On the 23d of July, the Commissioners from the English Parliament arrived at Newcastle, and were attended by Argyle and Loudoun as Commissioners for Scotland. The King appointed an audience next day, when the propositions were read to his Majesty, the Commissioners informing him that they had no power to treat, or to remain above ten days for an answer. At one of the interviews which the Commissioners had with the King, Loudoun, in very plain terms, intimated that the Parliament “are now in such a posture for strength and power, they are in a capacity to do what they will, both in Church and State; and some are so afraid, and others so unwilling to submit themselves to your Majesty’s government, that they desire not you nor any of your race longer to reign over them; but the people are so wearied of the war and great burthens they do groan under, are so loth to have monarchical government destroyed, that they dare not attempt to cast it totally off, till once they send propositions of peace to your Majesty.” He added, “If your Majesty (as God forbid) shall refuse to assent to the propositions, you will lose all your friends in the Houses, lose the city and all the country; and all England will join against you as one man: They will process and depose you, and set up another government; they will charge us to deliver your Majesty to them, and render their garisons, and remove our armies out of England; * * * and if your Majesty lose England by your wilfulness, you will not be permitted to come and reign in Scotland.”[341]
The King, however, was not entirely overwhelmed by the language of intimidation thus held towards him; but, on the 1st of August, delivered to the Commissioners an answer, which will be found annexed,[342] proposing to go to London “upon the publick faith and security of the two Houses of Parliament and the Scotch Commissioners,” there to negotiate the terms of an adjustment on all points; and, with this answer, the Commissioners returned to London the day following, and, on the 12th, reported their proceedings to Parliament.
“The spirit of the age,” in any age and in every country, is often marked emphatically by trivial circumstances. Of this we have an example at the period now under consideration. The Great Seal of England, which had been carried to Oxford in 1642, and other Signets of Royalty, were found there on its surrender, and were ordered by the House of Commons to be broken in pieces; and, on the 11th of August, “were, by a smith, broken to pieces at the bar of the Lords’ House, the whole House of Commons being present.” Such was the morbid fanaticism at that time even against the symbols of regal authority.
It cannot be deemed foreign to this compilation to state, that, in the course of this month, (19th August,) the most distinguished leader of the Covenanters died; we need scarcely add the name—Alexander Henderson. During the time that the King was at Newcastle, he had held an amicable controversy with his Majesty, on the relative qualities of Episcopacy and Presbytery, with the view of reconciling his antagonist in argument to the adoption of the latter; but this controversy, the records of which have been preserved, and which was conducted with great courtesy and talent on both sides, failed in the accomplishment of its object by the conversion of the King; and Henderson soon after returned to Scotland, where, suffering under a shattered constitution and broken spirit, he died, lamented by his friends and honoured by his opponents. The best tribute to his worth and talents is to be found in the pages of his contemporaries.
The settlement of the propositions, sent by the Parliaments to the King at Newcastle, did not form the only subject of perplexity to the ruling powers at the period now referred to. The same day that his Majesty’s answer was laid before the English Parliament, a paper was given in to the House of Peers by the Scottish Commissioners, declaring that the Scotch were “willing forthwith to surrender the garisons possessed by them in this Kingdom, [England,] (which they did keep for no other end but the safety and security of their forces,) and without delay to recall their army; reasonable satisfaction being given for their pains, hazards, charges, and sufferings; whereof a competent proportion to be presently paid to the army before their disbanding, and security to be given for the remainder.” Upon this a conference was held by the two Houses, and, two days after, the Commons voted £100,000 for the Scottish army, and promised an early audit and adjustment of their accounts. The demands of the Scotch amounted to about two millions; but, at length, after some cavilling, it was agreed, early in September, that they should be modified to £400,000, of which one moiety to be paid ere the army left England, and the remainder in future instalments. And, about the same time, Commissioners were sent from the Estates of Scotland to the King to persuade him to accede to the propositions already adverted to. The King’s answers to these are so important in a historical point of view, and as illustrating the relative position of all parties at that critical juncture, that we give them in our appendix of documents to which we refer.[343] And it may be here noted that, on the 3d of September, Montrose, by the Special orders of the King, relinquished, though reluctantly, his warlike position in the Highlands, and, along with some of his followers, embarked at Stonehaven for Norway.
On the 18th of September, “the House of Commons took into consideration how his Majesty’s person should be disposed of; and voted, 1. That whatsoever consultation and debate the Scots Commissioners should have concerning his Majesty’s person, the same should not in any ways impede the march of the Scots armies out of this kingdom, nor violate or trench upon the treaties between both nations. 2. That his Majesty shall be disposed of as both Houses of the Parliament of England shall think fit; and afterwards ordered that these Votes should be communicated to the Scots Commissioners, who pretending to a joint right of disposing of his Majesty’s person, a committee of both Houses was appointed to treat with them about it, who had sundry conferences thereupon.”[344] In the conferences which ensued, Loudoun, the Lord Chancellor of Scotland, in various eloquent speeches,[345] which reflect honour on his character and memory, contended for the perfect freedom of the royal person, and his restoration to all the honours of his station, or that he might go to Scotland; asserting the coequal right of the Scottish Parliament to regulate this matter: but the English Commissioners and Parliament maintained “that the Kingdom of Scotland hath no right of joint exercise of interest in disposing of the person of the King in the Kingdom of England”—overlooking, in the maze of the sophistries by which this doctrine was sustained, that the King was at the time under the protection of his Scottish subjects, and though in England for the moment, that, by removing him into Scotland, the whole argument would have been overthrown by a single day’s march, under a guard of cavalry, across the Tweed. They adhered pertinaciously to a prior and paramount right to the disposal of the King’s person, and, as will be seen in the sequel, they prevailed in the tedious written and oral controversy which took place on that subject.
The steadfastness of the King in refusing, without further consideration, to adopt the Covenant and abolish Episcopacy, while it discouraged the Presbyterians of England who were still attached to monarchy, was gratifying to the Independents, who rejoiced in it, as favourable to the establishment of a republic. Its effect in Scotland was most inauspicious, even although the Estates, and many of the chiefs, began once more to cherish their ancient loyalty. The English Parliament, while these altercations were in progress, (9th October,) issued ordinances abolishing Episcopacy, and ordering the sale of all church property—thus dispensing summarily with the royal sanction to these acts of democratic despotism.[346] On the 27th of November, the arrangements for paying off the arrears of the Scottish claims were completed, and the removal of the army stipulated for. On the 16th of December, the money was sent out of London in thirty-six carts, to pay off the first instalment; and, on the 21st of that month, the Commons voted that, after the payment of the first £200,000, the Scottish army would take no free quarters, nor levy moneys on the country; and both Houses named Commissioners to go to Scotland, and wind up this ticklish matter amicably. Nothing, however, was yet settled as to the King’s person; but it was agreed that this should be no impediment to the marching of the Scottish army, on receiving the first of the stipulated payments.
The Scottish Estates having met on the 3d of November preceding, were assembled at the time that these proceedings were maturing in the English Parliament. They resolved, on the very day that the money had been dispatched from London, (16th December,) to pay off their auxiliary army, “that instructions should be sent to their Commissioners to press his Majesty’s going to London, with honour, safety, and freedom, and that they should declare their resolutions to maintain monarchical government, in his Majesty’s person and posterity, and his just title to the Crown of England.”[347] This declaration, however, was not to the taste of the Commissioners of the General Assembly, who must needs intermeddle and supersede the Parliament; and, accordingly, next day, (17th December,) they concocted “A Solemn and Seasonable Warning to all Estates and Degrees of Persons throughout the Land,” in which, amidst a redundancy of the jargon of the times, they insisted that no deviation from the League and Covenant should be tolerated, under the pretence of preserving the King and his authority; and unless he should unconditionally adopt the Covenant, they obtested all the people to oppose his coming to Scotland—holding that document to be binding, not only upon all the existing generation, but their posterity.[348]
This most unseasonable usurpation of political power and interference in secular affairs had its natural effect in England. The declaration of the Scottish Estates, which was worthy of an independent, loyal, and supreme legislature, was presented to the English Parliament the one day, and the Warning from the Assembly’s Commission the day following; and, after reading it, a fresh discussion arose, which terminated in a resolution “that his Majesty should be desired to grant the whole propositions; and, in case of refusal, the certifications given to his Majesty should be put in execution, viz., To secure the Kingdom without him; and did declare that the Kingdom of Scotland cannot lawfully engage themselves for his Majesty, he not taking the Covenant, satisfying as to Religion, &c. Nor would admit him to come into Scotland unless he gave a satisfactory answer to the whole propositions lately presented to him in the name of both Kingdoms.”[349] This resolution implied an assumption of superiority in the English Houses of Parliament over the Estates of Scotland, which was a palpable act of unwarranted usurpation, inferring a breach of the Treaty; and we look in vain either to the general principles of international law, or to the existing treaties betwixt the two countries, for any justification of the assumption.
When the King was apprised of the proceedings in the English Parliament, which followed on the communications from Scotland, he sent another written message to both Parliaments, on the 20th of December, repeating his desire to confer with that of England, on the propositions submitted to him—not absolutely refusing, but desiring to give and receive in person, and in London, explanations. It concludes in these terms:—“’Tis your King who desires to be heard, (the which, if refused to a Subject by a King, he would be thought a tyrant for it,) and for that end which all men profess to desire. Wherefore his Majesty conjures you, as you desire to shew your selves really what you profess, even as you are good Christians and subjects, that you will accept this his offer, which he is confident God will so bless, that it will be the readiest means by which these Kingdoms may again become a comfort to their friends and a terror to their enemies.”[350]