CONSTITUTION-MAKING DURING THE COMMONWEALTH.*
IT is not too much to say that The Clarke Papers, the second volume of which work has jest been issued by the Camden Society, constitute one of the most interesting contributions ever made to English history at its most interesting period,— the period of the Commonwealth. This sounds exaggerated, but let our readers pause a moment before they condemn us for overdoing our praise. Think of what the Papers consist ! They are mainly the shorthand reports of the debates which took iilace at the "Council of the Army" in regard to the drafting of a Constitution for England. At these debates were discussed such questions as the veto of the House of Lords, the possibility of having a part of the Constitution put out of the reach of the House of Commons and made change- able only by consent of the people, the problem of natural rights, the proper extent of the franchise, the subject of re- distribution of seats, and a hundred other vital points such, for instance, as Centralisation, Particularism, and Socialism. The men who took part in the debates, and whose words are preserved, were Cromwell, Ireton, and Fairfax. Surely it cannot be wrong to say that the opiaions of such men, expressed on such subjects, are of paramount interest not only historically but politically. And not only do these debates show us what was thought by leaders like Cromwell. We get also the opinions of the plain soldiers,—representatives of whom attended the Council. Generally, these stern, hard-headed troopers of the New Model seem to have been content to let those officers who were in sympathy with them be their spokesmen, but every now and then " Baffecoate " or "A Soldier" (as the reporter, who apparently could not remember the names of any one below the rank of Colonel or Captain, heads their remarks) puts in some plain but shrewd and forcible observa- tion. In a word, these reports show us what the Puritan was in council,—eminently a political creature fall of sound sense, and as far separated, even when most extreme, from the heady word-drunken Jacobin of the French Revolution, as he was from the ordinary pleasure-loving, devil-may-care sol- dier of fortune such as the Continent knew to its misery during the seventeenth century. It may be as well to remind our • The Clarks Papers. Selecticras from the Papers of William Clarke, Secretary to the Council of the Army, 5547-49, to General Monck and the Commanders of the Army in Scotland, 1651-60. Edited by 0. H. Firth. Vols. I. and it Printed for the Camden Society. readers shortly how it happened that the "Council of the Army" came to be debating the sort of points that were debated by the Convention that drew up the Constitution of the United States of America, or that were debated a year or two ago, when the delegates of the Australian Colonies drew up their remarkable draft Bill for constituting the Australian Continent into a Commonwealth. It happened, roughly speaking, in this way. When the King had been taken prisoner and the first Civil War was over, the men of the New Model and of the other victorious armies of the Commonwealth were determined not to disband till a settlement of the nation bad been arrived at, and a Constitution devised and accepted by Parliament which should make it clear that the soldiers had not fought in vain, and should serve as a bulwark against tyrannies, new and old,—Monarchical and Parliamentary. But the House of Commons seemed in no mood to give the soldiers satisfaction on this point. Hence grew up in the Army, both among officers and men, a demand for a proper settle- ment of the Government. This demand was taken up by the "Council of the Army," at which the chief officers and repre- sentatives of the regiments were present, and they debated, clause by clause, various constitutional proposals. This is only a rough and imperfect sketch of the position, but we cannot attempt here to do more than indicate how and why the Council of the Cromwellian Army came to turn itself into a constitutional Convention. We have said enough, how- ever, to show in general the main contents of these supremely interesting volumes,—volumes that have found a most able editor in Mr. Firth. It only remains to be said before dealing with the book at close quarters, that Major Clarke was Secre- tary to the "Council of the Army;" that he took notes of the proceedings, that the notes were preserved at Worcester College, Oxford, and have now been given to the world through the enterprise of the Camden Society.
The first thing that strikes one in reading these debates is the mental characteristics of Ireton. It is little less than a revelation to find that the famous soldier was a constitu- tional lawyer of great ability and no little learning. His instincts were extraordinarily conservative, but at the same time he was no doctrinaire. Though the rights of property were his sheet-anchor, though he loathed the idea of universal snff rage, and though he held the notion of "natural rights" in the utmost contempt, he was not incapable of seeing the other side, and was always for compromise and a fair and reasonable agreement wherever possible. What he wanted was a redistribution of seats on a numerical basis and a free. hold suffrage. A freeholder was, he argued, a person who could not decamp and leave the country if he had muddled its affairs, as might the man who had only movables. Still, he was content to agree to household suffrage for people who paid rates to support the poor, provided that they were in an independent position, and not under the influence of any one else. Here are the terms of the franchise clause agreed to by the Army under the influence of Ireton :—
"That the electors in every division shall be natives or denizens of England, not persons receiving alms, but such as are assessed ordinarily towards the relief of the poor ; not servants to and receiving wages from any particular person. And in all elections except for the Universities they shall be men of 21 years of age or upwards, and housekeepers dwelling within the division for which the election is."
Ireton also was in favour of the House of Lords being main- tained. He agreed, however, to modify its veto by a clause which he thus explained :—
"Col. Bainborow : That some thinges in the Agreement were granted there. To Debate whether or noe when the Commons Representative doe declare a law At ought nott to passe without the Kinge's consent —Cotif. Ireton : Truly this is all ; whether honour, title, estate, liberty, or life, [if] the Commons have a minde to take itt away by a law [they can do so] ; soe that to say you are contented to leave them all, this [negative] being taken away, is as much as to say you are to allow them nothing. Con- sider how much of this dispute is saved, [by] this that is read to yon. It gives the negative voice to the people, noe lawes can bee made without their consent. And secondly itt takes away the negative voice of the Lords and of the Kinge too, as to what con- cernes the people ; for itt says that the Commons of England shall bee bound by what judgements and alsoe [by] what orders, ordinances, or laws shall bee made for that purpose by them ; and all that followes for the King or Lords is this, that the Lords or King are nott bound by that law they passe for their owne persons or estates as the Commons are, unlesse they consent to itt. Therfore what is there wanting for the good or safety of the Commons of England ? "
That is but a poor example of Ireton's power of constitutional exposition, but it must stand, because of the special interest of the subject-matter at the present moment.
Cromwell's intervention in the Debates is most curious and instructive. He seems to have taken far less interest in the details of constitutional lore than Ireton. His main idea seems to have been to keep the Council together to pour oil on the troubled waters, and to prevent violent disagreements. He only flamed up when there was anything like Particularism in the air. Then, indeed, the first and greatest of Unionists showed himself no Gallio. Here is an excellent Unionist sentiment. Cromwell is insisting upon the danger of throw- ing the Constitution headlong into the melting-pot. New Constitutions, all equally plausible, will follow each other in quick succession :— "And if E0 what do you think the consequence of that would be ? Would it not be confusion ? Would it not be utter confusion? Would it not make England like Switzerland, one county against another as one canton of the Swiss is against another ? And if so what would that produce but an absolute desolation—an abso- lute desolation to the nation."
Here is another curious example of Cromwell's Unionism :—
"And truly, this is really believed; if wee doe nott indeavour to make good our interest there [i.e., in Ireland], and that timely, wee shall nott only have (as I said before) our interest rooted out there, butt they will in a very short time bee able to land forces in Eogland, and to putt no to trouble heere. I confesse I have had these thoughts with myself that perhaps may bee carnall and foolish. I had rather bee overrun with a Cavalerish interest [than] of a Scotch interest ; I had rather bee overrun with a Scotch interest then an Irish interest ; and I thinke of all this is most dangerous. If they shall bee able to carry on their worke they will make this the most miserable people in the earth, for all the world knowea their barbarisme--nott of any religion, almost any of them, butt in a manner as bad as papists— and you see how considerable therin they are att this time. Truly itt is [come] thus farrs, that the quarrell is brought to this state, that wee can hardly returne unto that tyranny that formerly wee were under the yoake of, which through the mercy of God bath bin lately broken, butt wee must att the same time bee subject to the Kingdoms' of Scotland, or the Kingdome of Ireland, for the bringing in of the Kinge. Now itt should awaken all Englishmen, who perhaps are willing enough hee should have come in uppon an accomoda- tion, but [see] now [that] hoe must come from Ireland or Scotland."
We have only space to make one more quotation from these delightful volumes. It shall be from a speech by Crom- well. It is on that great principle of government,—Any Government is a good one as long as you stick to it and work it reasonably, i.e., there is no abstract right or wrong in the matter ; what is wanted is to know the real wish of the people :—
‘. If I could see a visible presence of the people, either by sub- scriptions, or number [I should be satisfied with it] ; for in the Governement of Nations that which is to bee loolet after is the affections of the people, and that I finde which satisfies my con- science in the present things. [Consider the case of the Jews.] They were first [divided into] families where they lived, and had heads of families [to govern them], and they were [next] under judges, and [then] they were under Kinges. When they came to desire a Kings, they had a Kinge, first Elective, and secondly by succession. In all these kindes of Governement they were happy and contented. If you make the best of itt, if you should change the Governement to the best of itt, itt is butt a morall thinge. Itt is butt as Paul sayes Drosse and du.nge in comparison of Christ ; and why wee shall soe farre contest for ternporall thinges, that if wee cannott have this freedome wee will venture life and liveli- hood for itt. When every man shall come to this condition, I thinke the State will come to desolaticn. Therfore the con- sidering of what is fitt for the Kingedome does belonge to the Parliament—well composed in their creation and election—how farre I shah leave itt to the Parliament to offer itt. There may bee care—That the elections or formes of Parliament are very illegall, as I could name butt one for a Corporation to chuse two. I shall desire, that there may bee a forme for the electing of Parliaments. And another thinge as the perpetuity of the Par- liament that there is noe assurance to the people, butt that itt is perpetuall, which does [not] satisfie the Kingedome ; and for other thinges that are to the Kinge's Negative vote as may cast you off wholly, itt bath bin the resolution of the Parliament and of the Army—If there bee a possibility of the Parliament's offering those thinges unto the Kinge that may secure us I thinke there is much may be said for the[ir] doing of itt."
We cannot leave The Clarke Papers without a word of thanks to Mr. Firth for the masterly way in which he has edited them. When is he going to give us what we have a right to demand at his hands because no one could do it better than be, a full, final, and complete Life of Cromwell, a life which shall give us the man, the whole man, and nothing but the man ? It is a great opportunity, for no such book exists ; but it is by no means an occasion too great for Mr. Firth's powers.
Previous page
