satisfaction in what was demanded with reference to the church that this might probably unite the Parliament and the city of London, where the Presbyterians were most powerful, and enable them, the Parliament, to reform their army, and to disband those who should be refractory, and then to bring His Majesty to London with honour, where he might have an opportunity of gaining more abatements than he could ever expect by refusing to sign the preliminaries: that many advertisements came from His Majesty's friends in London, and other places, that it was high time the treaty was at an end before the army drew nearer London, which it would shortly do, as soon as those in the north had finished their works.

And this account from Lord Clarendon fully establishes the truth of Colonel Hutchinson's above narrative of the presbyterian party's secret negotiations with the King; the discovery whereof by the army well accounts for their subsequent conduct, and which theywould deem no more than an act of self-preservation against their inveterate enemies, who were plotting their destruction. The principal officers were accused, as has been observed, in their negotiations with the King, of obtaining from him promises of preferments and other rewards, which the General (Fairfax) has positively denied; declaring that they bargained not, nor

asked any thing of the King for any private interest of their own.

Lord Clarendon, with his usual asperity towards every one connected with Cromwell, describes Mr. Holles as having, one day, upon a very hot debate in the House, and some rude expressions which fell from Ireton, persuaded him (Ireton) to walk out of the House with him, and then telling him. that he should presently go over the water and fight with him that Ireton replying that his conscience would not suffer him to fight a duel, Holles, in choler, pulled him by the nose, telling him, that if his conscience would keep him from giving men satisfaction, it should keep him from provoking them and to this affront, given to a man whom he describes of the most virulent, malicious, and revengeful nature of all the pack, he attributes the impeachment of Mr. Holles and the other ten members. Ireton's established courage in various actions in which he had been engaged, renders this account utterly improbable, and is entitled to no more credit than is due to Mr. Holles's impeachment of Cromwell's courage; both proceeding from the same ill disposition towards these extraordinary characters. Mrs. Hutchinson, however, in her preceding account of this quarrel, expressly says, that Holles challenged Ireton in the House, from whence they went to have fought, but were prevented by the interposition of one of the members,

who had overheard them. Ludlow, in confirmation of this account, says, that Mr. Holles, thinking some expressions used by Ireton, respecting himself and others of the secluded members, to be injurious to them, passing by him in the House, whispered him in the ear, telling him it was false, and that he would justify it to be so, if he would follow him; and thereupon immediately went out of the House, with the other following him: that some members who had observed their passionate carriage to each other, and seen them hastily leaving the House, acquainted the House with their apprehensions; whereupon they sent their sergeantat-arms to command their attendance, which letting them understand as they were taking boat to go to the other side of the water, they returned, and the House enjoined them to forbear all words or actions of enmity towards each other, which they promised to do. These two relations must be deemed of themselves a sufficient contradiction of Lord Clarendon's narrative of this transaction; nor is it probable that Mr. Holles would have omitted to mention this affair with the circumstances related by His Lordship, so creditable to his own courage and disgraceful to Ireton, had His Lordship's account been correct.

This misunderstanding of Holles and Ireton would not have been here noticed, but for the purpose of showing the small degree of credit to which

these narratives are entitled, where they are manifestly introduced for the sole purpose of vilifying and destroying those characters that wese most obnoxious to the writers, and of building upon the ruins of them their own fabricated histories, to serve a party purpose.

CHAPTER XII.

LUDLOW'S OBSERVATIONS UPON HIS ACCOUNT OF CROMWELL'S CONDUCt at a meeting for the ENDEAVOURING A RECONCILIATION OF THE PRESBYTERIANS AND INDEPENDENTS, ABOUT THE TIME OF THE SCOTS PREPARATIONS FOR INVADING ENGLAND, IN PERFORMANCE OF THEIR TREATY WITH THE KING. -WHITELOCK'S OBSERVATIONS UPON THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REPUBLICANS TO BRING THE KING TO TRIAL. —PRIVATE MEETINGS of WHITELOCK AND OTHERS, WITH CROMWELL AND OTHERS, TO ENDEAVOUR A SETTLEMENT OF THE AFFAIRS OF THE NATION, SUBSEQUENT TO THE TERMINATION OF THE TREATY OF NEWPORT, AND BEFORE THE TRIAL OF THE KING, WHICH WAS NOT THE SUBJECT OF THEIR DELIBERATION. CONSIDERATIONS OF THAT MEASURE, AND UPON THE KING'S DENIAL OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, AND THE OBSERVATIONS. THEREON OF RAPIN, JUDGE BLACKSTONE, AND OTHERS.

LUDLOW, referring to the Scots preparations for raising an army, in pursuance of their treaty with the King, wherein he says the Presbyterians and cavaliers joined, though with different designs, says, that in the mean time Lieutenant-general Cromwell, not forgetting himself, procured a meeting of divers leading men amongst the Presbyterians and Independents, both members of Parliament and ministers, at a dinner in Westminster, under a pretence of endeavouring a reconciliation between the two parties; but that he found it a