanstowne, Nicholas Nettervill,

viscount Nettervill of Lowth, John Bramhall late Bishop of Derry, (with

eighty-one baronets, knights and gentlemen mentioned by name) be excepted

from pardon of life and estate.

5. That all and every person & persons (both principalls and accessories)

who since the first day of October 1641 have or shall kill, slay or

otherwise destroy any person or persons in Ireland w'ch at ye time of their

being soe killed, slaine or destroyed were not publiquely enterteined, and

mainteyned in armes as officers or private souldiers for and on behalfe of

the English against ye Irish, and all and every person and persons (both

principals and accessories) who since the said first day of October 1641

have killed slayne or otherwise destroyed any person or persons entertained

and mainteyned as officers or private souldiers for and on behalfe of

the English, against the Irish (the said persons soe killing, slaying or

otherwise destroying, not being then publiquely enterteyned and mainteyned

in armes as officer or private souldier vnder the comand and pay of ye

Irish against the English) be excepted from pardon for life and estate.

6. That all and every person & persons in Ireland that are in armes or

otherwise in hostilitie against ye Parliam't of ye Commonwealth of England,

and shall not wthin eight and twenty dayes after publicacon hereof by ye

deputy gen'll of Ireland, and ye comission'rs for the Parliam't, lay

downs armes & submitt to ye power and authoritie of ye said Parliam't &

commonwealth as ye same is now established, be excepted from pardon for

life and estate.

7. That all other person & persons (not being comprehended in any of ye

former Qualifications,) who have borne comaund in the warre of Ireland

against the Parliam't of England or their forces, as generall, leift'ts

generall, major gen'll, commissary generall, colonell, Gouerno'rs of any

garrison, Castle or Forte, or who have been imployed as receaver gen'll or

Treasurer of the whole Nation, or any prouince thereof, Comissarie gen'll

of musters, or prouissions, Marshall generall or marshall of any province,

advocate to ye army, secretary to ye councell of warre, or to any generall

of the army, or of any the seuerall prouinces, in order to the carrying on

the warre, against the parliam't or their forces, be banished dureing the

pleasure of the parliam't of ye Com'wealth of England, and their estates

forfeited & disposed of as followeth, (viz.) That two third partes of their

respective estates, be had taken & disposed of for the vse & benefitt of

the said Com'wealth, and that ye other third parte of their said respective

estates, or other lands to ye proporcon & value thereof (to bee assigned

in such places in Ireland as the Parliam't in order to ye more effectual

settlem' of ye peace of this Nation shall thinke fitt to appoint for that

purpose,) be respectiuely had taken and enioyed by ye wifes and children of

the said persons respectively.

8. That ye deputy gen'll and comission'rs of parliam't have power to

declare, That such person or persons as they shall judge capeable of

ye parliam'ts mercie (not being comprehended in any of ye former

qualifications) who have borne armes against the Parliam't of England or

their forces, and have layd downe armes, or within eight & twenty dayes

after publicacon hereof by ye deputy gen'll of Ireland and ye Comissioners

for ye parliam't, shall lay downe armes & submit to ye power & authoritie

of ye said parliam't & com'wealth as ye same is now established, (by

promising & ingaging to be true to ye same) shal be pardoned for their

liues, but shall forfeit their estates, to the said comonwealth to be

disposed of as followeth (viz.) Two third partes thereof (in three equall

partes to bee diuided) for the vse benefitt & aduantage of ye said

ComOnwealth, and ye other third parte of the said respective states, or

other lands to ye proporcon or value thereof) to bee assigned in such

places in Ireland as the parliam't in order to ye more effectual settlement

of the peace of the Nation shall thinke fitt to appoint for that purpose

(bee enioyed by ye said persons their heires or assigns respectively)

provided, That in case the deputy gen'll Comission'rs or either of them,

shall see cause to give any shorter time than twenty-eight dayes, vnto

any person or persons in armes, or any Guarrison, Castle, or Forte, in

hostilitie against the Parliam't & shall giue notice to such person or

persons in armes or in any Guarrison, Castle or Forte, That all and every

such person & persons who shall not wthin such time as shal be sett downe

in such notice surrender such Guarrison, Castle, or Forte to ye parliam't,

and lay downe armes, shall haue noe advantage of ye time formerly limited

in this Qualificacon.

9. That all and every person & persons who have recided in Ireland at any

time from the first day of October 1641, to ye first of March 1650, and

haue not beene in actuall service of ye parliam't at any time from ye first

of August 1649, to the said first of March 1650, or have not otherwise

manifested their constant good affections to the interest of ye Comonwealth

of England (the said Persons not being comprehended in any of the former

Qualificacons) shall forfeit their estates in Ireland to the said

Comonwealth to be disposed of as followeth, (viz.), one third parte thereof

for the vse, benefitt, and advantage of the said Comonwealth, and the

other two third partes of their respective estates, or other lands to the

proporcon or value thereof (to bee assigned in such places in Ireland, as

ye Parliam't for ye more effectual settlement of ye peace of the Nation

shall thinke fitt to appoint for that purpose) bee enioyed by such person

or persons their heires or assigns respectively.

10. That all and every person & persons (haueing noe reall estate in

Ireland nor personall Estate to the value of ten pounds,) that shall lay

downe armes, and submitt to the power and Authoritie of the Parliament by

the time limited in the former Qualificacon, & shall take & subscribe the

engagem't to be true and faithfull to the Comonwealth of England as the

same is now established, within such time and in such manner, as the deputy

Generall & commission'rs for the Parliam't shall appoint and direct, such

persons (not being excepted from pardon nor adiuged for banishm't by any of

the former Qualificacons) shal be pardoned for life & estate, for any act

or thing by them done in prosecution of the warre.

11. That all estates declared by the Qualificacons concerning rebells or

delinquents in Ireland to be forfeited shal be construed, adiuged & taken

to all intents and purposes to extend to ye forfeitures of all estates

tayle, and also of all rights & titles thereunto which since the fiue

and twentith of March 1639, have beene or shal be in such rebells or

delinquents, or any other in trust for them or any of them, or their or

any of their vses, w'th all reversions & remainders thereupon in any other

person or persons whatsoever.

And also to the forfeiture of all estates limitted, appointed, conveyed,

settled, or vested in any person or persons declared by the said

Qualificacons to be rebells or delinquents with all reversions or

remainders of such estates, conueyed, uested, limitted, declared or

appointed to any the heires, children, issues, or others of the blood,

name, or kindred of such rebells or delinquents, w'ch estate or estates

remainders or reuersions since the 25th of March 1639 have beene or shal be

in such rebells or delinquents, or in any their heires, children, issues or

others of the blood, name, or kindred of such rebells or delinquents.

And to all estates graunted, limitted, appointed or conueyed by any such

rebells or delinquents vnto any their heires, children, issue, w'th all the

reversions and remainders thereupon, in any other person of the name, blood

or kindred of such rebells or delinquents, provided that this shall not

extend to make voyd the estates of any English Protestants, who haue

constantly adhered to the parliam't w'ch were by them purchased for

valuable consideracon before ye 23rd of October 1641, or vpon like valuable

consideracon mortgaged to them before ye tyme or to any person or persons

in trust for them for satisfaction of debts owing to them.

NOTE G, p. 396.

I have not been able to ascertain the number of Catholic clergymen who were

executed or banished for their religion under Charles I., and under the

commonwealth. But I possess an original document, authenticated by the

signatures of the parties concerned, which contains the names and fate of

such Catholic priests as were apprehended and prosecuted in London between

the end of 1640 and the summer of 1651 by four individuals, who had formed

themselves into a kind of joint-stock company for that laudable purpose,

and who solicited from the council some reward for their services. It

should, however, be remembered that there were many others engaged in the

same pursuit, and consequently many other victims besides those who are

here enumerated.

"The names of such Jesuits and Romish priests as have been apprehended and

prosecuted by Capt James Wadsworth, Francis Newton, Thomas Mayo, and

Robert de Luke, messengers, at our proper charge; whereof some have been

condemned; some executed, and some reprieved since the beginning of the

parliament (3 Nov. 1640); the like having not been done by any others since

the reformation of religion in this nation:--

William Waller, als. Slaughter, als. Walker, executed at Tyburne.

Cuthbert Clapton, condemned, reprieved and pardoned.

Bartholomew Row, executed at Tyburne.

Thomas Reynolds, executed at Tyburne.

Edward Morgan, executed at Tyburne.

Thomas Sanderson, als. Hammond, executed at Tyburne.

Henry Heath, alias Pall Magdelen, executed at Tyburne.

Francis Quashet, dyed in Newgate after judgment.

Arthur Bell, executed at Tyburne.

Ralph Corbey, executed at Tyburne.

John Duchet, executed at Tyburne.

John Hamond, als. Jackson, condemned, reprieved by the king, and died in

Newgate.

Walter Coleman, condemned and died in Newgate,

Edmond Cannon, condemned and died in Newgate.

John Wigmore, als. Turner, condemned, reprieved by the king, and is in

custodie in Newgate.

Andrew Ffryer, alias Herne, als. Richmond, condemned and died in Newgate.

Augustian Abbot, als. Rivers, condemned, reprieved by the king, and died in

Newgate.

John Goodman, condemned and died in Newgate.

Peter Welford, condemned and died in Newgate.

Thomas Bullaker, executed at Tyburne.

Robert Robinson, indicted and proved, and made an escape out of the King's

Bench.

James Brown, condemned and died in Newgate.

Henry Morse, executed at Tyburne.

Thomas Worseley, alias Harvey, indicted and proved, and reprieved by the

Spanish ambassador and others.

Charles Chanie (Cheney) als. Tomson, indicted and proved, and begged by the

Spanish ambassador, and since taken by command of the councell of state,

and is now in Newgate.

Andrew White, indicted, proved, reprieved before judgment, and banished.

Richard Copley, condemned and banished.

Richard Worthington, found guiltie and banished.

Edmond Cole, Peter Wright, and William Morgan, indicted, proved, and sent

beyond sea.

Philip Morgan, executed at Tyburne.

Edmond Ensher, als. Arrow, indicted, condemned, reprieved by the parliament

and banished.

Thomas Budd, als. Peto, als. Gray, condemned, reprieved by the lord mayor

of London, and others, justices, and since retaken by order of the councell

of state, and is now in Newgate.

George Baker, als. Macham, indicted, proved guiltie, and now in Newgate.

Peter Beale, als. Wright, executed at Tyburne.

George Sage, indicted by us, and found guiltie, and since is dead.

James Wadsworth.

Francis Newton.

Thomas Mayo.

Robert de Luke."

This catalogue tells a fearful but instructive tale; inasmuch as it shows

how wantonly men can sport with the lives of their fellow-men, if it suit

the purpose of a great political party. The patriots, to enlist in their

favour the religious prejudices of the people, represented the king as the

patron of popery, because he sent the priests into banishment, instead of

delivering them to the knife of the executioner. Hence, when they became

lords of the ascendant, they were bound to make proof of their orthodoxy;

and almost every execution mentioned above took place by their order

in 1642, or 1643. After that time they began to listen to the voice of

humanity, and adopted the very expedient which they had so clamorously

condemned. They banished, instead of hanging and quartering.

NOTE H, p. 493.

_Revenue of the Protector._

When the parliament, in 1654, undertook to settle an annual sum on the

protector, Oliver Cromwell, the following, according to the statement of

the sub-committee, was the amount of the revenue in the three kingdoms:--

Excise and customs in England . . . . . . . . . . . £80,000

Excise and customs in Scotland . . . . . . . . . . 10,000

Excise and customs in Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000

Monthly assessments in England (at 60,0001.) . . . 720,000

Monthly assessments in Ireland (at 8,0001.) . . . . 96,000

Monthly assessments in Scotland (at 8,0001.) . . . 96,000

Crown revenue in Guernsey and Jersey . . . . . . . 2,000

Crown revenue in Scotland . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,000

Estates of papists and delinquents in England . . . 60,000

Estates of papists and delinquents in Scotland . . 30,000

Rent of houses belonging to the crown . . . . . . . 1,250

Post-office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,000

Exchequer revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000

Probate of wills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,000

Coinage of tin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,000

Wine licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,000

Forest of Dean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,000

Fines on alienations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000

---------

£1,200,000

[From the original report in the collection of Thomas Lloyd, Esq.]

NOTE I, p. 558.

_Principles of the Levellers_.

The following statement of the principles maintained by the Levellers is

extracted from one of their publications, which appeared soon after the

death of Cromwell, entitled "The Leveller; or, The Principles and Maxims

concerning Government and Religion, which are asserted by those that are

commonly called Levellers, 1659."

_Principles of Government_.

1. The government of England ought to be by laws, and not by men; that is,

the laws ought to judge of all offences and offenders, and all punishments

and penalties to be inflicted upon criminals; nor ought the pleasure of his

highness and his council to make whom they please offenders, and punish and

imprison whom they please, and during pleasure.

2. All laws, levies of moneys, war and peace, ought be made by the people's

deputies in parliament, to be chosen by them successively at certain

periods. Therefore there should be no negative of a monarch, because he

will frequently by that means consult his own interest or that of his

family, to the prejudice of the people. But it would be well if the

deputies of the people were divided into two bodies, one of which should

propose the laws, and the other adopt or reject them.

3. All persons, without a single exception, should be subject to the law.

4. The people ought to be formed into such a military posture by and under

the parliament, that they may be able to compel every man to obey the law,

and defend the country from foreigners. A mercenary (standing) army is

dangerous to liberty, and therefore should not be admitted.

_Principles of Religion._

1. The assent of the understanding cannot be compelled. Therefore no man

can compel another to be of the true religion.

2. Worship follows from the doctrines admitted by the understanding. No man

therefore can bind another to adopt any particular form of worship.

3. Works of righteousness and mercy are part of the worship of God, and so

far fall under the civil magistrate, that he ought to restrain men from

irreligion, that is, injustice, faith-breaking, oppression, and all other

evil works that are plainly evil.

4. Nothing is more destructive to true religion than quarrels about

religion, and the use of punishments to compel one man to believe as

another.

NOTE K, p. 608.

That Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper was deeply engaged in the intrigues of this

busy time is sufficiently manifest. He appears to have held himself out

to every party as a friend, and to have finally attached himself to the

royalists, when he saw that the royal cause was likely to triumph. Charles

acknowledged his services in the patent by which he was created Lord

Ashley, mentioning in particular "his prudent and seasonable advice with

General Monk in order to the king's restoration."--Dugd. ii. 481. From this

passage we may infer that Cooper was one of Monk's confidential advisers;

but his admirers have gone much farther, attributing to him the whole merit

of the restoration, and representing the lord-general as a mere puppet in

the hands of their hero. In proof they refer to the story told by Locke

(iii. 471),--a story which cannot easily be reconciled with the more

credible and unpretending narrative of Clarges, in Baker's Chronicle, p.

602, edit. 1730. But that the reader may form his own judgment, I shall

subjoin the chief heads of each in parallel columns.

CLARGES

1. Scot, Hazlerig, and others sought and obtained a private interview with

Monk at Whitehall; and Clarges, from their previous conversation with

himself, had no doubt that their object was to offer the government of the

kingdom to the general.

2. The council of state was sitting in another room; and Clarges, sending

for Sir A.A. Cooper, communicated his suspicion to him.

3. After some consultation it was agreed that, as soon as Monk, having

dismissed Scot and Hazlerig, should enter the council-room, Cooper should

move that the clerks be ordered to withdraw.

4. When this was done, Cooper said that he had received notice of a

dangerous design; that some seditious persons had made "indecent proposals"

to the general; and of such proposals he desired that the council might

have a full discovery.

5. Monk, unwilling to expose them, replied that there was very little

danger in the case; that some persons had, indeed, been with him to be

resolved in scruples respecting the present transactions in parliament; but

that he had sent them away well satisfied (p. 602).

6. Bordeaux offered to Monk through Clarges the aid of Mazarin, whether it

were his object to restore the king, or to assume the government himself.

Monk refused; but consented to receive a visit of civility from the

ambassador, on condition that politics should not be introduced (p. 604).

LOCKE

1. Bordeaux, the French ambassador, visited Monk one evening, and Mrs.

Monk, who had secreted herself behind the hangings, heard him offer the

aid of Mazarin to her husband, if he was willing to take the government on

himself, which offer the general accepted.

2. Mrs. Monk sent her brother Clarges to communicate the discovery of her

husband's ambitious design to Sir A.A. Cooper.

3. Cooper caused a council to be called, and, when they were met, moved

that the clerks should withdraw, because he had matter of consequence to

communicate.

4. He then charged Monk, "not openly, but by insinuation, that he was

playing false with them, so that the rest of the council perceived there

was something in it, though they knew not what was meant."

5. Monk replied that he was willing to satisfy them that he was true to

his principles. Then, said Ashley, replace certain officers of suspicious

character by others of known fidelity. This was done on the spot; the

command of the army by the change was virtually taken from Monk; and he was

compelled to declare for Charles Stuart

It may be thought that Locke's narrative derives confirmation from another

version of the same story in the Life of Lord Shaftesbury, lately edited by

Mr. Cooke, with the following variations. Bordeaux is made to accompany the

republicans; the greater part of the night is spent in consultation, and

Monk not only consents to assume the government, but resolves to arrest in

the morning Cooper and several other influential individuals (p. 233-235).

But that life cannot be considered as an authority; for the documents from

which it is said to have been compiled are neither quoted nor described by

its author, nor have ever been seen by its present editor.

END OF VOL. VIII.