Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

CHAPTER XIII.

OBSERVATIONS

CONSIDERATION OF THE PROOFS OF CROMWELL'S RELUCT-
ANCE TO BRING THE KING TO TRIAL.
UPON THE EVIDENCE UPON THE TRIAL OF the king's
JUDGES BROUGHT FORWARD TO. PROVE THE CONTRARY.
UPON LORD CLARENDON'S ACCOUNT OF CROMWELL'S
SUPPOSED CRUELTIES IN HIS CAPTURE OF DROGHEDA

(TREDAGH) BY STORM. DEFENCE OF HIS CONDUCT IN

DEFENCE OF

AND AFTER THE BATTLE OF WORCESTER.
IRETON. OBSERVATIONS UPON WHITELOCK'S ACCOUNT
OF MEETING TO CONSIDER OF A SETTLEMENT OF THE
NATION.— ALSO, OF CONVERSATION BETWEEN CROMWELL
AND HIMSELF, WHEREIN CROMWELL PROPOSES THE QUES-
TION, WHAT, IF A MAN SHOULD TAKE UPON HIMSELF

66

TO BE A KING?" CONSIDERATION OF THE STATE OF

THE PARTIES, AND OF THE PUBLIC AFFAIRS OF THE NATION AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE WAR BY THE SURRENDER OF OXFORD AND OF OTHER THE KING'S REMAINING GARRISONS, THE UNSUCCESSFUL TERMINATION OF THE TREATY OF NEWPORT, AND THE DEATH OF THE KING, TO THE DEATH OF CROMWELL.

CROMWELL certainly very reluctantly concurred in the measure of the trial of the King. His sincerity in the negotiation for his restoration upon moderate terms, and his assistance in favouring the King's escape from Hampton-court, and placing him in a state of personal freedom to quit the kingdom, cannot reasonably be doubted. The in

and the threats of the agitators, who appear to have comprehended the greatest part of the army, alarmed him, and satisfied him that he could be of no further service to the King than to facilitate his escape; and it was the King's own fault that he did not avail himself of the opportunity afforded him.

[ocr errors]

Dr. Harris, in his anxiety to place Cromwell at the bottom of all these proceedings of bringing the King to a trial, takes upon himself to say, that Cromwell had a principal hand in all these transactions; and, in proof of his assertion, quotes from Walker's History of Independency the following passage: "When it was first moved in the House of Commons to proceed capitally against the King, Cromwell stood up and told them, that if any man moved this upon design, he should think him the greatest traitor in the world; but since Providence and necessity had cast them upon it, he should pray God to bless their counsels, though he were not provided on the sudden to give them counsel." This speech does not appear in Rushworth or Lord Clarendon, or in Ludlow, Whitelock, or Mrs. Hutchinson; and its authenticity is not to be relied on. But, supposing Cromwell really to have thus said, it, instead of supporting the Doctor's opinions, surely proves the truth of what has been before said, that the determination to bring the King to a trial did not originate with Cromwell, and that he even then

had not made up his mind to it, or formed a decided opinion upon the measure: and Neal, in his History of the Puritans, gives the same passage from Dugdale, as a proof of Cromwell's indetermination, introducing it with these words: -"This unheard-of motion met with some opposition even in that packed assembly; Oliver Cromwell was in doubt, and said, if any man, &c." These passages are probably taken the one from the other, and prove nothing in support of their veracity. He (Dr. Harris) allows that Bishop Burnet says, that Ireton was the person that drove it on; for that Cromwell was all the while in some suspense about it: he (Burnet) adds, that Ireton had the principles and the temper of a Cassius in him; he stuck at nothing that might have turned England to a commonwealth. Still, notwithstanding all this evidence in confutation of his assertion, he (Dr. Harris) persists in it: accordingly, he next produces the account the Bishop gives, communicated to him by Lieutenant-general Drummond, afterwards Lord Strathallan: the Bishop says, that the General served on the King's side, but had many friends amongst those who were for the covenant; that the King's affairs being then ruined, he was recommended to Cromwell, who was then in treaty with the Spanish ambassador, respecting some regiments to be levied and sent over from Scotland to Flanders: that he happened to

from Scotland to protest against the putting the King to death, came to argue the matter with him: that Cromwell bid the General stay and hear their conference: that they began in a heavy, languid style to lay indeed great loads upon the King, but that they still insisted on that clause in the covenant, by which they swore they would be faithful in the preservation of His Majesty's person; showing upon what terms Scotland, as well as the two Houses, had engaged in the war, and what solemn declarations of their zeal and duty to the King they had all along published, which would now appear to the scandal and reproach of the Christian name, to have been false pretences, if, when the King was in their power, they should proceed to extremities: that Cromwell thereupon entered into a long discourse of the nature of the regal power, according to the principles of Mariana and Buchanan: he thought a breach of trust ought to be punished more than any other crime whatsoever : he said, as to their covenant, they swore to the preservation of the King's person in defence of the true religion; if, then, it appeared that the settlement of the true religion was obstructed by the King, so that they could not come at it but by putting him out of the way, then their oath could not bind them to the preserving him any longer: that their covenant did bind them to bring all malignants, incendiaries, and enemies to the cause to condign punishment; and was not this to be executed impartially? what were all those on whom public justice had been

done, especially those who suffered for joining Montrose, but small offenders, acting by commission from the King, who was therefore the principal, and so most guilty? The Bishop adds, that Drummond said, Cromwell had plainly the better of them at their own weapons, and upon their own principles. The Bishop does not give any date to this account; but this interview with the Scots commissioners being before the King's death, the above particulars must have been related more than twelve years afterwards, after the Restoration in 1660; and having been given from memory, its accuracy cannot be entirely relied on. Nevertheless the substance may be true, and probably is so, but it does not support Dr. Harris's assertion, that these transactions originated with Cromwell, and that he had a principal hand in them; it only proves that he, at the time of the above interview, had determined upon the part he should take in the King's trial.

[ocr errors]

Dr. Harris then proceeds with his proofs: he says, from a publication called "The Exact and Perfect Narrative of the Trial of the Regicides,' that on the 21st January, 1648, Hugh Peters preaching at Whitehall upon the passage, "Bind your kings with chains, and your nobles in fetters of iron," and talking in his bold manner concerning the King's being liable to the law, as well as other men, Cromwell was observed to laugh. From the same authority he says,

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »