WELDON, Ralph (1606-83), of Swanscombe, Kent.

Behind the fervent parliamentarianism of Weldon’s family during the civil wars lay a connection with the court which dated back almost a century. Weldon’s grandfather, Sir Ralph Weldon, served as clerk of the greencloth to Elizabeth I, and his great uncle, Anthony, held the post of clerk of the kitchen to James I. Weldon’s father, Sir Anthony, succeeded to both positions, but later turned against the royal interest. Even if Sir Anthony was not the author of The Court and Character of King James (1650), or the scurrilous tract called A Cat May Look Upon a King (1650), he certainly became a prominent, controversial, and allegedly tyrannical parliamentarian committee-man in Kent during the 1640s, and could claim to be the leader of the county’s radicals before his death in 1648.17Oxford DNB.

Ralph Weldon was probably a zealous puritan by the early 1640s, when he twice contributed to collections for distressed Protestants in Ireland, and he subsequently became active in the parliamentarian army during the first civil war.18SP28/192, unfol. He rose to prominence in the aftermath of the Kentish rising of 1643, upon which he became a deputy lieutenant and a member of the county committees, not least in order to sequester local delinquents.19CJ iii. 275b; LJ vi. 256b; HMC Portland, i. 150; Bodl. Nalson III, f. 139; SP28/11, f. 32. Like others in the region, however, he expressed concern at the ‘insupportable’ financial burden placed upon the county, from which they sought relief through appeals to the Speaker, William Lenthall*.20HMC Portland, i. 163; Bodl. Nalson V, f. 95. In January 1644 Weldon was commissioned as colonel of a regiment of Kentish foot, and his duties took him away from the county for the bulk of the civil wars. He was ordered to join the army of Sir William Waller* in Sussex in March 1644, and during the months which followed he attended Waller’s councils of war in Hampshire, Gloucestershire, Northamptonshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire.21CSP Dom. 1644, p. 32; Cent. Kent Stud. U951/O8. In September 1644, Weldon’s forces were assigned for Lyme Regis and the campaign in the west, and by October his regiment was garrisoned at Plymouth.22CSP Dom. 1644, p. 502; Kingdomes Weekly Intelligencer no. 76 (8-15 Oct. 1644), 611 (E.12.23). Weldon returned to Kent in early 1644, where he resumed service on the county committee, and later in the year he was involved in orchestrating the removal of popish icons at Eltham.23SP28/234, unfol.; SP18/235, unfol. Not to be confused with ‘Major Weldon’, whose Kentish forces were despatched to Arundel in late 1644, Weldon was ordered to return to Lyme Regis in December 1644, following attempts by the Committee of Both Kingdoms to recruit his regiment.24SP28/157 (Kent assessment bk.), f. 15; CSP Dom. 1644-5, pp. 142, 175, 201. In January 1645, Weldon’s force was recorded as being at Weymouth, ahead of a planned campaign to Taunton.25CSP Dom. 1644-5, p. 239.

For his ‘good service and good affection’, Weldon was commissioned as colonel of a regiment of foot in the New Model army.26LJ vii. 266b, 279. After quartering at Wokingham in April, his regiment formed part of a brigade – which Weldon commanded as the senior colonel – sent to relieve Taunton in early May.27J. Vicars, Magnalia Dei Anglicana (1646), 133, 148-9 (E.348.1); CSP Dom. 1644-5, pp. 458, 459, 476; Rushworth, Hist. Collns. vi. 28; J. Sprigge, Anglia Rediviva (1854), 19, 20, 21; Ludlow, Mems. i. 119; Whitelocke, Mems. i. 433-4; Two Letters… the Other from Colonell Ralph Weldon (1645), 3-5 (E.284.9). Thanked for his service by the Committee of Both Kingdoms, Weldon was also lauded in the press, as being ‘gallant, wise and brave’.28CSP Dom. 1644-5, pp. 488, 491; A Great Victorie (1645), 1-5 (E.284.11); A Narration of the Expedition to Taunton (1645), 5 (E.285.10). Weldon remained in the west, despite financial difficulties and a lack of supplies, and was eventually blockaded in Taunton himself by the forces of George Goring*, until being relieved by Sir Thomas Fairfax* after battle of the Naseby.29CSP Dom. 1644-5, pp. 518, 524, 525, 526, 544, 553, 556, 561, 594; Sprigge, Anglia Rediviva, 25, 26, 67, 68; Whitelocke, Mems. i. 436; Ludlow, Mems. i. 123. Thereafter, Weldon’s regiment was involved in key phases of the campaign in the west country. It was involved in the taking of Bridgwater (July 1645), and in the storming of Bristol (Aug.-Sept. 1645), and having been recruited once again the regiment helped lay siege to Tiverton before wintering at Exeter.30Rushworth, Hist. Collns. vi. 56, 57, 65-6, 68; Sprigge, Anglia Rediviva, 75, 77, 101, 102, 104-5, 107, 123, 126-7, 147, 154-5; HMC Portland, i. 268; Whitelocke, Mems. i. 511; CSP Dom. 1645-7, p. 142; Vicars, Magnalia, 300-301. Weldon’s reward, dubious though the honour turned out to be, was appointment as governor of Plymouth. This was proposed by the Commons in late October 1645, and finally approved on 16 December.31Whitelocke, Mems. i. 527; HMC 6th Rep. 82b, 88a; LJ vii. 653a, 655b, 660a, 661a, 661; viii. 42b, 43a. His regiment was granted to Robert Lilburne, to his troops’ apparent dismay.32CSP Dom. 1625-49, p. 706. During the months which followed, Weldon was responsible for securing the surrender of royalist garrisons in the region, and for negotiating with local royalist leaders like Piers Edgcumbe*.33CSP Dom. 1645-7, p. 317; CCC 35, 1082; Colonell Weldens Taking of Inch-House (1646), 1 (E.330.5); CCAM 695; Whitelocke, Mems. ii. 28; Articles of Agreement for the Surrender of Charles Fort (1646), 1-3 (E.339.18); Bodl. Tanner 58, ff. 380, 382-v. By the spring of 1647, however, Weldon faced serious problems in maintaining the garrison, caused by a profound shortage of funds, and this forced him to make financial contributions to the townsmen, upon whom his troops relied for quarter, out of his own pocket.34Rushworth, Hist. Collns. vii. 1024.

Although Weldon retained the confidence of both Parliament and Committee of Both Kingdoms, his letters to Lenthall began to reveal his desperation.35CSP Dom. 1645-7, p. 563; LJ ix. 238a. On 18 June he complained of the ‘extreme necessity’ caused by his troops’ lack of pay for 12 weeks. The result was that local inhabitants were impoverished, and he described their complaints as being ‘most lamentable and importunate’. He also expressed concern that he was no longer able to trust his men.36Bodl. Tanner 58, f. 209. Fearing that Parliament had failed to respond, Weldon explained to Lenthall less than a fortnight later that the garrison’s position had now ‘grown intolerable and cannot be longer borne’, and he claimed that ‘I have now no way left, but in most humble manner to lay down the command of this garrison’. He also added that his replacement would be welcomed only so long as he brought money, ‘but if otherwise I am confident it will be very dangerous for anyone to undertake the command and likewise for myself, that am to leave it, who, I am verily persuaded, shall neither get off with a whole skin, nor a rag to my back’. Weldon was apparently living in a state of fear, and ‘every hour I look for some sad accident’.37Bodl. Tanner 58, f. 427; Cary, Memorials, i. 324-5.

Such fears were apparently realised within days, and Weldon subsequently reported that his troops had begun to mutiny and had ‘lost all obedience’. Although he had planned to impose punishments, Weldon had restrained himself upon realising that ‘famine seemed to appear in most of their faces’, and that they had to ‘steal or starve’. Weldon’s response was to use £500 of customs revenue in order to buy food.38Bodl. Tanner 58, f. 439; Cary, Memorials, i. 326-7. However, while Weldon reiterated his hope to resign, he evidently recognised the dilemma he now faced. Explaining to Lenthall on 6 August that he had been ‘twice endangered’, Weldon recognised that ‘unless the garrison be paid, I shall never be permitted to come away, and staying here without pay I run the hazard of every day being mischiefed’.39Bodl. Tanner 58, f. 444; Cary, Memorials, i. 327-9. Weldon’s plaintive letters to Lenthall, and his lobbying of Edmund Prideaux I*, eventually brought a response from Parliament. Weldon’s letters indicate that his position remained parlous during the autumn and winter, as when he bemoaned ‘the extreme and crying wants and necessities’ of the garrison.40Bodl. Tanner 58, ff. 476, 482; Cary, Memorials, i. 343-4, 344-6; HMC Portland, i. 162; Bodl. Nalson III, f. 101; CJ v. 286b, 343a, 362b. Nevertheless, upon consideration by the Committee of the West and the Army Committee, the Commons ordered the payment of £8,000 to the garrison in late October, and £10,000 from the Devon assessments in mid-November. Such money was to be used in part to satisfy personal debts incurred by Weldon, as well as his arrears of pay, although Weldon evidently doubted whether such money could be raised in the region.41CJ v. 286b, 343a, 362b; LJ ix. 568b.

Such measures did little to alleviate the suffering of the troops and inhabitants, and Weldon narrowly avoided death at the hands of one of his mutinous soldiers in February 1648, although the letter in which he described ‘to what height of mutinous carriage their great necessities have brought them unto’ brought forth an order for a further £6,000 to be paid to the garrison.42CJ v. 441b, 467b; Moderate Intelligencer no. 153 (17-24 Feb. 1648), 1174 (E.429.1). However, neither this nor a subsequent order passed in March for the reimbursement of money which he had provided from his own funds appears to have been carried out, and this appears to have prompted Weldon to return to London in late May.43Whitelocke, Mems. ii. 282. He was duly summoned to appear on 28 May before the Derby House Committee, who sought to persuade him to return to Plymouth, not least by renewing orders for payments to both the garrison and Weldon, who was found to have spent £4,000 of his own money.44CSP Dom. 1648-9, pp. 85, 86, 91, 148; Rushworth, Hist. Collns. vii. 1132, 1158; Whitelocke, Mems. ii. 320, 335; HMC 7th Rep. 28, 29, 35; LJ x. 293b, 295b, 310a, 311b, 359b; CCC 808. That this money remained owing by late summer prompted yet more letters from Weldon, more promises of money, and more threats of resignation, a process which lasted from late July to mid-November, when he made another trip to Westminster in order to plead his case.45CSP Dom. 1648-9, pp. 225, 251, 268, 275, 309-11, 313, 315, 323, 325; CJ v. 656b; CCAM 460; Rushworth, Hist. Collns. vii. 1320, 1339; Whitelocke, Mems. ii. 436, 462; Bodl. Tanner 57, f. 373. Things finally came to a head in the spring of 1649, when Weldon once again appears to have threatened resignation in order to secure payment of money long since promised by undelivered, and although the council of state sought to encourage him to stay at Plymouth, he appears to have finally negotiated his exit in May 1649.46CSP Dom. 1649-50, pp. 47, 52-3, 57, 76-7, 128, 573. Weldon returned to Kent upon his departure from Plymouth, but played only a slight role in public life during the early 1650s.47SP28/130iv, f. 35v; Medway Archives, RCA/N5/60, unfol.

In securing election to the first protectorate Parliament in 1654, as one of the knights of the shire, Weldon may have been motivated by his concern to secure not only financial compensation from the state but also protection from his creditors. Weldon was named to just two committees, on the maintenance of ministers (7 Dec.) and the enumeration of heresies (12 Dec.), but on 18 January 1655 he also petitioned the House for £4,000 which was still outstanding from the money ordered to be paid to him in June 1648.48CJ vii. 397b, 399b, 419a. Although the Commons approved payment of this sum, it remained outstanding by the time of the second protectoral Parliament, to which Weldon was once again returned for one of the county seats. His personal circumstances may have influenced his nomination to ten committees regarding personal business and petitions in the early months of the sitting, and one such issue, relating to his native Kent, prompted him to make a brief speech on 22 December.49CJ vii. 452a, 457b, 463b, 473a, 483a, 484a, 486a, 488a; Burton’s Diary, i. 206. Weldon’s own case had been raised on 3 December 1656, with a report to the protectorate council indicating the size of the debt remaining due to him, which prompted an audit of his accounts, and a recommendation that he should be paid.50CSP Dom. 1656-7, pp. 185, 209, 224. Weldon was nevertheless forced to submit a petition some six months later, in which he explained the threat from creditors to whom he faced being ‘delivered up as a sacrifice’, and in which he waived claims to interest upon his debt. With the support of John Lambert* and William Lenthall, who was troubled that Weldon had been unpaid for so long, the House ordered payment of Weldon’s £4,000.51Burton’s Diary, ii. 182, 190, 191; CJ vii. 549a.

Weldon’s involvement in public affairs during this Parliament is less straightforward. He was named to committees regarding bills for the security of the protector (26 Sept.), the abolition of the court of wards (29 Oct., 6 Nov.), and naturalisations (13 Feb.).52CJ vii. 429a, 437b, 447a, 450a, 490a. He displayed an interest in church affairs, as a member of committees to support the churches in Exeter (9 Feb.) and to consider a bill to encourage the purchase of impropriations to support ministers (31 Mar.), and he also acted as a teller against a motion to compel Congregationalists to use the Westminster Catechism (20 May).53CJ vii. 488a, 515b, 535b. There is little in Weldon’s parliamentary career to suggest that he belonged to any particular political faction or grouping, and he played no part in the constitutional debates in the spring of 1657, although he was present in the House during that period. It may or may not be significant that Weldon was missing from the list of those who voted to retain kingship in the Humble Petition and Advice on 25 March, and that he acted as teller against granting lands in Ireland to the leading supporter of kingship, Roger Boyle* (Lord Broghill) on 5 June.54Narrative of the Late Parliament (1657), 22-3 (E.935.5); CJ vii. 546a. Weldon returned to Westminster for the brief second sitting of Parliament in early 1658, and again avoided controversy. He was named to four committees, including the delegation to attend Oliver Cromwell* regarding his Banqueting House speech, and the body concerned with the maintenance of ministers.55CJ vii. 581b, 589a, 591a, 592a. Thereafter, Weldon seems to have returned to the local administration in Kent, where he served until the Restoration.56Add. 42596, ff. 8, 8v.

That Weldon opposed the return of Charles II appears from a report written sometime in the early 1660s, in which he was described as a hater of monarchy, a seeker for popularity, and an Anabaptist, rather than the Presbyterian which he apparently pretended to be. This report also alleged that he had referred to the executed regicides as martyrs, that he had been involved in plots against the new regime, and that his house was a meeting place for discontented opponents of the Stuarts.57CSP Dom. 1663-4, p. 406. Nevertheless, Weldon appears to have been left at liberty until his death in the spring of 1683, when he left his estate in Swanscombe and Newchurch to his son, Anthony, and £300 to his only daughter.58PROB11/373/27.