n the toleration which existed in England, and
Charles believed that his presence would at once rekindle their loyalty
to a king of Scottish blood. But the results of his surrender were other
than he had hoped. To the world at large his action seemed simply the
prelude to an accommodation with his opponents on the ground of
religious uniformity. This new aspect of affairs threatened the party of
religious freedom with ruin. Hated as they were by the Scots, by the
Lords, by the City of London, the apparent junction of Charles with
their enemies destroyed their growing hopes in the Commons, where the
prospects of a speedy peace on Presbyterian terms at once swelled the
majority of their opponents. The two Houses laid their conditions of
peace before the king without a dream of resistance from one who seemed
to have placed himself at their mercy. They required for the Parliament
the command of the army and fleet for twenty years; the exclusion of all
"Malignants," or Royalists who had taken part in the war, from civil and
military office; the abolition of Episcopacy; and the establishment of
a Presbyterian Church. Of toleration or liberty of conscience they said
not a word.

The Scots, whose army had fallen back with its royal prize to Newcastle,
pressed these terms on the king "with tears." His friends, and even the
queen, urged their acceptance. But the aim of Charles was simply delay.
His surrender had not brought about the results he had hoped for; but he
believed that time and the dissensions of his enemies were fighting for
him. "I am not without hope," he wrote coolly, "that I shall be able to
draw either the Presbyterians or the Independents to side with me for
extirpating one another, so that I shall be really king again." With
this end he refused the terms offered by the Houses. His refusal was a
crushing defeat for the Presbyterians. "What will become of us," asked
one of them, "now that the king has rejected our proposals?" "What would
have become of us," retorted an Independent, "had he accepted them?" The
vigour of Holles and the Conservative leaders in the Parliament rallied
however to a bolder effort. It was plain that the king's game lay in
balancing the Army against the Parliament, and that the Houses could
hope for no submission to these terms so long as the New Model was on
foot. Nor could they venture in its presence to enforce religious
uniformity, or to deal as they would have wished to deal with the