Tyger's Head Books

Posts Tagged ‘mutiny’

Earl of Warwick allegedly complains to Parliament

In Parliamentary business on September 14 at 2:03 am

14 Sep 1643 (Thu) || It was advertised this day from London, that the Earle of Warwicke had sent Letters of complaint to his friends and factors in the Houses, declaring that he was in much distresse for want of victuals, that his Mariners (never true watermen till now) had dranke nothing but water in foure dayes: and after that, another letter which came unto the Houses upon Monday last, complaining that they are so insolent that he cannot rule them, and that if present monies be not sent them in, they will carry the Ships unto the King… || John Berkenhead/Peter Heylyn – Mercurius Aulicus (R)

Advertisements

Unrest at Portsmouth garrison

In Hampshire on August 31 at 1:16 am

31 Aug 1643 (Thu) || This day we received intelligence, that the Garrison in Portsmouth, (consisting of 350 men onely) are very mutinous for want of pay, being above six weekes behind, which hath so deeply touched the Common Souldiers, that Captaine Thomas, Captaine of the ship called the Swift sure, was most conveniently beaten in the open streets by his owne Sailers, who all cryed, Let us have pay, let us have pay. Nor dare this Captaine offer to goe to Sea, lest his men carry him to Bristoll, as they have often threatened him: and on the other side the Earle of Warwicke (who is now in the Downes) dare not set foot on shore, lest his saylers (of the same perswasion with Captaine Thomas’s) when they have once gotten him a shoare, should keepe him there. || John Berkenhead/Peter Heylyn – Mercurius Aulicus (R)

Letters from the Earl of Northampton: activities of Lord Grey; Warwick garrison intimidates Stratford

In Northamptonshire on January 9 at 11:54 pm

9 Jan 1642/3 || By letters from the Earl of Northampton, written from Banbury, there came advertisement that the Lord Gray (sonne to the Earle of Stamford)¹ having sent before him from Northampton the last Friday, two Companies of Dragoones with two pieces of Ordnance, and being resolved to follow after with all speed that might be, was hindred by a mutinie amongst the saylors which were sent to serve him, who made no difference in their plundering and other rapines betwixt their owne party and the Kings good subjects. For the Lord Gray threatning to strike one of them for some misdemeanour, the fellow with his pole-axe strooke him in the shoulder, and had not the force of the blow beene taken off by some of the by-standers, it is thought his Lordship had bene killed.² For this the Saylor was imprisoned, and the rest commanded to their Armes: but they were obstinately resolved not to stirre a foot before their fellow was released, whom they tooke along with them for his greater safety. The morrow after being Saturday, the Lord Grey followed after with 40. horse, and went with all his forces towards [Market] Harborough. It was also signified in the said Letters, that upon Saturday last, being the 7 of January, about 80 Horse and 30. Dragooners, issued out of Warwick Castle, and came to Stratford upon Avon, but that the Towne did oppose their entrance: upon which comming to a Parley, they demanded all the Armes in the Towne; which when the Bayliffe and Aldermen had refused to deliver up, they went away in discontent, threatning to come againe with a greater number, not onely to disarme the Towne but to plunder it also.³ || John Berkenhead/Peter Heylyn – Mercurius Aulicus (R)

——
¹ Thomas, Lord Grey of Groby; son of Henry Grey, Earl of Stamford.
² Collings asserts that Grey did in fact “gave him a switch or two with his wand”, in return for the sailor’s “petulant saucinesse”, and in response the sailor ran at him as he walked away (Kingdomes Weekly Intelligencer, issue 2).
³ London editor Humphrey Blunden notes this week, “The Lord of Northampton is at Stratford upon Avon, raysing money upon that Towne, and in the Countie, to the great impoverishment of the Inhabitants.” It is difficult to tell whether pot or kettle was blacker: whether the Earl of Northampton, for noting how Parliament’s Warwick garrison threatened the townsmen for their arms, and then collecting money from them himself; or Blunden, for accusing the Earl of impoverishing the town, when Parliament’s garrison had just threatened to plunder it.

Parliament orders punishment of City soldiers refusing to attend their colours

In London, Military News on January 6 at 9:50 pm

6 Jan 1642/3 || This day a complaint was made to the House of Commons from divers of the City Captaines for the great neglect, that divers of their Souldiers of the City did often times refuse and neglect to come to their Colours upon the drum beating; in so much that few or none divers times did appeare in that service; whereupon the Lord and Commons hath now made this order here following.

Whereas many of the Trained-Bands and others listed under severall Colonels and Captaines, Inhabiting within the Cities of London and Westminster, and the County of Midlesex, have neglected to make their appearance in Armes to doe such service, by day or night, within the Cities and Liberties aforesaid, and in the Tower of London as of them hath been required, being lawfully summoned thereunto by the beate of the Drum, or otherwise, for the defence of King and Parliament; the safety of the Cities and Tower of London, with the adjacent parts in the County of Middlesex: for the Reformation of so great a neglect, and for the avoyding of so eminent evills in these dangerous times that might ensure thereupon: It is this day ordered by the Lords and Commons now assembled in Parliament, that the Colonels, Captains and Lieutenants of the Trained bands or others in the Cities of London and Westminster, and Suburbs thereof, and the County of Middlesex, may inflict the punishment of two dayes imprisonment without Bayle, or Maine-prise¹ or the mulct² of five shillings for supply of the service, upon such Souldiers under their commands as shall not repair to their Colours at the time appointed, and do their duties there, when, and as often as they shall be required, unlesse they be reasonably excused: And that made knowne to the Captaine or other chiefe Officers, or being come to their Collours, shall depart, before they be lodged; or being to find Armes for others, shall refuse to provide them, also desired when, and as often as they shall be thereunto required. || Samuel Pecke – A Perfect Diurnall (P)

——
¹ Mainprise was similar to bail, although mainprise specified that the surety was a sum of money, whereas bail did not. Under mainprise the accused could not be recalled to gaol, whereas bail (as it does now) permitted re-arrest. Mainprise is now obsolete.
² “Mulct” meant “forfeiture”

Murder in Coventry; mutiny in York

In Warwickshire, Yorkshire on November 20 at 9:19 pm

Sunday 20 Nov 1642 || In the City of Coventry there hapned a sudden accident this day, some popishly affected Malignants of Straford upon Avon, being at the Signe of the Bull at one Ellis Jones his house, in their cups began to speake ill of the Proceedings of the Parliament. Jones being an honest man, and a true honourer of the Parliament, told them it was uncivill in them to speake ill of their betters, and that for his part he did not desire any such discourse should be in his house, at which word one of them with a Damme stab’d the poore man to the heart, and getting to their horses, all of them escaped out of the City. ||

In Yorke this day there was a mutiny in the Earle of Cumberland’s Army for want of pay, plundring divers mens houses of worth in the time of Divine Service, which the said Earle could not, or at leastwise would not punish; so that he and his Cavaliers are growne very odious to the Citisens. || John Johnson – The English Intelligencer