r

• r

•-%^j4 }*

HIHTOKKJAL

TRADITIONS AND FACTS

Ktl.ATiNO

THE COUNTY OF MONMOUTH,
Br A
MEMBER OF THE CAERLEON AND MON.MOUTHSIIIRE
ANTIUUARLVK SOCIETY.

PART vr.

THE CHURCH DURING THE PURITAN
PERIOD.

PRICE ONE SHILLING,

NEWPORT :
PlUStED ABfD PUBLISKBD Bif W, N. JOHiiS, 'STAKOP aWEsr' (ti-'FICg.

1885.

It'

rTjy^^nrTrTT^'"

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

Bought with the income
of the
ALFRED E. PERKINS FUND

HISTORICAL
TRADITIONS AND FACTS

EELATINO TO

THE COUNTY OF MONMOUTH,
BY A
MEMBER OF THE CAERLEON AND MONMOUTHSHIRE
ANTIQUARIAN SOCIETY.

PART VI.

THE CHURCH DURING THE PURITAN
PERIOD.

NEWPORT :
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY W. N. JOHNS, " STAK OF GWENT " OFFICE.
1885.

HISTORICAL
FACTS AND TRADITIONS
RELATING TO
MONMOUTHSHIRE.

PART VI.

THE CHURCH DuRiNG THE PURITAN
PERIOD.

The last chapters in this seiies of Pacts and
Traditions related to the scenes and events
which occurred in Monmouthshire during the
Civil War of the 17tli century, and closed
with the death of King Charles I. To the
military aspect of the struggle waged between
King Charles and the Parliament, chiefly on the
question of prerogative, chief attention was there
given, but another issue equally affecting the
welfare of the people had been raised between
between diiferent sections of the community hold
ing opposite religious views, which only became
fully developed after the death of the King. It is
now therefore proposed to carry the history a stage
further, and lay before the reader some facts which
will enable them to form an idea of the state of
the district during the period when the country
was agitated by the great Puritan movement.
At the present time, when Liberationists are
loudly clamouring for the Disestablishment and
Disendowment of the Church, when a Minister ot
the Crown is found declaiming against the existing
erder of things, inciting the masses to deeds of
violence, and eliciting their sj.mpathy on account
of a debt which he says he has to pay for wrongs
alleged to have been done to his ancestors ; and
further, when to a large extent history threatens
to repeat itself, it is well that more light should be
shed upon transactions dimmed by lapse of time
A

and thrown into the shade by the glare of minor
facts illumined by the heat of unceasing bigotry
and prejudice.
It is pretty well understood that the great con
test of the 17th century which culminated in the
power of the sword, was not only a contest between
the King and his Parliament, but a struggle also by
the Puritan party to destroy in the English Church
not only the impress, but the semblance of Popery,
with which it was supposed the King bad much
sympathy. The Church being naturally on the
side of law and order, gave countenance and aid
to the cause of the King, though perhaps not all
too wisely. Parliament was supported to a man
bj the party of Puritans to whom the form of
religion aa established under the influence of
Archbishop Laud, was more hateful than the
the system of limited monarchy against which they
fought. The supporters of the Church and Crown
were one party ; the Parliamentary and the
Puritan party were one also, and equally aa com
pact. The existence and force of this state of
things throughout the contest is generally very
lightly set forth, but on a close investigation it will
be found ' to have had a considerable effect in
engendering great bitterness of feeling among all
classes. The acts of the King, whatever violence they did
to the constitution, were such as could not be im
mediately or directly felt injuriously by the bulk
of the people, especially in remote parts of the
country. If the King enforced loans, it was the
monied classes who parted with their riches, the
poor man being none the worse. If ship money
were levied, the impost was not universal, and
where collected not in its amount a very heavy
burden. A church, however, existed, and its in
fluence was exerted in every parish. To rai^e an
outorj against this, to revive a smouldering agita
tion against Popery, to denounce every clergyman
as scandalous and malignant, and to persecute
every schoolmaster because he was an adherent of
the Church and an aid to the minister, were not a
difficult task. It was a work congenial to a section

of narrow-minded, unscrupulous men, who, not
content to stop in their struggle at a constitutional
equilibrium, pushed forward until they attained
the summit of power. They succeeded in obtain
ing many followers, and the zeal engendered by
them in the name of religion stimulated the people
to action against the King, supported as he was by
the Church party, far more than any of the delin
quencies of which his Majesty was justly or
unjustly accused.
It ia questionable whether the members of the
Church of V ngland have in their charity been wise
in not making special effort to keep alive in the
memory of the people a knowledge of the cruel
treatment of her clergy at this period. Walker's
Attempts towards Recovering their Number and
Suffering, wide and comprehensive as it is, con
tains by no means a complete record, and although
a meritorious work is comparatively unknown.
The great body of Protestants possesses Poxe's
Book of Martyrs in a form convenient to be placed
in the hands of every child, and Nonconformists,
both from pulpit and platform as well as in their
numerous publications, never tire in narrating the
circumstances of the ejectment of 2,000 of their
ministers under the operation of the Act of
Uniformity. It therefore seems that at the
present juncture when the Church of England is
once more seriously assailed, that a great . and
valuable lesson which past history should teach
will be ineffective if pains are not taken to bring
into prominence, and impress the public mind with
the persistent and malignant persecutions which
the clergy of the Established Church endured at
the hands of the Puritans during the last years of
Charles I., and the period of the Commonwealth.
Details of the proceedings against the Church
and clergy in Monmouthshire seem almost incre
dible at the present day, and if the events which
here occurred may be taken as a specimen of the
manner in which Puritanical principles were admi
nistered throughout the kingdom, they reveal a state
of things absolutely without parallel in its religious
history. It must in candour be admitted that the

treatment of Monmouthshire was exceptional. In
this county more church livings were sequester"d,
more clergy ejected, and more fraud and injustice
perpetrated under the cloak of religion than in any
other county in the kingdom.
Upon the errors or the weakness of the Church,
or the origin or aim of the Puritan movement in
the early stages of its existence, it is not our inten
tion to enter. Much has been written on both
sides, both for and against. It is intended here to
show, particularly with respect to Monmouthshire,
how those who prated of liberty of conscience act'd
towards those who differed from them when they
had the opportunity to wield the power of persecu
tion and oppression ; how they destroyed a religious
institution, that hypocrisy, novelty, and nonsense
might prevail, and overthrew beneficial laws and
constitutions to establish anarchy, confusion, and
tyranny. The Puritanical opinions which had for some
years been developing in the Church were repre
sented and promulgated in this district by several
of her ministers who afterwards became j)rominent
in the widespread contest v.hich followed, When
King Charles, in 1633, under the influence of Laud,
Archbishop of Canterbury, revived the Declaration
of James I. regarding the Book of Sports, and
•rdered it to be read in all churches, the Arch
bishop desired the bishops of his province to report
to him how far the clergy in their respective
dioceses had conformed to the K ing's commands.
In accordance with this request Bishop Murray, of
Llandaff, in reporting upon his diocese, forwarded
the names of three ministers as having been dis
obedient, and further, that they had preached very
schismatically and dangerously, leading many
simple people after them. The three ministers
named were the Rev William Wroth, vicar of
Llanvaches, near Newport ; the Rev William
Brbery, vicar of St. Mary's, Cardiff, and his
curate, Walter Cradock.
We have in this work previously narrated
the principal incidents in the life of Mr. Wroth,
and therefore it will not be necessary again to

dwell upon them at any length. He was proceeded
against by the bishop, and suspended from his
, living, but according to the bishop's account he sub
mitted in 1635. In November 1639, his friends
assembled at Llanvacl^gs and constituted them
selves the first Nonconformist church in the
Principality of Wales, choosing Mr. Worth as their
pastor. Earlier gatherings of Dissenters have
been mentioned, but it is generally acceded that
the association at Llanvaches was tho earlies\^ recog
nised as a regularly constituted Nonconformist
church. This Nonconformist church soon became
wonderfully successful as to numbers, and was by
the Rev. Henry Jessy, the pastor of the first
Independent Church in London, likened to "the
mother Church of Antioch in the Gentile country
of Wales — being very famous for her officers, mem
bers, order, and gifts."
William Erbery, whose name is joined with that
of Mr. Wroth in the report of the bishop,
commenced his ministry at St. Woolos Church,
Newport. He is said to have been born at Roath,
Cardiff, in 1604. He was educated at Brasenose
College, Oxford, and after taking degrees, received
ordination, and commenced ministerial work as
stated at St. Woolos. He was soon, however,
presented to the living of St. Mary's Cardiff, and
it was his conduct while holding that incumbency
that brought upon him the censure of the bishop.
He was prosecuted in the courts, but being of an
intractable disposition, neither prosecution nor
suspension influenced him in his conduct as a
preacher. After considerable dissension among his
congregation, arising from his erratic practices, he
resigned the vicarage and left the diocese.
Walter Cradock was born in Monmouthshire, at
a farm called Trevella, in the parish of Llangwm
Ucha, probably about 1608. He is stated to have
been heir to an estate worth £60 a year at that
time. Like Erbery, he was an Oxford man, though
his name has not been found in the registers of
that university. Having spent his boyhood near
Llanvaches, he may be supposed to have well
known Mr, Wroth, and very likely was influenced

by his teaching. Having completed his university
education, he received an appointment as curate at
Peteraton upon Ely, near Cardiff, and subsequently
became curate of ^'t. Mary's, under Mr. Erbery,
the vicar, already mentioned. Being only a curate
he was not so difficult to deal with as the vicar.
B ia license was suspended in 1638, and his privilege
of using the churches in the district for preaching
was denied to him. It would appear that after his
suspension from the living at Cardiff, Cradock
obtained a curacy at Wrexham, where he created
by his preaching considerable excitement. After
the lapse of a year we find him at Shrewsbury,
staying with a friend named Richard Symonds,
a person of Nonconformist views. Cradock also
made the acquaintance while here of Richard
Baxter, from whose writings we glean that Cradock
was in concealment from the bishop's officer, and
that at this time he passed by the name of Williams.
From Shrewsbury he found refuge under the wing
of Sir Robert Harley, of Brampton Brian, in Here
fordshire, whs was a good friend to the early
Nonconformists, and harboured their ministers in
hia house. In 1639 Cradock was once more in
Monmouthshire, and was present at Llanvaches
when the first Nonconformist church was there
established under the pastorate of Mr, Wroth, as
already noticed.
Soon after the formation of the Nonconformist
Church at Llanvaches a second Society gathered
at Mynyddislwyn, where a Mr Henry Walter was,
as Rees says, in his History of Nonconformity in
Wales, ' ' the instrument to call most or all the
original members." This Henry Walter, the
second son of John Walter, Esq., of Piercefield
Park, near Chepstow, was born in 1611, and
matriculated at Jesus College, Oxford, April 12,
1633. His first ministerial charge was the
perpetual curacy or vicarage of Mynyddislvryn.
He was a sympathiser and follower of Mr Wroth,
being probably one of the many by whose ministry
it was stated it "pleased the Lord to convert."
SooD after his induction he began to display an
independence of spirit with an earnestness for

preaching not common among the ministers in his
neighbourhood. We find, toe, that he was
accustomed, like Mr Wroth, to go over to Bristol
and preach, his name being mentioned as one of
the Reforming ministers ef iJouth Wales.
The earnestness and energy of the ministers
named would not allow them to be silent. Though
deprived of the churches formerly used by them
they still preached to the people, both under cover
and in the open air, not only on Sundays, but
every day as an opportunity offered. The story of
their prosecution was received with much sym
pathy, and a band of followers gathered around
them determined so far as they were able to stand
by them and seek redress for the supposed wrongs
they had auffered.
When the differences between the King and
Parliament became acute, and the people were
almost compelled by circumstances to declare for
one side or the other, the schismatic preachers
named, with their followers, joined politics with
their profession of religion and gave their support
to the Parliamentary cause. Wroth, who was now
a very aged man, died shortly before the war broke
out, and was in accordance with the desire he had
expressed buried in the chancel of the church of
his own parish. The other ministers experienced
so strong a feeling against them in the
district that they deemed it prudent to leave.
Cradock and Erbery travelled the country for a
time and became as preachers more notorious than
popular. With the Rev. Henry Walter they are
found to have frequented the rendezvous of Non
conforming ministers in London, and in the
religious arrangements which were afterward
carried out in Wales, all three were appointed to
take a leading part.
In the more central parts of England an agita
tion against the Church of a somewhat different
character had been promoted by men like Pryn,
Burton, and Bastwick, who assailed the Estab
lishment and its Bishops with a violence of
language unequalled in the present day, so that
when the Long Parliament met in November, 1640,

8
there was a readines.= shown to present petitions
craving for redress of grievances alleged to exist
in the Church and State. These petitions gave
encouragement to those in the House who
favoured them. A Committee of Religion was
appointed, and an attack upon the Church was
made paripassu with that on the Monarchy. The
Bishops were the first object of attack, and a bill
was framed and brought in to remove them from
the House of Lords, and also from holding any
office whatever in secular affairs. The action of
Parliament stimulated the agitators out of doors,
and the agitation soon became general throughout
the country. Clarendon states that the Press was
used to publish the most invective, seditious, and
scurrilous pamphlets that wit and malice could
invent. The clamour maintained in the country
gave increased boldness to those in Parliament.
In January I64I, the Commons by their own
authority, ordered that Commissioners should be
sent into all counties to deface, demolish, and quite
take away all images, altars, crucifixes, auper-
stitious pictures, monuments, and relics of
idolatry out of all churches, &c. The execution
of this order in some cases was carried out by men
blinded by ignorance or fanaticism, who destroyed
many valuable monuments and profaned many
churches. It was in virtue of this order that the
celebrated Paul's cross in London was taken down,
a structure at which, as one writer remarks,
" More learned men had appeared, and out- of
which more sound and good divinity had been
delivered than perhaps any one pulpit since the
first preaching of the Gospel could ever glory in."
It was in virtue of this direction of the Commons
also, that the crosses standing in nearly all our
parish churches were everted and destroyed. The
cross has been an object of veneration from early
Christian times, and in England it had been
customary to erect them, not only in churchyards,
but in public places for the purposes of public prayer.
Now, however, the sacred erections wherever found
were desecrated, and worshippers who regarded
them as emblems of the Christian faith saw them

9
ruthlessly demolished. In some churchyards the
base, and in others portions of the pedestal of
ancient crosses still remain and may to the reader
have been the object of curious inquiry. The
remains of such crosses are still visible in the
churchyards of Goldcliff, Magor, Undy, Marsh-
field, Sudbrook, Llantarnam, and no doubt in m^iny
other churches of the county. Portions of ancient
crosses exist also on the roadside at Redwick
and one such will be familiarly recognised at the
entrance to Eavelock-street on Stow Hill. The
remains we have referred to, after a period of at
least 240 years, testify at least to the fanaticism,
if not the godlessness, of their destroyers. The
defaced monuments and broken tffigies in the
parish church of St. Woollos, Newport, as well as
the beheaded sculptured figure on the front of the
tower maybe likewise assigned to the period dur
ing which this iconoclastic fever so severely raged.
It is probable, however, that the destruction of
crosses and monuments in the churches of this
district was not accomplished until some time after
the promulgation of the order referred to, as the
Parliamentary party had no opportunity of exer
cising power among a people so thoroughly loyal
both to the Church and the King as were the
inhabitants of Monmouthshire.
The weakness of the Parliamentary party
may be gathered from the fact that they were
unable after several attempts to remove the contents
of the county magazine from Monmouth to Newport,
being frustated by the determined and successive
efforts of the Mayor, the Deputy-mayor, the
bailiff, and justices of the former borough, all of
whom were taken to London in custody. The
matter was considered to be of sufficient impor
tance to be laid before Parliament in a petition
supported by as influential a deputation as the
supporters could get together. 'J he contents of
the petition can be pretty accurately judged from
the reply of the Speaker to the deputation. The
Speaker assured them that effectual order had
been taken for the removal of the magazine to
Newport. The Speaker's Assurance, however,
c

10
proved a mere empty phrase, as Parliament for some
time after was utterly impotent to take any steps
in the matter. Jis regards the complaint made by
the deputation respecting the great number of
Papists who flocked about the houses of recusants
in Monmouthshire, and of the great number of
papists that were inhabitants of the county, the
Speaker again assured them that Parliament had
taken the complaint into consideration ; but beyond
obtaining and publishing a list of "the names oi
g'-eat recusants that live in and near the town of
Monmouth, with the value of their estaesand the
distances at which they live from that town,"
nothing more seems to have been done. The fact
was that the people named as recusants were not
so much obnoxious on account of their religion as
that they were loyal to their ^Sovereign. To be
loyal to the King was not yet a penal offence, but
recusants were under the ban of the law, and liable
to be disarmed, fined, and imprisoned. To
weaken their support to the King, therefore,
advantage was taken of their recusancy. Parlia
ment sent Commissioners down to Raglan Castle to
disarm the Earl of Worcester, who was the recusant
of greatest note in the neighbourhood, but owing
to an ingenious and humourous trick played upon
their credulity bj the iiarl, they left the castle
without completing the errand for which they had
been sent.
Roman Catholics generally in the kingdom sup
ported the King, and those in the county of Mon
mouth formed no exception. In K ush worth we
find that when the Queen sent circulars to Roman
Catholics to put them under contribution for the
King's service against the Scottish Covenanters
that collectors were appointed to gather in the re
cusants' money, and that among the names ao men
tioned are those of Sir Charles Somerset, son of
the Earl of Worcester ; Mr. William Morgan, of
Llantarnam ; and Mr. George Morgan, of Itton.
The question of recusancy was soon lost sight of
in the wider and more general attacks made against
the Church and the Crown.
Early in 1641 the general outcry made against

u
the Church gathered round the persons of the
Bishops. Numerous complaints were laid before
Parliament relating to the episcopal body generally,
and also against individual members of it. A com
mittee of Parliament was appointed on February
23rd to consider some of these complaints, and
among others those made against Ur Owen, who
had only recently been appointed to the see of
Llandaff. It was found, however, that there
was little ground for the complaints, and the pro
ceedings were never followed up. Other circum
stances soon occurred which equally answered the
desire of the Commons. In March the House
institu ted proceedings against the Bishops . for
making Canons in Convocation. Archbishop Laud
was sent to prison, and the infliction of very heavy
fines upon the aeveral Bishops proposed. The
bill was dropped, and their Lordships subsequently
impeached. In this cause, however. Parliament
displayed more haste than wisdom, as there soon
appeared a difficulty in determining what crime
the Bishops had been guilty of. The laws of the
land were searched in vain to provide for the case,
an' I when it was urged that it might well be
treason, the answer of the eminent men of the long
robe was that it might as well be called adultery.
The matter was adjourned, and those who had
impeached the Bishops, finding their proceedings
utterly wrong and illegal, slunk away in silence.
Morgan Owen, Bishop of Llandaff, was among the
thirteen bishops so impeached. The agitation
went on apace, and petitions to Parliament poured
in from all quarters — petitions which appear from
all accounts to have been of a, character as
genuine as those we have become acquainted
with in the present day in favour of
Welsh Sunday Closing ! The apprentices of
o' London among others prayed that prelacy might
be rooted up ; and even the London porters
petitioned against it as a burthen too heavy for
their shoulders, a circumstance which cannot be
regarded as other than a huge joke. With no less
truth than humour the author of Hudibras hit off
the spirit of the times when he wrote, —

12
" The oyster women lacked their fish up.
And trudged away to cry ' No Bishop !' "
By and by the friends of the Church got up counter
petitions and forwarded them to the House of Com
mons, but the House discouraged them, allegingthey
were mutinous and malignant. This was stated
in a Remonstrance sent to the King, which led his
Majesty to remark as follows : — " Hath a multi
tude of mean, unknown, inconaiderable, contemp
tible persona about the city and aubvirba of London
had the liberty to petition against the government
of the Church, against the Book of Common
Prayer — and been thanked for it ? and shall it be
called mutiny in the <;ra»'est and beat citizens ot
London, in the gentry and .commonalty of Kent,
to frame petitiona upon theae grounds, and desire
to be governed by the known laws of the land, and
by orders or votes of both Houses. To stir up men
to a care of maintaining the discipline of the
Church, upholding and continuing the reverence
and solemnity of Ood'a aervice, encouragement of
learning, is mutiny ! Let Heaven and Earth, God
and man judge between us."
The Remonstrance was printed and circulated by
order of the House of Commons, and the Bishops
having been singled out for censure, an intense
feeling was aroused against Ihem. The Archbishop
of \ork was one day set upon oy an excited rabble
in the street, and, amid cries of "No Bishop," had
his robes torn from his back. Upen this he called
some twelve of the Bialiops together — Archbishop
Laud and Bishop Wren, of Ely, being in priaon at
thia time — and they resolved upon a Protestation
(December 27, 1041,) against the force that had
been used against them, and against all the Acts
cf the House of Lords during the time that they
should be prevented from attending it. 'Ihe
Protestation had no sooner been delivered to Par
liament than the Commons once more accused all
the Bisho-j/s who had subscribed to it of High
Treason. The Usher of the Black Rod was imme
diately sent to take them into custody, and the
whole episcopal body, excepting the Bishop of
Llandaff, who could not be found until next day.

13
stood committed to the Tower. Here they re-
maiued until May, 1642, and were then a, second
time released on bail by the Peers, and were never
brought to trial.
Before they were liberated, however, the Com
mons had prepared a Bill for the forfeiture of the
whole of their estates, for the imprisonment of
their persons during their lives, .md the disposal
of all livings that fell within their gifts. The Bill
was subsequently modified so as to make some
allowance to those whose eatates were confiscated.
The Bishop of Llandaff was to be allowed £200
a year, and the other Bishops sums of various
amounts. The Bill was, however, like other
extreme measures proposed, ultimately dropped.
The Bishops were now enjoined under penalties
to appear in their places three days after having
received notice. To the Bishop of Llandaff', having
a charge so far distant from London, this proved a
hardship, which to remedy or overcome he
petitioned the House praying that the time for his
appearance before the House after nt tice given
may be enlarged, aa the limit of three dara pre
vented his visiting his diocese. To this petition
no attention seems to have been paid, and in less
than a month another petition was preferred by
him, in which he set forth more fully that the
diocese of Llandaff, and his residence at
Matherne, in the county of Monmouth, were
distant more than 130 miles from London,
and further that he had been absent from
his charge a long time, and could not, al
though he desired, go thither, while he
was bound to appear before their Lord
ships within three days after notice. Be therefore
prayed for the time to be extended. It must be
assumed that Bishop Owen waa unsuccessful in his
request, as the Bishops were becoming every day
more obnoxious to the Commons, and their wishes
altogether ignored.
On the 10th July, 1642, the Commons passed a
resolution that ecclesiastical power for the govern
ment of the Church be exercised by Commis
sioners, and on the 15th of the same month they
D

14
resolved that archiepiscopal and episcopal juris
diction should be exercised by themselves. This
was followed by a resolution that the members for
every county should bring in the names of nine
persons who were to be Ecclesiastical Com
missioners upon whom the power of Church
government should be devolved. It was exprepsly
provided that no clergyman should be on the
Commission, 'I'here remained, therefore, no need
for Bishop Owen to visit his diocese — that is no
need in the eyes of Parliament.
The members for the county of Monmouth at
this period were William Herbert and Henry
Herbert ; the former a zealous loyalist, the latter
subservient to Parliament, and one who used his
influence to carry out their desires. Of the action
of the members in naming Commissioners we
possess no information, and it seems probable that
none were then named.
In another month King Charles had raised his
standard at Nottingham, and the civil war com
menced. William Herbert at once threw in hia lot with
the King's party, and was found among the
Aaaerably at Oxford. When this became known
to Parliament he was at once " disabled."
This "disabling" of members was the method
adopted by the tyrannical majority of Parliament
to expel members of the House who were loyal to
their King. Monmouthshire thus lost the voice of
one of its members, and as no new writ waa issued
the county remained partially disfranchised until
September, 1646, or a period of three years and
eight months. At the expiration of that time, and
after the Parliamentary forces had attained some
successes in Monmouthshire, a new election was
ordered. After the process of "disabling" members had
been vigorously pursued, the remnant of the
Commons appear to have bent their efforts to over
throw the Church as well as the King. They
passed a Bill for removing the Bishops and Clergy
from the Commission of the Peace, and fronfi pre
venting the Bishops from voting in the House of

15
Lords. On the bill being sent to the House of Lords
there appeared a willingness for the sake of peace
to assent to the removal of Bishops and clergy
from the Commission of the Peace, but the Lojds
refused to agree to the removal of the Bishops
from Parliament, and threw out the Bill on the
second reading. The Commons became infuriated,
and disregarding the well understood rule that the
same bill shall not be presented a second time in
the same session, they sent another bill
with the same object to the House of Lords and
endeavoured in a variety of ways to intimidate the
Lords to pass it.
While the Bishops were being attacked in the
way described, the clergy in general had received a
considerable amount of attention. The condition
of the clergy waa no doubt lamentable at this
period. Macaulay says respecting them that
" not one living in fifty enabled the incumbent to
bring up a family comfortably. As children multi
plied and grew the household of the prieat became
more and more beggarly. Holea appeared more
and more plainly in the thatch of his parsotage,
and in his single cassock. Often it waa only by
toiling on hia glebe, by feeding swine, and by
loading dung carts that he could obtain daily
bread ; nor did his utmost exertions always pre
vent the bailiff from taking his concordance and
his inkstand in execution. It was a white day on
which he was admitted to the kitchen of a great
house and regaled by the servants with cold meat
and ale. His children were brought up like the
children of the neighbouring peasantry. His boys
followed the plough, and his girls went to service.
Study he found impossible ; and he might be con
sidered unusually lucky if he had ten or twelve
dog-eared volumes amongst the pots and pans on
his shelves. Even a keen and strong intellect
might be expected to rust under such circum
stances." Since the Dissolution of the Monasteries and the
sweeping away of the Preaching Friars with other
religious orders, in the time of Henry VIII.,
nothing had been substituted to supply the reli-

16
gioua instruction which they afforded to the people.
The system of parochial ministration and organisa
tion as witnessed in our own day had never been
developed. The Scriptures in Wales, including
Monmouthshire, was almost unknown in the
common tongue of the people.
The earlieat books known to have been printed
in Welsh were a translation of the Lord's Prayer,
the Commandments, and the Creed ; and a transla
tion of the Epistles and Gospels for Sundays and
Festivals. Both theae were published during the
reign of Edward YI. , the former in 1546 by Sir
John Price, of Brecon, and the latter printed in
1551, by J- obert Crowley for William Salesbury.
During the reign of Mary nothing was done in
this direction, but in 1563 Queen Elizabeth ordered
the Bible to be translated into Welsh and a copy
placed in every pariah church. The translation
was not, however, completed for 25 years, the
country being chiefly indebted for this great work
to Morgan, Bishop of Llandaff. In the meantime
(1567) a translation ot the New Testament had been
made by W. Salesbury and R. Davies, Bishop of
St. David's, but the number printed of these works
was not sufficient to supply a single copy for half-a-
dozen parishes. A second edition of Morgan's
Bible was printed in 1620, and a third in 1630, but
it may be fairly said that not one in a thousand of
the population had ever possessed a copy of the
Scriptures to read in their native tongue.
In Convocation in 1640, Dr. Griffitha made a
motion fnr the publication of a new edition of the
Welsh Church Bible by Bishop Morgan, pointing
out the many errors and omiaaions which the
printer had made in the previous edition. Nothii g
is known to have resulted from the motion, and
although the necessity for the work may have
been acknowledged, parties were too excited to
settle down to curry out any such useful under
taking. Within a week of the opening of Parliament
(November, 1640), a Committee of Keligion was
formed, which body appointed sub-committees to
assist them in their work. One sub-committee was

17
authorised to enquire into the causes of the scarcity
of preaching ministers, and how preaching minis
ters may be set up where none were, and how they^
could be maintained ; and to consider of some
way for removing scandalous ministers and putting
others in their places. This committee consisted
of sixty-one persons, and was generally spoken
of as the Committee of Scandalous Ministers 
a humourous appellation which contained a truth
never contemplated when first applied to them
It seems impossible to find out exactly what was
done by the committee under thia resolution, but
by records in the Commons Journals, v. ii. 189, it is
. clear that certain appointments of preachers were
made, and that among the number appointed was
Walter Cradock, the suspended curate of Cardiff.
During several years Cradock had not ceased
preaching and agitating, and that his great
popularity had been brought under the notice of"
Parliament is evident from an entry concerning
"the humble petition of certain ministers of
Wales authorised by the Committee of this
Honourable House to preach where there was a
want of preaching."
In the petition it is stated that there were found
upon strict enquiry scarcely as many conscientious
and constant preachers in Wales as there were of
counties, and that those, too, were silenced or much
persecuted, T he remarks, of course, having refer
ence to Wroth, Erbury, Cradock, and their asso
ciates especially.
If the statement were true, it would show how
highly fortunate was the condition of Monmouth
shire, that while in the whole of thirteen counties
there were not so many conscientious and constant
preachers, that no less than four — viz , Wroth,
Cradock, Erbury, and Walters— should have sprung
up into notoriety within a dozen miles of the town
of Newport.
The small number of conscientious and con
sistent preachers in Wales, as ascertained by the
Parliamentary Committee in 1641, must be a
matter of surprise, and although explanations nay-
be given which would show in a large degree a
E

18
mitigation of the lamentable slate of religion dis
closed, still there were doubtless wide grounds for
complaint. Many of the clergy held a plurality of
benefices ; and in many parishes the clergy were
non-resident. The services of the church were
very irregularly performed ; and in parishes whore
the clergy resided they held converse with their
flock as often in the alehouse as in the House of
God. It is evident therefore tint grievances
existed which required to be redressed. But
mucli as the clergy may have been disturbed in
other parts ot the kingdom, in Monmouthshire
they pursued for a time the even tenour of their
way. They ploughed and sowed, and praj ed and
preached as before. The services cf the church
were carried on as usual, and the parishioners wit
nessed the rites of baptism, marriage, .and burial as
their fathers had done before them. The clergy on
the whole dwelt in amity with the people, and
enforced upon them, probably with more earnest
ness than ever aa their primary duty, to Fear God
and Honour the King. If bitterness of feeling
existed it was not displayed by the parishioners to
their ministers, but towards the political Noncon
formist who unhinged the minds of many by cease
less agitation.
.Walter Cradock, as one of those who sub
scribed the petition to Parliament already referred
to, was called before the Committee, and having
avowed his connection with the same, it waa
ordered, " That the petition be referred to the
Cpmraittee for Scandalous Ministers where Mr,
Corbet hath the chair ; and it is likewise ordered,
that the parties complained of in that petition be
summoned to appear before that Committee."
From this petition and the entries concerning it,
it is clear that Cradock and others had received
from the Parliamentary Committee appointments as
preachers in Wales, and that they had been
obstructed in their labours. It would almost be
iDjierred that Cradooli and his fellow preachers,
having ol;),tained such appointments, were afraid
tljat they would fall through, the House having on
the Ist of June limited the existence of the Com-

19
mittee to a period when a Bill should be reported
to the House. The petitioii' was datfed and presen
ted to the House on the 26th of June, 1641, and
within three days, viz., on the 29th, the Committee
was revived.
Instead of Parliament now exerting iself
to provide a remedy, they used the sad con
dition of the clergy as a means for their over
throw and to further the design they had formed
for the destruction of the Church and Crown
together. H elpless in their poverty, the dergy
were charged with crimes as various in their
character as they were vile in their conception',
and being uniformly loyal to their King they were
persecuted and relentlessly ill-treated by every man
and officer of the Parliamentary forces when an
opportunity occurred. The long list of crimes
charged upon ministers usually concluded with
the sting and gravamen of the whole, viz.,
malignancy and disaffection to the Parliament.
The committee continued its operations, not so
much, it appears, in appointing "preaching minis
ters where none where " as in " removing scandalous
ministers and putting others in their places."
Cradock and his associates soon felt their position
in Monmouthshire so uncomfortable that they left
the district almost en masse. Walter Cradock and
Henry Walters are known to have taken up their
quarters in Bristol, where some particulars are
preserved of their doings. In the Broadmead
Records it is stated that the members of the Church
at Llanvaches joined with the Church at Bristol,
and that Mr. Ctadock, who had on the death of
Mr. Wroth been chosen as his successor in ^the
pastorate of the Church at Llanvaches, adminis
tered to them the ordinance of the Lord's i^ upper.
It is also stated that the people of Bristol had been
occasionally cheered by visits from Mr. Wroth, and
that they would run after him and the other
reforming ministers of South Wales like hungry
souls for food.
The Church fellowship which Cradock and other
Monmouthshire ministers enjoyed with the Bristol
friends wa« disturbed when the city was delivered

20
up te the Royal Army in 1643, and nearly the whole
Nonconformist body left for London, which event
is thus recorded in the Broadmead Records : —
"Then those of Wales and most of the prosperous
of this city were fain to journey to London, ai.d
thus going a little way they were guarded by a con
duct of the King's soldiers according to the articles
agreed upon at the delivering of the city, but by
the same guard they were stripped and robbed in
the country, and so left there ; those who had no
horses journeyed on foot. When they came to
London the people of Wales and those of Bristol
joined together and did commonly meet at the
Great All Hallows for the most part." All Hallows
seems to have been the head quarters or rendezvous
in London of the reforming ministers. Here
Walter Cradock was appointed the stated preacher,
and here he delivered those sermons which were
afterwards printed for him. Henry Walters and
Richard Symonds are also mentioned as having been
accustomed to preach at All Hallows, and from
thence were subsequently sent into South Wales to
preach. The harsh treatment which the political-religious
supporters of Parliament are said to have had
meted out to them was made the excuse for speedy
reprisals, and the turn of the loyal clergy soon
came. A short time after the outbreak of the war,
viz., in 1642, the Earl of Stamford obtained pos
session of the city of Hereford, and his action in
respect to the Rev Thomas Swift, vicar of Brid-
stow, near Ross, who was the grandfather of the
celebrated Dean Swift, may be taken as a specimen
of the cruelty inflicted upon clergymen and their
families by the Parliamentary officers. Swift had
held his preferment about 18 years at the time
when the intruders first appeared at Hereford.
When preaching at Ross Church on one occasion he
took for his texc '' Render unto Csesar," &c , and
dwelt perhaps with more zeal tlian prudence upon
the obligations of his people to support the cause of
Church and King. There was a further charge
rumoured against him, but denied by him, that he
had purchased and assisted the Monmouthshire

21
levies with arms. The treatment he received for tl.is
offence is detailed in a publication of the period
entitled "Mercurius Rusticus"(N(). 8), from whoh
we gather that he had after warning to abandon his
wife and family of more than ten children, and
betake himself to a liiding place. In his absence
the soldiers seized what possessions they could
easily carry ofl", unmoved by the tears and entreaties
of his distracted wife. Subsequently the wife paid
£40 for the purchase of her horses, but in a few days
these were again taken away. In ihe end, after
five visits of violence, the soldiers cleared out the
vicar's homestead even of lumber, and left his
children and servants at the beginning of the
winter with hardly a garment to shelter them, and
threatened any one who ihould show them mercy.
It was not unatural that the Earl of l>tamford
should be reminded of his responsibility for such
doings, and his reply illustrates the inhumanity by
which even the highest leaders were at this time
influenced. His statement was that all persons in
his situation who served the Parliament must be
for a while, and to a certain extent, left to act for
themselves, and he had the assurance that they
would be held harmless as to any vexation they
might inflict upon the enemy.
When the war first broke out the Commons did
not fail to submit their bills to the House of
Lords for approval, but day by day they became
not only more democratic but autocrdtic, and
subsequently compelled its orders to be carried
into effect without seeking any other autliority
than the resolutions of their own House.
In order to harass the clergy the Commons
nominated Committees for each county, who were
authorised under the Great Seal to inquire into
certain crimes alleged against them. Amongst
the crimes enumerated in the schedule the follow
ing were specifically mentioned : Not preaching the
Word of God, blasphemy, wilful, .and corrupt
perjury, subornation of perjury, fornication,
adultery, ale house and tavern hunting, drunken
ness, profane swearing and cursing, and malignancy
and disaffection to the Parliament. In the large

23
majority of cases the charges were utterly ground
less, but the sweeping manner in which the charg< s
were made, and the inquiries instituted, implied
that the crimes mentioned were rife among the
clergy, and the effect Was that by the common
people generally the bare charges were assumed as
guilt of the moai flagitious nature. It is not a
mattir for wonder therefore that the feeling
excited against the clergy was in many instances
most intense. The Cornmittees were
authorised to receive petitioi s from any parishioner,
no matter of what standing, and there are
numerous instances of men of learning and
unblemished lives being brought under notice and
made to suffer by the petition of mean and
profligate persons. Lord Clarendon remarks that
if the meanest aiid most vicious parishioner could
be brought to prefer a petition against a clergyman,
he waa sure to be prosecuted as a scandalous
minister, and the same writer further records that
no less than 900 ministers were brought before one
sub-division of this Committee,
The work of the Committees not proving so effica-
«ious as desired, the Commons resolved to proceed
further, and so in April, 1643, they passed an
ordinance blending both clergy and lai'y together
under the general title of Delinquents, and order
ing the sequestration of their estates, in order to
provide funds to prosecute the war. The ordinance
declares how agreeable it was to natural justice
that the estates of those who are instruments of
public calamities should be applied towards the
support of the Commonwealth, and provides that
the estates of the Archbishop of Canterbury and
. . . the Bishop of Llandaff shall be forthwith seized
into the hands of sequestrators and committees.
A subsequent ordinance, passed August 19th,
defined Delinquents as persons who absented them
selves from their usual places of abode or betook
themselves to the King's forces.
In the ordinance of April a clause was inserted
empowering the committees to allow the wives and
chiMren of a Delinquent for their maintenance any
portion of his goods and estate provided it did not

23
exceed one-fifth part, but Parliament soon dis
covered that the operation of the clau.se w?s more
benevolent towards the dependents upon the clergy
than it was designed to be. i- ccordingly, on Sep
tember 8th, another ordinance was agreed to re
stricting the allowance of fifths to the wife and
family of those ministers who did not reside in
their parishes. If a minister continued to live
among his pai ishioners he forfeited his claim to
any allowance, and if he had not a wife or children
he was not entitled to anything.
In many places the confiscation of estates and
property was carried into immediate operation, as
for instai-ce the seizure of £17,000 which had been
collected for the repair of St. Paul's Cathedral.
This sum was seized and used to carry on the war
with the King, and all the materials intended for
the completion of the building was turned into
money for the same purpose. But the blow took
fuller effect as time went on, and the cities and
counties, wherever the estates lay, came under the
dominion of Parliament.
After a few months of civil war the King's
forces proved so successful that the Parliamentary
leaders were almost inclined to give up the con
test. In their despair they I urned towards
Scotland for help, and at this juncture circum
stances fav®ured them. Though the Puritans had
ruthlessly plundered the Church there were many
who had no wish at this i ime to destroy it as a
national institution, but the form in which it was
to be retained was a question which they could not
settle. The differences between the Presbyterians
and Independents were ao strong that no scheme
could be agreed to without a compromise, and the
slightest departure from principle was regarded as
apostacy. Scotland was devoted to the scheme of
Presbyterianism, and when the Er glish Commons
sought help from this quarter, one of the con
ditions was that the > arliament should bind
themselves by oath to use every means to extirpate
popery and prelacy, and to establish the Presby
terian form of Church Government. The Solemn
League and Covenant as it was called having been

24
thus accepted by the Parliament, was next sought
to be enforced upon the clergy. An order was
published that it should be hung up in every
church and read by the minister to the people on
Sunday, October 1st, 1643. Any default in these
respects were to be reported by the Committee to
the House of Commons. "Very few clergy obeyed
the order, and the Committee being not slow to
report the delinquencies, many thousands of the
clergy were in consequence driven from their
livings. It can be easily understood that the expu'sion
of the loyal clergy from their benefices was more
easily and readily accomplished in England than in
Wales, which was then regarded as a very remote
part of the Kingdom, and whose people as a
whole, though rude, simple, and ignorant in
manners, were ihoroughly loyal. The exemption
from misery which the clergy of Wales enjoyed as
compared with their English brethren was not of
long duration, for as soon as Parliament was able
to direct its attention in that (Juarter, it put in
force the acts of confiscation and violence with, if
possible, double energy. That the Committee,
acting under the authority of Parliament, began
their work of ejecting ministers from their livings
at an early period ia evident from the records of
Parliament itself, although the sequence of their
proceedings cannot be traced.
In the Ordinance appointing the Committee pre
viously referred to. no Committee was named for
Oxford, nor anj county or place in Wales, the
Principality being then entirely under the control
of the King and his staunch supporters. Parlia
ment, however, sought to remedy the omission on
the first opportunity. This occurred in May, 1644.
Early in that month General Massey, who was in
command of the Parliamentary forces at Gloucester
made a succesaful inroad into Monmouthahire, and
on the 10th of the aame month the Commons
passed an Ordinance appointing Committees
for Monmouthshire "and the adjoining counties,
for the purpose of "putting into execution the
Ordinance of April, 1643," and "for seizing and

25
sequestering the estates of delinquents " in the
counties named. These Committees were to con
sist of not more than ten nor less than five persons,
and each acting member was to be paid a salary of
four shillings per day, a sum which was afterwards
increased to five shillings. The primary duty of
the Committees was to raise money to carry on the
war. The simple seizure and sequestration of the
estates of delinquents was the most ready means
they adopted, but in some instances the persons
declared delinquents were desirous to compromise
the matter or compound. In these the Committee
had power to make temporary arrangements
until the circumstances should be heard and
determined upon in London. If the estates of
delinquents failed to aupply the wants of the Com
mittee, they had a further power to levy taxation
of whatever kind to make up their requirements.
Beyond matters of a pecuniary nature the Com
mittee rendered great assistance in collecting and
communicating intelligence to the Central Com
mittee in London, and to the local military
authorities. General Massey, like other Parlia
mentary officers, found the Monmouthshire
Committee of great service.
The instructions to the Committee as regards the
clergy were to be "speedy and effectual in the
discharge of their office," and thej were em
powered to call to their assistance some "well
affected men" in each hundred of the county,
and enquire into " the lives, doctrine, and con
versation of all ministers and schoolmasters." Ta
the parishioners in general papers were issued in
viting " all ingenuous persons . . . to be very
active to improve the present opportunity." The
invitation, however, was not complied with, and
in subsequent papers it was set forth that " it is
found by sad experience that parishioners are not
forward to complain of their ministers though
scandalous " — an expression which certainly im
plies that as a rule the parishioners were so satis
fied with the conduct of their ministers that in
most parishes there was not the slightest ground.
for complaint as to their conduct. The Com-
a

26
mittees proved equal to the circumstances, for
failing to receive complaints from the parishianers,
they engaged paid agents, or, in other words,
common informers, who were instructed to go about
and seek accusations against both clergy and school
masters. This scheme was commonly called "par
son hunting," and admirably answered its purpose,
for now charges began to flow in freely, and the
Committee had ample work provided for them.
It ia evident that the powers given to the Com
mittees under the two ordinances referred to, over
the estates and persons of delinquents were quite
sufficient to brinK under sequestration every one
of the clergy without particularly specifying them
as a body, but Parliament, gaining another advan
tage in the county, were not slow to act upon it
with vigour. In September, 1644, the town of Mon
mouth was captured by Massey, and many of the
Royalists fled from the county. Now was the time
for Parliament to operate. Powers were at once
given to Commissioners, the Lieputy Lieutenants,
and Committees of the county of Monmouth and
adjacent counties, to call before them all ministers
and schoolmasters who were regarded as scandalous
or ill-affected towards the Parliament, and upon
proof being given of the charges, to eject such
ministers and schoolmasters, and nominate in their
places such godly and fit persons as they should
think proper, and put them in possession of the
churches, schools, &c.
There is plenty of evidence to show how arbi
trarily and cruel the Committees worked. They
robbed the helpless clergy right and left, and exer
cised the powers which they either possessed or
assumed to possess with unpitying rigour. The
Committees, although originally formed of men of
position and respectability, became in time composed
of inferior agents without character or principle,
who made men delinquents at their pleasure, seiz
ing property and money in the most illegal manner,
and never accounting for large sums so obtained.
Any two were competent to act, and their proceed
ings exhibited a revolting system of barefaced
imposition and extortion. Complaints were

27
naturally made, and the House of Lords by their
repeated reminders to the Commons compelled
them at kst to institute inquiries, which disclosed
a mass of iniquity reflecting the greatest culpability
upon the whole Parliamentary party.
The Commons now gave further proof to the
Scots of their desire to annihilate any remnant of
Episcopalianism and to promote Presbyterianism,
by imprisoning the clergy in large numbers, and
persecuting to death the aged Archbishop Laud.
The clergy secured in custody were so many that
new gaols had to be built, and when these were
found insufficient for their confinement the minis
ters were thrust on board hulks, where they
endured, as may be imagined, great sufferings.
Archbishop Laud, after remaining in prison for
some time, was charged with treason, but on being
brought to trial the judges declared that the
charges preferred against him did not amount to
treason. The Commons, however, had resolved
on his death, and proceeding by the more tyran
nical mode of attainder, they passed an ordinance
for his execution. Notwithstanding that Laud
produced a Royal pardon, he was by an act more
arbitrary than any the King had ever perpetrated,
beheaded on January 10, 1645, being then 72
years of age. On the news of Laud's death being
communicated to Morgan Owen, the Bishop of
Llandaff, that prelate instantly dropped dead.
Laud had been the Bishop's friend, and it was by
his influence that Morgan Owen was promoted to
the See. After Owen's death the See remained
vacant for sixteen years, no new bishop being
appointed until the Restoration in 1660.
Immediately following the death of Archbishop
Laud, the use of the Book of Common Prayer in
Divine Worship and In private places and families
was practically abolished, and a further order was
promulgated enforcing the general use of a book
called the Presbyterian Directory. While the use
«f the Prayer Book was forbidden under a penalty
of £10, or a year's imprisonment, all ministers of
the Church were enjoined to use the Directory
under a penalty of 40a for each omission. There

28
was another penalty provided of not less than £6,
nor more than £50, for who ever ventured to speak
against it.
In opposition to this the King at Oxford set forth
a proclamation (dated November 13th, 1645),
enjoining the use of Common Prayer according to
the law, notwithstanding the pretended Ordinance
published by Parliament for the use of the new
Directory. The people stood amased and per
plexed between the two orders. In many parts of
England the Common Prayer daily decreased, and
the 1 irectory, by the power of Parliament,
advanced ; but throughout Monmouthshire and
South Wales the Old Prayer Book still maintained
favour with the people.
It is both amusing and confusing to find the
record of so many Orders and Ordinances of this
Parliament. Fuller says that in bulk and number
they not only equalled but exceeded all the laws
and statutes made since the Conquest.
What progress in sequestration the Committees
in South Wales had made up to the middle of
1645 is not clear, but they had not been idle.
They had at all events secured poaaession of the
lands of the Pdshop, Deans, and Chapter of Llan
daff and St. David's, and on the 15th of August the
House of Commons proceeded to utilise the funds
arising from the said lands by resolving that a sum
of £300 per annum be allowed and paid out of the
funds to Mr Henry Walter, Mr Richard >-ymonds,
and Mr Walter Cradock, ministers, during the
pleasure of the House.
With the name of Walter Cradock the reader
must be already familiar, and Mr Henry Walter,
it may be remembered, has been mentioned as
first curate of Mynyddialwyn, and subaequently
pastor of the newly formed Nonconformist com
munity at that place.
What little is known of Henry Symonds is that
he was born in Abergavenny in 1609, and
matriculated at Exeter College, Oxford, in 1627.
He afterwards opened a school at Shrewsbury, and
had the celebrated Richard Baxter among his pupils.
When Cradock was in hiding from the Bishop's.

29
officers, he found refuge at Symonds' house at
Shrewsbury, and made acqua ntance with Richard
Baxter there. Symonds left that town in 1635, and
proceeded to South Wales where he identified
himself with the Puritanical movement going
forward. The amount to be paid to the ministers named
was specified to be equally divided between them
— that is one hundred pounds per annum each —
a'^d it was especially stated that the money was
" towards their maintenance in the work of the
ministry in South Wales " The Parliamentary
phrase was, however a euphemism. The faet
being that the work of the ministry was at a stand
still. iVtany of the regular minister-' had been
ejected from their livings, and the agitating
preachers paid by f'arliament to labour in Mon
mouthshire and South Wales, 'spent both their
time and salaries in London.
On the 11th October, 1645, Chepstow Castle was
taken by the Parliamentary forces, and this suc
cess, with the posse sion of Monmouth gained on
the 24th of the same month, gave them the com-
Kiand of a greot part of the county. Chepstow was
at once selected by the Committee as the seat of
Government, and here they sat lo carry out the
virions purposes for which Parliament had
appointed them.
It may be supposed that this Parliamentary-
success would have given encouragement and pro
tection to Cradock and his friends, and that they
would have gladly left the busy metropolis ta
minister to the wants of the siiiritually starving
people of South Wales. But no, they still occu
pied themselves at Great All Hallows, and occa
sionally preached to their patrons in Parliament
grossly flattering sermons.
With the opening of the year 1616, the Parlia
mentary forces concentrated beforo I'aglan Castle,
the seige of which waa more prolonged than was at
first anticipated. In July, Colonel Morgan reported
favaurably to Parliament of the progress of the
seige, and up to that time Cradock was continuing
his agitation in London. On ^;he 21st July he
H

30
.preached a sermon before the Parliament, and
urged his case thus : — "Is it not a sad case that
in thirteen counties (Monmouthshire being one of the
thirteen counties cf Wales) there should not be
above thirteen (God grant there be more ! 1 know
not so many) conscienti- us ministers who in these
times expressed themselves firmly and constantly
faithful to the Parliament ! and formerly preached
profitablj in the Welsh language twice every Lord's
Day ? "
It would be difficult to obtain stronger evidence
than this of the universal loyalty of the Welsh
clergy. For in the face of Parliament assembled
to hear the Word of God preached to them by the
leader of the religious movement which they had
inaugurated and countenanced, they were assured
that not so many ministers throughout Wales as
are cunted in a baker's dozen were firmly and
constantly faithful to their cause.
The influence of the agitator had its wonted
effect, for on the very next day in the House of
Oommons, July 22nd, an ordinance was passed
for constituting Mr. Richard Symonds, Henry
Walter, and Walter Cradock, ministers to preach
itinerantly in the aeveral counties of South Wales,
and for allowing each of them one hundred pounds
per annum out of ihe rents and revenues of
the deans, deans and chapters, and prebends of
•St. Davids and Llandaff, for their pains, and like
wise for constituting a committee to sequester the
¦said rents and revenues and pay the said stipend
to the said ministers out of them. Tiie ordinance
was ordered to be sent to the Lords for their con
currence. In the course of another month (August 19),
Haglan Castle fell ; but even then, when the
power and influence of the Royalists were finally
broken in Monmouthshire, the salaried itinerants
seem to have felt an indisposition to leave London,
for a period of three months elapsed and they were
still found in the great city. Then the Commons
by another order dated October 28th, commanded
that Mr. Cradock, Mr. Symonds, and Mr. Walter,
who were formerly appointed to go into Wales to

31
preach the Gospel there, do with all speed proceed
thither according to former appointmentsj and that
the former allowance ordered to be paid to them
for their pains be now paid unto them by the
Committee of the Revenue. The draft order for
the appointment and payment of these preachers
appears in extenso in the Lords' Journals
VIII., 569, and is dated November 16, 1646.
What these itinerants did after their arrival in the
Principality, except to draw their salaries, we do
not know. They had the whole country for their
labours, and are supposed td have travelled up
and down the country as they thought proper, but
Mr. Rees, who has done his best to show these
ministers iu a good light, gives no particulars of
their work during the remainder of that year
(1646), nor until 1648, when he merely observes
that the second civil war which broke out, inter
rupted the work of evangelization, and Cradock
and his friends fled back to England. Cradock is
credited with having published in 1646 and 1647
two editions of the New Testament in Welsh, but
the evidence given is not sufficiently strong to
warrant the statement being unreservedly accepted.
Translations in Welsh had already been made by
WiUiam Salesbury, Bishop Morgan, Dr. Parry,
Richard Heylin, Sir Thomas Middleton, and the
Rev. William "Wroth, ai.d it is possible that Mr.
Cradock may have urged forward the printing of
another edition. Although the author of several
works, and a notorious preacher, he is not known
to have published anything in the Welsh language
— a fact that militates very much against the belief
that he was competent to do the Welsh spiritual
good when it is remembered that amid the deep-
rooted ignorance of the people there were few
things they lacked more than a knowledge of the
English language, in which it seems WaUer
Cradeck both wrote and preached. His only Com
plaint against the ministers of South Wales, beyond
that they were not faithful to the Parliament, was
that they did not preach twice a day in the Welsh
language, and it would appear that while making
the complaint he was himself unable to remedy it.

32
The close of the year 1646 brought with it what
is known as the Black Christmas Day. Fanatic
preachers had urged Parliament to do away with
all habituated and doted-on customs, and accor
dingly the observance of the Feast of tho Birthday
of the World's Redeemer — being one of those
customs which the hnglish people had for centuries
indulged in — was prohibited. The feast was
changed into a fast, and the fast declared to be
obligatory upon all. 1 ike other commands of the
Parliament it was not universally obeyed. Both
Houses of Parliament sat on this diy for the trans
action of usual business, and, as the papers of the
time tell us, " had a long dispute. " The churches
throughout the country were all closed, but the
people generally would not open their places of
business. Puritanical shopkeepers, however, in
London took down their shutters, and Puritanical
masters compelled their servants to work without
relaxation as on any ordinary day ; but the people
generally, wedded to the old custom of keeping
Christmas, revolted at the Puritanical tyranny, an I
serious rioting occurred throughout the country.
The triumphant Presbyterian party had now
been enabled to a large extent to carry out their
programme for the reformation of the Church and
reconstruction of the Government. The condition
of things at this time may be shortly summarised.
The King was a prisoner, and loyalty to his Majesty
suppressed ; episcopacy had been abolished ; the
clergy as a body had been robbed of their livings ;
the Prayer Book condemned, the Presbyterian
system formally established, and the universities,
schools, and benefices, so far as they could be,
filled by ministers of that persuasion. With all
the change, the moral and spiritual state of the
people had not improved. It was simply lament
able. The Mercurius Britannicus declares Mon
mouthshire and tdjacent counties in Walej to be as
dark as the country of Egypt.
"V. Powell, in the preface to his Scriptural
Catechism, published in 1646, says : — " Having
finished this little Catechism in Knglish, it ' is
translated into Welsh for my dear and soul-

33
hungering countrymen, who have not to my
knowledge any except one, (if one) of this natuie,
nay far worse, have not of godly able Welsh
ministers one for a county, nor one Welsh Bible
for 500 families."
The Puritan writer Edwards, in a book entitled
"Gangrena," which he dedicated to the two
Houses of Parliament, summarises the religious
situation of the country thus : — " Things every
day grow worse and worse ; you can hardly
imagine them as bad as they are. No kind of
blasphemy, heresy, disorder, and confusion, but
is found among us, or coming in among us. For
we, instead of reformation, are grown from one
extreme to another, fallen from Scylla to
Charybdis ; from Popish innovations, supersti
tions, and prelatical tyranny, to damnable heresies,
horrid blasphemies, libertinism, and fearful
anarchy  The worst of the prelates
held many sound doctrines, and had many com
mendable practices ; but many of the sects and
sectaries of our days deny all principles of religion —
are enemies to all holy duties, order, learning,
overthrowing all. What swarms are there of all
sorts of illiterate mechanic preachers ; yea, of
women and boy preachers, &c." Referring to
Cradock and a sermon preached by him the same
writer says : — " What a sad thing it is that men
so principled should go among such people as the
Welsh, with so large a power of preaching, as he
and his fellows hare."
Dugdale states that " during the calamitous war
kindled and carried on by the Presbyterians more
country mansion were plundered and burnt, more
churches robbed and profaned, more blood spilt
within the compass of four years, and in short
more frightful scenes opened of savage slaughter
and confusion than had been acted in the long
contest between the houses of York and Lancaster."
The early part cf the year 1647 waa compara
tively uneventful. Loyalty was crushed and
tyranny paramount. The triumphant party now
carried out their designs with impunity unopposed,
and consequently we find the Preaching Ministers

34
on the increase, and taking the place of the
banished clergymen. The so-called churches of
Llanvaches and Mynyddislwyn sent forth a score
of itinerants, who went up and down the country
and found excellent opportunities for exercising
their gifts.
The work of sequestration, too, went quietly on.
Now that the Committee could unrestrainedly exer
cise their power, it was no longer necessary to go
from Monmouthshire to London to make accusa
tions against Scandalous Ministers. The instru
ments of oppression were brought home to the
very doors of tlie Plunderers, as Walker puts it,
and it was i endered as easy to dispossess as it was
to invent accusations against innocent men.
In June the Committee, having removed from
Chepstow, met at Usk, and fearing from circum
stances which became known that the suppressed
loyalty would again gather head, they took steps to
disarm all persona whom they considered Papists
and Delinquents, and ordered the High Sheriff,
who appears to have been one William Herbert, to
seize and secure all "Desperate persons." The
Committee also ordered all places of strength to be
secured, as well aa dangerous persons, and to
search suspected houses as well as to disarm
Papists. "V"ery few records of the proceedings of
the Cequeatrators are preserved, but there is suffi
cient to enable, a judgment to be formed of the
spirit in which the Sequestrators acted, and the
rapacity of their deairea. Their proceedings at
thia period were regarded as^despotie and alarming.
They are reported to have received a bribe of £26
for sparing "One reverend learned and faithful
divine " from being made a delinquent, and they
are said td have extorted' from one "fariatic's
wife " the sum of £30 under a threat that she
shbuld otherwise be denounced.
The estate and' possessions of the noble Marquis
of Worcester formed a fine picking, the rents and
tithes alone amounting as it appears from a report
of the Sequesttators, to no less than £4,631 4s 5Jd
per annum. Haw a portion' of this was disposed
of is sHown by the following statement : —

36
jxi ; . ¦ ¦ ,J> . ¦ ¦ - - £ B. d.
"Disposed of " by Ordiiiance to Cromwell ... 465 17 0|
,, ,, Preachers in the idanty, and
South Wales  675 0 0
,, ,, Marqne^' two Grand-
daugbtsrs  866 11 8
,, ,, A farm let to Cromwell  kOO 0 0
,, ,, Two Manors sold, yearly
value  16116 SJ
£2,369 5 5
An allowance was also made out of some portion
of the estate, of £200 per annum to Hugh Peters,
one of the leading itinerants, the draft order for
which appears among the House of Lords records
dated November 28, 1646. To increase the
resources of the Sequestrators the timber in the
noble parks belonging to the Marquis were cut
down, the value of which was estimated at £6,000,
the loppings alone amounting to 37,000 cords.
Much of this timber was ^ent to Bristol, and used
there in repairing and re-building houaea which had
been burnt on the old bridge.
The whole eatate, as appears by a Parliamentary
audit, was valued at £20,000 per annum, and this
remained in the hands of Cromwell until hia death,
a period of 14 years.
Among other estate^ sequestered was that of Sir
Edward Morgan, of Pencoed, but this gentleman
seems to have compounded with the Committee
by a payment of £1,007. Money the Committee
wanted, and money it appears they would have.
The county was assessed for the support of the
army at £192 19s Id, but Royalists voluntarily
offered a contribution of £1,300 a month to
the commanding officer if the servile yoke
of the Committee could be removed. Their
oppression was intolerable, and ere another
year had passed the second civil war had
broken out. Major-General Langharne and
Colonels Poyer and Powell, who had fought against
the Royalists in the first war, were now defying
Cromwell, and protecting the people from the
tyrannous conduct of his Government. At this
time petitions in favour of the King and of the
Book of Common Prayer were put into circulation

36
and numerously signed by the people of Mon
mouthshire and South Wales. The conflict of
parties threw the country once more into con
fusion, and again necessitated the itinerant Puritan
preachers to seek safety in flight.
Cradock, as we before observed, returned to
London, aiid published there a sermon, in which
he referred to the progress religion had made
during the war, and in the absence of preachers. He
says : " Since I have been from you of late I have
observed and seen in the mountains of Wales the
most glorious work I ever saw in England, unless
it were in London. The Gospel is run over the
mountains between Brecknockshire and Monmouth
shire aa the fire in the thatch. And who should
do this ? They have no ministers ; but some of the
wisest say that there are about eight hundred godly
people there, and they go from one to another.
They have no ministers, it is true ; if they had they
would honour them, and bless God for them.
They are filled with good news, and they tell it to
others." From the statement of Cradock in this passage
it would appear that all the ministers had been
ejected at this time, and that, notwithstanding the
resolution of Parliament, there was still an absence
of itinerant preachers to carry on the work of the
Gospel. Matters were growing darker, day by day,
and it was evident that a climax was approaching.
The Church had been stripped, and in the opinion
of many had received its death-blow. The attack
was now concentrated upon the Crown, and on the
penultimate day of January, 1649, King Charles
was beheaded. In less than a week the Commons,
proceeding rapidly in their work of utterly de
stroying the constitution of the country, began
to discuss the question of retention or abolition of
the House of Lords. On February 6th they voted
by a majority of 44 to 29 that the House of Peers
in Parliament was useless and dangerous, and
ought to be abolished. By the same Act it was
declared that those Peers who had demeaned them
selves; with known courage and fidelity to the

37
Commonwealth should not be excluded from the
councils of the nation if qualified to be elected.
It was not a question, let it be observed, depen
dent upon the voice of the electors, but one to be
determined by the Rump of the Parliament whe her
a Peer had been their supporter, or loyal to his
King and country. Such was the exacting
tyranny of the Caucus in 1649.
Cnly three Peers are known to have been ao
elected, one of whom was Lord Philip Herbert,
who, in 1641, was appointed by Parliament as
Lord-Lieutenant of the county of Monmouth. In
February, 1650, his father, the Earl of Pembroke,
died, and being then a Knight of the Shire of
Berks, he continued to represent that constituency
in the House of Commons.
The drastic measures of reform which had been
carried out with regard to the Church did not
prove So satisfactory as many of its promoters
desired. The i piscopal form of Church Govern
ment had been destroyed, and Parliament had
passed an ordinance for the setting up of Pres
byterianism, but the matter was not easy of
accomplishment. If men were wise in modern
times they would recognise that it is not difficult to
combine for destruction, and that it may not be
eas> to provide a substitute for that which is de
stroyed. In opposition to the Episcopal Church
both the Presbyterian and the Independent parties
had been united, but now that the Church no
longer existed, a jealousy sprang up as to which
religious party should be dominant in the State.
After much and prolonged squabbling, the Indepen
dents, with Gromwell at their head, got the upper
hand, and the new religious scheme which had
been formulated on the Presbyterian model came
to ^ief. Respecting its chief promoters Dugdale
remarks than when they thought of nothing less
than dividing the prey and raising vast fortunes
out of Crown and Church lands, their hopes were
luddenly scattered, they were turned out of their
scandalous acqaisitions, and publicly exposed to
contempt and scorn. For now with the triumph
of Cromwell the Independentg forced them to

38
retire from Wes minster, seized their post?, and
made themselves masters both in Church and
State. As the Presbyterians robbed the Episoo-,
palians, so now the Independents filched from the
Presbyterians all the good things with which they
had enriched themselves. We are concerned only,
however, with what they did with poor little Wales.
The greatest desolation which seemingly was
inflicted upon the country resulted from the
operation of a special Act passed February 22,
1650, entitled, " An Act for the better propagation
and preaching of the Gospel in Wales, and for
" ejecting scandalous ministers and schoolmasters,
and redress of some grievances."
The grejt deep-laid scheme of the Act was to
pluck out of their livings all the clergy under the
the name of Malign ants alias Royal ; to get pos
session of the whole ecclesiastical revenues, and
to supply the churches with stipendiary ministers
and itinerant preachers.
The design of this Act is credited to Hugh
Peters, and this is the version Walker gives of it.
Peters had gone to Ireland with Cromwell, under
whom he held a commission, and was sent back to
Wales in the position of a Coloiiel to raise a
regiment of soldiers to strengthen Cromwell's
- army. In the carrying out of thia charge he seems
to have mis-spent his time, and neglected his duty.
At a time when Cromwell was looking out for the
support of this new regiment, he ascertained that
Peters had only raised three corapaniea. Croni-
well'a wife seems to have interfered and drew up
articles against Peters, who in his defence, hit upon
a novel plan of justifying himself by stating that in
conjunction with Colonel Philip' Jones, of Sivan-
sea, he had managed " to settle a Congregational
Church of their own invention." The defence
- seems to have been considered good, an 1- his neg-
: lect condoned, for Peters" was afterwards- aent to
London ¦ and was consulted there aa to the beiat
¦means "to drive on the great design of propaga
ting the Gospel in Wales." His " advice in brjef
was simply this : "Sequester all -ministers without
exception, and bring the revenues of the Church

39
into one public treasury ; out of which allow a
hundred pounds a year to six itinerant ministers
to preach in every county." The suggestions made
by Peters were adopted and carried into effect,
but it soon became evident how grievously they
failed to meet the necessities of the case, or to
supply the void created by the expulsion of the
godly men who had previously ministered in every
parish. In the Act for the propagation and preaching of
the Gospel in Wales seventy-one commissioners
are named who were empowered, or any five of
them, on behalf of the Commonwealth, to hear all
charges made against any minister or schoolmaster,
and eject them from their offices if proved to be
delinquent, scandalous, malignant, or non resident j
to induct to livings or schools such preachers and
schoolmasters as would be recommended to them
by the Approvers ; to manage the profits of all
sequestered livings, which they were to divide, as
specified in the Act, between the wives and
children of the ejected ministers, the approved
preachers and schoolmasters, and the wi.dows of
godly ministers. Among the names of the commis
sioners, who appear to have been men of some
standing, we find those of Hugh Peters, Col. Philip
Jones, Henry Herbert, William Herbert, John
Herbert, Reese Williams, Bussey Mansel, Edward
Prichard, and Edward Stradling — all names familiar
in this district. Colonel Philip Jones was one of
Cromwell's officers who displayed courage and tact
at the battle of b't. Fagans, and wps left aa
Governor of Swansea (of which place he waa a
native) when Cromwell went to Ireland. He was
elected in 1653 as representative of Monmouthshire
in the Little Parliament, and returned again in
1654. He was" afterwards raised by Cromwell to
the Upper H ouse, and appointed Comptroller of
the Protector's Househo d. Cromwell further
favoured him by appointing him High Steward of
Swansea, under the ' charter which h? granted to
that town, and leased to him on favourable terms
some property in iho seignoryof Gov/er, of which
the Royalists had been deprived. Asa compliment

40
in return Colonel Jones was among the number of
those who offered the crown for the Protector's
acceptance. Reese Williams was a native and resident of
Newport, of whose circumstances we know but
little. It is clear, however, that he was one of the
leading IVonconformists of the time, and held in
great respect if not in reverence. In a letter to
Cromwell, Walter Cradock refers to him as "a
renowned ancient saint," who had served the State
in many places, but who had gained no pecuniary
advantage therefrom. And if we may be forgiven
for the profanity, we may add that Walker states
that in a sermon preached in Monmouthshire by an
itinerant named Williams, probably Philip
Williams, of Monmouth, he afi^rmed " That Christ
Josus was such another man as old Ricfe Williams,
of Newport, and that he had a large grey beard."
The Act also provided for the appointment of
twenty-five Approvers who were to recommend and
approve of persons to fill the places of the ejected
ministers and schoolmasters. The name of Henry
Walter heads the list, and it is followed by the
names of Walter Cradock and Richard Symonds,
particulars of whom we have already given. Then
among the nominated twenty-five we find Roger
Charnock (presented to the Vicarage of St. Mary's,
Monmouth, in 1654). Edmond Ellis, of St.
Fagan's ; Jenkin Jones, John Miles, and George
Robinson (of Caerleon.) Respecting Edmond
Ellis, Walker in his 'Suffering of the Clergy,"
makes the following statement; — The Rector of
St. Fagan's, one Lewis Williams, having been
ejected, he was succeeded by one EUis. This
preacher, who was a skinner from London, had
£100 a year paid him by the sequestrators, and
preached down tithes as unlawful and anti-Chris
tian, but the Government after some time, finding
it troublesome to take the profits of the livings and
pay the ministers themselves, issued an order that
all such as were possessed of places which were
worth £100 a year should receive the tithes, where
upon Ulr Ellis, thinking it too shameless to preach
up what he had before preached down, gets Richard

41
Symonds^a brother itinerant, to preach for him on
Malachi iii, 10— "Bring ye all the tithes into the
store house,'' &c., taking occasion himself to step
out of the way. The parishioners were offended at '
both, and looked en them as a couple of knaves.
Of Jenkin Jones, who' Calamy states was a
Catabaptist {i.e. , against all baptism), and one
Robinson, we have some mention in the Note
Book of Walter Powell, of Llantilio, from which, as
illustrating the history of the district at this'
period, we quote the following : —
1650— May 27.— The new Prayers began at Llantilio.
July 27.— Jenkin Jones preached at Llantilio.
Sept. 1. — Lieut. Kogers preached at Llantilio, and
the smyth of Malpas expounding.
Sept. 29. — Jenkin Jones pleached at Llantilio.
1651 — May 22. — John ^ Morgan Robinson preached
damnacion to Llantilio people.
Jnne 2.— Phi: Williams, of MomnoUth, preached.
John Miles, mentioned in the list, was a preacher
at Swansea, and founder of the Anti-psedobaptist
interest in Wales. After the Restoration he went
to America.
Some of these Commissioners and Approvers were'
themselves approved of as preacher,", and obtained
full benefit of the salaries allowed to itinerants.
One I of these was the chief designer of the Act,
Hugh Peters. It is true that Peters is said to have
asserted in one of his sermons that he never re
ceived a penny for his 'pains ' and' preaching, but
Walker points out the services he performed wbre
equal to any amounts paid to him, for he was one
of the most zealous and efficient comniissioners and
itinerants. In the accounts of the Sequestrators
for South Wales and Monmouthshire, £53 is charged
against him, > and although it is well known that the--
amounts charged' were not always paid'^ it is
scarcely possible to believe that those in charge of
the accotintr'ivoutd put down the Chief Commis
sioner as being party to a cheat.
Henry Walter, again, who devoteid his time
entirely to preaching, is said by Walker to have
received a separate saldty fori'l Mdnmouthshire and
GlambrganshiVe, his labours being chiefly con
fined to the border between the two counties.

42
Hugh Peters soon left the district, and the
execution of the Act was entrusted chieflj to
Walter Cradock and Vavasour Powell, a con
spicuous preacher and an enthusiast, who had been
converted by Cradock.
The sequestration of livingi and the ejectment
of ministers in Monmouthshire prior to the Special
Act of 1650 for the Propagation of the Gospel in
Wales, was only partial, in consequence of the
limited district over which the Parliamentary forces
had command. In many parts of the county the
people were still thoroughly loyal, though their
active hostility had ceased ; and in the absence of
military power the ordin mcea of Parliament were
disregarded with impunity. After the possession
of the towns of Monmouth and Chepstow had been
acquired, and free commanication established with
Newport and Cardiff, the whole southern portion
of the county was held in subjection and little
difficulty waa then experienced in ^effecting the
sequestrations desired, A comparison of the list
of panahea aeque^trated before and after the pass
ing of the Act shows this very clearly, as there is
hardly a parish in the upper part of the county
named in the earlier list.
The following are the parishes sequestrated
before the Act for the propagation of the Gospel
in Wales, with the names of the ministers ejected,
so far as we have been able to ascertain : —
Bassalleg, with Benllis and iSisca.— The Manor ot Bas-
salleg belonged to the see of Llandaff, and was
after the seiz'ire of the Bishop's lands sold on the
6th July, 1619, to Wm. Jones and others for £131.
The ejected minUter was named Geo. Walker, or
Watklna.
Bedwas.—Thla living was held by Bishop Owen, and
sequestered before his death iu 1645. Walker states
that the Bishop had, in ceasequence ot the poverty
of his see, bean allowed to hold in commendam the
rectory af Bedwas, Mon., ot which he waa
deprived, as well as of his see of Llandaff. This,
remark? Wjlker, was a fate too common to excite
remark but for the vile profaiia'nan by which it
waa followed. One Rr^es John David, the agent
and seouestrator, who lived in the parson :rge house,
managed the glebe, and received the tithe, removed
a very fi e font of atone out of the church of Bed-

43
was ; and when himself and his man could not
break it to pieces, he caused it to be placed under
a tree, where it was used as a trough for his horses
and cattle.
BedweUty. — James Lewis, or, according to the accounts of
the sequestrators, Lewis James.
Bishton, with Llanwern.—Wm. Thomas was ejected.
Oaerwent. — Samuel Alaop is given in one list as the
minister ej«cted before 1649. Ht; is said to have
survived the Restoration, but died before re
possessing his living.
Oaldicott. — Nathaniel CoUington. He lived to be restored,
Gfoldclif, with Nash and Whitson. — Wai. Fairies.
Henllis. — See Bassalleg.
Jfton, mth Roggiett. —Henry Walker.
Ifton. — Wm. Thotuas was ejected about 1649.
Kemeys Inferior.— Wm. Evans.
Langstone. — John Edwards. See TreduuT;ock,
Llaindavenny with St. Bride's Netherwent. — Wm. Morgan,
Llandegveth with LlanlloweU —Charles Lewis.
Llangattock-juxta- Usk. — Phil Fowler.
Llangattock Lingoed. —William Thomas.
Llangovan. — No minister's name is preserved, but the
living was sequestered, and no minister was settled
in it for 18 vears, viz,, from 1642 to 1660.
LlanlloweU. —See Llandegveth.
Llanmartin with WiUrick. —John Edwards.
Llansoy. — JMr Legg.
Llanvaches. — Francis Price.
Llanwem. — See Bishton.
Marshfield with Peterstone, —Thomas Maddocks.
Mynyddislwyn. —The titues of this parish belonged to the
Bishop and were therefore sequestered at an early
date. A. reader or curate who served the church
was ejected.
Nash. -See GoldelifiE.
Peterstone. — See Marshfield.
Portskewett. — WiUiam Hurd.
Bisca. — Se-3 Bassalleg.
Boggiett. — See Ifton.
St. Bride's Netherwent. —See Llaudaveuny

tiZ7k' }-«ee Portskewett.

Tintern. — No Name,
Tredunnock. —The minister of this parish, and also of
Langstone, was named John Edwards, and was
p obably the same person. It is recorded that he
waa ejected from the latter place for malignancy
and prosecution of the Godly in his neighbourhood.
The date of hia ejectment from Langstone is not
given, but it was probably the same time as Tre
dunnock.
Whitsun.—Sne Goldcliff.
Wilcrick. —See Llanmartin,

44'
Judging from the aequestrations the number of
Scandalous Ministers waa astonishing. But thaugh
it may reasonably be doubted if all or any one of
them was scandalous in the sense of being guilty .of ;
the numerous offences against morality so freely
charged against the clergy and enumerated in the -
Act of Parliament, it is certain that the great
majority of the clergy were truly "disaffected
towards the Parliament," and thia in itself was
taken as sufficient cause for their aequeatration and
removal. Of the ¦ offences alleged - against the '
ministers whose names have been given, only a
few are specified*, r In the remaining cases the state- , . ¦
ment of the fact that they were turned out is all :
that we now know. Charles Lewis, the rector of
LlanlloweU and- Llandegveth,- is accused of ~^'
drunkenness, and for this same ..offence it is
recorded that he was put in the stocks at Chepstow
after his ejectment. John Edwards, rector, of
Langstone and Tredunnock (the two parishes being
so near together, wc take it, that the minister
named waa one and the same , person, although -
Walker statea that they were not) was accused of
malignancy and proaecuting .the,. Godly in his.vi
neighbourhood, and Mr Legg, the rector of Llan-
ssy, was removed for pluralities. - Whsit other ¦
livings thia minister held is not stated; but the
parish being one of the smallest in the county,
with a population of less than 200 s^uls, it can
hardly be regarded as a serious crime that he
held another living to assist his maintenance.
Thus the most culpable offence enumerated, for
which a score of clergymen were turned out , of
their livings, was drunkenness — an, flffenjia/ which;
however heinous in the present day, was neither
uncommon nor seriously regarded in the middle^'"'
of the 17th century.
No sooner did the Act for the Propagation of
the Gospel Cjome into operation than the powers of
the Commissioners for ejecting scantialou* minis
ters were vigorously exercised. In a very short
time every living in th^ county was sequestered,
and every clergyman ejected, excepting a few who
probably sacrificed their principjt^s, to retain theiir,^M
position.

45
We append a list of the Parishes in Monmouth
shire sequestered after the passing of the Act for
the Propagation of the Gospel in Wales (1651) :—
.<16«rsrcw)m»i2/ (Vicarage).- Charles Heibert was ejtcted,
mt lived fo be leatoreH. A minisfer i.ameri Wm.
Hughes IS also said to have been turned out by the
propagators for drunkei ness and ill. gal inunction.
The later term m«ins that tlie minister waa pre
sented by a person who, being loyal, was described
as a aalignant. Such presentations and induc
tions would not be reoogi ised by the ParUamentary
and Puritan party,
Bedwas (Rectory).— A clergyman named Hayward was
ejected from this living. It is presumed that he
obtained it after the death of Bishop Morgan
Owen, and ao was the second sufferer in it. Bed-
w,_s was cor solidated with Rudry in Glamorsran-
shirp, and therefore the two livings were voided at
the same time.
Bettws (Rectory).- No r< inister's nan^e given.
Bryngwyn (Eectoiy).— A clergyman named Frampton
wii.ssfqueste ed, but lived to be restored.
Caerleon ("Vioarage). — A minister named Price was
ejected.
Caerwerit (Vicarage).— This living appears in the Esqucs-
trators' acoount=, butuo minster's name is given.
Chepstow (Vicarage).— This livir g was also sequestrated.
Clytha, Penros, and Tregare. —These three places appear
as one sequHstr^t.jon.
Coedkernew, with St Bride's, Wentloog.^One Williams,
A.M.., V. as sequestered.
Cwmcarvan (Rectory).- Sequestrated.
Cwmyoy (Vicarage), with Oldcastle.—WUhsim Price was
turned out by the propagator.-i for using the Book
of Common Prayer.
Hingestow (Vicaraje). —William Jones lost his living for
druikenness aid being an ignorant reader. The
place remained vacant for some time, but at
length one Charles Williams, a fell monger, of
Monmouth, was put into the living, and being au
active member of his party and looked upon as a
man ot more than ordinary merit he had an aug
mentation ordered him. Williams remained for
two years only, and excepting for this period there
was EO ether minister for the parish until the
Restoration.
Diocton (Vicarage). — William Clark, mir 'ster of thia parish,
was dispossessed for malignai cy and drunkenness.
(rrosmoni.— Richard Heth was arbitrarily thrust tut of
his vicarage honse by a private person.
Ghoehelog. — A minister named William Hughes waa
removed rom thia living.
L

46

Gwemesney (Rectory). — The i ropagators discarded
Edward Williams from thi-< livirrg, allegilig
against him tippling, swearing, and read n? the
t'ommon Pravers-
Kilgwrrwg. — iSee L'anvihangel Torymynydd.
Llanarth (Vicarage). — X. liiiaistcr name Watkins waa
ejected from this living and afterwards restore 3.
Llanbedr. — Ricbard Jones is supposed to have been
sequestered It wa^ said he was a great sufferer.
His family were afterwa'ds in want, and were
relieved hy the Corporation for Ministers' Widows
among other wido'^rs of the sequestered clergy.
Llanbadoc ("Vicarage).- GeorgeParry, IVI.A., Was eject«id.
He was succeeded by an illiterate man named
Jones Parry lived to be restored.
Llanddeioi Skirrid (Rectory), — Lewis Tames or Jones.
was turned out for illegal induction,
which signifies that he was presented by a
M.-*lignant, and duly admitted by the B.shop. He
1 i ved to be restored.
Llandenny. - (See Raglan Vicai age)
Llandevavd (^i.-ctory.)— SeeLanbedr.
Llandogo (Goleford) Rectory ) These appear in the list
Whitehrook Chapel J of sequestrations.
Llanellen (Vicarage) — Aaron Watkins was turned out
tor insufficiency and using the Common
Prayer, f (e lived to be restored.
Llanfaenor. — (See Llangattock-vibon-avel.)
Llanfoist (Rectory). —.John Jones was removed froai
here charged with drunkenrreas.
Llanfrechfa ("Vicarage.)- Sequestrated.
Llangattock-juxta-Oaerleon. — >^ lower, the rector, waa
ej oted. but lived to. be restored.
Llangattock-vibon avel (Vicarage), with Llanfaenor a/nd St.
Maughans). — John' Dobbings was aequeatrated for
i'nsufficiency and reading Co'nmon Prayer.
Llangua (Rectory.) — This was aequeatrated.
Llangibiy (Rectory). — John Clegg was turned out by the
Commissioners for crimes t'lus expressed ; for
quitting his habitation in the time of the wara when
ever the Parliament forces came near ; for betaking
himself to the _ late tyrant's service against the
State, and settding to tbe Biahopi in prosecution of
Godly people, ' b dng an officer under them. To
which is added this not being able to preach in
Welsh. This John Clegg was a person of note,
and afterthe Restoration was created D.D. for his
services.
LUmgwm Isha 1 Vieara?e.— John Mapp was sequestered
Llangwm Ucha J for drunkenness.
Llanhenog (Vicara»e). —Sequestrated aa appears by the
accounta of the Gommisaionera.

47
ManhilleOi (Rectory).— Sequestrated.
Hanover (VicarsgeJ mth MamhUad.— This livinjf wis
sequestirated. bat Walker conceived it to b^ ibi
impropriation or rather au appropriation belaofing
to acme cathedral. The present patrona are the
Dean and Chapter.
LimUhcwy Vach (Rectory).— This liv iag appears in the Ust
of those sequestrated.
Hanthony,—[See\i9m.jo^)IMmtilio drosenny ( Vicars^e).— Oiven Rogers was ejected
I rom here for drunkenness and malignancy.
LlaiUUio Ptrtholey (yicarige.)- This living was seques
trated with that of Penrose.
JAanvaplcii (Recto y) —Sequestrated.
i?a»i't Wit (•(';»« (Reetorv.) — ^Sequestrated.
Llanriliaiigel Criuxrney (Vicirf^e). — Owen Price w^
ejected f.r m*lii;nincy and drnnkenness.
Llani-ihangel Llantarnam — This living was sequestrated.
Llanvihangel Po)itymoilc (Vicarage). — David FritchaTd
sequestrated.
Llanvihangel Torymynydd. with Kilg)i>niog.—Tie living
w.is sequestrated, bntnominister'sname is preserved.
Llanvihangel Gobion nigh Usk (Rect.Ty) — Seqiestrited,
accordiiii: to the Oommistioners' accounts.
Llanfrechfa — Sequestrated. /"Hugh Pritchard w-hs ejected
Llamccnarth Citra Rectory J from this Uving, and was
ito/iMX'/kirtfc CTtraR;CtO--y j succeeded Hy one J.
V Edwards, a Baptist.
Mauor with Bedioick (Vicarage).— A minister named
Morgan suSered seqaestration here ; one named
.Tones is also mentioned.
MamhUad (V carage). — Seqaestrated.
Matherne (Vicarage). — The minister seique^tered in this
living is given as Jeffrey and Jeffreys HL)well3,
The Bishop's Palace at Matherne, together with
all his revenues, were taken possession of by a Mr
Green, ot Cardiff.
Michaelstone y Vedw (Rectory),— Rhys Jones wis turned
out from here for malignancy andutter insuiBciency .
Monmouth, St. Mary (Vicarage). Rob«rt Brabant was
dispossessel by the Commissioners for propagating
the Gospel, for maUgnancy, and delinquency. Ou*
Robert Charnock, presented to the Uving in 1634,
w is one of the Approvers appointed under the Act
nf Farliament,
Mynyddiawyn (V.carage).— This ^lace was in the hands
of the sequestrators. The tithes belonging to the
bishop were I&iaed out. The church -was served by
a curate, who was turned out, and the bells of the
church were sold.
NewpoH. St Woolos (Vicarage).— Sequestrated, but no
name of minister preserved.

48
Oldeastle (Rectory).— See Cwmyoy, sequestered.
Panteg (Rectory).— Henry Vaughan, ejected trom this
living, wa3 a minister of --ome note and an author
i.f repute. Wood says he was one of the Court
Preachers at Oxford, Hnd by that Un.versity was
presented to this living in 1643. He lived to see the
Restoration and died the year following. He waa
tutor to Sir Leoline Jenkyns, Principal of Jesus
College, Jnfge of the Prerogative Couit of Canter
bury, and also Secretary of I^tate.
Penallt. - See Trelleck.
Penhow (Rectory) — Playford Field was requestered by
the Profagators for inaufficiency and reading the
Common Prayer
J"emTOS (Vicarage).— See Clytha.
Penrose —See Llantilio i roaenny.
Penterry —Perpetual Curacy joined with Monmouth (q. v.)
Penclawdd. — £eque9tra.ted.
Trevethin, Pontypool (Vicarage). — Sequeate-.ed as beloiig-
in^r to the Dean and Chapter.
Raglan (Vicarage) and Llandenny. —Sequestrated.
Redwick —See Magnr.
Risca — This living was joined with Baasaleg (which see).
Rumney ("Vicarage). — Sequestrated.
Runston. — Sequestra, tt d .
Skenfrith ("Vicarage). — Lewis David was turned out for
in.uffioie-acy and reading the C.'mmon Prayer. A
minister named Phillips is also said to have been
ffe-irived nf the rectory.
St. Brides, Wentlooge (Vicarage), with Coedkernew. —
S-questrated.
St. Maughan's.— ee Llangattock vii on avel.
St Pierre — See Portskewett,
St. Woolos.— See Newport.
Tregare ("Vicarage). — See Clytha.
Trelleck (Vicarage), u/ith Penallt and Pentwyn (Chapel
P.O.).— S-questrated. ,
Undy (Vicarage).— Wm. Rees was seque-t-red in 1630.
Usk (Vicirage), with Glascoed (Chapel), Monkswood. —
M'chael Hug es was lurned out for (!run..eimea3,
for promoting the King's sirvice, and for using the
¦Jommon Prayer.
Whitsun (Vicarage). — See Nash.
Wilcrick.See Llanmaitin.
Wolvesnewton (Rectory).-— Walt r Harr's v/as f.irned out
from this living for drunkenness and assisting his
Atij sty King Charles.
Wonastow ("R ct. ry). — Morgan Morris was dismissed from
this living for drunk. nne!>s and insufficiency.
Walker gives also the names of Pendath, Llan-
gynog, and Llanferring as places under sequestra-

49
tion, but they are net identified with any parishes
in Monmouthshire.
In addition to the above, John Craig, an
eminent scholar and divine, who kept a school
near Abergavenny, was removed from his ministry
and school. The rev gentleman, on the sudden
spread of Baptist principles in the district, came
forward as the champion of the Church, and
assisted by the Rev Henry Vaughan, A. ft'., held a
public debate on the subject of baptism in St.
Mary's Church, Abergavenny, on the 5th Septem
ber, 1653. Their opponents were the celebrated and
learned disputant John Tornbes of Leominster, Rev
John Abbott, and Mr. Christopher Price, of Aber
gavenny. Reports of the discussion were pub
lished, and, as is not unusual in such cases, both
sides claimed the victory.
It must be considered as a matter of good fortune
that many records of the proceedings under the Pro.
pagation Act have been preserved, and of the terrible
calamities which befel the clergy at this period
throughout the kingdom there are no records more
complete or better confirmed than those relating to
Monmouthshire and the adjoining counties. The re
cords were used by Walker in his Account of the
Numbers and Sufferings of the Clergy, and they
have since been examined also and used by Bees in
his History of >i onconf ormity in Wales. Their
authenticity has never been doubted. The papers
are still to be found among the archives of the Aroh-
ishop of Canterbury at Lambeth Palace, and there
fore we refer to them with the greater confidence.
The most considerable of the papers is entitled
"An Account from the Commissioners by Act of
Parliament for Propagation of the Gospel in
Wales, of all the sequestered tithes. Church Liv
ings, and Impropriations, within the Counties of
South Wales, and County of Monmouth,
together with all the proceedings made in
obedience to the said Act of Parliament, and the
said Commission." The paper is dated the 20th
April, 1652. This account. Walker conceives, was
occasioned by the petition of the inhabitants of
the counties named to the Parliament against the

50
Propagators. It consists of several columns con
taining distinctly for each of the counties the
parishes sequertetted, the names of the ejected
rectors and vicars, separately, au also the crimes
respectively for which they (such of them as fell bj,,
the Act of' Propagation) were sequeHtered, . dittioi ,
gwi'Shing such' as were dispossessed by the Act frcm,
those who' were ejected beftMre it, the number of
the Parsonages, Vicarages, and Impropriations then
unsequestered^ and the names of the old rainiijiters,
left in them. According t» this account there
were in Monmouthshire sixteen clergymen seqnes-
telred before the Act, and twenty-four
under the Act, making a total of forty..
Some of the ministers, however, held a plurality of
livings and hence we find that 4'i livings were
sequestered. It is evident, however, that these
figures do not represent the whole of the seques
trations as the total livings represented to be in the
hands of the Committee and Propagators for the
several years are set down as follows : — 1650, 81 ;
1651, 68 ; 1652, 69 ; and there occur in the papers
the names of aeveral ejected clergymen who are not
mentioned in the list. '1 he number of livings
varied in the different years, as sequestrations
w'ere sometimes compounded for, and then
removed, and the fact that other pariahes came
under the operation of the Aet. The total number
of livings on hand during the three years are
seated to have been 85. In many parishes one or
more curates were engaged, and thus the number of
clergymen ejected would be considerably increased.
The value of the livings which the Propagators
got into their hands is better ascertained th^n the
exact number of them, and it is given by Walker
in the following form : —
16.50. 1651, 16.52.
£ s. d. £ e. d. £ a. d
Monm'uth  2,13 18 10 l,9i9 2 4 1.617 6 8
Glamorgan  2,.5f;0 11 6 2,923 10 8 2,694 18 0
Oaermarthen  661 4 4 707 14 4 840 r, 0
Petabroke  1,063 15 8 1..S'6 10 0 1,31« 10 0
Cardigan  493 3 4 510 3 4 720 3 4
Brecon  1,282 13 4 1,543 11 8 l,fi43 11 8
Radnor  l.O'O 13 4 784 0 0 783 6 4
£9,196 e 4 £9,691 12 4 £9,466 0 0

Thase'dJinounta dcnoti liowever, represent fully
the plundw of the Church or the extent of suffe^:-
in;; mid luasondured by the olorny, as many of the ,
living* wore lot out to inuuda ut half itheir real
vntae) and it is computed that the proti^4,,9f the:
ttthesi'tutlid) livin!<B>8oquQstened in Mouth Wales, wnd
Mdnmoutbaliire ,wero ; annually worth £20,000,
TOilerB' was' I biJstdo,.,.the. Ipss of household jjoods,
liorsos, OBttle, and travolUng. expenses incurred by,
tlW i.jnotod iniuiatoi's, , in order to maintain their
rights ; and it oun easily,^ be imagined that if the
best of the estntes enabled the ministers to live in
a state little short of dowiirii;ht poverty, as de
scribed by Macaulay, what must have been their
condition under a total deprivation ? They wore
in short, with their wives and families, "roady to
|)orish," ns ii tniot of tho times states.
There is one matter to bo mentioned with regard
to thuso Committees — the nogleot of many of those
lutrislies from which they had ojuotoJ tho ministers.
II, appears tlmt when a minister was ejected and
the living sequestrated, the prolits and income
Wfiro not directly or indirectly handed over to the
person who suooeedod, but roooived by soiuo por-
son luiuuHi by tho Oomiuittoe ; and where no
Buooossors wore appointed, the revenues wero put
into thoir own pockets, and sometimes never
ttooounted for at all. No more glaring instance of
such shameful robbery was presented than that
wliicli oocurrod iu this district. The orimo was so
flsigrant that the attention of Parliament was called
to it, but no remedy was over afforded until the
whole system of hypocrisy and onnt prevailing wiw
swept away on the Restoration of tne Crown and
tho Churoh somo yaars later.
It must not be forgotten that tho itinerants in
the several counties wero not the only preachers,
there still being a uuiuiier of unejeoted ministers.
In tho whole of South Wales these numbered 127.
Tn Monmouthshire, m tho yoar 1650, aocordiii!; to
II1.S aoocuints, about niiio ai>pear. Tn the same
year there wero said to be seventeen Codly niem-
bora of Llanvaches and Mynyddislwyn, which
number in 1661 was increased to twenty. Iu 1652
about thirteoii others received stipends.

52
Notwithstanding the clamours raised by igno
rance and malice against the clergy who were
ejected, it is well that the characters and positions
of the itinerants who were appointed to succeed
them and convey to the people "the glad tidings
of Salvation " should be regarded. Authors of
the time who knew of what they wrote describe
them as such ignorant persona that they could
neither read nor underatand ii nglish.
Dr. Young, who liied through the period, and
who spoke from his own knowledge, states in his
Life of Hugh Peters that the vacancies in the
Church were filled with Cooks, Panters, Tailors,
Weavers Shoemakers, Peltmakers, Stocking-
menders, J'liillers, Gingerbreadmak.^r8, Collar-
makers, Carpenters, and Cheese Vat Makers, and
that there was no more than one Academician
among them. This sweeping assertion, which
many peraona of the present day would be inclined
to regard as incredible, is entirely corroborated,
so far as it can be, by the records concerning Mon
mouthshire. One Reginald Morgan, a miller, was
by an Order of the Commissioners for Appro
bation preferred to a living in Monmouth
shire, and also had the living of Vaynor,
in Breconshiie. One Charles Williams, a fell-
monger of Monmouth, was placed to suc
ceed the Rev William Jones, of Dingestow. who
was dispossessed for, amcng other crimes, being an
ignorant reader. At St. Woollos one Henry
"Walter, who had not been brought up to the Minis
try, and who was pastor of the Baptist congregation,
performed divine service. At St. Fagan's a skinner
was put into the living, at l?wansea a weaver. A
miller and shoemaker are also mentioned. The
onerous duties of the cathedral services at
Llandaff were performed by one Walter, a
weaver, Henry Nicholls, and Watkin Jones, of
Mynyddislwyn, the latter of whom was
the gospeller who converted the font of
the parish church into a trough to water
his cattle, in which condition it was found at
the Keatoratior. Of the profittrs by the Revolu
tion, Baxter, whose words no Nonconformist will

53
despise, remarks that the clergy cast out of tho
Church, though bad enongh for the most part, were
yet better than any of the few itinerants set up in
their places. Hume, who may be regarded as
an impartial writer on the question, says the
itinerant preachers were all of them men of the
lowest birth and education, who had deserted
mechanical trades in order to follow the new
profession, and in this particular, as well as in
their own wandering life, they pretended to be
more truly apostolical.
At length the project of Hugh Peters developed
into full operation. The itinerant preachers or
" Travelling Gospellers" as Walker calls them, set
to work to supply the places and duties of the
ministers who before were fixed and settled in the
several parishes. It does not appear whether the
new ministers were confined to a certain district
and to stated and regular appearance at church,
or whether they were left to roam at will in what
parts of the countj they felt inclined. in some
counties it is clear that with the number of
churches they could not go the round oftener
than once a month. This was evidently, the case
in Mtinmouthshire where six itinerants had to
supply something like 150 parish churches, or
about 25 each. It is quite evident, therefore,
as a writer states, you might ride twenty miles on
a Sunday where there were 20 churches and find
not a door of one of them open. Anethei writer
remarks that there was scarce a sermon heard
within a distance of sixty miles. The fabric of
the churches, too, was altogether neglected, so
that the buildings were ready to fall for want of
repairs. The reader, therefore, cannot wonder
that people complained that they had neither the
eomfort of preaching, ner praying, nor sacra
ments, nor visiting the sick, nor any decency of
burial, all of which had been their privilege, and
that they were ready to again turn Papists, or
anything in fact that had the semblance of
religion. In truth the Act which professed to
provide for the propagation of the Gospel became
the cause of its utter abrogatidn and ruin ; and its
ir

54
light was declared before .the House ©f Coiqinons
'.' to be almost extinguished." ,lfhe reourrpnpe Qf
snch a state of things cannot surely be desired by
those who in the present day plampur for the.
Disestablishment of the Church, bat if, , theijc
agitation prove succesaful it is, not easy t«
perceive how such a cSilainity can be avoided. , ,
It was a condition in the scheme propounded by
H.dgh Peters and accepted by ,the nCoinqki0sione,ra
for carrying the Propagation Act into effect, that
each itinerant preacher should receive the sum of
£100 a year put of the fund accumulated i by the,
sequestrations, but the account9.,preserve(I seem to
show that the receipt of this, aipount by the
preachers was the exception and not the rule,
Thus the charges entered as payments to ministers
for a year's services are in some cases not more tliain
£70 ; others are £60, some £50, and a few £10 and
£5. ,.,..¦ ,, ,,. H
According to the .Sequestrators' accounts for
Monmouthshire in the years 1650-51, there was
distributed amongst seventeen godly members, of
the Churches of Mynyddislwyn and Llanvaches),
sent forth to exercise their; gifts and to promote
the work of the Lord mosjtly amongst the Welsh in
the mountains, being also upon apprpbation befpr^
the Csmmissioners, £364 Os lOd, which amounted
to about £21 , apiece ; but in the following years
their numbers were inpre?^sed and the sum Jotal of
this salary so much lessened as i;educed, it tp aboni
£17, as there was "distributed anjongst, 20, godly
members of the church oi IJanyaches a^d IMynyddisr
Iwyn, aent forth to exercise their gifts ,and ,to hel,p
on the work of, thp Lord mostly ,?imongst t^^
Welsh in the mountains," no m^re ^an,, 1^3^ '1%^
amounts here nawed, .cynica.lly, remark WalkeCf
was iprobably .more iha-n^^ithey cp^ld get .Ijj
cobblinigland those other trades they had previously
engaged in. o ,' , . , ,; . , ,„,.;
. Some bf the leading i,tineraRts, however, maMage4
matters. more: tpit.hei.r.. a^yantag^ receiving. .^t
only, the full atipeind[all,owe,d by Act of Parlianieflti
but enjoyed the profits.!3^cej:ta^(i.}iyyigS4in addijiionj
Again, as in the case of Henry "WjQker, who did

56
dnty at .St. ;^oolof»0hurchi they accepted silariefl
for„prBt?ading to ,»?irve in two counties. - Henry
Walter ivppearsiin the ^accounts as having received
salaries in both Monmouthshire' and Glamorgan
shire. ' Therie ieems also to have been another
source fr^m which they occasionally profitted, and
that Va.s' the. corporStte fkihds. The- cdrporate
repords of SWatnsefi testify that it was a common
practice at this peribd to pay out of the b^rettgb
fuiids sums of moniy to itinerant preachers for
sermons preached b^them. ' The amounts; like the
salaries, . varied : thus' Mr. Lewis Thomasy a
j>reacH6i:, received *fPr two sermons 6s. 8d.; one
Mr. Morgan had 10s.; a Mr; Love, 6s. 8d.j and
one unnamed preacher of Monmonth for a ser-
m6n 10s.
Itisraiichto be regretted that the borough re
cords of Newport and Monmouth have not been
preserved, as, so far as we know, there is not a
vestige in existence bearing the date of this most
disastrous 'period. The besbm of destruction was
freely applied not ohly to MSS. records, but also
to work^ of art ; and it is computed that in the
course of two or three yearS the devaatation was
greater than had been perpetrated during the many
centuries of Saxon and Normtin rule. In some in
stances books and articles of value were removed
by loyal friends, with a view to their preservation,
until the troublous times were over ; but it was
not alwa;y3 that the intended restoration was made,
or was possible of being made. Some valuable
MSS. belonging te Llandaff Cathedral,' together
with the ancient book of St. Chad, were removed
for safety by the Rev. William Higgins, then pre
centor j9f the cathedral, who communicated .the fact
in 1658 to Dugdale, the antiquarian. The letter
imparting this information isi now preserved with
the book at Lichfield, frori which place it has never
again found its way back to Llandaff, Another
instanpe has recently come to our knowledge
relating to| the parish of Bryngwyn, near Raglan.
The most ancient Register Book of Baptisms, &c.,
now preserved there, has the following inscription
written on the first pagie : —

56
The old Register Book ot Bryngwyn deliver . . ,
seige of Raglan by Wm. Jones, of TJsk, Esq,, Farliament
Commissioner to his Kinsman David Pritchard, of Bryn-
gW3m, was all torn in pieces and lost saving this one poor
leaf herennto affixed. Teste RoEBBTO Fbakfion,
Rector.
We have befere noted in the list of parishes
sequestrated, that this Robert Frampton was
ejected, but lived to be restored. He was rector
from 1632, and died at the age of 83 years in 1685.
There ia a monument in the church with an
inscription in good Latin to his memory.
If the Act for the Propagation of the Gospel in
Wales contained one redeeming feature, it was the
provision that for the maintenance of the wives
and families of the ejected ministers during good
behaviour one-fifth ©f the tithes of the parish from
which any minister had been ejected, should be
paid to them. This was not a new feature. A
similar clause had been inserted in the earlier
acta of sequestration, and unfortunately was very
grossly abused. By an omiaaion of which every
advantage waa taken the clergymen were not
expressed by name, and in consequence those who
received the tithes, &c. sequestrated, refused to
contribute what the law desired. A great outcry
went throughout the land, and the clamours of the
starving familiea became so loud that Parliament
was compelled to give attention to it. With a
view to remedy the injustice the following ordnance
was passed : —
November 11, 1687. " That the wives and children of
all snch persons as are or have ben or shall be seques
tered by order ot either House of Parliament shall be
comprehended within the ordinance that alloweth a fifth
part for wives and children and sball have their fifth
part allowed unto them ; and the Committee of Lords
jbnd Commons for Sequestration, and the Committee of
Plundered Ministers, and all other Committees are
, required to take notice hereof and yield obedience here
unto accordingly."
From the prominence which thia subject occu
pied, and the attention given to it by Parliament,
it would have been supposed that no further
cause of complaint would arise, but the rapacity of

57
those who held " the bag" was much greater then
regard for any ordinance or law. Complaints were
still made that the payment of fifths was withheld,
and it is evident that of those entitled to the
pittance very few indeed were able to obtain it.
In Monmouthshire the fifths prescribed to be
allowed were not even charged to more than eleven
persons for the years 1650 and 1651, although
about 70 or 80 parishes appear to have been in the
sequestrators' hands at that time.
What proportion these fifths bore to the whole
revenues of the clergy which they had seized may
be judged from the fact that in the year 1650 the
revenues in Monmouthshire were £3,123, while the-
fifths charged were only £63. In many parts of
South Wales it is stated that from 1646 to 1660 a
ppriod of 14 years, the livings were enjoyed by the
sequestratois without payment of any fifths at a'l.
The deprivation of fifths was apparently not thft
only indignity to which the wives of s-he seques
tered clergy were subjected to. Browne "Willis
states that in company with a number of cavaliers.
thej' were one day invited to Cardiff Caslle, and
there bid warm themselves by a fire which wa»
there made of a heap of Common Player Books
and a number of volumes which formed a portion
of the Library of Llandaff Cathedral.
It must not be admitted for a moment that the
state of things which prevailed after the Propaga
tion came into operation was better than before the
war broke out, or that it was satisfactory to-
any but a few who had profited by the misfortunes
and sufferings of others. Cromwell had triumphed
and silenced opposition by the swcrd, and th»
dissatisfied ones had to select by other means a
remedy for evils which were unendurable. They
tried the pen. A gigantic petition was prepared
setting forth in much detail the lamentable
condition of the people ; and the complaints made
in this petition were so generally acknowledged
that in a short space of time no less than 15,000
inhabitants of Monmouthshire and South Walea
appended their signatures to the document. The
petition was presented to the House of Commons

58
on the 18tli March, 1651, by Colonel Freeman,
member for Leominster. It forcibly set forth
among other things that sines the Act Jiad come
into force most of the ministers had been unjustly
ejected from their livinga, and that few or none of
the counties were supplied with a competent
number of godly aole teachers to officiate
in the room of the ousted ministers, neither had
there been a sufficient number of godly schools
established as was the intention of Parliament ;
there not being above four or five itinerant
preachers in some of the counties appointed and
approved of, to teach the Gospel, whereas some of
the counties consisted of 120 parishes, many
whereof had more than 2,000 souls, and the least
of the counties had fifty or sixty parishes. It
declared the country to be in a most deplorable
state for want of regular preaching. The Comuiis-
sioners were accused of having embezzled the
profits of the sequestered livings, and it was stated
that the mock teachers would have been glad to
have received £10 per annum, though their masters
might aet upon their score large reckonings to be
accounted to the State. It further alleged that the
revenues " went to the hands of private persons
to build new sumptuous houses and buy lands ;
and that little of it had been converted towards
the propagation of the Goapel. "
With regard to the wives and children of the
sequestrated clergymen, tie petition set forth that
the very fifths were denied them, though allowed
by the Act f.ir Propagation. According to the
undervaluations made by the sequestrators and
their agents, these would appear to be a small
allowance to maintain a family ; and yet this
pitiful pittance cannot be received or obtained
without many a tedious, tiresome journey, and
much expense and hazard of m3n'3 lives ; as some
h ive perished in the waters by going to petition
and seek relief for their psrishing families ; and
others, being wearied out with fruitless journeys
and dilatory answers, have given over all addresses
to those unmerciful sequestrators and other officers-
to pour out their complaints to the a/ll-seeing God.

59
It has been pointed out as a curious circum
stance that although this famous petition was signed
by upwards of 15,000 inhabitants of South Wales,
is has not, so far as can be ascertained, a single
Cardiff signature.
Colonel Freeman, in presenting the petition to
the House, put the case thus : — "How four or five
itinerants can supply a whole county is humbly left-
to your Honours' grave consideration." An
attempt was soon made to remedy the difficulty by
a resolution of the House to the effect that the
Itinerants in their expeditions should be supplied
with fresh horses at every stage, commonly ten
or twenty miles apart, and sometimes more, to
ride post from place to place to spi ead their doc
trine ; but it was pointed out that horses ought
also to have been provided for their auditors,
who would need them as much as the preachers.
The petition gave considerable alarm to the
instruments by which Parliament had been carry
ing out its set purpose, and Vavasour Powell
and others were not slow in representing
that the petition was a high contempt of the Act
of Propagation, and that the petitioners desired
the restoration of malignant, drunken, unpreach-
ing, ejected curates. To counteract the effect of
the petition, and if possible to suppress the
sympathy which the promoters received, Powell,
"Walter Cradock, and other itinerants were ordered
to ride post from county to county, and parish
to parish, to threaten all the petitioners and their
agents with damnation, sequestration, and ruin,
unless they would deny their signatures. Fresh
proceedings were also taken vindictively against
the few clergy remaining unejected, with the object
of throwing them out of their houses, and to
deprive of their fifths the wives and families of
such as had been already sequestered. Colonel
Freeman, to whom the petition was entrusted,
became a special object of detestation to the Com
missioners and itinerants, the latter having instruc
tion to preach especially against him, and to offer
earnest prayers to the Lord to punish him in hia
person, power, and place. The Colonel shortly

60
afterwards, aays Walker, fell aick of a fever, when
public thanka were ordered to be offered to the
Lord for hearing the prayers of bis servants.
Colonel Freeman, however, recovered, and con
tinued hia exertions in the intereata of the
petiti mers, and to expoae one of the greateat
scandals ever perpetrated with the cognizance of a
civilized Governmeiit.
The very reasonable desires of so great a num
ber of the inhabitants of South Wales, supported
by facta equally ahameful and undeniable, were
received by the House of Commons, and forthwith
referred to the Committee of plundered Miniaters
to examine the business and state the matters of
fact, and report their opinions thereon to the
House. The Committee were furnished with the
usual power of ex imining witneaaea, and the Com-
miaaionera were authorised to examine witnesses
upon oath touching all matters contained in the
petitions. AUhough the matter waa of the firat importance,
no writer has been able to follow up the proceedings
of the Committee, and only now and again does an
entry crop up showing how they set about their
work and how little they accomplished. One of
the first ateps waa to order the Propagators to
answer the petition and render tl.eir accounts
by the 18th of May. This order, says a publica
tion of the d.iy, "Put the Welsh Saints in a
pitiful cold sweat in riding up and down, andsitting
up day and night to patch up their broken
acc.iunts, but th^ whole produce at last was only a
sheet of paper, and a few general negatives,
emballished, however, with m.\ny Godiy words
and phrases, with a confession of the receipt of
£20,000 or thereabouts for the last two years, but
not one particular how th3y h.il disposed of it, or
what had become of it."
Walker enquires what proportion of the vast in
come of the Church, which in South Wales he
estimates at £200,000, waa applied to the purposes
intended by Parliament, and concludea that during
ten years i;ot more thm £20,000, or one year's
profits, were devoted to tho propagation of the

61
Gospel, the remainder being plundered by the
' ommissioners, their friends, and those connected
W'th them. The committee's report shows that
the committee had several meetings, and had the
Commissioners' books examined before the solici
tors for the petitioners, but delays were again and
again interposed. From Whitelock's Memorials
we find that on May 3, 1652, letters were received
justifying the proceedings of the Commiaaioners^
for propagating the Gospel in Wales, written by
Vavasour Powell, and that an September 9 of the
same year further letters came to him stating that
aa soon as the Act become operative, there were
150 good preachers in the 13 counties, moat of
them preaching three or four times a week. The-
matter crops up again in the House of Commons,
as evidenced by the Journals, vol. VIII., p. 271,
where the following lecord appears : —
"Friday, the 25th March, 1653. The humble
petition of divers well affected in South and IMorth
Wales was this day read."
A further account given by Walker from Scobell,
seems to show that 19 Commissioners for South
Wales and Monmouthshire were appointed August
30th, 1654, by an ordinance of the Protector and
his Council, any three of whom were empowered
to call before them all those who by the auihority
of the Act of Propagation had received or disposed
of any of the profits of the rectories, vicarages.. &o.,,
to give a true and perfect account upon oath.
Pursuant to this the sequestrators and the
Collectors or Treasurers, as they are at times.
called, delivered in their accounts for 1650-1-2, at
Neath, before George Gwyn, Herbert Evans,
Charles Gwyn, John Williams, and Robert Thomas,
five of the Commissioners.
An entry in Whitelock's Memorials, under date
September, 1654, for an ordinance for the taking
of accounts of money received by the Act for
Propagation of the Gospel in Wales, does not
throw mere light upon the matter, but shows that
it was still kept open.
The Act was to continue only for three years
from the 25th March, 1650, but although it seems
o

62
never to have been renewed, the greater part of the
livinga sequestered remained in the hands of the
sequestrators down to 1658, and probably until
the Restoration, aa until that time very few of the
expelled clergy found means to re-possesa them
selves of the positiona of which they had been..
deprived. It is difficult to conceive that any further perse
cutions of the loyal clergy was possible, but Crom
well's ingenuity and vindiotiveness produced yet
other weapons to complete the nefarious designs
against the Church. It having been ascertained
that some loyalista had been re-appointed to their
livinga a Commiaaion of Triera waa appointed in
1654, of whom the notorious Walter Cradock was
one. Their business was to satisfy themselves
that all persons preaenbed to livings had in them
" the grace of God," and what in their eyes was
still more important, that they were favourable to
the Parliament. This Commission had far greater
powers than Bishops or Archbishops ever pos
sessed, and sequestered such loyal clergymen aa had
recently been appointed. This act swept out of
benefices and achools the last few men wh ) might
have continued to linger on under the protection
of a friendly squire or through the affection of
their old parishioners.
By another ordinance passed August 29, 1634,
called an " ordinance for the ejection of scan
dalous, ignorant, and insufficient ministers and
schoolmasters," it waa enacted that such ministers
and schoolmaaters shall be accounted scandalous in their
lives and conversations as have publicly and fre-i
quently read the Common Prayer Book, &o.
"There were few or none of the clergy who did not
value the Prayer Book, and hence they iadig-
nartly refused to comply with such an outrage
upon-freedoni. The ministers and; schoolmasters
to whom this ordinance applied were speedily
de^lt with, and without mercy.
It may beh^e aldded' that the persons appointed.
to take the places of the schoolmasters who were
ousted were "either the Ooramissioners' clerks or
sei^vants that had the 'capaieity tooiead English and

63
make out a warrant," or such others that were more
fitted to go to school than to keep one.
Yet another soonrge was prepared for the already
deeply suffering clergy, by a declaration or order,
lasuad KoTember 24, 1665, that no person should
have in his -house for the purpose of teaching
children any sequestered or ejected minister, and
no such miaiBter should be allowed to keep a school,
either public or private ; or preach, or administer
sacraments, or use the Book of Common Prayer,
or the forms of prayer contained in them. Such
extreme measures did not meet with universal
approval, even in the ranks of Puritanism, for
Pryn, who was certainly no friend of the clergy,
denounced this order as transcendant barbarism,
impiety, and highway robbery to extirpate religion,
as the Pope and Jesuits could not have invented
the like j and exceeded all foreign pe'secutions
against Protestant ministers by Popish princes.
The disturbed and unhappy condition of the
country is indicated by statements c.jntained in a
tract published in 1654, and entitled " A perfect
revelation of the whole transactions concerning the
petition of the Six Counties of South Wales and
the County of Monmouth," by Alexander Griffith,
vicar of Glasbury, Breconshire. The writer in this
pamphlet refers to " differences and disturbances
having occurred at Bedwas on Easter Sunday, at
Mynyddislwyn in Easter week, and at Swansea,
M^tiiyr, and other places, at some of which there
had been several swords drawn and some persons
hurt, and the inhabitants generally put to great
fear lest these differences do grow to the endan
gering of the public peace of this country."
The controversy between the petitioners and the
Propagators, both in Parliament and the country
continued until the Restoration ; and after this
enquiries were still pursued with the object of
making the plunderers refund some of their ill-
gotten wealth.
Before passing away altogether from the period
of the Commonwealth to pursue the progress of
religions matters in this district during the reign
o|.Charles II., it might be convenient at this point

64
to interpose a few memoranda relating to civil and
military affairs which we have not yet found an
opportunity to introduce.
In our papers on the Civil War we had occasion
to mention frequently the names of -.VI aj or-General
Langhorne and Colonels Powell and Poyer, who,
after leading victoriously the Parliamentary forces
in South Wales, became active Royalists. They
were taken priaeners, and under articles of war
sentenced to death in April, 1649. Subsequently
an order was issued that the three officers should
draw lots for their lives. The lot to die fell to
Colonel Poyer, who was accordingly shot on the
15th April. The lives of the two other officers
were spared.
The Bristol Channel waa at this time still infested,
as it had been for many years, with pirates and
privateers, who profited by the unsettled condition
of the times. A few instances are recorded which
serve to illustrate the period. On June 26th,
1649, a frigate said to belong to Sir John
Greenville, governor of Scilly, coming near
to Swansea, the Governor of Cardiff sent out
boats, and pursued her from creek to creek, and at
length took her and all her crew, excepting the
captain and some few of the men who escaped to
the shore. The frigate was found to have on board
two brass guns, twenty-fsur muskets, and twenty-
four oars, and evidently had been fitted out for
purposes of piracy. Early in the next year, viz.,
on January 11, 1650, an Irish frigate dropped
anchor off Cardiff, and sent ashore for provisions.
The Governor of Cardiff, suspecting something
wrong, detained the men, and sent out a strong
party in small boats. The frigate was captured,
and found to be laden richly with plate and other
commodities. The people of Monmouth continued to giro the
Governmpnfmuch concern. Iheir loyalty, although
repressed, could not be eradicated, and therefore
broke out whenever the severity ot repression was
relaxed, <)n 2nd May, 1650, there was a little
demonstration in the town, upon which the Par
liamentary officers pounced upon the Royalist

65
leaders, termed malignants, and put them into
safe custody. One of them is said by Whitelock
to have had the Declaration of Major-General
Massey in his pocket, and of proclamating the Act
ot Parliament at the County Court from thj
Council of State.
In the same year Parliament took into account
the state of some of the castles in the county which
they had been besieging and destroying, and the
Parliamentary Committte voted the sum of £300
for the purpose of repairing ar.d fortifying the
castle of Chepstow, of which the governor at this
time was Captain John Nicholas.
In the following year, according to the diary of
Walter Powell, under date August 25, some com
motion was again occasioned in the county town.
A levy of horses was made throughout the county
and the county troop assembled at Monmouth, a
movement which, according to the prevailing
rumour, was induced by a fear of some attempt
being made by Charles II.
The representation of the country in Parlia
ment was a subject which in 1653 occupied the
attention of Cromwell and his Council. A scheme
was deliberated upon and drawn up, and in a
document agreed to and signed by Cromwel', it was
arranged that the county of Monmouth shoula have
three representatives in Parliament and the
boroughs one. No borough is named, but it is
prefumed that no change was proposed and the
boroughs contributing to the election of a member
at that time were Monmouth, Usk and Trelleck.
Newport had petitioned in 1640 to participate in
the privilege of election, but as no result of the
petition appears in the records of Parliament it is
assumed that the claim was not conceded.
In 1654 there was a rising in the West of
England, of which the leaders were Penruddock
and Booth. Sympathy was openly expressed for
this in the Monmouthshire district, ' which again
gave Cromwell much anxiety. The friends .-.f the
the Protector immediately got up an address
(mentioned by Whiitelooke), signed by many
persons in Monmouthshire and South Wales, and

66
forwarded to him in February, recognising his
Government ; but Cromwell lost no time in com
municating with the commanders of the military
forces in the several districts with the view to
their adopting repreaaive measures. From their
reports some light can be gathered as to what was
done under the circamatances. Cromwell's order
was dated March 14, and the answer of Captain
Nicholas, governor of Chepstow Castle, was
sent from Monmouth two days later to
the following effect, that he had poated troops
in various quartera, had aent 100 horse and
dragoons to join Major Creed at Gloucester, and
kep*' others in hand at Monmouth. He further
stated that he had aecured thechie' of thoae whom
" the honest people did judge moat dangerous" in
Chepstow Castle. Among those who were so con
fined, we learn from Walker, was one Roger Clark,
rector of Ashmore in Dorsetshire, who had during
a stay in this part said or done something in favour
of Penruddock and Booth. Besides being confined
in Chepstow Castle he waa imprisoned for some
time at Monmouth.
In further reply to Cromwell's orders above
mentioned. Colonel Rogers reports from .Hereford
shire that though deficient in arms and ammuni
tion, he had been raising a regiment of foot and
two troops of horse in Hereford and Monmouth
shire. Later in the same year (November 15) Parlia
ment took into consideration the standing forces,
and it was proposed that certain garrisons should
be dismantled and certain others continued and
kept up. Among the latter was Chepstow, but
upon Cromwell considering the report, he stated
that aa Chepstow Castle waa his own house, he
would not have a garrison there at the Common
wealth's charge.
It was a part of Cromwell's scheme of govern
ment to divide England into twelve "pachaliks,"
each to be under the command of a major-genersJ. '
The county of Monmouth was included in the
pachalick of Herefordshire, and in command of
this division was placed one James Berry. This

67
person was at first a clerk at an ironworks, who
having enlisted in Cromwell's original troop, and
exhibited both devotion and courage, obtained
rapid promotion. Cromwell at last selected him
as one of the twelve major generals. He repre
sented Monmouthshire in 1656, but he was soon
succeeded by Nathaniel Waterhouse, but whether
this was on his appointment as Major General or
from other circumstances, is not clear. As Major
General his powers were large, and these he did
not fail to exercise. Some particulars are given
of him in Webb's History of Herefordshire. He
could interfere with the appointment of ministers
as well as postmasters, and at Monmouth he would
seem to have called in question the conduct of
some municipal officers who had been disorderly
in public houses. On February 19, 1656, we find
him writing to Cromwell and expressing his
anxiety lest " my lord should be too liberal in dis
tributing his indulgences amongst those incon
sistent people who have played with both hands."
He specially mentions Sir Trevor Williams, of
Llangibby, and says — "Sir Trevor Williams will
visit you, who, though he may have something to
plead for himself with strangers, yet with those
who know him in these parts he hath no argument
that will prevail." He begs the Protector not to
interfere too much lest he ahould bring odium on
his proceedings. He complains of the market
towns as places where there are " vices abounding,
and the magistrates fast asleep,'' and speaks con
temptuously of the inhabitants of Monmouth,
regarding them as a " pitiful people."
Cromwell's Diary shows that about 1658 one
Colonel More was governor of Monmouth Castle.
A reference to the Protector's Letters also
reveals to some extent how well he was provided
for and how keenly he looked after his own
interest amidst the multitudinous affairs of
State. Soon after the war was ended the division
of the spoil — or the allocation of the estates filched
from the supporters of his Majesty, Charles I.,
began. The bigplum^ in the county of Monmouth
was the estates of the Marquis of Worcester, and

63
this is ' what Cromwell sets forth in a letter
respecting 'it : —
"Truly the laiid '0 Ve settled— both what the Parlia-^
ment gives m=^ and my own — ia very little less than
£3,000 per annum — all things conaiderad, if I be rightly
informed ; and a lawyer of Lincolns Inn having rearched
all the Marquis of Wurcestei's writings, which wjre taken
at Kagland ard sent tor by the I'arliament — as5ares me
there ia no scruple concerning the titl»."
Clement Walker reports upon the matter thus :
"The 7th March, an ordinance to settle £2,500 a
year of land out of the Marquis of Worcester's
estate " — [old Marquis of VVorcester at Bagland,
f3.ther of my Lord Glamorgan, who in his turn
became Marquis of Worcester, and wrote the
Century of Inventions — £2,500 a year out of this
pld Marquis's estate] — -"upon Lieutenant-General
Cromwell. I have heard some gentlemen that
know the manor of Chepstow and the other lands
affirm that in reality they are worth £5,000 or
even £6,000."
In the Commons Jouriials the affair is thus re
corded : — " 7th March. An ordinance for passing
i^nto Oliver Cromwell, Esquire, Lieutenant-
General, certain lands and manors in the counties
(jloucester, Monmouth, and Glamorgan, late the
5arl of Worcester's, was this day read the third
time, and upon the queption passed ; and ordered
to be sent unto the Lords for their concurrence."
All these estates remained in Cromwell's posses-
sipn until the Restoration
We pass to the year 1660. Cromwell's power,
like himself, was no more. The nation was
weary, sick, and sorry for past events. The remedy
enforced for the evils complained of during the
r^ign of Charie t I. proved inconceivably worse
than the previous state of things. The military
despotism grown up had become intolerable, and
there was a danger of the natipn becoming a prey
to the caprices of insignificant military adven-
tiyefs,! as well, as to, sectarianism and f$.naticism,,
w^ich) ran riot through the , land. T'he sober
minded of all classes entertained an earnest. long-
iiig for a r.eturn of monarchy, and when Charles IJ.
was prepared, he landed in England amidst

69
unbounded demonstrations of welcome. The civil
polity was re-established exactly as it was in the
time of his father. Charles entered London on
the 29th of May, and no time was lost by the Con
vention Parliament lp entering upon the considera
tion of the great question of the Church. The
differences of the contending reiigious factions
whioh had united to recall Charles soon broke
forth. The majority of the Parliament were un
doubtedly Presbyterians, but it speedily became
evident that they did not represent the general
opinion of the people. In the counti-y there w.s
a reaction against Puritanism in every form,
and hypocrisy and cant practised hy many were
assumed to be vices participated in by the whole
Puritan party. The death of the King, the
violence and cruelty of the military, and in fact the
whole evils which the country for 15 or 16 years
had endured were set down to theii discredit.
A Grand Committee on PeUgion was appointed,
and on July 9th they sat and entered upon a debate,
the question being whether the Presbyterian Church
Government or the Episcopal Church, -formerly
established, should be paramount. Sir Trevor
Williams, who represented the Monmouthshire
Boroughs, opened the debate by proposing for
approval the established religion according to the
39 Articles, which he contended was not only
according to the Old and New Testament, but was
as much as all who owned Christianity professed.
The majority of the Parliament was, as we have
stated, composed of Presbyterians, and had the
question come to the vote it would probably have
been carried against Sir Trevor WiUiams, but
before it could be settled, Charles, whose strong
attachment to the Episcopal Church was well
known, dissolved the Parliament.
The military forces in the Kingdom, amounting
to about fifty thousand iren, were now disbanded.
They had become au object of abhorrence to all
parties, the feeling being, Macaulay observes, even
stronger among the Cavaliers than among the
Roundheads. It is a fact worthy of remark that
when our country was for the first and only time
p

70
ruled by the sword, that instrument was
wielded not by her legitimate princes but by rebels
who slew the King and destroyed the Church.
The political descendants of these men seem to
have read history to very little purpose. In April,
1660, Colonel Pury was instructed to have three
companies of his regiment in this county, viz.,
one at Monmouth, one at Usk, and one at Aber
gavenny, until further orders. In October th'^e
further orders came, and were from Monk, Duke of
Albermarle, directing the regiments to bedisbandcd
and paid off before the 29th of that month. The
evil effects expected from disbanding so large a
force of men were happily not realised, and the
men accustomed to strict military discipline fel'
into the participation of industrial pursuits
without inconvenience either to themselves or
society generally.
In 1661 a general election took place, when, as
Macaulay says, the people were mad with loyal
enthusiasm. The Presbyterian party, was almost
swept from the board, and a large proportion of
the new representatives were men who had fought
for the Crown and the Church. The Parliament
met on the 6th of May, the Members for the
County and Boroughs of Monmouth being the
same as in the previous Parliament — viz.. Lord
Herbert and William Morgan for the former, and
Sir Trevor Williams for the latter. Before the year
expired, however. Lord Herbert waa created Mar
quis of Worcester, and the county electors chose
as their representative Sir Trevor WiUiama, the
Borough Member, showing that, notwithstanding
that he had been Royalist and Parliamentarian by
turn, his independence and integrity had aecured
the admiration of those who knew him, The
Boroughs elected in the pla^e of their late member
one Sir George Probert, Knight, who died while
still representing them.
The new Parliament was zealous to an extreme,
and it needed all the influence of the King to re
strain them from retaliating without mercy for all
that they had suffered. The Episcopacy was re
stored, Hugh Lloyd, Archdjeacon of St. David's,

71
being appointed to the See of Llandaff. The old
Liturgy was revived, unmodified in any way to
conciliate the views of the Presbyterians, and an
Act was introduced making Episcopal C'rdination
necessary for church preferment. This Act passed
on the 19th of May, 1662, and came into operation
the 24th of August following. Its effect was to
cause about 2,000 persons who held livings in the
Church to give them up. These were the Puritans
who had from time to time) been appointed by their
political friends to fill the position of the Episcopal
clergy ejected from their parishes for loyalty to
their Church and King.
As we have previously given an account of the
sufferings of the loyal clergy, so now we append the
fullest information we have been able to learn
respeotina those who suffered by the violent re
action in favour of ecclesiastical uniformity,
Abergavenny. — John Abbot, who we have previously
referred to as having taken part in a public discussion on
Baptism at St. Mary's in 1653. The value of the living
was estimated at £14 per annum. Charles Herbert, Ihe
former vicar, was subsequently restored.
Caerleon. — Gtorge Robinson was ejected from this
vicarage, which waa ifalued at £20. He was one of the
anprovera Lamed in the Act for the Propagation of the
Gospel in Walea.
CaeraeMi.—Hopkiu Rogers was ejected. Value of the
living £!i&,
Llandvering (Llanvetherine?).— Owen Morgan ia named
by I "alamv fa having been ejected.
Llangattock. —A Mr Robins ia said to have been
ejected from ote of the parishes in the county of this
naine, the value of the living leing £45.
Llanvapley. — A preacher named Williams, supposed to
be ( harie 3 Williams, a fell monger of Monmouth, waa
ejected. Magor. —Thomas Barnes waa ejected.
Monmouth. — I^icholaa Cai ey waa ejected. He then left
olf pr,e,aohing to study physic. He ia said to have
acquired peculiar success in curing diseases of the eye
aria ear.
St. Woollos. Newport.— 'B.enry Walter, was ejected
froin his vicarage, valued at £20 per annual.
Treduif.nock.—WB.Mst Kosser waa ejected. He ia aaid
to hfve attjained some eminenee as a preacher, ard
laboured in Ihe adjacent parifhes
Trelleck.— ^ir Sims, the preacher ejected, is alleged
to have persecuted the Quakers.

72
Vavasour Powell, one of Walter Cradock's
disciples, and an avowed Republican, was im
prisoned, and remained in custody at intervals
until 1667. He waa then released, and no sooner
did he find himself in the fields of his former
triumphs than the old spirit broke out again. At
Newport he harangued large assemblies, and also
at Merthyr, where he was arrested and conveyed to
Cardiff prison, lie was removed to the Fleet, and
there died October 27, 1670.
We will not pretend to say that the above were
all the ministers who sufferred loss through
the operation of the Act of Uniformity ; but they
are the only complete particulars we have been able
to glean. Calamy states that one William Mill-
man of Magor, a Sabbatarian Baptist, waa ejected
from a living which he held in the county, but no
parish is named ; and from the statements that the
former ministers in the parishes of Caldicot,
Llanarth, Llanbadoc, Llanddewi Skirrid, Llanellen,
and Llangattock (Caerleon), were restored, it may
be inferred that the Nonconforming preachers
were ejected from these places also. At all events
it seems conclusive that the Nonconformists
expelled from livings which they held in opposi
tion to the general sense of the community were
not one-tenth the number of those loyal ministers
ejected by the cruel enactments of the Puritans
under the Commonwealth.
It is refreshing to turn for a moment from dwell
ing upon the contentions and strife of opposing
parties in the kingdom to the delightful seclusion
of Llantarnam Abbey ; closed in as it still remains
from the busy haunts of men, and where Nature
can be seen in charming loveliness. Here in the
quiet chamber of the Abbey, while the nation
outside was in a delirium of change, Percy
Euderbie sat, like a monk of earlier days, poreing
over, in ponderous tomes and fusty MSS., the
materials for perfecting his great historical work.
The title of this is "Cambria Triumphans, or
Britain in its perfect lustre, shewing the origin
and antiquity of that illustrious nation ; the suc
cession of their Princes from the first to King

73
Charles of happy memory, &c. This repository of
historical lore was issued to the world with a
preface dated from " My Chamber at Llantarnam
in Monmouthshire," dated 16th of May, 1661.
In his address to the reader he gives several in
ducements which drew him on to attempt the
work, and states that the help of a good library
of Sir Edward Morgan encouraged him to bring
the embryon to its full maturity Time brings
its changes. In the course of two centuries the
"good library " has been dispersed, and the name
of Morgan is no longer connected with the old
Abbey. Reverting to the religious question, we may
state that the very important petition of the
inhabitants of South Wales, presented to Parlia
ment in 1651, was not lost sight of, notwithstand
ing the many obstacles thrown in the way of its
prosecution. Colonel Freeman from time to time
called attention to it, and succeeded during the
Commonwealth in getting Committees appointed
to inquire into the management of the Church
revenues, but the scandal was so huge, and the
persons implicated so numerous and influential
that no progress could be made. After the
Restoration, Committees were again appointed,
but there was the less necessity of prosecuting the
question then, as many Church ministers were
restored to their livings, and began to get back the
emoluments of which they they had been for some
years so unjustly deprived.
From the papers preserved at Lambeth Palace,
it is gleaned that in 1662 the petty constables were
required to summon before the members of a Com
mission all persons in their respective parishes who
had been in any way instrumental in ejecting the
clergy from their livings, and among the said
returns is the following : —
Walter Jones, petty constable of the parish ot
Llandenny, Mon., returns as follows: — "June,
1668. We return that Walter Cradock, of Llan-
gwmisha, was the chief man with the rest of the
Commissioners in putting ministers out of their
churches and livings. We do return that Walter

74
Cradock died, and that Richard Creed and Thomas
Jones, his sons-in-law, are his heirs, executors, and
administrators." We do not find that any further
action in this direction was ever taken.
pi owe ver laudable were the objects of the pro
moters of the Act of Uniformity, they failed in
producing the effect intended. The Nonconformists,
who abolished the Episcopal form of public worship
and made it penal for any person to use or even
possess a copy of the Book of Common Prayer, did
not submit to have the like measure of justice
meted out to them as they had given to others.
When in power they endeavoured to force
unwilling people to comply with their religious
formalities. Now that the power was in the hands
of others they refused to change their religious
views, and pleaded for toleration. They com
plained loudly, and Parliament, listening to their
cries, sought to provide a remedy in the Con
venticle Act, passed in 1664. This provided not
only for freedom of worship in families, but per
mitted at such meetings for worship the presence of
a limited number (not above five) of visi+ora.
The Act proved a great relief, and from its
results have sprung those numerous chapels of the
Nonconformist body which now stud the kingdom
from end to end. In 1669 returns were made to
Parliament of all the Conventicles in England and
Wales, and the following are those relating to the
county of Monmouth : —
DlOOESE OF ILANDAFP.
Panteg. — At the house of Richard Hanbury; Num-
b=!r 40, 50, 60, and sometimes more, Tuachers : George
White, of Llanvihangel, and sometimes the aaid Richard
Hanbury. Llanwenarth. — Anabaptists. Number, 80 to 100.
Teachers : David Robert, and Morgan Evan.
Llanwerne. — Quakers. Number 30 or 40, and when they
bear some eminent seducing teachers there will be 60 and
upwards. Abergavenny. — Anabaptists. iVumber, 60. Their
teachers and seducers are Chriatopher Price, an apothe
cary ; John Edward, shoemaker ; and Watkin Morgan,
shoemaker, Caerleon. —At the house of Mr Henry Walter.
Magor. — At the houae of Mr Samuel Jones, of Little
Salisbury, and Mr Tnomaa Jones', of Milton.

75
Llanvaxihes. — At the houae of Mi Nathan Rogers.
Dinham.—At the House of William Blethin.
Caldicot.— Ai the houae of Hopkin Rogers.
Wilwick (Wilcrick). — At the house of John Jones.
Shirenewton.— At the house ef Robert Jones.
These meetings are ot three sects, viz., Independents,
Anabaptiata, and Quakera. The number is sometimes
200 or more at the greatest. Of which number there are
many persins of good quality, being country gentlemen,
and such as either were in actual arma in the late
rebellion or bred up under auoh, and many of the meaner
sor' of people, beaidea women and children. Teachera :
Mr Henry Walter, of Parkypill, in the parish of Caer
leon ; Thomaa Barnea, late of Magor, now of Bristol ;
one Lloyd, who pretends to be a scholar of New Inn
Hall, Oxon ; and one William Millman, of Magor, a
Sabbatarian Anabaptist ; besidea Repeaters, viz., Samuel
Jones, gent : Henry R )msey, gent ; Robert Jones, gent ;
Hopkin Rogers, Gesrge Edwards, Watkin George ; with
divers other vagrant persona, leaders and teachera of the
{Quakers. Marshfield. — At the house of Jane Reynolds, the relict
of Henry William, a lieutenant in the late rebellion.
Number 100. Teachera : Thomas Qnarrell, John Powell,
and others. The congregation is mide up of old Militia
men of the counties of Monmouth and Glamorgan.
Bedwas. — Every third Sabbath day, at the houses of
William Evan and Thomaa Morgan. Number 150.
Teachera : Morgan L^wia Lawrence, of Bedwas, and
Thomas Qnarrell, of Whitchurch.
Mynyddislwyn and BedweUty. — There are tive conven
ticles in these two pariahes ; at the houaea of Evan Lewis,
Philip Rees, Evan Williams, Watkin John Evan, of
Mynyddislwyn, and Edmund Morgan, ot BedweUty.
Number 200. Teachers ; Evan William, Watkin John
Evans, Thomaa Quarrell, and Wm. Lewia, ot Gellygaer.
Newport. — At the house of Mr Rice WiUiama. Num
ber 100, of all sorts ; some gentlemen. Teachera : Mr
Rice WiUiama, one Prosaer, of the parish of Tredunnock,
Mr Joshua Lloyd, Mr Rogers, and Watkin John, of
MvnyddislwyDi Llantrissant.—At the houss of George Morgan. Num
ber 40 or 50, T«acher: William Thomaa, of the said
parish, son-in-law of the aaid Morgan, their entertainer.
Llangwm.— At the houses of John Gwynne, John
Morgan, Nathaniel Morgan, Thomas Williams, and
David Evan. Nnmber, aometimes 200, 100, 60, 30. Some
men of competent parts and breeding; and have been,
in the time of the late rebellion, in officea both military
and civil, some of £500 a year, some £300, some £2o0,
some £100, some £60, and some £30 ; beaidea people of
mean sort. Teachera : William Thomas of Llantrissant,
one Millman and one Jones, a Repeater,

76
In the 1 riory of Usk. — .^t the house of Mrs Mary
Jones, relict of William Jones, Esq, Number 30 or 40.
Teachers : Moore, Geddard, and William Thomas of
Llantriaiaant. Llangibby and Llandegveth. — Edward Walters of Llan
gibby. Waltir William of Llandegveth, and Giles
Morgan i.f Llanddewy Vac:h, entertain them. Numher
30 or 40, some freeholders and farmers among them.
T- noheru: William Thomas, Walter Prosser, and Walter
Williams. The amount of toleration conceded to the Non
conformists waa not at thia period given to Roman
Catholica, against whom the penal laws remained
in 'ull operation. True the laws against all
recusants — Roman Catholics and Nonconformists
alike — were still unrepealed, but the Conventicle Act
had virtually abrogated the laws so far as Noncon-
formista were effected by them, and as against the
Roman Catholics a disinclination had grown to put
these laws into force. Unfortunately a variety of
circumstances occurred, to be learned from general
history, which impressed the public mind with the
belief that the Roman Catholics were on the point
of making a grand coup to recover the position of
power they formerly occupied in England. In a
short space of time the old feelings of hostility
broke out, and all sections of Protestants became
united once more in measures of persecution
against them. In the county of Monmouth Roman
Catholics had continued Strong in numbers and
influence, and therefore in the outci'y raised pro
minent attention waa called to their exiatence
and actions.
In 1678 the war in wliich England had been
engaged on the Continent terminated j as the Com
mons refused to vote supplies although they had
urged the King to undertake it. One of the
reasoiis which seems to have affected the Commons
in the course taken was the fact of " having dis
covered that a dozen Catholic priests existed in the
counties ot Hereford! and Monmouth, and that the
laws against recusanta were often evaded." Charles
was unable to reaiat the hostile feeling aroused, and
prosecutions of Ron.an Catholics took place on all
hands. OnS John Kemble, of Hereford, a Romish

77
priest, waa executed in 1679 for saying mass. Sub
sequently the head was cut off and the body burnt
in Welsh Newton churchyard. Another instance
of such cruelty was that ot the execution of David
Lewia, of Dak, It would seem from particulars
preserved that the right name of this priest waa
Charles Baker. He was born in 1617, and became
a student of the law. When 19 years of age he
turned a Roman Catholic, whereupon he was sent
to the English College at Rome. He became a
priest in 1642, and returned in 1648 to England,
where he carried on his duties as priest for 34
years. In times of bitter peraecution he took the
name ot Uavid Lewis in order to conceal his own,
and was commonly called "The father of the
poor." He was apprehended 17th November,
1678, in the parish of St Michael, Llantarnam, and
taken from thence to Monmouth Gaol. He waa
tried at Monmouth Assizes in March, 1679, the
indictment against him being for having taken
orders in the Church of Rome, and remaining in
England contrary to the statute 27th Elizabeth,
He was condemned to death, and was drawn to the
gallows at Usk on August 27th, 1679. His body
was afterwards burnt on the island in the river.
He addressed the people before his execution,
and offered up a beautiful prayer, which is
recorded in Challoner's " Lives of Missionary
Priests," v. ii., p. 419. An account of his trial,
written by himself, is recorded in the ' ' State
Trials," v. ii., p. 801. He was nearly the last
person put to death for religious reasons, The
stone over hia grave remained until 1830, with the
words " Popish Recusant " plainly visible. While
in prison Charles Baker copied out the speech he
intended to make on the scaffold, .and committed
it to memory. A copy of the speech was in the
possession of Mr. Richard Gabb in 1876, and waa
exhibited by him in the Muaeum of the Cambrian
Archaaological Society, when the Society held its
meeting at Hereford that year.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 03455 1128

'V":.