CHAPTER XVIICONCLUDING REMARKS

“These old Laws cannot govern a Free Commonwealth; because the Land is now to be set free from the slavery of theNorman Conquest, and the power of Lords of Manors and Norman Freeholders is to be taken away. Or else the Commoners are but where they were, if not fallen lower into straits than they were. The Old Laws cannot look with any other face than they did; though they be washed with Commonwealth’s water, their countenance is still withered. Therefore it was not for nothing that the Kings would have all their Laws written in French and Latin, and not in English; partly in honor to the Norman Race, and partly to keep the Common People ignorant of their Creation Freedom lest they should rise to redeem themselves. And if those Laws should be writ in English, yet if the same Kingly Principles remain in them, the English language would not advantage us anything, but rather increase our sorrow by our knowledge of our bondage.”

“What is Law in general?”

Winstanley then proceeds to consider the question, What is Law? and to emphasise the essential difference between customary, conventional or written Law and that unwritten Law, proceeding from the Inward Light of Reason, that inspires men, in action as in words, to do as they would be done unto. He first gives the following clear, rational and sufficient definition of Law:

“Law is a Rule, whereby men and other creatures are governed in their actions for the preservation of Common Peace.”

Then follows a most philosophic consideration of the whole question, which seems to us to reveal that Winstanley was groping, and by no means so blindly as many who succeeded him, after some Natural Law, some unalterable and immutable principle, which should serve as a basis, as well as the test and touchstone, of all man-made customs, laws and institutions. He continues:

The Two-fold Nature of Law.

“This Law is two-fold: First, it is the power of Life (called the Law of Nature within the Creatures) which dothmove both man and beast in their actions, or that causes grass, trees, corn and all plants to grow in their several seasons. And whatsoever anybody does, he does it as he is moved by this inward Law. And this Law of Nature moves two-fold, viz., irrationally or rationally.”

The Law of the Flesh.

“A man by this inward Law is guided to actions of present content, rashly, through a greedy self-love, without any consideration, like foolish children, or like the brute beasts. By reason whereof much hurt many times follows the body. And this may be called the Law of the Members warring against the Law of the Mind.”

The Law of the Mind.

“Or where there is an inward watchful oversight of all motions to action, considering the end and effect of those actions, so that there be no excess in diet, in speech, or in action break forth, to the prejudice of a man’s self or others: and this may be called the Light in Man, the Reasonable Power, or the Law of the Mind. And this rises up in the heart by an experimental observation of that peace or trouble which such and such words, thoughts and actions bring the man into. And this is called the Record on High; for it is a record in a man’s heart above the former unreasonable power: and it may be called the witness or testimony of a man’s own conscience: and this moderate watchfulness is still the Law of Nature, but in a higher resurrection than the former. It hath many terms, which for brevity sake I let pass.”

Their Struggle for Supremacy.

“This two-fold work of the Law within man strive to bring forth themselves in writing to beget numbers of bodies on their sides. That power which begets the bigger number always rules as King or Lord in the creature and in the Creation, till the other side overtop him: even as light and darkness strive in day and night to succeed each other. Or as it is said—“The strong man armed keeps the heart of man till a stronger than he came and cast him out.”

The Written Law.

“This written Law, proceeding either from reason or unreasonableness, is called the Letter, whereby the creation of mankind, beasts and earth are governed, according to the will of that power which rules.... As for example, if the experienced, wise and strong man bears rule, then he writes down his mind to curb the unreasonable Law of Covetousness and Pride in inexperienced man, to preserve Peace in the Commonwealth. This is called the Historical or Traditional Law, because it is conveyed from one generation to another by writing: as the Laws of Israel’s Commonwealth were writ in a book by Moses, and so conveyed to posterity. And this outward Law is a bridle to unreasonableness; or as Solomon writ, It is a whip for the fool’s back, for whom only it was added.”

Its Corruption.

“Secondly, Since Moses’ time the power of unreasonable covetousness and pride hath sometimes risen up and corrupted that Traditional Law. For since the power of the sword rises up in Nations to conquer, the Written Law hath not been to advance Common Freedom and to beat down the unreasonable self-will in mankind, but it hath been framed to uphold the self-will of the Conqueror, right or wrong, not respecting the Freedom of the Commonwealth, but the Freedom of the Conqueror and his friends only. By reason whereof much slavery hath been laid on the backs of the plain-dealing men; and men of public spirit, as Moses was, have been crushed, and their spirits damped thereby: which hath bred first discontents, and then more wars in the Nations.... But hereby the true nature of a well-governed Commonwealth hath been ruined; the will of Kings set up for a Law; and the Law of Righteousness, the Law of Liberty, trod under foot and killed. This Traditional Law of Kings is that Letter at this day which kills true freedom and is the fomenter of wars and persecutions.“This is the soldier who cut Christ’s garments into pieces, which was to remain uncut and without seam. This law moves the people to fight one against the other for those pieces; viz., for the several enclosures of the Earth, who shall possess the Earth, and who shall be Rulers over others.”

“This is the soldier who cut Christ’s garments into pieces, which was to remain uncut and without seam. This law moves the people to fight one against the other for those pieces; viz., for the several enclosures of the Earth, who shall possess the Earth, and who shall be Rulers over others.”

The everlasting Law.

“But the true ancient Law of God is a Covenant of Peace to the whole of mankind. This sets the Earth free to all. This unites both Jew and Gentile into one Brotherhood, and rejects none. This makes Christ’s garment whole again; and makes the Kingdoms of the World to become Commonwealths again. It is the Inward Power of Right Understanding, which is the True Law that teaches people in action, as well as in words, to do as they would be done unto.”

Winstanley then contends that, as far as written laws are concerned—

“Short and pithy Laws are best to govern a Commonwealth,”

and defends this conclusion as follows:

“The Laws of Israel’s Commonwealth were few, short and pithy; and the Government thereof was established in peace so long as Officers and People were obedient thereunto. But those many Laws in the days of the Kings of England, which were made some in times of Popery and some in times of Protestantism, and the proceedings of the Laws being in French and Latin, hath produced two great evils in England. First, it hath occasioned much ignorance among the people, and much contention. And the people have mightily erred through want of knowledge, and thereby they have run into great expense of money by suits of Law; or else many have been imprisoned, whipped, banished, lost their estates and lives by that Law which they were ignorant of till the scourge thereof was on their backs. This is a sore evil among the people.“Secondly, The people’s ignorance of the laws hath bred many sons of contention. For when any difference falls out between man and man, they neither of them know which offends the other; therefore, both of them thinking their cause is good, they delight to make use of the Law; and then they go and give a Lawyer money to tell them which of them was the offender. The Lawyer, being glad to maintain his own trade, sets them together by the ears till all their money be near spent; and then bids them refer the business to theirneighbors to make them friends, which might have been done at the first. So that the course of the Law and Lawyers hath been a mere snare to entrap the people and to pull their estates from them by craft. For the Lawyers do uphold the Conqueror’s Interest and the People’s Slavery; so that the King, seeing this, did put all the affairs of Judicature into their hands: and all this must be called Justice, but it is a sore evil.“But now if the Laws were few and short, and often read, it would prevent those evils. Everyone, knowing when they did well and when ill, would be very cautious of their words and actions, and thus would escape the Lawyer’s craft. As Moses’ Law in Israel’s Commonwealth: ‘The People did talk of them when they lay down and when they rose up, and as they walked by the way, and bound them as bracelets upon their hands:’ so that they were an understanding people in the Laws wherein their peace did depend. But it is a sign that England is a blinded and snared generation; their Leaders, through pride and covetousness, have caused them to err, yea and perish too, for want of the knowledge of the Laws, which hath the Power of Life and Death, Freedom and Bondage in its hand. But I hope better things hereafter.”

“Secondly, The people’s ignorance of the laws hath bred many sons of contention. For when any difference falls out between man and man, they neither of them know which offends the other; therefore, both of them thinking their cause is good, they delight to make use of the Law; and then they go and give a Lawyer money to tell them which of them was the offender. The Lawyer, being glad to maintain his own trade, sets them together by the ears till all their money be near spent; and then bids them refer the business to theirneighbors to make them friends, which might have been done at the first. So that the course of the Law and Lawyers hath been a mere snare to entrap the people and to pull their estates from them by craft. For the Lawyers do uphold the Conqueror’s Interest and the People’s Slavery; so that the King, seeing this, did put all the affairs of Judicature into their hands: and all this must be called Justice, but it is a sore evil.

“But now if the Laws were few and short, and often read, it would prevent those evils. Everyone, knowing when they did well and when ill, would be very cautious of their words and actions, and thus would escape the Lawyer’s craft. As Moses’ Law in Israel’s Commonwealth: ‘The People did talk of them when they lay down and when they rose up, and as they walked by the way, and bound them as bracelets upon their hands:’ so that they were an understanding people in the Laws wherein their peace did depend. But it is a sign that England is a blinded and snared generation; their Leaders, through pride and covetousness, have caused them to err, yea and perish too, for want of the knowledge of the Laws, which hath the Power of Life and Death, Freedom and Bondage in its hand. But I hope better things hereafter.”

Winstanley, then, we regret to say, was ambitious enough to attempt to formulate a whole series of rigid artificial laws, which he evidently deemed adapted to promote the prosperity and preserve the happiness of his ideal Commonwealth: laws for the planting of the Earth, for Navigation, Trade, Marriage, etc. etc. The curious reader will find them almost in full inAppendix C. Many of them may seem to us unnecessary, but then we should remember that we have at our command a greater store of economic knowledge, and more accurate economic reasoning, than were available to Winstanley. Many of his laws will appear to us unnecessarily severe; but if we compare them with those prevailing for many, many years after his time, they will appear, by comparison, both mild and humane. As it seems to us, Winstanley intended to formulate suggestions rather than Laws in the accepted sense of the term: suggestions by following which the Earth could be planted and harvested, and all handicraft, trade,commerce and industries carried on, and the fruits of the united labours of all equitably distributed amongst all according to their needs, without having recourse to “the thieving art of buying and selling” either the Earth or the fruits thereof.

The pamphlet concludes with the following quaint and yet philosophic lines, with which our notice of it may also fittingly close:

“Here is the Righteous Law, Man wilt thou it maintain?It may be, as hath still, in the World been slain.Truth appears in Light, Falsehood rules in Power;To see these things to be, is cause of grief each hour.Knowledge, Why didst thou come, to wound and not to cure?I sent not for thee, thou didst me inlure.Where knowledge does increase, there sorrows multiply,To see the great deceit which in the World doth lie.Man saying one thing now, unsaying it anon,Breaking all Engagements, when deeds for him are done.O Power where art thou? thou must mend things amiss;Come, change the heart of Man, and make him Truth to kiss:O Death, where art thou? wilt thou not tidings send?I fear thee not, thou art my loving friend.Come take this body, and scatter it in the Four,That I may dwell in One, and rest in peace once more.”

“While God gave to man a capacity to labour, He also gave him a right to the object (the earth) on which that labour must be employed to produce the necessaries of life. This gift of God is to all men alike. No compact or consent or legislation on the part of one portion of the community, can ever justly deprive another portion of the community of their right of their share of the earth, and of its natural productions. No arrangement or agreement or legislation of men now dead, can justly deprive the present inhabitants of the earth, or any portion of those inhabitants, of their right to labour, and to labour for their own profit, on some portion of the earth which God has given to man.”—Patrick Edward Dove,Elements of Political Science. 1854.“Our postulates are the primary perceptions of human reason, the fundamental teachings of the Christian faith. We hold: That—This world is the creation of God. The men brought into it for the brief period of their earthly lives are the equal creatures of His bounty, the equal subjects of His provident care.... Being the equal creatures of the Creator, equally entitled under His providence to live their lives and satisfy their needs, men are equally entitled to the use of land, and any adjustment that denies this equal use of land is morally wrong.”—Henry George,An Open Letter to Pope Leo XIII. 1891.228:1

“Our postulates are the primary perceptions of human reason, the fundamental teachings of the Christian faith. We hold: That—This world is the creation of God. The men brought into it for the brief period of their earthly lives are the equal creatures of His bounty, the equal subjects of His provident care.... Being the equal creatures of the Creator, equally entitled under His providence to live their lives and satisfy their needs, men are equally entitled to the use of land, and any adjustment that denies this equal use of land is morally wrong.”—Henry George,An Open Letter to Pope Leo XIII. 1891.228:1

Here, then, we must bid farewell to Gerrard Winstanley. We are uncertain as to the place and year of his birth; we know not where he lived, nor where or when he died; yet his words still appeal to us, prompting us to cast off the blinding and distorting spectacles of convention and custom, to look the facts of social life fairly and squarely in the face, and boldly to proclaim whatever social truths reflection and study may reveal to us. Such are the lessons which his life and teachings seem to us to inculcate.

What Winstanley regarded, and what a steadily increasing number of earnest students to-day regard, as a fundamental social truth was revealed to him; and right well he gave expression, by words and deeds, to his strong and well-grounded conviction of the equal claim of all to the use of Mother Earth, to the use of the nation’s natural home, workhouse and storehouse, whence, by labour, everything necessary to life and comfort can alone be derived. Winstanley realised, as they to-day realise, that to admit in the abstract the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man, to admit the equal claim of all to life, and yet to deny the equal claim of all to the use of God’s Earth, to share in those blessings which the great Father of all men has lavished upon His children, and which form the only means by which life can be maintained, is but hypocrisy and cant. The “rights of property,” the financial interests of the privileged classes, the Elder Brothers, the so-called “power of the capitalists,” may be based on and involved in the recognition of the claim of the few to control the use of the Earth. But the rights of man, the material, moral and spiritual interests of the masses of mankind, their emancipation from the unjust economic conditions to-day enthralling and impoverishing them, narrowing and degrading their lives, depriving them of all real enjoyment of the present, as of all hope for the future, hindering the advance of the race to a nobler civilisation, to a higher plane of individual and social life, depend upon our recognising and enforcing the claim of all to the use of the Earth, and to share in the bounties of Nature, upon equitable terms. What Winstanley discovered and proclaimed in the Seventeenth Century, Henry George rediscovered and again proclaimed in the Nineteenth Century, and that in tones which are still reverberating and producing their effects on social thought throughout the length and breadth of the civilised world, promising ultimately to produce a change in social conditions compared with which the abolition of slavery sinks into comparative insignificance. It is no longer a question of the emancipation of a few chattel slaves, but of the whole human race.

Fundamental social laws and institutions, based upon inequality of rights, must necessarily produce inequality of conditions. And all who impartially consider the question will be forced to admit that both Winstanley and Henry George trace the prevailing social inequality, the debauching wealth of the few and the degrading poverty of the many, to its true cause. Nor can there be any doubt but that if Winstanley’s practical and efficacious remedy had been adopted, if the use of the Common Land had been secured to the Common People on equitable terms, the economic condition of the masses of the generations which succeeded him, the whole subsequent economic, social and political history of the English People, would have been very different; and they would not now, in the Twentieth Century, be fighting for, or more often whispering with bated breath concerning, those very reforms he so strenuously advocated over two hundred and fifty years ago.

Winstanley’s writings met with the fate that awaits all thought much in advance of the times in which it is given to the world. They have been ignored and forgotten; and till very recently even his memory had vanished from the minds of his fellow-countrymen, to whose emancipation he unstintedly devoted his life. Nor can we be surprised at this, when we consider the circumstances. There can be little doubt but that his earlier writings were the quiver whence the early Quakers derived many of their arrows, their most pointed and consequently by their opponents most hated doctrines. And yet the highly philosophic and rational attitude toward cosmological and theological speculations Winstanley attained to in his last pamphlet, placed before our readers in Chapter XVI., seems to us sufficiently to account for his having been ignored even by those who may have availed themselves of his earlier works, and hence that these, too, should have been gradually forgotten.

That the same fate should have befallen his political writings, his noble and yet simple and practical political ideals and aspirations, is also not surprising. After the Restoration, when, as we have already shown, Winstanley’s bitter opponents,the old and new landholders, were in the saddle, and made unsparing, we had almost written unscrupulous, use of their opportunities, such doctrines as his were little likely to commend themselves to the privileged, cultured and educated classes. Prior to the Reformation, education, at least the knowledge of reading, writing and arithmetic, was undoubtedly more widely diffused amongst the masses of the people than it was subsequently—at all events, till very recent times. From the Restoration to within our own times, education, even the knowledge of reading, was as a very general rule only within the reach of the few, of the privileged classes and those more or less dependent on their favour, with whom such ideals as those voiced by Winstanley would naturally meet with but scant consideration. Moreover, though we may be accused of pessimism or cynicism for saying so, it seems to us that the main reason why teachings such as Winstanley’s must necessarily remain specially unpalatable and unwelcome so long as social and political privileges are allowed to continue, is that they are too simple and direct, and the path toward their realisation too clearly indicated, to be acceptable or welcome to those who benefit, or think they benefit, by the continuance of social injustice. Winstanley’s proposals, as the proposals of his great modern representative, Henry George, are, indeed, a test of sincerity. It is easy to express approval of Freedom, Justice, Honesty, Equality of Opportunities, Brotherhood, of the Equal Right of All to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, and so on,in the abstract, and to talk about the necessity for men,other men, dealing honestly, equitably and righteously one toward the other. It is difficult, though but a test of our own honesty and sincerity, to give practical support to unpopular doctrines and proposals which would tend to make these noble and elevating conceptions into real, living realities, and to enforce us to act honestly, equitably and righteously ourselves. Hence it is that even to-day those who advocate any such doctrines, any such social change, are either dismissed as impossible, utopian dreamers, or denounced as revolutionary demagogues, as “prophets of iniquity,” “preachers of immorality,” “advocatesof villany,” as enemies of society, and so on; and if this fails of its desired effects, other means are found by which their influence is undermined and their teachings discredited in the minds of those who more or less blindly follow in the wake of the “superior classes,” the privileged few and their more or less direct dependents. Thus Society continues its troubled slumbers until—until the necessary changes denied to peaceful reformers, to the thinkers of the race, may be demanded, by revolutionary methods, by force, by those who know themselves injured and oppressed, though they may be ignorant of the means by which they are wronged.

It was, however, as a sincere and unswerving advocate of peaceful, practical reforms, as a courageous and unflinching opponent of the use of force, of the sword, even for righteous ends, that Winstanley appealed to his own generation, as Henry George, Ruskin and Tolstoy appeal to the present. Nor can there be any doubt but that his teachings found far more general acceptance than is to be gathered from modern histories of the troubled times in which his lot was cast. For not only was there sufficient demand to warrant the publication of at least two editions ofThe Law of Freedom, as of several of his other pamphlets, but additional testimony is to be gathered from the fact that his writings were immediately pirated and issued under new titles by other publishers:232:1than which no better evidence can be had of the popularity of any writer.

However this may be, new and less earnest and less strenuous generations arose which knew not Winstanley, and heeded not his teachings; and till very recent years both he and his teachings have remained utterly forgotten. And yet we write the closing lines of our work with the same conviction with which we commenced it some five years ago, that not only was Gerrard Winstanley a man worthy to be recalled to the memory of his fellow-countrymen, as one who deserved well of his day, of his generation and of his country, but that theintrinsic merits of his writings and teachings make them worthy of our most careful study, of our highest admiration, and of our most profound respect.

True, they have hitherto received but scant consideration; but this need neither surprise nor disturb us. The man in whose heart a new truth is born may be a benefactor of his species; but, as all history teaches us, if he have courage to proclaim it to the world, he must be prepared to meet the hatred, scoffing and abuse of the ignorant, the sneering contempt, if not bitter persecution, of the learned and highly placed upholders of already accepted beliefs and superstitions. More especially is this true of a social truth, of a truth which threatens the continuance of society in its accustomed paths, which threatens the continuance of some vested social wrong, of some deep-rooted and time-honoured social injustice, which, though it may be poisoning the springs of social life, necessarily finds favour in the eyes of those who are advantaged, or think they are advantaged, thereby. It was such a truth that meditation and reflection revealed to Gerrard Winstanley; and, as we have seen, he too met with the fate awaiting those who find themselves in advance of their times. As already pointed out, his memory has passed away, his teachings have remained unheeded. The seed he planted fell upon barren soil; but though so hardened by the withering frosts of ignorance, of that ignorance which is indeed “the curse of God,” as to seem but as a dead stone, the vivifying sun of knowledge may yet stir its dormant potency, recalling it to life, to spring up and to develop into a stately tree, yielding its life-giving fruits, offering the welcome protection of its branches to all seeking rest and shelter beneath its shade. To-day the thought that inspired Winstanley has again been proclaimed by one greater than Winstanley, and is slowly but surely remoulding the social thought of the world. Thanks to the genius of Henry George, the more thoughtful and ethical-minded of our race are gradually coming to realise that, to use Winstanley’s words—“True Commonwealth’s Freedom lies in the free enjoyment of the Earth”; and that if they would remove those remediable social ills which harass, haunt andwarp our advancing civilisation, the use of the Earth and a share in the bounties and blessings of Nature must be secured to each and all upon equitable terms and conditions. Hence it is that we feel impelled to close our notice of the great Apostle of Social Justice and Economic Freedom of the Seventeenth Century with the following eloquent and soul-stirring words of his still greater successor of the Nineteenth Century, words which almost seem but as an echo of his own, even though many of us even to-day may have yet to learn to appreciate their full force, meaning and truth:

“In our time, as in times before, creep on the insidious forces that, producing inequality, destroy Liberty. On the horizon the clouds begin to lower. Liberty calls to us again. We must follow her further; we must trust her fully. Either we must wholly accept her or she will not stay. It is not enough that men should vote; it is not enough that they should be theoretically equal before the law. They must have liberty to avail themselves of the opportunities and means of life; they must stand on equal terms with reference to the bounties of nature. Either this, or Liberty withdraws her light! Either this, or darkness comes on, and the very forces that progress has evolved turn to powers that work destruction. This is the universal law. This is the lesson of the centuries. Unless its foundations be laid in justice the social structure cannot stand.”

END.

228:1Published under the title,The Condition of Labour(Swan, Sonnenschein & Co., London).232:1The following are some of such pirated publications:Articles of High Treason.British Museum, Press Mark, E. 521.A Declaration for Freedom.E. 321.The Levellers Remonstrance.E. 652. 12.

228:1Published under the title,The Condition of Labour(Swan, Sonnenschein & Co., London).

232:1The following are some of such pirated publications:Articles of High Treason.British Museum, Press Mark, E. 521.A Declaration for Freedom.E. 321.The Levellers Remonstrance.E. 652. 12.

Introduction.

To the Christian Reader, Peace and the Grace of God through Christ,—There are many Anti-Christians who now take occasion to libel the Gospel on account of the assembled peasantry, saying these be the fruits of the New Gospel, to obey none, to raise rebellion in all places, to rush to arms to reform, to root out, and perhaps to destroy all spiritual and temporal authority. All such godless and wicked judgements the Articles here written do answer; in the first place, so that the shame may be lifted off the word of God; in the second, to excuse in a Christian manner this uprising of the peasants.

In the first place, the Gospel is no cause of any uprising, seeing that it is the word of Christ, the promised Messiah, whose word and life teach naught save love, peace, patience and unity; so all who believe in this Christ should be loving, peaceful, patient and united. The object of all the Articles of the Peasants, when once clearly apprehended, is that they may hear the Gospel and live according to the Gospel. How then can Anti-Christians denounce the Gospel as a cause of rebellion and disobedience? But that Anti-Christians and Enemies of the Gospel should rise up against such requirements, of this the Gospel is not the cause, but the Devil, the most hurtful enemy of the Gospel, who arouses infidelity in his followers, so that the word of God, which teaches peace and unity, may be trodden down and taken away.

In the second place, the following show clearly that the peasants in their Articles demand the Gospel for teaching andfor life; therefore they cannot be called disobedient or rebellious. But should God hear the peasants, who sincerely desire to live according to His word: Who will oppose the will of God? (Rom. xi.). Who will impeach His judgment? (Isa. xi.). Who dare resist His majesty? (Rom. viii.). Did He not hear the Children of Israel when they called on Him, and delivered them out of the hand of Pharaoh (II Moses 3. 7), and can He not to-day also save His own? Aye, He will save them, and that speedily (Luke xviii. 8). Therefore, Christian Reader, read the following Articles sedulously, and then judge.

First Article.

It is our humble request and desire, as also our will and intention, that henceforth the community itself shall have power to choose their Pastor, as also to dismiss him should he be found unsuitable. The Pastor so chosen shall preach to us the Gospel clearly and purely, free from all man-made additions, teachings and ordinances. For whoever preaches to us the true Faith giveth us reason to pray to God for His mercy, and to call up within us and confirm us in the true Faith. For if we do not enjoy His grace, we remain mere flesh and blood, which profiteth not. It is clearly written in the Scriptures that it is only through the true Faith that we can come to God, and only through His mercy that we can be saved. Therefore it is that we require such a Pastor and Minister.

Second Article.

Secondly, As the just tithe was established in the Old Testament, and in the New covered all dues, so we will gladly furnish the just tithe of corn, but only in a seemly manner, according to which it should be given to God, and divided among His servants. It is the due of a Pastor, as the Word of God clearly proclaims. Therefore it is our will that the Church Overseers, such as are appointed by the Community, shall collect and receive this tithe, and therefrom shall give to the Pastor, who shall be chosen by the Community, suitable and sufficient subsistence for him and his, as the whole Community may deem just. The surplus shall be devoted to the use of the poor and needy, as we are instructed in the Holy Scriptures. And so that no general tax shall be levied on the poor, their share of such taxation shall be defrayed out of such surplus.

In villages where the right to the tithe has been sold, out of sheer necessity, the buyers shall lose nothing, but their rights shall be redeemed in a seemly manner. But those who have not bought the right to the tithe from the village, but who or whose fathers have simply usurped it to themselves, we will not and we should not give them anything. We owe such men nothing; but we are willing out of the proceeds of such tithe to support our chosen Pastor, and to relieve the needy as we are commanded in the Holy Scriptures.

The small tithe we will not give. For God the Lord hath created the beasts free to mankind (Gen. i.). It is only a mere human invention that we should pay tithe on them. Therefore we shall not pay such tithe for the future.

Third Article.

Thirdly, It has hitherto been the custom that we should be held as serfs, which is deplorable, since Christ redeemed us all with His precious blood, the shepherd as well as the noble, the lowest as well as the highest, none being excepted. Therefore it accords with Scripture that we should be free; and we will be free. Not that we are absolutely free, or desire to be free from all authority: this God does not teach us. We are to live according to His commandments, not according to the promptings of the flesh; but shall love God as our Master, and recognise Him as the one nearest to us. And everything He has commanded we shall do; and His commands do not instruct us to disobey the orders of the Authorities. On the contrary, not only before the Authorities, but before all men we are to be humble; so that in all matters fitting and Christian we shall gladly obey the orders of those who have been chosen or have been set up over us. And doubtless, as true and honest Christians, you will gladly abolish serfdom, or prove it to be in accordance with the Gospel.

Fourth Article.

Fourthly, It has hitherto been the custom that no poor man should have any right to the game, the birds, or to the fish in the running waters. This seems to us unseemly and unbrotherly, and not to be in accordance with the Word of God. Moreover, in some places the authorities let the game increase to our injury and mighty undoing, since we have to permitthat which God has caused to grow for the use of man to be unavailingly devoured by the beasts; and we have to hold our peace concerning this, which is against God and our neighbours. When our Lord God created mankind, He gave him power over all creatures, over the birds in the air and the fish in the waters. Therefore as regards those who control the running waters, and who can show us documents to prove that they purchased it with money, we do not desire to take it away from such men by force, but to come to some Christian agreement with them in brotherly love. Those who have no such documents shall share with the community in a seemly manner.

Fifth Article.

Fifthly, We find ourselves oppressed as regards the woods. For our Lords have taken to themselves all the woods; and when poor men require any wood, they have to buy it with money. Our view is that such woods, whether claimed by spiritual or by temporal Lords, as have not been purchased, should return to the community, and be free to all in a seemly manner. So that those who require wood for firing shall be free to take same without payment, as also if they require any for carpentering: but, of course, always with the knowledge of the chosen Authorities of the community. But where there are no woods save those as have been honestly purchased, with such we will arrange the matter in a brotherly and Christian spirit. And in cases where the land was first appropriated and afterwards sold, we will also come to an agreement with the buyers according to the circumstances of the case, and with regard to brotherly love and the Holy Writings.

Sixth Article.

Sixthly, The burden of service presses heavily upon us, and is daily increased. We desire that this matter shall be looked into, and that we be not so heavily burdened, but shall be mercifully dealt with herein; that we should serve but as our fathers have served, but only according to the Word of God.

Seventh Article.

Seventhly, Henceforth we will no longer allow ourselves to be oppressed by the Lords, but according as a Lord hathgranted the land, so shall it be held, according to the agreement between the Lord and the peasant. The Lord shall not force him to render more service for naught; so that the peasant shall enjoy his holding in peace and unoppressed. But if the Lord hath need of service, the peasant shall be willing and obedient to him before others; but it shall be at the hour and the time when it shall not injure the peasant, and at a proper remuneration.

Eighth Article.

Eighthly, Many of us are oppressed in that we hold lands that will not bear the price placed on them, so that the peasant thereby is ruined and undone. Our desire is that the Lord shall allow such land to be seen by honourable men, so that the price shall be fixed in such a manner that the peasant shall not have his labour in vain: for every labourer is worthy of his hire (Matt. x.).

Ninth Article.

Ninthly, We suffer greatly because of the new punishments that are continually laid upon us. Not that they punish us according to the circumstances of the case, but at times spitefully and at other times favourably. We would be punished according to the old written punishments, and not arbitrarily.

Tenth Article.

Tenthly, We suffer in that some have taken to themselves meadows and arable land that belong to the community. Such land we would take once more into the hands of our communities wheresoever they have not been honestly purchased. But where they have been purchased, then shall the case be agreed upon in peace and brotherly love, according to the circumstances of the case.

Eleventh Article.

Eleventhly, We would have the custom called the death-due entirely abolished. We will never suffer nor permit that widows and orphans shall be disgraced and robbed of their own, contrary to God and honour, as has happened in many cases and in many ways. Those who would protect and shelterthem, they have abused and injured, and when these have had some little property, even this they have taken. Such things God will no longer suffer, they shall be abolished. For such things no man shall henceforth be compelled to give aught, be it little or much.

Twelfth Article.

Twelfthly, It is our resolve and final decision that if any of the Articles here set forth be not according to the Word of God, we will, whenever they are shown to be against the Word of God, at once withdraw therefrom. Yea, even though certain articles were now granted and it should hereafter be found that they are unjust, from that hour they shall be null and void and of no effect. The same shall happen if there should with truth be found in the Scriptures yet more Articles which were held to be against God and a stumbling-block to our neighbours, even though we should have determined to preserve such for ourselves. For we have determined and resolved to practice ourselves in all Christian doctrines. Therefore we pray God the Lord who can grant us the same, and none other. The Peace of Christ be with you all. Amen.

The statement that toleration was the one leading principle of Cromwell’s life, may seem somewhat exaggerated to those who have not carefully studied his career. By his own words let him be judged. Writing to Major Crawford as early as March 1643 (1644) he plainly tells him—“Sir, the State, in choosing men to serve it, takes no notice of their opinions; if they be willing faithfully to serve it, that satisfies.” After Naseby, under date June 14th, 1645, in his dispatch to the Speaker, he tells the Presbyterian House of Commons—“Honest men served you faithfully in this action. Sir, they are trusty; I beseech you in the name of God not to discourage them....He that ventures his life for the liberty of the country, I wish he trust God for the liberty of his conscience, and you for the liberty he fights for.” The meaning of these words was not lost to the House, so when sending his dispatch to the press, they carefully omitted this paragraph.

After the siege of Bristol, Cromwell is still more outspoken. Under date September 14th, 1645, he writes to the Speaker as follows—“Presbyterians, Independents, all have here the same spirit of faith and prayer; the same presence and answer; they agree here, have no names of difference; pity it should be otherwise anywhere—for, bretheren, in things of the mind we look for no compulsion but that of light and reason.” This dispatch, too, the House of Commons took care to mutilate before sending it to the press.

As he advanced in his career, Cromwell became still more outspoken. In his opening speech to his first Parliament, after having given expression to his view that the Lord had given them the victory for the common good of all, “for the good of the whole flock,” he continues—“Therefore I beseech you—but I think I need not—have a care of the whole flock! Lovethe sheep, love the lambs; love all, tender all, cherish and countenance all, in all things that are good.And if the poorest Christian, the most mistaken Christian, shall desire to live peaceably and quietly under you—I say, if any shall desire but to lead a life of godliness and honesty, let him be protected.”

Again, when dissolving his first Parliament (Speech IV.), he expresses the same thought in the following words—“Is there not yet upon the spirits of men a strange itch? Nothing will satisfy them unless they can press their finger upon their bretheren’s consciences, to pinch them there. To do this was no part of the contest we had with the common adversary. For religion was not the thing at first contended for, but God brought it to that issue at last; and gave it unto us by way of redundancy; and at last it proved to be that which was most dear to us. And wherein consisted this more than in obtaining that liberty from the tyranny of the Bishops to all species of Protestants to worship God according to their own light and consciences?... And was it fit for them to sit heavy upon others? Is it ingenuous to ask liberty and not to give it? What greater hypocrisy than for those who were oppressed by the Bishops to become the greatest oppressors themselves, so soon as their yoke was removed? I could wish that they who call for liberty now also had not too much of that spirit, if the power were in their hands.”

Cromwell, in short, had no deep-rooted objection either to a moderate Episcopacy or to a tolerant Presbyterianism, though, as he somewhere says, “both are a hard choice,” provided only there was sufficient consideration for those who could not reconcile their consciences to the demands of the established State Church. His great desire was “for union and right understanding” between Protestants of all shades, in fact between “godley” (religious or moral) people of all races, countries and denominations, “Scots, English, Jews, Gentiles, Presbyterians, Independents, Anabaptists, and all.” (See his letter to Hammond,Clarke Papers, vol. ii. p. 49.) His aim was to reconcile, or rather to stand as mediator between all the opposing sects. “Fain,” he writes to one of his most devoted adherent (seeCromwell’s Letters and Speeches, Carlyle, part vii. p. 363), “would I have my service accepted of the Saints, if the Lord will;—but it is not so. Being of different judgements, and those of each sort seeking most to propagate their own, that spirit of kindness that is to them all is hardly accepted of any. I hope I can say it, My life has been a willingsacrifice,—and I hope—for them all. Yet it much falls out as when the two Hebrews were rebuked: you know upon whom they turned their displeasure.”

In short, Cromwell’s attitude toward all honest, sincere, “godley” men was the same as his attitude toward George Fox. “Come again to my house,” he said, when dismissing the sturdy Quaker, “for if thou and I were but an hour a day together we should be nearer one to the other. I wish you no more ill than I do to my own soul.”

On November 17th, 1645, “the Dissenting Bretheren,” the representatives of the Independents in the Westminster Assembly, declared for a full liberty of conscience. “They expressed themselves,” as Baillie, the Scotch Presbyterian commissioner, wrote sadly, “for toleration, not only to themselves, but to all sects.” In February of the same year, the Oxford Clergy, who had been consulted by the King as to the limits of possible concession, gave strong evidence that the pressure of events were forcing them to move, even though slowly, in the same direction. (See Gardiner,History of the Civil War, vol. ii. pp. 125-126.)

1. The bare letter of the Law established by Act of Parliament shall be the Rule for Officers and People, and the chief Judge of all actions.

2. He or they who add or diminish from the Law, excepting in the Court of Parliament, shall be cashiered his Office, and never bear Office more.

3. No man shall administer the Law for Money or Reward. He that doth shall die as a Traitor to the Commonwealth. For when Money must buy and sell Justice, and bear all the sway, there is nothing but Oppression to be expected.

Back to Index Next