at Nunappleton was discussed at the Council in London.  On the 9th of October, his Highness and eight more being present, it was ordered that a warrant should issue for arresting, and confining in the Isle of Jersey, George, Duke of Buckingham, who had been “in this nation for divers months without licence or authority.”  This led, of course, to earnest representations from Fairfax.  Accordingly, Nov. 17, “His Highness having communicated to the Council that the Lord Fairfax hath made addresses to him, with some desires on behalf of the Duke of Buckingham,” it was ordered “That the Resolves and Act of Parliament in the case of the said Duke be communicated to the Lord Fairfax as the grounds of the Council’s proceedings touching the said Duke, and that there be withal signified to the Lord Fairfax the Council’s civil respects to his Lordship’s own person.”  The message was to be conveyed by the Earl of Mulgrave, Lord Deputy Fleetwood, and Lord Strickland.  Fairfax and the young couple must have made farther appeal; for, Dec. 1, his Highness “delivered in to the Council a paper containing an offer of some reasons in reference to the Duke of Buckingham his liberty,” whereupon it was minuted “That the Council do declare it as their opinion that it is not consistent with their duty to advise his Highness to grant the Duke of Buckingham his liberty as is desired, nor consistent with his Highness’s trust to do the same.”  Lord Strickland and Sir Charles Wolseley were to communicate the minute to Fairfax.  Probably Fairfax had come up to town on the business.  The young couple would seem to have remained in the country; nor do I find that the order for the arrest of the Duke was yet actually enforced.[2]

[Footnote 1:  As early as Nov. 1654 Charles II. had written to Fairfax, begging him to “wipe out all he had done amiss” by such services to the Royal cause as he might yet render (Macray’s Calendar of the Clarendon State Papers, II. 426).]

[Footnote 2:  Council Order Books of dates.]

What may have disposed Cromwell not to be too harsh about the marriage was the fact that he had just celebrated the marriages of his own two youngest daughters.  Lady Frances, the youngest, became Mrs. Rich on the 11th of November, and Lady Mary became Viscountess Falconbridge on the 18th.

The drift of public interest was now towards the reassembling of the adjourned Parliament on the 20th of January 1657-8.  Especially there was great curiosity as to the persons that would be called by his Highness to form the Second or Upper House.  That was satisfied in the course of December by the issue of his Highness’s writs under the great seal (quite in regal style, with the phrases “We,” “ourself,” “our great seal,” &c.) to the following sixty-three persons, the asterisks to be explained presently:—­

  Lord Richard Cromwell (_Councillor_, &c.). 
  Lord Henry Cromwell (_Lord Deputy of Ireland_).

    Of the Titular Nobility.