POLITICAL HISTORY 



city by seizing Tilbury and crossing to Gravesend, so as to command 

 the river. But now for the first time London was taken from the 

 south. South wark declined to join hands with the City in resisting the 

 advance of the army, 1 the old jealousy of the suburbs against London 

 possibly helping to decide their attitude. But the southern bank of the 

 Thames was thereby thrown open to the army. It was intimated to 

 the army that the Surrey trainbands were not prepared to defend South- 

 wark. 2 At z o'clock in the morning of August 4 Colonel Rainsborough, 

 marching from Kingston, took possession of the Surrey side fortifications. 

 Two pieces of cannon planted opposite the gate of London Bridge per- 

 suaded the defenders to open the passage, and Rainsborough occupied 

 the bridge. On August 6 the army took possession of the City and 

 Westminster. The headquarters were afterwards fixed at Putney ; and 

 here were chiefly carried on the debates in the council of the army 

 during the autumn of 1647 for the settlement of the kingdom. It was 

 in effect the centre of English politics, where the proposals and suggested 

 terms of settlement propounded by the officers, the king and the Parlia- 

 ment were discussed. 



It was not easy to make these terms between the utterly opposed 

 fanatics for Presbyterianism and Independency, the conscious and uncon- 

 scious Republicans and the mass of quiet people who desired the restora- 

 tion of the old Constitution with both king and Parliament in their 

 right places. The Royalist fanatics were down and their wishes disre- 

 garded, but they were ready to take any advantage that they could of 

 the contentions among their conquerors. The king was regarded by so 

 many people as indispensable that it is small wonder that he thought 

 himself so. The monarchical and Presbyterian Scots were jealously 

 regarding the course of all English negotiations. Naturally the alliance 

 was drawn together between English Presbyterians, Scots, Moderate 

 people, and old Royalists, which after twelve years more of uncertainty 

 and military rule was to prove irresistible in 1660. But in 1648 it was 

 hampered by the life and character of Charles and was opposed by an 

 army admirably organized and led, which had not begun to lose faith in 

 its work as God-appointed. Surrey shared the wishes of most of the 

 country for a settlement on the lines of the old Constitution and for the 

 disbanding of all armies. Like the rest of the country it underrated 

 the difficulties of the task and was not organized to enforce its views. 

 The crying grievance to all people was the burden of the soldiery. On 

 December 17, 1647, the Surrey farmers presented a pitiful petition to 

 Parliament to the effect that for six years they had endured the charge 

 of soldiers quartered upon the county, and that their landlords neverthe- 

 less demanded their full rents, though the tenants were impoverished by 

 free quarters. 8 The landlords also were in many cases impoverished by 



1 Rushworth, vii. 741. 



* When the Parliament was again in accord with the army it passed on August 1 1 a vote of thanks 

 to the Southwark trainbands for their attitude. Rushworth, vii. 772. 

 3 Rushtvorth Collections, pt. iv. vol. ii. December 17, 1647. 



I 413 DD3 



