Iohn gave Master Sandys Forty shillings and nothing to Captain Preston seeing both were alike prisoners alike robbed Was there no design in this partiality did not Sir Iohn foresee or had hopes of a facile or possible corrupting Mr. Sandys and his man Vax to whom he gave so liberally as Fourteen pound or at least abating their zeal and fidelity to the Parliament It is certified That Mr. Sandys took it as a civil respect and favor and it was observed That Mr. Sandys and his man Vax did thereafter very coldly if at all engage for the Parliament And Mr. Sandys hath in requital of this respect certified his belief to that Court of Articles but grounded upon a known untruth He doth verily believe That many lives and much blood was that day saved by the onely means of the said Sir Iohn Stawel who then and at other times ever behaved himself as a lover of his Country These are the words of this bold Certificant whereas it is too well known in that his Country That the series of Sir Iohn his actions doubtless not unknown to Mr. Sandys himself doth speak him the contrary witness his Depopulations at Cothelstone and his Planting afterwards under colour of some satisfaction and through fear of the then Star chamber who began to question such offences the disterr'd Inhabitants on the top of Quantock-Hill witness those Articles of Complaint by the Town of Taunton the Inhabitants of a whole Corporation and his Neighbors exhibited against him in Parliament which seem to be the Articles mentioned in his Remonstrance P. 14. to be by that Town preferred 3 Car. against him unto the Parliament upon scandalous and false suggestions as he pretends and yet they were made good against him and himself reproved and which he hath since fully revenged as will appear Witness his Breach of the Publick Trust of his Country by leaving the Parliament at a time when all the Liberties and Common-Interest of the Subject lay at stake and his taking up of Arms to destroy and tyrannize when thus armed over the Lives Liberties Estates and Consciences of his Fellow-Subjects the very Magistrates and High Sheriff himself of the County not excepted And yet Mr. Sandys is pleased to term him a lover of his Countrey then at Marshals-Elm at that time when Mr. Sandys himself fighted him if he fought at all as a disturber thereof O Regina Pecunia What a strange alteration of judgment hath these Forty shillings wrought in Mr. Sandys in a few years Sir Iohns next Proofs are the Examinations of the Lord Pawlet and one Robert Knight Gentleman which Knight although not by the title of Gentleman yet is otherwise notoriously known in his Country both their Depositions being to this effect That Sir Iohn did not hurt any man nor discharged his Pistol as the Lord Pawlet remembers being near unto him during all that action and as Mr. Knight verily believes Sir John not stirring out of the highway and that the Drummer whom the Lord Paulet knoweth not was as he believes not hurt by Sir John but as he hath since heard by one Crocker which Depositions if true will no waies invalid Wards testimony and much less the affirmative and positive testimony of the witnesses at the Tryal and Verdict of the Iury thereon in regard these Depositions are in the negative Did not stirr out of the highway nor discharge his Pistol nor did hurt any man Whereas it is proved that Sir John had his sword drawn and Wards wounds were given by a sword and might be given as well in the highway as in any other place Neither is it usual for one Commander to take particular notice of anothers actions especially in a fight and pursuit of an enemy and when there was no preintention or cause of any such particular observation neither is it improbable but that Ward might have that day some wounds given him by Crocker and yet afterwards receive 26 more from Sir John Stawell all his wounds exceeding that number and those by Crocker might be given in the Corn and those by Sir Iohn in the highway The same answer might be given to the ensuing Depositions of William Stuckly and Robert Vax being both to the effect of the former but that the Deposition of Vax is voluntary and extra-judicial and both the Deponents of no such credit in their Country as in any sort to call in question the verdict aforesaid however by comparing the Depositions of Knight Stuckly and Vax it is evident that Sir Iohns company were by direction and order to and did give the onset and charge which argues Sir Iohns actions rather offensive then defensive as Sir Iohn pretendeth and the first shot to be given by his party The next endeavour of Sir Iohn is by his Remonstrance to extenuate his sending of William Cady and Iohn England to Ivelchester Gaol to ease forsooth the Castle of Taunton whom he there found prisoners and where they were improperly kept T is very true they were improperly imprisoned for their faithfulness to the Parliament and as improperly by Sir Iohn by a Mittimus to the Keeper of Ivelchechester removed from Taunton thither But Sir John saith that he soon after released England but could not Cady because he was a prisoner for debt upon his first coming thither but Cady swears that Sir Iohn committed him to the common Goal and kept him there in chains for a year and more and threatned to hang him and said he was a Traitor against the King and demanded 20 l. of him and Iohn England doth depose that he tasted very deeply of Sir Iohns cruelty The Transcriptions ensuing are full October 22. 1650. Examinations taken upon Oath the day and year above written by vertue of directions from the High Court of Iustice concerning certain high crimes and misdemeanors committed by Sir Iohn Stawell Knight of the Bath for levying war against the Parliament of England IOhn England of Taunton Clothier aged thirty years or thereabouts sworn and examined saith That Sir John Stawell when he was Governor of the Town of Taunton for the late King against the Parliament did exercise much cruelty on some of the inhabitants that were real in their affections to the Parliament by close imprisoning of them putting by his command Irons on them and requiring great Fines from them to advance the Kings Interest to the great destruction of the Commonwealth of which cruelty this Deponent tasted very deeply November 5. 1650. An Examination taken at Dunster concerning certain high crimes and misdemeanors committed against the Parliament and Commonwealth of England by Sir Iohn Stawell Knight of the Bath VVilliam Cady of Dunster Mercer aged 49. years or thereabouts sworn and examined saith That the said Sir Iohn Stawell did in the year 1644. raise Arms against the Parliament and Commonwealth of England and in particular was in a hostile posture of war at a place called Marshals Elme in this County and there did fight
contrary yet this Plea De son Assault demesne although it is a good Bar in an Action of Assault and Battery He first Assaulted me and therefore I did cut and gave him those wounds in my own defence Yet here it is no Plea sithence for a Theif to say The Honest-man first assaulted me and therefore I robbed him or for a Traytor to affirm The Parliaments Forces first shot at me and therefore I killed wounded and imprisoned them were never known to be any good Pleas or so much as colourable excuses And Sir Iohns being there in Arms against the Parliament was a Treason of an high nature Vain therefore are this and the rest of Sir Iohns pretences in that his Remonstrance and of as little weight are his Protestations therein one whereof we now light upon For he protests before the Almighty God That he did not cut or draw blood on any man that day but made it his care to preserve any of that party and to rescue as many as he saw any violence offered unto The truth of which his Protestation will appear by this Deposition transcribed October 24. 1650. Examinations taken upon Oath by virtue of Directions from the Right Honorable The High Court of Justice concerning Treasons Murthers and other high Crimes and Misdemeanors committed by Sir John Stawel Knight of the Bath NIcholas Ward of Chard Cordwinder Aged Thirty five years or thereabouts sworn and examined saith That about eight years since he was then a Drummer under Lieutenant Colonel Iohn Preston of the County of Somerset who raised Forces by Authority derived from the Parliament for suppressing of Insurrections and Rebellions This Examinant marched with divers other persons unto Marshals-Elm in the County of Somerset where appeared Sir Iohn Stawel Knight of the Bath with divers other Gentlemen in Arms against the Parliament for the late King when and where the Parliaments Forces were routed by an Ambuscado laid And the said Sir Iohn Stawel having his sword drawn fell on this Examinant and with his own hand gave him with his said sword twenty six wounds leaving this Examinant for dead This Examinant did then see the said Sir Iohn Stawel ride after the Parliament Soldiers and hacked and hew'd them This Examinant further saith That the said Sir Iohn Stawel did often say in this Deponents hearing That all those that did take up Arms for the Parliament were Rebels Rogues and Traytors and should be all hanged one after another By which Examination the pretended civility of Sir Iohn doth manifestly appear by his hacking and hewing upon the pursuit and his carbonading of Nicholas Ward a fit expression of that outrage and would be adjudged so if Wards mangled face were in present view his nose being cut off and his eye cut out as Nicholas Ward by his Petition to the Court of Articles and in that Remonstrance recited doth set forth But this blood Sir Iohn endeavors to wipe off by affirming That Ward having once sworn and obtained a Judgment against him for 100 l. damages findes himself now bound to make good that shameless untruth so he is pleased to term it doubtless it is the part of an honest man at all times and in all places to affirm a truth especially having sworn it before a lawful Authority and therefore Ward inserting in his Petition to that Court of Articles such Sir Iohns dealing with him cannot be any scandal except truth it self be one For an untruth it cannot now be presumed For Nicholas Ward in Hillary Term the two and twentieth of Caroli brought his Action of Assault and Battery against Sir Iohn Stawel whereunto he pleaded neither this pretended Plea of Self-defence nor his being comprised within the Articles of Exon but the general Issue of Not guilty Which Issue coming to be tryed at an Assizes for that County of Somerset the Jury persons not interessed nor concerned found him guilty of this shameless untruth And this very Main being then given in evidence and proved by one Checkford since deceased and other witnesses whereof Ward himself could not be one the same Jury assessed so great damages as 100 l. Without which Testimony the Jury would not have found Sir John guilty unless they themselves knew the truth thereof as perhaps some of them did being Inhabitants of the same County And therefore Sir Iohns bare negation especially seeing it tends to the attainting of both Jury and Witnesses must and will with all unbyast persons beat no weight Which Sir John it seems well knew and therefore produceth several Certificates and Depositions in order as himself saith to remove the Grievance which then lay on him by that Petition of Ward and doubtless will lie on him to Succession And to this Testimony Sir Iohn gives the title of Very Honorable whereas Neighbor-hood will know how little credit may be given to all those Witnesses and Certificates except one of them Mr. Emmanuel Sandys his Certificate is first produced which if admitted doth make against Sir John himself For Mr. Sandys certifies that after some entercourse between the Forces Captain Preston and the Company offering to march up the Hill in two Bodies the Company on the Hill meaning Sir Johns Company shot at us several times meaning the Parliaments Forces and we at them Of which words what other construction can be made then that Sir Iohns Company made the first shot and if so where is the truth of Sir Iohns Plea of Self-defence Thus far Mr. Sandys and we must believe him Sir Iohn else will be angry hath fixt the shameless untruth on Sir Iohn himself and then proceeds to certifie That the Parliament Forces flying Captain Preston and himself were taken prisoners and their Moneys Horses and Weapons taken from them by some of Sir Iohns Company who had killed them if not rescued by the now Lord Pawlet and Sir Iohn Stawel And these prisoners had that night fair Quarters and for that the Soldiers had taken from them their money Sir Iohn Stawel Gentleman-like delivered to Mr. Sandys Forty shillings which Mr. Sandys took for a civil respect and afterwards repaid him with thanks for his favor and kinde usage This is the further effect of Mr. Sandys Certificate by which it is observable how soon Sir Iohn Stawels Party had learnt their Trade first to rob and afterwards to kill which must speak aloud Sir Iohn Stawels honor in that he rescued the prisoners and gave Mr. Sandys Forty shillings Which for ought appears might be part of the moneys taken from him or Captain Preston and if so Mr. Sandys is favored with a Pig of his own Sowe But where is the Certificate of Captain Preston on this behalf A person of valor and one that hath faithfully passed through the greatest offices of trust in his County his Certificate is not to be found perhaps not demanded his usage was so bad It is certified his Moneys Horse and Arms were taken from him And what was the reason that Sir
beginning of the late Wars which being not paid caused the said George Longe to go at several times to the Gaol at Newgate to intreat him to Petition the Parliament that he might be admitted to a Composition but the said Sir John Stawell was much discontended with him for his endeavour therein Also the said George Longe being prosecuted on his said engagements for Sir Iohn Stawell made again his request unto the said Sir Iohn that he would think upon some way to make his Composition and peace with the Parliament telling him that the Parliament as it should seem had taken such notice of his not prosecuting his Articles or forfeiting them that an Act was drawing up for the sale of his and other Delinquents lands a Copy or draught whereof the said George Longe at his own cost procured and delivered to him and he read the same being left with him to consider and did further acquaint him that until the Act was perfected there was hope yet left so as he would betake himself to the work but if he neglected it that he would not onely undoe his own family but also this Certificant and his Which courtesie of the said George Longe the said Sir Iohn Stawell repaid with disdainful scorn and pride telling him that he had better Councellors then the said George Longe Which Act passed not until about an year after during which time many of the persons which were first mentioned got themselves struck out of the said Act their causes being referred to a Committee and as it is thought so might Sir Iohns have been if he had but laid hold of the advice of his meanest friends Afterwards his Highness the Lord Protector was to make his voyage into Ireland to reduce it before whose going the said George Longe went again to Sir Iohn Stawell in regard of his the said Georges sad condition to intreat and perswade him and having made some relation of his thoughts did acquaint Sir Iohn that he was come the third time to draw a Petition unto his Highness then Lord General that he would intercede to the House in his behalf that he might be admitted to a Composition wherein the said George Long being so nearly concerned did promise unto him if he would cause his Petition to be drawn and therein humbly state his case he the said George would find some means of procuring his Petition to be answered In which the said George Long could not prevail with the said Sir Iohn Stawell at which this Certificant stood amazed to see Sir Iohn Stawell and himself so near undone and the said George Longe so sensible and Sir Iohn no way regardful of his condition and so took a sorrowful farewell George Longe Was not this an apparent wilfulnes in Sr. Iohn that rather then he would Petition the Parliament for his admittance to Composition he would hazard the ruine not of himself and Family alone but of this Gentleman and his house who had so friendly and deeply engaged for him and is not Sir Iohn justly declared by the Parliament to be not admitted to Compound when he had for four years space for the Articles were granted the ninth of April 1646 and the Act that declared his non admission was passed the ninth of July 1650 against the advice and notwithstanding the importunities of his friends and sureties disdainfully neglected to Petition to that purpose which by his Articles he ought to have done for it was not enough for Sir Iohn passively to submit to a Composition but by all means to compass it actively and to that end the word submit in the twelfth Article is explained by the word make in the 22 of the same Articles Sir John is pleased in his Remonstrance to produce a Petition which he saith he delivered to Mr. John Ashe but indeed hath been lately drawn by Sir John of purpose to secrete his resolution not to compound for Mr. Iohn Ashe Ans page 13. saith that the Petition which after many amendments and obliterations of the high language therein Mr. Iohn Ashe was to deliver as then it was Mr. Iohn Ashe upon his going into the Country did by Sir Iohns appointment deliver to Mr. DenZil Hollis who refused to deliver it because it desired his removall to a Prison more commodious but not his admissito his Composition neither doth that Petition in his Remonstrance mention any such desire nor indeed his removal therefore could not be the Petition delivered to Mr. Iohn Ashe but one of a later birth Thus his resolution not to compound continueth still upon him notwithstanding his now endeavours to perswade a continual readiness in him thereunto if suffered In the interim he is by Order from the House of Commons of the 18. of August 1646. at the next Assizes held for the County of Somerset at Taunton found by the then Grand-Iury guilty of High-Treason But that Indictment being in a legal formality only insufficient to bring him to his Trial was laid aside and afterwards by another Order of the same House of the 18 of February 1647. there were three Indictments found against him one for High-treason and two for Murder one for killing of Robert Osborn at Marshals-Elm being the first blood shed in the West of England in that quarrel and the other for the murder not execution of Christopher Viccary Which Indictments were found by a Grand Iury consisting of nineteen Esquires and Gentlemen some whereof have been since and now are in the Commission of the Peace four whereof only were of Taunton viZ. Mr. Richard Bovet Mr. Samuel Whetcomb Mr. Philip Lyssant and Mr. George Powel the rest living in several places in that County and but two of these four viZ. Mr. Richard Bovet and Mr. Powel had then obtained Iudgments against Sir Iohn and yet those legally and upon evidence and defence made The one for Sir Iohns taking away unjustly 1200 l. worth of Mr. Bovets estate the other for his cruelty towards Mr. Powel as aforesaid and Mr. Bovet only hath since chased a parcel of Sir Iohns Estate But doe all or any of these allegations invalid those Verdicts found by fifteen more besides those four of Taunton Because Sir Iohn Stawels most frequent and greatest acts of Treason and the Murder of Viccary were committed in Taunton was it not fit that some of the Jury should be of Taunton that could best judge of these his acts And because some of them had obtained Verdicts against him upon sufficient proofs for injuries done unto them can it be any exception against their Verdict especially since they had long before the time of the Verdict recovered the same And as weak is the last allegation Because one of them hath purchased some Estate exposed to sale in 1651. Therefore he was no competent Iuror 1647. four years before when such exposal to sale could not without a spirit of divination be before seen and might have been prevented if he had pleased but being now sold
allow to such persons as should claim releife by Articles were both received and it was resolved upon the question in the Negative which he prayeth may be specially observed It may be thought presumption in Sir Iohn to intimate any reason or grounds of the refusal of those Provisoes and it would be modesty in us not to imitate him yet in answer to that his intimation we say that the Parliament as appeareth by their proceedings intended so much in the case of Sir Iohn Stawell though perhaps they would not have such a general proviso incerted either because their was no Judgement Vote or Resolution of that Parliament touching Articles but in the Case of Sir Iohn Stawell or because they presumed as well they might that their inferior deivrative Court of Articles would not call inquestion any of their proceedings but as soon as they did find that that Court had proceeded in the Case of Sir Iohn Stawell they forthwith by their Resolution of the 24 of Febr. abovesaid prohibited them any further proceedings especially when that Court began to proceed to sentence contrary to their judgement untill that time wisely forbearing their prohibition in expectation of that subordinate Courts submission to their Declaration of Sir Iohns not admittance to compound and their disposition of his Estate There is likewise a Proviso in that Act of reviver which in effect is the same with the recited Proviso and is in these words viZ. Provided That such person or persons claiming benefit of Articles as aforesaid have not forfeited the same by breach or nonperformance of what is or was on their part to be performed since those Articles were so granted And there cannot be a more supream Declaration or Judgement then that of the Parliament it self that Sir Iohn had forfeited the benefit of his Artitles and therefore the Case of Sir Iohn Stawell the onely Case depending in Parliament touching Articles was already provided for and by consequence that Proviso needless The second Proviso seemeth as needless to be inserted in this Act of Reviver for since it doth revive the former Act and doth enable that newly erected Court to put in execution all and every the powers expressed in that former Act one of which powers is to releive and redress the parties complaining so far as in justice they ought to have by the said Articles by restitution in specie or in value c. That Proviso speaks no more then what was enacted in the very body of that Act and for that reason doubtless was laid aside The next material thing for our Answer is the Letter of Sir Anthony Irbie mentioned in the Remonstrance page 59. to be directed to Mr. Tracy Pauncefoot Reg. of the Court of Articles and at large inserted and because he did Sir Iohn such good service by his said Letter Sir Iohn hath produced him as a Witness before the present Committee of Parliament where his examination was in these words viZ. The Examination of Anthony Irby Knight taken the 16 of November 1654. before the Committee of Parliament to whom the Lord Cravens Petition is referr'd being produced as a Witness on the behalf of Sir John Stawel whose Petition is referred by the Parliament to this Committee VVHo saith That he was one of the Committee for Compounding sitting at Goldsmiths Hall and was present there when Sir Iohn Stawel did prefer his Petition to compound And saith that the same was so preferred within the time limited by the Articles of Exeter as appeared by the Pass of Sir Thomas Fairfax And saith that the said Petition was read at the board but something therein was disliked for Sir Iohn Stawel did not acknowledge his Delinquencie nor would he take the Covenant and Negative Oath And further saith that Sir Iohn Stawel did not behave himself misbecomingly as this Deponent conceiveth only did insist upon the Articles of Exeter and said that by them he was to be admitted to Composition and he this Examinant took no exceptions at his carriage And saith that in those times there was want of mony and it was his opinion that Sir Iohn Stawel ought to compound And further saith That at that time this Examinant did not know of any body that was about to buy any part of Sir Iohn Stawels Estate but saith That about two or three yeares ago as he remembreth he was at Sir Abraham Williams his house being about the time of Sir Iohn Stawels Trial for his life or presently after as he remembreth and there he met Sir Edward Baynton and enquired of him the reason of the prosecution of Sir Iohn Stawell And Sir Edward Baynton then told this Examinant That there was a Gentleman who would have bought a Mannor of Sir Iohn Stawell in Somersetshire or Wiltshire he cannot tell whether and that he the said Sir Edward Baynton had some interest in part of it and had offered if Sir Iohn Stawell would sell his part he also would sell his other part but said that afterwards he was sorry for that offer because he conceived that was the original of Sir Iohn Stawels troubles And this Examinant further saith That Sir Iohn Stawell came punctually within the time limited by his Articles for that the Committee for compounding gave him a time to appear after the date of the time given by the said Articles on purpose that the Committee might shew him no favor when the time given by the Articles was out And saith That Sir Edward Baynton told him this Examinant that the person who would buy the said Mannor was Mr. Iohn Ash And this Examinant further saith That one of the Members of that Committee being the Chairman told the Committee that Sir Iohn Stawell was without with a Petition but said the same was failing in many circumstances And saith That after the Case then in debate was ended which was one Berkleys as this Deponent now remembers Sir Iohn Stawell was called in And this Examinant being now demanded whether Sir Iohn Stawell had subscribed not to bear arms against the Parliament as was required by his Articles This Examinate saith that there was a Committee who sate in Goldsmiths Hall to take Subscriptions without which as he remembreth Delinquents were not to stay within the Lines of Communication but saith that he doth not remember that ever he saw any Certificate that Sir Iohn Stawel had subscribed not to bear arms nor did he ever see the Certificate of any other person to that purpose that came to compound And this Examinant further saith That the Committee had an Order of Parliament not to compound with any that did not take the Covenant and Negative oath which latter the Committee had power to administer and the same was tendred to Sir Iohn Stawel but he refused to take it and said he was excused by his Articles And this Examinant further faith That it was not then objected against Sir Iohn Stawel that he had not subscribed the Engagement not to bear arms
and there did draw bloud and so continued in arms in the said County against the Parliament and raised great sums of money to assist the King against the Parliament Committed this Examinant to the common Goal and there kept him in prison and in chains by the space of one whole year and more and threatned to hang this Examinant divers times and said he was a Traitor against the King and did demand sums of money of him as he remembers 20 l. or more and further saith that he was carried from the Goal to the Assizes for this County and there was indicted for High Treason and the Bill then found against him And this Examinant verily believeth and to his best remembrance saith That Sir John Stawell was then present at the same Assizes Will. Cady By which Depositions of William Cady it is manifest that Sir Iohn Stawell fought and drew blood at Marshals Elme yet Sir John Stawels honorable testimony would perswade that they believe he did hurt or wound no man there A very neat belief to mince a truth as if the wounding of Ward to desperation of life found so by verdict his hacking and hewing upon the pursuit proved by Nicholas Ward and his fighting and drawing of bloud attested by William Cady were no hurting of any man These Depositions likewise prove the cruelty of Sir John and yet Sir John thinks it impossible for him to be guilty of so much bloud and cruelty as is mentioned in the Petition of Cady and Ward as if 26 wounds draw little or no bloud and as if chains irons close imprisonment exaction of great fines of well-affected persons to advance the late Kings interest to the destruction of the Commonwealth as the insuing Depositions will plainly manifest be less cruelty then is mentioned in their moderate Petition We do pray that Sir John may no longer stand on publick extenuation of these and the ensuing outrages of his but in secret repent them humbly imploring the divine mercy to avoid divine Justice being the readiest way to pacifie the restless proceedings of them who as he scandalously pretendeth hate him without a cause but probably are the instruments of that Justice Sir Johns Remonstrance hath brought us to the year 1643. and to Marquiss Hartfords approach to the Town of Taunton the place which afterward God preserved amidst the fires and notwithstanding the adusted wrath and rage of the besiegers and which Sir John during his Command thereof made the Rendezvous of Tyranny and arbitrary power not to advance the Royal Interest as was divulged but as is very likely to satisfie the displeasure he had taken up against the Inhabitants thereof upon the occasion abovesaid upon which approach these faithfull Inhabitants finding that they were not of strength sufficient to protect themselves from this rebellion sent their Justice of Peace Mr. George Powel and one Mr. Nicholas to the Besiegers to Treat of a Rendition upon Articles during which Treaty and after Articles agreed on amongst which some of them were That the Inhabitants should be free from Plunder and Imprisonment the Enemy upon pretence without the least ground of truth or probability that the Inhabitants were flying with their Moveables whereas they were in truth some strangers only then in the Town that went out did enter the same and notwithstanding those Articles plundered it to the value of 10000 l. and imprisoned the then Maior and chief Inhabitants thereof With what face then can Sir John now call so loud upon the faith of the Parliament and their Armies to perform their Articles when himself and his associates then brake theirs Now after this Plunder was made then Sir Iohn as he saith intreated that the Town might be admitted to a reasonable Fine which was assessed at 8000 l. a sum which that poor exhausted Town was not able to pay the richest of them being before that time plundered to what could be found And this moderate Fine was thus imposed likely to the knowledge of Sir Iohn if not by his Vote for he was then of the Councel of War that imposed it and Governor of the Town And yet now he saith it was 8000 l. as he hath heard To gain which Government Walter Cliffe the Gaoler Aldred Seaman and others Sir Iohns Agents were sent to gain subscriptions to the Petition in that Remonstrance recited page 13. which Petition was drawn beforehand and without the knowledge of the Inhabitants some of whom in hopes to get out of prison and others for fear of being imprisoned subscribed the same and such as denied their subscriptions thereunto were by Sir John Stawels special command inhumanly dealt with Sir John having thus gained unto himself the Government of this Garrison begins his intended revenge on the Inhabitants labouring with all rigour to extort that fine from them which he knew to be unreasonable and contrary to Articles to maintain as he confesseth page 16. the souldiers left there in Garrison indeed his fellow-Traitors And such Inhabitants as refused to pay the same either through a good affection to the Parliament or disability he imprisoned laid them in irons threatned to hang them and denied them humane necessaries causing a spout to be taken away which served them with rain water for their drink In which hardships Sir John kept them untill he had gained from them such sums of money as he thought fitting and then scoffingly boasted that he now knew a way to get money meaning by hard imprisonment and the torment of irons to inforce men by any means to raise sufficient to satisfie him Neither will his allegation that the Town agreed with the Marquiss to pay that fine any way excuse him in regard such Composition was contrary to their Articles and made when a plundring sword was amongst them Mr. George Powel was then a Justice of the Peace in that Town and how Sir John used him his depositions and his wifes attestation will declare being as followeth viz. October 22 1650. Examinations taken upon Oath the day and year above written by vertue of Directions from the right Honorable the High Court of Justice concerning certain high Crimes and misdemeanors committed by Sir John Stawell Knight of the Bath for Levying War against the Parliament of England GEorge Powel of Taunton in the County of Somerset Gentleman aged 30 years or thereabouts sworn and examined saith That in or about the fifth day of June in the year 1643. Sir John Stawell Knight of the Bath then in company with the Lord Marquiss of Hartford and others entred the said Town of Taunton in an hostile way having the day before summoned the said Town and Castle for the use of the late King which Town and Castle had then declared to be kept for the use of the King and Parliament who after their entring and so by force and power seized on this Deponent with many others and by one Davis their Marshal kept him prisoner some daies This Deponent then being
of Commission and Iustice of the Peace for and within the Town of Taunton And also saith That about the eight day of the same Month of Iune the said Sir Iohn Stawell in company with Iohn Syms Esquire sent for and commanded the said Davis to bring this Deponent before them at the house of one Edward Cooper in the said Town who told this Deponent that he was fined eight hundred pounds to the King for his rebellion against the said King and after many opprobrious speeches used saying the Parliament and the said Town were a company of Rebels and Traitors against the late King and deserved to be hanged required the said Fine of 800 l. of this deponent and upon his refusal to pay the said Fine committed this Deponent close prisoner to the Castle of Taunton then in the hands and power of the said Sir Iohn Stawell as Governour of the said Garrison for the late King who after divers weeks imprisonment there and several demands of the said Fine by the said Sir Iohn Stawell and refusal of payment thereof by this Deponent he this Deponent was afterwards by the said command transmitted to the Bridewell of Taunton and there kept in Irons close Prisoner with many others not suffered humane necessaries to the great weakning and impairing of the health of this Deponent untill at last being often threatned by the said Sir Iohn Stawell to be hanged or to be sent to Oxford then in the late Kings power to be tryed for his life through fear of which and terrour and for preservation of his life he was constrained to Morgage and Pawn that land credit they had left him for three hundred pounds or thereabouts which he paid then languishing in prison unto the said Sir Iohn Stawell to redeem himself out of that cruel bondage and inhumane usuage and imprisonment This Deponent further saith that during S. Iohn Stawell's bearing power and government in the said Town he exacted great sums of mony from several persons for the late King his armies use Mustered Soulderies for the late Kings service against the Parliament and billited and enforced on this Deponent and divers of the said Town many Soulderies to free quarter And during his Government there a Souldier of his Regiment the name of whom at present this Deponent remembreth not was then hang'd on the Gibbet or Gallowes set upon the Market place in the said Town and by one Reeves his Major declared that it was the command and pleasure of the Governour that he should be hanged which being done the said Reeves did then further declare openly in the Market place that it was a beginning and president for the rest of the Rebels and Roundheads of the Town to look upon and must look some of them to follow after shortly or words to that effect which was to the great terrour and fear of the free-born of this Nation I Honour Powell of Taunton the relict of my late Husband George Powell Gent. am ready to make attestation of what is under written In the time of the late miseries of this Land it pleased God to make us of this Town partakers in a great measure of the calamities of the times of the which my late husband as is well known had not the least share being exposed to the most inhumane cruelties and outrages of the Enemy when this Town was subdued by them and afterwards made the mark of Sir Iohn Stawels envy and hatred as will more largly appear by what is under written when he usurped that most Tyrannous government over this Town First of all he imposed a Fine of eight hundred pounds on him his house being before rifled and plundred by the Souldery for the refusal to pay the said Fine he was committed by the said Sir Iohn Stawell prisoner to the Castle of Taunton after he had lain there a long time he was removed by his order to the Bridewel where he was kept close prisoner and lay night and day in Irons without the least favour nay denying him that favour which we give to horses namely to have a bundle of clean straw to lye on saying that he would make him an ensample to all Rogues and should look through a grate all dayes of his life and saying at his committing to the Bridewell that he would lay him neck and heels until he paid his Fine which words Mr. Maj. of Taunton which now is can attest being in the presence when they were spoken and threatned at several other times that he would hang him Afterwards having paid a Fine of 300. l. of mony besides what other goods were fetcht from us by his order he was then released of his imprisonment being so weak with lying on the ground and in Irons that he was scarce able to go along the street afterwards being sick for not hearing one of their malignant Priests on their Monthly Fast Sir Iohn caused him to be brought before him and fined him 10 l. and told him if he did not pay it forthwith he would levy a greater fine on him which was forthwith paid unto him with many more of such like cruelties and threats which now would be too tedious to recite One act more of his cruelty I cannot here in silence pass by which is this when he had clapt up my husband close prisoner in the Bridewel putting him in the common prison where Felons and other Rogues were kept he would not suffer me nor yet admit my children to go unto my husband And although Sir Iohn Stawell by his Remonstrance page 15. seems to excuse Mr. Powells imprisonment and detainer because he found him committed and his offence of such a nature as that he could not be delivered without due course of Law Mr. Powell upon his Oath discovereth the cause of his detainer to be for his affection to the Parliament and not payment of the 800 l. imposed on him for his proportion of that Fine Mr. Iasper Chapline who was then Maj. of that Town and a person of about 70 years of age will next relate Sir Iohn's usuage of him and the cause thereof His certificate followeth viz. Some particulats of Sir Iohn Stawell's Remonstrance answered by me Jasper Chaplin the 28 of Nov. 1653. When my Lord of Stanford first entred into the Town of Taunton I being then Major was commanded with others to seize the Castle into our hands for the good and safety of the County which was done acordingly And some of the honourable Deputie Leiutenants of this County authorised me to receive of divers Delinquents great sums of money which I ceived and paid according to order but when the Kings army entred this Town I was wounded in the Knee and sent to prison into the Castle being an old man and paid a hundred pound Fine for which I have a receipt under Sir Iohn Stawells hand Whilst I was there in prison divers of those of whom I received great sums of money became suitors to
Letter mentioned in the Remonstrance page 60 is pleased to confess viZ. that the truth was that by the order of the House that Committee was bound up from admitting him to compound unless he took the Covenant except the House would dispence with it which he saith they did when they approved of those Articles Certainly when Sir Anthony wrote this Letter he had forgotten that the Negative Oath and Covenant were injoyned to be taken by Compounders by Ordinances of both Houses of Parliament And therefore although the approbation of the Articles of Exon by the House of Commons should be granted to be a dispensation of those Ordinances in respect of them yet the Ordinance of the House of Lords lay still on that Committee as a prohibition not to make any Composition without the tendring of those Oaths otherwise why did that Committee and Sir Anthony amongst the rest send some of those Gent. that were comprised within those very Articles of Exon to the House of Lords after that the House of Commons had approved of them to procure such their dispensation likewise which had been needless if the approbation of the House of Commons alone had wholly disengaged that Committee from the tender of those Oaths and although they were thus limitted yet was not Sir Iohn without his means of Composition for he might have Petitioned the then Parliament to admit him to Composition who did before the Committee of Goldsmiths Hall were enabled constantly to compound with Delinquents which Sir Iohn neglecting or rather refusing to do the nonperformance of his Articles lyeth still on his accompt for suppose Sir Iohn had come to the Court of the Upper Bench or any other Court and had presented by Petition his offer to compound with them and that Court had told him they could not compound with him and that thereupon he had sate down had not Sir Iohn neglected the performance of his Articles or was it any fault in that Court that Sir Iohn could not be admitted by that Court to compound certainly no and there is no difference but that the Court of Upper Bench had no power at all to compound and the Committee of Goldsmiths Hall had such a power but limited to such rules which Sir Iohn refused the primitive and original power of Composition remaining still in the Parliament which Sir Iohn neglected nay refused to submit unto It is observable that notwithstanding sir Iohn had denied to take those Oaths or to acknowledge his Delinquencies yet that Committee our of a designe to preserve him gave him some time to consider thereof as himself confesseth Remonstrance pag. 24. which he seemed to accept as Mr. Ash affirms although sir John now denies it Let it be either yet it doth aggravate his neglect or obstinacy that having longer time notwithstanding the expiration of the four moneths and finding that Committee was disabled otherwise to compound with him he had not resorted to the Parliament it self for his peace Again the House of Commons themselves had after their confirmation of those Articles and before sir John came to compound viZ. Die Martis 2 Junii 1646. RESOLVED THat all persons that have or shall come and reside in the Parliament-Quarters shall take the National League and Covenant and the Negative Oath notwithstanding any Articles that have been or shall be made by the Souldiery So as after this time the Negative Oath and Covenant were to be taken by all Compounders at Goldsmiths Hall though they were within Articles and this by the command of both Houses Neither can sir John object the Order following viZ. Die Sabb. October 18 1645. ORdered That all Compositions for the discharge of the Delinquencies of any persons and for the taking off their Sequestrations shall be made with the Committee of Goldsmiths Hall and that no other Committee do compound with any Delinquent without the special directions of this House JOHN BROVVN Cler. Parl. Nor can sir Iohn upon this Order say that since this Order doth enable that Committee to compound with Delinquents in general that therefore it was the only place for sir Iohns address For although they were to compound with all Delinquents yet not untill after the taking of the Oaths but sir Iohn was to compound without Oaths which composition the Parliament alone could make Again this Order taketh away this power of compounding from all other Committees and centers it in the Committee of Goldsmiths Hall alone but still reserving to themselves either the power it self in cases extraordinary or direction thereof Sir Iohn therefore finding the Committee of Goldsmiths Hall to be limited to Rules and Oaths from which himself pretended an exemption by Articles should have made his address to the Parliament to make his Composition with them or from them to receive directions where else to make it especially when the Articles do mention Compositions with the Parliament and sithence his Composition made at Goldsmiths Hall if he had made any must before it could be effectual have the approbation of the Parliament If it should be objected that these Articles being confirmed were become the Articles of the Parliament and not of the Souldiery and so by consequence not within the word Souldiery in that Order of the second of June It is answered that those Articles ought to have the confirmation of both Houses which they having not until above 12 Months after they still continued the Articles of the Souldiery especially when the words are Articles that have been made by the Souldiery Sir Iohn therefore not making any application to the Parliament touching the gaining his Composition is guilty of this neglect those objections notwithstanding If Naaman had washed twice seven times in Abanah or Pharpar he had not been cured the command and together with it the healing vertue being fixt in Jordan which Naaman upon advise wisely performing was cleansed of his Leprosie But Sir Iohn not applying himself to the Parliament on whom the agreement rested and in whom the compounding power remained though importun'd thereunto continueth yet a Delinquent Every Compounder at Goldsmiths Hall was to deliver in a particular of his Estate by these resolves following viZ. Die Sab. 13 Dec. 1645. REsolved That if any shall come in to compound he shall present the particular of his Estate to the Committee of Goldsmiths Hall and the true yearly value of it as it was before these troubles began and for that that is concealed or omitted he shall have no advantage by his Composition but shall pay four times the yearly value of what real estate is concealed and for his personal estate concealed he shall forfeit all Such a particular Sir Iohn likewise did neglect both at the first and second time of his appearance although advised thereunto before he came by Mr. Ashe and at his first coming by the whole Committee and it had been wisdome in Sir Iohn to have hastened his Composition having vainly spent already so much time