340

The Scots give up the King

[1646-7 Presbyterian and Parliamentary tyranny was to be set up. The King, still hoping for assistance from France, made an evasive reply. The Scots pressed him to take the Covenant, offering, if he would do so, to support his rights in other respects. The Queen, who thought one heretic as bad as another, begged him to throw over the Church.

At length, on the rupture of the Irish peace, and the dissipation of hopes from France, the King informed the Scottish Commissioners (October 13) that he was ready to give up the militia for ten years, or even for life, and to grant Presbyterianism for five years, provided that a regulated Episcopacy should follow. These proposals failed to satisfy the Scots; still less could they satisfy the English Parliament. The two bodies now came to terms. The Scots had already offered to withdraw their forces on payment of their expenses and arrears. They estimated these at half-a-million; Parliament offered £400,000, which the Scots agreed to accept. The Houses voted that they should dispose of the King; and the Scottish Parliament, convinced at last that Charles was obdurate, assented. At the end of January, 1647, the Scots, having received half the sum to be paid them, handed over the King to the English Commissioners, and left Newcastle. By February 11 the last of them had recrossed the Tweed. They have been much blamed for "selling their King"; but this is unjust. The money they received was in discharge of a debt incurred by the Parliament which their assistance had saved. They rendered up the King because he refused to assent to the only terms which would have enabled them to raise their fellowcountrymen in his behalf.

The Scots having withdrawn to their own country, and the King having been brought south and lodged at Holmby House in Northamptonshire, Parliament and army were now left face to face, to settle their own differences and their dispute with the King as best they could. The Presbyterian majority in the Houses and in the City of London appear to have thought that, having got rid of one body of inconvenient allies, it would be comparatively easy to dispense with the other. There were several reasons which made them anxious to accomplish this end. In the first place, it would leave their hands free to deal with the King. Secondly, the existence of an armed force, now predominantly Independent, was an obstacle to the settlement of the ecclesiastical question on a strictly Presbyterian basis. Lastly, the cost of the army was enormous, and imposed a strain on the resources of the country which, though borne with more or less equanimity while the war lasted, was now regarded as unnecessary, and would, if continued, make the Parliamentary Government highly unpopular. The Parliamentary revenue has been calculated at about a million and a half, more than twice as much as Charles had ever enjoyed. Of this sum the army and the navy together swallowed up, in 1647, about three-fifths. The ravages of war, bad harvests, and a natural falling-off of trade weakened

1647]

Proposed disbandment of the army

341

the national capacity for bearing such a burden, and increased the general discontent. There was good reason, therefore, for a large reduction of military expenditure. The continued existence of rebellion in Ireland, which it was highly important to put down, supplied a pretext for transporting a large part of the force to that country. The rest, it was thought, might be disbanded. But Parliament reckoned without its host.

In February, 1647, a scheme for the reduction of the army was brought forward; it passed both Houses by March 6. No infantry was to be kept in England, except in garrisons; the fortresses were to be mostly demolished, so that the number of garrison-troops would be but small; on an emergency, infantry for the field could be furnished by the trained bands. The cavalry, as requiring more training, was to be kept up at the figure of 6600. A force of about 12,500 men, horse and foot, was to be sent to Ireland; this force, however, was not to be composed of existing units, but of volunteers a measure which would destroy that potent military element, esprit de corps. The remaining infantry, amounting to about half that of the New Model army, were to disappear. Had Parliament at the same time satisfied the soldiers' just claims for arrears of pay, there might have been some chance for this project; but money was scarce, and Parliament neglected this indispensable condition of success.

A deputation was sent to Saffron Walden, where the bulk of the army was encamped, to invite volunteers for Ireland; but only about one in ten accepted the invitation. The officers put inconvenient questions, asking especially for satisfaction in regard to arrears, and security for pay and subsistence if they went to Ireland. The arrears varied from about four months to ten or more, and amounted in all to over £330,000. The soldiers also demanded an indemnity for their actions in the war. Had they got satisfaction on these points, many would have been willing to go to Ireland, preserving their regimental organisation and under Fairfax and Cromwell as their leaders; but Parliament had made choice of Skippon and Massey, both Presbyterians; and it evidently intended to break up the army and get rid of the prominent Independents. The soldiers argued, "If they be thus scornfully dealt withal for their faithful services whilst the sword is in their hands, what shall their usage be when they are dissolved!"

As,

They therefore drew up a petition to Fairfax, asking his assistance in obtaining the above-mentioned demands and certain others of a moderate nature. Parliament, highly indignant, declared the petition to be mutinous, but made no motion to redress the wrong. however, the Parliamentary Commissioners with the army failed to obtain volunteers for Ireland, and many of those who had offered their services withdrew, Parliament was compelled, in April, to vote six weeks' arrears of pay, afterwards increased to eight, to be paid on disbandment. Such

342

The army resists, and carries off the King

[1647 a resolution, while recognising the justice of the complaints, did not go near to satisfying them; and the army began to organise itself with a view to pressing its claims. Towards the end of April, the soldiers of eight cavalry regiments chose agents, or "Agitators," two for each regiment, to carry their petition to Westminster, and otherwise to act on their behalf. Early in May the example set was followed by the whole army. Parliament, in much alarm, sent Cromwell and other military members down to pacify the soldiers, with instructions to promise an indemnity, immediate payment of a large part of the arrears, and security for the rest. The efforts of the mediators were successful; and the officers, after consultation with the Agitators, drew up a friendly "Declaration," asking that these somewhat vague promises might be further defined (May 16).

Meanwhile Parliament had been casting about for the means of offering armed resistance, if necessary, to the petitioners, and had issued orders remodelling the City militia, from which all Independents were to be excluded. But a much larger design was now being hatched. Plans were considered for bringing the Scots again upon the scene; and four Commissioners, with Lauderdale at their head, were sent by the Scottish Committee of Estates to England, with instructions to reopen negotiations with the King. Ostensibly they were to support the Newcastle Propositions; secretly they were instructed to drop the demand that the King should take the Covenant, and to insist only on a temporary adoption of Presbyterianism. On May 13 Lauderdale was allowed to go to Holmby House, whence the King had, on the previous day, addressed a communication to Parliament offering to adopt Presbyterianism for three years, and to resign the militia for ten. A few days later Parliament agreed to accept this offer as a basis for discussion.

The foundation of an alliance between Scottish and English Presbyterians and an understanding with Charles being thus laid, Parliament proceeded to vote the disbandment of all soldiers who should not go to Ireland. The Agitators at once protested. Under Cromwell's influence Parliament offered some concessions; but on May 25 the majority decided to proceed with the disbandment, and to bring the artillery train from Oxford to London. The Agitators now determined to resist ; the army got out of hand; and mutinies broke out at Chelmsford and elsewhere. The Presbyterians were discussing a plan for removing the King to Scotland; some time previously the army had considered the advisability of capturing him for itself. Face to face with military anarchy, Cromwell was obliged to take a side; and, with his connivance at least, Cornet Joyce carried off the King to Newmarket, where a general rendezvous had been arranged (June 4-8). Fairfax had nothing to do with Joyce's raid, but he and Cromwell joined the army at Newmarket; and, on the initiative of the latter, a "Solemn Engagement" was subscribed. Throwing the blame on their Presbyterian opponents

1647] The army marches on London. Its demands 343

the soldiers agreed not to disband without receiving satisfaction, and established a " Council of the Army," composed of officers and representatives of the men, which should in future conduct their joint affairs. The army thus took up an independent position in the State.

Emboldened by this success, yet anxious to justify its action in the eyes of the world, the army now widened its demands. Hitherto the soldiers had merely claimed justice and consideration for themselves; they now began to assert the rights of the nation against a tyrannical Parliament, and to formulate political views. From their camp at Triploe Heath, a few miles south of Cambridge, they sent a remonstrance to the City of London (June 10), demanding a recognition of their rights, not as soldiers but as Englishmen, and threatening to enforce them. They then set out to march by Royston towards the capital. On June 15 they issued a " Declaration," in which they asserted their right, as not being "a mere mercenary army," to speak for the people whose liberties they had been called on to defend. For the first time they put forward a positive political programme, in the formulation of which the dominant influence of Henry Ireton has been traced. They demanded that Parliament should dissolve itself; that the future duration of Parliaments should be fixed by statute; that offences should be punished by law; and that the right of petition should be recognised. The presentation of this remarkable document to the House of Commons was followed by charges against eleven members, including Holles and William Waller, whose suspension was demanded on the ground that they had sought to overthrow the rights and liberties of subjects, and had sown dissension between army and Parliament. Parliament refused these demands, whereupon the army moved to Uxbridge. The Commons gave way; and, with permission of the House, the eleven members retired.

Other demands, more specially concerning the army itself, were subsequently put forward; but the real point at issue was whether Parliament should remain predominantly Presbyterian, and therefore intolerant, or not. Some of the hotter heads in the army were for entering London and purging the House of Commons at once; but Cromwell, who acted throughout as a mediator, dissuaded them for the time; and the army withdrew to Bedford (July 22). The Presbyterians, encouraged by this apparent hesitation, recovered themselves. A mob from the City invaded the Houses, and compelled them to reverse their recent concession; and the eleven members returned. Meanwhile the army had opened direct negotiations with the King, offering to restore him to the throne, and to accept Episcopacy, if only they could have complete toleration. Thus from the Scots and from the army he received offers of help, combined in the one case with Presbyterianism, in the other with religious liberty.

On July 17 Ireton had sketched out a policy for the army in the farsighted plan called the "Heads of the Proposals." Under this scheme

344 "Heads of the Proposals."-Cromwell's action [1647

the Bishops were to be deprived of coercive jurisdiction; no penalties were to be inflicted on nonconformists; and the Covenant was to be put aside. The existing Parliament was to fix a date for its dissolution; future Parliaments were to be biennial, with a redistribution of seats giving more weight to populous towns and districts; and their duration was to be limited. A Council of State, to be named at first by agreement, was to exercise a large control over public affairs, including the regulation of the militia for ten years. During the same period, Parliament was to appoint military commanders and the higher civil officials; after which time the King was to appoint commanders with the approval of Parliament, and to choose civil officials out of a list of three nominated by Parliament in each case. Stipulations for a lenient treatment of Royalists concluded this statesmanlike paper, which, however, was too radical to stand much chance of acceptance at that date.

Having made its intentions clear, the army now advanced upon London, which was almost in a state of anarchy. As it approached, some 67 Independent members, including the two Speakers, Manchester and Lenthall, joined it outside the walls, and returned with it when, on August 6, it marched through the City. The eleven members and other Presbyterians fled; and for a little time, the Independents had a majority in Parliament. The first collision between the military and the civil power had ended, naturally, in the victory of the army; but the advantage which it had gained was only temporary.

Cromwell had for some time striven to reach a basis of agreement with the King—an attitude which brought him into suspicion with the hotter spirits in the army, who thought him to be bargaining for personal honours and private ends. As he was already suspected by the majority in Parliament, detested by many, and feared by all, his position as a mediator became very difficult. He was charged with hypocrisy ; and his changes of front, though not difficult to explain on another hypothesis, gave some colour to the charge. As he said himself, when charged with ambition, “no one rises so high as he who knows not whither he is going." But an impartial estimate will not charge him with aiming at the height which he eventually reached. His talents had placed him in a position of responsibility from which he could not retire without shame, even had his fervent temper and his consciousness of ability allowed him to withdraw. Being there, he met each difficulty as it arose, not looking far ahead, but seeking the likeliest visible method of securing the objects on which his heart was set. Such a course, involving not a few sudden turns, was naturally open to misinterpretation.

At this time, convinced as Cromwell was throughout that a monarchy was the only stable form of government in England, he was resolved, if possible, to come to terms with the King. It was not his fault that an agreement with Charles could not be made. The "Heads of the Proposals" were modified to meet the King's views; but Charles' conviction that he