Doctoral Dissertations

John Shedd

Date of Award

8-1990

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy

Major

History

Major Professor

John Bohstedt, Paul J. Pickney

Committee Members

Arthur Haas, Jack Armistead

Abstract

The English Parliamentary Committee for Indemnity worked from 1647 to 1655 to save from harm the soldier and civilian supporters of Parliament for actions they had committed during the civil wars. Thousands of adherents to Parliament's cause were persecuted at law or otherwise by Royalists, and the Indemnity Committee was given authority to intervene into legal processes to prohibit Cavalier retribution against people who had aligned themselves with Parliament's cause. This study examines the role of the Indemnity Committee in the political-administrative, social, and military history of England during the tumultuous and revolutionary years of the mid-seventeenth century. The types of cases heard by the Indemnity Committee were varied, and only the most common can be mentioned here. Most of the soldiers who petitioned the indemnity Committee sought relief from lawsuits stemming from their having procured commodities or quarters from civilians. Besides accusations of plunder, soldiers also faced judges to answer indictments for felonious actions. Parliament's officeholders, both national and local, from constables to MPs, brought cases to Indemnity in order to avoid punishment at law for actions they argued were done in pursuance of their duty. Another type of case resulted from agencies of Parliament in London as well as county committees' having confiscated property from Royalists and Catholics. Much of this real estate was in turn leased to Parliament's supporters who paid rent to the State. For this they were sued at law by their former landlords for unpaid rents. The Indemnity Committee waded into land tenure disputes and attempted to protect the State's new tenants from unfair persecution and eviction by Royalists and Catholics. Although composed of MPs who were mainly political and religious radicals, the Committee for Indemnity adopted standards of procedure in keeping with the workings of a law court. Its non-partisan preoccupation with legality meant that it did not become an instrument of radical terror for Parliament's army or for its officeholders. Royalist defendants at the Indemnity Committee won cases when a petitioner failed to provide concrete proof that his or her actions had been performed on behalf of Parliament.

Download
Files over 3MB may be slow to open. For best results, right-click and select "save as..."

Share

COinS