1640 Aug. 29. Newcastle abandoned. PROGRESS OF THE SCOTS. 193 in the morning of the 29th, therefore, Conway and Astley marched out with all their force, leaving the town to its fate. Before many hours had passed, Sir William Douglas presented himself at the gate with the usual promises of good treatment. His countrymen, he said, had come to petition for their religion, their laws, and their liberties, but had brought with them a sword to defend themselves against all who might attempt to hinder them from reaching the King. They were ready to pay for all that they consumed. The next morning Newcastle was occupied in force by the Scots. They seized the King's custom-house, and took for their own use the stores which had been abandoned by the retreating army.1 Aug. 30. Newcastle occupied by the Scots. On the night of the 30th, Conway, having rejoined his fugitive horse, arrived with his whole force at Darlington. Conway at Strafford, who was there to receive them, wrote Darlington. cheerfully to the King. To his bosom friend, Sir George Radcliffe, he poured forth a wail of despair. "Pity me," he wrote from Northallerton, to which place he had gone, to put himself at the head of Conway's men, "for never came any man to so lost a business. The army altogether necessitous and unprovided of all necessaries. That part which I bring now with me from Durham, the worst I ever saw. Our horse all cowardly; the country from Berwick to York in the power of the Scots; an universal affright in all; a general disaffection to the King's service, none sensible of his dishonour. In one word, here alone to fight with all these evils, without anyone to help. God of his goodness deliver me out of this the greatest evil of my life." 3 Strafford spoke truly. Not the scaffold and the raging Narrative, Clar. S. P. ii. 108. to Windebank, Sept. 10, S. P. Vane to Windebank, Aug. 29. Dymock Dom. cccclxv. 38, cccclxvii. 6. Narrative of the Scots' entry (S. P. Dom. cccclxv. 59 i.) compared with Dymock's letter to Vane, quoted in the last note. The dates are difficult to make out, unless the Narrative, which is said to have been written on Aug. 29, was in reality written on the 30th. 2 Strafford to the King, Aug. 30, S. P. Dom. cccclxv. 49. • Strafford to Radcliffe, Sept. 1, Whitaker's Life of Radcliffe, 203. crowd, thirsting for his blood, were the worst of evils. In the inexplicable and utter failure of hopes conceived with a lofty. purpose, lies the tragedy of life to him who cannot humbly bend beneath the stroke, and ask, in all seriousness of purpose, whether the work which has for long years seemed to him so lofty and heroic be, indeed, other than a fabric of his own self-will. CHAPTER XCIV. THE TREATY OF RIPON. STRAFFORD was not one to feel despondent long. But for the temper of the soldiers, the mere military position was even better than it had been before the rout at Newburn. There was no longer a danger of an interruption of the communication between the two divisions of the army. The Scots, indeed, had pushed on to Durham, and occupied the line of the Tees. From Durham there had been a sudden flight of the cathedral clergy, the Scottish dean, Dr. Balcanqual, who knew himself to be specially obnoxious to the invaders, as the author of the Large Declaration, being foremost in the hasty exodus, so that far into the next century the Durham boys were in the habit of greeting a breathless fugitive with scornful cries of "Run away, Dr. Boconcky." But the flight of a few dignitaries of the Church could not affect the military position. The King was concentrating his forces at York, and whether he advanced to Conway, or summoned him to his assistance, the united armies would be about equal in number to that of the invaders. Unhappily for Charles it was very far from being a question of numbers alone. The army was without heart or discipline. The nation was equally without heart or discipline. There was a widespread conviction that the cause of the invaders was the cause of the invaded as well. "I must tell you,” upon Winde- wrote Vane to Windebank, "it is strange to see how bank. Leslie steals the hearts of the people in these northern parts. You shall do well to think of timely remedies to Vane's call My friend, Professor Hales, pointed out to me this anecdote in Surtees' History of Durham, be applied, lest the disease grow incurable, for I apprehend you are not much better in the South." A postscript added the alarming news that Leslie had already quitted Newcastle, and was pushing farther on in pursuit.' Aug. 31. Timidity of the Council. Already the committee to which the government had been entrusted during the King's absence, was at its wits' end. Information was brought that Essex, Warwick, Bedford and his son Russell, Saye, Brooke, Pym, and Hampden, were in close conference in London. Such a gathering boded no good to the tranquillity of the Government. Yet the committee did not dare to attack the offending peers openly, to make them smart for it, as Strafford had said of these very men in his speech after the dissolution. Neither could they resolve to let them alone. They weakly sent Arundel to Bedford, to recommend him 'as of himself' to go back to his duties as lord-lieutenant of his own county, and they suggested to Essex, through one of his friends, that it would be well for him to offer his services to the King. The Queen, too, agreed to write him a civil letter to the same effect. Anything more that his Majesty might suggest they were ready to do.2 Aug. 28. Not by such means as this was Charles's authority to be made good. The peers and commoners who met in London, The Opposi were but taking the step which they had always tion meeting. intended to take. In the letter forwarded by Savile in July, they had engaged to support the Scottish advance by a demand for a Parliament. That demand they now put into shape. On the 28th, the day of the rout at Newburn, Petition of they signed a petition, which was probably only a copy with slight alterations of the Remonstrance, to avoid the presentation of which the Short Parliament had been dissolved. It ran over the grievances of the military charges, of the rapine caused by disorderly soldiers, of the innovations in religion, of the increase of Popery and the employment of recusants in military commands, of the dangerous the Peers. Vane to Windebank, Aug. 30, Hardwicke S. P. ii. 164. 1640 THE TWELVE PEERS. 199 employment of Irish and foreign forces,' of the urging of shipmoney, of the growth of monopolies, and of the intermissions of Parliament. They then turned to the remedies. They asked that a Parliament might be summoned in which the authors and counsellors of their grievances might be brought to trial, and that negotiation might be opened for a peace with the Sccts, in order that both kingdoms might be united 'against the common enemy of their reformed religion.' 2 The addition of the demand for the punishment of his advisers was all that the King had gained by his rejection of the terms of the Short Parliament. The petition as it stands is now known to have been the handiwork of Pym and St. The twelve John; but neither Pym nor St. John affixed his peers. signature to it. By customary usage the peers were regarded as the born counsellors of the King, and it was in that character that twelve of their number now approached the throne. To the names of six of the signatories of the letter to the Scots-Bedford, Essex, Brooke, Warwick, Saye, and Mandeville-were added those of Exeter, Hertford, Rutland, Mulgrave, Howard of Escrick, and Bolingbroke.3 Behind these names was England itself. cil's advice Before the petition was made known, Charles had sent to his Council in London for its advice as to the steps to be taken Sept. 1. if the Scots should disregard his shattered army and The Coun- march upon London. Already, before the request arrived, the Council had come to the conclusion that it was itself too weak for the burden thrust upon it. An army there must be in the South to second the efforts of the King. But where were officers to command it, or money to pay it? asked. Probably alluding to the Danish contingent, which was talked of then and later. See page 175. 2 Savile to Lady Temple, Nov. 1642, Papers relating to the Delinquency of Lord Savile, p. 2, ed. by J. J. Cartwright in the Camden Misc. vcl. viii. Petition of the Peers, Aug. 28, S. P. Dom. cccclxv. 16. The copy in Rushworth, which, as Ranke has pointed out, is incorrectly printed, contains the names of Bristol and Paget in the place of those of Exeter and Kutland. • Vane to Windebank, Sept. 1, S. P. Dom. |