Conclusion
Eventually Ireton and Cromwell suppressed the demands of the army.
The debates concluded with the understanding that a modified version of the Agreement approved by a committee chosen mainly from the ranks of the Army's officers would be the basis of any future constitutional settlement and that it would be presented to the Army itself at a mass meeting. However, the Agitators wanted to discuss the future of the king and the Grandees, fearing a complete breakdown of discipline in the Army, proposed on 8 November that the Agitators and New Agents return at once to their regiments to restore order, thereby suspending the meetings. This was reinforced on 11 November when King Charles escaped from Hampton Court, apparently fearing a splinter group from the Agitators, who he termed Levellers would attempt to assassinate him. Charles I's flight brought all debate to an end as the New Model Army were faced with a more immediate threat. A new group then met to draw up a manifesto in the name of Lord-General Fairfax and the Army Council to be presented to the troops in place of the New Agents' Agreement.
The presentation itself was split from one mass meeting to three smaller ones. Those regiments invited to the first meeting on 15 November agreed with the manifesto, but two regiments arrived uninvited and objected, sparking the Corkbush Field mutiny. Cromwell suppressed the mutiny and at the other two meetings the other regiments agreed to the terms in the manifesto.
Read more about this topic: Putney Debates
Famous quotes containing the word conclusion:
“I’ve heard the wolves scuffle, and said: So this
Is man; so what better conclusion is there
The day will not follow night, and the heart
Of man has a little dignity, but less patience
Than a wolf’s....”
—Allen Tate (1899–1979)
“I have come to the conclusion that the major part of the work of a President is to increase the gate receipts of expositions and fairs and by tourists into town.”
—William Howard Taft (1857–1930)
“The conclusion suggested by these arguments might be called the paradox of theorizing. It asserts that if the terms and the general principles of a scientific theory serve their purpose, i. e., if they establish the definite connections among observable phenomena, then they can be dispensed with since any chain of laws and interpretive statements establishing such a connection should then be replaceable by a law which directly links observational antecedents to observational consequents.”
—C.G. (Carl Gustav)