anomalous. Claiming exemption for themselves, in many important respects, from the interference of the state, they nevertheless held a direct relationship to it, of such a kind as was most favourable to their own advancement. At a time when their unanimous advocacy of perfect liberty of conscience might have led Cromwell and parliament to a reconsideration of the whole question of establishments, and to a reconstruction of civil affairs after the manner of the American Republic, they stopped short. They yielded to their fears respecting the consequences of universal toleration, instead of confiding in justice and the God of truth. It is conceded that, within the sphere defined by their peculiar opinions, they were generous and tolerant; but the limitations of that sphere were such as to exclude from perfect liberty large classes of their fellow-citizens as much entitled to it as themselves. In some particulars, Oliver Cromwell was greatly in advance of them. He actually conceded a liberty to both papists and episcopalians, which his own party disavowed; and would have admitted the Jews to the privileges of citizenship, if he had not been thwarted by those who ought to have been foremost in hailing the concession with joy.

If the Independents of this period had been united, on a proper basis; if they had known and faithfully advocated the whole length of their own principles; if they had stood entirely aloof from all connection with the state in their religious capacity; if they had refused to receive any of the emoluments formerly appropriated by the anglican hierarchy; if they had thus done their best to instruct both rulers and ruled, by example as well as by precept, in the great principles of civil justice and religious freedom; the im

partiality of their demeanour could not have failed to secure the admiration of their country and the advancement of their principles in succeeding years, even though it might not have averted the perils which afterwards overtook them, and in which, for a season, their own liberties, and those of the nation, were overwhelmed.*

Richard Cromwell succeeded to the protectorate in his thirty-third year. The mildness of his character, which would have suited the reign of legitimacy, unfitted him for a post of so much responsibility and danger. He was well received on his accession. Addresses, of a flattering character, were sent to him. from all quarters; the army, the navy, and even the city, gave in their adhesion to his government; and for a few months his administration proceeded with tranquillity. Even the royalists regarded him with favour, and the presbyterians laid by much of the acerbity of temper which they had evinced towards the victorious Oliver. But this promising aspect of affairs was shortlived, and was succeeded by one of increasing alarm and peril.

* John Goodwin protested with his dying breath, as we have seen, against the doings of the congregational Independents. Milton also lifted up his trumpet voice to the last, in loud and warning notes. In 1659, he published his two famous treatises,—the one against force, and the other against hire, as employed by the state, in matters of religion. The first, addressed to Richard's parliament, is entitled, "A Treatise of Civil Power in Ecclesiastical Causes;" the latter, addressed to the revived Long Parliament, after Richard's abdication, is entitled, "Considerations touching the likeliest Means to Remove Hirelings out of the Church, etc." Our limits alone prevent quotation from these masterly works. See an admirable, though brief account of both, in the Introductory Review to Milton's Prose Works, by Robert Fletcher.

Richard's first parliament met on the 27th January, 1659. The writs were directed after the ancient fashion. The disfranchised boroughs regained the privilege which, on account of their smallness, they had lost in the time of Oliver; while the large towns, such as Manchester, Leeds, and Halifax, were deprived of the franchise. The policy of Richard's government, in thus reverting to the old law of election, may be seen in the result. No doubt, the change which Cromwell had effected in the representative system had been fruitful of dispute; but the representatives thereby chosen were more likely to act for the welfare of the nation, than the nominees of small and corrupt boroughs. Many concealed royalists got into parliament, in consequence of this return to the old system, while the return itself was regarded as the first step in a counter-revolution; and before long, both parliament and army were divided into factions. The Independents now became suspicious of the proceedings of the presbyterians; perhaps not without good reason, remembering, as they did, that the chief cause of their enmity to Oliver, had been his determination to suppress their intolerant proceedings. They feared lest their influence in parliament and in the government should give them an undue ascendancy. A coalition was at length formed between the officers of the army and the republicans in the House of Commons, the object of which was the dissolution of parliament. Their designs were successful. Against his better judgment, but with a commendable anxiety to avoid bloodshed, Richard dissolved parliament, abdicated the throne, and retired to private life. The Long Parliament was now revived, and with it all the party feelings that had

threatened the nation at the time when Oliver Cromwell dismissed it in 1653. Endless confusion speedily arose, and the presbyterians joined the royalists in attempting to recall the Stuarts.

The army and the Independents were now split up into various sections, the chief of which, with Fleetwood at its head, met at Wallingford-House. Owen and Vane appear to have been associated with this party. In August, 1659, when the Long Parliament was in danger from the combination of royalists and presbyterians, the congregational churches in London offered to raise three regiments for its defence, and obtained permission to do so.* They had become alarmed, and not without reason, for their own liberty. They saw before them nothing less than ruin, should the enemies of the commonwealth succeed in their aims.

The chief instrument in promoting the designs of the royalists was General Monk. Like many others, he was nominally an Independent, but really a man of no character. During Cromwell's vigorous administration, he had discharged his duties efficiently, as the deputy of the protector in Scotland; but now that the condition of public affairs had changed, he looked round on the distraction of parties with a purely selfish regard to his own interests. Owen, and the Independents of London, were anxious to prevent the evil consequences apprehended from his mingling in the fray, and sent a deputation on the ground of the connection subsisting between him and the Independents, to remind him of his duties at that season, and to deprecate his proposed advance with the army of Scotland into England. Monk pro* Whitelocke's Memoirs, p. 683; Orme's Life of Owen, p. 217.

tested that his only desire was the settlement of the Commonwealth, with proper securities for liberty, civil and religious. By his dissimulation, he prevented the English army from effectually opposing his movements, and marched into London; to the great joy of the presbyterians and royalists, who looked upon him as an ally, or at least as an antagonistic power to the already divided army of the Independents.

After many hypocritical protestations that he was solely concerned for the consolidation of the commonwealth, Monk declared for a free parliament. Such a declaration, at such a time, was neither more nor less than a call for the restoration of monarchy. The Rump Parliament was again dissolved. The elections throughout the country were favourable to the royal family. The House of Lords, which revived in its ancient character, joined with the House of Commons in inviting the exiled heir of the House of Stuart home. All opposition was now in vain. Amidst great rejoicings, Charles the Second ascended the long vacant throne of his father.