HARVEY, Edmund I (c.1601-73), of Aldermanbury, London and Fulham Palace, Mdx.

Originally from the west country, the Harvey family had settled in London by the beginning of the seventeenth century, and Edmund’s father, Charles, was a citizen and member of the Fishmongers’ Company.30Vis. London, i. 360. A freeman of the Drapers’ Company, Edmund Harvey had become reasonably prosperous by the early 1640s. In the spring of 1642 he made two subscriptions totalling £250 in the Irish Adventure.31Bottigheimer, Eng. Money and Irish Land, 183. As well as his trade connections, Harvey had family links with the militia forces of the capital, and was a member of the Honourable Artillery Company.32Raikes, Ancient Vellum Bk., 62. At the beginning of the civil war Harvey was appointed captain of one of the newly-raised troops of horse attached to the London militia.33Nagel, ‘Militia of London’, 110. Over the winter of 1642-3 he was busy dispersing disaffected ‘peace petitioners’ in the City and guarding the Guildhall, and in March 1643 he was instructed by the lord general, the 3rd earl of Essex, to seize horses and arms from Catholics in the London area.34Nagel, ‘Militia of London’, 111; CSP Dom. 1625-49, p. 648. By the beginning of May Harvey had been appointed colonel of the London horse, and in the early summer was busy preparing the regiment for service.35SP28/7, ff. 59, 173, 418, 522; CSP Dom. 1641-3, p. 466. In July he assisted the London militia committee in searching for suspicious people in the capital, and in the same month he was dispatched with four troops of horse to suppress disturbances at Sevenoaks in Kent.36Nagel, ‘Militia of London’, 112; CJ iii. 166a, 175a; Add. 31116, p. 127. In the next few weeks he served in Surrey and Hampshire before returning to London, where he was appointed to the council of war on 2 August, and week later was involved in the suppression of the demonstration that accompanied the presentation of the women’s petition for peace.37CJ iii. 191b; Clarendon, Hist. iii. 139. He commanded his regiment during Essex’s campaign to relieve Gloucester, and at the subsequent 1st battle of Newbury in September.38Noble, Regicides i. 337; Juxon Jnl. 8. In October he took his regiment to St Albans, and was involved in the capture of Newport Pagnell and raids against royalist outposts in Northamptonshire.39Nagel, ‘Militia of London’, 138, 154-6. On 1 November the regiment distinguished itself in a fight against the superior forces of Prince Rupert at Towcester, and Harvey’s account of the battle was soon afterwards published on Essex’s orders.40A Letter from Colonel Harvie (1643) (E.75.24).

In the spring of 1644, Harvey’s regiment was assigned to join Sir William Waller’s* forces guarding the western approaches to London. A long period of delay followed, as Harvey insisted that he could not march until his regiment’s arrears and quarters were settled.41CSP Dom. 1644, pp. 70, 83, 92, 103, 108, 115, 131-2, 136, 144-5, 150, 152-3, 176. Such excuses masked personal differences between Harvey and Waller. The royalist newsbook, Mercurius Aulicus, reported in May that Harvey had chosen to lay down his commission rather than serve under Waller, and both the Committee of Both Kingdoms* and the House of Commons seriously considered overriding Harvey’s authority by ordering his officers march without him.42Mercurius Aulicus 20th week (18 May 1644), p. 985; CJ iii. 459a, 488a, 490b; CSP Dom. 1644, pp. 155. According to Thomas Juxon*, ‘the committee … sent to Colonel Harvey to go along with Sir William Waller, but he utterly refused it, though they sent to him again and again and used him with great respect and civility … yet told them he would carry a musket under his excellency than have any charge under Waller’.43Juxon Jnl. 53. Essex broke the deadlock by ordering Harvey to join the main field army while assigning other cavalry units to Waller; and on 27 May, almost three months after the initial order, Harvey’s regiment marched out of London, carrying with it money to pay the earl’s army.44Juxon Jnl. 53; CJ iii. 505b; CSP Dom. 1644, pp. 168, 175.

Harvey’s insolence towards the Committee of Both Kingdoms, and Essex’s indulgence of him, made him many enemies at Whitehall. At the end of June 1644 he was with the earl at Melcombe Regis in Dorset, where he was involved in a dispute over confiscated goods which led to his recall to London to explain himself before the committee in July.45CJ iii. 543b-4a; CSP Dom. 1644, p. 328. Later in the same month Harvey joined Sir Philip Stapilton* and Lionel Copley* in opposing plans for Essex’s army to march westwards from Plymouth, the three men being described as ‘extremely bent against the good party, and complain of the council and my lord’s present condition as desperate’.46Juxon Jnl. 56. Harvey had probably rejoined Essex in time for his humiliating defeat at Lostwithiel. His regiment was among the cavalry units that fought their way out of Cornwall, but was badly mauled, and sought sanctuary at Plymouth, where it was stationed in the first week of September.47Nagel, ‘Militia of London’, 204-6, 208; CSP Dom. 1644, p. 493. Despite some evidence to the contrary, it is unlikely that the regiment had recovered sufficiently to take part in the second battle of Newbury in October, and it may have ceased to be an effective military force by that time.48Sprigge, Anglia Rediviva, 6. Harvey was certainly back in London in the weeks that followed, and was one of the colonels – including Stapilton and Copley – kept within the lines of communication by order of Parliament, for fear of ‘mischief’.49Juxon Jnl. 60. Harvey remained out of favour in August 1645, when he was assessed at £1,000 by the Committee for Advance of Money for non-payment of his assessment, although he was subsequently discharged because of the arrears of pay still due to him.50CCAM 576. In mid-April 1646 Harvey, Stapilton and Copley were seen by the Independents as a malign influence over the City Presbyterians, encouraging them to make ‘a desperate resolution to petition no more, but put forth a remonstrance and pay no taxes or excise, yet cry for the king and wish him with them, and condemn the House of Commons or the godly party for men of no conscience or honesty, no king, no church government’.51Juxon Jnl. 20, 114. On 27 July Harvey was returned as a recruiter MP for the Wiltshire seat of Great Bedwyn, almost certainly on the interest of either Sir John Danvers* or of the prominent Presbyterian Sir Edward Hungerford*, who also secured the election of his half-brother, Henry Hungerford*.52Supra, ‘Great Bedwyn’; C219/43/34.

Harvey had taken his seat by 11 August, when he was named to a committee to negotiate for a loan for the Irish service, and he was soon involved in measures to ensure the payment of money due to the Scots, preparatory to the withdrawal of their army north of the border.53CJ iv. 641b. On 21 August he was named to committees to prepare the general accounts of the army and to consider how to raise £100,000; and on 5 September he was ordered to attend the lord mayor, aldermen and common council to borrow a total of £200,000 as a first payment to the Scots.54CJ iv. 650b, 663b. The departure of the Scots was an important step in the demilitarisation of the England after the civil war, which lay at the heart of Presbyterian plans for a permanent settlement. Later in September, Harvey was named to committees to consider the state of Newcastle (where the Scottish headquarters lay) and on the disbandment of local forces in Cheshire.55CJ iv. 666b, 674b. On 1 October he was appointed to discuss the defence of the House with the City militia committee, and on 10 October the Committee of Accounts was instructed to certify his own arrears of pay as colonel of horse.56CJ iv. 679b, 689b.

Harvey’s concern for orderly disbandment lay behind his involvement in two related issues: the guaranteeing of legal indemnity for former soldiers, and the sale of confiscated lands to pay off their arrears. On 15 October he was named to a committee to draft an indemnity ordinance and to deal with those who had been arrested in the pursuance of the service of Parliament.57CJ iv. 694b. On 23 October he was named to a committee to consider a petition from the Herefordshire Grand Inquest against the county town’s former governor, the Presbyterian Colonel John Birch*.58CJ iv. 703a. Harvey first became involved with the issue of confiscated estates on 24 October, when his paper advising the appointment of a ‘register-accountant’ was referred to the grand committee on the ordinance for the sale of bishops’ lands.59CJ iv. 703b. On 29 October he was appointed to look into the instructions to the county committees on valuing the estates of leading royalists ‘excepted’ from pardon, to speed their sale.60CJ iv. 708a. On 19 November he reported from the committee to discuss an ordinance with the trustees for the sale of bishops’ lands, and five days later delivered the ordinance to the House of Lords for their approval.61CJ iv. 725a, 728b. On the same day Harvey was named to a committee to consider issuing tickets promising repayments on the public faith.62CJ iv. 728b. During the winter there was the constant risk of unrest. On 4 December Harvey was among those sent to request the common council to speed up the collection of the assessment to pay the New Model army.63CJ iv. 738a. The House was greatly concerned with the safety of London and Parliament: on 5 December Harvey was sent back to the City to request the lord mayor to use his authority to suppress tumultuous assemblies, and two days later he was appointed to a committee to consider how to deal with disaffected persons in the capital.64CJ v. 2b, 4a. He took the Solemn League and Covenant on 9 December, the next day he was named to a committee on settling army arrears, and on 16 December he was sent as messenger to the Lords with an ordinance on bishops’ lands.65CJ v. 7b, 9b, 15a-b; LJ viii. 613b.

By 18 January 1647 Harvey had become chairman of the Committee for Indemnity, and thereafter cases were regularly referred to him from the House.66CJ v. 55a. He introduced the indemnity ordinance on 4 February, and on 7 and 14 May he was included in committees to scrutinise the ordinance.67CJ v. 75a, 166a, 174a. The payment of arrears remained important to Harvey. On 10 February he carried an ordinance up to the Lords to recompense Edward Massie*, whose brigade had recently been disbanded.68CJ v. 83b. At the end of February Harvey was involved in drawing up legislation on the sale of bishops’ lands, taking an ordinance on trustees to the Lords (26 Feb.) and being appointed to a committee on an explanatory ordinance (27 Feb.).69CJ v. 99a, 99b. By the end of March, the disbandment of the army was becoming increasingly controversial, as the New Model resisted attempts to pay off some of its regiments and ship others to Ireland. Harvey was named to a committee to consider a petition from the army officers on 27 March, and on 31 March he joined Zouche Tate as teller in favour of a motion to appoint Sir William Waller, now a Presbyterian grandee, as head of the Leinster and Ulster forces.70CJ v. 127b, 131b. Harvey was also an important figure connecting the Presbyterians to the City of London. On 2 April he was appointed to the joint committee on a City loan to facilitate the disbanded of the army and to a Commons’ committee on the new London militia ordinance.71CJ v. 132b, 133a. He was appointed to manage a conference on this issue later in the month, and on 1 May he was named to a committee to arrange a meeting with the City authorities concerning the borrowing of further money and to discuss security.72CJ v. 143b, 160a. He was named to a committee for an ordinance to raise a loan of £200,000 on 12 May, and two days later was sent to the common council to inform them that the legislation had passed.73CJ v. 168b, 172b. During this period, Harvey continued to work for the sale of bishops’ lands: on 7 April he reported obstructions to the sale and in early May was involved in legislation concerning the Bishop of London’s estates.74CJ v. 135b, 158b, 162a. As relations between Parliament and the army deteriorated, Harvey played some part in attempts at conciliation. He was sent with another leading Presbyterian, Anthony Nicoll* on 18 May to ask Sir Thomas Fairfax* to reside with the army.75CJ v. 176b. In other respects, however, Harvey appears to have been intent on encouraging the New Model’s enemies. He was appointed to a joint committee to meet with the Scottish commissioners (5 June); he was involved in negotiations with London for a guard for Parliament (7 June); and he was sent to inform the City that a ‘committee of safety’ had been established (11 June) for mobilising London against the army.76CJ v. 200a, 202a, 208a. After the army’s articles of impeachment against the Eleven Members, Harvey remained hostile. On 19 June he was added to a committee to prepare a declaration concerning the assembly of soldiers in London; and on 8 July he was named to the committee to allow the raising of horse regiments within the City.77CJ v. 217a, 236b. Harvey remained in Parliament during the Speaker's absence and was named to a committee on 2 August to investigate the rioting and breach of privilege on 26 July.78CJ v. 265a.

The autumn of 1647 marked a watershed in Harvey’s career. The defeat of the Presbyterian interest and the dominance of the Independents, backed by their allies in the New Model, seem to have prompted Harvey to reconsider his political position. On 18 August he was appointed to the committee declaring null and void all acts and ordinances passed during the ‘forcing of the Houses’, and his acceptability to the Independents can be seen in his subsequent appointment to the new militia commission for London (2 Sept.) and, on a temporary basis, to the Army Committee (9 Sept.).79CJ v. 278a, 290a, 298b. In September Harvey also acquired a personal interest in the issue of bishops’ lands with his purchase of Fulham Palace, previously the residence of the bishop of London.80Lysons, Environs ii. 346; Col. Top. et Gen. i. 3. Later critics saw this investment as crucial in enticing Harvey away from the City Presbyterians. According to Clement Walker*, ‘the exceeding cheap bargain of Fulham House and manor … changed him from a furious Presbyter to a Bedlam Independent’.81[C. Walker], Anarchia Anglicana: or the History of Independency, the second part (1660), 13 (E.1052.2). Marchamont Nedham concurred, saying Harvey ‘was drawn over to the Independents to secure the slight purchase in the lands of the bishop of London’.82Mercurius Pragmaticus no. 22 (22-29 Aug. 1648), Sig. Dd2 (E.461.17); no. 36 (5-12 Dec. 1648), Sig. Ccc2 (E.476.2). Harvey’s parliamentary activity over the next few weeks suggests that such comments were not too far wide of the mark. On 21 September he acted as messenger to the Lords with the ordinance concerning purchasers of bishops’ lands, and on 9 October he was appointed, at the call of the House, to consider the validity of excuses given by absentees, including his former allies.83CJ v. 311b, 329a. It may not be a coincidence that, for the first time, Harvey was appointed to religious committees, including those to consider the ordinance for tithes (15 Sept.), and to purge the universities and prevent the use of the Prayer Book and prayers for bishops (12 Oct.).84CJ v. 302a, 331b. Harvey was also named to committees on the propositions to be sent to the king on 18 and 21 October, and on 28 October he was named to the committee on an ordinance to remove ‘obstructions’ from the sale of bishops’ lands.85CJ v. 336a, 339a, 344a.

Harvey appears to have been absent from the Commons for November and most of December 1647. On his return, he was named to committees on indemnity for soldiers (21 Dec.) and the money owed to the Scots (25 Dec.), and he was added to the Committee for Plundered Ministers* (27 Dec.).86CJ v. 396a, 405b, 407a. Harvey’s main concern during the winter of 1647-8 was his own financial position. His petition to the House was ordered to be read on 28 December. This probably concerned his arrears, as his colleague in the London militia, Colonel John Venn*, was ordered to make a report on this issue.87CJ v. 407a, 409b. Two reports concerning Harvey were made from the committee on major-generals, on 30 December and 2 March 1648, though the details are unknown.88CJ v. 410b, 477a. On 3 March it was ordered that Harvey’s arrears be paid in full and the ordinance to this effect was passed on the following day, with the Lords’ order following on 6 March.89CJ v. 477b, 479a; HMC 7th Rep., 13. Harvey was also involved in a dispute about the payment of tithes. On 27 January he was instructed to deliver up an order concerning the tithes owed to Adoniram Byfield as minister of Fulham for the Lords to consider, and on 9 February he was included in the committee on an ordinance for the better payment of tithes in London.90CJ v. 446a, 460b. Perhaps with this, and other matters concerning Fulham, in mind, on 9 February Harvey was also named to the committee on an ordinance for better explaining and executing the former ordinance for the sale of bishops’ lands.91CJ v. 460b.

From the late spring of 1648, Harvey was preoccupied with military affairs, prompted by the growing unrest that became the second civil war. On 20 May he was sent with Venn to request another former comrade, Colonel Philip Skippon*, to keep the peace between the London regiments and the troops guarding Parliament; on 22 May he was added as a commissioner for the Middlesex militia (approved by the Lords on 25 May); and on 26 May he was also named to a committee to consider the defence of the City.92CJ v. 567a, 569a, 574a; LJ x. 283a. In early June he was named to two committees on army arrears, and on 14 June he was appointed to a committee to consider the printing of details of what had been paid.93CJ v. 581b, 582b, 599a. A day later he was named to a committee to consider the seizure of royalist hostages in retaliation for the capture of Sir William Masham* and the Essex committee by the insurgents.94CJ v. 601b. On 27 June he was added to the committee for scandalous publications to vindicate the honour of Skippon, who had been slandered in a recent publication.95CJ v. 614b. On 11 July Harvey was appointed to investigate the 1st earl of Holland’s ill-fated insurrection in Surrey, and on 20 July to investigate who had aided and abetted the 1st duke of Hamilton’s invasion of the north of England.96CJ v. 631b, 640b. He continued during August to be named to committees concerning the defence of Parliament. On 15 August he was instructed to advise with the London militia committee concerning the recruiting of forces in the City by Skippon, and on 17 August was named to a committee to investigate ‘a design’ with power to seize horses and arms, in conjunction with the London militia committee.97CJ v. 671b, 673b. On 29 August Harvey was appointed to the committee to consider the disposal of the Scottish soldiers captured during Hamilton’s defeat at Preston.98CJ v. 692a.

Amid these military affairs, there are the first signs that Harvey had acquired something of a radical streak. In the debate on where to hold new peace negotiations in July, it was suggested that the king’s word be taken that he would not attempt an escape during the talks. Harvey ‘slighted this motion, vilifying the king’s royal word, and saying there was no trust in princes’, reminding the House that the king had assured the Commons of their rights and privileges only days before the attempt on the Five Members in 1642.99OPH xvii. 278. On 28 August, while reporting from a committee on the ordinance for the sale of bishops’ lands, Harvey pointed to a direct correlation between the level of confiscated lands purchased by London citizens, and the extent of their support for Parliament, and claimed (apparently without irony) ‘that the men most refractory and backward in your service were such of the Presbyterian party as have no engagement upon bishops’ lands, whereas others of the same party and principles that I knew to have an interest in those lands were as forward as any’.100CJ v. 685a, 689b, 690b; Mercurius Pragmaticus no. 22 (22-29 Aug. 1648), Sig. Dd2; Anarchia Anglicana, 13. In September and October Harvey acted as messenger to the Lords with the new ordinance for the bishops’ lands, and he was named as a commissioner for the sale on 21 November.101CJ vi. 23a, 26b, 27a, 57a, 81b.

Harvey was reluctantly involved in the early attempts to broker a new peace deal with the recalcitrant king, and on 8 September he was one of those sent to common council to request the speedy payment of the City’s loan towards the peace treaty.102CJ vi. 9b. On 11 September, however, he was teller with Sir John Danvers against resuming the debate on sending a blank pass to Scotland, as requested by the king: a motion narrowly defeated by 46 votes to 30, with Harvey’s former allies, John Birch and Lionel Copley, telling in favour.103CJ vi. 18b. On 10 October Harvey was among those who spoke out in support of a number of petitions to the House which condemned the leniency of the proposed peace treaty towards delinquents, and proposed that many more delinquents be proceeded against as capital offenders.104OPH xviii. 30-5. On 30 October he was appointed, alongside Nathaniel Fiennes I, Sir John Evelyn of Wiltshire and others, as one of the reporters on a conference with the Lords concerning the peace negotiations with the king, with special reference to the issue of bishops’ lands.105CJ vi. 65a. On 1 December, when Fiennes spoke in favour of accepting the king’s latest answer, ‘Mr Sacrilege Harvey, lord bishop of Fulham’ protested on the grounds that the articles concerning bishops’ lands were unacceptable, as ‘the purchasers and contractors would not be contented with leases for 99 years, and therefore the king had not given satisfaction’. When it was suggested that he was putting his own financial interest before ‘the public peace and welfare of the kingdom’, Harvey was struck ‘as mute and dead as a shotten herring’, bringing the discussion to an abrupt halt.106OPH xviii. 286-7; Mercurius Pragmaticus no. 36 (5-12 Dec. 1648), Sig. Ccc2.

After the purge of the Commons by the army on 6 December, Harvey remained in the House. On 13 December he was appointed to a committee to review the electoral system in cities and boroughs in order to avoid the election of royalists and other ‘malignants’, and to a committee to ensure the orders of the House were entered in the Journals.107CJ vi. 96a. On 23 December he was named to committees to reply to a letter from the Elector Palatine and a petition from the City of London, and on 25 December he signed the dissent.108CJ vi. 102b, 103b; Underdown, Pride’s Purge, 375. On 28 December he delivered to the Lords the latest ordinance concerning the sale of bishops’ lands, and the following day he was named to a committee to consider the non-payment of fines by delinquents.109CJ vi. 105b, 106b. Harvey was involved in the early stages of the trial of Charles I. He was named to committees to consider how to proceed against the king (23 Dec.) and to draft the ordinance for his trial (29 Dec.).110CJ vi. 103a, 106a. He was appointed to the high court of justice on 6 January 1649 and attended 13 sittings of the trial.111Abbott, Writings and Speeches i. 728n. He was present on 27 January, when the king was sentenced, but left the court in protest at its refusal to allow the king to defend himself, and he did not sign the death warrant.112Rushworth, Hist. Collns. vii. 1416; Worden, Rump Parl., 48. Nevertheless, Harvey was included in committee to consider ‘obnoxious’ publications criticising the trial and execution on 3 February.113CJ vi. 131b.

In Parliament Harvey began 1649 with two appointments concerned with raising money for the public service. He was named to the committee on the public revenues on 1 January, and to a committee to consider raising £300,000 on the sale of dean and chapter lands to fund the navy on 12 January.114CJ vi. 107b, 116a. Among the most lucrative deans and chapters was that of Westminster, and Harvey was added to the committee to consider its revenues on 5 February.115CJ vi. 132a. During this period, Harvey was also involved in changes to the government of London and its environs. On 15 January he was named to a committee to consider the petition of the newly-elected common council, drawn up in the absence of the lord mayor, and in February he was appointed to committees to draw up an ordinance to settle the suburban militia forces (2 Feb.), and to consider alterations to the oath taken by freemen in London (10 Feb.).116CJ vi. 117b, 129b, 137a. On 15 February he was appointed to a committee investigating the loss of the return for the Cirencester election and reported from the committee two days later that the indentures had at last been located. Harvey’s involvement in this business is interesting, as the MPs in question were Sir Thomas Fairfax and Colonel Nathaniel Rich.117CJ vi. 142a, 144b. Harvey’s relations with former Presbyterians were correspondingly frosty. On 7 April, for example, he was appointed to take special care of the investigations into the party played in the royalist uprisings of the previous year by the former sheriff of London, Serjeant Richard Browne II*.118CJ vi. 181b.

During the spring of 1649, Harvey was increasingly concerned with reorganising the public revenue. On 12 March he was named to a committee concerning money charged against the treasurers for compounding, and how security could be transferred to other treasuries.119CJ vi. 161b. His own pay arrears were transferred from the excise to the dean and chapter lands a few weeks later.120CJ vi. 191a. He was added to a committee to go to the City concerning a loan (12 Apr.) and made reports concerning maintenance of the ministry (18 Apr.) and debts charged on the excise (20 Apr.).121CJ vi. 185a, 188b, 190b. Harvey was appointed as commissioner for customs on 24 April and thereafter his activity in the Commons began to decrease markedly, although he remained an important figure in revenue matters, especially the sale of confiscated lands.122CJ vi. 193a-b. On 9 May he was appointed to a committee on a bill to charge army arrears on the proceeds from the sale of crown lands instead of the excise, and he reported from the committee for removing obstructions from the sale of bishops’ lands on 19 and 24 May.123CJ vi. 205b, 212a, 216a. As a customs commissioner, it was appropriate that Harvey was added to the Navy Committee on 13 June, and this further reduced his direct involvement in the business of the Commons.124CJ vi. 232a. He received only three further committee appointments that year: to regulate the election of officers of state (2 Aug.), to enforce the taking of the Engagement by MPs (12 Oct.) and to encourage those with money secured on the excise to allow their debts to be transferred to other treasuries (23 Nov.).125CJ vi. 273b, 307b, 325a.

During 1650, Harvey made only occasional appearances in the House, and these were mostly concerning financial matters. On 17 January he was added to the committee on fee farm rents (perhaps reflecting his recent acquisition of such rents in Dorset); on 25 April he was named to the committee on a bill to prohibit the export of coins and bullion; on 20 June he was appointed to a committee on a bill to appoint new commissioners for the excise; and on 28 August he was named to a committee to consider bringing in more money for public service.126CJ vi. 348a, 403b, 427a, 459b. In the autumn, Harvey was again involved in the sale of dean and chapter lands. On 1 October he reported from the committee on obstructions to the former legislation, and on the same day he was ordered to take care of measures to ‘double’ the security offered.127CJ vi. 475b, 476a. He again reported from the committee on obstructions on 9 October, and was duly named to the committee on the bill to prevent such abuses, appointed on 18 October.128CJ vi. 481a, 485a. In the same month, Harvey was again appointed to command a troop in the Middlesex militia.129CSP Dom. 1650, p. 512. Surviving warrants show that he was attending the meetings of the navy committee in October, November and December, alongside George Thomson*, Luke Hodges*, Richard Aldworth* and others.130Add. 22546, ff. 28, 30, 35.

On 24 January 1651 Harvey was named to a committee to receive claims under the bill for the sale of delinquents’ estates.131CJ vi. 528a. He received no further committee appointments between February 1651 and April 1652, when vested interests necessitated his inclusion on a committee to consider a petition by the contractors for the sale of bishops’ lands.132CJ vii. 115a. In the following months, his attendance appears to have been sporadic. On 27 July he was named to a committee to consider bringing all the treasuries together; on 27 August he was appointed to the committee for petitions; and on 12 October he was named to the committee on a bill concerning leases of forfeited estates.133CJ vii. 159a, 171b, 190b. The first Dutch War pre-occupied Harvey. In September he was summoned with Thomson to attend the council of state concerning the navy and customs.134CSP Dom. 1651-2, pp. 417-8. On 4 December Harvey reported on financial matters from the navy committee, and on 15 March 1653 he was ordered to request Mr Knight to preach on the day of thanksgiving for the recent defeat of the Dutch navy.135CJ vii. 225a, 266b.

Harvey was returned for Middlesex in the elections for the first protectorate Parliament in the autumn of 1654, but his continued involvement with customs and excise limited his participation in the affairs of the House. He was named to the committee for scandalous ministers on 25 September, the committee on Irish affairs four days later, and that to consider the trade in corn, butter and cheese on 6 October.136CJ vii. 370a, 371b, 374b. After nearly a month’s gap, on 3 November he was added to the committee on the petition of purchasers of Sir John Stawell’s* estate, and on 10 November he was teller with Lord Broghill (Roger Boyle*) for the majority in favour of a motion to continue discussing the clause of the Government Bill concerning the lord protector’s veto over parliamentary legislation.137CJ vii. 381a, 384a. The latter suggests that Harvey was a supporter of the protectoral government, and this is confirmed by his subsequent appointments. On 22 November he was named to a committee to examine fraudulent debentures, and on the same day he was teller with Colonel John Clerke II* in favour of continuing the debate on a clause allowing exceptions to Parliament’s sole right to legislate, especially when it came to the armed forces. The opposing tellers were two critics of the regime, John Birch and Christopher Guise.138CJ vii. 388a. Harvey’s final committee appointment of the session, on 12 December, was to consider ‘blasphemous publications’ by the Socinian, John Biddle.139CJ vii. 400a.

After the dissolution of Parliament in January 1655, Harvey continued as a customs commissioner, liaising with John Disbrowe*, John Barkstead* and the navy commissioners during the spring and summer.140CSP Dom. 1655, pp. 115, 437, 492, 499. His good standing with the regime can be seen in the protector’s visit to Fulham Palace, to be entertained ‘most magnificently’, at the beginning of November.141The Mystery of the Good Old Cause (1660), 24 (E.1923.2); Abbott, Writings and Speeches iv. 17. A week later, however, Harvey was under arrest, accused of defrauding the customs of over £30,000, on the evidence of his own brother-in-law, Colonel William Langham.142Aylmer, State’s Servants, 160-2; CSP Dom. 1655-6, p. 8; Clarke Pprs. iii. 61. Sir William Roberts*, Harvey’s Middlesex colleague in the late Parliament, was among those appointed to investigate.143CSP Dom. 1655-6, p. 16. News of the arrest was widely reported and caused great surprise even in the merchant community. Richard Bradshaw, resident at Hamburg, wrote to Secretary John Thurloe* expressing shock ‘that a person so honoured and advantaged by the state as I hear Colonel Harvey hath been, should so shamefully falsify his trust’.144TSP iv. 222. Harvey’s stay in prison, however, was short-lived. On 26 December 1655, on a petition pleading ill-health, he was released on £20,000 bail; and in January 1656 was allowed to continue at Fulham on a further bond of £10,000 to return to the Tower when required.145CSP Dom. 1655-6, pp. 55, 63, 76, 78, 92, 129, 136. Investigations into the affair continued during 1656 and 1657 and various schemes were drawn up for repayment of the debt.146CSP Dom. 1655-6, pp. 352-3; 1656-7, pp. 5, 59. In the end he was discharged, having paid only a fraction of the £57,000 that was ultimately concluded to have been the extent of the fraud.147Aylmer, State’s Servants, 160-2.

Harvey returned to Parliament on the restoration of the Rump in May 1659, and attended the House regularly until the military coup in October. During this period, he seems to have resumed his role as a financial expert, despite his shady past. He was named to a committee on a bill to bring in money due to the commonwealth (20 June); appointed to a committee to consider the non-payment of instalments by purchasers of delinquents’ estates (11 July); and added to a committee to consider petitions by officers who had bought land in the Forest of Dean (16 July).148CJ vii. 690a, 711a, 721a. On 5 August he was named to a committee on a bill for the sale of confiscated estates.149CJ vii. 748b. On 18 August and 1 September Harvey was appointed to prepare a bill for a monthly assessment of £120,000, and he reported amendments to this on 9 and 13 September.150CJ vii. 762a, 772a, 776b, 777b. He was also named to a committee on 19 September to revive acts and ordinances relating to customs and excise receipts.151CJ vii. 789b. In the month that followed, as tensions grew between the commonwealthsmen and the army, Harvey played less of a role at Westminster. He was fined for absence at the call of the House on 30 September, and his last committee appointment, to consider an additional bill concerning sequestrations, was on 4 October.152CJ vii. 789a, 791b.

There is no evidence that Harvey was politically active in the months following the army coup of 18 October, but when the Rump was again restored at the end of December, he resumed his seat. His main concern over the next few weeks was to reassert the authority of the Rump and punish its enemies. He was appointed to the committee to investigate recent cases of imprisonment without cause on 30 December, and on the following day to a committee to discuss the defence of the City with the common council.153CJ vii. 800a, 801a. A few days later, the Commons resolved to keep the doors locked on the basis of information provided by Harvey concerning the safety of the House, and he was appointed with Sir James Harrington and John Weaver to investigate the matter.154CJ vii. 802a. On 7 January 1660 he was named to a committee to decide if the part in the dissolution of the Long Parliament in 1653 played by the clerk, Henry Scobell, was covered by the indemnity ordinance and on 17 January he told for the majority in favour of a vote to imprison Major Richard Salwey* for his part in the more recent dissolution of the Rump.155CJ vii. 805a, 814a. He was appointed to a committee on the bill for the Engagement on 10 January and on the following day to committees to disable certain persons from parliamentary elections and to improve the Tower of London.156CJ vii. 806b, 807a. In February he was appointed to take care of legislation concerning common council elections (9 Feb.), and was named with two others to draw up a proviso to extend the powers of the London militia committee (10 Feb.).157CJ vii. 838b, 840a. On 13 February he was named to investigate the activities of the committee of safety – the executive that the army had set up after dissolving the Rump in October.158CJ vii. 842a. He reported on which constituencies were currently represented in Parliament on 16 February, and two days later was appointed to a committee on the bill for new elections.159CJ vii. 845a, 846a. His final appointment, on 21 February, was to the committee on a bill for a new council of state.160CJ vii. 847b. The return of the secluded Members on the same day brought Harvey’s parliamentary career to a sudden end.

At the restoration of Charles II, Harvey was among those whose arrest was ordered by the Lords, and on 23 July he was on an official list of those present at the passing of the death sentence against Charles I, and thus to be shown no mercy.161LJ xi. 32b, 101b. He gave himself up to the authorities shortly afterwards.162Ludlow, Voyce, 186. Harvey was excepted from pardon as to life and estate because of his part in the regicide, and was brought before the Old Bailey in mid-October. He pleaded that although he had attended Charles I’s trial he had opposed the death sentence, producing witnesses to attest that this was so. The court found him guilty but accepted there had been extenuating circumstances, and the death penalty was commuted to life imprisonment.163State Trials, v. 1195-6, 1203. The following month, Bulstrode Whitelocke* discussed Harvey's case with the 1st earl of Clarendon (Edward Hyde*) and persuaded him to be ‘a friend’ to Harvey if Fulham Palace was returned to the bishop of London without a struggle. Whitelocke was interested in the case because his daughter had married Harvey’s eldest son Samuel, now lord of the manor of Fulham, in September 1658.164Whitelocke, Diary, 498, 616. Edmund Harvey was moved to Pendennis Castle in 1661 where he died on 25 June 1673.165CSP Dom. 1661-2, p. 130; 1673, p. 410. With a bitter irony, two days later he was buried in the grounds of the newly-built parish church at Falmouth, dedicated to Charles King and Martyr.166Falmouth Par. Reg. 675.