Trigonometry A Unit Circle Approach 10th Edition

Sullivan Solutions Manual download

https://testbankmall.com/product/trigonometry-a-unit-circle-
approach-10th-edition-sullivan-solutions-manual/

Find test banks or solution manuals at testbankmall.com today!

 We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click
the link to download now, or visit testbankmall.com
to discover even more!

Solution Manual for Precalculus: Concepts Through

Functions, A Unit Circle Approach to Trigonometry 4th
Edition by Sullivan
https://testbankmall.com/product/solution-manual-for-precalculus-
concepts-through-functions-a-unit-circle-approach-to-trigonometry-4th-
edition-by-sullivan/

Test Bank for Precalculus: Concepts Through Functions, A

Unit Circle Approach to Trigonometry 4th Edition by
Sullivan
https://testbankmall.com/product/test-bank-for-precalculus-concepts-
through-functions-a-unit-circle-approach-to-trigonometry-4th-edition-
by-sullivan/

Precalculus A Unit Circle Approach 3rd Edition Ratti Test

Bank

https://testbankmall.com/product/precalculus-a-unit-circle-
approach-3rd-edition-ratti-test-bank/

Solution Manual for Marketing Management, 3rd Edition,

Greg Marshall Mark Johnston

https://testbankmall.com/product/solution-manual-for-marketing-
management-3rd-edition-greg-marshall-mark-johnston/
Test Bank for Auditing The Art and Science of Assurance
Engagements, 11th Canadian Edition: Arens

https://testbankmall.com/product/test-bank-for-auditing-the-art-and-
science-of-assurance-engagements-11th-canadian-edition-arens/

Test Bank for Clinical Nursing Skills: A Concept-Based

Approach Volume III 3rd Edition Callahan

https://testbankmall.com/product/test-bank-for-clinical-nursing-
skills-a-concept-based-approach-volume-iii-3rd-edition-callahan/

Test Bank for Physics for Scientists and Engineers, 4th

Edition: Douglas C. Giancoli

https://testbankmall.com/product/test-bank-for-physics-for-scientists-
and-engineers-4th-edition-douglas-c-giancoli/

Test Bank for Social Statistics for a Diverse Society

Seventh Edition

https://testbankmall.com/product/test-bank-for-social-statistics-for-
a-diverse-society-seventh-edition/

Essentials of Marketing Research 6th Edition Babin

Solutions Manual

https://testbankmall.com/product/essentials-of-marketing-research-6th-
edition-babin-solutions-manual/
Statistics for Business and Economics 13th Edition McClave
Test Bank

https://testbankmall.com/product/statistics-for-business-and-
economics-13th-edition-mcclave-test-bank/
23. 40  1 1 1 º
61º 42 '21" = 61+ 42 ⋅ + 21⋅ ⋅
º1
0'
25
24.
"=


40
+1
0⋅

60
+
25
⋅

60
⋅

60

≈
(
4
0
+
0
.
1
6
6
7
+
0
.
0
0
6
9
4
)
º
≈
4
0
.
1
7
º

127 127
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
  
 60 60 60 
≈ (61 + 0.7000 + 0.00583)º
≈ 61.71º

128 128
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure

1 1 1 º 32. 29.411º = 29º + 0.411º

25. 50º14 '20" = 50 +14 ⋅ + 20 ⋅ ⋅
60 60 60 = 29º + 0.411(60 ')

≈ (50 + 0.2333 + 0.00556)º = 29º +24.66 '

≈ 50.24º = 29º +24 '+ 0.66 '
= 29º +0.66(60")
26. 73º 40 ' 40" =  73 + 40 ⋅ + 40 ⋅ ⋅ 
1 1 1 º
= 29º +24 '+ 39.6"
 60 60 60 
≈ 29º 24 '40"
≈ (73 + 0.6667 + 0.0111)º
≈ 73.68º 33. 19.99º = 19º + 0.99º
= 19º + 0.99(60 ')
 1 1 1 º
27. 9º 9 '9" =  9 + 9 ⋅ + 9 ⋅ ⋅  = 19º +59.4 '
 60 60 60 
= (9 + 0.15 + 0.0025)º = 19º +59 '+ 0.4 '
≈ 9.15º = 19º +59 '+ 0.4(60")
= 19º +59 '+ 24"
 1 1 1 º = 19º 59 '24"
28. 98º 22 '45" =  98 + 22 ⋅ + 45 ⋅ ⋅ 
 60 60 60 
≈ (98 + 0.3667 + 0.0125)º 34. 44.01º = 44º + 0.01º
≈ 98.38º = 44º + 0.01(60 ')
= 44º +0.6 '
29. 40.32º = 40º + 0.32º = 44º +0 '+ 0.6 '
= 40º + 0.32(60 ') = 44º +0 '+ 0.6(60")
= 40º +19.2 ' = 44º +0 '+ 36"
= 40º +19 '+ 0.2 ' = 44º 0 '36"
= 40º +19 '+ 0.2(60")
= 40º +19 '+12" π π
35. 30° = 30 ⋅ radian = radian
= 40º19 '12" 180 6

30. 61.24º = 61º + 0.24º π 2π

36. 120° = 120 ⋅ radian = radians
= 61º + 0.24(60 ') 180 3

= 61º +14.4 ' π 4π

37. 240° = 240 ⋅ radian = radians
= 61º +14 '+ 0.4 ' 180 3
= 61º +14 '+ 0.4(60")
π 11π
= 61º +14 '+ 24" 38. 330° = 330 ⋅ radian = radians
180 6
= 61º14 ' 24"

π π
31. 18.255º = 18º + 0.255º 39. − 60° = − 60 ⋅ radian = − radian
180 3
= 18º + 0.255(60 ')

129 129
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure

= 18º +15.3' π π
40. −30° = −30 ⋅ radian = − radian
= 18º +15 '+ 0.3' 180 6
= 18º +15 '+ 0.3(60") π
= 18º +15 '+18" 41. 180° = 180 ⋅ radian = π radians
180
= 18º15 '18"

π 3π
42. 270° = 270 ⋅ radian = radians
180 2

130 130
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure

π 3π π
43. −135° = −135 ⋅ radian = − radians 60. 73° = 73⋅ radian
180 4 180
73π
π 5π = radians
44. − 225° = − 225 ⋅ radian = − radians 180
180 4 ≈ 1.27 radians

π π π
45. − 90° = − 90 ⋅ radian = − radians 61. − 40° = − 40 ⋅ radian
180 2 180
2π
π =− radian
46. −180° = −180 ⋅ radian = −π radians 9
180
≈ − 0.70 radian
π π 180
47. = ⋅ degrees = 60° π
3 3 π 62. − 51° = − 51⋅ radian
180

5π 5π 180 = − 17π
48. = ⋅ degrees = 150° radian

6 6 π 60
≈ − 0.89 radian
5π 5π 180
49. − =− ⋅ degrees = − 225°
4 4 π π
63. 125° = 125 ⋅ radian
180
2π 2π 180
50. − =− ⋅ degrees = −120° 25π

3 3 π = radians
36

π π 180 ≈ 2.18 radians

51. = ⋅ degrees = 90°
2 2 π π
64. 350° = 350 ⋅ radian
180
180
52. 4π = 4π ⋅ degrees = 720° 35π
π = radians
18

π π 180 ≈ 6.11 radians

53. = ⋅ degrees = 15°

12 12 π
180
65. 3.14 radians = 3.14 ⋅ degrees ≈ 179.91º
5π 5π 180 π
54. = ⋅ degrees = 75°
12 12 π
180
66. 0.75 radian = 0.75 ⋅ degrees ≈ 42.97º
π π 180 π
55. − =− ⋅ degrees = − 90°

2 2 π

131 131
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
 Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure

67. 2
ra
dia
ns
=
2⋅
18
0

de
gre
es
≈
11
4.5
9º
180 π
56. −π = −π ⋅ degrees = −180°
π
180
π π 180 68. 3 radians = 3 ⋅ degrees ≈ 171.89º
π
57. − =− ⋅ degrees = − 30°

6 6 π
π
180
69. 6.32 radians = 6.32 ⋅ degrees ≈ 362.11º
3π 3π 180
58. − =− ⋅ degrees = −135°
4 4 π
180
70. 2 radians = 2 ⋅ degrees ≈ 81.03º
π 17π π
59. 17° = 17 ⋅ radian = radian ≈ 0.30 radian
180 180

132 132
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure

1 1
71. r = 10 meters; θ = radian; 81. θ = radian; A = 2 ft 2
2 3
1 1
s = rθ = 10 ⋅ = 5 meters A = r 2θ
2 2
1  1 
2 = r2
72. r = 6 feet; θ = 2 radian; s = rθ = 6 ⋅ 2 = 12 feet  
2  3 
1
1 2 = r2
73. θ = radian; s = 2 feet; 6
3 2

s = rθ 12 = r
s 2 r = 12 = 2 3 ≈ 3.464 feet
r= = = 6 feet
θ (1 / 3)
1
82. θ = radian; A = 6 cm2
4
1
74. θ = radian; s = 6 cm; 1 2
4 A= rθ
s = rθ 2

1 21
r=
s
=
6
= 24 cm 6= r  
θ (1 / 4 ) 2  4 
1
6 = r2
75. r = 5 miles; s = 3 miles; 8
2

s = rθ 48 = r
s 3 r = 48 = 4 3 ≈ 6.928 cm
θ = = = 0.6 radian
r 5
83. r = 5 miles; A = 3 mi 2
76. r = 6 meters; s = 8 meters; 1 2

A= rθ
s = rθ 2
s 8 4 1
(5) θ
2
θ = = = ≈ 1.333 radians 3=
r 6 3 2
25
π π 3= θ
77. r = 2 inches; θ = 30º = 30 ⋅ = radian; 2
180 6 6
θ= = 0.24 radian
π π 25
s = rθ = 2 ⋅ = ≈ 1.047 inches
6 3

84. r = 6 meters; A = 8 m 2
π 2π 1
78. r = 3 meters; θ = 120º = 120 ⋅ = radians A = r 2θ
180 3 2

79.

133 133
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure
1 2
s= 8=( 6) θ
2
rθ = 8 = 18θ
3⋅ 8 4
2π θ = = ≈ 0.444 radian
18 9

=
2π
≈
6.28
3
met
ers
3

r=
10
met
ers;
θ=
1

radi
an
2

1 =2
A
r1 θ
= 2
(10
1 )
=
100
=25
m2
 
2 2 2 4 π π
85. r = 2 inches; θ = 30º = 30 ⋅ = radian
180 6
80. r = 6 feet; θ = 2 radians 1 1 2 π π
A= r 2θ = 2 = ≈ 1.047 in 2
( )  6  3
A=
1 2 1 2
r θ = ( 6 ) ( 2 ) =36 ft 2 2 2  
2 2

134 134
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure

π 2π π
86. r = 3 meters; θ = 120º = 120 ⋅ = radians 92. r = 40 inches; θ = 20º = radian
180 3 9

1 1  2π  π 40π
( 3)
2
A= r 2θ = =3π ≈ 9.425 m 2 s = rθ = 40 ⋅ = ≈ 13.96 inches
 
2 2  3  9 9

π π π
87. r = 2 feet; θ = radians 93. r = 4 m; θ = 45º = 45 ⋅ = radian
3 180 4

π 2π 1 1 π
( 4)
2
s = rθ = 2 ⋅ = ≈ 2.094 feet A= r 2θ = = 2π ≈ 6.28 m 2
 4 
3 3 2 2  
1 2 1 2π 2π
A = r θ = ( 2) == ≈ 2.094 ft 2
  π π
2 2 3 3 94. r = 3 cm; θ = 60º = 60 ⋅ = radians

180 3
π 1 1 π 3π
( 3)
2
88. r = 4 meters; θ = radian A= rθ=
2
= ≈ 4.71 cm 2
 3 
6 2 2   2
π 2π
s = rθ = 4 ⋅ = ≈ 2.094 meters 3
π π
6 3 95. r = 30 feet; θ = 135º = 135 ⋅ = radians

1 1 π 4π 180 4
( 4)
2
A= r 2θ = = ≈ 4.189 m2
  
2 2 6 3 1 2  3π  675π
1 2 2
  A = r θ = ( 30 )   = ≈ 1060.29 ft
2 2  4 2
π 7π
89. r = 12 yards; θ = 70º = 70 ⋅ = radians 2

180 18 96. r = 15 yards; A = 100 yd

1
s = rθ = 12 ⋅
7π
≈ 14.661 yards A = r 2θ
18 2

 7π  1
(15 ) θ
1 1 2
A= r 2θ = (12 )
2
= 28π ≈ 87.965 yd 2 100 =
  2
2 2  18 
100 = 112.5θ
π 5π 100 8
90. r = 9 cm; θ = 50º = 50 ⋅ = radian θ= = ≈ 0.89 radian

180 18 112.5 9
°
5π 8 180  160 
s = rθ = 9 ⋅ ≈ 7.854 cm or ⋅ = ≈ 50.93°
 
18 9 π π
 
1 2 1 2  5π  45π
A= r θ = (9)   = 4 ≈ 35.343 cm
2
97.
2 2  18 

135 135
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure
1 1
A= r 2θ r 2θ
−
θ=
120°
2π
= 1 2
2 2 3
91. r = 6 inches 1 2π 1 2π
= (34) 2 − (9) 2
In 15 minutes, 2 3 2 3
15 1 π
θ= rev = ⋅ 360º = 90º = radians
60 4 2 1 2π 1 2π
= (1156) − (81)
π 2 3 2 3
s = rθ = 6 ⋅ = 3π ≈ 9.42 inches
2 π π
= (1156) − (81)
In 25 minutes, 3 3

25 5 5π 1156π 81π
θ= rev = ⋅ 360º = 150º = radians = −
60 12 6 3 3
5π 1075π
s = rθ = 6 ⋅ = 5π ≈ 15.71 inches 2

6 = ≈ 1125.74 in
3

136 136
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure

1 1 25π 104. r = 5 m; ω = 5400 rev/min = 10800π rad/min

98. A = r 2θ − r 2θ θ = 125° =
v = rω = (5) ⋅10800π m/min = 54000π cm/min
1 2
2 2 36

1 25π 1 25π cm 1m 1km 60min

= (30) 2 − (6) 2 v = 54000π ⋅ ⋅ ⋅
2 36 2 36 min 100cm 1000m 1hr
≈ 101.8 km/hr
1 25π 1 25π
= (900) − (36)
2 36 2 36 105. d = 26 inches; r = 13 inches; v = 35 mi/hr

25π 25π 35mi 5280ft 12in. 1hr

= (450) − (18) v= ⋅ ⋅ ⋅

36 36 hr mi ft 60 min
= 36,960 in./min
11250π 450π
= −
v 36,960in./min
36 36 ω= =

10800π r 13 in.
= = 300π ≈ 942.48 in 2 ≈ 2843.08 radians/min
36
2843.08rad 1rev
≈ ⋅
1 min 2π rad
99. r = 5 cm; t = 20 seconds; θ = radian
3 ≈ 452.5 rev/min

θ (1 /3) 1 1 1
ω= = = ⋅ = radian/sec 106. r = 15 inches; ω = 3 rev/sec = 6π rad/sec
t 20 3 20 60
v = rω = 15 ⋅ 6π in./sec = 90π ≈ 282.7 in/sec
s rθ 5 ⋅ (1 /3 ) 5 1 1
v= = = = ⋅ = cm/sec in. 1ft 1mi 3600 sec
t t 20 3 20 12 v = 90π ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ≈ 16.1 mi/hr
sec 12in. 5280ft 1hr
100. r = 2 meters; t = 20 seconds; s = 5 meters
107. r = 3960 miles
θ ( s /r ) ( 5/2 ) 5 1 1
ω= = = = ⋅ = radian/sec θ = 35º 9 '− 29º 57 '
t t 20 2 20 8 = 5º12 '
s 5 1
v= = = m/sec = 5.2º
t 20 4
π
= 5.2 ⋅
101. r = 25 feet; ω = 13 rev/min = 26π rad/min 180

v = rω = 25⋅ 26π ft./min = 650π ≈ 2042.0 ft/min ≈ 0.09076 radian

s = rθ = 3960(0.09076) ≈ 359 miles
ft. 1mi 60min
v = 650π ⋅ ⋅ ≈ 23.2 mi/hr

137 137
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure
min 5280ft 1hr
108. r = 3960 miles
θ = 38º 21'− 30º 20 '
102. r = 6.5 m; ω = 22 rev/min = 44π rad/min = 8º1'

v = rω = (6.5) ⋅ 44π m/min = 286π ≈ 898.5 m/min ≈ 8.017º

m 1km 60min π
v = 286π ⋅ ⋅ ≈ 53.9 km/hr = 8.017 ⋅

min 1000m 1hr 180

≈ 0.1399 radian
s = rθ = 3960(0.1399) ≈ 554 miles
103. r = 4 m; ω = 8000 rev/min = 16000π rad/min

v = rω = (4) ⋅16000π m/min = 64000π cm/min 109. r = 3429.5 miles

cm 1m 1km 60min π
v = 64000π ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ω = 1 rev/day = 2π radians/day = radians/hr
min 100cm 1000m 1hr 12
≈ 120.6 km/hr π
v = rω = 3429.5 ⋅ ≈ 898 miles/hr
12

138 138
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure

110. r = 3033.5 miles 115. r = 4 feet; ω = 10 rev/min = 20π radians/min

π v = rω
ω = 1 rev/day = 2π radians/day = radians/hr
12 = 4 ⋅ 20π

π ft
v = rω = 3033.5 ⋅ ≈ 794 miles/hr = 80π
12 min
80π ft 1mi 60min
111. r = 2.39 ×105 miles = ⋅ ⋅
min 5280 ft hr
ω = 1 rev/27.3 days ≈ 2.86 mi/hr
= 2π radians/27.3 days

π 116. d = 26 inches; r = 13 inches;

= radians/hr
12 ⋅ 27.3 ω = 480 rev/min = 960π radians/min
π v = rω
(
v = rω = 2.39 ×10 ⋅ 5
327.6
)
≈ 2292 miles/hr = 13 ⋅ 960π
in
= 12480π
112. r = 9.29 ×10 miles
7
min
ω = 1 rev/365 days
12480π in 1 ft 1 mi 60 min
= ⋅ ⋅ ⋅
= 2π radians/365 days min 12 in 5280 ft hr

π ≈ 37.13 mi/hr
= radians/hr
12 ⋅365 v
ω=
π
(
v = rω = 9.29 ×107 ⋅ ) 4380
≈ 66, 633 miles/hr r
80mi/hr 12in 5280ft 1hr 1rev
= ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅
13 in 1 ft 1 mi 60 min 2π rad
113. r1 = 2 inches; r2 = 8 inches; ≈ 1034.26 rev/min
ω1 = 3 rev/min = 6π radians/min
Find ω2 : 117. d = 8.5 feet; r = 4.25 feet; v = 9.55 mi/hr

v1 = v2 v 9.55mi/hr
ω= =

r1ω1 = r2ω2 r 4.25 ft

9.55 mi 1 5280 ft 1 hr 1 rev

2(6π) = 8ω2 = ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅
hr 4.25 ft mi 60 min 2π
12π
ω2 = ≈ 31.47 rev/min
8

114. = 1.5π radians/min

1.5π
= rev/min
2π
3
= rev/min
4

r = 30 feet

139 139
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
 Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure

118. represent the time 90(24)

t= ≈ 0.0966 hours ≈ 5.8 minutes
L for the earth to 2π(3559)
e rotate 90 miles.
t t 24
=
t 90 2π(3559)
1rev 2π π
ω= = = ≈ 0.09 radian/sec
70 sec 70 sec 35
π rad 6π ft
v = rω = 30 feet ⋅ = ≈ 2.69 feet/sec

35 sec 7 sec

140 140
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Chapter 2: Trigonometric Functions Section 2.1: Angles and Their Measure

119. A = π r 2 123. We know that the distance between Alexandria

and Syene to be s = 500 miles. Since the
= π (9) 2
measure of the Sun’s rays in Alexandria is 7.2° ,
= 81π the central angle formed at the center of Earth
between Alexandria and Syene must also be
3 243 7.2° . Converting to radians, we have
We need ¾ of this area. 81π = π . Now
4 4 π π
we calculate the small area. 7.2° = 7.2° ⋅ = radian . Therefore,
180° 25
A = πr2 s = rθ
= π (3) 2
π
500 = r ⋅
= 9π 25

1 9 25 12, 500
We need ¼ of the small area. 9π = π r= ⋅ 500 = ≈ 3979 miles

4 4 π π
243 9 252 12, 500
So the total area is: π+ π = π = 63π C = 2π r = 2π ⋅ = 25,000 miles.
4 4 4 π
square feet. The radius of Earth is approximately 3979 miles,
and the circumference is approximately 25,000
120. First we find the radius of the circle. miles.
C = 2π r
8π = 2π r 124. a. The length of the outfield fence is the arc
length subtended by a central angle θ = 96°
4=r
with r = 200 feet.

The area of the circle is A = π r 2 = π (4) 2 = 16π . π

s = r ⋅ θ = 200 ⋅ 96° ⋅ ≈ 335.10 feet

The area of the sector of the circle is 4π . Now 180°

we calculate the area of the rectangle. The outfield fence is approximately 335.1
feet long.
A = lw
A = (4)(4 + 7) b. The area of the warning track is the
A = 44 difference between the areas of two sectors
with central angle θ = 96° . One sector with
So the area of the rectangle that is outside of the r = 200 feet and the other with r = 190
circle is 44 − 4π u 2 . feet.

1 1 θ
121. The earth makes one full rotation in 24 hours. A= R 2θ − r 2θ = R 2 − r 2 ( )
2 2 2
The distance traveled in 24 hours is the
96° π
circumference of the earth. At the equator the = ⋅
2 180°
2
(
200 −190 2 )
circumference is 2π(3960) miles. Therefore,
4π
the linear velocity a person must travel to keep = ( 3900 ) ≈ 3267.26
up with the sun is: 15
The area of the warning track is about
s 2π(3960)
v= = ≈ 1037 miles/hr 3267.26 square feet.
t 24

141 141
Copyright © 2016
Copyright Pearson
© 2016 Education,
Pearson Inc. Inc.
Education,
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
petitions were presented, and the House of Commons appointed its
111
committees to attend to and report on the complaints.
Before the year closed the House of Commons had struck at the
power of Laud and Wentworth (now the Earl of Strafford), and the
two ministers lay in prison impeached for high treason. Windebank,
Charles’s secretary of state, and Finch, the chancellor, were already
fled over seas.
It was Pym who went to the bar of the House of Lords to
summon Strafford to surrender, and it was Pym who opened the
charge of impeachment the following March. As in Eliot’s time,
Hampden is content to be overshadowed by his friend, though his
was the greater influence in the House.
Clarendon has given us his view of Hampden at the opening of
the Long Parliament:

When this parliament began the eyes of all men were

fixed upon him, as their patriae pater, and the pilot that must
steer the vessel through the tempests and rocks which
threatened it. I am persuaded his power and interest at that
time were greater to do good or hurt than any man’s in the
kingdom, or than any man of his rank hath had in any time;
for his reputation of honesty was universal, and his affections
seemed so publicly guided, that no corrupt or private ends
could bias them.

Baxter, it may be recalled, had written in the Saints’ Rest that

one of the pleasures which he hoped to enjoy in heaven was the
society of John Hampden. The name of Hampden was blotted out in
the copies published after the Restoration. “But,” wrote Baxter, “I
must tell the reader that I did blot it out, not as changing my opinion
of the person.”
The work of Pym and Hampden is conspicuous at the beginning
of the Long Parliament. The Star Chamber and High Commission
Courts are abolished. Ship-money and all enforced taxation
unauthorised by parliament are declared illegal. Oliver Cromwell’s
motion for annual parliaments is amended into an act for triennial
parliaments to be called with or without royal summons. Strafford—
the only strong minister Charles had—perished on Tower Hill in May,
both Pym and Hampden supporting impeachment instead of
attainder, and voting for the fallen minister to be allowed the use of
counsel at his trial. That Strafford was a criminal and a traitor ready
to use his Irish army for the suppression of the English parliament
Pym had no doubt.
Still Charles would not admit the position lost, and still struggled
to govern, not through parliament, but by personal rule. The death
of Strafford, though approved by all supporters of the House of
Commons, rallied the king’s friends. The House of Lords was no
longer quite at one with the Commons in the contest. In the House
of Commons a royalist party emerges to oppose Pym, and the
beginning of party government is seen. Overtures are made by Pym
to the queen—to be disregarded, of course; though the tide is
setting towards revolution, yet Pym and Hampden are far from
revolutionaries. They are willing to end the political power of the
bishops by turning them out of the House of Lords, but have only
moderate sympathy with the root-and-branch Puritans who would
abolish episcopacy.
In the Grand Remonstrance which Pym laid before the House of
Commons in November, 1641, the case for the Parliament was stated
with frankness, but the demands were not revolutionary. The main
points were securities for the administration of justice, and
insistence on the responsibility of the king’s ministers to parliament.
The royalists fought the Remonstrance vigorously, and in the end it
was only carried by a majority of eleven, 159 to 148. At the end of
the debate the excitement was intense: “some waved their hats over
their heads, and others took their swords in their scabbards out of
their belts, and held them by the pummels in their hands, setting the
lower part on the ground.” Violence seemed inevitable, “had not the
sagacity and great calmness of Mr. Hampden, by a short speech,
prevented it.”
On the 1st of December the Remonstrance, with a petition for
the removal of grievances, especially in matters of religion, was
presented to the king at Hampton Court. “Charles had now a last
chance of regaining the affection of his people. If he could have
resolved to give his confidence to the leaders of the moderate party
in the House of Commons, and to regulate his proceedings by their
advice, he might have been, not, indeed, as he had been, a despot,
but the powerful and respected king of a free people. The nation
might have enjoyed liberty and repose under a government with
Falkland at its head, checked by a constitutional opposition under
the conduct of Hampden. It was not necessary that, in order to
accomplish this happy end, the king should sacrifice any part of his
lawful prerogative, or submit to any conditions inconsistent with his
dignity.” So Macaulay wrote. But the days of “governments” and
“constitutional oppositions” were far off in 1641, and only the germ
of party government is seen in the division of the House of
Commons. To “submit to any conditions” from parliament was
inconsistent with the king’s notions of royal dignity, fostered by Laud
to reject all criticisms as denials of the absolutism of the crown.
Charles promised an answer to the deputation which waited on
him, and the answer was seen on January 3, 1642, when the king’s
attorney appeared at the bar of the Lords, impeached Pym,
Hampden, Holles, Strode, and Hazlerig of high treason, in having
corresponded with the Scots for the invasion of England, and
demanded the surrender of the five members. “All constitutional law
was set aside by a charge which proceeded personally from the king,
which deprived the accused of their legal right to a trial by their
peers, and summoned them before a tribunal which had no pretence
to a jurisdiction over them.”
The House of Commons simply declined to surrender their
members, but promised to take the matter into consideration.
 Then Charles, with some three hundred cavaliers, went to
Westminster, and entered the House of Commons to demand the
accused. But the five members, warned of his coming, were out of
the way and safe within the city of London. “It was believed that if
the king had found them there, and called in his guards to have
seized them, the members of the House would have endeavoured
the defence of them, which might have proved a very unhappy and
sad business.” As it was, the king could only retire discomfited, with
some words about respecting the laws of the realm and the
privileges of parliament, and “in a more discontented and angry
passion than he came in.”
The invasion of the Commons was the worst move Charles could
have made, for parliament was in no temper favourable to royal
encroachments, and it had a large population at hand ready to give
substantial support. The city of London at once declared for the
House of Commons, ignored the king’s writs for the arrest of the five
members, and answered the royal proclamation declaring them
“traitors” by calling out the trained bands for the escort of the
members back to Westminster, and for the protection of the House
of Commons.
Falkland and the royalist members turned for the moment from
Charles at his unexpected attack on the House, the cavaliers of
Whitehall, menaced by the trained bands from Southwark and the
city, fled, and Charles, standing alone, left London.
War was now imminent. Pym and Hampden at once prepared for
the struggle.
Pym secured the arsenals of Portsmouth and Hull for the
parliament, but his efforts to obtain the control of the militia in the
counties were frustrated for a time by the king’s natural refusal to
consent to the Militia Bill, which would have placed troops under the
orders of country gentlemen of the parliamentary party.
Both king and parliament had to break through all constitutional
precedent. The king levied troops by a royal commission, and Pym
got an ordinance of both Houses of Parliament passed appointing
the lords-lieutenant to command the militia, and thereby published
the supremacy of parliament over the crown. In April the king
appeared at Hull to obtain arms, and was refused admission to the
town by Sir John Hotham, the governor. Parliament expressed its
approval of Hotham’s act, the royalists gathered round Charles at
York, and the final proposals of parliament for ending absolute
monarchy were rejected by the king in June with the words, “If I
granted your demands I should be no more than the mere phantom
112
of a king.”
With this refusal all negotiations were broken off. Essex was
appointed commander of the parliamentary army, and in August
Charles raised the royal standard at Nottingham, and war was
begun.
Hampden threw himself vigorously into the campaign. From his
native county of Buckingham, the county which made him its
representative in parliament in 1640, he raised a regiment of
infantry. “His neighbours eagerly enlisted under his command. His
men were known by their green uniform, and by their standard,
which bore on one side the watchword of the parliament, ‘God with
us,’ and on the other the device of Hampden, ‘Vestigia nulla
retrorsum.’” In the first stages of the war, before any decisive blow
had been struck, Hampden was busy passing and repassing between
the army and the parliament. Clarendon praises his courage and
ability on the field.
A skirmish at Chalgrove, on June 18th, 1643, between bodies of
horse commanded by Rupert and by Hampden, ended in victory for
the royalists. Hampden was seen riding off the field, “before the
action was done, which he never used to do, and with his head
hanging down, and resting his hands upon the neck of his horse.” He
was mortally wounded, for two carbine balls were lodged in his
shoulder, and reached Thame only to die six days later.
The death of Hampden—at the age of 49—came at a dark hour
in the early fortunes of the parliamentary army, and deepened the
gloom. “The loss of Colonel Hampden goeth near the heart of every
man that loves the good of his king and country, and makes some
conceive little content to be at the army now that he is gone.” But
Pym remained, and Cromwell and Vane, and many another resolute
House of Commons man.
Pym’s health was already broken when Hampden fell, but he
lived to accomplish the alliance of the English Puritans and the
Scotch army, and, as the price of this alliance, the abolition of
episcopacy and the adoption of Presbyterianism in the Church of
England. The Solemn League and Covenant was accepted by
parliament, and imposed on the nation in September. Henceforth the
parliamentary army was pledged to extirpate “Popery, prelacy,
superstition, schism and profaneness”; to bring “the Churches of
God in the three kingdoms to the nearest conjunction and uniformity
in religion”; to “preserve the rights and privileges of the parliament
and the liberties of the kingdom; and to unite the two kingdoms in a
firm peace and union to all posterity.”
The taking of the covenant—a political necessity—was John
Pym’s last work. He was ten years older than Hampden, and his
character was ruggeder and sterner and without the charm of the
younger man. But Pym’s was the greater genius in politics, and his
scheme of constitutional government was to be fulfilled in England at
a later season.
John Pym died on December 8th, 1643, and his body was buried
in Westminster Abbey—only to be turned out at the Restoration and
removed to St. Margaret’s churchyard.
With Pym and Hampden gone, henceforth the conduct of
parliament was in other hands, and the day of moderate
statesmanship had passed.
The war undertaken to preserve the liberties and establish the
supremacy of the House of Commons was to bring in its train not
only the abolition of monarchy and the House of Lords, but the
suppression of the House of Commons itself.
 Important to the nation as the issues at stake were, most people
in England took hardly any more part or interest in the great civil
war than they had done in the Wars of the Roses. “A very large
number of persons regarded the struggle with indifference.... In one
case, the inhabitants of an entire county pledged themselves to
remain neutral. Many quietly changed with the times (as people
changed with the varying fortunes of York and Lancaster). That this
sentiment of neutrality was common to the greater mass of the
working classes is obvious from the simultaneous appearance of the
club men in different parts of the country, with their motto, ‘If you
113
take our cattle, we will give you battle.’”
How could it be otherwise? Supremacy of King, or supremacy of
Commons,—seed time and harvest remain, and the labourer and the
artizan must needs do their day’s work.
Not till the deposing of the Stuarts—forty-five years after John
Hampden’s death—is the supremacy of parliament over the crown
arrived at by general consent, to become a recognized and settled
thing in British politics. By the middle of the nineteenth century the
House of Commons is unmistakably the ruling power in the
constitution, and the labours of Eliot, Hampden and Pym are
vindicated.
In our own day changes in the balance of constitutional power
may be noted. The supremacy of the House of Commons is quietly
disappearing before the growing popularity of the crown, the
reawakened activity of the House of Lords, and the steady gathering
of the reins of power into the hands of the Cabinet and Executive. As
the crown in the last twenty years has increased in popular esteem,
so the influence and importance of the Commons has waned in the
country; and this waning influence of the Lower House has been
further diminished by the frequent rejection and revision of its
measures by the House of Lords.
The power of the Executive has also been obtained at the
expense of the power of the Commons. The Cabinet, rather than the
House of Commons, holds the supremacy to-day, and the direction
of foreign policy, and the making of international treaties are no
more within the authority of the House of Commons than are the
administration of Egypt and India. Pym and Hampden fought and
gave their lives for the right of the House of Commons to control the
ministers of the crown and to order the policy of these ministers. By
its own consent, and not from pressure from without, the House of
Commons has silently surrendered this right, and has agreed that
the policy of its Foreign Minister for the time being—whether he be
Liberal or Conservative—must not be subject to reproof, still less to
correction. In home affairs administrative order steadily supersedes
statute law.
In theory ministers are still subject to the House of Commons. In
actual practice they can rely on not being interfered with as long as
their party has a majority in the House. When the price of effective
interference with the conduct of affairs is a defeat of the Cabinet
and a consequent dissolution, the payment is more than members of
parliament are prepared to make.
Given the sense of security of social order and of the
administration of justice, the nation, generally, no more heeds the
passing of the supremacy from the House of Commons, than it
heeded the winning of that supremacy.
The Laudian doctrine in the Church of England, revived at the
Restoration, disappeared with the passing of the non-jurors at the
close of the seventeenth century. But its Anglo-Catholic teaching was
renewed by the Oxford Movement, early in Queen Victoria’s reign,
and has largely changed the whole appearance of the Church of
England. The modern high Anglican, claiming, as Laud claimed, the
right to interpret the Book of Common Prayer as a Catholic
document, but no longer the advocate of any theory of divine right
of kings, or the champion of any particular political creed, has
travelled indeed far beyond Laud’s very limited success in winning
support for Catholic doctrine and ritual in the Church of England.
Laud was beaten by the opposition of parliament; his present day
successors in the Church of England have prospered in spite of that
opposition, and have triumphed over acts of parliaments, adverse
judicial sentences, privations and imprisonments. But with Laud the
movement was directed by bishops and approved by the king, the
modern Laudian movement was banned by bishops and disfavoured
by all in high authority.
To-day nearly every Catholic doctrine, save papal supremacy, has
its expounders and defenders in the Church of England, and Catholic
rites and ceremonies are freely practised.
Laud, dying on the scaffold in 1645 at the hands of parliament,
is amply avenged in the twentieth century by the victorious high-
churchman. The Laudian clergy of the Established Church can now
maintain their Anglo-Catholic faith and practice, without any fear of
parliamentary interference. For generally they enjoy a popularity and
respect that the House of Commons does not willingly venture to
assail.
 John Lilburne and the
Levellers
1647–1653
Authorities: Lilburne’s Pamphlets; Calendar of State Papers;
Charles I. and the Commonwealth; State Trials; House of Commons’
Journals; Whitelocke—Memorials of English Affairs; Clarendon—
History of the Rebellion; W. Godwin—History of the Commonwealth;
S. R. Gardiner—History of the Great Civil War; History of the
Commonwealth and Protectorate; G. P. Gooch—History of
Democratic Ideas in the Seventeenth Century.

JOHN LILBURNE AND

THE LEVELLERS
1647–1653.
F
ROM his coming of age in 1637 till the near approach of
death, when he turned, a dying man, to the peaceful
tenets of the Quakers, the life of John Lilburne is a record
of twenty years of strife and battle with the rulers of the land.

He came of pugnacious stock, for John Lilburne’s father, a well-

to-do Durham squire, was the last man to demand the settlement of
a lawsuit by the ordeal of battle, and came into court armed
accordingly—only to be disappointed by an order from the crown,
forbidding the proposed return to such ancient and obsolete
methods of deciding the differences of neighbours.
Apprenticed to a wholesale cloth-merchant in London, John
Lilburne soon became acquainted with Bastwick and Prynne, then
busy over anti-episcopal pamphlets, and, keeping such company,
naturally fell into the clutches of the Star Chamber. The charge
against him was that he had helped to print and circulate unlicensed
books, in particular, Prynne’s News from Ipswich; and though
Lilburne declared the charge to be false, on his refusal to take the
usual oath to answer truly all questions put to him, the Star
Chamber adjudged him guilty, and passed sentence—Lilburne was to
be whipped from the Fleet to Westminster, to stand in the pillory,
and to be kept in prison.
The sentence was carried out on February 13th, 1638, but
Lilburne was not cowed, for he scattered some of Bastwick’s
offending pamphlets on the road, and was gagged in the pillory to
reduce him to silence. In prison things went hardly with Lilburne, for
the authorities had him placed in irons and kept in solitary
confinement, and only the compassion of fellow prisoners saved him
from actual starvation in the two years and nine months of his
imprisonment.
It was a rough beginning, and John Lilburne was henceforth an
agitator and a rebel.
At the end of 1640 one of the first things done by the Long
Parliament was to order Lilburne’s release, and in the following May
the sentence was pronounced “illegal and against the liberties of the
subject.” But illegal or not, the punishment had been inflicted, and
with unbroken spirit, passionately resenting the tyranny that could
so wrong men, Lilburne flew quickly to the attack on the authors of
the injustice.
At Edgehill Lilburne held a captain’s commission, and at
Brentford he was taken prisoner by the royalists. Only the threat of
swift reprisals by the parliamentary army saved him from being shot
as “a traitor,” and the following year he was again at liberty on an
exchange of prisoners. Again, after fighting at Marston Moor, he fell
into the hands of the royalists, and, shot through the arm, was kept
in prison at Oxford for six months.
Brave soldier as Lilburne was, he left the army in 1645 (with the
rank of Lieutenant-Colonel and with £880 arrears of pay owing to
him) rather than take the covenant and subscribe to the
requirements of Cromwell’s “new model.”
And now monarchy having fallen from its high estate, Lilburne at
once saw elements of tyranny in the Parliamentary government, and
did not hesitate to say so. Courageous and intrepid, with
considerable legal knowledge, a passion for liberty, and clear views
on democracy, John Lilburne might have given invaluable service to
the commonwealth. He had shown skill and daring in the war, his
character for fearless endurance had been proved, his ability as a
pamphleteer was considerable, and his capacity for work enormous;
the government had either to treat Lilburne as a friend or foe—he
was not to be ignored. The government, unwisely, decided Lilburne
was an enemy, and for the next ten years he fought the rule of
parliament and the army, his popularity increasing with every new
pamphlet he produced. The price the commonwealth government
paid for its opposition to Lilburne was to be seen on the death of
114
Cromwell.
From 1645 to 1649 Lilburne’s vigorous criticisms of the men in
power provoked retaliation, and brought him to Newgate. But in
prison or out of prison Lilburne went on hammering away to
establish a democratic constitution. The time was to come when
Cromwell would find the Long Parliament had outlived its usefulness
and would end it by main force. Lilburne was anxious in 1647 for a
radical reform of parliament and a general manhood suffrage. His
proposals were popular in the army, and had Cromwell supported
him the whole future of English politics would have been changed.
When the Presbyterian majority in parliament proposed the
disbandment of the army in 1647, the regiments chose their
agitators, and, refusing to disband, drew up the “Agreement of the
People” and the “Case for the Army.” These documents give the
political standpoint of the Levellers and the particular grievances to
be remedied.
The distribution of parliamentary seats according to the number
of inhabitants was the chief proposal in the “Agreement of the
People,” and the principles maintained are that “no man is bound to
a government under which he has not put himself,” and that “all
inhabitants who have not lost their birthright should have an equal
voice in elections.”
The particular demands in the “Case for the Army” were the
abolition of monopolies, freedom of trade and religion, restoration of
enclosed common lands, and abolition of sinecures.
While Cromwell and Ireton were both bitterly against manhood
suffrage, the council of officers to whom the Levellers appealed
agreed to support it, without approving the rest of the programme.
Cromwell, relying on the army to prevent a royalist reaction—for
Charles was plotting from Carisbrooke for aid from Scotland, and the
royalists in the House of Commons were anxious to effect a
reconciliation—would give neither time nor patience to the demands
of Lilburne and the Levellers.
In vain the Levellers exclaimed, in 1648, “We were ruled before
by King, Lords, and Commons, now by a General, Court Martial, and
Commons: and, we pray you, what is the difference?” Cromwell, at
all costs, was determined to preserve the discipline of the army, and
to suppress mutiny with an iron hand. For him the army which had
beaten the cavaliers was the one safeguard against the return of the
old order in Church and State. Lilburne and the Levellers, with the
“Fifth Monarchy” men, had been the strength, the very life of the
army that had conquered at Marston Moor and Naseby. The petition
of the Fifth Monarchy men for the reign of Christ and His saints
(which, according to prophecy, was to supersede the four
monarchies of the ancient world) had no terrors for Cromwell; in
other words, they demanded government exclusively by the godly,
Independents and Presbyterians combining to elect all
representatives, “and to determine all things by the Word.” “Such a
proposal might attract fanatics; it could not attract the multitude.
The Levellers who stood up for an exaggeration of the doctrine of
115
parliamentary supremacy were likely to be far more numerous.”
To Cromwell the immediate thing was the royalist danger; it was no
season for embarking on democratic experiments with which he had
no sympathy. The breach between Cromwell and the Levellers
widened, and as Cromwell became more and more impatient of their
agitation, distrust and suspicion of Cromwell and of the newly-
116
appointed Council of State ripened, in 1649, into revolt. It is the
perennial misunderstanding between the statesman and the agitator.
The one weighted by responsibility can rarely travel at the pace of
the other, untrammelled by office, and as the distance between the
two lengthens, it seems they are not even pursuing the same course
—as, indeed, very often they are not.
Lilburne had none of Cromwell’s anxieties as to a possible
royalist reaction; for him the danger could not come from the
dethroned king and his defeated cavaliers, but from a parliamentary
oligarchy or a military dictatorship. But he overestimated the
strength of the Leveller movement in the army. With the
presentation of the “Agreement of the People” the bulk of the
discontent in the army diminished, and while the Levellers who
remained became in several regiments openly mutinous, the
movement generally died down, so that when the revolt came, it
117
was suppressed without difficulty.
Lilburne was out of prison at the beginning of 1649. He took no
part in the trial of Charles I., and let it be known that he doubted the
wisdom of abolishing monarchy before a new constitution had been
drawn up.
As neither the remnant of the Long Parliament nor Cromwell and
Fairfax were doing anything to set up this new constitution, Lilburne
proceeded to lay a remonstrance before parliament, and to follow
this up by his two pamphlets on “England’s New Chains.” He now
urged that “committees of short continuance” should supersede the
Council of State, that the Self-denying Ordinance should be put in
force, “seeing how dangerous it was for one and the same persons
to be continued long in the highest commands of a military
118
power,” that a new parliament should be elected, and the
“Agreement of the People” proceeded with heartily. At the same time
he called for army reform by a reconstruction of the General Council
and the election of agitators.
The expulsion of five troopers from the army for directly
petitioning parliament provoked another pamphlet—“The Hunting of
the Foxes from Newmarket to Whitehall by five small beagles late of
the army.” The argument here was that Cromwell, Ireton, and
Harrison ruled the council of officers, and that the council of officers
ruled parliament and the nation. “The old king’s person and the old
lords are but removed, and a new king and new lords with the
commons are in one House, and so we are under a more absolute
arbitrary monarchy than before.”
There was only one answer to be made to Lilburne’s pen, and
that was to arrest the man who held it, for the commonwealth had
no one on its side who could reply to him. At the end of March
Lilburne and three of his supporters, Walwyn, Prince, and Richard
Overton were arrested as traitors, “England’s New Chains” having
been voted by parliament seditious and destructive of the
government, and were committed to the Tower to await trial.
At once a petition was got up and signed by 80,000 persons for
Lilburne’s release, and a fortnight later—April 18th—another petition
was taken to the bar of the House of Commons to the same effect.
Parliament promised that the prisoners should have a legal trial, but
declared the course of justice must not be interfered with. A large
deputation of women also appeared at Westminster on April 23rd
with a similar petition; but these were forbidden to enter the House,
and, admonished by members to “go home and wash their dishes,”
119
answered they would soon have no dishes to wash.
Lilburne was not brought to trial till October, and in the six
months’ interval, though the output of democratic pamphlets
continued from the Tower, the Leveller movement in the army ended
in open mutiny and defeat.
Carlyle tells the story accurately enough of the mutiny in
Whalley’s regiment in Bishopsgate, London, on April 25th:

They want this and that; they seize their colours from the
cornet, who is lodged at the “Bull” there; the general (Fairfax)
and lieutenant-general (Cromwell) have to hasten thither,
quell them, pack them forth on their march, seizing fifteen of
them first to be tried by court-martial. Tried by instant court-
martial, five of them are found guilty, doomed to die, but
pardoned; and one of them, Trooper Lockyer, is doomed and
120
not pardoned. Trooper Lockyer is shot in Paul’s Churchyard
on the morrow. A very brave young man, they say; though
but three-and-twenty. “He has served seven years in these
wars,” ever since the wars began. “Religious,” too, “of
excellent parts and much beloved”; but with hot notions as to
human freedom, and the rate at which the milleniums are
attainable. Poor Lockyer! He falls shot in Paul’s Churchyard on
Friday, amid the tears of men and women. Lockyer’s corpse is
 watched and wept over, not without prayer, in the eastern
regions of the city, till a new week come; and on Monday, this
is what we see advancing westward by way of funeral to him:
About one thousand went before the corpse, five or six in
a file; the corpse was then brought, with six trumpets
sounding a soldier’s knell, then the trooper’s horse came,
clothed all over in mourning, and led by a footman. The
corpse was adorned with bundles of rosemary, one half
stained in blood, and the sword of the deceased along with
them. Some thousands followed in ranks and files, all had
sea-green and black ribbon tied on their hats and to their
breasts, and the women brought up the rear.
At the new churchyard at Westminster some thousands
more of the better sort met them, who thought not fit to
march through the city. Many looked upon this funeral as an
affront to parliament and the army; others called these
121
people “Levellers”; but they took no notice of any of them.

In May one Corporal William Thompson rallied a body of

Levellers at Banbury, published a manifesto called “England’s
Standard Advanced,” and inveighed against the tyranny of courts-
martial. Overwhelmed by force of numbers, Thompson escaped, and
later died fighting alone near Wellingborough. Some twenty of his
followers joined the mutineers of Scrope’s regiment at Salisbury.
Numbering some 1,200, these Levellers made their way by
Marlborough and Wantage to Burford. Here Cromwell came up with
the mutineers, and surprised them at midnight. Resistance was
hopeless, and the majority at once surrendered. All were pardoned
except Cornet Thompson (brother to William), and two corporals—
Church and Perkins—who showed neither fear nor admitted any
wrong on their part. These three men were shot in Burford
122
churchyard on May 15th, and with their deaths the Leveller
movement was at an end.
 But Lilburne was unsubdued. His new “Agreement of the Free
People,” published on May 1st, called for annual parliaments elected
by manhood suffrage—pensioners, militant royalists, and lawyers
excluded—and for the free election of unendowed church ministers
in each parish. At the same time he disclaimed all connection with
123
Winstanley’s “Diggers”—political reform was Lilburne’s demand.
Released on bail in July, Lilburne issued in August an
“Impeachment for High Treason against Oliver Cromwell and his son-
in-law, James Ireton.” In this his hatred of government by the army
compels the admission that monarchy is preferable to a military
despotism: “If we must have a king, I for my part would rather have
the prince than any man in the world.... For the present army to set
up the pretended Saint Oliver or any other as their elected king,
there will be nothing thereby from the beginning of the chapter to
the end thereof but wars and the cutting of throats year after year;
yea, and the absolute keeping up of a perpetual army under which
the people are absolute and perfect slaves.”
Thereupon, instead of bringing him to trial, the government
merely issued a warrant for Lilburne’s arrest. The agitator met this
by a stronger manifesto, “An Outcry of the Young Men and
Apprentices of London,” calling on the army to rise in support of a
democratic parliament and to vindicate the men executed at Burford.
Some response came from the garrison at Oxford, who summoned
their officers to join in the demand for a free parliament, but no
success attended this step.
At last in October Lilburne was brought to trial at the Guildhall,
not on the charge for which he had been first committed to the
Tower in March, but for the “treason” of his later pamphlets. The
trial is memorable for Lilburne’s demand that counsel should be
assigned to him in the event of legal technicalities arising, and for
his bidding the jury remember they were judges of law as well as of
fact. His real defence lay in the question he had put so often: Was
England to be governed by the sword and a mock parliament, or by
duly elected representatives of the People? The jury understood that
Lilburne was on trial for putting that question, and, agreeing with
him, they acquitted him. The verdict was received with tremendous
applause, and “a loud and unanimous shout” of triumph went up
124
from the citizens of London in the Guildhall.
In December Lilburne was elected to the common council of the
city, but parliament promptly declared the election void. “Fiercely as
Lilburne attacked Cromwell, there was at times considerable liking
between the two men, and they met on friendly terms before
Cromwell went to Scotland in 1650. Cromwell assured Lilburne of his
desire to make England enjoy the real fruit of all the army’s promises
and declarations,” and friendly relations lasted till Cromwell’s return.
But, in Cromwell’s absence, Lilburne charged Hazlerigg with
corruption in the administration of justice concerning a disputed
colliery lease in Durham, and parliament took up the matter. In
January, 1652, it declared Lilburne’s petition for redress a libel, and
imposed a fine of £7,000 with a sentence of banishment for life.
This proceeding by parliament revived the methods of the Star
Chamber in imposing a conviction and a sentence without trial, but
the House of Commons was determined to stop Lilburne’s activities
at all cost.
Cromwell made no effort to hinder the conviction, and Lilburne
insisted that Cromwell’s professions of friendship were hypocritical,
and that the general himself was responsible for the sentence.
For the time Lilburne retired to Holland, where he discussed
favourably the chances of a royalist restoration. But on the expulsion
of the Rump of the Long Parliament the agitator at once wrote off to
Cromwell for permission to return to England, and getting no answer
crossed to London in June, 1653, and settled in lodgings in
Moorfields. He petitioned Cromwell and the Council of State for leave
to remain unmolested, promising to live peacefully, but Cromwell,
with the whole government on his shoulders, had no willingness to
incur the risk Lilburne and his doctrine of popular rights involved to
the safety of the State.
 Lilburne was promptly arrested by Cromwell’s order and brought
to trial at the Old Bailey on July 13th. The government case was that
he had returned to England knowing that a sentence of death was
decreed by parliament if he broke his exile.
Lilburne’s defence, in the main, was that the parliament which
had passed sentence was dead, and that if Cromwell had acted
justly in dissolving it, then its unjust actions ought not to be
maintained; if Cromwell had acted unjustly, why was he not
punished?
Again the jury acquitted him, and again the people of London
expressed their satisfaction at the verdict, “the very soldiers sent to
guard the court joining in the shouts, and beating their drums and
sounding their trumpets as they passed along the streets to their
quarters.”
But “for the peace of the nation” Cromwell would not let Lilburne
be at large. Back in the Tower, then at Guernsey, and then in Dover
Castle for more than two years Lilburne was a prisoner.
His health was broken in 1656, and consumption had set in.
Death was near, and for John Lilburne the days of “carnal sword-
fighting and fleshly hustlings and contests” were over. He wrote to
Cromwell from Dover Castle telling the Lord Protector of his
conversion to Quakerism, and Cromwell, assured that there was to
be no more agitation from “Free-Born John,” granted his release,
and a pension of 40s. a week.
The battle was over for John Lilburne, liberty could not stay the
hand of death. The many imprisonments and close confinements
had done their work, and rapid consumption marked down the man
who had stood up against the whole might of Cromwell’s
government.
John Lilburne died at Eltham in August, 1657, at the age of forty.
A year later, and his old antagonist, and older comrade-in-arms,
Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protector, was dead, and the Commonwealth
government which had contemned the agitation for democracy was
doomed.
 Winstanley the Digger
1649–1650
Authorities: Winstanley’s Pamphlets; Whitelocke—Memorial of
English Affairs; Clarke Papers; L. H. Berens—Digger Movement in the
days of the Commonwealth.

WINSTANLEY THE DIGGER

1649–1650.

I
N the spring of 1649, the “Digger” movement revealed a
strange and unexpected manifestation of the democratic
spirit in England. Free communism had been the creed of
more than one Protestant sect on the continent in the sixteenth
century, and the Anabaptists had been conspicuously identified with
the proposal. But in England John Lilburne and the Levellers were
attacking the parliamentary government in the name of political
democracy, and social agitation had been unknown since the Norfolk
Rising of 1549, save for a riot against land enclosures at the
beginning of James I.’s reign.

Gerrard Winstanley was the leader at the sudden outbreak of

social discontent, and his “Digger” movement was to end this
discontent and all other miseries of the time by getting rid of
enclosures of common lands, and allowing people to plough these
common lands and waste spaces, “that all may feed upon the crops
of the earth, and the burden of poverty be removed.”
Little is known of Winstanley, and the movement is shortlived.
The “Diggers” never threatened the safety of the Commonwealth
government as Lilburne and the Levellers did, for Winstanley’s social
doctrine included the non-resistance principles that later found
exponents in the Society of Friends, and the agrarian revolution he
preached could hardly be accomplished without force of arms. What
is notable about Winstanley is his witness to the fact that a social
question existed—that he saw beyond the Civil War, and the strife
for political liberties, a great mass of poverty unheeded; and seeing
the miseries of his fellows resolutely thought out some cure for their
distress, and did his best, as it seemed to him, to get this cure
adopted.
Neither the Council of State nor the republican army had time or
patience for Winstanley’s schemes, and the “Diggers” were dispersed
with little trouble; but Winstanley’s religious teaching was to exercise
considerable influence in the world when George Fox became its
preacher, and his social teaching on the land question has thousands
of disciples in Great Britain to-day.
125
Gerrard Winstanley was born in Lancashire in 1609. He seems
to have settled in London as a small trader and to have lost what
money he had in business—cheated he says, “in the thieving art of
buying and selling, and by the burdens of and for the soldiery in the
beginning of the war”—so that he was obliged “to accept of the
good-will of friends to live a country life.” In the country Winstanley
ponders the source of the ills around him, and, having some
considerable gift of expression, gives utterance, in a number of
pamphlets, to a cry for reform, and gathers followers.
In December, 1648, Winstanley (or one of his friends) issued the
earliest of the Digger publications under the title of “Light Shining in
Buckinghamshire—A Discovery of the Main Ground, Original Cause of
all the Slavery of the World, but chiefly in England. Presented by way
of a Declaration of many of the Well-affected in that County, to all
their poor oppressed Countrymen in England. And also to the
consideration of the present army under the conduct of the Lord
Fairfax.”
A month later and Winstanley publishes his “New Law of
Righteousness: Budding forth to restore the whole Creation from the
Bondage of the Curse. Or a glimpse of the new Heaven and the new
Earth, wherein dwells Righteousness.” Here, with a good deal of
mystical religious phrasing (the author explains that when he was in
a trance the message came to him), Winstanley proclaims his calling
and unfolds his agrarian proposals:

And when the Lord doth show unto me the place and
manner, how He will have us that are called common people
manure and work upon the common lands, I will then go
forth and declare it by my action, to eat my bread by the
sweat of my brow, without either giving or taking hire,
looking upon the land as freely mine as another’s.

There is to be no forcible expropriation of landlords:

If the rich still hold fast to this propriety of Mine and

Thine, let them labour their own lands with their own hands.
And let the common people, that say the earth is ours, not
mine, let them labor together, and eat bread together upon
the commons, mountains, and hills.
 For as the enclosures are called such a man’s land, and
such a man’s land, so the Commons and Heath are called the
common people’s. And let the world see who labor the earth
in righteousness, and those to whom the Lord gives the
blessing, let them be the people that shall inherit the earth.
None can say that their right is taken from them. For let
the rich work alone by themselves; and let the poor work
together by themselves. The rich in their enclosures, saying,
This is mine; and the poor upon the commons, saying, This is
ours, the earth and its fruits are common. And who can be
offended at the poor for doing this? None but covetous,
proud, idle, pampered flesh, that would have the poor work
still for this devil (particular interest) to maintain his
greatness that he may live at ease.
Was the earth made for to preserve a few covetous,
proud men to live at ease, and for them to bag and barn up
the treasures of the earth from others, that these may beg or
starve in a fruitful land: or was it made to preserve all her
children? Let Reason and the Prophets’ and Apostles’ writings
be judge.... For the earth is the Lord’s; that is the spreading
Power of Righteousness, not the inheritance of covetous
proud flesh that dies. If any man can say that he makes corn
or cattle, he may say, That is mine. But if the Lord made
these for the use of His creation, surely then the earth was
made by the Lord to be a Common Treasury for all, not a
particular treasury for some.
Leave off dominion and lordship one over another; for the
whole bulk of mankind are but one living earth. Leave off
imprisoning, whipping, and killing, which are but the actings
of the curse. Let those that have hitherto had no land, and
have been forced to rob and steal through poverty;
henceforth let them quietly enjoy land to work upon, that
everyone may enjoy the benefit of his creation, and eat his
own bread with the sweat of his own brows. For surely this
 particular propriety of mine and thine hath brought in all
misery upon people. First it hath occasioned people to steal
from one another. Secondly it hath made laws to hang those
that did steal. It tempts people to do an evil action, and then
kills them for doing of it. Let all judge whether this be not a
great evil.

In April, 1649, the time was ripe—so Winstanley and his friends
judged—for making a start to get rid of this evil.
The Council of State, but a few months old, and much occupied
with dangers in Scotland and Ireland, and with mutinous Levellers in
the army, was suddenly informed of the strange activities of “a
disorderly and tumultuous sort of people” by one Henry Sanders, of
Walton-upon-Thames.
Sanders’ testimony affirmed that “there was one Everard, once
of the army but was cashiered, who termeth himself a prophet, one
Stewer and Colten, and two more, all living at Cobham, came to St.
George’s Hill in Surrey, and began to dig on that side the hill next to
Camp Close, and sowed the ground with parsnips, carrots, and
beans. On Monday following they were there again, being increased
in their number, and on the next day they fired the heath, and
burned at least forty rood of heath, which is a very great prejudice
to the town. On Friday last they came again, between twenty and
thirty, and wrought all day at digging. They did then intend to have
two or three ploughs at work, but they had not furnished themselves
with seed-corn, which they did on Saturday at Kingston. They invite
all to come in and help them, and promise them meat, drink, and
clothes. They do threaten to pull down and level all park pales, and
lay open, and intend to plant there very shortly. They give out they
will be four or five thousand within ten days, and threaten the
neighbouring people there, that they will make them all come up to
the hills and work: and forewarn them suffering their cattle to come
near the plantation; if they do, they will cut their legs off. It is feared
126
they have some design in hand.”
 The date of this information was April 16th, and Bradshaw, the
President of the Council, at once asked General Fairfax “to disperse
the people so met, and to prevent the like for the future, that a
malignant and disaffected party may not under colour of such
ridiculous people have any opportunity to rendezvous themselves in
order to do a greater mischief.”
Fairfax sent Captain John Gladman to attend to the matter, and
Gladman reports three days later that Mr. Winstanley and Mr.
Everard are the chief men responsible, that he “cannot hear that
there have been above twenty of them together since they first
undertook the business,” and that Mr. Winstanley and Mr. Everard
will wait upon Lord Fairfax. He adds; “I believe you will be glad to be
rid of them again, especially Everard, who is no other than a mad
man. I intend to go with two or three men to St. George’s Hill this
day and persuade these people to leave this employment if I can,
and if then I see no more danger than now I do I shall march back
again to London to-morrow.” Gladman’s opinion is that “the business
is not worth the writing nor yet taking notice of.”
The interview between Fairfax and Winstanley and Everard took
place on April 20, and Everard explained that the Diggers “did not
intend to meddle with any man’s property nor to break down any
pales or enclosures, but only to meddle with what was common and
untilled, and to make it fruitful for the use of man: that they will not
defend themselves by arms, but will submit unto authority; that as
their forefathers lived in tents, so it would be suitable to their
condition now to live in the same.”
Fairfax evidently decided that the movement was not so
alarming as the Council of State had represented, for Winstanley and
his Diggers resumed their work, and at the end of May, Fairfax, with
the officers of the army, paid a visit to St. George’s Hill. Winstanley
returned “sober answers” to the inquiries of Fairfax, “though they
gave little satisfaction (if any at all) in regard of the strangeness of
their action.” Winstanley’s argument, often enlarged in his
pamphlets, was that the people were dispossessed of their lands by
the crown at the Norman Conquest, and that “the king who
possessed them by the Norman Conquest being dead, they were
returned again, being Crown Lands, to the Common People of
England.”
This was not conclusive to their visitors, and “some officers
wished they had no further plot in what they did, and that no more
was intended than what they did pretend.” To the objection that the
ground was too poor to repay cultivation, “the Diggers answered
they would use their endeavours and leave the success to God, who
had promised to make the barren ground fruitful.” Public opinion
gave out that the Diggers were “sober, honest men,” and that “the
ground will probably in a short time yield them some fruit of their
labour, how contemptible soever they do yet appear to be.”
Encouraged by Fairfax’s “kindness and moderation,” Winstanley
appeals to him in June against the interference of the local
landowners, and getting no response (for Fairfax had said that the
Diggers were to be left to “the Gentlemen of the County and the
Law of the Land”), publishes an appeal to the House of Commons
against his arrest for trespass by the Lords of Manors in Surrey. The
House of Commons, occupied with State matters, turned an
indifferent ear to Winstanley’s complaint, and the leader of the
Diggers sent a “Watchword to the City of London and the Army,”
telling the wrongs the Diggers suffered at the hands of the law for
“digging upon the barren common”—how they were mulcted in
damages at £10 a man, with costs at twenty-nine shillings and a
penny, and taken in execution, and how their cows were seized by
the bailiffs. At the end of November the very huts they had built
were pulled down, and it was a hard winter for the little colony still
left on St. George’s Hill.
Winstanley does not merely relate his injuries in these
publications, he is all the time urging that his plan for setting people
upon the common lands is the needful thing in England, that a
common ownership of land is God’s will, and that the crown lands
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

testbankmall.com