Rupert Prince Palatine Part 18

[21] Clarendon, Bk. VIII. p. 149.

[22] Warburton, III. p. 31.

[23] Warburton, III. p. 32.

[24] Clar. Hist. Bk. VIII. p. 29.

[25] Ibid. p. 108.

[26] Warburton, III. p. 32, and Rupert's Journal, Nov. 15, 1644, Clarendon Papers.

[27] Whitelocke. ed. 1732. p. 114.

[28] Ibid.

[29] Maurice to Rupert, Jan. 29, 1645. Warb. III. p. 54.

[30] Warburton, III. p. 54. Maurice to Rupert, Jan. 29, 1645.

[31] Rupert Transcripts. Byron to Rupert, 14 Jan. 1644.

[32] Warburton, III. p. 56-7. Howard to Rupert, Jan. 30, 1645.

[33] Rupert Transcripts. Astley to Rupert, Jan. 11, 1645. Pythouse Papers, p. 20.

[34] Domestic State Papers. Rupert to Astley. Jan. 13, 1645.

[35] Rupert Transcripts. King to Rupert, Jan. 1645.

[36] Warburton, III. p. 68. Rupert to Legge, Mar. 11, 1645.

[37] Ibid. p. 69, Mar. 24, 1645.

[38] Carte's Ormonde, VI. 271-272. Archbishop Williams to Ormonde, Mar. 25, 1655.

[39] Add. MSS. 18982. Byron to Rupert, Jan. 1645.

[40] Webb, Vol. II. pp. 141, 157, 178.

[41] Webb. II. pp. 146-147.

[42] Gilbert's History of the Irish Confederation, Vol. IV. p. XIV.

Ralph Goodwin to Houses of Parliament, Mar. 23, 1645.

[43] Dom. State Papers. Bard to Rupert, Ap. 28, 1645.

[44] Walker's Historical Discourses, ed. 1705, pp. 126, 129.

[45] Carte's Letters, I. 90, May 25, 1645.

[46] Clarendon State Papers, Rupert's Journal, May 29, 1645.

[47] Walker, p. 128.

[48] Walker, p. 128.

[49] Warburton, III. p. 100. Rupert to Legge, June 8, 1645.

[50] Sir Edward Southcote. Troubles of our Catholic Forefathers.

Series I. p. 392.

[51] Warburton. III. pp. 119-121. Rupert to Legge, June 18, 1645.

[52] Warburton. III. pp. 125-128. Digby to Legge. No date.

[53] Warburton, III. pp. 128-131. Legge to Digby, June 30, 1645.

{177}

CHAPTER X

RUPERT'S PEACE POLICY. THE SURRENDER OF BRISTOL. DIGBY'S PLOT AGAINST RUPERT. THE SCENE AT NEWARK. RECONCILIATION WITH THE KING. THE FALL OF OXFORD

After the battle of Naseby, misfortunes crowded thick upon the Royalists. Garrisons surrendered daily to the Parliament; Goring suffered a crus.h.i.+ng defeat; and the King seemed in no way to raise another army. Rupert retired to his city of Bristol, and summoned Maurice to his side. But the younger Prince was at Worcester, which was threatened by the Scots, and could not quit the place with honour.

"I hope when you have duly considered my engagement herein, you will be pleased to excuse me for not observing your orders to be personally with you,"[1] he wrote humbly to his brother.

After a three weeks' stay at Raglan, the King himself thought of joining his nephew at Bristol. But the Prince's enemies opposed the idea, and Rupert, though enough inclined to it, declared that he would not be responsible for what he had not advised. And the rallying loyalty of the Welsh, combined with continued misfortune in the West, caused Charles to change his mind. In Rupert's eyes the King's final decision was a matter of indifference; defeat was inevitable, and all the Prince's efforts were directed towards peace. This complete change of att.i.tude is an evidence of Rupert's strong common-sense. In 1642 he had been regarded as one of the obstacles which made peace impossible; but in 1642 there had been hope, even {178} probability, of victory.

In 1645 defeat and ruin stared the Royalists in the face, and Rupert would not, like the King and Digby, shut his eyes to disagreeable fact.

On July 28th he wrote to Richmond a plain statement of his views. "His Majesty has now no way left to preserve his posterity, Kingdom, and n.o.bility, but by a treaty. I believe it a more prudent way to retain something than to lose all. If the King resolve to abandon Ireland, which now he may with honour, since they desire so unreasonably; and it is apparent they will cheat the King, having not 5,000 men in their power. When this has been told him, and that many of his officers and soldiers go from him to them (_i.e._ to the Parliament), I must extremely lament the condition of such as stay, being exposed to all ruin and slavery. One comfort will be left,--we shall all fall together. When this is, remember I have done my duty. Your faithful friend, Rupert."[2]

On the same day he wrote to Legge:

"I have had no answer to ten letters I wrote, but from the Duke of Richmond, to whom I wrote plainly and bid him be plain with the King, and to desire him to consider some way which might lead to a treaty, rather than undo his posterity. How this pleases I know not, but rather than not do my duty and speak my mind freely, I will take his unjust displeasure."[3]

This advice was in fact exceedingly displeasing to the King. Richmond, who fully concurred in Rupert's opinion, showed the letter to his master "with as much care and friends.h.i.+p to Rupert" as possible; and the King read it graciously, saying that his nephew had "expressed as great generosity as was all his actions;"[4] but, for all that, he firmly forbade him to write in such a strain again. "Speaking as a mere soldier or statesman," he acknowledged that {179} Rupert might be right; but, "as a Christian, I must tell you that G.o.d will not suffer rebels and traitors to prosper, nor this cause to be overthrown; and whatever personal punishment it shall please Him to inflict on me must not make me repine, much less give over this quarrel; and there is little question that a composition with them at this time is nothing less than a submission, which, by the grace of G.o.d, I am resolved against, whatever it cost me. For I know my obligation to be, both in conscience and honour, neither to abandon G.o.d's cause, injure my successors, nor forsake my friends. Indeed I cannot flatter myself with expectation of good success more than this, to end my days with honour and a good conscience; which obliges me to continue my endeavours, as not despairing that G.o.d may yet, in good time, avenge his own cause.... I earnestly desire you not in any way to hearken after treaties, a.s.suring you, low as I am, I will not go less than what was offered in my name at Uxbridge. Therefore, for G.o.d's sake, let us not flatter ourselves with these conceits; and believe me, the very imagination that you are desirous of a treaty will lose me so much the sooner."[5]

But n.o.ble and earnest as were the King's words, they could not alter his nephew's mind. Rupert had little faith that a miracle would be vouchsafed to save the royal cause; and he could never be made to understand that the questions at issue were such as admitted of no compromise. Digby of course seized the opportunity of widening the breach between King and Prince. Ever since Marston Moor, he had intrigued with increasing success against his rival, and Rupert struggled vainly in his meshes. "I would give anything to be but one day in Oxford, when I could discover some that were in that plot of Herefords.h.i.+re and the rest. But I despair of it!"[6] the Prince had written in the March of this year. In June he had sent Langdale to Ormonde in {180} Ireland, as a counterfoil to O'Neil, and Digby hastened to let the Lord Lieutenant know that Langdale was "a creature of Prince Rupert, and sent over not without jealousy that Dan O'Neil may be too frank a relater of our military conduct here."[7] And, July 21st, 1645, it is entered in the Prince's diary: "Ashburnham told the Prince that Digby would ruin him."[8] By that time Rupert had become convinced that Digby would succeed in his endeavours. A week later he wrote pa.s.sionately to Legge, from Bristol: "You do well to wonder why Rupert is not with the King! When you know the Lord Digby's intention to ruin him you will not then find it strange."[9]

Digby's chance was close at hand. Throughout July and August Rupert busied himself at Bristol, circling about the country, pacifying and winning over the Clubmen and trying to supply the deficiencies of the Bristol stores. This town was now the most important garrison of the King. It was the key of the Severn. It alone held Wales and the Marches loyal, and its loss would also terribly affect the Royalists in the south-west. Rupert had a.s.sured the King that he could hold the place four months, and great was the horror and dismay when he surrendered it after a three weeks' siege.

The truth was that he had found the town insufficiently supplied, greatly undermanned, and full of despondency and disaffection. He had done his best to remedy these evils; he ordered the townspeople to victual themselves for six months, imported corn and cattle from Wales, and he started manufactories of match and bullets within the town. All the recruits he could gain were "new-levied Welsh and unexperienced men," and even of these there were but few. "After the enemy approached, His Highness never could draw upon the line above 1,500,"

and this to defend a {181} stretch of five miles![10] Moreover, all his Colonels a.s.sured him that the wall was not tenable against a vigorous a.s.sault. The one chance was that, if they repulsed the first storm, the enemy might be discouraged, and the approaching winter might save the city for yet a little while.

On September 4th Fairfax sat down before Bristol, and summoned Rupert to surrender, in rather peculiar language. The summons was a private exhortation to the Prince himself, and a personal appeal to his sense and humanity, "which," says Fairfax, "I confess is a way not common, and which I should not have used but in respect to such a person, and such a place."[11] He proceeded to explain that the Parliament wished no ill to the King, but only his return to its care and Council, and entreated Rupert to end the schism by a surrender without bloodshed.

The Prince only replied by demanding leave to send to ask the King's pleasure. This Fairfax refused to grant, and Rupert entered into a treaty, hoping thereby to spin out time until relief could come. But the patience of Fairfax was soon exhausted. On September 10th he a.s.saulted the city, about 2.0 a.m., entered the lines at a spot held by some new recruits, and was, by daybreak, in full possession of line and fort. Thus the enemy was already within the city, and Rupert had no hope of relief, for, since Naseby, the King had had no army in the field. Moreover, since the siege began, no word had come to the Prince from any quarter. Three courses now lay open to him. He might, with his cavalry, break through Fairfax's army, leaving behind him just sufficient men to keep the castle; this plan was rejected as exceedingly dangerous and unsatisfactory. Secondly, he might retreat to the castle, which could be held for a long time; but the castle would not contain all the cavalry, and thus a large portion of it, together with the "n.o.bility, gentry and well affected of the town,"

would {182} be left to the mercy of the conquering foe.[12] Thirdly and lastly, he could surrender on honourable terms; and this was the course chosen by the Council of War. Rightly or wrongly, Rupert entered into treaty, and a cessation of arms was agreed on. But the cessation was violated by Fairfax's men, and Rupert thereupon declared that he "would stand upon his own defence, and rather die than suffer such injuries."[13] Fairfax hastened to apologise and make amends; Rupert was pacified, and the treaty concluded. The terms were good and honourable; the garrison were to march out with the honours of war, a charge of bullet and powder was granted to each of the Prince's guards, the sick were to stay uninjured in the city, and no private person was to be molested. It must also be noted that Rupert yielded only at the second summons, and after the city had been entered by the enemy.