Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 49.djvu/416

 setting out with the New Model to relieve Taunton; but Rupert persuaded the king to adhere to the northern plan and to send Goring, with his three thousand horse, back to the west. Jealousy of Goring as a possible rival was alleged to be one of the motives which induced the prince thus to divide his forces (ib. p. 126;, Rebellion, ix. 30; Cal. Clarendon Papers, i. 267). The northern movement began with success. Hawkesley House in Worcestershire was taken (14 May), and the siege of Chester was raised at the rumour of Rupert's approach (18 May). The news that Fairfax was besieging Oxford led the prince to turn south again, and the attack on Leicester was undertaken ‘somewhat to divert Fairfax's designs.’ After its capture (31 May) Rupert wished to resume his northern march, but the anxiety of the king and his advisers to keep within reach of Oxford obliged the army to linger near Daventry. Meanwhile, Fairfax raised the siege of Oxford and marched to engage the king's army. Rupert was so full of confidence that he neglected adequately to inform himself either of the movements or the numbers of his opponents. When he heard of Fairfax's approach he did not hesitate to abandon an advantageous defensive position in order to attack a numerically superior enemy on ground chosen by themselves. In the battle of Naseby (14 June) he routed the right wing of Fairfax's horse, and chased them as far as their baggage-train, which he prepared to attack; but when he returned to the field he found the king's foot and the rest of his horse defeated, and could not rally his men for a second charge (, p. 115;, Diary, p. 151). All the king's foot were taken prisoners, and his horse were pursued as far as Leicester. Charles made his way to South Wales, while Rupert left the king at Hereford (18 June) to take command of the garrison of Bristol. In July it was resolved that the king should join Rupert at Bristol, and both should unite with Goring's army in the west, but Rupert's enemies at court frustrated the scheme (, p. 117;, Rebellion, ix. 67). By this time the prince had come to believe a further struggle hopeless. On 28 July he wrote to the Duke of Richmond urging the king to make peace. ‘His majesty,’ he said, ‘hath no other way to preserve his posterity, kingdom, and nobility but by treaty. I believe it to be a more prudent way to retain something than to lose all.’ The king indignantly rejected the proposal, and Rupert became regarded as one of the leaders of the party which wished to force Charles to accept whatever conditions the parliament would give him (, ii. 287, 303;, iii. 149).

On 21 Aug. 1645 Fairfax appeared before Bristol, which he summoned on 4 Sept. Rupert strove to gain time by negotiating, but on 10 Sept. Fairfax made a general assault, and, by capturing an important fort, rendered the city untenable. Rupert capitulated, and marched out on the following day (, Anglia Rediviva, pp. 97–131). In an apology, published some months later, the prince alleged the weakness of the fortifications and the insufficiency of the garrison as the causes of the fall of Bristol (A Declaration of Prince Rupert concerning Bristol, 4to, 1647;, vi. 69; Nicholas Papers, i. 65). The king, however, had concerted an infallible scheme for the relief of the city, and could only explain its surrender on the theory of Rupert's gross dereliction of duty. Without further inquiry he revoked all his nephew's commissions, and wrote to him in the highest indignation: ‘Though the loss of Bristol be a great blow to me, yet your surrendering it as you did is of so much affliction to me, that it makes me forget not only the consideration of that place, but is likewise the greatest trial of my constancy that hath yet befallen me; for what is to be done when one that is so near to me both in blood and friendship submits himself to so mean an action? … My conclusion is to desire you to seek your subsistence (until it shall please God to determine of my condition) somewhere beyond seas, to which end I send you a pass, and I pray God to make you sensible of your present condition, and give you means to redeem what you have lost’ (, Rebellion, ix. 90;, Diary, ed. 1879, iv. 173). Rupert was resolved not to be condemned unheard, and, in spite of the king's prohibitions and the troops of the parliament, he forced his way to Newark and demanded to be judged by a court-martial. Their verdict declared him ‘not guilty of any the least want of courage or fidelity, but did not absolve him from the charge of indiscretion’ (10 Oct.) On 26 Oct. a fresh quarrel broke out between the king and his nephew over the removal of Sir Richard Willis from the government of Newark. Rupert, in a stormy interview with the king, complained that Willis was removed because he was his friend, and denounced Lord Digby as the cause of all the recent misunderstandings. ‘Digby,’ he cried, ‘is the man that hath caused all this distraction between us.’ The prince and his adherents then presented a petition