between them and some of the sitting members, which miscarried, because the sitting members could not undertake that the parliament would stand to their agreement. Upon which Monk resolved to restore them immediately by force, lest the parliament and their army should come to an accommodation, and dislodge him from the city. Accordingly he summoned the secluded members to Whitehall, February 24, and having acquainted them with his design, exhorted them to take care of the true interest of the nation, and told them "that the citizens of London were for a commonwealth, the old foundations of monarchy being so broken that it could not be restored but upon the ruins of the people, who had engaged for the parliament; for if the king should return (says he) he will govern by arbitrary will and power. Besides, if the government of the state be monarchical, the church must follow, and prelacy be brought in, which I know the nation cannot bear, and have sworn against; and therefore a moderate, not a rigid Presbyterian government, with liberty of conscience, will be the most acceptable way to the church's settlement." He then obliged them to subscribe the following articles: "1. To settle the armies so as to preserve the peace. 2. To provide for their support, and pay their their arrears. 3. To constitute a council of state for Scotland and Ireland. And, 4. To call a new parliament and dissolve the present." And so dismissed them with a strong party of guards to see them take their places in the house. This speech was very different from what is pretended the general had in view, and seems to have been drawn up by some of the moderate Presbyterians, with whom he kept a close correspondence. And though he did not turn the members out of the house as Cromwell did, yet his discharging the parliament-guards, and placing a strong body of his own horse at the door, without leave of the parliament, gave them sufficiently to understand, what would be the consequence of their making opposition.

The house thus enlarged became entirely Presbyterian. They ratified the vote of December 1648, viz. that the king's concessions at the Isle of Wight were a sufficient ground for peace.They annulled the engagement of 1649.-They put the militia into new hands, with this limitation, that none should be employed in that trust but who would first declare under their hands, that they believed the war raised by both houses of parliament against the king was just and lawful, till such time as force and violence were used upon the parliament in 1648.-They repealed the oath of abjuration of Charles Stuart.-They appointed a new council of state, and declared for a free commonwealth-for a learned and pious ministry-for the continuance of tithes, and for the augmentation of smaller livings by the tenths and first-fruits.They resolved to encourage the two universities, and all other

* Kennet's Chron. p. 63, 64.

schools of learning.-And, to content the Independents, they voted, that provision should be made for a due liberty of conscience in matters of religion, according to the word of God.

Thus all things seemed to return to the condition they were in at the treaty of the Isle of Wight. The Presbyterians being now again in the saddle, a day of thanksgiving was kept; after which the city-ministers petitioned for the redress of sundry grievances; as, 1. "That a more effectual course be taken against the Papists. 2. That the Quakers be prohibited opening their shops on the sabbath-day. 3. That the public ministers may not be disturbed in their public services." They requested the house to establish the assembly's Confession of Faith, Directory, and Catechisms; to appoint persons for approbation of ministers, till the next parliament should take farther order; and to call another assembly of divines, to be chosen by the ministers of the several counties, to heal the divisions of the nation *.

In answer to these requests, the house agreed to a bill, March 2, for approbation of public ministers, according to the Directory, and named Mr. Manton, and several others of the Presbyterian persuasion, for that service; which passed into an act March 14. They declared for the assembly's Confession of Faith, except the thirtieth and thirty-first chapters of discipline, and appointed a committee to prepare an act, declaring it to be the public confession of faith of the church of England. The act passed the house March 5, and was ordered to be printed; Dr. Reynolds, Mr. Manton, and Mr. Calamy, to have the care of the press. On the same day they ordered the solemn league and covenant to be reprinted, and set up in every church in England, and read publicly by the minister once every year.

Thus presbytery was restored to all the power it had ever enjoyed; and the ministers of that persuasion were in full possession of all the livings in England. A reform was made in the militia; and the chief places of profit, trust, and honour, were put into their hands. The army was in disgrace; the Independents deprived of all their influence, and all things managed by the Presbyterians, supported by Monk's forces. After this the longparliament passed an act for their own dissolution, and for calling a new parliament to meet April 25, 1660, the candidates for which were to declare under their hands, that the war against the late king was just and lawfult; and all who had assisted in any war against the parliament since January 1, 1641, they and their sons were made incapable of being elected, unless they had since manifested their good affection to the parliament. They then

Kennet's Chron. p. 52. 75.

This was the requisition put to such as sought a commission in the army, rather than to candidates for a seat in parliament: though Kennet, in his margin, applies it to the eligibility of members. He says nothing of the candidates being obliged to sign the declaration. So that Mr. Neal not quite accurate in his

statement of this matter.-ED.

Kennet's Chron. p. 85.

appointed a new council of state, consisting of thirty-one persons, to take care of the government; and dissolved themselves March 16, after they had sat, with sundry intermissions, nineteen years, four months, and thirteen days.

We are now come to the dawn of the Restoration, of which general Monk has had the reputation of being the chief instrument. This gentleman was son of sir Thomas Monk, of Potheridge in Devonshire, and served the king in the wars for some years, but being taken prisoner he changed sides, and acted for the parliament. He afterward served Oliver Cromwell, and was by him left commander-in-chief of the forces in Scotland, from whence he now marched into England to restore the parliament. Lord Clarendon and Echard say, "he was of a reserved nature, of deep thoughts, and of few words; and what he wanted in fine elocution he had in sound judgment. That he had a natural secrecy in him, prevalent upon all his qualifications of a soldier; a strong body, a mind not easily disordered, an invincible courage, and a sedate and uniform contempt of death, without any frenzy of fanaticism or superstition to turn his head." This is the language of flattery. Others have set him forth in a very different light; they admit, that he was bold and enterprising, but had nothing of the gentleman, nor had any depth of contrivance; that he was perpetually wavering, and betrayed all whom he served but Cromwell. Ludlow says, he was a man of covetous temper, and of no principles; of a vicious life and scandalous conversation. Father Orleans says, that he was a man of slow understanding. And Whitelocke reports, that the French ambassador said, he had neither sense nor breeding. The truth is, he had a cloudy head, and in no action of his life discovered a quick or fine genius. In the latter part of life he was sordidly covetous, and sunk into most of the vices of the times. No man ever went beyond him in dissimulation and falsehood, as appears in this very affair of the king's restoration. He took the abjuration-oath once under Oliver; and again this very year, whereby he renounced the title of Charles Stuart, and swore to be true to the commonwealth, without a single person or house of lords*. And yet in his first message to the king by sir John Grenville, he assures his majesty, that his heart had been ever faithful to him, though he had not been in a condition to serve him till now†. When he came with his army to London, he assured the Rumpparliament of his cheerful obedience to all their commands, and desired them to be very careful that the cavalier party might have no share in the civil or military power. When he restored the secluded members, he promised the parliament to take effectual care that they should do no hurt. When the commonwealth's men expressed their fears, and asked the general whether he would join with them against the king, he replied, "I have

* Welwood's Mem. p. 117, &c.

+ History of the Stuarts, p. 459.

often declared my resolution so to do;" and taking sir Arthur Haslerigge by the hand, he said, "I do here protest to you, in the presence of all these gentlemen, that I will oppose to the utmost, the setting up of Charles Stuart, a single person, or a house of peers." He then expostulated with them about their suspicions; "What is it I have done in bringing these members into the house? (says he.) Are they not the same that brought the king to the block, though others cut off his head, and that justly?" And yet this very man, within six months, condemned these persons to the gallows. Nay, farther, the general sent letters to all the regiments, assuring them that the government should continue a commonwealth, that they had no purpose to return to their old bondage, that is, monarchy; and if any made disturbances in favour of Charles Stuart, he desired they might be secured. So that if this gentleman was in the secret of restoring the king from his entrance into England, or his first coming to London, I may challenge all history to produce a scene of hypocrisy and dissimulation equal to his conduct. Dr. Welwood adds, that he acted the part of a politician much better than that of a Christian; and carried on the thread of dissimulation with wonderful dexterity. Bishop Burnet differs from the doctor, and says, that "though he had both the praise and the reward, yet a very small share of the restoration belonged to him. The tide ran so strong that the general only went into it dexterously enough to get much fame and great rewards. If he had died soon after, he might have been more justly admired; but he lived long enough to make it known how false a judgment men are apt to make upon outward appearance +."

But before we relate the particulars of the Restoration, it will be proper to consider the abject state of the church of England, and the religion of the young king. If Cromwell had lived ten or twelve years longer, episcopacy might have been lost beyond recovery, for by that time the whole bench of bishops would have been dead, and there would have been none to consecrate or ordain for the future, unless they could have obtained a new conveyance from the church of Rome, or admitted the validity of Presbyterian ordination. This was the case in view, which induced some of the ancient bishops to petition the king to fill up the vacant sees with all expedition, in which they were supported by sir Edward Hyde, chancellor of the exchequer, who prevailed with his majesty to nominate certain clergymen for those high preferments, and sent over a list of the names to Dr. Barwick, to be communicated by him to the bishops of London, Ely, Sarum, and others who were to be concerned in the consecration. It was necessary to carry on this design with a great deal of secrecy, lest the governing powers should secure the bishops, and by that means put a stop to the work. It was no less difficult to provide

* Memoirs, p. 117, 120.

+ Burnet's History, vol. 1. p. 126. 12mo.

persons of learning and character who would accept the charge, when it would expose them to sufferings, as being contrary to the laws in being, and when there was no prospect of restoring the church. But the greatest difficulty of all was, how to do it in a canonical manner, when there were no deans and chapters to elect, and consequently no persons to receive a congé d'elire, according to ancient custom.

Several expedients were proposed for removing this difficulty. Sir Edward Hyde was of opinion, that the proceeding should be by a mandate from the king to any three or four bishops, by way of collation, upon the lapse, for the dean and chapters' nonelection. But it was objected, that the supposal of a lapse would impair the king's prerogative more than the collation would advance it, because it would presuppose a power of election pleno iure in the deans and chapters, which they have only de facultate regia; nor could they petition for such a licence, because most of the deans were dead, some chapters extinguished, and all of them so disturbed, that they could not meet in the chapter-house, where such acts regularly are to be performed.

Dr. Barwick, who was in England, and corresponded with the chancellor, proposed that his majesty should grant his commission to the bishops of each province respectively, assembled in provincial council, or otherwise, as should be most convenient, to elect and consecrate fit persons for the vacant sees, with such dispensative clauses as should be found necessary upon the emergency of the case, his majesty signifying his pleasure concerning

The Dr. Barwick to whom Mr. Neal refers was a singular and eminent character at this period; an active and zealous adherent to the kings Charles I. and II. He managed with great address and dexterity the correspondence of the first with the city of London, when he was at Oxford. He corresponded with the second while he was abroad and was sent by the bishops, as will afterwards appear, with their instructions to him at Breda, where he preached before him, and was made one of his chaplains. He had the chief hand in the Querela Cantabrigiensis, and wrote against the covenant. It was much owing to his influence, that the Cambridge plate was presented to the king: and he is said to have furnished lord Clarendon with a great part of the materials for his history. He was so dexterous in all his communications, as to elude the vigilance of Thurloe. He was born April 20, 1612, at Wetherslack in Westmoreland, and received his classical learning at Sedberg-school in Yorkshire, where he distinguished himself by acting the part of Hercules in one of Seneca's tragedies. In the eighteenth year of his age he was sent to St. John's college, Cambridge; where, so eminent were his abilities and attainments, he was chosen, when he was little more than twenty, by the members of his college, to be their advocate in a controverted election of a master, which was heard before the privy-council. He resided some time in Durham-house in London as chaplain to the bishop, Dr. Morton; who bestowed on him a prebend in his cathedral, and the rich rectories of Wolsingham and of Houghton-in-le-Spring. In 1660, Charles II. promoted him to the deanery of Durham; and before the end of the year he was removed from that dignity to the deanery of St. Paul's. On the 18th of February, 1661, he was chosen prolocutor of the convocation. He died in the year 1664, aged fifty-two. He united in his character, with his loyalty, sincere devotion with sanctity of manners, and an undaunted spirit under his sufferings in the royal cause, for which he was imprisoned in a dungeon in the Tower. He was then far gone a consumption; but living upon gruel and vegetables, he, after some time, recovered to a miracle. See his Life; and Granger's History of England, vol. 3. p. 257, 8vo.-ED.

in