gether, he said, that by their advice he might proceed to the chastisement of the rebels. Then lowering his tone,

Sept. 24.

speech to the Great Council.

The King's he announced the issue of writs for a parliament to meet on November 3, and asked for counsel, not on the best mode of chastising the rebels, but on the answer to be given to their petition, and on the means of keeping the army together till the meeting of Parliament. "For so long as the Scotch army remains in England," he said, in conclusion, "I think no man will counsel me to disband mine, for that would be an unspeakable loss to all this part of the kingdom by subjecting them to the greedy appetite of the rebels, besides the unspeakable dishonour that would thereby fall upon this nation."

Traquair's narrative.

In the afternoon the peers met again. Traquair, by the King's command, repeated the narrative which had moved the Council in the preceding winter to declare the Scottish demands to be inadmissible. Evidently Charles had not yet abandoned the hope that the peers would support him in the position which he had taken up. Such was not the view of the situation which they took. At Bristol's motion

Commis

treat.

they resolved to name sixteen of their own number sioners to as Commissioners to negotiate with the invaders. Every one of the seven who had signed the letter forwarded by Savile, reappeared amongst the number, and the remainder were favourable to a good understanding with the Scots.

Bristol's

Whatever their private opinions might be, the Lords had clearly accepted the leadership of Bristol. His old loyalty was a sufficient guarantee that he would be no favourer leadership. of revolution, whilst he was known to be entirely hostile to the new system of government. No other peer could compete with him in capacity for the conduct of the negotiation.1

The next day the peers took the King's financial difficulties into consideration. It was acknowledged that at least 200,000l. were needed. Strafford urged the necessity of supplying the

Vane to Windebank, Sept. 24, Hardwicke S. P. ii. 186. Rushworth, iii. 1275.

1640

Sept. 25.

The peers engage their security to the City for a loan.

A NEGOTIATION OPENED.

209

money at once. If that army were to be dissolved the country would be lost in two days. He was not for fighting now. If they remained on the defensive they would wear out the Scots. The question of overpowering the Scots was not the foremost one with the other peers. Now that a Parliament was to meet, said Bristol, the City would be ready to lend. It was ultimately resolved to send a deputation to London to collect a loan of 200,000l. on the security of the Peers.1

It remained to be considered on what terms the negotiation should be opened. The King proposed that the Pacification of Berwick, that vague and inconclusive arrangement which had been subjected to so many interpretations,

Sept. 26. Terms of negotiation.

should be taken as the basis of the understanding. Was it not, asked the King, dishonourable to go further than the Pacification? If he had had his way he would have secured the support of the Lords in refusing the Acts of the late Parliament. He would not acknowledge that he must look upon the Scots as capable of dictating terms. Bristol took the more sensible view. "If his Majesty were in case," he said, "it were best to bring them on their knees; but now, considering their strength, Newcastle and the two provinces taken, we must now speak of the business as to men that have gotten these advantages.' 192 Charles was not to be moved. Instructions In the instructions finally given, he declared his missioners. intention of keeping the Scottish castles in his own hands. As to such acts as were derogatory to his crown and dignity, he had instructed Traquair, Morton, and Lanark to inform the Scots of his pleasure.3

Sept. 29.

to the Com

Oct. 2. Meeting at Ripon.

There could be little doubt what that information would be. The point, however, would not be raised for some little time. The Commissioners of the two nations met at Ripon on October 2. It was evident, from

Sir J. Borough's notes of these and the subsequent meetings of the Great Council are printed in Hardwicke S. P. ii. 208, from Harl. MSS. 456. The printed copy cannot always be relied on; Mandeville's speech, for instance, is attributed to Savile at p. 209.

2 Hardwicke S. P. ii. 225.

VOL. IX.

3 Rushworth, iii. 1283.

P

the first, that the Scots were aware of the strength of their position.

Scottish

Loudoun, who took the lead on the Scottish side, said plainly that his countrymen would not be content without taking into consideration events which had happened since the demands. Pacification; and he also took objection to the presence of six persons who had been named as assistants to the English lords, especially as one of the number was the obnoxious Traquair, who was pointed out by the Scots as one of the incendiaries at whose trial and punishment they aimed.1

Oct. 3.

between

Loudoun,

Johnston,

and Mandeville.

The Scots seem to have been surprised at the tenacity with which Bristol, without contradiction from his fellow-commissioners, fought them inch by inch. They had entered England under the belief that they had received from seven of the commissioners present a positive offer of armed assistance, and they could not understand how those very men should be found supporting the arguments against their claims. That evening, Loudoun and Johnston applied anxiously to MandeMeeting ville for an explanation, charging him and the other six peers with a breach of their signed engagement. To this unlooked-for accusation Mandeville answered that he knew nothing about the matter. Loudoun and Johnston replied that the whole negotiation had passed through Savile's hands, and that he would be certain to bear witness to the truth. The next day, accordingly, Savile was sent for and interrogated. Prevarication in such confession of company was useless, and he boldly acknowledged the forgery. He declared himself to have acted as he had from motives of patriotism, and he now said that the only thing to be done, since his falsehood had been discovered, was to take advantage of its results for the common good. Savile's treachery was easily condoned. It was not likely that he would ever be trusted again by those whom he had tricked; but if, as is probable, he had been the medium through whose hands genuine as well as forged writings had passed, it is easy to understand 1 Borough's Treaty of Ripon (Camd. Soc.), 1-17. Commissioners to the King, Oct. 2, Rushworth, iii. 1289.

Savile's

forgery.

Savile's

treachery candoned.

1640

STATE OF LONDON.

211

E the mixed motives of those who concurred in passing over so odious a treachery. Naturally, too, the English lords were anxious to obtain from the Scots the incriminating paper. The Scots refused to give it up, but they cut out the supposititious signatures and burnt them in Mandeville's presence.1

Oct. 5. Progress of

the negotiation.

The

In the open discussions which followed, the question of the assistants was settled by the compromise that they might give advice without showing themselves at the public conferences. Then came a debate on the terms on which a cessation of arms was to be granted. Scots declared that nothing short of 40,000l. a month would satisfy them during their occupation of the northern counties, and that this payment must last until the conclusion of peace. The English Commissioners referred the demand to the King. Before Charles gave his answer he was in possession of better news from London than he had been accustomed to receive. In the last days of September the exasperation of the citizens had been daily growing. At the election of the new Lord Mayor, they shouted out that they would have none who had opposed the petition to the King, and set aside the aldermen who stood highest on the list, and one of whom, according to the usual custom, would have been elected without further difficulty. The greater part of the votes I were divided between Geere, who had given his support to the petition, and Soames, who had been sent to prison for his resistance to the loan. Riots, too, broke out in two of the City churches, where Dr. Duck, the Bishop's Chancellor, had irritated the people by calling upon the churchwardens to take the usual oath to present offenders against the ecclesiastical law. In one of them the summons was received with shouts of

Sept. 29. State of London.

1 Nalson, ii. 427. The story is extracted from Mandeville's own Memoirs. Dr. Burton commented on it, that 'the doubts that any such affair ever occurred are strengthened by the absence of any reference to it in Mr. Bruce's Ripon Papers.' Surely he could not have been serious in supposing it likely that the official note-taker of the Conference would be invited to be present at this interview! The passage in question is to be found in a fragment now known as Add. MSS. 15,567, which is thus identified as a portion of the long-lost Memoirs of the Earl of Manchester. Its importance will be seen when the narrative reaches Strafford's arrest.

'No oath! no oath!' from the crowded assembly. An apparitor, who unwisely spoke of the disturbers as a company of Puritan dogs, was hustled and beaten, and was finally carried off to prison by the sheriff, who had been summoned to restore order. The Chancellor was glad enough to escape in haste, leaving his hat behind him.1

Oct. 2. The City agrees to a loan.

All this was changed for a time by the arrival of the peers from York. On October 2 an informal meeting was held, in which a number of the richer citizens appeared in the midst of the Common Councillors. As Bristol had anticipated, the declaration of a Parliament carried all before it. The Lord Mayor was invited to write to the City Companies to ask them to lend 200,000l. on the security of the peers.2

Oct. 6. Debate in the Great Council on

demand.

The news of the success of the application to the City reached York on the 6th,3 the day on which the Great Council met to take into consideration the Scottish demand. The King had no certain advice to give. He hesitated between the risk of exasperating the Scots, the Scottish and the indignity of buying off the vengeance of rebels. Strafford had no such hesitation. "This demand," he said, "hath opened our eyes. Nothing of religion moves in this business." "The Londoners' example," he added, "hath much turned my opinion." Once more he was beginning to think that the Scottish exorbitance would give the King the support that he needed. He was for taking the defensive, and leaving the Scots to do their worst. Some, indeed-Lord Herbert of Cherbury, amongst them-were equally prepared to proceed to extremities. But the general

Oct. 7.

feeling of the peers inclined the other way, and on The negotia the following day the King proposed that the negotiation should be removed to York, apparently with the intention of bringing his personal influence to bear upon the Scottish Commissioners.4

tion to be removed to York.

1 Rossingham's News-Letter, Oct. 7, Add. MSS. 11,045, fol. 122. Windebank to the King, Sept. 30, Clar. S. P. ii. 125.

2 The Peers' deputation to the King, Oct. 3. S. P. Dom. cccclxix. 32. 3 Vane to Windebank, Oct. 6, Hardwicke S. P. ii. 193.

Hardwicke S. P. ii. 241.