stances of the time. Only fo may the eagerness ment King. fication of Great and paffion difplayed on both fides become again intelligible to the modern reader. SII.WHAT THE GRAND REMONSTRANCE WAS. Cafe of THIS most memorable State Paper, comthe Parliamonly fo garbled and almoft invariably fo mifreagainst the prefented as I have had occafion to remark, remains nevertheless a fact living and acceffible to us; a folid piece of actual history, retaining the form which its authors gave to it, and breathing ftill fome part of the life which animated them. It embodies the cafe of the Parliament against the Ministers of the King. It is the most authentic ftatement ever put forth of the Moft com wrongs endured by all claffes of the English plete jufti people, during the firit fifteen years of the reign of Charles the Firft; and, for that reafon, Rebellion the most complete juftification upon record of the Great Rebellion. It poffeffes, for the student of that event, the special interest which arifes from the fact, that it demonstrates more clearly than any other paper of the time, by its Religion clofe and powerful reafoning, how infeparable and Poli- Religion and Politics had become, and how each was to be stabbed only through the fide of the other. If we would fatisfy ourselves that wherever any writer fuch as Hume has fought to put a diftinction between the modes. of regarding thefe fubjects pursued by the statesmen of this Parliament, and that where he has contrafted their profound capacity, falfe dif- undaunted courage, and largenefs of view in Civil Affairs, with their fuppofed narrowness tics in union. Hume's tinctions: Remon and bigotry in Religion, he has fimply shown refuted how imperfect and narrow had been his own by the ftudy and preparation for the task of doing ftrance. justice to fuch men, we have but to turn to the Grand Remonftrance. For the present I can only dwell upon it briefly. It tents. It defcribes, then, the condition of the three kingdoms at the time when the Long Parliament met, and the measures taken thereon to redress still remediable wrongs, and deal out justice on their authors. Enumerating the Character ftatutes paffed at the fame time for the good of of its conthe subject, and his fafety in future years, it points out what yet waited to be done to complete that neceffary work, and the grave obstructions that had arisen, in each of the three kingdoms, to intercept its completion. warns the people of dangerous and desperate intrigues to recover afcendancy for the court faction; hints not obfcurely at ferious defec- Warnings tions in progrefs, even from the popular against phalanx; accuses the bishops of a defign to Romanize the English Church; denounces the effects of ill counfels in Scotland and Ireland; and calls upon the King to dismiss evil counsellors. It is, in brief, an appeal to the country; confifting, on the one hand, of a dignified affertion of the power of the House of Commons in re-establishing the public liberties, and, on the other, of an urgent reprefentation of its powerleffness either to protect the future or fave the past, without immediate Appeal prefent fupport against papifts and their to the favourers in the Houfe of Lords, and their country. unfcrupulous partizans near the throne. There Court. No dif King or is in it, nevertheless, not a word of disrespect refpect to to the perfon or the juft privileges of royalty; and nothing that the fair fupporters of a found Church Eftablishment might not frankly have approved and accepted. Of all the State Papers of the period, it is in these points much the most remarkable; nor, without very carefully reading it, is it eafy to understand rightly, or with any exactness, either the iffue challenged by the King when he unfurled his standard, or the objects and defires of the men who led the House of Commons up to the actual breaking out of the war. States what the war put in iffue. 15 folio pages in Rushworth. Effential as the ftudy of it is, however, to any true comprehenfion of this eventful time, the difficulty of reproducing it in modern hiftory must doubtlefs be admitted. It is not Occupies merely that it occupies fifteen of Rufhworth's clofely printed folio pages, but that, in special portions of its argument, it paffes with warmth and rapidity through an extraordinary variety of fubjects, of which the connection has ceased to be always immediately apparent. Matters are touched too lightly for eafy comprehenfion now, which but to name, then, was to ftrike a Difficulty chord that every breaft refponded to. of repro- fubjects alfo have a large place, to which only ducing it. a near acquaintance with party names and themes can affign their juft importance, either as affecting each other, or making stronger the ultimate and wider appeal which by their means was defigned. The very heat and urgency of tone, the quick impatience of allufion, the minute fubdivifion of details, the paffionate iteration of topics, everything that made its Some minute illuftration narrative so intense and powerful once, and Its varigives to it in a certain fenfe its vividnefs and ous and reality ftill, conftitutes at the fame time the detail. difficulty of presenting it in fuch an abstract, careful and connected, not without detail and yet compreffed, as would admit of reproduction here. It will be well worth while, nevertheless, to make the trial; which, however fhort it may fall of fuccefs in the particular matter, may have fome hiftorical value independently. For, by the ufe of thofe manu- Purpofed fcript records to which I have referred, as yet by Ms. unemployed by any writer or hiftorian, it will records. at least be poffible to illustrate the abstract to be given by an account of the Debates respecting it in the Houfe of Commons, and these Iwith relation as well to itself as to its antecedents and confequences, far more interesting, because more minute and faithful, than any heretofore given to the world. And in this will be the undoubted additional advantage, that thereby will be fupplied a not inefficient teft for Clarendon's accuracy and honefty of Teft for statement in the most critical part of his nar- Clarenrative of these affairs. § III. SIR SIMONDS D'EWES AND HIS don's honesty. for new ONE preliminary to the task I have under- Authority taken seems to be required of me. To eftab- facts in lish for myself the claim to authenticity of this work. statement which it is proposed to difpute in others, it will be neceffary to describe the D'Ewes in Har authority from which the most part of the facts given in this paper are derived, and now firft contributed to hiftory. They are the result of much tedious and painful research into the blotted manufcripts of Sir Simonds D'Ewes, preferved in five bound volumes in Journal by the British Museum,* and entitled, “A Journal "of the Parliament begun November 3d, leian MSS. "Tuesday, Anno Domini 1640." To the existence of such a journal attention has been lately drawn more than once by allufions in Mr. Carlyle's writings in connection with Cromwell; and from a manufcript abstract made for him when he contemplated writing a Hiftory of the Puritans (a project which it is a matter of great regret that he abandoned), a very interesting notice of D'Ewes, Writers with fome account of his Journal, was pubacquaint lifhed feveral years ago in the Edinburgh ed with it. Review. Mr. Carlyle kindly placed this *Harleian MSS. Nos. 162, 163, 164, 165, 166. +"We call these Notes the most interefting of all manu"fcripts. To an English foul who would understand what was really memorable and godlike in the Hiftory of his country, try, diftinguishing the fame from what from what was at bottom un-memorable and devil-like; who would bear in everlasting remembrance the doings of our noble heroic men, and fink character-" into everlasting oblivion the doings of our low ignoble ifed. quacks and fham-heroes,-what other record can be fo "precious?"-Carlyle's Mifcellanies, iv. 338-9. Notes by Edinb. Review, July, 1846. For July, 1846. I do not betray any confidence in ftating that this paper was by that very learned and agreeable writer, Mr. John Bruce, whofe defcription of D'Ewes's original manufcript may here be fubjoined, in confirmation of what is faid in the text. "For fome part of the time, the "Notes have been copied and written out in a narrative form, "in a refpectable hand; in other places, we have nothing "but the rough jottings-down of D'Ewes's own pen. At "firft, when we begin to read them, all is obfcurity, as dull "and denfe as that which overclouds the pages of Rushworth, |