5.  I have already copied Bruodin’s description of the sack of Drogheda; here I may transcribe his account of the sack of Wexford.  “Ipse strategus regicidarum terrestri itinere Dublinium praetergressus, Wexfordiam (modicam quidem, et maritimam, munitam et opulentam civitatem) versus castra movet, occupatoque insperate, proditione cujusdam perfidi ducis castro, quod moenibus imminebat, in civitatem irruit:  opposuere se viriliter aggressori praesidiarii simul cum civibus, pugnatumque est ardentissime per unius horae spatium inter partes in foro, sed impari congressu, nam cives fere omnes una cum militibus, sine status, sexus, aut aetatis discrimine, Cromweli gladius absumpsit.”—­Bruodin, Propag. 1. iv. c. 14, p. 679.  The following is a more valuable document, from the “humble petition of the ancient natives of the town of Wexford,” to Charles II., July 4, 1660.  “Yet soe it is, may it please your Majestie, that after all the resistance they could make, the said usurper, having a great armie by sea and land before the said toune, did on the 9th of October, 1649, soe powerfully assault them, that he entered the toune, and put man, woman, and child, to a very few, to the sword, where among the rest the governor lost his life, and others of the soldiers and inhabitants to the number of 1,500 persons.”—­Gale’s Corporation System in Ireland, App. p. cxxvi.

6.  My object in these remarks has been to enable the reader to form a correct notion of the manner in which Cromwell conducted the war in Ireland.  They will give little satisfaction to the worshippers of the hero.  But his character is not a mere matter of taste or sympathy.  It is a question of historic inquiry.  Much indeed has been written to vindicate him from the imputation of cruelty at Drogheda and Wexford; but of the arguments hitherto adduced in his defence, it will be no presumption to affirm that there is not one among them which can bear the test of dispassionate investigation.

NOTE E, p. 338.

The following pensions were afterwards granted to different persons instrumental in facilitating the king’s escape.  Unless it be mentioned otherwise, the pension is for life:—­

L.
To Jane Lane (Lady Fisher) . . . . . . . . . 1000
Thomas Lane, the father . . . . . . . . .  500
Charles Gifford, Esq. . . . . . . . . . .  300
Francis Mansell, Esq. . . . . . . . . . .  200
Thomas Whitgrave, Esq.  . . . . . . . . .  200
Catharine Gunter, for 21 years  . . . . .  200
Joan Harford  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   50
Eleanor Sampson . . . . . . . . . . . . .   50
Francis Reynolds  . . . . . . . . . . . .  200
John and Anne Rogers, and heirs male  . .  100
Anne Bird . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   30
Sir Thomas Wyndham, and heirs, for ever .  600
William Ellesdun, during pleasure . . . .  100
Robert Swan, during the king’s life . . .   80
Lady Anne Wyadham . . . . . . . . . . . .  400
Juliana Hest  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   30

Clarendon Corres. i. 656.