The Presbyterians were the principal instruments in Charles'
restoration; and in this they acted as the exponents and
instruments of the nation's will. It was not Monk who influenced
the Presbyterians--the Presbyterians influenced Monk. Their leaders
encouraged his bringing back the King, and conveyed to him that
encouragement at a conference which they held with him in the City.[62]
The part played by the Presbyterians in this transaction is admitted by
members of the Royal family; and in the correspondence of the period a
curtain is lifted up, disclosing Court secrets, and illustrating the
manner in which the Presbyterians at that moment were overreached. When
the Queen Dowager saw Lord Aubony she remarked, "My Lord, I hear you
say that the King is to go to England, and that you are glad there is
such a (way) laid open for him. Do not you know that the Presbyterians
are those that are to invite him?" The nobleman answered that he did
not care who they were, but only wished to see His Majesty restored to
his own realm. "But the conditions," rejoined the Queen, "may be such
as they would have pressed upon the King his father." "Madam," replied
his lordship, "a king crowned, and in his own dominions has more reason
to insist upon terms than an exiled prince that hath not been accepted
by them. What would any one have him do, other than receive his
kingdoms by what means soever they were given him? And some better way
than this occurs not, what fault is to be found with that which cannot
be mended?"[63]
[Sidenote: 1660.]
Baxter informs us respecting schemes adopted by the Episcopalian
Royalists, with a view to influence their Presbyterian brethren.
Sir Ralph Clare, of Kidderminster, and therefore one of Baxter's
parishioners had, before Booth's rising, spoken to his pastor on
the subject; and he had replied by expressing fears of prelatical
intolerance, and of the danger to the interests of spiritual religion
in case of the restoration of the Stuarts. The Knight said, that
being acquainted with Dr. Hammond, a correspondent of Dr. Morley,
then attending upon His Majesty, he could assure Baxter, the utmost
moderation was intended, and that "any episcopacy, how low soever,
would serve the turn and be accepted." Letters from France were
procured, testifying to the character of the Royal exile. They abounded
in eulogies upon his Protestantism. Monsieur Gaches, a famous preacher
at Charenton, after flattering Baxter, gave "a pompous character of the
King," stating that during his residence in France he never neglected
the public profession of the Protestant religion, not even in those
places where it seemed prejudicial to his affairs.[64] Baxter's pages
bear witness to the fears of others as well as to his own, to lull
which dulcet promises were sung. Presbyterians and Episcopalians, it
was softly said, were not irreconcilable; union was possible; present
incumbents would not be turned out of their livings. Their ordinations
would be valid.[65] Episcopalians were resolved to forgive, to bury the
remains of rancour, malice, and animosity for ever; having been taught
by sufferings from the hand of God, not to cherish violent thoughts
against their brother man.[66] Some Presbyterians were pacified,
expecting that subscription to the Prayer book would be no longer
required. Others, at least, hoped for toleration. Some acted simply
from a conviction that it was a duty to bring back the King; others
regarded that event as at once ruinous but inevitable.[67] A few could
not abandon the idea of restoring Charles on _Covenant terms_; but
only such as lived in a little world of their own dreamt of a thing so
preposterous.[68]
[Sidenote: PROGRESS OF RESTORATION.]
In coincidence with these circumstances the personal friends of
the exiled Prince revolved in their minds the possibilities of the
future, and employed themselves in framing suggestions to be laid
upon the Royal table. We read in a paper without signature, dated
March 28, 1660, "It is most certainly true that Presbytery is a very
ill foundation to Monarchy, and therefore it must be said with great
care and circumspection. You know what your father suffered by them,
and yourself also in Scotland, whither when you went, though all were
for it, I was absolutely against it, and gave my reasons to one, who
I suppose now attends you, which experience hath proved true." And
again, "'Twill be of great consequence that you mainly insist upon a
toleration for all, as well Roman Catholics as others, or, at least, to
take off the penal statutes against them. There is not anything you can
do will be of more advantage than this, for thereby you will satisfy
all here and abroad. Moreover, by doing this you will secure yourself
against the Presbyterians and Sectaries, by equally poising them with
others of contrary judgments, for you may doubt that the Presbyterians
and Sectaries will at length fall to their first principles again, and
endeavour to make you at the best but a Duke of Venice, if they see
not a visible power to defend you. The like course hath many times
been used by great princes, and never succeeded ill when they saw one
faction rise too high to suffer a quite contrary to grow up to balance
it."[69]
[Sidenote: 1660.]
Sir William Killegrew addressing Charles, upon the 8th of April,
shrewdly states the difficulties of his new position: "If your Majesty
do but think on the numerous clergy with their families, and on the
innumerable multitudes of all those that have suffered on your side
that will expect a reparation or recompence; nay, Sir, it is evident
that all the people in general do look that you should bring them peace
and plenty, as well as a pardon for all those who have offended. And
I do fear you will find it a harder matter to satisfy those that call
themselves your friends, and those who really are so than all those who
have been against your Majesty." "Next, Sir, if you come to your crown
as freely as you are born to it, how will you settle Church-government
at first to please the old true Protestants? And how the Presbyterians,
who now call you in, when all other interests have failed to do it?
And how the Papists, who do hope for a toleration? How satisfy the
Independents, the Congregation, and all the several sorts of violent
Sectaries? Whereas if your Majesty be tied up by Articles, none of all
these can blame you for not answering their expectations."[70]
[Sidenote: PROGRESS OF RESTORATION.]
Two days before the date of this last letter, Secretary Thurloe, at
Whitehall, silently watching what was going on around him, conveyed his
impressions of the state of religious parties to the English minister
at the Hague.
"There are here great thoughts of heart touching the present
constitution of affairs. The Sectarians with the Commonwealth's
men look upon themselves as utterly lost if the King comes in, and
therefore probably will leave no stone unturned to prevent it; but
what they will be able to do, I see not, of themselves, unless the
Presbyterian joins with them, whereto I see no disposition; yet many of
them are alarmed also, and are thinking how to keep him out, and yet
not mingle again with the Sectaries. Others of the Presbyterians are
studying strict conditions to be put upon the King, especially touching
Church-government, hoping to bind him that way; and therein are most
severe against all the King's old party, proscribing them which are
already beyond sea. Not one of them is to return with him if he comes
in upon their terms, and prohibiting his party here to come near him:
he must also confirm all sales whatsoever."[71]
[Sidenote: 1660.]
The first decided declaration in favour of the restoration of Charles
on the part of Monk, who for months had perplexed everybody, seems to
have occurred on the 19th of March, when, in answer to Royal overtures
for his assistance, and to Royal promises of high rewards, he said to
Sir John Grenville, about to join the little Court at Breda, "I hope
the King will forgive what is past, both in my words and actions,
according to the contents of his gracious letter, for my heart was ever
faithful to him; but I was never in a condition to do him service till
this present; and you shall assure His Majesty that I am now not only
ready to obey his commands, but to sacrifice my life and fortune in his
service."[72]
Thus, the man who had solemnly declared himself in favour of a
Commonwealth, now suddenly, with open arms, embraced the Royal cause,
as the turn of events began to brighten its fortunes; and, as he
had been first an Independent, and then a Presbyterian, so now he
became not only a Royalist, but an Episcopalian. Most likely Monk
was all the way through a selfish schemer, trimming his sails to the
wind, and ready for King or Commonwealth, as he might see it safe
and advantageous. If that view of his character be not correct, then
the only alternative--one which his admiring biographers adopt, and
which he avowed himself--is, that he had long been promoting Royalist
interests under the disguise of Republican sentiments,--a conclusion
which would justify us in pronouncing him one of the most consummate
hypocrites the world ever saw.[73]
[Sidenote: PROGRESS OF RESTORATION.]
The dissolution of the Rump had been connected with a determination
to call together a new Parliament to meet on the 25th of
April. The preparatory elections evoked the efforts of all
parties--the Presbyterians, the Episcopalians, and the "sects," as
Congregationalists and other Nonconformists were termed. The last
of these three parties--mostly anxious for a Republican form of
government--did what they could to return representatives holding
extreme democratical opinions. The second of them, where they dared to
appear, in some cases, from a too fervent zeal, overshot the mark, and
by their violence alienated the constituences which they canvassed. The
first of these parties, the Presbyterians,--who, after the dissolution
of Parliament, had held the administration of affairs in their own
hands, and with whom, for the time being, Monk, their betrayer in the
end, was in co-operation,--used such methods as their executive powers
afforded, to sway the elections in favour of their own views. The
Presbyterians, including different shades of opinion, uniting with the
more moderate Episcopalians and Cavaliers, succeeded in obtaining a
large majority.
[Sidenote: 1660.]
The persons who had been elected members of the Convention began
to assemble in St. Stephen's Chapel upon the 25th of April. The
Presbyterian leaders, Hollis, Pierrepoint, and Lewis, secured
immediately the office of Speaker for Sir Harbottle Grimston, of whose
decided Presbyterianism there could be no doubt. This critical movement
was accomplished in an irregular manner, before even forty members
had taken their seats. The preachers appointed to address the Commons
were Gauden, Calamy, and Baxter,--all three at that time Presbyterian
Conformists. In the House of Peers, where only ten members at first
resumed their places, the Presbyterian Earl of Manchester was chosen to
preside. Two Presbyterian ministers, Reynolds and Hardy, were selected
to preach to their Lordships.
Before proceeding to describe the revived loyalty displayed by the
Convention, we must notice the violent manifestation of opposite
feelings by a portion of the Commonwealth Army. Lambert, one of
Cromwell's officers, escaped on the 9th of April from the Tower, where
he had been imprisoned, and, gathering around him some of his comrades,
marched into the Midland Counties, hoping successfully to raise a
standard in support of Republicanism. Ludlow and Scott had before this
been preparing for such a movement; and, it is said, that despondency
of success alone prevented Haselrig from drawing his sword.[74] The
French Ambassador, writing on the 3rd of May to Cardinal Mazarin, thus
describes the actual outbreak which followed:--[75]
[Sidenote: PROGRESS OF RESTORATION.]
"Great alarm," he says, "has been felt about an insurrection of
Sectaries in different localities; some had assembled in the
neighbourhood of York, with the intention of taking it by surprise;
and, at the distance of twenty leagues from London, Colonel Lambert
had gathered together a body of cavalry, which the first accounts
stated to consist of three hundred men. Orders were immediately given
to send against him most of the troops which are in London; the levy
of the London militia was directed to hold itself in readiness, and
that of several counties, which has not been set on foot, to be placed
within the hands of persons considered to be too violent Royalists,
was also ordered out. At the same time, some of the most distinguished
Sectaries, both in this city and in the country, were arrested, and
the General was making preparations to go and attack Lambert before he
could increase his forces; but news arrived, at the end of last week,
that he had only two or three hundred men; and, this morning, we were
informed of his defeat by a party of six hundred horse, without much
bloodshed; his troops having abandoned him one after another, he was
taken prisoner with a few others who have been officers in the Army,
and they are on their way to London. The militia were immediately
countermanded, and the universal topic of conversation now is the
punishment of the offenders, whose leader was proclaimed a traitor on
the day before yesterday.
"His capture seems entirely to ruin all his party, against which the
people entertain so great an aversion, that, unless the old troops had
mutinied, it could not have met with better fortune. Some Royalists
could have wished it to hold out a little longer, in the hope that the
present authorities would have been thereby compelled to hasten the
return of the King upon more advantageous conditions, whereas they
will now have entire liberty to act, and will, perhaps, impose harsher
conditions, as they have nothing to fear from the Sectaries."
[Sidenote: 1660.]
It is remarkable that the troops employed by the Council of State
to crush Lambert's outbreak were led by Ingoldsby, one of Oliver
Cromwell's attached officers; and, amongst those acting under him on
this occasion, was the Fifth Monarchist, Colonel Okey. Republicanism,
at that moment, was a house divided against itself; and very different
were the subsequent fortunes of the two men just mentioned. Ingoldsby's
previous support of Cromwell obtained Royal forgiveness on account of
his defeating Lambert; the dark fate which befell Okey will be noticed
hereafter. The rash attempt thus promptly resisted, and speedily
suppressed, was, there can be no doubt, the result of a feeling more
widely diffused than the limited action of the Commonwealth soldiery,
as just described, would by itself indicate. The Civil Wars had
proceeded on the principle that it is justifiable to defend by arms
what is deemed the cause of freedom; and, at this juncture, Charles
had not yet returned, he was not, in fact, King of England; and,
therefore, Republicans might naturally feel all the more satisfied
in resisting his restoration, as that restoration, in their opinion,
would be a revolutionary act, overthrowing the Commonwealth--a form of
English government won by Parliamentary Armies, and established by the
decisions of the Legislature.[76]
[Sidenote: PROGRESS OF RESTORATION.]
When May-day had arrived--with its vernal memories and hopes stirring
the hearts of Royalists all over the country--Mr. Annesley reported to
the Commons a letter from the King, unopened, directed to "Our trusty
and well-beloved General Monk, to be communicated to the President and
Council of State, and to the Officers of the Armies under his command."
He stated that Sir John Grenville, a Royal messenger, was at the door.
Permitted by a vote to approach the bar, this gentleman proceeded to
announce that he had been commanded by the King, his master, to deliver
a letter directed to "Our trusty and well-beloved the Speaker of the
House of Commons." Inclosed within the letter was a declaration, given
under the King's sign-manual and privy signet, at his Court at Breda.
When the messenger had withdrawn, both communications were read aloud
by Sir Harbottle Grimston. They are entered in the _Journals_; so also
is Monk's letter. Immediately afterwards the same messenger delivered
a letter "To the Speaker of the House of Peers, and the Lords there
assembled;" that letter inclosing the same declaration as had been
communicated to the Commons.[77]
The last-named document, which soon became so famous, states that
Charles had never given up the hope of recovering his rights, that he
did not more desire to enjoy what was his own, than that his subjects
by law might enjoy what was theirs; that he would grant a free pardon
under the Great Seal to all who should lay hold of his grace and favour
within forty days, save those only who should be excepted by Act of
Parliament; and that he desired all notes of discord and separation
should be utterly abolished. Then came the following clause:--"And,
because the passion and uncharitableness of the times have produced
several opinions in religion, by which men are engaged in parties and
animosities against each other, which, when they shall hereafter unite
in a freedom of conversation, will be composed or better understood;
we do declare a liberty to tender consciences, and that no man shall
be disquieted or called in question, for differences of opinion in
matter of religion which do not disturb the peace of the kingdom, and
that we shall be ready to consent to such an Act of Parliament, as,
upon mature deliberation, shall be offered to us for the full granting
that indulgence." In conclusion, there appeared a promise to refer to
Parliament all grants and purchases made by officers and soldiers who
might be liable to actions at law, and to pay arrears due to the Army.
[Sidenote: 1660.]
A conference took place the same afternoon between the Lords and
Commons, when it was agreed that, according to the ancient and
fundamental laws of the kingdom, the Government is and ought to be
by King, Lords, and Commons,--a conclusion of the two Houses which
formally re-established Monarchy in England.
Amidst all this haste there were not wanting some who, to use
Clarendon's words, "thought that the guilt of the nation did require
less precipitation than was like to be used, and that the treaty
ought first to be made with the King, and conditions of security
agreed on before His Majesty should be received." The Presbyterians in
Parliament, he further says, were "solicitous that somewhat should be
concluded in veneration of the Covenant; and, at least, that somewhat
should be inserted in their answer to the discountenance of the
Bishops."[78]
[Sidenote: PROGRESS OF RESTORATION.]
Sir Matthew Hale moved, that a Committee might be appointed to consider
the propositions which had been made to Charles I. at Newport, and
the concessions then allowed by him, as affording materials for
a constitutional compact with the Prince now about to ascend the
throne. But no more attention was paid to the wise lawyer than to the
zealous Presbyterians. Monk assured the House that the nation was now
quiet, but he could not answer for the public tranquillity should the
Restoration be delayed.[79] At the same time, the General was quietly
seeking to accelerate the execution of his plans by pressing Sharp,
the agent in London of the Scotch Presbyterians, to go over to the
King at Breda, "to deal that he might write a letter to Mr. Calamy, to
be communicated to the Presbyterian ministers, showing his resolution
to own the godly, sober party, and to stand for the true Protestant
religion in the power of it."[80]
Upon the 2nd of May the House resolved to send a grateful letter to
His Majesty, together with a grant of £50,000 for his immediate use;
and, at the same time, it was resolved to proclaim King Charles the
following day, a ceremony duly performed in Palace Yard, Westminster,
and at Temple Bar, London.
Sermons were delivered before the Houses, and Richard Baxter preached
in St. Paul's Cathedral, before the Lord Mayor and the Corporation,
one of his most spiritual and earnest discourses, entitled "Right
Rejoicing:" with this discourse, the preacher says, the moderate were
pleased and the fanatics were offended, whilst the diocesan party
thought he did suppress their joy.
[Sidenote: 1660.]
Speedily the Proclamation was repeated throughout the kingdom, and
everywhere revived loyalty took a tinge from its ecclesiastical
associations. In cities, where Episcopalians retained ascendancy,
scarlet gowns, scaffolds covered with red cloth, volleys fired by
musqueteers, and cathedral men singing anthems, appeared conspicuously
in the arrangements. A diarist of that period thus describes what he
witnessed:--
"May 12th.--Mem. This day, at the city of Worcester, were placed on
high four scaffolds, one at the Cross, two at the Corn-market, three at
the Knole End, four at or near All-Hallow's Well. The scaffold at the
Cross was encompassed with green, white, and purple colours; the two
first as his own colours, being Prince, the third as King. Mr. Ashby,
the Mayor, a Mercer, and all Aldermen in scarlet, the Sheriff of the
City, the 24 and 48 in their liveries; each trade and free-man marching
with their colours. First went 100 trained city bandmen, after their
captain, Alderman Vernon. Then came the Sheriffs, Thos. Coventry, Esq.,
the Lord Coventry's eldest son, servants; then the two Army companies;
then the several livery companies with their showmen or band; then
the City Officers; then the Mace and Sword-bearers; then the Mayor,
with the High Sheriff and some gentlemen; then all the 24 and 48; then
part of a troop of horse of the Army. The Mayor, mounting the scaffold
with the gentlemen and Aldermen, Mr. John Ashby, reading softly by
degrees the Proclamation of Charles II., to be King of England,
Scotland, France, and Ireland; the Mayor himself spoke it aloud to all
the people; which done, all with a shout said, 'God save the King.'
Then all guns went off, and swords drawn and flourishing over their
heads, drums beating and trumpets blowing, loud music playing before
the Mayor and company, to every scaffold, which was done in the same
manner throughout; and all finished, the Mayor and City gave wine and
biscuits in the chamber liberally. Bonfires made at night throughout
the City, and the King's health with wine was drank freely. Never such
a concourse of people seen upon so short a notice, with high rejoicings
and acclamations for the restoring of the King. God guard him from
his enemies as He ever hath done most miraculously, and send him a
prosperous peaceable reign, and long healthful life, for the happiness
of his subjects, who is their delight."[81]
[Sidenote: PROGRESS OF RESTORATION.]
In places where Presbyterianism prevailed the ceremony differed. At
Sherborne the Proclamation followed "solemn prayers, praises, and
seasonable premonition in the Church." At Manchester, Henry Newcome
went into the pulpit and prayed about half an hour. At Northampton "Mr.
Ford, the minister, went with several others to a great bonfire in the
Market-place, when, after a suitable exhortation, he joined them in
singing the twenty-first Psalm." At Northenbury, Philip Henry preached
a discourse, congratulatory and thanksgiving, from the words, "The
king's heart is in the hand of the Lord" (Proverbs xxi. 1); but, many
years afterwards, he dated a letter 29th of May, as a day in which the
bitter was mingled with the sweet.[82]
Every lover of peace will rejoice that the Restoration was a bloodless
change; but the mode of deciding upon it suggests grave reflections.
After a long period of strife spent in order to bring within limits
the prerogatives of the Crown; after the desperate remedies which had
been adopted for the cure of evils brought on by Royal aggression;
after all which had been done to resist and overcome the intolerance
of the High Church party,--the nation invited Charles Stuart back
without any condition, and opened the way for the re-establishment of
the old order of things, without any provision against the recurrence
of mischief. Such a proceeding, to say the least, exposed the country
to imminent hazard; and the history of the next eight and twenty years
proves that the fears which were entertained by a few were but too well
founded. The old Stuart disposition and habits reappeared, the old
ecclesiastical intolerance returned, and the Revolution of 1688 was
found necessary to supply the defects of the Restoration of 1660.
[Sidenote: 1660.]
[Sidenote: PROGRESS OF RESTORATION.]
Yet, after all, the mode of the Restoration excites less surprise
than lamentation. For it is easy to understand how natural it was
for the Royalist party, even the more moderate portion of it, to
feel extremely anxious to accomplish the one thing which at that
critical juncture seemed to them so necessary. As in private affairs,
as in the exigencies of domestic and social life, people are apt
precipitately to adopt a certain course, at the moment appearing
indispensable--flattering themselves that afterwards, with proper
care, any seriously unpleasant results may be prevented or cured,
that matters can be made all right in the end: so the leaders of the
English people, at that moment, felt the question to be Restoration or
Ruin; and that, the grand prerequisite for renewed prosperity being
secured, other desirable things could be afterwards shaped according
to pleasure or circumstances. Besides, the Presbyterians clung to the
Breda Declaration as a sheet anchor of hope. It was thought then, and
is still so thought by some, that however theoretically desirable
stipulations might have been, it was practically unwise to insist upon
them at the time; that delay in negotiation with the exiled Prince
tended to involve the country in fresh confusions, and exposed it
to the risk of a military despotism; and that what Parliament could
not then safely wait to do might be subsequently effected. After all
reasonable excuses and palliations for the course adopted, that course
is now seen to have been an enormous mistake. The dangers of a little
delay have been assumed, not proved; there could be no probability
of losing the chance of restoring Charles, had Parliament determined
beforehand to bind him to terms. He would gladly have accepted the
Royalty of England, with such guarantees for public liberty as were
accorded by William III. And as to the Army, from which chiefly alarm
arose, it does not appear how the difficulty of keeping Republican
soldiers quiet for a month or so, whilst pacific men were engaged
in laying foundations for the stability of their liberties, could
be greater than the difficulty of keeping those same soldiers quiet
between the decision for the King's return and his actual arrival.
Possible evils, in the form of political intrigues, the conflict of
parties, the further unsettlement of the country, and the postponement
of the Restoration, might be imagined as the result of delay; but over
against them we are justified in placing the evil which did come as
the consequence of haste. And with regard to expectations resting on
a future Parliament--the Parliament now sitting could not calculate
upon what the character and proceedings of its successor might be.
That which really prevented any conditions from being imposed on the
returning Prince, was the want of a few wise heads and a few stout
hearts. Who can believe that if Pym or Hampden, or even Falkland, had
been members of the Convention, matters would have been managed as they
were? We cannot but think that during the infinitely momentous weeks
which made up that month of May, such men would have little heeded
the voting of jewels to Royal messengers, and decisions respecting
State beds and State coaches--things which occupied the Houses for
some time--but would rather have thrown themselves heart and soul into
the work of building up some safe and sure defence against the return
of arbitrary government and ecclesiastical intolerance. But England
was wanting in great Statesmen. There remained one wise, good man who
proposed a pause for the arrangement of conditions: but another man,
selfish and unprincipled, put him down. It is deplorable to think of a
Parliament in which Monk silenced Hale.[83]
[Sidenote: 1660.]
Certain Presbyterian ministers--Reynolds, Calamy, Manton, and
Case--accompanied a deputation from London to express the loyalty
of the citizens. Pepys gives the amusing information, that, as he
was posting in a coach to Scheveling, the wind being very high, he
"saw two boats overset, and the gallants forced to be pulled on
shore by the heels, while their trunks, portmanteaus, hats, and
feathers were swimming in the sea;" the ministers that came with the
Commissioners--Mr. Case amongst the rest--were "sadly dripped."[84]
The King resided at the Hague, and to that pleasant Dutch town the
reverend brethren proceeded without delay; they were graciously
received. They assured Charles, that in obedience to the Covenant,
they had urged upon the people the duty of restoring him; and, after
thanking God for His Majesty's constancy to the Protestant religion,
they declared themselves by no means inimical to moderate Episcopacy;
they only desired that in religion, things held indifferent by those
who used them, should not be imposed upon the consciences of others to
whom they appeared unlawful. The first interview seems to have passed
off pleasantly; another audience was sought by the clergymen for closer
conversation.
[Sidenote: PROGRESS OF RESTORATION.]
The Scotch were very earnest for an exclusive Presbyterian
Establishment in England. They had frequent correspondence with Sharp,
now in Holland, and they urged him to remember the great inconvenience
which would ensue if the King used the Prayer Book upon returning
to his dominions.[85] Whether or not Sharp (then believed to be a
zealous Presbyterian) influenced the London ministers, it is certain
they adopted an intolerant policy. Admitted once more to the Royal
presence[86] they told His Majesty that the people were unaccustomed
to the Common Prayer, and it would be much wondered at, if, as soon as
he landed, he should introduce it in his own chapel. They begged, at
all events, that he would not use it entirely, but only some parts of
it, and permit extempore prayers by his chaplains. The King replied,
reasonably enough, and with some warmth, "that whilst _they_ sought
liberty, _he_ wished to enjoy the same himself." He professed his
strong attachment to the Liturgy, and said, although he would not
severely inquire about the use of it elsewhere he would certainly have
it in his own chapel. Then they besought him not to have the surplice
worn: upon which he declared he would not himself be restrained whilst
giving so much liberty to others; a declaration proper enough had he
adhered to both parts of it. Whatever the Presbyterian deputation
might have said, probably it would have made little difference as to
the issue; yet all must see how foolishly they committed themselves at
the very commencement of their negotiations--giving Charles and his
Court too much ground for meeting the charge of Episcopal intolerance
by the accusation of Presbyterian bigotry.
[Sidenote: 1660.]
Upon the following Sunday, Mr. Hardy, one of the ministers, preached
before the King at the Hague, when some amusing circumstances occurred.
The place appointed for the service was the French Church, and it was
arranged that the English worship should begin as soon as the French
should end. Crowds came from the neighbouring towns to see the Monarch
and his retinue. Precautions were adopted to prevent their admission
in a way which might inconvenience the illustrious worshippers, and
particular care was taken to reserve for the Court a pew "clothed with
black velvet, and covered with a canopy of the same stuff." But another
contingency had not been contemplated--the difficulty of dismissing
those already in the building before others were admitted. The French
congregation wished to wait and witness the subsequent worship, and
Dutch persons of distinction, occupying the velvet pew, would not
retire. The French ministers urged them to withdraw, but there they
were, and there they would remain. The people in possession outwitted
the rest, and outwitted themselves too; for the church being crammed,
and no more being able to enter, the King gave up the idea of going
into it, and attended Divine service in a private room, with as many
of the Lords as the place would accommodate. Mr. Hardy preached from
Isaiah xxvi. 19, "and made so learned and so pathetic a discourse
that there was not any one there which was not touched and edified
therewith."[87] After the Liturgy and sermon the King, according to a
long and elaborate ceremonial, touched certain persons afflicted with
"the evil."
[Sidenote: PROGRESS OF RESTORATION.]
Whilst the Presbyterians were active the Episcopalians were not idle.
The Bishops despatched Mr. Barwick to Breda with a loyal address to
His Majesty, and letter of thanks to Hyde, now Chancellor Clarendon.
Barwick was instructed to report upon ecclesiastical affairs, and to
bring back the Royal commands, particularly as to which of the Bishops
should pay their duty upon their Master's landing; and whether they
should present themselves in their Episcopal habits; and also as to the
appointment of Court Chaplains. Since it had been customary for the
Kings of England to return public thanksgivings at St. Paul's Cathedral
on great occasions, Barwick inquired what was the Royal pleasure as
to the place in which such service should be held, seeing the ruinous
condition of the Metropolitan Church at that time? He met with a
gracious reception, and on the Sunday after his arrival preached before
the King.
The Episcopalians in England very naturally were filled with joy.
As early as the month of March one gave expression to it in violent
language from the pulpit. The prudent Chancellor at Breda, hearing of
these intemperate effusions, had written, in April, begging that the
Episcopalian clergy would restrain their tempers. "And truly I hope,"
he added, "if faults of this kind are not committed that both the
Church and the Kingdom will be better dealt with than is imagined; and
I am confident those good men will be more troubled that the Church
should undergo a new suffering by their indiscretion than for all that
they have suffered hitherto themselves."[88]