terpreted by this Parliament, is really for a King? That our Laws cannot go on without a King?—His Highness means the former mainly, but means the latter too; means several things together, as his manner sometimes is, in abstruse cases!] -I hope I may urge against it, that the reason of my own mind is not quite to that effect. But I do say undoubtingly (let us think about other things, 'about the mind of the Nation and suchlike,' what we will), What the Parliament settles is what will run, 'and have currency,' through the Law; and will lead the thread of Government through this Land equally well as what hath been. For I consider that what hath been was upon the same account, 'by the same authority.' Save that there hath been some long continuance of the thing [This thing of Kingship], it is but upon the same account! It had its original somewhere! And it was with consent of the whole, there is the original of it. And con

sent of the whole will still,' I say, be the needle that will lead the thread through all [The same tailor-metaphor a second time];-and I think no man will pretend right against it, or wrong!

And if so, then, under favour to me, I think these arguments from the Law are all not as of necessity, but are to be understood as of conveniency. It is in your power to dispose and settle; and beforehand we can have confidence that what you do settle will be as authentic as the things that were of old,—especially as this individual thing, the Name or Title,—according to the Parliament's appointment. 'Is not this so? It is question not of necessity; we have power to settle it as conveniency directs.' Why then, there will (with leave) be way made for me to offer a reason or two to the other considerations you adduced: otherwise, I say my mouth is stopped! [His Highness is plunging in deep brakes and imbroglios; hopes, however, that he now sees daylight athwart them.]

There are very many inforcements to carry on this thing. [Thing of the Kingship.] But I suppose it will have to' stand on its expediency-Truly I should have urged one consideration more which I forgot [Looks over his shoulder in the jungle, and bethinks him!],-namely, the argument not of reason only, but of experience. It is a short one, but it is a true one (under favour), and is known to you all in the fact of it (under favour) [A damnable iteration; but too characteristic to be omitted]: That the Supreme Authority going by another Name and under another Title than that of King hath been, why it hath been already twice compliedwith! [Long Parliament, called "Keepers of the Liberties of England," found compliance; and now the "Protectorate" finds.] 'Twice :' under the Custodes Libertatis Angliæ, and also since I exercised the place, it hath been complied-with. And truly I may say that almost universal obedience hath been given by all ranks and sorts of men to both. Now this, 'on the part of both these Authorities,' was a beginning with the highest degree of Magistracy at the first alteration; and 'at a time' when that 'Kingship' was the Name ' established:' and the new Name, though it was the name of an invisible thing, the very Name, I say, was obeyed, did pass current, was received and did carry-on the Public' Justice of the Nation. I remember very well, my Lords the Judges were somewhat startled: yet upon consideration,-if I mistake not, I believe so,-they, there being among them (without reflection) as able and as learned as have sat there,-though they did, I confess, at first, demur a little, they did receive satisfaction, and did act, as I said before. [Untwist this extraordinary WITHE of a sentence; you will find it not inextricable, and very characteristic of Oliver!] And as for my own part [My own Protectorate], I profess I think I may say: Since the beginning of that change,though I should be loath to speak anything vainly,-but

since the beginning of that change to this day, I do not think there hath been a freer procedure of the Laws, not even in those years called, and not unworthily, the “Halcyon Days of Peace," from the Twentieth of Elizabeth to King James's and King Charles's time. I do not think but the Laws have proceeded with as much freedom and justice, and with less of private solicitation, since I came to the Government, as they did in those years so named,—'Halcyon.' I do not think, under favour,-[His Highness gets more emphatic]-that the Laws had a freer exercise, more uninterrupted by any hand of Power, in those years than now; or that the Judge has been less solicited by letters or private interpositions either of my own or other men's, in double so many years in all those times 'named" "of Peace"! [Sentence involving an incurable Irish-bull; the head of it eating the tail of it, like a Serpent-of-Eternity; but the meaning shining very clear through its contortions nevertheless!] And if more of my Lords the Judges were here than now are, they could tell us perhaps somewhat farther.5--And therefore I say, under favour: These two Experiences do manifestly show that it is not a Title, though never so interwoven with our Laws, that makes the Law to have its free passage, and to do its office without interruption (as we venture to think it is now doing): 'not a Title, no;' and if a Parliament shall determine that another Name run through the Laws, I believe it will run with as free a passage as this of King ever did.' Which is all I have to say upon that head.

And if this be so, then truly other things may fall under a more indifferent consideration :6 and so I shall arrive 'at the Second thing I had in view,' at some issue of answering for myself in this great matter. And all this while, nothing that I say doth any way determine as to my final resolu5 Reform of Chancery; improvements made in Law.

6 'Other things,' your other arguments, may lose a great deal of their formidable air of cogency, as if Necessity herself were backing them.

tion, or 'intimate any thought against the Parliament's wisdom in this matter; but 'endeavoureth' really and honestly and plainly towards such an answer as may be fit for me to give. The Parliament desires to have this Title. It hath stuck with me, and doth yet stick. As truly, and I hinted the other day,' it seemed as if your arguments to me did partly give positive grounds for what was to be done, and partly comparative grounds; stating the matter as you were then pleased to do,-for which I gave no cause that I know of, that is, for comparing the effects of Kingship with those of such a Name as I at present bear, with those of' the Protectorship 'to wit.' I say, I hope it will not be understood that I contend for the Name; or for any name, or any thing of a merely extraneous nature;' but truly and plainly for the substance of the business,'—if I speak as in the Lord's presence; ay, in all right things, as a person under the disposal of the Providence of God, -- neither "naming" one thing nor other; but only endeavouring to give fit answer as to this proposed Name or Title. For I hope I do not desire to give a rule to anybody—' much less to the Parliament.' I professed I had not been able,—and I truly profess I have not yet been able,-to give a rule to myself 'in regard to your Proposal.' I would be understood in this. [Yes, your Highness. "That it is not doubt of the Par"liament's wisdom; that it is not vain preference or postponence

66

66

of one 'name' to another; but doubt as to the substantial expediency of the thing proposed, uncertainty as to God's will " and monition in regard to it,—that has made and still makes 66 me speak in this uncomfortable, haggling, struggling and 66 wriggling manner. It is no easy thing forcing one's way "through a jungle of such depth! An affair of Courtship

7 Saturday last, day before Yesterday.

The original (Somers, vi. 368) unintelligible, illegible except with the powerfulest lenses, yields at last,—with some slight changes of the points and so forth,this sense as struggling at the bottom of it.

66

moreover, which grows and has to grow by the very handling of it! I would not be misunderstood in this."]

I am a man standing in the Place I am in [Clearly, your Highness]; which Place I undertook not so much out of hope of doing any good, as out of a desire to prevent mischief and evil [Note this],-which I did see was imminent on the Nation. I say, we were running headlong into confusion and disorder, and would necessarily 'have' run into blood; and I was passive to those that desired me to undertake the Place which I now have. [With tones, with a look of sorrow, solemnity and nobleness; the brave Oliver!] A Place, I say, not so much of doing good,—which a man lawfully may, if he deal deliberately with God and his own conscience,—a man may (I say) lawfully, if he deal deliberately with God and his own conscience; a man may lawfully, as the case may be (though it is a very tickle case), desire a Place to do good in! [Window once more into his Highness! "Tickle" is the old form of TICKLISH: 66 a tickle case indeed," his Highness candidly allows; yet a case which does occur, shame and woe to him, the poor cowardly Pedant, tied up in cobwebs and tape-thrums, that neglects it when it does!] I profess I had not that apprehension, when I undertook the Place, that I could so much do good; but I did think I might prevent imminent evil.—And therefore I am not contending for one "name" compared with another; - and therefore have nothing to answer to any arguments that were used for preferring the name' Kingship to Protectorship. For I should almost think any "name" were better than my Name; and I should altogether think any person fitter than I am for such business [Your Highness?-But St. Paul too professed himself "the chief of sinners,"—and has not been altogether thought to "cant" in doing so!];-and I compliment not, God knows it! But this I should say, That I do think, you, in the settling of the peace and liberties of this Nation,