Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

 Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow Extracts from Newsletters 2 - The Clarke Papers. Selections from the Papers of William Clarke, vol. 3

Return to Title Page for The Clarke Papers. Selections from the Papers of William Clarke, vol. 3

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

Subject Area: Political Theory
Subject Area: History
Topic: The English Revolution

Extracts from Newsletters 2 - Sir William Clarke, The Clarke Papers. Selections from the Papers of William Clarke, vol. 3 [1899]

Edition used:

The Clarke Papers. Selections from the Papers of William Clarke, Secretary to the Council of the Army, 1647-1649, and to General Monck and the Commanders of the Army in Scotland, 1651-1660, ed. C.H. Firth (London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1899). 4 vols.

Part of: The Clarke Papers. Selections from the Papers of William Clarke, 4 vols.

About Liberty Fund:

Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.


Extracts from Newsletters2

Jan. 24, 165.—

Munday3 the House spent some time in hearing all the transactions and depositions concerning the late plott at Whitehall read, and thereupon ordered, that Friday come fortnight should be observed as a day of thanksgiving for the discovery thereof before it was executed upon his Highness person. It was thereupon moved, that in respect his Highness person was in such continuall danger by the wicked designes of disaffected persons, that for the better security of the nation a kingly and hereditary government might be speedily setled. This was for some time debated, but came to no result. . . .

Fryday4 the Speaker with above 200 of the Members attended his Highness at Whitehall, and as they were goeing up into the banquettinge house part of the stayrecase brake, and down fell many of the Members, vizt. the Lord Richard Cromwell, whose shoulder was much bruised; Mr. Sollicitor Generall Ellis, one of whose legges is broken; Lieutenant-Colonel White, whose arme is sayd to be broken, with many other members prejudiced. . . .

Major Generall Boteler is under a cloud by reason of a charge presented against him. The continuing or dissolving the power of the Major Generalls is soe even a cast that as yet it cannot be discerned.5

Feb. 7, 165.—

Many citizens of London have laid severall wagers of late that we shall have suddenly an alteration of the present government, but what their meaning is we cannot yett discerne.

Feb. 14.—

The House this weeke spent some time in debating of publique assessments, and ordered thereupon that noe taxe or assessment bee hereafter laid upon the people of the three nations but by their free consent in parliament, but the next day1 after the passing of this vote, understanding that the same was against one of the Articles in his Highness Instrument of Government, ordered that the said vote should bee repealed.

[2 ]The letters for 1657 are from Clarks MSS. vol. xxix.

[3 ]January 19.

[4 ]January 23.

[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, 165.—Carte MSS. lxxiii. 16.)

‘The bill for Decimation was redd on Wedn[esday], and begott a 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 itt 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, 165.—Carte MSS. ccxxviii. 88.)

[1 ]February 10.