Puller’s father, Abraham Puller, was originally from Shrewsbury. Little is known of his career in the four decades after he had completed his education at Cambridge in 1600, although he was presumably ordained at some point.20Al. Cant. It seems likely that he returned to Shrewsbury and it was there that his only son attended school.21Shrewsbury School Regestum, 302. Significantly, through his mother’s first marriage Abraham Puller was also the stepbrother of the philanthropic London alderman and leading figure among the feoffees for impropriations, Rowland Heylyn.22Oxford DNB, Rowland Heylyn. His cousins therefore included Thomas Hunt* and Thomas Nicholl*. Puller’s son, Isaac, the future MP, himself inherited Heylyn’s lands in Middlesex and at Chertsey, Surrey, on his uncle's death in 1632.23PROB11/161/220.
So far as is known, the family had no connection with Hertford before Puller’s own marriage to Elizabeth Barbor in 1635.24Hertford All Saints par. reg. The crucial link was probably via Heylyn and the feoffees for impropriations, a group of godly clergymen and laymen who, until their suppression by the government in 1633, had sought to provide ecclesiastical livings for clergymen who shared their views. Elizabeth Barbor’s father, Gabriel Barbor, had been an associate of Heylyn. He had also personally augmented the living of his local church, All Saints, Hertford. Added to this, he was a leading member of the Hertford corporation and had stood unsuccessfully for the borough in the parliamentary election of 1628.25Impact of the First Civil War ed. Thomson, 208.
Following his marriage, Isaac Puller probably settled in Hertford or London, as in 1640 he wrote from London to the mayor of Hertford in order to collect some rent due to his father-in-law from the corporation.26Herts. RO, HBR 33/27. In late 1641 or early 1642 the parishioners of All Saints, Hertford, took advantage of the parliamentary order of 8 September 1641 by which any parish was authorised to appoint its own lecturers to approach Abraham Puller. When this appointment was opposed by the vicar, Humphrey Tabor, many of the parishioners complained to Parliament. The Commons responded on 19 March 1642 by confirming Puller senior as the lecturer.27Herts. RO, HBR 33/30; CJ ii. 488b. (Twelve months later Parliament sequestered Tabor and appointing its own nominee, Francis Peck, to perform his duties.)28CJ iii. 3a; LJ v. 663a-b. The Shropshire royalists, for their part, denounced Abraham Puller as a delinquent against the king.29W. Phillips, ‘The Ottley pprs. relating to the civil war’, Trans. Salop Arch. and Nat. Hist. Soc. 2nd ser. vii. 251. Puller senior and Barbor had meanwhile both invested £200 each in the Irish Adventure.30CSP Ire. Adv. 1642-59, pp. 207, 208; Bottigheimer, Eng. Money and Irish Land, 176, 208.
During the civil war Barbor was one of the leading supporters of Parliament in Hertfordshire. His son-in-law first became involved in local politics as one of his most dependable allies. Along with Barbor, Isaac Puller helped take control of Hertford during the war’s earliest stages. On 18 July 1642 the House of Commons authorised the town of Hertford to raise a troop of volunteers to commanded by Puller; the Lords gave its consent the next day.31CJ ii. 679b; LJ v. 221b. Four weeks later, on 15 August, Puller and Barbor were among five Hertford inhabitants ordered by the Commons to seize the town’s store of weapons and ammunition.32CJ ii. 721b; LJ v. 296b-297a. On 12 November the Commons instructed Puller and the Hertfordshire MP Sir Thomas Dacres* to attend the Committee of Safety to receive orders concerning the deployment of his volunteers.33CJ ii. 846b. In the spring of 1643 Sir John Wittewronge raised a regiment of foot in Hertfordshire. At some point that year Puller joined it as its sergeant-major.34SP28/11, f. 143, 145; Spring, Regts. of the Eastern Assoc. ii. 112. Just as importantly, by the summer of 1643 he and William Turner were acting as treasurers for the assessments raised within the county.35SP28/8, f. 61; Impact of the First Civil War ed. Thomson, 71-2, 137. The following October Parliament promoted Puller to become a member of the county standing committee.36LJ vi. 257a; Impact of the First Civil War ed. Thomson, 6, 21, 43, 44.
By November 1643 Puller had become one of the Hertfordshire representatives on central committee of the Eastern Association, sitting in Cambridge and tasked with coordinating the defence of East Anglia on behalf of Parliament.37SP28/11, ff. 14, 18, 116. It may well be that Barbor had got him appointed so that he could be his eyes and ears in Cambridge. Soon Puller became one of the committee’s most active members, signing hundreds of its warrants and other documents between then and early 1645.38SP28/12-15; SP28/17-23; SP28/25-26; SP28/251; Luke Letter Bks. 358, 398, 598, 603; Suff. ed. Everitt, 69, 81; Impact of the First Civil War ed. Thomson, 132. In early 1644 he subscribed the letter from the association to the House of Commons complaining that the income granted to them from the weekly assessment was insufficient to cover the association’s expenses.39Suff. ed. Everitt, 80-1. Several months later, in April 1644, the committee paid him £10 10s for his attendance on them for one month.40SP28/25, f. 336. In September 1644 Nathaniel Bacon*, Humphrey Walcott* and Puller were together paid £9 16s 11d for the journeys they had made to London and Reading on committee business.41SP28/18, f. 320. By early 1645 some members of the committee at Cambridge may have been siding with Oliver Cromwell* in his dispute with the association’s major-general, the 2nd earl of Manchester (Edward Montagu†). There are indirect hints that this group might have included Puller.42Holmes, Eastern Assoc. 294-5n.
The Eastern Association committee declined in importance after the creation of the New Model army, but Puller continued to attend some of its meetings. In early 1645 he was among those who warned the Suffolk deputy lieutenants to assemble their forces in anticipation of a possible royalist attack on East Anglia.43Abbott, Writings and Speeches, i. 353. The following August he was among members of the committee who wrote to the House of Lords about the continuing refusal by the mayor of Cambridge, John Lowry*, to acknowledge the privileges of the university.44LJ vii. 547b.
Puller combined those duties with membership of the Hertford corporation. In October 1644 he was appointed as one of the town’s nine chief burgesses.45Herts. RO, HBR 30/12; Chauncy, Herts. i. 492. Three years later, on 21 September 1647, he was elected as mayor.46Herts. RO, HBR 30/17; Chauncy, Herts. i. 491. He had meanwhile been promoted to the rank of lieutenant-colonel in the militia.47Impact of the First Civil War ed. Thomson, 39. In June 1648, at the height of the second civil war, the Derby House Committee thanked him for the taking of six prisoners.48CSP Dom. 1648-9, p. 139. On 11 July Puller and William Plomer at Hertford wrote to London with the news that the 1st earl of Holland (Henry Rich†) had been captured the previous day at St Neots.49Col. Hammond’s Lttr. (1648), 7-8 (E.452.18). That same year Puller benefitted from two separate bequests, when he inherited properties in Hertford on the deaths of both his father and his father-in-law.50PROB11/208/456; PROB11/204/601.
In the final weeks of 1648 Puller was added to the Hertfordshire commission of the peace.51C231/6, p. 128. Subsequently, the regicide and the creation of the republic seem to have made no difference to his willingness to serve. In January 1651 his colleagues paid him £20 for repairs to the county gaol.52Herts. County Recs. v. 412. That May he and another Hertfordshire justices, Dr John King, were told by the council of state to deal with disorderly meetings at Hitchin.53CSP Dom. 1651, p. 185. Then at the July sessions he and Thomas Tooke were instructed to receive accounts from all the treasurers and chief constables since 1641 for money they had received for the gaol, hospitals and maimed soldiers.54Herts. County Recs. v. 421. Three years later he was also one of a number of Hertfordshire justices to whom the council of state referred a dispute between the inhabitants of Graveley-cum-Chisfield.55CSP Dom. 1654, p. 227. He had also been active as a Hertfordshire militia commissioner.56Add. 40630, ff. 256, 258, 263, 269, 276. In 1653 Puller and brothers-in-law, as their fathers’ heirs, employed William Webb to represent them in the draw by the Irish Adventurers for Irish land. The result was that they were allocated lands in Meath.57CSP Ire. Adv. 1642-59, pp. 207, 208, 343; CSP Ire. 1647-60, pp. 437, 447, 557.
Puller was the sole representative of his borough in Parliament under the Instrument of Government in 1654 and 1656. His role in 1654 seems to have been limited: he was named to only two committees – on the bills for ejecting scandalous ministers (25 Sept. 1654) and for uniting parishes (7 Dec. 1654).58CJ vii. 370a, 397b. In late April 1656, between the two Parliaments, he assisted the local deputy major-general, William Packer*, in the investigation into the conduct of the clergyman, Richard Farrer, who had been ejected from his living at Ware. They recommended that he be expelled from the town.59CSP Dom. 1655-6, p. 305.
Re-elected for Hertford in 1656, Puller probably disapproved of the decision by the council of state to prevent many MPs taking their seats. On 22 September he voted against the successful motion referring those exclusions back to the council.60Bodl. Tanner 52, f. 166. He was later horrified by James Naylor’s Quaker excesses at Bristol, suggesting on 16 December that Naylor should be sent to Jamaica.61Burton’s Diary, i. 155. When two days later the House debated various anti-Quaker petitions, Puller spoke in support of the proposal that the remit of the committee previously appointed to examine Naylor should be expanded to review what could be done to curb the more outrageous behaviour of other Quakers. Specifically, Puller wanted that committee to prepare new legislation against blasphemy.62Burton’s Diary, i. 171. On 27 December he opposed the granting of a reprieve to Naylor.63Burton’s Diary, i. 262.
On Christmas Day Puller was against an immediate vote on whether a bill confirming the decimation tax should be brought in. He seems to have considered that legislation on this was unnecessary, but he also thought that, considering the small attendance, this decision should be made when more MPs were present.64Burton’s Diary, i. 242. With William Boteler*, he offered excuses on behalf of William Shield* for his absence from the call of the House on 31 December.65Burton’s Diary, i. 285. He had also been named to the committees on the bill relating to Wyggeston’s Hospital in Leicester (9 Dec.) and the 2nd earl of Carlisle’s estate bill (15 Dec.).66CJ vii. 466a, 468a. The following February he was among MPs appointed to consider the bill for the maintenance of ministers in Exeter.67CJ vii. 488b. On 9 May 1657 he was named to the committee on the bill to restrict the construction of new buildings in the London suburbs.68CJ vii. 531b.
On 10 June 1657 the Commons, in debating the assessment bill, discussed whether the rates and distribution of the tax assessments between different parts of the country should remain unchanged. When this came to a vote, Puller and Sir Richard Lucy* were the tellers for the majority who wanted the issue to be re-opened.69CJ vii. 554a; Burton’s Diary, ii. 218. He was a teller again, this time with Nathaniel Bacon, ten days later in the division on the bill for the observance of the sabbath. They opposed as unnecessary a proviso that constables could not ‘demand entry’ to search properties, apart from taverns and alehouses, on Sundays.70CJ vii. 567b; Burton’s Diary, ii. 263-4. Speaking in the debate on the Additional Petition and Advice on 24 June, he took the view that it should require those nominated to the Other House to be approved by the Commons.71Burton’s Diary, ii. 301.
Nothing is known of Puller’s contribution to the short, second session of this Parliament in late January and early February 1658. There is, however, some evidence that he had been in London just before Parliament re-assembled, as on 11 January the Hertfordshire commission of the peace reimbursed him for the 30s he had spent obtaining documents from one of the official bodies that met at Worcester House.72Herts. County Recs. v. 502.
Puller was re-elected as the MP for Hertford on 8 January 1659. But the contest between James Cowper* and William Packer over the second seat resulted in a disputed return which required adjudication by the Commons. This should not have affected Puller. He seems to have been named on both indentures and, unlike Cowper and Packer, as a resident freeman, his qualifications were not open to dispute. When he reported to the Commons on behalf of the committee of privileges on 24 March, Thomas Waller* advised that, unlike Cowper and Packer, Puller had been ‘clearly chosen’.73CJ vii. 619b; Burton’s Diary, iv. 250. But again, he played no known part in parliamentary proceedings.
With the Restoration, Puller’s name disappears from the records of the Hertford corporation and he was removed from the commission of the peace.74Herts. County Recs. vi. 524. In 1664 royal officials attempted to recover what they claimed was over £5,000 still held by Puller from his time as the joint treasurer in the mid-1640s.75CSP Dom. 1663-4, pp. 591, 645. There is no trace of Puller over the next three decades. His children mostly conformed to the Church of England. His eldest son, Timothy, was ordained in 1664 and went on to become the rector of Saccombe, Hertfordshire and of St Mary-le-Bow, London. He was best-known for his 1679 work, The Moderation of the Church of England, which rejected the idea that it should make concessions to win over non-conformists.76Oxford DNB, ‘Timothy Puller’; T. Puller, The Moderation of the Church of Eng. (1679). One of the MP’s three daughters, Hannah, married John Spencer, the eminent Hebrew scholar and master of Corpus Christi, Cambridge.77Oxford DNB, ‘John Spencer’. Another, Rebecca, married Samuel Bendy, rector of Watton-at-Stone, Hertfordshire.78Staffs. Peds. ed. G.J. Armytage and W.H. Rylands (Harl. Soc. lxiii.), 22; PROB11/418/212. His other son, Isaac junior, became a linen-draper in London.79CSP Dom. 1679, p. 139; CSP Dom. 1682, p. 512; A.H. Johnson, Hist. of the Worshipful Co. of Drapers of London (Oxford, 1914-22), iv. 297, 299, 302, 305, 351, 372, 463; Mins. of the Vestry Meetings and Other Recs. of the Par. of St Christopher le Stocks, ed. E. Freshfield (1886), 62-4. The former MP died in 1693. His funeral took place at St Andrew’s, Hertford, on 26 April.80Hertford St Andrew par. reg. In his will of 9 October of that same year, Timothy Puller referred to his ‘honoured father’ having died between ‘the writing and publishing of this my will’.81PROB11/418/212. No other member of the family was returned to Parliament.