[Milton-L] Fw: Hanged in their coffins (Milton and Bradshaw in the DNB)

Bob Blair bblair48 at yahoo.com
Sun Mar 4 20:37:43 EST 2012


I'm not sure where you're going with this, Carol, but there is a recent (2010) biography of Bradshaw: http://www.regicide-john-bradshawe.com/index.htm

It's on my list, but I haven't got to it yet.

--- On Sun, 3/4/12, Carol Barton <cbartonphd1 at verizon.net> wrote:

> From: Carol Barton <cbartonphd1 at verizon.net>
> Subject: [Milton-L] Fw: Hanged in their coffins (Milton and Bradshaw in the DNB)
> To: "Milton-L" <milton-l at richmond.edu>
> Date: Sunday, March 4, 2012, 3:09 PM
> Bradshaw,  John, Lord
> Bradshaw  (bap. 1602, d. 1659), lawyer, 
> politician, and regicide, was born at Wibersley, in the
> parish of 
> Stockport, Cheshire, and baptized on 10 December 1602 at St
> Mary's, 
> Stockport, the second surviving son of Henry Bradshaw (d.
> 1654) of 
> Marple Hall and Wibersley, and Catherine Winnington (d.
> 1604) of 
> Offerton in the same county. His grandfather, also Henry,
> descended 
> from a respectable Derbyshire family, was described as a
> yeoman, but 
> having purchased Marple in the break-up of the estate of Sir
> Edward 
> Stanley early in the reign of James VI and I, the Cheshire
> Bradshaws 
> were of comfortable gentry standing.
> 
> Early life
> 
> As a youth Bradshaw is said to have attended Stockport Free
> School, 
> Bunbury School, elsewhere in Cheshire, and Middleton School,
> 
> Lancashire. He entered Gray's Inn on 26 May 1620 and was
> called to the 
> bar on 23 April 1627. Typically described as an obscure
> Cheshire 
> attorney, Bradshaw appears nevertheless to have been at
> least 
> reasonably well connected. His mother's family apparently
> had dealings 
> with Sir Benjamin Rudyard, surveyor of the court of wards.
> In 1630 a 
> John Bradshaw was appointed as steward of the manor of
> Glossop, which 
> belonged to Thomas Howard, earl of Arundel. The manor lay
> close to the 
> Cheshire home of the future lord president, but it has
> proved 
> difficult to establish incontrovertibly whether it was he
> who served 
> the earl. Bradshaw was also related to Sir Humphrey
> Davenport, lord 
> chief baron of the exchequer from 1632.
> 
> Bradshaw was certainly already well connected in his native
> Cheshire, 
> and it was here that his legal career began. He corresponded
> with the 
> Leghs of Lyme, and once took a letter from Sir Peter to the
> earl of 
> Bridgewater. Subsequently he enjoyed the patronage of Sir
> William 
> Brereton, his neighbour and kinsman. Sir George Booth also
> appears to 
> have been well enough disposed towards him. His clients at
> law 
> included the brewers and bakers of Chester; the borough of
> Congleton; 
> and families such as the Fittons of Chester and the Booths
> of Twemlow. 
> He also represented John Milton (to whom he may have been
> related) in 
> a chancery case in 1647, an engagement perhaps typical of
> those which 
> prompted Clarendon's remark that he was 'much employed by
> the 
> factious'  (Clarendon, Hist. rebellion, 4.475). This
> would appear to 
> have marked the beginning of one of Bradshaw's most signal 
> friendships.
> 
> Bradshaw's activities as a lawyer raised him to prominence
> in the 
> affairs of his provincial homeland. In 1637 he became mayor
> of 
> Congleton, and later became high steward there, serving in
> that 
> capacity until May 1656. He was also chosen steward of
> Newcastle under 
> Lyme by the mayor, bailiffs, and burgesses on 31 August
> 1641; he held 
> this office, which entailed certain judicial
> responsibilities in the 
> town, until his death. On 3 January 1638 he married a local
> woman, 
> Mary (bap. 1596, d. in or before 1658), daughter of Thomas
> Marbury of 
> Marbury. Bradshaw's legal practice made him wealthy. By 1640
> he 
> retained no fewer than five servants.
> 
> The civil war
> 
> Lucrative as his legal career had been in peacetime, the
> 1640s were 
> the making of John Bradshaw. He first rose to prominence in
> the City 
> of London in 1643. Against the backdrop of revelations about
> Waller's 
> plot to betray the capital into royalist hands,
> under-sheriff Richard 
> Gibbs died, leaving a vacancy for a judge in the Wood Street
> sheriffs' 
> court. Common council and the court of aldermen vied for the
> right to 
> nominate a successor. On 18 July Alderman John Langham
> nominated 
> Bradshaw for the vacant post, and sought the backing of the
> council. 
> But Bradshaw's appointment was challenged by Richard
> Proctor, the 
> preferred candidate of the lord mayor and court of aldermen.
> On 21 
> September 1643 Bradshaw was accepted as its nominee by the
> common 
> council in preference to the other two candidates, Proctor
> and William 
> Steele, Bradshaw's fellow Cheshireman. On 25 September, the
> day MPs 
> took the solemn league and covenant, Bradshaw was sworn as
> judge 
> accordingly. The resulting legal case in the king's bench
> (after 1649 
> the upper bench) was not resolved in Bradshaw's favour until
> 1656, 
> although he had himself sat on the bench in the sheriffs'
> court since 
> his appointment, and had been authorized to appoint a deputy
> in 1649. 
> The early phase of this dispute also took place against the
> backdrop 
> of an argument among parliamentarian militants over the
> command of 
> militia forces in the City, an argument in which Bradshaw
> appears to 
> have taken a prominent part himself, as well as the debate
> in the City 
> over the principle of the 'general rising', the all-out
> military 
> strategy favoured by 'war party' sympathizers in London.
> 
> Bradshaw entered the national stage as a parliamentarian
> lawyer in the 
> rapidly expanding world of state and administrative
> advocacy. His 
> first important engagement was as counsel to the committee
> for 
> compounding with delinquents. Such was the importance of his
> role at 
> the heart of this sensitive business that by January 1647 he
> was 
> referred to as being 'as it were Attorney General' 
> (BL, M636/8, 
> Verney Correspondence, unfoliated). That year, he also acted
> as 
> counsel to the committee for the visitation of Oxford.
> 
> It was in the service of the state that Bradshaw now came to
> make a 
> real impact on national affairs. On 23 October 1644, the
> third 
> anniversary of the outbreak of the Irish rising, Bradshaw
> joined the 
> legal team appointed by the Commons on the king's behalf for
> 
> prosecution of the Irish rebel Lord Maguire. In June 1647 he
> was 
> junior counsel in the trial of Judge David Jenkins. He acted
> as 
> principal counsel when Lieutenant-Colonel John Lilburne
> successfully 
> appealed the Star Chamber judgment against him before the
> House of 
> Lords on 13 February 1646.
> 
> It has been suggested that Bradshaw's retention on
> Lilburne's behalf 
> reflected partisan calculation by an Independent faction at
> 
> Westminster working at this time to protect the future
> Leveller as 
> part of their political warfare with the presbyterians. When
> the lower 
> house began to recruit its membership upon the gradual
> resumption of 
> peace from 1645, Bradshaw had certainly figured in the plans
> of the 
> emergent Independent interest. In November that year he
> failed to 
> obtain election to a seat for Newcastle under Lyme, much to
> the 
> disappointment of his patron Brereton, the parliamentary
> commander in 
> Cheshire and north Wales. On the other hand, despite initial
> 
> enthusiasm Brereton appears to have dropped Bradshaw from
> his designs 
> on a seat for the city of Chester the following year. On 8
> October 
> 1646, having been nominated by the Commons as a commissioner
> of the 
> great seal along with Sir Rowland Wandesford and Sir Thomas
> 
> Bedingfield, Bradshaw was rejected by the Lords. It has been
> remarked 
> that 'we must suppose that this employment was [sought for]
> him 
> through the influence of his great clients in the House of
> Commons' 
> (M. Noble, Lives of the English Regicides, 2 vols., 1798,
> 1.48).
> 
> After some initial resistance to his nomination in the
> Commons, the 
> House of Lords sent down an ordinance making Bradshaw chief
> justice of 
> Chester, Flint, Montgomery, and Denbigh on 12 March 1647,
> which passed 
> the Commons on the 16th. It has been claimed that on 18
> March 
> following he was also chosen by the Lords as one of the
> eight judges 
> responsible for the Welsh great sessions. But the ordinance
> for 
> appointing judges to go on circuit in Wales discussed in the
> Commons 
> and the Lords on 19 and 20 March left the matter of
> appointment to the 
> commissioners of the great seal. In any case, as justice of
> Chester, 
> Bradshaw would have been responsible for the circuit in the
> three 
> north Wales counties specified by his patent. On 12 October
> 1648 
> Bradshaw was one of those created serjeants-at-law by
> parliament, on 
> which occasion his sponsors were his Cheshire patrons Booth
> and 
> Brereton.
> 
> The trial of Charles I
> 
> On 10 January 1649 Bradshaw was appointed lord president of
> the high 
> court of justice set up to try Charles I, of which he had
> been 
> appointed a member by the first unicameral act of parliament
> in 
> English history [see also Regicides]. Conventionally it is
> claimed 
> that Bradshaw was appointed to and then chaired this
> unprecedented 
> tribunal only because he was the only judicial figure of any
> rank who 
> could be persuaded to participate in proceedings. However,
> Bradshaw, 
> along with Serjeant Nicholas, Roger Hill, and Francis
> Thorpe, had all 
> been nominated to sit in the court first projected under the
> terms of 
> an ordinance which was rejected by the House of Lords on 2
> January 
> 1649. All four judges were then also named to the high court
> of 
> justice as it was established on 6 January, and all four
> were absent 
> from the court's first two meetings. That Bradshaw was
> singled out 
> from among these judicial figures on 10 January to preside
> over the 
> trial may owe a great deal to the factional machinations
> which 
> influenced the way in which the trial was conducted.
> Bradshaw was 
> closely linked, through the sheriffs' court and the Salters'
> Hall 
> subcommittee for the command of the city militia, with those
> elements 
> within the common council of the City of London which had
> staged a 
> successful coup to seize control over the corporation from
> the lord 
> mayor and aldermen in December and January. Since the trial
> was itself 
> predicated on the notion of the constitutional supremacy of
> the House 
> of Commons, it is likely that Bradshaw commended himself as
> a 
> potential chairman of the high court of justice due to his
> association 
> with one of the constituencies in English politics with the
> clearest 
> interest in maintaining the new constitutional 
> dispensation-represented in the court itself by
> commissioners Robert 
> Tichborne and Owen Rowe.
> 
> Bradshaw became the focus of every effort to conduct the
> trial with 
> dignity and a veneer of legal formality. His title was to be
> observed 
> outside the court in Westminster Hall, as well as within. He
> was given 
> smart apartments in New Palace Yard, and later in the dean's
> house at 
> Westminster Abbey. Each day's proceedings began with the
> lord 
> president's ceremonial entry into the great hall, a mace and
> sword of 
> state going before. On the final day of the trial he was
> noted to have 
> worn a scarlet gown. There is no contemporary evidence to
> support the 
> legend that he wore a beaver hat lined with plates of steel
> for the 
> duration of the trial, for fear of assassination attempts.
> 
> As lord president, the deputed spokesman of the king's
> judges, 
> Bradshaw also played a crucial role himself in the conduct
> and 
> handling of the trial, having been directed by his fellow 
> commissioners to deal directly with the king. The immense
> drama of the 
> trial derives in large part from Bradshaw's oratorical
> duelling with 
> Charles, whom the lord president undoubtedly skewered in the
> course of 
> some of the most important exchanges of the four days of
> public trial. 
> Bradshaw's influence was apparent on the first day when it
> was he who 
> decreed that the king ought to sit facing his judges, rather
> than off 
> to the side, as some judges had wished. On the third day, 23
> January, 
> Bradshaw appears to have attempted effectively to rule the
> king 
> contumacious after his sixth refusal to plead to the charge,
> and 
> thereby to precipitate a move to condemnation the following
> day. In 
> this he was overruled by his colleagues. On the final day of
> the 
> trial, 27 January, Bradshaw had been instructed by his
> fellow judges 
> to allow the king to offer 'anything' he might wish to say
> to the 
> court before it proceeded to judgment. Charles duly proposed
> a 
> trilateral conference with his Lords and Commons in camera.
> Bradshaw's 
> attempt to brush aside this suggestion was overruled,
> prompting the 
> high court's short withdrawal to the court of wards to
> consider the 
> proposal. When it reconvened, Bradshaw had to tell the king
> that his 
> judges had declined his offer. Nevertheless, clearly under
> strict 
> instruction from the other judges, he offered Charles two
> further 
> opportunities to propose something more acceptable. The
> king's failure 
> to do any such thing was the cue for Bradshaw to enter the
> history 
> books as the only Englishman ever to hand down sentence of
> death upon 
> his sovereign.
> 
> The Commonwealth
> 
> Bradshaw was commissioned to chair the high court of justice
> 
> subsequently set up to try and condemn several royalist
> delinquents, 
> the duke of Hamilton (tried as the earl of Cambridge), the
> earl of 
> Holland, Arthur Lord Capel, Lord Goring (alias the earl of
> Norwich), 
> and Sir John Owen. On 14 February 1649 Bradshaw was among
> the 
> forty-one peers, politicians, judges, and soldiers chosen by
> MPs to 
> sit on the new council of state set up by the Rump as the
> principal 
> executive organ of the Commonwealth of England and Ireland.
> Tied up 
> with the trials in Westminster Hall, Bradshaw was unable to
> attend the 
> council's early meetings. Nevertheless, on 10 March, the day
> after the 
> executions in palace yard, he was appointed lord president
> of the 
> council by his colleagues at the board, making him in effect
> England's 
> first elected executive head of state, albeit somewhat
> indirectly. Two 
> days later he made his first appearance in the temporary
> council 
> chamber at Derby House, attending with unrivalled diligence
> 
> thereafter. It may have been his influence which secured for
> John 
> Milton appointment to the office of secretary for foreign
> tongues to 
> the council. The journalist Marchamont Nedham, who, like
> Milton, was 
> remembered years later in a codicil to the lord president's
> will, also 
> appears to have benefited from Bradshaw's patronage.
> 
> Bradshaw held the chair of the council until 26 November
> 1651, when 
> his office went into rotation, apparently to Bradshaw's
> great 
> discontent. He held on to his seat at the board comfortably
> at the 
> next election in the Commons house, however, and himself
> served as the 
> first rotating president. He also polled very respectably in
> the 
> council election of November 1652, continued as a councillor
> until the 
> dissolution of the Rump, serving once more as lord president
> in 
> January 1653, and was a member of standing committees on
> foreign 
> affairs and trade, among others. He retained the title of
> Lord 
> Bradshaw for the remainder of his political career.
> 
> Bulstrode Whitelocke remarked that at the council board
> Bradshaw 
> 'spent much of their time in his long speeches, a great
> hindrance to 
> ... business'  (The Diary of Bulstrode Whitelocke,
> 1605-1675, ed. R. 
> Spalding, Records of Social and Economic History, new ser.
> 13, 1990, 
> 234). But Whitelocke also supported the first attempt to
> appoint 
> Bradshaw to the chancellorship of the duchy of Lancaster,
> defeated by 
> twenty-five votes to twenty-one on 16 July 1649. Bradshaw
> was awarded 
> a short-term commission a fortnight later, but does not
> appear to have 
> been entrusted with the revised duchy seals, nor the chamber
> in 
> Westminster where duchy business was conducted.
> Nevertheless, despite 
> obvious controversy among MPs about the status of the duchy
> 
> jurisdiction, his commission was periodically revived and
> renewed, 
> until 17 September 1653, when it was split with Thomas
> Fell.
> 
> One of Bradshaw's most politically sensitive roles during
> the 
> Commonwealth was as chairman of the court for relief on
> articles of 
> war. In this capacity he was responsible, from June 1649,
> for 
> protecting the claims of individuals who had negotiated
> their 
> capitulation with army officers during the wars in England,
> only to 
> find that the terms they had been granted were not
> subsequently 
> respected by parliament and its local committees. The court
> sat in 
> adjudication of numerous such claims in the early 1650s,
> frequently 
> ruling that the articles of war ought to be upheld in the
> face of 
> decisions taken at Westminster or in the provinces. On one
> or two 
> notable occasions, as in the case of Sir John Stowell, the
> court's 
> rulings caused uproar among those who had purchased
> confiscated 
> estates in good faith, only to find their title questioned
> on the 
> grounds of prior claims to the benefit of articles. The
> whole issue 
> contributed greatly to the growth of political tensions
> during the 
> Commonwealth era.
> 
> The former lord president was eclipsed somewhat in the wake
> of the 
> dissolution of the Rump, and was at times clearly rather out
> of sorts 
> with the protectorate. It is popularly held that Bradshaw
> defied 
> Cromwell on 20 April 1653, warning the lord general when he
> came to 
> dissolve the council of state, having just ejected
> parliament, that 
> 'no power under heaven can dissolve them but
> themselves'  (S. R. 
> Gardiner, History of the Commonwealth and Protectorate,
> 1649-1660, 2, 
> 1897, 265). But there is no direct evidence of this.
> Certainly 
> Bradshaw was not in the chair that day, as Ludlow's account
> would 
> appear to imply. Having no formal record of the day's
> business in the 
> council chamber, it is impossible to say whether he was
> present at 
> all, or even whether the council actually sat.
> 
> The protectorate
> 
> Bradshaw managed to cling onto his official suite of rooms
> at 
> Whitehall after the meeting of Barebones Parliament,
> occasion for the 
> ousting of many of his colleagues from the palace, and he
> continued to 
> serve in the court for relief on articles of war. But after
> the 
> inauguration of the protectorate Bradshaw's political
> position became 
> precarious. In February 1654, the protector's council had
> recommended 
> that Bradshaw be sent a new patent as chief justice of
> Chester, but 
> evidently this was insufficient to salve the wounds
> inflicted less 
> than a year earlier. When the first protectorate parliament
> met in 
> September 1654 one newsbook reported that 'Lord Bradshaw',
> one of the 
> MPs for Staffordshire, had been a candidate for speaker.
> About this 
> time Milton praised Bradshaw for his role in condemning
> Charles I, an 
> action which 'liberty herself ... has entrusted to eternal
> memory' 
> ('The second defence of the English people', Complete Prose
> Works of 
> John Milton, vol. 4 pt 1, 1966, 637).
> 
> Bradshaw was in the van of the attack made by the
> 'Commonwealthsmen' 
> on the new constitution which commenced almost as soon as
> the new MPs 
> had settled into their seats. He rapidly fell under the
> suspicion of 
> the new regime. His official appointments became a
> particular bone of 
> contention, and he was forced to confront the lord protector
> in 
> defence of his patent appointing him chief justice of
> Chester in 1654. 
> He was dismissed in August, but successfully faced down his
> opponents, 
> going on circuit, official sanction for which was granted in
> 
> September.
> 
> Although Bradshaw appears to have been included in the
> Cheshire 
> commission for securing the peace of the Commonwealth, set
> up to 
> assist the new major-general in 1655, it is hard to see how
> he could 
> have been omitted from a body whose support among the
> leaders of 
> Cheshire society was thin at best. In August 1656 the
> major-general 
> whose jurisdiction included Cheshire, Tobias Bridge or
> Bridges, 
> managed to prevent Bradshaw's return as MP for the county,
> principally 
> by persuading the leading gentry to exclude him from the
> slate. 
> According to Bradshaw's brother, Henry, the popular
> candidacy of the 
> chief justice was not forced, as his proposed running-mate,
> Sir 
> William Brereton, would almost certainly have come off very
> much the 
> worse if it had come to a vote. Subsequent attempts to
> secure Bradshaw 
> a seat in the City of London came to nothing. He had become
> an open 
> opponent of the regime by now, Monck having received
> intelligence the 
> year before that he had conspired with other opponents of
> the 
> Cromwellian regime to kidnap the colonel as a prelude to
> overthrowing 
> the army leadership. Fresh attempts were made to deprive
> Bradshaw of 
> his judicial office at Chester in August 1656. According to
> Noble, he 
> was deprived, though if this were indeed so, by July 1659 he
> had 
> certainly been reinstated.
> 
> Bradshaw was elected to sit in Lord Protector Richard
> Cromwell's 
> parliament as MP for Cheshire in 1659, at least in part
> thanks to the 
> intervention of the sheriff, John Legh of Booths, who moved
> the poll 
> at a crucial moment to Bradshaw's home town, Congleton.
> Bradshaw took 
> his seat only after considerable opposition to his return in
> the 
> parliamentary privileges committee had been borne down, the
> vote in 
> the house giving Bradshaw a bare majority of seven. The
> election 
> itself contributed not a little to the rising of Booth in
> the county a 
> few months later, it having been suggested that Bradshaw's
> appeal to 
> the 'birthright' of freeholders, even Quakers, to exercise
> their 
> political will free from gentry control forced upon Booth
> and his 
> confederates the realization that they were left with no
> option other 
> than 'fighting to preserve their way of life' 
> (Morrill, Cheshire, 
> 1630-1660, 298).
> 
> Nevertheless, Bradshaw had been heaped with rewards for his
> services 
> in the course of the 1650s. In August 1649 parliament voted
> him land 
> worth £2000 per annum from the estates of the earl of St
> Albans 
> (marquess of Clanricarde) and Lord Cottington. The former
> included 
> Summer Hill, which in 1645 had been sequestered and granted
> to 
> Clanricarde's half-brother, the earl of Essex, and Tonbridge
> Park, 
> Kent (in the same parish as Summer Hill). The Cottington
> estate 
> included the manors of Feltham and Hanworth in Middlesex,
> plus other 
> properties in that county, as well as Berkshire, Hampshire
> (including 
> Fremantle Park), Kent, Somerset, and Wiltshire. In the
> latter county, 
> the properties included Hatch, the manor of Fonthill
> Gifford, and land 
> in the parish of Tisbury. Subsequently Bradshaw also
> acquired 
> Farrockline House, forfeit for the treason of a Lancashire
> gentleman, 
> by which time he was apparently living at Greenway Hall,
> Bagnall, 
> Staffordshire. He had supposedly also acquired the estate of
> his 
> brother-in-law, John Fallowes, the heavily indebted lord of
> Fallowes 
> Hall, Alderley, Cheshire, who was married to Anne Bradshaw.
> 
> Last days
> 
> The restoration of the Commonwealth saw Bradshaw once again
> in the 
> saddle, though by now ill. He was a member of the council of
> state 
> appointed in May 1659, and in the following month became one
> of three 
> new commissioners for the great seal. Within days he had
> written to 
> parliament asking to be relieved temporarily of his duties
> as seal 
> commissioner. He attended the house on 22 July to take the
> requisite 
> oath. He rose from his deathbed to denounce the military
> usurpers who 
> once more disrupted the Rump in October, and reputedly
> declared with 
> almost his dying breath that had he to try the king again he
> would do 
> it willingly. His old associate Marchamont Nedham reported
> that John 
> Bradshaw, whom he described as 'my Noblest Friend', died at
> Dean's 
> House, Westminster on 31 October 1659. The cause of death
> was 
> described as 'quartan ague', usually taken to be malaria or
> 
> malaria-like symptoms. He was buried in Westminster Abbey on
> 22 
> November; his wife, who predeceased him, was also buried
> there. They 
> left no surviving children. Bradshaw had bequeathed his
> estate to his 
> wife, with reversion to his nephew, Henry, towards whom the
> lord 
> president had apparently shown some affection during his
> lifetime. 
> [see below] chided his son's choice of studies at Christ's
> in 1652, as 
> ill requital of 'your uncles indulgencie in sufferinge you
> to make 
> your owne choise what to studie'  (Bodl. Oxf., MS top.
> Cheshire e.3, 
> fol. 15v).
> 
> On 15 May 1660 it was resolved that Bradshaw, although dead,
> should be 
> attainted by act of parliament, together with Cromwell,
> Ireton, and 
> Pride, all of whom had died before the Restoration. As early
> as 3 May 
> 1654 Bradshaw had been specially excepted from any future
> pardon in a 
> proclamation issued by Charles II. On 12 July 1660 the 
> sergeant-at-arms was ordered to deliver to the house
> Bradshaw's goods. 
> On 4 December 1660 parliament directed that:
> 
> the bodies of Bradshaw, Cromwell, and Ireton 'should be
> taken up from 
> Westminster' and hanged in their coffins at Tyburn. This
> indignity was 
> duly perpetrated on 30 Jan 1661. The regicides' heads were 
> subsequently exposed in Westminster Hall and their bodies
> reburied 
> beneath the gallows. (DNB)
> The remains of Bradshaw's wife were translated to
> Westminster Abbey 
> churchyard on 9 September 1661. At least one legend has
> Bradshaw 
> surviving the Restoration, then making good his escape,
> incognito, to 
> Jamaica, where he died and was buried, a memorial
> inscription advising 
> passers-by that they 'never, never forget that rebellion
> against 
> tyrants is obedience to God' (Chester City Archive, Earwaker
> 
> Collection, 'Bradshaw of Congleton', CR63/1/72/1; extract
> from Leek 
> Times, 3 Dec 1892).
> 
> Assessment
> 
> Throughout his public career Bradshaw fairly consistently
> aligned 
> himself with more radical elements in English politics,
> first in the 
> City, then at Westminster, favouring the drive for outright
> military 
> victory over the king, followed by the redistribution of the
> power of 
> the crown away from existing elites. At the king's trial he
> was in a 
> position to put forward for the benefit of posterity some
> very strong 
> views about the nature of authority in the English state,
> and the 
> subjection of the crown to laws made by the representatives
> of the 
> English people. Inevitably, calculations of political
> advantage were 
> bound up with the articulation of his principled
> convictions. In 
> January 1649 the best hope of securing those convictions had
> seemed to 
> lie, paradoxically, in securing the compliance of the king.
> The 
> growing desperation of the trial commissioners was voiced in
> 
> Bradshaw's admonitions, repeated over and over even in the
> face of the 
> king's utter contempt, that Charles plead to the charges
> against him, 
> thereby accepting the jurisdiction of the high court of
> justice, and 
> hence the authority of the Commons to legislate
> independently of the 
> crown and House of Lords. When this strategy failed and the
> monarchy 
> soon after fell, Bradshaw found himself at the helm of the
> council of 
> state, the new executive authority whose first and most
> pressing task 
> was the final destruction of the Levellers, the only
> supporters of 
> something more genuinely approaching the reality of 'popular
> 
> sovereignty' in the aftermath of regicide. Simultaneously,
> Bradshaw 
> had a hand in drafting legislation to alleviate hardships
> faced by 
> victims of delinquent landlords. Yet as a leading light of
> the 
> judicial establishment, he was allied with powerful military
> interests 
> in the frontline of a struggle to uphold property and its
> interests 
> during the 1650s, even when these clashed with those who had
> carried 
> the burden of the struggle against the king in the provinces
> of 
> England. His public stance at the election of 1656 was more
> of a 
> response to the hostility of Cheshire society towards his
> candidacy, 
> than a belief in social and political egalitarianism.
> However, it 
> probably did in part reflect some of the 'antiformal'
> potential 
> inherent in his religious outlook and associations.
> 
> Bradshaw's elder brother, Henry Bradshaw  (bap. 1601,
> d. 1662), 
> parliamentarian army officer , was baptized on 23 January
> 1601 in St 
> Mary's, Stockport. In 1630 he married Mary Wells (bap. 1606,
> d. 1643), 
> and in 1644 he married his second wife, Anne Bowdon (fl.
> 1644-1660). 
> On 6 July 1646 he signed a Cheshire petition for the
> establishment of 
> the presbyterian church. He performed military service for
> parliament 
> during the civil wars and Commonwealth, commanding in
> September 1651 
> the Macclesfield militia at Worcester, where he was wounded.
> He:
> 
> sat on the court martial which tried and condemned the earl
> of Derby 
> and other loyalists at Chester in 1652; was charged with
> this offence 
> at the Restoration; was imprisoned by order of parliament
> from 17 July 
> to 14 August 1660; was pardoned on 23 February 1661; and,
> dying at 
> Marple, was buried at Stockport on 15 March [1662]. (DNB)
> 
> Sean Kelsey
> 
> Sources  DNB + pedigree of Bradshaw and Isherwood of
> Marple, Ches. & 
> Chester ALSS, CR63/1/73 + J. Foster, Register of admissions
> to Gray's 
> Inn, 1521-1881 (privately printed, London, 1887) + journals,
> CLRO, 
> court of common council, vol. 40, fols. 68v, 69v, 71, 74v,
> 75; vol. 
> 41, fols. 131v-34v + repertories of the court of aldermen,
> CLRO, vol. 
> 56, fols. 194, 199v, 206, 209v, 243v-4, 246v + JHL, 9
> (1646-7), 30, 
> 55, 75 + JHC, 3 (1642-4), 648, 651, 674 + JHC, 5 (1646-8),
> 113 + JHC, 
> 6 (1648-51), 132, 141, 261, 271, 272, 443, 599 + JHC, 7
> (1651-9), 43, 
> 112, 241, 277, 320, 367 + JHC, 8 (1660-67), 88 + IGI + CSP
> dom., 1639, 
> 301-2; 1648-54, 411; 1656-7, 50, 117 + The letter books of
> Sir William 
> Brereton, ed. R. N. Dore, 2 vols., Lancashire and Cheshire
> RS, 123, 
> 128 (1984-90) + A. C. Gibson, 'Original correspondence of
> the Lord 
> President Bradshaw', Transactions of the Historic Society of
> 
> Lancashire and Cheshire, new ser., 2 (1861-2), 41-74 + A. C.
> Gibson, 
> 'Every-day life of a country gentleman of Cheshire in the
> 17th 
> century', Transactions of the Historic Society of Lancashire
> and 
> Cheshire, new ser., 3 (1862-3), 67-92 + J. P. Earwaker, East
> Cheshire: 
> past and present, or, A history of the hundred of
> Macclesfield, 2 
> (1880), 65-77 + G. Ormerod, The history of the county
> palatine and 
> city of Chester, 2nd edn, ed. T. Helsby, 3 (1882), 843-7 +
> J. G. 
> Muddiman, The trial of Charles I (1926?) + P. J. Pinckney,
> 'Bradshaw 
> and Cromwell in 1656', Huntington Library Quarterly, 30
> (1966-7), 
> 233-40 + J. S. Morrill, Cheshire, 1630-1660: county
> government and 
> society during the English revolution (1974) + J. S.
> Morrill, 
> 'Parliamentary representation', VCH  Cheshire + K.
> Lindley, Popular 
> politics and religion in civil war London (1997), 311-19 +
> J. T. 
> Peacey, 'John Lilburne and the Long Parliament', HJ, 43
> (2000), 625-45 
> + J. L. Chester, ed., The marriage, baptismal and burial
> registers of 
> the collegiate church or abbey of St Peter, Westminster,
> Harleian 
> Society, reg. ser. 10 (1876) + JRL, Legh of Lyme MSS
> 
> Archives TNA: PRO, letters and state MSS, State Papers 25
> 
> Likenesses  W. Dobson, double portrait, oils (with Hugh
> Peters), 
> Helmingham Hall, Suffolk; negative, Courtauld Inst. · M.
> Vandergucht, 
> line engraving, BM, NPG; repro. in E. Ward, The history of
> the grand 
> rebellion, 3 vols. (1713) · engraving, NPG [see illus.]
> 
> Wealth at death  disposed of extensive real estate in
> Berkshire, 
> Hampshire, Kent, Middlesex, Somerset, and Wiltshire;
> bequests of 
> several thousand pounds, though many were cancelled in final
> codicil: 
> Earwaker, East Cheshire, vol. 2, pp. 73-7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ========================================================================
> ©    Oxford 
>    University    Press, 
>   2004.    See     legal
> 
> notice:
> http://www.oup.com/oxforddnb/legal/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Milton-L mailing list
> Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
> Manage your list membership and access list archives at http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
> 
> Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/



More information about the Milton-L mailing list