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
comprised within the Articles of Exon or of any other Garison or not within Articles yet did they Petition in that manner although they were as zealous for their King as Sir John Stawel deeming it wisdom in them rather so to do then to run the hazard of not performing their Articles and thereby of the loss of their Liberty and Estate and especially since such acknowledgment or expression and formality of Address was within the intention of those Articles For if a man agreeth to submit to a Composition with these Exceptions certainly he doth agree to submit to all other Rules for such Composition not formerly excepted and this was a constant rule and observed at and before the time of the making of those Articles And therefore in regard Sir John Stawel did refuse to insert such an Acknowledgment or Expression in his Petition he hath in a second particular neglected the performance of his Articles and that premediately since he was preadvised Neither is it satisfactory when Sir John alleageth That he did tell Mr. Ashe he had borne Arms for the late King and by his command unless for the Reasons aforesaid he had in writing affirmed as much And yet this very Paper or pretended Petition which was thus delivered was not presented by himself but put in by a Solicitor And Sir John did refuse to subscribe the same as Mr. Michael Herring hath lately affirmed before a Committee of this present Parliament sitting in the Star-chamber And if it shall be objected That although the several Orders aforesaid did inable that Committee to compound onely with Delinquents it followeth not They should compound with none but such as in terminis acknowledged Delinquency It is easily answered when it is considered That Sir John was not advised to acknowledge in express terms That he was a Delinquent but if he had in his Petition set forth some act done by him amounting to Delinquency it had been sufficient but one of them he was by the constant rules of the Committee to insert in his Petition which Sir Iohn refused Sir Henry Berkley with others came in upon the Articles of Exon as well as Sir Iohn yet Sir Henries Petition was in these words To the Honorable Committe for Compounding with Delinquents The humble Petition of Sir Henry Berkley Knight Sheweth THat your Petitioner as formerly a Commissioner of the Army for His Majesty and since did voluntarily contribute to the Forces raised against the Parliament by means whereof he is become under the notion of a Delinquent That being in the City of Exeter upon the delivery thereof humbly craves the benefit of the Articles of the same And that he may be admitted to a favorable Composition for his offence according to the value of his Estate to the end he may free the same from Sequestration And he shall pray c. Subscribed Hen. Berkley But Sir Iohn having taken on a Resolution not to compound took up all pretences to avoid the same But Mr. Ashe asked him as Sir Iohn objecteth whether he had taken the negative Oath and Covenant to whom Sir Iohn answering no and that his Articles did free him from taking any Oaths Mr. Ashe replyed that before he could be admitted to Composition with them he must take them both It is answered that there then lay on that Committee a command several Ordinances of both Houses the transcripts whereof are inserted that injoined them to tender that Covenant and negative Oath to all persons that came to compound and to secure their persons upon refusal Sab. 1 Nov. 1645. ORdered by the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled That the Committee at Goldsmiths Hall shall have power to tender the Solemn League and Covenant to all persons that come out of the Kings quarters to that Committee to compound either upon Mr. Speakers Pass or otherwise and to secure such as shall refuse to take the Covenant until they shall conform thereunto Sab. 5. April 1645. BE it ordained by the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled That all and every person of what degree or quality soever that hath lived or shall live within the Kings quarters or been aiding assisting or adhearing unto the forces raised against the Parliament and hath or shall come to inhabite or reside under the power and protection of the Parliament shall swear upon the holy Evangelists in manner following I A. B. do swear from my heart that I will not directly nor indirectly adhere unto or willingly assist the King in the war or in this cause against the Parliament nor any forces raised without the consent of the two Houses in this cause or war And I do likewise swear that my coming and submitting my self under the power and Protection of the Parliament is without any manner of design whatsoever to the prejudice of the proceedings of the two Houses of Parliament and without the direction privity or advice of the King or any of his Councel or Officers other then in what I have now made known so help me God and the contents of this book And be it ordained by the Authority aforesaid that the Commissioners for the keeping of the great Seal of England for the time being shall have power are hereby authorised to tender administer the said Oath unto any Peer or Wife or Widdow of any Peer so coming to inhabit as aforesaid And it shall be lawful to and for the Committee of the House of Commons for Examinations the Committee for the Militia in London and all Committies of Parliament in the several Counties Cities of the Kingdome to tender and administer the said Oath unto every other person so coming to inhabite a abovesaid if any person not being a member of or assistant unto either of the Houses of the Parliament shall refuse or neglect to take the said Oath so duely tendered unto him or her as abovesaid the said Commissioners and Committees respectively shall and may commit the same person to some prison there to remain without bail or mainprize untill he shall conform thereunto It is true that the Articles of Exon do free all persons comprised therein from all Oaths Covenants and Protestations but it is likewise as true that those Articles were not at the time of Sir Iohn's being at Goldsmiths Hall confirmed by both Houses as in right they then ought indeed the House of Commons had before that time confirmed them viZ. sixth of May 1646. but they were confirmed by both Houses not before the fourth of Nov. 1647 above an year after Sir Iohns being there so as the command of tendering this Oath and Covenant lay still upon that Committee and they were not to compound with any person be he within Articles or without before he had taken them and therefore it was no injustice in that Committee to deny Sir Iohn to treat with him before he was sworn for they were prohibited otherwise to admit him to Composition which Sir Anthony Irbie in his
he catcheth at every twig to recover it However the truth of those Verdicts and Indictments is since confirmed by the Iudgment of the High Court of Iustice upon Sir Iohn Stawels Plea of Not guilty and the Depositions of several Witnesses to that purpose as is certified under the subscriptions of three and twenty of that Court and manifested by the recital of the proceedings of that Court in the Remonstrance Sir Iohn being thus found guilty by three several Indictments of Treason and two Murders and still refusing the mercy of his Articles the Parliament in honour of Iustice and upon consideration of his forfeiture of Articles did on the 14 of March 1648. and two years and a half and more after his first Commitment Order his Trial upon these Indictments at the Upper-Bench bar where his Expressions were more insolent and his disownings of the present Authority greater then at any time before And so far was Sir Iohn Stawel after so long imprisonment from accepting the benefit of his Articles that he did not then mention them in order to his exemption from that Trial but on the contrary distinguishing Mr. Iustice Bacon from Mr. Iustice Roll owned the first as one sitting by the Kings Commission but disowned the latter being appointed by the Parliament under the Great Seal by them approved which Seal he termed a Counterfeit and accused the then Sollicitor-Generall of high treason for prosecuting against him in the name of the Parliament as was by several Witnesses proved before the High Court of Iustice And as Mr. Iohn Ash affirmeth uttered words to this effect viZ. My offence is not Treason for which I am here arraigned but because I would not permit the Committee of Goldsmiths Hall to pick my purse and give my consent to pay a sum of mony for the redemption of my Estate which is unjustly taken from me Which speeches if they had fallen from one formerly innocent had been an offence of an high nature but being spoken by sir Iohn a person guilty and so found by several Grand Iuries and at several times of Treason Murder and other high offences And by one that came into the Parliament-Quarters under the pretence of a Composition and in that conjuncture of time when divers Garrisons held yet out for the late King and some Ships had renegaded the Parliament-service and in one of the highest Iudicatures whither multitudes resorted to observe his deportment became not a Compounder much aggravated his former offences must prove prejudicial to the Parliaments affairs and contrary to the 21 of Exceter Articles and to sir Iohns Engagement and subscription at the Guild Hall and was doubtless a breach of his Articles And although perhaps these insolencies were not Treason within the Cognizance of an inferior or ordinary Judicature yet might the Parliament adjudge them so which they have done For in their Act of sale they have mentioned Treason committed by him which must be his miscarriages since his Articles for his former were pardoned And although it be granted they do not amount unto Treason yet they may be a breach of Articles for it is not Treason only that doth break them inferior offences may prove a breach the breach of good behaviour and certainly his miscarriages are of no less nature is a forfeiture of a pardon and why not of Articles Truely much more for pardon though of grace is grounded upon the compact and agreement of the whole Nation but these Articles are but the agreement of certain persons thereof of the Army with Traitors And although by the third Article of Exon certain enumerated Acts are made a breach of those Articles yet questionless other matters not enumerated may be a breach whereof these of sir John are some and it seems have been so adjudged by the Parliament For in the Debate of all Acts and Resolutions of theirs against sir John they still had a consideration of his Articles and adjudged these his miscarriages a breach of them and therefore declared him not to be admitted to Composition having forfeited the benefit thereof And although the Articles bind not sir John in point of his judgement yet they restrain him from all open and overt expressions thereof to the prejudice of the Commonwealth A man in private thoughts deemeth another man to be a thief perhaps knoweth him to be one This judgement this knowledg the Law taketh no notice of But let him declare such his thoughts judgement or knowledge by saying he is a Thief these open words being prejudicial to the party whereof the words were spoken make him liable to an Action and if he proves it not to repair him in damage Sir John might without damage have kept his judgement to himself but expressing it in such insolent and prejudicial language to the affairs of Parliament he forfeited his Articles Which his deportment being reported to the House of Commons they proceeded at that time no further against him in that Court but having then consideration of the Articles of Exon and to preserve the faith of their Armies from all colour of violation they still reserved their mercy for him if he had but then implored it But sir John continued in his averse resolution out of a confidence of the late Kings restitution to his Power and Authority and a designe thereby to receive his whole Estate gratis with a great reward for his many sufferings in owning and justifying the late Kings Cause beyond any of his party being the only Subject of his that refused to comply with the Parliament when he might and was earnestly invited thereunto which aim of his is apparent For Mr. Iohn Ash doth tell us that he sent unto the late King at Hampton-Court desiring him to take notice of the great sufferings he had undergone for his Majesties Cause and did let him know the hopes he had of his Majesties great favour and reward for him when he should be restored And Mr. Iames Ash testifieth that the Lady Stawell told him that sir Iohn did still flatter his hopes to have the King restored and although there were daily less hopes yet his faith continued strong nay besides the testimony of these two persons of honour and by the testimony of two witnesses each truth ought to be tryed if half an eye did but look into his carriage from his first coming before the Committee at Goldsmiths Hall untill his tryal by the High-Court of Justice it could be nothing but disownings contempts and opprobrious language of the present Government and Authority deriding of Compounders and not the least claim of the benefit of his Articles as long as his hopes of favour and singularity remained For sir Iohn never pleaded nor so much as ever pretended to those Articles untill some time after the late Kings death although in the mean time there were brought and obtained against him divers Actions and Iudgements for acts by him done before those Articles and relating to the wars which
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
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
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
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
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
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 said Viccary must suffer who imediately after was hanged on a Gibbet in the Market place of Taunton by the order and appointment of the said Sir Iohn Stawell as this Deponent verily believeth he this Deponent being then a servant unto the said Captain Robert Clark Henry West of Taunton in the County of Somerset aged 42 years or thereabouts sworn and examined saith That Sir John Stawell Knight of the Bath in the years 1643 or 1644. was Governor of the Town of Taunton aforesaid for the late King against the Parliament and that he raised Forces both of horse and foot for the said late King against the Parliament And this Examinant further saith that he being a Captain for the Parliament at and before the time of the enemies entrie into the said Town The said Sir Iohn imposed on this Deponent a fine of 500 l. whereof he paid the summ of 250 l. in money and goods And further saith that he knew there was a Souldier whose name he doth not now well remember who was commanded with others to march from Taunton unto and against Lyme who marching a little beyond this Deponents house in Silverstreet did there first lay down his Arms for which he was carried away and afterwards hanged He further saith that one Mr. Anthony Pardee late Minister of the said Town told this Deponent that the Lady Stawell did pitch down on her knees unto the said Sir Iohn her husband craving of him to save the said souldiers life who in wrath denied her and took her by the arm and thrust her forth of dores which said Lady after employed the said Pardee to sue for the said souldiers pardon who upon his motion was commanded to hold his peace And after this Examinant saw the said souldier hanged Philip Atherton of Hillforrence in the County of Somerset Gentleman sworn and examined saith That he was Ensigne unto Captain Robert Clark in the time when Sir Iohn Stawell Knight of the Bath was Governor of the Town and Castle of Taunton for the late King against the Parliament and was in the said Town when one Vicarry a souldier to the said Captain Robert Clark was condemned to suffer death by a Councel of War as this Deponent conceiveth who was then personally present and heard the Debate of the said Councel of War and the sentence of death given by the said Sir Iohn Stawell in these words That the said Viccary should go from thence to the Castle of Taunton and from thence to the Cornhill and there to be hanged untill he was dead or words to the like effect And further saith that about four or five hours after of the same day he this Deponent saw the said Viccary brought forth and hanged according to the order and appointment of the said Sir Iohn notwithstanding there were several means used by solicitation to the said sir Iohn by one Major Reeves to save the said Viccary's life And further saith That when the said Viccary was commanded to march by the said sir Iohn from Taunton unto and against Lyme he this Deponent verily believeth the said Viccary was distempered with drink By which Depositions it is evident that Christopher Viccary when he was drunk was hanged by Sir John Stawels command for refusing to march as formerly he had refused against the Parliament Garison at Lyme notwithstanding the importunate intreaties of the Lady Stawell his own wife Mr. Pardee a Minister and Major Reeves his own Major to the contrary which refusal although Sir John endeavoureth to excuse by the aspersion of Mutiny sometimes for pay or advance money and afterwards for want of Arms yet in truth it was to satisfie the dictates of his conscience for if want of pay and arms had been the cause of his pretended mutiny the pay being satisfied and the arms delivered to satisfaction as Sir John confesseth they were he would readily have marched but he refused notwithstanding and swore he would not go so as the pay and the arms were but pretences the conscience was the cause of the refusal neither could this refusal be a mutiny within the Kings Military Articles for Sir John as himself confesseth receiving Orders from the late King to send a hundred men to the siege of Lyme sends for an ancient Trained Band under the command of Captain Robert Clark whereof Viccary was one in order to send them to Lyme but because he was not formerly listed in that service he now refused to march and therefore was hanged but by what Law or Justice he was either thus hanged or a mutinier let each man judge Where are now those glorious expressions of Sir Iohn in his Remonstrance that he acted not beyond the moderate and sober limitations of a contrariant that he was a lover of his Country and a protector of every man in his property that he was governed in all the course of his life by that divine rule and principal in humanity do as you would be done unto Hath not every one of these his acts exceeded the sober limitations of a Contrariant can this man be said to be a lover of his Country when he sought the destruction of the faithful thereof or a protector of property when each action of his intrenched on it were not undeserved Imprisonment Irons Chaines swolne Legs pinching hunger weakened bodies and exaction of monies thereby scandalous language persecuted consciences threats of death and death it self the emblems of his love and moderation and so proved and by many more ready to be proved and certified And yet this man dares to Remonstrance would Sir Iohn have been done unto as he hath done unto others certainly no his frequent complaints of his late condition though deserved do witness the contrary Sir Iohn at length concludes his Government at Taunton with an act of humanity shewn to Mistress Treagle touching Sir Samuel Roll his Estate which as he supposeth did put an end to that his command But whatsoever his civilities were to the Wife he was very uncivil to the Husband as his own Depositions doth evidence And as one or two bad acts do not make a good man bad so one or two good actions make not a bad man good nor in any sort excuse or diminish his wickedness And it hath been observed That wicked men have sometimes ruined themselves in not being wicked enough through a desire to be honest themselves If Sir Iohn had taken away this Plate as he did the Goods of many others and which he might have as justly perhaps he had continued longer in his Command but doing not the one he lost the other by the injustice of his friends not the sword of an enemy But now the Scene is altered and Sir Iohn that formerly sate at Taunton triumphing over the lives and liberties of the well effected there is now besiedged in Exon by the Parliaments forces and enforced in order to his safety to Article with them for his life and liberty and had been
thereof Neither is the objection of weight that a particular was to be brought in when the Compounder was admitted to his Composition for Sir Iohn was really admitted observing the Rules of that Committee whereof a particular was one and to perform which he had time given him but at that time neglecting it his resolution not to compound appeareth and without such a particular that Committee being strangers to his estate could not without a survey thereof which would be chargable to the Commonwealth compound according to the rates prescribed them to avoid which charge the Parliament ordered a particular Sir Iohns having no notice of these Rules hath been vainly objected for when Mr. Iohn Ashe gave him the visit he was informed by him of the form of his Petition and of the particular and when he first came to Goldsmiths Hall the Committee gave him longer time as himself confesseth to consider of the Oath and Covenant or as Mr. Iohn Ashe deposeth upon hopes that at his next appearance he would be better advised and yield submission to the authority of Parliament and conform to the Rules of the Committee or as Mr. James Ashe informeth to amend his Petition and bring in his particular to compound of which also he was told by the Committee neither could it be in any sort prejudicial to him to subscribe a Delinquency or some act amounting unto it for this over act of subscription could not have been treason or breach of his Articles in regard it was known and taken as an inabling rule of that Committee onely if it had been yet the very subscription carried with it a pardon of that subscription So as in these four particulars Sir Iohn Stawell did neglect the performance of his Articles and therefore the blame of his after troubles must light on himself not on the Parliament especially since the Committee of Goldsmiths Hall did admit him to composition accoring to the Rules of Compositions but he would not submit unto it and sithence the Parliament hath performed what their Armies promised in suffering Sir Iohn quietly to enjoy his liberty during the four Moneths and expressing their readiness to compound with him at two years value had he Petitioned them to that purpose but he wilfully refused it for as Mr. Ashe affirmeth although Sir Iohn Stawell did appear at the Committee of Goldsmiths Hall yet he never intended to make any Composition there according to the Order of Parliament and the rules prescribed for Composition upon the said Articles but did oftentimes declare his resolution to the contrary which his resolution he seconded by his carriage and words at his first coming thither And although Sir Henry Berkly hath said that it was fitting and Sir David Watkins that he came to that Committee with a fair and civil respect And Sir Anthony Irbie took no offence with his carriage neither as he thinketh justly there could be any taken neither saw he any incivility at the time he was before them either in carriage or language yet hath Mr. Richard Wareing deposed that it was insolent Mr. Michael Herring that it was very high Mr. Samuel Moyer that his comportment was very insolent and Mr. Iohn Ashe that the sence and substance of his words were That the Parliament had seized and sequestred his Estate or had taken it away by force for doing his duty to the King as by the Law and several Oaths which he had taken he was bound to do and that he could not have his Estate again unless he gave that Committee mony to redeem it that he was a person in debt and his debt and his debts were much increased since his Estate was taken from him by the Parliament by which means he was disabled to pay the Committee much money notwithstanding if they could accept of what he could procure he would then compound with them for the redemption of his Estate And Mr. James Ashe doth attest that his words were and Mr. Samuel Moyer certifieth that he scornfully said that he was no Delinquent but the Parliament and they was who contrary to their Oaths had fought against the King and although Sir Henry Berkly being of the same judgment and affect so although Sir David Watkins by forgetfullness or age and Sir Anthony Irbie for some other respect seem now to excuse him yet certainly his deportment then both in the opinion of Sir David and Sir Anthony themselves was very disrespective to the Government and such as the whole Committee and especially Sir Anthony Irby being the most earnest had thereupon resolved forthwith to have it reported to the House of Commons had not Mr. Iohn Ash desired them to give him some four or five days respite upon the hopes aforesaid which the Committee did accordingly Sir Iohn having thus voluntarily refused the Armies mercy in not making his Composition within the four moneths limited he was after the expiration of them reduced to a Delinquent that had forfeited his Articles and therefore cannot complain of injustice when upon his coming to Goldsmiths-Hall the 13 of August 1646. they then committed him for refusing to take the Negative oath and Covenant and upon his reiterated misdemeanors being higher in his expressions then at his first being there although his former expressions contemptuously disowned the authority of the Parliament Ordered Mr. Stevens their then Chairman to report such his carriage to the House of Commons And being thus committed he did not in the least degree petition or desire that Committee to be admitted to Composition he only craved maintenance which that Committee promised him to take care of as himself relateth in his Remonstrance During his imprisonment there he and the rest of the Prisoners whereof Mr. Michael Tidcombe a Wiltshire Gentleman was one having received an intimation of the late Kings pleasure that the Prisoners might make their peace with the Parliament debated what to do therein at which debate Sir Iohn was present And although the rest of the Prisoners did agree to make their Composition with the Parliament yet Sir Iohn utterly opposed it in his particular and laughed at such as already had or would make such Composition which jeering at such Compounders he used at another time by the testimony of Mr. Ash Afterwards Mr. Stephens accordingly doth make his Report to the House of Commons and as Mr. Iohn Ash hath sworne before the High Court of Justice to this effect viZ. That the opinion of that Committee was That Sir Iohn Stawell had slighted and contemned the Authority of the present Parliament and forfeited their mercy contained in the Articles of Exon with this conclusion That if the Parliament did not make Sir John Stawell a Traitor Sir John had made them Traitors And this conclusion is likewise attested by Mr. Iames Ash Upon which Report Sir Iohn is sent for to the House of Commons but being staid some time in the Lobby till the Debate of the House was ended Mr. Iohn Ash came
unto him and advised him to acknowledge his miscarriage at Goldsmiths Hall crave the pardon of the House and desire admission to Compound Which Sir Iohn disliked saying That if he were willing yet he was not able to pay the mony for a Composition Sir Iohn being brought to the Bar of that House and refusing to kneel is committed to Newgate for High-Treason for levying war against the Parliament the Transcripts of which Order and Mittimus are inserted in the Remonstrance fol. 29. Where he continued for some years Neglecting refusing passionately disdaining to Petition to be admitted to a Composition or any way to comply with the Parliament in that behalf although entreated and importuned thereunto by his wife and friends that desired to preserve him and his Estate and by others that stood deeply engaged as Sureties for his Debts His wife hath upon her bared knees and with many tears desired him if not for her sake yet for the sake of the children of his body to use her words that he would submit and Petition the Parliament for a Composition which notwithstanding he slighted as the poor Lady her self with grief affirmed to divers Gentlemen of worth and hath complained of his wilfulness amongst the rest unto Mr. Iames Ash whose testimony lately given to the Committee of Parliament to whom sir Iohns Petition is referred followeth viZ. Decemb. 15. 1654. The Information of James Ash Esq a Member of Parliament given to the Committee of Parliament to whom the Petition of Sir John Stawel is referr'd in the Case of the said Sir John Stawel WHo saith That he was present at Goldsmiths-Hall when Sir John Stawell came thither who delivered a paper which he called a Petition The Committee upon receipt and reading that paper were all of opinion It was not a Petition to compound The said Committee thereupon called in Sir John Stawell and asked him some questions some of them the Informant hath forgot but these he remembers Being demanded why he came thither if not to compound and they telling him they were a Committee to compound with Delinquents He said that he came to have his Estate that was taken from him and did endeavour in his speech to take off the Delinquencie from himself and to cast it upon the Parliament and Committee The particular expressions he cannot now remember nor doth he remember the title of the said Petition but saith the substance of it was to have his Estate Sir John Stawell being withdrawn the Committee fell into a debate whether his ill carriage there should be reported to the House But afterwards a Gentleman Mr. John Ash moving that he might have three or four dayes to amend his Petition and bring in a Particular to Compound which also he was told of by the Committee He this Informant heard no more of him till the Report made to the Parliament by Mr. John Stephens of his miscarriage and ill behaviour which the Parliament highly resented and did order him to be sent for as a Delinquent Whereupon being brought to the bar of the Parliament and commanded by the Speaker to kneel He this Informant sitting very neer Sir Iohn Stawel heard him mutter these words I desire to know my offence or crime Upon which being ordered to withdraw the Parliament made an Order for his commitment to Newgate as this Informant remembers Afterwards being by Order of Parliament referred to be tryed for Treason and Report being made to the Parliament of his high carriage and disowning their Authority and the Judges that sate thereby they were yet more incensed against him And afterwards upon the news given to the Parliament of one Mr. Anthony Ascams death the Parliament having before declared to bring some Delinquents to punishment who were excepted from pardon did refer Sir Iohn Stawell amongst others to be tryed at the High Court of Justice That during all the Debates when the Parliament gave any Judgment against him consideration was still had of his Articles and yet in those Judgments there were hardly any Negatives but the Question passed cleer That afterwards the Report being made from the High Court of Justice who did not proceed to give sentence of death against him in regard of the Articles of Exceter many Gentlemen Members of Parliament in the House did much wonder thereat but in regard of the opinion of the said High Court they did not again refer him to be tryed for his life but did as he remembers eo instanti pass a Vote That his Estate should be confiscate to the Commonwealth and afterwards past the Act for Sale of his Lands That to this Informants knowledge for many years together after the first apparance of sir Iohn Stawell at Goldsmiths Hall there were many endeavours used for to have drawn him to compound and to have had the benefit of his Articles but he would never be perswaded thereunto Now the reason of this his knowledg is because he was privy to the actings on his behalf and having discourse several times with the Lady Stawell concerning those endeavours which had been used to perswade him to compound And this Informant saying to her Can there be no way found out whereby he may be preserved and have the benefit of his Articles She answered this Informant in these words Sir you know what endeavours have been used and how we would have perswaded him to have suffered his son Ned Stawell meaning him called sir Edward Stawell to have compounded for his Estate but he would not give his consent thereunto but did threaten him if he endeavoured any such thing For saith she he doth still flatter himself with vain hopes of seeing the King restored and although there be every day more unlikelihood then other yet his faith continues strong That having some discourse with one Michael Tidcomb a Gentleman in Wiltshire as he remembers upon reading of the Act passed by the late little Convention or Parliament for the confirmation of the sale of sir Iohn Stawels Lands The said Gentleman spake these words I wonder said he that sir Iohn Stawell should now pretend to the Articles of Exceter since to my knowledge he did refuse to have the benefit of them For said he when I was a prisoner in Ely House with the said sir Iohn Stawell some intimation we had from the then King that we should submit to the Parliament and compound for our Estates Upon which we had a Debate amongst our selves and sir Iohn Stawell was present and it was the opinion of most of them they should submit to compound but sir Iohn Stawell did declare against it and laughed at them that had compounded or did intend it And this Informant further saith That sir Iohn Stawell came to Goldsmiths Hall in the afternoon as he now remembers and that this Informant was then a Member of Parliament but not of that Committee And this Informant saith that sir Iohn Stawell said these words I am no Delinquent which words he
this Informant remembers positively but the Parliament and you who contrary to your Oaths of Allegiance have fought against the King Or words to that effect Being cross interrogated by sir Iohn Stawels Councel He saith That it is the custom of the Parliament when a Delinquent is brought to the Barr that the Delinquent doe first kneel before he receive any Charge And saith that upon the Debates in Parliament it was alleadged That sir Iohn Stawell had forfeited his Articles and it was clearly the opinion of the House that he had forfeited his Articles And that was one ground of their judgement there was no Vote passed to that purpose that he knows of but it was taken as a thing clear and indisputable And further saith That M. Iohn Ash was to have the benefit of sir Iohn Stawels Composition by Order of the House of the 20 of Iuly 1646. as he takes it which was to be towards the satisfaction of debts and disbursments to the value of ten thousand pounds which had been entred into by the said Mr. Ash Col. Popham Col. Fines c. in Somersetshire for the service of the Parliament which being satisfied the overplus was to go to Mr. Ash towards his losses and sufferings but for certainty this Informant refers to the said Order it self This Informant further saith That Mr. Stephens did report to the House the high and insolent behaviour of sir John Stawell who came to Goldsmiths Hall under the pretence of a Compounder and had spoken divers words tending to the dishonour and disowning of the Parliament for which the Committee had committed sir Iohn Stawell and commanded him to report the same to the House And he concluded his Report in these words Although the Parliament shall not make sir John Stawell a Traitor yet he hath made them Traitors And further the Informant saith he doth not know that ever Mr. Iohn Ash did make application to sir Iohn Stawell to buy Aubery nor did ever hear of any such thing untill sir Iohn Stawell told the story at the High-Court of Iustice six years after the business of his Composition The Information of Michael Herring Esquire taken the same time in the same Cause Who saith THat he was one of the Committee at Goldsmiths Hall and present when sir Iohn Stawell came and presented himself to compound as he understood it who was very high in his language and in carriage but this Informant remembers not the words He refused to take the Negative Oath and Covenant and to subscribe his Petition to acknowledge himself a Delinquent as all men did For my Estate said he doe what you will but I would keep my conscience to my self And this Informant refers to his old Examination at the High Court And further saith That he conceives sir Iohn Stawell came to compound because he came there and presented himself but doth not remember that he desired to compound There was a Paper presented but sir Iohn Stawell would not put his hand to it This Informant did not read it nor can he remember that the Committee read it nor that they called it a Remonstrance this Informant understood it as a Petition and doth not remember the particular reason why sir Iohn Stawell did not subscribe the Paper nor did he subscribe any Paper to the Committee that this Informant knows And this Informant conceives the said Paper was brought in by sir Iohn Stawels Sollicitor who acted for him This is a true Copie Examined by T. PAUNCEFOOT Hitherto sir Iohn Stawell notwithstanding his Imprisonment continued his resolution not to compound It is true that about five nights after his imprisonment in Newgate he sent late in the night the Lady Stawell to Mr. Iohn Ashe under pretence of a business of importance but when Mr. Ash was come accordingly he entreated Mr. Ash to move the House for his removal to the Tower for his better accommodation but being desired by Mr. Ash to Petition for a remission to Goldsmiths Hall to make his Composition and receive the benefit of Exon Articles He answered That Mr. Ash knew his resolution as to compound and that if he had a mind to compound that he had no money to pay his Composition Which is not only attested by Mr. John Ash in his Answer annexed to pag. 11. but by the Ladies affirmation to a Justice of Peace in the County of Somerset whose Certificate followeth viZ. I have several times being in discourse with the Lady Stawell heard her to say that Mr. Ash hath been a very good friend to her husband notwithstanding all those calumnies he hath cast on the said Mr. Ash for his endeavouring to save the said sir Iohns Estate And about a quarter of a year since being in the company of the said Lady at Ham I acquainted her that Mr. Iohn Ash had not long before that acquainted me with the passage of his visiting the said sir Iohn at Newgate late at night upon the earnest importunity of the said Lady and on assurance from her that her husband had then a real mind and will to submit to a composition But when he came there he found the said sir Iohn to take him up with needless and impertinent discourses wholly waving his business of compounding so that the said Lady was enforced to say Sir Iohn is it not sufficient for you to abuse me but must you also abuse your good friend Mr. Ash who hath at such an unseasonable time and at such a place come unto you and by your direction for the good of you and yours or words to that effect All which the said Lady at the time aforesaid consented unto alleadging that it was the truth which I had made relation of In witness whereof I have set my hand this 14 day of December 1654 John Barker In which stubborness he continued for the space of four years and could not be perswaded to a composition notwithstanding the many indeavours of his friends as Mr. James Ashe hath attested upon his knowledg Mr. Iohn Ashe doth Answer page the 2 affirm that when the Lady Stawell his wife and Sir Edward Stawell his son then in France did earnestly solicite him that they might Petition the Parliament to be admitted to compound for the Estate since he refused it Sir Iohn denied to give his consent thereunto threatning his Son to disherit him if he attempted any such thing and was much incensed against his son Edward for writing Letters to Mr. Ashe for his admission since his Father refused it Mr. George Longe was deeply engaged for him as surety whose ensuing Certificate will acquaint you how he stood affected unto a Composition during his imprisonment in Newgate George Longe Gent. doth certifie that he being engaged for Sir John Stawell for several great sums of moneys as by the Counterbonds and other obligations will appear borrowed by Sir John Stawell in 1637. and 1638. to purchase lands in Aubury in the County of Wilts before the
dissolved did deliver their opinions against such jurisdiction The Examinations Judgment and Proceedings of that Court being coram non Judice and against Fundamentals are meerly void in Law especially when that Judgment is grounded upon no proofs the proofs taken by the High Court of Justice being taken extrajudicially as abovesaid and are therefore in a Legal construction Nullities Which gives a full and short Answer to that large recital thereof in the Remonstrance And although the Certificates Orders and Awards of that Court of Articles are binding and conclusive to all Courts of Justice Committees c. any Law Order or Ordinance to the contrary notwithstanding yet hath not that Court such sole and supreme power or jurisdiction as to controll the Acts or Resolutions of the Parliament the source of their power and especially when their Act beginneth with Courts of Justice which are of an inferior jurisdiction Nor can it now neither ought it to be supposed that the aforesaid Acts Orders Resolutions Iudgments and Proceedings of that Parliament were or were given in breach or violation of any of the Articles of Exon especially they still having a consideration thereof in the violation of which Articles the faith of the Army and honour and justice of the Nation is so highly concerned But it shall and ought to be presumed that Sir Iohn by some or all of the misdemeanors and neglects aforesaid or by other acts of his best known to that Parliament had in the judgment thereof forfeited and lost the benefit of his Articles Sir John by way of objection Remonstrance p. 74. reciteth a Clause in that Act of Sale in these words viZ. Nevertheless upon trust and confidence that the said William Skinner and others the persons abovenamed or any five or more of them shall have hold and enjoy all and every the premises and every of them subject unto such trusts and uses as by this Act or in and by authority of Parliament shall be hereafter further directed and appointed and shall dispose of the same accordingly And from thence would infer 1. That this power of limiting the trusts of those Lands was reserved by the Parliament in relation to the Articles of War by them confirmed that in regard they had ratified divers of them and eminently bound themselves in Faith Honour and Justice to make good and could not take notice of such as had right or claim to the same they thereof provided according to this reserved power that the Trustees should dispose of Lands accordingly In answer whereof it must be premised 1. That the Articles of Exon were confirmed by both Houses the fourth of Novemb. 1647. And this Act passed the sixth of July 1651. almost four years after 2. That the words of that clause refer to trusts and uses onely which should for the future be directed and appointed by that Act or authority of Parliament It will then follow that the trusts if any of the Articles of Exon cannot be the trusts mentioned in that Act being precedent to it not subsequent That the Act for sale passed for no causes mentioned in those Articles but for others and for ought appeaes for offences of a later perpetration That it was well known to that Parliament that Sir Iohn did claim the benefit of those Article for the Parliament had at several times before and at the time of the passing of this Act his very Articles in consideration and deemed them forfeited by him The second thing that Sir Iohn doth infer is that the reviving after that of the Court of Articles was a Declaration of the uses and trusts of that Act of Sale seeing to that persons grieved contrary to those Articles this Court was constituted to do them right any Law Order or Ordinance to the contrary notwithstanding But Sir Iohn hath mistaken the Act the words are not that the Court of Articles should releive the party within Articles any Law to the contrary but that the Certificate of that Court should be binding to all inferiour Courts of Justice any Law to the contrary notwithstanding Again by the Act of Sale the trusts of that Act are declared the land sold and setled according to that Declaration and therefore the Patliament cannot by vertue of that reservation declare any contrary or other trusts nor did by their Act of reviver make use of their former power having already executed the same in overthrow of those sales executed by vertue of that Act of sale especially when as hath been shewn Sir Iohn is a party excepted out of that Act. After which Act of Sale and not before Sir Iohn doth pretend to Petition the Parliament for admission to composition which Petition as he alledgeth by his Remonstrance page 39 he delivered unto Mr. Garland but whether Mr. Garland did or thought fit to present it to the Parliament in regard of Sir Iohns former actions is not declared and perhaps the Parliament refused it and justly for Gods vice-gerents do often Act like God himself who when after a long forbearance on his part and an obstinate continuance in evil on mans part he resolveth to punish he doth execute the same accordingly notwithstanding the Prayers and supplications of the sinner to whom he then turneth a deaf year This might the Parliament do Sir Iohns slightning of their mercy and the necessity of their Justice urging them to it Sir Iohn saith Remonstrance pag. 40. that at the time of the passing of the Act of the 29. of Septemb. 1652. for reviveing the Court of Articles provisors were tendered he conceiveth by the Purchasers the one of the 28 of Septemb. 1652. in these words viZ. Provided that this Act or any thing therein contained shall not extend nor cinstrained to ixtend to prejudice alter or make void any Resolutions Votes or Judgments given in the Parliament touching any of the Articles aforesaid or any persons claiming thereby The other of the day following in these words viZ. Provided alwayes and be it further enacted and declared That no real or personal Estate which hath been setled conveyed or assured to any person or persons by vertue of any Act Ordinance or Order of this present Parliament shall be made null vacated or otherwise determined or disposed of by the Commissioners named in this Act or by their Authority but if they shall see cause of restitution by vertue of Articles subject unto their CogniZance they make a word not in specie against the particular person or persons upon whom such Estate or Estates shall be setled conveyed or assured but invalue to be satisfied by such other Lands or Revenew as the Parliament shall direct any thing in this Act or the former which is hereby revived to the contrary notwithstanding The first of these he saith after the second reading the last after the first reading did pass in the Negative which proviso tending to the limitation of that benefit which the House was most honourably pleased to grant and