Thomas
Rainsborough, the son of Captain William Rainsborough, was born in
about In 1610. A strong opponent of Charles
I and
after the outbreak of the Civil
War he
served in the parliamentary fleet. In 1643 he was given command of
the Swallow, a 34 gun ship. Soon
afterwards he helped General Thomas
Fairfax in the defence of
Hull.
Rainsborough
joined the army and took part in the capture of Crowland in December,
1644. When the New
Model Army was
formed he was given command of a regiment. He fought at Naseby
and participated
in the sieges of Bridgwater, Sherborne and Bristol.
A radical
in politics and religion he was elected to represent Droitwich in
the House of Commons in 1646. In October
1647 Rainsborough took part in the
Putney Debates. The debate was
based on An Agreement of the People,
a constitutional proposal drafted by the Levellers.
Senior officers in
the New Model Army such as Henry
Ireton argued against the idea of universal suffrage. Rainsborough,
was the highest ranking officer who supported the Levellers.
In the debate Rainsborough
argued: "that every man that is to live under a government ought
first by his own consent be put himself under that government."
A compromise was eventually agreed that the vote would be granted
to all men except alms-takers and servants.
The House
of Commons was angry with Rainsborough for taking this point of
view and General Thomas
Fairfax was
called before Parliament to answer for his behaviour. For a time Rainsborough
was denied the right to take up his post as Vice Admiral. Eventually,
after support from Fairfax, Oliver Cromwell
and Henry Ireton,
Parliament voted 88 to 66 in favour of him going to sea.
As a supporter of the Levellers,
Rainsborough was unpopular with his officers and he was refused permission
to board his ship. Parliament now appointed the Earl
of Warwick as Lord High Admiral and Rainsborough returned to the
army. In October 1646 General Thomas
Fairfax sent
him to take command of the siege of Pontefract Castle.
On 29th October, 1648,
a party of Cavaliers attempted to kidnap
Rainsborough while he was in Doncaster. During the struggle to capture
him he was mortally wounded. At his funeral in London
the crowd wore ribbons colored sea-green, which became the emblem
for the Leveller movement.
(1)
The Putney Debates (October, 1647)
Thomas
Rainsborough: I desire that those that had engaged in it should
speak, for really I think that the poorest he that is in England hath
a life to live as the greatest he; and therefore truly. Sir, I think
it's clear that every man that is to live under a Government ought
first by his own consent to put himself under that Government; and
I do think that the poorest man in England is not at all bound in
a strict sense to that Government that he hath not had a voice to
put himself under; and I am confident that when I have heard the reasons
against it, something will be said to answer those reasons, in so
much that I should doubt whether he was an Englishman or no that should
doubt of these things.
Henry
Ireton: Give me leave to tell you, that if you make this the
rule I think you must fly for refuge to an absolute natural Right,
and you must deny
all Civil Right; and I am sure it will come to that in
the consequence ... I would fain have any man show me their bounds,
where you will end, and why you should not take away all property?
Thomas
Rainsborough: As to the thing itself, property (in the franchise).
I would fain know how it comes to be the property of some men and
not of others. As for estates, and those kind of things, and other
things that belong to men, it will be granted that they are property;
but I deny that that is a property to a Lord, to a Gentleman, to any
man more than another in the Kingdom of England.
If it be a property, it
is a property by a law; neither do I think that there is very little
property in this thing by the law of the land, because I think that
the law of the land in that thing is the most tyrannous law
under heaven, and I would
fain know what we have fought for, and this is the old law of England,
and that which enslaves the people of England, that they should be
bound by laws in which they have no voice at all. The thing that I
am unsatisfied in is how it comes about that there is such a property
in some freeborn Englishmen, and not in others.
John
Wildman: Our case is to be considered thus, that we have been
under slavery. That's acknowledged by all. Our very laws were made
by our Conquerors; and whereas it's spoken much of Chronicles, I conceive
there is no credit to be given to any of them; and the reason is because
those that were our Lords, and made us their vassals, would suffer
nothing else to be chronicled.
We are now engaged for
our freedom. That's the end of Parliament, to
legislate according to the just ends of government, not simply to
maintain what is already established. Every person in England hath
as clear a right to elect his Representative as the greatest person
in England. I conceive that's the undeniable maxim of government:
that all government is in the free consent of the people.
And therefore I should
humbly move that if the Question be stated which would soonest bring
things to an issue - it might perhaps be this: Whether any person
can justly be bound by law, who doth not give his consent that such
persons shall make laws for him?
Edward
Sexby: We have
engaged in this kingdom and ventured our lives, and it was all for
this: to recover our birthrights and privileges as Englishmen - and
by the arguments urged there is none. There are many thousands of
us soldiers that have ventured our lives; we have had little property
in this kingdom as to our estates, yet we had a birthright. But it
seems now except a man hath a fixed estate in this kingdom, he hath
no right in this kingdom. I wonder we were so much deceived. If we
had not a right to the kingdom, we were mere mercenary soldiers.
There are many in my condition,
that have as good a condition, it may be little estate they have at
present, and yet they have as much a right as those two (Cromwell
and Ireton) who are their lawgivers, as any in this place. I shall
tell you in a word my resolution. I am resolved to give my birthright
to none. Whatsoever may come in the way, and be thought, I will give
it to none. I think the poor and meaner of this kingdom (I speak as
in that relation in which we are) have been the means of the preservation
of this kingdom.
Thomas
Rainsborough (to
Ireton) Sir, I see that it is impossible to have liberty but all property
must be taken away. If it be laid down for a rule, and if you will
say it, it must be so. But I would fain know what the soldier hath
fought for all this while? He hath fought to enslave himself, to give
power to men of riches, men of estates, to make him a perpetual slave.
We do find in all presses that go forth none must be pressed that
are freehold-men. When these Gentlemen fall out among
themselves they shall press the poor scrubs to come and kill each
other for them . . .
Henry Ireton: First, the thing itself
(universal suffrage) were dangerous if it were settled to destroy
property. But I say that the principle that leads to this is destructive
to property; for by the same reason that you will alter this Constitution
merely that there's a greater Constitution by nature - by the same
reason, by the law of nature, there is a greater liberty to the use
of other men's goods which that property bars you.
Available
from Amazon Books (order below)
