in his favour.  But the saints expatiated on his repeated apostasy from the cause; and, after a sharp contest, Cromwell and Ireton obtained a majority of a single voice for his death.  The case of Goring was next considered.  No man during the war had treated his opponents with more bitter contumely, no one had inflicted on them deeper injuries; and yet, on an equal division, his life was saved by the casting voice of the speaker.  The sentences of Hamilton and Capel were affirmed by the unanimous vote of the house; but, to the surprise of all men, Owen, a stranger, without friends or interest, had the good fortune to escape.  His forlorn condition moved the pity of Colonel Hutchinson; the efforts of Hutchinson

[Sidenote a:  A.D. 1649.  March 6.] [Sidenote b:  A.D. 1649.  March 7.] [Sidenote c:  A.D. 1649.  March 8.]

were seconded by Ireton; and so powerful was their united influence, that they obtained a majority of five in his favour.  Hamilton, Holland, and Capel died[a] on the scaffold, the first martyrs of loyalty after the establishment of the commonwealth.[1]

But, though the avowed enemies of the cause crouched before their conquerors, there was much in the internal state of the country to awaken apprehension in the breasts of Cromwell and his friends.  There could be no doubt that the ancient royalists longed for the opportunity of avenging the blood of the king; or that the new royalists, the Presbyterians, who sought to re-establish the throne on the conditions stipulated by the treaty in the Isle of Wight, bore with impatience the superiority of their rivals.  Throughout the kingdom the lower classes loudly complained of the burthen of taxation; in several parts they suffered under the pressure of penury and famine.  In Lancashire and Westmoreland numbers perished through want; and it was certified by the magistrates of Cumberland that thirty thousand families in that county “had neither seed nor bread corn, nor the means of procuring either."[2] But that which chiefly created alarm was the progress made among the military by the “Levellers,” men of consistent principles and uncompromising conduct under the guidance of Colonel John Lilburne, an officer distinguished by his talents, his eloquence, and

[Footnote 1:  If the reader compares the detailed narrative of these proceedings by Clarendon (iii. 265-270), with the official account in the Journals (March 7, 8), he will be surprised at the numerous inaccuracies of the historian.  See also the State Trials; England’s Bloody Tribunal; Whitelock, 386; Burnet’s Hamiltons, 385; Leicester’s Journal, 70; Ludlow, i. 247; and Hutchinson, 310.]

[Footnote 2:  Whitelock, 398, 399.]

[Sidenote a:  A.D. 1649.  Mar. 9.]