Rupert Prince Palatine Part 16

[45] Rupert Correspondence. Add. MSS. 18981. Richmond to Rupert, May 26, 1644.

[46] Rupert Transcripts. King to Rupert, May 26, 1644.

[47] Ibid. June 7, 1644; Warburton. II. p. 415.

[48] Richmond to Rupert, June 9, 1644; Warb. II. p. 415.

[49] Warburton. II. p. 432.

[50] Rupert Transcripts. Richmond to Rupert, June 14, 1644.

[51] Carte's Ormonde. VI. p. 151. Trevor to Ormonde, 29 June 1644.

[52] Ibid. VI. p. 167. Radcliffe to Ormonde, 18 July, 1644.

[53] Clar. State Papers. Rupert's Journal, Fol. 135.

[54] Fairfax Correspondence, ed. Johnson. 1848. I. p. 1.

[55] Pamphlet. Brit. Mus. Warburton. II. p. 442.

[56] Webb. II. p. 59.

[57] Warwick's Memoirs, p. 274.

[58] Rupert Correspondence. King to Rupert, June 14, 1644; Warburton.

II. p. 438.

[59] Warburton. II. p. 438.

[60] Clarendon State Papers. 1805. Life of Newcastle, ed. Firth, p.

77, _note_.

[61] Gardiner's Civil War. Vol. I. p. 374.

[62] Carte, Original Letters. I. 57, 10 July, 1644.

[63] Gardiner, Vol. I. p. 376.

[64] Pamphlet. Brit. Mus. Prince Rupert's Message to My Lord of Ess.e.x.

[65] Vicars' Jehovah Jireh. G.o.d's Ark. p. 281.

[66] Gardiner. I. p. 377.

[67] Carte's Letters, I. p. 56.

[68] Whitelocke, p. 94.

[69] Vicars' G.o.d's Ark. p. 277,

[70] Ibid. p. 274.

[71] Warburton, II. p. 468.

[72] Carte's Letters, I. 59. O'Neil to Trevor, 26 June, 1644.

[73] Life of Newcastle, ed. Firth, 1886. p. 81.

[74] Pythouse Papers, p. 21. General King to Rupert, Jan. 23, 1645.

[75] Rupert's Diary. Warburton, II. 468

[76] Webb, II. 71.

[77] Carte's Ormonde, VI. 206. Trevor to Ormonde, 13 Oct. 1644.

{154}

CHAPTER IX

INTRIGUES IN THE ARMY. DEPRESSION OF RUPERT. TREATY OF UXBRIDGE.

RUPERT IN THE MARCHES. STRUGGLE WITH DIGBY. BATTLE OF NASEBY

Terrible though the disaster in the North had been, the blow was softened to the King by successes in the West. During August, in company with Maurice, he pursued Ess.e.x into Cornwall and forced his whole army of foot to surrender without a struggle. But for the supineness of Goring, who had just succeeded Wilmot as General of the Horse, the Parliamentary cavalry might have been captured in like manner. But when Balfour led his troops through the Royalist lines, Goring happened to be carousing in congenial company; he received the news of the escape with laughter, and refused to stir until the enemy were safely pa.s.sed away.[1] Goring's new prominence and importance was one among the many unfortunate results of Marston Moor. That battle had ruined Rupert's reputation, and it had proportionately raised that of Goring, who alone among the Royalist commanders had had success that day. To Goring, therefore, the King turned, and Goring's licence, negligence, indifference--or perhaps treachery--eventually lost the West completely to the Royalists. Had Rupert been placed in Goring's position he must have certainly effected more than did his rival.

For some time the King had been anxious to remove Wilmot from his command. As early as May he had suggested to Rupert, as "a fancy of my own,"[2] that Maurice {155} should be declared General of the Horse in Wilmot's stead. But Rupert did not encourage the idea; he knew probably that his brother was unfit for so much responsibility. Wilmot therefore remained in command until August 9th. He was, as has been said, a good officer, but he talked so wildly in his cups that his loyalty was suspected; and when he was detected in private correspondence with Ess.e.x, the King decided to arrest him, and to promote Goring to his post. The arrest took place in sight of the whole army; but though Wilmot was exceedingly popular with his officers, they confined their protest to a little murmuring and a "modest pet.i.tion" to be told the charges against their commander. The King responded by a promise that Wilmot should have a fair trial, and his partisans were apparently pacified, though Goring declared to Rupert: "This is the most mutinous army that ever I saw, as well horse as foot!"[3] Digby's account of the affair, also addressed to the Prince, was as follows: "We have lately ventured on extreme remedies unto the dangers that threaten us amongst ourselves. Lord Wilmot, upon Wednesday that was a s'ennight, was arrested prisoner on the head of his army, and Goring declared General of the Horse.... There have been since consultations and murmurings among his party, but the issue of them was only this enclosed modest pet.i.tion, which produced the answer and declaration of the causes of his commitment; and so the business rests. My Lord Percy also withdrawing himself upon good advice, and my Lord Hopton being possessed of his charge, I make no doubt that all the ill-humours in our army will be allayed, now that the two poles on which they moved are taken away."[4]

But, though neither Wilmot nor Percy were estimable characters, Goring was no better, and the result of these drastic measures was only to render the state of Court and {156} Army more confused and more factious than ever. Digby's partisans tried to lay the onus of Wilmot's fall on Rupert, and Rupert's friends endeavoured to refer it to Digby. Judging from Digby's own letter above quoted, Rupert, who was absent from the King's army during the whole of the proceedings, does not seem to have had much share in them. Certainly the Secretary gives no hint of his collusion. "Lord Digby is the great agent to incense the King," a.s.serted Arthur Trevor. "My Lord Wilmot undertakes to turn the tables on him, and so the wager is laid head to head.

Daniel O'Neil goeth his share in that hazard, for certainly the Lord Digby hath undone his credit with the King... And truly I look upon Daniel O'Neil as saved only out of want of leisure to dispose of him.

Prince Rupert and Will Legge are his severe enemies; and so is Ashburnham."[5] Critical indeed was the position of the unlucky Daniel, who had been so lately the "dear and intimate friend" of Digby. Owing, as he explained to Ormonde, to "the unfortunate falling out of my two best friends," he had fallen between two stools. Wilmot he considered most to blame, for he had endeavoured to render Digby "odious to the army and to all honest people."[6] The army had been on the very point of pet.i.tioning against the Secretary when he forestalled the move by the unexpected arrest of his adversary. "How guilty he will be, I know not," was the conclusion of O'Neil. "But sure I am that the accusing of him was not seasonable, and his commitment less... and two friends I have lost!"[7] Wilmot himself seems to have directed his animus princ.i.p.ally against Rupert. He was unwilling to stand his trial, and was therefore permitted to join the Queen, then in France. There he found the Marquess of Newcastle, whom he hoped to secure as an ally against the Prince. "I understand from one coming from Wilmot," wrote {157} Trevor, "that he and the Marquess of Newcastle are preparing a charge against Prince Rupert, and will be at the next advice of Parliament at Oxford, where their party will be great,--the Marquess of Hertford, Lord Herbert--you may guess the rest. Prince Rupert and Daniel O'Neil are inconsistent in this state."[8]

The proposed accusation of Rupert was never made, and was probably a figment of Wilmot's brain. Neither Hertford nor Herbert (with whom Rupert had clashed as President of Wales) had any love for the Prince, but they were both too loyal to increase the King's difficulties by factious action. And indeed in the spring of 1645, we find Hertford, Rupert, and Ashburnham in close alliance against Digby and Cottington; the three first desiring a treaty with the Parliament, and the other two opposing it. O'Neil was easily convinced that Wilmot owed his fall to Rupert, and in October 1644 he wrote to Ormonde: "Prince Rupert, whoe is nowe knowen to bee the primum mobile of that mischeef, iss strangely unsatisfied with Wilmot's resolutione. For he thought to make use of this occatione to ruine Lord Digby; but, his project fayling, he plays the Courtier and iss reconsyled, whiche iss a great hapines to the King."[9]

The truth was that, were the charges against them true or false, Wilmot and Percy did really owe their downfall to the hatred of Rupert and Digby. The Secretary had been the actual agent in the matter, but Rupert approved and supported his action. The two were willing enough to unite against their enemies, and they would have been equally willing to ruin each other. But for a time Rupert endeavoured, for his uncle's sake, to curb his hatred of the Secretary. In August the King had exhorted his nephew earnestly to make friends with Digby; "whom I must desire you (for my service, and because he is a useful servant) to countenance so far as to show him a possibility to recover {158} your favour, if he shall deserve it... Not doubting but, for my sake, ye will make this, or a greater, experiment... I must protest to you, on the faith of a Christian--the reason of this protest I refer to Robin Legge--that as concerning your generosity and particular fidelity and friendship to me, I have an implicit faith in you."[10] This pa.s.sionate protest was caused by the libels circulated against the Prince, some of which had reached the King's ears. For a while Rupert was pacified, and he made overtures of tolerance to Digby, who responded fluently that his previous unhappiness as the object of Rupert's aversion, would now serve only to increase his joy and satisfaction in the Prince's confidence and friendship.[11] "Rupert and Digby are friends; but I doubt they trust one another alike!"[12]

was the Prince's own view of the matter, as expressed to Will Legge.

Digby had also formed a close friendship with Goring, "each believing that he could deceive the other." It was to Digby that Goring chiefly owed his promotion, though it had been accorded the approval of Rupert, who was inclined, just then, to tolerate Goring. Nor was George Goring backward in receiving overtures of peace. "My Prince," he wrote to Rupert familiarly, and he signed himself, "your Highness's all-vowed, all-humble, all-obedient Goring." Moreover, having made up his mind never to serve under Rupert again, he took care to add, "there is nothing on this earth I more pa.s.sionately desire than to sacrifice my life in your service, and near your person."[13] But the truce could not last. Rupert, as Commander-in-Chief and Governor of Bristol, had a double power in the West, and Goring was determined to escape from his control. In January 1645, we find him writing with unwonted candour: "Your Highness is pleased to think yourself disobliged by me for {159} desiring my orders under the King's hand. As I remember, Sir, the reason I gave His Majesty for it was the having more authority by that to guide the Council of this army to obedience; _but one reason I kept to myself_, which was that I found all my requests denied by your hand, and therefore desired my orders from another."[14]

The Prince of Wales had by this time been sent to Bristol as nominal General of the Western army, with a selection of the King's Councillors to a.s.sist him. The conflicting Borders of Rupert, Prince Charles's Council, and the King, gave Goring an excellent excuse for disobeying all. In March, Rupert indignantly desired Legge to ask the King whether he had authorised that Council to send orders to Goring, and added cautiously, "Let Sir Edward Herbert be by, he can argue better than you."[15] A few days later he visited his young cousin at Bristol, and advised him to send Goring with his horse into Wiltshire, or with his foot to besiege Taunton. Prince Charles sent orders as directed, but Goring, knowing them to emanate from Rupert, retired to Bath, and refused to do anything at all. Rupert now thoroughly "abhorred" the notion of Goring's proximity to the Prince of Wales, and had him recalled to Oxford. But there his friendship with Digby, and his own natural powers, won him so much influence with the King, that Rupert was soon as eager to send him back into the West as Goring was to escape from the Prince's vicinity. Thus their "very contrary affections towards each other,"[16] worked to one end. There was a second truce. Rupert told Goring, no doubt with some pleasure, all the evil that the Council of the West had said concerning him; and Goring returned the compliment, with notes and additions. Goring was given the command of all the West, whither he gladly departed. "Goring and Prince Rupert are now friends," wrote {160} Trevor, "but I doubt the building being made of green wood, which is apt to warp and yield!"[17]

As proved ere long to be the case.

We return now to the autumn of 1644. Rupert's wanderings had brought him, by the end of August, to Bristol, whither he was pursued by doleful reports from his officers left in the Marches.

"My most dear Prince," wrote Legge from Chester, "in truth Your Highness's departure sent me back here a sad man, and the news I met with gave me new cause of trouble.... I despair of any good in Lancashire."[18] And in Cheshire itself, Byron and Langdale had just suffered a defeat from Ma.s.sey. "Upon the spot where Your Highness killed the buck, as the horse were drawing out,"[19] explained Byron with careful exactness. These new misfortunes increased Rupert's melancholy, which was already deep enough. Something of his state of mind may be gathered from a sympathetic and consolatory letter written to him at this time by Richmond.