GARLAND, Augustine (1603-c.1677), of Barking, Essex, and Lincoln’s Inn, Mdx.

Garland’s family originated at Hayes in Kent and later became established as London merchants and members of the Fishmongers’ Company, although the improvement in their fortunes was such that his father was able to pursue a legal career.28Vis. London (Harl. Soc. xv), i. 301. Augustine Garland senior was almost certainly puritanically inclined, as a resident of the godly parish of St Antholin, Budge Row, before establishing himself in Coleman Street, where he died in January 1638.29Obit. Richard Smyth ed. Ellis, 14; St Stephen, Coleman Street, par. reg. His son would thus have been surrounded by members of London’s godly community during his youth, and this, together with his education at Emmanuel College, Cambridge and Lincoln’s Inn, probably had a profound impact on his outlook. Indeed, his friends at Lincoln’s Inn included the prominent Rumper, Nicholas Love*. Garland was suspended from the inn, and briefly imprisoned in king’s bench, in June 1635, for instigating a violent protest against the exclusion of Love and another barrister for beating a porter.30LI Black Bks. ii. 327-30. Garland was readmitted in November 1635, and eventually completed his legal training in January 1639.31LI Black Bks. ii. 330, 350.

During the 1640s it was in Essex, rather than London, that Garland first made an impact on public life, and even then his involvement seems to have been undistinguished. He was resident in Barking in the early years of the civil war, two sons being baptised in the church there in June 1642 and July 1643.32Barking par. regs. He was of sufficient standing to be appointed to the commission of the peace in Essex in July 1644, and attended the quarter sessions in the months that followed, but he was removed again in September 1645.33C231/6, pp. 4, 18; State Trials, v. 1216; Essex RO, Q/SR 324/129; Q/SR 322/132; Q/SR 324/133; Q/SR 325/56, 117. He became an active member of the Barking vestry in the same period, and served as trustee of a local charity, and was living in the parish as late as June 1646.34Essex RO, Q/SR 330/68; T/B 84/1. He also acquired at least one forfeited royalist estate in the county, sometime before November 1647.35CCC 1179; SP23/87, p. 454. Garland would later claim to have been ‘forced to forsake my habitation’ in Essex and return to his chamber at Lincoln’s Inn, ‘where I … behaved myself fairly in my way’.36State Trials, v. 1216. Although the reasons for his return to London are unclear, the end of his involvement in the local government of Essex in 1645-6 suggests that he had indeed turned his back on the county. It may not be a coincidence that in the same period Garland was increasingly involved in the affairs of the Kentish town of Queenborough, where he had also inherited property. He almost certainly sought a place in the recruiter election for that borough held in September 1645, as he was made a freeman immediately before the contest, but on that occasion the place went to Sir Michael Livesay*. Garland had to wait two and a half years for another vacancy, but on 26 May 1648 he was elected as MP, replacing Sir Edward Hales*. Having no known connection with Queenborough other than his personal property, Garland was probably returned on his own interest.37Cent. Kent. Stud. QB/JMS4, ff. 171, 176-7; QB/RPr7; QB/ZB49; QB/FAg1.

The death of Garland’s wife, who has yet to be identified, in August 1648, may have prevented him from taking his seat immediately, and his presence in the Commons is not recorded before 13 December.38Obit. Richard Smyth, ed. Ellis, 26; CJ vi. 96a. Garland himself later explained that he did not sit before Pride’s Purge, and that he had not initially expected to be admitted to the chamber by the army.39State Trials, v. 1216. Once he had taken his place, however, he rapidly rose to a position of prominence within the Commons, as an enthusiastic activist for the trial of the king. He was appointed to ensure that the votes for ‘No Further Addresses’, which had been removed from the records in August, were re-entered into the Journal and he took the dissent on 20 December.40CJ vi. 96a; C. Walker, Anarchia Anglicana (1649), 49 (E.570.1). In the weeks that followed he not only sat on committees regarding the publications of those members imprisoned at Pride’s Purge, but also on the committee to prepare the ordinance for the king’s trial (29 Dec.). Garland explained that ‘it was put on me to be chairman for bringing this act for trial’, and having reported the ordinance on 3 January, he was also given charge of finalising its form and named to the committee to consider the response to the London petition in support of the judicial proceedings.41State Trials, v. 1216; CJ vi. 97b, 106a, 110a-b, 111a, 118a Garland was named as a commissioner for the trial on 6 January, attended 13 meetings in the Painted Chamber, all four sessions in Westminster Hall, and signed the death warrant, on the day that he was named to the committee to consider the act against the proclaiming of a Stuart successor.42CJ vi. 124a. His support for, and intimate involvement in, the proceedings against Charles I would subsequently be made evident by his role in perusing the official narrative of the trial, in preventing illicit publications of such material, and in considering the act for the abolition of kingship, as well as in preparing legislation for the removal of the royal arms from public buildings.43CJ vi. 135b, 158a, 274a; CSP Dom. 1648-9, p. 353. He would also oversee the taking of the dissent by other members, and in June 1649 was given responsibility for considering the cases of those members who had remained in prison since Pride’s Purge.44CJ vi. 152a, 238a.

Garland’s enthusiasm for the new regime ensured that he became a ubiquitous, and influential, figure in the Commons in the months that followed.45SP28/258, ff. 457, 467, 647. In a sign of his new status, he was approached by the lawyer lobbying on behalf of the Cinque Ports, and was paid handsomely for his ‘care and pains for them’.46E. Kent RO, CP/Bp/123, pp. 5-6. Indeed, he could probably lay claim to being the most active member of the Rump, and would later be styled ‘an indefatigable stickler in most committees’, although he was not elected to any of the councils of state.47The Mystery of the Good Old Cause (1660), 23 (E.1923.2). In part, this influence probably reflected his legal background, which encouraged his involvement in commonwealth legislation, as well as in the management of the official parliamentary records, and the reform of central and local courts.48CJ vi. 107b, 126a, 168b, 169a, 206a, 209a, 217a, 218b, 221b, 239b, 260a, 262a, 271a, 297a, 301a, 333a, 369b, 427b, 430b, 467a, 488a, 498a; vii. 215a. For example, he played a key role in preparing legislation for the control of the press, both in 1649 and in succeeding years, as well as in preparing the act of oblivion in the summer of 1649.49CJ vi. 135b, 250b, 276a-b, 296b; vii. 11b. He was also involved in drafting legislation regarding naturalisations.50CJ vi. 515b, 516b, 575b. His prominence within the chamber is often more apparent than his personal beliefs, however, and beyond his enthusiasm for bringing about the republic, Garland’s activity does little to demonstrate that he was one of the political leaders of the Rump, although his zealous supporter of those who sought widespread constitutional and social reform is not in doubt.

In the wake of Pride’s Purge, and during the course of the Rump, Garland was named to a number of the most important standing committees, and he proved active on the Army Committee, the Committee for Compounding, and the Committee of Navy and Customs.51Eg. 2978, f. 255; Add. 63788A, f. 10; Add. 24861, f. 37; Add. 63788B, ff. 92-3v; Add. 22546, f. 28; CJ vi. 113b, 185a-186a, 192b; vii. 171b; SP46/108, ff. 104, 108, 117, 131; CCC 144, 158. He also played a prominent part in plans for the sale of crown and church lands, and for the relief of their tenants, often chairing committees, preparing legislation, reporting to the House, and being given particular responsibilities.52CJ vi. 116a, 163b, 174a, 178b, 201a, 254a, 258b, 259b, 260b, 271b, 274a, 305a, 326b, 358b, 369b, 382a, 389a, 393a, 400b, 420a, 497b, 519b, 555a, 556a, 563b; vii. 104a, 175b, 222b, 231a, 236b, 245a, 250b. He frequently liaised closely with the council of state on parliamentary business.53CSP Dom. 1651-2, p. 83. Garland’s enthusiasm for such measures was evidently linked to the need to reward particular military commanders and civilian grandees, like John Lambert*, Henry Marten*, John Bradshawe*, Oliver Cromwell*, and William Lenthall*, as well as the settlement of debts incurred by Parliament, and the cases of those with financial claims against the regime.54CJ vi. 174a, 196a, 198a, 199b, 201a, 237a, 250a, 265b, 266b, 267a, 279a, 299b, 300a, 305a, 279b, 290b, 294a, 296a, 307b, 308a, 398b, 404b, 406b, 411b, 417b, 428a, 433a, 441a, 491b, 431a, 516a-b, 519a, 567a, 595a, 618b; vii. 5a, 23b, 52b, 80b. He was also concerned to settle soldiers’ arrears, and to address the claims of reduced officers.55CJ vi. 258b, 286b, 302a-b, 305b, 306a, 325b. Perhaps as a result, Garland became involved in plans for reform of procedures for oversight of financial matters between March 1649 and November 1650, including the creation of a new committee of accounts, the preparation of legislation regarding the receivership of public revenue, and the consideration of pensions paid by Parliament.56CJ vi. 154a, 162b, 204b, 298a, 319b, 400a, 459b, 502a. From January 1651 he was also named to a number of committees relating to army accounts.57CJ vi. 524a; vii. 58a, 169b, 175a.

More importantly, Garland proved assiduous in considering the regime’s relations with former royalists. He was tenacious in his pursuit of leading delinquents, organising the trials of royalist leaders before high courts of justice in 1649, 1650 and 1652, and considering the jurisdiction of such courts.58CJ vi. 106b, 126b, 127b, 130a, 131a, 132a, 142b, 201a, 202a, 203a, 204a, 217a, 229b, 434a, 456a, 459a, 469a; vii. 62a. Subsequently, he became involved in the management of the state’s prisons, particularly as chairman of the committee for transporting felons and delinquents.59CJ vi. 154a, 267b, 268b, 271a, 272a, 290a, 548b. Furthermore, he assumed a leading role in the sequestration and sale of delinquents’ lands, formulating legislation, selecting commissioners and considering the names and cases of those affected.60SP23/118, pp. 217, 939; CJ vi. 167b, 393b, 436b, 442a, 446a, 452b, 455b, 460a, 482a, 499b, 502b, 522a, 527a-b, 528a, 538a, 543a, 552b, 557a, 565a, 565b, 566a, 567b, 571a-b, 587b, 598a-b, 604b, 612a; vii. 46b, 91b, 141a, 158a-b, 166b, 175a, 178a, 183b, 184b-185b, 190b, 192b, 216a, 231a, 246b, 263a. As chairman of the committee for the sale of delinquents’ estates he also worked closely with the commissioners for compounding.61CCC 592, 1127, 1168, 1173, 1695, 1753, 1796, 1889, 1913, 1923, 2549, 2791, 2935, 2941, 2965. Increasingly, this meant considering legislation regarding the estates of particular delinquents.62CJ vi. 455b, 510a, 587a, 611b; vii. 4b, 182a-b, 260b. Moreover, Garland’s concern with delinquents was also manifest in attempts to purge mercantile companies, local administration, and civic bodies, as well as the military hierarchy. He chaired the committee to consider the oaths to be taken by persons in places of trust in corporations, and prepared the legislation for the regulation of officers in the commonwealth, the removal of offices deemed burdensome to the public, and the disabling of delinquents from voting or bearing office in boroughs and corporations.63CJ vi. 127b, 130a, 134a, 181a, 267b, 273b, 327a, 432b; vii. 187b, 190a

Garland himself may have been a beneficiary of measures for the reform of officeholding. Although he continued to take an interest in matters relating to Essex, he devoted much more attention to London, where he was able to secure the position as prothonotary in the sheriff’s court, which he had held in reversion since 1624.64CJ vi. 201a, 203a, 204a; CLRO, Jor. 40, f. 320; Jor. 41, ff. 14v, 54. Thereafter, he was involved in many issues relating to the London region, including the regime’s response to the fire at Greenwich House in 1652, and he naturally became a central figure in relations between Parliament and the City authorities, as well as in the proceedings of the Common Council, the management of trading companies, and petitions from the capital and its environs.65CSP Dom. 1651-2, pp. 306, 381; CJ vi. 118a, 127b, 142a, 151a, 181a, 181b, 206b, 216a, 227b, 407a, 430a, 515a; vii. 11a, 99a, 100a, 235b. This in turn probably fed into a wider concern with matters concerning trade, including markets, coinage, and the threat from pirates.66CJ vi. 186a-b, 187b, 216a, 247b, 251b, 260a, 274b, 275a, 290b, 293b, 294a, 311a, 331a, 353b, 358a, 378a, 379b, 403b, 458a; vii. 134a. On at least one occasion, in November 1649, he acted as chairman of the grand committee regarding the excise.67CJ vi. 330b, 427a. Garland’s concern with mercantile and commercial affairs may also have encouraged him to take an interest in the highways, the committee for which he also served as chairman from August 1650.68CJ vi. 486b, 488a, 529a Having displayed a concern for measures for the relief of the poor, including regulation of the price of corn, as well as the issues of maimed soldiers, debtors, and soldiers’ widows, Garland was made chairman of the committee regarding London’s poor in March 1649, and remained active in relation to such business throughout the life of the Rump.69CJ vi. 137a, 161b, 171a, 190b, 192b, 201a, 209b, 227b, 231a, 262a, 267b, 276a, 284a, 322b, 378b, 413b, 441b, 481a, 485b, 486a, 535b, 569b, 608b, 612a; vii. 15a, 127b; CLRO, Jor. 41, f. 17.

Garland’s importance was not only manifest from his activity in relation to issues which were central to the management of commonwealth affairs, but also by his prominent role in a number of important political and constitutional initiatives. He was involved, therefore, in preparing the Engagement in the winter of 1649-50, both as a measure to test the loyalty of MPs and as an oath to be administered throughout the nation.70CJ vi. 307b, 370b. From November 1649, Garland was also involved in plans for the future constitutional settlement, and the formulation of legislation relating to the ‘equal representative’, and in February 1650 he was named to a committee to consider the manner of electing the council of state.71CJ vi. 318a, 363b. Following the battle of Worcester in September 1651, he was also involved in considering England’s dominion over Scotland.72CJ vii. 14a. Garland’s enthusiasm for transforming the methods and structures by which the country was governed also ensured that he became a leading figure in plans for law reform.73CJ vi. 318a. He helped mastermind plans to ensure the transaction of legal proceedings in English (Apr. 1651), and having helped to arrange the formation of the Hale commission in December 1651, proved to be one of more its active members, particularly in reporting proposals to the House in the months that followed.74CJ vi. 557b; vii. 58b, 121b, 124a, 124b, 130a, 131b. Subsequently, he also prepared legislation for the establishment of county registers, and for the reform of probate courts.75CJ vi. 211b; vii. 251a, 253b, 269a, 270a.

As well as revealing his support for, and active involvement in, plans for constitutional, legal and social reform, Garland’s career during the Rump also indicates the nature of his religious views, which were probably those of an Erastian Independent, who supported a nationally maintained church. During the spring of 1649, he was involved in preparing legislation for preventing the clergy from interfering in political affairs, and he was also given responsibility for preparing an act for settling maintenance upon conforming ministers.76CJ vi. 175b, 179a, 196a, 199b, 275b, 382b. He subsequently assumed a leading role in schemes for encouraging the propagation of the gospel, both in Britain and the colonies.77CJ vi. 231a, 352a, 416a, 458b, 460b; vii. 12b. That he was named to the committee to consider the act for repealing statutes for punishing non-attendance at church (29 June 1649) suggests his concern to grant a degree of toleration to tender consciences, and this may also have informed his involvement in the committee regarding the articles of the Christian religion (26 July 1649).78CJ vi. 245b, 270a. Like many Independents, however, he probably drew the line at tolerating radical sectarians, like the Ranters, although his attitude towards Catholics who conformed to the regime is less clear.79CJ vi. 423b; vii. 147a.

Garland probably remained in the Rump until its dissolution by Cromwell in April 1653, and appears to have been prepared to work with the council which met in the weeks which followed.80CJ vii. 275b, 278a. He certainly served on the committee to oversee the management of Whitehall, having earlier chaired a committee with similar duties in 1651.81CSP Dom. 1652-3, pp. 336, 425; CJ vi. 534b, 570a, 572a. Garland probably withdrew from Westminster shortly thereafter, however, and played no part in the Nominated Assembly. Instead he appears to have returned to Essex, where he was proposed, although eventually not adopted, as a trustee for a proposed religious meeting house in Waltham Forest, Barking, which appointed the Presbyterian, Edward Kighley.82CJ vii. 354a. That he did not resume an active role in public life in the months after December 1653 suggests that he had doubts about the creation of the protectorate.83CCC 673.

Whatever his initial qualms, Garland was prepared to return to Westminster in the first protectorate Parliament which convened in September 1654, as Member for Queenborough. His activity in this Parliament was relatively low-key, as he was nominated to only 11 committees, on subjects where he had particular expertise, such as law reform, the poor, and public accounts, as well as to the committee for Irish affairs.84CJ vii. 371b, 374a, 378b, 387a, 388a, 394b, 407b, 409b. The most interesting, if perplexing, aspect of his activity, however, concerns debates over the constitution. Named to the committee appointed on 7 December to prepare legislation on the proposed settlement, Garland is reported by an army newsletter as having moved, in a grand committee later in the month, ‘to have my lord protector crowned’, a motion which was apparently seconded by a councillor, Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper*, and the protector’s younger son, Henry Cromwell*.85Clarke Pprs. iii. 16. According to John Fitzjames*, this was no more than a mock-debate, ‘for recreation sake ... which made us a little merry’.86Alnwick, Northumberland 551, f. 14. The newsletter account certainly sits uneasily with Garland’s previous zeal for the overthrow of the monarchical constitution, and with his contemporary reputation as ‘a notable commonwealthsman, and a resolute opposer of the government in a single person’, who was ‘out of date upon the intrusion of Oliver Cromwell’.87Mystery of the Good Old Cause, 23. Garland’s only other known activity in relation to the constitution was as teller in an unsuccessful attempt to preserve Queenborough’s parliamentary seat (2 Jan. 1655), and as a member of the committee to consider securing a role for Parliament, as opposed to the protectoral council, in any alteration of the constitutional settlement.88CJ vii. 411b, 415a. This does little to support the idea that Garland would have seriously proposed that Cromwell should assume the crown, and the fact that he played almost no further role in public affairs during the remainder of the protectorate suggests that he was an unlikely ‘kingling’.

Garland returned to Westminster during the revived Rump in May 1659, and immediately resumed his association with a number of important issues, including the management of Whitehall, parliamentary records, the navy, and the state finances, including customs and the sale of public property.89CJ vii. 647a, 656a-b, 658b, 676b, 690a, 696a, 702a, 705a, 767a, 772a, 788a. He once more displayed his concern for maimed soldiers, and with the punishment of delinquents and the sale of their estates.90CJ vii. 682a, 688a, 705a, 748b, 756b, 791b. He was also involved in the preparation of legislation, particularly on matters relating to law reform and the courts.91CJ vii. 655a, 657a, 658b, 707a-b, 717a-b, 744a, 745b, 751a, 788a, 795b, 796b. And he proved particularly active in relation to business relating to Essex, London, and Westminster, particularly in terms of the organisation of the militias.92CJ vii. 647a, 662b, 663b, 666a, 668a, 682a, 694b, 705a-b, 709a-b, 710b, 717a-b, 739a, 751a, 757a. Moreover, Garland frequently acted as a committee chairman, on issues relating to London and the navy, and took charge of the grand committee regarding indemnity.93CJ vii. 699b, 751a; HMC 8th Rep. i. 248. From early August, indeed, he was largely preoccupied by his duties as chairman of the grand committees regarding union with Scotland, and regarding the state of the government.94CJ vii. 745a, 749b, 752a, 754b, 757b, 760a, 763a, 766b, 768b, 769b, 771a, 773a, 774b, 775b, 779a, 789b, 792b, 795a.

Almost certainly in alignment with the civilian republicans, Garland’s role in asserting the power of Parliament over taxation, and his involvement in the appointment of army commissioners (12 Oct.) helped provoke the army’s decision to interrupt the proceedings at Westminster in October 1659.95CJ vii. 795a-b, 796b. He returned to Westminster, however, as soon as the Rump reassembled in December, and having been thanked for his service during the preceding weeks, he helped to investigate the activity of the army and its executive, the committee of safety, and resumed his role in relation to matters of personal expertise.96CJ vii. 797b, 799a, 800a, 805b, 807a, 808b, 811a, 813a, 821a, 838a, 842a. His interest in the constitutional settlement once more became evident, however, not just in considering the dissolution of the Rump in 1653, but also in terms of preparing qualifications for membership of future parliaments.97CJ vii. 803a, 805a, 806b. Moreover, the purity of his republican credentials was made evident by his willingness to act as a teller in favour of the motion to read the bill for enacting an oath renouncing the Stuart line.98CJ vii. 803b. Garland may be assumed to have opposed the readmission of the secluded members in February 1660, and certainly played no further recorded part in proceedings after their return, although he was apparently in the House on the day that the Long Parliament finally dissolved (16 Mar. 1660).99CJ vii. 842a; Grand Memorandum (1660, 669.f.24.37). He later explained that ‘when the government was thus tossed and turned and tumbled … and the secluded members came into the House, I knew not what to do in that case’.100State Trials, v. 1216.

Garland claimed to have surrendered to the mayor of London on 9 May 1660, immediately upon learning of the royal proclamation regarding the regicides. As one of those who had signed the death warrant he was excluded from pardon (9 June), and subjected to trial.101State Trials, v. 1216; CJ viii. 61, 68; C. Walker, Complete History of Independency (1660), iv. 112-13 (E.1052). Indicted on 9 October, he initially pleaded not guilty, but reversed this plea at his hearing a week later.102State Trials, v. 994, 1005, 1195. He denied allegations of having spat in the king’s face following the passing of the sentence, and claimed that he had been pressured into participating in the proceedings against King Charles, and that ‘I did not know how to contradict that power or authority’. He also said that he had been ‘forced to run throughout what they imposed upon me’, and professed no ‘malignity’ towards the king. Claiming to have been torn between conflicting inclinations, he said that ‘without doors was misery, within doors was mischief’.103State Trials, v. 1215-16; An Exact and Most Impartial Accompt (1660), 264-5. As he had surrendered voluntarily, Garland was imprisoned rather than executed, and although an act was introduced to permit his execution in January 1662, it was not passed.104HMC 7th Rep. 155a; LJ xi. 372; HMC 11th Rep. vii. 4. Along with other regicides, he was conveyed to Tangiers in March 1664, remaining there until February 1677, when he accused of ‘contributing to the many present disagreements and animosities’ within the colony and transferred to the seclusion of Southsea Castle in Hampshire.105CSP Dom. 1663-4, p. 536; Oxford DNB; Tanner, ‘Naval manuscripts’, 351, 399, 403. The date of Garland’s death is unknown.