[Footnote 6:  Edmund Ludlow (1620?-1693) lieutenant-general of the Parliamentary army.  He was one of the judges of King Charles’s trial, and who signed the death-warrant.  He died at Vevay, in Switzerland, where he had fled on finding that Charles’s judges were not included in the Act of Indemnity.  His memoirs were printed at Vevay in 1698-1699.3 vols. 8vo.  It is to these Swift refers. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 7:  Ireton and Fairfax were two famous generals of the Parliamentary army serving with Cromwell. [T.S.]]

From what I have already deduced, it appears manifest, that the differences between those two sects, Presbyterian and Independent, did not then amount to half so much as what there is between a Whig and Tory at present among us.  The design of utterly extirpating monarchy and episcopacy, was equally the same in both; evidently the consequence of the very same principles, upon which the Presbyterians alone began, continued, and would have ended in the same events; if towards the conclusion, they had not been bearded by that new party, with whom they could not agree about dividing the spoil.  However, they held a good share of civil and military employments during the whole time of the usurpation; whose names, and actions, and preferments, are frequent in the accounts of those times.  For I make no doubt, that all the prudent Presbyterians complied in proper seasons, falling in with the stream; and thereby got that share in employments, which many of them held to the Restoration; and perhaps too many of them after.  In the same manner, we find our wisest Tories, in both kingdoms, upon the change of hands and measures at the Queen’s death, have endeavoured for several years, by due compliances, to recover the time they had lost by a temporary obstinacy; wherein they have well succeeded, according to their degrees of merit.  Of whose names I could here make honourable mention, if I did not fear it might offend their modesty.

As to what is alleged, that some of the Presbyterians declared openly against the King’s murder, I allow it to be true.  But, from what motives?  No other can possibly be assigned, than perfect spite, rage, and envy, to find themselves wormed out of all power by a new infant spawn of Independents, sprung from their own bowels.  It is true; the differences in religious tenets between them are very few and trifling; the chief quarrel, as far as I remember, relating to congregational and national assemblies.  But, wherever interest or power thinks fit to interfere, it little imports what principles the opposite parties think fit to charge upon each other:  for, we see, at this day, that the Tories are more hated by the whole set of zealous Whigs, than the very Papists themselves; and, in effect, as much unqualified for the smallest office:  although, both these parties assert themselves to be of the same religion, in all its branches of doctrine and discipline; and profess the same loyalty to the same Protestant King and his heirs.