The Great Civil War in Lancashire (1642-1651) Part 10

Sir John Byron to Rupert, Apr. 7, describes Lathom as in danger of being lost: "The constant intelligence from that county every day is that if your Highness only appear there, the greatest part of the rebels' forces will desert them and join you, and that county being once reduced, all this part of England will presently be clear." "Rupert MSS.," fol. 137; "Clarendon" (Macray), Vol. 3, p. 339 (book 8, par. 17).

[139] a.s.sheton to Moore, March 18 (Stewart MSS., "Hist. MSS. Com.," rep.

10, app. 4, p. 71). He has heard that the Princes are joined, and fears that their objective may be Lancas.h.i.+re by way of Hale Ford or Liverpool.

In the meantime Derby continued to address urgent appeals to Rupert. He has not been able to raise the regiments which the Prince had required in order to raise the siege, "and the time is now past, for the enemy is so close to the House that it is impossible for that design to take effect which might have been some relieving of a distressed woman whose only hope, next to Almighty G.o.d, is in your Highness's help." ("Hist MSS. Com.," report 9, app. 2, p. 437.)

[140] Newspapers in "C.W.T.," 187; "C.S.P.," 173, 174.

[141] "C.S.P.," 1644, pp. 206, 207. They urged that there were only two ways for Rupert to go, either through Warrington or Stockport; and that both should be well guarded.

[142] Lancas.h.i.+re Committee to the Earl of Denbigh, May 16: "They profess willingness to send some troops, but that if the older soldiers are withdrawn the new recruits are not to be trusted" ("C.S.P.," 1644, p.

164). The regiments intended for Denbigh were Holland's and Booth's (_ibid._, pp. 111, 123). Cf. also H. L. Calendar, "Hist. MSS. Com.,"

report 6, p. 13.

[143] "C.S.P.," pp. 173, 200. Cf. Rosworm's "Good Service," "C.W.T.,"

pp. 230-232. Some action of Fairfax's, it does not appear what, had evidently provoked resentment. Dodding afterwards marched with his regiment into Yorks.h.i.+re, and fought at the battle of Marston Moor, where he lost many of his men ("Discourse," p. 50).

[144] "Perfect Diurnall," June 3 ("C.W.T.," p. 188).

[145] Rosworm's "Good Service," "C.W.T.," p. 229. But cf. "C.S.P.,"

1644, p. 205, where a reference is made to a letter from Col. Moore before Lathom on May 9, stating that Heywood's plot had then been discovered and that he had fled. Rosworm says that Heywood was captured, but released through Holland's influence.

[146] "Discourse," p. 49. The details are probably correct, though all the dates in this narrative during May, 1644, are a fortnight too early.

[147] "C.W.T.," pp. 183, 188; "Seacome," p. 93; "Discourse," pp. 50, 51.

[148] For a full and thoroughly sound discussion of this incident, _vide_ "Discourse" note, pp. 134-142. The only possible doubt of Derby's innocence of the crime is that the charge is made with great detail by the author of the "Discourse," who is an unusually impartial writer, and had, moreover, a high opinion of Derby.

[149] Arthur Trevor to Ormonde, June 29: "My Lord of Derby is now sending over to your excellency to barter for or buy arms and ammunition. I shall, on his lords.h.i.+p's behalf, desire he may pay well. I promise he is well able to do it, for upon the relief of Lathom he presented the Prince with a ring worth twenty pounds sterling at most; Sir Richard Crane, who carried the 22 colours to be left as trophy in his house, a ring price 40 s.h.i.+llings, and W. Legge with four candlesticks worth 10 in all." ("Carte MSS.," Vol. II, fol. 315.) The rather cynical tone of this letter may be taken as an example of the Earl of Derby's unpopularity with the royalist leaders. The ford at Hale was for a long time the princ.i.p.al pa.s.s over the Mersey between Liverpool and Warrington. It ceased to be generally used about 150 years ago; but almost within living memory horses were taken over by this way for hunting in Ches.h.i.+re. It is now impossible to get across.

[150] "Baillie's Letters" (ed. Laing, 3 vols., 1841-2), Vol. 2, p. 203.

[151] "C.W.T.," p. 199.

[152] "C.S.P.," 1644, pp. 192, 200, 207, 223-225.

[153] "C.S.P.," 1644, p. 217.

[154] _Vide_ p. 37. "Discourse," p. 52; "C.W.T.," p. 199; "Seacome," p.

95. Ramsay Muir, "History of Liverpool" (1907), chap. 9, p. 16. Legge to Trevor, June 13: "And now Liverpool is in our hands, I hope we shall have a freer intelligence from Ireland than before we had. I a.s.sure you that was the end we stopped ther for." In spite of this advantage, the siege of Liverpool was not worth while, and the royalists admit that the 100 barrels of powder which it cost, left Rupert but ill provided.

("Carte MSS.," Vol. II, fol. 184, 313.) "Seacome," p. 96, says that the siege lasted nearly a month, but this is evidently an error, for it cannot have begun before May 30.

[155] "Seacome," p. 97. "July 30, 1644: My wife landed in the Isle of Man." Derby's Diary, "Stanley Papers" (C.S. 70), ed. Raines, pt. 3, Vol.

3, p. 4.

[156] "Discourse," p. 52.

[157] "C.S.P.," 1644, pp. 231, 248, 272, 292.

[158] Trevor to Ormonde, Chester, June 26, 1644 ("Carte MSS.," Vol. 11, fol. 312, 313; "Discourse," p. 52.

[159] Baillie to Spong, June 9 ("Letters," Vol. 2, p. 193). Col. R.

Byron to Ormonde, July 5 ("Carte MSS.," Vol. 11, fol. 495).

[160] "Discourse," pp. 57, 58; "C.W.T.," p. 204; "Denbigh MSS.," Vol. 1, p. 275. It seems evident that if Meldrum had been better informed of the fords across the Ribble below Preston, he might have caught the royalists a day before he did. In the Parliamentarian newspapers the number of prisoners taken was placed as high as 1,000 men. On July 15, Sir George Booth at Dunham was informed that Prince Rupert was still at Preston with 6,000 horse and some foot.

CHAPTER VIII.

The End of the First Civil War.

There was now no longer a royalist army in Lancas.h.i.+re; the only places which still held out were Liverpool, Lathom House and Greenhalgh Castle.

c.l.i.theroe Castle had been deserted by its garrison a few weeks after the battle of Marston Moor; but Skipton, over the Yorks.h.i.+re border, was for some time longer a source of apprehension to the Parliamentarians in Blackburn Hundred. After the defeat of the royalists at Ormskirk, Meldrum at once laid siege to Liverpool; but the fortifications were strong, and the town resisted for ten weeks, being at last surrendered on Friday, November 1st. Colonel Rosworm directed the ordnance at the siege, and Colonel Moore commanded some s.h.i.+ps from the river. But Meldrum was called away for service in North Wales, and during his absence the siege was not conducted with any vigour. "I have had much ado," he wrote to the Committee of Both Kingdoms from Liverpool on October 2nd, "to bring back the Lancas.h.i.+re foot to their quarters before Liverpool, in regard to their want of obedience even to their own officers, the unseasonableness of the weather, and the time of harvest.

They have had no pay for 18 weeks, and have been much pinched for want of victuals ever since they have been under my charge, the country being so wasted and spoiled by Prince Rupert's two journeys through Lancas.h.i.+re.... During my being abroad the enemy has taken divers of our men while sleeping upon their guard, and by what is intercepted I find them reduced to great extremities by inviting the garrison of Lathom House, consisting of 200 horse and 300 foot under Colonel Vere, who since the rout at Ormskirk hath been there, to fall upon some of our quarters upon Thursday next and in the meantime those within the town resolved to fall desperately upon some of our quarters and to make their retreat to Lathom House."[161] The Earl of Derby was also reported to be gathering troops in Ches.h.i.+re for the relief of the town; but he was defeated by Sir William Brereton, and the intended attack from Lathom House never took place. But no breach could be made in the walls of Liverpool, and in the end it was starved into surrender. The circ.u.mstances were peculiar. In the last days of October 60 English soldiers of the garrison escaped, driving away with them some of the cattle, and surrendered to the besiegers, many of them taking service under the Parliament. The officers in the town realising that resistance was useless after this occurrence, attempted to make their escape by sea as Colonel Moore had done when Liverpool was captured by Prince Rupert.

But the remainder of the garrison, who were Irish troops, feared that they would be excepted from quarter; they therefore secured their officers, and opened the gates to the Parliamentarians on promise that their own lives should be spared. Colonel Clifton and 20 other officers with many arms were captured; Clifton was taken to Manchester and afterwards died. The capture of Liverpool was important enough to be made the occasion of a public thanksgiving on November 4th.[162]

Differences, however, again broke out among the Lancas.h.i.+re leaders, and it was difficult to find a Governor for Liverpool who would be generally acceptable. Meldrum himself was in favour of leaving the town in the hands of Colonel Moore, of whose ability he had evidently formed a high opinion. Moore seems to have acted as Governor for a time, but in May, 1645, John Ashhurst, now Major, was appointed. There was at first some doubt about the continuance of the garrison. The Committee of Both Kingdoms were of opinion that the works had better be demolished on the ground of expense, though it would be necessary to keep a small vessel to guard the harbour. But the position of Liverpool as a port forbade its being left without a garrison, and a force of 300 foot and 1 troop of horse was ordered to remain there. In March, 1646, the House of Commons ordered that the Liverpool garrison should consist of 600 foot.[163]

The siege of Greenhalgh Castle was entrusted to Col. Dodding and Major Joseph Rigby, younger brother of the better known Colonel Rigby. It was garrisoned by a number of royalist refugees, the Governor being Mr.

Anderton, probably Christopher Anderton of Lostock. The castle stood on a little hill about half a mile south-east of Garstang; it was very strongly built, and having only one entrance was difficult of approach.

Probably only a few troops were told off for the siege, for the garrison could sally out to plunder the countryside, and for a time at least had the better of the Parliamentarians. The sandy nature of the soil made mining operations difficult, and on one occasion the garrison countermined and captured five barrels of powder. At length Anderton died, and the garrison surrendered on promise of their liberty. The Castle was demolished and all the timber sold; only a part of one tower now remains.[164] (June 10th, 1644).

During the autumn of 1644 negotiations were opened with the Earl to induce him to surrender. These were conducted by Sir John Meldrum, who employed as his agent Major Ashhurst, the only Parliamentarian officer at the first siege of Lathom House for whom the royalists had a good word to say. In October Meldrum wrote twice to Derby, and early in the following month William Farington and John Greenhalgh came into Lancas.h.i.+re under safe conduct to discuss terms. What exactly the propositions were is not stated, but Meldrum told the Committee of Both Kingdoms that he would only begin to treat on condition that Lathom and Greenhalgh were surrendered. In spite of this, however, he was of opinion from notes of a private interview which Ashhurst had with the Earl, that Derby would be "found inclinable to any course which may give the Parliament contentment." A fortnight later he writes more decidedly:

"I find the Earl inclinable to give all satisfaction to both Houses of Parliament, if he may have the least testimony under the hands of the Earls of Pembroke and Salisbury that upon demolis.h.i.+ng the fortifications and removal of the garrisons of Lathom House and Greenhalgh Castle, he may expect to have fair and n.o.ble dealings."

(Nov. 21st, 1644.)

Later still it seemed as if an agreement had nearly been reached.

Meldrum writes:--

"I desire to know your pleasure whether the Earl after the full accomplishment of the Treaty may not begin his journey to London, and stay at St. Alban's till he shall receive an order from both Houses or from your Lords.h.i.+ps to come to London." (Dec. 16th, 1644.)

It is not quite clear what led to the breaking off the negotiations; but the Parliament would be almost sure to ask more than Derby was willing to yield, and the longer the strongholds in Lancas.h.i.+re held out the more severe might the Parliament terms be expected to become. Twelve months later they made a proposal which could only have been intended as an insult. He was required as the price of his reconciliation to give up Lord Digby, the Earls of Nithsdale and Carnwath, Sir Marmaduke Langdale, Sir William Huddleston, and other royalists who had found refuge in the Isle of Man when the King's cause in England was entirely lost, "otherwise your Lords.h.i.+p is not to expect from us any further invitation." As might have been supposed, Derby returned an indignant refusal.[165]

The defeat of Rupert at Marston Moor completely destroyed the King's chances of victory in the Civil War, but less than two months later his triumph over Ess.e.x at Lostwithiel, where all the Parliamentarian foot were obliged to surrender, gave his cause a new lease of life in the south of England. The winter was pa.s.sed in fruitless negotiations; when they had broken down the New Model Ordinance was pa.s.sed through Parliament, and in the spring of 1645 the toils began to close round the King who left Oxford and marched northwards with Rupert.

Thus once more Lancas.h.i.+re was brought into the general course of events.

It was feared that Charles would try to break through to join the Earl of Montrose in Scotland; instead of advancing Leven retreated, notwithstanding remonstrances from Sir Thomas Fairfax. The Fairfaxes themselves were at York, and thus Lancas.h.i.+re was left completely undefended. The leaders were in great consternation. Already in the middle of March, 1645, it was feared that the King would march on Shrops.h.i.+re and Ches.h.i.+re, and the Committee of Both Kingdoms wrote to Sir George Booth to be careful to guard Warrington.[166] Two months later the danger was acute; if the King could enter Lancas.h.i.+re he might indefinitely increase his forces. Charles penetrated into Ches.h.i.+re in May, and obliged Sir William Brereton to raise the siege of Chester and draw his men into garrisons. Fairfax promised to send 1,500 men in order to hinder the King's advance, and the Lancas.h.i.+re leaders were urged to keep careful watch over all the pa.s.ses into that county, and to have 200 horse and 1,000 foot ready to send to any rendezvous which Fairfax and Leven might appoint. Colonel a.s.sheton's regiment was recalled in haste from Ches.h.i.+re. The ford at Hale was guarded by 1,100 foot and 4 troops of horse, and the general rendezvous was appointed at Barlow Moor, near Manchester, on Thursday, May 19th. The Lancas.h.i.+re troops, however, attended in small numbers. They were greatly disorganised and the county much wasted by three years of war; and they complained of the place chosen for the rendezvous as being too near to plague-stricken Manchester. Lathom was still a thorn in the side of the Parliamentarians of the county, and they were obliged to leave some troops at Ormskirk to continue the siege; there remained only one company of foot to defend both Liverpool and Warrington, and one of Egerton's regiments flatly refused his order to march. On May 22nd the Lancas.h.i.+re Committee wrote to London that they had obeyed the orders regarding the disposition of troops, "but it is more difficult to defend the country near Manchester, the river being shallow, and the Scots and Cromwell both marching further off than was expected." Next day Sir William Brereton wrote from Manchester, giving a very gloomy picture of affairs. "The forces a.s.signed for the pa.s.ses are inconsiderable, the pa.s.ses many and indefensible." All the men he could spare were on the borders of Ches.h.i.+re but they were quite inadequate to oppose the King if he should try to enter Lancas.h.i.+re. A few days before the Earl of Callander had sent a letter to the Scotch Commissioners in London to the same effect. "If we should abandon Yorks.h.i.+re to go into Lancas.h.i.+re, this county would lie open to the King, and York will probably be lost; if we stay here the King is at liberty to enter Lancas.h.i.+re and increase his army, because of the many disaffected persons in that county. It is impossible to defend both places which is a line of 80 miles, at once, the ways and pa.s.sages also between those counties being such as the forces in one county cannot without very great difficulty and marching a long way give a.s.sistance to the other."[167]

All this may have been exaggerated, but there is no doubt that Lancas.h.i.+re was in a state of great distress. Fortunately for the Parliamentarian party, however, the King's position was even worse than their own. Weak as they were, he was in no condition to force an entrance into hostile territory. The resistance offered may have been inadequate, but the appearance of force was enough to turn him in another direction. On May 21st he was at Whitchurch, 'not 24 miles from Hale Ford'; but he came no nearer to Lancas.h.i.+re than Market Drayton, but turned eastwards into the Midlands, and on May 31st took Leicester by storm.[168]

There were further fears of Charles in September when he was in Ches.h.i.+re; but his defeat at Rowton Heath disposed of that danger. Even in October when he was at Welbeck, it was feared that his plan was to march northwards to relieve Skipton and Lathom, and to recruit his foot in Lancas.h.i.+re, "where Manchester will be as easily entered as attempted"; but the defeat of Langdale, near Pontefract, removed this danger too.[169]

Meanwhile the siege at Lathom House dragged on. During the winter of 1644 the garrison was practically unmolested, so that they were able to make little plundering expeditions, riding out after nightfall and returning to the house before daylight. Sometimes they even ventured further afield into the Fylde country. So great was the nuisance occasioned by their plundering and that of the royalists at Greenhalgh, that in December a local "cessation" was effected; but the Parliament promptly annulled it. At length the Committee at Manchester decided to re-form the siege, and Colonel Egerton was chosen for command.

(January, 1644-5.) Troops were provided out of all the county, but no serious attempt was made to storm, the object being rather to starve out the garrison. In the House were a numerous garrison under Colonel Rawsthorne and Colonel Vere, who had with them Charnock, Key, Molyneux Radcliffe, Farington and other Captains who had taken part in the first siege. There seem to have been three divisions of the royalists, the main guard being in Lathom itself, and others at New Park; while the third division consisting of the Irish troops who had been at Liverpool during the previous summer occupied the Lodge.