ROLLE, John (1598-1657/8), of St Mary Aldermanbury, London.

The fourth son of an influential Devon landowner, Rolle was apprenticed to the Levant Company, and as a London merchant trading in luxury cloths, including silk, he had become a prosperous man by the late 1620s. Returned on his father’s interest to the Cornish borough of Callington in 1626 and 1628, during the latter Parliament he became involved in the resistance to Charles I’s attempt to levy tonnage and poundage without parliamentary consent, taking a personal stand in October 1628, when he refused to pay the duty on bales of silk. A protracted legal battle followed, culminating in Rolle being served a subpoena to attend star chamber while sitting in a committee – a move condemned as a breach of privilege. After the closure of Parliament in 1629 Rolle was not pursued further in the courts, but his goods remained impounded, and he was forced to suspend his trading activities during the 1630s.19HP Commons 1604-1629.

Rolle may have retired to the west country during the personal rule of Charles I, and in 1634 he was a party in the marriage settlement of his sister Jane, who had married (Sir) Alexander Carew* of Antony three years before.20Antony House, Carew-Pole CS/11/16; Cornw. RO, R/5825. In this period, Rolle may also have renewed contact with his kinsman, Hugh Boscawen*, who no doubt used his position as recorder of Truro to secure Rolle’s return for the borough in March 1640. Rolle’s contribution to the brief session that followed was limited to his inclusion in three committees, for bills on the manufacture of needles and wire, for reforming abuses in church courts, and for granting administrations, all on 1 May.21CJ ii. 17b.

Long Parliament 1640-2

Rolle was re-elected for Truro in October 1640. In the first ten months of the Long Parliament he was involved in the general attack on the abuses of the Caroline regime. He was named to committees to consider illegal taxation (27 Nov.), the activity of the king’s officers in the port of Weymouth (21 Dec.), the corruption of the postal system (10 Feb. 1641), and the abuses of the customs farmers (24 Feb.).22CJ ii. 38a, 55a, 82a, 92a. On 5 December 1640, during the debate on the petition of the London merchants against the collectors of imposts, Rolle denounced such taxes as ‘illegally imposed’.23Procs. LP i. 472. Rolle’s treatment in 1628-9 gave him a special interest in such taxes, and this also explains his inclusion in other committees, such as that to consider the case of another persecuted London merchant, Richard Chambers (2 Dec. 1640), and to consider the breach of privilege against John Pym*, John Hampden* and Sir Walter Erle* (18 Dec.), who were also the subject of the king’s anger in the late 1620s.24CJ ii. 43a, 53b. Rolle’s own case was considered by another committee, appointed to peruse the exchequer records and consider the star chamber proceedings, appointed on 10 November.25D’Ewes (N), 521. This committee deliberated during the winter of 1640-1, and Sir Robert Harley* reported on 22 May the recommendation that Rolle’s silk, confiscated in 1628, should be returned, and asked that the lawyers of the House would ‘show the illegality of the proceedings against Mr Rolle’.26D’Ewes (N), 522, 524; CJ ii. 154a; Procs. LP iv. 525-6. On 1 July the Commons ordered that Rolle’s business should be combined with that of Chambers, and that his brother, Sir Samuel, be added to the committee.27CJ ii. 195a. On 13 August the Commons, on the motion of Bulstrode Whitelocke*, ordered that Rolle be ‘discharged from his security given to pay any custom which had been unlawfully seized’, and again stipulated that his goods were to be returned.28Procs LP vi. 400; CJ ii. 254b.

Rolle’s parliamentary activity at this time reveals his concern for religion, and in particular the rise of Laudianism. On 23 February 1641 he was named to the committee to initiate proceedings against Richard Montagu, bishop of Norwich; on 16 March to the committee to abolish the ‘popish hierarchy’ of the church; on 27 April to the committee on the bill to punish members of the Convocations; and on 24 June he was added to the committee to punish scandalous ministers.29CJ ii. 91a, 105b, 129b, 184b. Rolle’s religious views were underpinned by a deep suspicion of Catholicism. On 14 November 1640 he was added to the committee on popish recusants, and on 16 August 1641 he was named to a committee to consider banning Catholics from trading in London.30CJ ii. 29a, 258a. The Irish rebellion, which broke out in October 1641, confirmed Rolle’s fears. He reacted in practical ways during the winter and following spring. In the Commons, he was named to committees to import more coins into Ireland (9 Nov.) and to arrange the import of supplies, including gunpowder, through the Ulster port of Carrickfergus (24 Feb., 28 Mar.).31CJ ii. 308b, 451b, 502a. In January he was one of the MPs sent to attend the lord admiral, Robert Rich, 2nd earl of Warwick, with information about Dunkirk ships gun-running to the Irish rebels, and in February he moved the Commons for an investigation of a ship at Hull allegedly containing arms.32CJ ii. 375b; PJ i. 57, 295. In March Rolle also invested £450 in the Irish adventure.33Bottigheimer, Eng. Money and Irish Land, 190; CSP Ire. Adv. 1642-59, p. 142. Rolle’s concern for Ireland was closely connected with his involvement in matters of trade, and this in turn gave him a strong interest in the navy. On 19 November 1641 he was named, with Giles Grene and Samuel Vassall and others, to the committee to consider victualling the navy, and on 14 January 1642 all four were named to a new committee for naval affairs that would shortly become the Committee of Navy and Customs (CNC).34Supra, ‘Committee of Navy and Customs’; CJ ii. 320a, 378b. This was the beginning of a working relationship that lasted throughout the decade. Rolle’s relationship with Vassall appears to have been particularly close. He was named to ten committees in February, March, April and May 1642, and of those, Vassall was also named to seven, including the committee for public accounts (10 Mar.), the committee on the new rates for cloth export (17 Mar.) and the committee to treat with merchants for a loan for the supply of Ireland (14 May).35CJ ii. 441b, 451b, 467b, 474a, 476a, 483a, 499a, 533b, 535b, 571b; PJ ii. 318.

Managing the war effort, 1642-4

This combination of trade, Ireland and the navy dominated Rolle’s parliamentary activities for the second half of 1642. In June and July he was named to two committees to arrange loans from merchants’ companies, and on 14 July he was appointed to the committee to treat with the gentlemen of Ireland for the supply of the southern province of Munster.36CJ ii. 601b, 623a, 666a, 672a. On 28 July he was named to the committee to consider a new customs ordinance, and on 10 August he was added to the committee for the distribution of the Irish ‘contribution’ to Protestant refugees.37CJ ii. 694a, 713a. With the outbreak of civil war in England, Rolle’s role became formalised. On 3 September he was appointed to the new Committee for Irish Affairs; on 12 September he was named to the committee on the king’s revenues, and on 15 September he was appointed commissioner for the navy.38CJ ii. 750b, 762b; A. and O. On 19 October 1642, Rolle was also nominated to Parliament’s new naval executive, the Committee for the Admiralty and Cinque Ports (CACP).39Supra, ‘Committee for the Admiralty and Cinque Ports’; LJ v. 407b; Add. 18777, f. 31. These were administrative rather than overtly political jobs, but Rolle’s ad hoc appointments suggest that he was deeply committed to the parliamentary cause. In June he had lent £100 for the defence of Parliament, and he advanced a further £30 in December.40PJ iii. 469; Add. 18777, f. 109v. On 16 September he was named to the committee to consider how to deal with the ‘delinquents’ who had incited the king to make war; on 10 October he was one of those nominated to travel to Scotland to ensure the northern nation did not enter the war (although there is no evidence he ever went); and on 12 November he was chosen as one of three MPs to interrogate a royalist prisoner.41CJ ii. 769a, 802b, 846b; Add, 18777, f. 25v.

During the early months of 1643, Rolle continued to be at the centre of naval affairs. On 5 January he was named to a committee to consider how to prevent ships from trading with Newcastle, now in royalist hands, and he was named to the committee to prepare heads for a conference on the same issue on 12 January.42CJ ii. 916a, 923b. On 27 January he signed an order of the CACP for the mustering of the fleet and the strengthening of the force blockading Newcastle.43Add. 37999, f. 68. The problem of Newcastle and the coal trade recurred in later months. In May Rolle was named to a committee to respond to demands from London that Newcastle be reduced; and in July Rolle, Vassall and others were instructed to search a Danish ship intercepted on its way to the northern port.44CJ iii. 104b, 186a. By this time, the navy was in danger of becoming overstretched. On 4 May Rolle reported to the Commons from the CNC, and ‘showed very honestly that we did but deceive ourselves in thinking that the tonnage and poundage, as it now stood, could maintain the charge of the navy’ – a point that was reinforced by Grene, the chairman of the committee.45Harl. 164, f. 383v.

As before, naval matters dovetailed with trade and finance, and during 1643 Rolle became an important figure in the parliamentarian revenue system. In January he was active in reforming the customs, appointing new officials and serving on the committee to investigate its management, and make it more profitable, alongside Vassall, Grene and the Shrewsbury MP, William Spurstowe.46Add. 18777, ff. 120v, 121; CJ ii. 919b. On 20 March Rolle and Vassall were named to the committee for public accounts, and on 4 April Rolle was appointed to the committee to receive the accounts of the former customs commissioners.47CJ iii. 9b, 29b. During the spring he was again appointed to various committees to treat with merchant companies, and on 12 April he was chosen as one of the members to attend the City of London to raise money for the war effort.48CJ iii. 16b, 41a, 44a, 65b. Rolle’s financial acumen was greatly in demand. On 19 June he was one of the first two commissioners to be suggested under the new excise ordinance, but within a month he had been removed from the list of commissioners ‘at his own entreaty’, perhaps to avoid becoming overloaded with business.49Harl. 165, f. 113v; CJ iii. 169b. Rolle’s reluctance did not last for long, however, and he was named to the committee to raise money for the navy on 21 August, that to raise a loan on the customs on 29 August, and on 5 October he was named to the committee for the excise.50CJ iii. 213b, 222a, 263b. On 7 October Rolle was manager of a conference with the Lords on ordinance incorporating the Merchant Adventurers (and then raising a loan from them), and in November he was appointed to a series of revenue committees, including that to account for the money brought in under the new excise ordinance (13 Nov.).51CJ iii. 266a, 302a, 308a, 310a.

During 1643, Rolle became more involved in the management of the war. In January he was named to committees to recruit horses and raise volunteers.52CJ ii. 943a-b, On 21 April, as forces under Robert Devereux, 3rd earl of Essex, besieged Reading, Rolle, Vassall and the Cornish MP Anthony Nicoll, were ordered to attend the earl and ensure regular communications with Westminster.53Harl. 164, f. 376v; CJ iii. 54b. In August Rolle was named to a committee to consider a petition to the king from Gloucester, and in September he was one of the MPs instructed to bring John Hotham* to the bar.54CJ iii. 214b, 221a, 233b. On 14 September, when the Commons heard reports that French troops were to land at Bristol, Rolle moved for an ordinance to ban ships from transporting men without license from the Speaker.55Add. 18778, f. 42v. In the late summer and early autumn, Rolle’s interest in Ireland revived, as the cessation between the king and the Catholic Confederates came to fruition. On 31 August he was named to the committee on the ordinance to seize ships bringing any troops from Ireland; on 16 October he was named to the committee to consider what action needed to be taken to counter the effects of the cessation; and on 25 November he was involved in efforts to persuade the Protestant Irish regiments to mutiny and join Parliament.56CJ iii. 223a, 276b, 320a.

During 1643 Rolle became more obviously concerned with the west country, perhaps through the influence of his brother Sir Samuel Rolle, his kinsman Hugh Boscawen, and his parliamentary associates, like Anthony Nicoll and Edmund Prideaux I. In March Rolle was named to the committee to consider the local truce agreed in Devon and Cornwall, and he was added to the committee to consider charges against Henry Bourchier, 5th earl of Bath.57CJ iii. 8a, 20b. On 1 August Rolle was instructed to summon his brother-in-law, the turncoat Sir Alexander Carew, to attend Parliament, and two days later he was named to the committee to raise money for the relief of Exeter and the western parts.58CJ iii. 190b, 192b. In September Rolle was ordered to go to the London corporation to raise further sums to ensure the safety of Plymouth; in October he and Prideaux returned to the City to speed the payment of the sums promised; and in November he joined Prideaux and Nicoll on a committee of both Houses for the preservation of the town.59CJ iii. 247b, 275b, 300b. On 15 December, Rolle and his brothers were instructed to visit Carew, who had been arrested for attempting to betray Plymouth to the king, and brought to the Tower of London.60CJ iii. 341b.

During 1644, Rolle’s parliamentary career followed a similar pattern to the previous year. The navy and the protection of trade continued to be his main spheres of activity. In January and February he was named to committees to regulate the trade in currants, which was an important commodity for the Levant Company.61CJ iii. 357a, 391a. On 10 February he was named to a committee on an ordinance for encouraging the East India Company, and on 19 March he was named, alongside Vassall, Spurstowe, Grene and Prideaux, to a committee for selecting the commanders of the summer’s fleet.62CJ iii. 395b, 431b. Newcastle and the north east remained a concern for Rolle, and on 2 April he reported to the Commons a letter from Sunderland, concerning a skirmish at South Shields.63Add. 18779, f. 87v. In May and June Rolle was appointed to committees to prevent trade with enemy ports, to safeguard Dover, and to examine abuses by foreign wine merchants.64CJ iii. 501a, 505a, 539a. In August Rolle took the chair of the CNC (in Grene’s absence), and reported on a scheme to extend the excise to servants’ wages – a motion rejected out of hand by the Commons.65CJ iii. 582a, 588b. Grene had returned to the chair by 21 August, when he joined Rolle and others on a committee to consider how to raise money and reduce costs in both the navy and the army.66CJ iii. 601a. In December, Rolle was ordered to attend the merchant adventurers to negotiate a loan, and he was also named to committees to consider the petition of ship owners in the Thames, and to arrange for repayment of money advances by the London merchants.67CJ iii. 716a, 722a, 728a. Rolle’s naval and commercial interests led to his involvement in diplomacy. On 5 July he was named (with Grene and Vassall) to a committee to consider a letter from Parliament’s agent in Holland, Walter Strickland*, and later in the same month he was appointed to the Committee for Foreign Affairs*, which was set up to consider complaints from the Dutch concerning seizures of their shipping by Parliament’s warships.68Supra, ‘Committee for Foreign Affairs’; CJ iii. 551a, 568a. On 7 August the House made Rolle temporary chairman, in Grene’s absence, of the CNC and the Committee for Foreign Affairs.69CJ iii. 582a; LJ vi. 675a.

Rolle’s other important main concern at this time was the financing of the parliamentarian war effort. There was a substantial overlap between this and his other activities, and he worked with a similar group of MPs in both, notably Vassall, Grene, Spurstowe and Prideaux. All of these were named, alongside Rolle, to the new committee on the excise on 8 January 1644, and Rolle, Vassall and Spurstowe were also appointed to the committee to join the Committee for Revenue in considering the alum works on 7 February.70CJ iii. 360a, 390a. On 25 March Rolle was named to the committee to consider the pay establishment of the army, and on 11 April he was appointed to a committee to consider the raising of money for the armed forces.71CJ iii. 437a, 457a. In May he was named to the committee on the excise ordinance (despite his earlier reservations); in June he was named to the committee on an ordinance to extend the excise to cover a greater range of goods; and in July he was also included in the committee on the ordinance to regulate the excise on flesh imposed on London.72CJ iii. 489a, 531b, 551b.

Rolle’s activity in the various money-raising committees suggests that he supported waging a vigorous war against the king. On 27 February 1644 he was named to a committee to raise money to allow Sir William Waller’s* army to march westwards, and on 17 April he was included in the committee to raise money for the earl of Essex’s army to do the same.73CJ iii. 409b, 462a. Rolle was also involved in attempts to reform the ordnance office, which was controlled by his associate Sir Walter Erle. On 28 March he was added to the committee to consider abuses in the office; and on 5 August he was named to the committee to consider Erle’s petition, and consider ways of settling the ordnance.74CJ iii. 439b, 580b. The stagnation of the war effort after Marston Moor prompted further attempts at reform, and Rolle was involved in these, including a committee to raise a new brigade of troops (5 Oct.), to consider a petition from the Eastern Association that money raised locally should be spent by local forces (8 Oct.), and the committee for army accounts (19 Oct.).75CJ iii. 654b, 655b, 670a.

The years of warfare had delayed consideration of Rolle’s own case, but he retained the support of most MPs, and he had won a major concession on 30 December 1642, when the Commons ordered that the case should be considered by the committee on Chambers, but with Rolle’s colleagues on the CNC attending.76CJ ii. 907b. Even so, there was little progress until the spring of 1644. On 30 April the House ordered that the recorder bring in Rolle’s business, and the report was made on 7 May, outlining the case, and recommending that he be paid compensation for his subsequent loss of trade as well as for the impounding of the goods in question.77CJ iii. 473b, 483a. The matter was sent back to CNC, to decide how that compensation might be raised, and Rolle’s ally Giles Grene, reported back on 18 May, recommending that he should receive reparations from the then customs farmers, the sheriff of London, and Baron Trevor of the exchequer court, all of whom were deemed culpable for his treatment.78CJ iii. 483a, 499b; Add. 31116, p. 277. On 14 June Rolle was awarded a total of £8,641, to be levied on the estates of the guilty men.79Harl. 166, f. 73v; CJ iii. 530a-b. This provoked a desperate petition from one of them, Sir William Acton, who asked the Lords to suspend the order until his defence could be heard.80HMC 6th Rep. 17. Acton’s plea, and a similar petition by Sir Paul Pindar, threatened to delay the payment, despite a series of orders in July and August authorising local sequestrations commissioners to raise the money from the lands in question.81CJ iii. 571b, 598b, 611b, 615b. The matter had still not been settled in May 1645, when the Commons ordered the CNC to consider the rival petitions in Rolle’s case, and it is doubtful if he ever received the full amount, although some money had been paid to him by the early 1650s.82CJ iv. 142a; CCC 2691.

Political Presbyterian 1645-8

The years 1643-4 marked the high point of Rolle’s involvement in parliamentary bureaucracy. Thereafter, his position became increasingly compromised by his involvement, however reluctant, with the political Presbyterians. The evidence is fragmentary, but Rolle seems to have been a critic of the New Model army and its Independent allies from the very beginning. Although he was named to the committee on the Self-Denying Ordinance on 24 March 1645, this did not indicate his support for the measure, and subsequent appointments suggest the opposite.83CJ iv. 88a. On 31 July he was named to the committee to consider the complaints of the Scottish commissioners against Richard Barwiss*.84CJ iv. 226a. On 4 December he was named to the committee to confer with the London authorities about reforming the City militia.85CJ iv. 346b. On 13 January 1646 Rolle made a rare appearance at Parliament’s executive for Ireland, the Star Chamber Committee of Irish Affairs (to which he had been appointed in July 1645), when a mostly Presbyterian gathering considered a report made by Lord Inchiquin from Munster.86CSP Ire. 1633-47, p. 427. He also seems to have supported Presbyterian efforts to disband the New Model and ship its troops to fight in Ireland, being named to two committees to raise money for a new Irish campaign in July and August 1646.87CJ iv. 629b, 641b. Signs of Rolle’s political alignment can also be seen in the spring of 1647. On 2 April he was named to a committee on an ordinance for the London militia, which was by this time the only force that might resist the New Model.88CJ v. 132b.

Also revealing is the way in which Rolle’s administrative role fluctuated during 1645 and 1646. In the early months of 1645, he remained an important figure in naval affairs. On 7 January the Commons ordered that Rolle report from the CNC on the petition of ship owners whose vessels had been lent to the state, and on 25 January he was instructed to bring in the ordinance to satisfy their arrears with money from the excise.89CJ iv. 12a, 30a. On 21 February he was named to the committee on an ordinance to extend the powers of the navy commissioners, and in early April he reported amendments to the ordinance for reviving the Committee for the Admiralty and Cinque Ports and was made a member of this body on 19 April 1645.90CJ iv. 57a, 110b, 112a; A. and O. On 28 April, when considering whether to vest supreme naval command in Warwick and two MPs, the House voted against nominating Rolle to this three-man committee.91Supra, ‘Committee for the Admiralty and Cinque Ports’; CJ iv. 125a. It is telling that the vote of 28 April was followed by a long period during which Rolle was named to no committees concerned with the navy and the admiralty, suggesting that his career had been brought to a sudden halt by his political opponents. It was only with the resurgence of the Presbyterian faction in the summer of 1646 that Rolle once again became involved in naval affairs. He signed an order of the CNC concerning the expenses incurred at Yarmouth, on 25 August 1646.92Add. 22546, f. 11. Rolle continued to be prominent in the early months of 1647. On 8 February he signed an order of the committee for the construction of four new frigates, as ordered by Parliament.93Add. 22546, f. 13. On both occasions Rolle was present with his main allies within the committee, Vassall and Grene, who were both Presbyterians. On 10 February he reported from the Admiralty Committee those merchantmen required to complete the summer fleet, and on 26 February he reported again, this time with a list of naval appointments.94CJ v. 84a, 99b.

Rolle’s political notoriety also seems to have affected his financial career. In the spring of 1645 it looked like business as usual. On 21 April he was named to the committee on the ordinance for taking the accounts of the kingdom, and on 31 May he was appointed to the committee to consider extending the excise on flesh to the whole of England.95CJ iv. 123b, 158b. On 6 June 1645 Rolle was appointed to the committee for regulating the excise.96A. and O. Thereafter, he played little part in financial affairs until the summer of 1646, when he was named to committees to raise money for the Irish war (30 July, 11 Aug.), to attend the City of London for a loan (5 Sept.) and to negotiate with the Levant Company (17 Sept.).97CJ iv. 629b, 641b, 663a, 671a. In the winter of 1646-7 he was named to committees on the sale of lands of some delinquents, and the fining of others, and to consider matters reported from the committee of accounts.98CJ iv. 710b; v. 8b, 63a.

An important factor in Rolle’s decision to gravitate towards the Presbyterians was his religious conservatism. Oddly, there were few signs of religious engagement in Rolle’s parliamentary record between 1641 and 1645. Apart from an obvious fear of Catholicism, heightened by the Irish rebellion, the only hints at Rolle’s thinking come from two committee appointments in 1644, including that making the provision for the Lord’s Supper in the Directory of Worship, on 26 November.99CJ iv. 1a. The rise of the Independents, and their sponsorship of diversity in worship may have provoked Rolle to become more involved in maintaining the status quo. In October 1645, he was named to the committee to fill fellowships and ensure a strong ministry in the university town of Cambridge, and on 7 April 1646 he was appointed to a committee to promote a preaching ministry throughout England.100CJ iv. 312a, 502a. On 5 June 1646 he was made a member of the committee of both Houses to determine the scandalous offences that would bar admission to the sacrament.101A. and O.; CJ iv. 563a. On 30 September he was named to two committees: to consider issuing a confession for the sins of Ireland and England, and to consider oaths used in marriages and other contexts.102CJ iv. 678b. Rolle’s apparent concern for religious order fits with later evidence that Rolle was a member of the congregation of St Mary Aldermanbury, whose minister, Edmund Calamy, was a leading Presbyterian.103PROB11/272/171.

Rolle was mostly absent from the Commons after April 1647, and he played no part in the Presbyterian coup and the ‘forcing of the Houses’ in July and early August, although he seems to have remained involved in the Admiralty Committee during the summer.104CJ v. 132b, 205b, 270a; CSP Dom. 1645-7, p. 606. He was, however, deeply disturbed by the army’s march on London and the Independent triumph that followed. On 9 August he did his best to avoid being implicated in the vote to declare void all business during the forcing of the Houses, by leaving the chamber after the question was put and thus being absent at the vote, which was tied. According to one account, Rolle and other Presbyterians ‘were in the committee chamber … and had not voted; and they being severally called, three of them did acknowledge to have been present’. When he and his friends were called in, they voted against the motion, and it was defeated, much to the anger of the Independents.105CJ v. 270a; HMC Egmont, i. 443. For some reason, his colleagues made doubly sure Rolle was named to the subsequent committee on the ordinance repealing the votes (11 and 18 Aug.).106CJ v. 272a, 278a.

Rolle was much less active in the Commons for the remainder of 1647, although he was appointed to committees that reflected his earlier interests. On 1 September he was named to the committee to raise money for Ireland, and he was added to the same committee when it was revived on 1 November.107CJ v. 287a, 347b. He continued as a member of the CNC: on 27 September the Commons ordered that he should thank Captain Batten for his services, and on 6 November he was named to the committee to consider charges on trade and merchandise.108CJ v. 318a, 352a. Rolle was also named to political committees: to prepare propositions to the king for the establishment of Presbyterian church government (6 Oct.); to consider absent MPs (9 Oct.); and to examine the circumstances of the king’s flight from Hampton Court (12 Nov.).109CJ v. 327b, 329a, 357a.

In the early months of 1648, Rolle’s attendance in the Commons seems to have become more irregular. On 4 January he was appointed, alongside Prideaux and John Maynard, to the committee to consider the grievances of the people, but was then apparently absent until March, when he was named to two financial committees and the committee on the ordinance for settling the jurisdiction of the court of admiralty.110CJ v. 417a, 480a, 501a, 505b. Rolle attended the Star Chamber Committee of Irish Affairs on 17 May 1648.111CSP Ire. 1647-60, p. 8. With the onset of the second civil war, and the growing importance of the Presbyterian interest thereafter, Rolle returned to a more active role during the summer and autumn. On 6 June he was named to the committee on the ordinance for sequestering rebels in south Wales, alongside Harley and Grene; and on 16 June he was appointed to the committee on an ordinance abolishing deans and chapters, which also included Harley, Maynard and Sir Walter and Thomas Erle.112CJ v. 587a, 602a. Later in June, Rolle suddenly re-emerged as a major figure in naval affairs. On 19 June the Commons ordered him to prepare a letter to Captain Peter Pett*, thanking him for safeguarding Chatham against the royalist insurgents; and on 22 June he was added to the committee to draft a declaration against the ships that had joined the king’s cause.113CJ v. 606a, 610b. Rolle’s London connections were also strong at this time, and on 5 July he and Vassall were ordered to prepare an ordinance for reforming the City’s militia.114CJ v. 624a. This rush of activity was not sustained, however. On 20 July Rolle was named to the committee for the ordinance regulating the estates of papists and delinquents, but then he disappears from the parliamentary record for several months, probably taking advantage of the leave of absence granted to him on 13 July.115CJ v. 634b, 641b. He returned to Westminster only in the autumn. On 9 October the Derby House Committee ordered that the CNC, and Rolle in particular, attend their deliberations the following day.116CSP Dom. 1648-9, p. 297. On 29 November he was ordered to ask Thomas Watson to preach at the forthcoming day of humiliation.117CJ v. 91b. When Thomas Pride* and the other colonels purged the Commons on 6 December, Rolle was secluded, while many of his close associates, like Vassall and Grene, were imprisoned.118A List of the Imprisoned and Secluded Members (1648, 669.f.13.62); Underdown, Pride’s Purge, 384.

Final years

Rolle retired from politics after the purge, and probably returned to his mercantile activities. He was living in the parish of St Mary Aldermanbury in 1652 and 1655, when his sons were born.119GL, MS 3572/1. In 1654 he claimed his land allocation under the Irish adventure, and was granted land in King’s County.120Bottigheimer, English Money and Irish Land, 209. He made his will in November 1657, leaving small bequests to various members of the Boscawen family and Sir John Carew, and £10 to Edmund Calamy to preach his funeral sermon. The main estate went to his elder son, Robert, with £2,600 and the Irish adventure lands being left to the younger son, George. Rolle stipulated that the boys, described as being ‘very young’, were to remain in the care of their mother, and to be brought up ‘in the fear of God and good literature’. Rolle died during the winter of 1657-8, and his will was proved on 13 January 1658.121PROB11/272/171. Members of other branches of the family continued to sit in Parliament in the later seventeenth century.