CLERKE, John II (d. aft. 1661), of Kensington, Mdx.

The origins of John Clerke, who rendered his name thus, are unclear.17Stowe 185, f. 88 (3 Jan. 1655). He may have been the son of Humphrey Clarke of Edmonton, Middlesex, admitted to Gray’s Inn in August 1635.18G. Inn Admiss. This theory is supported by the MP’s later appointments as a justice of the peace for Essex and Middlesex, and as sewer commissioner for the River Lea (which forms the eastern boundary of Edmonton parish), but as he is not mentioned in Humphrey Clarke’s will of 1643, the identification remains provisional.19Woolrych, Commonwealth to Protectorate, 181-2; C181/6, p. 222; PROB11/202/633. Whatever his background, John Clerke’s political career was more dependent on his service as a parliamentarian officer than on his landed position or family connections, and it was only during the first civil war that he can be identified with any certainty. In November 1644 he was serving as a lieutenant in the parliamentarian garrison of Wareham in Dorset, and when the New Model army was created in the following spring, he became captain of the foot regiment of Sir Hardress Waller*.20Wanklyn, New Model Army, i. 56, 66, 77, 86.. He remained with Waller’s regiment over the next few years, and may have accompanied his commander to Ireland as part of the short-lived expedition of Viscount Lisle (Philip Sidney*) to Munster.21Clarke Pprs. i. 31-2.

On his return to England, Clerke achieved notoriety as a prominent army agitator. At Saffron Walden in May 1647, he opposed the sending of New Model regiments to Ireland, and angrily refuted allegations that he and other officers from Waller’s regiment had secretly engaged to return to the Irish wars.22Clarke Pprs. i. 31-2. In July 1647, as the political crisis at Westminster worsened, the New Model headquarters (now at Reading) again became the centre for debate. On 5 July Clerke was one of 12 men chosen by the council of war to attend Parliament with formal charges against the Eleven Members who led the opposition to the army, and a week later he was involved in canvassing support in Wales against the ‘enemies of the state’ at Westminster.23Clarke Pprs. i. 151, 158-161. On 16 July Clerke and other agitators urged the army’s commanders to march on London to end Presbyterian rule by force: in the ensuing debate, Clerke said he did not want to undermine the political system, only to change its personnel: ‘the thing we insist on [is] to remove such persons that are most corrupt out of power and trust, and that such persons as are of known integrity may be placed in their rooms’.24Clarke Pprs. i. 173-6, 180, 187. After the occupation of London by the New Model in August, the army withdrew its headquarters to Putney. In the debates of October and November, Clerke again came to the fore, as one of the officer-agitators.25Clarke Pprs. i. 363, 413, 437. Opposing those who pushed for political decisions based on reason, Clerke argued that ‘reason should have been subservient unto the spirit of God’ and that ‘we should desire no way but wait which way God will lead us’. This was as much a counsel for caution as a statement of his trust in providence, and Clerke’s opposition to the extension of the franchise to the landless also arose from his desire not to cause splits in the army.26Clarke Pprs. i. 280-1, 330-1, 338-9. In this way his views echoed those of his regimental commander, Sir Hardress Waller.

In the spring of 1648 Clerke went into the south west with Waller’s regiment, and served there during the second civil war. In December 1648 he returned to London, where he attended the army council at Whitehall. His only recorded contribution to the latest round of debates was on 14 December, when he praised the army as ‘a shelter to honest people’, and championed freedom of conscience:

[It is] our common right and our common freedom to live under a civil magistrate to live by our neighbours, but as touching religion why should any people be punished? I think, my lord, that everyone here when he speaks his conscience will say plainly ‘no’... no man or magistrate on earth hath power to meddle in these cases.27Clarke Pprs. ii. 94-5, 272-3.

In his confidence in the army as the guardian of the nation, and in his support for religious toleration, Clerke was expressing views typical of the New Model officer corps.

After the regicide, Clerke returned to the west country with Waller’s regiment. In July 1649 he was promoted to the rank of major, and in January 1650 was given command of five foot companies ordered to remain in England while the remainder of the regiment was shipped to Ireland.28Firth and Davies, Regimental Hist. i. 443, 449. In late April or early May 1650 Clerke was commissioned as lieutenant-colonel.29SP28/67, ff. 170, 551. Over the following year, his main task was suppressing royalism in western Devon. In September 1650 Clerke was working with Colonel John Disbrowe* to enforce the taking of the Engagement at Plymouth, and his contempt for his opponents can be seen in a letter to Colonel Robert Bennett*, written shortly after news arrived of the victory at Dunbar, in which he complained of the obduracy of the Devonshire royalists, ‘notwithstanding the signal hand of the Lord of Hosts against them, which of late appeared in so much super eminency of mercy to our brethren in Scotland’.30CSP Dom. 1650, p. 348; FSL, X.d.483 (66). The royalists refused to submit. In the spring of 1651, Clerke joined Admiral Robert Blake* in a joint operation against the royalist forces on the Scilly Isles.31CSP Dom. 1651, pp. 100, 190, 214-7, 239. In August 1651, in the face of the Scottish advance towards Worcester, Clerke’s companies were withdrawn from Devon. They were at first ordered to join the army in Oxfordshire, then directed to reinforce the garrison at Bristol on 22 August; but on the same day new orders arrived, sending the force back to Plymouth; and finally, on 29 August, Clerke was told to march from Plymouth to join the main army before Worcester, which he reached on 1 September.32CSP Dom. 1651, pp. 350, 353, 356-7, 387, 395. Despite this confusion, Clerke’s service in the west country had further enhanced his reputation as a stalwart of the commonwealth regime, and in November 1651, when Waller’s companies in England were made into an independent regiment, and posted to Ireland, Clerke became its colonel.33CSP Dom. 1651-2, p. 22.

Although Clerke’s regiment was ordered to travel to Ireland in December 1651, it did not arrive there until several months later. The delay was caused by unrest within the ranks, but the root cause of this seems to have been concern about pay arrears rather than political grievances.34CSP Dom. 1651-2, pp. 85, 153, 169, 204, 212, 220, 268. By the time of its arrival at Waterford in late June 1652, Clerke’s regiment had missed most of the fighting, and Edmund Ludlowe II* concluded (probably unfairly) that the reinforcements ‘were procured rather to promote the designs of General [Oliver] Cromwell*, than from any need we had of them’.35Bodl. Tanner 53, f. 73; Ludlow, Mems. i. 324. Yet Clerke’s regiment was not entirely redundant. Assigned to the northern theatre, the regiment was active in the final defeat of the rebels in Ulster, and in September Clerke was a member of Parliament’s negotiating team which secured articles of surrender with the Irish commanders in the province.36Ire. under the Commonwealth, i. 282. Although his regiment continued to serve in Ireland until later in the 1650s, Clerke was in Ireland for less than five months. On 6 November 1652 he returned to London with Sir Hardress Waller, Colonel Richard Lawrence and Dr Philip Carteret to act as the army’s spokesmen at the council board.37CSP Dom. 1651-2, p. 537. In the early months of 1653 Clerke advised the council of state on the Irish land settlement and liaised with the Irish and Scottish committees on other business, working closely with John Lambert*, John Reynolds* and other prominent officers.38CSP Dom. 1652-3, pp. 322, 341, 372, 393, 445, 454.

It was presumably Clerke’s activity in Whitehall in the spring and summer of 1653 that secured him a place as MP for Ireland in the Nominated Assembly which met in early July. Clerke was heavily involved in proceedings from 7 July to 3 December 1653, and acted as teller on 17 occasions: the most of any Member in this Parliament. His activities fell into three categories. First, he continued to have a voice in Irish affairs, through the Irish committee (appointed 9 July), and as reporter from the committee on restructuring the army in Ireland (5 Sept.) and he acted as teller on motions concerning economic provisions and compensation to Protestants to be included in the adventurers’ bill (8, 22, 24 Sept.).39CJ vii. 283b, 286b, 295b, 314a, 316a, 322b. Related to this was his activity in the affairs of the army. On 20 July he was named to the House’s committee for the army, which was established by ordinance on 27 July as a new Army Committee.40CJ vii. 287a; A. and O. Thereafter, he reported on regulating the treasurers-at-war (25-26 July), ways to pay the arrears due to the army in Scotland (8 Aug.), and how to maximise the revenue from assessments (12, 15 Nov.).41CJ vii. 289a-b, 297a, 327b, 350a, 351a-b. The third main area of Clerke’s activity seems to have been the civil administration: he was teller on a clause in the bill for the forfeiture and composition of delinquents’ estates (17 Aug.), and in the next few weeks he was named to a number of committees on the payment of customs and excise, and the administration of justice.42CJ vii. 302b, 307a, 323b, 325a, 334b, 335a, 336b, 347a. In the surviving record of his parliamentary activity in 1653 Clerke comes across as a moderate supporter of the army interest, but without the religious fervour which marked out some of his colleagues. His private beliefs inclined towards Independency, but there is no evidence to suggest that he was a religious zealot.43Woolrych, Commonwealth to Protectorate, 202; Burton’s Diary, i. 75-6. Indeed, of his 40 mentions in the Journals for the Nominated Assembly, only two involved religious matters.44CJ vii. 286a, 305a. Clerke was appointed commissioner of the admiralty and navy on 3 December, but this was not a sign of his support for the regime, and when the Cromwellians moved to dissolve the assembly a few days later, Clerke was thought to be among the ringleaders of the coup.45CJ vii. 362a; A. and O.; Woolrych, Commonwealth to Protectorate, 343.

Clerke certainly welcomed the establishment of the protectorate. On 26 December 1653 the protectorate council entrusted Clerke and Henry Scobell with drafting an act renewing the powers of the Army Committee and admiralty commission set up earlier in the year, and Clerke remained a prominent member of both bodies during the early months of the new government.46CSP Dom. 1653-4, pp. 300, 313, 341; 1654, pp. 41, 186, 216, 219, 402, 464-593. In this period his closest colleagues seem to have been two military men with strong west country connections, Thomas Kelsey* and John Disbrowe.47CSP Dom. 1653-4, pp. 313, 457; 1654, pp. 144, 397, 412, 455. Clerke continued to be concerned for the army’s share of the Irish land settlement, and this business brought him into contact with Lord Broghill (Roger Boyle*), who was regarded – probably rather optimistically – by some Irish Protestants as having a degree of influence over Clerke’s decisions.48CSP Ire. 1647-60, p. 609; HMC Egmont, i. 556. It was government backing which probably secured Clerke’s election for the counties of Londonderry, Donegal and Tyrone in August 1654, alongside the Irish Protestant candidate, Thomas Newburgh*.49Mercurius Politicus no. 219 (17-24 Aug. 1654), 3710 (E.809.5).

Clerke’s administrative brief proved as powerful an influence on his parliamentary activity in 1654 as it had been in 1653. He was appointed to the committee to consider the ‘recognition’ of the protectorate on 14 September, the committee to bring in a bill on the settling of the government on 21 September, and the committee for Irish affairs on 29 September.50CJ vii. 367b, 369a, 371b. In the weeks that followed he was named to committees on the army and navy, for reforming the judicial system, encouraging trade, administering the customs and excise, and imposing further monthly assessments.51CJ vii. 368a, 370b, 374a, 374b, 378b, 381b, 388b, 407b, 415b, 419a. Amid this activity, Clerke was involved in the main issue of this Parliament, the debate on the future of the Instrument of Government. Despite his ties to the Cromwellian regime, Clerke was capable of siding with the government’s opponents: on 22 November he was a teller in favour of a motion to continue the debate on Parliament’s right to restrict Cromwell’s power to change laws and taxes unilaterally, and on 27 November, he was teller against a proviso to change the voting qualifications for electors in the counties.52CJ vii. 388a, 392a-b. On 2 December, however, he was teller against extending the parliamentary day to allow a vote on allowing the protector to choose councillors without Parliament’s right of veto.53CJ vii. 394b. Although Clerke accepted the Instrument needed to be altered, there seem to have been limits to how far he was prepared to undermine the protector’s authority. Clerke’s involvement in parliamentary affairs declined after mid-December, and in January he was named to only two committees to consider the financial implications of the proposed new Government Bill.54CJ vii. 415b, 419a.

After the dissolution of the first protectorate Parliament, Clerke returned to his administrative duties, especially on the Army Committee, where worked in tandem with Adam Baynes* on raising money to pay the army’s arrears.55Stowe 185, f. 88. In March 1655 he helped to coordinate the government’s response to Penruddock’s royalist rising in the west country, receiving information from agents in Hampshire, Wiltshire and Devon.56TSP iii. 246; CSP Dom. 1655, pp. 80, 84, 88, 98, 131. From the spring of 1656 Clerke was chairman of the Army Committee, with a salary back-dated to June 1654.57CSP Dom. 1655-6, p. 320; 1656-7, p. 25. Throughout 1655 and 1656 Clerke was also an active member of the admiralty commission.58CSP Dom. 1655, pp. 75, 120-45, 212, 324, 431ff; 1655-6, pp. 198-284, 347, 409ff. From May 1655 there were plans that he and his old colleague Thomas Kelsey should be made admiralty judges; they were also granted £400 per annum in future for their services as commissioners, and in the following year this stipend was confirmed by the council.59CSP Dom. 1655, pp. 152, 155, 371; 1656-7, p. 98. From the summer of 1655 there were also moves by Lord Deputy Charles Fleetwood* to bring Clerke back to Ireland. ‘I wish heartily his highness could spare Colonel Clerke and Lieutenant-Colonel Kelsey’, Fleetwood told Secretary John Thurloe* on 18 June, ‘to be governor of Galway and Cork ... had we but two or three more precious, choice, godly and such able men, we might employ them to places of great advantage to the public’.60TSP iii. 559. A few days later, Fleetwood recommended Clerke to Cromwell as governor of Cork, as his ‘discreet management of affairs would ... give a happy settlement to all those parts’; he also recommended to Henry Cromwell* that Clerke ‘may be chosen for the Parliament’ for one of the Irish seats, adding ‘he will be very useful as to Ireland’.61TSP iii. 567; Henry Cromwell Corresp. 166. By August, Fleetwood’s call for Clerke to be promoted had been seconded by John Reynolds, who pressed Thurloe to employ him in place of Robert Venables* as governor of Ulster.62TSP iii. 691. Although this scheme came to nothing, Clerke’s abilities were plainly making an impact on those around the protector.

In the elections for the second protectorate Parliament in August 1656, Clerke was returned not for an Irish constituency but for two Welsh ones: Cardiganshire and Pembrokeshire. There is no evidence to suggest that Clerke had any personal connections with either county (although as a member of the Army Committee he had dealt with assessment problems in Carmarthen in 1655), and it is more than likely that he owed his election to the local influence of the Cromwellian councillor, Philip Jones*.63Add. 18986, f. 211. Clerke chose to sit for Cardiganshire, his fellow Member being another ally of Jones, James Philipps, while his vacant seat in Pembrokeshire was filled by Edward Lawrence, son of Henry Lawrence I*, president of the council.64CJ vii. 432a; C219/45, unfol. In the same period Clerke cemented his connections with the Cromwellian regime when he married the widowed half-sister of Secretary Thurloe.65Firth and Davies, Regimental Hist. ii. 450. Clerke’s parliamentary activity was less straightforward than his court-sponsored election might suggest, and for the first three months of the Parliament, he was mostly involved in routine business concerning the excise, trade matters and the disposal of forfeited estates, in much the same way as he had been in 1653 and 1654-5.66CJ vii. 426b-460b. As in the past, Clerke took a very individual line over certain key issues. In the debate on the fate of James Naylor in December, he joined the army radicals in arguing that the Quaker should not be accused of blasphemy, as he was suffering from a ‘devilish delusion’ rather than being party to ‘designed malice and wickedness’.67Burton’s Diary, i. 75-6. On 23 December he joined Colonel William Sydenham as teller in favour of the Commons accepting a petition from the London Quakers asking for clemency for Naylor: a motion won despite strong opposition from the Presbyterian interest.68CJ vii. 474a; Burton’s Diary, i. 216. At the end of the month, Clerke spoke in favour of continuing the decimation tax on former cavaliers, supporting John Lambert and other hard-liners, and dismissing claims that the levy undermined the act of oblivion of 1652.69Burton’s Diary, i. 241.

Clerke’s tolerance of Naylor and his support for decimation suggests that his sympathies lay with the army interest in the winter of 1656-7; but he does not seem to have shared their vehement opposition to the offer of the crown to Cromwell under the Humble Petition and Advice, initiated by the civilian interest in February. Instead, Clerke seems to have been prepared to engage with the new constitution. On 11 March he was teller against setting a quorum on the new upper chamber, the Other House, and although he did not vote for kingship on 25 March, he went on to be named to important committees concerning the new constitution, including that to justify Parliament’s support for the Humble Petition and Advice (6 Apr.), and to answer Cromwell’s objections to the 16th article (24 Apr.).70CJ vii. 501b, 520b, 524a. In May and June Clerke was involved in further committees to hasten the passage of the revised Humble Petition (now shorn of its monarchical elements).71CJ vii. 535a, 540b, 557b. The author of the Narrative of the Late Parliament was in little doubt about Clerke’s support of the Humble Petition, asserting that he was ‘deeply engaged to uphold the court-interest’.72Narrative of the Late Parliament (1657), 12 (E.935.5). This was too simplistic a view, however. Clerke’s administrative duties, and his increasing identification with the Cromwellian regime, may have drawn him towards the policies of ‘courtiers’ like Jones and Broghill, but his suspicion of former royalists and his desire for limited religious toleration suggest that he retained sympathies with the army interest.

Despite his reservations, in the later 1650s Clerke continued to support the Cromwellian regime. In June 1657 he was appointed to the committee to reform the customs and excise – a post he held in conjunction with his roles in admiralty and on the Army Committee.73A. and O.; TSP vi. 872. He was based at Whitehall in 1657-8, and should not be confused with Colonel Samuel Clarke who served in the English force sent to Flanders in the same period.74Bodl. Carte 73, ff. 106, 112, 130; CSP Dom. 1657-8, pp. 73, 164, 175, 202, 282, 421-511; 1658-9, pp. 48, 186, 288, 296, 319, 326, 357, 406-543; cf. TSP vii. 116, 200; Bodl. Carte 223, f. 184; Carte 73, ff. 126, 140. Clerke remained in high standing with those around Cromwell. In December 1657 he was nominated as a member of Oliver Cromwell’s ‘Other House’ (although he was not appointed), and in the second, brief session of Parliament in January 1658 he acted as commissioner, tendering an oath on the Humble Petition to MPs as they entered the chamber.75CCSP iii. 400; TSP vi. 668; CJ vii. 578a. In June 1658 Thurloe supported his claim for land in Ireland, telling Henry Cromwell that ‘Colonel Clerke is so useful a man here, that much is due to him upon that account, and I know his highness intends him a respect herein’.76TSP vii. 211. The death of Oliver Cromwell in September 1658 did little to dent Clerke’s support for the protectorate. He carried the banner for Ireland at the late protector’s funeral, and in October 1658 he told Henry Cromwell of his support for Protector Richard, for Oliver ‘hath not left us without hope, in that he hath established a successor out of his loins, that may leave upon him his name and spirit, and maintain that cause and interest’.77Burton’s Diary, ii. 524; TSP vii. 424-5.

Despite his assurances to Henry Cromwell, Clerke’s relationship with the protectorate remained ambiguous. His return for the port towns of Dartmouth and Weymouth in the elections for the third protectorate Parliament may have reflected his position as admiralty commissioner as much as his standing at the Cromwellian court. The Weymouth election seems to have been due to the influence of the mayor, George Pley, who was eager to raise the town’s profile at the admiralty board, and it is likely that the burgesses of Dartmouth were also keen to secure Clerke’s favours in the Whitehall administration.78Weymouth Min. Bks., 326; Hutchins, Dorset, ii. 438; CSP Dom. 1658-9, p. 326. Clerke was less involved in administrative business in this Parliament, although he was named to committees for elections (28 Jan.), to prepare reasons for a fast day (30 Mar.), for the affairs of Scotland (1 Apr.) and to consider a petition from the maimed soldiers and Ely House (7 Apr.).79CJ vii. 594b, 622a, 623b, 627a. On 17 February he presented to the Commons a paper from the admiralty containing the estimate of navy costs for the year, but for some reason he was not included in the committee for Irish affairs appointed on 1 April.80CJ vii. 604b, 623a-b.

As before, elements of Clerke’s parliamentary activity appear almost contradictory. In successive debates, he urged the Commons to bolster the military establishment: the Dutch naval threat had to be met with a vigorous response, as ‘it is not for your honour to sit still’; it was wrong to economise on the navy or the army; the Army Committee was above reproach and ‘you must lean upon your army for the great part of your safety; and the real threat was from the royalists at home and abroad.81Burton’s Diary, iii. 398, 446; iv. 307, 384-5, 460, 463; CJ vii. 604b; Derbs. RO, D258/1079/2, f. 31. Yet, at the same time, Clerke was open in his support of the Humble Petition, and argued passionately in favour of the ‘Other House’. As he told the Commons on 28 February, ‘by law they stand, and if it be intended to remove them, it must be by bill... another House is in being by your constitution. It is so clearly argued, that if it be denied you must grub up all your constitutions and make an earthquake in the nation’.82Burton’s Diary, iii. 529; Schilling thesis, 133-4. At this stage Clerke did not seem to make the connection, so obvious in the minds of many of Richard Cromwell’s supporters, between the army’s power and political instability. In April, though clearly inclining towards the army interest, Clerke’s tone was conciliatory. On 9 April, in the debate on reducing the armed forces, he argued against drastic measures, reminding MPs that the Self Denying Ordinance of 1645 had merely ‘thrust some out of trust and out others in, but it saved you no money: it was but change of hands in places of trust and profit’.83Burton’s Diary, iv. 384-5. When matters came to a head on 18 April, with MPs seeking to prevent ban the army council, Clerke again tried to calm fears, telling the Commons that ‘this diffidence of your friends ought to be avoided. Jealousy stirs up jealousy. I had rather have you suspect the Cavaliers. You must lean upon your army for the great part of your safety’.84Burton’s Diary, iv. 460.

The collapse of the protectorate threatened to ruin Clerke. Although he sat on the council of officers gathered at Wallingford House, the commonwealthsmen on the committee of safety were suspicious of his true allegiances, and he was questioned by the restored Rump Parliament in early May.85Henry Cromwell Corresp. 509. According to Ludlowe, Clerke ‘told them he would consider well before he would engage with the present authority’, and this raised fears that he was still in touch with Thurloe and other Cromwellians, who hoped ‘the way was still open to reconcile themselves to Mr Richard Cromwell, who yet remained at Whitehall’.86Ludlow, Mems. ii. 81. On 7 May Clerke was sacked as admiralty commissioner, although the Rump thereafter ordered that his warrants from before that date should still be honoured.87CJ vii. 656b, 657a. But the fears of the committee of safety seem to have died down soon afterwards. By the end of May Clerke had been re-appointed to the new admiralty commission, and, in a further sign of his political rehabilitation, he was appointed colonel of an Irish foot regiment on 28 June, his commission being confirmed in July.88CJ vii. 669b, 670b, 696a, 722b. In the autumn of 1659 Clerke was again active on the Army Committee and the admiralty commission.89CSP Dom. 1659-60, pp. 216, 221, 472-89.

With the protectorate beyond redemption, Clerke appears to have become a single-minded supporter of the army interest from the summer of 1659. He was a key member of the army council, and was branded as ‘factious’ in a later edition of the History of Independency.90C. Walker, History of Independency: the Fourth and Last Part (1660), 70 (E.1052.4). Clerke’s activity in the Army Committee shows that his political stance had hardened. In September he was busy strengthening the regiments of Edmund Ludlowe II, Richard Lawrence and Thomas Cooper II* in Ireland, working with Fleetwood, to secure ‘employment’ for his friends in the army.91CSP Dom. 1659-60, p. 198. In the same month Clerke was in close co-operation with Lambert in the north of England*.92CSP Dom. 1659-60, p. 216. The Lambert connection became increasingly important in the next few weeks. In early October the senior officers mounted a coup against the Rump, and Clerke joined Lambert, his old associates Disbrowe and Kelsey, and others in issuing a petition, which, in Ludlowe’s words was ‘the ground on which they designed to unite the army against the civil authority’.93Ludlow, Mems. ii. 136-7. On 26 October he was included on the new supreme executive the committee of safety, where he may have acted as a moderating influence on some of his colleagues.94Whitelocke, Mems. iv. 336. According to Thomas Clarges*, when a committee to vet military commissions was chosen that month, Clerke suggested adding George Monck* to their number, but was shouted down.95Clarke Pprs. v. 317. Nevertheless, in January 1660 Clerke was among a number of officers expelled from London by the restored Rump.96CSP Dom. 1659-60, pp. 308, 342.

Clerke was regarded with great suspicion after the restoration of the king. In August 1660 he was among a number of former Cromwellians arrested in London, accused of plotting against the restored monarchy; and he was still in prison in December of that year, when he petitioned Charles II for his release, protesting his innocence.97CSP Dom. 1660-1, pp. 205, 207, 415, 492. In November 1661 Clerke was again under investigation, as one of a number of former New Model officers – ‘teachers and heads of their respective congregations, men of violent spirits and dangerous principles as to government’ – residing in London, but there is no hard evidence of his involvement in Fifth Monarchist or Republican plots at this time.98SP29/44, ff. 256v, 258v. After 1661 Clerke disappears from the historical record as abruptly as he had appeared 16 years earlier. The ubiquity of his name makes the date and place of John Clerke’s death impossible to establish.