If he was so
conditionally pardoned, it must then be, by a particular instrument.
That could not be after he had been purified entirely by the general
indemnity, nor was it likely the King, who had declared from Breda, he
would pardon all but whom the Parliament should judge unworthy of it,
and had thus lodged the matter with them, should, before they came to
a determination, bestow a private act of indulgence to one so
notorious as Milton. It is true, Rapin says, several principal
republicans applied for mercy, while the Act was yet depending, but
quotes no authority; and upon search, no such pardon appears on
record, though many are two or three years after, but then they are
without restrictions; some people were willing to have a particular,
as well as a general pardon; but whatever was the case of others,
there was a reason besides what has been already noted, that no such
favour would be shewn to Milton. The House of Commons, June 16, 1660,
vote the King to be moved to call in his two books, and that of John
Goodwin, written in justification of the murder of the King, in order
to be burnt, and that the Attorney General do proceed against them by
indictment. June 27, an Order of Council reciting that Vote of the
16th, and that the persons were not to be found, directs a
Proclamation for calling in Milton's two books, which are here
explained, to be that against Salmasius, and the Eikon Basilike, as
also Goodwin's book; and a Proclamation was issued accordingly, and
another to the same purpose the 13th of August: as for Goodwin he
narrowly escaped for his life, but he was voted to be excepted out of
the Act of Indemnity, amongst the twenty designed to have penalties
inflicted short of death, and August 27, these books of Milton and
Goodwin were burnt by the hangman. The Act of Oblivion, according to
Kennet's Register, was passed the 29th. It is seen by this account,
that Milton's person and Goodwin's are separated, tho' their books are
blended together. As the King's intention appeared to be a pardon to
all but actual regicides, as Burnet says, it is odd, he should assert
in the same breath, almost all people were surprized that Goodwin and
Milton escaped censure. Why should it be so strange, they being not
concerned in the King's blood? that he was forgot, as Toland says,
some people imagined, is very unlikely. However, it is certain, from
what has been shewn from bishop Kennet, he was not. That he should be
disti