THE CIVIL WARS

With these awful calamities the people endured severe privation, both as to food and clothing. Provisions had risen so enormously in price as to place even the coarsest food beyond the reach of the poor. We are told that so deficient were the working-classes of the commonest provision, that they were glad to resort, for subsistence, to horse-bread, composed of beans, oats, and bran. “The good old times” are too frequently quoted as periods of comfort, compared with the present days; but such facts as have been now related must convince every Englishman of right feeling that, however humble his lot, he still possesses “a goodly heritage.”

For a considerable time no event occurred in Oswestry worthy of detailed notice. In the 42nd of Elizabeth, Coke, Attorney-General, acknowledges all the liberties and franchises of Oswestry, by an order that all further proceedings on the part of the Crown, on a writ ofQuo Warrantoagainst the Bailiffs and Burgesses of Oswestry, should wholly cease. In 1603 a dispute took place between the Bailiffs, Burgesses, &c. and the Earl of Suffolk, then lord and owner of the town and manor, the former body having, in numerous assembly, resolved to maintain the rights and privileges granted to them by Richard II., and confirmed by their “late sovereigne of famous memorye, queene Elizabeth.” A petition setting forth their grievances, mainly caused by the Earl of Suffolk’s steward, had been presented by them to the Lord President of the Marches; to which Lord Suffolk replied as follows:—

“To his good freinds,the Burgesses and Townesmen of his Towne and Manor of Oswester:Ihaveof late receaved a Letter from my honblegood Lord and freind, the L. President of Wales, wchdeclared unto mee, a great desire in his Lppto give some satisfaction to you uppon a Peticon given him from yorTowne, as exceptinge against the Course wchMr. Lloyd, my Officer, healde with you. Nowe you must knowe, that I doe, and will avowe him in such things as he, in his discreation, shall find to bee profitable for mee wch, perchaunce, may bee displeasinge to you, but herin you may further wronge yorselves then you are aware off; for yf you shall deny to yeald mee thoes Rights & Proffits that are due unto me, as Lord of the Manor, you must then knowe, that I doe look for at Mr. Lloyds hands such a resistance of yorwills as I may not bee prejudized thereby: & I knowe his understandinge & discreation is such, as he would not drawe mee into frivolous and needles questions.—Therefore I must tell you, that yf you have refused the duties whchbelonge unto mee, that I will execute my remedies as the lawes of the Land will allowe mee. But, becawse I wolde not be thought rigorous, and that yt may appeare that my L: President hath the powre of an honorable & kind ffreind in mee, I am contented that yf you doe sende upp to the Tearme at Winchester, such as shall have powre to followe the cawse in the behaulf of you all, that then the questions wchare risen between the Steward & you shall, yf yt may be, have an end; by Councill chosen of each syde; wchCourse shall please mee well: but yf yt happen otherwise, the fault shall not be myne, for I desire not contencons; but then of necessety, Lawe must determyn them. In the meane tyme, I charge you all to carry yorselves respectively and duetifully to my Officers; for you must learn to obey, yf you will desire to be obeyed; wchyou, being a Corporate Towne, should principally desire. And soe I leave you for this tyme, untill I heare further from you. From the Court at Wylton, this 25th of October, 1603.YorLovinge freind & Lord,SUFFOLKE.”

“To his good freinds,the Burgesses and Townesmen of his Towne and Manor of Oswester:

Ihaveof late receaved a Letter from my honblegood Lord and freind, the L. President of Wales, wchdeclared unto mee, a great desire in his Lppto give some satisfaction to you uppon a Peticon given him from yorTowne, as exceptinge against the Course wchMr. Lloyd, my Officer, healde with you. Nowe you must knowe, that I doe, and will avowe him in such things as he, in his discreation, shall find to bee profitable for mee wch, perchaunce, may bee displeasinge to you, but herin you may further wronge yorselves then you are aware off; for yf you shall deny to yeald mee thoes Rights & Proffits that are due unto me, as Lord of the Manor, you must then knowe, that I doe look for at Mr. Lloyds hands such a resistance of yorwills as I may not bee prejudized thereby: & I knowe his understandinge & discreation is such, as he would not drawe mee into frivolous and needles questions.—Therefore I must tell you, that yf you have refused the duties whchbelonge unto mee, that I will execute my remedies as the lawes of the Land will allowe mee. But, becawse I wolde not be thought rigorous, and that yt may appeare that my L: President hath the powre of an honorable & kind ffreind in mee, I am contented that yf you doe sende upp to the Tearme at Winchester, such as shall have powre to followe the cawse in the behaulf of you all, that then the questions wchare risen between the Steward & you shall, yf yt may be, have an end; by Councill chosen of each syde; wchCourse shall please mee well: but yf yt happen otherwise, the fault shall not be myne, for I desire not contencons; but then of necessety, Lawe must determyn them. In the meane tyme, I charge you all to carry yorselves respectively and duetifully to my Officers; for you must learn to obey, yf you will desire to be obeyed; wchyou, being a Corporate Towne, should principally desire. And soe I leave you for this tyme, untill I heare further from you. From the Court at Wylton, this 25th of October, 1603.

YorLovinge freind & Lord,SUFFOLKE.”

James I. in 1616, granted a Charter to the town, thus removing “divers doubts and ambiguities” which had “arisen concerning the ancient liberties, francheses, &c., of the town and borough of Oswaldstre,” and extending their liberties and privileges, as well as confirming them a body corporate, by the name of “the Bayliff and Burgesses of Oswestry, in the Countie of Salope.”

About this period a heavy blow was struck at the commerce of the town, by the Drapers of Shrewsbury (a reference to whose complaints and apprehensions has already been made), “who weary,” says Pennant, “of their weekly journeys to Oswestry, determined to transfer the market to their own town, from that in which Queen Elizabeth had established it. But this attempt proved in the first instance abortive. The Lordship of Oswestry was enjoyed at this time by Thomas Howard, Earl of Suffolk, to whom it had been granted by the late queen, in the 43rd year of her reign. He was in great favour with James, in whose Court he held the office of Lord Chamberlain, and to whom he had recently recommended himself by his vigilance and promptitude in the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot. Possessed of the highest notions of the privileges of the peerage, and jealous of the infringement of his rights by the traders of Salop, he issued his mandate to them by one of their own body,—Arthur Kynaston, merchant of the staple, a younger brother of the house of Ruyton,—to desist from such attempts in future. Their answer is recorded in their own books: it is entitled ‘The copy of a letter sent by the Company to the Earle of Suffolk, Lord Chamberlain of his Majestie’s househoulde, ye 24th June, 1609.’ ‘Right Honerabell,—Your letter bearing date the second of this June, by the hands of Mr. Kiniston wee have received: wherein ytt appereth yor Lordship was informed that wee the Societie of Drapers wentt aboute by underarte and menenesse to withdraw your markett of Walsh clothe from your towne of Oswester;’ and they proceed to exculpate themselves from the charge in those phrases of submission which were in that day the established usage of inferiors in their addresses to those above them. This was their tone during the plenitude of the Earl’s power, which, five years after the date of this letter, received a great increase by his appointment to the exalted post of Lord High Treasurer of England. During this time we may be sure‘the market for frize and cottons continued, where, according to Heylin, it was originally fixed, at Oswestry.’ But in 1618, the King’s necessities caused an enquiry into the management of the treasury, and Suffolk, whose unbounded expenses in his magnificent palace at Audley-End, had brought him into pecuniary difficulties, was fined by the Court of Star Chamber in the vast sum of £30,000, and dismissed from all his employments. The clemency of James mitigated this enormous fine, but the influence of the Earl of Suffolk was gone; and in 1621 the Shrewsbury Drapers made an order upon the books of their Company, ‘That they will not buy cloth at Oswestry, or elsewhere than in Salop.’”

As we have shewn in a preceding page, the struggles of the Welsh, to recover the freedom they had lost, terminated with the death of their last great leader, Owain Glyndwr. “Their wild spirit of independence, and their enthusiasm for liberty,” says the eloquent historian whom we have already quoted, “from this period gradually declined. The blood of their beloved Princes was nearly extinct; and their native bravery was subdued, or rendered ineffectual, by their intestine divisions and by their repeated misfortunes. When fierce valour and unregulated freedom are opposed to discipline, to enlarged views, and to sound policy, the contest is very unequal: it is not therefore surprising that the genius of England at length obtained the ascendancy. It was, indeed, an interesting spectacle, and might justly have excited indignation and pity, to have seen an ancient and gallant nation, falling the victims of private ambition, or sinking under the weight of a superior power. But such emotions, which were then due to that injured people, have lost at this period their force and their poignancy. A new train of ideas arises; when we see that the change is beneficial to the vanquished—when we see a wild and precarious liberty succeeded by a freedom which is secured by equal and fixed laws—when we see manners hostile and barbarous, and a spirit of rapine and cruelty,softened down into the arts of peace, and the milder arts of civilized life—when we see this Remnant of the Ancient Britons uniting in interests, and mingling in friendship with their conquerors, and enjoying with them the same constitutional liberties; the purity of which, we trust, will continue uncorrupted as long as the British Empire shall be numbered among the nations of the earth.”

We now approach a period in our national history which has ever been viewed, by opposing political parties, in a conflicting spirit. The turbulent elements of

were not allayed until Death had silenced the two great actors in the tragic and murderous drama. The present volume, devoted principally to local history, is not an appropriate organ in which to discuss the merits and demerits of Charles I. and his sturdy rival Cromwell. Charles was doubtless guilty of many gross violations of his prerogative, and plunged into a reckless course of misgovernment, accompanied with galling taxation, which the people, beginning to learn the lessons of liberty, and to understand the genius of the British constitution, would not tamely submit to.

The ill-fated monarch, looking at him through the long vista of two centuries, was greatly to be pitied. The son of a king, who disregarded the instructions of his wise preceptor, George Buchanan, and who, in his rule over the English people, was prodigal, unprincipled, and tyrannical, he ascended the throne with a corrupt education, and urged to despotism and injustice by his infamous minister Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, he speedily exhibited in his regal capacity, a passion for power, which, as Macauley remarks, soon became “a predominant vice; idolatry to his regal prerogative, his governing principle. The interests of the crown legitimated every measure, and sanctified in his eye the widest deviationfrom moral rule.” Such was the son of a kingly father who was fond of cockfighting, and the brutal pleasures of inebriation, who utterly neglected the affairs of state on the plea that “he should not make a slave of himself;” who sold titles and privileges of all kinds, that his vices might be fed; and who basely deprived people of their patents, after having paid for them to himself. These were only a small portion of the sire’s iniquities. What surprise then can be entertained that Charles, his son, walked much in the father’s footsteps! Notwithstanding his despotic and infatuated measures, to which all the evils of the civil wars may be traced, yet he had many excellencies; and the closing scene of his unhappy life proved that had he been blessed with a wiser tutelage, and taught to govern with a just and righteous hand, he might have descended into the tomb with virtue and honour, embalmed in the grateful recollections of his country.

Of his powerful rival and successor much has, and still may be said, in his praise and condemnation. His character, however, singular and erratic as it was, was mixed, as that of other men; and whilst he displayed a religious enthusiasm and sanctity in most of his public acts, apparently impressed with the conviction that he “was doingGodservice” in the course in which he had embarked; yet the troublous events of his life—the fears, anxieties, and weakness of his mortal nature—must have convinced him, if he sincerely believed in the religion of which he made so loud and trumpet-tongued a profession, that “he had done many things which he ought not to have done, and left undone many things he ought to have done.” Now that we look calmly back upon Cromwell’s life, we can see much in his administrative policy that elevated the nation during his transient rule, and that has shed its salutary influences even upon the present generation; but the deep, dark spot in his escutcheon—the murder of Charles—a crime which harrows up the feelings, and rouses the indignation of all right-minded men—that foul murder, withall its cruel and inhuman associations, blots out any excellency that he ever did achieve, and stamps his character indelibly as that of a religious, enthusiastic professor only, and not of a Christian man. Charles may have been guilty, and deserving of punishment for his misrule; but we have yet to learn that Cromwell had plenary power to execute the mandate ofJehovah, and to have adopted the inspired exclamation, “Vengeance is Mine!”

“At the breaking out of the Civil Wars,” says Pennant, “the whole of Shropshire, with few exceptions of persons and none of places, adhered to the cause of royalty. Oswestry, like the rest, was garrisoned for the king. The town was defended by a new gate and draw-bridge; the castle was fortified very strongly; and to prevent it from being commanded by the church, in case of the capture of the town, the steeple was pulled down, and a part of the sacred edifice was also demolished.” The same popular author, with his fervid nationality, and strong royalist principles, adds, with evident pride and delight, “The garrison consisted chiefly of Welsh (a people almost to a man staunch in the cause of their sovereign).” The governor of Oswestry Castle at this disturbed period was a Colonel Lloyd. Edward Lloyd, Esq., of Llanvorda, compounded for his estates, as a royalist, in the sum of £300; and at the period of which we write (1643) he was in the prime of life, and therefore physically able to assume the important command of Governor of the Castle. Colonel Thomas Mytton, of Halston, near Oswestry, a man well skilled in military art, and of great personal courage, had united as a commander with the Parliamentary forces, and first signalized himself in an assault upon the town of Wem, which he seized and garrisoned; that place soon became the centre from which attacks were directed against the royalist garrisons in the neighbouring towns. Mytton’s success at Wem was achieved in the latter end of August, 1643; and although he actively assisted the Parliamentaryarmy in its attacks upon other parts of the country, he frequently visited Wem to concert measures for fresh conquests. In January of the following year, a plan was there determined upon for a sudden and covert attack upon Oswestry. The story is on record that Mytton well knew thebon vivantqualities of the Governor of Oswestry. It was said of this royalist Commandant, that in the social circle he was the life and soul of the company, and that when he entered upon the convivialities of the table, he found it a difficult matter to interrupt the rosy hours by wending homewards. Colonel Mytton might know the frailties of his gallant opponent; and, with a strategetic art unworthy of a modern general, he devised a scheme for capturing the Governor and seizing the town of Oswestry. The anecdote proceeds to state, that Colonel Lloyd was to be invited to dinner at the house of a neighbouring gentleman; and Mytton calculated that no dinner invitation would be refused by good-humoured Col. Lloyd. The plot included the spread of further net-work, in which the unsuspecting Governor was to be surely caught. His gastronomic and vinous attachments were to be plentifully gratified; and whilst indulging in bacchanalian revels, a military force, under Mytton’s direction, was to enter the dining room in which the innocent Governor was carousing, to seize him,vi et armis, take him before his own garrison, in Oswestry, and there compel him to issue orders to his officers to surrender the town and castle. The plot, as we have described it, was partly successful, but eventually failed. Colonel Lloyd accepted the apparently-friendly invitation to dinner; and all went merrily on with him for a brief period. The detachment of troops was sent from Wem to take him prisoner, so that the first act of the drama was nearly completed. Whilst, however, the Parliamentarians were on their way to surprise him, two of their scouts were seized by some royalist friends; they confessed their share in the treacherous plot; the Colonel was apprized of the danger he was in, fled from the habitation of his Judas-like host,reached the “post of honour” which he had so improperly abandoned for the pleasures of the table, and secured from the grasp of his enemies both the town and castle. Colonel Lloyd’s misconduct was reported, it seems, to the royalist commander-in-chief, who removed him from his important position, and appointed as his successor Sir Absetts Shipman.

The parliamentary leaders were numerous and powerful, and they were all fired with zeal and enthusiasm in the cause which they espoused. The town of Oswestry was a military post of distinction in their eyes; and to possess it was an achievement “devoutly to be wished.” Oswestry stood on a towering height, vigilantly watching the varied movements of the parliamentary hosts, and protecting the communication between the town and Wales. The opposite party were equally active and observant. Colonel Mytton was well acquainted, from his local connexion, with the strength and resources of the town, and brought to his aid, in his meditated attack upon it, Sir Thomas Fairfax, the equal to Cromwell in military tactics. In the month of March, 1644, Fairfax and Mytton, with a strong force under their command, made a sudden attack upon the town, which was gallantly repulsed by Prince Rupert (the King’s nephew), who commanded the royalist troops in garrison. This triumph was but of short duration, for the town was attacked in a few months afterwards, and in this renewed onslaught, the parliamentary forces were victors. The Battle of Oswestry, if such it may be called, was fought on the 22nd June. The Earl of Denbigh, a young parliamentary leader of some military talents, and son of a nobleman who had died in defence of the crown, suddenly left the main body of his army, and marched, with his “forlorn hope” upon Oswestry, determined upon taking the town by acoup de main. He reached the vicinity in company with Colonel Mytton, about two o’clock in the afternoon of June the 22nd, the former probably knowing, from the “false brethren,” as spies were then called, thatthe garrison was partly defenceless, the Governor having imprudently gone to Shrewsbury with certain parliamentary prisoners. Denbigh’s force consisted merely of two hundred infantry, and two troops of cavalry. The engagement was short and sharp. After a hot affair of about two hours, in which Lord Denbigh’s artillery played fiercely upon the garrison with small and great shot, a breach was made in the walls of the town, and the infantry poured in, headed by Major Fraser, with the loss of only one man killed and three wounded. “The New-gate,” adds Pennant, “was next demolished by the cannon, when a young fellow, one George Cranage, went with a hatchet, and cutting down the chains of the draw-bridge, enabled the cavalry also to enter. The besieged made an attempt to maintain the Church, but soon finding it untenable, fled to the castle. Hither they were closely pursued, and the pioneers were quickly called in to undermine its walls; in which, we are informed, the skill as well as valour of Colonel Mytton was very conspicuous. He was probably enabled, from his residence in the neighbourhood, to direct the miners to proceed with most effect. But the daring valour of Cranage again anticipated these slower operations. He was persuaded to hang aButtar(a petard) at the castle-gate! Being well animated with sack, he undertook this desperate attempt, crept with the engine from house to house, till he got to that next to the castle, fastened it to the gate, set fire to it, and escaped unhurt! The gate was then burst open, and the garrison, finding it impossible to make any further resistance, surrendered the castle upon promise of quarter for their lives. * * * It is greatly to the honour of the victorious commanders that they restrained their soldiers from pillage, at the expense of a gratuity of £500. One can scarcely err in ascribing this noble and uncommon act of mercy to Colonel Mytton’s solicitude for the welfare of his neighbours. The Earl dispatched intelligence of his success to the Parliament. His letter was read to the House of Commons, on the 27thJune, giving an account of his taking the town and castle of Oswaldstree, with 400 prisoners and 300 arms. Thanks were voted to him for this his good service, and former testimonies of affection to the house.” The circumstantial narrative proceeds to state that “his Lordship returned, after this exploit, to his main army at Drayton,” and left Colonel Mytton in defence of the town. The fall of Oswestry was a severe blow to the royal party. Besides opening a door for the reduction of North Wales to the power of the Parliament, it lowered them in the scale of public opinion, a loss, in the declining posture of their affairs, of incalculable importance. Active and energetic as were both Lord Denbigh and Colonel Mytton, in their attack upon Oswestry, still they did not escape the slanders even of their own party. The Earl of Denbigh seems to have felt their calumnies acutely, for a few months after the siege his Lordship wrote a letter to Mytton, vindicating the gallantry of both; which we subjoin:—

“COLL. MITTON,I will not trouble you with the injuries that are offered to you and myselfe, by the Committe of Wem. I am sure you have deserved more of the Parliament then the rest of that Committe. Captaine Clive, as I am informed, reports I was not at the takeing of Oswaldstre, and that my horse stood att too great a distance; I am sure they entred with the foote; but the false representations of passages heere shall not divert me from those occasions that may fully expresse me to be

“COLL. MITTON,

I will not trouble you with the injuries that are offered to you and myselfe, by the Committe of Wem. I am sure you have deserved more of the Parliament then the rest of that Committe. Captaine Clive, as I am informed, reports I was not at the takeing of Oswaldstre, and that my horse stood att too great a distance; I am sure they entred with the foote; but the false representations of passages heere shall not divert me from those occasions that may fully expresse me to be

Your faithfull frend and servant,DENBIGH.”

“Condor, 29th Oct. 1644.”

At this period the King’s position was critical and alarming. In the early part of the month he determined to take refuge within the walls of Shrewsbury, in his march through Worcester and Bewdley. Waller, the parliamentary leader, hearing of Charles’s movements, broke up from Oxford, and hastened in the direction of Shropshire. On this intelligence the King left Shrewsbury, and retraced his steps. The battle of Copredy Bridge (June 29th) terminated in the defeat of the parliamentary forces; and in July the Earl of Denbigh, encouraged by his success at Oswestry, drew his forces towards Shrewsbury, butwas repulsed by the royalist army, with a loss of 120 of his men. The King’s defeat at Marston Moor (July 3rd) added, however, to his disasters and dangers. The whole of Shropshire was in arms, and jeopardy and distress stared every man in the face.

Among the prisoners taken in the late disaster at Oswestry was Francis Newport, Esq., who had served both in the short and long Parliaments. The historians of Shrewsbury have furnished us with an interesting account of this distinguished man:—

“Mr. Newport was son and heir of Sir Richard Newport, of High Ercall, one of the knights of the shire. This young gentleman was but just eligible to serve in parliament, having arrived at full age only on the 23rd day of the preceding February. He manifested the same ardent loyalty which actuated his father: and ventured, with rare but honourable gallantry, to vote for the acquittal of Lord Strafford, at a time when such votes exposed those who gave them to no small personal hazard; the populace, with their usual toleration of sentiments differing from their own, denouncing all such, fifty-six in number, asStraffordians; and exposing their names to execration and danger by public placards. Mr. Newport was soon expelled from the house as amalignant; appeared in arms against the parliament; and was among the prisoners taken at Oswestry, on the capture of that town by the Earl of Denbigh and Colonel Mytton. It is needless to say that he suffered very considerably in his estate: being obliged to compound in the large sum of £5284, in addition to £3287, and £170 a year extorted from his father for the same crime of loyalty. Yet though attached to the monarchy, he was friendly to the rights of the subject; and it is not a little remarkable, that he who had suffered so deeply for the first Charles, was so much disgusted by the base and arbitary measures of the two succeeding kings, by the last of whom he had the honour of being dismissed from the office of lord lieutenant of this county; that he was agreat promoter of the Revolution, and was excepted, by the abdicated monarch, from his general pardon. He was created earl of Bradford by king William; and died Sept., 1708, in the eighty-ninth year of his age.”

The town of Oswestry was now in the hands of the parliamentarians, under the temporary Governorship of Colonel Mytton, but was not long permitted to remain quietly in the power of the victors. Only one short week elapsed before a formidable attempt was made by part of the royalist army, under Colonel Marrow, a skilful and intrepid commander, to retake the town, and drive the parliamentary forces from their position. Colonel Marrow invested the town with 3,500 infantry, and 1,500 cavalry, and maintained a close siege for the three following days. This sudden assault greatly embarrassed Colonel Mytton, whose only hope for relief was from Sir Thomas Myddleton, his kinsman by marriage, who was then stationed at Knutsford, in Cheshire, more than fifty miles distant. Colonel Mytton, however, succeeded in making Sir Thomas acquainted with his position in less than twelve hours from the commencement of the royalist attack; and the gallant knight, who was heartily engaged in the parliamentary cause, immediately mustered three regiments, namely, Booth’s, Mainwaring’s, and Croxen’s, with Major Lothian at the head of the reserve, and marching onwards with all speed, reached in two days within sight of Oswestry—it is supposed between Halston and Whittington. During this interval of time the royalists had not obtained full possession of the town, though consisting, as Sir Thomas Myddleton says, “of the most valiant commanders and soldiers, drawn out of the garrisons of Chester, Cheshire, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, Ludlow, Denbighshire, Flintshire, and other places.” They had possessed themselves of the Church, but had made no inroad upon the Castle. Myddleton’s approach having been made known, Colonel Marrow marched out from the town, determined to attack him before his troops could recruit themselvesafter their long march. “They had taken the passage of water neere to Whittington,” says Sir Thomas, in his letter to Lenthall, the Speaker, “and very furiously assaulted and charged us, but were repulsed and forced to retire, through the courage of our horse, who most courageously entertained the enemy. Three several times the skirmish was doubtful; either side being forced so often to retreat. But in the end, our foot forces, coming up, relieved the horse, beat back the enemy, and pursued them with such force, that our horse being thereby encouraged, which indeed was formerly weary, joining with the foot, they put the enemy to an absolute flight, in which we pursued them five miles towards Shrewsbury, to a place called ‘Felton Heath,’ and where we remained after their flight, again masters of the field. In the skirmish with the enemy, and in the pursuite, we lost several of our horse, some of our troopers, but never a footman, which I am yet informed of. As for the enemy they lost several stout men; had many of them taken prisoners, some of them being of great quality, as the Lord Newport’s eldest son; and besides, in their flight, such was their haste, that we found in our pursuite the highway as it were strewed with bread, cheese, bacon, and other good provisions; clothes, and such necessary appurtenances to an army, besides some whole veals and muttons, new killed.” Sir Thomas adds, that “his forces followed up their blow nearly to Shrewsbury, and that Majors Manley and Whitney were afterwards taken under the walls of that town, in pursuite of them.”

This affair closed the struggle between the royalist and parliamentary forces for the possession of Oswestry. On the very day on which Sir Thomas Myddleton raised the siege, Prince Rupert was signally defeated at Marston Moor, with the loss of ten thousand men killed and taken prisoners. Colonel Mytton must subsequently have delegated his command as temporary Governor of Oswestry, as we find him soon afterwards actively engaged in commanding the parliamentarytroops in the conquest of Shrewsbury. That event happened early in 1645, when the town was placed in the hands of the parliamentarians. At this period we find Mytton named, in several public documents, as Major-General in the parliamentary army, and some time afterwards as Commander-in-chief of the forces in North Wales.

All the historical records referring to this period give evidence of the arduous duties of General Mytton, and of the difficulties which he had suffered in maintaining his hold upon Oswestry. A letter which we here give indicates the straits he was in, and at the same time the friendly offers of support made to him in the county. The letter is from a Mr. Edward Mynshull, of Bearstone, near Drayton:—

“HonobleSr,I came to Drayton, hearinge you were there, butt unfortunately mist of you, yorhonor lyeinge in Stafforde the night before; I have since then waited yorretorne from London, haveinge 30 able men in readiness, and 20 of them well armed, to doe yorhonor servise. I have kepte them together upon my owne charge, and should have bin glad they might have bin accepted in Ossestrie, to doe duty for theire free quarters till yorhonor had returned. I motioned this to Major Goldegay, butt itt could nott be granted without an order from the Comitte. Sr,I am resolved to doe you servise, or no man; and for my fidelity, I will engage £400, paid in Shropshire, and if you please, as much in Cheshire; if yorhonor please, I could wish to have a comission sent me by the first, because I only tooke itt in direction from yorhonor, and whether thatt may suporte me in yorhonor’s absence, (should I be questioned) I make a doubte of. Sr,my request is, I may have order by the first, to martch to Osestree, where I and my men will doe duty for free quarters, (requireinge noe pay) till yorhonor retorneth; and lett me receive order from Major Goldegay to thatt purpose, if you soe please, for were I settled in a garrison, I could have men sufficient. I beseech yorhonor retorne me yorpleasure by the first, and I shall willingly embrace yorcommands; if yorhonor send to Hugh Bate, Shoemaker, in Wem, he will convey yorletter to Mr. Jon. Grosvenor, in Berson, from whence itt will come safe to me. Sr,I pray for yorhonors prosperity and safe retorne, and whilst I live I shall remaineAtt yorservise,EDWARDE MYNSHULL.”“Berson, April 25th, 1645.”

“HonobleSr,

I came to Drayton, hearinge you were there, butt unfortunately mist of you, yorhonor lyeinge in Stafforde the night before; I have since then waited yorretorne from London, haveinge 30 able men in readiness, and 20 of them well armed, to doe yorhonor servise. I have kepte them together upon my owne charge, and should have bin glad they might have bin accepted in Ossestrie, to doe duty for theire free quarters till yorhonor had returned. I motioned this to Major Goldegay, butt itt could nott be granted without an order from the Comitte. Sr,I am resolved to doe you servise, or no man; and for my fidelity, I will engage £400, paid in Shropshire, and if you please, as much in Cheshire; if yorhonor please, I could wish to have a comission sent me by the first, because I only tooke itt in direction from yorhonor, and whether thatt may suporte me in yorhonor’s absence, (should I be questioned) I make a doubte of. Sr,my request is, I may have order by the first, to martch to Osestree, where I and my men will doe duty for free quarters, (requireinge noe pay) till yorhonor retorneth; and lett me receive order from Major Goldegay to thatt purpose, if you soe please, for were I settled in a garrison, I could have men sufficient. I beseech yorhonor retorne me yorpleasure by the first, and I shall willingly embrace yorcommands; if yorhonor send to Hugh Bate, Shoemaker, in Wem, he will convey yorletter to Mr. Jon. Grosvenor, in Berson, from whence itt will come safe to me. Sr,I pray for yorhonors prosperity and safe retorne, and whilst I live I shall remaine

Att yorservise,EDWARDE MYNSHULL.”

“Berson, April 25th, 1645.”

The fall of Shrewsbury into the power of the Parliament was marked by “a solemn thanksgiving throughout the City of London,” on the 12th March; Mytton was summoned to appear before the House of Commons on the 29th of that month, and “Master Speaker, in the name, and by the command of the whole House, gave him hearty thanks for his many and faithfull services done to the state; giving him all encouragement to persist in the same: especially for that gallant service of Shrewsbury; assuring him that he shall never want the encouragement of the House of Parliament in his undertakings.”

General Mytton had evidently embarked all his energies in the parliamentary cause; yet notwithstanding the tribute paid to him by the Commons, it does not appear that he obtained from that source any more substantial honours. This neglect seems to have given him much pain. A letter to him from the Duke of Northumberland, about this period, shews that even the Governorship of Oswestry was not actually accorded to him till late in the year 1645. The letter we subjoin:—

“Sr,By an indisposition in my health, I have not beene able for some dayes to attend the Committie of both kingdomes, so as I can not give you so good an account of your businesse as I desired, but I heare that a commission for your being governor of Oswallds-tree is alreadie signed; to-morrow I shall make a further enquirie after this particular, and if it be in my power to contribute any thing towards your satisfaction, none shall more readily assist you thenYour very affectionate freind and servant,“London, Nov. 21, 1645.”NORTHUMBERLAND.”“For my very loveing Freind, Col. Mytton.”

“Sr,

By an indisposition in my health, I have not beene able for some dayes to attend the Committie of both kingdomes, so as I can not give you so good an account of your businesse as I desired, but I heare that a commission for your being governor of Oswallds-tree is alreadie signed; to-morrow I shall make a further enquirie after this particular, and if it be in my power to contribute any thing towards your satisfaction, none shall more readily assist you then

Your very affectionate freind and servant,

“London, Nov. 21, 1645.”

NORTHUMBERLAND.”

“For my very loveing Freind, Col. Mytton.”

The conquest of Shrewsbury, by the parliamentary troops, is generally acknowledged to have been achieved by the gallantry and superior tactics of General Mytton; and havingaccomplished so signal a service for his party, he naturally expected, now that the Governorship of that town was vacant, that the office would he conferred upon him. His ancient relation to the town, his ancestors having been inhabitants and burgesses for upwards of four centuries, added strength to his claim. All his important services to the Parliament were, however, of no weight, and the Governorship was bestowed upon another man. We are told that “Colonel Mytton’s politics were getting very fast out of fashion. He had sided with the Parliament only for the limitation of prerogative, not for the subversion of the monarchy. The Presbyterians, to whom, it appears, he belonged, had no insurmountable objections to the office of a king, provided he was under their controul: or to a national establishment of religion, if its revenues were at their disposal. But those who commence important changes in a state have seldom the satisfaction of reaping the fruit of their labours. Spirits more ardent, with views more extensive, step in between them and the consummation of their designs.” With Sir William Waller, another of the ablest and most successful commanders of the Presbyterian party, he could say, “after the expence of so much blood and treasure, all the difference between our former and present estate is this, that before-time, under the complaint of a slavery we lived like freemen; and now, under the notion of a freedom, we live like slaves, enforced by continual taxes and oppressions, to maintain and feed on our miseries.”

Although General Mytton had been thus ungratefully treated by the Parliament, he still occupied his military position, for we find that in 1648 he was engaged with Sir Thomas Myddleton in the attack upon Caernarvonshire and Anglesey. In June of that year the Speaker of the House of Commons communicated to him a letter, highly approving his “good and faithfull service” against “Sir John Owen and his rebellious crewe.” The letter referred to is a curiosity, as itshows the blasphemous freedom which Cromwell’s parliament took with the holy name ofGod:—

“Sir,I received a letter subscribed by yourself and the Governor of Conway, wherein you gave an account of the late successe wherewith God hath beene pleased to blesse the forces under both yorcommands and conductes in yorlate expedition into Carnarvonshire, against Sir John Owen and his rebellious crewe, wchI have imparted to the house, and hath beene there read. Yorgood and faithfull service in that expedition is soe well represented, that I am comanded, as from the house and in their name, to returne thanks for the same, wchhereby I doe, and you are desired to do the like to those officers and souldiers under the charge and comand wchGod hath beene pleased to make instrumentall in the obteyning of such a seasonable mercy, and withall to represent to the house what course (like to be effectual) may bee taken for remunerating ye officers and souldiers for their good service. This beeing all I have in comand at present, I shall only add that I amYorassured loveing freind,WM. LENTHALL,Speaker.”“June the 13th, 1648.”

“Sir,

I received a letter subscribed by yourself and the Governor of Conway, wherein you gave an account of the late successe wherewith God hath beene pleased to blesse the forces under both yorcommands and conductes in yorlate expedition into Carnarvonshire, against Sir John Owen and his rebellious crewe, wchI have imparted to the house, and hath beene there read. Yorgood and faithfull service in that expedition is soe well represented, that I am comanded, as from the house and in their name, to returne thanks for the same, wchhereby I doe, and you are desired to do the like to those officers and souldiers under the charge and comand wchGod hath beene pleased to make instrumentall in the obteyning of such a seasonable mercy, and withall to represent to the house what course (like to be effectual) may bee taken for remunerating ye officers and souldiers for their good service. This beeing all I have in comand at present, I shall only add that I am

Yorassured loveing freind,WM. LENTHALL,Speaker.”

“June the 13th, 1648.”

Lenthall, the Speaker, was profuse, as we have shewn, in compliments, but still no substantial mark of favour upon General Mytton was bestowed. The Committee to whom the appointment of Governor of Shrewsbury Castle had been referred had long before found “reasons of weight to put another” in that office, after having held it in their own hands for some time. In 1647 the Governorship was filled by Humphrey Mackworth, Esq., of Betton, a Presbyterian, and Colonel in the army, who occupied the post till his death, in 1654, and having been one of Cromwell’s Privy Council, was buried in Henry VII.’s Chapel in Westminster Abbey, on the 26th December, with great magnificence. He was succeeded in office at Shrewsbury by Thomas Hunt, Esq., representative of the town in Parliament, and a Colonel in the army. Mytton retired to London, from what immediate cause there is no record to show; but some writers assert that he resigned his command. In 1651 we find that the Parliament again solicited Major-General Mytton’s services, the followingletter having been forwarded to him by the President Bradshawe. The kingdom was disturbed at this period by the Scottish Covenanters, under the nominal command of Charles II.:—

“Sr,The Scotts army being now entred into England, and bending their course towards those parts where wee know you have a good interest, wee conceive your presence there may bee of use for the service of the Commonwealth; wee therefore desire you forthwith to repaire into the Countie of Salop, and there, with the rest of your fellow Commissioners, doe your best endeavour, and put out your interest there for the raiseing of what force of horse and foot you can, for the service of the Commonwealth in this present exigency of affaires.Signed in the name and by order of the Councell ofState, appointed by authority of Parliament,JO: BRADSHAWE,Prsidt.”“Whitehall, 14th August, 1651.”“For Major General Thomas Mytton.”

“Sr,

The Scotts army being now entred into England, and bending their course towards those parts where wee know you have a good interest, wee conceive your presence there may bee of use for the service of the Commonwealth; wee therefore desire you forthwith to repaire into the Countie of Salop, and there, with the rest of your fellow Commissioners, doe your best endeavour, and put out your interest there for the raiseing of what force of horse and foot you can, for the service of the Commonwealth in this present exigency of affaires.

Signed in the name and by order of the Councell ofState, appointed by authority of Parliament,JO: BRADSHAWE,Prsidt.”

“Whitehall, 14th August, 1651.”

“For Major General Thomas Mytton.”

Most probably by this time General Mytton had grown tired with the hard toils of intestine warfare, and become disgusted with the faithlessness of the men whom he had so ardently and faithfully served; for we do not find that he complied with Bradshawe’s letter, or took any further part in public affairs. He died in the metropolis in the year 1656, and his body was taken down to Shrewsbury, and interred in St. Chad’s Church there.

It is unnecessary here to do more than merely advert to the unhappy close of Charles I.’s reign, the triumphs of Cromwell, and the bold and manly efforts made by Charles II. to obtain the Crown which had been so violently wrested from his father. Although Cromwell had made himself Lord Protector of England, Scotland, and Ireland, yet he reposed not on a bed of roses. “Every party in the kingdom soon became disgusted with Cromwell’s dominion. The royalists were indignant to see the ancient monarchy usurped by an upstart who had no hereditary claim upon their allegiance;the republicans were mortified to see all their blood and efforts, which had been spent for the setting-up of the Commonwealth, lavished only for the support of a government which, in everything but the name, was a most despotic monarchy; the Presbyterians were chagrined at the favour of their rivals, the Independents, and at a general toleration of every religious denomination (except the Church of England).” Conspiracies and plots were hatched in many parts of the land; and the Protector was kept on the alert by daily intelligence that the exiled king would challenge the usurper, and claim the British throne as soon as a favourable opportunity presented itself for so bold an enterprise. Cromwell, however, after various struggles with the royalist forces, was summoned to “the house appointed for all men living.” He was succeeded, for a brief period, by his son Richard, who speedily retired from public life. General Monk, who had been an intrepid commander both of the royalist and the parliamentary forces, and who possessed powerful influence in the country, on the death of the Protector Cromwell wisely threw the weight of that influence into the royalist scale, and adopted measures at once to bring back Charles II. from France to England. Upon that joyful event all ranks hastened to return to their allegiance, and on the 29th of May, 1660, Charles II. set his foot again upon British soil, and immediately assumed the functions of sovereignty.

During the events to which we have been adverting the town of Oswestry suffered much privation and distress by the feuds and divisions into which all classes of men were thrown. A letter from Mr. John Griffith to Major-General Mytton, dated January 7th, 1650, shows that Oswestry was enduring much hardship. The letter, which is copied from the Halston MSS., is as follows:—

“Honor’d Sir,I receaved a note from * * * * to write unto yorhonor concerning our sufferings. I presume yorhonorknowes the maner of our sufferings, and how we may be releeved is better known to you then to us. The Baylifes and the rest of the sufferinge people of Oswestree depende much upon your assistance, and hope yorhonor will have a fitt opportunity to doe this poor towne good. * * * I shall make bould to put yorhonor in mind of your promise to draw a petition to the Parliament wthyorowne handes, wchwe all hope you will doe before yorreturne, and then yorhonor shall further ingadge the whole towne ever to pray for yorhonor, and especiallyYorservant,JOHN GRIFFITH.”“Osw., the 7th of January, 1650.”“To the Honrable Major Generall Mytton, at London.”

“Honor’d Sir,

I receaved a note from * * * * to write unto yorhonor concerning our sufferings. I presume yorhonorknowes the maner of our sufferings, and how we may be releeved is better known to you then to us. The Baylifes and the rest of the sufferinge people of Oswestree depende much upon your assistance, and hope yorhonor will have a fitt opportunity to doe this poor towne good. * * * I shall make bould to put yorhonor in mind of your promise to draw a petition to the Parliament wthyorowne handes, wchwe all hope you will doe before yorreturne, and then yorhonor shall further ingadge the whole towne ever to pray for yorhonor, and especially

Yorservant,JOHN GRIFFITH.”

“Osw., the 7th of January, 1650.”

“To the Honrable Major Generall Mytton, at London.”

There are no records extant showing precisely the position of civil and military affairs, as regards the town of Oswestry, in the struggles of Charles II. for the Crown. The parliamentary party held firm possession of all towns which they had taken, and against Charles they fought as fiercely as against his murdered father. Whatsoever the position of Oswestry was at the period to which we are referring, that of a valiant neighbour, Sir Thomas Myddleton, of Chirk Castle, was dangerous and deeply painful. In 1659, upon the royalists of Cheshire, headed by Sir George Booth, declaring in favour of Charles, the venerable old man, then eighty years of age, decided in favour of the ancient constitution, believing monarchy to be indispensable to the settlement of the nation, and proclaimed Charles II. at Wrexham. For this act he suffered severely, but was named afterwards as Commander-in-chief of the Counties of North Wales, and as Governor of Shrewsbury, although this latter nomination seems to have embarrassed Sir Edward Hyde, Chief Minister of Charles II., as likely to clash with the views of his friend Lord Newport, who had ever been a staunch friend to the royalist cause.

The events of public interest that occurred in connection with the town subsequent to the Restoration were “few and far between.” The most important act in Charles II.’s reign was his grant in 1673 of a Charter, which, looking atthe privileges it confers upon the town, is considered by some to be the Magna Charta of Oswestry. Its importance to the borough, as its provisions are still acted upon in the leading Law-Court of the town, justifies us in giving a correct abridgment of it:—

was granted

“to the ancient Borough and Corporation of Oswestry, alias Oswaldstrey, in the County of Salop: That they be encorporated by the name ofThe Mayor,Aldermen,Common-council-men,and Burgesses of Oswestry; and that they are empowered to purchase lands to them and their heirs for ever, and to give and bequeath or otherwise dispose of the same: That the said corporation may have one common seal for dispatching of all business concerning the said borough; and to change and make new their same seal, as often as they shall think convenient: That there be Twelve Aldermen and Fifteen Common-council-men; whereof one of the said aldermen is to be Steward: and that whoever is chosen steward, must come in as an alderman. And that there shall be chosen a discreet person for Recorder, well learned in the law, who must be one of the Common-council-men: That the said borough may have one house of meeting, to be called the Guild-hall of the said town; and that the mayor, aldermen, common-council-men, steward, and recorder may meet there, or in any other convenient place within the said borough, for making, establishing, &c. any laws, orders, &c. for the better government of the said corporation; and to declare in what manner the said mayor, &c. may manage themselves in the negociation of the said borough: and that the said mayor, aldermen, &c. or the greatest part of them, may imprison the bodies or impose fines or otherwise, upon all such as shall offend against the said laws, &c. and that the one moiety of the said fines to be levied for the use of the said mayor, aldermen, &c.; and the other moiety to the use of the lord of the manor: provided, such laws, &c. be not repugnant to the laws of the land, or contrary thereto, or prejudicial to the lord of the manor: That Richard Pope, first mayor, continue in his mayoralty from the day of the date hereof, until the next Friday after the feast of St. Michael, the Archangel, 1674, and until another be sworn in his stead. Sir John Trevor, knt.; Morgan Wynne, esquire; Edward Owen, Richard Edwards, Richard Lloyd, the aforesaid Richard Pope, gentlemen; Gabriel Edwards, woollen-draper; Hugh Price, woollen-draper; John Jones, mercer; Richard Jones, John Blodwell, gentlemen; and John Lloyd, mercer, to be the first aldermen; and to continue in their office during life, unless for just cause any of them shall be removed by the mayor, aldermen, common-council-men, &c. or thegreatest part of them.—Richard Price, brewer; Richard Jones, mercer; John Glover, tanner; Richard Jones, glover; Edwd. Evans, apothecary; John Jones, glover; John Muckleston, shoemaker; Thomas Edwards, gentleman; Thomas Edwards, baker; Nathaniel Jones, brewer; Hugh Edwards, shoemaker; Timothy George, mercer; Thomas Vaughan, chandler; William Price, butcher; and Thomas Felton, brasier, to be the first common-council-men; and to continue in office during life, unless removed as aforesaid. The mayor, &c. to meet on the next Friday after Michaelmas, yearly, and to choose at that time, out of the common-council-men, a new mayor; and to swear him in then, if present, or within twenty-one days next after such election, before the old mayor or (in his absence) before two or more of the aldermen of the said borough. If the mayor happen to die, or be removed out of his place for not well demeaning himself, or for any other just cause, before the expiration of the said year, that then and in such case, the aldermen, and common-council-men, &c. or the major part of them, shall elect and choose another mayor for the executing the said office of mayoralty during the remainder only of the said year. And upon the decease of any aldermen or common-council-men, to choose others to make up the number; administering to them their oaths for the executing of their places: and that they shall be sworn in the presence of the mayor, or (in case of his absence) of the aldermen, common-council-men, or the major part of them. In case the mayor be sick or absent, that the mayor may constitute and appoint one of the aldermen to be his deputy; and that being duly sworn, he may officiate the place of mayoralty during such sickness or absence, as fully and effectually in every respect as the said mayor might or could have done personally. When Morgan Wynne, the present Recorder, dies, or should happen to be dismissed, that the mayor, aldermen, &c., choose another, able and experienced in the law, within one month after such decease or dismission. The mayor, coroner, steward and recorder, during the time and term of holding their places, shall be Justices of the Peace, &c., and that each and every of them are Clerks of the Market, to settle weights and measures, and all other laws and ordinances incident thereto; and to officiate the same as fully and effectually as any other of his Majesty’s justices of the peace might or could do. Sir John Trevor, knight; Robert Owen, and Edward Kinaston, esquires, or any of them, to swear the first mayor; and that the mayor being sworn, he is to swear the coroner, steward, recorder, &c. That the mayor, steward, and recorder, or any two of them (whereof the mayor to be one) may keep a Quarter Sessions for all offences, as fully and effectually as the justices of the said county of Salop may do; and that any one of them may commit to the common gaol of the said county any person accused of treason, murder, man-slaughter, or felony, whatsoever: and that the justices of the said county have no power to intermeddle with the said borough upon any cause whatsoever. That themayor (for the time being), shall choose any inhabitants of the borough, Constables; and to swear them in accordingly. The mayor to choose two Sergeants, to attend upon him or his deputy, when required; and to continue for one year (if they well demean themselves): and that the said sergeants shall carry two maces with his Majesty’s and successors’ arms, and the arms of the lord of the manor thereon, in their hands or upon their shoulders bare-headed, before the mayor, when required: and that the said sergeants shall be sworn by the mayor, for the due executing of all precepts, warrants, &c. The last mayor to be Coroner, who shall have as full power to officiate as any other coroner in any of his Majesty’s counties hath, or may have; and not to execute his power before he be sworn before the mayor or his deputy: and upon the death of any coroner, the mayor, aldermen, &c., to choose another. A Court of Record to be kept every Friday, at the guild-hall, before the mayor or his deputy; and to try all actions and causes whatsoever, as fully as the bailiffs and burgesses formerly did, or as fully as any corporation in his Majesty’s kingdom do, or did formerly: and that the mayor, &c. shall have to their use the one moiety of the issues, amerciaments, &c.; and the other moiety thereof, to the use of the lord of the manor. John Morral to be Common Clerk of the Borough, and Clerk of the Court; and may have a deputy, to be appointed by the steward: that the common clerk to be nominated by the lord of the manor, and to be sworn, as well as all other officers by the mayor: that if he shall not reside in the said borough, then he shall employ, in his absence, an honest and able attorney of the said court, to be approved of by the steward: and the said attorney shall officiate in the time of his absence.—Six Attornies to be of the court: whereof four to be chosen by the mayor, and two by the steward. One Marshal, or Crier to be chosen by the mayor. The mayor, aldermen, &c. to have within the borough a Gaol or Prison, for detaining of all prisoners, committed by the mayor, steward, or recorder, or any of them: and that the mayor, recorder, clerk of the market, common clerk, marshal, keepers of the prison, and sergeants (for the time being) shall receive such Fees, &c. as the bailiffs, &c. of Ludlow, and the said borough, have hitherto received. [Ludlow fees are half of the Common Pleas.] All burgesses and other inhabitants of the said borough to pay scot and lot, and to be assessed for the maintenance, good order, and further profit of the same; and in default of payment, distresses to be laid upon their goods.—The mayor, &c. to have power to elect persons who have served seven years’ apprenticeship, or that have been householders (paying scot and lot) seven years within the said borough, Burgesses: and with the approbation of the steward, to make any other person burgess of the said borough; and so continue, unless for any just cause he be expelled by the mayor, &c. No Stranger or Foreigner shall exercise any Trade in the borough (except it be in time of fair) unless he be a burgess; nor keep any shop, without special licence from the mayor,aldermen, &c. or the major part of them: the mayor, &c. to punish such foreigners and strangers by fines, and to distress upon their goods, in default of payment. The mayor and corporation, and burgesses, Exempt from serving on Juries out of the borough, at assizes or quarter-sessions. The corporation to have return of writs; and all which returns to be made by the mayor. No high-sheriff, or any of his officers, to enter the liberty, unless in defect of the mayor for the time being. The mayor or clerk to receive recognizances, according to form of Statute Merchant, or Acton Burnell; and to make execution, &c. as fully as any other town can do, by virtue of the said statute: and that there shall be a seal for the sealing of those recognizances. The mayor and corporation may purchase lands, &c. not exceeding £50 a year, but such as are not heldin capiteor knight’s service. The said borough is to enjoy two Markets weekly, for ever; that is, one on Wednesday and the other on Friday. To have a Fair on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th days of March, yearly; and the fairs on the 1st and 2nd of May, the 4th and 5th of August, and the 29th and 30th of November, to be continued as heretofore. And if any of the said fairs shall fall upon the Lord’s-day, then the same to be kept on the Monday following. The mayor, &c. may hold a Court of Pie-poudre at the time of the fairs; and to take the usual tolls of markets and fairs—all rights, &c. of the lord of the manor excepted.”

The privileges secured to the inhabitants of the borough by this Charter must, at the time of its being granted, have been very valuable, and no doubt contributed greatly to the good government and prosperity of the town, during subsequent times. Some of such privileges have been superseded by the provisions of the Municipal Corporation Act, 5 & 6, William 4th, cap. 76, entitled “An Act to provide for the Regulation of Municipal Corporations in England and Wales,” and other modern enactments; but others still remain, although the value and convenience of them appear in some degree to be overlooked. The Charter secures some peculiar privileges with respect to trade which may not probably harmonize with modern views and notions; but the privileges of trying at Quarter Sessions all offences, except felonies, committed within the borough, and of suing for debts, unlimited in amount, in the Court of Record, ought not to be regarded otherwise than as precious relics of byegone times. It is true, that the Court of QuarterSessions has been constantly and regularly held by the most able Recorder, J. R. Kenyon, Esq.; but the Court of Record has of late years been so seldom resorted to, that on a late occasion, when a cause was tried before it, a local newspaper referred to it with special wonder, hinting its surprise that, in a place where the weapons of legal warfare were so easily obtained, the inhabitants should so long have ceased to use them, and to remain in peace amongst themselves, without any legal strife in a Court of Record. Although, however, debts without limit, as regards amount, may be sued for, the final process of the Court is confined to the borough, and cannot be put in force beyond its boundary; and this circumstance, connected also with the facilities for the recovery of debts afforded by the Small Debts Act, has rendered resort to the Court of Record less frequent than, under other circumstances, it doubtless would have been; still, to have it is a privilege, as is also the exemption from serving on Juries at the Assizes, or County Quarter Sessions, secured by the Charter.

TheRestorationbrought with it, of course, the ascendancy of loyal subjects and monarchical principles in all parts of the realm. Charles, however, did not make the wisest use of the power and influence he had newly acquired; and the closing hours of his life proved that his religious principles, unfixed and vacillating, were ill adapted to the requirements of the age. Howsoever much other parts of the kingdom were disturbed during this reign, the town of Oswestry would seem to have resumed a tranquil position: the injury and damage sustained in it during the many years of disquietude and war were partially restored; the ancient Church was gradually repaired; but the Castle, so dilapidated and broken down, was permitted to lie in ruins; the crown made no effort to restore it; and by degrees its shattered walls and fallen columns were carried away by nocturnal depredators, until at length the vestiges of the fortress consisted of little more than the mound still left in our sight.

In 1681, only four years before Charles’s death, a polemic scene was enacted in Oswestry, which, from the celebrity of the parties engaged in it, forms no uninteresting feature in the history of the town. Charles’s reign was marked by odious political intolerance and injustice. He aimed at absolutism, and was as regardless of religious liberty as of religion itself. The controversy to which we have alluded occurred in the Guildhall of Oswestry, in September, 1681, and was conducted throughout in a spirit of candour and moderation not frequently to be witnessed in that turbulent period. The leading parties engaged were Dr. Lloyd, Bishop of St. Asaph (the prelate who preached the first sermon in the Chapel Royal to William III.), and the distinguished Philip Henry, of Broad Oak, Flintshire (father of the erudite and evangelical Matthew Henry, the Commentator on the Bible). Other nonconformist Ministers were present, and took part in the proceedings, especially Mr. James Owen, then of Oswestry—but afterwards of Shrewsbury Seminary for the education of Dissenting Ministers—a man of considerable acquirements and genuine piety. The Bishop, upon his elevation to the episcopal chair, was desirous of securing the conformity of those who dissented, and “that he might do it with the cords of a man, he resolved to reason the matter with them, and endeavour to effect their conviction by discourse, in which he had a very great facility both by learning and temper.” The account from which we derive these particulars goes on to state, that “one of the most eminent nonconformist ministers in his diocese was Mr. James Owen, of Oswestry. The Bishop had several interviews with Mr. Owen in private. At last he appointed a meeting to be held in the Town Hall, Oswestry, on Tuesday, the 27th of September, 1681, at which he requested Mr. Owen to give an account ‘by what right he exercised the ministry, not having episcopal ordination.’ He also directed him to procure any other ministers he could to assist him, for ‘he would be glad to hear what any of them had to say for themselves.’ Mr. Owen sought the co-operationof Mr. Henry, which, after much hesitation, was granted; to whom also was joined Mr. Jonathan Roberts, ‘a plain man of great integrity, and a very good scholar.’ On the day appointed the Bishop made his appearance with the famous Henry Dodwell. In those days of intolerance, some parties had refrained from engaging in the controversy, ‘lest it might be prejudicial to their liberty. The Bishop, however, was pleased to promise that no thing which should be said, by way of argument, should be any way turned to the prejudice of the disputants, nor advantage taken of it to give them trouble.’ There was convened a large number of the gentry and clergy of the neighbourhood, the magistrates of the town, and a great concourse of people. The discussion lasted from two in the afternoon till between seven and eight at night. ‘Much was said, pro and con, touching the identity of bishops and presbyters, the bishoping and unbishoping of Timothy and Titus, &c. It was managed with a great deal of liberty, and not under the strict laws of disputation.’ ‘The Bishop won golden opinions from all parties on account of the gravity, calmness, and evenness of spirit’ with which he conducted his part; while he seems to have been so much gratified with the temper of his opponents, as to have formed from that time a most intimate friendship with Mr. Henry.” The report does not inform us whether the Bishop was convinced by the arguments of the nonconformists. That Philip Henry retained his opinions is undeniable; for he never ceased advocating, with Christian zeal and moderation, the principles of nonconformity. It is gratifying, however, to read of so tolerant and well-conducted a disputation in so persecuting an age; it speaks much in favor of the just and beneficent spirit of Bishop Lloyd.

The reign of James II. offers no particular incident in relation to Oswestry. As a sovereign he was worthless and dangerous. His darling objects were, the establishment, throughout the land, of the Roman Catholic religion, and the restriction of popular freedom. During his brief occupationof the throne he paid a visit to Shrewsbury and Whitchurch; and on his way from the metropolis sojourned at Ludlow for a night, and passed through the Strettons. The people of Shrewsbury had not been favoured with a royal visit for nearly half a century, and were now disposed to give the monarch a cordial reception. All the public functionaries were trained and disciplined as to duty, for an incident had occurred in the royal progress, so ludicrous in character, that the Shrewsbury corporation resolved it should not be re-enacted amid their loyal congratulations. The story to which we refer may be true or fabulous; but it is too good not to be connected with a notice of James’s reign: and, after all, the mayor of the town where the scene is laid, in adopting literally the promptings of the learned recorder, was not, to use a common phrase, “so great a fool as he seemed to be.” If King James had received those promptings in a wise spirit—mirth-exciting as they must have been—he might have been a good sovereign, and had around him loyal and devoted subjects.

The mayor whose absurdities we are about to describe is said to have been both illiterate and dull, incapable of reading or remembering an address. It was settled therefore, says the tale, that the recorder should stand behind him, to set him right if he happened to be out. When they (the corporation) were ushered into the royal presence, and the chief magistrate was about to commence his harangue, as he appeared somewhat sheepish and embarassed, his friendly monitor whispered in his ear, “Hold up your head,sir,and look like a man!” Mistaking this for the beginning of his speech, he boldly stared the king in the face, and roared out, “Hold,up your head,sir,and look like a man!” Alarmed at the frightful blunder just made, the recorder whispered to the chief magistrate (who at this moment must have resembled the celebrated Mayor of Garrat, with two nosegays in his coat), “What the d—l do you mean,sir?” The mayor, as stolid as ever, andnothing abashed, thundered out the recorder’s exclamation as boldly as before. The recorder, indignant and irritated, muttered, “By heavens, sir, you’ll ruin us all!” His worship, taking this to be a continuance of the speech, and still staring his majesty full in the face, with a yet louder voice repeated, “By heavens,sir,you’ll ruin us all!” Even kingly patience could bear this no longer, and rising, his majesty in an angry tone demanded what was the meaning of this jargon? when the recorder laid before him “the facts of the case,” and the king passed the affair by with a gracious smile.

The Revolution of 1688 brought over to England William III.; and his reign was followed by that of “good Queen Anne.” Her reign has been termed the Augustan era of English literature, as it was graced with the polished writings of Sir Isaac Newton, Addison, Steele, Farquar (who laid the scene of his comedy, “The Recruiting Officer,” in Shrewsbury, and who, in his epistle dedicatory, first used the lively sentiment, “To all friends round the Wrekin,” now one of the social laws of Salop), of Vanbrugh, Prior, Pope, Parnell, Garth, Gay,cum multis aliis. Instructed as the nation was by these and other eminent men, still bigotry and enthusiasm were evidenced by many in matters of religion and politics. In the year 1709 the nation was thrown into a gentle ferment by the indiscreet conduct of the government towards an obscure clergyman named Sacheverell (who had long been starving on a poor curacy in London), in consequence of his having preached and published two scurrilous and intemperate sermons, of which red-hot politics were the staple. He was summoned to the bar of the House of Lords, and impeached. The Whig ministry viewed his attacks with alarm, and he was sentenced not to preach for three years. This persecution, as the proceedings of the government were called at once martyrised Sacheverell, who suddenly found himself famous. A gentleman residing in the neighbourhood of Oswestry, RobertLloyd, Esq., of Aston, sympathized with the suffering Sacheverell, and became his friend. Mr. Lloyd had been the doctor’s pupil at Magdalen College, Oxford; and as the rectory of Sylattyn, in his gift, became vacant at this juncture, he presented it to the high-church meteor. This was doubtless a god-send to the doctor, who set off from London, to take possession of his new living, with all the state which a corrupt popularity could give to him. A Tory writer of Queen Anne’s reign tells us that “he entered upon his triumphant progress to Shropshire. He was magnificently entertained at Oxford by the University, and received in the other great towns he passed through (Shrewsbury and Oswestry included) with the loud acclamations and joyful congratulations of the people, upon his deliverance from whig persecution.” In Shrewsbury the crier was sent about to proclaim his arrival, and the bells were rung in honour of the event. As he passed through Oswestry, it is related, the crowd assembled to witness his arrival was so great, that an enthusiastic old woman, a great dabbler in politics and religion, no doubt, was so excited in her endeavours to obtain a sight of the distinguished bigot, that she succeeded only in catching a passing glance at his figure and periwig. “I could see only part of the holy man,” she exclaimed, “but I console myself with having had a sight of his ever-blessed wig as he rode along.” This sort of mummery was not confined to Oswestry. In many towns people were desirous to have their new-born infants christened with a name so revered; which, having been transmitted through succeeding generations, is not yet extinct in this county. On his return to London he met with nothing but laudations, except at Worcester, where, by the direction of Bishop Lloyd, a suitable rebuff was administered to him. Of Dr. Sacheverell nothing more was heard worthy of transcription. Like most other men whose popularity is created by intolerant doctrines in religion or politics, he speedily found that his sudden greatness was as mutable as it was undeserved.

The death of Queen Anne, in 1714, secured to the kingdom the Brunswick Dynasty. The Act of Settlement, passed in the reign of William III., provided that the crown of Great Britain should henceforth be held only by Protestant Princes. James Stuart, Queen Anne’s brother, known more popularly as the Pretender, could not reign in England because he was a Roman Catholic, and George, Duke of Brunswick, and Elector of Hanover, a Protestant Prince, whose mother was grand-daughter of James I., became King of Great Britain. The Brunswick succession has continued till the present time, the united kingdom deriving especial benefits from the reigns of the three Georges, of William IV., and of Queen Victoria. Under the sway of George III. enlarged freedom, civil and religious, was extended to his subjects; arts, science, and commerce flourished, and the people made rapid advancement in religious and moral improvement. The memorable wish of the venerable monarch George III., “That every one of his subjects should read and possess the Bible”—a far more generous sentiment than that of the French King who desired to see the day when every one of his subjects should be able to put a fowl into the pot once a week—was largely realized through the instrumentality of Robert Raikes, Dr. Bell, and Joseph Lancaster, the great promoters of education in the land, and by, also, the foundation of the British and Foreign Bible Society, whose distribution of the Scriptures gave an impulse to religious and benevolent efforts which have been increasing in usefulness and efficiency to the present day. Under the auspices of George IV. the nation derived numerous blessings, deficient as he was of many of the bright qualities that ought to shine in the moral diadem of a British King. The reign of William IV.—the Sailor King, as he has been familiarly but appropriately called—was rendered illustrious by his intense regard for the interests of the people, and his sanction to the Second Great Charter of British rights. Under the mild and gracious rule of our beloved SovereignQueen Victoria, the rights and privileges of Britons are held sacred; literature, arts, and science have acquired “amore than double sway;” commerce and manufactures, in a multiplicity of forms, for the comfort and luxury of mankind, have careered onwards with giant steps, that have astonished and delighted the wisest and the best; the social comforts of all classes of the British community are rendered almost boundless by the progress of invention, the ingenuity of mechanical skill, and the unceasing activity of all industrial pursuits; the unrighteous laws that prohibited the importation of corn have been abolished; free trade in bread has been established with all the nations of the earth; ancient grinding monopolies have been destroyed; national imposts reduced; the just demands of the people speedily granted; harsh feudal laws, carrying with them inhuman punishments, have been blotted out of the Statute-book; “man’s inhumanity to man,” under the sanction of Acts of Parliament, has been softened if not wholly subdued; the just principle of national brotherhood, inculcated by divine precept, has gained vital force; religion has become less sectarian, and more thoroughly Christian in profession and practice; the helping hand of man to his brother man, in the hour of necessity, is seen now more actively at work than ever; the people at large are united as one man, in all great designs of philanthropy and benevolence, and in all puissant combinations against injustice and oppression; ourQueenand her enlightened and virtuousConsortare ever watchful for the country’s weal. The reign ofVictoriais thus far the brightest page of regal history, because it has been pre-eminently the best. We may sum up in the eloquent language of Dr. Southwood Smith:—“We live in a glorious age. The rapidity of the progress of liberal opinion, and I will add, of liberal feeling, within these few years has been unexampled in the history of our race. Sometimes indeed the tide of improvement like the tide of the ocean may appear to have receded; but soon, as if deriving strength from its momentary retreat, slow, majestic, irresistible, it has rolled beyond its former limit; but, unlike its type, it has not returned,and it will not return, to the boundary it has passed.”

Back to Index Next