The History of England - Vols. 1 to 6 (420 page)

When the king presented himself to this company, a great and 18th Sept. Treaty of

sensible alteration was remarked in his aspect, from what it Newport.

appeared the year before, when he resided at Hampton Court.

The moment his servants had been removed, he had laid aside all care of his person, and had allowed his beard and hair to grow, and to hang dishevelled and neglected.

His hair was become almost entirely gray; either from the decline of years, or from that load of sorrows, under which he laboured, and which, though borne with constancy, preyed inwardly on his sensible and tender mind. His friends beheld with compassion, and perhaps even his enemies, that
grey and discrowned head;
as he himself terms it, in a copy of verses, which the truth of the sentiment, rather than any

elegance of expression, renders very pathetic.f
Having in vain endeavoured by courage to defend his throne from his armed adversaries, it now behoved him, by reasoning and persuasion, to save some fragments of it from these peaceful, and no less implacable negotiators.

The vigour of the king’s mind, notwithstanding the seeming decline of his body, here appeared unbroken and undecayed. The parliamentary commissioners would allow none of his council to be present, and refused to enter into reasoning with any but himself. He alone, during the transactions of two months, was obliged to maintain the argument against fifteen men of the greatest parts and capacity in both houses; and no advantage was ever obtained over him.
g
This was the scene, above all others, in which he was qualified to excel. A quick conception, a cultivated understanding, a chaste elocution, a dignified manner; by these accomplishments he triumphed in all discussions of cool and temperate reasoning.
The king is much changed,
said the earl of Salisbury to Sir Philip Warwic:
He is extremely improved of late. No,
replied Sir Philip;
he was always so: But you are now at last sensible of it.
h
Sir Henry Vane, discoursing with his fellow commissioners, drew an argument from the king’s uncommon abilities, why the terms of pacification must be rendered more strict and

rigid.i
But Charles’s capacity shone not equally in action as in reasoning.

The first point, insisted on by the parliamentary commissioners, was the king’s recalling all his proclamations and declarations against the parliament, and the acknowledging, that they had taken arms in their own defence. He frankly offered the former concession; but long scrupled the latter. The falsehood, as well as indignity of that acknowledgement, begat in his breast an extreme reluctance against it. The king had, no doubt, in some particulars of moment, invaded, from a seeming necessity, the privileges of his people: But having renounced all claim to these usurped powers, PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)

341

http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/792

Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 5

having confessed his errors, and having repaired every breach in the constitution, and even erected new ramparts, in order to secure it; he could no longer, at the commencement of the war, be represented as the aggressor. However it might be pretended, that the former display of his arbitrary inclinations, or rather his monarchical principles, rendered an offensive or preventive war in the parliament prudent and reasonable; it could never, in any propriety of speech, make it be termed a defensive one. But the parliament, sensible, that the letter of the law condemned them as rebels and traitors, deemed this point absolutely necessary for their future security: And the king, finding, that peace could be obtained on no other terms, at last yielded to it. He only entered a protest, which was admitted; that no concession, made by him, should be valid, unless the whole treaty of pacification were concluded.
k

He agreed, that the parliament should retain, during the term of twenty years, the power over the militia and army, and that of levying what money they pleased for their support. He even yielded to them the right of resuming, at any time afterwards, this authority, whenever they should declare such a resumption necessary for public safety. In effect, the important power of the sword was for ever ravished from him

and his successors.l

He agreed, that all the great offices, during twenty years, should be filled by both

houses of parliament.m
He relinquished to them the entire government of Ireland, and the conduct of the war there.
n
He renounced the power of the wards, and accepted of

100,000 pounds a year in lieu of it.o
He acknowledged the validity of their great seal,

and gave up his own.p
He abandoned the power of creating peers without consent of parliament. And he agreed, that all the debts, contracted in order to support the war against him, should be paid by the people.

So great were the alterations, made on the English constitution by this treaty, that the king said, not without reason, that he had been more an enemy to his people by these concessions, could he have prevented them, than by any other action of his life.

Of all the demands of the parliament, Charles refused only two. Though he relinquished almost every power of the crown, he would neither give up his friends to punishment, nor desert what he esteemed his religious duty. The severe repentance, which he had undergone, for abandoning Strafford, had, no doubt, confirmed him in the resolution never again to be guilty of a like error. His long solitude and severe afflictions had contributed to rivet him the more in those religious principles, which had ever a considerable influence over him. His desire, however, of finishing an accommodation induced him to go as far in both these particulars, as he thought any wise consistent with his duty.

The estates of the royalists being, at that time, almost entirely under sequestration, Charles, who could give them no protection, consented, that they should pay such compositions, as they and the parliament could agree on; and only begged, that they might be made as moderate as possible. He had not the disposal of offices; and it seemed but a small sacrifice to consent, that a certain number of his friends should be

rendered incapable of public employments.q
But when the parliament demanded a bill of attainder and banishment against seven persons, the marquess of Newcastle, lord PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)

342

http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/792

Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 5

Digby, lord Biron, Sir Marmaduke Langdale, Sir Richard Granville, Sir Francis Doddington, and judge Jenkins, the king absolutely refused compliance: Their banishment for a limited time he was willing to agree to.
r

Religion was the fatal point about which the differences had arisen; and of all others, it was the least susceptible of composition or moderation between the contending parties. The parliament insisted on the establishment of presbytery, the sale of the chapter lands, the abolition of all forms of prayer, and strict laws against catholics.

The king offered to retrench every thing, which he did not esteem of apostolical institution: He was willing to abolish archbishops, deans, prebends, canons: He offered, that the chapter lands should be let at low leases during ninety-nine years: He consented, that the present church government should continue during three years.
s

After that time, he required not, that any thing should be restored to bishops but the power of ordination, and even that power to be exercised by advice of the presbyters.
t

If the parliament, upon the expiration of that period, still insisted on their demand, all other branches of episcopal jurisdiction were abolished, and a new form of church government must, by common consent, be established. The book of common prayer he was willing to renounce, but required the liberty of using some other liturgy in his

own chapel:u
A demand, which, though seemingly reasonable, was positively refused by the parliament.

In the dispute on these articles, one is not surprised, that two of the parliamentary theologians should tell the king,
That if he did not consent to the utter abolition of
episcopacy, he would be damned.
But it is not without some indignation, that we read the following vote of the lords and commons. “The houses, out of their detestation to that abominable idolatry used in the mass, do declare, that they cannot admit of, or consent unto, any such indulgence in any law, as is desired by his majesty for exempting the queen and her family from the penalties to be enacted against the exercise of the mass.”
w
The treaty of marriage, the regard to the queen’s sex and high station, even common humanity; all considerations were undervalued, in comparison of their bigotted prejudices.
NOTE [JJ]

It was evidently the interest, both of king and parliament, to finish their treaty with all expedition; and endeavour, by their combined force, to resist, if possible, the usurping fury of the army. It seemed even the interest of the parliament, to leave, in the king’s hand, a considerable share of authority, by which he might be enabled to protect them and himself, from so dangerous an enemy. But the terms, on which they insisted, were so rigorous, that the king, fearing no worse from the most implacable enemies, was in no haste to come to a conclusion. And so great was the bigotry on both sides, that they were willing to sacrifice the greatest civil interests, rather than relinquish the most minute of their theological contentions. From these causes, assisted by the artifice of the independents, the treaty was spun out to such a length, that the invasions and insurrections were every where subdued; and the army had leisure to execute their violent and sanguinary purposes.

Hamilton, having entered England with a numerous, though

Civil war and

undisciplined, army, durst not unite his forces with those of invasion repressed.

Langdale; because the English royalists had refused to take the PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)

343

http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/792

Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 5

covenant; and the Scottish presbyterians, though engaged for the king, refused to join them on any other terms. The two armies marched together though at some distance; nor could even the approach of the parliamentary army under Cromwel, oblige the covenanters to consult their own safety, by a close union with the royalists. When principles are so absurd and so destructive of human society, it may safely be averred, that, the more sincere and the more disinterested they are, they only become the more ridiculous and more odious.

Cromwel feared not to oppose 8000 men, to the numerous armies of 20,000, commanded by Hamilton and Langdale. He attacked the latter by surprize, near Preston in Lancashire;
y
and, though the royalists made a brave resistance, yet, not being succoured in time by their confederates, they were almost entirely cut in pieces.

Hamilton was next attacked, put to rout, and pursued to Utoxeter, where he surrendered himself prisoner. Cromwel followed his advantage; and marching into Scotland with a considerable body, joined Argyle, who was also in arms; and having suppressed Laneric, Monro, and other moderate presbyterians, he placed the power entirely in the hands of the violent party. The ecclesiastical authority, exalted above the civil, exercised the severest vengeance on all who had a share in Hamilton’s engagement, as it was called; nor could any of that party recover trust, or even live in safety, but by doing solemn and public penance for taking arms, by authority of parliament, in defence of their lawful sovereign.

The chancellor, Loudon, who had, at first, countenanced Hamilton’s enterprize, being terrified with the menaces of the clergy, had, some time before, gone over to the other party; and he now, openly in the church, though invested with the highest civil character in the kingdom, did penance for his obedience to the parliament, which he termed a
carnal self–seeking.
He accompanied his penance with so many tears, and such pathetical addresses to the people for their prayers in this his uttermost sorrow and distress, that an universal weeping and lamentation took place among the deluded

audience.z

The loan of great sums of money, often to the ruin of families, was exacted from all such as lay under any suspicion of favouring the king’s party, though their conduct had been ever so inoffensive. This was a device, fallen upon by the ruling party, in order, as they said, to reach
Heart Malignants.
a
Never, in this island, was known a more severe and arbitrary government, than was generally exercised, by the patrons of liberty in both kingdoms.

The siege of Colchester terminated in a manner no less unfortunate than Hamilton’s engagement, for the royal cause. After suffering the utmost extremities of famine, after feeding on the vilest aliments; the garrison desired, at last, to capitulate. Fairfax required them to surrender at discretion; and he gave such an explanation to these terms, as to reserve to himself power, if he pleased, to put them all instantly to the sword. The officers endeavoured, though in vain, to persuade the soldiers, by making a vigorous sally, to break through, at least, to sell their lives as dear as possible. They

were obligedb
to accept of the conditions offered; and Fairfax, instigated by Ireton, to whom Cromwel, in his absence, had consigned over the government of the passive general, seized Sir Charles Lucas and Sir George Lisle, and resolved to make them PLL v6.0 (generated September, 2011)

344

http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/792

Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 5

instant sacrifices to military justice. This unusual severity was loudly exclaimed against by all the prisoners. Lord Capel, fearless of danger, reproached Ireton with it; and challenged him, as they were all engaged in the same honourable cause, to exercise the same impartial vengeance on all of them. Lucas was first shot, and he himself, gave orders to fire, with the same alacrity, as if he had commanded a platoon of his own soldiers. Lisle instantly ran and kissed the dead body, then chearfully presented himself to a like fate. Thinking that the soldiers, destined for his execution, stood at too great a distance, he called to them to come nearer: One of them replied,
I’ll warrant you, Sir, we’ll hit you:
He answered smiling,
Friends, I have been nearer
you when you have missed me.
Thus perished this generous spirit, not less beloved for his modesty and humanity, than esteemed for his courage and military conduct.