¹ The letters for 1653 are all from vol. xxv. of the Clarke MSS. in Worcester College Library.

^{page 1 note 2} Printed in the English Historical Review for July 1893, with other documents relating to the Expulsion of the Long Parliament.

^{page 2 note 1} See Gardiner, History of the Commonwealth and Protectorate, ii. 217.

^{page 3 note 1} Printed in Thomas Wright's Political Ballads published during the Commonwealth, 1841, p. 126.

^{page 4 note 1} Compare Ludlow's Memoirs, i. 358, ed. 1894.

^{page 9 note 1} Sir Charles Wolseley.

^{page 10 note 1} From vol. xxvi. of the Clarke MSS. in Worcester College Library, with the exception of the two letters of December 21.

¹ From vol. xxvi. of the Clarke MSS. in Worcester College Library, with the exception of the two letters of December 21.

^{page 2 note 1} On the meetings of the officers at St. James's, see Robert Vaughan's The Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, i. 80, 87.

^{page 3 note 1} This letter and the following, both derived from vol. xxvii. of the Clarke MSS., were addressed to one of the officers arrested in Scotland for the plot known as ‘Overton's Plot,’ and were probably found on one of the prisoners. Probably Mr. Oates was the person to whom they were written. (See Scotland and the Protectorate, p. 240.)

¹ This letter and the following, both derived from vol. xxvii. of the Clarke MSS., were addressed to one of the officers arrested in Scotland for the plot known as ‘Overton's Plot,’ and were probably found on one of the prisoners. Probably Mr. Oates was the person to whom they were written. (See Scotland and the Protectorate, p. 240.)

^{page 17 note 1} The newsletters for 1655 are all from vol. xxvii. of the Clarke MSS. VOL. III.

^{page 19 note 1} Carlyle's Cromwell, speech iv.

^{page 24 note 1} See Thurloe's letter to Monck on the imprisonment of Harrison and Courtney, Clarke Papers, ii. 242.

^{page 25 note 1} Cf. Evelyn's Diary, April 9, 1655.

^{page 27 note 1} MS. ‘countrey and kept up the gent.’

^{page 27 note 2} M S. ‘Branford.’

^{page 29 note 1} Balearres (?).

^{page 30 note 1} Originally Overton's regiment. Morgan perhaps commanded it between Overton's arrest in December 1654 and March 1655.

^{page 31 note 1} See Scotland and the Protectorate, ii. pp. 238, 241, 251, 252.

^{page 32 note 1} Thurloe, iii. 281, 335.

^{page 32 note 2} MS. ‘three.’

^{page 33 note 1} See Thurloe, iii. 364, 377.

^{page 33 note 2} Thurloe, iii. 377, 378.

^{page 34 note 1} Thurloe, iii. 365, 371, 372, 375, 378, 380.

^{page 36 note 1} Thurloe, iii. 394.

^{page 36 note 2} Thurloe, iii. 368, 398.

^{page 36 note 3} Thurloe, iii. 306.

^{page 36 note 4} Lede.

^{page 37 note 1} To the Protector.

^{page 39 note 1} See Whitelooke's Memorials, iv. 191–206, ed. 1853.

^{page 39 note 2} Porto Farino.

^{page 40 note 1} Grandison(?).

^{page 42 note a} See Carlyle's Cromwell, letters cxciii. and cxciy.

^{page 47 note 1} The MS. here inserts ‘being part of Hispaniola.’

^{page 47 note 2} This is nonsense, as they had been many days on shore.

^{page 48 note 1} MS. ‘monies.’

^{page 49 note 1} This petition, which was drawn up by a certain John Norbury, is given at length in the Calendar of Domestic State Papers, 1655, p. 277.

^{page 51 note 1} Howard had been given the regiment lately Colonel Rich's, which now passed to Ingoldsby.

^{page 51 note 2} See Thurloe, iii. 738, and the life of Sturgeon in the Dictionary of National Biography.

^{page 51 note 3} Evidently a mistake for General Venables, whose death was confidently reported.

^{page 53 note 1} I.e. the Council of State.

¹ Undated. It appears in the MS. between letters of 11 and 15 Sept. 1655, when it came to hand, but it was evidently written about June.

^{page 54 note 2} Really March 30.

^{page 54 note 3} Saturday, April 14.

^{page 54 note 4} C. A. Fortescue's.

^{page 55 note 1} Jaina

^{page 55 note 2} Apparently Fortescue.

^{page 55 note 3} Tuesday, April 17.

^{page 56 note 1} Major Will Hill of Forteseue's regiment, who probably became its Lieutenant-Colonel when Holdip was promoted to command the St. Kitt's regiment.

^{page 56 note 2} So in MS. (? ‘by gunns.’)

^{page 56 note 3} I.e. ‘A mortar piece two drakes.’

^{page 57 note 1} See Perm's Life, ii. 86.

^{page 57 note 2} Wednesday, May 25.

^{page 57 note 3} Of Col. Buller's regiment. This seems to show that the author of this narrative was merely a captain.

^{page 59 note 1} In MS. ‘courdy.’

^{page 59 note 2} I.e. ‘cassava.’

^{page 59 note 3} In 1642(?).

¹ This narrative was evidently written by an officer in Fortescue's regiment, and probably by one of its captains, but the newsletters contain no evidence as to its authorship. It should be compared with the documents printed in Granville Penn's Memorials of Sir William Pernn, the letters on the Jamaica expedition in Thurloe, and the accounts printed in the Appendix.

¹ Probably from Secretary Thurloe.

² Shew him (?)

³ See also Mercurius Politicus, Dec. 13–20, pp. 5821, 5836; Thurloe, State Papers IV. 380; and ‘Animadversions upon a letter and paper sent to his Highnesse by certain gentlemen in Wales,’ 1656.

¹ This is undated in the MS. but follows a letter of Jan. 22, 165⅚. There can be little doubt that it was written by Secretary Thurloe, and the heading has therefore been added.

¹ The letters which follow are taken from vol. xxviii. of the Clarke MSS.

^{page 66 note 1} This speech was made on March 5. An abridged report of it is given in the Publiek Intelligencer for March 3–10, 1655\6, p. 385. The next number of the same paper, p. 401, contains a ‘Declaration of his Highness inviting the people of England and Wales to a day of Solemn Fasting and Humiliation,’ fixed for March 28. It is of some interest from its remarks on foreign and domestic politics.

^{page 67 note 1} On this meeting see the Venetian despatches quoted by Ranke, History of England, iii. 166, and Thurloe, v. 122.

^{68 note 1} On the elections of 1656 see Ludlow's Memoirs, ed. 1894, ii. 17, and the authorities mentioned in the note. Some account of the contested elections is given in Mercurius Politicus, pp. 7174, 7181, 7191, and the Publick Intelligencer, pp. 754, 770.

^{page 68 note 2} England's Remembrancers, or a Word in Season to all Englishmen about their Election of Members for the approaching Parliament. It is reprinted in Thurloe's Papers, v. 268.

^{page 68 note 1} See Ludlow's Memoirs, ii. 10–14, ed. 1894.

^{page 69 note 1} Mercurius Politicus, p. 7181, August 14–21, 1656.

^{page 70 note 1} William Kyffin. See Heath's Chronicle, ed. 1663, p. 705, and Thurloe, v. 349.

^{page 72 note 1} See Thurloe, v. 341, for the Secretary's account of trie position of affairs, and Vaughan, Protectorate of Cromwell, ii. 32.

^{page 72 note 2} Major Ralph Knight, of Monok's regiment of horse, who was one of the officers who had been sent for to represent the regiments in Scotland.

^{page 72 note 3} Carlyle's Cromwell, Speech v. See also Vaughan, Protectorate of Cromwell, ii. 41.

^{page 74 note 1} Swinton, i.e. John Swinton of Swinton, one of the members for Scotland.

^{page 74 note 2} According to the Newsletter of September 20 the number originally excluded was ‘near 120.’ In that of September 25 it is added that the excluded members were about 100. ‘Some of them are gone into the country discontented and will not apply themselves to the Counsell, and some are guilty and dare not.’ For their protest see Whiteloclie Memorials, ed. 1853, iv. 2

^{page 75 note 1} I.e. a bill against.

^{page 77 note 1} On this shipwreck see Thurloe, v. 558, 570. The soldiers were part of Col. Brayne's regiment, drawn from the army in Scotland, and on their way to Jamaica. The ship was named the Two Brothers.

^{page 77 note 2} Timoleague.

^{page 77 note 1} On this shipwreck see Thurloe, v. 558, 570. The soldiers were part of Col. Brayne's regiment, drawn from the army in Scotland, and on their way to Jamaica. The ship was named the Two Brothers.

^{page 77 note 2} Timoleague.

^{page 78 note 1} I.e. Sovereign.

^{page 78 note 2} Courceys

^{page 80 note 1} In the letter-book this is entered under November 19, which was probably the date of its reception at Monck's headquarters.

^{page 81 note 1} The treasure taken in the victory of September 8 by Stayner. See Vaughan, Protectorate of Cromwell, ii. 26, and Thurloe.

^{page 81 note 2} On this subject see a speech by an unnamed member, printed in Scotland and the Protectorate, p. 333.

^{page 82 note 1} November 11. This incident is not mentioned in the Journal of the House.

^{page 83 note 1} See Commons' Journals, vii. 460. The speech ia not given in the Journals, though said to be reported to the House by the Speaker.

^{page 83 note 2} November 25.

^{page 83 note 3} By Article VII. of the Instrument of Government a Parliament was to be summoned every third year, and could not be adjourned, prorogued, or dissolved,

¹ See Commons' Journals, vii. 460. The speech is not given in the Journals, though said to be reported to the House by the Speaker.

^{page 83 note 2} November 25.

^{page 83 note 3} By Article VII. of the Instrument of Government a Parliament was to be summoned every third year, and could not be adjourned, prorogued, or dissolved, without its own consent. But by Article XXIII. the Protector might, ‘when the necessities of the State shall require it,’ summon with the consent of his Council a parliament other than these triennial parliaments, and these additional parliaments could not be dissolved for three months after their meeting. This Parliament came under Clause XXIII., had met on September 17, and might be dissolved on December 10, which would be three lunar months after the date of its meeting.

^{page 84 note 1} December 10.

^{page 84 note 2} I.e. impostor or apostate.

^{page 84 note 3} The following notes on the further proceedings of the House are from a newsletter of December 23 amongst the Carte Papers, vol. ccxxviii. The debate on Naylor is reported at great length in Burton's Diary :

^{page 84 note 4} The other day some two or three members moved that we might rise or adjourne for two or three monethes cause of the shortness of the dayes and thinness of the House, there being within this week neare 100 members gone home, but the motion was very soon laid aside without a question. Itt being thought very unreasonable to vote a warr, and leave it unprovided for how to carry itt on. The Councell and Army men would not with any patience here of such a motion. Some said we oould not take Spain nor Flanders with a bare vote.

‘It was moved the same tyme that all the members might be called, as well the persons not approved as approved of, for that the Counsell might surely in three months tyme be well satisfyed of the integrity of some of those that were kept out. This motion together with the former bredd some heate in the House, and some reflexion upon persons and calling to the barr. Mr. Bampfield called Sir Gilbert Pickeringe to the barr, and Lord Strickland, Mr. Godfrey, and thus heates grew, but the Speaker was so discreet as to divert it by another question, and we rose all good friends.’

This letter, which is dated December 23, goes on to say that a call of the House was fixed for to-morrow week, which seems to show that the debate described took place on December 20. See Commons' Journals, vii. 471.

^{page 85 note 1} See Burton's Diary, i. 19, 300–304; Commons' Journals, vii. 479.

^{page 85 note 2} Compare Burton, i. 293.

^{page 85 note 3} A letter from the Carte MSS. (lxxiii. 18) gives the following account of the situation as it appeared to a staunch supporter of the government : ‘This poore nation,’ wrote Major-General Boteler to Montagu, on January 9,1657, ‘is in a tottering condition, not so much (I make account) from the preparations of the enemies abroade, as from the contrivances of those within our bowells, and our unwilling-nesse in Parliament, at least our delatoriness to obviat and prevent them, nay I wishe our enemies do not take more encouragement from our proceedings than our friends do or can. We have not all this time raysed one penny towards the Spannish warre, nor are like to do after this rate we go till we heare of him upon our border I thinke, but instead of hastening that great concernment we have more minde to take away the Militia and lessen our army, as though we had the greatest calme of peace that ever yet we sawe. All these things, and many more I might speake of, considered together with our unsettlement in point of Government me thinks threaten us sorely, yet that his Highness and Council have a through sense of them as I perceive by some discourse last night the officers had with his Highness is some reviving to my hopes, which I profess to you have beene witheringe this month apace, and now I hope God will direct to some speedy prevention, which is much better than a late remedy.’

¹ Lieutenant-General William Brayne to his old commander General Monck. Brayne arrived at Jamaica on 14 December, 1656, and died there September 2, 1657. Thurloe, v. 770 ; vi. 512.

² The letters for 1657 are from Clarke MSS. vol. xxix.

^{page 87 note 3} January 19.

^{page 87 note 4} January 23.

^{page 87 note 5} On December 25, Major-General Desborough introduced a bill for confirming the power of the Major-Generals, which was read a first time on January 7. After many days' debate it was rejected on January 29 by 124 to 88 votes. See Commons' Journals, vii. 481–3, and Burton's Diary, i. 230, 310. The following extracts relating to these discussions are from letters amongst the Carte Papers in the Bodleian Library:

‘The sense of the greater number, I heare was to indemnify such as had acted, what was done being done by the state uppon necessity, but not to continue it by a law. ’Twas said ‘twould intayle a quarrell, and punish some for other mens faults. The bill was not cast out, neither was there a time appoynted for a second reading.’ (John Crewe to Montagu, January 1, 165⅞.—Carte MSS. lxxiii. 16.)

‘The bill for Decimation was redd on Wedn[esday], and begotta very furious debate about the 2nd reading of it. Lord Claypoole spoke first to the rejecting [?] of it, and L. Broughill and L. Whitlock seconded him, and severall others spoke highly against the bill; the principall argument was the breach of the public faith in violatinge an Act of Oblivion which was never done in any age in this nation. The Major Generalls were very much spoken against, as a constitution too bigg to be bounded within any law, and that it was always the usher to an arbitrary power, and to inflame the people etc. That party take such reflexions very ill out. Its doubtfull they will have the amends in theire owne hands. I cannot tell how it is relisht at Whitehall. Various reports upon it.’ (Undated newsletter signed T. B.—Carte MSS. lxxxiii. 21.)

‘Wednesday last the howse sate till candle light upon the bill for the decimations, and next day (after 2) came to a question. The howse was twise divided upon lit and was carryed for the rejection 124 to 88. The Major-generalls were very loath to surrender. It was a serious debate, and not without sharpness and reflexions. The exceptions between Gen. Disborow and Mr. Ash were debated next morninge, but upon some explanation though the words were high all was putt upp. It was expected that the exceptions between Mr. Cromwell and M. Gen. Butler should have come on in order, but I heare that was taken upp without doors and itt went noe further.’ (Newsletter signed T. B., February 4, 165⅞.—Carte MSS. ccxxviii. 88.)

^{page 87 note 1} February 10.

¹ The original of this letter is Egerton MS. 2618, f. 51. A copy is amongst the Clarke MSS. (xxxix. 7).

^{page 90 note 1} Undated, written about February 23 or February 24, and probably from John Bushworth. Pack presented his paper to the House on February 23.

^{page 91 note 1} Maintain (?)

^{page 91 note 2} February 23.

^{page 93 note 1} The speech is given in a letter printed in Burton's Diary, i. 382.

^{page 94 note 1} March 2. See Commons' Journal, vii. 497.

^{page 94 note 2} First Article of the Remonstrance:

‘That your Highnes will be pleased to assume the name, style, tytle, dignity and office of King of England, Scottland and Ireland and the respective dominions and teritories thereunto belonging, and the exercise thereof, to hould and injoy the same with the rights, priviledges, and prerogatives justley, legally, and rightly thereunto belonging. God who puts downe and setts up another, and gives the kingdomes of the world to whomsoever hee pleaseth, having by a series of Providence[s] raised you to bee a deliverer to these Nations, and made you more able to governe us in peace and prosperity then any other whatsoever soe long as God shall continue to us the blessing of your life and governement; and for preventing such confusions and inconveniences that otherwayse may ensue upon your death, that your Highnes will he pleased in your life time to appoint and declare the person, who shall, immediately after your death, succeed you in the government of these nations; and we shall esteeme your Highnes acceptance of our unfained desire herein as a farther testimony of your care and good affection to us and this Commonwealth, and doe faithfully obleige ourselves to adhere to you with the expence of our lives and estates.’ (Clarice MSS. xxix. f. 10b.)

The second part of this article was passed in an abridged form on March 3, the words italicised being voted to stand as part of this Remonstrance.

^{page 96 note 1} It is possible that H. D. is a mistake for G. D. and that this letter is from George Downing to Monck. See his letters of March 19. On the other hand it looks as if the author were an officer and H. D. may be Major Henry Dorney, one of the Scottish Officers sent to London in the previous September to represent the army there.

^{page 98 note 1} See p. 86 ante.

^{page 103 note 1} April 8. A letter amongst the Carte MSS. (ccxxvii. 84) dated April 8, and signed T. B., gives the following account of the situation :

‘ We went in a Committee yesterday att 11 to attend his Highness, whoe was in his bedchamber under some indisposition of body, as he told us, yet he would endeavour himselfe to meet the house this day att 11 in the banqueting house, or rather at 3 this afternoone, if it stood with the orders of the house and our conveniency.

‘ All busines whatsoever are utterly excluded till this busines be determined. And I am confident if it take nott, upon this address or the next (which will be more formall, rizt. in the place for passing of lawes and the ultimate refuge), that it will goe neere to dissolve us.

‘ The royall party are highly discon[ten]ted, and when I speake with some of them seriously in itt, they tell me they never thought to be soe trappannd (even of those that pretend a little knowledge to the caball) who had better assuranoes than every body know on. How the scene is changed it's pas't my skill to determine, but I feare there is somethinge of feare as well as conscience in the case. And if such influences remaine predominant, it may prove of ill omen to the personall as well as politicall capacity, and of most ill to the nation.

‘ Omitt this opportunity, and be for ever under an arbitrary lash, and some have not stuck to say soe with much resolution in the House.

‘ The other party are very crowse [?] and confident, and thought to have surprised us upon the vote on Saturday last, about adheering etc., which was the life of the whole, and never dream'd on by many of us, though designed by them.

Col, Sidnam, who had been 6 weeks from us, and all the dissatisfyed party, came thronging in with their negatives, and thought to have oarryed it cleare. Some talke that they have a further designe to discreditt this modell, by bringing in one of their owne more illustrious, and more answering the ends propounded. It would doe well, if we could come to a settlement at any hand, but its hardly to be hoped for, if this fayle. Sword dominion is too sweet, to be parted with, and the truth is (whatever kind of squeezynes we may pretend to) that the single issue, the maine dread is, that the civill power shall swallow upp the millitary: there's a Demetrius in the case I doubt.

‘ By the next I hope we shall know more certainly the result, for its nott a busines will keep, and if we have a house of Lords the names will be knowne presently after the bill pass. All the old Lords that have not forfeited by delinquency will be restored; the rest are butt only guess't att, the first list I have or heare of you shall have itt.

‘ April 8, 1657.’

^{page 106 note 1} April 13.

^{page 107 note 1} Thomas Clarges (?).

^{page 108 note 1} Thurloe, vi. 281; Ludlow's Memoirs, ed. 1894, ii. 25–28.

^{page 108 note 2} Thurloe, vi. 267; Commons' Journals, vii. 533. Carlyle's Cromwell, speech xiv. The version in the Clarke Papers agrees with that given in the Journals.

^{page 108 note 3} May 12. An account of the debate on the petition of the officers is given in a letter from Major Morgan to Henry Cromwell, printed in a note to Ludlow's Memoirs, ed. 1894, ii. 26.

² The original is unsigned, but the author was probably either Major-General Morgan or Lieut.-Col. Hughes. See pp. 116, 124.

^{page 110 note 1} See Thurloe, vi. 291,310 ; and Scotland and the Protectorate, Scottish History Society, 1899, p. 354.

^{page 111 note 1} Thurloe, vi. 297 ; Guizot, Cromwell and the English Republic, ii. 568.

^{page 112 note 1} The version of this speech given in the Clarke Papers agrees with that in the Commons' Journals, vii. 539, not with that in Thurloe, vi. 309. There are, however, the following trifling differences between the Clarke MS. and the speech printed in the Journals. The Clarke MS. reads:

‘… I believe that the same spirit,’ 1. 26.

‘… testified your forwardness,’ 1. 33.

‘… to satisfy my conscience and judgment,’ 1. 37.

‘… under their various forms,’ 1. 54.

‘… if God make not these nations as thankful,’ 1. 55.

‘… in the least as doubting it,’ 1. 63.

^{page 114 note 1} See 3rd Report Hist. MSS. Comm. p. 247, for Cromwell's letter demanding Lambert's Commission.

^{page 114 note 2} Nathaniel Temse.

^{page 114 note 3} Wolseley.

^{page 116 note 1} Fifty men according to Morgan's narrative and the abridgment of his letter in Mercurius Politicus.

^{page 117 note 1} The signature should be T. not J. Mo. The letter is evidently by Major-General Thomas Morgan, and it exactly confirms the account of the siege of St. Venant given by him in his narrative. See ‘A true and just Belation of Major-General Sir Thomas Morgan's Progress in France and Flanders,’ Harleian Miscellany, ed. Park, iii. 342. On the siege of St. Venant, see also Thurloe, vi. 480, 487, and Bourelly, Deux Campagnes de Turenne, 1886, p. 27, and Mercurius Politicus, September 3, 1657, pp. 1590, 1597.

^{page 118 note 1} September 3.

^{page 118 note 2} Cf. Mercurius Politicus, p. 1606, where there is a fuller account of Blake's funeral.

^{page 118 note 3} The Portuguese Ambassador had audiences on September 2 and September 9 according to Mercurius Politicus.

^{page 118 note 4} MS. ‘frame.’

^{page 119 note 1} Marville, upon the Lys.

^{page 119 note 2} Montauboy, according to Mercurius Politicus.

^{page 119 note 3} On these movements see Thurloe, vi. 523; Mercurius Politicus, pp. 1632, 1637 ; and Bourelly, p. 37.

^{page 120 note 1} See Mercurius Politicus, p. 1664, September 24-October 1, and Ootober 1–8, p. 7

^{page 120 note 2} See Thurloe, vi. 525, 526, 547, 579.

^{page 120 note 3} This letter is probably by Joachim Hane. See Thurloe, vi. 538, 547.

^{page 121 note 1} See Thnrloe, vi. 547, 548, 550; and Mercurius Politicus, pp. 37, 48, for the proceedings of the forces in Flanders. This letter is doubtless by the author of those dated October 13 and November 4.

page 122 note 1 Lockhart arrived at London on October 15, and pp. 54, 70, 80, 84.

page 122 note 2 This letter was doubtless written by the same officer as that of November 4, which follows p. 124. There was a more serious attack on Mardvke on October 22. See Mercurius Politicus, under October 24.

page 123 note 1 Mercurius Politicus, under November 7 (p. 88), says that Turenne was moving the French army towards Ardres for change of quarters.

page 123 note 2 Four battalions? See p. 121.

page 124 note 1 See Mercurius Politicus, Nov. 5–12, 1657, p. 95.

page 124 note 2 See Thurloe, vi. 005, 014, 618.

page 124 note 3 Ibid., vi. 578.

page 126 note 1 On this trial see Thurloe, vi. 010.

page 127 note 1 Probably should be signed J. H. Its author seems to be an engineer, and Joachim Hane had been sent from Scotland to fortify Mardyke. See p. 120, note 3.

page 127 note 2 See Memoirs of James II. i. 326 ; cf. Thurloe, vi. 687, 731.

page 129 note 1 See Thurloe, vi. 653, 638.

page 129 note 2 Cromwell was apparently more desirous to oblige Lord Fairfax by releasing Buckingham, than his Council were. See also Thurloe, vi. 617.

page 129 note 3 A list of the members, identical with that printed in Thurloe, is given on a later page of the MSS. At the end of the list it is added : ‘The number for the present is but 60, his Highness having left power to him self to issue out a writt for ten more.’

page 130 note 1 John Evelyn was amongst the persons thus arrested. See his Diary, ed. Wheatley, ii. 95.

page 131 note 1 ‘The letters which follow are from vol. xxx. o£ the Clarke MSS.

page 131 note 2 See Cal. State Papers, Dom. 1657—58, pp.258, 551; Nieoll's Diary, p. 209 ; and Thurloe, vi. 741.

page 131 note 3 Lord Rothes.

page 132 note 1 Once that of Col. Saunders. See Thwloe, vi. 699, 359.

page 133 note 1 The newsletters amongst the Carte MSS. add further details on the first proceedings of this session of Parliament. The first is dated January 27 :

‘The great debate about the title of the other House hangs still in limine; when this fast day is over we shall oome to some rtsolucion in it. I dread the issue; here are very, strange spiritts oome in amongst us, and there are dayly more flocking in ; there are 206 sworne, and likely to be a full House, but how longe lived I cannot say. The great Sir Arthur (notwithstanding his higher call) vouchsafed on Monday last to take his seate amongst the Commons. Lord Lambert, Sir Anth. Ashley Cowper, Coll. Rossiter, and Baron Thorpe came in at the same tyme. His Highnes sent a lettre to us on Monday desireing a meeting with both Houses that afternoons in the banqueting house, where he made a very longe and serious speech relateinge to the state of our affaires both at home and abroad, our dangers and necessityes, inviteing us to unite for preservaoion of the whole.

We have had a very smart debate upon the representacion which Mr. Scobell clerk of the other House sent to us, in answer to our order for delivering the records, bookes, and writeings, belonging to this House. He pretended he had an Act of Parliament for being clerk for his life and to have the custody of the records, which was very ill resented. It's [?] agreed that his non attendance has forfeited his place, and alsoe the keeping of the records, and such an answer was not expected from a servant. A Comittee is appointed to take an inventory of all the bookes, records, and writeings, and they are to be delivered to our clerk. Mr. Scobell must buckle, and sayes he will not reflect soe mueh upon our. House as to appeale to the other. Every thing adds to the flame. I confess I like not the face of affairs-Wee shall either sitt a great while, or rise very soone.’—(Carte MS. ccxxxix. f. 461.)

The seeond, which is addressed to Lord Wharton and signed ‘R. B.,’ is dated January 30:

‘The Commons House have not yet fallen upon anything of publique concernement, declineing on purpose till theis domestieall fast was over. The firste efforte of the other House was a message sent downe by two of the judges for concurrance on a publike day of humiliation,, which being delivard by them as from the Lords, stirred the passions of some and exereised the witts of others ; but in fine ended in a resolution to send an answer by messengers of their owne. In the meane tyme the Protector takeing notice of the constitution of the House by the accesse of the secluded Members, invited them by letter to a meeting in the banquetting house, where he made a speech to them, pressing unto unanimitie and representing dangers. I was present at some parte of it, but since I heare that a Committee hath beene sent to desire it may be printed, I shall not presume to give any aocount of it. Upon their day of humiliation there preached in the Commons House Mr. Griffeth and Mr. Calamy ; in the other Mr. Caryl and Mr. Eeynolds. Mr. Griffeth upon these words—we know not what to doe but our eyes—His observation was that in tymes of doubt and dimcoltie it was good to observe providence, instanced in Eahab's closing with the Israelite, the people with Saul after the businesse of Jabeth Gilead, and with David after his successes against Isboseth, and David concluding the Lord would now establish him when Hiram a heathen king owned him. He made this application, goe ye and doe likewise ; which was the more taken notice off because he is said to be an adversarie to the higher tytle. Mr. Calamie meddled not with any thing of state, but shew'd out of Haggai that the ground of not succeeding in affayres was the neglect of the Church of God, instanced in 10 or 12 things of that kinde, declared himself by judgment and obligations a Presbyterian that protests againste an imposing spirit on the one hand as a lukewarme on the other. When the service was over the next day they began to fall to worke, severall motions were made about priviledges, questioning the secludors of the members, the tytles of the supreme magistrate, another House. In the issue a motion was made to take in consideration what answer to send to the message sent by the judges, which giving ocoasion to take in the tytle of the House and their chooser was assented unto, and ordered that noe private businesse should be received for a month, by which the Lord Craven's businesse was putt off, which should have beene heard the next day. The motion aforesaid was made by Sir A. A. ’C—(Carte MS. lxxx. 753.)

page 136 note 1 On the dissolution of this Parliament see the English Historical Review, 1892, p. 102 ; Thurloe, vi. 778, 781, 788.

page 136 note 2 This speech is number xviii. in Carlyle's collection. It seemed worth printing at length as a specimen of the reports in the Clarke MSS., and because it differs more than the previous speeches from Carlyle's version.

page 138 note 1 wthat in MS.

page 140 note 1 See Thurloe, vi. 786, 780, 793, 806.

page 141 note 1 It had been reported that Disbrowe was to have this post: Thurloe, vi. 790.

page 141 note 2 See Thurloe, vi. 806.

page 141 note 3 Richard Beke of Haddenham, Bucks, married February 7, 1655, Levina Whetstone (or Whitstone) daughter of Roger Whetstone, of Whittlesea in the Isle of Ely, by Catherine daughter of Robert Cromwell. Vide Some particulars relative to Col. Richard Beke, by C. T. Beke, 1852.

page 142 note 1 Compare the newsletter of May 29. This shows that the plan adopted in calling the Parliament of January 1659 had been long under discussion. The calling of a new Parliament was proposed almost at once after the dissolution of February 1658. See Thurloe, vi. 820, 840. A letter of advice as to the calling of a new Parliament, addressed to the Protector by some unknown person about this time, is amongst Thurloe's papers, Rawlinson MS., A. lix. 77 :

‘It is conceived to be the opinion of most of the good people of the nation of all judgments, as to the Legislative power. That there being soe much worke for it to doe as there is, and the body of a Parlaiment (after the old way) moveth soe slowlie (though unanimous), that now when it wilbe much divided (which oanot but be expected upon a promiscuous election) it wilbe impossible to be done by it.

‘They seeme therfore much to desire a lesser body, or Councell somewhat lyke to it, of moderate and peaceable men as neere of one mynd as may be.

But if it be by Parlaiment in the former way. It is conceived to be much to advantage to call it out of course, and speedilie. And not to stay till the 3^d yere. 1. For then if not liked it may be disolved at the end of 3 moneths. 2. It is conceived soe, it may be called to apeciall purposes, and that then they are not to medle with any thinge els. 3. The elections now by the care of the Sheriffes and helpe of the Maiors generall wilbe looked to. 4. If any get in unfit, the councell may put him out by the words of the Govermeht.

‘[Endorsed.]—Some considerations about a Parliament deliverd to the Lord Prot.’

page 143 note 1 See Mercurius Politicus, March 11–18, for Cromwell's speech to the City (on March 12) ; it is reprinted in Cromwelliana, p. 171. See also Thurloe, vii. 3.

page 143 note 2 Cat. State Papers, Dom. 1657–58, p. 330.

page 148 note 1 This letter was probably written by Henry Whalley. In Mercurius Politicus, under March 27, there is an address from the officers of the army to Cromwell. Whalley is the only one of the signatories whose initials are H. W.

page 148 note 2 See Thurloe, vii. 38, 99, 153.

page 146 note 1 1 See A Narrative wherein is faithfully set forth the sufferings of John Canne Wentworth Day, etc., London, 1658. They were arrested April 1, 1658. Day had once been a cornet in Harrison's regiment of horse.

page 149 note 1 See A Relation of the Defeating of Cardinal Mazarine's and Oliver Cromwell's Design to have taken Ostend by Treachery in the Tear 1658, written in the Spanish by a person of quality, and now translated, 12mo. 1666. Also Bourelly's Cromwell et Mazarin, 1886, pp. 122–135. Thurloe, vii. 113, 115.

page 149 note 2 An account of the plott, and counterplott of the late transaction att Ostend : ‘For the worke on the French-side the plott was (as they say) laid thus, they had made for themselves two of the Burgomasters,’ etc., as in the print. See Mercurius Politicus, May 6–13, 1658, p. 525. The narrative promised by Thurloe is not transcribed in the Clarke MSS., with the exception of the first line or two.

page 150 note 1 This letter is undated, but from the account of the opening of the siege of Dunkirk, and from its position in the letter-book, was evidently written about Mayjf. See Bourelly, p. 145.

page 150 note 2 Francis Cheynell, died 1665.

page 153 note 1 Cf. Thurloe, vii. 126, where Lookhart's letter should probably be dated May 28, o.s.

page 153 note 2 Capt. William Cotes of Sir Brioe Coohrane's; ‘shot’ means wounded, not killed.

page 153 note 3 This was one of the portents supposed to refer to Cromwell's death. Compare Dryden's lines:

‘But first the ocean as a tribute sent

The giant prince of all her watery herd.’

page 154 note 1 Should be .

page 154 note 2 Lieut.-Col. Roger Fenwick died of his wounds. Thurloe, vii. 156, 174, 215.

page 154 note 3 Captain Henry Jones. Thurloe, vii. 156.

page 155 note 1 I.e. Muskerry.

page 155 note 2 Castelnau.

page 157 note 1 Thurloe, vii. 170.

page 159 note 1 See Thurloe, vii. 172 ; Bourelly, pp. 229, 231.

page 159 note 2 Drummond died of his wounds. Thurloe, vii. 174, 208, 216.

page 160 note 1 Bergen, i.e. Bergues, capitulated July 1 (new style), and Fumes on July 3. Bourelly, p. 245. See also Thurloe, vii. 191, 200. A newsletter amongst the Clarke MSS., written in July, says : ‘Lt.-Col. Hughes is dead of his wounds received at Bergen; he was buried 15 July.’

page 160 note 2 See Thurloe, vii. 203.

page 160 note 3 For other letters of Morgan's during this campaign, see Thurloe, vii. 200, 217, 223, 258.

page 164 note 1 Alluded to in Marvell's lines on Cromwell's death:

‘The last minute his victorious ghost Gave chase to Ligny on the Belgian coast.’

page 164 note 2 Undated, but apparently written about September 17 from the Hague, whither Downing had just been sent as agent.

page 165 note 1 Cf. Thurloe, vii. 447, 452, and Guizot, Richard Cromwell, i. 246.

page 167 note 1 Public Intelligencer, November 8–15, 1658. ‘A relation of the Sea-fight between the Swedes and Dutch, as it was sent from Helsingor, 29th of Oetober’ (English Style). The Swedes are said to have lost two ships, the Dutch nine. Another aooount is given in Mercurius Politicus, December 9–16.

page 167 note 2 A newsletter dated September 25 says : ‘The Councell sat most in oonsultation about due preparations for the Enterment of his late Highness, the glorious solemnity whereof will bee much after the manner of the late King Jameses.’

page 167 note 3 Guizot, Richard Cromwell, i. 248, 251.

page 168 note 1 See Thfirloe, vii. 447, 452, for an earlier speech of Bichard's to the officers on October 18, and for a different version of this one see Mercurius Politicus, November 18–25; cf. Guizot, Richard Cromwell, i. 264.

page 168 note 1 See Thfirloe, vii. 447, 452, for an earlier speech of Bichard's to the officers on October 18, and for a different version of this one see Mercurius Politicus, November 18–25; cf. Guizot, Richard Cromwell, i. 264.

page 170 note 1 A newsletter from G. M., November 20, gives another and briefer account of the speech, adding that the officers ‘seemed not a little satisfied at their departure.’ They were to meet again the following Friday, and a letter of November 27 says : ‘Yesterday the officers were again at James's to pray as formerly.’ In a postscript it adds: ‘A petition was carryed on by the troopers for the addition of 3d per diem to their pay, but it is supprest, and the promoters under examinacion.’ A letter of December 18 says : ‘Wednesday last two troopers of the Lord Fleetwood's regiment were cashered by a Court Martiall for endeavoringe to promote a petition for arreares and increase of pay.’

page 171 note 1 Cf. Mefcurius Politicus, December 23–30, 1658, p. 118.

page 172 note 1 Cf. Thurloe Papers, vii. 581.

page 172 note 2 The papers for the year 1659 come from vol. xxxi. of the Clarke Papers.

page 174 note 1 This refers to the Newcastle election, and is evidently addressed to Monck by some officer there.

page 176 note 1 He ‘delivered himself in a compendious speech for above a quarter of an hour’ says another letter of the same date. A third adds that ‘it was very taking, and much approved of by most of the members, which they signified by their general hummings of him whilest hee was speaking.’

page 176 note 2 The Petition and Advice.

¹ The letter is unaddressed, but from the advice about Parliament contained in it is probably a copy of a letter written to Thurloe.

page 180 note 1 MS. ‘T. M.’

page 180 note 2 A second newsletter adds that the petition is the same upon the matter ‘if not the very words, that should have bin presented to the last Parliament, and which as supposed was the occasion of his late Hiphnesse p[rejm[ature] dissolving the Parliament The Hopse are not possest of it, and is like will not bee till this debate be over,’

page 182 note 1 MS. ‘ard.’

page 182 note 2 Cf. Guizot, Richard Cromwell, i. 302.

page 183 note 1 MS. ‘G. N.’

page 183 note 2 A letter dated March 1 adds : ‘Yesterday the House was in debate of the House of Lords, whether it should consist of the old, present, or mixed peerage.’ The debates are reported at length in Burton's Diary.

page 183 note 3 Downing writes from the Hague, . ‘This last weeke wee have bin filled with reports that my Lord Protector was putt in the Tower by the parliament, and that the Lord Fairfax was to bee Generall, the Lord Lambert, Lieut General and Major General Harrison, Major General! of the Army, and that now there was noe danger of England being troublesome this yeare in the Sound or elsewhere.’

page 185 note 1 1 For comments on this scene see the letter of Bordeaux to Mazarin. Guizot, Richard Cromwell, i. 336.

page 185 note 2 2 The journals of Cromwell's House of Lords are in the possession of Sir Bichard Tangye. Very little is said of their proceedings in newsletters or newspapers.

page 186 note 1 Perhaps Capt. Edward Sootton, M.P. for Devizes, or Col. Edward Salmon, M.P. for Scarborough.

page 186 note 2 Undated in the MS.

page 186 note 3 This took place on March 30. Burton's Diary, iv. 301.

page 187 note 1 See Burton's Diary, iv. 312–317, 327. This may refer either to the debate of March 31, or to that of April 1.

page 187 note 2 These two votes were passed on March 31 (Burton, iv. 312). ‘Today’ is probably a clerioal error for ‘to-morrow.’

page 187 note 3 The Petition is printed in the old Parliamentary History, xxi. 340; of. Guizot, Richard Cromwell, i. 351.

page 188 note 1 See Ludlow's Memoirs, ii. 65, ed. 1894.

page 189 note 1 Ibid. ii. 60, ed. 1894.

page 188 note 1 See Ludlow's Memoirs, ii. 65, ed. 1894.

page 188 note 2 Ibid. ii. 60, ed. 1894.

page 189 note 1 This was written by a member of the Second Chamber who had some connection with the Government of Scotland, probably by Archibald Johnston, of Warriston. The use of the word ‘anent’ seems to prove the author was a Scot. The ‘speech’ against the House of Lords referred to is that reprinted in Morgan's Phoenix Britannicus, where it is attributed to Sir A. A. Cooper. It is also reprinted in the Somers Tracts, vi. 466, and in Christie's Life of Shaftesbury, vol. i. appendix iv. There is no good ground for attributing it to Cooper. The full title of it is A Seasonable Speech made by a worthy Member of Parliament in the House of Commons, concerning the other House, March, 1659.

page 190 note 1 The late King's.

page 190 note 2 See Fox's Journal, pp. 272, 277. This Cornet Edward Billing had been a soldier under Monck in Scotland, and was one of the founders of the Colony of New Jersey.

page 191 note 1 Cf. Guizot, Richard Cromwell, i. 364.

page 191 note 2 Probably William Eosse, one of the Scottish Members.

page 191 note 3 See an account of this interview in a letter of Anthony Morgan's to Henry Cromwell. Ludlow's Memoirs, ii. 68, ed. 1894, and Guizot, Richard Cromwell, 364.

page 193 note 1 MS. ‘Master.’

¹ Another copy of this letter is amongst Mr. Leyborne-Popham's papers.

page 195 note 1 Cf. letter of April 7. J. M. was an officer in the army, probably in the army in Scotland, and not an M.P. Perhaps Captain John Miller, if he was in England.

page 196 note 1 See Ludlow's Memoirs, ed. 1894, ii. 62 n.

page 196 note 2 George Elsmore, captain in Ingoldsby's late regiment.