to Portſmouth, in order for tranſportation, but giving ſecurity to behave himſelf quietly for the future, was ſuffered to return[footnote 1]: after which he ſettled at Eltham in Kent, and joining the Quakers, preached among that ſect there, and ſometimes at Woolwich and the places adjacent, ’till his death[sidenote 1], which happened at Eltham, Auguſt 29th 1657, in the thirty-ninth year of his age. Two days after, his corps was conveyed to a houſe called the Mouth near Alderſgate in London, at that time the uſual meeting place of the Quakers. Here it was warmly debated whether his coffin ſhould be covered with a hearſe cloth, which being carried in the negative, it was conveyed without one to the then new burial-place in Moor-Fields, near the place now called Old Bedlam, and interred there, four thouſand perſons attending the burial[sidenote 2]. The character given by Mr Wood of our author, appears from his hiſtory to be very juſt, That ‘he was from his youth much addicted to contention, novelties, oppoſition of government, and to violent and bitter expreſſions; that growing up, he became for a time the idol of the factious people, being naturally a great trouble-world in all the variety of governments. That he grew to be a hodge-podge of religion, the chief ring-leader of the Levellers, a great propoſal maker and modeller of ſtate, and publiſher of ſeveral ſeditious pamphlets.’ But the remark upon him, attributed by this writer to Judge Jenkins, as ſpoken in a reproachful way, we are informed by Mr Ruſhworth, was ſaid in Mr Lilburne’s favour by his friend Sir Henry Martin: That if there were none living but him, John would be againſt Lilburne, and Lilburne againſt John[sidenote 3]. Lord Clarendon, who judged our author not unworthy of a place in a hiſtory of the civil wars, having obſerved that he was a perſon of much more conſiderable importance than Wildman, and that Cromwell found it abſolutely neceſſary to his own dignity effectually to cruſh him, concludes his account of him in the following terms. ‘This inſtance of a perſon not otherwiſe conſiderable is thought pertinent to be inſerted, as an evidence of the temper of the nation, and how far the ſpirits at that time [1653] were from paying a ſubmiſſion to that power, when no body had the courage to lift up their hands againſt it.’ We have taken notice in the courſe of this memoir, that our author likewiſe complains heavily of this cowardlineſs in general, and particularly of his party on that very account[sidenote 4]. Indeed one main deſign in enlarging upon this article, was to produce a large variety of inſtances, which may ſerve as a commentary to the Hiſtory of the Rebellion, the plan of which would not admit of being ſo particular. Another principal end herein, has been to give a ſeries of proofs not commonly known, of the infinite guile and ſubtlety of Cromwell, which, joined to an enthuſiaſtic confidence that he ſhould always accompliſh his deſigns in every inſtance, carried that arch-diſſembler at length through a ſea of difficulties, into the full poſſeſſion of a deſpotic ſupremacy.
Sidenotes
- ↑ (n n n) Lord Clarendon was miſinformed in his account, that he was not ſet at liberty, but ſhifted from priſon ’till Cromwell’s death. Hiſt. of the Rebellion, Vol. III. p. 392. fol. firſt edit.
- ↑ (o o o) Wood’s Athen. Oxon. Vol. II. col. 174. and Ruſhworth’s Collections, Vol. II. p. 471.
- ↑ (p p p) Intimating a quarrelſome diſpoſition to be more his misfortune than his fault, as being ſo predominant in his nature, that it could not be reſiſted.Naturam expellas furca tamen uſque recurret. Hor.
- ↑ (q q q) See rem. [D D].
Footnotes
- ↑ [I I I] Upon ſecurity for his good behaviour he was ſuffered to return.] Mr Wood, from whom we have the account of this particular, does not inform us who or what was his ſecurity, his author, undoubtedly, not being able to furniſh any thing certain upon that head. But, as this author appears to be Lilburne’s nephew Richard, ſecond ſon to his brother Robert, we have not ſcrupled, againſt the authority of Lord Clarendon[citation 1], to inſert in the text the matter of his teſtimony as far as it reaches. And here, in the notes, we ſhall venture a ſtep further, there being ſufficient grounds for raiſing ſuch a conjecture concerning the particular perſon who gave the ſecurity mentioned, as will not, it is conceived, be obnoxious to the imputation of futility. Nay, we cannot but think that the reader, by peruſing what has been already obſerved in the courſe of this memoir, is beforehand with us in pointing out the man; ſince he muſt have ſeen our author’s brother Robert, not only concurring in general with him in his opinion of men and things, and particularly puſhing his ſcheme of ſettling the government as far as he durſt, and ’till he ſaw Cromwell abſolutely reſolved againſt it, but even (which is directly to the preſent purpoſe) carrying his affection and concern for his brother ſo far, as to offer to be his bail, in the view of obtaining thereby a ſuſpenſion of his tryal in 1649, and afterwards conſtantly ſtanding at his ſide to aſſiſt him therein, in an open diſregard of the diſpleaſure of the court frequently declared thereat. Add to this, on the other hand, that he appears to have been always well eſteemed in the army, held at this time a conſiderable rank in it[citation 2], and had particularly obliged Cromwell, by yielding, not only to have his name put into the liſt of the late King’s Judges, but alſo actually ſitting upon the Bench at his tryal and condemnation. Laying then all theſe circumſtances together, can there be any reaſonable doubt who was the perſon that averted Cromwell’s wrath againſt our author, and ſaved him from tranſportation, and, after going through an uncommon variety of ſtorms, tempeſts, and ſhipwrecks, ſettling the weather-beaten veſſel in a peaceful and ſtill harbour; where, partly through a full conviction, that all poſſibility of ſucceſs in any further ſtrugglings againſt his grand adverſary was cut off, and chiefly out of a religiouſly affectionate regard for his entirely beloved brother who ſtood reſponſible for him, he paſſed the remainder of his days in perfect tranquillity, equally undiſturbed by and undiſturbing his triumphant competitor[citation 3]. Mr Wood informs us, that our author’s family was continued in the deſcendants of his brother Robert; but Robert himſelf being tried and attainted after the Reſtoration, for having been one of the King’s judges, whilſt his father was living, the eſtate at Thickley devolved upon Robert’s children by his wife Margaret, daughter of Henry Beke of Hadenham in Bucks, Gent. which were, 1. Robert, born anno 1650; Richard, born in 1652; Ephraim, born about 1662, &c. all which were living in 1688; and their father, the Major-General, being baniſhed to the iſland of St Nicolas[citation 4] near Plymouth, ſpending the remainder of his days in that confinement; and, dying there in Auguſt 1665, aged 52 years or thereat bouts, was buried, as his ſon Richard believed, at Plymouth[citation 5].
perfectly ſubdued the force of both parties by his ſubtilty, in encouraging them to daſh themſelves againſt each other, ’till both were broken in pieces, and thereby made way for himſelf to enter at the breach, and take full poſſeſſion of the fort.
Citations
- ↑ (147) Hiſt. of the Rebellion, &c. Vol. III. p. 393. fol. edit.
- ↑ (148) He was Colonel of Horſe in 1645, Governor of Newcaſtle the two following years, and, after the King’s death, was Major-General of the North of England.
- ↑ (149) ’Tis not improbable, that Cromwell might be the rather diſpoſed to accept of the ſecurity for Lilburne’s good behaviour, and ſet him free as an act of clemency, at his entrance on the Protectorate about this time.
- ↑ (150) At his tryal he acknowledged the fact, and urged his ignorance of laws as his excuſe; ſaid he was for withdrawing the Court when the King moved it, and that on the day of the King’s death he retired to his chamber and mourned for it, upon which account his life was granted. See his tryal among thoſe of the regicides.
- ↑ (151) Athen. Oxon. Vol. II. col. 174.
LILLY
