VENN, John (1586-1650), of Bread Street, London and Windsor Castle, Berks.

Venn was the son of a Somerset yeoman who moved to London to serve an eight-year apprenticeship in the Merchant Taylors’ Company under William Priestly of Bread Street.34GL, Merchant Taylors’ Co. Apprenticeship binding bks. iii. 94; Venn, Annals, 52. Having gained his freedom in 1610, Venn remained in London but maintained his contacts with the west country through his involvement with the domestic silk and wool trade, and he also traded as far afield as Chester and Ireland.35CSP Dom. 1637, pp. 51, 59, 147. Although not one of London’s wealthiest citizens, he evidently made a good living, and later royalist descriptions of him as ‘a decaying tradesman’ and ‘a broken silkman in Cheapside’ are a gross exaggeration.36G. Bate, The Lives, Actions and Executions of the Prime Actors and Principall Contrivers of the horrid murder of.. King Charles I (1661), 128; Berks. Bucks. and Oxon. Arch. Jnl. xxx pt. iv (1926), 191. Venn showed an early interest in military matters, joining the Honourable Artillery Company in 1614 and becoming a captain of the trained bands in 1626, and in the latter year his advice was sought by the citizens of Exeter concerning a new muster master.37Keeler, Long Parl., 372. One of the original patentees of the Massachusetts Bay Company, Venn was elected as its assistant in October 1629 and may have considered emigrating to New England.38Winthrop Pprs. ii. 160; Thomas Hutchinson Pprs. i. 5-25. Although he never made the journey he did maintain business interests there, and later corresponded with John Winthrop.39Winthrop Pprs. ii. 177; iv. 220-1; Publications of the Col. Soc. of Mass. xxiv (1920-2), 167n.

Venn first attracted notoriety in the City in 1631 when he was involved in a disputed election in the Artillery Company. He was nominated as an opposition candidate to the aldermen’s choice, but the privy council intervened and forcibly instituted a third candidate. In the same year he became churchwarden of All Hallows’, Bread Street, whose congregation had a reputation for puritanism and enjoyed the right to elect its own ministers.40Pearl, London, 163, 188-9; BDBR iii. 267. Venn’s godly credentials are beyond doubt. As his daughter later remembered, Venn was keen to take his family to sermons, afterwards ‘repeating and farther pressing it home upon our spirits’, and he and his wife attended religious meetings ‘every week almost, and sometimes oftener’. By the end of the decade, these meetings took a more political turn: ‘which being times of great fears and sadness, the people of God met often and spake to one another, and kept days of humiliation and seeking the Lord in the behalf of the nation and his poor people in it’. It was during this period that the Venns first met the puritan minister, Christopher Love.41Anne Venn, A Wise Virgins Lamp Burning (1658), 2, 4, 6. Venn’s other associates in the later 1630s included notable critics of the crown: his colleagues in the Massachusetts Bay Company, Samuel Vassall* and Matthew Cradock*, and the president of the Honourable Artillery Company, Thomas Soame*.42Pearl, London, 188. When Venn heard of Charles I’s intention of calling a Parliament in the spring of 1640, he did not have much hope of its success and he wrote to Winthrop in April that ‘we are full of fears and have little ground of comfort or hope of good, save only in the Lord’.43Winthrop Pprs. iv. 220-1. Venn’s first overtly political move came during the proceedings against the 1st earl of Strafford (Thomas Wentworth†) in the spring of 1641. On 21 April he was one of the three city captains who led 10,000 citizens to Westminster to present a petition demanding justice against the earl. The king’s supporters complained that ‘these tumults out of the City [were] led up by Captain Venn to the parliament doors to see that the godly party (for so their faction was called) in the House might not be outvoted’.44R. Cheslin, Persecutio Undecima (1648), 62. When the crowds gathered again at Westminster on 3 May, demanding an answer to their petition, the Lords called in between six and ten of the citizens, and it was Venn who ‘spoke for the rest’.45HMC 4th Rep., 61; LJ iv. 232a.

London politics, 1641-2

Venn was returned to Parliament for London at a by-election on 1 June 1641 in place of Matthew Cradock, who had died only four days previously. Royalists claimed that Venn ‘was taken notice of for his more than ordinary forwardness against the king’s interest’.46Bate, Lives, Actions and Executions, 128. Another, related, factor was his reputation within the City, which was again attested a month after his election, when he was chosen as warden of the Merchant Taylors’ Company.47GL, Merchant Taylors’ Co. ct. min. bks. ix, f. 125. At Westminster, Venn was almost immediately involved in Parliament’s attempts to raise money, being sent on 4 June to the lord mayor to require a ‘positive answer’ to the £120,000 loan promised by the City.48CJ ii. 168a. Four days later he reported to the Commons ‘that notwithstanding all his endeavours used therein, he could not procure’ the remaining portion of the money, but insisted ‘there are 24 able citizens who would be ready to be bound if the money may be procured’.49Procs. LP v. 27, 40. At the end of June Venn responded to the army plots by calling for measures to ensure the safety of London and he also presented evidence of ‘a great design intended tomorrow by the papists against this House and the City’ – a revelation dismissed by more sober Members ‘as a toy’.50Procs. LP v. 256, 364. On 28 July Venn and the other London MPs were required to give a daily account of the latest totals from the poll tax and to indicate ‘where the obstruction is’, and he presented an account of the tax the following day.51CJ ii. 226b, 228b. On 4 and 5 August he again reported to the Commons on the poll money and also advised the House to invite the Scottish agents to attend when ‘the money was told, bagged and sealed up’ to avoid any queries later.52Procs. LP vi. 197, 216, 219. During this period Venn was appointed to committees to consider the money due to the army (29 July), the grievances of tradesmen in London (16 Aug.) and the state of the navy (25 Aug.).53CJ ii. 229a, 258a, 271b. He opposed the appointment of new privy councillors by the king in August, ‘charging some particular’ against one of the peers, possibly the Catholic 5th earl of Clanricarde; and in response to Sir Walter Erle’s report on the defence of the kingdom on 16 August, Venn argued for that the London militia should be left in the hands of the lord mayor in the king’s absence in Scotland.54Procs. LP vi. 322, 434. On 9 September he was appointed to the Recess Committee.55CJ ii. 280b. Venn’s hard-line attitude towards the king made him unpopular in some quarters. In the ‘Protestants’ Protestation’, published in early September, Venn was among the 14 peers and 13 Members of the Commons accused of having ‘promiscuously conspired together’ against the king, state and church.56HMC Salisbury xxiv. 277.

When the Commons returned from the recess in October, Venn introduced several motions to test the feeling of the House over the establishment of a puritan ministry as envisaged by the Recess Committee. On 21 October he informed the House that Thomas Bough, a churchwarden of St Giles, Cripplegate, had spoken ‘contemptibly of the House of Commons’ and slighted certain parliamentary orders about ‘preaching ministers’; he had also refused to accept a lecturer appointed by the House a year before.57Add. 34485, f. 82v; D’Ewes (C), 19. Shortly afterwards Venn presented a petition from the inhabitants of St Giles against their curate, Timothy Hutton.58Nalson, Impartial Colln. ii. 496-7; D’Ewes (C), 35. In the Commons, Venn denounced Hutton as ‘a drunkard and a swearer, that he had denied to have the rails pulled up, and ... he refused to permit a minister to preach’.59D’Ewes (C), 38. Over the next few days, Venn continued to report to the House on the state of the poll tax collections in London. Although many MPs thought the tax returns for the City were low, on 29 October Venn defended them ‘and showed that they had gone as high for their parts as other counties’.60D’Ewes (C), 49-50. On 3 November he was sent as the House’s messenger to the commissioners for the poll tax to ask the creditors to forego payment in view of ‘present necessities’.61CJ ii. 304a. On 16 November Venn and others were ordered to place a guard on Lord Petre’s house in London and to search there for ‘suspected persons, priests and Jesuits’.62CJ ii. 317a ; D’Ewes (C), 149.

Venn tried to dissuade the common council from entertaining the king in the City on 25 November, on his return from the north, declaring the proposal ‘a thing displeasing to the Parliament’, but the City authorities were determined to honour the king, and Venn’s protests were ignored.63HMC Cowper ii. 295; Pearl, London, 115, 126. Direct action followed. On 29 November ‘the factious citizens’ gathered at Westminster ‘with their swords by their sides’ and as the Members arrived at the House they shouted ‘no bishops, no popish lords’ in support of the proposal that bishops should be removed from the Upper House. Sir John Strangways* ‘was strictly examined by them of which side he was’ but eventually allowed to pass.64CSP Dom. 1641-3, p. 188; Pearl, London, 221-2. Once inside the House Strangways accused Venn of ‘procuring these tumults’. Working in association with Edward Kyrton* and Edward Hyde*, Strangways gave information to the House about Venn’s activities and demanded a select committee to inquire into the business.65Gardiner, Hist. of Eng. x. 86. He alleged that during the debate on the Grand Remonstrance, Venn had sent a message to his wife ‘that in the House of Commons they were together by the ears, that the worser party was like to get the better of the good party’.66Bodl. Clarendon 20, f. 129. It was said that Mrs Venn sent out messages ‘that her husband desired his friends to come with their arms to Westminster to help the good party’.67Clarendon, Hist. i. 455. While she sat ‘crying and wringing her hands for her husband whom she feared would be killed’ more than 1,000 people gathered at Westminster. Venn answered these charges by saying that he had been in the Commons all that day, did not know what his wife had done, and offered to clear himself; but the House ‘thought not fit till somewhat were proved against him’.68Bodl. Clarendon 20, f. 129. The Commons put off the consideration of charges against Venn no fewer than seven times between 4 and 28 December; attempts by Kyrton to restart proceedings in later months were met with further delays; and the case was eventually referred to the committee for information at Venn’s request on 26 March 1642.69CJ ii. 332b, 341b, 343a, 347a, 348b, 351a, 359b, 436a; PJ ii. 91.

On 18 December 1641 Venn was one of those appointed by Parliament to find suitable accommodation for the Scottish commissioners and to supply their necessities, as the lord mayor and recorder had failed to do so, and on 21 December he and William Spurstowe* were ordered to supply any other items required by the commissioners.70CJ ii. 349a, 352a; Pearl, London, 131; D’Ewes (C), 311, 331, 337. On 20 December Venn presented a petition from certain City ministers desiring that they might not be forced to use prayers which their consciences could not accept, despite the Lords’ recent declaration against toleration.71D’Ewes (C), 325. He was also involved in efforts to replace the minister of All Hallows, Bread Street, and to restore Henry Burton to St Matthew’s, Friday Street.72Oxford DNB. On 29 December Venn and the other London citizens in the Commons were appointed to find the best way of raising money to pay the soldiers to be sent to Ireland to put down the rebellion there.73CJ ii. 362b. The same day the royalist lord mayor, Sir Richard Gurney, apprehended some of ‘the most notorious’ who had been involved in the November tumults and committed them to prison. As a result about 2,000 apprentices armed ‘with clubs, swords, halberds’ gathered to go to the aid of their friends ‘but by the providence of God and the grave wisdom of Captain Venn they were prevented’. Venn assured the crowd that the Commons had already secured the release of their friends and he entreated them

to be at peace and quietness and return everyone to his own habitation and you shall find we will be as ready to do any favour for you and relieve you in any of your just grievances as you can or shall yourselves and as you show your willingness to us so shall we with our lives be willing and ready to help you: therefore I pray depart every man to his home in peace.74A True Relation of the Most Wise and Worthy Speech made by Captain Venn (1641), 2-3 (E.181.21).

The safety of London continued to be a priority for Venn in the early months of 1642, as relations between king and Parliament deteriorated further. On 3 January the Lords agreed to join with the Commons in a petition to the king to desire a guard on the Houses of Parliament and on the following day notice of this ‘was brought to the lord mayor of London by Alderman [Isaac] Penington* and Captain Venn who did much enlarge themselves in such general terms, as the order is, that their meanings were not easily to be known’.75CSP Dom. 1641-3, p. 297. Also on 4 January Venn and others were sent to the common council ‘to let them know in what danger the Parliament was’ because of military preparations in the Tower and the gathering of armed men in Whitehall.76CLRO, Jor. 40, f. 11; CJ ii. 367b; D’Ewes (C), 379-80. The London MPs had been working to undermine Gurney’s authority and during January and the Commons, allegedly ‘at the instance of Penington, Venn and [Samuel] Vassall*’, resolved to take to itself and the committee of safety the lord mayor’s power of calling a common council. Venn, in particular, was charged with using ‘this usurped power with such insolence’ that when Gurney asked the reason for calling a certain common council, Venn ‘vouchsafed him no other answer than when he came hither he should know’.77Pearl, London, 146-7. Tensions between the City authorities and Parliament continued to rise over the next few weeks. On 15 January Venn complained to the Commons that the guard for securing Parliament and the City had not been mustered by the sheriffs, who doubted their authority to do so: this prompted the Commons to issue an order to that effect, which was then sent to the Lords for approval.78PJ i. 84-5. On 17 January Venn reported to the House the concerns of the citizens for the security of the Tower and need to issue orders for the sheriffs to release ammunition to the militia.79PJ i. 92-5, 97. On 4 February Venn reported to the House that Sir John Byron†, the lieutenant of the Tower, refused to obey any command but the king’s.80PJ i. 271.

In the next few weeks Venn was involved in moves to wrest control of the London forces from the lord mayor and his cronies. On 11 February Venn was sent to the common council to request that Philip Skippon* command the militia, and the following day reported from the common council the names of the militia committee.81CJ ii. 426a; PJ i. 350, 362. Venn and the other London MPs attended the common council to tell them that their choice of commanders had been approved on 10 March.82PJ ii. 23. On 12 March Venn was added to the Commons’ committee on gunpowder and he was involved in supplying the capital with gunpowder and ensuring its safe storage.83CJ ii. 476a; PJ ii. 31. Later in the spring, Venn widened his focus to consider royalist activity elsewhere in England. On 29 March he reported to the House a letter from Somerset, warning ‘that there are sides making for the king’.84PJ ii. 107. In April he moved that money should be supplied to the Hull garrison, and in early May he arranged for the shipping to London of the royal magazine at Hull, being reimbursed £100 for his pains.85CJ ii. 561b; PJ ii. 236. London remained Venn’s primary focus, however. On 30 April he seconded a motion by Denzil Holles* that the London trained bands should ‘beat the drum and train’.86PJ ii. 253.

The financial position of the City depended on political stability. On 17 January 1642 Venn presented a petition from the Goldsmiths and several merchants warning that ‘there would be no more bullion coined in the Mint’ unless Sir John Conyers was appointed lieutenant of the Tower.87PJ i. 94. On 24 January he was sent to the City to demand an answer concerning the £100,000 loan and the following day he and Samuel Vassall attended the lord mayor concerning other money promised by the citizens.88CJ ii. 392b, 396a. On 31 January ‘upon Captain Venn’s motion, divers artificers dwelling in and about London came in and delivered a petition’.89PJ i. 228. The citizens ‘spoke boldly’ and ‘with unheard of rudeness and importunity’ and demanded the removal of all obstructions ‘which hinder the happy progress of your great endeavours’, especially the bishops and Catholic peers.90PJ i. 228, 231. As a member of the Merchant Taylors’ Company, Venn gave in £200 from the company for the suppression of the Irish rebellion on 31 January, and he was involved in preparations for transferring the committee at Grocers’ Hall to the Merchant Taylors’ Hall on 2 February.91PJ i. 233, 259. When the lord mayor fell ill during March, Venn was one of those chosen to attend him to ask him to appoint a deputy.92CJ ii. 476b. On 15 March he was named to the committee to consider grievances presented by the common council.93CJ ii. 479a. On 23 March he was named to a committee for an explanatory bill to complement the Irish Adventurers’ Act, although he does not seem to have invested his own money in the project.94CJ ii. 493b. In March and April Venn was appointed to committees on a petition of the Merchant Strangers (26 Mar.), the guard on the Tower of London (2 Apr.) and the creation of a new parish in Westminster (8 Apr.); and on 3 May he was named to the committee on a bill to prevent new building in London and its suburbs.95CJ ii. 499a, 507b, 517a, 554b. Later in May he became more involved in the City’s response to the Irish rebellion, being named to committees to consider propositions of merchants, to encourage the London Adventurers to release money, and to arrange for money to be sent to Ireland.96CJ ii. 571b, 572b, 580b. On 18 May Venn and Vassall were sent to the Merchant Adventurers to hasten a loan promised for Ireland, and two days later Venn gave in the names of those willing to oblige.97CJ ii. 578b, 580b.

Parliamentarian colonel, 1642-5

When the king drew up his propositions for an agreement with Parliament in June 1642, he resolved to offer ‘a full and absolute pardon to all except twelve’, including Venn.98HMC 5th Rep., 141; CSP Dom. 1641-3, p. 342. Venn’s activities in the summer did nothing to improve his reputation in the king’s eyes. Throughout June he was involved in seeking out those members of the trained bands who ‘though summoned to do his majesty and the Parliament service, have neglected to attend without showing cause for their absence’.99HMC 5th Rep., 30. Venn himself promised to provide £100 for the defence and to ‘have a horse ready for himself to serve always upon’.100PJ iii. 470. His close links with the City and merchant community meant that he was frequently employed by the Commons to encourage subscriptions of money, horse and plate. He moved for the City companies to meet to advance loans to Parliament on 4 June.101PJ iii. 15. He was named to committees on a voluntary contribution from the citizens (7 June); to liaise with the City on the king’s letter against subscriptions in the capital (18 June); and to draft an order for the bringing in of arrears of the poll tax and the loan (9 July).102CJ ii. 610b, 632b, 662b; PJ iii. 190. The disposal of the Hull magazine had not yet been decided, and the lord mayor had ignored repeated requests, conveyed by Venn and others, to call a common council to deal with the matter.103CJ ii. 570b, 597a, 598b. This brought tensions between Parliament and the City to a head. The most recent refusal to cooperate by the lord mayor was considered by the Lords on 9 July, when evidence of the lord mayor’s obstructions was provided by Venn and other members of the common council.104LJ v. 197b. On 14 July Venn was named to a committee to advise the Commons about the storage of the Hull magazine.105CJ ii. 672a. On the lord mayor’s impeachment at the end of July, Venn gave evidence that he had constantly refused to call a common council and when at last it did convene he refused to put before it the matter of how to store or dispose of the Hull magazine, ‘which was a neglect of the command of both Houses’.106LJ v. 247a; Pearl, London, 154, 156.

As this drama was played out, Venn was again actively involved in raising money from the City. On 22 July he was ordered to discover what remained to be paid of the £100,000 loan; the next day he and Vassall were sent to the treasurers of the subscriptions to see who had not paid; and on 2 August he was ordered to demand an account of the loan monies received and disbursed.107CJ ii. 685b, 689a, 700b. Venn was appointed to the committee to consider the defence of the kingdom on 4 August, and a week later he and Thomas Erle were ordered to take custody of the plate and money intercepted at Bishopsgate while being smuggled to the king.108CJ ii. 703a, 714a. On 12 August the king issued a declaration claiming that John Pym* and his party had little cause to complain of breaches of privilege such as the attempted arrest of the Five Members, for ‘where was that freedom and privilege when Alderman Penington and Captain Venn brought down their myrmidons to assault and terrify the Members of both Houses whose faces or whose opinions they liked not, and by that army to awe the Parliament?’. The king demanded that Venn and his associates be handed over to face trial.109Clarendon, Hist. ii. 279, 281. Venn remained unrepentant. The day after this declaration he and Vassall were sent to seize copies of the petition of the Kent cavaliers.110CJ ii. 719a, 722a. Venn was also involved in searches throughout London for money, arms and ‘other warlike provisions’ which he was charged to put in some safe place.111CJ ii. 731b, 732b. On 27 August he took the oath to the 3rd earl of Essex as lord general.112CJ ii. 740a. On 3 September Venn reported the common council’s request for some amendments to the joint parliamentary order for summoning all the wards in London which they claimed entrenched on their liberties, and he carried the amendments to the Lords and reported their concurrence.113CJ ii. 751a-b; LJ v. 337b. On the same day he was appointed to the select Committee for Irish Affairs, although he does not appear to have attended any of its meetings.114CJ ii. 750b; Add. 4782, passim.

Venn became increasingly active in the Commons after the outbreak of civil war. He continued to be involved in the seizure of money and plate from royalists and he was named to committees for raising horse (12 Sept.), disposing of prisoners (14 Sept.) and providing arms for the Scots in Ireland (22 Sept.).115CJ ii. 763a, 766a, 777b. On 16 September he was appointed a committee to receive information concerning active royalists and those who ‘incited’ the king to make war.116CJ ii. 769a. During this period he was appointed colonel of a foot regiment, which marched west under the earl of Essex and took part in the skirmish at Powick Bridge near Worcester on 23 September.117CSP Dom. 1641-3, p. 391. Venn, who was named to committees on 22 and 26 September, apparently did not accompany them.118CJ ii. 777b, 782b. He was present in the House on 3 October, when he was ordered to recommend to the City a request for troops from the parliamentarians at Manchester, and on 8 October he was ordered to receive ‘all arms brought in from the malignant party and to issue them out again by virtue of any command of the lord general or the committee for defence’.119CJ ii. 792a; Add. 18777, f. 24. This order was ratified by the Lords on 11 October.120CJ ii. 800b, 802b; LJ v. 394b, 396a. Over the next few days he was named to a committee to consider how to dispose of prisoners and was involved in supplying arms for Parliament and expediting levies of dragoons to be sent to the siege at Manchester.121CJ ii. 807b; HMC 5th Rep., 53. He was also included in the committee to arrange quarters for soldiers in the capital.122CJ ii. 825b.

On 28 October Venn was appointed governor of Windsor Castle, which guarded the approaches to London along the River Thames. He went there with his foot regiment, his family and Christopher Love, who was now chaplain to the regiment. Venn was strongly influenced by Love, who, according to one royalist, ‘instructed him in better principles than he afterwards possessed’.123Bate, Lives, Actions and Executions, 129. From Windsor, Venn’s men launched attacks on the local royalists and it was said that Venn’s name had soon ‘grown so terrible to the cavaliers that for fear of him they have taken up the bridge to Staines to hinder him from the means and opportunity to pursue them any further’.124A True Relation of 2 Merchants of London (1642), 6 (E.242.21). During the royalist advance on London, the cavalry under Prince Rupert turned aside to attack Windsor Castle, hoping to cut off the river traffic to the capital. Rupert at first offered to make a deal with Venn that if he ‘would but let him have access into the said town and castle and resign the charge thereof to his custody, he would immediately send to his majesty to inform him of his true and faithful service’.125A Most Famous Victory Obtained by… Colonel Venne (1642), 5 (E.126.42). Venn refused to betray his trust and successfully withstood Rupert’s men for seven hours. It was later reported that ‘Captain Venn behaved himself very bravely to the wonder and amazement of the beholders so that in spite of all Rupert’s policy he and his cavaliers were forced to retreat’.126Most Famous Victory, 8. During the following winter, Windsor became the headquarters of the parliamentarian army. Venn remained active in parliamentary business and on 26 November he was one of those appointed to assess those who had not contributed to the propositions in London.127A. and O. In the second half of December he returned to Westminster, where he secured money for the garrison at Windsor, and he was appointed to draw up an order for the punishment of deserters from the trained bands on 21 December.128CJ ii. 896b, 898b. When MPs made a further voluntary contribution on 31 December, Venn gave £25.129Add. 18777, f. 109v.

In January 1643, at the beginning of the Oxford peace negotiations, the king appealed to the citizens of London to consider what hope he could have of safety while Venn, Penington and two aldermen, ‘persons notoriously guilty of schism and high treason commit such outrages in oppressing, robbing and imprisoning according to their discretion all such his majesty’s loving subjects whom they are pleased to suspect but for wishing well to his majesty’.130Clarendon, Hist. ii. 433. This provoked a furious response from both Houses of Parliament, who insisted Venn and his colleagues had ‘done their duty in adhering to the Parliament in defence of the kingdom’.131LJ v. 550b. Two pamphlets addressed to the king were printed to vindicate the actions of Venn and his associates, arguing that ‘malignants’ had misrepresented them to the king and that they were ‘innocent and clear from all suspicion of treason or treachery’ for they had never acted without ‘just authority from the high court of Parliament which we are bound in conscience and equity to obey’. It was denied that Venn and the others intended to introduce Brownism and Anabaptism: they desired only that the king should join with Parliament ‘in the calling of an assembly of divines for the settling of a thorough reformation’. The pamphlets also argued that the king would come to thank Venn and the others for their diligence ‘which hath been a principal means to preserve the City of London from devastation and ruin, and defended God’s true religion from the machinations of Popish recusants’.132An Humble Remonstrance to the King's Majesty in Vindication of Isaac Penington, Alderman Fowkes, Capt. Venn, Capt. Mainwaring ... (1643); The Declaration and Vindication of Isaac Penington, Capt. Venn, Capt. Mainwaring and Mr Fowke in Answer to Sundry Scandalous Pamphlets ... (1643); Add. 18777, f. 122v. The animosity of the king towards Venn would continue later in the year, and in June a new proclamation was issued offering a pardon to all those who returned to their allegiance but once again excluding Venn and other ‘principal authors of these present calamities’.133LJ vi. 110b; Harl. 164, f. 278.

During 1643 Venn was only an occasional visitor to Parliament. On 9 January 1643 he was named to committees for the disposal of dangerous prisoners and to ensure that the customs tax was collected in the interval before the new collectors were chosen.134CJ ii. 919a, 919b. He took an active interest in the selection: according to one diarist ‘Captain Venn did undertake to bring in the names of new men that should undertake that office’.135Add. 31116, p. 37. Venn returned to Windsor shortly afterwards, and in early February was sent instructions from the Commons concerning the treatment of prisoners held in the castle.136Add. 18777, ff. 140, 143; LJ v. 589b, 604b; CJ ii. 952b, 955a. Venn was back in Westminster on 28 February, when he was appointed to the committee to consider the charter of the City of London.137CJ ii. 983b. On the same day he joined Vassall in protesting that the inhabitants of the City ‘were not possibly able to pay’ the new weekly assessment tax.138Harl. 164, f. 310. He continued to carry messages between Parliament and the London government. On 1 March the common council delivered to Venn a copy of its act increasing the London fortifications and asked him ‘to move the Parliament to give power to the committees named therein’. The same day Venn informed the common council that their application to have the weekly assessment reduced had been made too late, but that Parliament had resolved to allow them an additional £3,000 per month for the City’s defences.139CLRO, Rep. 40, f. 54; CJ ii. 985b. The pay of Venn’s regiment was a constant source of anxiety. He was reasonably successful in extracting funding, receiving repeated orders for the payment of the garrison in March and April and also an order for the payment of money owed to him personally, which now amounted to £2,217.140CSP Dom. 1641-3, pp. 448, 456-7; CJ ii. 985a; iii. 44b, 45a, 46b, 53b; Add. 5497, f. 66; Add. 31116, p. 89. Venn was named to a committee on rules for paying the army on 5 April.141CJ iii. 30b. In mid-April he told the Commons that Windsor needed money and, with Essex besieging Reading ‘he could not now well be absent from thence … having made so many journeys’ in the past.142Harl. 164, ff. 375v-376. In early May the treasurer at war was instructed to pay the garrison directly from the Berkshire assessments.143CJ iii. 85a-b, 96a, 192a.

On 14 April Venn had been appointed to the committee for sequestering the estates of Papists and delinquents in Berkshire and on the same day he was also instructed to execute the sequestrations ordinance in Windsor.144CJ iii. 43b, 44a. Venn used the latter order as a pretext for expelling the canons of St George’s chapel. In May they petitioned the Lords for exemption since they did not bear arms and Venn was ordered to allow the prebends to live in their own houses as long as they caused no trouble.145HMC 5th Rep., 83; LJ vi. 30a-b. He was also to ensure there were ‘no disorders or disturbances’ in the chapel, but this did not stop the seizure of plate and the destruction of woodwork, windows and the organ by his own men.146VCH Berks. iii. 26. Venn decided it was not prudent for the canons to remain at Windsor and at the end of May they complained that ‘Colonel Venn detained and had in his possession all the dean’s plate at our leaving the castle which by order of Parliament should have been restored’.147Bodl. Ashmole 1111, ff. 142v-145. His actions brought protests from the supporters of the church, with the bishop of Ossory describing Venn and the other London commanders as ‘the most factious and schismatical men, addicted to Anabaptism and Brownism and other worser sects’.148G. Williams, The Discovery of Mystery (1643), 66 (E.60.1). Later in the year the Commons gave Venn’s activities its approval when it issued an order for the removal of all ‘scandalous monuments and pictures’ from the chapels at Eton and Windsor.149CJ iii. 348a. The royalist Mercurius Aulicus reported that ‘as the members do lord it at Westminster, so doth Master Venn in his castle at Windsor, where if you chance to die there’s no Christian burial’, because Venn believed the Church of England ceremony to be ‘papistical’ and ‘against the Covenant we have taken’. It was also reported that Venn’s wife ‘could not sleep or take any rest in any part of Windsor castle, but only in the queen’s lodgings’.150Newsbooks, Mercurius Aulicus ii, 279-80.

Venn continued his involvement in London affairs from the summer of 1643. On 12 May he and Vassall were charges with drafting an ordinance to allow the lord mayor, Isaac Penington, to choose preachers for the St Paul’s Cross sermons.151CJ iii. 82b. On 8 June he was added to the commissioners for the weekly assessments and the sequestrations.152CJ iii. 120a. Venn was one of those sent to attend the Merchant Taylors and other livery companies on 5 August to encourage them to raise men and give money for the defence of religion, laws and liberties.153CJ iii. 197b. He took the Solemn League and Covenant on 9 October, and on 12 October he was named to a committee to join with the London militia committee to consider raising more forces to join Essex’s army.154CJ iii. 263b, 274a. In the dying days of 1643 it was becoming clear that Venn shared the enthusiasm of the London militia committee for Sir William Waller*. He served on the delegation to ask Essex to place the new raised forces under Waller’s command on 11 October.155CJ iii. 273b. On 28 November Venn was one of the committee sent to the City to try to appease the lord mayor and the militia committee who had demanded that the London regiments serving under the Essex should be recalled.156CJ iii. 323a. On 22 December he was named to a committee to consider legislation to allow the militia committee to reassign two of the London regiments for the defence of the capital.157CJ iii. 349a.

During the early weeks of 1644 Venn was again present in the Commons, where he was involved in raising money for the war effort. On 1 February he was named to the committee on an ordinance for a contribution within London to maintain the forces within the ‘lines of communication’ and on 7 February he was appointed to a committee to consider extending the excise to cover tobacco pipes.158CJ iii. 385a, 391a. Venn also used his influence to get money for the Windsor, securing an order from the Lords for money from the Committee for Advance of Money on 9 January; and on 5 February a committee, of which he was a member, was appointed to consider the payment of arrears to the garrison.159CJ iii. 388a; LJ vi. 397a. On 7 March he warned the Commons that the garrison was ‘ready to disband for want of pay’ and his plea for more resources was seconded by the Speaker ‘with much vehemency’, prompting a vote to release £2,000 from the excise, confirmed two days later.160Harl. 166, f. 28; CJ iii. 420b, 422b. On 16 March a further £1,000 was made available for Windsor from the Committee for Revenue.161LJ vi. 472a. In April the Commons resolved to disband the garrison at Windsor with a month’s pay, but when the City petitioned against it they relented. No new measures had, however, been taken to provide money for Windsor and Venn enthusiastically organised searches for delinquents in Berkshire whose property could be confiscated and sold. The situation did not improve and on 21 June the recorder of London, John Glynne*, delivered to the Commons a letter by Venn, ‘in which he showed that the garrison at the said castle of Windsor had served the Parliament as faithfully as any other garrison but that they now wanted not only pay but food, that unless speedily supplied he could not rule them’.162Harl. 166, f. 75v. The Commons responded by ordering a grant of £500 from the Committee for Advance of Money and measures to try to arrange for regular payments from the surrounding counties.163CJ iii. 537b. In July he lobbied his fellow London MP, Richard Browne II*, and in August his paper concerning the needs of the garrison was considered by the Committee of Both Kingdoms and reported to the Commons.164CSP Dom. 1644, pp. 347, 437; CJ iii. 601a.

From the early summer, Venn was increasingly concerned with strengthening regional forces that did not form part of Essex’s main field army. On 9 May he was given care of communicating matters concerning the security of the London suburbs to the militia committee.165CJ iii. 487a. He was named to committees for raising money for the payment of soldiers in Oxfordshire (6 June) and recruits for Waller (28 June).166CJ iii. 520b, 544b. He was ordered to supply artillery for the siege of Greenland House in June; he was responsible for supplying ammunition to Browne’s forces at Reading in August; and in September he was attended the Committee of Both Kingdoms to discuss the forces needed to defend Berkshire.167CJ iii. 529b, 530a; CSP Dom. 1644, pp. 463, 500, 529. On 3 September, immediately after Essex’s catastrophic defeat at Lostwithiel, Venn was appointed as a member of the joint committee to settle the differences between the county committees and the parliamentary commanders-in-chief.168CJ iii. 617a. This led to appointments to further committees to oversee the Southern Association (21 Sept.) and resolve divisions among the commanders in the Isle of Wight (21 Sept.) and Surrey (18 Oct.).169CJ iii. 635a, 635b, 669b. On 29 October Parliament ordered that the Windsor garrison should be reduced to 200 men who were to be maintained by the committee for Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, and Oxfordshire.170CJ iii. 681b. The reaction at Windsor was violent. By mid-November Venn was faced with open mutiny, and his imprisonment of the ringleaders caused more problems as ‘the rest of the soldiers got them out and hurt Colonel Venn’.171CSP Dom. 1644-5, p. 124; Add. 31116, p. 347. The Commons were ‘very sensible of the present and imminent danger that place lies in’ and referred the business to the Committee of Both Kingdoms. The committee sent 300 men from the Middlesex trained bands and wrote to Venn about those responsible

We are sorry that they have been so unmindful of their duty not to have manifested their grievance in a fair way, but on the contrary behaved themselves in so insolent a manner to their commander in chief. We have written to your officers to contribute their endeavours for quieting of that distemper and shall be further careful to settle you in the peaceable command of that garrison.172CSP Dom. 1644-5, p. 126.

Parliament ordered money for the garrison and Venn was told to send up the seven instigators of the mutiny.173CSP Dom. 1644-5, pp. 128, 130; LJ vi. 67a, 73a, 74b; CJ iii. 697b, 698a, 706a. Within a few days the danger had passed and the Middlesex soldiers were ordered home.174CSP Dom. 1644-5, p. 134.

While these disputes were being resolved, Venn was also busy in other areas. On 6 September he was sent to the common council with Parliament’s resolutions on farthing tokens and he explained to them the necessities of Ireland which would require an extra contribution of £500 per week.175CJ iii. 619a. On 25 October he was named to a committee to consider an ordinance for a tax to pay for maintaining the fortifications around London, and he was sent to the lord mayor to ask for a common council to be convened to discuss the matter.176CJ iii. 676a, 677a. On 12 December he was appointed to a committee to consider the petition of owners and captains of ships in parliamentary service.177CJ iii. 722a. A week later he was sent into the City with an ordinance directing that only ‘well affected persons’ should be chosen as common councilmen at the forthcoming elections.178CJ iii. 729a.

In the new year of 1645 it was feared that Basing House in Hampshire would form a spring-board for a royalist attack on the Thames Valley. On 2 January Venn was ordered back to his post and instructed to increase his garrison to 400 because ‘those who are present are negligent in performance of their duty’, but he was only to enlist ‘such soldiers as are fit to discharge the duty and not raw countrymen’.179CSP Dom. 1644-5, pp. 226-7, 247. The royalist advance did not materialise and Windsor instead became the venue for the general muster of units that would make up the New Model army.180VCH Berks. ii. 156-7. Venn was supportive of the new army: he was named to the committee to consider its recruitment (17 Feb.) and to committees to confer with the City for a loan of £80,000 to fund it (6 and 10 Mar.).181CJ iv. 51a, 71a, 73b. On 28 March he was appointed to the new Committee for the Army that would manage the payment of the New Model.182A. and O. In the same period Venn was again involved in the choice of new customs collectors. He was ‘violent’ in his opposition to delaying the decision on 15 February, and when the matter was considered two days later, he ‘objected against Samuel Avery*’ as one of the collectors, as ‘one that had done nothing for Parliament at first’.183Harl. 166, ff. 177v, 178. Under the Self-Denying Ordinance, in May Venn was replaced as governor of Windsor by Colonel Christopher Whichcote*.184CSP Dom. 1644-5, p. 485. He did not abandon his former comrades, however: over the next few weeks he pressed for payments to the garrison to be honoured, in the summer he was appointed to a committee for their maintenance, and finally, at the end of the year, he secured a payment of £1,000 from the Committee for Revenue.185CJ iv. 141a, 144b, 153b, 198a; Harl. 166, f. 211v; SC6/Chas.I/1662, m. 7d.

Supporting the New Model army, 1645-6

On Venn’s return to London in May 1645, Parliament provided a house for him in Whitecross Street.186CCAM, 383. Despite his demotion, Venn remained an enthusiastic supporter of Parliament’s war effort. He was an assiduous attender at meetings of the Army Committee, where he soon began working in tandem with its most prominent members, Robert Scawen* and Thomas Pury I*.187SP28/29/1-2; 30/4; 31/5-6. Venn’s involvement in that committee was supplemented by appointments to related ad hoc committees. On 17 May he was appointed to a committee to raise more money from subsidies and assessment and on 5 June he was given care of the negotiations for the £80,000 loan for the New Model army.188CJ iv. 146a, 164a. He was named to committees for raising money for the Scottish army (13 June), disposing of prisoners taken by the New Model (18 June) and to consider the king’s letters seized after the battle of Naseby (23 June).189CJ iv. 173b, 177b, 183b. On 26 June he was sent to the common council to secure more money for the Scots and on 5 July he was named to a committee to consider army widows.190CJ iv. 186a, 197a. During June and July Venn was a frequent messenger from the House to the common council and the London militia committee to ensure that sufficient forces were raised for the New Model, prisoners disposed of and deserters punished.191CJ iv. 177b, 188a, 189a, 192a, 197b, 203a. He was also involved in religious matters. He was charged with removing papists from the lines of communication on 5 July, he was appointed to a committee to consider directions for the election of Presbyterian elders on 25 July and later in the year he was chosen for the committee to prepare an ordinance for confiscating the estates of bishops and deans and chapters.192CJ iv. 197b, 218a, 276a. Venn was still under the influence of Christopher Love and it was said that he ‘took a house in Aldersgate Street, London for the only reason that he might be near unto Mr Love who then preached at St Anne’s Church, Aldersgate’.193Bate, Lives, Actions and Executions, 129. On 6 August he delivered the petition from the inhabitants of Southwark desiring the election of two Members of Parliament, and on the same day he and William Jephson* were sent to the common council to ask for their nomination for two agents to travel to Munster in Ireland.194CJ iv. 232b, 234a. On 11 August Venn was given a fortnight’s leave to go into the country, but he did not depart immediately, as on 14 August he delivered to the Commons a petition from the inhabitants of Southwark.195CJ iv. 237a, 241b. On his return, Venn was once again involved in raising forces. On 6 September, 14 and 16 October he was named to committees to facilitate the raising of troops by the militia committee to be sent to assist the New Model in the west.196CJ iv. 264b, 307b, 311b. On 7 October he reported to the Commons his efforts to raise recruits for the New Model from Reading, and four days later he visited the City authorities with a scheme for raising money to raise troops for Munster.197CJ iv. 299a, 304b. On 15 October Venn and Penington were sent to the lord mayor of London to give notice of a day of thanksgiving for the New Model’s victories, and they attended him again with orders for the same on 22 and 27 October and 1 November.198CJ iv. 309b, 317b, 323b, 330a. On 21 November Venn informed the lord mayor that the king intended ‘a plundering voyage in adjacent counties’ and recommended the doubling of the guard; and in December he worked with the London militia committee to ensure the guards were kept ‘full and strong’.199CJ iv. 350a, 392b.

In the new year of 1646 Venn was appointed to committees to enforce martial law (1 Jan.) and to prepare an establishment for the garrison at Windsor (7 Jan.).200CJ iv. 394a, 399a. He was also sent to inform the London ministers of a day of thanksgiving for victories in the north of Ireland on 12 January.201CJ iv. 404a. He remained a strong supporter of the New Model. From February he was involved in raising soldiers for the New Model army in Hertfordshire and Surrey, taking recruits by force and using ‘such services that would have disgusted more honest persons, dispatching him with the pressed men’.202CJ iv. 439a, 461b; CSP Dom. 1645-7, pp. 359, 371, 390, 392, 400, 405, 408; Add. 19398, ff. 177-8; M. Noble, Lives of the English Regicides (2 vols. 1798), ii. 283. In March one party of recruits mutinied at Farnham, ‘their conductor Colonel Venn being very imperious and not pleasing to them, but it was soon appeased’.203Whitelocke, Mems. i. 582, 586. On 26 March Venn received the thanks of the Commons for conducting the recruits and he was sent to Northampton and Evesham to take charge of the soldiers intended for the siege of Oxford.204CJ iv. 490b. This new venture was not a great success. As Venn reported back to the Lords in April, the recruits from the east midlands were ‘the scum of all their inhabitants, the king’s soldiers, men taken out of prison, tinkers, pedlars and vagrants … It is no marvel if such run away’.205LJ viii. 268b. Venn was occasionally present at meetings of the Army Committee between mid-February and mid-April, suggesting that he was visiting London from time to time, and he evidently attended the Commons on occasion, as he was appointed to committees to review the powers of the Committee for Advance of Money (17 Feb.) and to prepare a proclamation for unauthorised persons to leave the capital (26 Mar.).206SP28/36/2, 6; 37/6; CJ iv. 445b, 490b. He had returned to his duties in the Army Committee by 18 April, and at end of the month he delivered an order from the Army Committee to the committee at Goldsmiths’ Hall concerning the money necessary to supply the army.207SP28/37/6; CCC 36-7.

From the summer of 1646, Venn was assiduous in his attendance in the Commons. He was appointed to the joint committee to hear information from the Scottish commissioner, the 1st marquess of Argyll (Archibald Campbell*) on 25 June.208CJ iv. 587a. On 11 July Venn and Vassall were sent to inform the lord mayor a day of thanksgiving for the surrender of Oxford.209CJ iv. 616b. Venn was also involved in religious matters at this time. He had been given care of publishing an ordinance against Catholics remaining in London on 6 May, and during the summer he was named to committees to determine scandalous offences (3 June), to prepare a declaration on sequestered ministers (8 July) and the sale of recusants’ estates (10 July).210CJ iv. 537a, 562b, 608a, 613a. In the autumn he was sent to ask Christopher Love to preach at a fast day.211CJ iv. 707b. On 30 July Venn was seconded to the Star Chamber Committee of Irish Affairs to assist in their efforts to raise more money for Ireland and on 21 August he was ordered to attend the Committee for Compounding when they considered how to raise £100,000 to pay off the Scottish army.212CJ iv. 629b, 650b. Venn was also involved in the City of London. He was messenger to the lord mayor on 5 September and on 15 October he was named to a committee to consider a petition of the commanders and officers of the London regiments.213CJ iv. 663b, 694b. On 4 December he attended the common council to ask for the speedy payment of arrears of assessments to pay the New Model, and the following day he was a member of the committee sent to inform the lord mayor of measures against rioting in London.214CJ iv. 738a; v. 2b. When the first part of the money owed to the Scots was available, in mid-December, Venn was sent to warn the treasurers.215CJ v. 14b. On 25 December he was added to committees to consider the pay of soldiers when it considered the petition of the unruly brigade in the west under Edward Massie* and on 31 December he was named to the committee to examine complaints about lay preachers.216CJ v. 28b, 35a.

The Independent Party, 1647-8

During 1647 Venn moved to Kensington and as a result ‘could not enjoy ... the benefit of Mr Love’s soul searching preaching’. He remained attached to his religious mentor, however, employing the physician George Bate to transcribe Love’s sermons, ‘whereby what Mr Love preached one Sunday at St Anne’s was the next preached by Colonel Venn in his own family’.217Bate, Lives, Actions and Executions, 129-30. Venn’s political activity was much reduced during this period. His attendance at the Army Committee became sporadic during February and had ceased altogether by April.218SP28/41/4; 49/4. His involvement in the Commons in the early months of 1647 was limited to minor committees, although he maintained his links with the City. On 1 March he gave the Commons’ thanks to ‘divers young men and apprentices’ of London for their expressions of affection to Parliament.219CJ v. 102b. On 4 March he presented an ordinance for the relief and employment of the poor and for the punishment of vagrants.220CJ v. 106a. Venn was one of those appointed to prepare an ordinance on the London militia on 2 April.221CJ v. 132b. On the same day he was sent to the lord mayor on 2 April to ask him to call a common council, and he was also named to a committee of both Houses to go to the City to arrange a loan of £200,000 for the service of England and Ireland – a matter that would concern him over the next few weeks.222CJ v. 133a, 172b. Presbyterian dominance of the Commons and the City may explain the intermittent nature of Venn’s activity at this time. Despite his friendship with Love, Venn was no friend of the Presbyterian political interest in Parliament. On 4 May Venn and Thomas Atkin were ordered to give notice to the former members of the militia committee that they would be formally thanked for their service, and on 7 May, when they assembled, Venn was among their number.223CJ v. 161a, 166a. On the same day Venn was named to the committee on an ordinance to indemnify those who had acted in the public service, and on 14 May he was added to the Committee for Advance of Money when it considered an ordinance for protecting from prosecution those who had taken horses for the army, and the Commons ruled that Venn’s military accounts would be given priority.224CJ v. 166a, 171b.

Despite this move to side-line him, Venn had again involved himself in London’s affairs by the beginning of June. On 27 May he was appointed to a committee to consider a petition from the Weavers’ Company; on 7 June he was named to a committee to request the militia committee to provide further guards for Parliament; and on 11 June he was included in a committee to meet with the City authorities, including the militia committee, to consider other security issues within the lines of communication.225CJ v. 187a, 202a, 207b. On 22 June he was named to a committee to meet the apprentices with assurances that Parliament was happy to consider their latest petition.226CJ v. 220a. In the face of growing unrest in the City, Venn was named to similar committees over the next few weeks. On 8 and 9 July he attended the militia committee concerning the guards for Parliament and he was named to committees concerning raising horse and listing of men in London.227CJ v. 236b, 237a, 238a. On 13 July he was among those MPs who told the ‘young men and apprentices’ at the door of the House that the Commons would consider their petition at a more suitable time, and four days later he and Atkin attended the lord mayor with the warning that the Commons expected the recent ordinances commanding the militia committee to disband would be put into execution.228CJ v. 243a, 248b. There was also the question of defusing tensions between the army and the City. On 21 July Venn and Penington were instructed to report what the militia committee had done to remove reduced soldiers from London.229CJ v. 253a. On the same day Venn was named to two committees, concerning maimed soldiers and widows and abuses in army pay, and on 22 July he was appointed to consider a printed petition of the trained bands, seamen and apprentices.230CJ v. 252b, 253a, 254a. Security concerns gave the opponents of the Presbyterians more leverage, and on 22 July Venn and others were named to a committee to prepare an ordinance to restore the political Independents to the militia committee.231CJ v. 254b. On 24 July he was a member of the committee that communicated the Commons’ declaration against the ‘engagement’ with the king to the City government, and on 26 July he and Soame were sent to receive the apprentices’ petition defending the same.232CJ v. 257b, 258b. Venn’s name is absent from the Journals after the Presbyterian coup on 26 July, but he did not withdraw from London or take refuge with the New Model army. Indeed, he was present in the House on 2 August when he was appointed to committees to investigate the events which had led to the flight of Speaker Lenthall to the army a few days before and to consider an ordinance for giving power to the Presbyterian-dominated ‘committee of safety’ and the militia committee to secure and disarm papists.233CJ v. 265a, 265b.

Venn took part in the inquest that followed the ‘forcing of the Houses’ and the New Model’s occupation of London. On 6 August he was named to a committee of both Houses to consider the violence perpetrated against Parliament on 26 July; on 11 August he was appointed to the committee on an ordinance to repeal all the votes and orders passed during the absence of the Speaker; and on 13 August he was made a member of the ‘sub-committee of secrecy’ to consider the incident further.234CJ v. 268a, 272a, 273a. This latter body was later denounced as a gathering of ‘all persons engaged to live and die with the army’, who ‘now appeared to make a clandestine scrutiny and search into the lives and actions of the Presbyterian party’.235C. Walker, Hist. of Independency (1648), 53 (E.463.19). Venn was certainly involved in pro-army measures at this time. He arranged meetings between the Army Committee and the common council for the advance of a month’s pay on 21 August, and on 1 September he was added to the committee on maimed soldiers.236CJ v. 280b, 287b. Venn was appointed to the reconstituted militia committee on 2 September.237CJ v. 290a. Although the army had imposed its will on the City, the corporation still refused to collect taxes and on 3 September Venn was sent to express Parliament’s concern at their attitude and to require their ‘positive answer’ to a request for a loan of £50,000 to meet army arrears.238CJ v. 290b. Thereafter Venn took no part in proceedings and on 9 October his absence at the call of the House was excused because of illness.239CJ v. 329b. He was also absent from the Army Committee throughout October, attending his first meeting only on 8 November.240SP28/48/1; 49/2. His return to the Commons was delayed until 20 November, when he and Penington were sent into the City to convey the anger of the army grandees at the City’s refusal to pay their soldiers and the threat that free quarter would be extracted.241CJ v. 364b, 365a. On 29 November he returned the thanks of the Commons to the militia committee ‘for their seasonable care of the safety and secure sitting of Parliament’.242CJ v. 372b The corporation did not share the loyalty of the militia committee, however. In December Venn was appointed to committees to consider further representations from Sir Thomas Fairfax* and the Army Committee ‘for putting the soldiery into constant pay’ (7 Dec.), to enforce the ordinances for electing municipal officers in London (17 Dec.) and to bring in propositions for the payment of assessments in return for the lifting of free quarter (21 Dec.).243CJ v. 376b, 390b, 396a. Amid the wrangles between the City and the army, Venn maintained his religious interests. On 27 December Venn was added to the Committee for Plundered Ministers, and in the new year of 1648 he was named to a committee to consider an explanatory ordinance concerning the sale of bishops’ lands.244CJ v. 407a, 460b.

On 14 January 1648 Venn and Soame were sent to the City to press for the punishment of those involved in royalist riots in Fleet Street and other parts of London, and to put renewed pressure on the City to collect the assessment arrears.245CJ v. 432b. Venn petitioned the Commons for the money still due to him from his time as governor of Windsor and on 8 March he was awarded £4,000 damages to be paid from the sale of delinquents’ lands.246CJ v. 484a. According to one account this grant was not unopposed in the House, and ‘it was moved he might first account for … the plunder of the country about Windsor and the king’s household stuff, hangings, linen and bedding’.247Hist. of Independency, 83. On 13 April Venn was named to a committee to facilitate the erection of an oyer and terminer commission to try those involved in rioting in London and on 20 April he was appointed to a committee on an ordinance for punishing muster defaulters in Kent.248CJ v. 529a, 538a. In May Venn was at the forefront of Parliament’s attempt to brow-beat the City authorities. On 12 May he was one of the Members sent to the lord mayor informing him of victories in Wales and pressing for immediate payment of assessment arrears.249CJ v. 558a. On 18 May Venn and Vassall were sent to the City with an ordinance for settling the militia and for settling Skippon as major-general of the forces there.250CJ v. 564a. On the same day Venn arranged a conference between the Commons and common council to consider propositions for ‘preserving good agreement and correspondence within the City’.251CJ v. 565a. Two days later Venn and Edmund Harvey I carried an order to Skippon to ensure there was ‘good correspondence and understanding’ between his forces and those of Fairfax at the Mews and Whitehall.252CJ v. 567a. On 23 May Venn was again sent to the lord mayor to ask for the common council to meet to consider the payment of arrears to the army.253CJ v. 571a. In early June Venn carried to the City news of the parliamentary victory at Maidstone and notice of a day of thanksgiving.254CJ v. 583a. Such good news did not calm the fears of Londoners. On 5 June Venn again attended the City, reporting back ‘that as the affairs of the City of London now stand, they do not conceive it safe to call a common council’.255CJ v. 585a-b. The next day he reported the militia committee’s concern at the Spanish ambassador’s plans for a bonfire because ‘it is dangerous at this time to have assemblies of people to meet on any occasion’, and he obtained a parliamentary order forbidding the gathering.256CJ v. 587a.

The siege of Colchester did nothing to reduce anxieties in London. On 15 June Venn seconded a motion by John Gurdon* that Lady Norwich and Lady Capel and her children should be sent to the lord general and placed at the front of the army if the royalists attempted to break out of Colchester.257Hist. of Independency, 101. On the same day he was named to a committee to arrange further legislation for the removal of papists and delinquents from London.258CJ v. 601b. At the end of the month several petitions were received for a personal treaty with the king, and royalist commentators denounced Venn as among those ‘who desire a new war, namely those zealots who supply their indigent fortunes by war. These men fear peace, doubting they shall be forced to disgorge what they have swallowed in time of war’.259Hist. of Independency, 111. On 5 July Venn was sent into the City to arrange a day of thanksgiving for the parliamentary victories in the north and to consult the common council and the militia commanders about an engagement for the safety of the capital during the forthcoming peace talks.260CJ v. 624a, 625a. The same day he was ordered to take a boat up the Thames in pursuit of ammunition and supplies which were loaded on to boats at Westminster and ferried upstream to the royalist forces.261CSP Dom. 1648-9, p. 162. On 6 July he was added to the committee to consider the accounts of the army and on 12 July he was added to the committee to draft a declaration for a day of thanksgiving for Parliament’s recent victories.262CJ v. 625b, 633a. Venn was elected master of the Merchant Taylors’ Company on 12 July but was excused from serving at his own request because ‘by ordinance of Parliament (to which he did submit when he left his service at Windsor Castle) he is exempted and freed from all and any other whatsoever than only his service in the Parliament House’.263GL, Merchant Taylors’ Co. ct. min. bks. ix, ff. 293v, 294v. This service was becoming increasingly political, with Venn siding with the New Model and its allies in the House. When John Weaver ‘openly in the House affirmed that the Scottish design of the duke of Hamilton, the Colchester design and that of the earl of Holland were all begun and carried on in the City of London’, Venn and several other MPs were reported to have applauded.264Hist. of Independency, 120.

The factional struggle made relations between the army and the City increasingly tense as the summer wore on. The absence of the New Model from the capital encouraged some high Presbyterians and royalists in the City to demand its disbandment and the removal of Skippon as commander-in-chief of the London forces. The common council passed an act to resume its control over the militia but ‘this was soon complained of in the House of Commons by Venn, Harvey [I] and Penington and other ill birds of that corporation who defile their own nests’.265Hist. of Independency, 125. On 29 July Venn was a member of the committee appointed to meet the common council to ‘acquaint them with the dangers of the City and Parliament’ and with the reasons for continuing the ordinance for listing soldiers under Skippon.266CJ v. 651a. On 3 August he was sent with Soame to give the lord mayor notice of Parliament’s votes on the letters received from the prince of Wales and to warn the City not to answer them without parliamentary consent.267CJ v. 660b. An attempt to settle the problem of the City militia was made on 15 August when Venn and others were appointed to confer with the London militia committee about how the forces raised by Skippon could be made more ‘serviceable’ for the City and Parliament.268CJ v. 671b. At the meeting Venn ‘and others of the godly pack’ took exception to the clause ‘of having recourse to the law of nature for self defence’ and moved for an ordinance transferring the power of recruitment from Skippon to the militia committee (of which Venn was a member), although Skippon was to remain commander-in-chief.269Hist. of Independency, 135. On 16 August Venn was again sent to the lord mayor to ask for the common council to meet and discuss the needs of the troops in the ‘northern parts’ and the next day he was again sent to the militia committee to inform them of intelligence of a plot.270CJ v. 673a, 673b. After the arrival of news of Oliver Cromwell’s* victory over the Scots at Preston (17-19 Aug.), Venn was named to the committee on an ordinance for recruiting cavalry in the City (22 Aug.), and a week later he was named to a committee to consider how to dispose of the Scottish prisoners.271CJ v. 678a, 692a. On 2 September he was appointed to a committee to prepare for a conference with the Lords on continuing the ordinance for recruiting in London, and he was added to the committee for reformadoes on 8 September.272CJ vi. 3a, 10a.

The stresses of the second civil war took their toll. On 26 September Venn was absent from the House because of illness; he was excused and on 3 October he was given leave to go into the country.273CJ vi. 34a, 42b. His attendance at the Army Committee became infrequent over the same period.274SP28/54/2; 55/2-3. The break down may have been spiritual as well as physical. According to one royalist pamphleteer it was during 1648 that Venn ‘forsook both Mr Love and his religion too and sides with the then prevailing factious party’, the radical Independents.275Bate, Lives, Actions and Executions, 130. Venn had returned to the Commons by 4 November when he was appointed to the committee to meet with the common council about the state of the parliamentary guard.276CJ vi. 69b. The same day he was appointed to give notice to the sheriffs of London and Middlesex to suppress plays and punish both actors and audiences.277CJ vi. 69b On 9 November he was added to the committee for maimed soldiers.278CJ vi. 72a. On 21 November he was appointed to the committee of both Houses to remove obstructions in the sale of bishops’ lands, and the following day he was named to the committee on an ordinance to speed the collection of assessments for the army.279CJ vi. 81b, 83b.

Commonwealthsman, 1649-50

Venn was an enthusiastic supporter of the Rump Parliament from the outset. He was present at the Army Committee when its meetings reconvened on 12 December.280SP28/57/2. In mid-December 1648 he was involved in preparations for the City elections, being named to committees to assemble evidence of past practice and to see how royalists might be excluded (13 Dec.) and to consider the ordinance to authorise the new contest (15 Dec.). 281CJ vi. 96a, 98a. He carried the ordinance for the City elections to the Lords for their concurrence on 18 December and ten days later report from the committee on these elections.282CJ vi. 99b, 105b. On 20 December he subscribed the ‘dissent’ against the vote to continue the treaty of Newport earlier in the month.283C. Walker, Anarchia Anglicana (1649), 48 (E.570.4). Venn was also named to committees on the public revenues (21 Dec.), the collection of arrears owed by delinquents under the compounding scheme (29 Dec.) and raising money by the sale of dean and chapter lands (12 Jan.).284CJ vi. 102a, 106b, 116a. Much of Venn’s activity in the early weeks of the Rump related to his membership of the Army Committee. On 1 January 1649 he was given charge of an order to the committee enabling the commissioners in south Wales and Monmouthshire to sequester royalist estates.285CJ vi. 107b. Soon afterwards Venn was involved in the disagreement between the City and the army about the chains which had been put across the streets to block a cavalry assault. He took an order to the lord mayor requiring him to take down all the chains in London and to secure them in Leadenhall and Fairfax was to restore the chains that the army had recently removed.286CJ vi. 111b. On 2 January Venn was nominated to the Committee for Indemnity (an appointment the Commons confirmed four days later).287CJ vi. 109a. On 6 January he was also made responsible for bringing in a bill to settle the London militia and another for removing obstructions in the election of London officers.288CJ vi. 112b, 113a. On 20 January he again reported from the Army Committee, this time on the need for coats for soldiers.289CJ vi. 122b. Venn supported the trial of the king. He was named to the committee to consider how to proceed with a high court of justice on 23 December and to that concerning the ordinance for the trial of the king on 29 December.290CJ vi. 103a, 106a. On 3 January he was named to the committee on an ordinance for erecting a high court of justice and on 6 January he was appointed one of the commissioners for the trial.291CJ vi. 110b; A. and O. He was present at all but two of the commission’s sittings and signed the death warrant.292Nalson, True Copy of Jnl. of High Ct. for Trial of Charles I (1684), 5-108.

In the six months that followed the regicide, Venn was involved in a wide variety of business in the Commons. He was appointed to numerous committees dealing with financial matters. He was added to the committee for the excise on 10 February and was involved in considering abuses in the Mint and making new stamps for the coinage, being named to the committee on the mint on 13 February.293CJ vi. 137b, 138b. On 2 March he was appointed to a committee to consider a bill for taking the accounts of all who had received public money, on 12 March he was named to the committee to examine the debts repayable from the compounding and excise receipts, and a week later he was among those chosen to consider the regulation of sequestration appeals.294CJ vi. 154a, 161b, 167b. In May he was appointed to the committee to consider amendments to the bill for taking the accounts of the commonwealth (8 May) and committees to investigate the sequestration treasurers (26 May) and the Committee for Advance of Money (28 May).295CJ vi. 204b, 218a, 218b. Religious affairs occupied less of Venn’s time. On 26 April he was named to a committee on a bill for settling £20,000 per annum for the maintenance of ministers, and on 13 June he was one of those chosen to scrutinise a bill for propagating the gospel in New England.296CJ vi. 196a, 231a. He played a minor role in dismantling the old regime. On 19 March he was involved in considering a bill dispose of the records of the newly-abolished House of Lords.297CJ vi. 168b. He was ordered to give an account of the proclamation by the lord mayor and aldermen of the act abolishing the monarchy on 10 May.298CJ vi. 206a. The abolition of the monarchy promised to release funds for satisfying the arrears of the army – a cause that obviously concerned Venn. In February and March he was named to a committee to bring in a bill for the surveying of crown lands and properties and for the sale of fee farm rents.299CJ vi. 150b, 160b. On 9 May he was named to the committee on a bill for charging the arrears of the soldiers on the proceeds of the sale of crown lands.300CJ vi. 205b. Venn was also involved in rewarding individual commanders, as on 19 June, when he was added to a committee to consider a bill awarding £2,000 to Skippon, and in early July he was named to a committee to consider which royal estates should be excluded from the bill to satisfy soldiers’ arrears.301CJ vi. 237a, 254a.

During this period, Venn's main focus was on London. He was sent to the lord mayor and common council with instructions for the supply of coal to the poor on 30 January and on the days that followed he was named to committees to remove obstructions in the proceedings of the common council (31 Jan.) and for bringing in ordinances to settle the militia (2 Feb.).302CJ vi. 126a, 127a, 129b. On 9 March he was instructed to answer petitioners calling for measures to help the poor and on 23 March he was named to the committee on a bill for relief of the poor and punishment of vagrants.303CJ vi. 160b, 171a. At the beginning of April he was appointed to committees on measures to reduce the price of food and to answer a petition of the Weavers’ Company.304CJ vi. 179b, 181a. London remained the most important source of revenue, and in the spring Venn was involved in extracting money for the Rump. On 9 April he was sent to arrange a meeting between the common council and Commons about a loan of £120,000 for the service of Ireland, and on 12 April he was added to a committee to go to the City to negotiate a loan.305CJ vi. 183a, 185a. By the early summer relations between Parliament and the City had improved, and Venn was involved in symbolic moves to recognise the reconciliation. On 8 June he returned the thanks of the Commons to the City for the respect they showed in delivering up the lord mayor’s sword to the Speaker; on 30 June he was named to a committee on a bill to confer Richmond Park on the City; and a fortnight later he was sent to the lord mayor and aldermen with the new bill, which was presented as ‘a mark of their favour to the City’.306CJ vi. 227b, 247a, 263a.

In the second half of 1649 Venn continued to be involved in the City. He was a member of the committee to negotiate with the common council for a £150,000 loan for the Irish war on 4 July, and on the same day he was added to the committee on satisfying those who had lent money on the ‘public faith’ in the past.307CJ vi. 250a. On 22 August he was appointed to a committee to consider a bill for settling confiscated property on a corporation to relieve the poor of London.308CJ vi. 284a. In July and August he was also involved in a small number of commercial committees to encourage adventurers, to take the accounts of the customs collectors (3 Aug.) and to regulate the transport of pepper and spices.309CJ vi. 270a, 274a, 275a. He was added to the Committee for Compounding on 2 November.310CJ vi. 318a. Venn was named to four committees on religious affairs: to consider articles of religion (26 July), the maintenance of ministry (7 Aug.) and the preaching of the gospel in Ireland (30 Nov.) and throughout England (20 Dec.).311CJ vi. 270a, 275b, 327b, 336a. These suggest that, despite his estrangement from the religious Presbyterians, Venn was a conservative at heart. Venn was a member of several committees on the Engagement. In October and November he was named to committees to ensure all MPs subscribed to the oath, to consider former engagements and to arrange for the Engagement to be taken across the nation. 312CJ vi. 307b, 312b., 321b, 326b.

Venn’s main role was, however, in military affairs, and throughout the summer and autumn of 1649 he liaised between the council of state and the Army Committee over the supply of garrisons, furnishing magazines and repairing weapons.313CSP Dom. 1649-50, pp. 349, 487, 568, 589, 591-2, 594, 598; 1650, pp. 76, 136, 526, 571, 576 In the Commons he frequently reported from the Army Committee in the days preceding Cromwell’s Irish expedition. On 21 July he reported from the committee a letter from Cromwell concerning Ireland and a suggested bill to settle the accounts of senior officers engaged to serve there.314CJ vi. 267b. On 26 July he brought in estimates for the number of troops required for Ireland and their likely pay; and on 1 August he delivered a bill for continuing the £90,000 assessment for another three months.315CJ vi. 270a, 273a. On 2 August he reported a bill to speed the settlement of accounts for officers and soldiers bound for Ireland.316CJ vi. 273a. Once the Cromwellian invasion force had embarked, Venn turned his attention to the problem of paying military arrears. On 21 August he reported from the committee of accounts at Worcester House the publication of a book protesting at the scale of debt owed to army.317CJ vi. 383a. On the same day he was chosen as treasurer of the petty exemptions, which was used to pay for supplies to the garrisons and the artillery train.318CSP Dom. 1649-50, pp. 285, 598; 1650, p. 578. On 2 October he reported instructions for the disposal of £30,000 raised at Weavers’ Hall and suggestions that the contractors for the sale of church property should pay sums directly to those claiming arrears.319CJ vi. 301b. On 4 October he was named to a committee to consider a letter from Fairfax and the council of officers concerning the sale of crown lands.320CJ vi. 302b. He signed a letter from the Army Committee concerning the cost of reducing forces in October.321Eg. 2618, f. 40. In the same month he reported twice from the Army Committee on the need to satisfy the inhabitants of Essex for provisioning the army during the Colchester campaign.322CJ vi. 306a, 309a. In November he reported twice on the new assessment bill.323CJ vi. 322a, 327b. On 15 November Venn reported on progress on the sale of crown lands and on 27 November he was named to the committee on a bill for enabling reduced officers to discover concealed estates to satisfy their arrears.324CJ vi. 322b, 325b.

During 1650, Venn’s activity in the Commons followed a similar pattern as before. London affairs took up much of his time. On 28 January 1650 Venn was added to the committee on corporations and he and Penington were sent to inform the lord mayor that the City’s petition would be considered by this committee.325CJ vi. 351a. Venn and Penington returned to the City on 14 February, to acquaint the authorities that the bill for settling Richmond Park on the City was about to pass into law.326CJ vi. 365a. On 14 March he was named to a committee on a bill for establishing a court martial in London and its suburbs, and two days later he was named to the committee-stage of the bill to regulate trade.327CJ vi. 382b, 383b. On 13 April he was named to a committee on a petition from the City and on 25 April he was appointed to the committee on a bill for prohibiting the export of coin and bullion.328CJ vi. 397b, 403b. The commissioners for compounding accepted his nominations for the new London sequestration commission on 26 April.329CCC, 204. Venn was also engaged in measures to control religion and curb the more radical sectaries. In January and February he was named to committees on preaching the gospel in Wales and Bristol, in March he was one of those chosen to consider an additional bill for the maintenance of preaching ministers, and in June he was appointed to a committee on a bill for advancing religion in Yorkshire.330CJ vi. 352a, 365b, 382b, 420b. On 14 June he was named to a committee to consider how to suppress licentious and obscene practises justified by arguments of liberty of conscience.331CJ vi. 423b. The concerns of the army were, as before, paramount. On 7 February he was named to the committee on a bill for removing obstructions from the sale of crown lands, that would finance the army arrears, on 18 February he was appointed to the committee to consider several ordinances for assessments to maintain the army.332CJ vi. 358b, 368a. Venn reported from the Army Committee on 4 March, with a statement of the pay roll and concerns as to false debentures, and on 1 April he reported the need for surgeons and the problem of forged warrants.333CJ vi. 376a, 377a, 390a-b. On 6 April he was appointed to a committee on the bill for the sale of delinquents’ estates, and on 10 April he again reported from the Army Committee on the inconvenience of quartering in private houses.334CJ vi. 393b, 396a. In early May he reported on the assessment receipts and also a conference between the Army Committee and Major-general John Lambert* on the deduction of soldiers’ billet money from their pay.335CJ vi. 407b. On 7 June he was named to the committee on a bill for settling the militia of the commonwealth and on 12 June he was ordered to draft a bill authorising Skippon to command the City forces.336CJ vi. 417a, 423a. On 22 June he was appointed to the committee to consider settling lands on the widow of Colonel Thomas Rainborowe*.337CJ vi. 428b. On 25 June Venn reported a bill for the continuation of the Army Committee and the treasurers at war and a bill allowing the militia committee to collect money voted for the security of the capital in December 1644.338CJ vi. 431a-b. On the same day Venn was one of those sent to Fairfax on his resignation as lord general, to acquaint him with Parliament’s high esteem of his service.339CJ vi. 431b.

Venn attended a meeting of the Army Committee on 28 June; by the next morning he was dead.340SP28/68/1; Smyth's Obit., 29. The suddenness of his demise – ‘going to bed very well with his wife he was found dead by her next morning’ – led to speculation, especially among royalist sympathisers, that ‘the judgements of God followed him in a troubled conscience’ so that eventually ‘he had destroyed himself’.341Bate, Lives, Actions and Executions, 130; Noble, Regicides ii. 284. There is no hint of this in his daughter’s account of the ‘taking away from me of my dear and precious father … in so sad and sudden a manner, which made it take a deeper impression upon my spirit’.342A Wise Virgins Lamp Burning, 26. Venn’s will, which is undated and has no religious preamble, was proved on 1 July. Venn left his houses in London, Colchester and Lydiard St Lawrence, together with his lands in Lincolnshire and those ‘lately purchased’ in Northamptonshire to his wife for her lifetime, and thereafter to his only surviving son, Thomas. There were bequests of money to his other children, members of his extended family and to the poor of London, Kensington, Lydiard and Taunton. At his death Venn was still owed the £4,000 he had been granted by Parliament and another £140 from the sale of bishops’ lands which his widow subsequently tried to collect. He left instructions for his ‘own family to mourn’ but ‘to be sparing in the funeral charges’.343PROB11/213/13. His widow was granted £691 by order of Parliament of 3 July 1650, but despite a further order of 9 May 1651 for repayment of the £4,000 grant, she struggled fruitlessly to redeem the full amount owed to her deceased husband.344CJ vi. 436a, 572a; CCAM 88, 92, 535, 538-40, 1129-30. She eventually remarried a minister, Mr Wells. Thomas Venn went on to become mayor of Bridgwater in Somerset.345Venn, Annals, 78-9.

Conclusion

John Venn was not a typical London MP, as he was neither a merchant nor an alderman. Rather, his power was based on the military establishment of the City – the trained bands, the London regiments and the militia committee – and this gave him something of a popular appeal, allowing him influence over the London apprentices in the crisis of 1641-2. His standing in Parliament was founded on his membership of the Army Committee, and he went on to support the creation of the New Model, the Independents hegemony from 1647 and the commonwealth from 1649. Venn was a political radical, but he was not a religious extremist. His break with his Presbyterian mentor, Christopher Love, came only in 1648; and his activities in the Commons thereafter suggest that he adhered to a conservative national church and had no time for ‘liberty of conscience’ outside this rigid framework. Oddly, it was Venn’s influence over the London mob in 1641 that proved his lasting legacy. In the early stages of the Exclusion Crisis of 1679 a pamphlet appeared lamenting the indirect practices used in the election of the London sheriffs, which, it was claimed, ‘fell little short of the old story of Venn with his myrmidons’.346Venn and his Myrmidons, or the Linen Draper Capotted (1679), 8.