[1646 A.D.] speedly reduced. While Fairfax was employed in the western counties Cromwell took Winchester (October 5th) and Basing House, the fortified mansion of the marquis of Winchester (14th); and in the north, Lathom House, which the intrepid countess of Derby1 had defended for two years, Lord Scroop's castle of Bolton, and other places surrendered. The new year opened with the taking of Dartmouth by Fairfax (January 18th), who then resumed the siege of Exeter. At Torrington (February 16th) he totally routed Lord Hopton and his Cornish troops. He followed him into Cornwall, where the people submitted at his approach, and by a treaty (March 14th) Hopton disbanded his army, and surrendered all his arms, stores, and ammunition. The prince of Wales had gone to Scilly, whence he soon after passed over to Jersey, and finally joined his mother at Paris. Penryn and other places surrendered, and the lord-general came back to Exeter, which at length was yielded on articles (April 13th). The whole west being now reduced, Fairfax led his army back to Newbury. Chester had surrendered early in February. Sir Jacob Astley, with a body of three thousand men whom he was leading to Oxford, was attacked (Mar. 22) and totally defeated at Stow in the Wolds, on the borders of Gloucestershire, by Colonel Morgan and Sir William Brereton. "Now you have done your work and may go play, unless you fall out among yourselves," said Sir Jacob to those who had made him a prisoner. The king's only hopes in fact lay in the divisions among his enemies; and had he known (which he never did know) how to act with judgment, he might have recovered a sufficient portion of his regal authority. The breach between the two religious parties was widening every day; the cordiality between the English parliament and their Scottish brethren was also on the wane. Charles intrigued with all these parties. "I am not without hope," he writes to Digby, "that I shall be able to draw either the Presbyterians or Independents to side with me for extirpating one or the other that I should be really king again." He used Montreuil, the French envoy, as his agent in his dealings with the Scots. His great object was to get to London, where he had numerous adherents, and where the peaceparty was now strong. For this purpose he was urgent for a personal treaty, but to this the parliament, suspecting his object, would only consent on condition of his giving a previous assent to bills which they were preparing; the three first of which were the same as those offered at Uxbridge. The commons even went so far as to pass a vote (Mar. 31, 1646), that if the king came within their lines, the militia of London should apprehend those who came with him or resorted to him, and "secure his person from danger," i.e. confine him. They also ordered such as had borne arms against the parliament to quit London by the 6th of April. The king's plan of playing the parties in parliament against one another was not a bad one if he had possessed skill to execute it. This will appear by the following view of that assemby. Until the end of the year 1645 the constitutional party had the preponderance. As a proof may be cited their vote on the 1st of December, in a debate on the proposition for peace. It was as follows. That Fairfax should be made a baron and have 5000l. a year settled on him, and his father be made an earl: Cromwell, Waller, and Haslerig also to be barons, the two former with 2500l., the last with 2000l. a year; Northumberland, Essex, Warwick, and Pembroke to be dukes, and Salisbury and Manchester marquesses; Say, Roberts, Wharton, Willoughby of Parham, and Howard of Escrick to be earls; Holles, a viscount, and Stapleton and Sir 'This heroic lady was a Frenchwoman, a daughter of the noble house of La Trémouille. [1646 A.D.] Henry Vane senior barons. As these were nearly all Presbyterians, this vote, though it speaks little for the disinterestedness of the parliament, proves the strength of that party and their attachment to the monarchic form of government. But when, in consequence of deaths and the secession or expulsion of the royalists, it was found that nearly two hundred seats were vacant, the Presbyterians were obliged to give way and issue writs for new elections, and the house in the beginning of the following year presented an altered appearance. The royalists alone being excluded and the Self-Denying Ordinance being now a dead letter, the officers of the army and others of the Independent party obtained seats; for, as Ludlow i candidly confesses, "honest men (i.e. his own party) in all parts did what they could to promote the elections of such as were most hearty for the accomplishment of our deliverance," by which he means the establishment of a commonwealth. The parties now were more evenly balanced, though the preponderance was still on the Presbyterian side, and the royal name and authority if judiciously managed would have sufficed to incline the beam. THE KING SURRENDERS TO THE SCOTS (1646 A.D.) To resume the narrative: the parliamentary troops began to close in on Oxford, and the king must either resolve to sustain a siege and finally surrender himself a prisoner, or to fly from the town. He chose the latter, and on the night of the 27th of April, he quitted Oxford, having cut his hair and beard, and riding with a portmanteau behind him as the servant of his faithful follower Ashburnham; one Dr. Hudson, a loyal military clergyman who knew the country well, being their guide. They took the road to London. They passed through Uxbridge and Brentford, and thence turned to Harrow-onthe-Hill, where the king finally determined to give up all thoughts of London, and to follow his original design. He proceeded by St. Albans, and finding that his escape in the disguise of a servant was known, he assumed that of a clergyman. At length (30th) he came to Downham in Norfolk, where he remained while Hudson went to Montreuil at Newark. Montreuil had been for some time negotiating on the part of the king with the leaders of the Scottish army. The affair is involved in obscurity; but it would appear that the Scots had overreached the sanguine Frenchman, and led him to give the king hopes of what they never intended to perform. It was arranged that they should receive the monarch in their camp-a measure from which they proposed to themselves many advantages; but at the same time they required it to be done in such a manner as not to implicate them with the English parliament. Their plan was to send a party of cavalry to Harborough, whither the king was to come, as it were, accidentally on his way to Scotland, and he was to command their attendance on him. This plan however had been given up, and Charles on arriving at that place had found none there to meet him. Montreuil, though he now distrusted the Scots, thought when Hudson came to him that the king's only chance was to put himself into their hands. Charles therefore came (May 5) to Montreuil's abode at Southwell, and after dinner the envoy took him to Kelham, Leven's headquarters. Leven raised his hands in real or affected surprise; he and his officers showed the monarch the most marked attention; he assigned him Kelham House for his residence; but when Charles, to try if he was free, gave the word to the guard, Leven said, "I am the older soldier, sir; your majesty had better leave that office to me." They wrote off immediately to the parliament, saying that "they were astonished at the providence of the king's coming into their army, [1646 A.D.] which was so private that it was long ere they could find him there," etc.; and the king having ordered Bellasis to surrender Newark to them, they set out (May 9) on their march homewards, for the commons had voted that the king's person should be disposed of by both houses, and that he should be sent to Warwick castle. Poyntz, with a body of five thousand horse, was ordered to watch the Scottish army; but their march was so rapid that on the 18th the houses had intelligence of their arrival at Newcastle-on-Tyne. Next day they voted that they "had no further need of the army of their brethren the Scots in this kingdom," and voted them 100,000l.; half to be paid when they gave up Newcastle, Carlisle, and other places held by them; the other half when they had entered Scotland. At Newcastle the king was treated with suitable respect, but none of his friends were given access to him. As the establishment of presbytery was a sine qua non with the Scots, he undertook, unaided as he was, to discuss the matter with their great champion Henderson. From the general insincerity of his character it was thought at the time that Charles was not in earnest in his maintenance of Episcopacy, but his sincerity in this matter is now beyond question. He had consented to its abolition in Scotland, but it was with a secret design of restoring it when he should have the power. He had in a similar manner, as we have seen, agreed to the abolition of Protestantism in Ireland; and as his attachment to the Protestant faith cannot be questioned we fear he meant to deceive the Catholics also. Yet at this very time he wished to throw himself into their hands. In a letter to Glamorgan (July 20) he says, "Tell the nuncio, that if once I can come into his and your hands, which ought to be extremely wished for by you both, as well for the sake of England as Ireland, since all the rest as I see despise me, I will do it." He also, while at Newcastle, meditated an escape by sea, but whether he intended to go to France or Ireland is uncertain. At this very time too, he was harassed by letters from the queen, Jermyn, Colepeper, and others, at Paris, and the foreign residents there, urging him to give up the church; the queen even threatening to go into a monastery if he refused. Yet he stood firm. In truth he saw that he should gain nothing by it, for nothing short of the militia would content the parliament, and this the queen and his other friends would not allow him to part with. There were two points now under debate between the English and the Scots; the one the disposal of the royal person, the other the settlement of the arrears due to the Scottish army. The Scots declared (July 4) "that as they came into England out of affection, and not in a mercenary way, so they will be as willing to return home, and want of pay shall be no hindrance thereunto." In reply to this it was voted that the kingdom had no more need of them, and "is no longer able to bear them." The Scots (Aug. 12) then proposed to evacuate the kingdom, provided they were paid for their losses, etc.; it was voted (Aug. 14th) to give them 100,000l. and to have their accounts audited. "The houses," says Whitelocke," "now saw the advantage of keeping up their army, as that which the more inclined the Scots to come to this offer.' The Scots (19th) stated their demands at 500,000l., but agreed (Sept. 1) to take 400,000l., which sum the parliament consented to give; and so far the transaction appears to have had no reference to the king. In the end of August the parliament sent nineteen propositions to the king; they were in substance the same with the Uxbridge articles, but the militia, with power to employ it, was to remain with the parliament for twenty years. To these the king gave a positive refusal, veiled indeed under the demand of a personal treaty. The enemies of peace and royalty exulted, [1646 A.D.] the moderate party were dejected at this event. The arrangements having been effected respecting the Scottish arrears, it was voted (Sept. 18) that the king's person should be disposed of as the two houses should think fit, but that no dispute on this subject should interfere with the treaties or the return of the Scots army. The Scottish commissioners strongly asserted the right of their nation to a share in the disposal of the king. In November the Scottish parliament met; Hamilton, who was now at liberty, exerted himself strongly in favour of the king; all were of opinion that he should accept the propositions, but Charles was immovable on the subject of the church. A vote was notwithstanding obtained (Dec. 16) to maintain his personal freedom and right to the English throne. The general assembly, however, having declared it unlawful to support him while he refused to assent to the covenant, and the parliament, being aware of the madness of engaging in a war with England, and advised by Holles and the leading Presbyterians there that the surrender of the king was the only means of causing the Independent army to be disbanded, who were the great enemies of the king and of peace; they accordingly gave him up to commissioners sent to receive him (Feb. 1, 1647). Charles gladly left the Scots, and he was conducted to one of his mansions named Holdenby or Holmby House near Althorpe, in Northamptonshire. CHARLES A CAPTIVE IN ENGLAND Charles himself said that he "was bought and sold," and the charge of selling their king has been down to the present day reiterated against the Scots. There are no doubt many circumstances in the affair which have a suspicious appearance. It seems certain that they would not have gotten so large a sum from the parliament as they did if the person of the king had not been in their hands, and they probably took advantage of this circumstance to insist on their demands. But there are no sufficient grounds for charging them with inviting him to their camp with this design; they did not give him up till they had no choice but that or war; they acted under the advice of the friends of monarchy in the English parliament; they stipulated in the most express terms for the safety of his person; nay, to the very last, if he would have given them satisfaction on the subject of religion, they would have declined surrendering him. Like the monarch himself, they were unhappily situated; but we do not think that they can be justly charged with the guilt of having sold their king. The civil war, after a duration of nearly four years, was now at an end. Oxford, Worcester, and other places had surrendered; the old marquis of Worcester defended Raglan Castle against Fairfax and five thousand men, but he was obliged at last to open his gates (Aug. 19); and two days later Pendennis Castle in Cornwall also surrendered. Harlech Castle in North Wales was the last to submit (Mar. 30, 1647). Favourable terms were granted in all cases, and the articles were honourably observed. Much and justly as intestine warfare is to be deprecated, the English may look back with pride to this civil contest, unexampled in the history of the world. It does not, like the civil wars of other countries, disgust us by numerous butcheries and other "If it be not admitted they sold him," says Sir P. Warwick, "it must be confessed they parted with him for a good price." [Gardiner points out how gladly the Scotch would have protected Charles had he been willing to comply with what they felt to be just and due their creed. He thinks that the Scots "get less than justice" in the accounts of this transaction, as Charles' one idea in taking refuge with them was to get the two nations at war.] [1646 A.D.] savage atrocities; all was open and honourable warfare; a generous humanity for the most part was displayed on both sides; and those who were finally victorious, to their honour, sent none of the vanquished to the scaffold. While awarding praise we cannot in justice pass over the Catholic nobility and gentry of England. Urged by an impulse of generous loyalty, as appears to us, rather than by any cold calculations of interest, they ranged themselves on the side of the king, though they knew but too well that he was at all times ready to sacrifice them, and that they were the persons on whom the vengeance of the parliament would fall most heavily; in the royal cause they wasted their estates, and shed their blood; and dead must he be to generous feeling who honours not the names of the marquesses of Worcester and Winchester, Sir Marmaduke Langdale, and the other Catholic nobles and knights who fought on the side of royalty in the civil contest. Montrose on receiving orders from the king laid down his arms and retired to the continent. Ormonde had by the royal command concluded a peace with the Irish Catholics, but the nuncio and the clergy having assembled at Waterford declared it void (Aug. 6). The nuncio then assumed the supreme power, and at the head of the united armies of Preston and Owen O'Neil1 advanced against Dublin. As Ormonde had wasted the country they were obliged to retire, but he was well aware that it must fall into their hands if not relieved from England. The king was now a captive, and powerless; the Irish Catholics were entirely ruled by their priesthood, and nothing short of the extirpation of Protestantism and the English interest would content them. To avert this Ormonde entered into treaty with the parliament, and he agreed (Feb. 22, 1647) to put Dublin and the other garrisons into their hands. The sequestration was taken off from his own estate, and he had permission given him to reside for some time in England. The Presbyterian system was at this time established by ordinance of parliament; each parish was to have its minister and lay elders; a number of adjoining parishes were to form a classis with its presbytery of ministers and elders; several classes a province with its assembly; and finally, a national assembly over all. But the system never came into full operation except in London and Lancashire; the parliament could not be brought to allow of the divine right of presbytery; they greatly limited the power of the keys, and they allowed of appeals from ecclesiastical courts. In their zeal for uniformity, hatred of toleration, lust of power, and tyrannical exercise of it, the Presbyterian clergy fell nothing short of the prelatical party who had been their persecutors. The moderate party in parliament lost at this time a great support by the death of the earl of Essex (Sept. 14). He died in consequence of overheating himself in the chase of a stag in Windsor Forest. He was buried with great state in Westminster Abbey (Oct. 22); the members of both houses, the civil and military officers, and all the troops in London attending the funeral.u Gardiner ascribes the military downfall of Charles to two facts: in the first place his cause appealed to the cavalier and aristocratic elements, while the great middle class and trade elements, the farmers and yeomen either kept aloof or sided against him; in the second place, he offended the English by his incessant appeals for aid, to the Welsh (who made up a large part of his army at Naseby), to the Irish, French, Lorrainers, Dutch and Scotch. Cromwell on the other hand stood for the national spirit.a 'Preston was the general of the Catholics of the English blood, O'Neil of the Ulster Irish, |