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
Sir Iohn Stawell to this effect as I remember that they might be repaid out of my personal Estate by whose importunity as I conceive I was still kept in prison but how long I was so kept in prison I remember not it being about ten years sithence and my self about 80 years of age as also for that I had received of _____ Hellier of Exon 200 l. which was thus as I have since been informed he came into this County supposing to have remained here in some safety but this being known unto the deputy Lieutenants he was brought unto the Inn called the Three Cups in Taunton as it seems gave bond for paiment of 200. l. to be paid unto my self I not knowing therof until I saw the bond but I received the 200 l. and it was thus imployed the Dep. Leiut before that time wanted 200 l. which was procured by my self Mr Searl and others on our bonds and repaid accordingly as by our bonds appeareth During my imprisonment my house was plundered and I not left worth ten shillings to my knowledge more then the timber stuff so that I lost 400 l. or thereabouts And Sir Iohn Stawell came himself to the Prison at my enlargement but I never found such contentment in prison as to desire the said Sir Ioh. Stawell to send me back to prison again as is alledged so that for my suffering and losses the said Sir Iohn confessed me a judgement 313. l. as I was informed by my Attorney By me Jasper Chaplin And although Sir John in his Remonstrance p. 20. seems to justifie it the imprisonment being by his consent and for his good for the Reasons therein set forth yet doth Mr. Chaplin deny any such consent or any contentment in his imprisonment to induce either his desire thereof or consent thereunto Indeed his great Age could take no delight in nor endure any imprisonment but the truth was he was detained by Sir John until he had paid a considerable proportion of that moderate Fine And although it should be granted That he was imprisoned in such manner and for those curteous ends mentioned in that place of his Remonstrance yet Sir Iohn had no Authority nor Reason so to do no Authority we know nor Reason himself confesseth For as he saith he wrote unto Prince Maurice That it was contrary to Reason to enforce that from him meaning Mr. Chaplin who was admitted to his Composition which he was liable to repay unto his Creditors But Sir Iohn did first imprison Mr. Chaplin and then return an Answer to the Prince whereas it had perhaps been more just first to have endeavored the Princes satisfaction Mr. Matthew Quash Mr. William Milles Mr. Christopher Taylor Mr. John Adams Mr. Evans Mr. Andrew Pit Mr. George Treagle Mr. William Cady Mr. Iohn England Mr. Alexand Kingsland Mr. George Lyssant and others of the chiefest Inhabitants suffered likewise under him some of whom were so much weakned by their imprisonment and ill-usage therein that they were not well able to go out again All which these Oaths and Certificates will manifest The Information of John Adams of Taunton in the County of Somerset Gentleman taken upon Oath before Sir William Rowe Knight George Manby and William Weston Esquires A Committee of Examinations appointed by The High Court of Justice the 12 day of December 1650. Who saith HE hath known Sir Iohn Stawel Knight of the Bath by the space of sixteen years and upwards last past and that in Iune in or about the 19 year of the Reign of the late King He knoweth That the said Stawel was in Taunton with Prince Maurice and Marquess Hertford and about a week after he was in Taunton and acted there as the Governor and sent Summons to this Informant under his hand to appear before him where being come the said Sir Iohn Stawel commanded him to provide One hundred pounds for the late Kings service whereof one Fifty pounds he demanded in hand and the other shortly after Which said One hundred pounds was imposed on this Informant as his part of Eight thousand pounds imposed as a Fine upon the said Town of Taunton for their Rebellion as the said Sir Iohn Stawel termed it against the said late King by their adhering to the Parliament Which Money this Informant refused to pay and was therefore committed prisoner by Warrant under the Hand of the said Sir Iohn Stawel to the Castle of Taunton where he remained about ten days until his wife had borrowed Fifty pounds and paid it to the said Stawel and so procured his liberty And shortly after the said Sir Iohn Stawel sent to this Informant for Twenty pounds as his part of Two thousand pounds which the Messenger that came to him from the said Sir Iohn Stawel told him was to be sent to the Garison of Bristol then held for the late King which Messenger also told this Informant as from the said Sir Iohn Stawel That in case the Money was not forthwith paid he the said Sir Iohn Stawel would send this Informant to the Bridewel in Taunton and would there keep him a prisoner until he had paid full Two hundred pounds to which his Fine was increased And he further saith That the said Sir Iohn continued Governor of Taunton about one year during which time divers well affected persons to the Parliament were by his command made prisoners and put to fine and ransom for their affection to the Parliament As namely Mr. Evans the School Master Mr. Iasper Chaplin then Major of Taunton Mr. George Powel one of the Justices of the Peace for the Town with divers others And that during Sir Iohn Stawels Government there divers of the Parliament Officers and Soldiers were brought in there and made prisoners and there kept by his Command until such time as they were discharged by Exchange or let go upon their Parol Iohn Adams 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 Stawel Knight of the Bath for levying War against the Parliament of England GEorge Treagel of Taunton in the County of Somerset Clothier Aged Fifty years or thereabouts sworn and examined saith That he hath known Sir Iohn Stawel Knight of the Bath for the space of Twenty years or thereabouts and that he knew that about seven years since the said Sir Iohn Stawel was Governor of the Town of Taunton for the late King against the Parliament And that the said Sir John together with other of the Kings Party committed this Deponent as a prisoner into the Castle of Taunton for the space of five weeks or thereabouts for his affection to the state Part of which time he was kept in Irons And further saith That the said Sir Iohn Stawel did raise Forces both of Horse and Foot for the late King and levied War against the Parliament
AN ANSWER OF THE PURCHASERS Of the Lands late of Sir JOHN STAWEL By Act of Parliament Exposed to Sale for his TREASON To a Pamphlet Intituled The humble Remonstrance of Sir John Stawel TOGETHER With the Answer of John Ashe Esquire to divers Scandals mentioned in that Remonstrance AS ALSO A Petition and several Reasons for establishment OF PUBLICK SALES Tendred by Wil. Lawrence Esq One of the Judges in SCOTLAND LONDON Printed by Thomas Newcomb dwelling in Thamestreet over against Baynards Castle Anno Domini 1654. AN ANSWER OF The Purchasers of the Lands LATE OF Sir JOHN STAWEL By ACT of PARLIAMENT Exposed to Sale for his Treason c. IT is true that Affliction and Calamities have attended Sir John Stawels late condition not by any practise mis-information or ill-grounded Apprehensions as himself would have it but through his own obstinacy wilfulness doubtless as a punishment for his slighting that Mercy which Divine Providence tendred unto him by the Army and which others of his own judgment and within his own Articles timely embracing did safely harbor whilest himself remains splitted on those Rocks which they wisely avoided Yet doth he now by his Remonstrance proffer his Peaceable-Obedience to this Common-wealth and it is better late then never But of what integrity can such his Autumn-submission be since it is tendred not till after the Fall of all hopes of a Contrariant and is mixt with an endeavor to palliat if not justifie his former exorbitances The particulars of which Remonstrance he doth avow upon the Faith of a Christian and Honor of a Gentleman though many of them be notorious untruths and which Remonstrance he hath published to Vindicate as he pretendeth the Honor and Justice of the Parliament and Army and undeceive the People when divers of them yet feel the smart and others will ever bear the marks of his cruelties It cannot be denied but that the County of Somerset in the year 1640. chose Sir John Stawel to serve in Parliament as a Knight thereof and thereby intrusted him with the protection of their Estates and Liberties Which high trust he undertook and accordingly sate in that Parliament but afterwards contrary to that trust he not onely deserted that Parliament but levied war against it and the Publick Interest of that County by colour of a most Illegal Commission of Array and by the command of one who as little deserved the recommendation of the then House of Commons as Sir John Stawel did the choice of that County neither answering the expectation then had of them and both infringing their Countries trust Sir John being thus in Arms opposed at Marshals-Elm the Forces then raised in that County by Authority of Parliament where his catriage will appear by this ensuing Examination being the Deposition of a Minister of Gods Word faithful to the Parliament and one that did therefore afterwards suffer under Sir Johns Tyranny 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 Stawel Knight of the Bath for levying War against the Parliament of England JOhn Daniel of Buckland-Mary in the County of Somerset Clerk Aged Sixty years or thereabouts being sworn and examined saith That Sir John Stawel late of Higham in the County aforesaid Knight of the Bath did take up Arms against the Parliament of England and to his knowledge listed many Soldiers both Horse and Foot And Anno Dom. 1642. the said Sir John Stawel was himself in person at a place in the said County called Marshals-Elm and then and there had many Soldiers under his command both Horse and Foot and did abet and incourage the said Soldiers to fight against those that were then near unto them under the command as I conceive of Col. Pyne for the Parliament and preservation of the Peace of the then Kingdom And this Examinant further saith That he being with the company that were for the Parliament did adventure to ride up to the said place of Marshals-Elm by himself alone of purpose to discern what Forces the said Sir John Stawel had Before he came full to the top of the Hill the said Sir Iohn Stawel staid him and asked this Examinant What he did there and whether or no he was a Chaplain to the Army To whom this Examinant replied That he was not but had some occasion of his own at a place called Shapwick which was about two Miles from that place of Marshals-Elm And being demanded by the said Sir Iohn Stawel whether the Round-heads would come up the Hill and fight them This Examinant replied That he believed that they intended not to fight and thereupon this Examinant desired him to preserve the peace of the Kingdom But the said Sir Iohn being much enraged swore That if they would not come up to fight with them the said Sir Iohn and his Company would go down the Hill and fight with them and thereupon drew his sword and had also a Pistol and brandishing his sword said Come up Blades if you have a minde to it and we are for you And this Examinant further saith That there were placed in Quar-Pits thirty Muskettiers or thereabouts which had their light Matches and their Muskets loaden ready to fight which were at that time encouraged by the said Sir Iohn to be valiant And this Examinant further saith That at that time Mr. Robert Osborn being for the Parliament was there slain and many others grievously hurt and wounded and this Deponent with others taken prisoners by the said Sir Iohn Stawel and his Forces there with him And this Examinant further saith That one Captain Rosecareck a Cornish man six Moneths after or thereabouts came to Machelny where this Examinant then lived being sent by the said Sir Iohn Stawel and there searched this Examinants house for Arms and then carried away a Welsh-hook into the Castle of Taunton and also divers other Arms from other his Neighbors And the said Sir Iohn Stawel then calling in the Country upon Posse Comitatus by Warrant sent for this Examinant to appear before him and there told him That he was worthy to be drawn hanged and quartered for his siding with the Parliament against the late King By which Deposition the intention of Sir Iohn and that Company doth clearly appear to be otherwise then what by his Remonstrance is pretended Sir Iohn called the Parliament Forces Round-heads a Nick-name he lately learnt at Court swore those Round-heads should fight and then drew and brandished his sword inviting them to come up and fight and encouraged his Muskettiers in the Quar-pit But saith Sir Iohn the Parliament Forces made many shots first at us and wounded a Gentleman and killed his Horse which made him and his put themselves into a posture of Defence Be this granted to be true although the Depositions on both Parts seem to affirm the
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
Iohn Stawell was to sup and the said Cluff said further to the said Grand Iury that Sir Iohn Stawell refused to reprieve him and bid the Executioner do his Office and accordingly he the said Viccary was executed Henry Mintern October 22. 1650. Examinations taken upon Oath the day and year above written by vertue of Directions from the right Honourable the High Court of Iustice concerning certain high crimes and misdemeanors committed by Sir Iohn Stawell Knight of the Bath for Leavying War against the Parliament of England HEnry Ceely of North Curry in the County of Somerset Gentleman aged 53 years or thereabouts sworn and examined saith That Sir Iohn Stawell Knight of the Bath and Governor of Taunton in the year 1643 or 1644. about the first of February sent a Troop of horse to the house of the said Ceely by night by one Captain Walton and plundred the house of the said Ceely and carried him away prisoner to Taunton and there kept him in cruel endurance so long as the said Sir Iohn Stawell staid there Governor threatning him with hanging and death for adhering to the Parliament and at his the said Sir Iohn Stawels departure from Taunton sent the said Ceely to the prison of Bridgewater then in the power of the late King to the undoing of him the said Ceely and his Family Also in the time of this Deponents imprisonment in Taunton the said Sir Iohn did cause to be hanged and put to death one Viccarie for refusing to go in Arms against a Town in the County of Dorset named Lyme-Regit And further saith That the said Sir Iohn Stawell did appear with many more in Arms in the County aforesaid at Marshals Elme to the intent and purpose to wound kill and slay those that adhered to the Parliament as he the said Sir Iohn confessed to this Deponent when he was in prison in Taunton aforesaid and said that all those that were at Marshals Elme deserved to be hanged as Traitors for adhering to the Parliament And this Deponent doth verily believe that the bloud shed at Marshals Elme was the first bloud shed in the West of England I Iohn Baker of Higham in the County of Somerset Esquire do humbly certifie the unchristian dealings of Sir Iohn Stawell towards me who having received a wound and maim at Launsdown fight whereof I lay dangerously sick a long time as soon as Sir Iohn understood that there were hopes of life granted his Warrant for the apprehending of me and my brother threatning that if he took us he would hang us And indeed his Tyranny was such that we could expect no other had not God preserved us out of his hands and fury by letting of us have private notice of his designe upon which this Certificants friends conveyed me away by night and hid me in several places to avoid his rage Iohn Barker Sir Iohn Stawell did also commit Mr. Martyn Sandford the then High-Sheriff of the County of Somerset to the Prison of the Bridewell for some actings of the Sheriff for the advantage of the Parliament which as it is thought shortned his aged daies And to compleat his cruelty he caused to be hanged one Christopher Viccary for refusing to fight against the Parliament and the dictates of his conscience as appears by the precedent and following Depositions October 22. 1650. Examinations taken upon Oath the day and year above written by vertue of Directions from the right Honourable the High Court of Iustice concerning certain high Crimes and misdemeanours committed by Sir Iohn Stawel Knight of the Bath for Leavying War against the Parliament of England GEorge Lyssant of Taunton in the County of Somerset Woollen-draper aged forty years or thereabouts sworn and examined saith That he knew Sir Iohn Stawell to be late Governor of Taunton and that he in that time did raise Forces for the late King both of horse and foot against the Parliament and that the said Sir Iohn did raise and went with Forces from Taunton against the Town of Lyme and that the said Sir Iohn Stawell together with others of the Kings party did fine the said Town of Taunton for their Rebellion against the late King in the sum of 8000 l. for that they did adhere unto the Parliament And further saith that he saw one Reeves Major unto the said Sir Iohn Stawell upon the clamors and outcries of the people of the said Town to goe into the Quarters of the said Sir Iohn to seek to save the life of a Souldier whose name was reported to be Christopher Viccary who formerly lived at Norton which said Reeves returning back again said he could not prevail but that the said Viccary must suffer whereupon immediately after the said Viccary was hanged And also saith that he this Deponent was by the said Sir Iohn fined in the sum of 100 l. for his affection to the Parliament the said Sir Iohn saying that this Deponent was a Rebel against the King VVIlliam Savage of Taunton in the County of Somerset Lock-smith aged fifty years or thereabouts sworn and examined saith That Sir Iohn Stawell Knight of the Bath was about seven years since Governor of the Town of Taunton for the late King against the Parliament And also saith that one Christopher Viccary who sometimes quartered in this Deponents house being then a Souldier under the command of Captain Robert Clark in the late Kings service was by one Maior Reeves after he was condemned to suffer death carried into the Castle of Taunton and immediately after brought forth again and hanged by the order and appointment of the said Sir Iohn Stawell the said Viccary being drunk at the time of his suffering And further saith That the said Sir Iohn Stawell committed this Deponent unto Prison for his affection to the Parliament and there detained him for the space of three or four daies George Deacon of the Parish of Norton-fitZ-Warren in the Coutty of Somerset Husbandman aged 28 years or thereabouts sworn and examined saith That he knew Sir Iohn Stawell to be Governor of the Town of Taunton in the County of Somerset for the late King against the Parliament in the years 1643 or 1644. And that the said Sir Iohn did raise Forces both of foot and horse for the late King against the Parliament And further saith that he doth well remember one Christopher Viccary of Norton aforesaid who was then a Souldier under the command of Captain Robert Clark for the Kings service which said Viccary being by the said Sir Iohn Stawell and others commanded to march from Taunton unto and against Lyme which he the said Viccary refusing was by one Major Reeve carried into the Castle of Taunton and condemned to suffer death which said Reeves upon the outcries of the people of the said Town went unto the then Quarters of the said Sir Iohn to seek to save the life of the said Souldier which said Reeves returning back again said he could not prevail but that he
the Parliament had by their Act declared that he was not admitted to compound and that that Court should try him as one not admitted thereunto which Declaration no inferior or subordinate Court or authority whatsoever hath power to examine or question And all Examinations Resolutions and other proceedings of that Court touching those Articles and Plea thereof are void and extrajudicial and Sir Iohn stands guilty by the Judgement of that Court of high Treason and other the offences abovesaid and by Act of Parliament declared not admitted to compound This his Guilt being certified to the Parliament by the high Court of Justice with a cesser of sentence in respect of his Articles the Parliament upon reading of that Certificate 10 Iune 1651. resented the same yet by reason thereof spared his life but passed an Act of the 16 of Iune 1651. a month thereafter whereby they adjudge sir Iohn to have forfeited his Estate for Treason and thereupon vested the actual possession of that Estate in certain Trustees and their heirs in order to the sale thereof which Lands are since sold accordingly and the moneys disposed of for the use of the Commonwealth sir Iohn Stawell being in that Act first named and before others of higher degree Which Act and Iudgement being the Act and Iudgement of all the People of England inclusively and the same judgement being since fully executed and the Estate of sir Iohn in fact sold and disposed of by and according to that Act and the Purchasers thereof by force of their respective bargains in the actual and peaceable possession thereof these consequences will follow and be necessarily deduced 1. That the Reasons and causes of that Iudgement cannot be examined or questioned out of the House it self Whether they passed that their Iudgement for Treasonable acts by him done before his Articles in regard they adjudge his Articles to be either neglected in performance or broken by all or any his refusals or misdemeanors abovesaid or whether they adjudged those misdemeanors either joyntly or severally to be a new Treason and by consequence a forfeiture of his Estate since his Articles Or whether for any and for any other act of his or cause they passed their Iudgement against him It will therefore seem very unreasonable and be of dangerous consequence if the Purchasers mediat or immediat should be now enforced for defence of such their Possessions to search into and produce the reasons and causes thereof especially since the Purchasers are meer strangers thereunto 2. That all the Examinations and other proceedings and very Iudgement of the Court of Articles on the said Iudgement of Parliament although an Act of Parliament erected it after that Iudgement given were extrajudicial against the fundamental Laws of this Commonwealth and of bad example Coram non Iudice When that Court under pretence of a general Act of Relief upon Articles did intermeddle with the Case of sir Iohn Stawel touching his person and Estate his Estate being already adjudged by Act of Parliament to be forfeited and the imprisonment of his person remaining indiscussed in that very House especially after the Parliament had Thursday Febr. 24. 1652. Resolved THat the Cause of Sir John Stawel upon his pretence of Title to Articles be resumed to the consideration and determination of the Parliament and that the Commissioners for giving relief to persons upon Articles do forbear to proceed any further therein untill the Parliament take further order Hen. Scobell Cler. Parl. Which Resolves amounting unto an explanation of that Act of Reviver determined not with the dissolution of the Parliament but doth remain annexed to it as a Codicil taking away the Iurisdiction of that Court in the Case of Sir Iohn 2. These proceedings were coram non Iudice in regard of a Proviso in that Act of Reviver in these words viZ. Provided That such person or persons claiming benefit of Articles as aforesaid have not forfeited the same by breach or non-performance of what is or was on their part to be performed since their Articles were granted Now the Parliament having declared if not adjudged Sir John Stawell not to be admitted to Compound have adjudged or declared that Sir John hath forfeited his Articles either by breach or non-performance either of which Judgment or Declaration the Court of Articles could not draw into question And therefore is Sir John within that Proviso and without the jurisdiction of that Court. It is a fundamental That a Judgment of Parliament should not be reversed or annulled by any subordinate or delegated Court Judicature or Authority whatsoever or otherwise then by the immediate power of Parliament which power cannot be transmitted to any other Judicature The Court of Articles have adjudged That Sir John Stawell from and after Composition made as aforesaid shall have the possession of his Estate freed and discharged from all sequestrations and seisures whatsoever and shall enjoy the same without any claim demand impediment or molestation of the said Trustees or of the Survivors or Survivor of them they or any of their heirs These are the words of that Judgment as it is recited in the Remonstrance pag. 71. Which Judgment in respect of this Estate is no otherwise then an annihilation of that Act of Parliament by this subordinate Court under pretence of a power transmitted unto them by the general words of the Act of Reviver when as a special Act could not give any such power of annihilation The Legislative power by the fundamental laws remaineth solely and undoubtedly in the Parliament and cannot be transferred to any inferior Judicature whatsoever Of which power the Abrogation or Repeal of former Laws is a branch or part But this Judgment of the Court of Articles in respect of the Estate of Sir Iohn doth amount unto a Repeal of that Act of disposing this Estate by a power pretended to be delegated to that Court by the general words of that Act of Reviver It is of bad example for that Court of Articles to take cognisance of the Cause of Sir Iohn Stawel the same being depending before the Supreme Authority of the Nation when as their Predecessors who had the same if not greater power for that very reason forbare to give Sir Iohn any relief in that behalf And when the High Court of Justice for the same cause forbore their sentence and did submit it to the judgment of the House although their Act was particular and the Act of Reviving the Court of Articles in generall words And the example is heighthened after that the Parliament-Votes had prohibited them any further intermedling to resume the cognisance of the Cause and to proceed to judgment and by that judgment in respect of the Estate to intrench upon the priviledge of Parliament in reversing the Judgments of Parliament and repealing the Acts thereof and when the Judges Members of that Committee and the best and fundamental Expositors of Acts of Parliament the Parliament that made them being
against the Parliament Being Cross-examined on the behalf of the Commonwealth He saith That he doth not remember that Sir Iohn Stawel said the Committee were Traitors or Delinquents That to his remembrance they had no Order of Parliament that persons should acknowledge their Delinquencie before they were admitted to compound but the Committee made such an agreement amongst themselves And saith that some of the Committee did say that Sir Iohn Stawels Petition was rather a Remonstrance then a Petition And saith that there was no Particular of his Estate annexed to his Petition nor was it ordinary so to do but the Particular was usually delivered after admission to a Composition And saith that Sir Iohn Stawel did refuse the Covenant and Negative oath upon account of his Articles and that the subscription not to bear Arms was not to be made before them but in another place before they came to them And saith That he was neer Sir Iohn Stawel when he was with the Committee but did not hear any particular ill language given by him to the Committee as he remembreth but saith that his carriage was then as it was usually not very pleasant or Courtly Sir David Watkins examined at the same time on Sir John Stawels part Saith THat he was of the Committee for Compounding and was there when Sir Iohn Stawel came and presented his Petition to the Committee which was within four moneths from the 8. of April And saith that he came in a civil manner but did not acknowledge his Delinquencie nor would take the Negative oath and was refused to be admitted upon that account And saith that he doth not remember any Order of Parliament that did forbid them to Compound with persons that did not acknowledge themselves Delinquents but such as had not taken the Oath and Covenant And saith that he saw the Lord Fairfax his Pass dated in April and that he doth account four moneths after the rate of 28 dayes to a moneth And saith that he doth not know that any Certificate was brought to them touching Subscription not to bear Arms either in this or any case of persons compounding upon those Articles and saith that Sir Iohn Stawels not subscribing was not objected against him at that time Being Cross-examined on the behalf of the Commonwealth He saith That some did say That Sir Iohn Stawels Petition was rather a Remonstrance then a Petition but the title was A Petition But he had not acknowledged his Delinquencie nor taken the Negative Oath and Covenant and for that reason he conceives it was called a Remonstrance That the Committee were informed he had subscribed not to bear Arms against the Parliament Sir Anthony Irby being called in after the Company were withdrawn and asked whether there were any private discourse at the Committee to Sir John Stawels prejudice HE saith that Sir Iohn Stawell being without the dore the Chair-man went out and on his return told this Examinant That Sir Iohn Stawel was a great Enemy had raised Arms against the Parliament drew the first blood in the West of England that his Petition was not valid he acknowledged no Delinquencie had not taken the Negative Oath and saith that the Committee pressed him to it and upon refusall gave him time till his Articles were out because then they knew how to deal with him and saith that the Committee did not meddle with subscription for that was to be done by particular Committees separated from them because that concern'd Delinquents stay in Town but only to see that they did take the Negative Oath and Covenant And further saith that the second day that Sir Iohn Stawell appeared Mr. Stephens was in the Chair as he remembers Of both which to make some observations Sir Anthony saith in his Letter That he knoweth sir John delivered his Petition within the time according to Articles And in his Examination that the same was so preferred within the time limited by the Articles of Exon as appeareth by the Pass of Sir Thomas Fairfax But in neither hath he explained himself what he meaneth by the time limited for if he intendeth thereby Kalendar time it is then true for sir John appearing first on the sixth of August came within the time limited But then it cannot be true what Mr. Michael Herring hath both sworn and affirmed upon his examination that the Committee refused him not for not coming in time And so Gens contra Gentem But if sir Anthony reckoneth but 28 daies to the Month sir John must first appear before the 30 of July when the time according to that Act expired but then the suggestions of sir Anthony's own Warrant of the Committee whereof sir Anthony was one and present of the fourth of August cannot be true for that surmiseth that sir John had not then appeared before any Committee And by this construction there is sir Anthony Irby the Commissioner against sir Anthony Irby the Witness He saith upon his Examination The Petition was read but something therein was disliked because sir Iohn did not acknwledge his Delinquency neither would he take the Covenant and Negative Oath As touching the refusal of the Oaths that could be no cause of disliking his Petition it might be of refusing his Composition the Oaths being collateral to the Petition As touching his acknowledgement of Delinquency it is strange that it is now grown with sir Anthony a finding of fault or an occasion to pick a quarrel with one that deserved no favour by reason of a Character given him of the violentest and earliest enemy which was indeed true let whomsoever give that Character when as it was the constant rule by which that Committee and sir Anthony himself did walk neither was there any person whatsoever that did compound without it let him deserve favour or not But if sir Anthony intended to shew him no favour why did sir Anthony for he sweareth that We did give him time for eight or ten daies or fortnight He further deposeth that he did not certainly remember but it was to his cetain remembrance that by that time his time given him by his Articles would be out that We might deal with him the better which if it should be believed to be true because he sweareth it certainly sir Anthony was then too severe in his Justice rather injust as he is now too mercifull neither can he be excused of casting snares in sir Iohns way to satisfie his passion for sir Anthony himself was then the violentest man against him though to the breach of the faith of the Army and Nation But we will not take advantage with an Habemus confitentem reum we will not for his own credit at this time believe him but do believe Mr. Iames Ash that time was given unto sir Iohn Stawell upon the entreaty of Mr. Iohn Ash and in hope to draw sir Iohn in the interval unto a submission Sir Anthony's testimony touching sir Iohns carriage at that Committee hath been