Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

 Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow Newsletters - The Clarke Papers. Selections from the Papers of William Clarke, vol. 4

Return to Title Page for The Clarke Papers. Selections from the Papers of William Clarke, vol. 4

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

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

Newsletters - Sir William Clarke, The Clarke Papers. Selections from the Papers of William Clarke, vol. 4 [1901]

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., 1901). 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.


Newsletters

October 13.—

xxxii. f. 17.Yesterday the Howse voted that the comissions of Collonel Lambert, Disbrowe, Berry, Cobbett, Ashfeild, Kelsey, Packer, Creede, and Colonel Barrowe voyde, and that they bee incapable of any military imployment. They likewise passed an act to enable the Lord Fleetwood, Generall Monck, Lieut.-Generall Ludlowe, Sir Arthur Heslirigg, Colonel Morley, Major Generall Overton, Colonel Walton to bee commissioners for mannageing the affaires of the army.1

The last night a greate party of the forces heere weere in armes, and this day the Speaker and most of the Members were kept out of the Parliament by all the army, except Colonel Moss and Colonel Morleyes regiment, who continued in the Hall till fower at night as a guard to some few Members that got into the Howse, till an order came from the Councill to the commissioners of the army then in the Howse for drawing them and some forces upp in Southwark to their quarters, which was obeyed; and noe sooner drew they out of Westminster Hall but the Lord Lambert appeared at the head of them, whome they received with greate acclamations and severall volleyes, though this morning part of Colonel Morleyes regiment was commanded to fire at his Lordshipp, but they refused. What the next goverment will bee a short time will declare it.

G. M.

[1 ]The origin of this breach was as follows: After the suppression of the Derby petition by the Parliament the officers drew up a vindication of their conduct and of the contents of their petition, entitled The Humble Representation and Petition of the Officers of the Army, which was presented to the House on October 5, 1659. It is printed in Redmayne’s True Narrative (p. 4), and in Baker’s Chronicle (p. 679). One clause asked that any persons who cast scandalous imputations upon the Army might be duly punished. This was directed against Haslerig (Baker, p. 680). Another asked that Fleetwood’s commission as commander-in-chief should be renewed. Parliament took the petition into consideration, and passed votes in favour of several of its requests, but at the same time vindicated the members attacked, resolving that they had done no more than their duty in informing the House of the Derby petition. Meanwhile the officers in London appealed to the troops elsewhere in England and to the armies in Scotland and Ireland for support. One of theseletters, signed by Lambert and eight other officers, was presented to Parliament, which replied by annulling the commissions of the nine officers in question (October 12). A specimen of these circulars is printed in Thurloe (vii. 755), and a slightly different version, addressed to General Monck, is printed in Redmayne’s True Narrative, p. 14. It asked Monck to communicate the petition to his officers, and to get their subscriptions to it, and forward them to Fleetwood’s secretary. Monck replied, in a letter dated October 13, with a refusal. ‘Our force,’ said he, ‘is very small, and our enemy very great; and I shall be unwilling to set anything on foot that may breed jealouses amongst us. And finding many officers decline the signing all papers of that nature, and rather propense to declare their testimony to the Parliament’s authority, and their absolute adherence thereunto, I have thought it my duty to suspend the execution of your desires.’

In the same way Colonel Overton and the garrison of Hull, in a letter dated October 11, also refused to send in their signatures, concluding, as Monck did, with an exhortation to unity and submission to the authority of Parliament. Both letters are printed in Redmayne (pp. 14, 16); cf. Baker, 681.