Charles Thomas-Stanford.

Sussex in the great Civil War and the interregnum, 1642-1660 online

. (page 9 of 30)
Online LibraryCharles Thomas-StanfordSussex in the great Civil War and the interregnum, 1642-1660 → online text (page 9 of 30)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


ishmen, who were numerous in the force. From bandying
opprobrious epithets, "Cornish Choughs, Puritans, and
Roundheads" on the one side, and "Irish kernes and
Popish dogs " on the other, they fell to fighting. Several
Cornishmen were killed, and their comrades, variously



THE SIEGE OF ARUNDEL 89

estimated at 500 to 1,500, deserted their colours and re-
turned to their homes. 1

The bringing over of Irishmen to fight on English soil
was regarded with great indignation by the Parlia-
mentarians, and with disfavour by many Royalists. It was
looked upon very much in the same light as the employ-
ment of natives as combatants in the South African War.
Whitelock says: " Divers of the Irish, about 1500, were cast
away at sea coming to serve his Majesty. It was observed
that these bloody Irish coming over hither never did any
service considerable, but were cut off, some in one place
and some in another. In all places the vengeance of God
follows bloodthirsty men." 2 In the main the Civil War,
considering its date, was conducted with remarkable
humanity, and the presence of an Irish contingent, re-
garded as composed of irresponsible foreigners, lacking the
restraints which influenced both English parties, was
feared as likely to be the occasion of outrage and bar-
barity.

But in spite of his troubles, Hopton succeeded in march-
ing out of Winchester with 2,000 cavalry and 1,500 in-
fantry. He reached Petersfield on Wednesday the 27th.
The news of his movement raised fresh hopes in the
garrison, who " came forth to the balcony again," only to
be shot down by Waller's musketeers posted in the ruins
of an old chapel. The besieged had managed to keep in
communication with Hopton, and Waller's men discovered
an ox-hide boat in the river, which had been used to ferry
over a messenger. Desertions from the castle were
numerous, and continued to be so until the end of the
siege.

On Thursday the 28th a flag of truce was hoisted, and
an application was made by the garrison to Sir William
Waller for a supply of sack, tobacco, dice, and cards, in

1 Godwin, Civil War in Hampshire, ch. xviii.

2 Whitelock, Memorials, March 1644.



90 SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

return for which they offered beef and mutton. Waller
was no bigot; and this message was probably in jocular
reference to a pleasant passage between him and Lord
Crawford at Alton on I2th December. 1 Lord Crawford
had sent to him at Farnham asking for a rivulet of sack,
and promising a fat ox in exchange. " Our worthy Sir
William sent in a loving compliment to the Lord Crawford
half a hogshead of sack, who mistrusting the matter and
the messenger, caused the messenger and divers others to
taste thereof, and then caused it to be carefully laid by for
his own drinking." Sir William demanded the promised
ox, whereupon Lord Crawford replied that he would bring
it himself. Waller " fails not at nightfall to go in search of
his ox, and, instead of a beast, brought away 565 prisoners."
Crawford fled in haste, without his hat or cloak, and it was
a standing joke that he had " left his sack at Alton." Next
day he wrote a letter to Waller, which was read in the
House of Commons on i8th December:

"To SIR W. WALLER:
" SIR,

" I hope your gaining of Alton cost you dear. It
was your lot to drink your own sack, which I never in-
tended to have left for you. I pray you favour me so much
as to send my owne chirurgion, and upon my honour I
will send you a person suitable to his exchange. Sir, your
servant,

" CRAFORD." l

But however Waller took the ribald application of the
Arundel Cavaliers, it was doubtless a stumbling-block and
offence to some of his serious-minded adherents. The
Puritans, with all their virtues, to some of which the great-
ness of England is chiefly due, were lacking in appreciation
of the lighter side of human intercourse, and were in-

1 Cal. S. P. Dom., Chas. I, ccccxcviii, 76.

2 Godwin, Civil War in Hampshire, ch. xvi.



THE SIEGE OF ARUNDEL 91

tolerant of pleasures, whether harmless or the reverse. To
them the rollicking humour of the pleasure-loving Cavalier
was anathema. His very appearance betrayed his wicked-
ness, every species of vice and iniquity was thought to
lurk in his long and curly tresses; while the Royalist for
his part imagined the close-cropped Roundhead to be as
destitute of wit and wisdom as of hair.

Hopton advanced rapidly to within a few miles of
Arundel. On Friday the 29th, Waller left 1,500 men to
continue the siege and marched to meet him. The armies
faced each other on North Harden Down and at West
Dean. Finding himself in the presence of a greatly superior
force, Hopton, after the exchange of a few shots, retired in
the direction of Havant. A few days later Colonel Norton,
with his Hampshire dragoons, attacked a detachment of
the retreating Cavalier army near that place, and took
several prisoners.

The garrison was now very anxious to make terms of
surrender, but as Waller required it to surrender " at
mercy," no negotiations took place. The news of the
approaching fall of Arundel gave great satisfaction in
London. On ist January 1644, Parliament requested the
Earl of Essex to grant to Sir William Waller a commission
as major-general to command the forces of the four associ-
ated counties of Hants, Surrey, Sussex, and Kent, appar-
ently in confirmation of the commission already given him
by the House. This commission, which enabled Waller to
command independently in the four counties, was at once
granted by Essex, not without an energetic protest, and
was delivered to Waller on 3rd January. At the same time
such necessaries as he required were ordered to be
delivered to him a sharp contrast to the niggardly treat-
ment accorded him when he was making his preparations
at Farnham.

Lord Hopton, having failed in his attempt to relieve
Arundel, endeavoured to create a diversion by laying siege



92 SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

to Warblington Castle, between Chichester and Portsmouth,
which was held by a small garrison. It appears that he
took it " after long siege and with loss of more men than
were there in garrison," but with no particular advantage
to the Royalist cause.

On 4th January Waller opened fire on Arundel Castle
with some heavy guns which he had procured from Ports-
mouth. The state of the garrison was now desperate ; not
only were they short of provisions, " they had no bread,
only each soldier had 2 spoonfuls of sodden wheat a day,
beef they had enough " ; l but discord, fomented by Waller,
reigned within the walls. Clarendon says : " By some of the
soldiers running out to him, he found means to send in
again to them, by which he so increased their faction and
animosity against one another that after he had kept them
waking, with continual alarms, three or four days, near
half the men being sick and unable to do duty, rather than
they would trust each other longer they gave the place and
themselves up as prisoners of war upon quarter, the place
being able to have defended itself against all that power
for a much longer time."

Accordingly on Friday, 5th January, a message was
sent out of the castle by a drummer, who, being hungry
and seeing abundance of food in the besiegers' lines, sur-
rendered on his own account as a prisoner. A second
drummer was sent, with the result that three commissioners
were appointed on either side to arrange terms of surrender.
While these were being arranged, Waller courteously per-
mitted some ladies to leave the castle and dine at his own
table. They were Lady Bishop, daughter of the Earl of
Thanet, and wife of Sir Edward Bishop, with her two
daughters, one of whom, Diana, was the young wife (only
fifteen years old) of Henry Goring. 2 Mrs. Goring returned
to the castle with the commissioners, the other ladies with
their maids were provided with quarters by Waller.

1 Rev. J. Coulton to Samuel Jeake. a S. A. C., v, 62.



THE SIEGE OF ARUNDEL 93

The following were the propositions made by Sir William
Waller to the besieged in Arundel Castle:

First. I require the castle of Arundel to be delivered
into my hands by to-morrow morning, ten o'clock.

Second. That all colonels of horse and foot, and all
horse, arms, ammunition and military provision whatever
be then delivered to me entire and unspoiled.

Third. That all commanders, officers, and gentlemen
have fair quarter and civil usage.

Fourth. That all soldiers shall have quarter for their
lives.

Fifth. That for security of performance, Sir Edward
Bishop and Sir Edward Ford be immediately delivered
into my hands.

EXPLANATIONS

One. By fair quarter, I mean giving life to those that
yield, with imprisonment of their persons; but civil
usage, which is sufficient security that they shall not be
plundered.

Two. Concerning the place they shall be sent to, I will
not determine, but will be left to mine own freedom, without
further capitulation.

Three. The ministers are included in the articles, and
are prisoners, as well as the soldiers.

Four. When I send away the officers, I shall take care
that they shall not want horses to carry them, but will not
be bound to let them have their own horses.

At midnight Waller sent in an order to the garrison that
Sir Edward Ford and Sir Edward Bishop must come forth
at once if they desired a further cessation of hostilities.
They gave themselves up at two o'clock in the morning,
and the fortress was formally surrendered about nine o'clock
in the morning of Saturday, 6th January 1644.

Seventeen colours of foot and two of horse were taken,



94 SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

and more than 1,000 prisoners, including about a hundred
officers and fifty gentlemen. A newswriter of the day says :
" I never saw so many weak and feeble creatures together
in my life, for almost all the common soldiers were half
starved, and many of them hardly able to set one foot
before another." l About 200 horses, 2,000 arms, many oxen
both alive and dead, 20 barrels of powder, and 4,000 in
money fell to the victors.

Waller immediately sent " 2,000 horse and foot and two
drakes to besiege my Lord Lumley's house in Sussex."
This was Stanstead, in the parish of Stoughton; it had
been sold after the death of the last Lord Lumley, in 1609,
to Richard Lewknor, of the well-known Cavalier family. It
surrendered at once. A force was also sent to destroy, or
more probably to capture, the ironworks in St. Leonard's
Forest, which, belonging either to the Crown or to the
Royalists, had provided the royal ammunition.

On 8th January news of the fall of Arundel reached
London. Parliament immediately voted its thanks to Sir
William Waller, " much approving of all his proceedings
herein ; and they perceiving by the list that there are many
gentlemen of the country, that are not soldiers, that are
men of good estate, they do give power to him to ransom
them for sums of money, the which they leave to his dis-
position upon account." Sir H. Vane, junr., and Sir
Arthur Haselrig were directed to prepare a letter for Sir
William Waller, to be signed by Mr. Speaker Lenthall,
" to congratulate him on his great and good success, and to
encourage him according to his intentions to prosecute the
advantages it has pleased God to bless him with." The
town of Lewes sent Waller a present of 50 " in acknow-
ledgement of my poor service at Arundel," as he says in his
Vindication. " It is worth noting," wrote Mr. Coulton to
Samuel Jeake, " to see how our Eastern gentry come to
comfort our poor Colonel, and to show their thankfulness

1 S. A. C, v, 63.



THE SIEGE OF ARUNDEL 95

to our noble Waller." The Rye troop, to which Mr. Coulton
was attached, had apparently particularly distinguished
itself; its Captain, Richard Cockeram, Mayor of Rye, was
voted 100 by Parliament in testimony of his good services
to the State.

So for the third time within little more than a year the
castle of Arundel was captured. Of the 800 soldiers taken
prisoners, 500 joined Waller's army; the rest were sent to
London, guarded by four troops of horse, " some in carts,
some on foot," and arrived there on 2Oth January. 1 Waller
proceeded to repair the defences of the castle ; " we have
fortified Arundel as strong as ever you saw a thing," wrote
Mr. Coulton ; and having left it in charge of Colonel Morley
and Colonel Springate, prepared to follow Lord Hopton,
who had made a "nimble retreat" to Winchester. The
following letter from Lord Hopton to an unknown corre-
spondent, preserved in a private collection, shows that he
was informed that Waller was concentrating the troops he
had left at various points on his line of communications
before advancing into Hampshire.

" Winchester, Jan. 25, 1644.

" The intelligence that came to me of Sir William
Waller's advancing, prooves only two regiments of horse
that was moved fro' neere Chichester to Stansheed, and the
quarters where we were, I have dayly intelligence of him
and do not find he doth yet move, the foot that were att
Guildford and moved thence to Godliman I heare ar gonn
on towards Petworth which makes me think he will joyn his
whole body in Sussex before he advances." 2

Colonel Stapley remained governor of Chichester, and in
that capacity objected to quarter some of Waller's troopers
in the city; but the Parliament, after much correspondence
on the subject, and a reference to the committee of both

1 Journ. Commons ; S. A. C., v, 66.

2 Morrison Collection of MSS., ii, 306.



96 SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

kingdoms, desired him to yield obedience upon all occa-
sions to Sir William Waller as commanding-in-chief. 1

So ended the winter campaign in Sussex of 1643. It is
by far the most interesting period of the war as far as the
county is concerned, and its importance as regards the
general result can hardly be over-estimated. Civilians may
not always be competent to grasp the military value and
results of any set of operations in the field, but the political
effects of a Royalist dominance in Sussex, and the import-
ance to the Parliament of its overthrow, may be obvious to
all. By its final elimination the position of London was
relieved of a great element of insecurity, and the Parlia-
ment was enabled to use to the full the enormous advan-
tage which its hold of the capital afforded. The undisputed
possession of the Sussex iron-forges may also have been an
asset of greater value than is generally recognized. Per-
haps an amateur may be permitted to suggest that Sir
William Waller's stubborn persistence in the face of con-
stant neglect and inadequate supplies, and his grasp of the
essential points in the great game, have hardly received,
either in his own day or since, their due meed of appro-
bation.

The town of Arundel suffered very severely from these
repeated attacks. It had been grievously pillaged by Lord
Hopton's army, and many houses had been destroyed.
Further damage was done during Waller's siege of the
castle. In 1645 a Committee was appointed by Parliament
to meet at Billinghurst, and inquire into and pay for
damage done by the army. On the petition of Nathan
Older, Mayor of Arundel, .3,772 was allotted to certain
inhabitants of the borough for repair of damages. 2

1 Journ. Commons, January loth, i6th, February i6th, 2oth,
March 7th, 1644; S. A. C., v, 66. See also Cal. S. P. Dom., Chas. I,
d, 45, 46, 47 ; di, 65.

2 Arundel Corporation MSS., quoted by Dallaway, p. 210. See also
Tiemey's Arundel, p. 714.



THE SIEGE OF ARUNDEL 97

Sir Edward Ford, a man " of honesty, courage and good
meaning," as Clarendon says, had been the evil genius of the
Royalist party in Sussex. His uncalculating zeal had brought
on Chichester the calamity of a siege in 1642, and laid heavy
burdens on the estates of his friends. A year later he had
induced Hopton to occupy Arundel, and being left in com-
mand had neglected to furnish the castle with supplies
sufficient to enable it to hold out against Waller for any
useful period. His connection with Ireton seems to have
insured him a continuance of lenient treatment when taken
prisoner, for we find him once again in arms against the
Parliament in 1645. * Taking part in the defence of Win-
chester Castle in October of that year, he assisted to draw
up the terms of surrender, a task for which experience had
qualified him. But so great was the interest he could com-
mand that the comparatively small fine of 500 was all
that was laid upon Up Park. 2 For the part they had taken
in the defence of Arundel, he and Sir Edward Bishop had
been declared by the Parliament on 9th October 1644 "to
be incapable of any employment " perhaps a euphemistic
way of letting them off easily. His father, Sir William Ford
of Up Park, relying on the interest his son could command,
was shrewd enough to throw the blame of his own proceed-
ings upon him. There was in the old man something of the
artfulness of the Simon Fraser of a later day. His petition,
dated 24th October 1645, is an interesting document.
" Your Petitioner humbly begs that Parliament would not
punish him (the father) for the son's fault. . . . Two years
since he was forced to go into the King's quarters, his land
being sequestered, his house spoiled, and his personal estate
taken from him. . . . And being at Winchester when Sir
Ralph Hopton marched into Sussex with his army, your
petitioner went along with him to see if he could get any
rent of his tenants, but none of them paid him any money.

1 Godwin, Civil War in Hampshire, ch. xxix.

2 Cal. Com. for Compounding, 932.

H



98 SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

Yet he procured as many as spake unto him protections ;
and at the return of the army [Hopton's retreat from
Arundel] the soldiers wanting bread were appointed to
fetch the same from the countrymen's houses. But they
fearing to be plundered of their goods under colour of
fetching bread, divers of the country came to your petitioner
and entreated him to be a means that they might send
some bread, and not to have the soldiers to fetch it. And
according to their desire he sent a note to have it done so
(for their good) and he had not any of his tenants taken
prisoners, nor any of their cattle taken away for his rent
behind, as he might have done."

This petition helps us to a picture of the sufferings of
all classes in West Sussex in that terrible winter of 1643:
" the country far and wide ransacked for bread, rents un-
paid, two sets of hungry soldiery in turn masters, church
cottage mansion and park alike pillaged, the squires in
gaol, the parson and the farmers fined." l

" Our country," said a letter-writer of the time, " makes
as much haste as it can towards the miserable condition of
Germany, contrary parties having been all this winter in
many counties still acting hostilities against one another,
to the undoing of the inhabitants that are forced to stand
to the courtesy of both." 3

Sir Edward Ford is said to have retired for some time to
the Continent, but in 1647 ^ e Queen, knowing his rela-
tionship to Ireton, sent him over " to discover the intentions
of the army, and promote an agreement between his Majesty
and them." Sir John Berkeley followed, and met him at
Reading, with the same hopeless intrigue in view. 3 On the
flight of the King from Hampton Court Ford was sus-

1 Rev. H. D. Gordon, History of Harting, 1877, p. 84.

- CaL S. P. Dom., Chas. I, ccccxcviii, 85. Mr. Harrison to
John Bradley at the College of Tournay, Paris, 28th December
1643.

: Sir J. Berkeley's Memoirs, 1699.



THE SIEGE OF ARUNDEL 99

pected of being privy to it, and was ordered by the Parlia-
ment to be arrested. 1

When the war was over Ford acquired interest and
favour with Cromwell and the Parliament. He was a clever
engineer and projector; but some of his later schemes have
an anticipatory flavour of the South Sea Bubble. In 1656
" being encouraged by Oliver, and invited by the Citizens
of London, he raised the Thames water into all the highest
streets of the city, 93 feet high, in four eight-inch pipes, to
the Wonder of all men, and the Honour of the Nation,
with a rare Engine of his own Invention, done at his own
charge and in one year's time. He also built the Great
Water Engine near Somerset House, which supplieth the
inhabitants of the Strand, and adjacent parts with water." 2

His projects took a wide range. On 22nd September
1663 Samuel Pepys records in his Diary: "This day my
wife showed me bills printed wherein her father, with Sir
John Collidon and Sir Edward Ford, have got a patent for
curing of smoky chimneys." 3

After the great fire of London he published " Experi-
mental Physics how the King may have money to pay and
maintain his Fleets, with ease to his people: London may
be rebuilt and all proprietors satisfied : money to be at six
per cent, on pawns, and the Fishing Trade set up, which
alone is able, and sure to enrich us all. And all this with-
out altering, straining or thwarting any of our Laws, or
Customs, now in use." 4

A year or two later he invented a mode of coining
farthings. Each piece was to differ minutely from another
to prevent forgery. He failed to procure a patent for this
scheme in England, but obtained one for Ireland. He died
in Ireland on 3rd September 1670, before he could carry
his design into execution. 5 In some of the projects of his

1 S. A. C., v, 63. " Wood, Athenae Oxonienses, i, 469.

3 Pepys' Diary, ed. H. B. Wheatley, iii, 286.

4 Reprinted Harleian Miscellany, iv, 195. 5 D. N. B.



ioo SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

later days we seem to see a hint of the reckless daring
which led him in earlier life, as High Sheriff of Sussex,
to undertake the defence of Chichester and Arundel with
insufficient means against overwhelming odds.

His only daughter, Catharine, married Ralph, Lord Grey
of Werke, maternal ancestor of the second and third Lords
Braybrooke.



CHAPTER VII

CHILLINGWORTH, CHEYNELL, AND SPRINGATE

THE clause in Waller's terms of surrender for the gar-
rison of Arundel which provided that ministers were
included in the articles, and to be prisoners as well as the
combatants, was probably meant to cover the celebrated
Church of England divine, Dr. Chillingworth, who was not
only an inmate of the castle, but had taken a prominent
part in its defence. Being in bad health he had perhaps
selected it as a place of residence, with no warlike intent,
but as offering comfortable winter quarters, protected by
the supposed inaccessibility of Sussex from any possible
stress of war. Although only in his forty-second year,
Chillingworth had passed a life of considerable variety.
Son of a mercer at Oxford, and godson of Archbishop
Laud, he was a fellow of Trinity College, Oxford, and
disputed against" John Fisher" [Percy] the Jesuit; in 1630
he embraced Romanism and went to Douai, returning to
Oxford the following year, and reverting to Protestantism
in 1634. In 1638 he published his best-known book The
Religion of Protestants a Safe Way of Salvation, and in
the same year was appointed Prebendary and Chancellor
of Salisbury. When war broke out he attached himself to
the King's army, and was present at the siege of Glou-
cester. " He invented," says Dr. Calamy, 1 " engines after
the manner of the Roman ' testudines cum pluteis,' which
ran upon cart wheels, with a blind or planks musket proof,

1 Dallaway, i, 173.
101



and holes for four musketeers to play out of, placed upon
the axletree, and carrying a bridge before it. The wheels
were to fall into the ditch and the bridge to rest upon the
town's breastwork, so making several complete bridges to
enter the city." At Arundel Castle he had under his charge
two small guns, called " murderers," the only guns mounted
on the works. " Some say that he was actively engaged
during the siege in constructing machines after the Roman
method, and that the vexation arising from their failure
greatly hastened his death. He was a good logician and
used his logic to some purpose in theology ; but he left out
an important consideration in his military elenchus when
he forgot that the Romans did not employ ' villainous salt-
petre ' in their sieges."

Chillingworth was one of those "sons of the Renais-
sance " to whom neither party offered a sure abiding-place.
His contention that the test of reason should be applied to
revealed religion, and his hatred of dogmatism drove him to
the King's side, and brought on him the unquenchable
wrath of the Puritan divines, who accused him of Socinian-
ism, and a denial of the divinity of Christ. " Learne," said
Cheynell, " the first lesson of Christianity, Self-deniall ;



Online LibraryCharles Thomas-StanfordSussex in the great Civil War and the interregnum, 1642-1660 → online text (page 9 of 30)