1649.] COMPONENT PARTS OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ARMY. 95 putting down of this dangerous insurrection is beyond a doubt; though here, as elsewhere, some of his enemies have been bold enough to charge him with want of personal courage. Clement Walker's account of Cromwell's behaviour on the occasion is rather an amusing specimen of the style of that scurrilous and mendacious writer. "Cromwell," says Walker, "not knowing what party to draw out against them, that would be steadfast to him, shunned the danger, and put his property the General upon it to oppose the rendezvous, and, looking as wan as the gills of a sick turkey-cock, marched forth himself westward, to intercept such as drew to the rendezvous."1 We have now, taking the testimony of Baxter, a credible witness, who was for two years 2 chaplain to the principal Ironside regiment, the Agreement of the People, drawn up by Ireton, and the proceedings of Lilburne, Overton, Thomson, and others, altogether, the means of analyzing the Parliamentary army; that is, of decomposing it into its component parts; and we find that it consisted of two parts-one, the larger and more powerful, headed by Cromwell and his friends or partizans (not including Ireton nor Harrison, except so far as the latter was duped by Cromwell), who were the sort of men described by Baxter as for a settlement of the business similar to that of William the Norman and his officers; the other, much weaker, who were for a republic in reality, not merely in name, like the "Commonwealth "-a republic such as the instrument called the Agreement of the People, if fully carried into operation, would have created. But the smaller party was rendered much weaker than it would otherwise have been by the mischievous activity of Lilburne and 2 Baxter's Autobiography, part i. p. 1 Clement Walker's History of Independency, part ii. p. 179. 57. one or two others, who, as stated above,' proposed several alterations in Ireton's Agreement of the People. Without imputing any superfluous dishonesty to Cromwell, it may be supposed that so practical a logician, as he was, considered this republic according to Ireton's Agreement of the People, much more according to Lilburne's Agreement of the People, as a visionary and even an impossible project, which he was justified in crushing and which he accordingly crushed with his characteristic decision and promptitude. And as both Ireton and Blake served under the Government which had destroyed under the name of Levellers some of those who sought to carry out by force some at least of the provisions of Ireton's Agreement of the People, it may I think be concluded that those two brave and able men tacitly at least admitted that the difficulties in the way of a republic were at that particular time insurmountable. Still, the question is an extremely complicated one, and I do not feel by any means unlimited confidence in this solution of it, but it appears at least some clearing up of the darkness and confusion in which this period of English history has to me always appeared to be enveloped. During this month of May 1649 the new Government of England had more than even its ordinary share of dangers and difficulties to cope with, for, besides the mutiny in the army, which, but for the rapidity and decision of Fairfax and Cromwell might have overthrown them, they received 1 In the two subsequent chapters I will endeavour however to do that justice which has by no means been done to Lilburne in regard to his quarrel with Cromwell and the remnant of the Long Parliament. His penetration in discovering Cromwell's designs long before others discovered them and his defence of himself on his trial, fighting singly without counsel against the whole power of the Government and their law officers, prove that he possessed abilities of a much higher order than modern writers attribute to him. information of the assassination of Dr. Dorislaus, their resident at the Hague. Dr. Dorislaus, who though a native of Holland had lived long in England, and had acted as judge-advocate in Essex's army and as assistant counsel against the late king, had been sent towards the end of April to the Hague as resident jointly with Walter Strickland for the Parliament in Holland. Soon after his arrival at the Hague, while seated at table in his own lodgings Dr. Dorislaus was assassinated by some Royalists, in revenge, as they said, for their king's murder. On the 10th of May, a Memorial on the murder of Dr. Dorislaus at the Hague was ordered by the Council of State to be drawn up and delivered to the Dutch ambassador.1 On the following day, the 11th of May, it was ordered by the Council of State "that it be reported to the Parliament that it is the opinion of this Council, in regard Dr. Dorislaus lost his life in the service of the Commonwealth, being murthered in so barbarous a manner, his children being deprived of their father and thereby of the maintenance they had by him, that the Parliament will settle £200 per annum as a pension on his son during his lifeand that each of his two daughters may have £500 to be paid to her forthwith-also that there may be £250 appointed for the interment of Dr. Dorislaus in an honourable way at Westminster." 2 On the 10th of May, there is in the Order Book of the Council of State a minute of the committal of one Walter Breame "prisoner to Peterhouse upon suspicion of having a hand in the death of Dr. 1 Order Book of the Council of State, May 10, 1649. MS. State Paper Office. 2 Order Book of the Council of State, 11th May, 1649. MS. State Paper Office. H Dorislaus." The general opinion was, that the assassins of Dorislaus were six Scotchmen in the train of the Mar quis of Montrose. A minute of the Council of State of 12th May directs "That the informations had concerning the death of Dr. Dorislaus be reported to the House, and withall that the Council hath informations that there are designs for assassination of the Lord President and some members of the Parliament and of this Council." 2 On the 14th the Council considered that the mutiny in the army wore so dangerous an appearance as to render it necessary to suspend the preparations for the expedition to Ireland. They ordered" that a letter be written to the generals of the fleet to let them know that by reason of some present disturbance in this nation the soldiers formerly designed for the service of Ireland are not in such readiness as was formerly expected they by this time would have been; to desire them therefore that the vessels by them prest for transporting forces thither be discharged from further exportation at present." 3 On the 15th the very day following, the Council of State received the news that the revolt in the army had been put down and they immediately took off the temporary stoppage of the transportation of troops to Ireland. I may mention in this place an instance of the weight of Vane in the councils of the English Government at that time. A Spanish ship the Santa Clara had been taken at sea carrying near 200 Irishmen for the military service 1 Order Book of the Council of State 10th May, 1649. MS. State Paper Office. 2 Order Book of the Council of State, 12th May, 1649. MS. State Paper Office. 3 Order Book of the Council of State, 14th May, 1649, à Meridie. MS. State Paper Office. 1649.] RELATIONS WITH SPAIN. LIBRARY ول OF THE IVERSITY OF MICH of Spain. On the 16th of April 1649, before Vane's arrival in the council-room, there was a considerable number of members of the Council of State present, including Fairfax, Cromwell, Ludlow, Martyn; and a good deal of business had been gone through, chiefly relating to the details of transporting troops to Ireland. The importance of the business dealt with in the order made next after Vane's arrival, an order which might and did lead eventually to war with Spain, manifests in a remarkable degree Vane's weight in the Council. It was probably a matter that had been committed to Vane's particular consideration and immediately on his arrival in the Council, it was propounded, and then the important order made. Cromwell and Vane may certainly be regarded as the two great men-the men of genius-of the Council of State--Cromwell chiefly as a soldier or rather as a statesman-soldier-Vane as a statesman only, not at all as a soldier. As compared with these two, the others must be regarded as mere men of detail. The following is this important order :-"That it be returned in answer to the Spanish ambassador That, upon due consideration of the contents of the paper given in by his secretary, it is the opinion of this Council that it is not contrary to any of the alliances between the two nations of England and Spain to hinder the carrying of Irishmen into the service of Spain, and that it is in their power to dispose of them as they shall conceive best for the Commonwealth, which accordingly they have done.” "1 The "Instructions to Sir Oliver Fleming, Master of the Ceremonies, to be observed in his Address to the Lord Ambassador of Spain" are these, and their import must have convinced even Gondemar, had he then filled the place of Spanish ambassador, that he had now another sort 1 Order Book of the Council of State, 16th April, 1649. MS. State Paper Office. |