LEGALISM OVER REVOLUTION: THE PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE FOR INDEMNITY AND PROPERTY CONFISCATION DISPUTES, 1647–1655

Abstract

Royalists of the Civil JVar period readily employed the English legal system to recover lost estates, even at the nadir of their politicalfortunes, namely theyears just after the king's defeat. Rather than accept the verdict of a war lost, royalist and Catholic 'delinquents' successfully sought their own verdicts at law against former tenants for rents on lands that had been confiscated by parliament. The radical lVPs staffing the Indemnity Committee respected the principles of due process of law and, ironically, given the fact that the committee's purpose was to protect parliament's supporters, upheld royalist claims to confiscated lands, thereby assisting the law courts in thwarting parliament's plan to repay war debts with rents collectedfrom losers' property. So pervasive was the legalistic mindset in both the courts and the Indemnity Committee that royalists receivedfavourable rulings against many on the winning side of the conflict, includingfamous leaders such as Sir William Brereton. Though they served heretofore under the Royal Standard, yet, through the favor of Parliament have regained possession of their estates. Marchamont Nedham, The case of the commonwealth of England stated (i 650) As a way of raising money and punishing royalists at the same time, the English parliament set out early in the Civil War to confiscate property from 'delinquents' disloyal to its cause. Other sources of income, mainly assessment and excise taxes, proved insufficient to pay parliament's soldiers regularly and wages fell steadily in arrears throughout the conflict. Westminster attempted to placate its unpaid, disgruntled army by increasing the flow of property confiscation revenues and by creating the Committee for Indemnity in I647, giving it power to stay cases at law throughout the nation and to overturn or nullify verdicts, which prevented courts from punishing thousands of soldiers and civilian officials for actions they had taken during the war on behalf of parliament. Scholars of the Puritan Revolution have recently produced impressive works which focus on the protracted contest between an inherently conservative