rank, were put to the sword under the pretence that they were Irish Catholics.  In this fatal battle, fought near the village of Naseby, the king lost more than three thousand men, nine thousand stand of arms, his park of artillery, the baggage of the army, and with it his own cabinet, containing private papers of the first importance.  Out of these the parliament made a collection, which was published, with remarks, to prove to the nation the falsehoods of Charles, and the justice of the war.[1]

[Footnote 1:  For this battle see Clarendon, ii. 655; Rushworth, vi. 42; and the Journals, vii. 433-436.  May asserts that not more than three hundred men were killed on the part of the king, and only one hundred on that of the parliament.  The prisoners amounted to five thousand.—­May, 77.  The publication of the king’s papers has been severely censured by his friends, and as warmly defended by the advocates of the parliament.  If their contents were of a nature to justify the conduct of the latter, I see not on what ground it could be expected that they should be suppressed.  The only complaint which can reasonably be made, and which seems founded in fact, is that the selection of the papers for the press was made unfairly.  The contents of the cabinet were several days in possession of the officers, and then submitted to the examination of a committee of the lower house; by whose advice certain papers were selected and sent to the Lords, with a suggestion that they should be communicated to the citizens in a common hall.  But the Lords required to see the remainder; twenty-two additional papers were accordingly produced; but it was at the same time acknowledged that others were still kept back, because they had not yet been deciphered.  By an order of the Commons the papers were afterwards printed with a preface contrasting certain passages in them with the king’s former protestations.—­Journals, June 23, 26, 30, July 3, 7; Lords’, vii. 467, 469.  Charles himself acknowledges that the publication, as far as it went, was genuine (Evelyn’s Memoirs, App. 101); but he also maintains that other papers, which would have served to explain doubtful passages, had been purposely suppressed.—­Clarendon Papers, ii. 187.  See Baillie, ii. 136.]

After this disastrous battle, the campaign presented little more than the last and feeble struggles of an expiring party.  Among the royalists hardly a man could be found who did not pronounce the cause to be desperate; and, if any made a show of resistance, it was more through the hope of procuring conditions for themselves, than of benefiting the interests of their sovereign.  Charles himself bore his misfortunes with an air of magnanimity, which was characterized as obstinacy by the desponding minds of his followers.  As a statesman he acknowledged the hopelessness of his cause; as a Christian he professed to believe that God would never allow rebellion to prosper; but, let whatever happen, he at least would act as honour