CHAPTER XIV.

The Armies are separated. - Prince Maurice commands in the West. Lord Carnarvon takes Weymouth. - Difference between Prince Maurice and Lord Hertford as to the appointment of the Governor. — The King ultimately confirms the appointment of Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper. — The Earls of Bedford, Clare, and Holland join the King. The Queen desires the appointment of Lord Holland as Groom of the Stole. — The King fulfils his promise of conferring the office on Lord Hertford. Lord Holland leaves the King, and returns to the Parliament's quarters. - Lord Hertford resigns the office of Governor to the Prince of Wales. He is installed Chancellor of the University of Oxford.

THE government of Bristol being settled, the next questions that arose were-first, whether both armies should be united and march together when they were to take the field; and secondly, what their plan of operation should be? A pause of ten or twelve days in Bristol had rather tended to weaken their force than to refresh the troops, and the effects of plunder were as destructive of discipline as the siege itself had been destructive to life.' The questions respecting the armies were at length solved by its being determined that they should separate-that the army of the West should proceed, under the command of Prince Maurice, to the

Hist. of the Rebellion, vol. iv. p. 169. "Those soldiers who had "warmed themselves with the burden of pillage never quietly again sub"mitted to the carriage of their arms."—Ibid.

2 Lord Clarendon says there was a reason for the separation of the armies "which was not given," but which evidently weighed much in the scale of the decision," that, if both armies had been kneaded into one, "Prince Maurice would have been but a private colonel."-Hist. of the Rebellion, vol. iv. p. 171.

West, and that the King should go in person with the other army towards Gloucester for the purpose of reducing that town.1

The Earl of Carnarvon, as general of the horse in the army of the West, was ordered to advance towards Dorchester. Prince Maurice was to begin his march two days later in the same direction, with the foot and cannon; but before the Prince came up to the cavalry the Earl of Carnarvon had already taken Dorchester and Weymouth. It was not thought necessary that Dorchester should be made a garrison, but Weymouth was considered the seaport of most importance in that county, and was to be kept with great care. A Governor was to be appointed, and this appointment afforded a fresh subject of difference between Prince Maurice and Lord Hertford, and unhappily a fresh opportunity for the King to exhibit his wish to favour whatever pretensions were advanced by his nephews.

The possession of Weymouth had been anticipated with sufficient certainty for Lord Hertford to have promised the governorship of it to Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper, whenever it should be taken. Not only had this promise been made before the King had withdrawn Lord Hertford from the army, but the town of Wey

"On Wednesday, the 10th of August, the King ranged his whole army upon a fair hill in the clear view of the city and within less than "two miles of it, and then, being about two of the clock in the afternoon, "he sent a trumpet with this summons to the town."-Hist. of the Rebellion, vol. iv. p. 178.

2" A young gentleman of that country, of a fair and plentiful fortune, "and one who in the opinion of most men was like to advance the place "by being governor of it, and to raise men for the defence of it without

lessening the army.”—Hist. of the Rebellion, vol. iv. p. 220.

mouth was actually secured before the King had declared to him his intention of so doing. He therefore justly regarded himself as having been the General in whom was vested the right both to make and to fulfil the promise. In expectation of this governorship Sir Anthony had collected on his own account officers and soldiers ready to be called together in defence of the place.

Before the Prince reached Weymouth, the news, however, had reached Sir Anthony that the Marquis was not with the army, and instantly, therefore, on the town being taken, he hastened to Bristol, where Lord Hertford still remained, to claim from him the promised appointment. Lord Hertford was more than anxious to fulfil his promise, he considered it a point of honour to do so, and would have been willing to have given him at once the commission had he not been otherwise advised.

The day on which Sir Anthony arrived at Bristol was that on which the King had commenced his march to Gloucester; but Sir Edward Hyde having been detained at Bristol on business concerning his own office, Lord Hertford and Sir Anthony determined to confer with him on the subject. Sir Anthony eagerly desired his assistance, and expressed his hopes "that, "after so much charge as he had been put to in the

Lord Hertford appears to have exercised the right of appointing governors after he had quitted the command of the western army. The commission granted by him to his relation, Colonel Edward Seymour, to be governor of Dartmouth town and castle, bears date August 12, 1643.MS. Commission in possession of the present Duke of Somerset.

• Vide Life of Lord Falkland, vol. i. p. 147.

66

1

expectation of it, and to prepare for it, he might not "be exposed to the mirth and contempt of the coun"try." Sir Edward Hyde felt strongly the justice of his claim and the propriety of his petition being granted by Lord Hertford, but he was too well acquainted with the character of Prince Maurice, and too conscious of his power over the King, not to know that without the support of the King's consent Lord Hertford might be insulted by his commission being slighted, and Sir Anthony humiliated by the town not being allowed to submit to him. His advice was therefore to appeal at once to the King, and, by obtaining from his justice and favour the appointment, Sir Anthony would be secure of the governorship which Lord Hertford had destined for him, without risk of further dispute or contumely on the part of the Prince.

Sir Edward Hyde offered to address the King himself on the subject. The offer was accepted, and, to give his own words, "he did write with all the skill "and importunity he could use to the King;" and to give further weight to his application and advice, he wrote also in the same sense to Lord Falkland, advising him "to take Sir John Culpepper with him if "he found any aversion in the King, that they might "together discourse and prevail with him."* But neither justice nor argument could prevail over Charles's nepotism.

When Prince Rupert first claimed the right to dispose of the governorship of Bristol, and then asked it for himself, his uncle thought the claim was just, be'Hist. of the Rebellion, vol. iv. p. 221. ' Ibid., p. 222.

2

cause founded on the rights of success, and, having once acceded to his wish, he became proof against all arguments on the subject because he had then himself established a right by virtue of his own royal promise. Lord Hertford's power as commander-in-chief had not ceased when his promise was made to Sir Anthony, nor, to his knowledge, when Weymouth was taken. Prince Maurice could claim no privileges by right of conquest, for those would have been due to Lord Carnarvon, nor had the King barred his power of showing justice or favour to Lord Hertford by having made any promise to Prince Maurice that was to be held inviolable; "but," says Lord Clarendon, "his Majesty positively and obstinately refused to grant it," and in terms no less ungracious than the refusal itself he declared "he "would not, to please the Marquis in an unjust pretence, put a public disobligation and affront upon

66

"nephew."

his

Lord Hertford was deeply mortified by the King's denial. His loyalty was unshaken; that was to him an unalterable duty; but he had served the King with such generous devotion, with such affectionate zeal, that his feelings were acutely wounded at thus finding his wishes disregarded and his petition rejected; and under the painful impression of his services being slighted, and the King's regard for him changed, he not unnaturally expressed his conviction "that he was fallen from all "credit with the King, and was made incapable of doing "him farther service; that his fidelity should never be

Hist. of the Rebellion, vol. iv. p. 222.