SHAW, John (c.1617-90), of Colchester, Essex.

The origins of the Shaws of Colchester are obscure. All that is known is that this MP’s father, John Shaw senior, prospered as a citizen of the town to such an extent that he rose to become one of its aldermen and was able to acquire an estate close by at Kirby.1Vis. Essex 1664-8, 82; Morant, Essex, i. 483, Colchester pt., 118. His wife, Mary Lufkin, was a member of another prominent Colchester family. Their decision to send their eldest son, John junior, to Cambridge and then on to Lincoln’s Inn to train as a lawyer was no doubt seen as a means of enhancing their social standing.

There is some evidence that during the mid-1640s both father and son were regarded as being supporters of Parliament. John Shaw senior was appointed as one of the assessment commissioners for Essex in late 1644 and his son served on most of the local commissions between February 1645 and early 1648.2A. and O. As John junior was then probably only in his late twenties and was not called to the bar until 1647, he must have been thought to be especially useful in such roles. The appointment of John Shaw senior as a Colchester alderman in 1645 was followed two years later in September 1647 by his election as mayor.3Essex RO, D/B5 Gb3, f. 255; D/B5 Gb4, f. 7v. No sooner had he been elected than he asked to be excused. It was later claimed that Parliament had disapproved of the choice, allegedly because Shaw was ‘honestly and religiously principled’, and that a troop of horse had been sent to the town to impose an alternative candidate, John Cox. The corporation allowed Shaw to step aside in return for the gift of a piece of plate.4Essex RO, D/B5 Gb4, ff. 7v, 9; HMC Beaufort, 23. The following year Shaw senior was one of those purged from the corporation in the aftermath of the siege of Colchester and Parliament’s recapture of the town.5Essex RO, D/B5 Gb4, ff. 20v-21. The bodies of the royalist officers, Sir Charles Lucas and Sir George Lisle, may have been taken to the Shaws’ house following their executions on 28 August 1648.6Add. 10116, f. 211v.

With his father barred from local politics, the son seems to have taken over some of his involvement in civic affairs. John junior thus spent the 1650s embroiled in the factional intrigue which divided the leaders of his native town.7J.H. Round, ‘Colchester and the Commonwealth’, EHR xv. 641-64. From the autumn of 1653 he was acting as the corporation’s deputy recorder, having been recommended by the recorder, Arthur Barnardiston (brother of Sir Nathaniel Barnardiston*), who was prevented by ill health from performing his duties in full.8Essex RO, D/Y 2/7, pp. 35, 39; D/B5 Gb4, ff. 107, 109. In the parliamentary election held in July 1654, Shaw voted for John Maidstone* rather than William Goffe* to be the town’s MP.9Essex RO, D/B5 Gb4, f. 113v. Before long, however, he had emerged as one of the leaders of those opposed to the ruling pro-protectorate faction on the corporation. A surprise coup in late 1654 reversed this. By appealing to the free burgesses for their support, Shaw and his allies were able to appoint Thomas Reynolds as mayor. Shaw was then installed as recorder in place of Barnardiston. Barnardiston responded by bringing a case in the court of upper bench successfully alleging unfair dismissal. Petitions to the council of state obtained a order that new elections be held.10CSP Dom. 1655, pp. 202-4, 309, 310, 354, 378; W. Style, Narrationes Modernae (1658), 446-7, 452-3. When these finally took place on 19 December, Shaw stood against Nathaniel Taylor* in the contest to be recorder. The local major-general, Hezekiah Haynes*, intervened to make sure that as many people as possible were prevented from voting for Shaw, whom Haynes regarded as ‘the chief of the malignant interest’ in the town. Taylor’s margin of victory was nevertheless no more than a handful of votes.11TSP iv. 330.

The decision by the council of state to issue a new charter to Colchester in advance of the elections for the 1656 Parliament was intended to settle this dispute. Instead, it encouraged both sides to use the parliamentary election as an excuse to renew their differences. The new corporation, acting as loyal supporters of the protectorate, nominated Henry Lawrence I* and Maidstone for the two seats, only for the free burgesses to respond by claiming the right of nomination for themselves and naming Shaw as one of their preferred alternatives.12Essex RO, D/B5 Gb4, ff. 144v-146. It was Lawrence and Maidstone who were allowed to take their seats. Shaw’s appointment as one of the assessment commissioners named in the assessment act passed by this Parliament hardly compensated for this setback.13A. and O.

Shaw had to wait until 1659 before getting another chance to challenge the new corporation. He was again the preferred candidate of the free burgesses in the contest for the 1659 Parliament and this time he was successful. An appeal to the Commons resulted in the ruling of 22 March by which he and Abraham Johnson* were admitted to the House.14C219/46: Colchester return, 18 Jan. 1659; CJ vii. 618a. His only two committee appointments were those to draft impeachment articles against William Boteler* (12 Apr.), which is consistent with his previous opposition to the protectorate, and to remove the records of the various standing committees from Worcester House.15CJ vii. 637a, 639a. He intervened in the debate on 16 April on the petition presented by the Quakers, supporting Sir Walter Erle’s* objection that what had been presented was not a proper ‘petition’.16Burton’s Diary, iv. 445.

It was the recalled Rump which the following month set in motion the process by which the Colchester corporation was again remodelled. The previous charter was reinstated by the Commons on 18 July. It was probably at this point that Shaw resumed his place as recorder, although the first firm evidence that he was again exercising this office is only provided by his election to Parliament the following April. It nevertheless seems likely that he was the person sent to London in early March 1660 to consult with the former recorder, (Sir) Harbottle Grimston*, on the town’s affairs.17Essex RO, D/B5 Gb4, ff. 208v, 210. The decision by the free burgesses, whose right of election had been confirmed, to elect Shaw and Grimston as their MPs for the Convention and later for the Cavalier Parliament confirmed that the conservative elements within the town had finally come out on top.

For the 1660s and most of the 1670s Shaw loyally served Colchester as its recorder and MP, combining these roles with a successful practice as a barrister. His record in the Cavalier Parliament was as a strong supporter of the court and of the Church of England.18HP Commons 1660-1690. His persecutions of the local Quakers became notorious.19The First Publishers of Truth, ed. N. Penney (1907), 98-102. He later fell out with the Colchester corporation, with the result that he was removed as recorder and was not elected to any of the later Parliaments. He briefly regained his local offices in 1688 as one of James II’s tory supporters, although this was used against him when he was not reappointed as a king’s serjeant after 1689. He died in 1690 and was buried in Holy Trinity, Colchester.20Morant, Essex, i. Colchester pt. 118, app. 20-1; P. Summers and J. Tillerton, Hatchments in Britain 6 – Cambs., Essex, Herts., Hunts. and Mddx. (1985), 45. Neither of his two eldest sons, John and Samuel, survived him and his third son, Thomas, did so only until the following year. As none of these three had left surviving offspring, Shaw’s lands passed to his fourth son, Jeremy, and later to Jeremy’s son-in-law, John King.21Morant, Essex, i. 483. Shaw was therefore the only member of the family ever to sit in Parliament.