D . . . . .
Ligraalliagsse Name. Cambridge University Library & Dependent

Search Request: Keyword Relevance Search = visitation county kent
Search Results: Displaying

 
 

 

.. as *3§_?9{?4  ‘ " I Am? flilé  

A visitation of the county of Kent : begun anno Dni. MDCLXIII,
finished...

Relevance: I I I I I
Main Author: Bvsshe, Edward, Sir.

Title: A visitation of the county of Kent : begun
anno Dni. MDCLXIII, finished anno Dni.
MDCLXVIII / ed. by Sir George J. Armytage.
Other Entries: Armytacie, Georcle J., Sir (George John), 1842-
1918.
 of Arms (Great Britain)
Published: London : [Mitche||, Hughes and Clarke,
printers], 1906.
Description: 203p : ill ; cm.
Series: Publications of the Harleian Society ; 54
Su bj ect(s) : H e ra I d ry:

Format: Book

 

Location: UL: Order in Rare Books Room (Not borrowable)
Classmark: Toft.b.52

Number of Items: 1
Status: Not On Loan


iTIiJltimap.com

 

QUECl(SEARCH
Great Britain
GB postcode or place

l""""""Z

flan»-nwcsn SEFIROH
gfisenrccll TIPS

     

 

I Print version 6
I Link to this map

@ View aerial photo

i:3(."1OK  THIS AWEEA1

I Cottages

I Flights

I Hotels

I Restaurants

BUY...

I Aerial Photos

I A-Z Maps

I Buy this Map

I Historic Photos

I Maps and Guides
I Train Tickets

SF’EGlAL FEATURES

3*‘ Full Address Search
;' _§ Service

!"'”1 Traffic information
1
ii.
Aerial Photos
London Tubemap

E‘ Wireless

l3l]llllllllllllllllllllIll 5

   
  
 
 

 1.

 iH$§ i '2
Colin; BBrfl'K1kl|'T‘lD’!'J Ltti EDC1

MAP INFORMATION

Address:
X:532l0s’>m Y:l8l200m lat: 5l:30:50N (5/l.5lf39‘,l lon: 0:lJf3:54V\/ l_~0.lJ983)

 

 lg__
Lon och _
1% ~T‘‘~--~..§aui!: l

33;‘

- » Br:’?§§e~5:epe7
 {Es =-

    

 £3


weather

 Click) Grid Rel:'l‘('.)3208illaocurate to 1.00 metres) Pat
Ci

tly cloudy, 25

. ~'-,~.. «—m..,,-.n<

 fig fiflflfikn


~7f\; F 
 MDCLX/]]   MAC/(_)((/H,‘
Lowl/2»\ m++«»w~ M an mow

vW%m mm by S?A€Aw~4' 6a4’Vi\.L.?}LY C1,,‘  Km“) Pww,

_,.  NIB .

M3 Ed“ ‘} 9‘/*";‘L5’“’> [s;’".z<i.59 []0r~L.»-1:.s§o_j?/:3L")

\~_,,....,..V.\,‘; mg‘; X

W\M wo\rc[C«»Lf+ob 5 ‘N‘cm7|u14" afrfs, J, s:)"P’_3;O3, {gr "M  aqwgjl
\r\Jfl/bum» ‘EAJW (F/"‘v~1b‘“(1"‘ C K4211» : W} Mwrgmmy
8-DJ»

T.»/3vrvv\5/t§;3<L A@a.«hF.sA.(64.){‘A g/‘;3,*,L,\17'(,& fin‘ W69 fir \

wLC,,,W_ Kg”/ft
[K zyqmmmr, A.r%
4\~w an - .c&m.\ Kum =F\u3-ma 
M ;¢u.f Ccv.v~-K2fr/ W a~:¢;~;3;

 


 Oywuw a,fiW/ ¢/:L.og'«g,,é{g¢,a. I§.;n> «mu. Q
p‘5(>’ 

 . ‘Ia/L’  _ ’A7~]\.\24<]/9'(L_'§'\1 

6A,7k:./Quu~.} rum Mm.cm3 6.». ’«5.s.I§‘I‘/»

I, 'LL.l¢.I>'(.u,-  v8/gwflm.

93,”; SW5 f,/uh? ,.",z‘.,( " 354% o:\d’yM1.'ah43X1—-..- I/\4»{'I:3(fl/(fi¢,i"\Aa/3’\»v;
2o.unx,¢a,uL,_ :§A~;;;.y.«ew/3*: mu »J»=v~«,/ m42wW*v:) /‘:7 [¢
irsrw ‘WW. »~w-s~ » wmw, W “W
“#6    ; £10 7.lO.I§"9S//’CIN~T:T4M4/f fix, M48 vn 
CWO» £ ’,iLv~4Y«M L3.7.H.o3,' kw/[tn/2 am; \ Mt”

‘QMW 3W~3(¢>’@  . s~w?y°~+ >».u.u.z4 W’ , /W
W“ W‘? Wiwkj V4»f'1» WW 4%», v=iW~4~n.r’7«»~»/</. ‘M

5. ma» "
CM W ‘)'.J'-f
E .

   

TU&5*~’$. IWJM; UM»/,

 

 

LJ\~L»—~«)M~(4fb.§ 1‘/‘«-.,l»C.. $».«JrrC/t(
\«.m;.) ”AP'k""~1'~,‘am'°-)f- ’~9f""““"
\~§}—?47o_\; M <m.:<r.?. Peru? «1h»*W*~<'r3 “’-"1»~'- 5’w¥->4:
tn,

   

1.1.1553: l~€fc._ 9 p,.,..,,, ,(,,r.

L % 4’ 
L«JaW~’< .4 aw-m-:v_:>_x ‘:3 ma 
C,M~Jb_l(.l¢, P‘:D_l14 93) (A)‘,_, K’   :§   4:;
Zufis aw; 3-r~(—cIVy.Dy:n—.¢?.(€~(»S"‘ f.»e,g_yLJ:.,{~,.,.,.,.;‘;.,(c31/- recjwwwgv g 3 2  X 4
,¢Q.y;9) (Luv; rc.o(-9C’,;w_,,,_(a>q,~)l6h.)I? NJ <5  63% 3 B; ’ E
(“°(g)(""<  “'V”l"°k;  an Ex ‘    “
. 5 HM,“ ::.(o.u,§<; ~ 3; 2. A 2 ,. 54 

" ‘- .5“:   Q: 

: cg 4. <3 \» :§\ 3 2 w“ E

=*. é? :5 ~

g :3 3:» U; géééég

,‘__ .A. 4. *

  31,4 MW W=‘%3   W" ‘I
 fiiwl1eg«Mr@§:f.:;/5&9 ‘
 W, }4‘\J’V’j"’t"’”

?(,z,. /4    <‘ u A I
Q’ )0».  Nuv~'=**” V ~» W‘  

 ‘%3‘W5‘* ?9?1x2 3%K Hg

"<.\\'?  ,\
“:-.:\\.= ex.‘

« wxtifw, Ina .
ik ad’ 


Institute of Historical Research

Home I About Us I Events I Research Centres I Online Resources I Publications I 5tudy&Training I Library 3'3‘: SS;

 
 

Introduction Custodes Rotulorum Navy Surveyor of Marine Princess Augusta Household
Clerk of the Crown in Chancery Exchequer: Receivers of Land Victuals Princess Caroline Household
Clerks of the Privy Council Revenues 1554-1832 Navy Treasurers Queen Adelaide Household
Clerks of the Privy Seal Justices in Eyre Officers of the Mint Queen Charlotte Household
Clerks of the Signet Kings Proctor Officers of the Ordnance Queen Caroline Household
Commissioners Masters of Request Officers of the Green Cloth Queen Victoria Household
Commissioners of Bankrupts c. Navy Cierk of the Acts Paymaster of Forces Vice Admirals

1720-1831 Navy Comptroller Paymaster of Pensions wards

Comptroller of Accounts Navy Surveyor Prince Frederick Household

Prince George Household

Navy Comptroller c. 1546-1639

Provisional list compiled by J C

This office had come into existence by 1546 when the crown granted a Sainty January 2003
salary by letters patent under the great seal. Thereafter the crown granted

the office itself in this fashion. Tenure was for life until 1639 and during P3995 in this Section -
pleasure subsequently. The patent salary, originally 100 marks, was fixed

at £50 in 1561. For a list of subsequent holders of the office, see Navy Abbreviations

Board Officials 1660-1832, comp. J.M. Collinge (1978), p. 22).
‘ _ . References (this page)

.2“ I

 Ml .‘ “Mk.  _  

‘L1. Refefences  if‘ ‘ )i’ A , I _ __.%'  Chronological List of Comptrollers
C 66 Chancery'patent rolls it »\~ -'  cl  ' (this page)
C 142 Chancery inquisitions post mortem: I _ N

series II .  mt.   ‘ ~~    ~ I -~ - .~ .  -A '  ,

CPR ._\\,\,\_  ‘V , CaIendarof’I°atentRo||s I .--.—<é* ~ \ '4 ‘~  '  gm

Chronological list of Comptrollers

By 1546 Broke, William
Gt. of salary 24 Apr. 1546 (Letters and Papers of Henry VIII, xxi(1), 359
(10)); surr. by 12 Dec. 1561 (CPR 1560-63, p. 302).

1561 Broke, William; Holstock, William
Gt. in surv. 12 Dec. 1561 (CPR 1560-63, p. 302); Holstock, sole survivor,
surr. 29 Oct. 1580 (ibid.).

1580 Holstock, William; Borough, William
Gt. in surv. 5 Nov. 1580 (CPR 1578-80, p. 272(2155)); Holstock d. 28 Oct.

1589 (History of Parliament 1558-1603, ii, 331); Borough d. by 24 Dec.
1598 (C 66/1499, gt. to Palmer).

1598 Palmer, Sir Henry (1), Kt.
Gt. 24 Dec. 1598 (C 66/1499); d. 24 Nov. 1611 (DNB).

1611 Slingsby, Sir Guilford, Kt.
Gt. in rev. after Sir Henry Palmer (1) 10 Mar. 1604 (C 66/1621);
succeeded 24 Nov. 1611 (d. of same); d. 29 Apr. 1631 (C 142/728 no. 7).

1631 Palmer, Sir Henry (2), Kt.
Gt. in rev. after Sir Henry Palmer (1) and Guilford Slingsby 20 Aug. 1611
(C 66/1924 no. 14); succeeded 29 Apr. 1631 (d. of Slingsby); vacated by


12 Dec. 1639 (gt. to Palmer and Carteret).

1639 Palmer, Sir Henry (2), Kt.; Carteret, George
Gt. in surv. 12 Dec. 1639 (C 66/2862 no. 16).

, . Th I t'tt fH'st' IF-‘(es h'sm br fth Sh I fAd dstd h‘h' rt fth
Dlsclalmer e nslueo I once earc I Lz}arr‘ri1v:rs§yofceLo(r:1d<‘))<':~1o Vance u yw IC IS pa 0 e Copyl


The Royal Navy under James I

 

M. Oppenheirn
The English Historical Review, Vol. 7, No. 27. (Jul, 1892), pp. 471-496.

Stable URL:
httnz/.»"links.istor.or<v/sici?sici=00 l 3-8266"/£128 l 89207%297%3A27%3C47l %3ATRNUJI%3E2.0_CO%3B2—V

The English Historical Review is currently published by Oxford University Press.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of J STOR‘s Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
htto://wwwistor.ortzfabout/terms.h.t1nl. J STOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained
prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in
the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non—commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact infonnation may be obtained at
httn:/'»"wwwv.istor.ore/ioumals./oup.htrnl.

Each copy of any part of a J STOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

J STOR is an independent not-for—profit organization dedicated to and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For
more information regarding J STOR, please contact support@jstor.0rg.

http://WWw.jstor.org
Thu Dec 28 17:49:46 2006


1892 471

The Royal Navy under fczmes [

N 24 March 1602-3 the weapon forged by Henry VIII and
wielded by Elizabeth fell into the feeble hand of James
Stewart. Elizabeth left England supreme at sea; the Royal Navy
bequeathed by the queen to her successor was by far the finest fleet of
men-of-war then afloat, for it was not until the close of the sixteenth
century that Spain and Holland commenced to build ships for
purely fighting purposes.‘ The men who manned it were renowned
for hardihood, daring, and smart seamanship; and its organisation
as controlled by the great seamen of her reign was more eificient
and smoother in its working than any other of the departments of
state.’ It is fortunately not necessary for me to attempt yet
another estimate of the political capacity of Elizabeth, but the
student of the naval history of that time cannot but be impressed
by the foresight with which, from the first days of her accession to
the hour of her death, she recognised that the enemies of England
were to be fought at sea, and that the right arm of England was
its maritime strength—a doctrine which is a commonplace now, but
which was then being only slowly evolved in minds even yet dazzled
by memories of invasions of France. Notwithstanding her parsi-
mony—and her parsimony emphasises the fact-—she expended money
—for her lavishly—on the navy all through her reign, while the
military and other services of the crown were remorselessly starved.
Sooner or later the naval authorities obtained the greater part of
their requirements, in striking contrast to the fortune of other
oflicials, who thought, and whose contemporaries probably thought,
their needs of equal or more importance. Even in 1558 the days
were in reality long past when Spanish fleets were to be feared, and
when the Bay of Biscay could be proudly called ‘ the Spanish Sea; ’
but it was due to Elizabeth's sagacity that the weapon which was
to slay the Goliath threatening European civilisation was at
once recognised and consistently used. For centuries the defence
of England had depended on the mail-clad horseman and the
yeoman archer; the supremacy even of the Channel, often hardly
‘ Raleigh, ‘ Discourse of Ships,’ Works, ed. 1751.

’ Manson says that in 1599 a fleet was prepared for sea in twelve days, and ‘the
queen was never more dreaded abroad for anything she ever did.’


472 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

contested, had been only occasionally gained. Elizabeth was the
first of English sovereigns throughout the whole of whose reign the
English flag flew supreme and triumphant in the English Channel.

That she was aided by the legacy of a fleet, by the helplessness of‘

France, by changing economic conditions at home and the revolt of
the United Provinces abroad, may have made her task easier, but.
these things do not detract from the praise due to her discernment.
It will be seen that James I took an even keener personal interest
in the navy than did Elizabeth, but the lack of controlling capacity,
so disastrously shown in other affairs, was equally fatal to naval
administration. The naval records of his reign are but a sorry
collection of relations of frauds, embezzlements, commissions of
inquiry, and feeble palliatives.

The first wish of the new monarch was to obtain peace with
Spain, a desire for which modern historians have unanimously
praised him, although it may be at least a matter for debate whether
the continuance of the war until Spain was bled to death would
not have been ethically justifiable, politically expedient, and com-
mercially profitable. On 23 June 1603 a proclamation was issued
recalling all vessels which had been sent out with hostile intent,
and thus ending the lucrative privateering speculations which had
so long provided occupation and profit for English sailors and
merchants. The last important prize captured by the Queen’s
ships was the ‘ St. Valentine,’ a Portuguese carrack taken by Sir B.
Leveson in 1602, and its cargo was sold in 1604 for upwards of
26,O00l.3

In a previous paper‘ I have remarked the improvements in
building and equipment attributed to Elizabethan shipwrights and
seamen, chief among which I should place the increase of length
and decrease of height above Water, due to Sir John Hawkins. But
the greater demand for faster and more seaworthy ships had not
yet produced models which satisfied the more critical of sixteenth-
century experts. Shipbuilding was not yet a science and seemed
in some respects to have even retrograded during the previous half-
century; in the coloured drawings by Anthony Anthony of Henry
VlII’s ships? which are obviously meant to be faithful representa-
tions of their general appearance and outline, we see that the hulls
of the smaller vessels are of the flush-decked, corvette type, such as
are not again met with till the eighteenth century. The subsequent
tendency to overload ships, however small, with forecastle and poop
superstructures, although it can be explained by the necessity for
providing accommodation for larger crews and longer voyages than

’ Add. MSS. 5752, f. 136. ‘ ENG. Hxsr. REVIEW , July 1891.
5 Add. MSS. 22047. There are existing drawings of fifteenth-century vessels

which are more seaworthy and modern in appearance than those of the two succeeding
centuries.


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 473

were before known, can scarcely be considered an improvement on
the earlier models. Captain George Waymouth, who appears to
have been considered an authority on the theory and practice of
shipbuilding and navigation, and who was several times called upon
to report independently on the workmanship displayed on the royal
ships, was very severe on his professional contemporaries, and
writes, ‘ Yet could I never see two ships builded of the like pro-
portion by the best and most skilful shipwrights, though they have
many times undertaken the same . . . because they trust rather
to their judgment than their art, and to their eye than to their
scale and compass.” He says that they are too high out of the
water, crank, and cannot carry their canvas or work their guns in a
seaway; that they will not steer, and sometimes ‘ their sides are
not of equal proportion the one to the other.’ 7 Waymouth, among
other improvements, suggested a turret on the upper deck, moving
on a swivel and armed with ‘ murtherers.’ In another paper he
says, ‘The shipwrights of England and Christendom build ships
only by uncertain and traditional precepts, and by deceiving aim of
their eye,’ and the resulting vessels ‘cannot bear sail nor steer
readily . . . for want of art in proportioning of the mould and
fitting of the masts and tackling.’ 3

It must, however, be borne in mind that for at least aquarter of
a century English men-of-war had outsailed their antagonists, had
weathered gales and fought actions, just as successfully as though
they had been built on the most scientific modern principles.
Waymouth himself was not successful as a commander at sea; per-
haps he knew too much. Raleigh, in his ‘ Observations on the Navy,’ 9
addressed to Prince Henry, says that there are six principal things
required in a man-of-war, viz. that she should be strongly built,
swift, stout-sided, carry out her guns in all weathers, hull and try
well,” and that she should stay well. None of these things did the
king’s ships do satisfactorily, and ‘it were also behoofeful that his
majesty’s ships were not so overpestered and clogged with great
ordnance . . . so that much of it serves to no better use but only
to labour and overcharge the ship’s sides.’ As a practical illustra-
tion of the shipwrights’ loose methods of calculation it may be
mentioned that when the ‘ Prince Royal,’ the largest vessel of the
reign, was built, Baker, Pett, and Bright estimated that 775 loads
of timber would be required, while 1,627 loads were actually used,
and the increase in her cost above the original computation made
was 5,908l.“ These laments did not lead to any great improve-
ments in construction. Only a few of the vessels were in any way

"' Add. MSS’. 19889; The Jewell of Artes, 1604, f. 135 et seq.

" Rrid. 8 Harl. MSS. 309—51. 9 Works, ed. 1751.
‘° Lie to in a. gale, showing little or no canvas.

“ Add. MSS. 9294, Nov. 1610.


474 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

sheathed; in 1624 Dutch men-of-war could literally sail round
English ones," and their crankness was only imperfectly remedied
by furring or girdling,” a method, says the writer of the ‘ Nomen-
clator Navalis,’ “ which is ‘ a loss to owners and disgrace to buflders,
and deserves punishment . . . In all the world there are not so
many furred as in England.’ How slow was the advance may be
inferred from the fact that in 1635 the ‘ Merhonour,’ launched in
1589 and rebuilt in 1613, was still regarded as one of the fastest
sailers in the navy.

An onlooker *5 says that the English were ‘ good sailors and
better pirates.’ Whatever their quality as seamen, or still doubtful
maritime morality, no greater care was taken now to preserve their
health or improve their morals than had formerly been the case.
It is true that the first article in every commission laid stress on
the performance of divine service at least twice a day, while the
singing of psalms at a change of watch was an old custom, but
such humanising details as the punctual payment of wages,” a
supply of eatable provisions, hospitals for the sick, and suitable
clothes had not yet recommended themselves to the naval autho-
rities as modes either of obtaining men or of keeping them in the
service. Raleigh writes, ‘ They go with as great a grudging to serve
-in his majesty’s ships as if it were to be slaves in the galleys.’
James I made little use of the navy beyond fitting out the Algiers
expedition in 1621, and commissioning a few ships year by year for
service in the narrow seas; but for these few vessels it was found
equally difiicult to obtain men and to retain them when caught
now that the incitements of Spanish prizes were wanting, while
the mortality afloat was equal to the worst days of Elizabeth. The

only occasion when a large number of men were required was for

the fleet prepared in 1625, two months before the death of James,
and then the navy commissioners write to Buckingham that ‘the
pressed men run away as fast as we send them down.’ "’ Captain
Christian, of the ‘ Bonaventure,’ almost a new ship, serving on the
east coast in 1628, writes to the commissioners of ‘ the weak and I
may truly say miserable state of this ship . . . Of 160 men there
are but 7 0 persons of all sorts that at present is either fit or able
to do the least labour in the ship.’ 13 There was also ‘a great
infection and mortality ’ on board the ‘ Garland.’ Captain Chris-
tian complains too of the quality of the men pressed. ‘ Of all the
whole company when they are at the best there are not 20 hehns-
men and but three that can heave a lead.’

" S'.P., Dom., Jae. I, cl. 83, 84.

" Whole or partial external double planking.

“ Ha/rl. MSS. 2301. " Paul Hentzner.

" On 20 July 1613 a warrant was issued to pay wages owing since 1608.
" Add- M86’. 9302. f. 9. '- S’.P., Dom, Jas. I, cl. 20.


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 475

These instances belong to the end of the reign, but matters had
not changed; they had’ only continued. In 1608 it was said that
‘ the navy is for the greatest part manned with aged, impotent,
vagrant, lewd, and disorderly companions; it is become a ragged
regiment . . . of common rogues.’ 19 In the Algiers fleet one ship
put ashore ninety-two sick men at Malaga at one time. A hospital
ship accompanied this expedition, but its use is not mentioned,
although we may infer that if a man-of-war still had ninety-two
men ill enough to be sent ashore the hospital ship must have
been previously filled ; but statistics of sickness and death are
everywhere rarely referred to in comparison with salutes, state
visits, and other affairs of personal dignity. Although the sailor
was not properly fed and paid, even if he behaved well, he suffered
sufliciently severe penalties for bad conduct. Flogging was so
common that ‘some sailors do believe in good earnest that they
shall never have a fair wind until the poor boys be duly . . .
whipped every Monday morning.’ Ducking, keelhauling, tongue-
scraping, and tying up with weights hung round the neck ‘till
heart and back be ready to break’ were ordinary punishments.
‘ These will tame the most rude and savage people in the world,’
says Monson. If for the fourth time a. sailor was detected asleep on
watch 2° he was tied to the bowsprit with a biscuit, a can of beer, and
a knife, ‘and so to hang and choose whether he would cut himself
down and fall into the sea or hang still and starve.’ 2‘ Small wonder
the men ‘ abhorred ’ 2’ the employment of the crown, and that in
1625 the shipkeepers at Chatham included weavers, barbers, tailors,
bakers, shoemakers, &c., ‘ most of Whom had never been to sea.’ '3

The disorganisation of a service commonly presses most hardly
on its weaker members ; those of higher rank have usually suflicient
influence to enable them to preserve their rights or, if they are
unscrupulous, to obtain unlicensed gains in the general scramble.
Nottingham was still at the head of the navy as Lord High Admiral,
a posthe retained till 1618. Englishmen will always remember him
with respect as the commander of 1588, but a perusal of the various
papers relating to the naval administration of this period compels
one to conclude that while always ready to do his duty em grand
seégneur, to command fleets, and to accept responsibility and decide
when referred to, he took but a fingertip interest in those details of
which successful organisation consists, while his implicit confidence
in his subordinates was a disastrous weakness. During the lifetime
of Hawkins and under the keen supervision of the queen and her

" S.P., D0m., Jas. I, xl. f. 70.

”° Probably on ‘ look-out ' is meant, still the most serious offence of which he can
be guilty.

2' ‘A Dialogical Discourse of Marine Afiairs,’ by Nathaniel Boteler, Harl. M85’.

1341. Partly printed in 1685, but of this period. “ Ibid.
” S.P., Dona, Jas. I, elxxxii. 29.


4.-7.6 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

ministers this neglect mattered little, but from 1596 onwards the
conduct of the navy oflice degenerated rapidly. Neither Langford
nor Greville, who in turn succeeded Hawkins, was treasurer of
the navy long enough to do much good or harm, although signs

were not wanting during the closing years of Elizabeth’s life that.

the able control which had made the navy so terrible to England's
foes was relaxing. But the appointment in 1604 of Sir Robert
Mansell was most unfortunate. Mansell, who was an indifferent
seaman and an incapable and dishonest administrator, and whose
only claim to the place was his favour with Nottingham, remained
in ofiice tfll 1618, and the greater portion of this paper is practically
a record of his unfitness for his important charge.

Mansell’s own delinquencies will be more fully treated subse-
quently, but both he and Nottingham dealt liberally with oflicersl
employed at sea or in executive work ashore. Nottingham himself
obtained, in 1609 and 1611, two pensions from James I, during
the supremacy of the Howard faction with the king, amounting
together to 2,7 00l. a year; and it is characteristic of James that the
larger of these pensions, of 1,700l. a year, was granted while the
commission of 1608 was sitting, and when its disclosures must
have been Well known. When Mansell went to sea he gave himself,
as treasurer and rear-admiral, thirty shillings a day, although Sir
Fulke Greville, when discharging the same functions in 1599, re-
ceived only sixteen and eightpence a day. Admirals were appointed
for the north, south, east, and west coasts, for the narrow seas, and
for Ireland, all at liberal rates of pay; in one year when only seven
ships were in commission there were three admirals and four vice-
admirals serving, ‘ so that the navy was like an army of generals and
colonels.’ 3‘ In 1602, with twenty-six vessels at sea, the pay of the
superior oificers was less than during any one of the four or five
years before the storm burst on Mansell and Nottingham in 1618.
Again, ‘ we find . . . that these admirals and vice-admirals with
their twenty shillings and ten shillings per diem, together with
the allowance of their retinue and other advantages, are . . .
so contented on land that they cannot brook the seas, and get
captains under them as substitutes in their absence.’ 25 Travelling
expenses were liberally allowed, and even some of the inferior officers
were generously permitted to benefit by the stream of wealth cir-
culating among the higher navy otficials. The cost of piloting the
thirteen ships which took the Princess Elizabeth over to Flushing
was 208l., and thereon it is remarked that the whole piloting
charges for 286 ships during the last five years of Elizabeth did
not amount to more. The comptroller of the navy, when he went
from London to Chatham, charged 9l. 9s. 11d. for travelling ex-
penses, and the surveyor required 1% 16s. for the same journey,

'“ S.P., Dom., Jas. I, cxii. 101. *5 Ibid.


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 477

"it being the duty of his place,’ they indignantly annotate,“ while
even his deputy takes 8l. or 10l. when he goes. Mansell himself
was almost sublime: he afterwards claimed 10,000l. for travelling
expenses during his term of ofice.” New posts were freely created
and equally freelyipaid. Besides the various admirals who did nothing
there were a captain-general and two vice-admirals of the narrow
seas, a storekeeper at Woolwich at 541. a year, while ‘ the store not
worth forty shillings,’ and a surveyor of tonnage, whose duty it was
to survey merchant ships of 100 tons and upwards, claiming the
bounty of five shillings a ton, and who was accused on all sides of
embezzling half the amount paid by the crown to the merchants.
When Mansell resigned he sent in to the commissioners of 1618
only an uncertified abstract of his payments for the preceding five
years; they, ‘being noways vouched or subscribed by the oflicers, we
can give no satisfaction of the state of his accounts, being only his
own assertions,’ 29 and the complaint fairly generalises ’Mansell’s
system of financial control even where not tainted with absolute
theft. Notwithstanding his defiance of the abortive orders for in-
quiry issued in 1613, and his consequent temporary imprisonment,
he was sufficiently in favour three years later to receive a presentof
10,000l. from the king on the occasion of his marriage.” Proved
dishonesty or incapacity barred no one from the favour of James I,
provided the culprit was sufiiciently good~looking or had influential
friends; and although the evidence laid before the commission of
1608, and the commissioners’ report thereon, should have amply
sufliced to send Mansell to the Tower, his ascendency with
Nottingham enabled him to continue in oflice for a further ten
years. Soon after his appointment he and Sir John Trevor, the
surveyor of the navy, took steps to provide all the requisite stores
themselves, thus making large gains on the articles sold by them to
the king. Not only was timber ordered three or four times over
for the same purpose,” but on that item alone Mansel was accused
of making a fraudulent profit of 5,000l. in some four years, and, in
conjunction with Sir John Trevor, of obtaining upwards of 7,000l.
during the same time by the difierences between the prices paid for
pitch, tar, masts, &c., and those charged to the crown.“ He, Pett,
and Trevor were joint owners of a ship, built of government
materials and furnished with government stores, which was hired
to the king as a transport to go to Spain when Nottingham went
there as ambassador in 1605, and for which the State paid,
but ‘the same ship was at that time employed in a merchant's
voyage, and so entered in the custom-house books.’ 3’ Hawkins
had introduced the practice of paying over money at once to
merchants supplying the various requisites for the navy on de-

“ S.P., D0'm.., Jas. I. *7 Ibid. cxvi. 86. 2‘ Ibéd. ciii. 104. " Ibid. lxxxix. 33.
9° Ibid. xli. f. 17. 3‘ Ibid. x1. 87. 3’ Catt. MSS. Julius, F  f.. 15.


478 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

duction of threepence in the pound, an allowance they were well
pleased to make in view of the prompt payment, while he had to
wait long for his accounts to be settled. Mansell still deducted the
threepence, but did not pay. He stopped sixpence a month from
the seamen’s wages for the Chatham chest, ‘ but falls presently into
raging passions and pangs when they call for it.’ 33 But Mansell
was by no means the only one of the superior ofiicers who helped
himself out of this fund. Charges of embezzlement, in its crudest
forms, were made against him in that he certified for more wages
than were ‘actually paid—1,000l. in one year alone—and that he re-
tained the proceeds of such government stores as were sold; 3‘ and
it must be remembered that these accusations were not anony-
mous attacks, but charges deliberately formulated, which he never
dared to face. It may be truer to say that he was indifferent; it
is possible that a portion of his ill-earned fortune went in purchasing
immunity. And it is an argument in favour of this view that his
dismissal from oflfice did not destroy his influence at court; he
was chosen to command the expensive and resultless expedition to
Algiers in 1621, and his subsequent disgrace was due to causes
independent of his failure as a seaman or his dishonesty as an
administrator.

N orreys, writing to Sir John Coke about the navy in 1603, says,
‘ To say truth the whole body is so corrupted as there is no sound
part almost from the head to the foot; the great ones feed on the
less and enforce them to steal both for themselves and their
commanders.’ 3"’ Abuses unknown during the lifetime of Hawkins
had sprung into existence shortly after his death : delay in paying
off ships, to the discontent of the men and extra expense of the
government, combinations between captains, pursers, and victuallers
to return false musters, and the practice of selling appointments to
inferior posts were all, according to reliable evidence, begun about
1597 or 1598.35 Under James ‘the chief ofiicers bear themselves
insolently, depending on powerful friends at court,’ and ‘the ship-
Wrights and others are ordered, commanded, and countermanded in
their work by chief oflicers who know nothing about it, so that the
meanest merchantman is better rigged and canvassed than the
royal ships.’ The insolence and ignorance complained of showed
conditions very different from those which had obtained under the
iron hand of Elizabeth. In 1608 the scandal caused by these and
other circumstances was so great as to necessitate inquiry whether
the determining cause was the contrivance of Sir Robert Cotton or
other influences ; a commission was issued to Nottingham, North-
ampton, Zoueh, Wotton, Sir Julius Caesar, Cotton, and others, of

" S.P., Dom., Jas. I, xli. f. 25. " Ibid. cxji. 101,
" Cake MSS. Cal. Hist. MSS. Com. Report, xii, App. pt. i. 41.
" Catt. MSS’. Jul/ius, F iii. if. 98, 249, 250, 252.


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 479

whom only Nottingham was an experienced seaman, and he never
attended their meetings.” The sittings of the commission extended
from May 1608 till June 1609; they ‘commenced with an ‘ elegant’
speech from the earl of Northampton, they compiled a voluminous
report, and the only punishment the culprits experienced was that
of suffering ‘ an oration ’ from James, in which be trusted that the
guilty persons would behave better in future, and with that patient
and saintly hope the proceedings ended. How some of his hearers
must have longed for one hour of Elizabeth 1

Among the malpractices examined into at some length by the
commissioners was the sale and purchase of places already referred
to. Hugh Lidyard was made clerk of the checque at Woolwich by
Sir John Trevor, for which he was to pay Trevor 201. yearly and a
hogshead of wine ; another witness deposes ‘ that of late years the
general way of preferment is by money, and few that he knoweth

. come freely to their places.’ Pursers paid from 701. to 1201.
for their posts, boatswains 201. and cooks 301. Naturally, under
such circumstances, ‘ the officers put in and keep in whom they list,
though they be never so unfit, and put out whom they list, though
never so fit, and woe be to him that taketh exception to any man,
though he be never so unruly . . . It breaketh the hearts of them
that are worthy.’ It was equally natural that men who had paid
heavily for their employments were unscrupulous in recouping them-
selves. ‘ The captains being for the most part poor gentlemen, did
mend their fortunes by combining with the pursers,’ who were in
league with the victuallers, to send in returns of more men than were
on board the ships; boatswains and gunners sold their stores, ship-
wrights stole timber, and captains sheltered or took bribes from
pirates, or turned their vessels into merchantmen to enable owners
of goods to evade payment of customs.

James I had every reason to check sharply the waste‘ going on,
for the crown debt, which was only 400,0001. at his accession, had
mounted to 1,000,0001. in 1608, while the deficit in revenue was
70,0001. a year.?“ But ‘ an oration’ in broad Scotch from the lips
of the conceited pedant staggering under the weight of the Tudor
crown did not prove an effective method of reform. The old
knaveries continued even as though James had not made a speech.
In 1613 Cotton attempted, through the intervention of Northampton
and Rochester, to obtain another inquiry; but his efiorts fafled, owing
to the influence of Nottingham and the intrigues of Mansell. In
1618 the naval administration was worse than ever, and other
departments were equally corrupt; ‘the household was one mass of

"’ The report of the commissioners will be found in S.P., Dcrm., Jas. I,'xli.; the
sworn depositions on which that report was based are preserved in Catt. MSS. Julixug,
F  The evidence in question is of value for to-day, and as long as oflcial human
nature is liable to temptation, and the volume is well worth printing.

” Gardiner, History of England, cab. ed.  11.


480 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

peculation and extravagance.’ ‘*9 Even now Cranfield, who was the
moving spirit in the endeavour to purify the public services, might
have failed had it not been that Buckingham desired to himself
occupy the post of Lord High Admiral. Nottingham at last retired
with a gratuity of 3,000l. and another pension of 1,0001. a year,
while Mansell was succeeded by Sir William Russell, a merchant of
the Muscovia Company, who paid him for his place, and who was
wealthy enough to subsequently advance 30,000l. towards fitting out
the Cadiz expedition in 1625.“ It is probable that, from his lack
of technical knowledge, Bussell’s direction, if more honest than
Mansell’s, would have been as unsuccessful had he been entrusted
with absolute control; but the plan was now adopted of appointing
navy commissioners for five years, responsible only to the lord
high admiral, but with absolute charge‘ under him, and who
reduced the four principal oificers of the navy to the position of
mere chief clerks. Immediate benefit was obtained from the reform ;
the fleet and dockyards were kept in repair, theft was checked, and
two new ships a year were built in five consecutive years, all for
less money than Mansell had squandered in doing nothing efi‘i-
ciently. Buckingham himself appears to have not only given his
subordinates a loyal support but to have been honestly anxious to
obtain the best men for the service, and to render officers and
sailors contented ; the chronic emptiness, however, of the treasury,
for which he was largely answerable, made his endeavours in this
last direction of less avail.

The new commissioners, on commencing their duties, sent in a
report of the state of affairs they found existing in the various
naval departments ;‘“ all the frauds of 1608 were still flourishing,
with some new ones due to. the lapse of time. Places were still
sold, and at such high prices that the buyers ‘ profess openly that
they cannot live except they may steal; ’ the yearly cost of the
navy had of late been some 53,000l. a year, ‘ that could not keep it
from decay.’ For building a new ship in place of the ‘ Bonaventure ’
5,7001. had been allowed, but, although 1,7001. had been paid on
account of it, no vessel had been commenced, and‘ though this same
ship ‘ was broken up above seven years past, yet the king hath
paid 63l. yearly for keeping her.’ Further, ‘the “ Advantage ” was
burnt about five years since, and yet keepeth at the charge of
104l. 9s. 5d.; the “Charles” was disposed of in Scotland two years
since, and costeth 60l. 16s. 10d. for keeping.’ For repairing the
‘Merhonour,’ ‘ Defiance,’ ‘Vanguard,’ and ‘ Dreadnought’ 23,5001.
had been paid, ‘for which eight new ships might have been built, as
the accounts of the East India Company do prove; yet all this while
the king’s ships decayed, and if the “ Merhonour ” were repaired she
was left so imperfect that before her finishing she begins again to

3' Gardiner, History of England, cab. ed. iii. 200.
“' S.P., Dom., Jas. I, clxxxii. 28. 41 1Zn‘d_ c, and ci_ 3,


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 481

decay.’ In nine years 108,000l. had been charged, for cordage, and
the commissioners express their intention of reducing the expendi-
ture on this item by two-thirds. At a later date some of the commis-
sioners themselves did not escape suspicion. In 1623 Sir John
Coke, who was a leading member, wrote to Conway that all went.
well until the Algiers voyage, but that he then suspected some of
his colleagues were selling their own wares to the government,
although they denied the accusation when he openly taxed them
with so doing, and ‘ ever since I carried a watchful eye over them
and employed fit persons to discover their dealings.’ 42 A man like
Coke was not likely to be popular even among those with whom he
was associated, still less with the gang whose deceits and illicit
gains he had greatly helped to terminate. A year later he appealed.
for protection against Sir Gruilford Slingsby, who had threatened
that, unless he was restored to oflice by Lady Day, Coke should not
outlive that date.“ Slingsby had been comptroller of the navy, a
post to which he was reappointed by Charles I, and wherein he
again gave evidence of his peculiar qualifications for the exercise
of authority over others. But there is no doubt that the adminis-
tration of the commissioners was pure enough compared with
that of Mansell; their failures were due to causes they were
unable to deal with, such as want of money and the bad treat-
ment of the men; they could raise wages, but they were power-
less to insure punctual payment of the promised sums. At the
close of their first five years of office they sent in a certificate of
the work done by them.“ They say that whereas they found in
1618 twenty-three serviceable and ten unserviceable ships, of alto-
gether 15,670 tons, four decayed galleys, and four hoys, costing
53,0001. a year, they have now thirty-five serviceable vessels, of
19,339 tons, besides the hoys and galleys, and the expense has
been little more than 30,0001. a year, including the charges for
building ten new ships. The yearly expenditure on the navy
throughout the reign, exclusive of the victualling expenses, was- 45*

=9 :8
1603-4 . . . . . . 45,595 1614-15 ,. . . . . . 41,000”
1604-5 . . . . . . 32,630 1615-16 . . . . . . 41,000
1605-6 . . . . . . 28,967 1616-17 . . . . . . 41,000
1606-7 . . . . . . 19,592 1617-18 . . . . . . 41,000
1607-8 . . . . . . 30,430 1618-19 . . . . . . 81,783
1608-9 . . . . . . 30,077 1619-20 . . . . . . 29,396
1609-10 . . . . . . 43,992 1620-21 . . . . . . 29,688
1610-11 . . . . . . 30,536 1621-22 . . . . . . 80,765
1611-12 . . . . . . 35,845 1622-23 . . . . . . 30,442
1612-13 . . . . . . 18,000 "5 1623-24 . . . . . . 29,981
1613-14 . . . . . . —- 1624-25 . . . . . . 29,703
" S. P., Dom., Jas. I, cli. 35. " Ibid. clx. 43, “ Ibid, 9171, 12,

" Lans. M85’. 142, f. 278; State Papers, Dom., Jas. I, c.; ibid. clvi. 12, clxiii. 39..
The cost of victualling varied between 6,0001. and 16,0001. at year.

“ For the half-year only. " Average for this and the following three years.

31 Vol. 7


482 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

Piracy, though still a school for seamanship, was no longer the
flourishing business it had been under Elizabeth; the trade, to use
a modern phrase, was ‘ out up.’ Spanish commerce was almost
destroyed in the northern latitudes, and the Dutch was well able to
protect itself, while new competitors were found in the Mediter-
ranean rovers who hovered round the English coasts and even
stretched out into the North Atlantic, and in the fast-sailing Dun-
kirk ‘privateers who swarmed in the Channel. In 1605 Hannibal
Vivian writes from the west, ‘ Let it not offend you that I inform
you from time to time of the piracies and depredations daily com-
mitted on this coast.’ However repugnant piracy may have been
to some of the ofiicials it commended itself to many of the inhabit-
ants of the western counties ; out of one pirate crew, thirty-five in
number, seventeen belonged to Dartmouth and Kingswear, and the
mayor and others of Plymouth were accused of buying the stolen
goods and favouring the escape of the men. The government
appeared helpless; if they sent ships to sea the captains ‘ pretend
to pursue, and when well away in some distant port write up that
a leak had been sprung, obtain warrants to repair in port, and so
"remain for the captain’s benefit,’ or sometimes even took the
pirates’ goods on board and sheltered the criminals themselves. If
any of the corsairs were caught the general opinion among them
that they were only liable to a little ‘lazy imprisonment’ was usually
borne out by results. Ireland was said to be ‘ the nursery and store-
house of pirates,’ ‘*8 for, besides providing its own quota of sea-rovers,
it offered the hospitality of its ports to those vessels requiring repair
belonging to the Barbary corsairs.“ In 1616 the weakness of the
crown was shown by a warrant being granted to two London mer-
chants to prepare a ship to go pirate-hunting, with permission to
retain for themselves three-fourths of the goods seized,5° there being
about this year a fleet of thirty Turkish ships in the Atlantic, and
another Salleeman had recently been captured in the Thames.“ The
inhabitants of Swanwhich (i.e. Swanage) seem to have been especially
nervous, since they petition for a block-house, ‘the Turks being grown
exceedingly audacious.’ Matters grew even worse towards the close
of the reign. Some Weymouth merchants desired to fit out ships of
their own to deal with the incubus terrorising commerce, but per-
mission was refused, mainly because it was injurious to the lord
high admira1’s profits and ‘ dishonourable to the king.’ Others,
however, of the Weymouth tradesmen dealt with the robbers, and
the local admiralty officers were supposed to connive at the trafi’ic.5"’

" Catt. MSS. Otho, E viii. f. 316. ‘'9 1'bid. 1. 323.
5° State Papers, Dom., Jas. I, lxxxvi. 101. At this time the navy was costing
53,0001. 1:. yea.r—more than Elizabeth spent during many of the years England was

at war.
“ Ibid. xc. 24. 5’ Ibid. cli. 21, 1623.


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 483

The Lizard light was objected to, because ‘it will conduct pirates,’
and it reads strangely now that it was forbidden at the instance of
the Trinity House. The Newfoundland Company, in asking for
assistance, say that since 1612 damage to the amount of 40,000l.
has been committed by the marauders, and that over 1,000
men have been forced or persuaded to join them.” One of the
freebooters was admiral of a large pirate fleet. In 1624 the
navy commissioners were desired to certify how many men-of-
war would be required to clear the southern and western coasts,
just as they had frequently before been required ‘to certify; ’ the
process seldom proceeded further.

That ‘ merchantmen dare hardly sail ’ was scarcely a condition
of things conducive to commercial enterprise. Little can be said
about the merchant marine for these years, the returns of available
ships, so frequently occurring among the papers relating .to Eliza-
beth’s reign, being entirely absent for this period. But all the
notices of trade met with are invariably characterised by lamenta-
tion ; the Dutch were said to be obtaining the carrying trade, owing
to the greater cheapness with which their vessels were built and
worked, the difference in their favour being as much as one-third
of the English owner's demand for freight. In 1620 it was stated
that the number of London-owned ships had fallen to one-half of
that of former years, and, as accounting for part of the decrease,
we have a return for 1618 of vessels belonging to the river but
lately sold for want of employment.“ The list in question shows
an enormous depreciation in value, since none of them can have
been very old :—

: Tons Guns Cost Soldier —- l Tons Guns Cost Sold for’

£ £ £.
‘ Neptune ’ 500 30 5,000 1,500 ‘Industry ’ 350 26 4,500 2,000
‘ Paragon ’ 280 24 3,200 1,000 ‘ Clement
‘ Martha ’ 250 20 2,400 500 and Job’ 300 24 3,600 1,000

The building price here almost certainly does not include the cost
of ordnance, while it is probable that the sale price does, and it will
be noticed that these merchantmen are nearly as strongly armed
as men-of-war. Complaints came from all quarters ; the Muscovy
Company had employment for only two instead of seventeen ships,
as in former days, and the Norway trade was ‘in pawn to the
Dutch; ’ the Levant Company found its trade destroyed by piracy;
the greater portion of the Newcastle coal trafiic was carried on in
foreign bottoms, and the fisheries in English waters were entirely
in the hands of the Hollanders, who were reputed to make a profit
of 1,000,000l. a year from that which under a stronger sovereign
would have been held for England.“ During this reign the most

“ State Papers, Col. Mar. 1620. “ State Papers, Dorm, Ja.s. I, civ. 65.
*5 Harl. Misc. iii. 232 et seq. ed. 1809.


484 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

flourishing association was the East India Company, although its
profits were not so large as were those of its Dutch rival ; 56 in
twenty years it had despatched eighty-six ships, of which eleven
had been seized by the Dutch and fourteen had been wrecked or
worn out, and the estimation in which it was held is shown by its
being more heavily assessed towards the expenses" of the Algiers
expedition than was any other company. This association at-
tempted, in 1613, to start iron and shipbuilding works near Cork,
but the hostility of the natives forced them to discontinue the
enterprise. The largest merchantman built during the reign of
James, the ‘ Trade’s Increase,’ of 1,100 tons, was constructed
for the East India Company. It, with a smaller ship, the
‘Peppercorn,’ of 250 tons, was launched in January 1609—10,
and there are some curious notes by the captain of the ‘ Pepper--
corn’ describing the event.“ On Saturday, 30 Dec., the king
came down to name the two ships, but every attempt to launch
them failed, and continued efforts on the Sunday ‘God made
fruitless that day.’ On 1 Jan. the ‘ Peppercorn’ was launched, and
it was only then found that the dock-head was too narrow to let
the ‘Trade’s Increase’ pass. On the Wednesday, however, she
was got clear, and the captain of the ‘ Peppercorn ’ complains that
‘ on this ship was all the company’s pride set; she was altogether
regarded, tended, and followed, while the other, the “ Peppercorn,”
was left in manner desolate.’ The ‘ Trade’s Increase ’ was wrecked
in 1618 during her first voyage. The hire of merchantmen taken
up for government service was still two shillings a month per ton,
and the bonus of five shillings a ton on vessels of 100 tons and
upwards, suitable for fighting purposes, ceased in 1624, only to
be renewed early in the next reign for vessels of 200 tons and
upwards.

The following list comprises all the men-of-war of the Royal
Navy existing at the accession of James I, with the dates, in some
instances absent or only approximately correct, of their building
and rebuilding, compiled from diverse sources.. Both the number
and names vary slightly in different papers. It should be remarked
that the term ‘ rebuilt ’ appears to have been used with little exact-
ness, and was applied to more or less extensive repairs or to a
process which left hardly an old timber in the ship. It is only
where the charges for repairs are expressed and the cost per ton
can be calculated that the extent of renewal can be estimated.
Here such dates are only given where a distinct statement that a.
ship was ‘ rebuilt’ has been found.“

5‘ The Dutch Company is said to have distributed, in twenty-one years, dividends
of 30,000,000 florins on a capital of some 6,000,000 florins (Irving, Commerce of India).
5' Eg. MSS. 2100.

59 The ‘ Assurance ’ is not named in the last Elizabethan lists, but she is referred
to in State Papers of preceding years, occurs in the first navy list of James in 1603,


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 485

..._ 1 Built ‘ Rebuilt ———— Bum [ Rebuilt

' Elizabeth ’ . . 1558 — ‘ Vanguard ‘ . . 1587 1619

‘ Triumph ’ . . 1561 -— ‘ Swiftsure ’ . . 1574 1608

‘ White Bear ’ . . 1564 1589 ‘ Swallow ’ . . — -

4 Victory ' 59 . — —— ‘ Foresight ’ . . —— -

' Merhonour ’ . . 1589 1613 ‘ Crane ’ . . . 1589 1610

‘Ark Royal’ , . 1586 1608 ‘ Adventure ’ . . 1594 —

-st, Mmhew= so . _. ._ l ‘Quittance’ . . 1589 1605

‘ St. Andrew ’ 5° . —— —— ‘ Answer ’ . . 1589 1604

‘ Due Repulse ’ . 1596 1610 ‘ Tremontane’ . 1586 -

‘ Garland ’ . . 1589 —— ‘Advantage ’ . . 1589 —

‘ Warspite ’ . . 1596 — ‘ Charles ’ . . 1587 —

‘ Mary Rose ’ . . 1555 1589 ‘ Moon ’ . . . 1586 1602

‘ Hope ’ . . . 1558 1602 ‘Advice’ . . . 1587 1612

‘ Bonaventure’ . 1561 1587 ‘ Spy ’ . . . 1586 -

‘Lion’ . . . 1582 1609 ‘ Merlin ’ . . . —— 1615

‘Nonpareil ’ . . 1585 1602 ‘ Sun ’ . . . 1586 ——

‘ Defiance ’ . . 1589 1613 ‘ George,’ hoy . . —-— -

‘ Rainbow ’ . . 1587 — ‘ Primrose,’ hoy . — 1612

‘ Dreadnought ’ . ——~ 1613 ‘ Scout ’ . . . 1577 —-

‘ Antelope ’ . . 1558 —~ 4 galleys . . — --

The ships added to the fleet between 1603 and 1625 were-— 51
—— Built Tons Burthen Guns Ielffgh Beam Depth

. feet feet feet

‘Nonsuch ’ . . . 1603 636 38 88 34 15

‘ Prince ’ . . . 1610 1,200
‘Phoenix ’ *2 . . 1612 250

55 115 43% 18
20 70 24 11

‘ Convertive’ “ . . 1616 500 30 —- -—- -—
‘Rainbow ’ . . . 1618 650 40 102 35 14
‘Antelope’ . . . 1618 450 34 92 32 123-
‘Gonstant Reforma-

tion ’ 1619 752 42 106 35:} 15

‘ Happy Entrance ’ . 1619 582
‘ Victory ’ . . . 1620 875
‘ Garland ’ . . . 1620 683

32 96 32 14
42 108 8 17
34 93 33 16

333863 ;|||H
c’30l\DO':~‘liF

- Swiftsure ' . . 1621 s37 42 106 36% 1
‘Bonaventure ’ . . 1621 675 34 98 33 1

‘ St. George ’ . . 1622 895 671 42 110 37 1

‘ St. Andrew’ . . 1622 895 671 42 110 37 16$
‘ Triumph’ . . . 1623 922 692 42 110 37 17
‘ Mary Rose ’ . . 1623 394 288 26 83 27 13

‘ Seven Stars ' . . —“ 140 —— 14 60 20 _9

‘ Charles ’ . . . ——‘* 140 —— 14 —— — —

‘ Desire ’ . . . ——“ 80 —— 6 66 16 6

and is stated to have been rebuilt in that year. The ‘ Achates,’ ‘ Tide,’ and ‘ Cygnet,’
small vessels, are mentioned in some lists.

59 I have previously (ENG. I-Irsr. Bnv. vi. 481) classed the ‘ Victory ' among the vessels
built between 1562 and 1574 ; the earliest reference to her that I have been able to find
is in Baeshe’s victualling accounts for January 1562-3 (Harl. M88. 167, 1). She was
then at Portsmouth. In February 1558.9 the ‘ Peter,’ of 800 tons, was ‘in new making ’
at Woolwich; in the fleet list of Henry VIII the ‘Peter ’ is said to be of 600 tons.
while the ‘ Victory,’ though called in every Elizabethan one an 800-ton ship, was cal-
culated, in the more exact measurement of 1602, as of 555 net and 694 gross measure-
ment. We may take it, therefore, that the two vessels were of about the same size.
Seeing that the ‘Peter ’ was rebuilt in 1559; that her name never recurs in any navy
list, not in any of the numerous papers relating to the navy; that there is no trace of
the construction of the ‘ Victory,’ whereas the cost or various details relating to other
large ships are directly or incidentally referred to; that there are some other instances
of the name of a ship having been changed after rebuilding——I suggest the possibility

For notes 60-64 see next page.


486 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

Out of these nineteen vessels Mansell, who held oflice for four-
teen of the twenty-two years under review, had furnished at the
most six, and perhaps only four, of the ships on this list, and two
of them were mere pinnaces.

In 1603 the king had resolved to have three ships built, but the
‘ Nonsuch ’ was the only accession to the strength of the navy.
Although no new vessels were then constructed for some years,
James took suflicient pride in his fleet to be eager to show it to
visitors; in 1606 he ordered all the available vessels ‘to be rigged
and put in warlike order,’ preparatory to a visit from himself and
the king of Denmark, which took place in August. In 1608 the
‘ Ark Royal,’ Nottingham’s flagship in 1588, was rebuilt, and her
name, which should have lived in popular memory with that of
the ‘ Golden Hind,’ changed to the ‘ Ann Royal,’ in honour of the
commonplace queen. She was rechristened by Sir Oliver Cromwell.
The ‘ Swiftsure,’ rebuilt and renamed the ‘ Speedwell ’ in the same
year, is noteworthy as being the first English man-of-war lost by
misadventure at sea since the ‘ Mary Rose ’ foundered at Spithead
in 1545. She went ashore near Flushing in November 1624, a
mischance which her captain—Chudleigh—attributed to a drunken
pilot.“ He at any rate lost all control over his crew, whose disci-
pline seems to have been quite unequal to the sudden strain of an
unexpected accident.

It was probably due to the express desire of James that on
20 Oct. 1608 the keel was laid of the ‘ Prince Royal,’ of 1,200 tons,
the largest ship yet designed for the navy. Under the new rules
of measurement in force in 1632, she was certified as of 1,035 net,
and 1,330 gross tonnage. Her construction was assigned to
Phineas Pett, and many intrigues, reaching even the court, centred
round her. The other shipwrights were both jealous and critical,
and openly expressed their disapprobation both of the material
used and the manner in which it was employed. In 1609 Baker,
now an old man of seventy-nine years, but still in active

that the ‘ Peter ' became the first ‘ Victory’ of the English navy. But it may be that
the ‘lesser new ship’ of 1561, which I considered, but not on conclusive evidence, to
be probably the ‘ Bonaventure,’ was really the ‘ Victory.’

'° Captured at Cadiz in 1596.

“ State _Papers, Dom., Jas. I, cxxxiii. 70; ibid. clviii. 54;  Chas. I, xiii. 56-,
Add. MSS. 9294, f. 505 ; ibid. 9295, Pett’s autobiog.; ibid. 9297, f. 359. As usual all
these dimensions, especially tonnage, difler somewhat in the papers quoted.

" Built as a yacht for Prince Henry.

" This was the ‘ Destiny,’ built for Sir Walter Raleigh before his last voyage, and
afterwards bought or confiscated into the navy.

“ The ‘Seven Stars’ and ‘Desire’ between 1611 and 1618, and the ‘Charles’
between 1618 and 1622. Two other third-rates, the ‘Mercury’ and the ‘ Spy.’ were
built in 1620 by Phineas Pett, who went as captain of one of them, for some
London merchants to go with the Algiers fleet. By a warrant dated August 1622 they
were directed to be taken into the navy, but their names do not appear in any list of
James or Charles. “’ S.P., Dom., Jas. I, clxxiv. 56.


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 487

employment, Bright, Stevens, and some other shipwrights, with
Waymouth as an unoflicial expert, were ordered to report on the
execution of the work. Pett did not like Waymouth, whom he
describes in his autobiography as ‘ great kilcow Waymouth ’ and
‘ a great braggadocio, a vain and idle fellow.’ Baker, and perhaps
some of the others, must have been chosen on the governmental
principle of setting personal enemies to inspect each other’s per-
formances, seeing that he had not long before stated on oath that
he thought both the Petts ‘ simple ’ and quite unfit to be entrusted
with the production of a large ship.“ Pett, naturally, had little
love for Baker, although he had years before attempted to be friendly
with the veteran, ascribing all his knowledge of his art, ‘if I have
any,’ to the elder man ; 5" but the system which made it to each
man’s pecuniary interest to obtain as many ships as possible to
build and repair, and to exert all his personal influence to that end,
converted the dockyards into nests of intrigue. Pett was protected
by Nottingham and Mansell, and ‘ he is reported to be their right
hand, and they cannot do without him,’ said Bright, another of Pett’s
competitors, and who was therefore chosen to sit in judgment upon
him. Nottingham, Suffolk, and Worcester were then appointed to
make further inquiry, and their report being satisfactory, and
therefore displeasing to Northampton, the latter desired another
investigation, which the king acceded to by appointing a day when
he would examine the vessel and hear the conflicting evidence him-
self. He and Prince Henry came to Woolwich on 8 May 1609, and
after a long day of scrutiny and discussion Pett emerged triumphant
from the ordeal. Time, however, was on the side of the objectors-
The ‘ Prince Royal ’ was never subjected to any serious work, but
in 1621 the commissioners wrote to Buckingham that she was then
only fit for show, that she cost in the first instance 20,000l. and
would require another 6,000l. to make her fit for service, and that
she was built of decaying timber and green unseasoned stufl'.5"
These were the very points on which Baker and his fellows had in-
sisted, and on which they had been defeated in 1609. She attracted
universal attention when building; the king, the prince of Wales,
Princess Elizabeth, and the French ambassador came several times
to visit her when approaching completion, and ‘ nobles, gentry, and
citizens from all parts of the country round ’ resorted to Woolwich.
An attempt to launch her was made on 24 Sept. 1610, the whole of
the royal family being present, but, as in the case of the ‘ Trade’s
Increase,’ the dock~head was too narrow to permit her to pass. A
second essay was more successful. The ‘ Prince ’ was the first

" Catt. MSS. Julius, F  f. 293.
“’ Letter, Pett to Baker, 10 April 1603; Catt. MSS. Otho, E  f. 155.

" Coke MSS. Cal. i. 114.


488 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

three-decker built for the English navy; 59 she was gorgeously
decorated, according to the taste of the time, with carvings, and
‘ curious paintings the like which was never in any ship before,’
and ‘ she was double-planked, a charge which was not formerly
thought upon, and all the butt-heads were double-bolted with iron
bolts.’ 7°

Perhaps as the result of C0tton’s efforts in 1613 to procure
further inquiry into the naval administration several of the old
ships were rebuilt about that time, but, as the commissioners sub-
sequently remarked, at prices which would have more than provided
new ones in their stead. It was not until the navy commission
took control, in 1618, that the systematic production of new ships
was commenced. It will be seen from the preceding list that
from that date they carried out for five years their expressed intention
of adding two ships a year to the navy. They also made certain
recommendations to be kept in view by themselves and their suc-
cessors." The fleet was to average thirty sea-going ships, and
building was to be confined to Deptford, where two vessels could be
worked upon simultaneously. The length of keel was to be treble
the breadth, ‘ but not to draw above sixteen feet, because deeper
ships are seldom good sailers ; ’ besides, ‘ they must be somewhat
snug-built, without double galleries and too lofty upper works, which
overcharge many ships and make them loom fair but not work well
at sea.’ It is no reproach to the commissioners, who could but
act on the best professional advice obtainable, to have to remark
that their ships were nearly as crank as their predecessors, and all
required to be furred or girdled to make them at all trustworthy in
a seaway; and, at a later date, even the smaller stern galleries
they were provided with excited much adverse criticism. They
continue, ‘For strengthening the ship we subscribe to the new
manner of building-—1st, making three orlops, whereof the lowest,
being placed two feet under water, strengtheneth the ship though
her sides be shot through; 2nd, to carry this orlop end to end;
3rd, the second or main deck to be suificiently high to work guns
in all weathers.’ Cooking galleys were to be placed in the forecastle,
as the weights carried at each end with a comparatively empty
midship section caused ‘ hogging,’ besides wasting valuable stowage
space and producing other inconveniences. The lower ports were
now to be at least four and a half feet above the water-line. Most
of the commissioners’ ships were built with three decks, but with
only quarter-deck and round—house, instead of the half-deck, fore-

" In the literal but not later sense of ‘ three-decker.’ She had three decks but
only two full batteries. In 1634 the authorities of the Trinity House, who, through
a long series of years, appear to have always chosen the wrong view, wrote, ‘ The art
or wit of man cannot build a ship fit for service with three tier of ordnance.’ Three
years later the first ‘three-decker ’ was afloat.

"' Add. MSS. 9294, Nov. 1610. '” S.P., Dom., Jae. I, ci. 4.


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 489

castle and spar-decks before customary. Bad as they were they
seem to have been steadier than their predecessors.

An undated paper calendared under 1627, but which from its
arguments in favour of a third deck——-a question finally closed
long before 1627——I think belongs rather to this period, gives us
some particulars relating to the internal arrangements of a man-
of-war. The lowest deck was to carry the bread and other store
rooms, the cables and oflicers’ cabins, besides the greater part of
the crew who were also to be berthed upon it. The second deck
was to be laid 5% or 6 feet above this, and in a ship like the ‘ Lion ’
was to be pierced for nine ports a side and four chase-ports fore
and aft. The ports were to be at least two feet three inches square,
‘ and that there be built between every two ports hanging cabins
to fold up to the decks for the lodging of men.’ Otherwise this
deck was to be kept clear instead of being hampered by the cables
stowed upon it in two-decked ships. Readers desirous of technical
details relating to the position and dimensions of floor, timbers,
riders, butts, carlings, clamps, foot and chain waling, standing and
running rigging, &c., will find much exact information in the State
Papers of the next reign dealing with the surveys taken of most of
the new and old ships in 1626 and 1627.

It was ordered that the ‘ Elizabeth ’ and the ‘ Triumph ’ should
be sold, the ‘ Quittance ’ and ‘Tremontane ’ broken up, while the
hulls of the ‘ Garland ’ and ‘ Mary Rose ’ were to be used to wharf
a proposed new dock at Chatham. The ‘Bonaventure,’ ‘Advantage,’
and ‘ Charles ’ had long ceased to exist, and the ‘ St. Andrew ’ and
‘ St. Matthew ’ had been given to Sir John Leigh in 1604 as being
then no longer serviceable. The Elizabethan ‘ Victory ’ is not men-
tioned in any list subsequent to that of 1607, although her repairs
in 1609 cost 4,071l., which is the last time she is even indirectly
referred to ; I am unable to say how or when she passed out of the ser-
vice, but, as it was at first intended to call the ‘ Prince ’ the ‘Victory,’
it must have been very shortly after 1609. The four galleys were
a source of constant expense, one or the other being in continual
need of repair, rebuilding, or shed protection from the weather.
They were never used, and in 1629, having ‘been long laid aside
as useless vessels,’ were ordered to be sold. The new ‘Antelope ’
and ‘ Rainbow ’ of 1618 were not claimed by the commissioners as
due to their initiative, although both must have been completed
after their entry into office. The ‘ Happy Entrance ’ and ‘ Constant
Reformation ’ were launched in the presence of the king at Deptford,
and were named by him with intent to commemorate Buckingham’s
accession to his post and the good effects to be expected from it.
In 1624 no new vessels were built, and the last navy list of James I
is as follows :—7‘*‘

7’ S’.P., Dom., Jas. I, clxi. 68. The classification is that of the State Paper.


490 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

First rank Second rank Third rank Fourth rank
‘ Prince ’ ‘ Due Repulse ' ‘Dreadnought ’ ‘ Phaanix ’
‘ Bear ’ ‘ Warspite ' ‘ Antelope ' ‘ Seven Stars '
‘ Merhonour ' ‘ Victory’ ‘ Speedwell ’ ‘ Charles '
‘ Anne Royal’ ‘ Assurance ' ‘ Adventure ' ‘ Desire ’
‘ Nonsuch ' ‘ Convertive ’
‘ Defiance ’ ‘ Happy Entrance ’
‘ Lion ' ‘ Bonaventure ’
‘ Vanguard ’ ‘ Garland ’
‘ Rainbow ' ‘ Mary Rose ’
‘ Constant Reformation ’
‘ Swiftsure '
‘ St. George '
‘ St. Andrew ‘
‘ Triumph ’

There were also the four galleys and some hoys; eleven of the
vessels were noted as needing more or less substantial repairs, and
most of the old ones were broken-backed. The ten new ships cost
6l. a ton for the larger and 5l. 6s. 8d. for the smaller ones, against
161. a ton under Manse1l’s improvident management ; 73 but it is
likely that these prices are for the hulls alone, and, according to
another statement, the ‘ St. George’ and the ‘ St. Andrew’ cost
8,959l. 103. each ; 7‘ Burrell’s contracts for 1619 were at the rates
of 81. and W. 10s. a ton.“ No alteration was made in the way of
calculating tonnage until 1628.

There is little to be said about any improvements in rigging or
canvas during this period. Top-gallant masts and sails were said
to have been introduced during the reign of Elizabeth, but no
oflicial mention is made of them till 1618; the earliest reference
to them, as actually existing, that I have found is in the inventory
of the rigging of the ‘ Hector’ and her consorts, fitted out for the
East India Company in 1600.75 Fore and aft sails are still absent;
studding sails and booms are spoken of in the ‘ Nomenclator
Navalis,’ 7" but are not alluded to in any naval document. It may
be of interest to quote from the same manuscript the rules govern-
ing the proportions of masts and yards.

Mainmast . . . 3 times four-fifths of the beam
Foremast . . . . four-fifths of mainmast
Bowsprit . . ,, ,,
Mizzen-mast . . . one-half of mainmast

Topmasts . . . . half the length of lower masts

" S.P., Dom., Jas. 1', clviii. 56. " Add. MSS. 9297 , f. 258.

" S.P., Dam., Jas. I, cviii. 58.

" Stevens, Dawn of Trade to the East Indies.

" Earl. MSS. 2301. About 1625 or earlier, and by Sir Hen. Manwayring. It was
printed in 1644 under the title of The Sea-'man’s Dictionary. There is another MS.
copy among the State Papers (S.P. Dam... Chas. I, cxxvii.) called. A Brief Abstract

, . . of all Parts and Things belonging to a Ship. The three versions difier but little
from each other.


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 491

Mainyard . . . . five-sixths of length of keel
Foreyard . . . . four-fifths of mainyard
Topyard . . . . three-sevenths of nminyard
Cross-jack yard . . four-fifths of mainyard
Spritsail yard . . . ,, ,,

Baker, Pett, and Burrell were the three chief shipwrights of the
reign; Stevens, Adye, Bright, Clay, Greaves, and Maryott were less

known men. Baker died on 31 Aug. 1613, at the age of eighty-B

three. As a boy and man he had seen the rise of the English
navy, and had himself largely helped by his skill to produce the
type of ship which was found suificient for that age. That during
the whole of his longlife he appears, so far as existing records show,
to have quarrelled with, or spoken ill of, equals, inferiors, and
superiors may be charitably attributed rather to the unfortunate
conditions governing a shipwright’s position than to any natural
bent of character." The ships built by him represented sound and
honest work; he died in harness while in charge of the repairs of
the ‘ Merhonour,’ which had -been made under his superintendence
twenty-four years previously, and he was long remembered as ‘the
famous artist of his time.’ Pett had been favoured by Nottingham
and Mansell, but does not appear to have experienced the same
partiality from the commissioners. They chiefly employed Burrell,
who had previously been master shipwright to the East India
Company, for their ships, but during the next reign Pett came again
into favour, and was made a principal ofiicer and commissioner for
the navy shortly after Burrell’s death in 1630. The master ship-
wrights received two shillings a day and lodging money, but Baker
had extra payments of three shillings a day and a pension of 401. a
year, which he had enjoyed since building the ‘ Merhonour.’
Bright had an additional three shillings and eightpence a day, of
which one shilling and eightpence had been given to his predecessor,
Chapman, for good service in building the ‘ Ark Royal,’ and had
descended to him. Pett had also a payment of three shillings a
day, of which one shilling had been retained in the family since it
had been first granted to his father in the second year of Mary’s
reign." Probably the orthodox scale of wages would not alone
have retained these men in the royal service, and the pensions
were used to make their posts more valuable.

Chatham and Deptford were still the chief dockyards, the latter
containing the principal building slips; little mention is made of
Portsmouth until the next reign. In 1618 the commissioners
recommended that a new dock should be constructed at Chatham,
330 feet long and 86 feet broad, at a cost of 2,000l., the expenses of

" The writings or utterances of other shipwrights which have come down to us-

show them to have been in no way superior to Baker in these respects.
" Add. MSS. 9299, f. 48.


492 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

sending ships to and fro between Chatham and Deptford being very
great, amounting sometimes to some hundreds of pounds for a
single vessel. This suggestion apparently fell through for lack of
money. The dockyards shared the disorganisation of the other
departments; notwithstanding the exposures of 1608 ten years later
the storehouses at Deptford were said to be ‘full of rotten wood
and bad cordage,’ the scales were light by one pound in the cwt.,
and while bad materials were knowingly received the good were
sold to boatswains and other officers at low prices. In 1624
Chatham yard remained uninclosed, so that strangers came and
took away timber, nails, or any portable article. In 1604 the stores
at Deptford included 210 masts, 322 loads of timber, 41,000 feet of
plank, 171 cables, 499 hawsers, 15 serviceable and 28 unserviceable
anchors, 24 compasses, 40 bolts of canvas, 24,000 tree-nails, and
many other articles down to ‘ a decayed pitch-pot,’ and it is likely
that they were larger in number and better in quality at this date
than at any time during the succeeding twenty years.” The value
of Deptford dockyard, house, and ground was estimated at 5,000l.
and the average yearly charge at 7 65l. ; it was at one time proposed
to remove the whole plant to Chatham.“ The expenses at Chatham
during 1622 were- 3’

£ .9. d. .43 s. d.
J an.—March. Ordinary 652 4 3:} Extraordinary 681 2 4%
Mar.—June ,, 666 17 1 ,, 669 5 3}
June—Sept. ,, 766 2 5 ,, 829 10 8%
Sept.—Ghristmas ,, ,, 787 19 9}

The ‘ ordinary ’ charges embraced those for ship-keepers and inferior
ofiicers attached. to ships lying up, Upnor Castle, clerical work,
rents, watchmen, clerks, storekeepers, and the superior oflicers.
The ‘ extraordinary ’ were for shipwrights, 61 in number, carpenters,
joiners, caulkers, pump-makers, sawyers, sail-makers, and bricklayers.
Wages were, per day: shipwrights, from 1s. 2d. to 23. ; caulkers,
7d. to 28.; carpenters, 1s. 3d. to ls. 10d. ; pump-makers, 1s. 6d. to
23. ; joiners, 1s. 4d. to 13. 8d. ; sail-makers, 1s. 8d.; sawyers, 13. 2d.
to 18. 4d.; bricklayers, 10d. to 13. 6d.; and labourers, 8d. or 9d.
All these men, except the labourers, had lodging money, varying
from 58. 4d. in the case of the master shipwrights 33 to so small a
sum as 2d.

The armament of ships was still very heavy for their tonnage,
and accounted in some measure for their rolling proclivities and the
impossibility of obtaining a comparatively steady gun platform.
Sometimes it was necessary to dismount some of the g11ns. ‘ The
“ Dreadnought” carries 36 ; yet four of them for seven years have

9° Add. MSS. 9297. f. 25. 5‘ Catt. MSS. Otlw, E  E. 219, 220.
3‘ State Papers, Dom., Jas. I, cxxxvi., and Add. MSS. 9294, f. 260.
3‘ Probably per week.


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 493

been buried in her ballast, as some are also in the “ Answer,” and
other ships.’ 3‘ This stowage of the guns strained the vessel dan-
gerously and caused leaks, and, as gravel ballast was still employed,
an injury was a very serious matter from the difliculty in reaching
the damaged part. From a paper which gives a detailed list of the
guns belonging to each ship of the fleet I quote those of the new
‘ Victory ’—-two cannon, two demi-cannon, sixteen culverins, twelve
demi-culverins, four sakers, two falcons, and four fowlers. Of these
we may suppose that cannon, demi-cannon, and culverins were
carried on the middle, or main, deck, the remainder being.divided
between upper deck, half-deck, quarter-deck, and forecastle.“ The
lowest or orlop deck, recently introduced, was of course not used as
a battery. The price of ordnance was from 121. to 15l. a ton, and
the manufacture was still retained in a few hands, its exportation
without license being forbidden. In 1619 orders were issued that
casting was to be confined to Sussex and Kent, that guns were to
he landed at or shipped from the Tower wharf only, and that East
Smithfield was to be the one market-place for their sale or pur-
chase. They could be proved only in Ratclifl Fields, and all pieces
were to have on them at least two letters of the founder’s name,
with the year and the weight of the gun. The founders had to give
bond for 1,0001. as a surety against illegal exportation, and once a
year to send in a report of the number and description of guns
cast and to whom they had been sold.“ These precautions were
not unneeded, but did not prevent the secret sale to foreign buyers
any more than similar restrictions had availed during the reign of
Elizabeth. The royal forts themselves were turned into marts for
this and other unlawful transactions. Upnor Castle is described as
‘ a staple of stolen goods, a den of thieves, a vent for the transport
of ordnance.’ The person holding the post of ‘ king's gun-founder,’
Thomas Browne, was accused of transgressing largely." The
method was to require payment beforehand, the purchaser taking
the risk of seizure, and the guns were then shipped under protec-
tion of a warrant authorising them to be sent to London, but once
at sea they went to the continent instead of the river.

A few stone shot were still carried, and the price of iron shot
varied between lol. and 131. a ton,” and its expenditure in saluting
was liberal. It was only about this time that gunners were directed
to fire blank charges in these marks of respect, an order which was
for long disregarded. Attempts were made to check the too lavish
use of munition for salutes, the amount of which depended mainly

3‘ State Papers, Dom., Jas. I, cix. 139, i. '5 Ibid. cxxxiii. 70, 1622.
3‘ State Papers, Dom., Elia. ecxxxvii. f. 119. Although calendared under
Elizabeth many of the papers in this volume are copies of documents relating to the

reigns of James I and Charles I. See also Lower (M.A.), Contn‘but1Zons to Literature,
for an article on the Kent and Sussex gun foundries.

3' Catt. MSS. Otho, E vii. f. 78. " State Papers, Dom, Ja.s. I, cxxviii. 94.


494 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

on the goodwill of the ofiicers and the stores of the ship. Gunners
were ordered not to shoot without the captain’s permission, and
they were forbidden to fire at ‘ drinkings and feastings.’ They were
further directed to ‘ salute no passengers with more than one piece,
or three at the most, except the person be of quality and the occa-
sion very great, and that for volleys of honour no bullets be spent ; ’
and the captain was not to fail to lock up the powder room if he
went ashore. These regulations were not very effective. In 1628
the fleet lying at Plymouth ‘ shot away 1001. of powder in one day
in drinking healths.’ 89 Another writer says that salutes should be
‘ always of an odd number, but no particular number.’ An even
number signified the death of the captain, master, or master
gunner at sea during the voyage. Of a kindred nature to the love
of display by noise was that of display by flags. The ‘ Prince’ was
supplied with eight flags, five ancients, and fifty-seven pennants:
these, however, were of some use in assisting in the primitive
system of signalling now being attempted on the principle of placing
difierently coloured flags in various parts of the rigging.

One great alteration was made during this reign in the manning
of men-of-war. It had always been customary to place soldiers in
the proportion of one-third of the total complement on board vessels
equipped for service. This practice no longer obtained; in 1619
the commissioners write, ‘ Indeed, till the year ’88 soldiers and
mariners were then usually divided, but that and later experience
hath taught us instead of freshwater soldiers (as they call them) to
employ only seamen.’ 9° The crew as a whole was not reduced,
ships being heavily armed and the spars of a man-of-war being
equal to those of a merchantman of much greater tonnage. We
have the ‘ station list’ of the ‘ Speedwell,’ of thirty guns, which gives
the following division of duties: 18 gunners and 48 men for the
battery, 50 small arms men, 50 to work the ship and man the tops,
4 in the powder room, 4 carpenters, 3 trumpeters, 3 surgeons and
mate, 4 stewards, 3 cocks, and 3 boys. Nearly one-third of a
crew were officers or non-combatants. It will be noticed from this
list that the vessel was only prepared to fire one broadside at a
time, and that the arrangements implied plenty of sea room and a
stand-off fight. At this time English seamen shrank from board-
ing; memories of the enormous Spanish galleons, with their crews
of hundreds of men, and the tactics which had defeated them, were
too fresh in the mind of the English sailor to permit him to have
that confidence in his ships and himself which he subsequently
obtained. I have already mentioned that when this ship, the
‘ Speedwell,’ was lost there was an utter absence of subordination
among the crew, but this lack of discipline appears to have been

" Yonge’s Diary, Cam. Soc. '° State Papers, Dom., Jas. I, cix. 139, i.


1892 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I 495

more or less present at all times. In 1625, when we were at war
with Spain, the ‘ Happy Entrance,’ ‘ Garland,’ and ‘ Nonsuch ’ were
left lying in the Downs with no officers and only a few men on
board, because it was the Christmas holidays and everyone was
on shore merrymaking.“ At an earlier date Coke wrote that ships
rode in the Downs or put into port while the captains went to
London, or hardly ever came on board, and the men ran away.”

Seamen’s wages fluctuated between ten and fourteen shillings a
month, the latter being the rate at the death of James I, and the
pay of the oflicers had been raised in 1618. Not only was it diffi-
cult to keep the men on board the ships, but the expensive and
wasteful system of impressment made the eventual outlay even
heavier. In 1624 an estimate was drawn up of the expenses for
fitting out a fleet of 12 men-of-war; 3,000 men were required, of
Which number the river was to supply 800 at press and conduct
money of 2s. 6d. a man, the remaining 2,200 being obtained from
‘ remote places ’ at a cost of 8s. a man. At their discharge 1s. and
7s. a man conduct money respectively for the river and country
districts would again have to be paid.”

Fortunately the services of the navy were never needed in
earnest during the reign of James. How it would have broken
down under the direction of Mansell may be inferred from the
steady decrease in the number of seaworthy ships, and the increas-
ing disorganisation of every department, during each year of his
retention of otfice. The administration of the commissioners was
both competent and honest, but the grievous results of Mansell’s
treasurership were too plainly shown during the earlier years of the
succeeding reign, when fleets were once more sent to sea. Ships
might be replaced and open peculation checked, but the deeper
moral wounds caused by fourteen years of license among the higher
officials and fourteen years of heartless chicanery suffered by those
more lowly placed were not so readily healed, and bore their fruits
for long afterwards in the habitual dishonesty of minor ofiicials and
workmen, in the disloyalty and half-heartedness of the seamen,
and, later, in the shameless knaveries which disgraced the Na
Office at the close of the century, and many of which had their origin
under Mansell’s rule. The commissioners were hampered in their
efforts by want of money, an embarrassment of which Mansell had
little to complain. Nor can the king be absolved from the respon-
sibility of permitting Mansell’s misdeeds. He knew at least as early
as 1608 of the iniquities daily occurring in every branch of the
service, but he contented himself with making ‘ an oration; ’ he was
ready enough to act as an impromptu arbiter on technical details, to
superintend launches, to visit the ships, and to give them euphuistic

'1 Add. M55’. 9302, f. 9. ” Coke MSS. Cal. i. 105.
9’ State Papers, Dom., Jas. I, clxxv. 85.


496 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER JAMES I July

names, but that portion of his kingly oflice which involved protect-
ing the helpless and punishing the guilty was sufliciently satisfied
by ‘an oration.’ And had not Buckingham desired to be lord
high admiral We have no reason to suppose that James I would
have seen any cause for interference merely on behalf of seamen
who were starved and robbed, or of the English people whose chief
defence was being destroyed and whose money Went to enrich a
ring of rogues. So far had the traditions of Plantagenet and Tudor
kingliness degenerated into Stewart ‘ kingcraft.’
M. OPPENHEIM.


The Royal Navy under Charles I: Part III -- The Administration

 

M. Oppenheim
The English Historical Review, Vol. 9, N0. 35. (Jul., 1894), pp. 473-492.

Stable URL:
l1_ttia://linl<s.istor.or<r/sici?sici=O€) l 3-8&6“/528 1 894()7%399‘?/o3A35%3 C473 %3ATRNUCl%3E2.0.CO%3B2—N

The English Historical Review is currently published by Oxford University Press.

Your use of the J STOR archive indicates your acceptance of J STOR‘s Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
htto:5’/wwwzistor.or2/about/terms.html. J STOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained
prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in
the J STOR archive only for your personal, non—commercial use.

Please Contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact infonnation may be obtained at
ht ://www.' t r.or 'oumals/ou

        

Each copy of any part of a J STOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

J STOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For
more information regarding J STOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www.jstor.org
Thu Dec 28 16:59:44 2006


1894 473

7716 Royal Navy mzder C/£657’/65‘ I

PART III.-——THE Anmmrsrrwrron.

HE system, inaugurated in 1618, of governing the navy by
commissioners acting under the lord high admiral remained in
force until February 28, when the four principal officers resumed
control under Buckingham. Although the commissioners’ direction
was of course, both in ability and honesty, immeasurably superior
to that of Mansell, they cannot be said to have risen to any great
excellence of administration. In October 1627 Charles, in writing
to the duke, apologised for the slowness with which supplies were
furnished, ‘the cause whereof is . . . the slow proceedings of the
commissioners of the navy (which all commissioners are liable
to)." If king and minister were both of this opinion, it would
account for the supersession which so soon followed. After
Buckingham’s murder the post of lord high admiral was put into
commission, and the new lords of the admiralty were even more
reliant on the capacity of the principal oflicers than had been their
predecessors; but they appear to have been also more suspicious
of them than the commissioners Were. Of Buckingham it may be
said that, had he possessed less power, he would have made a
better chief. In the ten years he held office he practically doubled
the effective of the navy, for the commissioners could have done
little without his aid. So far as the emptiness of the treasury
would allow he enlarged and repaired docks and storehouses, and,
if he did not discover, he was one of the first to appreciate the
naval importance of Portsmouth.“ He provided for the home
manufacture of cordage by inducing Dutchmen to settle here and
teach Englishmen their art, and was the builder of the first rope-
houses attached to English dockyards. He reintroduced lieutenants
and corporals on board ship, and was the first administrator who
began systematic naval and gunnery instruction in the service.

' Ha.11iwell’s Royal Letters, ii. 277.

1 Portsmouth was largely used during the earlier years of the reign of Henry VIII,
but lost its pre-eminence when Deptford, Woolwich, and Chatham were founded. It
is curious that one of the first recognitions of its value as a. permanent naval station
should have come from Philip II (State Papers, Domestic, Mary, vi. 16).


474 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I July

Unfortunately for his memory, he must be judged not as head of
the navy but as the all-powerful minister, and in that sense history
has pronounced its verdict.3

Since 1618 the duties of the treasurer of the navy had become,
and remained in the future, almost entirely financial. His salary was
increased from 1630 by the grant of the poundage of threepence on all
payments made by him, including wages, instead of, as before, only
on those to merchants supplying stores, as well as a house at
Deptford and other advantages, and in 1634 his fixed fee was raised
from 270l. 13s. 4d. to 645l. 13s. 4d.‘ He even received the pound-
age on the salaries of the other three officers, and they were con-
tinually petitioning for an advance in their rate of pay, which had
remained unaltered since their posts were created by Henry VIII.
It is suggestive to find that, among their reasons for the requested
increase, they mention that before the reforms of 1618 they had
an allowance of 60l. a year from the treasurer and victualler for
passing their accounts? and that the surveyor and comptroller
estimated the total annual value of their perquisites before that
date at 384.1. and 480l. respectively. This included the allowance
from the treasurer and victualler, commissions given by officers on
appointment, and dividends divided among them from the sale of
old stores.“ In 1637 they appear to have been promised that if
they could obtain their augmentation without going to the royal
cofi'ers for it they were welcome to whatever they could get.
Accordingly they point out that in this year they had prevented
fraudulent overcharge on the part of owners of hired merchantmen
to the extent of 1,374l., and they therefore desired to divide the
whole of this sum.7 What advantage this would be to the crown
they omitted to say. They were exceptionally unlucky, seeing that
most officials had only to petition in order to receive. In one case
201. a year was taken off the salaries of the masters attendant, but,
when these complained, they had each 401. a year added and with
less work. Their ill fortune was, perhaps, due to the disfavour with
which the lords of the admiralty seem to have usually viewed them,
and it was not until the era of the long parliament, when, from
motives of fear, all wages were raised, that they shared in the
general increase. None of these officers was of any historic interest.

' It is difiicult to apportion the credit for the reforms which followed 1618 between
the commissioners and Buckingham. Nicholas (State Papers, Domestic. Charles I, ccxli.
85, 86) gives it to Buckingham ; but Nicholas was his private secretary, and we know
that the duke had no grasp of detail. On the other hand he wrote after the duke’s
death, when he had nothing more to hope from him, and it is certain that the com-
missioners could not have stood for twenty-four hours against the vested interests
they attacked without Buckingham’s consistent support.

‘ Add. MSS. 9301, f. 110. 5 State Papers, Domestic, Charles I, ccciv. 9.

" State Papers, Domestic, Elizabeth, ccxxxvii. f. 138.

’ State Prz.pr;r.s. Domestic, Charles I. ccclxxii. 21.


1894 THE ROYAL NAVY UKDER CHARLES I 475

For two and a half years, between 1627 and 1629, Sir Sackville
Crowe was treasurer, but he, to put as favourable a construction as
possible on what happened, got his accounts into confusion to the
extent of 1,5OOl.3 Before and after Crowe Sir Wm. Russell was
sole treasurer till 1639, then for two years with the younger Vane,
and again, in 1642, by himself till August, after which Vane alone
was reappointed. Russell was a mere man of affairs, who confined
himself to his accounts, and seems never to have ventured an
opinion on anything outside them. Kenrick Edisbury, at first
paymaster, and from December 1632 surveyor of the navy, and per-
haps the most observant and energetic of the chief officers, held the
latter post till his death in 1638, when he was succeeded by Wm.
Batten, who was appointed ‘ during pleasure,’ instead of by patent
for life, as in preceding cases.” Sir Guilford Slingsby had been
comptroller of the navy under Mansell, and was again given the same
office in February 1628 by Charles. The main incidents of his second
tenure which have come down to us relate to his assaults on his
inferiors and his quarrels with his brother oflicers. Immediately
after his appointment John Wells, the storekeeper of the navy,
petitioned that, although the other ofiicers had allotted him lodgings
in the navy ofiice, Slingsby, to accommodate his family and
servants, ‘ hath violently taken his lodgings from him.’ 1° In
1629 his colleagues complained to the lords commissioners that he
had felled with a pocket pistol, and otherwise maltreated, the man
in charge of the navy ofiice, and kept him out of the house, not-
withstanding their wish to reinstate him.“ Slingsby died in 1632,
and Sir H. Palmer succeeded him. The most notable event in
Palmer's ofiicial career was his excuse for selling government
cordage and pocketing the proceeds—‘ because his predecessors had
done the like.’ He subsequently amended this defence by saying that
he had spent the money on naval necessaries.” Till 1628 William
Burrell was in charge of all ship—building and repairs, and in
1629 Burrell and Phin. Pett were made assistants to the principal
oificers. Burrell died in 1630, and from January 1631 Pett became
himself a principal ofiicer, being three months junior to Sir Kenelm
Digby, who had been appointed in the previous October. Neither

5 It will be remembered that during his treasurership he helped himself to 3,0001.
from the Chatham chest, and that the money was still owing in 1644. After his dismis-
sal from office Crowe was ambassador of the Levant Company at Constantinople, and,
in 1646: nearly mined that company by, on the one hand, quarrelling with the Porte,
and on the other ixnprisoning the members and agents of the association. When he
returned in 1648 he was sent to the Tower, but seems to have escaped scatheless.

9 By an order of 13 Feb. 1637 no place in the navy or ordnance oflices was hence-
forth to be granted for life, but only during pleasure. Edisbury’s real name was
VVilkinson (see Hasted, History of Kent, i. 20 note, ed. Drake, London, 1886).

"’ State Papers, Domestic, Charles I, cxxxv. 37. " Ibid. clii. 51.

"3 Add. MSS. 9301, ff. 121, 133.


476 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I July

Digby nor Pett had any defined duties, and in Digby’s case the
position seems to have been almost entirely honorary, although at
one time he was treating with Mervyn for the latter’s command in
the Channel. Mervyn asked 5,000l., his arrears of pay, to his
rights in which Digby would presumably succeed, and the 3,0001.
he had given for his admiralship of the narrow seas.” It would
be a matter of some interest to know to whom that 3,000l.
was paid, but there had been obviously no secrecy in the trans-
action.

After Buckingham’s death the lords commissioners met twice a
week, sometimes at Wallingford House and sometimes in the
council chamber at Whitehall. In April 1638 the child duke of
York was made lord high admiral for life, and Northumberland his
acting substitute during the king’s pleasure; the navy, therefore,
ceased to be governed by commission from that date. In 1628 the
principal oflicers met at St. Martin’s Lane, but in March 1630 some
rooms were taken for them in a house in Mincing Lane at a rental
of 30l. a year.” Thenceforward expenses incurred in relation to
that house appear in many of the accounts ; it cost 1501. for
furnishing, twelve months’ beer there 13l. 8s.,‘5 yearly water rate
ll. 6s. 8d., but only 3s. 6d. for Christmas gratuities. Although in
1628 the chief officers had been reinstated in a portion of their
former authority, they by no means escaped the control of, and
occasionally severe censure from, the lords of the admiralty.
Sometimes my lords considered that their sympathies ran rather
with their subordinates than with the king’s interests, and, as most
of them had been suspended for acts similar to those they were
called upon to condemn in minor oflicials, the charge was not un-
founded.” In the fleet of 1637 embezzlement of stores by the
boatswains had been very general. There was nothing unusual in
this, but the resolve of the lords commissioners to punish the guilty
persons appeared to strike the principal ofiicers as both unusual
and unfair. Their pleas on behalf of these men provoked the com-
missioners to write, ‘ We observe that you are more apt to intercede
for those that are most faulty than to certify what you find against
other boatswains . . . . it is time by due punishment to break up
this custom of the boatswains’ exorbitant wasting of his majesty’s
stores, the continuance whereof so long with impunity hath, it seems,
made the ofiicers think it almost lawful.’ ” On another occasion
they were told, ‘ If you were as careful of his majesty’s service as

" State Papers, Domestic, Charles I, clxxiii. 6. Mcrvyn to Nicholas.

H Add. Mss. 9297, f. 178.

“ The price of beer at this time was about ll. 10s. a tun.

" In 1634 Palmer, the comptroller, Denis Fleming, clerk of the acts, Phin. Pett,
another principal oflicer, and several storekeepers and masters attendant had all been

suspended for selling government stores for their own profit.
" State Papers, Domrstic, Charles I, cccliii. f. 88.


1894 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I 477

you are to cast all such unfitting troubles on us, you would gain
much more reputation and esteem to yourselves; ’ 13 and, once
again, reference was made to their ‘ supine negligence.’ While
they were exposed to these snubs from their superiors one of their
inferiors certainly, and others probably, expressed opinions of them
with the same frankness. They complained to the lords that
Francis Brooke, storekeeper at Portsmouth, ‘ used many base words
of ourselves, calling us loggerheads.’ Perhaps the admiralty agreed
with him ; at any rate I do not find that Brooke was reprimanded,
so that the only consolation left to them was their salaries.
Observers who acquitted the principal ofiicers of intentional fraud
accused them of incompetence, although they doubtless possessed
the amount of intellect considered sufiicient for permanent officials.
They were said not to know where their respective duties began or
ended, but the conditions under which theyworked were not favour-
able to success in management. Each one kept his books at his
own residence, and neither sufficient time nor assistance was allowed
for the various duties of inspection or bookkeeping which fell to
him. Moreover they were compelled to purchase stores from
persons holding patents for the sale of special articles, such as iron,
canvas, &c., a necessity sufficient to account for any depth of bad-
ness in the supply. Whether the confusion was due to neglect or
overwork, the effect on the lower ranks of naval employés was the
same. From the first year of the reign we have a continuous record
of carelessness and fraud, which neither commissioners nor lords
commissioners seem to have been able to stamp out. In 1625, on
board the ships at sea, pursers charged on the full number of men
supposed to be mustered and shared the profits made on those
absent with their captains, while gunners and boatswains each kept
from two to five servants who were rated as seamen, but who were
boys and landsmen, and whose wages were retained by the officers.
When the vessels were laid up the ship-keepers were usually drunk
or absent. Captain Joshua Downing one night rowed down the
Medway, and ‘might have gone on board all ships but three and
done any mischief; ’ and ‘in these twenty years last past all the
navy hath not bred five able sailors nor two able gunners.‘ '9 Fifteen
years later matters were as bad. John Holland, then paymaster
of the navy, wrote that the ship-keepers and apprentice servants of
the olficers were coachmen, tailors, gardeners, &c., and that the
apprentices were dismissed at the end of their term as ignorant as
when they joined.” Robberies were frequent. ‘ Generally the

“ State Papers, Domestic, Charles I, cccliii. f. 55.

“' Ibid. xiii. 70, 1625, Le. by the system of servants and apprentices. It was not
until 1647 that the ship-keepers in the Medway were ordered to strike the hell on
board every half-hour through the night (Add. MSS. 9306, f. 103).

3° Discourse of the Navy (Add. MSS. 9335).


478 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I July

watchman is the thief and the ship-keeper the cabin-breaker ; ’ but
the ship and dockyard officers dared not prosecute, because such a
course would have called attention to their own delinquencies.“
Downing’s experience did not evoke much attention, since, in the
following year, it was reported from Chatham. ‘ There are divers
that are upon the king’s majesty’s charges both for victuals and
Wages, but give no attendance nor do no service ; neither can we
take any muster of any man but just at dinner time, for no longer
than they are tied by the teeth are they to be kept on board,’ 22
this being in the full stress of war time. When captains were
turning their men-of-war into cargo boats, to enable merchants to
defraud the customs,‘-'3 we need not be surprised that their inferior
officers allowed themselves license in theft, and the references to
carpenters, gunners, boatswains, and pursers about the sale of stores
entrusted to them are innumerable. That fortunes were made
from ‘chips ’ taken out of the dockyards is well known. ‘ The
infinite abuse and prejudice the king has in all or most of his yards
under colour of chips is intolerable;"“ again, ‘a great quantity
of wood is carried away by workmen when they go to breakfast, at
dinner time, and at night under colour of, chips; they cut up good
timber and call it chips;’ 9‘ and in some yards the shipwrights
built huts in which to store their plunder. In one case a lighter
containing 8,000 tree-nails, said to be made from chips, but more
probably stolen from Deptford yard, was seized, and the destined
receiver was found to be one of the government shipwrights who
also owned a private ship-building yard. Some of the dockyard
employés converted the storehouses into lodgings for themselves and
their families, and this abuse continued until the parliamentary
navy committee made a clean sweep of them.”

Of all the subordinate officials the pursers, as in later times,
were the most acquisitive, liaving the greatest opportunities. Most
places in the navy were for sale, but theirs were considered so pro-
fitable that they were eagerly sought. In 1626 Nicholas was
informed that a person, lately mayor of Rochester, would give him
100l. for the appointment to the ‘ Anne Royal,’ or 60l. for either of
two others. As the ex—mayor could only sell again the eventual
holder must have anticipated a handsome income. One article on
which he made it was the beer ; the brewer delivered this by beer
measure, but the purser served it out by wine measure, pocketing
the value of the difi°erence.97 Sometimes he was a pluralist. One
man was cool; of the ‘ Bear ’ and purser of the ‘ George,’ and exe-

”‘ J)icoursc of the Navy (Add. MISS. 91-J35.)

""-' Smtc I’apc-1'5, I)cmcst-ic, Charles I, xxvii. 69. 7" Ibitl. ch. 33.
2' Ibicl. cclx. 29. Edisbury to Nicliolas. 3"’ Ibid. cclxiii. 19.
'-'-i Add. Mss. 9306, r. 119.

‘“ State I’apcrs, IJomr:st£C, (_.'7u11'7r.S‘ T, xxiii. 120,1G2f3. Ten ytars later Northumber.
and made the same complaint. 'i‘I;«,-re haq freon no 1-clam,


1894 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDEIL‘ CHARLES I 479

cuted both places by deputy. Of course they, like the others, sold
their stores ashore. But one of their particular sources of profit was
the men’s clothes. In 1623 Wearing apparel Was first ordered to be
provided for the men, and to be sold to them at cost price, subject
to a commission of one shilling in the pound for the purser. In
1628 it was being sold, when obtained, at ll. 73. a suit, to be
deducted from the wages, but, as occurred with other naval requi-
sites, the contractors frequently refused to supply it without pre-
payment. By 1636 the commissions had increased. The merchant
had to pay two shillings in the pound for entering the clothes on
board ; the paymaster and purser took each a further shilling on all
articles sold, and of course the unfortunate sailor had to meet all
these extra and illegal perquisites, the result being that ‘the men
had rather starve than buy them.’ The original purpose of the
supply was ‘to avoyde nastie beastlyness by contynuall Wearinge of
one suite of clothes, and therebie boddilie diseases and unwholesome
ill smells in every ship.’ The Whole of the clothes served out during
the earlier years of the reign was not a quantity likely to have much
improved the unpleasantly suggestive conditions of this passage.

In 1641 Northumberland, as lord high admiral, tool-; the busi-
ness in hand, and issued stringent regulations which forbade the
sailor to purchase more than fifty shillings’ worth a year, at fixed
prices, and reduced the commission to sixpence in the pound, which
was to be paid to the purser by the vendor.‘3“‘ When, as rarely hap-
pened, a purser was honest, he seems to have been assaulted and per-
secuted by his captain, and his position on board rendered unbearable.
Perhaps the key to the situation is to be found in their petition of
1639, when many of the pursers asked for increased pay, saying,
‘ We know not how to subsist in our places without the continuance
of what has ever been tolerated, or else the grant of a competent
salary.’ ‘-"J Uorroborating this plea we have Holland’s opinion that
wages were too low, ‘ most of them being for want thereof necessi-
tated . . . either to live knaves or die beggars, and sometimes both.’
It was however a sign of the times that when in 1640, Thomas Smith,
NorthuInber1and’s secretary, took -10l. for an appointment, he found
himself exposed to the taunts of his equals and had to defend him-
self by asserting that he never bargained, but ‘ ‘what men volun-
tarily give me my conscience assures me that I may take as mere
gratuities.’ It was still no crime but was reaching the stage which
precedes legal condemnation. There is no trace of the sale of
places during the Commonwealth, but the custom was reintroduced
with the other fashions of the Restoration.

Neither in their sense of honour nor in the extent of their
professional knowledge did the navy captains of this generation

3” 1'b2'zI. cccclxxx. 30. 2’ Ibid. ccccxxix. 33.


480 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I July

favourably impress their superiors. In August 1630 Mervyn, who
was commanding in the Channel, Wrote to Nicholas that he had cap-
tains who knew neither how to command nor how to obey, and a
month later he requested that John Mennes should be given a ship,
so that he might at least have one captain who had ‘ passed his
a h c.’ ‘Men of such calibre usually owed their position to, and ob-
tained other advantages from, court influence and family connexions.
Of one man who received 3,000l. as his 3 per cent. commission
on carrying treasure to Dunkirk we read, ‘ You may see what a
brother or friend in the bedchamber doth.’ Another captain, his
men said, was ‘ fearful in oaths,’ plundered merchantmen, and
threatened to kill any one who complained of him ; his crew refused
to sail, because ‘ for his blasphemous swearing they feared the ship
would sink under them.’ Others were questioned for beating
officers and men, but in no case does any punishment appear to have
followed. Another form of fraud which came into existence now,
and lasted till the present century, was the forging and uttering of
seamen’s tickets. The tickets were practically promises to pay
wages due, and in the state of the royal treasury were only saleable
at a heavy discount. Not only did the captains and pursers forge
tickets in the names of men who had never existed, but civilians
carried on a brisk trade in such articles, and, when Crowe was navy
treasurer, they were ‘ such good merchandize that a penniless wag
made out a ticket for Ball, a dog . . . and sold it with a letter of
attorney to a man who lodged seamen.’ 3°
When the civil war commenced most of the non-combatant
employés of the admiralty remained, like the ofiicers and men, in
the service of the parliament, which took control by means of
committees, whose members were constantly being changed.
Subordinate to the parliamentary committee was a board called
the commissioners of navy and customs, whose work was chiefly
financial, and the functions of the principal ollicers, except the
treasurer’s, were performed by another body known as the com-
missioners of the navy. The earl of \Varwick was their lord high
admiral, appointed in 1642, in place of ;\'orthu1nberland, and he
resigned in April 1645, to be again appointed on 29 May 1648,
"" It must not, howev:-r, be supposed that naval morality was worse during the
reigns of James and Charles than subsequently. Leaving the eighteenth century out
of consideration it was said that at the beginning of this one the annual public loss
from fraud and embezzlement ran into millions, a sum which may well have almost
drawn the shades of Mansell and hundreds of other pettifogging seventeenth-century
navy thieves back to earth. I take the great difference to have been that at the later
«l:Ltc, whether from higher principle or want of opportunity, the combatzmt branches
of the service were honest, the theft and johbery being confined to the admiralty, navy
lioard, and ¢lr)::lx‘y£tl‘¢l establislxnicnts. Lord St. Vincent said of the navy board that it
was ‘ the curse of the navy,‘ and the methods of the dockyards may be gauged from
the fact that while the (present) ‘Victory ’ cost 97,4002. to build, 112-3,6001. were in
fifteen years expended on her repairs. 01' the Admiralty nothing need be said.


1894 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I 481

when the news of the Rainsborow outbreak was received. In one
matter the parliament found itself better off than the previous
administration, for the question of timber had for years been a
difficulty, the royal forests having deteriorated from various causes.
Now, in spite of increased requirements, it was obtained more
easily by the process of seizing the timber on delinquents’ estates.
In 1632 a report was made on the condition of the forests, when
that of Dean was said to be ‘ wasted and ruined,’ the New Forest
was ‘ so decayed ’ that there were not 2,000 serviceable trees in it;
there were not more in Waltham Forest and hardly 400 in East
Bere.“ Much of this wreck was due to lavish grants made by
James and Charles to private individuals, and a further cause was
the open theft which went on, sufiicient wood to build ships being
sometimes taken away without any attempt at concealment. Still,
in 1633, there were 166,000 trees left in the Forest of Dean of an
average value of twenty shillings a tree.”

John Browne, who held the appointment of ‘ king’s gunfounder ’
under James I, continued in that office during the whole of this
reign. The price of ordnance in 1625 was from 131. to 141. a ton,
and did not afterwards materially vary. Many complaints were
made about the excessive solidity and weight of naval guns, which
caused much of the straining and rolling at sea, and they were so
unnecessarily strong that when sold abroad the new owners rebored
them for larger shot. In 1626 Browne was granted a reward of
2001. for casting lighter guns which had withstood a double proof;
but, notwithstanding this encouragement, he, like every one else
dealing with the crown, suffered in his purse. By June 1628 up-
wards of 11,0001. was due to him, and Evelyn, the powder contractor,
had 2,400l. owing to him, and had refused to furnish anything more
for three months past. Coke thereupon suggested to Buckingham
that Evelyn should be compelled to resume his supplies, ‘ but till
the ceasing of parliament holds it best not to urge him too much,’
which throws an interesting side light on general history.33 Not-
withstanding these straits and the requirements of his fleets,
Charles did not neglect his glorious heritage in the crown jewels
which were pawned to the Dutch, and Burlamacchi was directed to
sell 4,000 tons of ordnance abroad and redeem the treasures. As
an appropriate part of the transaction Browne found himself
obliged to export in Dutch vessels, as they were provided with con-
voy. In 1632 there were in store 81 brass and 147 iron pieces,
presumably the reserve behind those in the ships and forts, and
207,000 round and 3,000 cross-bar shot. Stone shot are no longer
mentioned.3“ The allowance for a second-rate was three lasts of
powder, six cwt. of match, 970 round, 100 cross-bar, 70 double cross-

" Slate Papers, Domestic, Chr.u'Ics I, ccxxix. 114. 3'-' Ibirl. ccxlv. 19.
" I~’J5d- Will» 13- 3' 1/)i«/. ccxxxii. l.

31 Vol. 9


482 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I July

bar shot, and 2,000 rounds for small arms.” The musket trade
had been gained from us by Holland since the preceding reign, and
now Sweden was underselling English founders of big guns; in
1634 Browne, in petitioning the king for payment, said that he
had paid 1,2001. for a license to export ordnance, but that the
Swedes were now selling at half-price. This Swedish manufacture
was really worked by Dutch capitalists, and within twenty years the
price of English ordnance in the Low Countries had fallen from
36l. to 141. a ‘ton. For the proper equipment of the fleet, exclusive
of castles and forts, 96 lasts of powder were required in 1635, but
in that year only 94 were in store for all purposes ; between 1628
and 1635 there had been no powder in Southsea Castle, and doubt-
less many less important positions were equally ill furnished.
Perhaps the crown could not supply the forts, because too busy in
private trade, the sale of gunpowder to merchants and others being
a royal monopoly. A handsome profit was made on it, the cost
being 7%d. per lb. and the selling price 13. 6d. In 1637 the year’s
gains on this article came to 14,7861.“ The ordnance office had
already obtained that evil pre—eminence in sloth and incapacity it
has never since lost, and its situation in 1638 was that of ‘the
surveyor sick, the clerk restrained of his liberty, one of his clerks
absent, the clerk of the deliveries out of town and his clerk absent,
the master gunner dead, the yeoman of the ordnance never present,
nor any of the gunners attendant, and the stores for ordnance
empty.’ 37 Outcries, such as we have been also used to hear in
this generation, against their delays in serving the ships with guns
and ammunition, were loud and continuous, and in 1639 it was
proposed to return to the original arrangement made by Henry VIII
and allow the naval authorities to supply themselves with these
necessaries. It is an illustration of the meditative and weighty
caution with which ofiicial wisdom can be trusted to move onward
from change to change that it was not until a few years ago
that the alteration suggested in 1639 was made. Finally we read
that ‘the accountant nor other officers keep no books, and the
ancient ofiicers and clerks are averse to all new propositions which
meet their inveterate frauds and defects.’ 33 The parliamentary
leaders seen at first to have doubted how far Browne was to be
trusted, since on 30 Dec. 1645 it was ordered that his works, which
had been managed by deputies, should be given back to him.
Besides producing dangerous international friction the matter
of saluting was a cover for theft and an excuse for waste at home.
The lord high admiral seems to have been the only person whose
reception was according to distinct forms, and for him the royal

’-" State Papers, Domestic, Charles I, cclxix. 67.
35 Ibid. ccclxxvi. 160 and ccccxlii. 12.
3’ Ibid. cccxcvii-37. =8 Ibz‘d.cccc1xxvi. 115.


1894 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I 483

standard was to fly at the main, yards to be manned, and on his
approach within musket shot of the ship the trumpets were to cease
and ‘ all who carry whistles are to Whistle his welcome three times,
and in the intervals the crew to cheer.’ 39 Butler notices the fond-
ness of the English for making a noise as a mark of deference, and
the expenditure of powder in this way was described as the ‘ main
excuse of gunners’ frauds,’ and as causing the waste of at least a
thousand barrels of powder a year. Every one stood closely on his
honour in the matter of salutes, and in 1631 Pennington was fired
on from Pendennis Castle for not striking his flag. No occurrence
was of too little consequence to be thus signalised; in one gunner’s
accounts we find: ‘One faucon when the master’s wife went ashore.
. . . One minion the master commanded to be shot off to a ship his
father was in. . . . We shot two faucons inhealths and three when
Master Newton Went ashore.’ Of another gunner it was remarked:
‘ He cannot write, yet presents the account here enclosed, in which
you see the kings powder spent in salutations of ketches and
oyster boats. . . . I shall shortly send far greater and fouler
examples of powder purloined by the last.’ ‘° The hired merchant-
men in the royal pay had as much self-respect on this question as
men-of-war, and saluted towns on entering and leaving harbour, the
captain’s brother, and ‘the captain’s friends for their farewell ’ in
orthodox service fashion. The large ones had, in some respects,
the advantage of the smaller men-of-war, since the captain of one
of the latter, in accounting for his consumption of ammunition, said
that ordinary traders ‘ scorned to strike to a whelp,’ and he had to
force them to their duty. The result of all this firing was that in
the two and a half years ending on 30 June 1627 out of 653 lasts
of powder issued to the various forts there had been 300 used in
saluting.“ Nor were these proceedings devoid of danger, since the
repeated orders that guns should be fired with blank charges were
still disregarded, and there are several instances mentioned of
persons on shore being struck from vessels saluting at sea. The
admirals were equally sensitive about their dignity, and when
Lindsey commanded the fleet of 1635 the question of his flags
appeared to weigh most on his mind. On 1 May he complained
that he had not enough flags and was not furnished with a
standard; the next day he repeats his wants, adding that he would
like a kitchen ship, and a week afterwards he thinks himself ‘ a
little maimed,’ still lacking the standard.

Among foreign powers the Dutch were the chief victims to the

3*’ Butler’s Dialogical Discourse, &c. Of course the guns would be going all the
time. This form of reception appears to have been that given also to the king or to
a. general commanding an expedition.

“' State Papers, Domestic, Charles I, liii. 40. Haydon to Nicholas.

‘" Ibzld. lxxxviii. 27.


484 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CILIRLES I July

requirements of maritime decorum, here complicated by the dispute
about the dominion of the narrow seas. In July 1626 the captain
of Deal Castle fired at a Dutchman which came into the roads with
colours flying, and made the master pay ten shillings, the cost of
the shot. In his report of the affair he says, ‘ The rather did I it
because I have heard it imputed that we have lost the jurisdiction
of the narrow seas.’ Six years later a man-of-war having been
sent to Calais to fetch the body of Sir Isaac Wake, her captain had
the audacity to force the French to strike their colou1's to him.“
When Lindsey went to sea in 1635 his instructions ran that his
‘ principal care ’ was to make foreign fleets perform their ‘ duty and
homage,’ and, if they refused, to make them answer for their ‘ high
contempt.’ ‘3 Remembering the state of Lindsey’s fleet, not only
in the absence of the standard which he deplored so sadly, but in
more urgent essentials, such as men, provisions, and stores, it was
perhaps fortunate that Richelieu evaded the trial, and that the Dutch
were content——for the time—to salute all day long if Charles so
pleased. Northumberland, the next year, was told to insist on foreign
ships yielding homage in Calais and other harbours if out of range
of the forts. 4“ Wiser than his master, if he did more than look into
the French ports he did nothing to provoke a collision. Moreover
Northumberland may have felt that he was hardly in a situation to
enforce compliance. Lindsey mentioned in his journal that in two
days eleven ships lost masts and topmasts with only ‘ strong
winds ’ blowing, but had not thought the circumstance deserved
comment, although his vice—admiral, the old Elizabethan seanian
Sir William Monson, was not so reticent. Northumberland’s fleet
was equally ill found, and on his return he charged the principal
oflicers with giving him ships leaky and out of repair, fitted with
defective masts and yards and bad cordage ; some, he said, were too
old to be worth repairing, and the new ones required girdling to
make them fit for sea.“ What the earl thought of his men and
stores has been already related. However, English captains con-
tinued to carry matters with a high hand, and, in 1637, Stradling
meeting a Dutch squadron which did not salute with sufficient
promptness, reported : ‘ The captain of the rear-admiral I have taken
out of his ship and sent to Plymouth.’ As time wore on the Dutch,
seeing that Charles had enough to occupy his attention at home,
became more independent, and in 1639 they were searching English
ships and taking Spaniards out of them, a change from their
former submissive attitude.

“ State Papers, Domestic, Charles I, ccxx. 25. M. de Kermaingant (Le Droit dos
Geus Maritime . . . cm Commcnccnzcnt du .\'Ir'II" Sificlc, Paris, 1802) suggests that
the real origin of the English claim to the lordship of the narrow sens is to be found
in the possession by our early kings of both shores of the Channel.

" Ibid. 2 May 1635. “ Ibid. cccxvii. 102.
" Ibid. cccxxxvi. 13 and cccx:~:x\'iii. 39.


1804 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I 485

A precarious source of crown revenue was that obtained from
the prize tenths. In the two years ending with May 1626 seventy-
three vessels had been taken and proceeded against in the admiralty
court, and Bristol paid 7,6041. between 1628 and 1631. It was not
unt-il the civil war that the crew of a ship belonging to the state
had any fixed proportion of the proceeds, but by a council order of
October 1626 ‘ a competent reward’ was to be given to the captors.
On the other side seventy-seven vessels, of 100 tons and upwards,
were taken by the enemy between 1625 and 1628, so that the balance
of profit was hardly with us. In another paper we are told the,
presumably net, proceeds from Spanish prizes between July 1626
and August 1639 came to 38,1581. 83.“ In October 1642 the
parliament announced that henceforth one-third of the value of
a prize was to be divided among officers and crew, in addition
to wages. Its effect was undoubted, since from February 1643 to
April 1649 prize goods were sold for 123,200l., and this must repre-
sent an enormously higher original value." However, out of this sum
ofiicers and men only got 14,465l., while the two collectors, Thomas
Smith and John Hall, took 4,989l., Warwick 5,985l., and the expenses
of storage, lading and unlading, &c., were 17,()00l. The delay and
deductions in the payment of the thirds were among the chief causes
of the trouble the Commonwealth experienced with the seamen in its
earlier years, and in this account we see quite extraneous charges
borne upon it. The treasurer of the navy took 30,000l. trom it,
Augier, the parliamentary agent in Paris, 610l., the secretary and
usher of the committee of foreign affairs their salaries, and it had
to meet various other items which would now go under the head of
secret service money. The Dutch system of rewards for captures
was in working order long before ours and was liberal enough in
amount. Privateers were allowed, beyond the value of the ship
and goods taken, a state reward of from 8,000 to 30,000 guilders,
the latter sum being given for any vessel of more than 100 lasts
burden. If the enemy was sunk at sea instead of being brought
into port, only half these sums were paid.

The following table, compiled from the ‘ Audit Office Declared
Accounts ’ for the several years, gives the ordinary and extraordinary
expenditure in round figures, as well as that of ship money, of
which 1,028,702l. was demanded by writ, and 716,528l. was paid
over to the navy treasurer.“ The estimates for the ordinary are
for routine, naval, and dockyard work and the Channel squadron,
and do not include the cost of the expeditions of the first three
years or of any of the later fleets. The amounts in the last column

but one are those actually paid by Sir Wm. Russell out of tonnage .

“ Ami. 00'. Dccl. Accounts, 1699, 65. " Ibirl. 1812, 443 L.
*9 State Papers, Domcstvlc, Charles I, ccccxxxviii. 102.


486 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I July

and poundage, anticipated revenue, and other sources. For
instance, in 1625 he spent 170,000l., of which he received 119,000Z.
from the exchequer, 40,000l. from tenths, fifteenths, and subsidies,
and ‘from the French king's agent’ towards fitting out the
‘ Vanguard ’ 4,800l.49 The last column gives the sums paid out of
the ship-money receipts for the corresponding fleets ; no doubt
much of the balance Went to clear ofif old debts, to pay for ship-
building, as in the case of the ‘ Sovereign,’ and other purposes :—

; .
1 Estimates Dockyard expenditure, ordinary l
' 5°? 01"“ and extraordinary '
f nary and Actually Pam out
a —~ ,,,;=,=::;,=;..—-- —s ———e—~~———coraage °*P:;:d°“ orsmp
2 navy and I Dept Pm_ts_ treasurer m°"°5'
I \'l%t]:1ga1- Chatham -Woolwich ford mouth
I
1025 23,000 — — — —- __ 170,000 —
1020 28,700 —— —— — —— — 117,000 —
1027 5‘ 40,500 8,445 1,522 1,714 370 _ 03,000 —
1028 40,000 5,000 701 3,171 359 —— 110,000 .-
1020 47 000 — —— — —- __ 57 000 —
1030 342700 4,977 185 2,141 1,400 4,805 102:000 —
1031 34 200 — — — —— _ 40 000 -
1032 273900 0,700 97 1,025 1,591 4,455 211000 -
1033 28,600 7,453 100 1,233 1,034 4,145 09,000 -
.l , _ _ __ __ __
  M _ _ — _ @3003 80000
1030 15500 5,050 025 3,029 3,000 3,205 533000 130Z000
1037 14,200 -— — — — —— 12 500 122,000
1033 20,300 ._ ~ — — — 221000 109,000
1039 35 100 — ~ —— —. W 50,000 ; 47,500
1040 3S:80O -— ~ — — — 73,000 ; 44,500 |
 33,500 —- — —- —— ——— S8,U(,K6  -
4 0,700 —~ —— -— —— — 66,00 5 ~
13 May 1645 to -
31 Dec. 1040 } “ '" “ " " ‘ 3910"” 3 ‘
1047 _ —. — — —— —— 173,000 ' -
1 J. . 1648 0 . .. . .. 1
12‘3"my 16 4;’ } —— 22,000 5,414  2,247 5,159 — 350,000 3 —~

The disbursements during the civil war years by no means
represented the naval expenses, there being always hundreds of thou-
sands of pounds owing; the authorities, however, took care that the
executive branches should be comparatively punctually paid, owners
of hired ships and purveyors of stores being the principal sufi"erers
by delay. Vane acted under an ‘ ordinance of both houses, of
8 Aug. 1642, concerning subsidy of tonnage and poundage,’ and simply
continued the forms and system used by his predecessors.“

"’ Pennington and his men were paid double wages ‘ out of the French king’s
moneys ’ (Aud. Of. Decl. Accounts, 1698, 63), which throws their intense abhorrence
of their work into still stronger relief.

-"° For the distinction between ‘ ordinary ’ and ‘ extraordinary ’ charges see ENGLISH
Hrsronrcu. Rnvmw, vii. 492.

51 In this year the navy and ordnance offices were 251.0001. in arrears (State
Papers, lxxxvii. 35).

5" Few historical students admire Charles I, but even such a king as he is
entitled to the justice of posterity beyond that which he got from his contemporaries.
Professor Hosmer (Life of Sir I-I. Vane the Younger, p. 497) says that Vane ‘had
created the fleet out of nothing, had given it guns and men.’ He appears to think


1894 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I 487

Among the dockyards the most noticeable change is the steady
increase in the use made of Portsmouth, while Woolwich was almost
discarded, part of it being leased in 1633 to the East India Company

that a naval force, with its subsidiary manufactures and establishments, could be
created in a few years, but, as a matter of fact, the parliament commenced the struggle
infinitely better equipped at sea than on land, and it was so powerful afloat that
i did not find it necessary to begin building again till 1646, when the stress of the
conflict was over. If Mr. Hosmer is referring to a later period, the statement is still
less accurate, since the number of men-of-war had been increased and Vane had
ceased to have any special connexion, except in conjunction with others, with naval
affairs. Allowing for his narrow intelligence and vacillating temperament, Charles
showed more persistence and continuity of design in the conduct of the navy than in any
other of his regal duties ; for, although relatively weaker as regards other powers,
England, as far as ships and dockyards were concerned, was stronger absolutely in
1642 than in 1625. The use made of the ship money showed that under no circum-
stances could Charles have been a great naval organiser; but he has at least a right
to have it said that he improved the material of the navy so far as his limited views
and disastrous domestic policy permitted.

Returning to Vane, Mr. Hosrner says in one place (p. 148) that the post of
treasurer was worth 30,000l., and in another (p. 376) 20,0002. 9. year. What Mr.
Hosrner’s authority (G. Sikes, The Life and Death of Sir Henry Vane) really writes
is, ‘The bare poundage, which in time of peace came to about 3,000l., would have
amounted to about 20,0001. by the year during the war with Holland.’ The poundage
in peace years never approached 3,000l., and, as Vane ceased to be treasurer in 1650,
and, from the date of his resignation, a lower scale of payment was adopted, the
second part of the calculation is obviously nothing to the purpose. Whether the
reduction in the treasurer’s commission was due to Vane or whether he resigned on
account of it we have no evidence to show, nor do vague generalities help to clear
the doubt. As bearing testimony to Vane’s disinterestedness Mr. Hosmer quotes
Sikes to the effect that he returned half his receipts, from the date of his appoint-
ment as sole treasurer, at the time of the self-denying ordinance. Unfortunately the
accounts previous to 1645 are wanting and the question must remain open, but if the
probability may be judged by general tendency it must be said to be extremely un-
likely, since, not content with his pay, he gave himself a commission of thirty shillings
on every thousand pounds for portage, bags, wax, &c., an addition which neither his
predecessors nor successors received, and which, for the nineteen months ending .on
31 Dec. 1650, came to 1,0051. 163. 8d. Moreover he was treasurer from 8 Aug. 1642
till 31 Dec. 1650, and during that time received in poundage and salary for the five
and a half years for which the accounts remain the sum of 19,6201. 13. 1042. There
is no sign in the audit oflice papers that he returned one penny of his legal dues, and,
whoever else had to wait, he seems to have paid himself liberally and punctually.
Mr. Hosmer has only indirectly noticed that parliament, when Vane resigned, settled
a. retiring pension on him. Sikes says, ‘ some inconsiderable matter without his seek-
ing, was allotted to him by the parliament in lieu thereof ’ (i.e. of his place). The
‘ inconsiderable matter’ was landed estate producing 1,2001. a. year. Seeing that he
held his post for only seven and a half years, that during that time he must have
received at least 25,000l., and that all previous treasurers had been, on occasion, dis-
missed without any suggestion of compensation, his disinterestedness may be ques-
tioned. When parliament voted Ireton an estate of 2,0001. :1. year he refused it on
account of the poverty of the country. And Sikes’s version that it was ‘ without his seek-
ing ’ is not absolutely beyond doubt. On June 27, 1650,21 petition of Vane’s was referred
to a committee to discuss how the treasurership was to be managed from Dec. 31 follow-
ing, and ‘ also to consider what compensation is fit to be given to the petitioner out of
that office or otherwise in consideration of his right in the said office.’ It is no unjusti-
fiable assumption to infer from this the possibility that the petition at any rate
included a claim for compensation. Bikes, again, tells us that he caused his subor-
dinate Hutchinson to succeed him, but when, on 10 Oct. 1650, the motion was before


488 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I July

at 100l. a year.“ It had long been pointed out that it frequently
cost a fleet as much time and trouble to get round from the Thames
to Portsmouth as from that place to the Mediterranean, and under
Buckingham’s administration it came into favour as a rendezvous
for the ships prepared for service. It possessed a graying, but no
dry dock, and in 1627 the duke caused estimates to be prepared for
the construction of a double dock, but his death deferred the
question.“ In 1630 Pett, Sir Thos. Aylesbury, and others were
sent down to report on its capabilities, and they recommended that
the men-of—war should ride in F areham creek, at the head of the
harbour, about a mile and a half from Porehester and two miles
from the then dockyard, a proposal which was adopted. They did
not advise the making of a dry dock, thinking the rise and fall of
the tide too little, and ‘there is no use of any there; ’ 55 but
personal interests were also in the way, the comfort and pecuniary
advantages of the shipwrights being bound up with the Thames and
Medway yards. From this date, however, a few ships were always
stationed at Portsmouth, but it was not until January 1638 that a
master shipwright was ordered to reside there permanently ; before
that time the shipwrights had taken the duty in turns, and the
absence of a dry dock, although several times intended to have been
commenced, was still causing inconvenience and expense. Russell
complained that ‘his majesty cannot have a pennyworth of work
there done under twopence, in respect the king’s yard and the ships
be so far asunder for transporting materials.’ The dockyard con-
sisted chiefly of storehouses, and orders had been given that all
private houses near them were to be tiled instead of thatched,
they having been once already burnt down during the reign of
Elizabeth. It is difficult to say what extent of ground belonged to
the crown at this time. The official plan now existing gives the
size of the doekyard when first formed by Henry VIII at 8 acres
1 rood. The natural suspicion with which one regards an official
statement, whatever its date in the centuries, was here intensified by
the exactness of the measurement and the fact that the admiralty

the house that the ‘ question be now put ’ whether Hutchinson’s appointment should
be made, Vane was one of the tellers for the ‘ Noes ’ and was beaten by '27 to 18. This
was immediately followed by Hutchinson’s nomination without a division. The in-
cidents of Hutehinson’s official career imply a much stronger and more lasting influence
than that of Vane, but the only importance of the question is as affecting the trust-
worthiness of the latter’s seventeenth century biographer. Mr. Hosmer, like all other
writers on Vane, appears to quote Sikes with implicit faith, but the man evidently
wrote only loosely and generally, making up in enthusiasm what he lacked in exact-
ness ; c._r]. ‘ In the beginning of that expensive war he resigned the treasurership of the
navy.’ Hutchinson succeeded him from 1 Jan. 1650-1, and war with Holland did
not occur till June 1652. There is nothing to show that Vane was not an honest
administrator, but his party, fortunately, produced many others equally trustworthy.
5“ Add. MSS. 9302, f. 42. 5‘ Ibid. 9297, f. 75.
55 State Papers, Domestic, Charles I, clxxiii. 32.


1894. THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I 489

either do not know or will not say by what means it is obtained.
Those suspicions were confirmed by finding——so far is the official
date of 1540 from being correct——that storehouses and a. dry dock,
large enough to take the ‘ Regent,’ existed in 1507. In 1523
Henry VIII added other buildings and constructed a dock capable
of receiving the ‘ Henry Grace de Dieu.’ Another cause of hesita-
tion in the adoption of Portsmouth as a permanent naval station
was the diverse opinions expressed as to the existence of the Tcredo
navalis in the harbour. This maritime pest, probably brought
into northern waters from the tropics during Elizabeth’s reign,
played havoc with ships mostly unsheathed, and whose sheathing,
when it did exist, was ill adapted to resist its ravages. In 1630
the chief shipwrights reported that ‘ no worm destructive to ships
is bred in Portsmouth harbour;’ five years later some of the
same men turned round with, ‘We positively conclude that there
is a worm in that harbour.’ The decision was still postponed till,
in September 1645, a number of Shipwrights were sent down, and
it thenceforward rapidly grew in naval importance, although the
dry dock, so often ordered, was not commenced till 1656.

Chatham had for nearly a century been the first of English
dockyards, and in 1684 contained seventy-five acres, held on a lease
granted for 100 years, from 1618, by Robt. Barker, lord of the
manor of Chatham.“ In March 1627 Coke, at the request of the
king of Denmark, sent a Dane named Andersen there, with a letter
of recommendation to the ofiicials, desiring them to explain to him
their methods of work. The request was complimentary, but
Andersen could hardly have been very favourably impressed by all
he saw and heard. The dockyard service was as much disorganised
as the rest of the administration; the ‘Assurance’ had recently
been repaired only by the expedient of selling fifty-four guns to pay
the expenses,“ and 7,740l. was owing to the shipwrights and ship-
keepers there, nearly eighteen months’ wages being over-due.58
They had of course freely petitioned, but ‘ a letter to persuade the
workmen to go on cheerfully ’ had quieted them for the time. One
explanation of their patience may be found in the existence of a
rule under which persons in the naval departments could not he
proceeded against legally until permission was given by the
authorities. Just before Andersen’s visit work had been at a stand-
still for want of materials to the value of 400l., which the govern-
ment could not obtain on credit, and, in April, the workmen still
had fifteen months‘ pay due. Both the commissioners and chief
oflicers confessed their inability in face of these difficulties, since if
the men were discharged they came clamouring and threatening
daily for their wages, and if kept on there were not sufiicient stores

5‘ State Papers, Domestic, Charles I, cclxxix. 20.
5’ Ibid. ccxlv. 49, January 1627. 5* Ibid, 1, 45,


490 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I July

for them to work with.” Matters did not improve, and in 1629
Edisbury pointed out that, in addition to all this, great waste and
theft existed, many families livingin the dockyards, and cabins and
other parts of ships being daily ransacked, and the materials stolen
or used for fire wood, ‘ every one almost being director of his own
work for want of some able, understanding man to regulate the
inferiors, as it was While the commissioners had the government.’ 5°
This handsome testimonial to the merits of the commissioners,
lately relieved, may be considered impartial, for tl1e interests of
Edisbury, then paymaster, but shortly to be himself a principal
ofiicer, were bound up with those of the officers. Another writer
tells us that the master shipwrights rated their subordinates accord-
ing to favour, and that they themselves were sometimes absent for
one or two months at the time at their own private yards.“ In
thirteen years’ experience he had never known any inferior suffer
for delinquency, ‘ although he had been convicted of divers stealths.’
At the most they were suspended, and then restored, and the entries
in the State Papers bear out Holland’s assertions. He also tells
us that Fridays, being the Rochester market days, were kept as a
general holiday in the dockyard; the expenditure on ornamental
carving and painting had become four times as great as formerly,
because the amount was left to the master shipwrights who refused
to be outdone by each other ; if work was done by contract, a bill
was usually sent in for ‘overworkes ’ which exceeded the original
contract amount, and, as a result, the shipwrights’ houses were
‘fitter for knights than men of their quality.’ These houses had
back doors opening into the dockyard—for obvious purposes, the
writer hints.

The almost incredible financial straits of the treasury may be
measured by the fact that some storehouses in Chatham yard having
been damaged by a storm in January 1630 the money necessary
for the repairs—only 20l.—-had to be obtained by selling old
cordage.“ Large sums, however, were at various times expended
on maintaining, improving, and enlarging the yards. In 1629 there
was spent 2,197l. on Portsmouth, Deptford, and Chatham,“ and in
1634 there was a further estimate of 2,445l. for the same places
for additions subsequently carried out, one of them being a brick
wall round the new dock at Chatham. The barricade across the
Medway at Upnor, although it had been allowed to become almost
useless, was still nominally maintained. It must have been an
expensive defence, since the estimate in 1635 for another, made
like the earlier ones of masts, came to 2,305l., besides involving a

5’ 1'b'icZ. cxxxviii. 66. 5° Ibid. cxliii. 37.

5' J. Holland, Discourse of the Navy. ‘"1 Add. MSS. 9301, I. 135.

9’ Egerton MSS. 2541, f. 123. Deptford was chiefly used for building, and Chatham
for repairing.


1894 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I 491

yearly outlay of 624l. to keep it in good order. An iron chain
weighing twenty-eight tons, and held by eleven anchors, was re-
commended in its place, as costing only 1,5001.“ The long parlia-
ment further enlarged the dockyards, and cared for the shipwrights
spiritually as well as physically. In 1644 they ordered that a
lecture should be delivered at Deptford every Wednesday morning
on ‘saving truths,’ and the time thus occupied was not to be
deducted from the men’s pay.

In 1637 the stores at Woolwich, Deptford, Chatham, Portsmouth,
and on board the ships in harbour comprised 1,446 tons of cables
and cordage, 221 tons of anchors, 79 lasts of tar, sails made up
to the value of 4,500l., canvas not made up to 5,000l., 167 com-
passes, 2,236 hammocks, 520 masts, 1,200 spars, 3,694 loads of
timber, and 332,000 tree-nails.“ This was in the full flush of the
ship-money receipts, yet both cordage and timber are far below the
minimum considered necessary by either principal officers or com~
missioners. As in later years ships lying up were dismantled, and
in 1631 the lords of the admiralty ordered that, instead of sails and
rigging being kept in a confused heap at Chatham, a room, with the
ship’s name painted on the door, should be provided for the belong-
ings of each vessel. In 1637 Hildebrand Pruson died, he and his
father having been sail-makers to the navy for sixty years. Edisbury
then tried, but in vain, to persuade the lords commissioners to have
the sails made at Chatham and save a fifth of their cost. So far
from undertaking fresh responsibilities they desired to transfer
some of those they already bore. They were at the time nego-
tiating with Russell about an offer he had made to provide the
squadron for the narrow seas by contract at 8l. a man per month,
that rate to cover all expenses except those of repairs to the
vessels.“ They were to be nine months out of the twelve at sea,
and doubtless Russell saw his way to a profit, but the proposal was
not carried into effect. There were few naval improvements intro-
duced under Charles. Deck ring-bolts for the lashing of ordnance
were first supplied in 1628 ; 57 staysails came into use early in the
reign, one of the whelps having two in 1633, and in 1639 there were
forty in store at Portsmouth, but they seem to have been only fitted
to the smaller classes of ships.

However badly ofi fleets might be in material necessaries, they
should have been well furnished with the aesthetic refreshment of
flags, judging from the number in store. In 1626 1,280l. was spent
in providing them, and in January 1627 there were 415 of various
kinds to be had at Chatham alone, and however low in the future
might fall the reserves of powder every care was taken that the men
should not lack this solace. A proclamation was issued on 5 May

*” State Papers, Dmnestic, Charles I, cccii. 27. ‘*5 Ibid. cccliii. f. 67.
5“ llaid. cccxlvii. 85. ‘*7 Ibid. xlviii. January 20.


492 THE ROYAL NAVY UNDER CHARLES I July

1634 commanding that English and Scotch merchantmen were no
longer to fly the union flag of St. Greorge’s and St. Andrevv’s crosses,
but to each keep to its own national cross, men-of-war alone flying
the union. The parliamentary committees were just as fond of
flags, for in the sixteen months ending with November 1646 they
spent 1,178l. on these articles, while sailors’ hammocks for the same
period cost only 777l. For 1647 their bill for flags was 567l. and
for hammocks 307l. In Feburary 1649 the parliament ordered
that men-of-war should carry a St. George’s cross on a white
ground, similar to the present admiral’s flag, which, although the
St. George’s cross had been in general use for many centuries, may
be considered to be the beginning of the present naval ensign in
its special form.”

The following prices were paid for naval necessaries at various
dates :—

Cordage (1625), 262. 133. 4d. a ton. Round shot (1627), Ill. a ton.
,, (1629), 32l. a. ton. Musket shot (1627), 14l. a ton.
,, (1631), 30l. ,, i Hammocks (1625), 23. each.
(1640), ,, ,, ,, (1642), 23. 7d. each.
Tar (1631), Bl. 103. a last. 5 Anchors (1626), ll. 103. to 2l. per cwt.
,, (1635), 101. a last. ,, (1631), 21. per cwt.
Rosin (1631), 13l. a ton. ,, (1640), ll. 133. per cwt.
Train oil (1631), 201. a ton. ‘ Beer (1635), 283. to 343. the tun.
Crooked and straight timber (1681), ll. ,, (1646), 383. the tun.
103. a load. . Beef in 4-lb. pieces (1635), 9d. and 10d.
Knee timber (1631), 2l. 103. a load. the piece.
Elm ,, ,, ll. 63. ,, Pork in 2-lb. pieces (1635), 5d. and 6d.
,, ,, (1640), ll. 128. ,, the piece.
,, plank (1626), ll. 183. ,, Codfish (1635), 4l. 33. the cwt.
Oak ,, ,, 21. 23. as Biscuit ,, 133. and 143. the cwt.
n n (1540); 35- 113- u Seamen’s clothes (1628) :69-
French canvas (1635), 222. a bale. Shirts, 33. 4d. each ; caps, 23. each;
1PSW1C11 99 (1626), ll. 63. a. bolt. cotton breeches, 23. 8d. each;
,9 H (1635). 13- 108- ., stockings, 13. 4d. a pair; canvas
Powder (1627), 5l. 2:. barrel. suits, 63. each; cotton Waistcoats,
,, (1646), 4?. 103. a barrel. 33, each,

M. OPPENHEIM.

'59 It is possible, too, that the present navy button and cap badge may be traced
back to the parliamentary régivnc. Northumberland’s seal consisted merely of his arms
with a background of sea and ships, and although earlier lord admirals—Southampton,
Lincoln, and Buckingham—-had used the anchor, none of them had combined the
coronet, anchor, and wreath. Warwick’s was one which differs only in the relative
proportions of the details from the button and badge now in use, except that the anchor
is now fouled. If it is only a coincidence it is a curious one. Popham, Blake, and
Deane employed a modification of Warwick’s seal, omitting the crown, and then the
navy oflice started one of its own, consisting of three anchors, a, large centre one with
9. smaller on each side, and ‘ The Seale of the Navye Ofiice ’ round the edge, so that
the device selected by Warwick seems, in one form or another, to have been soon widely
used and continued.

'” These prices were paid by the government; the cost to the sailor depended on
the honesty of many intermediaries.


Summary Guide: SLINGSBY W L Page 1 of 2

King’s College London
Liddell Hart Centre for Military
Archives

Summary Guide

Note: The item numbers represent a subset from ISAD(G) rules (General International
Standard Archival Description) promulgated by the International Council on Archives
to standardise archival description world -wide. Only item numbers relevant to our
specific archive are included here.

3.1 IDENTITY STATEMENT

3.1.1 Reference code: GB99 KCLMA Slingsby W L

3.1.2 Title: SLINGSBY, Lt Col William Laurence (1919-1994)
3.1.3 Dates of creation of material: 1915, 1939-1962, 1989
3.1.4 Level of description: collection level

3.1.5 Extent: 2 files

3.2 CONTEXT

3.2.2 Biographical history: Born in 1919; educated at Gordonstoun School and
Royal Military College, Sandhurst; commissioned into the King’s Own
Yorkshire Light Infantry, 1939; served in World War Two in Burma, 1939- 1941,
UK, 1941-1943, North Africa, 1943, and Italy, 1943-1944; commanded D
Company, 2 Bn, Sherwood Foresters, Italy, 1944; Capt, 1946; graduated from
Staff College, Camberley, 1948; Maj, 1952; Deputy Assistant Adjutant General,
HQ 1 Commonwealth Div and Commonwealth Contingent, Korea, 1955-1956;
graduated from French Army Staff College, Paris, 1961; Military Attache,
Algiers, 1963-1965; Staff Officer Grade 1, War Office; retired, 1968; worked as
stockbroker, [1968—1971]; investment manager for an international banking
group, [1972]-1986; died in 1994.

3.2.5 Provenance/source of acquisition: Placed in the Centre by the family in
1996.

3.3 CONTENT AND STRUCTURE

3.3.1 Scope and content: Papers relating to his military career, 1939-1962,
principally his service in Burma, 1939-1941, UK, 1941-1943, North Africa,
1943, Italy, 1943-1944, and Korea, 1955-1956, notably including battalion
orders for 2 Bn, Sherwood Foresters, 1945; German propaganda leaflets for US
and Allied troops, [l944]. 'An ancient Yorkshire family‘, a history of the

http://www.kc1.ac.uk/lhcma/summary/S180-001 .htm 6/22/00


Summary Guide: SLINGSBY W L Page 2 of 2

Slingsby family, written by Slingsby in 1989.
3.3.4 Arrangement: 2 files

3.4 CONDITIONS OF ACCESS AND USE
3.4.2 Access: Open, subject to signature of reader’s undertaking form.
3.4.3 Copyright: Copies, subject to the condition of the original, may be
supplied for research use only. Requests to publish original material should be
submitted to the Trustees of the Liddell Hart Centre for Military Archives,
attention of the College Archivist.
3.4.4 Language: English, Italian, French
3.4.6 Finding aids: Summary guide entry on—line and due to be published in
hard copy.

3.5 ALLIED MATERIALS
3.5.3 Related units of description: The Centre also holds the papers of
Slingsby’s father, William Ecroyd Slingsby (Ref: GB99 KCLMA Slingsby W E)
and those of his uncle, Capt Henry Laurence Slingsby (Ref: GB99 KCLMA
Slingsby H L).

3.6 NOTE AREA
3.6.1 Date of compilation: Nov 1996
3.6.2 Decorations: MBE

o Return to Summary Guide introductory page
a Return to List of Collections
- 

Last modified: Wednesday, 22-Jan-1997 12:31:11 GMT

http ://WWW .kcl.ac.uk/lhcma/summary/sl80—0O1 .htm 6/22/00


Diana [de Mol] to Ormond

Written from: Brussels? or Ghent?

Date: [March?] 1660

Shelfmark: MS. Carte 30, fo1(s). 586

Document type: Holograph. Endorsed: "My Lady Diana".

Personal affairs. Prays that the Marquess will grant the writer an assignation [for payment of
money due,] for Sir Arthur Slingsby, who she perceives, "resolves to quit  Brussels, and to
pursue his fortune in England".

,5”


FILL Uwr

S .
L  ‘4 W QM/nLLQ Qwea "w.«LLN Fwd‘? Ac, ’

7k1;?;..L §,<_;./G’. 9;.r(4¢,V3 514315 /4%, M1, 

pug‘  ~(_(L3~m«.3,5  “  Fr:/vs/' 134,37.
9 M“ A % A
W9 WW“ “*3” “’“”‘*’Wv/l~ mwuégk
“”C““”‘“"“~s,=—*w sswvum ~9}4umi
gw1+>~r7X/{ZoL,v4') wt‘/U? Q4 Adjmf VJ“ ‘ .

_ ( ____‘  
N°(‘3i”€‘“*‘*“°* M ~34 mm».  3  
Rho? KL Am pkg W‘

SCWY5 {"“‘LL‘”°’*°“-v~<~7urNL._r;%v»»,,,4, Jm NJ

gt‘ /Jwfiu “""'~*° fi~£1)'b°v\6<A1»‘/K.
(o1=#~MLw.m.4.Msr»ar ' fl"“"’V“”'U W‘ 5rw~~mu.

F.5Ro«utU~&I— WE /H3] ‘jg: z,;.«££g¢€’[ w/_ My-0,. u»j3%rw.3,.,4
TN_$Lm~v Na, ‘Mk  A M  by /yuvj
l«0~«l‘v~7:.a,4_{;(‘}~0~re'-7 ¢,JL3vFL(,—‘,°\)h\L. 

1/\u'€«‘h/t;"Z‘A*‘:T“£«r‘”‘““~siVIe,VL>r1A,/( »;\.)\»;«J~‘}\~.;\4/f7kgyu0A4,»:,Jz,J+4,4»..,\/,?s

"W-‘ ‘~"‘4PU{ovuAa,qLz,L,?a./ra«~ “’u*"t)UNL.,41“;nW¢wL
£mwY,~»M‘;*7f*1L>7v+ku¥mNL£;u_fln7N_uNl5MA,LL,J_ K/L~_,u__T¢~
1'"k1~U1 “-tv”v13hxt:.,toLaW~Q%kV/.,M-N

  
.;A,5)L\mLLUrAf/U“M5~§a»y3;w«<A P'Vuv\7Q—L)\6/("‘-«A»vQA
.3{NkC:£._1Ug34LJ.5w..¢UI4(,fLa.L..w<M»u<
3.  ‘wkmm I , _
I8!V4fijL\:\“o|/‘AVJBJ lNM""   /o§)VMml/JN\}~/‘Md%o7vA/ A W
Mon.
 A “"h°J‘veseuJf'~m,u Vb,
. 3?“

3
T

P, ‘F33


Aflwx “L
‘7":’:'-fig.’//~ _ ' \    «’A"”\/ML (M; wCJ1V_ 4
Am“ WM)-A MW WW I I h, V 44,

. _ Q W A’ La) CLamJ»<r it
mmxwi Wma ;m»M{»r W J9’f‘WL'(M'”331,W _
éhwdumiéh 
kummyw *$qf{'s:7Cu”Q”,.:Z?,5$.  [(A14,4.~9,&¢zx:  Jaw»

9... .xJn.AE—&rw~» '“"’-V“ M” ‘“*”*“’?°11‘“”°‘* 3“ 1”” Mfh” Mr]
3%, 4° he C’  8W h  J’\~.w7</' "Kx.a,w¢:3 ECSFD ILL}/L(r.3‘fJ

. _ ’ ‘ ‘L M/—%t,\
HWMr41gk5“;wmuJmwwH{;/L»um\L\MwLJ[l(u:wJ{.';WA~WL\dMwm rbvgi
;HoM2' 4* Foam’ L
M, N\M;, M .._57«3b\6; 

$1 Ouxmsmiflg
M>.U~4*xm%.'W. »
I


SLINGSBY GENEALOGY

—Francis SLINGSBY (»I«4.8.1600,Slingsby chapel of Knaresborough church); Sir

=Elizabeth INGILBY; daughter of Sir William INGILBY of Ripley

=Mary PERCY (*1532;T1598), daughter of Sir Thomas PERCY (*1537, by execution at Tyburn) and Alianora HARBOTLE (daughter and co—heir of Sir Guichard HARBOTLE)
I—Thomas (T1579, aged 28, by drowning in the River Nidd while trying to save his servant)

I-3 sons (died young, or without issue)

I-3 daughters (died young, or without issue)

I—Henry (*1559;T12.1634);knighted in 1602 by Queen Elizabeth I; High Sheriff of Yorkshire 1611-12;} built Redhouse, Yorkshire; “pillar of the Church of England”

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

SLINGSBY GENEALOGY ~ Sheet I

=Frances VAVASOUR (T1611); daughter of William VAVASOUR of Weston, Yorkshire, and Elizabeth BECKWITH; papist

I—William (T1617, killed in Florence); member of Barnard’s Inn; admitted to Gray’s Inn 8.2.158‘/2; went to Italy in 1613

I—Elizabeth

I =28.1.1594/5 at Knaresborough, sir Thomas METCALFE(*4.12.1579;T7.1655;~I«Aysgarth) of Nappa, Yorkshire; J.P.; “The Black Knight”;2
|—Mary

I =Sir Walter BETHELL; Surveyor of the East Riding to King James I; lived at Alne; a Puritan

I—Katherine (%3l.7.1584,Knaresborough); [4th daughter]

I =1603,by licence, John FENWICK (T1658,aged 79) of Wallington Hall, Northumberland;3 knighted at Royston 18.1.1604/5;“

I —John (aged 3 in 1615;T2.7.1644 in battle at Marston Moor); Member of Parliament for Morpeth 1640 until disabled 1.1643/4; colonel of Dragoons
|—Alice (T1627;ISandal church)

I =1602 in Moor Monkton church, Thomas WATERTON of Walton Hall, Yorkshire

I—Anne

I—Henry “Harry” (*l4.l.160I/2;T8.6.1658, beheaded on Tower Hill;~IS1ingsby chapel); created baronet of Nova Scotia l638;5

I =7.7.163l in Kensington church, Barbara BELASYSE (T1641,London); daughter of Thomas BELASYSE, 1st Viscount FAUCONBERG of Newstead Abbey
I I—Barbara (*1633)

I I =Sir John TALBOT of Lacock, Wiltshire

I I—Thomas (*~l635;T~1685); 2nd baronet; High Sheriff of Yorkshire; Governor of Scarborough Castle 1670; M.P. for Knaresborough 1678

I I :1 65 8 Dorothy CRADOCK (»ISlingsby chapel); daughter and co—heir of George CRADOCK of Caverswall Castle, Staffordshire6

I I —Henry (*~166l ); 3rd baronet

I I —Thomas; 4th baronet

I I —three daughters

I |—Henry (T1692); Gentleman of the Privy Chamber to Charles II; one of the first members of the Council of the Royal Society

I—Thomas (T1670); colonel in the King’s Army during the Rebellion; gallant leader; present at the siege of York 1646

I-2 sons (died young)

I—Frances

I =Bryan STAPYLTON (T1658, Wighill, Yorkshire;IWighiIl);7 Receiver—General of the North for King Charles 1. Of Myton-on—Swale, Yorkshire.
I-2 daughters (died young)

I—Eleanor

: in Moor Monkton church, Sir Arthur INGRAM of Temple Newsam, Yorkshire; one of the richest men in England

L.L.B0yle 07/02/01


I —Elizabeth
I I I =Lord RICH, son of Lord HOLLAND; this connection facilitated the wedding of Sir Harry in Kensington church
|—Charles; rector of Rothbury, Northumberland
I =Elizabeth ELLIS
I I—Thomas
I I—Margaret
I I—Mary
I—Guilford (T1631, aged 66, drowned at sea); Sir; matriculated Queen’s College, Oxford 1581; Comptroller of the Navy8
=Margaret WALTERS; daughter of William WALTERS, Alderman of York; referred to as “old Lady Slingsby” in Samuel Pepys’ Diary for 29.1. 1660/]
I—Gui1ford (*1610;T16. 1.1643,m battle at Gisborough9;I26.1.l643, aged 32 in York Mrns:er);‘°~“
|—Robert (*161 1;T26. 10.1661 ;); created baronet of Newcells, Hertfordshire 16.3.1660/.; Comptroller of the Navy; Captain of the 8th Lion’s Whelp
|—Percy
|—Walter (*1618); colonel with Prince Rupert; commanded the Great Fort; fought to the bitter end in the siege of Pendennis Castle; escaped to France;12
|—George
|—Francis
I—Arthur (*~1623 (was 4 in 1627);T12.2.1665/6, aged 41, Bifrons);'3 knighted at Brussels 24.6.1657; created 1st baronet of Bifrons 19.10.1657‘‘;'5
I = a Flemish lady
I I—Charles (was under 21 in 1664); 2nd baronet of Bifronsm; sold Bifrons 1667; was living abroad in 1669
I I =I7 1681 Mary (~I»l.3.1693/418); Mrs ALDRIDGE then from 1660-1680 as Mrs LEE then from 1681-1685 as Lady SLINGSBY; well-known actress
I I-Peter; was living abroad in 1669
I I—Anne
I I—Mary (%26.4. l666,Patrixbourne)
I-4 daughters and 1 more son
—William (*l562;~I8.1624;Slingsby chapel of Knaresborough church”); Sir;2°

=E1izabeth BOARD, daughter of Sir Stephen BOARD of Board Hill, Sussex; lived at Kippax

I-William (Tyoung)

I—Henry “Samborne” (T 1690); Master of the Mint in the reign of Charles II 167121; one of the original members of the Royal Society

I = Ann CAGE, a daughter of Sir T CAGE, knight

I I—Henry (11695)

I |—Anthony (T1697)

I |—Elizabeth
I :Adlard CAGE of Thavies Inn, Holborn
|—Elizabeth
I = John VILLIERS, elder brother of the Duke of BUCKINGHAM
—Francis (*1569); Sir; of Kilmore, Co. Cork; Constable of Haulbowline Castle and of the Royal Council of the Province of Munster;22

=E1izabeth CUFF
|—Francis
I—Henry
I—Mary

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

SLINGSBY GENEALOGY -- Sheet 2 L. L. Boyle 07/02/01


l—Katherine

|—Anne

|—Elizabeth

I = W. DODWELL; Captain
1 —Henry

|—Jane

1 Vice—President of the Council of the North 1629.

2 Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

3 Son and heir of Sir William FENWICK of Wallington Hall and Grace FOSTER; Master of the Royal Studs to King Charles I.

4 Member of Parliament for Northumberland 1624-5,1625,1625—6,1628—9; for Cockermouth 4-5 . 1640 and 1.l642—l.l643/4 when disabled as a Royalist; restored 6.1646—l2.l648
5 Matriculated as a Fellow Commoner of Queen’s College, Cambridge 1.1618/9; resided there until 1621 but did not graduate; Member of Parliament for Knaresborough 1640 (twice).
6 Granddaughter of Dr. John SAUNDERS who was Provost of Oriel College, Oxford from 1644-1653.

7 Son of Sir Robert STAPLETON (*1538) and Olive SHERRINGTON.

8 [PRO says he is 8th son of Thomas Slingsby of Scriven].

9 Killed in a skirmish with his cousin, Sir Hugh Cholmeley; he lost both legs and died. His eulogy was preached by Archbishop Bramhall (Bishop of Derry).

10 M.A. (St. Andrew’s) 1628; incorporated into Oxford University 24.1 1.1628; Member of Parliament for Carysfoot, Ireland 1634.

11 Secretary to the Earl of Strafford who made him Lieutenant of Ordnance and Vice-Admiral of Munster.

12 Returned from France to organise a resistance movement in Cornwall; captured and imprisoned in the Tower of London; Deputy Governor of Carisbrooke Castle.

13 Friend and tennis partner of King Charles II. Mentioned in Pepys’ Diary. Described by John Evelyn as a “meer shark” for his running of a lottery in the Banqueting Hall,
Whitehall by permission of the King on 20.7.1664.

14 By letters patent at Bruges.

15 Comptroller of the Navy; colonel of Horse; Secretary to the Earl of Bristol.

16 The baronetcy of Bifrons became extinct on Charles’ death.

17 The Public Record Office merely suggest that this lady was the wife of Sir Charles.

18 At St. Pancras’ old churchyard from St. James’ church.

19 A beautiful monument to him may be found in this chapel.

20 Imprisoned by Spaniards in Como in 1594; served with his brother Guilford in the successful expedition against Cadiz in 1596 as Commissary of the Fleet.

21 Author of the motto Decus et tutamen found on modern English pound coins.

22 Came to England in 1648 after having lost his Connaught estate in the Rebellion. He was with his brother William on his trip to Spain.

SLINGSBY GENEAL()(7Y —- Sheet 3 L,L,B()y]e O7/()2/O1


SLINGSBY GENEALOGY

—Francis SLINGSBY (~I«4.8.1600,Slingsby chapel of Knaresborough church); Sir

:Elizabeth INGILBY; daughter of Sir William INGILBY of Ripley

=Mary PERCY (*1532;T1598), daughter of Sir Thomas PERCY (*l537, by execution at Tyburn) and Alianora HARBOTLE (daughter and co-heir of Sir Guichard HARBOTLE)
I—Thomas (T1579, aged 28, by drowning in the River Nidd while trying to save his servant)

I~3 sons (died young, or without issue)

I-3 daughters (died young, or without issue)

I—Henry (*1559;T12.l634);knighted in 1602 by Queen Elizabeth I; High Sheriff of Yorkshire 1611-12;] built Redhouse, Yorkshire; “pillar of the Church of England”

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

SLINGSBY GENEALOGY —- Sheet 1

=Frances VAVASOUR (T1611); daughter of William VAVASOUR of Weston, Yorkshire, and Elizabeth BECKWITH; papist

I—William (T1617, killed in Florence); member of Barnard’s Inn; admitted to Gray’s Inn 8.2.1581/2; went to Italy in 1613

I—Elizabeth

I =28.1.l594/5 at Knaresborough, Sir Thomas METCALFE (*4.12.1579;T7.1655;IAysgarth) of Nappa, Yorkshire; J.P.; “The Black Knight”;2

I—Mary

I =Sir Walter BETHELL; Surveyor of the East Riding to King James I; lived at Alne; a Puritan

I—Katherine (%31.7.1584,Knaresborough); [4th daughter]

I =1603,by licence, John FENWICK (T1658,aged 79) of Wallington Hall, Northumber1and;3 knighted at Royston 18.1.1604/5;4

I ——John (aged 3 in 1615;T2.7.l644 in battle at Marston Moor); Member of Parliament for Morpeth 1640 until disabled 1.1643/4; colonel of Dragoons
|—Alice (T1627;ISandal church)

I =1602 in Moor Monkton church, Thomas WATERTON of Walton Hall, Yorkshire
|—Anne
|—Henry “Harry” (*14.1.l60I/2;T8.6. 1658, beheaded on Tower Hill;~I»Slingsby chapel); created baronet of Nova Scotia 1638;5

I =7.7. 1631 in Kensington church, Barbara BELASYSE (T1641 ,London); daughter of Thomas BELASYSE, 1st Viscount FAUCONBERG of Newstead Abbey
I I—Barbara (*l633)

I I =Sir John TALBOT of Lacock, Wiltshire

I I—Thomas (*~1635;T~1685); 2nd baronet; High Sheriff of Yorkshire; Governor of Scarborough Castle 1670; M.P. for Knaresborough 1678

I I :l658 Dorothy CRADOCK (ISlingsby chapel); daughter and co-heir of George CRADOCK of Caverswall Castle, Staffordshirefi

I I —Henry (*~1661); 3rd baronet

I I ~—Thomas; 4th baronet

I I —three daughters

I |—Henry (T1692); Gentleman of the Privy Chamber to Charles 11; one of the first members of the Council of the Royal Society

I—Thomas (T1670); colonel in the Kings Army during the Rebellion; gallant leader; present at the siege of York 1646

|—2 sons (died young)

I—Frances

I =Bryan STAPYLTON (T1658, Wighill, Yorkshire;~IWighill);7 Receiver-General of the North for King Charles I. Of Myton—on—Swale, Yorkshire.

I-2 daughters (died young)

I—Eleanor

= in Moor Monkton church, Sir Arthur INGRAM of Temple Newsam, Yorkshire; one of the richest men in England

L. L. Boyle 07/02/01


—Elizabeth
I I =Lord RICH, son of Lord HOLLAND; this connection facilitated the wedding of Sir Harry in Kensington church
Charles; rector of Rothbury, Northumberland
=Elizabeth ELLIS
I~Thomas
I—Margaret
I—Mary
Guilford (T1631, aged 66, drowned at sea); Sir; matriculated Queen’s College, Oxford 1581; Comptroller of the Navy8
=Margaret WALTERS; daughter of William WALTERS, Alderman of York; referred to as “old Lady Slingsby” in Samuel Pepys’ Diary for 29.1. 1660/1
I—Guilford (*1610;T16.1.1643,in battle at G1sbereugh°;i26.1.1643, aged 32 in York M1nster);‘°~“
I—Robert (*1611;T26.10.1661;); created baronet of Newcells, Hertfordshire 16.3.1660/1; Comptroller of the Navy; Captain of the 8th Lion’s Whelp
|—Percy
I—Wa1ter (*1618); colonel with Prince Rupert; commanded the Great Fort; fought to the bitter end in the siege of Pendennis Castle; escaped to France;12
I—George
I—Francis
I—Arthur (*~1623 (was 4 in 1627);T12.2.1665/6, aged 41, Bifrons);13 knighted at Brussels 24.6.1657; created 1st baronet of Bifrons 19.1o.1657”;‘5
I = a Flemish lady
I I—Charles (was under 21 in 1664); 2nd baronet of Bifronsm; sold Bifrons 1667; was living abroad in 1669
I I =17 1681 Mary (~I«1.3.1693/418); Mrs ALDRIDGE then from 1660-1680 as Mrs LEE then from 1681-1685 as Lady SLJNGSBY; well-known actress
I
I
I

l—Peter; was living abroad in 1669
I—Anne
I—Mary (%26.4.1666,Patrixbourne)
|—4 daughters and 1 more son
~William (*1562;~I«8.1624;Slingsby chapel of Knaresborough church”); Sir;2°
=Elizabeth BOARD, daughter of Sir Stephen BOARD of Board Hill, Sussex; lived at Kippax
I—Wil1iam (Tyoung)
|—Henry “Samborne” (T1690); Master of the Mint in the reign of Charles II 16712]; one of the original members of the Royal Society
I = Ann CAGE, a daughter of Sir _ CAGE, knight
I I—Henry (T1695)
I I—Anthony (T1697)
I I—Elizabeth
I =Adlard CAGE of Thavies Inn, Holborn
I—E1izabeth
I = John VILLIERS, elder brother of the Duke of BUCKINGHAM
—Francis (*1569); Sir; of Kilmore, Co. Cork; Constable of Haulbowline Castle and of the Royal Council of the Province of Munster;22
=E1izabeth CUFF
I—Francis
IeHenry
|—Mary

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

SLINGSBY GENEALOGY —— Sheet 2 L. L. Boyle O7/02/()1


|—Katherine

|——Anne

|—El izabeth

I = W. DODWELL; Captain
I —Henry

|—Jane

‘ Vice-President of the Council of the North 1629.

2 Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

3 Son and heir of Sir William FENWICK of Wallington Hall and Grace FOSTER; Master of the Royal Studs to King Charles I.

4 Member of Parliament for Northumberland 1624—5,l625,l625-6,1628-9; for Cockermouth 4-5 .1640 and l.1642—l.l643/4 when disabled as a Royalist; restored 6.1646—l2.1648
5 Matriculated as a Fellow Commoner of Queen’s College, Cambridge 1.1618/9; resided there until 1621 but did not graduate; Member of Parliament for Knaresborough 1640 (twice).
6 Granddaughter of Dr. John SAUNDERS who was Provost of Oriel College, Oxford from l644—l653.

7 Son of Sir Robert STAPLETON (*1538) and Olive SHERRINGTON.

8 [PRO says he is 8th son of Thomas Slingsby of Scriven].

9 Killed in a skirmish with his cousin, Sir Hugh Cholmeley; he lost both legs and died. His eulogy was preached by Archbishop Bramhall (Bishop of Derry).

10 M.A. (St. Andrew’s) 1628; incorporated into Oxford University 24.1 1.1628; Member of Parliament for Carysfoot, Ireland 1634.

11 Secretary to the Earl of Strafford who made him Lieutenant of Ordnance and Vice-Admiral of Munster.

12 Returned from France to organise a resistance movement in Cornwall; captured and imprisoned in the Tower of London; Deputy Governor of Carisbrooke Castle.

13 Friend and tennis partner of King Charles II. Mentioned in Pepys’ Diary. Described by John Evelyn as a “meer shark” for his running of a lottery in the Banqueting Hall,
Whitehall by permission of the King on 20.7.1664.

'4 By letters patent at Bruges.

15 Comptroller of the Navy; colonel of Horse; Secretary to the Earl of Bristol.

'6 The baronetcy of Bifrons became extinct on Charles’ death.

17 The Public Record Office merely suggest that this lady was the wife of Sir Charles.

‘8 At St. Pancras’ old churchyard from St. James’ church.

'9 A beautiful monument to him may be found in this chapel.

20 Imprisoned by Spaniards in Como in 1594; served with his brother Guilford in the successful expedition against Cadiz in 1596 as Commissary of the Fleet.

21 Author of the motto Decus et tutamen found on modern English pound coins.

22 Came to England in 1648 after having lost his Connaught estate in the Rebellion. He was with his brother William on his trip to Spain.

SLINGSB Y GENEALOGY —— Sheet 3 L. L. Boyle 07/02/0 1


—Francis

i

SLINGSBY FAMILY GENEALOGY

SLINGSBY (‘I l600;l«4.8. l600,Slingsby chapel of Knaresborough church); Sir

=Elizabeth INGILBY
=Mary PERCY (* I 532;+ I 598)

I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

—Thomas (*l581, by drowning)

-3 sons (died young, or without issue)

-3 daughters (died young, or without issue)

—Henry (ll2.l634); Sir I ' » . 1: «‘ I
=Franc.es VAVASOUR (T I61 1); daughter of William VAVASOUR and Elizabeth BECKWITH ‘ I  ‘,
|—William (H617, killed in Florence) .1 kc M 5;  P. ’ t I,» II ‘ . , , ,_ l ,
|—Henry (*l4.l.l60'/2;l8.6.l658, beheaded in—t-he Tower of—{:o‘ndon); baronet . . .  I I“ ~   
= Barbara BELASYSE (H641) Jr  I
I—Thomas (*~l635); Sir ~ A I-" . — 1 I 9
=JDorothy CRADOCK of Caverswall Castle, Staffordshire ,1’?
—Henry (*~l66l)

d,‘«::‘‘,

4;:

arbara

I
I
I
I
I
I
I =Sir John TALBOT of Lacock, Wiltshire

I

I
|—Henry
|—B

I

|—Thomas
I-2 sons (died young)
I—Elizabeth
I =28.l .1594/5 at Knaresborough, Sir Thomas Mercmla (*4. 12.1 579;'I‘7.1655;iAysgarth) ofNappa, Yorkshire; 11>.)
|—Mary I I I _
| =SirWalterBETHELL ‘IQ. - 1”w.'-- '1  ~ 7‘ -' . A A «,~-‘J ..l  ,,
|—Katherine I » ‘
I =Sir .lohn  FENWICK of Wallington, Northumberland EV  X, 
|—Alice'"“-"_‘ V I’ 2. I - ,  -‘ ~ 2‘ ‘  "*I‘7hI;1«; ‘I711 .- I " -' “ I“ I
I  =Thomas WATERTON of Walton Hall, Yorkshire
|—Anne
|—Frances ». I - —'t
I =Bryan STAPYLTON (T1658, Wighill, Yorkshire;J»Wighill);' Receiver-General of the North for King Charles I. Of Myton, Yorkshire.
I—2 daughters (died young)
I—Eleanor R W A _

=Sir Arthur INGRAM ofTemple Newsome, Yorkshire 1 , I .  :  . : '41 ~

~Charles; rector of Rothbury, Northumberland

=Elizabeth ELLIS
|—Thomas
|—Margaret

rA:«~k“‘l‘.‘

, ,-


W

rm, 9' iwl" ‘ " .
I  v x... I ;  ' .. ‘:7 EA ' ":'*:‘."  ,J..A2 ‘-Ir  é I’? €b"""4“‘v‘\ ‘ Air 2 (3
I . ‘b1 3, \ {Mk/\ \»v  \ 2; ,. . J60. _
_ ' ' . ' 0' , ”\,\,. \;\..~,_, §  " ‘ 5“ ‘I--~'~v4'  5 *5 g
| Wnlham, Snr  M _ , 3 1 , cu _ ‘, .l_4_- \ 0“.
I =Elizabefih BOARD “’5“&Jr1t III v‘ , “ ""‘ ‘C "" In V'(/A f~-— *’ " f I V
| I—Willia$1 (died young
| I—Hem'yk'I‘l690); Master of the Mint ‘ pet il I11.   ‘M’ N2.-'  3:4.‘ .3 *1: . E39 1 §~':.r_.- -(_ 5.‘
_ ,1 K Q,» ‘.1:  J
| | — Ann CAGE “
I | |—Anthony

| I |—Elizabeth fill IN<‘l’I\tr 8 ‘IN b~«~I‘~'  st.IaI-»’*~a‘§.{‘~‘5’v-°‘*~
I |—Elizabeth¢__ ow‘ \/ILL l§fl=‘S) u v’ -=
|—Guilt'ord (T1633, drowned at sea); Sjr; Comptroller‘ of the Navy

I

I

I

_ A / y_ ‘ _  9 ‘K-‘ )‘.E V
,Margaret WALTERS ’I\,\L (Sh, L 47 St/~13 L’;-“;< J "3 fl rt 11 W4 /Lk

|—Guilford (*16l0;’rl643, killed) 4: 6-. 5  4‘ "’I"“"‘o""'~,t> A ,Kv;.‘._..\ , .g_.¢..,

. r I I
|—Robert (*l6l l;'H66l); baronet of Newcells; Comptroller of the Navy ‘ Q;-W  ‘; &\'V‘\(W>  5.4 V‘  F! kiegx‘
I I’Pe’°Y % I r ,  _ Iéfifuwui  II.-6-I-~'-M»  Q~r'»«.,?-”"“.‘-,_ gs.  ..m..a. A. 
: {—Walter J CDI°\,,¢f_ ’ §_1;‘~;.~..m.s«...-)tt..} *1, i;,:.a.I fvtsd’ , 4{9\~fi/.1‘ +0 '1»:   (n :} Q (‘ lb; (5  if‘ A ,9 _, . “W ) /  M L ‘ ‘__ _ X I \a
_George '*. , ' , - a? :“ y‘\»va..,‘ r‘ I “W: -.1 ’ 1 ‘ .y»\» (‘H "I F ' Pr r““Av." ~‘:- $2:
| |—Francis _ ; ,, 5. '3. , . I! /r r~I:...,\__,,».,wu
I |~Arthur (‘I Bifrons); baronet; Comptroller ofthe Navy I C'°\9““’k  W"(“‘€ $'“°“"“’I“°”‘) IN’ I“ “»‘”‘” I * " “P / I§*’*\m““‘y ‘A ,I"_..-«,,.\v.I‘£..;.:.4". -«
I | = a Flemish lady I ".’_l3..~"V'-.x~.,. e C  I
| | |—Charles; Sir <3: ;_  g(' 5 _ 1;
| I |—Peter _ ‘ A9 . M ,
I L :~Anne $ is” b _v ‘J; I ‘
4 —Mary <"*‘ 0 "‘
|—Francis; Sir 4'‘’‘‘I‘‘‘“'’’ ‘I I -.~V*"*  55*‘!/~<~r
=Elizabeth CUFF 5?£.«;a. ..«:s“s»
|—Francis  It
|—Henry
I-Mary
|—Katherine
|—Anne
|—Elizabeth
I = W. DODWELL; Captain
| —Henry
|—Jane

' Son of Sir Robert STAPLETON (*l538) and Olive SHERRINGTON.

‘ ‘ V 2, I ._'__l “ 531.5»; , , .J H ‘R L i3{“i~¢,rJ
3I7 Dofilbiv !%I\-LI\‘r Val car’ I‘ "‘°”  §:\,£€,€‘,  3

Wm
% €>;36s-.:~. . IQ -I D:  3.:-~\~«.r~ I33 M i"\<‘\
?S9~i2._..MJL  gg, 3.)‘ 3%“ C» ;Q C“ :2”;

'9 SCA mt 3-31». I0   *g..,‘f:,;m


|—Margaret

| = John VILLIERS; /elder brother of the Duke of BUCKINGHAM

l ,,

I l-Mary  «J - ’  .»   
|—William; Sir; served with his brother Guilford in the successful expedition against Cadiz in I596 as Commissary of the Fleet /' V ' .  ; ' - -M V

l =Elizabeth BOARD of Board Hill, Sussex; lived at KiPl5ax 6 i it '6’ 6 " '1. /f’  (‘,7 -~"" r’ ’ .

| |—William (died young)   ’ ' =-

| |—Henry “Sambome” (T 1690); Master of the Mint; one of the original members of the Royal Society ’ v — K ’ ’ , — J

l l : Ann  i ‘ 2‘ J ‘, r\ f’; ~»" I" ' ' ‘vs ,.  ll’. 9‘ “ l.‘ i 1;“  I‘, " ' 3 ‘~ N" .1 - \ ‘

l l l_Anth0ny ': ' V ‘ ii ./ ,; ,.V ‘ mg‘ I" ‘.--~;'-..._. -1 I  ' ~ » ’ l 7 . l ' " ‘ I ' I i 1": I -as ‘ ' r
| I |—Elizabeth A __ Q}, ~,‘,.j‘-, ' ' ’  g _ ‘

| |—Elizabeth H r  " "

I

l

-Guilford (H631, aged 66, drowned at sea); Sir; Comptroller of the Navy [PRO says he is 8th son of Thomas Slingsby of Scriven]

5’Margaret WALTERS; daughter of William WALTERS, A,lde?rman of York; referred to as the “Old Lady Slingsby” in Samuel Pepys’ Diary

]—Guilford (*l6l0;l'v1643,killed)  -Wlv   ,- l" ‘ , V -  '~ ,7. V .  « ..

|—Robert (* 161 l;l'l 661); created baronet ofN4ewcells; Hertfordshire 16.3. 166°/.; Comptrollerfof the Navy; Captain of the 8th or-l9th Lion’s Whelp , M I 6' l ,;  gt

 

'_percy ‘ g ‘N ..::.__7..  «  £«r~’;».::«»,:r;  1..  ‘n  gé,  I g. I .;.f ; '::'.'.‘~"{’
|—Walter; colonel; coln‘maiide‘d"! the Great Fort; fought to the bitter end ‘in the siege olPendennis Castle; escaped to France;5 » ‘ _  4, .- ‘ F»
l\Ee°rg.e ‘\\. .’.“;\. '4‘~:~s‘~~ ‘K . "Haw  »~   t‘~
— rancrs "’ " ‘ ‘ ;’\ "W  
]—Arthur (*~l623 (was 4 in 1627);'l12.2.l665/6, aged 4|, Bifrons); knighted at Brussels 24.6.1657; created lst baronet of Bifrons I9. 10. l6576;7 ‘
| = a Flemish lady V" -S ».-2;-.   ‘
] l~Charles (was under 21 in 1664); 2nd baronet of Bifronss; sold Bifrons 1667; was living abroad in 1669   , z r”
_ 7_  I _ I , . , =? aq (~l«l.3.l693/4'0); Mrs ALDRIDGE then from 1660-1680 as Mrs LEE then fi'om I681-I685 as Lady SLINGSBY; well-known actress

[ [ [—Peter; was iving abroad in 1669

| [ |—Anne

l [ |—Mary (%26.4. l666,Patrixboume)

| |—4 daughters and 1 more son ~'  .

|—Francis; Sir
=Elizabeth CUFF
|—Francis
|—Henry
|—Mary ,
|—Katherine /‘ ‘Z  9“ lb  ,   ; l
|—Anne _ S  '
|—Elizabeth  t   y  »'  «X   
| = W. DODWELL; Captain ’
| —Henry
|~Jane

SLINGSBY GENEA 1.00 Y —_ Sheer 2 L. L. Boyle 29/06/00


 

 ‘“'C”" SLINGSBY GENEALOGY
_ ’-'{L*’*"'\/
—Francis SLINGSBY (*1522;~I«4.8.1600,Slingsby chapel of Knaresborough church); Sir I*"‘~"~v~—. ft/\«_{,‘l,\ 

=E1izabeth INGILBY; daughter of Sir William INGILBY of Ripley ’ U _ _ _

=Mary PERCY (:"1532;I'1598), daughter of Sir Thomas PERCY (*1537, by execution at Tyburn) and Alianora HARBOTLE (daughter and co-heir of Sir Guichard HARBOTLE)

 .,\_g(,,{ I—Thomas (T 1579, aged 28, by drowning in the River_1\Iidd while trying to save his servant); B.A. (Oxon) 9.7.1568

V 2/15‘) I-3 sons (died young, or without issue) ~//_/ggqc’ ’ - “"\“ \;-s7__,,.,,\/__#:\. I 5.8"‘.  \ I :3’ 5‘ I IJevt,.3 4 1837.- ~ I £57
-"" ‘ V) I-3 daughters (died young, or withoutissue) ...- gi ‘I7, I95, 4. ,;,gt-( 1 » atflc» \"‘”'L 1 . _ ”
’ I—Henry (*v1_5,5\9;T12. l634);knight/ed”1/n 1602 by Queen Elizabeth I; High Sheriff of Yorkshire 1611-12; built Redhouse, Yorkshire; “pillar of the Church of England
, _ (give I /=Fra/nee/s VAVASOUR (‘I161 1); daughter of William VAVASOUR of Weston, Yorkshire, and Elizabeth BECKWITH; papist p I
Mmi.v~”/R I 1 I—William (T1617, killed in Florence); member of BarnaId’s Inn; admitted to Gray’s Inn 8.2.158 /2; went to Italy in 1613 3!‘ \§t'’g‘¢)
,___,»1/M’ J I—Elizabeth (31,, 1'1 _ (0 («ac I, yW,.,1,.,,,,,.1-,3. _ 2
S__,.»f’: ‘-1, 7”L;;I QMWEJ =28.1.1594/5 at‘Knaresborough, Sir Thomas METCALFE (*4.12.l_579;’r7.165V5;~I/Aysgarth) of Nappa, Yorkshire; J.P.; “The Black Knight”;
 ‘  “I”? I’ I‘MaT (‘I 1:18 V‘ ‘*6 \' o\- .‘‘‘'‘~’~> 1‘ 3’-~ ‘I’ \
\ Wk , .W\ Y .0 \ 5%" , _
A 1  ;~.\/I 'p-’r'“ I =Sir Walter BETHELL’; Surveyor of the East Riding to King James I; lived at Alne; a Puritan
‘I " I I—Katherine (%31.7.1584,Knaresborough); [4th daughter] r *-.31., ' \ -,_ I.\;\/‘rt ‘L3 7 V ,s£‘«" 4 4
( I I =1603,by licence, John FENWICK ('I'1658,aged 79) of Wallington Hall, Northumber1and;3 knighted at Royston 18.1.160 /5; 3
V, \.’,,;‘,_¢,"~7 I I  _ —John (aged 3 in l615;T2.7.1644 in battle at Marston Moor); Member of Parliament for Morpeth 1640 until disabled 1.164‘/4; colonel of Dragoons
ugf  . I |—Alice (11627-,Isandai church)
I‘ I I =1602 in Moor Monkton church, Thomas WATERTON of Walton Hall, Yorkshire
 I I—Anne*%g '7 ' ‘ ' ' 5
«M, 'I-»‘7°[ ‘ I 1 I—Henry “Harry” (*14.1.160'/ ;‘I8.6. 1658, beheaded on Tower Hi1l;ISlingsby chapel); created baronet of Nova Scotia 1638;’
IKI’) kw‘; I I =7.7. 1631 in Kensinéton church, Barbara BELASYSE (,1 l 641,London); daughter of Thomas BELASYSE, 1st Viscount FAUCONBERG of Newstead Abbey

I I I—Barbara (*1633) -1,,   \w‘\

I I I =Sir John TALBOT of Lacock, Wiltshire

I I I—Thomas (*~1635;T~1685); 2nd baronet; High Sheriff of Yorkshire; Governor of Scarborough Castle 1670; M.P. for Knaresborough 61678

I I I =1658 Dorothy CRADOCK (~I«SIingsby chapel); daughter and co-heir of George CRADOCK of Caverswall Castle, Staffordshire

I I I I—Henry (*~1661); 3rd baronet

I I I I—Thomas; 4th baronet

I I I {—three daughters .

I I I—Henry (T1692); Gentleman of the Privy Chamber to Charles II; one of the first members of the Council of the Royal Society fl I ‘;_:;(~. 11 /,
I 5 I—Thomas (I1 1.2.1670,Knaresborough); colonel in the King’s Army during the Rebellion; present at the siege of York 1646; created M.A.(Oxon) 1.1 1.1642  I
I I-2 sons (I young) ~_. ..., ;',,\ ..w,‘,H,,I J W  MW ,,.~.N,3- "_~..,,,- 4

I I—Frances I’ W _

I I =Bryan STAPYLTON (T1658, Wighill, Yorkshire;~IWighill);7 Receiver-General of the North for King Charles I. Of Myton-on-Swale, Yorkshire.

I I-2 daughters (T young)  . ~ ‘ __i 4, K "

....  _ ,. V  \\m n 5» ..
I I—Eleanor'(*1~1’5i51,Noffin ham;T>1576) I e’i‘._L 149% TA] :33‘ '
  .. .3 4-.. 4-. - -- I . ~ » « . . . .
I = in Moor Morfllton church, Sir Arthur INGRAM‘~of If  Yorkshire; one of the richest men in England  ‘AM /_
IIII/ix/I »- I\m"\.a1—l‘7‘ ‘  
.'\    J I V‘ Q‘ H‘ I
Wk»  ;:o_3ga5g‘” W...» U-VII ‘W W7
SLINGSBYGENEALOGY--Sheet1  g\;&-”' M . <~ '. ;3_C,,>,\\t:,\\‘ -  L .\’\’  _\w J L-L-30349 30/06/02
\/\ I Y: Z»:  f\¥ 5; IVWI» ‘-'‘‘‘”M W INA‘: wo\.:."°‘? W W1 I
« V, ‘ \ x , .
Y . _p.I-"’  \n»..f(\ .. .\.-»~'»‘P/


I
I

1.. §__,(gT->*’

|—Charles  1.1561); matriculated S

 

I
. I

” I “‘;s- “T3/Guiito

7/

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

,,=‘,Elizabetli"'ELLIs . - , ,
|—Thomas (‘if N we I
I—Margaret
|—Mary ,  ,  « /5
rd (%7.10.1565:T163l\, aged 66, drowned at sea); Sir; matriculated Queen’s College, Oxford 23.3.1581/2; Comptroller of the Navyg; knighted 23.7.1603

A . - 1‘ J, r’ M’? >_
. ’  7'“?-2"{\"‘\iAi)""‘ I ii/‘ilk :7‘ ‘~-
, - ¥_.I;‘~"’”’'
:_»i!\lVv*-/ 1
%§.'\/\"\,».\‘C.x« “
I—Elizabeth
I =Lord RICH, son of Lord HOLLAND; this connection facilitated the wedding of Sir Harry in Kensington church
I—Eleanor

t. Edmund Hall 20.12.1577; B.A.from The Queen’s College 5.6.1581; M.A. 27.6.1583;8 rector of Rothbury, Northumberland 1584

*2 ’ /9t\6tr.01
/' K _,,. rear

1 , E4"
7 V_“.‘m,.-etfx ‘Y’ 1‘ 1,. -4
V.-._1?o‘ ’ j , --\;2 /*J_,,,*‘' - g ._ /

.k.

=1609 in st. Nicholas’ Church, York, Margaret WALTERS10’; daughter of William WALTERS’, Alderman of York

|—Gui1ford (*1610;T16.1.1642/3,in battle at Gisborough”;~I26.1.1642/3 aged 32 in York Minster);I2'13 14
l—Robert (*161 1 ;1‘26. 10.1661 ;); created baronet of Newsells, Hertfordshire 16.3.1660/1; Comptroller of the Navy; Captain of the 8th Lion’s Whelp

I—Percy

= Elizabeth BROOKE

|—Walter (*1618); colonel with Prince Rupert; commanded the Great Fort; fought to the bitter end in the siege of Pendennis Castle; escaped to France;15
|—George

I—Francis

I—Arthur (*~1623 (was 4 in 1627);t12.2.1665/6, aged 41, Bifrons);I6 knighted at Brussels 24.6.1657; created 1st baronet of Bifrons 19.10.1657”;“‘

= a Flemish lady

|—Charles (was under 21 in 1664); 2nd baronet of Bifrons”; sold Bifrons 1667; was living abroad in 1669

I =20 1681 Mary (I/1.3.1693/42'); Mrs ALDRIDGE then from 1660-1680 as Mrs LEE then from 1681-1685 as Lady SLINGSBY; wel1—known actress
|—Peter; was living abroad in 1669

I—Anne

|—Mary (%26.4. 1 666,Patrixbourne)

I-4 daughters and 1 more son

I—William (*1562;»I«8.1624;Slingsby chapel of Knaresborough church”); Sir;23

=Elizabeth BOARD, daughter of Sir Stephen BOARD of Board Hill, Sussex; lived at Kippax

I—William (Tyoung)

|—Henry “Samborne” (T1690); matriculated Exeter College, Oxford 5.6.1635, aged 14; Master of the Mint 167124; one of the original members of the Royal Society

= Ann CAGE, a daughter of Sir __ CAGE, knight
|—Henry (T1695)
I—Anthony (T1697)
|—Elizabeth
=Adlard CAGE of Thavies Inn, Holborn

|—Elizabeth

= John VILLIERS, elder brother of the Duke of BUCKINGHAM

I—Francis (*15_6_9); Sir; of Kilmore, Co. Cork; Constable of Haulbowline Castle and of the Royal Council of the Province of Munster;25
=Elizabeth CUFF  1.8’) L7
I—Francis; matriculated Trinity College, Oxford 20.6.1628, aged 16; B.A. 5.2.1628/9.  &§fO5>

  W  I‘7%V/'»~,.-5'1-~\~,
SLINGSBY GENEALOGY -- Sheet 2 '

L.L. Boyle 30/06/02


|—Henry; matriculated Trinity College, Oxford 20.6.1628, aged 14; B.A. 4.2.1629/30; M.A. 1.7.1633

 

V‘  "N

|—Mary ‘ ‘ .\ J\~.r\ ‘£_,;.r
l—Katherine {r»§\1';¢a1; .‘\;"\\i\1\,~V;i\"\, (fa UV *1’ p ‘A ,   * L  r   it,» 

l—Anne 1\.;.a.);t ’ r r . *7 is «:-:'s’, 14 \vv1»'\/-9:"-(‘J 9’ Wv’»’<»~ K ‘‘v‘*”’“’ W‘, -.%““’_
|—Elizabeth .gi:1_.t£’,4,gg1 1; ,V V  .,; fir/l (,3) , vtceyexaw .2"?/‘j-/\ ,. M \,r—«~ (Mr
I = W. DODWEEL; Captain "" I ;Z"'\h."\ IQ 9   ‘ “’ 

I —Henry
|—Jane

‘Vice-President of the Council of the North 1629. Q-W44  C] ‘i""‘ iiiwi‘ '  
PC 1 ii ‘
/ " i i

2 Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.
3 Son and heir of Sir William FENWICK of Wallington Hall and Grace FOSTER; Master of the Royal Studs to King Charles I.

4 Member of Parliament for Northumberland 1624-5,1625,1625—6,l628—9; for Cockermouth 4-5.1640 and l.1642—1.l643/4 when disabled as a Royalist; restored 6.1646-12.1648 '

5 Matriculated as a Fellow Commoner of Queen’s College, Cambridge 1.1pQ8_/_9_;_resided there until 1621 but did not graduate; Member of Parliament for Knaresborough 1640 (twice).
6 Granddaughter of Dr. John SAUNDERS who was Provost of Oriel College, Oxford from 1644-1653.

7 Son of Sir Robert STAPLETON (*1538) and Olive SHERRINGTON.

3 B.D.(Oxon.) 25.1.159'/2; armiger.

9 [PRO says he is 8th son of Thomas Slingsby of Scriven].

‘° Referred to as “O1d Lady Slingsby” in Samuel Pepys’ Diary for 29.1. 1660/]. g
” Killed in a skirmish with his cousin, Sir Hugh Cholmeley; he lost both legs and died. His eulogy was preached by Archbishop Bramhall (Bishop of Derry).

'2 M.A. (St. Andrew’s) 1628; incorporated into Oxford University 24.11.1628; Member of Parliament for Carysfoot, Ireland 1634.

l3 Secretary to the Earl of Strafford who made him Lieutenant of Ordnance and Vice-Admiral of Munster. _ .
M The 8th Lion’s Whelp was a square-rigged, three-masted vessel of 162 tons built hastily in 1628 of cheap timber. It carried 14 guns and 60 men and in 1642 was fit for 2 years.

'5 Returned from France to organise a resistance movement in Cornwall; captured and imprisoned in the Tower of London; Deputy Governor of Carisbrooke Castle.’

'6 Friend and tennis partner of King Charles II. Mentioned in Pepys’ Diary. Described by John Evelyn as a “meer shark” for his running of a lottery in the Banqueting Hall,
Whitehall by permission of the King on 20.7.1664.

17 By letters patent at Bruges.

'8 Comptroller of the Navy; colonel of Horse; Secretary to the Earl of Bristol.

'9 The baronetcy of Bifrons became extinct on Charles’ death.

20 The Public Record Office merely suggest that this lady was the wife of Sir Charles.

2' At St. Pancras’ old churchyard from St. James’ church.

22 A beautiful monument to him may be found in this chapel.

23 Imprisoned by Spaniards in Como in 1594; served with his brother Guilford in the successful expedition against Cadiz in 1596 as Commissary of the Fleet.

24 Author of the motto Decus et tutamen found on modern English pound coins. . . '
25 Came to England in 1648 after having lost his Connaught estate in the Rebellion. He was with his brother William on his trip to Spain.

SLINGSBY GENEALOGY —— Sheet 3 L-L-Boyle 30/06/02


SLINGSBY GENEALOGY

—Francis SLINGSBY (I‘1600;»I4.8.I600,Slingsby chapel of Knaresborough church); Sir

=Elizabeth INGILBY; daughter of Sir William INGILBY of Ripley

=Mary PERCY (*I532;I I598), daughter of Sir Thomas PERCY (* I 537, by execution at Tybum) and Alianora HARBOTLE (daughter and co-heir of Sir Guichard HARBOTLE)
I—Thomas (I‘l579, aged 28, by drowning in the River Nidd while trying to save his servant)

I—3 sons (died young, or without issue)

I—3 daughters (died young, or without issue)

I~Henry (*l559;'Il2.l634);knighted in 1602 by Queen Elizabeth I; High Sheriff of Yorkshire 16] I-12;‘ built Redhouse, Yorkshire; “pillar ofthe Church of England”

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

SLINGSB Y GENE/I LOG Y -— Sheet I

=Frances VAVASOUR (+161 1); daughter of William VAVASOUR of Weston, Yorkshire, and Elizabeth BECKWITH; papist
I—William (T1617, killed in Florence); member of Bamard’s Inn; admitted to Gray’s Inn 8.2. 158'/2; went to Italy in 1613
IAElizabeth
I =28. I . I594/5 at Knaresborough, Sir Thomas METCALFE (*4. I2.l579;'I‘7. 1655;IAysgarth) ofNappa, Yorkshire; JP; “The Black Knight”;2
I—Mary
I =Sir Walter BETHELL; Surveyor ofthe East Riding to King James I; lived at Alne; a Puritan
I~Katherine (%31.7.l584,Knaresborough); [4th daughter]
I =I603,by licence, John FENWICK (Il658,aged 79) of Wallington Hall, Northumberland;3 knighted at Royston 18.1.1604/5;4
I ~.Iohn (aged 3 in I6l5;I'2.7.l644 in battle at Marston Moor); Member of Parliament for Morpeth 1640 until disabled 1.1643/4; colonel of Dragoons
|~Alice (’I1627;ISandaI church)
I =1602 in Moor Monkton church, Thomas WATERTON of Walton Hall, Yorkshire
I—Anne
|—Henry “Harry” (*I4. I . 160'/2;1‘8.6. I658, beheaded on Tower Hill;ISlingsby chapel); created baronet ofNova Scotia I638;5
:77 I631 in Kensington church, Barbara BELASYSF. (‘I l64l,London); daughter of Thomas BELASYSE, 1st Viscount FAUCONBERG ofNewstead Abbey
I~Barbara (* I 633)
I =Sir John TALBOT of Lacock, Wiltshire
|~Thomas (*~l635;I‘~l685); 2nd baronet; High Sheriff of Yorkshire; Governor of Scarborough Castle 1670; M.P. for Knaresborough 1678
I =l658 Dorothy CRADOCK (ISlingsby chapel); daughter and co-heir of George CRADOCK of Caverswall Castle, Staffordshireé
I —Henry (*~166I); 3rd baronet
I —Thomas; 4th baronet
I —three daughters
|—Henry (II692); Gentleman of the Privy Chamber to Charles II; one of the first members of the Council of the Royal Society
—Thomas (‘I‘ I670); colonel in the King’s Army during the Rebellion; gallant leader; present at the siege of York 1646
#2 sons (died young)
—Frances
I =Bryan STAPYLTON ('I‘I658, Wighill, Yorkshire;»I«Wighill);7 Receiver-General ofthe North for King Charles 1. Of Myton-on-Swale, Yorkshire.
I-2 daughters (died young)
I—Eleanor
= in Moor Monkton church, Sir Arthur INGRAM of Temple Newsam, Yorkshire; one ofthe richest men in England

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

L. L. Boyle 20/08/00


I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

SLINGSBY G12‘/V[:'AI.()G Y -— Sheet 2

~E1izabeth
| | =Lord RICH, son of Lord HOLLAND; this connection facilitated the wedding of Sir Harry in Kensington church

—Charles; rector of Rothbury, Northumberland

=Elizabeth ELLIS
|—Thomas
|—Margaret
l—Mary

—GuiIford (T1631, aged 66, drowned at sea); Sir; matriculated Queen’s College, Oxford 1581; Comptroller of the Navy8

=Margaret WALTERS; daughter of William WALTERS, Alderman of York; referred to as the “Old Lady Slingsby” in Samuel Pepys’ Diary

I—Guilford (*1610;'l‘16.l.1643,in battle at Gisborough";¢26.1.1643, aged 32 in York Minster);'°’”
|—Robert (*161 1;l'26.10.1661;); created baronet of Newcells, Hertfordshire 16.3.1660/1; Comptroller of the Navy; Captain of the 8th or 10th Lion’s Whelp

|—Percy

|—Walter (*16 I 8); colonel with Prince Rupert; commanded the Great Fort; fought to the bitter end in the siege of Pendennis Castle; escaped to France;'2
|—George

|—Francis

I—Arthur (*~1623 (was 4 in l627);'I‘12.2.1665/6, aged 41, Bifrons);'3 knighted at Brussels 24.6.1657; created lst baronet of Bifrons 19.1o.1657"‘;‘5

I = a Flemish lady

I |vCharles (was under 21 in 1664); 2nd baronet of Bifronsm; sold Bifrons 1667; was living abroad in 1669

| 1 ='7 1681 Mary (i1.3.1693/4”‘); Mrs Ammocis then from 1660-1680 as Mrs use then from 1681-1685 as Lady Sl,1NGSBY;well-known actress
I |—Peter; was living abroad in 1669

I |~Anne

I |—Mary (%26.4.1666,Patrixboume)

I-4 daughters and 1 more son

William (*l562;I«8. 1624;Slingsby chapel of Knaresborough church”); Sir;2°

=Elizabeth BOARD, daughter of Sir Stephen BOARD of Board Hill, Sussex; lived at Kippax

|—Wi11iam ('1‘young)

|-Henry “Samborne” (11690); Master of the Mint in the reign of Charles 11 1671“; one of the original members of the Royal Society
| = Ann CAGE, a daughter of Sir _“ CAGE, knight
| I—Henry ('1' 1695)
| I—Anthony (I‘ 1697)
| |—Elizabeth
| =Adlard CAGE of Thavies Inn, Holborn

|—Elizabeth

| = John VILLIERS, elder brother of the Duke of BUCKINGHAM

Francis (* 1569); Sir; of Kilmore, Co. Cork; Constable of Haulbowline Castle and ofthe Royal Council ofthe Province of Munster;22

=Elizabeth CUFF
|—Francis
|-Henry

I—Mary

L.L.B0y/e 20/08/00


|—Katherine

l—Anne

|~Elizabeth

1 : W. DODWELL; Captain
I —Henry

|—Jane

' Vice—President ofthe Council ofthe North 1629.

2 Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

3 Son and heir of Sir William FENWICK of Wallington Hall and Grace FOSTER; Master ofthe Royal Studs to King Charles I.

4 Member of Parliament for Northumberland 1624-5, 1625,1625—6, 1 628-9; for Cockermouth 4-5.1640 and 1.1642—l .1643/4 when disabled as a Royalist; restored 6.1646—l2. 1648
5 Matriculated as a Fellow Commoner of Queen’s College, Cambridge 1.1618/9; resided there until 1621 but did not graduate; Member of Parliament for Knaresborough 1640 (twice).
6 Granddaughter of Dr. John SAUNDERS who was Provost of Oriel College, Oxford from 1644-1653.

7 Son of Sir Robert STAPLETON (* 1 53 8) and Olive SHERRINGTON.

8 [PRO says he is 8th son of Thomas Slingsby of Scriven].

9 Killed in a skirmish with his cousin, Sir Hugh Cholmeley; he lost both legs and died. His eulogy was preached by Archbishop Bramhall (Bishop of Derry).

'0 M.A. (St. Andrews) 1628; incorporated into Oxford University 24.1 1.1628; Member of Parliament for Carysfoot, lreland 1634.

” Secretary to the Earl of Strafford who made him Lieutenant of Ordnance and Vice-Admiral of Munster.

'2 Returned from France to organise a resistance movement in Cornwall; captured and imprisoned in the Tower of London; Deputy Governor of Carisbrooke Castle.

'3 Friend and tennis partner of King Charles 11. Mentioned in Pepys’ Diary. Described by John Evelyn as a “meer shark” for his running of a lottery in the Banqueting Hall,
Whitehall.

'4 By letters patent at Bruges.

'5 Comptroller ofthe Navy; colonel of Horse; Secretary to the Earl of Bristol.

'6 The baronetcy of Bifrons became extinct on Charles’ death.

'7 The Public Record Office merely suggest that this lady was the wife of Sir Charles.

'8 At St. Pancras’ old churchyard from St. James’ church.

l9 A beautiful monument to him may be found in this chapel.

20 Imprisoned by Spaniards in Como in 1594; served with his brother Guilford in the successful expedition against Cadiz in 1596 as Commissary ofthe Fleet.

2' Author of the motto Decus et tutamen found on modern English pound coins.

22 Came to England in 1648 after having lost his Connaught estate in the Rebellion. He was with his brother William on his trip to Spain.

SLINGSBY GENEALOGY .. Sheet 3 L. L. Boyle 20/08/00


SLINGSBY GENEALOGY

—Francis SLINGSBY (T l600;~I4.8.l600,Slingsby chapel of Knaresborough church); Sir
=Elizabeth JNGILBY
=Mary PERCY (* l 532;1‘l598)  .
I—Thomas (*l58l, by drowning)  \   "“  '~  ‘~

I~3 sons (died young, or without issue)

I~3 daughters (died young, or without issue) I I _ V I . _f I !'
I~Henry (1”l2.l634); Sir; built Redhouse, Yorkshire; “pillar ofthe Church ofEngland” » I ‘ ** I’ ‘ ’ . _ V,‘ f__

/

I

_.s .“' I I

 I
K " ’“..‘\I

I

I

I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

SLINGSB Y GEN E/I LOG Y -- Sheet I .

=Frances VAVASOUR (Il6l l); daughter of William VAVASOUR and Elizabeth BECKWITH; papist
|—William ('l‘l6l7, killed in Florence); went to Italy in 1613

|—Elizabeth

I =28.l.l594/5 at Knaresborough, Sir Thomas METCALFE (*4.12.l579;'I'7.l655;I«Aysgarth) ofNappa, Yorkshire; J.P.; “The Black Knight”;'
l—Mary

I =Sir Walter BETHELL; Surveyor ofthe East Riding to King James I; lived at Alne; a Puritan

I—Katherine‘/  » . .  ;.~,  i , - '  " * '
I =Sir John FENWlClg:of Wallington Hall, Northumberland;"M.P. for Northumberland; Master of the Royal Studs to King Charles I
I—Alice (‘rl627;ISandal church) - ~ - I ' ~»  .   .. - -. I I I I ~  gt a

fl‘

I =l602 in Moor Monkton church, Thomas WATERTON of Walton Hall, Yorkshire A I  I I ' ’ I‘ ~    .

I—Anne _.- .. —

I—Henry “Harry” (*l4.l.l60'/2;l'8.6.l658, beheaded on Tower Hill); baronet;2 ‘ V I I ' , . I , 1.. I
I = in Kensington church, Barbara BELASYSE (+1641); daughter of the 1st Viscount FAUCONBERG of Newstead Abbey

I I—Thomas (*~l635); Sir ‘ T . V
I I =l658 Dorothy CRADOCK of Caverswall Castle, Staffordshire3
I I —Henry (*~l66l) "' ' --
I I—Henry » . . .
I I—Barbara
I

I

I

I

I

I .;

  _‘ 4-’ /V

I =Sir John TALBOT of Lacock, Wiltshire
—Thomas
-2 sons (died young)
«Frances
=Bryan STAPYLTON(1“l658, Wighill, Yorkshire;~I«Wighill);4 Receiver—General of the North for King Charles I. Of Myton-on-Swale, Yorkshire.
I-2 daughters (died young)
I—Eleanor
= in Moor Monkton church, Sir Arthur INGRAM ofTemple Newsam, Yorkshire; one ofthe richest men in England

-Charles; rector of Rothbury, Northumberland

=Elizabeth ELLIS
I—Thomas

- .f,,r\-yv \. 5. H

L. L. Boyle 29/06/00


Temple Newsam Portraits — Sir Arthur Ingram

 

E,_revp__s,_,Egt,rai_t I Family Tree l Antholoqv l Next Portrait
Sir Arthur Ingram (C1565/70-1642)
by George Geldorp (fl 1610-1653),
84 X 57 1/2 (213 X 146)

 This portrait (and a 19th century
copy) are the only surviving images of
the great financier who rose from
relatively humble origins to become
one of the wealthiest men in the
country and the owner of the most
extensive estates in Yorkshire. His
 fortune was based on his
Controllership of the Customs for the port of London and
later his position as Secretary of the Council of the North.
From these he was able to take advantage of farming the
royal monopolies and taxes, equipping expeditions to the
New World, and speculating in property. However, on
becoming Cofferer to the King's household in 1615 he
found himself blackballed from court on account of his
lowly birth and sharp business practices.

 

Thereafter he concentrated his interests in the North,
building new mansions on the site of the former
Archbishop's Palace in York and at Sheriff Hutton (1619),
at New Park (1640), and purchasing Temple Newsam

http ://www. leeds.gov. uk/templenewsam/temptour/portl . html

 

Page 1 of 2

23/12/02


Temple Newsam Portraits — Sir Arthur Ingram Page 2 Of 2
from the Duke of Lennox for £12,000 (1622).

The archives reveal various payments made to Geldorp
between November 1638 and January 1639 amounting to
over £40 which must be connected with this portrait.
These include 10/6d for ‘hooks to hang up the great
picture‘. Four days after Sir Arthur's death in 1642 a
footman, Nobbs, was paid 6d to ‘go with my Mr draught of
his picture & his clothes to Mr Geldorp' and this
posthumous sketch is mentioned in the various Temple
Newsam inventories until c1721.

Temple Newsam 18.2/83

Previous Portrait I Family Tree l Antholoqv l Next Portrait

© 2001 Leeds City Council | Webmaster | 9 July 2002

http ://www. leeds.gov. uk/templenewsam/temptour/portl . html 23/12/02


Temple Newsam Portraits - Sir Thomas Ingram

 
        
     
     
      

  

 Sir Thomas Ingram (1614-1672).
School of Sir Peter Lely (1618-
 1680), 53 1/2 x 371/2 (136 x 95)

 The portrait is mentioned in the
 Temple Newsam inventories since
1688 and appears to have hung in the
Blue Striped Dressing Room since .
C1862 whither it was returned in 1990
Sir Thomas was the younger son of
 Sir Arthur Ingram the elder by his
 second wife Alice Ferrets. King
James 1 attended his christening and he remained a
staunch royalist all his life, becoming MP for Thirsk 1640-
45. During the Commonwealth he was imprisoned briefly
but compounded and was fined £2,933.

His reward at the Restoration was his appointment as
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in whose robes he
is depicted here (although seated on a surprisingly
humble rush-bottomed chair). On his marriage in 1637 to
Frances Bellasyse, daughter of Viscount Fauconberg of
Newburgh Priory, he was given the estate at Sheriff
Hutton by his father which he retained until its sale
c1663. He, his wife and daughter (qv) are buried in

http ://www. leeds.gov. uk/templenewsam/temptour/port2 . html

Page 1 of 2

23/12/02


Temple Newsam Portraits - Sir Thomas Ingram Page 2 of 2

Westminster Abbey.
Temple Newsam 18.3/83

Previous Portrait I Family Tree I Anthoioqv I Next Portrait

© 2001 Leeds City Council | Webmaster I 9 July 2002

http ://www. leeds.gov. uk/templenewsam/temptour/port2.html 23/1 Z/02


Temple Newsam Portraits — Lady Bennet Page 1 Of 1 l

   

 
 
   
      
     
     

 Lady Bennet (nee Elizabeth
 Ingram) (c1605-1636). British
 School, early 17th century, 46 1/2 X 
39 1/4 (118 X 100)

 The picture was recorded in the ‘ 
 various Temple Newsam inventories 
 between 1688 and 1902, the compiler
 in 1750 describing it as by

 'Seoust' (probably Gerard Soest). Lady Bennet was the
é daughter of Sir Arthur Ingram the elder and married Sir
Simon Bennet of Beckhampton c1620. Her costume, and

the luxuriously upholstered armchair on which she sits,

suggests a date in the 1620s. A portrait of her husband is

at Hatfield and one of her mother—in—law, Mary, Lady

Bennet, was also recorded in the Temple Newsam

inventories between 1688 and 1902 and is now in a y
private collection in West Yorkshire. l

  

Earl of Halifax.

_l3__revlous,E_g_rt,rai,t l _E_a__milv Tree l Antholoqy l Next Portrait

© 2001 Leeds City Council | Webmaster | 9 July 2002

l

http ://www.leeds.gov. uk/templenewsam/temptour/port3.html 23/1 2/02


Temple Newsam Portraits — Lady Rich (?) Page 1 Of 1

.-,mv..-.......m.m«

   
 

mix
!f(}t_{S£;‘ _ _
 ; Lady Rich (?) (nee Elizabeth
 Ingram c1625-1661). British
 School, early 17th century, 47 X 38
- (119 X 96.5)

The identity of the sitter is by no
 means certain. For a number of years
it was thought to represent Essex,
wife of the first Viscount Irwin, but this  ,
 is now disproved. Alternatively she a

may be Lady Rich, the eldest daughter of Sir Arthur
Ingram the younger a portrait of whom is described in two
of the early Temple Newsam inventories. She married
Robert, Lord Rich and Kensington in 1641 as his second
wife, and became Countess Holland on her husband's
succession in 1649.

 

Temple Newsam.

Previous Portrait I Family Tree I Antholoqv I Next Portrait 

© 2001 Leeds City Council | Webmaster I 9 July 2002

http://www.leeds.gov.uk/templenewsam/temptour/port5.html 23/12/02 ‘
l


Temple Newsam Portraits — Henry, first Viscount Irwin Page 1 Of 2

  
     

Henry, first Viscount Irwin (1641-
1666). School of Sir Peter Lely, 47
X 38 (119 X 96.5)

     
    

This picture (which may be a
posthumous likeness) was probably
commissioned by the sitter's wife (qv)
as a pendant to her own portrait (fig
7). The style of costume in both
pictures suggests a date in the 1670s,
some years after her husband's death. Henry was the
 fourth but second surviving son of Sir Arthur lngram the
Younger and became the owner of Temple Newsam on
the death of his brother Thomas lngram (qv) in 1660

 
   
     
 

Immediately prior to his marriage the following year to
Essex, daughter of Edward Montagu, second Earl of
Manchester, he was created Viscount Irwin or Irvine of
Scotland (although the family had no known connection
with the northern kingdom). His extravagant lifestyle led
to debts of nearly £12,000 by the time of his unexpected
death in 1666.

Temple Newsam 22.89/48.

Ere;/i(ou_s;_l?_ofl'ait l flamilv Tree I Antholoqv l Next Portrait

http://www.leeds.gov.uk/templenewsam/temptour/port6.html 23/12/02


Temple Newsam Portraits — Essex, Viscountess Irwin Page 1 Of 1

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

 

Previous Portrait I Family Tree I Antholoqv I Next Portrait

  Essex, Viscountess Irwin (nee
 Lady Essex Montagu) (c1643-1677).
axe.-um. School of Sir Peter Lely, 49 X 40
6 124.5 x 101.5)

 

This portrait was probably
commissioned in the 1670s at the
same time as that of her husband
Lord In/vin and is evidently by the
same artist. Essex was the daughter
of Edward, second Earl of Manchester by his third wife
Essex, daughter of Sir Thomas Cheke.

   

Her husband Henry was elevated to the peerage as first
Lord Irwin shortly before their marriage in 1660 probably
in part as a reward for her father's adherence to the
royalist cause. At her husband's death in 1666 the estate
was left with considerable debts which were partly offset
by letting Temple Newsam for a number of years and by
a sale of many of its furnishings.

Temple Newsam 22.57/48

,F’L6\Li.9.lJ.§P,Q_I.‘t@II I Ee.1r.n,iIy._.T Lee I Antholoqv I Next Portrait

© 2001 I,..e/ecLs C_it¥.-CgLJ.rLc:i.l I .\/_Vebma.s.te,r I 9 JUIY 2002

http ://www. Ieeds.gov. uk/templenewsa m/temptour/port7. html 23/12/02


 

LEEDS CI I Y COUNCIL - Tourism - Temple Newsam Tour Page 2 Of 3
Bold type laminates cmners ’ my
‘ mficates portraits stfi at Temple Newsam Hugh lnaram *‘ N111 GGIWWWE
+ “Games its alfficmwall c-f¥'m'k
‘°°"’“ ‘°'*“"’ C1530-1512
+ I C1596 1613 ¥Sf6
3:: Vuifiam Ingram I Cstheflnee Edmmds Sir Arthur harem’ 8 {T} Susan Brawn = (2}A£cu Fstrcrs 32 (3) Mary
121623 all Cambndge c1 555179-£6-12 0! Lwflm 5)! tender: G U!‘ Sir Ezéuand Greville
d 1613 6 1651
4»
Sir Armnring:am:632{i) Eleannr, 16:??? Callharine, d of Jolhn 31' Simon Bennet :Ei12abem ‘Eg‘:h;;1”m§5m‘ ‘ :3; imnmat  . ‘
the younger :3 of Sir Henry Thonm Fairfax, 1605-36 of Beclétamptm ' at Nammw rm
class-1555 Séngaby, a 1:347 Lotti Eniey " '5'
. I 1665 + ‘*3: , I .,
Ttwmax Ingram :6 Mary Paylet flamylngram a Lady Essex llnntagu‘ Anhuringram 9: Jana Mallory Eizabath at Robert ‘E0 c£1$&ea,o€-whom Mme
31632-—EO 151 “mount 11 of Earl ufllancheater oil‘ Bamvwby 6 of Sir John Lord Rich 7 died in lnfam? {1638-52)
Irvin c1646-1713 Mallory of Slnfley
teams $693
+ ,8” I f | :ea»s+
Edward 3 Elizabeth Adina‘ at lewelfia Machsll £99:
Ind Vwaosmt d of Lou! Sharard 3rd\flscount ad uf-Jaihn Machell
1682~8B of Laura 1585-17132 cl‘?-lomwn. Sussex
c16TD—176C
1%
4 4- 1713 4. I 4- I I733 + 4 + is .
Edward Rich’ = Lady Anne Hasvraad Anhm‘ Harry‘ :1 Ann Scarburgh George Charles‘ = Elizabeth Scarburgh‘ Thomas
41*hVia:ount sdlvlsooun dof3tdEar1c!OarIis£e Gfllwwocmt flhvimosmt sisterofl~Iae¢\I§e(taMaud Efilvismunt 1696-W43 biié
€586-will $688-$721 of Gasfie l-éward 1539,1736 mum; Lady-Jetsédnsew £6?!-175*} MP for Haraham $695
mpfog Haxham §AP my Hnrsaam Cannn of Windsor t73'.?’,1 741,234?
1715 f722,1'r'2't'.t73«4 Jnhn wlllium
f99iI!»—‘£Yi!n ‘£70156
+ $753 , I ,
Charles‘ at Frames Gibson isabeia Elizabedh Artmr
id! Viscount d of Samuel
3227-73 "’snepue¢a mp-
MP for Harsharn t‘l'34-$887
fM¥,175£,'i7E‘I
_,_ me + 173: + I 2132 4, 4 I , I
Isabella‘ I Fmnas Frames II Lord lflfiarn Eizabem I Hugo Mayrtek Harriet I Colonel modes at {Sir John
Lady Hartfatd 2nd Mlarqms lmran Shepherd Gordon ingmm Shaphaard ad Hoar cross Hanryhshinn Ralnifififl
£760-1&3-1 ggfienygm am." am: Suffmrdshine
Francis Charles ‘Frances Sam-ela ‘Hugo Chane: vs Ge-argianxa Henry Eéavard Elizabeth Isabella
CNSTIBB ‘IWM _ Std Mattpias oi‘ Harfncd fiat Gordon ilaymll lnwam Phase
2 at Wscaunt Halifax 51753.1 my
I 1539 + I , +
Charles Wood =1 tady Agvee Counnay fiatkiflt Gnome Mqmdl Emily Challotha Wood’ 3 Hugo Francis Hanry Lease Elizabeth Geaergna
3*’ Wm Hall?” mamas élady k6ryLlndsay Mama: mam
$339-$134
4 ul-
http://www. |eeds.gov.uk/templenewsam/temptour/temptree.html 23/12/02


LEEDS CITY COUNCIL - Tourism - Temple Newsam Tour Page 3 Of 3

There are large numbers of lngrams in

America who claim descent from Sir AmEma‘mF_“Gm
Arthur. They may well be descendants **=€Es<='t°PW9°m-

of the Hon John lngram (b1693) the fifth

son of Arthur, 3rd Viscount In/vin and

Isabella Viscountess lrwin. Traditionally

he is said to have been disinherited

because he married a Quaker and later

settled in the Colonies. The records describe him as apparently 'dead'
in 1715. There have not yet been any conclusive pedigrees linking any
Americans with this line of descent but they may well exist.

Please note: we are unable to respond to enquiries or undertake
research in connection with geneological matters.

 

© 2001 Leeds City Council | Webmaster I 9 July 2002

http ://www.leeds.gov.uk/templenewsam/temptour/temptree.html 23/12/02


LEEDS CITY COUNCIL — Tourism - Temple Newsam Tour Page 1 01:3

 

Temple Newsam - Ingram Family Tree

http ://www. Ieeds.gov. uk/templenewsa m/temptour/temptree. html 23/12/02


Temple Newsam Portraits — Thomas Ingram

   
      
       
   
     
 

 Thomas Ingram (1632-1660) by Sir
4‘ Peter Lely (1618-1680), 28 1/2 X 20
 (72.5 X 50)

The portrait has been at Temple
 Newsam since the first surviving
picture inventory of 1688, apart from a
short sojourn at Stapleford Park,
Leics, during the lifetime of the sitter's
sister-in-law, Elizabeth second

He was the first surviving son of Sir Arthur Ingram the
younger and inherited Temple Newsam on the death of
his father in 1655. He married Mary, daughter of Sir
Watkinson Paylor of Thoralby, Yorkshire, who died in
childbirth the following year.

Earl of Halifax

Previous Portrait I Family Tree I Anthology I Next Portrait

© 2001 Leeds City Council | Webmaster | 9 July 2002

http ://www. leeds.gov. uk/templenewsam/temptour/porttitl . html

Page 1 of 1

23/12/02


No. 1 REPORT OF A.D. INGRAM, 1254 NORWOOD AVENUE, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS; M.C. INGRAM,
SALEMN, WEST VIRGINIA; W.C. PENNOCK, 5428 VINE STREET, PHILADELPHIA, PA., AND
LESLIE H. WHIPP, 1311 ASHLAND BLOCK, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, TOUCHING UPON THE
MATTERS OF THE INVESTIGATION OF THE INGRAM ESTATE IN ENGLAND.

In reading this report, it is supplemental to a former report made in June, 1913, with reference to the same matter.

We suppose that the average amount of curiosity will be attached with this reading as is the case with most matters
of this kind, viz; the results, therefore, we will write the portion which interests most of you in the first part of this
report, although it comes in an awkward position, being that the balance of our report leads up to what follows:

We have two opinions of attorneys which we hired in London, England, and from the opinion that I quote verbatim.
The first opinion was written March 5 1914 and the second March 9, 1914:

"Dear Sir:

I have looked up two points as arranged. As to the first point - it is provided by 3 & 4 William IV, Cap. 6 Section 18

that the power to bar estates tail given by the Act shall not apply to tenants of estates tail who under 34 & 35 Henry
VIII Cap. 20 are restrained from barring their estates.

By 34 and 35 Henry VIII. Cap. 20 it was provided that ‘no feigned recovery by assent of parties against any tenant in
tail of any lands given by the Crowns whereof the reversion shall be in the King shall bind heir heirs in tail "This

Statute applys only in the tail or case of grant made by a Crown as Recompense for services and not to a grant made
from motives of Affection.

It would seem however in the case covered by Henry VIII there is no right to bar the entail whether or not the
grantee is expressly restrained from so doing.

As regards the second point - it seems that in order that the title of the true owner may be barred by adverse

possession of a series of trespassers, the possession by them must be continuous but if continuous it is immaterial
whether they claim through one another or independently.

The interval between the periods of possession of trespasser prior to the acquisition by one of them of a good title

against the original owner, but no such interval will restore the title of the original owner after that title has once been
barred.

If there are any further points you would like me to consider I shall be pleased to deal with them.

Yours truly,"

SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION

"Dear Sir:
Re Entailed Estates of the Ingram Family.

We have carefully considered the position of the descendants of the late JOHN INGRAM with reference to the
above estate.

It would seem that on the death of the eldest brother of John Ingram without leaving male issue John Ingram became
entitled to the property, under the then existing settlement, either as tenant in tail or as tenant for life with remainder to
his first and other sons in tail. John Ingram at the date of becoming so entitled, had left England for America and it
seems to have been assumed by his family that he was dead. In fact it appears from the recitals in the Act of Parliament,


a copy of which you produced to us that the Probate of his will had been granted to certain executors thereby appointed.
However, this may be it seems certain that the Charles Ingram, John Ingram's youngest brother, and his descendants
have retained possession of it ever since. under the law as it existed at the time of Charles Ingram entering into the
possession of the estates, 20 years possession by Charles Ingram and his descendants was sufficient (at any rate if in the
absence of concealed fraud) to operate as a bar to any successful attempt by JOHN INGRAM to gain possession though
of course, if JOHN INGRAM was the only tenant for life the rights of the eldest son would not be barred until 20 years
after the death of John Ingram with an extension of time in the case of such son, being a minor or a non compos nentis
at the death of the father.

When there has been sufficient length of adverse possession to bar the rights of the tenant entail, all the descendants,
all such tenant entail are by English law deemed to be barred also, unless the entail was itself incapable of being barred,
that is to say, unless the entail was either (A) created by Act of Parliament and expressly made incapable of being
barred or (B) created by the Crown on the grant of land in return for services -- the reversion being in the Crown.

We understand that it cannot be ascertained that the entail of the estates in question was created by either of the
aforesaid methods. If however it should subsequently be found that the entail was created by method (A) we think that
the descendants of John Ingram would probably succeed in possessing themselves of the estates.

If created by (B) we think that there would be some prospects of success. The case would be however very doubtful
owing to the strong dislike of the Courts to eject those who have been in possession of land for generations.

It is by no means unlikely that the Courts would defeat the action by presuming that a dispensation was obtained
from the crown, giving power to dis—entail.

2/

If the entail was not created by method (A)or (B) that is to say, if it was created by a Deed of Settlement executed
by an absolute owner we think that the right of John Ingram and his descendants have been long since barred.

Now, although there is a suggestion that the brothers of JOHN INGRAM were aware that he was not dead, there is
really no evidence of this fact and even if such fact could be proved, we do not think that it would amount to concealed
fraud as the term is used in English law, for the reason, viz; that nothing done by the brothers of John Ingram prevented
him from becoming aware of his rights or induced him to abstain from taking possession of the property.

If John Ingram's brothers had written to him informing him that a son had been born to her elder brother and by so
doing had induced him naturally to think that he could have no interests in the estates, no doubt the brother so writing
could not if he subsequently took possession of the estates have relied upon such possessions as to bar John Ingram's
rights, but no such case is suggested here and in order to succeed on any such grounds in recovering the estates it would
be necessary that the most absolute proof should be afforded, and even then we do not think that the fraud would
prevent the present holders of the estates from relying upon their possession of 160 years or more as a bar to any action.

In the result we can only advise that unless the entail was created by one of the methods (A) or (B) above
mentioned, no further expense should be incurred in prosecuting the claim.

We regret exceedingly that we cannot give a more favorable opinion, because it is obvious that we have devoted
great time and care to the accumulation of all such evidence as it is possible to obtain. If we may say so, we have
admired exceedingly the very exhaustive and able manner in which the case was presented to us.

Of course, the opinion above expressed does not apply to "Titles of Honour." No time can bar the right of a male
descendant of JOHN INGRAM to claim the title of Viscount Irwin and the Baronetcy, both of which become extinct on
the supposed death of Charles Ingram in 1778 without male issue. The cost of reviving the titles would be very
considerable since all matters of pedigree would have to be strictly proved and probably the titles will not be
considered worth the amount that it would cost of recovering them.

we remain, yours faithfully,"


Previous to procuring these opinions, we made a secureless endeavor to reach a solicitor that would not be
influenced in any manner by the prominence of the people, the relation of church and state and no political biases or
prejudice, and that were in no manner connected with any of the parties now in the possession of this vast estate.
Therefore, we feel that the opinion above is the best that we could secure, and are men of reputation and standing in the
community. We hesitate to give you the name of these attorneys, for the reason, that there are many people connected
with the estate in America, and we are sorry to state that a few have shown no regard to business principles, in their
endeavor to circumvent the efforts that we personally made by their forwarding instructions, letters, inquiries and
things of that nature which hampered us greatly in these endeavors hence, we decided that it was best to avoid a
repetition of this and purposely have left out the names of firm of attorneys that gave these opinions. In addition to
what is herein written in this opinion, the solicitor personally attended with us a consultation, with a barrister of high
standing in London, and there heard rehearsed practically what is here written in this opinion.

In order that we may understand the portion of the opinion, the following history of the Ingram Family will aid you
in arriving at some of the conclusions drawn by English counsel which history is verified by most exhaustive search
that we made in order to substantiate all that is said herein, and will help you to fully substantiate the conclusion:

-INGRAM, VISCOUNT OF IRVINE.-

The Founder of this noble family was: —

1. Hugh Ingram, a wealthy citizen and merchant, in London, who dies, leaving a large fortune to his two sons, by his
wife Anna Galthorp. These were:

a. Sir William Ingram LL.D., Secretary to council of the North, and who dies leaving issue.
b. Arthur ------------------ -- .0. --------------------- --

2. Arthur Ingram, the second son, made an extensive purchase in Yorkshire, particularly the manor of Temple
Newsam, on the River Aire, 2 miles below Leeds from the Duke of Lennox, that Manor having been granted by King
Henry VIII to Matthew, 4th Earl of Lennox. He served the office of King James I, and was representative in Parliament
for the city of York. He married, first Susan, daughter of Richard Brown, of London and had issue

1 . Sir Arthur.

2. John Ingram, who dies without issue. He married first Anna, daughter and heiress of William Calverly of
Eccleshill; secondly, Dorothy, daughter of Thomas, Viscount Fairfax.

3- Daughter """"""" " married t0 Sir Sir Simeon Bennet. Bart-iHe married. secondly, Alice Ferrets, daughter of a
citizen of London, by whom he had a son: - “""

Sir Thomas Ingram of Sheriff Hutton, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, a Privy Councillor to King
Charles II, who married the Honorable Francis Belasyse, daughter of Viscount Fauconberg, and had a daughter, Mary.

He married thirdly, Mary, Daughter of Sir Ed, Grevile of Milcote, in Warwickshire, by whom he had a son,
Lionel, who died young.

Sir Arthur Ingram of Temple Newsam, the eldest son, served the office of Sheriff of the County of York in the sixth
of King Charles the 1. He married firstly Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Henry Slingsby, of Redhouse, Bart., and his issue:

1. Thomas, who married Mary, daughter of Watkinson Payler, without surviving issue.

2. Henry.

//'

ll


3. Arthur Ingram of Barrowsby: He was alive 1712. He married Jane, daughter of Sir John Mallory of Studley
Royal. She died August. They had a son Thomas, who died. He married Frances, daughter of John Nicholson of York,
M. D., and by her, who married secondly John Wood, Esq; had Arthur Thomas and Frances.

(1) Elizabeth, married to Robert, Lord Rich afterward Earl of Warwick and Holland, without surviving issue.
(2) Anne, married to Henry, 4th son of Sir Thomas Stapleton of Wighill. He married secondly, Catherine, daughter of
Thomas Viscount Fairfax of Emily relict of Robert Stapleton Esq., and Sir Matthew Bonyton, Bart., and by her who

afterwards married William Wickham Esq., had a daughter Catherine, married to Sir Charles Nevile of Amber, near
Lincoln, Knight.

Henry Ingram of Temple Newsam, eldest surviving son, was baptized at Stratford —le—Bow, 20th June, 1616; was
created a peer of Scotland by the title of Viscount of Irvine and Lord Ingram, by patent, dated 23rd May 1661, with
limitation to the heirs male of his body.

His Lordship married Lady Essex Montagu, daughter of Ed. Earl of Manchester, by whom he had issue:
(1) Edward, Second Viscount of Irvine
(2) Arthur, 3rd Viscount of Irvine.

Edward 2nd Viscount of Irvine, succeeded his father 1666; he married Elizabeth, daughter of Bennet, Lord Sherard;
and by her, who took to her second husband the Hon. John Noel, had an only daughter.

Catherine, who dies 6th November 1688 in her 2nd year.

Arthur, 3rd Viscount of Irvine, succeeded his brother 1688, and was chosen member of Parliament for the County of

York, 1701. He married Isabel, eldest daughter of John Machel of Hills, in Sussex, M. P. for Horsham, and by her had
issue:

1. Edward Machel, 4th Viscount of Irvine.
2. Richard, 5th Viscount of Irvine.
3. Arthur, 6th Viscount of Irvine.

4. *Henry, 7th Viscount of Irvine.

*****************************************************************************

5. *Hon. John Ingram, born April 1693, died unmarried*
*****************************************************************************

6. George 8th Viscount of Irvine.

7. Hon. Charles Ingram

8. Hon. Thomas Ingram, born 9th of Feb. 1697, died in May 1698,

unmarried.

Edward Machel, 4th Viscount of Irvine, born 26th December 1686, succeeded his father; was Lord-Lieutenant of
the East Riding of Yorkshire; and died of the sma1l—pox at London. Of him Thoresby said, "Whose excellent genius and
noble qualifications surpass what my dull pen dare pretend to express." His next brother,

Richard, 5th Viscount of Irvine, born 6th January 1686, was in 1715 appointed Governor of Hull, and Colonel of
the Life Guards, he had command of the First Regiment of Dragoon Guards conferred upon him 13th of December,
1717; was appointed Governor of Barbados, 1720; he married Lady Anne Howard, 3rd daughter of Charles, 3rd Earl of
Carlisle, but by her, who married secondly, Colonel James Douglas, had no issue.

His next brother,


Arthur, 6th Viscount of Irvine, born 21st December, 1689, was elected Member of Parliament for Horsham 1715;
succeeded to the title 1721, and voted at the keenly contested election for a representative peer of Scotland, 5th of
March 1721, when his vote was objected to as he was a member of the House of Commons, and the Viscountess of
Dowager was understood to be pregnant.

Henry, 7th Viscount of Irvine, born 14th of May 1691; was elected member of Parliament for Horsham, at the
general election, 1722, 1727 and 1734. A new writ was issued 1727, on his being appointed Commissary-General of
stores at Gibralter, and was re—elected; another, in 1735, on his being appointed Commissary of stores and provisions at
Minorca and he was re-elected; a third in 1736, on his becoming a peer.

George, 8th Viscount of Irvine, born 19th of November 1694, was bred to the church; appointed chaplain to the
House of Commons; installed Canon of Windsor, and Presendary of Westminister; succeeded to the title, 1761; and
died without issue 14th of April 1763, in the 69th year of his age, being succeeded by his nephew, Charles Ingram, son
of his next brother.

»

The Hon. Charles Ingram, who was born 8th of April 1696. He had a company in the 3rd regiment of Foot Guards
1737; was appointed Adjutant General of the forces in April 1743; elected member of Parliament for Horsham, in room
of his uncle, 1736; re-chosen at the General Election 1741 and 1747; and died leaving a son.

Charles, 9th Viscount of Irvine, who was elected member of Parliament for Horsham in the room of his father,
1748; re-chosen at General Election 1754 and 1761; and was appointed on of the grooms of the bed-chamber of
George; Prince of Wales, 1756; and continued in that office after his accession to the throne. He resigned it, 1763, on
succeeding to the title, when a new writ was issued for Horsham. His Lordship was chosen one of the 16
representatives of the Scottish peerage at the General Election 1768; and died at Temple Newsam without male issue,
whereby the title became extinct, after it had been possessed by nine individuals, in the period of 117 years making the
small average of 13 years to each. His Lordship married in 1756 Miss Shepherd, a lady possessed of a very great
fortune. She died at Temple Newsam, in the 74th year of her age, much regretted. Her charities were as extensive as her

rank was elevated; and by her death the poor of the surrounding villages lost a munificent benefactress. They had 5
daughters.

»

(1) Hon. Isabella Anne Ingram Shepherd, married 19th May 1776 to Francis Seymour Conway, Marquis of Hereford,
K.G. The King was pleased to grant to them, 18th December 1807, his royal license and authority, that they might in
compliance with an injunction contained in the Last Will and Testament of her father, Charles, Viscount of Irvine,
bearing date 16th June 1777, take and use the surname of Ingram, before their present surnames of Seymour and also

write the surname of Ingram before all titles of honor, and the said Marquis also bear the arms of Ingram, quarterly,
with those of Seymour and Conway, they have issue.

(2) Hon. Frances Ingram Shepherd, married 6th March 1781 to Lord William Gordon second son of Cosno George,
3rd Duke of Gordon. Without issue.

(3) Hon. Elizabeth Ingram Shepherd, married August 2nd, 1782 to Hugo Meynell, younger of Bradley, in the county of
Derby, who died without issue.

(4) Hon. Harriett Ingram Shepherd, married 16th Sept. 1789, to C01. Henry Harvey Ashton, and had issue. Going out
with his regiment to the East Indies, he was, at the Cape of ‘Good Hope‘ called out two days successively for having
said that two of his officers had behaved illiberally towards an inferior officer who had complained of their conduct. He
was ny the 2nd challenge shot through the body on the first fire, (Major Allen) but did not fall, nor was it perceived that
he was wounded. He then after having withe the utmost composure deliberately leveled his pistol with steady aim, to
show that it was in his power to return the fire, nobly withdrew it across his breast, declared he was wounded,and as he
believed, mortally, and therefore should not return the fire; for that it should not be said of him that the last act in his
life was an act of revenge. He died.


(5) Hon. Louisa Susan Ingram Shepherd, married at London, 5th of June 1787, to Sir John Ramsden of Bryon, in the
Country of York, Bart.

ARMS. ERMINE, OR ON A FESS. GULES, THREE SCALLOPS.
CRESTS. A cock, proper.

SUPPORTERS. Dexter, a Griffin, proper; sinister, an antelope, proper, horned, maned, tufted, and unguled, or gorged
with ducal coronet, gules.

MOTTO. "MAGNANIMOUS ESTO."

To make the above story more complete, we have attached hereto and included herewith the family tree down to the
date of the last issue of the Ingram family in England, which is verified by the above and foregoing history. We have
omitted to trace down each member of the family of Ingram in America from John Ingram, which we have at hand,
because of the added expense of following this matter out, which of course is in the interest of all of you.

Therefore you will note from the foregoing opinions and from the family tree and family history of the Ingram
Estate, that the last Ingram in America, Charles Ingram, was the last of the male issue who had possession of the vast
estate belonging to the Ingram heirs. Immediately upon his death, which was 18th of June, 1778, since said time people
who have no legal right or interest of said estate, either by descent or by virtue of being legatee under the Will which
created the estate of John Ingram, have had any right, title, interest or other than the possession of the said estate and
Temple Newsam, hence this opinion is given by the attorney, wherein it is recited ‘relying upon their possession of 160
years or more as a bar to any action." I trust that you will make a careful examination of the family tree, family
history, and the opinion of these attorneys, and determine for yourselves the conclusion at which they have arrived with
reference to the limitation and of an action, as we were verbally informed that the Courts of England will assume
anything, death, Act of Parliament, unprobated Will, or any other thing to defeat foreigners (as you all are) from getting
in possession of English property. Therefore, there was only one thing to be done by us after receiving the information,
and that was to make investigation as to how Arthur Ingram procured these vast properties. We at once began to search
for his derivative title and found such as to corroborate our belief that the estates had been granted to Arthur Ingram by
the King for service rendered, as it is recited in many places even in secular newspapers, monthly periodicals, club
publications, of the close relation between the King and your ancestor. In our searches it took us back to 1600, this
being about the time that Sir Arthur was supposed to have taken possession of this property. During that period, we
found many title papers, some of which had to be gathered out of parchments that were in rolls 80 feet long that had
been in vaults since 1600, portions of which had never been unwrapped or untied since they were placed in there in
1600. These writings were legible but mostly written in Old English and Latin, hence we were at a daily terrific
expense of calling out these writings and calling upon experts who are delving into these ancient papers daily to
translate them for us, which they could do in ten minutes that would take us a day, hence, it was apparent that we then
could conserve the interest of all concerned by placing this investigation in hands of competent abstractors who could

dig this up for us. Hence, it was useless to be waiting around London, Leeds and old church places while this
investigation was going on, hence this early return to America.

You will notice further by the opinion of the attorney, that the titles of Honor quoted in the last paragraph has
reference to the English title to which the John Ingram heirs are entitled, which at the present time is held by one of the

"Wood" heirs by special Royal license given in 1893, this title having been held four times since the death of Charles,
by Royal license under Act of Parliament.

This title of honor means more to an Englishman than both clothing or estates, and should every other endeavor on
our part fail to pry these heirs loose from the possessions of which they are so assiduously clinging, that it may be a
way of compelling them to divide their interest with us in these vast estates. This, however, is in addition to the very
probable condition that now exists with reference to the exceptions mentioned in the opinion of the attorneys which are
marked (A) and (B), so we have a possible threefold upon this estate at the present time.


The next inquiry that was of very interest to us was to know whether or not any other estates in addition to the
Temple Newsam estate were intact and to verify this, we got a copy of the Will of Emily Charlotte, portions of which I
will copy in this opinion for your benefit. I now quote some of the things that are mentioned in it:

"1 devise all my real estate of freehold tenure situated in and about Temple Newsam, Leeds, Holbeck Halifax Heath
Warnfield all to Stanley Sheriff Hutton Lilling and Baron Le Street in the County of York, other than my estate of
Hatfield, to the Honorable Edward Frederick Lindy Wood, sons of my brother Charles Lindley for his life with the
remainder of the issue of the first and other sons of the said Edward Frederick Lindley successively accordingly to
seniority in tail male with the remainder other estates mentioned in the Wills which are situated at Hoar Cross and at
Willough—Bridge, also estates in Stafford and Laughton, also an estate of Doncaster, all of which have come down
successively through the Ingram estate and are now intact."

Except that two years prior to the death of Charlotte she deeded to her brother two vast estates there, of which are as
large as the Temple Newsam, which also descended through the Ingram heirs.

In addition to this by looking at your family tree, you find that Arthur Lord Ingram, second son and brother of
Edward Lord Ingram, to which Third Viscount Irvine married one Isabella who was his daughter and co—heiress of John
Machel. We find that John Machel died in 1763, and by his Last Will and Testament which we also procured, which
was proved August 4, 1704, we find that John Machel left all his property to the Ingram Heirs, of which John T., the
fifth son, and in his Will there is left a vast estate in the same manner as Arthur left his in favor of the Ingram heirs, of
which John was the fifth son and from whose will I quote the following:

“And for default of said issue (being the male issue of Henry Ingram Fourth son of Sir Arthur) I give and devise all
and singular the said premises with their appurtenances unto my grandson, The Hon. John Ingram, Esq., fifth son of the
said Lord Viscount Erwin, deceased for and during the term of his natural life without impeachment, of for any manner
of waste and form and after the determination of that estate I give and devise the same premises to the said Joseph Lee
Samuel Blount and John Wicker their heires and assignes for and during the natural life of the said John Ingram upon
trust only for preserving the contingent uses and estates herein after limited from being barred or destroyed and for that
end to make entries as the case shall required, but that the said Joseph Lee Samuel Blount and John Wicker their heires
and assignes shall not convert the rents issues or profitees thereof to their own use and from immediately after the death
of the said John Ingram, I give and devise all the said mannors, messuages, lands tenementes titles hereditamentes and
premises with appurtenances unto the first son of the body of the said John Ingram, lawfully to be begotten and to the
heirs male of the body of such first son lawfully to be begotten and for default of such issue then to the second son of
the body of said John Ingram lawfully to be begotten and to the heires male of the body of such second son lawfully to
be begotten and for default of such issue then to the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and all and every other the son
and sons of the body of the said John Ingram family lawfully to be begotten severally or successively one after another
in order and course as they and every one of them shall be in seniority of age and priority of birth and to the several and
respective heires males of the bodies of all and every such son and sons lawfully issuing the elder of such sons and the
heires male of his body being always preferred before the younger of such sons and heires male of their bodies."

Corroborating the fact that John Ingram was living at the time of the making and probating of this Will, which further

corroborates the Will of his eldest brother, Edward Machel, which recital from the Will of Edward Machel is as
follows:

"And for default of such issue male or ye body of ye Henry Ingram I give and devise ye all premises and every part
thereof charged and charge—able as is aforesaid to my brother, ye Hon. John Ingram, Esq. for and during ye term of his
natural life without impeachment of or for any manner of waste and with such farther powers and authorities as are
hereinafter expressed and from and after ye determination of ye estate I give and devise ye same primises to ye
aforesaid the Woraley Junr and Arthur Ingram of Knottingley and their heirs during ye natural life of ye s I John
Ingram in trust to support ye conting estate hereinafter devised to ye sons of ye s I John Ingram from being defeated
and destroyed and for ye purpose to make entry and bring actions as occasion shall require but nevertheless to permit
ye s I John Ingram and he assigns during their life to receive and take ye rents issues and profits thereof to his and their
use and uses. And from and immediately after his decease I give and devise ye same premises and every part thereof to
ye first son of ye body of ye s I John Ingram lawfully to be begotten and of ye body of such first son lawfully issuing.
And for default of such issue I give and devise ye same premises to ye second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and all and
every other ye son and sons of ye body of ye s I John Ingram lawfully to be begotten severally successively and in rem


West End of Gallery Beginning from the Door.

1. Landscape ruins of Rome Joli
2. Descent from the cross of gold panel Albert Durer

3. Portrait of Lady Gordon Sir Joshua Reynolds

4. Landscape (pillars with trees in foreground) Claude Lorraine
5. Infant Savior and St. John the Baptist Vandyke

North Side of Gallery

Full length portrait Richard Lord Holland Vandyke

. Landscape — Ponte St. Angelo (in chimney piece) Panini

. Full length portrait — Sir Arthur Ingram Friend of Lord Stafford and Builder of Temple Newsome
. Landscape small (ships) Van Der Valde

. Full length portrait of Charles 9th and Last Viscount Irwin

. Figure of woman and cupids flying Polemberg

. Children bathing in sea (heads) Rubens

Isabella Ingram Machioness of Hertford

(full length) Sir Joshue Reynolds

9. Women bathing - landscape Polemberg

10. Full length portrait of Price of Orange Mirevelt

11. Roman bayhs in chimney piece

12. St. John Baptist preaching (large) Guido

13. Landscape ships (companion to 4) Vandervelde

14. Group of women dressing (companion to 9) Polemberg
15. Cupids dancing in circle Rottenhamer

po\1oxun.I>u2t\.>;—-

Miss Ingram's Room
Portraits of 5 Miss Ingrams Wilson
Blue Dressing Room — Portrait of Sir Ingram in Chimney Piece
Gallery Passage Original sketch of Strafford (head) Vandyke

Staircase Henriette Duchess of Orleans with portrait
in her hands Lebrum

Great Hall Portrait of William and Mary full length

Bed Room, Red Portraits of Price George & Anne 3/4 length
Mrs. Meyness's Sitting Room

Holy Family, Infant Savior, & St. John Vandyke

Darnley Room Confirmation of young Prince Lucius Crannack

The fact and further to show that the property, although for more than 400 years changing from one family to another is
still intact and by consulting some of the shops selling art work in London, we find this collection of paintings scarcely
could be valued, as most all the works of art are the original and not copies, and all is still hanging in the art gallery of

the Temple Newsam proper.

On our arrival in London, we set about to located the records we still needed to complete the history of the Ingram

family and in order to complete the connection with the Ingram family in America and in England.


There is no question but what the Ingrams are of Scotch descent and there is much history in the best libraries in
England which verifies this belief.

We also made every endeavor to locate the Leathem family, to see if they could find John's wife or some connection
between the two families, to ascertain if possible if they had any record of the departure of Susan Leathan to America.
We found a family tree which seems to be original stock of the Leathams in and about Leeds. Mr. W. C. Pennock has
this family tree, if any of you are interested in it.

Another fact is that the Leathams were all Quakers, and at about the time John departed for America, the Quakers
were being persecuted by the English Church throughout England and many of the Quakers were in prison, their lands
being forfeited and the most unjust prosecution given. It, therefore, seems feasible that the fact that many of the records
in America are traceable through the Quaker church; that probably this is the reason for the departure of John to
America, at or about the same time that Susan Letham came to America, but even to this time, we are not satisfied that
we have absolutely found the Susan Leatham, although we worked for almost three weeks attempting to trace the
Leatham family and history of the Ingram Family, in order to find the positive proof of the departure of John to
America.

We visited York, all the houses of record in London, the Cathedral at Chichester and at Caterbury, where we
located some of these Wills, and made a trip to Horsham where you will notice by the family tree that the father of John
Machell had his estate called the "Hills.' We saw the old mansion and saw this estate also, and it is impossible at this
writing to give you the full details of the amount of work that we did upon this estate. Suffice it to say, that from the
day that we landed until the day that we departed we only wasted what could be called one day and that was when we
were trying to get in touch with some attorneys and depended upon interests which we had no control, to furnish us
with the proper credentials.

We used every available source of information, and we could have spent 60 days more time in seeking out these
various lines of research, but when it was apparent that our right to recover depends upon the matters and things as set
forth by the attorneys in England, we thought it useless to spend further time and money in making further research
along the lines suggested.

Our opinion is that if these estates descended from the King, by granting for services rendered, the way to recover
them is easier than we had ever anticipated. If they are not, then without question you are entitled to the Ingram "title."
This means nothing to us as the people, and there are few that would give a thing even a sixpence for the title, yet our
value upon it is not the controlling force in this matter, for when we contemplate that an Englishman counts his title of
greater value and means more to him among his fellows than any other thing, and without doubt, the Ingram heirs in
America are entitled to the title, it is a means toward an end in our opinion to break these people loose from a part of
this estate if we agree to give to them the title to which you are entitled.

We have tried to cover briefly anything and everything of interest and if we have omitted anything, if you will write
personally to anyone of the undersigned, we will be glad to give you full information. We have done what we think
was best and our judgment up to the present time has not been changed with reference to any of the things undertaken
and sought to be accomplished for the end to which we are all striving.

Respectfully submitted,


r"g_”  <>~Y\~a  (74. J 
, v ; ,u—/~44».
Vxtflo J/‘“/“Hi” m’ w [

_   »~4W
/ Ur ~ns95’,‘TLe.m>‘ > {J/"””TW”’”‘”” W"

A1/{lug ¢A.f/Gm/«A ~,~;7~e
NIL55

_  _9;4L.~fl?:v‘*=,V
3 ELLKM/fir   NW‘ )$   ( 

L.9~—J"°“)
_ Q Ck“/(6)7/. T 3“6_Ié35) 


3'«k»»ru/v‘<7’v~ M ,~5~lc1><2/
K» (H )

 K5\'Q'i‘”‘An‘~(\k/M’/6))/O‘ W‘) Tggo Mg?’

.~(£ L.5"(£LL 3"‘n~</3 Sb; fiéyflr Jfinjséa (.Om:)
OK 7

f
K

3 %%wmu(@Q%Mw*mJ
Gut, W”, (557; W  +m4u rrmm nx\.a_f|,.,’\’\.l‘(«
Mm zmw. }”La.mJ r. f(b.W,,t..- (A3 «A IL

/‘fbvim, pm «W.  zasw<»a~a

6\»~AA/1)

r§:um+NW“-”“M”°“““W%‘””

aWJ#A~5
fifis”)

  5:9-7 5:2/*""1\T:]   ‘K v1§7v»I/5: “V/"Q‘”‘a’t7

Jvlv/3 n.«>«\.,«,muJ3L ‘/v"\~
whif-

%¢V17\~e/4" I. .“
C31 (:Q,;,{.NLx~ §f‘~£:,/I/qgf I7]?

I
-1

't._


 

Charles Meyer and Thomas Welsh that the said sum of £7000 will be

insufficient to pay the expences of the said works and he has requested to

have further advances of money made to him to enable him to carry on the

said works which the said Charles Knyvett Frederick Charles Meyer and

Thomas Welsh have agreed to make Now it is agreed between the said

parties and the said Alexander Robertsondoes engage to complete the said 5
works with all the alterations and additions‘ which have or shall be made by V
the direction of the said John Nash or which have or shall become necessary

from any reason whatever in a good and workmanlike manner on or before

the first day of January 1820 as aforesaid And that when the said work shall

be fully completed the sum of money to be paid to him the said Alexander
Robertson in addition to the said sum of £7000 shall be ascertained fixed and
settled by the said John Nash but in case the said Charles Knyvett Frederick
Charles Meyer and Thomas Welsh shall not be satisfied with the sum to be

fixed by the said John Nash then the said sum of money so to be paid to the "
said Alexander Robertson as aforesaid (in addition to the said sum of £7000) 1
shall be ascertained fixed and settled by William Ayrton of James Street
Buckingham Gate Esquire the said Charles Knyvett and Thomas Welsh and

the said Alexander Robertson doth agree to be satisfied with such sum of

money and to receive the same in full of all demands and to give an absolute
Release to the said Charles Knyvett Frederick Charles Meyer and Thomas

Welsh and also to all the Members of the Regents Harmonic Institution and

to allow in account all advances that have been or may be made over the said

sum of 27000. In consideration whereof the said Charles Knyvett Frederick
Charles Meyer and Thomas Welsh have this day advanced the said Alexander
Robertson the sum of Six hundred pounds in addition to the aforesaid sum of

£7200 for the purposes aforesaid and they do hereby agree to make further
advances if necessary such advances not to exceed £500.

Witness Chas. Knyvett

M. C. Burney F. C. Meyer

Thomas Welsh
Alex. Robertson

Sir Arthur Slingsby

Sir Arthur Slingsby, who purchased the Jacobean house Bifrons, near

Canterbury,in 1662, was descended of a younger branch of the Slingshys of

Scriven in Yorkshire and was created a baronet at Brussels in 1657. Born

about 1623, he was a son of Sir Guildford Slingsby (1565-1631), by his wife
Margaret, daughter of William Watters, Lord Mayor of York in 1620. He 
married "a Flemish lady" and was buried 12 February 1665/6 at Patrix- ‘
bourne in his fortysecond year. His widow was living on 28 April 1666. ,

20

  

.,:..._.-.....,. .

Sir Arthur's will confirms Dugdales 'Visitation of Yorkshire '

(The Genealogist, NS, vol. 26 p. 178) that they had two sons and two
daughters; Charles (the second and last baronet), Peter Francis, Anne
Charlotte (born in 1662, baptised 4 Jan. 1664 at Patrixbourne, Kent) and
Mary (born postumously and baptised 26 April 1666 at Patrixbourne).
Anne married Edward Nightingale, de jure fifth baronet (1658-1723).

The elder son, then Sir Charles Slingsby Bt, sold Bifrons in 1677 to
Thomas Baker, a London merchant, after which nothing is known of him.

It is conjectured that he may have been the husband of Dame Mary Slingsby
"who was buried 1st March 1693/4 at St. Pancras, Middlesex from

St. James’ ". The Dictionary of National Biography states that this lady
was Mrs. Aldridge, afterwards Mrs. Lee, afterwards Lady Slingsby, and
as Mrs. Lee from 1660 to 1680 and as Lady Slingsby from 1681 to 1685 was
a wel1—known actress.

The will of Sir Arthur is given in full as not only does it contain a
wealth of detail but illustrates how valuable an estate owners will can be to
a local historian.

Sir Arthur Caley (1614/15-?) was the son of Edward Caley of Brampton
in Pickering, Yorkshire, by his wife Anne, daughter of William Watters, of
Cundall, Yorkshire (Dugdales 'Visitation of Yorkshire‘ in ‘The Genealogist’,
NS, Vol. 29 p. 154). This William Watters is doubtless identical with the
William Watters, of Astubbing House in Gilstead, Yorkshire, who was the
maternal grandfather of Sir Arthur Slingsby. However, 'Yorkshire
Pedigrees’ (Harleian Society, vol. 96 p.444) states that Mary Watters and
not Anne Watters was the mother of Sir Arthur Caley.

Sir Arthur Slingsby's "worthy kinsman Robert Walter Esquire" is
probably either his uncle or his uncle’ s son Robert Watters (sic). His
uncle was High Sheriff of Yorkshire in 1660 and great grandfather of
Richard Robinson, created Lord Rokeby in 1722. ('Yorkshire Pedigrees‘
pages 444 and 445). Sir Arthur's elder brother Francis Slingsby was of
St. Martins in the Fields (will proved 1670 PCC 141 Penn).

For further information on this family please see 'Blackmansbury' vol. 1
No.2 (page 19).

Qpy of the will of Sir Arthur Slingsby (PCC 51 Mice)

In the name of God Amen. ISir Arthur Slingesby of Bifrons in the County of
Kent, Knight and Barronett doe make this my last will and testament in
manner and forms following, vizt I doe give and bequeath to my worthy
Kinsman Sir Arthur Caley knight and to my deare brother Francis Slingesby
Esquire And to my worthy kinsman Robert Walter Esquire and to their
heires All my mannors houses lands Tenements and hereditaments whatso-
ever whereof Ihave any estate eyther in possession or reversion upon trust

21


that they shall and will settle dispose convey and sell and dispose of the
proffitts thereof according to the directions of this my will for the payment
of my debts and the maintenance of my wife and Children Alsoe I doe give
and bequeath unto the said Sir Arthur Caley Francis Slingsby and Robert
Walter all that Lease Terms and interest and estate That I have of and in
Five hundred pounds per annum payable out of the post office for the terme
of one and thirty years or the life of Sirjsamuell Morland or which of them
shall have the longest continuance my Lease of the house at Pickadilly And
all houses, lands and rents which remayne yet unsold of my wives beyond
the seas And all shares and parts of any thing granted mee by his majesty
And all other my Leases money Debts, goods and Chattells whatsoever,
subject nevertheless to the Trust hereafter in this my will declared touching
the same And my will and mynd is and I doe hereby desire and direct That
the said Sir Arthur Caley Francis Slingesby and Robert Walter and the
survivors and survivour of them and his heirs shall settle and dispose and
suffer the rents fines and proffitts of all that my mansion house called
Bifrons with all out houses yards gardens orchards and appurtenances in
the parrish of Patrixborne in the said County of Kent And of all those two
orchards thereunto nere adjoyning conteyning three acres and all my two
Cherrye orchards with a part of the Forestall conteyning five acres And of
all those two peeces of arreable land called the Coaches conteyning eighteene
acres and of one peece of arrable land called the horse Leaze conteyning
Eight acres and of all that peece of meadow land called the Cowleaze
conteyning eleaven acres and of all that peece of meadow ground called the
lower meadow conteyning six acres all now in my owne occupation And of all
that other parte of the forestall conteyning two acres now in the occupation
of Valentine Staynes at the yearly rent of forty shillings and of all that
Tenement with the appurtenances in Lease to Christopher Sympson at the
yearly rent of fiftie shillings And of all those two tenements with the
appurtenances and a pasture close above the house conteyning two acres and
of one peece of meadowe conteyning fower acres called the Little horse
Lease, two peeces of pasture being part of Colland field conteyning eighteene
acres and of one peece of arrable land called the Tenne acres and of one
peece called the six acres and of one peece called the eight acres And of
one peece called Magate conteyning seaven acres all lying in Patrixborne
aforesaid and in lease to Thomas Badcock at the yearely rent of Fiftie three
Pounds And of one Tenement with the appurtenances and two peeces of
meadow called the Upper and the middle meadowes conteyning nyne acres
and of one peece of arrable land called the five acres and of one peece called
Stone acres conteyning eighteen acres and of one peece being parts of
Colland Field conteyning Eight acres in all five peeces conteyning forty

22

acres All scituate lyeing and being in the parrishes of Bridge and
Patrixborne in the said Countie of Kent and in Lease to Valentine Rucke at
the yearely rent of Fiftie eight pounds And of those three Tenements with

the appurtenances in Bridge aforesaid in Lease to Mr.Robert Bargrave at
the yearely rent of eight pounds and Tenne shillings And of all that Tenemtn
with the appurtenances in Bridge aforesaid in Lease to John Cooley at the
yearely rent of three pounds And of all that Tenement with the appurtenances
in Bridge aforesaid in the Tenure of widow Butcher And of all that Tenement
with the appurtenances in Bridge aforesaid in Lease to widow Cheston at the
yearely rent of thirty shillings and of one Tenement with the appurtenances
with two peeces of arrable land one behind the house and the other adjoining
to Bridge hill towards Canterbury conteyning sixe acres All in the occupation
of Richard Gilman at the yearely rent of Nyne pounds And of one Tenement
with a Tanne Yard and the appurtenances in Bridge aforesaid and a peece of
Meadowe conteyning three acres by the house And of one peece of arrable
land called Tanners Field conteyning Foure acres in the occupation of one
Thomas May at the yearely rent of Twelve pounds and of all rent Capons
rent Hennes and other such like rents or profitts payable by any of the
tenants to be received and taken as I have herein after appointed That is to
say That they the said Sir Arthur Caley Francis Slingsby and Robert Walter
and the survivors and survivor of them and his heirs shall permitt and
suffer my wife to have the use of my said house called Bifrons dureing her
naturall life for her habitation And my will is That she suffer her children
to live with her in the house whether single or married soe as they marry
not without theconsent of my wife or the consent of my executors or of my
brother Francis Slingesby but my will and mynd is That when my eldest
same then liveing shall marry or come to the age of one and twenty yeares
That his brothers and sisters shall not but with the consent of him and his
mother by vertue of any Clause in this my will Clayme any right to live and
inhabitt in the said house But my confidence is that They will not deny them
that priviledge without very just cause and my will is that my said kinsman
Sir Arthur Caley my brother Francis Slingesby and Robert Walter doe per-
mitt and suffer all my household goods now in my house at Bifrons to continue
there after my death for the use of my wife and children and that the same
be continued there dureing my wifes life and after for the use of my heir And
my further will and mynd is that my wife dureing her naturall life be per-
mitted to have and receive to her owne use the Moyety or one halfe of the
rents issues and proffits of all the perticularly before mentioned lands tene-
ments and herditaments And that when the said messuages lands Tenements
and hereditaments shalbe settled upon my children as I have in this my will
directed That the said Moyety of the said lands be settled upon or secured

23

I


unto my said wife for her life And my further will is that the said Sir Arthur
Caley and my brother Francis Slingesby and Robert Walter doe out of the
other Moyety of the rents issues and proffits of the said particularly men-
tioned lands pay (during the minority of my sonne Charles the somme of
thirty pounds to my sonne Peter Francis and thirty pounds to my daughter
Anne Charlott Slingsby for their maintenance by quarterly payments at the
Feastes of our blessed Lady Saint Mary the virgin the nativity of Saint John
the Baptist Saint Michaell the Archangell and the nativity of our saviour to
commence at the first of those feasts after my decease And that they pay the
overplus to my sonne Charles and that at the fullage of my sonne Charles or
of such sonne as shalbe my heir they settle the said messuages tenements
and lands in manner and forme following vizt. the house with the appurten-
ances and the one moyety of the messuageslands and tenements upon my
wife for her life. And the other moytie and also the said house (and that
moyety lymitted to my wife) after her deathupon my sonne Charles and the
heirs of his body And for default of such issue upon my Sonne Peter Francis
Slingsby and the heirs of his body And for defeault of such issue upon all and
every other some and sonnes that I shall happen to have by my wife And
upon the heirs of the bodyes of such sonnes severally and respectively
according to their seniority and ages the eldest and the heirs of his body to
bee preferred before the younger and the heirs of his and their body and
bodyes And for default of such issue to all such daughters as I shall happen
to have by my wife and to the heirs of their boydes And for default of such
issue to my deare brother Francis Slingesby for an dureing the terme of his
naturall life And after his decease to my Nephewe Guilford Slinesby and to
his heirs And my further will and mynd is ‘That the said Sir Arthur Caley
Francis Slingesby and Robert Walter at the full age of my said sonne
Charles or such of my sonnes as at his full age shalbe my heire shall not
settle my estate upon him or them as is before by me in this my will
directed or suffer my heire to receive any of the rents issues or proffitts
thereof until he hath given security to the good likeing of the said Sir Arthur
Caley Francis Slingesby and Robert Walter That my sonne Peter Francis
Slingesby and my daughter Anne Charlett Slingesby shall at their respective
ages of one and twenty years or Dayes of Marriage or which shall first
happen have five hundred pounds a peece paid unto them and thirty pounds
per annum be in the meane tyme yearly paid unto them by equall quarterly
payments at the aforesaid fower most usuall feasts of the years The first
payment thereof to be made at the first of those feastes which shall next
happen after my death. And that my wife shall quietly have and enjoy her
habitation dureing her life in the house and the use of all the goods there
And the moietie of all the rents and profitts of all the before particularly

24

jinn-1n\\\\m‘71mm1n\\\ /- “ '

mentioned lands And my further will is that dureing the minority of my heire
the said Sir Arthur Caley Francis Slingsby and Robert Walter or any of
them shall with a servant have free egresie and regresie into my said house
and there reside as long as hee or they please for the ordering and settling
my affairs according to the direction of this my will And I doe perticularly
recommend it to my deare brother to comfort assist and advise my deare
wife and children in their affairs aswell in England as beyond the seas and
to live with them as much as his affairs will permitt him And if my brothers
affairs will permitt him and that he will looke after such estate as doth or
shall belong to my wife or children beyond the seas in Flanders Brabant or
elsewhere that he shall allowe himselfe the charges of his Journey And I doe
heartily recommend it to my deare wife to make him a present according to
her ability and the efforts of his negotlaton And my further will is that for
lands from all ingagements and the satissfaction of such legacies as Ihave
given by this my will the said Sir Arthur Caley Francis Slingesby and
Robert Walter doe with what convenient speed they can sell these perticular
messuages and landes following or see many of them as shalbe necessarie
to doe the same vizt. one tenement with the appurtenances and eleaven
peices of arrable land pasture and meadow ground in the parish of Bridge
aforesaid in Lease to Daniell Ovenden at the yearely rent of Thirty and slx
pounds The parcell of which lands and the quitrents and proffitts which
Daniell Ovenden enjoys and pays by vertue of that Lease appeares in my
books of the perticulers of my estate kept for information of my trustees
And also one other Tenement with the appurtenances And tenne fields of
arrable pasture and meadow ground conteyning one hundred and f01‘tY acres
or thereabouts in the Parish of Bridge in Lease to John Castle at the yearly
rent of Fiftie pounds and also one other Tenement with the appurtenances
and fower parcells of land conteyning fourteene acres or thereabouts in the
parish of Bridge aforesaid in Lease to Nicholas Fasman (?) at the yearely
rent of eight pounds and tenne shillings And alsoe one peece of Woodland
called P hill conteyning Eleaven acres or thereabouts And one other peece
of woodland conteyning three acres or thereabouts all in my owne hands in
the parrish of Bridge aforesaid which my will is should be alsoe sold un-
lesse my executors shall thinke fitt to keepe it and annex it to my sonne
Charles his estate and to settle it as I have directed the estate that I have by
this my will appointed to be settled on him with the like remainders as I
have directed to be lymitted upon that estate to my sonne Charles which I
doe here give them power to doe if they shall soe thinke fitt And my will is
that the said Sir Arthur Caley Francis Slingesby and Robert Walter with the
money that shalbe raised by the sale of the aforesaid Lands and tenements
appointed to be sold as aforesaid and by the sale of my leases and of such

25


other parts of my estate as I have by this my will given unto them which are
all my goods and Chattells (except those household goods which I have dir-
ected by this my will to be left in my said house called Bifrons my will is
That in the first place they soe discharge all such debts as my lands or any
parts thereof are ingaged for And after those ingagements discharged that
they satisffie all my just debts And if it shall happen that my wife shalbe
with child at my death That then they dispose of Five hundred pounds to be
imployed as a portion for that child wherewith my wife shalbe with child at
my death And then my will is that the remains and overplus of my estate be
equally divided amongst all my children then living share and share (a) like
And my will is that such estate as shall fall or come to my wife and children
by their Aunt D'hautron (? D'hanton) if she order it not otherwise may after
my wives death be equally divided amongst my children And mywill also is
that what legacies I shall give in any Codicill hereafter written with my
owne hand to be subscribed by my selfe with my owne name and sealed with
my owne seale shalbe paid after my debts and before any division of my
estate amongst my children or as I shall appoint them to be paid And where-
as Ihave given a security to Mr. William Tompson of Bruxells merchant by
a certain Smithes house and shop and land in the occupation of William
Gilman in Bridge at the yearelly rent of Nyne pounds which is to be voyd
upon condition That my sonne Peter Francis Slingesby shall at his full age
make voyd a rent charge of Fiftie Florence Brabant money charged upon a
house that my wife and I sold in Bruxells to the said Mr. Tompson I doe
hereby devise That when my sonne Peter Francis Slingsby shall avoyd that
rent that my sonne Charles shall pay him one hundred pounds over and above
the five hundred pounds devised to himas aforesaid And then my will is that
the said house shop and lands in Bridge be settled upon my sonne Charles in
such manner and for such estate and with like remainder as the rest of my
lands hereby appointed to be settled on him as directed to be setled and of
this my will I doe constitute and appoint my said kinsman Sir Arthur Caley
and my said brother Francis Slingesby and my said kinsman Robert Walter
Executors And I doe give to every of them twenty pounds a peece to buy
every one of them a horse And I would have mourning apparrell only allowed
to my wife and children my executors Collonell Walter Slingesby and my two
sisters My body I would have decently buryed without any pompe whatsoever
desireing that if I dye within any reasonable distance it may be buried in the
Chappell belonging to my house in Patrixborne Parish Church In witness
whereof to this my last will written in twelve sheets of paper affixed together
at the toppe thereof with a red silke ribbon I have to every sheete thereof
subscribed my name and upon the last sheete there of and alsoe on the knott
of the said ribbon have sett my seals on hard wax and have published the

26

nh._..r:/.i;.\\\_.% nm:un\\\ ,» ‘

same to be my last will this six and twentieth day of January in the sixteenth
years of the raigne of our Soveraigne Lord King Charles the second 1664
Arth Slingesby signed sealed declared and published by the said Sir Arthur
snngesby as his last will the day of the date above written in the presence of
G, Benion William Singleton Bar Carpenter

probate. The above written will was proved at London before the Venerable
mamas Reade Doctor of Laws Surrogate of the pre-eminent Man
William Mericke, Kt. , also Doctor of Laws and lawfully constituted
Commissary of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, on the first day of the
month of March A.D. 1665/6, by oath of Francis Slingesby one of the
Executors in named the will to whom the administration was committed
(being) sworn (to) well (and faithfully administer) reserving a similar grant
to Sir Arthur Caley, Kt. , and Robert Walter the other executors named when
they shall come.

Queries
REGDJALD TURNER (1869-1938)

Stanley Weintraub, Editor of ‘The Shaw Review‘, wrote, in a letter to "The
Times Literary Supplement" (10 December 1964 page 1127) " . . . . in
‘Reggie’, my forthcoming biography of Reggie Turner, lam demonstrating
the equally plausible cases for 'I‘urner's having been fathered by Lionel
Lawson or by his nephew Edward I.evy- Lawson (Lord Burnham), as well as
the curious problems involved in tracing Reggie Turner's mother — another
intricate puzzle. " The Editor would be pleased to receive any evidence for
inclusion in an article entitled ‘Who Was Reggie Turner?’ which is due to
appear in the next (June) issue of 'Blackmansbury'.

EMLEY FAMILY

Information would be welcomed regarding this family in England. Rlease
reply to James O.Emley, 2118, S.Park drive, Santa Ana, California, U.S. A.

PICTURES AT BIFRONS

Bifrons, near Canterbury, the property of the Conyngham family, was
demolished about ten years ago. A valuable and interesting collection of
pictures hung in the house before the last war but no information can be
obtained regarding their fate. Enquiries of the Conyngham family have not
met with any response, but it is known that a painting of Bifrons by Wootton.
which was in the house before the war, recently passed through the hands of
a London dealer. Can any reader help, please?

27


\

English Civil War Timeline

13th June 1625 King Charles Marries

King Charles I married Henrietta Maria, daughter of Henry IV of France at St Augustine's
Church, Canterbury, Kent. The marriage was not popular because she was a Catholic.

1628 Thirty-Nine Articles

Charles re—issued the Thirty Nine Articles into the Church of England. This was seen as a move
towards Rome and evidence of the King's Catholic leanings.

1628 Petition of Right Parliament formed a committee of grievances and prepared a Petition of
Right which was presented to the King. The Petition was designed to protect subjects from any
further taxation unauthorised by Parliament. .

Charles signed the document reluctantly.

March 1629 Petition of Right

There were outbursts in Parliament when the Petition of Right was debated and the doors were
locked to keep royal guards out. The Speaker, who wanted to adjourn the proceedings, was held
in his chair. Parliament passed three resolutions:

l.That they would condemn any move to change religion.

2. That they would condemn any taxation levied without Parliament's authority.

3. That any merchant who paid 'illegal' taxes betrayed the liberty of England.

Charles dismissed Parliament.

March 1629 MPs Arrested

Charles arrested nine members of the Commons for offences against the state. Three were
imprisoned. This action by the King made him more unpopular. The King, defended his action
by stating his belief in his own divine right saying that ‘Princes are not bound to give account of
their actions, but to God alone.‘

1632 Thomas Wentworth

Known as ‘Black Tom Tyrant‘ by the Irish, Thomas Wentworth, Lord Deputy of Ireland, ruled
Ireland with a firm hand. However, his rule alienated the planters of Ulster and antagonised the
landowners of Connaught.

1633 Archbishop Laud

Charles appointed William Laud as Archbishop of Canterbury. Laud was known to have
Catholic leanings and Charles hoped that his appointment would help to stop the rise of the
Puritans.

18 June 1633 King of Scotland

Charles was crowned King of Scotland at Holyrood Abbey, Edinburgh.

1.638 Ship Money

This tax was paid by coastal towns to pay for the upkeep of the Royal Navy. In a bid to raise
more money, Charles now imposed the tax on inland towns as well. John Hampden, challenged
the King's right to impose such a tax but he lost the case and the court ruled that the King was the
only authority that could impose such a tax.

1638 Scotland and Book of Common Prayer

Charles demanded that the Book of Common Prayer be used in the Scottish Kirk. The Calvinist-
dominated Scottish church resisted the move. There were riots and a National Covenant was
formed which protested against any religious interference in Scotland by England. The Scottish
Kirk was so incensed that it expelled the Bishops installed in Scotland by James I.

1639 Pacification of Berwick

Thomas Wentworth's had led a scratch army against the Scots but had been defeated on the
border and had been forced to sign a temporary truce at Berwick. Wentworth told the King that
in order to raise an efficient army he must recall Parliament. Charles, who had enjoyed his eleven
years tyranny, was forced to recall Parliament.

1639 Short Parliament


The new Parliament refused to authorise any new taxes until the King agreed to abandon 'ship
money‘. The King said that he would only abandon ship money if Parliament would grant him
enough money to re—open the war with Scotland. Parliament refused and was dismissed.

1640 Oliver Cromwell

Oliver Cromwell was elected to Parliament for the second time. He openly criticised Charles
taxes and the level of corruption in the Church of England.

Oct 1640 Scotland

Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, set out for the Scottish border with a makeshift army.
However, the army mutinied and the Scots seized English land. The Scots demanded a daily rate
be paid until a satisfactory treaty was put in place.

21 Oct 1640 Treaty of Ripon

This treaty between Scotland and England allowed the Scots to stay in Durham and
Northumberland until a final settlement was concluded.

Nov 1640 Long Parliament

Charles had to have money to pay for an efficient army with which to defeat the Scots. However,
he couldn't have the money until he agreed to Parliament's demands which included an Act
which stated that parliament should meet once every five years and the arrest for treason of
Strafford. Charles had no choice but to comply.

20 May 1641 Wentworth Beheaded

Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, was executed on Tower Hill.

Summer 1641. Triennial Act

This act allowed Parliament to be summoned without royal command and declared 'ship money‘
to be illegal.

Late Summer 1641 Revolt in Ireland

A revolt broke out in Ireland. Parliament critical of the King's handling of matters in both Ireland
and Scotland, passed propositions that the Parliament and not the King should be responsible for
the country's defence.

Late Summer 1641 Grand Remonstrance

This document. put together by Pym, listed parliament's grievances against the King since his
reign began.

22 Oct 1641

Catholic Rebellion in Ireland

A Catholic rebellion broke out in Ulster and quickly spread across the country. Many Protestant
settlers were driven from their homes and the rebellion became war.

4 Jan 1642 Charles Arrests five MPs

Charles instructed his attorney—general to issue a charge of treason against one peer and five
members of the Commons including Pym and Hampden. When Parliament refused to recognise
the charge, Charles sent a troop of horsemen to make the arrests. However, Parliament had been
warned and the five men had fled. this move by Charles was extremely unpopular and across the
country people declared themselves for Parliament and against Popery. Charles removed himself
and his family from Whitehall to Hampton Court.

Jan 1642 Preparations for War

Charles sent his wife Henrietta Maria to the Continent to enlist Catholic support for his cause
against Parliament. She was also to pawn the crown jewels to buy arms. Although both sides
were now preparing for war, negotiations continued.

March 1642 Militia Ordinance

This allowed Parliament to take control of the Militia, virtually the only armed body in the
country.

April 1642 Charles - Hull

Charles tried to secure an arsenal of equipment left in Hull from his Scottish campaign. He was


blocked by Sir John Hotham. with parliamentary and naval support and was forced to retire to
York. Charles made his headquarters in York.

June 1642 Nineteen Propositions

The Nineteen Propositions were issued by Parliament in the hopes of reaching a settlement with
the King. They called for a new constitution recognising their own supremacy; demanded that
ministers and judges should be appointed by parliament not by the King and also that all Church
and military matters should come under the control of Parliament.

22 Aug 1642 Civil War - Standard raised

Charles raised his standard at Nottingham formally declaring war. However, both sides hoped
that either war could be averted or that one decisive battle would put an end to the matter.

7 Sept 1642 Portsmouth falls to Parliament

The vital port and fortress of Portsmouth surrendered to Parliament.

23 Oct 1642 Battle of Edgehill

In the early afternoon, Charles sent his army down the hill to meet the Parliamentary army
commanded by Essex. On the royalist right was Prince Rupert who broke Essex's left flank. In
the centre, reinforcements arrived and they managed to push forward putting the lives of the
King's sons, Charles and James, in danger. The battle was a stalemate with neither side able to
advance.

12, 13 Nov 1642 Small Battles

The Royalists led by Prince Rupert managed to surprise and capture Brentford. However, the
following day Rupert was surprised to find his route to the city of London barred at Turnham
Green by Essex and an army of some 24,000. The Royalist commander decided to retire rather
than fight.

Jan 1643 Royalist Victories

The Royalists had victories over Parliament at Braddock Down and Nantwich

1643 Skirmishes and Battles

Parliament took Lichfield. Reading, Wakefield, Gainsborough,

Royalists took Ripple Field, Tewkesbury, Chewton Mendip, Chalgrove Field, Landsdowne Hill,
Bristol and Yorkshire. Re—took Lichfield and Gainsborough, and held Cornwall, Newark and
Devises

30 June 1643 Battle of Adwalton Moor

The Royalist commander, William Cavendish decided to try and enclose the Parliamentarian
army in Bradford. However, Fairfax, the Parliamentary commander decided that his army had a
better chance of survival if they fought the Royalists in a battle rather than being surrounded and
forced to surrender. The Royalists won the battle.

13 July 1643 Battle of Roundaway Down

The Royalists were the first to charge but there was no counter-charge. After two more charges
the Parliamentary cavalry had fled. Waller then turned his attention to the Parliamentary infantry
who stood firm until a force led by Hopton attacked them from behind. Caught between two
Royalist armies the majority of Parliamentarian soldiers simply fled from the battlefield giving
the Royalists victory.

Aug 1643 Solemn League and Covenant

This document swore to preserve the Church of Scotland and reform the religion of England and
Ireland ‘according to the word of God and the example of the best reformed churches‘ and to
protect ‘the rights and liberties of parliaments’. It was accepted by the English Parliament in
September.

20 Sept 1643 First Battle of Newbury

Essex's force of tired wet and hungry Parliamentarians intended to rest at Newbury, a town
sympathetic to the Parliamentarians. However, Rupert had arrived there first and Essex had no
choice but to fight.

Essex moved the Parliamentarians before daybreak and secured the ‘Round Hill’, just south of


Newbury. The surrounding countryside was criss—crossed with lanes and hedgerows which
offerred excellent cover for the foot soldiers but was quite unsuitable for horse. Parliament won
the battle

June 1644 Battle of Marston Moor

This was the largest single battle of the Civil War involving 45,000 men. Although the Royalists
were outnumbered, they decided to fight. They were defeated by Parliament. For the first time

since the Civil War had began Rupert's cavalry were beaten by a Parliamentarian cavalry charge.

27 October 1644 Second Battle of Newbury

The Royalists were sandwiched between two Parliamentary forces. Each time Parliament made
some gain they were beaten back by the Royalists. The battle, which lasted all day, ended in a
draw.

14th June 1645 Battle of Naseby

The Parliamentarians broke their seige on Oxford and forced the Royalists into battle. Initially
the Royalists took up a defensive stance but later the order to attack was given. The battle lasted
just three hours and saw the death of most of the Royalist foot soldiers. It was a decisive victory
for Parliament. Charles fled the battlefield as soon as it was apparent that he had lost both the
battle and the war.

After June 1645 Interregnum

Parliament, led by Oliver Cromwell, took control of the country.

30 Jan 1649 Execution

King Charles I was executed by beheading. outside Whitehall Palace, London. He was buried in
St George's Chapel, Windsor.


The Cromwellian Settlement Pagc 1 Of 5

The Cromwellian Settlement

By Catherine 0’ Donovan

The execution of Charles I in 1649, on the orders of Oliver
Cromwell, brought the English Civil War to an end. England
became a Commonwealth or republic ruled by parliament with
Cromwell as Lord Protector. Cromwell and his army of well
trained and experienced soldiers, called Ironsides, came to
Ireland in August 1649 with the intention of subduing the
rebellion and stamping out all opposition to parliament.
Cromwell, a Puritan, ‘believed he was an instrument of divine
retribution for (alleged) atrocities committed by Catholics against Protestants in 1641 and he
accordingly gave orders to deny mercy to Catholics.’ His campaign was savage and is remembered
for the slaughter of women and children as well as unarmed captives. He captured Drogheda and
slaughtered the garrison. At Wexford the townspeople as well as the garrison were put to death. Cork,
Kinsale, Bandon, Youghal and Cloninel had surrendered before he returned to England in May 1650.
His son—in—law, Henry Ireton, continued the campaign. He captured Waterford. then Athlone and
Portumna and finally attacked Limerick which surrendered after a four-month siege. Ireton died in
November 1651 and was replaced by General Ludlow. Ludlow proceeded to break down the
resistance of the remaining garrisons. Galway was the last to surrender, in April 1652, after which the
rebellion was declared over.

 

Government agents were employed to round up beggars, widows and orphans to be transported to the .
sugar plantations of the West Indies where they became servants and indentured slaves. The Puritan
Parliamentarians persecuted not only Catholics but Ulster Presbyterians, members of the Church of
Ireland and those of other minority religions. Priests were hanged, exiled or transported to the West
Indies and Puritan preachers were brought over from England to replace them.

Parliament was now faced with settling its enormous debts. The English army in Ireland had not been
paid for 18 months and the adventurers were demanding to be recompensed. The adventurers were so
called because they lent or adventured money to parliament, a decade earlier, in response to an act
called the Adventurers’ Act. They were members of Parliament, merchants and tradesmen. Cromwell
himself was one; he advanced £600. The money was required to raise an army to subdue the rebels in
Ireland. The adventurers were offered two and a half million acres of Irish land, which was to be
confiscated at the end of the rebellion, as security of their money. Suppliers of provisions and
ammunition to the army also had to be paid. Irish land was to be used to settle all these debts. The
lands of the defeated Irish and Old English Catholics were declared confiscated and preparations
began for its distribution to the various people to whom the government was indebted. In order to
facilitate the redistribution a survey of the land was begun.

THE SURVEYS

Part of the country, including Clare, had been surveyed during the 1630s under Strafford. The Gross
Survey was the initial undertaking in preparation for the transplantation, very little is known about it.
The final and most important was the Down Survey carried out under the direction of William Petty.
It was so called because the information collected was noted down on maps for the first time. The

http://www.clarelibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/history/cromwell_settlement.htm 10/ 19/00


The Cromwellian Settlement Page 2 of 5

earlier surveys were merely descriptive lists of the landscape and its features.
THE ACT FOR SETTLING IRELAND, 1652

The act for settling Ireland was passed by the
English parliament in August 1652. While the
land was being surveyed the government was
, deciding who should forfeit land. Degrees of
()9 guilt were established and penalties defined.
The result was that owners of Irish land,
 whether they were Catholic, Protestant or Old
 English were to suffer. Some were dispossessed
“ totally; others forfeited one fifth, one third, two
thirds or three quarters of their land depending
‘  on whether their part in the rebellion was a
I “it; major or minor one. They were to be
0 — , frecompensed from forfeited land west of the
 Shannon by an area equal to the proportion they
3,, *5‘ were entitled to retain. For example, Donogh O’
W allaghan of County Cork forfeited three
_ quarters of his 12,000 acre estate. He was
V, I .   . assigned 3,000 acres in East Clare in lieu of the
 V ,‘[i;\g    proportion he was entitled to retain (he lost all
 i O  I I ’» 9  his Cork land). One of the Clare landowners
who was forced to make way for him was Donogh O’ Malony of Kilgorey who forfeited 166 acres
and was assigned in turn, 4l acres in Kilseily parish nearby. Some were dispossessed merely for
being Catholic, while many Protestant landowners who were considered to be less of a security risk,
were allowed to retain their land on payment of a heavy fine.

  
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
    
   
   
 
  
 
   

  

  
  
 

   
 

‘The province of Connacht and the county of Clare were set aside for the habitation of the Irish where
they were to transplant themselves, their families, dependents. livestock and goods before 1 May,
1654.’ The penalty for not transplanting was death by hanging. Connacht and Clare were chosen as
the area of transplantation because they were surrounded by water, (the sea, the Shannon, the Erne
and the bogs of Leitrim) except for a ten mile stretch of land which was to be protected by a series of
forts. A one mile strip, called The Mile Line, around the perimeter of Connacht and Clare was
reserved for military settlers ‘to confine the transplanted and to cut them off from relief by sea.’ The
Irish were forbidden to live in the towns of Connacht. 500 acres around Clarecastle and lands of ‘a
mile compass’ around Carrigaholt and Leamaneh were reversed for the English.

The resident landowners of Connacht and Clare also came  5:’;gm?éliffklggliigl   1Z§§:.,
within the category of transplanter. They too had their ’ '  \
holdings reduced and were often transplanted from one parish j 
to another. Some Clare landowners were transplanted to   3  or ,
Galway, Mayo and Roscommon. The native landowners "
regarded the transplanters from other provinces as enemies
and encouraged their followers to give them a rough
reception. Some of the principal landowners who were
transplanted to Clare and their counties of origin were: Ellen
Cheevers, Waterford; Marcus Cransborough, Waterford; John

    
    
    

 

  

http://www.clarelibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/history/cromwell_settlement.htm 10/ 1 9/00


The Cromwellian Settlement Page 3 Of 5

Ryan, Tipperary; Col. Garret Fitzmaurice, Kerry; James
Bourke, Limerick; James D’arcy, Galway; Sir Valentine
Browne, Kerry; Donogh O’ Callaghan, Cork and Edward .....

   
  

of transplantation by 1 May, l654. ‘.‘T‘‘i‘”l ’_

There were three categories of transplanter; proprietors, if if ‘
tenants and landless. The first were to have lands assigned to
them corresponding in quality to those they had left; the
second were to be assigned land as tenants of the state proportionate to the number and kind of
livestock they brought with them e.g. for each cow three acres, for each horse four acres, etc.

The landless were to be allowed to settle on state—owned land provided they were not within ten miles
of the Shannon, or they could remain where they were to become ‘hewers of wood and drawers of
water’ to the Cromwellian settlers. Ploughmen and other skilled workers were excluded from the
penalties of the act.

TRANSPLANTATION

The initial step taken by an Irish landowner was to appear before delinquency courts where he was
interrogated about his political conduct over the previous ten years thus determining his degree of
guilt and the amount of land he was to forfeit. His local revenue commissioner then issued him with a
Transplanter’s,Certificate, a licence to cross the Shannon. The certificate gave a brief description of
the transplanter and those travelling with him, the type and number of livestock and other goods he
proposed to take with him. He then appeared before commissioners in Loughrea who allotted him
land in Clare or Connacht on a temporary basis according to his entitlement. He would have had to
appear at court in Athlone a year or two later when he would have been given permanent title to his
Connacht or Clare land. This was called his final settlement.

The Government offered every facility to those who obeyed orders and moved by the appointed day.
The transplanters did not have to pay tolls for their cattle, neither did they have to pay rent on their
land until their claims were finalised by the Athlone courts.

Some of the dispossessed joined the Tories in the woods and hills. They were outlawed by the
Government but some of them were regarded as heroes by the Irish. The landless lrish who did not
transplant risked their lives by giving the Tories food and shelter. They became a serious menace to
the new planters, raiding their land, attacking and killing them. The Government offered large
rewards for their capture so that Tory hunting and Tory murder became common pursuits. Members
of the army were the first to be settled on the land vacated by the Irish, followed by the adventurers.
The last adventurer was settled on l May 1659 marking the end of the transplantation.

The transplantation proved to be an enormous administrative problem. Acts and orders were
constantly being reversed and revised, members of the army sold their debentures (documents
entitling them to confiscated land) against orders. the supply of land was insufficient to meet the
demands of those entitled to it culminating in what was officially described as ‘frustration, fraud and
injustice.’

RESTORATION

http ://www .clarelibrary . ie/eolas/coclare/history/cromwell_settlement.htm 10/ 19/00


The Cromwellian Settlement Page 4 Of 5

In May 1660, Charles II was restored to the thrones of England, Scotland and Ireland to the great joy
of the majority of the people. Puritan rule had been extremely harsh. Catholics and others were again
allowed to practise their religion in peace. Under the Acts of Settlement and Explanation the
confiscation of Irish land decreed by the Adventurers’ Act was confirmed but people who could
prove they were innocent of any part in the rebellion were to have their lands restored. A Court of
Claims was set up to hear their pleas and a small number, mostly Old English, succeeded in being
restored to their former lands. Very few Irish had their lands restored because the courts were
abolished before their claims could be heard. The courts sat for only eight months in 1663 during
which they heard 829 of the 7/8000 claims submitted. Although the Transplantation existed on paper
it took so long to get under way that by the time of the Restoration many people had not moved and
were restored to their old lands. Whether people moved or not can only be discovered by detailed
local investigation into the history of various families.

A new Ireland emerged after the Cromwellian Plantation. Land ownership and political authority
passed from the older inhabitants to the new colonists, from Irish and Old English Catholics to a
landed ascendancy of English Protestants who were to control the life of Ireland until the twentieth
century.

Further Reading

Prendergast, John P., The Cromwellian Settlement oflreland, Dublin (1922).

Dunlop, R., Ireland under the Commonwealth, Manchester (1913).

Simington, Robert C., The Transplantation to Connacht I654-58, Irish University Press (1970).
MacCurtain, Margaret, Tudor and Stuart Ireland, Dublin (l 972).

Books of Survey and Distribution 1636- I 703 :Vol. IV. Co.Clare Irish MSS Comm. (1967).
McLysaght, Edward., A Short Study of a Transplanted F amily in the Seventeenth Century, Dublin
(1935).

Frost, James, The History and Topography of the County of Clare, London 1893.

Berresford Ellis, Peter, Hell or Connacht. London 1975.

   

  
  

    

: xi“
, . I . i’
.7 fa»->\<o\s  , V ”
V ‘ Jame g
w«f§t»4va-fgt  g ’ E
T I“ ' M: ‘ . ‘
*3? ~  . :-.*§ 3 .~:_»-23:1: as. E n %
3 '*‘~‘x'>k -«:m’5 i‘ _'z’3?'&'£./§’.«'i!7:’afxf'.~"A >1?" t i
r ‘ I
3”.’ . .é«»a ,. Rxirxxi
«tfi .  . an .1 .«.« ~ . .  «w v »~§r4"»s}r»**5*§ir”*”“
4%’ , r>§.'us.;N«‘g:_.v§§2.!. .r:,:w,.a~,m..u,£ -3
§
9 »i>m.:sa’5-:> “»Mw ~ny” .; (
1- - «  . . . . . 11¢.-‘v‘a§« : r .‘s £;£W 
4.‘ ~  . . ts\!‘.‘nLi¢, .. .  £5‘ .9 er§?!7;»@é($yfl§s{~« ; 3
5 .
ff’ ;£§‘2?ax1:1a*aa;»4§w*}?r '

\ 5%$ac*«#*%»}nf..‘~£‘_,C3s ~ ? ;;¢.,¢ .,..§ég.1,. @?£ M«  ‘ ~ A _.

At‘ » ~ »  at~z:a-r§u>.*n.a§ ,g<.:3~.~ ~aavr¢3n§§~‘:%‘o‘!°!g§c‘c»-  { R
me i    I r
t .

I 1

http://www.clarelibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/history/cromwell_settlement.htm 10/19/00


The Cromwellian Settlement Page 5 of 5

The Book of Survey and Distribution, Co. Clare.

The Books of Survey and Distribution contain a fascinating record of the old Gaelic landowners, the quantity of land they
forfeited and the transplanters, both from Clare and across the Shannon, to whom it was granted under the Restoration
land settlement.

This is a copy of a page from the Clare book. It shows the owners of land in the townlands of the parish of Killno in the
barony of Tulla. On the left is the landowner in 1641 before the Cromwellian confiscation and transplantation. On the
right hand side appears the transplanted either from Clare or from another province. In between is the townland. with a
description of the land and the number of acres and then the quantity of that land granted to the newcomer.

l3...€19‘l<. to 

http://www.clarelibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/history/cromwell_sett1ement.htm 10/19/00


Charles II: British Monarchs

liritannia

Page 1 of 2

 

Search Britannia ,

tlasstsritti ‘.

r(’.%.’l§1LS»‘ '

 

BFllTANNlA
GATEWAYS

Histog l Travel l British
i fipitannia

amazonmm.

Search for:
aBooks V~§
Enter keywords:

Search I

 

3 Nights, 4 Days
Cotswolds, Lake
District, Cornwall &
Devon, the West
Country, Wales,
Scotland... plus London
by the day. Click for
details.

http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon49.htm1

Charles II (166()—85 AD)

Charles II, second son of Charles I and
Henrietta Marie of France, was born in
1630. He spent his teenage years fighting
Parliament's Roundhead forces until his
father's execution in 1649, when he
escaped to France. He drifted to Holland,
but returned to Scotland in 1650 amid the
Scottish proclamation of his kingship; in
1651, he led a Scottish force of 10,000
into a dismal defeat by Cromwe|l's forces
at Worcester. He escaped, but remained
a fugitive for six weeks until he
engineered passage to France. Charles
roamed Europe for eight years before being invited back to England as
the Commonwealth dissolved. He married Catherine of Braganza, but
sired no legitimate children. His oldest child, James Scott, Duke of
Monmouth, made a failed bid to capture the crown at the time of his
father's death and was executed by James II, brother of Charles ll and
Uncle to Monmouth. Charles ll died in February 1685 from complications
following a stroke.

 

Charles arrived in London to claim the throne on his 30th birthday, May
29, 1660. He was extremely tolerant of those who had condemned his
father to death: only nine of the conspirators were executed. He was also
tolerant in religious matters, but more from political wisdom than
overwhelming morality. England was overjoyed at having a monarch
again. However, royal powers and privileges had been severely limited
by Parliament. He was forced to fund his administration from customs
taxes and a healthy pension paid to him by France's Louis XIV. Royal
prerogative, the soul of the Tudor monarchs, James I and Charles I, had
all but vanished. This moment was a turning point in English political
history, as Parliament maintained a superior position to that of the king,
and the modern concept of political parties formed from the ashes of the
Cavaliers and Roundheads. The Cavaliers evolved into the Tory Party,
royalists intent on preserving the king's authority over Parliament, while
the Roundheads transformed into the Whig Party, men of property
dedicated to expanding trade abroad and maintaining Parliament's
supremacy in the political field.

The first decade of Charles‘ reign was beset by many problems. Defeat at
the hands of the Dutch in a mishandled war over foreign commerce cost
him domestic support. The Great Plague of 1665 and the Fire of London
in the following year left much of the city in ruins. In 1667, the Dutch
sailed up the Medway, sunk five battleships and towed the Floyal Char/es
back to Holland. King and Council were ridiculed for not having enough
interest in the affairs of government.

The 1670's saw Charles‘ forging a new alliance with France against the
Dutch. French support was based on the promise that Charles would
reintroduce Catholicism in England at a convenient time - apparently, that
convenient time never came, as Charles did nothing to bring England
under the Catholic umbrella, although he made a deathbed conversion to
the Roman faith. The Whigs used Catholicism to undermine Charles;
England was in the throes of yet another wave of anti—Catholicism, with
the Whigs employing this paranoia in an attempt to unseat the heir

O3/01/O1


Charles II: British Monarchs Page 2 of 2

apparent, Charles‘ Catholic brother James, from succeeding to the
throne. Titus Oates, a defrocked Anglican priest, stoked the fires of anti-
Catholicism by accusing the queen and her favorites of attempting to
murder Charles; ten men fell prey to false witness and Oates‘
manipulation of the anti-Catholic movement, and were executed. Many
accused Anthony Cooper, Earl of Shaftsbury and founder of the Whig
Party, of inciting the anti-Catholic violence of 1679-80; this has remained
one of the greatest mysteries in British history. The Whig-dominated
Parliament tried to push through an Exclusion Bill barring Catholics from
holding public office (and keeping James Stuart from the throne), but
Charles was struck down by a fever and opinion swayed to his side. His
last years were occupied with securing his brother's claim to the throne
and garnering Tory support.

Charles‘ era is remembered as the time of "Merry Olde England". The
monarchy, although limited in scope, was successfully restored — the
eleven years of Commonwealth were officially ignored as nothing more
than an interregnum between the reign of Charles I and Charles II.
Charles‘ tolerance was astounding considering the situation of England at
the time of his ascension, but was necessary for his reign to stand a
chance at success. He was intelligent and a patron of scientific research,
but somewhat lazy as a ruler, choosing to wait until the last moment to
make a decision. The British attitude towards Charles II is humorously
revealed in this quote from 1066 and All That: "Charles II was always
very merry and was therefore not so much a king as a Monarch. During
the civil war, he had rendered valuable assistance to his father's side by
hiding in all the oak-trees he could find. He was thus very romantic and
popular and was able after the death of Cromwell to descend to the
throne."

Charles ll's Genealogy
A guide to the monarch's ancestors and offspring. These trails can lead

you through the history of Europe's royal houses and to some
unexpected places.

> Return to Monarchs Index

[Britannia Shortcuts _‘_v_]

    
 

  

1»--I

uigltgnnia  Wacationing acmss the pond?    i 5 ; I
T0urs,,,  

iimihflfilk TOURS 1’; TRAVEL. ‘mi UK FRAVEE EI3’E§tT5i, O|’~fL|!¢E SINCE  CILIKK

    

  

Britannia.com (T) 302.234.8904 (F) 302.234.9154 Copyright ©2000 Britannia.com, LLC

http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon49.html 03/01/01


Britannia: The Mistresses of Charles II

I

Search Britannia

Pitkfn armors

BRITANNIA GATEWAYS
Home I Histom I Travel
Tours I London I 1
Panorama I News

 

HISTORY GATEWAYS
Monarchs I Timelines
Documents I Mags I EBK

King Arthur I Time
Indexes

 

http://www.britannia.com/history/charmist.htrnl

3  I » g I
 lll‘llflllllIfl

Page 1 of 4

Your To ur and Tiravel Guide to the British Isles
Home | Bulletln I Store I FAQs | r-taps‘ | Searcii I Contactus

The Mistresses of Charles II

by Brenda Ralph Lewis

 

Monarchs and mistresses were an expected combination when royal
wives were chosen for dynastic or political rather than for personal
reasons. However, even by the permissive standards this implied,
King Charles II (1630-1685) was an extraordinarily active monarch,
who ran more than one mistress in harness at a time and made no
secret of his fourteen illegitimate children. Charles started young, at
eighteen, when he was in exile in France following Parliament's
victory in the Civil War against his father, Charles I. There, in his
idleness, Charles had little to do but womanise. The first pretty girl
to catch his eye and the first of at least fifteen mistresses, was a
Welshwoman, Lucy Walter whom he met in The Hague in the
summer of 1648. Lucy took up with Charles shortly after his arrival ,
and in 1649 gave birth to his first child, James, later Duke of
Monmouth. Lucy was her lover's constant companion, but he made
the mistake of leaving her behind when he left The Hague in 1650.
He returned to find she had been intriguing with a certain Colonel
Henry Bennet. Charles ended the affaire there and then, leaving
Lucy to a life of prostitution. She died, probably of venereal disease,
in 1658.

Charles, meanwhile, moved on to other mistresses and enjoyed at
least four more before his exile ended and he was recalled to
England to become king in 1660. The list of illicit royal affaires
burgeoned after that, and came to typify the unbuttoned society
which grew up around the restored monarch. Joyless puritans did not
berate Charles as 'that great enemy of chastity and marriage‘ for
nothing, One of the spectacles at his court was Charles ' toying with
his mistresses,‘ and surrounded by his favourite spaniels. For a scene
of decadence, that took some beating.

Charles was not fussy about the status of his women. A pretty face
and a comely figure were enough for a mistress to be taken on the
strength, and he was particularly prone to actresses. . The stage
provided a handy hunting- ground for the regular royal theatregoer,
and it was here that Charles encountered Moll Davis in about 1667.
Moll was a popular singer-dancer- comedienne, but she had her dark
side. Mrs. Pepys, wife of Samuel Pepys the diarist, called her ‘the
most impertinent slut in the world’ and she was grasping and vulgar
with it. Moll flaunted her success as a royal mistress, showing off
her ‘mighty pretty fine coach’ and a ring worth the then vast sum of
£600.

Moll , who gave up the stage in 1668, had a daughter by Charles the
following year but soon fell foul of Nell Gwynne, one of the King's
concurrent mistresses, who had a wicked sense of humour. Hearing
that Moll was due to sleep with the king on a night early in 1668,
Nell invited her to eat some sweetmeats she had prepared. Unknown

03/01/01


Britannia: The Mistresses of Charles II Page 2 of 4

to Moll, her rival had mixed in a hefty dose of the laxative jalap.
After that, the night in the royal bed did not exactly go as planned.
Charles, too, had a sharp sense of humour, but this time, he was not
amused and Moll was summarily dismissed. Being a generous man,
though, Charles sent Moll packing with a pension of £1,000 a year.

However, Nell herself was the target of some opposition from
another of the royal mistresses, the high and mighty Louise de
Keroualle who berated Charles for taking up with this coarse,
common ‘orange wench'. Nell's name for Louise who had a slight
cast in on eye, was Squintabella. Another name Nell gave her was
‘weeping willow‘, since Louise would use tears to prise some gift or

favour from the King. Both nicknames infuriated Louise, but amused
Charles.

Yet the fact remained that Louise was socially more exalted than
Nell, who had emerged from the squalor of London's east end as
first, a whore in a bawdy house, next a theatre orange-seller, then an
actress before becoming a royal mistress. The daughter of a Breton
family of ancient and distinguished lineage, Louise was maid of
honour to the Duchess of Orleans, Charles' sister,who took her her to
England in 1670. The King fell for Louise's baby— faced beauty on
sight and she became maitresse en titre — official mistress - in

1671 .The following year she gave birth to her first child, Charles
Lennox, later Duke of Richmond. Louise herself was created
Duchess of Portsmouth.

Louise, however, had an agenda of her own.She attempted to
persuade Charles to become an Catholic, a suicidal move in strongly
Protestant England. Charles was canny enough to resist, despite his
own Catholic leanings. But Louise had fingers in other pies. She
reportedly engineered the disgrace of the prominent courtier, the
Duke of Buckingham and in 1677, another of Charles' mistresses,
Barbara Villiers, Duchess of Cleveland. She fought off several
rivals, including the Duchess of Mazarin, a further mistress, and the
young Duke of Monmouth. She ingratiated herself, sometimes
through sexual favours, with powerful men, including the influential
statesman the Earl of Danby.

. Meanwhile, Louise was building a substantial nest—egg. She
enjoyed a splendid apartment at Whitehall Palace, which was
redesigned three times to satisfy her expensive tastes. In addition,
she was allowed £40,000 a year from the royal coffers. In total, the
rapacious Louise accumulated over £136,668 from her royal
connection.

Barbara Villiers, later Countess of Castlemaine and Duchess of
Cleveland was another beauty with a less than beautiful disposition.
Barbara, a Viscount's daughter, was already married when she met
Charles soon after his return to England in 1660. When Charles'
future queen, Catherine of Braganza arrived from Portugal in 1662,
Barbara appears to have been heavily pregnant by him. She gave
birth to a son on 18 June, five weeks after Catherine's arrival. That

http://www.britannia.com/history/charmist.htrnl 03/01/O1


Britannia: The Mistresses of Charles II Page 3 of 4

same day, the Queen visited Barbara in her apartment at Hampton
Court, and was so shocked to see the newborn child that she threw a
fit and had to be carried out.

Charles had a dichotomous attitude towards Barbara. Although , like
Louise, she was never faithful to her royal lover, the King used to
visit Barbara four nights a week at her apartments in Whitehall.
When her second son was born in 1663, Charles denied paternity but
nevertheless gave Barbara lavish Christmas presents the same year.
Yet the couple had ferocious arguments and she was not above
threatening Charles. When she was expecting another child in 1667,
Barbara swore that if he denied paternity again, she would dash the
infant's brains out. Barbara's power over Charles was such that he
went down on his knees to be ‘pardoned’ for his very well—founded
suspicions.

Ultimately, Barbara's demands were so great, her temper so fierce
and her infidelities so brazen that Charles tired of her. Louise de
Keroualle was on to a surefire thing when she conspired to get her
rival removed from court. Barbara left for Paris in the spring of
1677, to embark on more liaisons which produced yet more children
until her tally totalled seven, fathered by at least six different men.
Her husband was not one of them.

No mistress could have been more different from these haughty
grasping beauties than the kindhearted, faithful, diverting Nell
Gwynne. She first met Charles at the Duke's House theatre in

1668 .He was enchanted by the unaffected girl Pepys later called
‘pretty, witty Nell’ and before long, they became lovers. Nell was
totally committed to the King, so much so that she punched the Duke
of Buckingham over the ear when he tried to kiss her. Buckingham
was not the only would-be seducer at court, but like him, all of them
found Nell was completely uninterested.

Charles never tired of Nell, who gave him two more sons, and
understandably so. Although he lavished two fine homes on her, one
of them in London's Pall Mall, she never treated them like prizes or
personal gains to be flaunted, but as places where he could relax and
enjoy what his other mistresses never gave him — a real home and an
interesting social life.

When Nell used her influence with Charles, it was often in the cause
of others. She persuaded him, for instance, to free the disgraced
Duke of Buckingham from prison and campaigned for the
foundation of the Royal Hospital, Chelsea after coming across an old
soldier begging in the street. Her great worry, though - and his - was
their twenty year age gap. On his deathbed in 1685, the King begged
his brother and successor, James ‘Do not let poor Nelly starve.’
James generously paid Nell's debts and gave her an allowance, but it
was not for long. Nell survived her king by only two years. She died
of ‘the pox’ in 1687, aged 37. Afterwards, Nell became something of
a legend, as a goodnatured charmer, and an ordinary girl from the
slums who was probably the only mistress of King Charles who truly

http://www.britannia.com/history/charmist.html O3/O l/01


Britannia: The Mistresses of Charles II Page 4 of 4

loved him.

 
  

 1’ -

v EIRITTMIMIA IMIRS 8 ?RA‘a‘E.§.. ‘ii-IE UK FRAVEE E.‘KPERT”_i., DMUNE Svllvii-Ci I
Britannia.com (T) 302.234.8904 (F) 302.234.9154 Copyright ©1999 Britannia.com, LLC

X-Excmioning aczmss the ;:>c::mi‘Z’

    

http://www.britannia.com/history/charmist.htm1 03/ 0 1/ 01


The Jacobite Era, 1685-1702 Page 1 of 4

 

The Jacobite Era, 1685-1702

By Brian O Dalaigh

When Charles II became king of England in 1660, many Catholics in Ireland expected the lands,
which had been taken from them by Cromwell. to be returned to them. However, in this they were
only partially satisfied. Charles II could not afford to offend the new Protestant land owners of
Ireland, so that the period 1660 — 85 was one of instability and dissatisfaction: the Catholics felling
aggrieved that their lands had not been returned and the Protestants feeling insecure that the lands, so
lately hard won by them, would once again be lost.

Disturbances

In 1685 a Catholic, James II, succeeded as king of England. In Ireland Catholic hopes for the
restoration of their lands rose. They were encouraged in their hopes when James began a process of
putting Catholics into important positions in government. In February 1687, for example, Richard
Talbot, the earl of Tyrconnell was appointed Lord Deputy of Ireland, the first Catholic to hold the
position since the Reformation.

Probably the first indication the people of Co. Clare had of this new Catholic policy, was in the
appointment of Catholic judges. At that time Judges went on circuit twice a year and held assizes
(law courts) in the principal towns of each county. We have an account of an incident that took place
in Ennis at this time, which shows how disturbed the county had become with the rising Catholic
expectations.

At that time men awaiting trial by the visiting judges of assize were held in the county jail in Ennis.
In October 1686 just days before the judges were due to arrive, two of the Ennis jail keepers helped
the prisoners to escape and joined them as outlaws.

Relations between Catholics and Protestants

As the reign of James II progressed relations between Protestants and Catholics in the county
worsened. This process can best be seen by the attempt to reform the Municipal Corporation of Ennis.
The government of the town was in the hands of Protestants; any attempt to reform the corporation
was seen as a threat to the Protestant position. The corporation was ruled by a provost and twelve
Protestant burgesses; Catholics were excluded by virtue of their religion from governing the town. In
1687 a new charter was issued for Ennis under James II, which allowed Catholics for the first time to
become burgesses; a Catholic, David White was made provost or mayor. The Protestants, who had
controlled the corporation since 1612, were incensed and resolutely refused to accept the new charter
or co—operate in the governing of the town.

A Son is Born to James II

Events in England were to bring matters to a head. In June 1688 a son was born to James II. This
caused alarm among English Protestants who feared a succession of Catholic kings of England.
Leading English politicians invited the Dutch prince William of Orange to become king of England.
By December 1688 James II had been compelled to abandon his throne and flee to France. These
events in England caused great commotion in County Clare. Naturally the Protestants of the county
declared their support for William of Orange, while the Catholics on the other hand, fearing they

http://www.clarelibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/history/j acobite_era.htm 10/19/00


The Jacobite Era, 1685-1702 Page 2 of 4

would lose whatever limited rights they had won, declared for King James.
Lord Clare

The leading supporter of King James in Co. Clare was Daniel O’Brien. 3rd Lord Clare, who lived in
Carrigaholt Castle. In January 1689, Lord Clare seized Clare Castle. On his orders the Protestant men
of military age were rounded up and imprisoned in the castle, since their loyalty to King James could
not be counted on.

Parliament of 1689

In March 1688 James II landed at Kinsale. He hoped that with the help of the Irish Catholics he could
win back the throne of England. A special Parliament was held in Dublin, four members from Clare
attended. Daniel O’Brien and John McNamara of Cratloe represented the county and Theobald Butler
and Florence McNamara represented the borough of Ennis. At this Parliament it was decided that
those who were in possession of land before 1641 could now reclaim it. Since most Protestants had
come into possession of their lands after 1641, it meant that they would now lose them.

Clare’s Dragoons

However not all Ireland supported King James; the Protestants of Ulster supported William of
Orange. It was clear war would have to be fought to decide who would eventually own the land and
thus the wealth of Ireland. To help with the war effort a three monthly tax of £1,798 was levied on
County Clare. A Cavalry regiment known as Clare Dragoons was established. They were called
dragoons because it was thought the smoke rising from their muskets resembled dragons. A supply of
good horses was essential for this regiment, so an order was issued for the seizure of all horses in the
county for the service of the king.

The hastily recruited dragoons had little experience of fighting and so did poorly in battle. The
regiment was sent north to help with the siege of Derry in July l689. They were drawn into an
ambush at Lisnaskea, Co. Fermanagh and cut to pieces. The regiment performed just as badly at the
battle of the Boyne.

Blowing up the Guns at Ballyneety

At the battle of the Boyne, July l690, the supporters of King James suffered a
major defeat. James immediately fled the country leaving his Irish army to fend
for themselves. Under the command of Patrick Sarsfield the Irish army decided
to hold the line of the river Shannon. The Williamite Army then laid siege to the
city of Limerick. Sarsfield on hearing that the Williamite army was bringing a
siege train of large guns to smash the walls of Limerick, left the city by the
Clare side on l 1 August l690. He took with him 500 picked horsemen. Under . 

the direction of the Reparee (outlaw) Galloping Hogan they crossed the Shannon at Ballyvalley near
Killaloe. Sarsfield and his men encountered the siege train at Ballyneety, Co. Limerick, resistance
was quickly overcome, the large guns filled with powder and blown to pieces. The action of Sarsfield
and his men was largely responsible for the failure of the first siege of Limerick.

We have little information of what was happening in Co. Clare in the winter of 1690. We know for
example that Teige McNamara of Ayle near Tulla had raised a troop of soldiers at his own expense.
with which he fortified Clare Castle. It also seems likely that the Jacobite Cavalry were encamped in
the county close to Ennis.

   

http://www.c1arelibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/history/j acobite_era.htm 10/ 19/00


The Jacobite Era, 1685-1702 Page 3 of 4

Battle of Aughrim

In June 1691, the Williamite forces under General Ginkel finally succeeded in crossing the Shannon
at Athlone and the Jacobite army was pushed back from the line of the Shannon. Galway and
Limerick were now the only two substantial towns in Jacobite hands. A French General called the
Marquis de Saint Ruth was put in charge of the Jacobite Army. He decided to make a stand at the hill
of Aughrim in County Galway. After a heroic fight the Jacobite Army was finally crushed. Thousands
of Jacobite soldiers were killed, including Saint Ruth. Patrick Sarsfield, the commander of the cavalry
gathered up what remained of the army and retreated to Limerick.

It seems that on his retreat from Aughrim Sarsfield spent a night in a tavern in Ennis. This claim is
based on the discovery, in the last century of a receipt for a night’s lodging signed by Patrick
Sarsfield, which was discovered in the recess of a wall of a house in Abbey Street.

Clare Castle

It would appear that no substantial military action was fought in County Clare. In order to put a quick
end to the war, General Ginkel at this time promised that any Jacobite commander who would
surrender a castle or town would not have his lands and property confiscated. It seems that this is
what happened in the case of Clare Castle as there is no evidence of a military action having been
fought there. And indeed the commander of the garrison, Teige McNamara, was afterwards allowed
to retain possession of his Tulla estates.

Siege of Limerick 1691

Sarsfield and his men retreated into the city of Limerick. This time there was no escape for them as
the city was surrounded on all sides. The last desperate action of the war was fought on Thomond
Bridge — the bridge that connected Co. Clare with the city of Limerick. About 850 soldiers were
defending the bridge against the Williamite advance. As the men retreated across the bridge hotly
pursued by the enemy, the French commander in charge of the city gate, fearing that the Williamites
would enter the city, ordered that the gate be closed, leaving the 850 men to be butchered on the
bridge.

As there now seemed to be no hope of success and to avoid further useless bloodshed, Sarsfield and
his men decided to surrender and thus brought the war to a close.

Treaty of Limerick

The Treaty of Limerick was signed on 3 October 1691. Under it the Irish army was allowed to go to
France. The Clare Dragoons were transported to the continent and were later to achieve great
distinction and fame. on the battle fields of Europe, particularly at the battles of Ramilles and
Fontenoy.

Confiscation of Lands

However the fate of the Jacobite land holders of Co. Clare was fairly predictable. Any land owner
who had supported James II was attained for high treason and lost his estates. Lord Clare for example
one of the biggest land owners in Co. Clare lost all his property, over 80,000 statute acres.

King William of Orange gave generous grants of the confiscated lands to his many followers. Lord
C1are's estates were presented to the king's Dutch friend Joost Van Keppel. Van Keppel quickly sold

http://www.clare1ibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/history/j acobite_era.htm 10/19/00


The Jacobite Era, 1685-1702 Page 4 of 4

on the land for £10,000 to three Protestants from Co. Clare, Nicholas Westby, Francis Burton and
James MacDonnell. These Protestant families and others like them became the new land owners in 
Co. Clare and largely controlled the wealth of the county for the next century and a half.

Further Reading:

T.W. Moody, F.X. Martin and El. Byrne (eds.), A New History oflrelcmd; (Oxford 1976, 1982).
Vols III & VIII.

P. White, History‘ of Clare and the Dalcassian Clans; (Dublin 1893).

Back. to .Hi.st.9_i‘y

http://www clarelibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/history/j acobite_era.htm 10/ 1 9/00


Slingsby, Sir Robert, baronet (1611-1661), naval officer and administrator, was the second of
five sons (there were also four daughters) of Sir Guylford Slingisbie or Slingsby (1565-1631) of
Bifrons, Canterbury, comptroller of the navy, and his wife, Margaret (d. in or after 1661),
daughter of William Walter of York. The Slingsby family, staunch royalists, originated from
Scriven, near Knaresborough, Yorkshire. In 1630 Sir Guylford sent his son to Bristol to supervise
the sale of a royal prize lying there, and in February 1633, his father having recently died, the
navy officers urged the admiralty to appoint Robert to command a small vessel, the eighth or
tenth Lion's Whelp (12 guns), preparing to serve in the channel, from which ship he moved in
1636-7 to the third Whelp and then the first Whelp. He was soon venturing out of home waters:
in 1638 he commanded the Expedition as the second vessel escorting the Moroccan ambassador
home from Portsmouth, and in January 1640 the Expedition convoyed troops and munitions
from the Tower of London to Edinburgh for the second bishops’ war. In June that year he was
back in the channel in the Happy Entrance, commanding a small defence squadron-a
command he held until June 1642 when he transferred to the Garland to convey the Portuguese
ambassador to Lisbon.

During the winter of 1641-2 Slingsby had taken lodgings in Russell Street, Covent Garden, where
he appears to have been an uneasy link between Admiral Sir John Penington and the king.
Unhappy about developments in parliament, he passed ‘not a merry Christmas, but the maddest
one I ever saw’ (CSP dom., 1641 -3, 217). On the outbreak of the civil war Penington declared for
the king, who appointed him to command the fleet. Slingsby was one of the few captains to
support him, refusing to obey parliament's order appointing Warwick to command. Next day
Warwick sent an ultimatum and threatened to attack Slingsby in the Garland and Baldwin
Wake, who was holding out in the Expedition. Slingsby and Wake abused the boat crews who
brought the message, whereupon the crews seized the two ships and their captains. The pair
were held prisoner by Warwick; on 21 July they petitioned the House of Lords to be freed or
charged, and they appealed again after seven weeks in gaol in London.

In December, Warwick urged the Lords to release the prisoners; they were called to the bar and
freed on condition that they did not accept any employment or command against the interests of
parliament, to which they agreed. In December 1643, however, Slingsby received £100 from the
king at Oxford and early in 1644 he sailed from Weymouth for France, where he was to gather
intelligence and raise funds in Paris and Amsterdam. From April he was awarded 40 shillings a
day indefinitely for services abroad, and June that year found him in Paris. He seems to have
travelled back and forth, however, for in 1643-5 he set out ships at Bristol for the king at his own
expense, and he was probably the Colonel Robert Slingsby who was at Bristol with Prince Rupert
in 1645 when the town fell to parliament. With his younger brother Colonel Walter Slingsby,
deputy governor of Bristol, he attended a council of war on 5 September 1645, shortly before the

surrender. During the years 1643-6 he was also sending arms to the king from abroad, for which
in 1660 he petitioned for the sum of £5800 still owed to him.

While Charles was held captive after the war, Slingsby visited him as a confidential messenger,
perhaps incognito, on several occasions, and was himself thrown into a ‘loathsome dungeon’,
receiving a royal message of sympathy and reassurance.


In January 1649 Slingsby petitioned parliament from Hemlington, Yorkshire, for permission to
compound; he asked again in June, noting that he had never been judicially impeached or
sequestered. In March 1650 he was permitted to compound for £200; in February 1652 he asked
for the sum to be reduced, and on 3 June the fine was settled at £140. In September he
petitioned over his manor at Barkway, Hertfordshire, detained from him by the earl of Arundel.
This manor had come to him through his marriage with Elizabeth, daughter of Robert Brooke of
Newcells, Hertfordshire, having been sold to the couple by her parents’ heir.

Nothing is heard of Slingsby during the remainder of the 1650s, when presumably he was living
quietly in Yorkshire. In April 1660 he stood for election as a knight of the shire—perhaps
Yorkshire. In May he was in competition with Sir George Carteret for the post of navy treasurer;
in August he secured the appointment of comptroller of the navy. Samuel Pepys recorded his
first meeting with Colonel Slingsby on 5 September, referring to him by this title until Slingsby
was created a baronet on 18 March 1661. He also met and approved of Slingsby's second wife,
Elizabeth (daughter of Sir Edward Radcliffe or Radclyffe of Dilston and widow of Sir William
Fenwick, baronet), and her daughter. In January 1661 Pepys read Slingsby's ‘Discourse upon the
past and present state of his majesty's navy’ in which he advocated regular payment, prohibition
of trading by officers, and the encouragement of merchant shipping. It was presented to the duke
of York, then lord high admiral, and remained unpublished until 1801. The original is probably
that now in the Pepys Library, Magdalene College, Cambridge, with later copies in the British
Library and elsewhere.

Slingsby barely had time to reap the reward of his loyalty for in the autumn he fell sick of the
intermittent typhus then circulating in London. Pepys went to visit him on 22 October, and
reported on his decline. He died on 26 October 1661 at his house in Lime Street, much regretted
by Pepys, who considered him to be a staunch friend and jovial companion, ‘he being a man that
loved me, and had many Qualitys that made me to love him above all the officers and
Commissioners in the Navy’ (Pepys, 2.202). Pepys was invited to view the body four days later,
but confided to his diary that there had been much disorder in the house, and ‘pretending that
the corps stinks, they will bury it tonight privately, and so will unbespeak all their Guests, and
there shall be no funerall’ (ibid., 2.204). Slingsby was buried at St Andrew Undershaft on 30
October; his second wife apparently survived him. There were no children of either of his
marriages and the baronetcy became extinct.

Sir Robert's elder brother, Guilford Slingsby (1610-1643), graduated MA of St Andrews
University in 1628 and was incorporated at Oxford the following year. He was elected to
represent Carysfort in the Irish parliament in 1634 and became secretary to the earl of Strafford,
who appointed him lieutenant of the ordnance office and vice—admiral of Munster. On Strafford's
fall from favour he took refuge in the Low Countries but returned to his estate at Cleveland about
December 1642 and levied a regiment there for the king's service. Leading it into battle at
Guisborough on 16 January 1643 he was defeated by Sir Hugh Cholmeley, and taken prisoner.
He died shortly afterwards from his wounds, and was buried in York Minster on 26 January.

Arthur Slingsby, one of Sir Robert's younger brothers, who inherited Bifrons, was knighted by
the king at Brussels in 1657 and in October 1658 made a baronet by a patent dated from Bruges.


He married a Flemish lady, and was the only one of the brothers to leave descendants.

Bernard Capp and Anita McConnell

Sources CSP dom., 1631-61 - Pepys, Diary, vols. 1-2 - Fifth report, I--IMC, 4 (1876) - The
manuscripts of the duke of Leeds, IHMC, 22 (1888), 40 -JHL, 5 (1642—3) - B. E. Warburton,
Memoirs of Prince Rupert and the Cavaliers, 3 vols. (1849), 3.175 - J. R. Powell and E. K.
Timings, eds., Documents relating to the civil war, 1642-1648, Navy RS, 105 (1963) - M. A. E.
Green, ed., Calendar of the proceedings of the committee for compounding  1643-1660, 4,
PRO (1892) - J. Foster, Pedigrees of the county families of Yorkshire, 2 vols. (1874) - H. Chauncy,
The historical antiquities of Hertfordshire, 1 (1826); repr. (1975), 102 - VCH Hertfordshire, 4.29 -
J. Burke and J. B. Burke, A genealogical and heraldic history of the extinct and dormant
baronetcies of England, Ireland and Scotland, 2nd edn (1841); repr. (1844), 490 - parish register,

St Martin—in-the—Fields, City Westm. AC - parish register, London, St Andrew Undershaft, GL
[burial]

© Oxford University Press 2004

All rights reserved: see legal notice 

\J)i£'|li3lfl.‘fI' YKSSI

Bernard Capp and Anita McConnell, 'S|ingsby, Sir Robert, barone1(1611-1661)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography,
Oxford University Press, 2004 [accessed 18 Nov 2004: http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/25729]

Back to top of biography site credits


"EU

RA/‘v'$'W‘ }Yf7L:{x:>?!i:
V! on xx), ¢».t‘u a_...| . -0.--2

 

. \
.I.‘:£ VHS guLc,L9.
 '   
./;-r I:-;;.’ ,’,r}«I.?:’-’u   ~'-"-
GUIDE TO THE ARCHIVE COLLECTIONS
OF THE YORKSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
1931-1983
AND TO COLLECTIONS
DEPOSITED WITH THE SOCIETY
W

;3 Sylvia Thomas

.3

I.

§-

sf

11

J

4

E’ ARCHIVE ADVISORY COUNCIL FOR WEST YORKSHIRE
M‘ WEST YORKSHIRE ARCHIVE JOINT COMMITTEE
I

if I

i 1985

M

E x

_ ‘ _ ______ _,__ _.____.. 7 ......—.-r7—_._-. .—....-...—4,,..—...¢-- o-um...-q v -<9 7- v


DD53/II

DD53/III

DD54

DD55

DD56

 

-See also MD37, MS43 - 59 and M5321

mainly 14 - 18 cent.

Wills etc., mainly of the Norton family 17 - 19 cent.
Licences, letters of administration and appointments
relating mainly to the Norton family 17 — 18 cent.

Papers of the Norton family, Barons Grantley. Deeds
and wills, family settlements etc., relating mainly to
Yorkshire, especially to BISHOP THORNTON, CRIGGLESTONE,
EAVESTONE, FOUNTAINS Park, GRANTLEY, BRIDGE HEWICK,
HUNGATE p. RIPON, KIRKBY MALZEARD, NETHERTON, RISPLITH,
RYHILL, SANDAL MAGNA, SAWLEY, SKELDING, WAKEFIELD and
WINKSLEY; also to Middlesex, Nottinghamshire, Somerset
and Surrey 16 - 19 cent.

Grantley Collection formerly at Burton Constable Hall
[E. Riding]. Large collection of deeds (mainly
medieval), most of which relate to the W. Riding, but
also much material on the E. and N. Ridings. Further
deeds relate to Bedfordshire, Berkshire, Buckinghamshire,
Cambridgeshire, Cumberland, Derbyshire, Dumfriesshire,
Durham, Hertfordshire, Lancashire, Lincolnshire, East
Lothian, Norfolk, Northamptonshire, Northumberland,
Nottinghamshire, Oxfordshire, Sussex, Westmorland and
France 13 - 18 cent.
Includes receipts and letters of the Duchy of
Lancaster 1320 - 1476
various accounts 1358 - 1366,
Inquisition into knights‘
wapentake (E. Riding] 1346
Transcript of a visitation of monasteries in the
province of YORK, the bishopric of COVENTRY and
LICHFIELD, etc. [te p. Henry VIII], 1.17 cent.
Annals of the city of YORK and officers of the
city c.1645 and c.1655
ggg YAJ 12 (1893) and 13 (1895)

1521

fees in Harthill DD56/

Add.
(1952)

DD56/
Add.
(1966)

Various deeds and papers 16 - 20 cent.

Includes deeds and papers relating to Raygill

Farm near LOTHERSDALE 1588 - 1817

Deeds of the Margetson family of DRIGHLINGTON

17 cent.

Inventory of TEMPLE NENSAM House p. WHITKIRK 1808 DD57
Deeds relating to SHERBURN [w.
wills 19 cent.

Riding] with some

Slingsby of Scriven Collection

Papers of the Slingsby family of Scriven Park relating
mainly to estates in the honour of KNARESBOROUGH but
also to BOLTON PERCY, HARSWELL, HOWTHORPE, HUTTON
RUDBY, KIRKLEATHAM, KIRBY SIGSTON, MOOR MONKTON,

.,  \,""\\2,_,_.f’.?l,'.','i!.‘
\!\ffl31\iFHxL.Iw»d

\
 “H318 9ULd-9-
7%$»?x¥nrW?“‘fi.? ”

.".‘

ufflflmrm

 

NBBURN, GREAT OUSEBURN, STAINSBY and STA§E§§ge::gttO
Cornwall, Devon. Durham: Kent: LONDON 3“

13 ~ 20 cent.

Includes deeds for many places 13 - 20 cent-:
notably for lands of St. Robert's Pri°IY:
KNARESBOROUGH [13] - 19 cent. Some of these are 6
published in yas 39 (1907). so (1913) and 111 (194 L
Extracts from KNARESBOROUGH court rolls 15 - 19 fish -
Papers relating to the prebend of BEECHILL 16 - ILL
cent; including court rolls of the manor of BEECH
1540 - 1719

Rentals and surveys 16 - 19 cent.

Stewards‘ accounts 16 - 19 cent. f
Enclosure and other papers relating to the forest 0
KNARESBOROUGH 13 - 18 cent. 1 and
Papers relating to waterworks, railways, cana S

gas undertakings 18 - 19 cent.

Maps and plans 16 - 19 cent., notably plan of
KNARESBOROUGH by Solomon Swale 1629

Papers relating to various public office: military
commissions in the KNARESBOROUGH Yeomanry CavalrY:
etc. 16 - 19 cent.

Slingsby family correspondence and personal papers
15 - 19 cen .

Account rolls of SELBY Abbey 1411 - 1414. 1;ggE'1;;g1
Papal bull addressed to the abbot of EGGLES

Slingsby family and other deeds, letters patent:

t ve s etc. 14 - 19 Cent-
a°§::1u§éss3§:1§us accounts for the castle: man°rr
forest and honour of KNARESBOROUGH 1393 - 1472

Further collection of Slingsby fami1Y estate a“d

personal material 13 - 20 cent-
Includes deeds etc. relating ma1n1Y t° Y°rksh1re

estates but also to property in Essgx. EENDON:
Lincolnshire and Westmorland 13 — 1 §in1- ordnance
Maps and plans of Slingsby estates (N Y

Survey) 18 - 20 cent.
See also DDl48, DD149 and DD188

Wentworth of Woolley Collection

. 1 ti to ARTHINGTON and Creskeld Hall:
gg;ggNe:§d 3553x122, and WOOLLEY and district, mainly
medieval 14 - 17 cent.

Includes manuscript transcripts with an introduction
to the collection, notes; etC-

Estate vouchers 1717 - 1721
Sme of the deeds are pub11snegs1?5v::d6gD§3g22)
See also DD164, MD272. M5551:

10


DDl42

DD143

D0144

DD145

DD146

‘ ‘"’:'F ___ ,1-

Surveys [photocopies] of the manor of ALMONDBURY [l340,
1425 and 1578]

Lay subsidies and hearth tax arrears returns [photo-
copies] for the wapentake of AGBRIGG and MORLEY [1523,
1545 and 1664]

Records of Thomas Leefe's ironmongery, MALTON 16 - 20

cent.
Includes accounts etc. 18 - 20 cent.
Title deeds of the shop premises and of lands at
ACKLAM and KIRBY GRINDALYTHE 16 - 17 cent.

Exemplification of a recovery of a messuage and land
etc. at BROTHERTON and KNOTTINGLEY 1806

Copyhold admittances for the manor of ULLESKELF 1779,
1814

 

accounts, mainly for LINDLEY Hall 1706 - 1748
Documents relating to the boundaries of LINDLEY,
STAINBURN and the forest of KNARESBOROUGH 16 - 18
cent., KIRKBY OVERBLOW [I362], ILKLEY c.1592, FARNLEY,
HAREWOOD, LEATHLEY and RIGTON 18 cent.

Journal relating to the funeral of Mrs. Christiana
Fawkes 1767

Estate and personal correspondence, notably letters
to Rev. Charles Burney of Greenwich and his son from
his family and friends including his sister Frances
D'Arblay (Fanny Burney) 1802 - 1838

Papers relating to the foundation of EARBY grammar
school 16 cent. and school at ELLAND 1735

FARNLEY township officers‘ accounts 1738 - 1848

See also DD161, DD193, DD198 and M51193

DD147 Deeds and papers of the Wilson family relating to
Fawkes of Farnley collection estates at CROFTON, KILHAM and RUDSTON 18 - 20 cent.
Includes maps and papers relating to the Scarborough
papers of the Fawkes family of Farnley Hall’ otley and E. Riding Railway, the Manchester, Sheffield and
relating to their estates in Wharfedale, mainly at L1ne°1n5hire Re11WeY and the Lendenr Nidlend end
ARTHINGTON, BURLEY, CALEY, CASTLEY, FARNLEY, HAWKSWORTH, 5°°“=15h Ra11WaY 19 Cent-
LEATHLEY, LINDLEY, MENSTON, OTLEY, POOL, RIGTON and
STAINBURN and some in 5_ Yorkshire’ together with DD148 Deeds and papers of the Slingsby family of Scriven
papers of the Ramsden, Ayscough, Atkinson, Gascoigne, 13 ‘ 19 cent-
Tomlinson, Shafto, Hawkesworth, Palmes, Fairfax, Savile, Includes deeds °f the Ughtred fem11Y relating me1“1Y
Calverley and other families relating to further t° “COR MONKTON 13 Cent‘ ' 1531 [ESE YRS 5°(1913)]
estates 1n BARKISLANDI Dgugyl DENTONI DEWSBURY, Papers relating to Duchy of Lancaster lands at
DRAUCHTON, ELLAND, GREETLAND, gAwoRTH' ROLLIN HALL KNARESBOROUGH and to officers of the forest of
p. ILKLEY, KEIGHLEY, cow KIRBY, LIVERSEDGE, MIRFIELD, KNARESBOROUGH 14 ¢ent- - 1675
MIXENDEN, OTLEY, OVENDEN, Rxnxucmou and STAINLANQ Papers relating to the office of sheriff of Yorkshire,
[11] - 20 cent. 1612, 1660
Includes deeds 12 - 19 cent. notably of Byland abbey Deeds ete- relating to properties of the Slinssby
c.1270, 1315 and 1538 [gee YRS 39(1907) and 111(1946)] family mainly in KNARESBOROUGH, the Thwaites family
Fountains abbey lands in STAINBURN 13 - 14 cent_ in YORK, the Harris and Turner families in Yorkshire
Iggg W. T. Lancaster, gg., Chartulary of the IN. Riding]; Cornwall, Devon, Durham, London, Norfolk,
Q;§5g5gigg_§gbgy_2§_§93n£§iE§, 2 vo1s_, 1915], the and Somerset 16 - 18 cent., notably documents relating
Knights Hospitallers 1336 and lands formerly of t0 the Printing Of Sir Jehn C0ke'S Institutes of the
Arthington nunnery 17 cent. Laws of En land 1668, 1677
Court rolls for BAILDON 1427 — 1490, FARNLEY 1591, Bonds 0? tge Pepys family of London. 1624 - 1642
1635 - 1762, HAWKSWORTH 1367 - 1446, LEATHLEY 1533 - Recipe books (2) 17 and 18 cent.
1535, 1641 - 1696, 1759 - 1761, LINDLEY (rolls) 1604, See also DD56. DD149 and D0188
1722 - 1752, (book) 1722 - 1762, MENSTON 1370 — 1727,
STAINBURN (rolls) 1564 — 1754, (book) 1713 - 1752 DD149 Letters of the Plingsby family relating to their
and other manorial material estates, legal affairs, personal matters and the civil
Rentals and surveys 16 - 19 cent. notably of omLgy war 16 - 20 cent., notably papers relating to the sale
rectory (tithe) 16 - 17 cent., BAILDON 1645 of delinquents‘ estates 1651 - 1652
Inquisition relating to lands at BURLEY formerly of MBDY Of the letters are Published in D- Parsons: The
Kirkstall abbey 1620 Dia of Sir Hen Slin sb , of Scriven Bart...,-T336
Maps 17 - 20 cent. notably of BAILDON common by See 8150 D056. DD14 and DD188
Robert Saxton 1610
Accounts etc. notably building and household repairs 99150 Deeds and PePer3 Of the W005 fem11Y relating t0
24  | M 1‘: 25
‘\.A 3. '..,.r: I .» -- \—-' ;“""""”
\
 was gu an
' .. . J
 n‘ ,  r;'7';:'.=‘.;‘f A"~‘/ ~:';.=
or n  .5 v. .?;,-‘.‘-.,u.';' ;2c.=’.«':u.~...<:.‘m.

 

 


 

DDl85

DDl86

DD187

DDl88

DD189
DDl90

DD191

DDl92

DD193

, bn19’§l)1
‘fldét

Personal papers of the Nussey, Leathley and other
related families of Leeds and the W. Riding 16 - 20
cent.

Deeds, copyhold admittances etc. relating to property
in OTLEY including the manor house 1807 - 1854

Notes and transcripts of W. E. Preston, mainly of
documents seen at SKIPTON castle [16 — 18 cent.) [See
DDl2l] "'-
Draft of article on ARTHINGTON nunnery n.d.[2O cent.]
Notes and extracts relating to the BRADFORD area

[16 - 17 cent.]

Slingsby of Scriven Collection (additional deposit)

Further papers of the Slingsby family of Scriven,
including estate and personal material 1869 - 1973 but
mainly relating to the case of C. E. E. slingsby v.

H. M. Attorney General 1913 - 1916

See also DD56, DD148 and DD149

Deed relating to HALIFAX 1620

Settlement certificate of John Bell and family at
HORSPORTH 1724

Deeds relating to land at CHURWELL for building a
primitive methodist chapel 1837 - 1892

Osborne.Duke of Leeds Collection (second deposit)

Further deeds and papers of the dukes of Leeds relating
mainly to their Yorkshire estates including NORTH and
SOUTH ANSTON, WEST APPLETON, ARRAIHORNE, ASTON: AUGHTON,
BARNSLBY, BRAMLEY p. BRAITHWELL, CONISBROUGH, DEEP CARES,
DODWORTH, HACKFORTB, HARDWICK, I-IARTHILL, HOOTON ROBERTS,
HORNBY, HUNTON, KIVETON, LANGTHORNE, GREAT LANGTON,
NETHERT1-IORPE p. ASTON, PATRICK BROMPTON, SEAMER, THORPE
SALVIN, TODWICK, TREETON, ULLEY, WAKEFIELD, WALES,
WOODALL and WOODSETTS and also to Buckinghamshire,
Cambridgeshire, Cornwall and WESTMINSTER 18 - 20 cent.
see also DD5

Maps and plans [photographs and photocopies] of estates
of the Fawkes family at GUISELEY, HAHKSWOREH, LEATHLEY,
LINDLEY, HENSION, STAINBURN and STEAD t. BURLEY IN
waummm [1727 - c.1872]

Surveys of MENSTON [18 - 19 cent.] and HAWKSWORTH [1811]
and draft deposition relating to boundaries of
HAWKSWORTH common (17331. [Photocopies]

30

tiiiéij
DDl95
DDl96

DD196/
Add.

DD‘19‘8‘L\"
K M’

 

See also DD146, DD161, DD198 and MSl193

wills, letters etc. relating to wales and Wiltshire
1705 - 1900

Engraving of LEEDS Mixed Cloth Hall n.d.[18 cent.]

Plans of premises of E. J. Arnold and Son Ltd. whole-
sale stationers, LEEDS 19 - 20 cent.

E. J. Arnold, 3 Briggate, LEEDS, general ledger 1871 -
1888 and other items

Further estate records relating to STOCKELD Park,
WETHERBY 19 - 20 cent., mainly correspondence 1935 -
1964, and some plans 20 cent.

See also MD59, DD163 and DD170

Fawkes of Farnley Collection (additional deposit)

Further estate records of the Fawkes family of Farnley
Hall, otley 19 - 20 cent., mainly correspondence

1954 — 1972
See also DD146 and DD161

Photograph on glass of a lady [?Mrs. Sam Tate of Leeds]
n.d.[19 cent.] with other Tate items 1885 and 20 cent.»

Further papers of the Wentworth family of Woolley Hall
16 - 19 cent.
Includes deeds etc. relating to DARTON, WISTOW and
WOOLLEY 16 - 18 cent.
Papers relating to WOOLLEY Moor enclosure 18 cent.
Papers relating to the tithes of BICKLETON, NOTTON,
ROYSTON and WOOLLEY [15] - 19 cent.
Papers relating to the church, poor and school of
WOOLLEY 1649 - 1764 and WOOLLEY colliery 19 cent.
Plan of DARTON 1822
See also DD57, DDl64, MD272 and MS755

31


  

M734-739 Papers of Henry Lawrance (1873 - 1947)

M734

M735

M5736

MS737

£5738

M739

See also MD248 and M5769 - 802

Notes, bibliography etc. mainly relating to heraldry
and armour, particularly that of the E. Riding,
Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire, and to
heraldry in churches including YORK minster 1.19 - 20
cent.
Includes ‘The borough and port of Faversham'
n.d.[?1.19 cent.]
‘Notes on the pedigrees of the heralds’ visitations
of Derbyshire' n.d.

[Kent]

Autograph letters and other documents of Sir William
Dalton, Col. Thomas Metham, William Penn, Sydney Smith,
Robert Walpole and others, 17 - 19 cent. with
transcripts, notes etc. 20 cent.
Includes probate inventories of Mary, Viscountess
Fairfax 1639 and Sir Thomas Norclife 1642

Notes and papers mainly relating to the Norcliffe
family of Langton 17 - 20 cent.
Includes extracts from the parish register of LANGTON
[printed] [1653 - 1725] and FRAISTHORPE p. CARNABY
[1698 - 1779]
Accounts and list of hounds for an E. Riding hunt
1711
See also MD69, MD161, MD237 and M5721

‘A catalogue of the high sheriffs of the county, mayon
and bailiffs‘ by R.H. Skaife 1860
See also M5206 - 228 and MS371 - 372

Henry Lawrance's collections for a work on Yorkshire
ecclesiastics n.d.[20 cent.]

Extracts by C.B. Robinson from the parish registers of
ALDBOROUGH [1538 - 1821], GREAT DRIFFIELD [1656 - 1693L
nurwon [Westmorland] [1571 - 1741], NEWBIGGIN
Iwestmorlandl [1577 - 1741], SHERIFF HUTTON [1627 -
1759], THORNTON-LE-STREET [1599 - 1791], WHELDRAKE
[1604 - 1782] and YORK Bedern chapel [1682], Holy
Trinity, Goodramgate [1582 - 1772], St. Martin [1557 -
1851], St. Mary Bishophill junior (1602 - 1772]. St.
Maurice [1651 - 1756], St. Michael le Belfry [1566 -
1778], St. Sampson [1640], 19 cent.

Extracts from the cartulary of OLD MALTON priory [13
cent.] and of deeds etc. of the Pudsey family [14 - 15
cent.] n.d.[19 cent.]

See also MS771, M5772, MS789 and MS1037 - 1040

82

 

JUIC11

‘mmmfimmmm

 

M5740
M8741
M5742

M5743

M744

M5745

M5746
M5747

M5748
MS749

MS750

MS751

M752

‘W .  

R
,m‘
.

  

r

'Hebden of Hebden in Craven and some possible
descendants‘ by W. Hebden 1935 - 1945

Account of moduses due in lieu of tithe hay in the
various townships in the parish of BIRSTALL 1776

Cash book of J. Beevers on account of Henry Vernon's
income and expenditure 1803 - 1809

‘Howell wood or the Raby hunt in Yorkshire’ by Martin
Hawke, (?)1812 with a shorter, printed version 1803
A collection of tradesmen's bills e.19 cent.

Notes on the Mauleverer family by W.P. Baildon
e.20 cent.

Papers of W.A. Atkinson consisting of manuscript
articles and notes on various topics, mainly industrial,
including lead smelting, WHITBY and GUISBOROUGH alum
works, SHEFFIELD plate, Yorkshire pottery, LEEDS clock-
makers, LEEDS brass foundry, SCARBOROUGH candle works,
HESSLE shipbuilding works, Cleveland iron mines etc.,
TADCASTER cooperage, British ships and the Slingsby
family of Scriven 4.1904 - 1947

Extracts from wills of the Armitage family of
Almondbury [16 - 18 cent.] made by H.T. Clay 20 cent.
See also MS756

Transcript of an Exchequer roll listing the retinue of
the earl of Northumberland at NEWCASTLE [Northumberland]
[1523]

Paper on John Mence, vicar of Barnsley in the 18 cent.
by M.B. Weinstock 1950

Pedigrees etc. of Yorkshire families, notably Armitage
and Charlesworth c.1948 - 1949

Part of a diary [photocopy] of a journey from

N. Ireland to LONDON [c.1659]

Letter [photocopy] of W. Burgh to [?John] Foster
including a description of STUDLEY ROYAL [1773]
Note: originals are in the P.R.O. Northern Ireland

Notes on the Thweng family by William Hebditch
n.d.[c.1940]

Account book of the Hoyland family of Brierley and
Hemingfield and Anthony Marshall of Ferrymoor,
Grimethorpe, including some accounts of Trinity College,
CAMBRIDGE 1629 - 1742

See also MS754

83

,. H»... . -on-j‘

   
   
   
   
 
 
 
 
 
   
  
    
  
  
   
  
  
 
   
   
   
   
 

  


 

2451069

$61070

$81071

$61072

181073

181074

MS1075

161076

161077

DB 1077/
Add.

161078

161079

151080

161081

BS1082

M81083

Minutes of the commissioners of the SOUTH MILFORD and
LUMBY enclosure 1793 - 1803 with a copy of the Act 1793

Sketches of various N. Riding churches by W.F. Saunders
1854

Drawings and sketches of Yorkshire abbeys, churches,
rectories etc. by various artists c.1815 - 1924

Copies of drawings by _ Fellowes of scenes in
BRIDLINGTON [1836 - 1855] by F. Hutchinson 1920

Watercolours of SANDAL MAGNA parish church by S.H.L.H.
1872 and n.d. ~

Drawing of WAKEFIELD bridge and chantry chapel

n.d.[19 cent.]
Copy of a sketch of WAKEFIELD chantry chapel in the

British Museum [1790], 1898

Plan, section, drawings and photographs of the Roman
site at RUDSTON by K.A. Steer and R.H. Stanwell 1936

ggg YAJ 33 (1938)

Proofs of Early Man in North-East Yorkshire by Frank
Elgee with au or s correct ons and various illustr-
ations, notes and photographs 1930

See also MS987 - 989 and M1048

Reports, plans and photographs [copies] of work carried
out by 8. Hutton and the North Yorkshire and Cleveland
Vernacular Buildings Study Group 1969 - 1974 '

See M51275

No document

Autobiography of Israel Roberts of Stanningley,
clothier and Wesleyan methodist c.1881
Note: edited and published by R. Strong 1984

‘Old ILKLEY', a paper read by Robert Collyer at the
opening of ILKLEY museum 1892

commonplace book with entries on international affain.
politics, Irish schools and other Irish matters

19 cent.

Section through the Roman road, CASTLEFORD to Assnnmm
near Sheldon Hill by L. smith 1964

Catalogue of unpublished finds reported to the YAS
Prehistory Research section n.d.[l9 cent. - 1967]

108

$1084

PL91085

#81086

161087

51038

161089

M51090

51091

161092
161093

$1094

161095

HS1096

Dra"'<1-"93 photogra h 1

prehistoric £1ndspa:'se::§:r;o:tc'
CAWTHORN. LEALHOLM. HIPPERLEY r’
SPALDING MOOR, P‘
1936 -

relating to
M HOLHE upon
MARKET wsrc T '_ _
1950 and n.d. H on and narrow LE HOLE

:§g°rt' se°t1°“ and plan of the Roman road at unnrsnsnn
R TOP by D. Hai h 1972
BLACKSTONE spas bygfl. nua1§3d1§$§°’t on R°m°W ’°°d ‘t

Ge
"°a1°9i°31 “°te8: extracts etc. relating to the

H 1
czgtfsway family and other uwssuny families [14 - 2o

“a"“5°riPt C°Pies of a biblio r n 5
and an EMLEY 1 k 9 as Y or WAKEFIELD 1891
EMLEY 1854 _ ?8g?“aC 1334: with notes on events in

Enrolments [photocopies] in the W
Deeds relati t est Riding Regigtry °f
wsrasnsy [1733 -°1§§??ertY of the Pitts family 1”

Notes relati t
Brooksbank f:gi1i)e:E11‘fJ1‘gGE zmllgugzngharton and

P1 h 7
[1??a[:e:§?f°Py] of °“YT°" “F11 estate IW- Riding]

Rem’-31 [photoco 1
FOUNTAINS AbbeYP¥{4:6fh granscript of the estates of

Note: ori in 1 1
E3335 Disgrigt AfichivggS5y§::k;:;r§42§chive Service.

Pedi
9‘°° °f the de Trappes family of nxnn Hall c.1908

Letters to J.W. Walker 1936 - 1937
pedigrees relati t and notes and
families by J w'nga1:e:h§‘§n9ram. Radcliffe and Green

Se 1 -
fi§%T%§§2 ”58°5 558: M8957. M8966 - 968, M31049 and

Funeral notice and order of processibn
(photoco iesl
for Sir Charles Slingsby of scriven 1869 P

Letter of R.G. Ra 1
of the GUISELEY crgzrfiimtgggz Sprittles with photographs

Letter of C.E. Whitelaw to B W J K

the signature f J ‘ ' ' ant with tr‘°1“9 °f
sword hilt 193: ames Grant of Stirling taken from 3
See also M51010

 


Savile fam. 13, 21, 24

Sawley, abbey 22, 54; manor 20, 152

Sawley p. Ripon 8-9, ?34, 39, ?43;
Hungate 9; Risplith 9

Saxton, monumental inscriptions 181;
see also Scarthingwell

Saxton, Christopher 95-6; Robert 3,
13, 24

Scagglethorpe p. Settrington 33

Scalby (N. Riding] 33; parish
register index 163

Scammonden 41; graveship 43';
scannonden West, parish register
transcript 163; see also Deanhead

Scaapston, manor 15; w.'r. St.
Quintin's lands 79

'Scanpewik' [unid.] 32

Scarborough 4, 6, 12, 39. 40: 42:
46, 47, 59, 98, 122; candle works
83; deputy receiver general 62;
parish register transcript 163:
troops 80

Scarborough and East Riding Railway 25

Scargill p. Barningham. M3110! 3

Scargill fam. 93

Scarr fam. 125

Scarthingwell 71

Scawton 36

Scholes p. Birstall 1; grave book 181

scholes p. Kirkburton 26 '

schools s_e£ Education

Science, telescopes 971 treatises 0“
alchemy 21, physics 14

'Sco1ley' fie Shelley

Scorton 41

Scosthrop 12; plan 120

Scotgate Ash Stone Co. 57

scouand 1; army 123: castles,
earthworks etc. 63

Scott Hilloughby [Lincolnshire] 5

Scott, Henry, earl of Deloraine 2,
6; fam. 118, 125

scotton p. Parnham 22. 43: l|°fi\I|3°'“'-‘1
inscriptions 175. 181'

Scrayingham ieg Hovlshalfl

Scriven 9, 23, 25*. 30. 46. 83- 1097
Slingsby collection iv, 9-10: 30

Scroggs, smith]. calendar 74

scrape, John 14;, 8th Baron Scrope of
Bolton 53

Seacroft, parish register
transcript 163

Seale [surrey] 56

Seamer 8, 30

H\)DE>< (E>«7re+§€r)
Not—.e:cv» c¢sL-oust cfitanoeeo more than 0051 '€Pe:~e/Keen hKo.~>c1mLP<as;_

Searles, Catherine 49

Seaton p. Hinderwell, alum works 8;
manor 7

Seaton Ross 2

Sedbergh 4, 11; manor 77

Sedgewick fam. 120

Selby 18, 23, 32, 33, 34, 42, 94, 127*;
abbey 10, ?49; Board of Health 94;
canal 8; corn mills 39; Friends’
burials (report) 175; Gas Co. 94;
market 39; monumental inscriptions
186; parish church 98; parish
register transcript 163; peculiar
64; plan 64; township and parish
officers‘ records 77; window tax
39; workhouse 94

Selby fam. 33

Selwyn fam. 85

Seneca, "I'hyestes' 39

Senior fam. 129

Sermons 65, 75, 118

Sessay 34, 35, 36, 44

Settle 11, 2e, 44, 46, 48": apprentice-
ship 23; canal 116; Craven savings
Bank 52; hearth tax returns 116;
manor 20, 152; monumental
inscriptions 181; poor law union 18;
roads 23; rural sanitary district
18; see also stockdale

Settle, Robert 39

Settlement s£e_ Poor

Settlements, family 16, 20, 23', 45,
53'; Clifford fam. 20; Norton fam- '
9; Osborne fam. l

Settrington 2, 33; parish register
extracts 105

sewerby 39, 44

sewers, connissions of, N. Riding 32

Sewers, sessions of. Hatfield Chase
67; N. Riding 32; H. Riding 35

Shackleton, B. 125: fam. 126

Shadwell 49

Shafto fam. 24

Sharlston 39, 58‘; charity 54

Sheffield 4, 11, 18, 23.: 401 58: 101:
114, 128, 130; Central Library 77;
freemasons 61; manor 152; monumental
inscriptions 186"; railway 18: St.
Luke's church, Dyer's Hill 72; plate
(notes) 83; see also Attercliffe

Sheldon Hill, Roman road 108

Shelf 6; monunantal inscriptions 181‘;
see also Anbler ‘morn

Shelley 29, 41, 119; manor 29, 153;

232

x...
\ .

 ~ ,- 7-. H. ; _ .
i 2 .. ‘;»", ‘Li: .a\_...J 1..-...’

monumental inscriptions 178;
rentals and surveys 29

Shenley [Hertfordshire] 52

Shepley 29, 59

Sherburn [E. Riding] 33, 61

Sherburn in Elmet 9, 12, 50; Friends‘
burials 175; manor ?6; parish
register transcript 163

Sheriff Hutton 2; castle 111; parish
register extracts 82

sheriffs Egg Public office

Sherwood see Eggborough

Sherwood £6235: [Nottinghamshire]
42, 153

Sherwood, George, extracts 64

Shibden 34; park (cottage) 97, 101

Shipley 35; Hirst wood
(archaeological site) 128; New
Close barn 127; plan 19; see also
Saltaire; wrose

Shipping §gg_Business; see also
Ships; wreck

Ships 83; 'Mayf1ower' 97; see also
Business; Industry; wreck

Shipton p. Market Weighton 40;
manor Egg Weighton with Shipton

Shitlington 35, 85; Nether
Shitlington 28; see also Netherton

Shooter fam. 115

shorthand 104

Shrewsbury, [earls of]

Shropshire 1

Sicklinghall 28

Sidgwick fam. 120

Sidney, Robert, Viscount Lysle, earl
of Leicester 60

Sigston §g§_Kirby Sigston

Sigsworth see Fountains Earth

silkstone 12, 14, 41; parish register
extracts 89, transcript 163; see
also Barnsley

Silsden, Clifford fam. estates 20-1*;
manor 20'—l, 153; map 29; see also
Holden

Silton, Over §gg_Over Silton

Simpson C., notes etc. 95, 96;
F(rank] Gleraldl. papers etc.
114-5, 119; H. notes etc. 95

Sims, Ronald G. 129

Sinnington 13; enclosure 76

Sisson, J[oseph] Llawsonl,
transcripts 84

sitlington §g§_Shitlington

Skaife, R[obert] H., historical works

see Talbot

 
 

etc. 65, 82, 106

Skeckling 40; see also Ryhill

Skelbrooke 46, 75

Skelding 9, 26

Skelmanthorpe 1, 60*, 122; tithe 107

Skelton [N. Riding, Bulmer wap.],
manor 153; parish register extracts
105

skelton (N. Riding, Langbargh wap.],
manor 7, 153

Skelton p. Howden 5

Skerne 6

Sketches s_e_e_ Drawings

Skidby, manor 153

Skinningrove 8

Skipton ll, 18, 21', 30, 44, 54;
borough 20, 154; canal 21; castle
74, 81, 107; Clifford collection
iv, 20-1; excavation, Horse Close
Hill 106; honour 20'—1; 134, 135*,
138, 140', 142, 149, 153, 154, 155,
156, 157; manor 20-1, 154;
monumental inscriptions 181*; roads
23; sale catalogue and plans 18

Skipton and Craven Local History
Society Bulletin 181

Skipton Local Board of Health 21

skipwith 64; parish register extracts
105, transcript 163

Skirbeck s_ee Old Sleningford

Skircoat 14', 16, 17, 21, 34, 41, 42,
43; Copley Hall 21; protestation
rolls 117; see also Salterhebble

Skyrack, wapentake 71; transfer of
alehouse licences 59

slaidburn 40', 43; parish register
transcript 163; Standridge Farm 22

Slaithwaite p. Huddersfield 21: manor
(slaithwaite with Lingards) 14

Slater fam. 114

Sledmere, House/Hall 64, 81; parish
register extracts 105

Sleigh fam. 45

Sleights see!-iskdaleside

Sleningford 19"; see also Old
Sleningford

Slingsby, Sir Charles 109; Clharlesl
Elugene] I-:[dward] 30; Sir Henry 25;
fam. 9-10*, 25', 30, 83; Slingsby
of Scriven collection iv, 9-10, 30

Smailes fam. 125

Smallfield s_e£Bradfield

smeaton, Little p. womersley 32, 42

Smeaton, John 76, 90

233

 

 Dims _gU\d;Q.

   

— _i_ :,;..:"1-

.'.- ".’.’.’£’.’,7." .5 E’ ,'',h);‘ [)3 ¢A‘{)/’);}_»(}’ 3:
, . . . . ‘ I,’ . ‘ , _ ,
"~‘ ,"'~'<”'- J v.  I ,"?-.‘."’.7,'/.~‘_\'/H/7. , "

i — .

, _ _ _ _ _ _.-  ,

.. F .- .___, __ _r .4 .4
:5-

   


...\ $7-‘

V    M d/MW    

 ‘)0/~V‘)";$—{ /~ \@"(;d3  ‘hfco/hi’ 3"”,
(mm mwflm ,(,mJ1\#..xf 4 wt. 
A /«W% W we W M Q/vr'~»3"‘7/"AL « /M  g M.


The Diary of Samuel Pepys

Tuesday 29 January 1660/ 6:1

Mr. Moore making up accounts with me all this morning till %
Lambert came, and so with them over the water to Southwark, and so
over the fields to Lambeth, and there drank, it being a most glorious and
warm day, even to amazement, for this time of the year. Thence to my
Lila where we found my Lady gone with some company to see
fla_rnpt_o1;_Court, so we three went to Blackfryers (the first time I ever was
there since plays begun), and there after great patience and little

expectation, from so poor beginning, I saw three acts of “The Mayd in ye
Mill” acted to my great content. But it being late, I left the play and them,
and by water through bridge home, and so to Mr. Turner’s house, where
the Comptroller, Sir William Batten, and Mr. Davis and their ladies; and
here we had a most neat little but costly and genteel supper, and after
that a great deal of impertinent mirth by Mr. Davis, and some catches,
and so broke up, and going away, Mr. Davis’s eldest son took up my old
Lady Slingsby in his arms, and carried her to the coach, and is said to be
able to carry three of the biggest men that were in the company, which I
wonder at. So l;o;n_e and to bed.

Annotations

- w on Thu 29 Jan 2004, 11:18 pm | Link
“The Maid in the Mill”

Another Beaumont & Fletcher play (1647).
Cfr. also background info:
http: //www.DeDVsdia1"V.C0m/D/289.DhD#10022

- Andrew Hamilton on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 12:19 am 1 LLk

This passage reminds me, apropos

manly feats including hard riding, which we discussed recently, that today’s
hardest—riding billionaire sheikhs manage less than 11 mph on the best mounts -
one more sign that Sam rides well. I cite the following item from the Khaleej
Times— Gulf News of September 17, 2002 (condensed):

“Sheikh Ahmed bin Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum was crowned world
champion after he won the World Endurance Championship in J erez, Spain,
yesterday. Sheikh Ahmed crossed the finish line three minutes ahead of his
nearest challenger... The brilliant UAE rider  took his 13-year-old gelding
Bowman [over] the 160 kilometre race in 9 hours, 19 minutes and 29 seconds.” (I
work that out to 10.64 mph, including rests. The Maktoums own the best
horseflesh available, and it is superbly trained. Sam was riding rental horses, and
did nearly as well, although his ride of Jan 16 was considerably shorter — 3—plus


hours vs. 9-plus.)

- language hat on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 1:44 am I Qnlg

“The Mayd in ye Mill”:
This “ye” is, of course, a graphic representation of “the,” and would not have been
pronounced with a y; the OED says:

Another value of y arises from the assimilation of y and 1), the runic thorn (see th),
which had become indistinguishable from each other in some MSS. of the early
14th century (e.g. the Cotton MS. of Cursor Mundi). After 1400 b fell more and
more out of use, and in some scripts was represented only by the y~form in the
compendia ye, yt or yat, yei, ym, yu = the, that, they, them, thou, and the like,
many of which continued to be extensively employed in manuscript in the 17th
and 18th centuries. Two of these, ye or &672., yt or &673., were retained in
printers’ types during the 15th and 16th centuries, but often with a form of y
somewhat different from that used in other positions. (In Sir John Cheke’s
translation of the New Testament, a dotted y stands for th.) In manuscript (e.g. in
letter—writing) ye lasted well into the 19th century. It is still often used pseudo-
archaically, jocularly, or vulgarly (pronounced as ye), e.g. in Lewis Carr0ll’s ‘Ye
Carpette Knyghte’, and in shop-signs like ‘Ye Olde Booke Shoppe’.

- Mary House on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 3:11 am | Link

VVhat is meant by “some catches?” Does this refer to music or games?

- The Bishop on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 3:44 am | Link

Catches are what we now call ‘singing in the round’.

- vincent on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 3:44 am I Link

“Catches” Just how my mind works ? Reading between the lines, there
was a little gamboling going on, frisky maybe, Fresh maybe, note the weather
spring like , It does bring out the best in men? at least the word is impertinent
“...and after that a great deal of impertinent mirth by Mr. Davis, and some catches,
and so broke up...”

[disrespectfu1,] the synonym, being saucy,insolent,impudent, pert, fresh,
rude,audacious, cheeky, sassy. Take your pick?

- The Bishop on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 3:50 am | Link

‘The Maid in the Mill’ was actually by Fletcher and Rowley (Wm.
Rowley).

It was licensed for publication in 1623 (and presumably performed about then),
long after Beaumont was dead. It was, however, included in the 1647 collection of
Beaumont and Fletcher’s plays, which is what dirk’s 1647 date refers to.

- Emilio on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 3:53 am I Link

“we three went to (VVhite)fryers”

Sam has goofed here: “Pepys cannot be referring to the famous Blackfriars
Theatre used by the King’s Men from c. 1608 until 1642, because it had been
pulled down on 5 August 1655. His ‘Blackfryers’ is an error for ‘Whitefriars’, i.e.
the Salisbury Court Theatre, at which the Duke of York’s company was performing
at this time. Cf. below [on 9 Feb], where Pepys again makes the error but corrects


it.” (L&M footnote)

I’m surprised that Wheatley didn’t footnote this fact as well—it seems exactly the
sort of historical detail he would revel in. The upcoming Feb 9 entry should
confirm the situation by reading ‘Whitefriers’ rather than ‘Black-‘.

From a later L&M footnote: “Not the Whitefriars Theatre opened c. 1605, but the
Salisbury Court Theatre (opened in 1629), situated in the Whitefriars district east
of the Temple and south of Fleet St. The Duke of York’s company, managed by Sir
William Davenant, played here before he transferred it to a new theatre in
Lincoln’s Inn Fields in June 1661.”

- Vincent on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 4:50 am | Link

Bishop’s comment on Rowley, William

(b. 1585?, London, Eng.—d. 1642?), English dramatist and actor who collaborated
with several Jacobean dramatists, notably Thomas Middleton

appears to be correct.

http: [ [search.eb

Fletcher, John and Rowley, William The maid in the

mill..com/ shakespeare/ micro/ 511/ 98.html

press release of the day about one of Fletchers works.

: Poets lives; wonder not how or why

Fletcher revives, but that he er’e could dye:

Safe Mirth, full Language, flow in ev’ry Page,

At once he doth both heighten and aswage;
http://emsah.uq.edu.au/drama/fletcher/ff/frontmatter 2;Lhtm
the most famous line from the play a song [poem]

How long shall I pine for love? /
first staged: (performed 1623) The Maid in the Mill (licensed 1623  The Elder
Brother (printed 1637)

- dirk on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 5:36 am | Link

catches

 what would nowadays be called ‘coarse music’ was not left out of an evening’s
entertainment in the seventeenth century. Both in tavern and home, the ‘catches’,
normally written for three unaccompanied voices in canon as a round, were widely
heard. The words of many or most catches have been thought unsuitable for
mixed company in most ages between the seventeenth century and our own
century, but their musical invention is often remarkable”

From:

http : //www.ecwsa.org/entofdrinkandsonghtml

There is a CD available with some of these 17th c. catches:

“The Art of Bawdy Song” by the Baltimore Consort and the Merry Companions,
CD Ref: DOR 90155

You can hear some samples from this CD on:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/Bo000O1OQ'%/026-6208702-
3580445

- Mary on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 8:00 am | Link

..by water through the bridge home....


Bearing in mind our earlier discussion of the perils of ‘shooting’ London Bridge,
it’s interesting that Sam finds it noteworthy that he achieved passage through the
bridge rather than around it. Presumably the benign weather and a slack tide
allowed this.

- Leslie Silberhans on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 10:24 am I Limk

The defining characteristic of a ‘catch’ (as opposed to a ‘glee’), is that
words from, say, the second line insert themselves into the first, thereby changing
the meaning, commonly in a ribald manner. they are very clever and ofttimes
beautiful. I recommend Purcell’s, in particular.

- Hic retearius (ut fiuminis nauta!) on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 3:01 pm | Link

Mary, catching the tide.

The impression Sam created here was just the opposite, he was in a rush to get

home and took advantage of the current in the river. To this reader; the facts of

it being late...”, that he had to leave a play that he was enjoying early and in the
doing abandon congenial company meant that he was under time pressure. He
zoomed home by the fastest means possible, catching the flood or ebb so that he
could nip over to Turner’s house in time for a power dinner (followed by a roaring
good time, a great way to network then as now!)

- Rex Gordon on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 3:06 pm | Link

For a great collection of English song lyrics, many of them bawdy, visit
this site:

httn :/ /www.acronet.net/ ~robokoDD/englishhtml

Songs from Sam’s era are particularly featured in the “Cavalier Ballads” section.
Although bawdy songs are always the ones I enjoy the best, the satirical, political
songs commenting on the momentous events of the era and how people perceived
and felt about them are also fascinating. (The Baltimore Consort, mentioned
above, hails from my hometown, Baltimore, in the state of Maryland in the USA.
Maryland was founded and settled by English Catholic families in the first part of
the 17th century: Calverts, Howards, Somersets, Crosslands and others  Cavalier
ballads must have been familiar to the first English—speaking Marylanders.)

- Brian McMu|len on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 3:11 pm | Link

From a later L&M footnote: “Not the Whitefriars Theatre opened c.
1605, but the Salisbury Court Theatre (opened in 1629), situated in the
Whitefriars district east of the Temple and south of Fleet St.

The Rocque map reference is:

http: //www.motco.com/Mao/810o2/SeriesSearchPlatesFulla.asp?
mode=querv&title=Temple+Street+White+Frvers%28%3F%
2q&artist=’-;84&other='«116&x=11&v=11

White Fryers is on one side of Water Lane and Salisbury Court is on the other side.

The map bears no indication of a theatre in the area.

- mary on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 3:36 pm I Link

Catching the tide?

It’s not many weeks since Sam got an unwelcome soaking when passing beneath


the bridge. He’s on his way to dinner and certainly wants to get there quickly, but
surely isn’t going to risk another soaking en route if the river looks less than calm.
We noted earlier that passage beneath the bridge, through the very narrow
waterways between the stanchions, could be uncomfortable and dangerous when
the tide was either ebbing or flowing. Hence my surmise that it was slack when
Sam needed passage; he was lucky to be able to avoid the delay normally incurred

when leaving one boat, walking past the bridge and taking another on the other
side.

- vincent on Fri 30 Jan 2004, 7:15 pm |L1k
Catch as catch can: no doubt catching the tide [rising ]singing bawdy
songs especially those rugger songs { Rolling in the h.... oh! sweet memories}

- PHE on Sat 31 Jan 2004, 12:54 am | Link
{memories sweet oh!...h the in Rolling}

songs rugger those especially songs bawdy singing [rising] tide the catching doubt
no : can catch as catch.

Any better? Worth a try.

- john iauer on Sat 31 Jan 2004, 3:47 am | Link
re: Catches and Glees

The three 12” LPs I find still in my collection are
allegro 107 (3008), Catches and Glees of the English Restoration, Purcell, et al.;

allegro 3046, More Catches and Glees, the Glee Singers, John Bath, Dir. (1953);
and

EA-0312, Catch That Catch Can (1958), the NY Catch Club.

Annotate this entry

TrackBack

Listed below are links to entries that reference this entry (if any).


The Diary of Samuel Pepys

Slingsby, Col. Robert (Comptroller of

-m

e Navy)

@ > People > Slingsby, Col. Robert (Comptroller of the Navy)

Refe

rences in the diary

Annotations

- Paul Brewster on Fri 26 Sep 2003, 6:15 am | Link

Wheatley: “Colonel, afterwards Sir Robert Slingsby, Bart., appointed
Comptroller of the Navy in 1660. He died October 28th, 1661, and Pepys grieved
for his loss.”

L&M: “Second son of Sir Guildford (himself Comptroller 1611-d 31); Entered naval
service 1633; secretary to Strafford and protege of Digby. He refused in 1642 to
serve under the parliamentary admiral and after a brief imprisonment became a
colonel in the royalist army, and later an active royalist agent, well tought of by
Clarendon.”

- E on Mon 19 Jan 2004, 10:30 pm I Link

Husband of Elizabeth: http://www.pepvsdiarv.com/p11857.php

- Vicente on Thu 27 May 2004, 2:39 am | Link

A look ahead to next year for Sir Robt:

1662 c. 29 Sir Robert Slingsby’s estate: sale of lands for payment of debts.
http:/ / wwwlegislation.hmso.gov.uk/ legislation / chron-

tables / private / chronO'74.htm

Annotate this page

References in the diary

1660

Sep: 5,m,;4,25,2_8
Oct: 6,15,39,31
iNovt ;Q,;g,1 ,g§
Dwzgggg
1661
hmgghamgggkfia
Feb: 2,4,19,a3
Adan §,g§,3g

Apr: 15,1626
May: ggzgm

Jun: 15,19,213



Samuel Pepys Diary January I 66] 

:-*r*---'"*-''
I (,mttent.s
heme...

.__N......«-«--«.,.

(‘‘’''’“—*'‘“l
‘i’.f7ir‘Itr1 t.tm.
t E '

‘.'
I

I.

—:\_gJ

Cilkfl
Kettipe



__ L. on t.aq_ri_

 

it‘

I"“"'““ .
om tl.r1‘___t1i?f§F

Tf:,t‘-‘t"trt:t: ff 

»..».M_

 

E
I

 

1660-61 .‘la~tI
if tit?
At the end of the last and the beginning of this year, I do live in one of the houses qi/V1 I,
belonging to the Navy Office. as one of the principal officers. and have done now about " ‘
half a year. After much trouble with workmen I am now almost settled; my family _j§[;;y»
being, myself. my wife. Jane. Will. Hewer, and Wayneman,--/ Will Mtyrmmm appetzrs by ‘ i,
I‘/li.\' to have bee/t_fk2rg1'ven fur /zis theft (sec ante). He was t1t'.mti.s‘.vc:r1 on July Xlh. l()’()3./—~my A’ ary
girle’s brother. Myself in constant good health, and in a most handsome and thriving jun i.
condition. Blessed be Almighty God for it. I am now taking of my sister to come and _
live with me. As to things of State.----The King settled. and loved of all. The Duke of :1“ ft;
York matched to my Lord Chancellor's daughter. which do not please many. The Queen  -
upon her return to France with the Princess Henrietta. The Princess of Orange lately "’ “ff
dead, and we into new mourning for her. We have been lately frighted with a great plot. (‘F1
and many taken up on it. and the fright not quite over. The Parliament. which had done all this great good to the King, . V
beginning to grow factions, the King did dissolve it December 29th last, and another likely to be chosen speedily. I 0* I
take thyself now to be worth I..3()(') clear in money, and all my goods and all manner of debts paid, which are none at )I,("c,.‘.,
all. '
{ills t‘

January 1st. Called up this morning by Mr. Moore. who brought me my last things for me to sign for the last
month, and to my great comfort tells me that my fees will come to L80 clear to myself, and about L25 for him, which
he hath got out of the pardons. though there be no fee due to me at all out of them. Then comes in my brother
Thomas. and after him my father. Dr. Thomas Pepys. my uncle Fenner and his two sons (Ant'hony‘s' only child dying
this morning. yet he was so civil to come. and was pretty merry) to breakfast; and I had for them a barrel of oysters. a
dish of neat.'s tongues, and a dish of anchovies, wine ofall sorts. and Norlhdown ale. We were very merry till about
eleven o'clock. and then they went away. At noon I carried my wife by coach to my cozen. Thomas Pepys, where 
with my father. Dr. Thomas. eozen Stradwick, Scott. and their wives, dined. Here I saw first his second wife, which is
a very respectfull woman. but his dinner a sorry, poor dinner for a mztn of his estate. there being nothing but ordinary
meat in it. To—day the King dined at a lord's, two doors from us. After dinner I took my wife to Whitehall, I sent her to
to Mrs. Pierces (where we should have dined today), and I to the Privy Seal. where Mr. Moore took out all his money.
and he and I went to Mr. Pierces: in our way seeing the Duke of York bring his Lady this day to wait Ltpon the Queen.
the first time that ever she did since that great business; and the Queen is said to receive her now with much respect
and love: and there he cast up the fees. and I told the money, by the same token one L 100 bag, after I had told it. fell
all about the room. and I fear I have lost some of it. That done I left my friends and went to my Lord’s, but he being
not come in 1 lodged the money with Mr. Shepley, and bade good night to Mr. l\’lo0re, and so returned to Mr. Pierces,
and there supped with them, and Mr. Pierce, the purser. and his wife and mine. where we had a calfs head carboned,
[Mmt out (‘!‘(I.s‘.\‘vt‘f.\‘(‘ tu1(.I1)rniletl l1'(l.\' .\'(,lft[ to he L‘(U‘/7UIl6l]. Fttl.s'ta/.)".r(1_v.\‘ in "Kine Henry I V., " Part 1,. art r., .v(‘. 3, "Well. if
I-’z'rc‘y he alive, I’/I picrc"<a him. lfhte do (’t)Ill(,' in my way. so; ff/I!’ do not‘. If I (.'t’PllI(.’ in his willingly. /at him makt.-' tz (.'(lrbUIl(l([() of
me. "] but it was raw. we could not eat it. and 21 good hen. But she is such a slut that I do not love her victualls. After
supper I sent them home by coach, and I went to my Lords and there played till I2 at night at cards at Best with I.
Goods and  Osgood, and then to bed with Mr. Shepley.

2d. Up early, and being called up to my Lord he did give me many commands in his business. As about taking care to
write to my uncle that Mr. Barnewelfs papers should be locked up. in case he should die. he being now suspected to
be very ill. Also about consulting with Mr. W. Mont-agu for the settling of the 1.4000 21-year that the King had
promised my Lord. As also about getting of Mr. George Montagu to be chosen at Iluntingdon this next Parliament.
&c. That done he to White Hall stairs with much company. and 1 with him; where we took water for Lainbeth, and
there coach for Portsmouth. The Queen's things were all in White Hall Court ready to be sent away, and her Majesty
ready to be gone an hour after to Hampton Court to—night. and so to be at Ports mouth on Saturday next.

I by water to my office. and there all the morning. and so home to dinner. where I found Pall (my sister) was come;
but I do not let her sit down at table with me, which I do at first that she may not expect it hereafter from me. After
dinner I to Westminster by water. and there found my brother Spicer at the Leg with all the rest of the Exchequer men
(most of whom I now do not know) at dinner. Here I staid and drank with them. and then to Mr. George Montagu
about the business of election, and he did give me a piece in gold; so to my Lords and got the chest of plate brought
to the Exchequer. and my brother Spicer put it into his treasury. So to Will's with them to a pot of ale, and so parted. I
took it turn in the Hall, and bought the King and Chancellor's speeches at the dissolving the Parliament last Saturday.
So to my Lords. and took my money I brought ‘thither last night and the silver cundlesticks. and by coach left the
latter at Alderman BackweIl's. I having no use for them. and the former home. There stood a man at our door. when I
carried it in. and saw me, which made me a little afeard. Up to my chamber and wrote letters to Huntingdon and did
other business. This day I lent Sir W. Batten and Captn. Rider my chine of beef for to serve at dinner tomorrow at
Trinity House. the Duke of Albemarle being to be there and all the rest ofthe Brethren. it being a great day for the
reading over of their new Charter, which the King hath newly given them.

3d. Early in the morning to the Exchequer. where I told over what money I had of my Lord's and my own there,
which I found to be L970. Thence to Will's. where Spicer and I eat our dinner of a roasted leg of pork which Will did
give us. and after that to the Theatre. where was acted "Beggars Bush," it being very well done; and here the first
time that ever I saw women Come upon the stage. [After the.’ R(fSf(3l‘(lfff’fl the acting uffelmtle t:harat.'rer.v by women lierame
(.'()IlIlIlUIl.]

Front thence to my father's, where I. found my mother gone by Bird. the carrier. to Brampton, upon my uncle‘s great
desire. my aunt being now in despair of life. So home.

4111. Office all the morning, my wife and Pall being gone to my father's to dress dinner for Mr. I-Ioniwood, my mother
being gone out of town. Dined at home. and Mr. Moore with me. with whom I had been early this morning at White
Hall, at the Jewell Office. to choose a piece of gilt plate for my Lord. in return of his offering to the King (which it


seems is usual at this time of year, and an Earl gives twenty pieces in gold in a purse to the King). I chose a gilt
tankard. weighing 3l ounces and a half. and he is allowed 30: so I paid 12s. for the ounce and half over what he is to
have; but strange it was for me to see what a company of small fees I was called ttpon by a great many to pay there.
which, I perceive, is the manner that courtiers do get. their estates. After dinner Mr. Moore and I to the Theatre. where
was "The Scornful Lady." acted very well, it being the first play that ever he saw. Thence with him to drink a cttp of
ale at Hercules Pillars. and so parted. I called to see my father, who told me by the way how Will and Mary Joyce do
live a strange life together, nothing but fighting, &e.. so that sometimes her father has a mind to have them divorced.
Thence home.

5th. Home all the morning. Several people came to me about business. among others the great Tom Fuller, who came
to desire a kindness for a friend of his, who hath a mind to go to Jamaica with these two ships that are going, which I
promised to do, So to Whitehall to my Lady. whom I found at dinner and dined with her, and staid with her talking all
the afternoon, and thence walked to Westminster Hall. So to Will's, and drank with Spicer. and thence by coach
home. staying a little in Paul's Churchyard. to bespeak Ogilby's AEsop's Fables and Tully's Offieys to be bound for
me. So home and to bed.

6th (Lord's day). My wife and I to church this morning, and so home to dinner to a boiled leg of mutton all alone.
To church again. where, before sermon. a long Psalm was set that lasted an hour, while the sexton gathered his year's
contribucion through the whole church. After sermon home. and there I went to my chamber and wrote a letter to
send to Mr. Coventry. with apiece of plate along with it, which I do preserve among my other letters. So to supper,
and thence after prayers to bed.

7th. This morning. news was brought t.o me to tny bedside. that there had been a great stir in the City this night by
the Fanatiques, who had been up and killed six or seven men. but all are fled.

My Lord Mayor and the whole City had been in arms. above 40,000. To the office. and after that to dinner. where my
brother Tom came and dined with me, and after dinner (leaving l2d. with the servants to buy a cake with at night. this
day being kept as Twelfth day) Tom and I and my wife to the Theatre, and there saw "The Silent Woman." The first
time that ever I did see it. and it is an excellent play. Among other things here, Kinaston, the boy; had the good turn
to appear in three shapes: first. as a poor woman in ordinary clothes. to please Morose: then in fine clothes, as a
gallant, and in them was clearly the prettiest woman in the whole house, and lastly, as a man; and then likewise did
appear the handsomest man in the house. Front thence by link to my eozen Stradwick's, where my father and we and
Dr. Pepys, Scott. and his wife. and one Mr. Ward and his; and after a good supper, we had an excellent cake, where
the mark for the Queen was cut, and so there was two queens, my wife and Mrs. Ward". and the King being lost. they
Chose the Doctor to be King. so we made him send for some wine, and then home, and in our way home we were in
many places strictly examined, more than in the worst of times. there being great fears of these Fanatiques rising
again: for the present I do not hear that any of them are taken. Home, it being a clear moonshine and after 12 o'clock
at night. Being come home we found that my people had been very merry, and my wife tells me afterwards that she
had heard that they had got young Davis and some other neighbours with them to be merry, but no harm.

81/1. My wife and I lay very long in bed to—day talking and pleasing one another in discourse. Being up, Mr. Wan‘en
came. and he and I agreed for the deals that my Lord is to, have. Then Will and I to Westminster, where I dined with
my I._.atIy. Aft.er dinner I took my Lord Hinchinbroke and Mr, Sidney to the Theatre. and shewed them "The
Widdow," an indifferent good play, but wronged by the wotnen being to seek in their parts. That being done, my
Lord's coach waited for us, and so back to my l_.ady's, where she made me drink of sortie I-iilorenee wine. and did give
me two bottles for my wife. From thence walked to my cozen Stradwick's. and there chose a small banquet and some
other things against our entertainment on Thursday next. Thence to Tom Pepys and bought a dozen of trenchers, and
so home. Some talk to—day of a head of Fanatiques that do appear about Barnett. but I do not believe it. However, my
Lord Mayor, Sir Richd. Browne. hath carried himself very honourably. and hath caused one of their meeting—houses
in London to be pulled down.

9th. Waked in the morning about six o‘clock. by people running up and down in Mr. Davis's house. talking that the
Fanatiques were up in arms in the City. And so I rose and went forth; where in the street I found every body in arms
at the doors. So [returned (though with no good courage at all, but that I might not seem to be afeared). and got my
sword and pistol, which. however, I had no powder to charge; and went to the door. where I found Sir R. Ford. and
with him I walked up and down as far as the Exchange. and there 1 left him. In our way, the streets full of Train—band.
and great stories. what mischief these rogues have done; and I think near a dozen have been killed this morning on
both sides. Seeing the city in this condition. the shops shut, and all things in trouble, I went home and sat, it being
office day, till noon. 50 home, and dined at home. my father with me. and after dinner he would needs have me go to
my uncle Wight's (where I have been so long absent that I am ashamed to gol. I found him at home and his wife. and
I can see they have taken my absence ill. but all things are past and we good friends, and here I sat with my aunt till it
was late, my uncle going forth about business. My aunt being very fearful to be alone. So home to my lute till late.
and then to bed, there being strict guards all night in the City, though most of the enemies, they say. are killed or
taken. This morning my wife and Pall went forth early. and I staid within.

10th. There comes Mr. I-Iawlcy to me and brings me my money for the quarter of a year's salary of my place under
Downing that I was at sea. So I did give him half, whereof he did in his nobleness give the odd 55. to my Jane. So we
both went. forth (calling first to see how Sir W. Pen do. whom I found very ill). and at the Hoop by the bridge we
drank two pints of wormwood and sack. Talking of his wooing afresh of Mrs. Lane. and of his going to serve the
Bishop of London. Thence by water to Whitehall, and found my wife at Mrs. Hunt's. Leaving her to dine there. I went
and dined with my Lady, and staid to talk a while with her. After dinner Will. comes t.o tell me that he had presented
my piece of plate to Mr. Coventry. who takes it very kindly. and sends me a very kind letter. and the plate back again;
of which m_v heart is very glad.

So to Mrs. Hunt, where I found a Frenchman, a lodger of hers, at dinner, and just as I came in was kissing my wife,
which I did not like, though there could not be any hurt in it. Thence by coach to my Uncle Wight's with my wife. but
they being out of doors we went home. where, after I had put some papers in order and entered sortie letters in my
book which I have a mind to keep. I went with my wife to see Sir W. Pen. who we ‘found ill still. but he do make very
much ofit. Here we sat a great while, at last comes in Mr. Davis and his lady (who takes it very ill that my wife never
did go to see her), and so we fell to talk. Among other things Mr. Davis told us the particular examinations of these
Fanatiques that are taken: and in short it is this. of all these Fanatiques that have done all this. viz., routed all the
Trainbands that they met with. put the King's lifc— guards to the run. killed about twenty men. broke through the City
gates twice; and all this in the day—time. when all the City was in arms: are not in all about 31. Whereas we did


believe them (because they were seen up and down in every place almost in the City. and had been about Highgate
two or three days. and in several other places) to be at least 500. A thing that never was heard of. that so few men
should dare and do so much mischief. Their word was, "The King Jesus, and the heads upon the gates." Few of them
would receive any quarter. but such as were taken by force and kept alive: expecting .lesus t.o come here and reign in
the world presently. and will not believe yet but their work will be carried on though they do die. The King this day
came to town.

Ilth. Office day. This day cotnes news. by letters from Portsmouth. that the Princess Henrietta is fallen sick of the
meazles on board the London, after the Queen and she was under sail. And so was forced to come back again into
Portsmouth harbour; and in their way, by negligence of the pilot, run upon the Horse sand. The Queen and she
continue aboard, and do not intend to come on shore till she sees what will become of the young Princess. This news
do make people think something indeed, that three of the Royal Family should fall sick of the same disease. one after
another. This morning likewise. we had order to see guards set in all the King's yards‘, and so we do appoint who and
who should go to them. Sir Wm. Batten to Chatham, Colonel Slingsby and l to Deptford and Woolwich. Portsmouth
being a garrison, needs none. Dined at home. discontented that my wife do not go ncater now she has two maids.
After dinner comes in Kate Stcrpin (whom we had not seen a great while) and her husband to see us. with whom I
staid a while. and then to the office, and left them with my wife. At night walked to Paul's Churchyard. and bespoke
some books against next week, and front thence to the Coffeehouse. where I met Captain Morricc. the upholstcr. who
would fain have lent me a horse to—night to have rid with him upon the Cityguards. with the Lord Mayor, there being
some new expectations of these rogues; but I refused by reason of my going out of town tomorrow. So home to bed.

12th. With Colonel Slingshy and a friend of his. Major Waters (a deaf and most amorous melancholy gentleman.
who is under a despayr in love. as the Colonel told me, which makes him had company, though a most good natured
man). by water to Redriffe. and so on foot to Deptford (our servants by water). where we fell to choosing four
captains to command the guards. and choosing the places where to keep them. and other things in order thereunto. We
We dined at the Globe. having our messenger with us to take care for us. Never till now did I see the great authority
of my place, all the captains of the fleet coming cap in hand to us, Having staid very late there talking with the
Colonel, I went home with Mr. Davis. storekeeper (whose wife is ill and so I could not see her), and was there most
princc—like lodged, with so much respect and honour that I was at a loss how to behave myself.

13th. In the morning we all went to church, and satin the pew belonging to us. where a cold sermon of a young man
that never had preached before. Here Commissioner came with his wife and daughters, the eldest being his wife's
daughter is a very comely black woman.---[The old ::xpre,\'sinnfm' tl bmrwtne.]——So to the Globe to dinner, and then with
Commissioner Pett to his lodgings there (which he hath for the present while he is building the Kings yacht, which
will be a pretty thing. and much beyond the Dutchman’sl. and from thence with him and his wife and daughter»in—law
by coach to Greenwich Church, where a good sermon. a fine church. and a great company of handsome women. After
sermon to Deptford again; where. at the Commissioner's and the Globe. we staid long. And so I to Mr. Davis's to bed
again. But no sooner in bed, but we had an alarm, and so we rose: and the Comptroller comes into the Yard to us: and
seamen of all the ships present repair to us, and there we armed with every one a handspike, with which they were as
fierce as could be. At last we hear that it was only five or six men that did ride through the guard in the town, without
stopping to the guard that was there; and, some say. shot at them. But all being quiet there. we caused the seamen to
go on board again: And so we all to bed (after I had sat awhile with Mr. Davis in his study. which is filled with good
books and some very good song books) I likewise to bed.

14th. The arms being come this morning from the Tower, we caused them to be distributed. I spent much time
walking with Lieutenant Lambert, walking up and down the yards, who did give me much light into things there, and
so went along with me and dined with us. After dinner Mrs. Pelt. her husband being gone this morning with Sir W.
Batten to Chatham. lent us her coach, and carried us to Woolwich, where we did also dispose of the arms there and
settle the guards. So to Mr. Pett's, the shipwriglit, and there supped. where he did treat us very handsomely (and
strange it is to see what neat houses all the officers of the King's yards have). his wife a proper woman, and has been
liandsome. and yet has a very pretty hand. Thence I with Mr. Ackworth to his house, where he has a very pretty
house. and a very proper lovely woman to his wife. who both sat with me in my chamber. and they being gone, I went
to bed. which was also most neat and fine.

.I5th. Up and down the yard all the morning and seeing the seamen exercise, which they do already very
handsomely. Then to dinner at Mr. Ackworth's, where there also dined with us one Captain Bethell. a friend of the
Comptroller's. A good dinner and very handsome. After that anti taking our leaves of the officers of the yard, we
walked to the waterside and in our way walked into the rope—yard. where I do look into the tar— houses and other
places. and took great notice of all the several works belonging to the making of a cable. So after a cup of burnt winc-
~/Burm wine was .wmtc'w/mt .viIniIt'tr In mulled wine. and a_/'u\wuritc' dI'ink]—~at the tavern there, we took barge and went to
Blackwall and viewed the dock and the new Wet dock, which is newly made there, and a brave new mcrchantman
which is to be launched shortly. and they say to be called the Royal Oak. Hence we walked to Dick-Shore, and thence
to the Towre and so home. Where I found my wife and Pall abroad. so I went to see Sir W. Pen. and there found lvlr.
Coventry come to see him, and now had an opportunity to thank him. and he did express much kindness to me.

I sat a great while with Sir Wm. after he was gone, and had much talk with him. I perceive none of our officers care
much for one another, but 1 do keep in with them all as much as I can. Sir W. Pen is still very ill as when I went.
l-Ionic, where my wife not yet come home, so I went up to put my papers in order, and then was much troubled my
wife was not come. it being I0 o'clock just now striking as I write this last line, This day I hear the Princess is
recovered again. The King hath been this afternoon at Deptford, to see the yacht that Commissioner Pett is building.
which will be very pretty; as also that that his brother at Woolwich is in making. By and by comes in my boy and tells
rue that his mistress do lie this night at Mrs. Hunt's. who is very ill, with which being something satisfied, I went to
bed.

16th‘ This morning I went early to the Comptroller's and so with him by coach to Whitehall. to wait upon Mr,
Coventry to give him an account of what we have done. which having done, I went away to wait upon my Lady; but
coming to her lodgings I find that she is gone this morning to Chatham by coach, thinking to meet me there. which
did trouble me exceedingly, and I did not know what to do, being loth to follow her, and yet could not imagine what
she would do when she found me not there. In this trouble. I went to take a walk in Westminster Hall and by chance
met with Mr. Child. who went forth with my Lady to-day, but his horse being bad. he come back again, which then
did trouble me more. so that I did resolve to go to her; and so by boat home and put on my boots, and so over to
Southwarke to the posthouse, and there took horse and guide to Dartford and thence to Rochester (I having good


horses and good way come thither about half-an-hour after daylight, which was before 6 o'clock and I set forth after
two), where I found my Lady and her daughter .lem.. and Mrs. Browne’ and five servants, all at a great. loss, not
finding me here but at my coming she was ovcrioved. The sport was how she had intended to have kept herself
unknown and how the Captain (whom she had sent for) of the Charles had forsoothed I ‘I‘nj'ur.muth is In utltl;-an in a
polite tun! (’t!)'£’IIlUItf(.!l(.\' manrtcn] her, thotigh he knew her well and she him, In line we supped merry and so to bed.
there coming several of the Charles‘s men to see tne before, I got to bed. lhe page lay with me.

17th. Up, and breakfast with my Lady. Then come Captains Cuttance and Blake to carry her in the barge on board:
and so we went through Hunt Creeke to the Soverayne (a goodly sight all t.he way to see the brave ships that lie here)
first. which is a most noble ship. I never saw her before. My Lady Sandwich. my Lady Jemimah, Mrs. Browne. Mrs.
Grace, and Mary and the page. my lady's servants and myself. all went into the lanthom together. From thence to the
Charles. where my lady took great pleasure to see all the rooms. and to hear me tell her how things are when my Lord
is there. After we had seen all. then the officers of the ship had prepared a handsome breakfast for her, and while she
was pledging my Lord's health they give her five guns. That done. we went off. and then they give us thirteen guns
more. I confess it was a great pleasure to myself to see the ship that I begun my good fortune in.

From thence on board the Newcastle. to show my Lady the difference between a great and a stnall ship. Among these
ships I did give away L7. So back again and went on shore at Chatham, where I had ordered the coach to wait for us.
Here I heard that Sir William Britten and his lady (who I knew were here, and did endeavour to avoyd) were now
gone this morning to London. So we took coach. and I went into the coach, and went through the town. without
making stop at our inn, but left J. Goods to pay the reckoning. So I rode with my lady in the coach, and the page on
the horse that I should have rid on——he desiring it. It begun to be dark before we could come to Dartford, and to rain
hard, and the horses to fayle, which was our great care to prevent. for fear of my Lord's displeasure, so here we sat up
for tonight, as also Captains Cuttance and Blake. who came along with us. We sat and talked till supper, and at
supper my Lady and I entered into a great dispute concerning what were best for a man to do with his estate--whether
to make his elder son heir. which my Lady is for, and I against. but rather to make all cquall. This discourse took us
much time. till it was time to go to bed; but we being merry. we bade my Lady goodnight, and intended to have gone
to the Post~ house to drink, and hear a pretty girl play of the cittern (and indeed we should have lain there, but by a
mistake we did not), but it was late, and we could not hear her, and the guard came to examine what we were: so we
returned to our Inn and to bed. the page and I in one bed, and the two captains in another. all in one chamber, where
we had very good mirth with our most abominable lodging.

18th. The (_.‘aptains went with me to the post—house about 9 o'clock. and after a morning draft I took horse and guide
for London: and through sortie rain, and a great wind in my face. I got to London at eleven o‘clock. At home found all
well. but the monkey loose, which did anger me. and so I did strike her till she was almost dead. that they might make
her fast again, which did still trouble me more. In the afternoon we met at the office and sat till night, and then I to
see my father who I found well, and took him to Standings to drink a cup of ale. He told me my aunt at Brampton is
yet alive and my mother well there. In comes Will Joyce to us drunk, and in a talking vapouring humour of his state.
and I know not what, which did vex me cruelly. After him Mr. I-Iollicr had learned at my father‘s that I was here
(where I had appointed to meet him) and so he did give me some things to take for prevention. Will Joyce not letting
us talk as I would I left my father and him and took Mr. I-lollicr to the Greyhound. where he did advise me above all
things. both as to the stone and the decay of my memory (of which I now complain to him). to avoid drinking often.
which I am resolved, if I can, to leave off. I-Ience home. and took home with me from the bookseller's Ogilby's
AEsop. which he had bound for inc. and indeed I am very much pleased with the book. Home anti to bed.

19th. To the Comptroller's. and with him by coach to White Hall: in our way meeting Venner and Pritchard upon a
sledge. who with two more Fifth Monarchy men were hanged to-day, and the two first drawn and quartered. Where
we walked up and down, and at last found Sir G. Cartcret. whom I had not seen a great while, and did discourse with
him about our assisting the Commissioners in paying off the Fleet, which we think to decline. Here the Treasurer did
tell me that he did suspect Thos. I-later to be an informer of them in this work. which we do take to be a diminution of
us, which do trouble me. and I do intend to find out the truth. Hence to my Lady, who told me how Mr. I-letley is
dead of the sma1l—pox going to Portsmouth with my Lord. My Lady went forth to dinner to her father's, and so I went
to the Leg in King Street and had a rabbit for myself and my Will. and after dinncrl sent him home and myself went
to the Theatre. where I saw "The Lost Lady." which do not please me much. Here I was troubled to be seen by four of
our office clerks, which satin the half-crown box and I in the 1s. 6d. From thence by link. and bought two mouse
traps of Thomas Pepys. the Turner. and so went and drank a cup of ale with him, and so home and wrote by post to
l*’ortsmoutl1 to my Lord and so to bed.

20th (Lord's day), To Church in the morning. Dined at home. My wife and I to Church in the afternoon, and that
being done we went to see my uncle and aunt Wight. There I left my wife and came back, and sat with Sir W. Pen.
who is not yet well again. Thence back again to my wife and supped there. and were very merry and so home, and
after prayers to write down my journall for the last [I ve days, and so to bed.

21st. This morning Sir W. Batten, the Comptroller and I to Westminster. to the Commissioners for paying off the
Army and Navy, where the Duke of Albemarle was; and we sat with our hats on. and did discourse about paying off
the ships and do find that they do intend to undertake it without our help: and we are glad of it, for it is a work that
will much displease the poor seamen, and so we are glad to have no hand in it.. From thence t.o the Exchequer, and
took L200 and carried it home, and so to the office till night. and then to see Sir  Pen. whither came my Lady
Batten and her daughter. and then I sent for my wife. and so we sat talking till it was late. So home to supper and then
to bed, having eat no dinner to—day. It is strange what weather we have had all this winter; no cold at all; but the ways
are dusty. and the flyes fly up and down, and the rose-bushes are full of leaves. such a time of the year as was never
known in this world before here. This day many more of the Fifth Monarchy men were hanged.

22nd. To the Comptroller's house. where I read over his proposals to the Lord Admiral for the regulating of the
officers of the Navy. in which he hath taken much pains, only he do seem to have too good opinion of them himself.
From thence in his coach to Mercer’s Chappell, and so up to the great hall, where we met with the King's Councell for
Trade, upon some proposals of theirs for settling convoys for the whole English trade. and that by having 33 ships
(fotir fourth-rates, nineteen fifths. ten sixths) settled by the King for that purpose, which indeed was argued very
finely by many persons of honour and merchants that were there. It pleased me much now to come in this condition
to this place, where I was once a petitioner for my exhibition in Paul's School; and also where Sir G. Downing (my
late master) was chairman, and so but equally concerned with me. From thence home, and after a little dinner my
wife and I by coach into London, and bought some glasses. and then to Whitehall to see Mrs. Fox, but she not within,


my wife to my mother Bowyer. and I met with Dr. Thomas Fuller. and took him to the Dog. where he tells me of his
last and great book that is coming out.: that is, his History of all the Families in England.’ and could tell me more of
my own. than I knew myself. And also to what perfection he hath now brought the art Of mCm0F_V; that he did 111101)’ [0
four eminently great scholars dictate together in Latin. upon different subjects of their proposing, faster than they
were able to write, till they were tired; and by the way in discourse tells me that the best way of beginning a sentence.
if a man should be out and forget his last sentence (which he never was), that then his last refuge is to begin with an
Utcunque. From thence I to It/fr. Bowyer's, and there sat a while, and so to Mr. Fox’s, and sat with them a very little
while, and then by coach home, and so to see Sir Win. Pen. where we found Mrs. Martha Batten and two handsome
ladies more. and so we staid supper and were very merry, and so home to bed.

23rd. To the office all the morning. My wife and people at home busy to get things ready for tomorrow's dinner. At
noon, without dinner, went int.o the City, and there meeting with Greatorex, we went and drunk at pot‘ of ale. He told
me that he was upon a design to go to Tcneriffe to try experiments there. With him to Gresham Colledge [The nzeering
which P(<])_\'.\‘ rztrurtcletl It/‘US an early (mu oft/ic Royal Sm:it<I_v. which was r'rr<.'m‘1vnmlcrI by rrzyal charter in 1003.] t Where I
never was before). and saw the manner of the house. and found great company of persons of honour there: thence to
my b0okscllei"s, and for books. and to Stevens, the silvcrsmith, to make clean some plate against to-morrow. and so
home. by the way paying many little debts for wine and pictures, &c.. which is my great pleasure. Home and found
all things in a hurry of business. Slater. our messenger. being here as my cook till very late. I in my chamber all the
evening looking over my ()sborn's works and new Emanuel Thesaurus Patriarchae. So late to bed. having ate nothing
to—day but a piece of bread and cheese at the ale- house with Greatorex. and some bread and butter at home.

24th. At home all day. There dined with the Sir William Batten and his lady and daughter, Sir W. Pen, Mr. Fox this
lady being ill could not come), and Captain Cuttance; the first dinner I have made since I came hither. This cost me
above L5. and merry we were--only my chimney smokes. In the afternoon Mr. Hater bringing me my last quartcr‘s
salary, which I received of him, and so I have now Mr. Barlow's money in my hands. The company all go away. and
by and by Sir Wins. both and my Lady Batten and his daughter come again and suppcd with me and talked till late.
and so to bed, being glad that the trouble is over.

25th. At the office all the morning. Dined at home and Mr. Hater with me. and so 1 did make even with him for the
last quarter. After dinner he and I to look upon the instructions of my Lord Northurnberlands. but we were
interrupted by Mr. Salisbury's coming in, who came to see me and to show me my Lord’s picture in little. of his
doing. And truly it is strange to what a perfection he is come in a year's time. From thence to Paul's Churchyard about
books, and so back again home. This night comes two cages, which I bought this evening for my canary birds, which
Captain Rooth this day sent me. So to bed.

26th. Within all the morning. About noon comes one that had formerly known me and I him, but I know not his
name. to borrow L5 of me. but I had the wit to deny him. There dined with me this day both the Pierees' and their
wives, and Captain Cuttance, and Lieutenant Lambert, with whom we made ourselves very nicrry by taking away his
ribbans and garters. having made him to confess that he is lately married. The company being gone I went to my lute
till night. and so to bed,

27th (Lord's day). Before I rose. letters come to me front Portsmouth, telling me that the Princess is now well. and
my Lord Sandwich set sail with the Queen and her yesterday from thence for France. To church, leaving my wife
sick . . . . at home. a poor dull sermon ofa stranger. Home. and at dinner was very angry at my people's eating a fine
pudding (made rue by Slater, the cook, last Thursday) without my wife's leave. To church again. a good sermon of
Mr, Mills, and after sermon Sir W. Pen and I an hour in the garden talking, and he did answer me to many things, I
asked Mr. C.oventry's opinion of me, and Sir W. Batterfs of my Lord Sandwich. which do both please me. Then to Sir
W. Batteifs. where very merry, and here I met the Comptroller and his lady and daughter (the first time I ever saw
them) and Mrs. Turner, who and her husband supped with us here (I having fetched my wife thither), and after supper
we fell to oysters. and then Mr. Turner went and fetched some strong waters, and so being very merry we parted, and
home to bed. This day the parson read a proclamation at church, for the keeping of Wednesday next, the 30th of
January. at fast for the murther of the late King.

2801. At the office all the morning; dined at home, and after dinner to Fleet Street, with my sword to Mr. Brigden
(lately made Captain of the Auxiliaries) to be refreshed. and with him to an ale—house. where I met Mr. Davenport:
and after some talk of Cromwell, Ircton and Bradshaw's bodies being taken out of their graves to—day,

/ "Tlw borlivs rt/'(')/ivzar Crrmzwel/. Hcrtry Irtffllfl, Jo/in BI‘(1(I.\'/l(IW. am] 'I'/mums Pride, were dug up out rt/‘rltcir grat'e.s‘ to be
/iarigorl at Ty/rut‘/1, tmzl lmried under the ga/loivxv. (fmmwu/I'.\' vault /ltll’I'Ilg been (I/7tfn(‘('[, the pcuple rrruwdccl very much In see
him. —Rugge'.r Dim'na/./

I went to Mr. Crew's and thence to the Theatre. where I saw again "The Lost I.ady.“ which do now please me better
than before; and here I sitt.ing behind in a dark place, a lady spit backward upon me by a mistake, not seeing me. but
after seeing her to be a very pretty lady, I was not troubled at it at all. Thence to Mr. Crew's, and there met Mr.
Moore, who came lately to me. and went with me to my father's, and with him to Standings, whither came to us Dr.
Fairbrother. who I took and my father to the Bear and gave a pint of sack and a pint of claret.

I-le do still continue his expressions of respect and love to me. and tells me my brother John will make 21 good scholar.
Thence to see the Doctor at his lodging at  Holden's. where I bought a hat. cost me 355. So home by moonshine,
and by the way was overtaken by the C.‘omptroller's coach, and so home to his house with him. So home and to bed.
This noon I had my press set up in my chamber for papers to be put in.

29th. Mr. Moore. making up accounts with me all this morning till Lieut. Lambert came. and so with them over the
water to Southwark. and so over the fields to Lambeth, and there drank. it being a most glorious and warm day, even
to amazement, for this time of the year. Thence to my Lord's. where we found my Lady gone with sortie company to
 Hampton Court, so we three went to Bl-ackfryers (the first time I ever was there since plays begun). and there after
great patience and little expectation, from so poor beginning, I saw three acts of "The Mayd in ye Mill" acted to my
great content. But it being late, I left the play and them, and by water through bridge borne, and so to Mr. Turner's
house. where the Comptroller, Sir William Batten. and Mr. Davis and their ladies; and here we had a most neat little
but costly and genteel supper, and after that a great deal of impertinent mirth by Mr. Davis. and sortie catches. and so
broke up, and going away, Mr. Davis's eldest son took up my old I..ady Slingsby in his arms, and carried her to the
coach, and is said to be able to carry three of the biggest men that were in the company. which I wonder at. So home
and to bed.


EAE

30!}: (Fast day). The first time that this day hath been yet observetl: and Mr. Mills rnade a most excellent sermon,
upon "Lord forgive us our former iniquitiesz" speaking excellently of thejustice of God in punishing men for the sins
of their ancestors. Home. and John Goods comes. and after dinner I did pay him L30 for my Lady. and after that Sir
W. Pen and 1 into Moorfields and had a brave talk, it being :1 most pleasant day, and besides much discourse did
please ourselves t.o see young Davis and Whitton. two of our clerks. going by us in the field. who we observe to take
much pleasure together, and I did most often see them at play together’. Back to the Old James in Bishopsgate Street,
where Sir W. Batten and Sir Wm. Rider met him about business of the Trinity House. So I went home, and there
understand that my mother is come home well from Brampton, and had a lette.r from my brother John. a very
ingenious one, and he therein begs to have leave to come to town at the Coronaeion. Then to my Lady Bzttten‘s; where
where my wife and she are lately come back again from being abroad. and seeing of Cromwell. lreton. and Bradshaw
hanged and buried at Tyburn. Then I home.

[ "Jan. 30th wax Imp: as a very snlmzzrz (lay (gf_fit.vting ("Ill prrtyer. T/tis morning the (.‘(ll'('tL\'(.'.\‘ u_f‘C.‘rnmwcll. /I'6‘lt’)I1. and
b’m(l.rImw tw/tic/t the day bey‘iu'¢' hurl hem l)rnught_f'rmn the Rm! Ijmz Inn, Hulbnrn). H/‘(€I'l’ drmrrt upon a .\‘/rfdgt‘ tn Tyburn, and
I‘/MN taken nut oftluair trrg/ffirt.r. am] in I‘/It'll‘ .~'hruutl..t' /mngwl by the track. until the guitzg (lawn uflhe XIII1. 'l'/my were then out
down, I/wir /Ié'(l(l.V taken nffl and their bt)tlH’,\' blniterl in ct grave m(t(lr' zmrlrxr the gal/tm'.x'. The r:0['fi'tt in which was rIzel7m1y of
Cromwell was (1 wry riz-It t/ting, V(’l')‘_fll// nfgilderl /ringers aml rutilx. "--I?Ltg,gte'.r I)iurnuI. ]

31st. This morning with Mr. Coventry at Whitehall about getting a ship to carry my Lord's deals to Lynne. and we
have chosen the Gift. Thence at noon to my Lord's, where my Lady not well, so I eat a mouthful! of dinner there, and
thence to the Theatre. and there sat in the pit. among the company of fine ladys.  and the house was exceeding
full, to see Argalus and Parthenia, the first time that it hath been noted: and indeed it is good, though wronged by my
over great expectations. as all things else are. Thence to my father's to see my mother, who is pretty well after her
journey from Brampton. She tells me my aunt is pretty well, yet cannot live long. My uncle pretty well too, and she
believes would marry again were my aunt dead, which God forbid. So home.


Show Batch of Index Matches

  

Page 1 of 1

MSS Home : MSS Index : MSS Descriptions

Manuscripts: Index

9 Entries

Search for: Slingsby

9‘ :'>‘P’!°t“

—-It-I

12.

13.

14.

)—|>#i—‘
.‘°?°.\‘

20.

.*“.O.‘°9°.\‘.°‘

Slingsby . Family ofi Copies of letters of, by J. Hunter 19th cent.  140
Slingsby . N.R., co. York. Deed rel. to 1677. 

Slingsby . N.R., co. York. Deeds rel. to 1677. Eg.Ch. 7185 Eg.Ch. 7186

Slingsby ( ) . widow of Henry Slingsby, late Mfaster of the Mint Petition to the Treasury circ.
1696. Add. 33_Oflf. 440

Slingsby (Bobert) Sir. Bart., of Newcells Discourse on the state of th e Navy 1660. @d,

 

Slingsby (Gylford) Sir. Comptroller of the Navy Signatures 1612- 1618. 

  

48 ff. 7-13
Slingsby (H-) . Letter to Hon. R. Arundel 1746. Add. 327_0__9______f. 407

Slingsby (Henry) Sir. Letter to J. Evelyn 1668.  _
Slingsby (Henry) Sir. Letter to Sir R. Browne 1668. Am  149

Slingsby (Henry) Maj.. Lt Governor of Portsmouth. Letter to W. Blathwayt 1687. Add. 38694
f. 89

Slingsby (Henry) Sir. Master Worker of the Mint Certificate to Charles II. in favour of 1665.
 2.3...f. 73

Slingsby (Henry) . Master of the Mint Papers relating to his office 1662-1670. 
15, 23, 27, 33

Slingsby (Henry) Sir. senior Fine conc. property in the parish of St Martin Ludgate betw.
R. Graves and Sir H. Slingsby 1623 Lat Add. 56286 f. 2

  
  

. Slingsby (Marmaduke) . Letter to the Bailiffs of Tindale 1559. Add. 33592_,_f. 154
16.

Slingsby (R.) . Sec., Cambridge and District Labour Council Letters to J. Burns 1892, 1893.
 29, 220

Slingsby (Thomas) Sir. Seal, as sheriff of York 1660. 

Slingsby (Walter) Co1.. Prayers written during captivity 1650-1654. 

Slingsby (William) Sir. Knt., d. 1604 Drawing of his tomb at Knaresborough 1817. 
§,6§9£Lf- 191

Slingsby (William) Sir. Knt., of Kippax Copies of his collections of records 17th cent. Ag
2..6.7.,1.,'./'.. Add. ..

Number of hits: 20.

http://molcat.b1.uk/msscat/INDX0010.ASP

‘MSS Home : MSS Index : MSS Descriptions

6/26/00


Charles II King Of ENGLAND |Parents] was born on 29 May 1630 in St. James Palace and
was christened there on 29 May 1630. He died on 6 Feb 1685 in Whitehall and was buried on 14
Feb 1685 in Westminster Abbey. He married Catharina Henriette Princess Of PORTUGAL on
31 May 1662 in Portsmouth.

Other marriages:

WALTERS, Lucy
KILLIGREW Elizabeth

PEGGE Catherine

GWYN, Eleanor §Nell)

PENANCOET, Louise Renee De

DAVIS, Marv (Moll) Actress

NEEDHAM Eleanor

MANCINI Ortensia

STUARDO Maria

VILLIERS, Barbara Duchess of Cleveland

 

 

 
 

 

"The Kings of Scotland", which appeared in volume I [1904] of *The Scots Peerage*,
edited by Sir James Balfour Paul, states on pp. 29-30:

CHARLES II was born 29 May 1630, succeeded his father on 30 January 1648-49, but
the kingdom being then in the hands of the ‘Republicans’ under Oliver Cromwell, who
governed with the title of Protector, his early years were spent in exile. The Scottish
Presbyterians distrusting Cromwell and the English Independents, had invited Charles to
assume the Crown of Scotland, and though their army was defeated by Cromwell at
Dunbar, 3 September 1650, he was duly crowned King of Scots at Scone 1 January 1650-
51. Invading England, however, his army was defeated by Cromwell at Worcester on 3
September 1631, and the Young king had to seek safety abroad.

Soon after the death of Cromwell, Charles was restored to his kingdom, and entered
London on his thirtieth birthday, 29 MAY 1660. He married, 31 May 1662, Donna
Catherine Infanta of Portugal, born 25 November 1638, daughter of John IV, King of
Portugal, sister of Alphonso VI and Pedro II., successively kings of Portugal. King
Charles died 6 February 1685 leaving no issue by his queen, who retired to Lisbon, where
she died 31 December 1705. He had, however, many illegitimate children

Lucy WALTERS was born in 1630 in Of, Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire. She died in 1658 in
Paris. She married Charles II, King Of ENGLAND in Not Married.
They had the following children:

i Mary WALTERS was born on 6 May 1651. She died in 1693.
: James SCOTT was born on 9 Apr 1649. He died on 15 Jul 1685.

The parents of Lucy Walters were:-
William WALTER was born in 1605 in Of, London. He was christened on 29 Mar 1605 in
Mawgan, Meneage, Cornwall. He died in Feb 1650 in London. He was buried in St—Giles-In-

Feld, London. He married Elizabeth PROTHEROE who was born in 1606 in Hawkesbrook,
Carmarthenshire.


Lucy Walters Queen of Scots, father William Walters:

On 9 April 1649 a son was born to Charles II of England and his (wife) Lucy Walters in
Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Charles II with his wife Lucy Walters and son James in tow, was
duly crowned King of Scots at Scone on 1 January 1651. On 6 May 1651 in Scotland a daughter,
Mary Walters was born to Charles II and Lucy Walters. Charles II then decided to invade
England, but Cromwell's army defeted him and the Scots at the battle of Worcerter on 3
September 1651, 3,000 Scots died and 10,000 were taken prisoners. Charles and his family fled
to France were Lucy Walters later died in 61658 in Paris, and after Cromwell's death in 1660,
Charles II was restored to the throne of England and Scotland on 29 May 1660. Charles then
married, Donna Catherine Infanta of Portugal, the daughter of John IV, King of Portugal, on 31
May 1662. Charles’ son James Scott (as he was now known) was brought to the royal court and
and raised by his father. When James turned 14 years old Charles II made him the Duke of
Monmouth, and in 1674 James Scott at 25 years old was made ‘Commander in Chief‘ of the
army. He held other titles as well, Duke of Buccleuch, Earl of Doncaster, Earl of Dalkeith, Baron
Scott of Tindale, Lord Scott of Whitchester and Eskdale. In 1679 Charles II banished him for
claiming his right to the throne of England. He lived in Holland until 1685 after Charles II died
and landed in Western England, where he found support for the “The Pitchfork Rebillion” to oust
James II. He gathered 4,000 men mostly farmers and met the English troops at the Battle of
Sedgemore, where he was routed. He was captured two days later and sent to London to be
beheaded on July 15th. As legend has it the man the English army captured was just a farmer,
and that James escaped to Virginia to hide out. I think this is why the Walters coat of arms

displays the Black Scottish Royal Lion with the Swords of the Commander in Chief of the
Army.(B1ack meaning the loss of the crown).


Public Record Office I Catalogue Page 1 of 1

§'I,n%t.It.f gv
Kl L‘t um 

    

m l M‘ " "

 ’..)‘2. mx 5

 t9

         

Main 

 

3‘-imxr 

News 

W §3'*’ét=......E:

 

§isa§2"*r;’§:%

Document Details for PROB 5/1179

lfetttercode Records of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury
I e

Class Title Prerogative Court of Canterbury and Other Probate Jurisdictions: Miscellaneous Inven

Accounts, and Associated Documents

Piece Title SLINGSBY, Sir Arthur, bart, of Bifrons, Patrixbourne, Kent (includes account) [Registe '3 ‘“ r '-
t".;;., ex, 11/320]

Text Date 1666

Closure Status Open

Place of Public Record Office, Kew
Deposfl

Goto Document Details for PROB 5/1179 to store a favorite/bookmark to these details

        

     

?r;§2vtx3t.;:;;. iLl*lC5£?lJ!‘t"¥;?;3t'l?i g  [}tTt=f.u¥’§"‘§§‘;%t'§{I

   

_ .W:§¢is:‘;.::3  __

Catalogue Release 1.4

http://cata1ogue.pro. gov.uk/Listlnt/browse_documents_se1ected.asp?iMode=2&ind=6849... 14/04/01


Contact us‘) i Help) l A to Z index> l Site search?

the national archives Thursday 19 May

l-tome  About‘  ‘ii./isi':’r  Research,edncatEe-riific  the  éiewuicesi   
 us  us  oniineex31ibit.ions  archives  pmfessicmais   cmiine

   

You are here: Home > Search the archives > the Catalogue > Search the Catalogue: Quick reference

 the Catalogue  Wetcome zzxbnut Research guides

 G0 in referenfie )   Search E Browse ? Help  Search results

Piece details: FROB 5/1179 ?”"=‘P = quick reference

SLINGSBY, Sir Arthur, bart, of Bifrons, Patrixbourne, Kent (includes {gag}; to seam}, ,,_.5L,Lt5
account) [Registered will: PROB 11/320]
1666

Quick reference Full details Browse from here 3. Request this )

Covering 1666

dates

Scope and SLINGSBY, Sir Arthur, bart, of Bifrons, Patrixbourne, Kent (includes account)
content [Registered will: PROB 11/320]

Access Normal Closure before FOI Act: 30 years

conditions

Closure status Open Document, Open Description
Held by The National Archives, Kew

Restrictions
on use

Catalogue Reader v2.2.0:G

Terms of use | Copyright l Privacy l Top of page "‘
The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU email: enqugiry@natiqnalarchiyes.,gov.uk tel: +44 (0)
20 8876 3444


Contact us‘? l Help) l A to Z index? l Site search}

thenatlonalar'tl1ives Thursday 19 May

 
   

‘"i-i<§mé“; About  Visit“; Re5earch,edi»:attVon'&.  Seerch the  Services for  Nuews {Shop
°  us  ontine exhibitions  ara:hi~.res.  pmfessionais.   online

         

You are here: Home > Search the archives > the Catalogue > Search the Catalogue: Quick reference

 the C   e  Welcome : About Research guides

 Search Esra‘:-use ?Help

 Go to reference )

V V . 7 . -
Department details: PROB ~ Help - C|"'°'”°f°'°“°°
Records of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury
1383-C1900
Quick reference Full details B“'°w5e fmm here 7
Covering 1383-C1900
dates
Scope and Records of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury and related jurisdictions,
content including wills and other probate matters.
Access Open
conditions
Held by The National Archives, Kew
Restrictions
on use

Catalogue Reader v2.2,C»:0

Terms of use l Copyright l Privacy l Top of page ’*
The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU email: enqulry@natEonalarchives.gov.uk tel: +44 (0)
20 8876 3444


;   * ‘“-’U°‘W-a/xiv}  £_‘ V
4 WWW 910% M »~ «A 2,wm)
f  (aw

‘h’u9vv~A—: M1 3 +
Wm” “‘f":§ o.fM’M)an.::.&  ’ W“ “’ 4=<-r»u~
/  ‘fikv J\mJ7L 4,/)l9J/Zvlafiger

sfl/9;¢, ,

  ‘1LJV~s-3‘V~/,*?J!»~- 3L,,~3<4-rs {LIq'../LL!‘  ‘yew’

5) ..M..
xmw NW?) «Mb

(72 (3% A   ‘‘‘‘ W /
> fnvww’  i¢«vsL ,, ;ii‘s”aLm._:~¢,,.
/ (Mk ,..
K “ y   '6? (017633
V’) 3i 72u;,(.:~r.

Q44/».T,;...zw,3§( :,,.,.M%


DRAFT

BAKER GENEALOGY

~I‘I’37';PMN’fi1'AA“

—Simon BAKER (time of Edward IV) of Faversham

:7

I50“?

. i N
—John (time of Hemry VII) of Tenterden

=?

45:94) J 

~IQ°>). /‘I

—Christopher (time of Henry VIII) of Tenterden
= Margaret TUFTON daughter of Humphry TUFTON of Ashford

I-Peter (‘I1584,Spain) of Ratcliffe, Stepney; Admiral under Queen Elizabeth I in her wars with Spain; taken prisoner in Spain 1584
I =Susan STOCKTON (T1583); daughter of William STOCKTON/, chaplain to King Henry VIII  ____,_v ___i,,_.
|—George of London, chief surgeon to Queen_Elizabeth I >['_"r ~ l5‘v SI) 

I—WiIliam gégranbrook ———————-g‘/5&7. m1;M;,.,A.,,,., ~ ( ,
-3 herine BATHURST (lived td be very old), daughter of Robert BATHURST of Goudhurst 0./mi IN“

I—John (’rRotterdam); merchant in London

at

._......~__-._-...

=daughter of Sir Thomas HOLMDEN of Tenchleys, Limpsfield
—Robert, envoy at Madrid for 4 years in the time of Charles I
=Jane COOPER, 4th daughter of Sir John COOPER of Rockborne, Hampshire;

I—Edward (aged ~70 in 1663); of Patrixbourne and Canterbury; bought Bifrons 1677

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

=Anne SEARE, daughter of Stephen SEARE
=Joyce JOWLES, daughter of John JOWLES of Alkham m~J~
=Margaret SWAN, daughter of John SWAN
|—John (aged ~56 in 1683); of Canterbury, who moved to Bewdley

 

- «a

widow of Sir William SANDERSON1

Mud»J.AJl¢~w. 3:47 (1 ’~'»'I"*'°)

I =Amy DUNCOMBE, daughter of John DUNCOMBE of Great Brickhill, Buckinghamshirez

I —Joyce Iv W73

I =l3dward WHICHCOT of Stoke-on-Trent * "IV?! "3-"017 

I =Mary GAWTON, daughter of Lancelot GAWTON of Powick, Worcestershire

I—Thomas

|—Robert _ . . » t’wJ«'> Ca.«JU\>~,,
I—susanr~’7.2 PI. (Lu, 3'“ M“‘.)‘. §"‘I"”L/ “' W ’

.‘_1.u,9.,=R0bert SMITH of Sandwich and Dane Court, Thanet
3Elizabeth, widow"oTGe'6rTe:'W'0ODf” 3)» n \  NR
=Jane CHAPMAN I

I—Walter of Dover

BAKER GENEALOGY —— Sheet 1

=May CLEGAT, daughter of William CLEGAT of Canterbury

0, ,.,|L9<//¢...«J.,IA..>
3:; warns «U3 '*;.*'q”:‘D',;j

|—John, Captain of Horse and then captain in the service of Charles I and Charles II; one of the Gentlemen of H. M. Horse Guards in 1683

I =Catherine GREENSTREET,\‘daughter of James GREENSTREET of Faversham

_ “ —~ ,.  _
:  7;‘: -1 us M0, cwug
I |—Anne

—¢'I~wtI’IJl4,frf’

L.L.B0yle O8/O8/O2


DRAFT

i—Anlhony [Frederick] (*26.9.1907,Bournemouth;‘i263.l983,London); art historian; Surveyor‘ of the Queen’s pictures; spied for the
Russians

1 Grand-daughter of Byron and daughter of Ada Byron (who lived in Bifrons from 1827 to 1830) and the first Earl of Lovelace.
2 Of Coombe Place, near Lewes, Sussex; rector of Hamsey and 4th baronet.

BAKER GENEALOGY-- Sheet 2 L-L-B0346 02/01/05


and dried [dyed]" and made to be sold, which ought each to have weighed 86 lbs. and not to lack above 3 Ibs. of that weight, lacked one 4 lbs. and the other 5
lbs . - ref. QM/SI/1606/9/26 - date: 10 July 1606

FILE — File of indictments for Midsummer Sessions 1606 [all ignoramus] - ref. QM/SI/ 1606/10 - date: 1606
item: Since Sir Thomas Baker, Sir Edward Hales and Sir Thomas Roberts, three justices of the peace, appointed Samuel Sharpie of Marden, clothier "an
overseer" "to search Brodeclothes" made in Marden and Samuel Sharpie was bound in £40 to serve the office faithfully, on 18 July 1606, at the house of James
Peake of Marden, shearman, at Marden, he found "A Brodecloth" worth £6 of Richard Pyner of Marden, clothier, made to be sold which had not been sealed as it
ought to have been. [Ignoramus] - ref. QM/SI/1606/10/7 — date: 18 July 1606

FILE — File for Michaelmas Sessions 1606 - ref. QM/SI/1606/13 - date: 1606
item: Since John Iggleden, constable of the Hundred of Barkley, having a warrant sealed by Sir Thomas Baker, William Campion, esquire and otherjustices,
to attach Henry Allard of Biddenden, clothier, to bring him before the aforesaid justices to give security to keep the peace and to appear at the next Quarter
Sessions, on 1 April 1606 Henry Allard at Biddenden in the Hundred of Barkley by virtue of the warrant was attached but he escaped from the constable.
[Ignoramus] - ref. QM/SI/1606/13/33 - date: 1 April 1606

FILE - File for Michaelmas Sessions 1610 — ref. QM/SI/1610/21 - date: Sept. 1610
item: Stephen Baker, "rippier", Thomas Baker, ripper, Michael Thomas, yeoman, Thomas Poulter, labourer, all of Goudhurst, at Goudhurst, from 1 Aug.
1610 to the day of the taking of the indictment without licence, have kept "Comon tipling howses" and sold "Ale and beare" - ref. QM/SI/1610/21/3 - date: 1
Aug. to end Sept. 1610

FILE - File of indictments for felony, Midsummer 1612 [? gaol delivery sessions] - ref. QM/SI/1612/5 - date: July 1612
item: Thomas Baker, carpenter, John Stephens, mason, Thomas Bowser, labourer, all of Hernhill, between 10 and 11 at night in the highway at Hernhill
assaulted Joseph Heeler and stole 39s. in money from the person of Joseph Heeler. [John Stephens ignoramus, other found not guilty] - ref. QM/SI/1612/5/5 -
date: 15 Jan 1611/12


278 Barnes AND r-zrnnm HUNDRED.

In Brige hundred, Richard, _/Em of PI/illiam, holds of
the hi/hop,‘Borne. It was taxed "at fix fulings. The
atfahle land is eight earuaztes. _In demeyne there are three
comedies, and fortyfour -villeins, -with three horderers
having ten earueates. _ There isa rhurth, and one fer-zkanf,
and four mills ‘offixteen /billings and eight "petite. A
_fi/hery if/ix-pence. Paflure, of which the foreign-tenants
have ploughed fix acres if land. Wood for the pammge
of four hogs. In the time of king Edward the Coafiflbr
it was worth eighteen pounds, when he received it ‘ten
pounds, now nineteen pouizds.

Four years after the taking of this furvey, the‘ bi«
{hop was difgraced-, and this manor, among the ref’: of
his poffeflions, efcheated to the crown. After which
it appears to have been divided into moieties, one of
which, called afterwards T_I-IE MANOR or PA'rRlX-
IBORNE MERTON, was held by Margerie de Bornes,
who carried it in marriage to John de Pratellis, or Dc
Pratis, as he was fometimes written, a Norman, who
foon after the year 1200, gave it to his new-ereéted
priory. of Beaulieu, or De Be/lo loeo, in Normandy, to
which it afterwards became an alien cell.“ In which
iiate this manor continued till the 1 Itll year of king
Henry IV.‘ when it was, with the king's licence, alie-
nated to the priory of the fame order of Augufiine ca-
nons of Merton, in Surry, whence it acquired the
name of Patrixborne Merton ;- and with this priory
it remained till the fupprefiion of it by the aét of the

31R: of king Henry VIII. when this manor coming
into the hands of the crown, was granted that year,
togetherwith the reétory and advowfon of the Vicarage
of Patrixborne, and all liberties, free warren, &c, to
Sir Thomas Cheney, to hold to him and his heirs
male in mpite, as of the cattle of Rochefter, After
which, king Edward VI. by new letters patent, in his

" Prynne-, p. 707. See fome account of the (late of thele alien
cells before, under that of Folkcftone, vol. vii. p. 179.

4th

PATRIXBORNEo 279

4th Ysa-If. regranted the whole of them, to hold to him
and _hIs heirs for ever. He was fucceeded in it by his
only fon Henry Cheney, efg. afterwards lord Cheney 5.
and he foon afterwards ahenatcd it to Sir Thomas
Herbert, who in the 2II’t year of that reign fbld it to
Thomas Smith: W110 pa.fl'cd it away ‘before the end of
‘the fame reign to William Partherich, and his gra,nd..
9” 5'' Edward P3-1'fl{¢F1Cl]» 05. Bridge, alienat-edit in
1638 to Mr. afterwards Sir Arnold Braems, of that
parilh, the heirs of whole fon Walter Braems, fold it
311.1704. to John Taylor, efq..of Bifrons, in this pa-r"ilh,
in Whofe defcendants it continued down to Edward
Taylor.-efq. the prefent pofiéflbr of this manor, with
the reétory-and advowfon of the church ofpatrgxbomc
THE organ MOIETY of‘ the manor of Patrix-.
borne, called afterwards -rnz MANOR or PATRXX-
-BORN! CHENEY, after the bilhop’s dilgrace, came
"‘t°-_‘tl‘° P°fi:°fl30_n Of the family of Say, in which it:
continued till Sir William de Say, in Henry III ”s
reign, gave it to Sir Alexander de Cheney. Heafte.r-
wards refidedihere, whence it gained the name of Pa-
.trixborne.Che_ncy ; but his {on William havi mar
Iied Margaret, daughter and heir of Sir Rdlagert de
Shurland, of Shurland, in Shepey, 'removed.af:e;-wads
thither. After which it remained in h-is defcendants
down ‘-to Sir T. Cheney, K. G. of Shurland who
having obtained from Henry VIII. in his 3 hi ;e,,. ,
grant of the other moiety of the manor of Patrixborri-c
as above-mentioned, became poffefled of the whole of
this manor, ‘which, notwithftanding, continued as tzoo
feZ>ar‘ate manors, in both which he was fucceeded by
his fon Henry Cheney, (afterwards created lord Che.
ney, of 'Tuddington} who in the beginning of that
reign alienated them to Sir Thomas Herbert. Since

° Rot. Efch. ann El‘ b h, . ._
Hays’ vol. vi. of ‘hi: flu‘:-it ;t24}77.t 3 See more of the Che.

T 4 which


280 BRIDGE AND PETHAM HUNDRED.

which they both remained in the fame fucceflion at
,ownerfhip, as has already been mentioned before, in
the defcription of the manor of Patrixborne Merton,
down to Edward Taylor,‘ efq. the preient polfelfor of
both thefe manors; which appear now to be Ul'.llt€d:~3-3
one court only is held for both of them, ftiled, the
court leet and court baron of the manors of Patrix-
borne Merton and Cheney.

BIFRONS is a feat in this parifh, fituated at a fn_ia_ll
__dif’tance weltward from the church, which was origi-
nally built by Mr. John Bargar, or_ Bai'graV€: _"Vh°f_¢
anceflors were originally of the adyoiriing parilh of
Bridge. Robert Bargrave, of Bridge, died in 1600,
leaving» a numerous ilfue ; of whom _Iohn,tthe eldefl:
Ion, was the builder ‘of Bifrons, and Ifaac, the fixth,
was dean of Canterbury, and ancefior of _Ifaac_Bar-
grave, efq. of Eaftry, where further mention will be
'made of him. They bore for their arms, Argent, an a
pale, gules, a _/word wit}: the pom! upfwardr, zbe pamel,
or, on a tbiey‘, azure, three bezantr. HIS grandfon john
Bargrave, efq. fold it in 1662 to Sir Arthur Slingfby,
knight and baronet, defee.nd_ed of a younger branch
of the Slingfbys, of Scriven, in Yorkfhire, and created
a baronet at Brufl'ells in 16 57 ; his arms were, Gules,
a ebeizron, between 1wo'leopana'.r facet, in_tbi_ef, and a
bugle born, in éa/‘e, urgent. is fon and heir Sir Charles
Slingfby, hart. in 1677, alienated it to Mr. Thomas
Baker, merchant, of ‘London,’ .on whole death it
came to Mr. William VVhotton, gent. of London,
and he in 1680 paffed it away_to Thomas Adrian-, efq.
who kept his fhrievalty here in 1690. He «alienated
it in 1594 mjohn Taylor, efq. the fon of Nathaniel
Taylor, ba'rrifier.at~ law, defcended of a family at
Whitchurch, in Salop, whofe arms were, Gules, three

P There is a pedigree of Baker, of Patrixborne, defcended
riginally from Cranbrooke, in the Heralds oflice, book marked
%. f. 31‘. See Vifln. co. Worcefier, anno 1683, p. 103.

rofer,

FATRIXBORNE. 28:

rojés, argent, a thief cbeguy, argent and’/able. He died
in I-729, leaving four fons and four daughters. ' Of the
former, Brook, the eldeft, was LL. D. and F. R. 5.21.
learned and ingenious-gentleman,who, among other
treatifes, wrote one on perfpeétive. He died‘inA173r,
leaving an only daughter Elizabeth, married -to Sir
William Young, bart. Herbert, in holy orders, of
whom hereafter; Charles, a merchant at Mofcow ;
and'Bridges. Of the daughters, Mary died, unmar-
ried, at -Bridge-place, in 1771, and Olive married
John Bowtell, D. D. vicar of Patrixborne. The el-
de{’t'fon Dr. Brook Taylor -fucceeded his father inithis
-feat, but ‘dying withoutmale itfue in 1731, his next
brother =tlie.Rev.r~ Herbert T.aylo.r became .pofl'e(l‘ed'o‘f
it, and refided here. He died in 1763, leaving by
Mary, one of the daughters of Edward Wake, clerk,
prebendary of Canterbury, and fivrlt-coufin to the
archbi-(hop, two fons, Herbert and Edward, the eldefl:
of whom‘ fucceeded him in this feat, with his other
eftates in this county,_ -butjdying unmarried in 1.767,
his brother, the Rev. Edward Taylor, lucceeded him
in it, and afterwards rebuilt, nearly on the old ficitc,
this feat of Bifrons, fo~called from its double front,
and thebuilder-of it, in commendation of his wife,
placed this motto‘ on the fore front : Diruta mlzfimz
ttxorbona, eedzfieata diruit mala. It was a handfomc
fpacious houfe, the front of which had ;a very grand
and venerable appearance. V He di‘ed'i—n 1798, leaving
by ' Margai"et_ his wife, daughter of Thomas Turner
Payler, efq.-of Ileden, who died at -Brufl'e_lls iri= i78o.,
four fons and three daughters, of whom Edward, the
eldeft, is a captain in the Romney fencible dragoons;
Herbert is a captain likewife in the. army, private
fecretary, and aidde camp to the duke of York;

‘ Brook is private fecretary to the fecretary of f’tate for

foreign»afi'airs; and Bridges, the youngefl, is a lieu.-
tenant in the navy. Of the daughters, the eldefiz,
Mary Elizabeth married Edward-Wilbraham Bootle,
efq. M. P. Charlotte married the Rev. Mr. Northey,

and


282 BRIDGE AND PETHAM HUNDRED.

and Margaret. Edward Taylor, efq. the efdel"t fon-
fucceeded on hisf1ther’s death to this feat,‘ and con-
tinues owner of it.

HODE, now ufually called Hoibe, and I-Iothe-lioufe,
in this-parifh, was antiently part of the pofleflions of
the family of Ifaac, who bore for their arms, Sable, a
bend, in I/ye /ingfler point, a leopard’: head, or; one of
whom, John Ifaac, held it in the 20th year of king
Edward III. His defcendaiit Edward Ifaac had his
lands di_'/"garuel1ed' by the aét of 31 Henry VIII. and
his defcendant of the fame name, at length leaving
only three daughters his coheirs, this efiate went in
marriage by Jane, his only daughter by his firft wife,
firft to Martin Sidley, efq. of Great Chart, and le-
condly to Sir Henry Palmer, of Howlers, who by his
will in i 61 1, gave it to his fon in-law Sir Ifaac Sidley,
bart. and he conveyed his right in it to his brother-in-
Iaw Sir Henry Palmer, from wliofe defcendant it went
by {ale to Merriweather, and Edward Merriweather,
about the year 1680, alienated it to Thomas Adrian,
gent. who conveyed it, with Bifrons and other efi-ates
in this parifh, in 1694., to john Taylor, efq. in whofc
defcendants it has, in like manner, continued down
to Edward Taylor, efq, the prefent poffeflbr of it.

RENVILLE is a manor, in this parilh, which for-
merly belonged to owners of the name of Crippen,
one of whom, Thomas Crippen, died poflefled of it
in the beginning of king James I.’s reign, leaving an
only daughter and heir _]oane, who carried it in mar-
riage to Robert N aylor,gent. whofe arms were, Argent,
on a bend, fable, ibree towered (up: of Ibe field, their
rim, or. _His {on john, about the year 1638, fold it
to VVilliam Kingley, S. T. P. archdeacon of Canter-
bury, who lefta numerous illue, of whom George,
the eldefi fon, iucceeded to.this efiate, whofe only
{on William died in 1701, leaving William, ofwliom
mention will be made hereafter; and Anthony, who
was anceltor of Thomas Pincke. Kingfley, gent. now

of

rnrntxnoann. 233
of London. From William Kingfley, efq.’ the eldgfl;
f_on, this efiate came down at length to his‘ gr-andfan
lieutenant-general William_ Kingfley, who refided at
Maidltone, where he died in 1769 unmarried, and
bequeathed this manor by will to his firft-coulin‘ Mr.
Charles Klngflcy, of London, for his life,‘1 on whofe
death in_ 1785. it came by the entail of the above
will to his fecond {on Mr.- Thomas Pincl<;e.Kjng{]ey
now of London, who is theprefent »pofl'efl‘or of it. .

HIGHAM is another manor, for it was formerly fo
accounted, though it has long fince lofl: the reputation
of having been one, fituated at the boundary of this
Pafllhs upon the high grounds, at a {mall difiancc
from the northern fide of Barham-downs. It was an-
tiently owned by a family of the fame ‘name, one of
whom, Nicholas, {on of William de I-Iigliam, by a.
deed ‘ofithe 13th year of king Edward III. to which
his feal is appendant, viz. a lion paflant regardant, ae-
tween fix my}; formee, filcbee, appears. to have held
it at that time, together with the nianorof Northirig.
ton, in the hundred of Downhamford, not far difiant.
Not Iongafterwliich it pafled into the name ofBourne,
and af_terwar_ds.of Haut, of the adjoining parilh of Bi-
Ihopfborne, in which it remained till atlength Eliza.
be-th, daughter and coheir of Sir William Haut, of
Bifhopfborne, ‘carried it in niarriage to Thomas Cole-
peper, efq. of Bedgbury, and he, in the 34th yea;-_ of
Icing Henry VIII. alienated it to Sir Anthony Aucher,
in whole defcendants it continued down to Sir Hewii;
Aucher, bart. who dying in r7a.6,_f..p, by his win
gave it to his filter Elizabeth, who entitled her huf-
band -John Corbet, LL. Dgof _Salop, to-the poireffion
of it. Heleft five daughters his coheirs, viz. Kathe-
rine, married to Stephen Beck-ingham; ‘Elizabeth to
Thomas Denward; Frances, to Sir William Hardres,
bart. Antonina, to I.gnatius,Ge.ohagan; and,Han.-M1,,

‘f See vol. vii. of this hiitory, p. 551.
to


284 BRIDGE AND PETI-IAM HUNDRED.

to William I-Iougham, who became "on his death
jointly entitled to it.- After which, Ignatius‘Geoh‘a-
gan, efq. before-mentioned, about the year 1768,
built the prefent feat, called I-I1GHAM- PLACE, and
relided in it for fome time, and thenalie-nated hisfifth
part of it, as did the heirs of Katherine, Elizabeth,’
and Hannah, who were before deceafed, their refpec-
tive fifth parts,—about 1781, to James I-Iallét, efq.
who now refides in it, and has fince purchafed the
remaining fifth part of the heirsyof Frances, widow
of Sir William Hardres, bart. who died in 1783.’

CHARITIES.

Sm I-Ii"-zniur PALMER, of Bekefborne, bywill in 16x1, gave
the fum of. ios. to be yearly paid out of his manor of Well~court;
towards the relief of the oorof this pariih, and he left the‘ like
{um towards the relief olp the poor of feveral of the neighbour-
ing parifhes, none of which has ever been paid to them.

The poor confiantly maintained are about eight, cafually 12.

THIS PARISH is within the ECCLESIASTICAL Joins-
DICTION of the dim;/e of Canterbury, and dmnry of
Bridge.

The church, which‘ is dedicated to St. Mary, cori-
fifls of one middle and two fmaller fide ifles, a high
and a fouth chancel, having a fpire Pteeple on the fouth
fide, in which there is only one bell. This church is
but fmall. It feems very antient. The pillars in it
are very large and clumfy, and the arches circular. In
the middle ifle are feveral memorials of the Dennes,
of this parilh. The fouth chancel, formerly called the
Ifaac, but nowrthe Bifrons chancel, as belonging to
that fear, is_ covered with pews. In itare monuments
for the Taylors, of Bifrons. At the entranceam'emo-
rial for john Bargrave, builder of Bifrons. In the
north ifle, in a window, are the arms of Fogge. Under

.' See more of them under. Stelling, vol. viii. P. 93, and Bi-
fliopfborrie thereafter.
the

PATRIXBORNE. 285

the Pceeple, on thefouth ride, is a fine arched -door.
way, circular, ornamented with much carvework and.
ernbleiriatical figures of Saxon architecture muchlikc
that at BarfriH;on., (of which a plate is giveii in Grofe's
Antiquities, vol. i. praef. p. 66) ; and. a— fmaller one
on the fouth tide of the high chancel, of a fimilar fort
over which isa. fmall Prone figure, having on its’ head’
_fc°m”1glY, fi_GF0_WD, and head-drefs on each fide harm:
ing down, with its hands lifted up as if having mind
fomething between them, perhaps for the vir in and
child; but it‘ is fo corroded by time, that fivhat it
win mieam f°‘3 C3,” °“1Y be gilefled at. At the eafl:
end of the chancel IS‘ a {mall circular window‘ of dif.
ferent compartments, like that at Barfrifion , In :11
wet’: part of the Cllu]‘Ch.yia1-d, are tombs for J-ames De
Rouflell, efq. a truly good and worthy man, obt. 1775::
and Elizabeth his wife ; and for john Bowte“,.D._ D:
vicar of Patrixborne, and Olive his wife - and’ one for
Ml'S. Mary Taylor,’ who died in 177;, ,

The church of Parrixborne, with the clia elv of
Bridge annexed, was given and appropriated 1:0 thg
P“0“Y Of "M61"-ton; in Surry, asearly as the year 12 5 8,
alniio 43 Henry III. on condition that three canons

_ Ould Yefidei for the performance of all parochial du-
ties; and it the profits‘ increafed, more lliould be fen:
f°T‘th3l Pufpofe.‘ In which {tare this church conti.
iiued till the diflblntion of the priory, by the act of the
gift year of king Henry VIII. when it came roge-
ther with the. manor of Patrixborne Merton, b’elonig-
ing to the priory, into the king’s hands, who granted
both that year to Sir Thomas Cheney. Since which
they have paffed, in the fame tract of ownerlhi a‘
has been already related before, in the defcriptioii no}
that manor, down to Edward Taylor, efq. theprefent

' 0rd.E9’ a/2/n-op. ecclgf anno i528 Reg‘ A;-unde]
'.. '. - _:P5-If-I5
 3’I:o1r\i/I p. 21?. . Iugugfltio zle fruflzéur ea-Zefi Sm: data. , Reg:
"*0"; . 2:3. Bibl. Catt. Cleopatra, Cvii, zo.

OWIICI‘


286 BRIDGE AND PETHAM HUNDRED.

owner of the appropriation and advowfon of the vi-
carage of this church, with the chapel of Bridge an-

nexed. _ _
It is, with the chapel of Bridge, valued in the

king’s books at 51. 7s. ggd. and the yearly tenths at
105. Bad. In 1578 here were thirty-nine communi-
cants. In 1640 it was valued at fixty pounds, com-

rnunicants fifty.

CHURCH OF PATRIXBORNE -with the CHAPEL OF
BRIDGE amzcxed.

PATRONS, "CA 5
Or 5} w/tam /zrg/enter]. R '
fame: C0165}, May 8, I644.
_7o/In Figs, A. B. obt. I667.‘
_7o/m Jlfacfiallan, A. M. N ov.
20, 1667, obt. January 27,
1698}
Illa;-garet Braemr, -widow. ........ film Bowtell, S.T. P. February
20, 1697, obt. January 5,
l 75 3 -W
jlfg;-J Taylor, /me -vice. ...--........ Herbert Taylor, A. M. February
3, 1753, obt. September 29,
1 3.‘
flay-éert Taylor, q/'7. ................. Edward Taylor, A.M. Nov. 16,
I763, obt. Dec. 1798.’
Edward Ttj/lar, tfg. .............. William _Ta£e, May, I799,pre.
fent vicar.

under a tomb in Patrixborne church-

: Buried in Bridge church.

II Buried in the chancel of this
church.

I Likewife reélor of Staplehurfl,
and lies buried with his wife Olive

yard. _
x And by difpenfatton reflor of
Hunton. _ _

Y And reétorof Ruckmg by dtfpcnv

fation.
_—q.¢<(@>»-——

BRIDGE

LIES the next adjoining parilh to Patrixborne
louthward, being written in old deeds, Bregge, and
taking its name from the bridge, which was antiently

over the l’trea.m which crofles it. This parilh was in
ear y

BRIDGE. 237

early times fo conliderable, as to give name both to the
hundred and deanry in which it is fituated.

IT is SITUATED about two miles and an half calf-
ward of Canterbury, on the high Dover road, formerly
the Roman \/Vatling-Ptreet way, which appears high
and entire almolt throughout it; in the valley on this
road ftandsthe village of'Bridge, with the church and
Vicarage in it, a low tnoift lituation, the bourn or Iiream
of the Little Stour crofling it under a {tone bridge,
built a few years ago by the contributions of the neigh-
bouring gentlemen. At a {mall diltance fouthward is
Bridge place, now inhabited by lady Yates, widow of
the late Judge Yates, and of Dr. Thomas, late bilhop
of Rochelter; The hills, from which there is a molt
pleafing profpeét, are wholly chalk, as are in general
the other upland parts of it, towards the fouth efpe—
cially, where the country is very barren, with heathv
ground and woodland, and much covered with (tones.
In this part of the parilh is Gofley wood, once belong-
ing to St. AuguRine’s monaftery, afterwards granted
to Thomas Colepeper, efq. It belongs now to Mr.
Beckingham.

THE MANOR or BLACKMANSBURY, alias BRIDGE,
claims over the greateft part of it, and the manor of
Patrixborne over that part of this parilh on the north
lide of the Dover road. There are two boroughs in
it, viz. of Blackmanflmry and of Bridge.

THE MANOR or BLACKMANSBURY, alias BRIDGE,
was parcel ofthe pofleflions of the abbey of St. Au-
gultine, belonging to the facriftie, as appears by the
regilters ofit, in which frequent mention is made of
this manor, with the free tenants belonging to it, in
I-Ionpit, Rede, and Blrtckmanlbury. In which {tare
this manor continued till the fuppreflion of the abbey
in the 30th year of king Henry Vlll. when it came
into the king's hands,‘ where it remained till the'36th
year of that reign, when this manor, with divers lands

_"_ See Dec. Script. col. 1895, 2029.
in


288 BRIDGE AND PETHAM HUNDRED.

in Houndpit and Blackmanbury, was granted tool-Iejnr_v
Laurence, to -hold in capile by.knight's fervice, and he
that year held a court here ; -and in his defcendants it
continued till the 18th of queen Elizab,eth’s reign,
wlje-n«it‘wasi alienated by fine levied, by ;Iohn.La_ure'nce,
to William Partherich, efq. whofe armsgwere, .Vm're,
argtnt and fable, o'n.a, r_/Jicjf.of the fecoild, ‘t~12reg.raj2*: of
tb: _/irji.» .H.is grandfon Sir Edward Partherich, of this
place, pafled itaway -in 1638 to Sir Arnold Braems,
defcencled of a family originally out of Flanders, where
his ancellors "were opulent.merchants. Jacob Braems,
his anceflor, was of Dovenmerchant, and built the
great houfe now the Cul’tom-houfe there, where he re-
fidecl. «Sir Arnold Braems above-mentioned, bore‘ for
his .arms, Sable, on a chief, argent, a ‘demiilion rampant,
gulet. He‘ builta fpacious and magnificent manfion
oh the fcite of the antient court’-lodge here, which he
named BRIDGE-PL,ACE, inwhich he afterwards refided,
as‘did his fon Walter Bxzaems, efq. till his death in
1692 ;_ but the great col’: ofbuilding this feat fo im-
poverilhed the e'f’tate,~ that his heirs, about’ the year
1,704, were obliged to part with it, -which they did by
fale to john Taylor, efq~.- of Bifrons, who foon after-
wards pulled down the greatefl: part of this rnanfion,
leaving pnly one wing of it Handing, the fize and {late-
linefs of which being of itfelf full fuflicient'for a gen-
tleman's reliderice, cannot but give anidea of the gran-
deur ofithe whole building‘ when entire. He died in
1729-, fince which this manor and {eat has continued
in his defcendants, in like manner as Bifrons above-
defcribed, down to his great-grandfon Edward Taylor,
efq. the prefent polfellor of-them. Thereiisnot any
courtheld for this manor.

BEREACRE, now called Great and iLz'ttlé ‘Barn/tars
is another manor in this parifh, which in the 219: year
of king Edward I. wasiin the poflirllion of Walter de
Kancia,;as appears by an inquifition taken that year, at
his deceafe ; not long after which it had {pafled into a

family

-we

BRIDGE. 289
family of its own name. After thisname was become
extinct here, it came into the pofl'eflio‘n‘ of the Litch-’
fields, who owned much. land about Eafiry, Tilman-
fione, and Betfhanger, and in this name it continued
till the 22d year of Edward IV. and then Roger Litch-'
field pafied it away to Richard I-Iaut, whofe only daugh-
ter and heir Margery carried it in marriage toWilliam
Ifaac, efq. of Patrixborne, from whole defcendant Ed-

ward Ifaac, about the latter end of king. Henry VIII.

it was {old to Petytrand Weekes, who joined in the false:
of it to Naylor, of Renville, from which name. it was
alienated to Smith and Watkins;'after which it was
conveyed by {ale to John Taylor, efq, of.Bifrons, in
whole defcendants it has continuedrdown to Edward
Taylor, efq. the prefent owner of it.

CHARITIES.

Sm Henxv PALMER, of Bekelborne, by willin 1611, gave
los. to be yearly paid out "of his manor of Well-court, towards

the relief of the poor of it.
The poor confiantly relieved are about eighteen, cafually

the fame.

BRIDGE is within the ECCLESIASTICAL jutusmc-‘
T'ION'Of the diare/e of Canterbury, and a'eanr_y of its
/own name».

The church, which is dedicated to St; Peter, confifls
of three illes, a high chancel, and a north fept or chan-
cel in the middle of the northifle. It has a fpire Pteeple
at the fouth-eal’t corner, in-which are three bells. In
the high chancel, within the altar-rails, is a monument
for Jane, fecond daughter of Walter‘ Harflete, of
Bekeiborne, firfi wife of Sir Arnold-Braems, ob. 1635,
and lies buried in St. Mary's church, in Dover; and
for Elizabeth, (fecond "daughter of Sir Dudley Diggs)
his fecond wife, obt. 1645, and lies in the middle of
this chancel. Againfi the north wall is aipaintcd por-
trait of Robert Bargrave, gent. of Bridge, obt. 1649.
Under a circular arch in the famewall are two rows of
fmall imagery, carved in ftone, the uppermofi repre-

VOL. IX. u fenting


390 BRIDGE AND PETHAM HUNDRED.

' ‘n ' God the Father, with feveral figures ‘on each
iieiiii, gthe lower one, figures taken fronithe liiftory of
the Old Teftament. Underneath thefc, in thehollow
oE—the—'wal], is the -figure of a man lying at full»l€ng_tha
in robes, with his twohands joinedand upllfE€d:~h_3V1“g
on hishead feemingly a full perriwig. A ‘memorial {Er
John Hardy, efq. ofB_ridge-p1ace,obt. i779. Onn t “:1
call fide of the fouth window is a hollow in the W8 3 3
under it an infcription for Macohus Kafey, vicar of Pa-‘
trixborne obt. m.v.c.i.xii. and of his being vi_ca-r there
xxi ears.’ On the oppofite lide of the window is carved
theiii ure ofa fcull, with a fnake entering in at one

aid the end" of it out at the other, and 3 himd with
cyfi, er ointing up to it, as if it had been the caufeof
:hen§erf§n’s death, -and feveral bones are interfperfed

about it. The north chancel is made ule of for a fchool, I

. ‘b ' ' . On the fouth fide of the
bl’), ii,coeIl]i]staai)bi(i(tih1l;i dlrtciliiifl door-way, with Saxon or-
c :1“ ems In the rcgifier are many entries, from the
niiar lgflo to !660, of the family ‘of Bargrave, alias
iiaargar, refidents in this parifh, and 0_nC f0r‘Th0ma5.
{on of John Cheney,’ gent. who died in_ 1620. 1

The church of Bridge, which is a Vicarage, was a -
ways efieemed as a chapel to the church of Patmtborne,
and as fuch is included in the valuation ofthat Vicarage
in the king's books, the vicar of which is inl’tituted.and
inducted into that "Vicarage, with the chapel of Bridge

' annexed to it.‘

The parfonage of this parifh therefore, as an appen-
dage to that of Patrixborne, is the property of Edward
Taylor, efq. of Bifrons. In 1588 here were eighty.-
nine communicants, in 1 640 one hundred and twenty.

' See the‘lil’t of vicars under Patrixborrie before-

NACKING.-

NACKINGTON. 29!
—-eoO@|€§§l@ooa—.—.

NACKINGTON,

CALLED in antient writings Natindon, and N41)»:-
ton, lies the next parilh fouth weftward from Bridge.
The greateft part of it is in the upper half hundred of
Bridge, and a fmall diltriét of the northern part of it in
the hundred of Whitllaple. It has but ‘one borough,
viz. that of Nackington.

NACKINGTON lies about a mile north-ealt from
Canterbury; the high road from which to Hythe and
Romney Marlh leads through it; it is a pleafant healthy
fituation. The call: and weft [ides of the parilh are
open uninclofed arable and hop-grounds, the eaftern
part behind Staplegate being mollly planted with them ;
and the weltern arable, in which is a large diltriift ofland,
called from its lize the Hundred-acres, formerly Haven
field, the property of feveral different owners. The
foil, though much inclined to chalk, is in general very
fertile, and worth upon an average twenty fhillings an
acre, though there is much in itlet for more. There
is no village, but there are about eighteen houfes in-
terfperfed throughout it; the church {lands on a gentle

rife, at a fmall dittance eafitward from the road, with
the parfonage and the court-lodge of Sextries near it.
Beyond I-lcppington the profpeét changes to a barren
dreary country, covered with Hints, and enveloped
among woods. Behind that feat ran the old Stone-
ltreet way of the Romans, from their flatioii Dzzrover-
vzum, or Canterbury, to that of Perm: Lemmiis, or
Linine, only to be traced now over the arable lands,
and through the woods, and a little higher up lies If-
fins wood, formerly the fcite of the manor of Ytching,
as it was antiently fpelt in king Henry the VIth.’s reign,
a {mall part of which only is within this parilh, clofe to
the bounds of which are the vefizgia of an amient ramp,

U 2 the


292 BRIDGE AND Pm-HAM HUNDRED-

the outward trenches of which contain about eight
acres, of which only two acres are level and connected;
the refi; being cut and interfefted by roads, &c. Thchrc
are numbers ofdifferent lntrenchments throughoutt 15
large wood, and one vellum efpecially, which ruhs 1(1)}!
to the Stone-ftreet road. At the north corner o_ t 1%
camp are the remains of arroblong fquare 'bllllCllDg 0.
fione, the length of it l’tand_1ng_ea[t and weft.‘ 1}: tfhc
ealt end is a fquare rife agamli: the wall, fflfmmg YT?‘
an altar, and a hollow in thewallon one fide.I_ h C
foot or pedefial, of a fecmingly gothic Pillar: Ufc 3;
were made for churches,’ was fome years ago 0"“
among the rubbifh in it, fo that if this ever was a pm-
torium ofa Roman general, a chapel feems to haye
been erected on the‘ fcite of it, as was frequentlyht e
cafe, probably by the owners of the manor, and tczl avg
been deferred‘ when this part of the country was epo.
pulated by the contefis between the houfés 0fY0Tk and
Lancafter. I .f I .
Herlza Paris, or One Berry, grows _plent: uly in
IH'cn wood, and Laniium Cazmabmo folta flare amp/.0’
luzeoflabia purpurea ; hemp-le.avcd' dead _net-tle, with a
party coloured flower, grows in this parilh. _
There are no parorbial charmer, but there _are eight
ghillin s .per’annum‘paid towards the repair of the
church)’ out of lands called Willys’s lands. The num-
berlof boot conltantly relieved are about twenty-five,
caf;‘_l:;a;1.;1i3’Ra3S Tizgyainnna MANORS in this parifh, each of
which is {tiled in antient records, Tm: MANOR or
NAcr<mc'roN. Of thefe
THE MANOR or Saxrau-:s, alias Nacxmc-row,
was part of the antient polleflions of the monafiery of
st Augufiine, and was allotted to the me of their fa-
c ifiie whence it acquired the former of thofe n3m€5-
-Iihis imnor, in the year 1046, was dcmifed to one
Turflin, belonging to the abb.ot’S holllholda and W33

afterwards fold and alienated from the monafl:ery.WhiCh
accounts

NACKINGTON. 293

accounts for its not being mentioned in the furvey of

Domefday ; but in king Edward I.’s reign,‘ jt appears
by the roll of knights Fees to have been again in the
pofleliion of the abbot and convent, for Natyndon is
mentioned in it as the abbot’s‘lord'lhip. After which
this manor of Natyndon, alias Sextries, continued in
the poffeflion of the abbot and convent till the difTolu-
tion of the abbey in~the goth year of Henry VIII.
when it came into the eking’s bands,“ who in his 32d
year granted it in exchange to Thomas Colepeper, efq.
fenior, whofe fpn Sir Alexander Colcpeper, of Bedg-A
bury, alienated it in the 2r[’t year of Elizabeth to Sir
James Hales, of the Dungeon, in.Canterbury, whofe
grandfon, of the fame name, by deed inrolled anno 22
James 1. fold it to John Smith, efq. of London, and he
devifed it by will to John Vaughan, efq. from which
name it pafled to Stephen Jcrmyn, efq. who conveyed
it to Thomas Page, citizen and ftationerof‘ London‘,
and he palfed itaway by {ale to William Fox, of Nack-
ington, whofe fon, of the fame name, reconveyed it to
Thomas Page, efq. of London, fon of Thomas before-
mentioned, and he in 176 3 fold it to Edward Jacob,
efq. of Faverlham, who died in 1788, and his widow
now poliefles it for her life, the inheritance being vetted
in their two younger fons, the Rev. Stephen Long Ja-
cob, and Mr. John Jacob, who relides at it. There
is no court held for it.

THE MANOR or STAPLEGATE, alias NACKINGTON,
is lituated in the northern part of this parilh, in the
hundred of Whitflaple, jult without the bounds of the
county of the city of Canterbury. It was formerly the
feat of an eminent family of the fame furhame, who
were ' owners not only of this place, but of lands in
Billington, Romney Marlh, and in Thanet.‘ Edmund
Staplegate died poflefied of this manor anno 13 king

" Augtn. off‘. inrolm. of conventual leafes, Kent, bundle 5.
f Philipott, p. 243. Regilt. Abb. Sci Aug. cart. 619.

U 3 Edward


294. BRIDGE AND PETHAM HUNDRED.

Edward II. whofe defcendant Edmund Staplegate had
that noted contefi, as lord of Billington manor, with
Richard, e'ar1 of Arundel, for the performance of the
office of chief butler at king Richard II.’s coronation.‘
He died  12. and was fuccecded by his brother_-john
Staplegate, in whofe defcendants, this manor did not
continue long ;' for in the reigns of. Henry V. and VI.
as appears by the antient court-rolls, it was in the name
of Litchfield, one of whom, Roger Litchfielcl, in the-
22d year of Edward IV. alienated it to William Haut,
whole fon Sir William Haut leaving two daughters his
coheirs, Elizabeth, the eldeft, entitled her hufband
Thomas Colepeper, efq. of Bedgbury, to it, and he in
the. if’: year of king Edward VI. alienated it to Philip
Chowte, eiq. who fold it in the 6th year of queen Eli-
zabeth to Walter Waller, and he immediately after-
wards pafied it away to Sir Anthony Aucher, of B1-
fhopfborne, who fold it to Sir James Hales, of the
Dungeon, and he in the 22d year of king James I. con-
veyed it, with the manor of Sextries, alias Nacking-
ton, to John Smith, efq.' of London. After which
they both continued in the fame line of ownerfhip, down
to Thomas Page, efq. who alienated this manor of Sta-
plegate, alias Nackington, to Mr. Hopkins Fox, whofe
{on Mr. William Fox died poflefled of it in 1794,, and
left it to his eldeft fon William, who now pollelfes it.
There is no court held for it.

HEP_PINGTON is a manor and feat, at the fouth-well:
boundary of this parilh, which in the reign of king
Henry II. was pofiefled by a family of the name of
Delce; for in the 29th year of it William de Dclce
accounted at the exchequer for the tenure of this land
of I-Ievington ; but this name was extinét here before
the reign of Edward III. in which it was come into the
pofleflion of ‘William Talbot, whofe heirs pollelled it
in the zoth year of that reign. The next owners of

“ See Bilfington, vol. viii. of this hiftory, p.. 347,
this

NACKINGTON. 295

this manor were the Chich’s, of the Dungeon, as ap-
peared by a record of that time, at the beginning of
king Henry IV.’s reign, it was become the property
of Fogge, and Sir john Fogge, of Repton, by will-
anno 6 Henry VII. devifed it to his fon by his fecond
wife, Sir Thomas Fogge, fergeant-porter of Calais,
whofe two daughters and coheirs, married to 0x611-
bridge and Scott, conveyed their moieties of it in 1558
and-‘I561, to Thomas Hales, efq. of Thanington, and
he fettled it on his eldeli {on William, by his fccond
wife Alice, and their fan William Hales, ell]. together
with his {on William Hales, in 1640, conveyed the
manor of Heppington, with the manlion and lands be-
longing to it, to Thomas Godfrey, cfq. the younger, of
Lid, who was knighted the year afterwards, and relided
here, being the eldefi fon of Peter Godfrey, efq. of
Lid.’ He died in 1684., without furviving i{I'ue, leav-
ing his wife lady Heller Godfrey furviving, who died
in 1699, when this manor came by her fettlement ofit
to her great nephew Henry Godfrey, efq. who was of
I-Ieppington, who leaving an only daughter and heir
Mary, {he carried it in marriage to Bryan Faulfett, efq.
of Rochefter, who rebuilt this feat, bearing for his
arms, Or, a lion rampant, fable, over all :2 bend, gube-
nated, urgent zmdguler. He died in 1750, and was

fucceeded by his eldeft ion the Rev. Brian Fauflett,

rector of Horton Monks, and perpetual curate of
Nackington, who died in 1776, having married Eliza-

beth, daughter of the Rev. Mr. Curtois, by whom he
had two fons, Henry-Godfrey, of whom below, and

Bryan, now of Sittingborne, gent. who married Doro-

thy, daughter of the Rev. John Smith, vicar of Bor-

den, and a daughter Elizabeth, married to Mr. ‘Wm.

Bland, of Sittingborne. Henry Godfrey Fauffett, efq.

the eldell fon, fucceeded on his mother's death in 1787,

to this manor; he married firlt Sufan, daughter of Ri-

f’ See the defcent of Godfrey, vol. viii. p. 426.
U 4 chard


 BRIDGE AND PETHAM HUNDRED.

chard Sa-ndys, efq. of Canterbury, by whom he had
three ions and five daughters, {he died in 1789; and
he married fecondly Sarah, daughter and heir of Fet-
tiplace Nott, efq. of Marfion-hall, in Warwicklhire,
late high fieward of thecity of‘ Litchfield. He is the
prefent polfefibr of this manor, and refides at Hep-
pington.

NACKINGTON-HOUSE is a feat in this parilh,-which
in the reign of king Charles I. was the refidence of
Capt. john Nutt, whofe defcendant Edward Nutt, efq‘.
died polfeffed of it in 1708, without i[Tue male, upon
which’ it came by entail to his brother William Nutt,
who fold it to Thomas Willys, efq. who in 1726 fuc-
ceeded to the title of baronet on the death of Sir Thou
mas Willys, bart. of Fen-Ditton, in Cambridgelhire,

p. their arms being, Parted per fcfs, gulesand ar-

‘gent, three lions rampant, counlercbanged, a bordure,»er-
'mine. He died next year, fl p.1ikewife, having devifed.

this efiate to.tru{’tees, who foon afterwards fold it to
Chriflopher Milles, efq. of \ Canterbury, defcended
from ancefiors who had refided at the parfonage at
Heme, from the reign of James I. and bore for their
arms, Ermine, a‘ mil/rina', /‘able, on 2: cbief, two mar‘-
Iion: wings, or; one of whom" was clerk of the robes
to queen Anne, and king James and of king Charles’s
privy chamber.‘ Chriltopher Milles, efq. after his pur-
chafe of Nackington--houfe, refided at. it, and died in
1742, having married Mary, eldefi daughter of Rich.
Warner, efq. of Norfolk, by whom he had three fons
and two daughters, Richard, of whom hereafter;
Chrifiopher, chief jufiice of Senegambia; -John, late
captain of an Eafclndiaman ; Mary, now unmarried ;
and Anne, married to Sir Ed ward Aftley, bart. of N or--
folk. Richard Milles, efq. the eldefi fon, is of North
Elrnham, in Norfolk," he ferved as member for Can-
terbury in three fuccelfive parliaments, having married

f See Heme before, p. 94.
Mary,

NACKINGTON. 297

Mary, daughter of, T_. Tanner, D. D. prebendary of
Canterbury, by whom he has an only dauohcgl-and heir
Mary, married to the right hon.‘ Lew.is-%homas,* lord
S_ondes. He IS the prefent owner of this feat, and at
times refides at it.

Tms ‘PARISH is ‘within the ECCLESIASTICAL
yunrsmcnon ofthe diorefe ofCanterbury, and deanry
of the fame.

Th‘? ClW|‘Ch: Which is dedicated t S . ‘
fmall. and confifis of one ifle and tW‘i)C'ilaIf\1/i:?:1ii:],liZS1Vii)Ii’t
at the-north-weftcorneralow wooden pointer-,1 tune?
in which hangs one bell. This church .is very fmalli
It is kept very neat and in good repair. By the fever-ai
narrow fmall circular windows it feemsantient, built
perhaps not long after the time of Lanfranc. Inrhc
hl8l1~Ch3T_‘C¢1. are feveral memorials for the Godfreys -
a tnemorialfor Bryan Fauflett, efq. obt. 1750 and (0:-
his {on the -Rev. Bryan Fauflett, obt; 177é..a,mS
Farflétt, quartering To/ee, Godfrey, and Brian irh alin’ ,
azure, three paler, ermine, over iz/1, zzfefr, £‘b,6’9ll_f‘ 1%
the fouth chancel, which belongs to the Milles famil -
are feveral memorials for the Wyllis’s and the Nuttgi
and memorials for the Pudners, who lie buried inzi.
vault underneath; arms, Bandy,‘ or, and gu/es over 41]
a croft, argent, a label of tbree paint: fbr eifi create:
Againft the welt wall are three elegant {mall monui
ments, of different coloured marbles; one for the Rev:
‘Bernard Afiley, A. B. fecond fon of Sir Edward A[};:
icy, bart. of Melton, in Norfolk, by Anne, dauoh;¢,-
of Chrifiopher Milles, efq. another for Chriftob her-
Milles, efq. of Nackington, obt. 1749., who mafiicd
Mary, eldefl: daughter and coheir of Richard Warner
efq. of North Elmham, in Norfolk; and another foi~
Mary, reli€_t of Chriftopher Milles, efq. obt. [781 In
the two ea[’r windows of this chance], are Good reniains
of painted glafs. D

THE CHURCH ofNackington belonged to the rim
°f 5“ GTCS0TYa perhaps part of its original endovlvnmeniti

by


298 BRIDGE AND PETHAM HUNDRED.

by archbiihop Lanfranc; It was very early appropriated
to it, and was confirmed to it by archbilhop Hubert
about king Richard I.’s reign.‘ After which this ap~
propriation appears by the regilier of the priory, to
have been efieemed as a manor, {tiled

THE MANOR or NACKINGTON, alias THE PAR-
SONAGE, which continued part of the poifeflions of it
till its fupprefiion by king Henry VIII. when it came,
with the advowfon of the Vicarage, into the kings
hands, where they did notftay long, before they were
granted, with the fcite and other pofleflions of the
priory, in exchange, to the archbifliop, part of the re-
venues of whofe fee they continue at this time, George
Gipps, efq. of Harbleclown, being the prefent lefl"ee of
this parfonage. But the advowfon of the Vicarage,
now elteemed as a perpetual curacy, his grace the
archbiihop referves in his own hands.

The Vicarage, or perpetual curacy, is not valued in
the king’s books.‘ Archbifhop Juxon, in 1661, aug-
mented the ‘ftipend of this curacy to twenty pounds per
annum; and archbifhop Sheldon, anno 28 Charles II.
augmented it further to forty pounds per annum, which
furn is paid yearly to the curate by the leilec of the
parfonage. It is now of the yearly certified value of
621. 18s. rod.“

THERE IS A PORTION or TITHES arifing from a.
difi-rift of land in this pariih, which was part of the
antient pofiefiions of the hofpital of Eaitbridge, and at
the endowment of the Vicarage of Cofmus Blean, was
given to it, being then of the value of five mares.
This portion now belongs to that Vicarage, and con-
_fiI’ts of the tithes of about one hundred and fixteen
acres of land, let at the yearly rent of forty—two pounds.‘

I In Bp. Wm’s map it is valued at 81. 4s.

1' I727. dc wit. :1’: Naiindon. Regi/l. .He71. Priorix, Cant. in pub.
lib- Camb. Ee, f. 37. Limits ofthe parilh, without date, in M33.
A. 1 I. f. 93. a. in the archives of the dean and chapter of Cant.

f See,Bleane, vol. viii. of this hiflory, p. 534.

There

NACKINGTON. 299

There were feveralc ti’: b }, ' '
St. Gregory and St. l-ati)rIi‘riceShotli)‘iit:1lnccinf:ei)rii;?<:y;}?:
. _ ) . D_
tithesof Moland befide _I-leppmgton, VIZ. of eighty
acres of land; belides WlllCl’l, the hofpital poflefied the
tithes of fifty acres of land in Havefield.“

CHURCH OF NACKINGTON.

PATRONS,
Or 5] -w/zom /z7‘t:fe7zte;l, coax-mas.
TIM A"[]l5l.fi I 0-I-no-uuo-.nua-no G ‘ P '
°”  A- 3- as m

Ricfiard _7olIgfon, 1684..

:7. S.€z'm1er, 1685.

Simon Dcverewx, A. M. 1686.
obt. 1733."

C/zzzrler ZVorrz'_r, LL. B. 1733
obt. ,1 76 7," '

B04” ‘F'1’{/3”’: A. M. Feb. 12,
I 767, obt. Feb. 10., 1776 0

,7:/rlua Dix. A. M. 1776, thg
prefent curate?

1: See Battely's Somn. p. 39, ap- which he held with time! Good cf
[1 v

pendix, p. 9. mm

1 Likewife reétor of Lower Hardres.

"1 In 1731 he had the king’s licence
to_hold the reétory of Harbledowne
Wllh the vicaragcof Brookland.

0 And rcaor of Horton,

P He had been ' {B -1
which he refigned iviicgrgog f0:ot°hl:._ 
tory of Old Romney, and is 2. mi-

n Likewife teflor of Braborne, nor canon of Canterbury gagged.-.1‘

LOWER HARDRES,

OR Harris, as it is f ll

called likewife Nether, 2iJn?laL}i/lllfolriigiigfzdianfdrigefly
times Nm/2 Hardres, to diitinguiih it froni the adjiiiii:
‘"8 P‘”_‘lh Of Upper or South Hardres, lies the next
parilh louth-ealtwartl from Nackington. Thcre is but
one borough in it, viz. of Lower Hardres,

Li;I‘mI:1Is_IPz:]R1sH, called frequently from its fmallnefg
1 _ ar res, 15 rather an out of the way lituation,
fylflg at the lkrrts. of the fine pleafant country lalt-dc.
°“b¢d.s and tilt? village. with the church in it, is in thc

valley


300 BRIDGE AND PETHAM HUNDRED.

valley at a--fmall’dil’cance from the Stone-{treet way:
which runs near the weflern boundary of this parifh,
clofi’ to which is a farm and pond called I-Iermanfole.
fuppofed to/cake its. name either from the Saxon idol,
named Ermenfeul, or from the Roman military way
on which it ftzinds, Herman fignifying military, and
jole a pond. From the valle-y on the other fide, this
parifh extends up to a dreary wild country of high hills
and deep dalcs, the land in which‘ is very poor, mofily
chalky, and covered with {harp flint Prones, having"
frequent woodlands interfpcrfed over it, and carrying a.
face of ruflic poverty throughout it. .

THE MANOR or Nn'i'H1-zn, alias LOWER Haamu-:s,
which, at the time oftaking the furvcy of Domelilay,
was part of the pofleflions of Odo, bifhop of~Baieux,
under the title of whofe lands it is thus entered in it:

Razzulfde Coluhels holds‘of the hi/hop, Hardres. It

was taxed at one fuling. The arable land is four cara-
rates. In demafnes there is half a earurate, and nine vil-
leim having two carurates. ‘I here is a church, and eight
_/erwmts, and thirteen acres of meadow. Wood for the
parmage of four hogs. In the time of king Edward the
Canfejjor it was worlh fix pounds, and aflerwards four
potpmdsnzow one hundred /hillings. Azor held it of Icing
Edward.

Four years afterwards the bifhop was difgraced, and
all his eftates confifcated. After which this manor ap-
pears to have Come into the poffeffion of the Criols,»
for ]ohn dc Criol, ‘younger Ion of Bertram, held it at
his death anno 48 Henry III. Soon after which it
pafled into the name of Godynton, and John de G-o-
dynton died poffeiied of it ‘anno 28 Edward I. holding
it in rapite-; but in the 2oth.year of king Edward III.
this name was extinét "here ; for then John de Cob-
ham, Johnde Mortimer, and the heirs of John de
Swanfham, were become poffefled of it, holding it by
knight’s fervicc. After which that part of this manor
which belonged to Mortimer, pafl"ed at the lattercnd

of

LOWER naamuzs. 301

ol'_king Richard II. into the pofieflion of the family of
1I\)]‘Sg5- FTOID which it came to be {tiled ’the manor of
ether Ha1‘(1re:, altar Dzggs-rozrrr, and it continued in
the defccndants of that name,‘.“till Thomas Pofihumus
Dlggs, efq.'of Barham, about the middle of queen Eli-
zabeth’s reign,.alienated it to" Sir James Hales of th
Dungeon, whofe grandfon of the fame‘ name d in "C
1665'» and lC‘“'l“8 00¢ Onlydaughter and. heiryEligz:in
beth, {he carried ‘it in marriage, firflto Sir Stepheri
Hales, K. B. oFWarw1ck{hire,-and fecondly to ‘Gear
third {on of William Sheldon, efq. of Beoly in Wgei
c°fi°rn’l"‘> bl’ neither of whom the had ifliie ’l‘l(1)h
relided at the Dungeon, where {he died in'x6. 8 a icy
did a few months afterwards, pofleffed of thiz  S’ 1c
which his heirs alienated in‘ 1636 to I-Ienr Leeaml)'r”
whmcc it gained the a name of Lee’: eouhif and Chis
grandfon Henry Lee VVarner,. efq. of Waliingham-
abbey, rn.Norfolk, IS the prefent owner of it,
There IS noccourt held for this manor, but one within
'.:‘:.‘:::"..Y. ‘iii? ‘°'  at a PM  
A. , .
 ‘if? $31.5‘; :'2'::;.::;"::;:,;‘;:s% 
tionetl, was afterwards called THE MANOR or Noiiien‘
COURT, alias LOWER I-IARmuas,for which he hadqolf
tained a charter ,of/'ree-zoarren in the 17th year ‘oft; -
reign, and it Continued in his defcendants lords Colin
- . . » -
lc?:r‘T‘:;tL1l bl’ ‘ll? fcmaleherrs It pafled fucceffivelytill it
who‘, dY Pfirglagc to Sir T. Brooke, of Somerfetlhire,
, _ e e cen ant John Brooke, ofSt. James’s, Dover,
(being ofa younger branch of that family) died of-
feffed of it anno 21 Henry VIII. and his {on Iihh
Brooke’ of Dcmonr fold it: anno 3 Edward VI tn
Thomas Spylman, efq. of Canterbury who‘-C fen -Ana
thony, gent. of Petham, anno 3 Elizabeth, palfcd it

“ Seeinquif. H . V11 _, ~
2 Edward VL p;;’o‘Z('2z~,i5i‘;:r3" Digéftfl 06:. James Digg-anno

away


A Access The English strand of

     

3 W3: the UK. archives network he

A An:‘hive:: Data base -»

Home l Search AZA l About A2A l New A2A Users 1 Family History I Research Interests l Useful Lmks E Contact: Us
Exit §,e_s,s_jcn 1 §_e_a_rc_h __lg_e_su__l_t_s_ E Back I Cataloque Table of Contents | Cataloque in Full I Troubleshootino I Site Map

West Sussex Record Office: Additional Manuscripts, catalogue 15

The contents of this catalogue are the copyright of West Sussex Record Office.
Rights in the Access to Archives database are the property of the Crown, © 2001-2004.

To find out more about the archives described below, Contact West Sussex Record Office

Additional Manuscripts, Catalogue 15
Catalogue Ref. Add Mss 11,301 - 11,899
Creator(s):
West Sussex Record Office, Chichester
Documents relating to property in Aldingbourne, Felpham, Middleton, Midhurst

and Rumboldswick

FELPHAM

FILE — Power of Attorney to accept seisin — ref. Add Mss 11,724 - date: 18
September 1671

 [from Scope and Content] Witnesses: William Whotton and John Penfo/d, jun



A WMAM SI‘. 9% uh‘ I "la
5i“‘gbV7\'~—  "~"/y fl M/Mi» ’  JV JJLW M’ L4 “" /Du..(_.,j
‘ I ~—¢Q:~¢, A I x.-
- “3 .w\ [\(AAA~AL0“v{3,a;\A‘?g1IJ_‘)qv’;_}Lu~(JUvvW(~' «jag
” d YuM' {

5”” ""’~“wV M‘ +1»  5%.. t....k.u«a2J£
‘* W"~v§ 

 

  g. .£ ,
\(;;M«:;»>/, 8/Swd"<L’“AV C°=m
T‘ $v5Ja\,, MW
‘~”’ Et;.,J.Jt~ EIJ-er
4-  05x 


Vwbm  xJA  MM!‘ WV?‘

L'J"’rj"/LL‘1*"“:J"‘*/f §’“W*’>] mgwu 2.—é’.29
7 Tkfvw wws’
Ctwww“ r~»}w/<2.» ,\,,,...-;RM
Z3/CXp~LuJvs- /U \

LLUL, uS2 QMZ

 
  

~w<<9w4»’

  ‘ Vb; , _.
j I V  A K gfim  
m W,7 (5, mpg .5g(i Ky.a.r¢,hr'v~)k Um/v‘~ > EMWLW’ We

- Wu
1‘ 

L‘) Euuhpq ¢..§)JJ¢3 um MM) €ma[NS3»)‘<§4:)

V  Ur“-3 ‘L°°,SV"‘§"’b3U“\"9'> 3 “‘ H?~v\/19 H iL.ll>?>'¢) -= Fmau. v’-‘~/=~<s~=~J
KW KT 1* -Sm... ‘-  “wnuvzu
 * WM :s»w« mm .-““"“”;(w.‘@‘::-;««r~3”3’:  %
F  ~  __ .- ‘ ‘   ‘
i V 4 §.\«.f -Jw«., TQM)‘-A Hi:-~43 {‘,..).JL 3.-S:\;‘l'lu;w, '
  K.» W M  .3:“M g
04  M W“   z
‘Tkjwsaa VVJVW:/V" ' CRjL“"n""‘*SfifJ.‘t«,. ‘
"‘ F?/“19..A—-.  ‘  :6“aifiuA>Lk
"1 B ‘ ~ _ W (.4£,&/vu\/ $'|'*fl»{\>‘:
- >w-”«~a =»%”J:z»:*:::*%W“”     L   
— T V‘us«rUnaxJb \wUv--f- :‘   \

* gbwwxfi ‘> V~0‘9‘-4' "‘:5““”J

5:/$§x»;r   ,%0«MV/ T A " 2 V ‘
e)m-.;;;L,_ {W  Cmwwb ‘“us~uTaJ»<:- /[W ’/W

ELI. ' ‘ 0 /7  -W ' _ ,\_  ;
Sj/\p..Q:?. L:i1)J/‘Wt i” M FM p,/’ J\}.;<\r:s,§ (4/:)(—9‘v~S:::‘_'(‘ i

“W49 w«5w; W» w%Og»:1$.~«;;o «MDE rmjfilhvvx vQ~'/U*‘*L~
.22!-~wc~

.L ‘\
Mariam Veg/near b2(i>r<. 431$ .— Uyruk, Erm.2,,

’};.},P,, ‘*::‘:iT5e\vf5-~» I


 
 

‘ ;} » 

  
 
 
  
 
 
  
   
  
  

 
 
  
 
 
 

 

an ;

 nies"oi" Gresham; hiiquiae ot-
to , Aschamh Epistolaé; Has_ted’s Kent,
1332 4588, and other genealogical references under
Woah-oir,Si:a EnwLiz.n.]”' . '1 A. F. P.

W OTTON ,,THOMAS (d. 17 63), com iler
of the ‘Baronetagefwas the son of Matt aw

i 1 s 1» Wotton, who kept a bookshop-at the Three
l Dag ers and Queen's Head, near St. Dun-

   

    

:" ; j stans Church, Fleet Street. According to
f E’ ' John’ Danton [(1. v.], the elder Wotton was
‘'9 ’ ‘a very courteous, obliging man’ of the
' ’ . highest character, whose trade ‘lay much
’ amen the lawyers.’ Thomas Wotton suc-
ceeded to his1father's business and carried it
enifor‘ man years, but retired some time
, beforefhis eath. He was warden of the
; Stationers’ Company in 1754 and master in
9 »1767.4* Among the works published by him
3 1  _ .were—R_.ushworth’s ‘Historical Collections’
, 1,‘.  ’ andeclitions of the works of Bacon and
z ‘1 7 Selden. _In 1727 he issued in three small
' 5 . 18mio)’volum‘es his ‘En lish Baronetage.
ing a Genealogical an Historical Ac»
count of their Families.’ It is dedicated to
Holland Egerton of Heaton, Lancashire, son
of ‘John baronet, of Wrine Hall, Staf-
 ’w_uiiam Holman  v&] of nu-
 ” and Thornhaugli .ur on [q.v.]
f Horfolk had also ‘placed their collections
  ' sal; an great assistance had
7    ‘vent by Arthur Collins [q._v.], who
hinisefi u.blie_hed a.;_baronetage_in 1720.
7 ghsmork is divided into five sections, con-
Qlrespectivel an account of the insti-
 ott‘the”order 37 James I, the descents,
 siicaessions,: and public employ-
’ f yetheiberonetag correctglistsof exist-

‘  exact tsbloeiof

   
    
   
  
 
     
 
 

 
 
  
   

an weourit ofthe institiition
V Nova Scotia’

_ 11‘ published in
mass e‘revise‘d~ and enlarged
, 1 usually’ erroneously attri-
 ‘In-it werei
‘ ed by‘Robert
tiblished “a volume of
tions. i Peter Le Neve
had‘ three folio volumes
ect, also rendered valuable
otton in preparing this edi-
notes, and pedigrees furnished
Baroneiage ’ are in Brit.

ebrriections and ad
£9» ‘#23. f‘W3?5‘ imblis

ton

Bel. tion. Letters,

to Woman for

Mus. Addit. MSS.
In 1771., after

edition of the

three volumes,

Wotton’s death, a further
tage’ was issued in
under the editorshi
hnson and»Edward Kimb
n the British Museum h
script notes by’Fl'8.l1clB Hargra
arrangement of each editi

on is chronological.
Wotton died at Point

Pleasant, Surrey, on

[Nichols’s Lit. An
602. v. 48, 49n.;
Dunton’s Life and Errors
bone’s Dict. Engl. Lit.
art. Connms. An'rnoa.]

WOTTON, 'VVIL
second son of
cumbent of Wrentham,
that parish on 13 Aug
after seven years at th
terbury, lived in

ecd. i. 62, iii. 440, 441 mt.
Mag. 1766, p. 199;
, 1818, i. 210; Alli-
; Wotton’s Baronetages;

LIAM (1666-
Henry Wotton, in-
Suffolk, was born in

. 1666. His father, ‘

e free school at Can-

the household of Meric '

and was by him trained in
Casaubon’s method seems
to Henry Wotton the ad-
rying from the beginning to in-
en in their studies, and his ‘Es-
say on the Education of Child

lished osthumously in I7 53.

Wil am could read a psalm when aged
nd six weeks, and from that date
laboured at his education.
in big books such as Buck’s

One day a friend called

ng with him Bucer’s

to have suggested

ren’ was pub-

on his father, brin
‘Commentary on t
looked into the book a
the Latin words, and t
know that language.
the names of thin
e to read the gospel o
Vulgate. After two months at St. .Tohn’s
spel in Latin his father showed him the
k Testament, and b
he could read St. .1’
Two months later be

rid tried to spell out
hus became eager to
ked into it by

five years of a
ohns Gospel throng .
began Hebrew, and soon

W0tt0f1 977 Wotton

read the first psalm. Every day he then read Woodward’s Account of the Deluge; ’ these
English at erg t, Latin at ten, Greek at two, were followed in 1698 by ‘An Answer to a
an Hebrew at four. He gradually acquired late Pamphlet.’ He paid much attention
a. nsaffulrlal ercepittion of gramm‘ . At five and to medals, and in 1701 wrote a ‘History of
ah e gan‘ omer and Virgil andb six R fr in th D th f=A t ' P' to
he had read the whole ‘Batrachoiriyomacihia,’ thbmdbatli of Seeveerlis Alexldncilbliitliintifiiiled
the golden verses of Pythagoras, and the first for the Duke of Grafton, of which it is said
thréeeoecliogues ofHVir il, afnd some Terence that Leibnitiplpraised it to George II.
an or erius. e t on or the first time Me nt' tt ' d f r e t d
learnetd the declensions, and soon after the was iii ldhllegiviin cillidliiiihg oIi'rLlhiI11dri1ll’-8y!ii-
rest 0 grammar. On 24 May 1672 John Rhos ' D b’ h h‘ b ch 1 i to
Ombler, fellow of Corpus Christi Collelgle, Daniel1nFin€:l1,l§edoriliI,eaidmd]feNoti;i)ngrliia.m,
1(;/’a.;11l)11'l((Jlg‘:,(()§?&il;‘lal'1t1_ed hém aligd cergiffidlto is aénd liplittlle lagpr rectolr of llléf (igdlfton Iii ililesi
nweg in ree an erew. l1ClJ.'l amsi. euse
llshiliphsikipporli on 1% :pt. I672 tfstified that ‘ A Letger to Eii:ebia,’1a.n attack oii Toland,
ecou trans ate e rew Gree and Latin and ' 1705 ‘D f ’ f h' ‘Re-
into English; and on 20 ’July  the same fleCtli)l11].B.’ Bighop l331£i1I-lr(i:t iireseliitgdvhim on
year Sir Thomas Browne the ph sician certi- 18 Nov. 1705 to the prebend of Grantham
fied that he read a. stanza in enser very South in Salisbury Cathedral, which he held
distinctly,also someverses of the rst eclogue till his death, and Archbishop Tenison in
of Virgil, some verses of Homer, and of the 1707 conferred upon him the degree of D.D.
Carm1inahAurea, fand the first verse of the He ublished in 1706 a visitation sermon,
fourt c apter 0 Genesis in Hebrew and ‘A efen e of th R’ ht f th Ch ist'
construed all accurately. ’ Church,’ which attiickdd Tinllal aiid rebeiiilid
He was admitted at Catharine Hall, Can:i- much applause. He was constantly at work,
bridge, in April 1676, and John Eachard and published in 1708 ‘A Short View of
[q.v. , the master, recorded in the register Hickes’s “ Thesaurus,” ’ in 1711 ‘ The Rights
that e was less than ten years of age and of the Christian Church Adjusted,’ and
‘nec Hammondo nec Grotio secundus,’ in ‘The Case of Convocation Considered.’ He
reading which statement it must, however, was in embarrassed circumstances in 1714
be remembered that Eachard had a vein of and retired into Wales, where he wrote
ironical humour which made Swift come to a treatise ‘De Confusions Linguarum Baby-
Egsltdllllm. ggmesb gilllport  v.], maspertof lfinica ’b€p1}11bgs_he<§ ppgthumouply, l730,t{5tvlo€i
ag e ene scri e lSme1‘l'S111SOme a in e pu is e in we vo umes eni e
verses‘In Gulielmum Wottonum.’ He gra- ‘ Miscellaneous Discourses relating to the
duated B.A. in 1679. In 1680 Gilbert Bur- Traditions and Usages of the Scribes and
not invited him to London and introduced Pharisees.’ The work is in four parts, of
him to Bishop William Lloyd (1627-1717) which the first two are on Misna the third on
[q. v.], who took him in 1681 to St. Asaph, Shema, ph lacteries, and gateb and door-
and employed him to arrange his library. osts, the ourth on the observance of one
Dr. Francis Turner (afterwards bishop of Ely) ay in seven. He urges the clergy whenever
- q. v.] gtéli h§)mda fellogvfihip at St. John's possible to lea1'nfHebrow and the history of
. ollege am ri ge an e graduated M.A. swish customs rom learned Jews. Simon
in 1683: and B.D. iii 1691. He was elected Ockley [_;<i1.v.:k the historian of the Saracens,
F.R.S. on 1 Feb. 1687. _ _ common edt ebook in aletter to the author,
In 11694 \Vott:pi11up&1bl1s£ed ‘Rellections andlit has oftenllieen i1io%ediin‘lp)ter theolo-
11 on ncient an o ern earning a con- gica writings. e u is e a escription
tiiibution on the side of the modem; to the of the Cathedral of Iandafl‘ ' in 1719.
controversy between Sir William Temple Wotton dili ently studied Welsh, and on
and Monsieur Perrault. Unlike most con- his return to London preached a sermon in
troversial writings it is chiefly devoted to the Welsh, dedicated to the stewards of the So-
clear statement of facts, and ma still be read ciety of Ancient Britons, on 1 March 17 22,
as the best summary of the 'scoveries in which was ublished @1723. He also made

nature and physical science u to its date. A considerab eprogressi an edition with trans-
-second edition ap eared in 1 97. Swift, on lation of the laws of ywel Dda, ublished
the other side of t e controversy, attacks him after his death as ‘Leges Wallicse in 1730,
in the ‘Battle of the Books.’ In 1695 Wotton fol. He was probably encouraged in Celtic
published in the ‘Philoso hical Transac- studies at Catharine Hall, which has from
tions’ an abstract of Soil a’s treatise on the time of Nehemias Donellan .v.] to that
petrifaction, and in 1697 a vindication of of George Elwes Corrie [(1. v. , and even
that abstract and ‘An Examination of Dr. later, produced a series of students of Celtic


     
     

966 Wotton Wotton 967 Wotton

‘nude. V Thisdid Chfbfl-3v.3P°d!1111B'.' B"*°°"3 B"°‘""’ G°“°‘i' Casaubon, and left owin his host much
zggitootfice  -4-3 F°1",°!°‘,’” P?P°";. C“m,:n°3_s§°',),'  money, which Casaubongrecovered with
 ' ' I 33»t3i..9’“?‘1¥¥""“.H“_"'S‘,’ ,gW rim (eeggml diificulty after inconvenient delay (PATTI-
 . l99.naation.:.,11e, ,“7c‘l?‘°°‘1":”'W°‘.l'B.l°‘;8.f g;sBac(lieIoi-sg 1899 son, Casaubon, pp. 4d—6)._ Subsequently
 Chfirgibllil x:°:;)fi']-3 v'm°'u. gm“ respecting the Wotton Wotton spent some time in France. He

4  0, 0

     
  
   
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
   
  

at Venice, where he occupied himself in

'terary work. From Venice he passed to Flo-
rence, where he obtained an introduction to
the court of Ferdinand, the great duke of
Tuscany. In 1602 the duke’s ministers in-

 

 
  

. . . ' _  429, A, h . was ambitions of diplomatic employment terce ted letters disclosing a design against

_ twins, Court and ,f§;§;1{~,)gng:§§°?g:n§;itin§:§)ilnurkss sludge and while on the continent he seems to have; the life of James, the Scottish king. At the

8),; .Ha.i-etired to and G E_ g[,,k,,y,,,]', 1399,-ages ; author-ities forwarded foreign news to Robert Devereux, suggestion of his secretary Vietta, the duke

C ha,(1ied—earlyin cited i}, t,xt_]‘ A. F. 1?. second earl of Essex, who appreciated his sent Wotton to warn James of the conspi-

— pas ffl1{)1'_t_9‘£If was taken _ services. During 1594 he wrote abroad his racy entrusting him not merely‘ with letters

. .(3Ihar1ea1I,ml.,ui. no. 92 . WOTTON, SIB HENRY (1668 1639), '

_ _ b . 1568 E longest and most important prose work, ‘ The to the king’ but with ‘such Italian anti-

‘first, on 1 Sept. 1575; ‘hP1°m"“st and P°°t’ was. fimf 1% Ma’ State of Christendom,’ an outspoken survey dotes against poison as the Scots till then

Sir~+'WiHiam Piickering, f:°a111g:1"11’n ,H5lIl§¢ mt the 83:?” ogranellégn 33. of current politics, displaying both informa- had been strangers to.’ Travelling as an
r e, in en .

 1,og1;'.ea.,¢,1;, »May1592, and was buried in

 
  
   

_ 51 d tionand insight; it remained unpublished till Italian under the assumed name of Octavio

 ' Mdherbe clil11'¢11 3 and secondly, S11‘ Edward VVOW111 (1“}1V89t‘t15 ( 1657, eighteen years after its authors death. Baldi, Wotton reached Sweden, whence he

Margaret, daughter.of P1111111» third b‘“'°11 folmth son of Thofmfiia f ghegig second mar: At the opening of the work he meditates the crossed to Scot1_a.n'd and was received by

, otton, who survived until 1652 (see 1131113 0111 9°11 0 13 ah fs. W..H. possibility of securing a safe return home Kinglames atStirling. After threemonths

 lutha Committee for C'0mp0uml- 11989 W11 Eleanorsfdfiug tslfi’ rt; 0f1K:‘: by ‘murdering some notable traitor to his stay in Scotland he returned to Florence,
ing,.:i); 23 ,;. -Addit. .MS. 5494, f. 197 ; and Finch; 111111 W1‘1°W ° 0 er ° ’ prince and country, but he thought better of

  
  

and was there at the time of Queen Eliza-
beth’s death.

Wotton at once returned to England and

, -- .  ’ 315 Ed ard Wotton, first baron Wotton [q. y.],

'i§0l’ii1’8)J01“’#(‘,It",,'o:,1l}',,,£:30?.:s:,3,8e81’, 17$; %51-‘:1; wjfé waswhis eldest half-brother. f Aftelpreceiiaing

- - . . - ' er
0,113,’ 5 son Thomas ands, dang tar Philippa, some instruction at home rom is mo

the plan owing to ‘ the great difficulty to re-
main unpunished ’ and to ‘ the continual ter-

. ror that such an offence mi ht breed into his was accorded a kindl rece tion b the new
who married sir Edmund Bacon, Thomas and 8- t11t°1': H911’? W” f?e’lt:’°er71:)‘:::§g:5 conscience.’ Again in England in 1595, he sovereign, James I. He recleived the honour
succeededassecond baron,but, being of weak 8011001; and at ‘?119m;1€l‘:Te‘;v Sgifie eP Oxford was admittedastudent to the Middle Temple, of knighthood and a choice of posts as am-
health 61168» 0511110110: 1300]‘ 11tt1°_ll’*1’l‘ 111P°h‘ 8'5 8'. c‘;n:.n°n;1; 5 June 1584 gT’w0 year; but he never was called to the bar. To- bassador at the cpurts of Spain, Fraiice, 05
tics. He died, aged 43, on 2Apri 1630, and matrlcll 11 ugg d t ,8-Cone 6 and wards the close of the year he became one Venice. Wotton s means were small , ap
wwmdinBousht°nMalherbechmlvhe ‘“i‘.‘?f":.‘”1%.§3:‘:...‘:i.3:‘:°‘:i....   are 2“:  h‘ "‘i?“'f“""“"“""l."”’:i."“"”""i‘£““f‘%{’
Widow was in F_‘ebruary1_63.2-3 fined 5901. w is fled ‘Taicredo , which was aPP&_ ‘Y egg er 09 d e_wasd u y in is mas; i e deastongrqus 10604.‘. e Hfireclal. If ehe
by the court of high commission forremoving 8: Pg)’ 01; sad on Tags”: recently Published . finds con eililce, any visite the margpayellq on ofn 11111 H111) y h . Allsb p -flap tow
the fontin the church to_make room for her fgl Y lemme Libemm, WOtt0n,s efibrtis f a efphat ft e ear sEi1i_ist:nce t0.Wl11 V13 (son 0 a a - roitl e111‘), ir er ps or 031
husbandis tomb “id for mscrlbmg on It a 1 lfmssacience also attracted him and 118 Clllen S dpd olliqueleilfl fillzdl llth (H1811  q"ll.J, Wldnd lvlvlc lm' its dselil'e My, han
bad ePit”‘Ph’smtmg timt he died a Romzlll '08 l 'd hen in his twentieth yeai to have omlim 1E9 epl at 6 lflssl) n E?‘ l '1 '“m116O7a ef  tm] Jodnz? Em zed ap-
catholic (Court and T zmes of Charles I, ii. is sail _WL En three lectures “ de owlon cem er 5 he was sent by ssex to Paris‘ aim in (c. 52 ea an uerzes,  ser.
227. j_,_-‘U-_. Work’ .7_ 311)_ He mm-med, on rea _in a1 _ h f th “Ox; to warn EssexsPortuguese protégé, Antonio vii. 281). His friend Donne sent im a.
6.1’ 11,110 16d8 Mar (1590-1658), daughter of W1191‘€111 119 d¢_13°11bed t 9 “mi f 9 lino ; Perez, of the treachery of his English atten- I letter in verse on his departiire (DONNE,
Si1‘A1'th111"1"111'°° 111°1't°“v ajndhild issue four and the curlXl;s0:(}::.%0S3l; fie yt;gr:t::,),’,evs dant Aleyn. Aleyn returned with.Wotton Poems, ed. _Chambersl, ii. 7-91, 41-2; cf.
dau hters: Catherine, who inherited Bough— (WALT0N2- , _ h i) P a friendshi and was arrested (BIRoii,_Queen Elizabeth, 1. WALTON, Lgfe, ed. Bu len, p_. 1 9). _ '
ton alherbe and married, first, Henry, lord five years 391110115)’: 9 “Ea”, h 19 346). Essex, who made it his object to col- Wotton was engaged in diplomatic duties
Stanho e b whom she was motherof Philip Wlth -101111 D011119 [‘l- “,1: Wm“ was °'.1 -7 lect foreign intelligence from all parts of at Venice for nearly twenty years, but he did
St h pe’ ezcond earl of Chesterfield [q.v.]; terminated by the latter” de“.th.' Albenco Europe, entrusted Wotton in 1596 with the i not hold oflice continuously. His first term

an rllp ‘John Pol ander A Kirkhoven see Gentili [q. V-ii; P1‘0f955°1' °f ‘flvll law’ 915,0 department dealing with the affairs of covered eight years, 1604 to 1612 ; his
l'§imnH0yV;EN CAII§EmNE]- and, thirgly, became W’11‘111 Y attached t°_ mm‘. Wotton 5 Transylvania, Poland, Italy, and Germany second four years, 1616 to 1619, and his third
.D&:i1:1O,Ne’m[q_v_ ; Hestér (d_1549),Wpo father died in 16]817,(l1ea(xii$r£i;fl1Ii1e:11‘:g: (z'b._ ii. 243), Although Wotton was an four years, 1621 to 1624. . .
w third wife of aptist Noel, third vis- garly annuity of a un re P active correspondent, his Judgment and During VVottonsfirst period he was cliieiiy

as t 011111 de‘1[‘l- V-1‘ M11-1‘B'*11‘etp W110111111‘ Plicated for the degree °f B'A' °n 8 '{“n° fidelity to his master were questioned by a occupied in supporting the republic in its
csndnsl Jollh Tufton- rind Anne, who mar. 1588, and then left the country 1'01‘ B 9118 fellow secretary, Anthony Bacon q. v.], and lon resistance to the authority of the pope.
tie 'rEd d H le,s father of Sir Edward tour on the continent Of_ Europe, W111011 continual bickerings between V otton and By iis exertions, too, many English soldiers
med S“ ‘ ulwar 1afTenterden[ v] seems to have occupied him nearly sev911 Bacon disturbed the harmony of Essex’s who had been brought over to serve the
Hales’mt M ear 0 qn ' years. . . household. While in London in Essex’s Venetian republic against the Turks were

[cap state papers, Dom. 1580-1626; Iaans- He first proceeded 17° the unwerslty °f employment,Wotton made the acquaintance relieved from extreme poverty and sent back
downe MSS. xlv. 6, l. 87. 1111- 54,lxxix. 19. 0X1- Altdorf,Where he met Edward, l01_'d _Z°“°h° of many men of letters, to whom probably to England. He made the acquaintance of
37; Addit. M83. 20770 f. 23, 34176 ff. 37-43. 49: [q,v.], aregular correspondent of his in later his friend Donne introduced him‘ As soon Paolo Sarpi’ and caused ,, portrait to. be
‘50 (c01‘1'°9P- With 311' Wmlflm T"-75d°")5 Ash‘ years. From A1tdoi'fWotton passed to Lina, as Essex fell out of favour with his sove— painted of him, which he sent to Dr. Collins,
111019 M53 333 f- 71' 362.‘ 4”’ 3132 -f' 3.‘ WhefBl18W1tfl95S3d5°1113°" ‘iflmems °“”§ reign, Wotton hastily left England on a provost of Kings College, Cambridge (BU_R-
Collins’s Lettersaiid_Memoria1s, vol. 11;; Bu-chs out by Kepler. He also visited Ingolsta t second visit to Italy. Unlike his fellow NET,L,-f-eqf-Bede”’p_194; Notewnd Quene,’
Mam. of Elizabeth. 1- 157? W"1“’°°d*'.M°m°' and Vienna, and earl in 1592 pushed on to secretary, Henry Cufl,‘e’ he seems to have 2nd gen vi 3504), and he showed “ten.
14819’  i15ll3;2-Vgrtlytlwl g?lrt5'mC(ia.l TlHnsl.:fiel)(l’ R°m°2 Whem he “B” lntrzalced lilo Cardngfiis been in no way involved in Essex’s futile tion to James Howell, Thpnéas Ooryatce, agd
"-71111199 - - ' 1 ' ' T’ ' ‘ mine al1dA 911- 91'“ ewmm ' ' ' not free from a other En lish travellers c. ORYATE, ru 1.-
MSSJ Cal'Buwbuch Mssiflm-M88’  5:111‘: 118 d1V1ded 31110118 N*1P1e9v Genoa’ Eiiglliblilbaifybfblbbmtlicibaf and, so long as ties, 1776? ii. 7). Donn(e, writing in 1607 ,
egg ‘$3,223,. (firm: Venice, and Florence, he arrived at Geneva Queen Elizabeth lived, England was complained that Wotton. ‘um... «I... M.

M. _, _ ., . . , . .

den’: Annals and Britannia, ed. Gough; Baker-’s on 22 June 1593; he lodged with the scholar Jr: closed to him W“ ,,,,,,M... 4»-


 

 'WbttGfl’

   

I ‘ 333956 ore,a»mer-
 ,-in 1 him5v:to.'inscribe his name in
his album; Wotton complied by writing the
Gflitfinco tns. est -svir bonus peregre
 Vmentiendum Reipublics causa,’
twhioh he would have been content should
have been thus englished: ‘An ambassador
is an honest msn,xsent to lie abroadfor the
good of   (Wsmox). Scioppius,
In noticing this episode, charged James I
inhis rinted diatribe with sendin a con-
fessed ' r to re resent him abro (Ecolo-
siasticus, cap. iv. V
About the same date as Scio ius’s attack
on James I was published (1611), Wotton
obtained leave to revisit England. He de-
sired a change of employment. He had al-
ready received a grant of the second vacanc
amon the six clerks 18 March 1610-11;
Cal. tats Papers, 161 -18, p. 17). While
at home at leisure in the following autumn,
he paid much court to Prince Henry and to
the Princess Elizabeth ; the princess inspired
him with an enthusiastic esteem, and he cele-
brated her charms in beautiful verse. Early
in 1612 he went to France on diplomatic
business, and wrote to Donne from Amiens.
On Lord Salisbury’s death on 24 May 1612
he was a candidate for the vacant ost of
secretary to the king. The queen and rince
Henry encouraged his pretensions ; but Wot-
ton had at court many enemies who doubted
his sincerity. Chamberlain, who usually
called him in his correspondence ‘ Signor Fa-
britio,’ declared in October 1612 ‘my good
old friend Fabritio will never leave his old
trade of being fabler, or, as the devil is, father
of lies.’ .
Finally, Wotton’s chances of prefer-ment
were mined by the king’s discovery of the
- contemptuous definition of an ambassador’s
function which was assigned him in Sciop-
pius’s book. James invited explanations of
theaindiscreet jest. Wotton told the king
that the, afihir was ‘ a merriment,’ but he was
warned to, takpfiistr-,7I3(£)erio8sl ‘ Nppnor-8,
Pwogr, usesiii 1 ; a. ate_.apera
Lou-..1s, gcn164,.l.57’,v162),.snd be doomed

 
 
   
   
  

 
  
   
  
  
 

 
 
 

A _  rudsnt to’ "1-spare two is ' 1 ‘es. On ~
ficigvs. P to the Eiixogl 8'

teiywsddressod g, is not ex-

‘ 1 I  butj§l'ames'admitted that it ‘ sufiiciently

eomsnutedifiar a greater ofi’ence.’ The other

” vinflbatin, was inscribed to Marcus Walser, a
‘ ‘burgomagter of Augsburg and

atron of
Soloppius. it was dated from Lon on 1612,

g, and 13  to have besnvpublished then, al-
- though it is now only accessible in the ‘ Re-

liquiua Wottonianss. It was a vituperative
assault on Scioppius, who retorted in a tract
which was entitled ‘Legatus Latro’ ( ub-
lished under the pseudon m of Oporinus gra-
vinius at’ Ingolstadt in 615 . A burlesque
trial of Scio pins for his inso ence was intro-
duced into t e prologue of Ruggles’s ' Ignora-
mus,’ when that piece was performed in the
kin ’s presence at Cambridge on 6 May 1616.
ugh 1613 Wotton persistently sought
oflicial employment in vain, and his obse-
uious bearing diminished his re utation (of.
means, Progresses, ii. 66; c . Wmwoon,
fllemoira, iii. 468). In the spring of 1614,
still disa pointed of office, he entered the
House 0 Commons as M.P. for Ap leby.
He stoutly supported the kings claim to
lay impositions on merchandise without ap-
peal to parliament. The right belonged, he
argued, to hereditary, although not to elec-
tive, monarchs. In the autumn his subser-
vience was rewarded by an invitation to
resume diplomatic work abroad. In Au-
gust 1614 he was sent to The Hague to
negotiate with the French ambassador in
the Netherlands concerning the inheritance
of the duchies of Juliers, Cleves, and Berg,
which was disputed by Wolfgang William,
count palatine of Neuberg, and the elector
of Brandenburg. By November 1614 the
envoys contrived to bring about an arrange-
ment on paper (the treaty of Xanten) be-
tween the claimants, whereby the disputed
territories were provisionally divided be-
tween them; but the question was not
settled, and the dispute contributed largely
to the outbreak of the thirty years’ war.
Wotton also super-intended the resumption
of negotiations for the amalgamation of the
Dutch and English East India companies,
and for the settlement of disputes with
Holland in regard to the Greenland fisheries;
but the discussion on these points also
roved abortive, and was broken oif in April
1615. In the following autumn Wotton
was at home, but he was sent again to
Venice early next year, and he completed
there a second uneventful term of three years’
service. He mainly occupied himself in pur-
chasing pgctures and works of art for the
king and uckin ham.
‘ Wotton trove led, home slowly through

Wottoh 969

Wotton

Germany in the spring of 1619. At Munich
in May he learned much of the designs of
the continental catholics against En land.
In June he visited at Heilbronn the e ector
palatine, who had been elected king of Bo-

emia, and was attending in the city a con-
gress of the princes of the union. Distressed
by the misfortunes threatenin the electress
palatine and her husband, otton deemed
it the bounden duty of James I to intervene
ofectually in continental politics in the elec-
tor’s behalf. In An st 1619 he had an
audience of James at oodstock, but seems
to have been coldly received. In June 1620
he was ordered to Vienna to sound the em-
peror as to the possibility of stayin the war
which was overwhelmin the new lring and
queen of Bohemia. otton was unable
to reach any common basis for negotiation.
But although the discussions proved in-
effectual the emperor gave Wotton ‘ a jewel
of diamonds as a testimony of his good
opinion of him.’ Wotton at once handed
the gift to ' the Countess of Sabrina,’ an
Italian whose house had been appointed by
the emperor for his accommodation. He
was indisposed, he said, ‘to be the better of
any gift that came from an enemy to his
royal mistress, the Queen of Bohemia.’ Un-
able to render her assistance, he returned to
his post at Venice in 1621, and remained
there until the early months of 1624. Then
he came home for good.

Absolutely penniless, Wotton bent all his
energies anew to the task of obtaining
lucrative employment. In the spring he
published his short and je'unc tract on archi-
tecture, a paraphrase of] Vitruvius, which
Chamberlain described as ‘ well spoken of,
though his own castles have been in the air’
(Cal. State Papers, 10 April 1624). James I
suggested that he might in course of time
succeed Sir Julius Cmsar as master of the
rolls, and gave him the reversion. Happily a
more suitable office was found for him. In
April 1623 Thomas Murra ’s death had va-
cated the rovostship of ton. Many can-
didates-ha entered the field, amon them
Wotton's friend Bacon, the disgrace chan-
cellor, and his nephew, Sir Albertus Morton;
but Wotton’s importunate appeals to secre-
tary Conway were well received, and he was
duly instituted to the provostship on 26 July
1624. He had to borrow mone to provide
for his settlement at Eton. n 1625 he
carried a banneret at James I’s funeral, and
was elected to Charles I’s first arliament as
member for Sandwich. James had granted
him a dispensation to enable him to hold
the Eton provostship without entering holy
orders, but Wotton on his own initiative

received deacon’s orders in 1627, doubtless
with a view to preferment in the church.
He was still embarrassed pecuniarily. The
income of the provostship was no more than

1001. with board, lodging, and allowances. *'

11 one occasion he. was arrested for debt.
In 1627 the king granted him a pension of

2001. In 1628 he laid his continued difiicul- 1

ties before Charles I; he a plied for a small
allowance reserved from the income of the
master of the rolls, the reversion to which
he had resigned, and ‘for the next good
deanery that shall be vacant by death or

remove’ (Reliquiaz, pp. 562 sqq.) In 1630 '3

Wotton’s pension was raised to 5001. in order
to enable him to write a history of England
and to obtain the requisite clerical assis-
tance. In 1637 he applied for the master-
ship of the Savoy, should its present holder
be promoted to the deanery of Durham (ib.
pp. 340-2). _ _ _

Wotton was an amiable dilettante or lite-
rary amateur, with a growin inclination to
idleness in his later years. c did not neg-
lect his educational duties, and wrote, after
long years of cogitation, a suggestive ‘survey
of education ’ or ‘moral architecture,’ as he
termed it, which he dedicated to the king
(it was printed posthumously in his ‘Reli-
quiae,’ e . 1672, pp. 73-99); but he found
the boys more interesting than their work.
‘He was a constant cherisher,’ says VValton,
‘of all those youths in that school, in whom
he found either a constant diligence or a
genius that prompted them to learning ’-—-
‘one or more hopeful youths ’ being ‘ taken
and boarded in his own house.’ The provost
was a familiar figure in the schoolroom, and
he gave practical trial of the dictum that
learning can be taught through the eye as
well as through the ear, ‘ for he caused to be
choicely drawn the pictures of divers of the
most famous Greek and Latin historians,
poets, and orators.’ These he fixed to wooden
pill are in the schoolroom (lower school) which
seem to have been erected about this time.
In the Election Hall he placed a picture of
Venice which still hangs there. ‘ He could
never leave the school,’ adds Walton, ‘ with-
out dropping some choyce Greek or Latin
apophthegme or sentence such as were worthy
of a room in the memory of a ‘growing
scholar’ (of. MAXWELL Lrrn, History of
Eton, 1889, pp. 208 sqq.; CUS1‘, History of
Eton, p. 81).

Wotton’s literary occupations at _Eton led
to little practical result. His history of
England did not progress beyond the accu-
mulation of a few notes on the characters of
William I and Henry VI (ReZz'qm'ce, ppil00—
110). He contemplated a life of artm


 
  
 

V _  by —otton’s‘power-
6&0 but  never worked

, . ' ‘and Wii.iton’sbiogri.i’phy
, alone survives (Gossn,.I4'fsp{ olm
 ‘$16). 'W'otton was one of a few
golese blends ito—'w‘ho‘m Donne gave one of
h mM. seals a few months before he

 Science also e 0 ed some of Wotton’s
~ ‘ ‘ 1 '1 ehadneverceasedto
intereat'himse1f»in»it~sinos he had been an
undergraduate at Oxford. In 1620 he sent
Bacon, who was than working at his ‘ Novum
Organonf an account of experiments wit-
nessed byéhim in Kepler’s house at Linz (Re-
Zfguiw p. 298 sqg In 1622 he had written
from Vhnice to har_les, prince of_ Wales,
promising to communicate such _phil_osophi-
cal experiments as might come in his way;
‘for mere speculations have ever seemed to
in conceit. At Eton he was consulted by
alton on the in dients of certain strong-
smelling oils whic proved seductive  fish
(C'ompleat Angler, reprint of 1653 edit. p.
98), and he discussed with Sir Edmund
Bacon, who married a half-niece, certain dis-
tillin s from ve stables for medical purposes
(Reliqsiaapp. 4-5). He also experimented
on the measurement of small divisions of
time by the descent of drops of water through
a filter (:72. p. 475). _
Wotton maintained to the end a_ highly
valuable correspondence. Among his most
interesting letters was one to the great Fran-
cis Bacon, thanking him for a gift of three
copies of his ‘Organum,’ and ‘promising to
send one of them to Kepler. otton wrote
the epitaph on Bacon s monument at_St.
Michael's Church, St. Albans (AUBREY, Lives,
i. 493 . Milton came over _from Horton to
visit 'm, and on 10 April 1638 Wotton
acknowledgedagift of ‘ Comus ’ from afi-iend,
John Rouse [q. v.], in a very complimentary
letter to the post, which was printed wit
Milton’s ‘Poems ’ in 1643. With this letter
Wotton sent the poet, who was leaving Eng-
landvto travel on the continent, an introduc-
tion to Michael Branthwait, formerly British
,3-en; 1;: Venice, 2 vBranthwait was at the
,niomenti1i Paris, -‘vlttending the young Lord

 
 
  
  
 
   
    
   

    

970

.;WOtt0fi

him in his account of hisvisit to Paris (‘De-
fensiciSe"eunda,'~ Works, vi. 287). _
 Wotton noticed at Eton a lavish hos-
pi_tality,-Van "delighted in the society of his
i men

bfIEton.% Wotton‘ was almost as enthusias-

he designed an account of the sport in antici-
pation of I Walton. Wogtlon andl Walton
t s accustom to an e in com-
Eaeri; dlosfiaiidntahe college at a bgnd in the
h know as ‘Black Pots.’ ‘ When he
wadnbedlyond sldventy ears of age,’ Walton
tells us, ‘he described in a poem a part of
the pleasure of angling as he sat quietly in a
summer’s evening on a bank a-fishing.’ Wal-
ton quotes in his ‘ Compleat Angler ’ Wotton s
verses, which begin:

This day Dame Nature seemed to love ;

they reappear with some verbal changes in
the ‘Reliquiae.’ ' _ _

Once a year Wotton left Eton to viit his

native place, Boughton Hall, and Oxford.
In the summer of 1638 he revisited his old
school at Winchester; but on his return to
Eton he was seized with ‘ feverish distemper,’
which proved incurable. He died at the
beginnin of December 1639, and was buried
in the col ege chapel. He wrote the epitaph
for his grave: ‘Hic jacet hujus sententise
primus author dis utandi pruritus, eccle-
siarum scabies. omen alias qiimre’ (cf.
Religuiw Wotton. 1672, p. 124). The tomb-
stone is now one of the stones leading into
the choir.

In 1637 he made a will, his executors
being his grand—nephews Albert Morton and
Thomas Bargrave, and the supervisors Dean
Isaac Bargrave [ . v.], Nicholas Pey, and
John Harrison, fe ow of Eton (cf. WAL'i:o_N,
who prints the will in full). Several pic-
tures and Sir Nicholas Throckmorton’s papers,
which Sir Nicholas’s son, Sir Arthur,_had
bequeathed to him, were left to the ‘king;
the Throckmorton pa ers are now in the
Public Record Office. 0 the library of Eton
College he left ‘ all manuscripts not_ before
disposed,’ and to each fellow a plain gold
ring, enamelled black, withthe motto ‘Amor
vincit omnia ’ engraved. inside.

There is an interesting half-length por-
trait in oils in the pr0vost’s lodge at Eton;
this is reproduced in Cust’s ‘History'of
Eton.’ Another portrait, by Cornelius
Janssen, is in the picture galle at the
Bodleian Library ; it is repro uced 111

-I; m1‘dgsgme]as hii§:'§&V6}'n"0l.l -Milton ’te-
ly tnehtions Wotton‘! ‘elegant epist to

Led e’s‘ Portraits,’ _vol. iv. 27. _ '
Vigotton had published in his lifetime two

do; chief among whom in his last years —
"  ‘Izaak Walton and John Hales, a fellow

tic an angleras Walton. Angling occupied,
he said, ‘his —id'le'time not idly spent,’ and ‘

i

Wotton

973

Wotton”

:, slendervolumes. The first was‘The Elements

of Architecture, collected by Henry Wotton,

-‘ Kni ht, from the best Authors and Exam-

ples, L_ondon (printed by John BiIl,1624,4to);
a copy in the British Museum Library has the
dedication to Prince Charles inserted in
Wotton’s autograph (0.45, c. 6). The second
v0lume,a anegyrical congratulationinLatin
rose to t e king on his return from Scot-
and in 1633, was entitled ‘ Ad Regem e
Scotia reclucem Henrici Wottonij Plavsvs et
Vote: Londini excusum t pis Augusti Ma-
thu_sii Aiino cioiocxxxiii ’ [71633]. The dedi-
cation was addressed to Prince Charles; is
copy of this rare volume is in the Grenville
Library at the British Museum (cf. KNOW-
LER, Strafihrd Papers, i. 167). The work
reappeared in an English translation in 1649.
Immediately after Wotton’s death there
were issued ‘A Parallell betweene Robert,
late Earle of Essex, and George, late Duke
of Buckingham, written by Sir Henry Wot-
ton, Knight, London, 1641; and ‘A Short
View of the Life and Death of George Vil-
liers, Duke of Buckingham, written by Sir
Henry Wotton, Knight, late Provost of
Eaton Colledge ’ (London, printed for Wil-
liam Sheares, no date; another edition, 1642).
In 1651 there appeared the main collection

Weston,Laud, Izaak Walton, and Dr.]

mund Castle [(1. v.]; and many oems.

In 1661 some further letters, ated 16] i
1638, were issued as ‘Letters of Sir Hei ‘

Wotton to Sir Edmund Bacon,’ Lond i
printed by R. W. for F. T. at the Th j

aggers in Fleet Street, 1661.

A third and enlarged edition of the ‘l
liquise’ (1672) contains a few new histori
essays on Italian to ice, the letters to
Edmund Bacon, an

_A fourth edition appeared in 1685 with
important appendix of Wotton’s letters
Edward, lord Zouche.

Finally there appeared ‘ The State

Discovery of many Secret Passages a
Hidden Mysteries of the Times. Writi
by the Renowned Sr Henry Wotton, If
Ambassadour in Ordinary to the Most Sere
Rcpublique of Venice, and late Provost
Eaton Colledg,’ London, printed for Hu
phrey Moseley, 1657, with portrait (anotl
edit. 1679, fol.)

‘ Letters and Despatches from Sir Her
Wotton to J amesl and his Ministers in t
years 1617-20,’ were printed from the ori;
iialsin the library ofEt01i College for theRc

of Wotton’s works, ‘Reliquiae VVottonianae.’
This was prefaced by an elegy by Abraham
Cowley and by a memoir from the pen of
Izaak Walton, who apparently had a chief
hand in preparing the whole work for the
press. The title ran: ‘_Reliquise Wottonianse,
3.i}Ji1gi§’.1.1f..°.‘€§.3Z ‘Si €335’ Iifm’ P°e“”Zi
r ersona es an
other Incomparable Piecesyof Langiigge and
ikirt. Byl th§' Crulrious I"‘efnsil of tIl£ie Ever
emora e enr tt ‘. 1 t
Provost of Eton Collzdg,’ (Lciildbn (piiinizled
bydT%oiéiras lpllaxey fpg Mairiot, G. Bedel,
an . art Wait - 1; d't‘
dated 1654, 1672,’ 1685., 0Tl1eer  
cludes Lord Clarendon’s ‘ Difference and
Disparity between the Estates and Condi-
tionsof George, Duke of Buckingham, and
Robert, Earl of Essex, in reply to "Wotton’s
“ Parallell.”’ VVotton’s chief contributions
are (besides the ‘ Parallel,’ the ‘ Life of
the Duke of Buckingham,’ the ‘ Elements of
Architecture,’ and an English translation of
the already published Latin ‘ Panegyrick to
King Charls’) the following previously un-
ppbllfifihed essays: ‘A Philosophicall Surveigh
inn.y"‘i2’€?.ii’i'o..°'i<3"‘i’5?i.§§§°1$i”i§§"“"obf’
. on o -
ledg ;' ‘A Meditation u on the XXI1th
Chapter of Genesis, by I . W.;’ letters to
several persons, including James I, Charles I,

Buckingham, Bacon, Lord Keeper Williams,

burghe Club in 1850. The letters dated fl'(
Venice begin on 1 Aug. 1617 ; the last let!
of Wotton, dated 15 Nov. 1620, is address
to Sir Robert N aunton. Many are in Itali
and bear Wotton’s pseudonym of Gregoi
de’ Monti. VVotton’s complete corrcspoii
ence was collected in Mr. Pearsall Smitl
‘Life and Letters ’ (Oxford, 1907, 2 vols.)
Wotton’s poems are the most valuable
his literary remains. Of the twenty-fi
poems included in the ‘ Reliquiae’ only flfte.
are attributed to Wotton. The ten whii
are assigned to other pens include the we:
known poem, beginning ‘The World is
bubble,’ which is assigned in the ‘ Reliquis
to Francis Bacon; in some contemporai
manuscripts it is associated with the 11am
of other writers, including Wotton himse
Wotton’s fully authenticated verse includ
an elegy on the death of his nephew, S
Albertus Morton (November 1625), and
very happy epigrom on Lady Morton's dent
‘An Elegy of a Woman’s Heart’ was fir
printed in Davison’s ‘Poetical Rhapsody
1602. A short hymn upon the birth -
Prince Charles was clearly written in tl
spring of 1630, and the ode to the kingc
Charles I’s return from Scotland in 163.
Two of Wotton’s oems ran]: with the fine:
in the language. hese are entitled respe.
tively ‘ The Character of a Happy Life,’ at
verses ‘ On his Mistress, the Queen of B:

others ‘to and fr 1
several persons,’ mainly on foreign politi ‘

Christendom, or A most Exact and Curi( E


   
 
  
 
  

    
  

nu. . ..2.sé*.*‘n...,swaan.
pg; 10.07.)

M .. ‘ c .. .
A ~ fifilaltonfs Life, vvhieiiuglas
_  . "’W6.ttoniana,.1651, and was
, ‘. '1“, ‘sooil_ects'd‘.Di'ves,’ 1670, and
ail-Whibq ‘editioni:“"'.l'hsnntiqu' ,William

1 1'9I'fl_II}I1!_.piiipKrsdn’ sketch of Woman's ' ,which
' icsiov '3niths~‘iibrsry of Carpni Christi College,

£3111‘;-'4 Oxford, with some of*Wotton's. letters. Bliss
614: seams to have need Fulman’s work in his edition

I s of Wood’: Atheosa Oxon.ii. 544. SeealsoDr.A.

W. Ward‘: Biographical Sketch of the Life of
Wotton, 1899; Donne's Letters, 1661; Goose’:
Life of Donne, 1899; Mn.sson’s Milton; Har-
wood’s Alumni Etonienses, pp. 14 seq. ; Maxwell
L e's History of Eton; Cust’s History of Eton,
1 99; Spedding's Bacon's Life and Letters, iii. 10;

“ti on. 8tate‘Papers, Dom. 1603-1639.] _§, L.

_ hlancebetween
as .1‘éi‘i“3.li¢a‘?.;‘.‘§;‘.‘.-”‘.iP°°”‘“
,w, c 9 . to‘ a

V. , .

  

  
   
  
 
   
   
  
  
  
   

p . in
 (c£~Notes' and Queries, let
ser.5ix. 420).. _‘A‘Dis1o e’ in verse on a
topic ‘of love ‘between ' Henry Wotton
and Mr:Donne«*is given in Donne's ‘ Poems’
(16852; but the m is ascribed to other

as other co lections of the period (cf.
 forms, ed. Chambers, i. 79, 232).

_ edited Wotton’: poems for the Percy
SegW:_;.etym..1843, and the were included in
Hannah's“ Poemsof-Sir -alter Raleigh and
other Courtly Posts,’ 1870, new ed. 1885, pp.

' Sir ntyWottonahou1dbe distin ‘shed
from Henry Wotton, son of Edwar Wot-
ton -[q. v.], and also from Henry Wotton or
Wooton, son of John Wooten of North
Tudenham, and brother of one Wooton of
Tudenham, Norfolk, whose second wife was
Mary or Anne, daughter of Geor e N evill,
lord Bsrgavenny, and widow 0 Thomas
Fieunes,lor’d~Dacre of the South Bnomrmnn,
NorfoIIc,'i. 205). This Henry otton was
siblefor the collection of stories from

I ‘an romanceainterspersed with verse,
Efitledt ‘A‘CourtliAECox'1rtrr‘oversie plf Cupids
containing’ ' ve ‘call istoryes

by throefientlemen and tw‘dlGentlewomen,
translatedout of French by Hen. Wotton,’
London, 1578, 4170. It was dedicated to the
tranelator’e‘—'sister-in-law, the Lady ‘Deere of
t   copies, both’ imperfect, are

' . 1. , ' -"—‘*t_Il'Iia‘*5I:.i.n%if.htI,<Bod1siIIiL1ba'ary,:and

  

WOTTON, NICHOLAS (1497 P-1567),
secretary of state, diplomatist, and dean of
Canterbury and York, was the fourth child
of Sir Robert Wotton of Boughton Malherbe,
Kent, by his wife Anne, dau hter of Sir
Henry Belknap. Sir Edward otton (1489-
l65l) [q. v. was his eldest brother. Nicholas
is often sai to have been born in 1495, but
in his epitaph he is described as ‘fere sep-
tuagenarius. According to Fuller he was
educated at Oxford, where he graduated in
civil and canon law, but no record of his
matriculation or graduation has been found
in the registers or in Wood. Many years
later Wotton referred (Letters and Papers,
xv. 581) to his having lived at Perugia, and
probably he studied at some Italian uni-
versity. During his sta in Italy he was
admitted a brother of t a hospital of St.
Thomas at Rome, and apparently he wit-
nessed the sack of Rome in 1527. He cer-
tainly aduated not only doctor of civil and
canon w, but of divinity as well, and in
1536 he was oflicially described as ‘sacrae
theologies, juris ecclesiastici et civilis pro-
fessor’ (ib. xi. 60). He was ‘ clericus’ before
9 Dec. 1517, when he was presented b his
father to the family living 0 Boughton al-
herbs, and on 6 Sept. 1518 he was presented
by Archbishop Warham to the vicarage of
Sutton Valence. Wotton, however, re-
ferred the legal to the spiritual duties 0 his
order, and having attracted the notice of
Tunstall, bisho of London, was appointed
the bishop’s o cial. In this capacity he
attended the proceedings of the le atine
court which sat in London in June an July
1529 to try the divorce question (Hnannnr,
Henry VIII, 1). 279), and in June 1530 he

VV0lZtCIl 97 3

Wotton‘

was sent to France to assist Edward Fox

q. v.] in procuring a favourable answer from

oreign umversities (Letters and Papers, iv.
6481; Poooox, Records of the Refomsaticn,
i. 659).\ He had ' ed the vicarhge of
Sutton Valence before 20 Ma an on
26 Oct. 1530 was collated by arham to
the living of Ivychurch, Kent. In 1586
he was motor for Anne Boleyn, and sub-
scribed e articles of religion, and in 1537
had a share in com iling the ‘Institution
of a Christian Man’ Letters and Papers, vi.
299, xi. 60, III.  402-3). In 1538 Cran-
mer appointed him his commissary of facul-
ti

es.

On 11 March 1538-9 Wotton was one of
the ambassadors sent to the Duke of Cleves
to negotiate a marriage between Henry VIII
and the duke’s sister Anne, and a. league
with the German protestant princes against
Charles V. On 23 April Cromwell requested
the ambassadors to procure a ortrait of Anne
of Cleves, and on 11 Aug. fo owing Wotton
reported that ‘your Grace’s servant, Hanze
A bein, hath taken th’ efiigies of my ladye
Anne and the ladye Amelye, and hathe ex-
press cl theyr immges verye 1 elye ’ (ib. XIV.
ii. 393. His description of nne’s domestic
virtues was, however, pitched in a minor
key, and he remarked that she could not sing
or play upon any instrument. In July Henry
nominated him archdeacon of Gloucester,
though he was not admitted until 10 Feb.
1589-40, and on 25 Oct. 1539 commissioned
him as sole ambassador to the dukes of
Saxony and Cleves. As a further reward
for his services Henry designed for him in
the same month the bishopric of Hereford,
which Bonner had just vacated by his trans-
lation to London. Wotton, however, had a
rooted aversion to bishoprics; ‘ forthe assion
of God,’ he wrote to his friend Dr. ellasis
on 11 Nov., ‘if it be possible yet, assay as
far as you may to convey this bisho ric from
me,’ signing his letter ‘yours to ' little
power. A d whatsoever you will more to
it, so you add not bishop (ib. x.Iv. ii. 501;
TODD, Deans of Canterbury, 1793, p. 4 . On
this and on subse uent occasions otton
successfully resiste all attempts to make
him a bisho . Meanwhile he accompanied
Anne of Clieves to England in December
1539, and on 27 Jan. 1539-40 was again sent
as ambassador to her brother. reaching Cleves
on 5 Feb. In April he attended the duke to
Ghent, on his negotiations with Charles V
about the duchy of Gueldres, returning to
Cleves in May. In July he had the un-

leasant task of communicating to the duke
em-y’s repudiation of his sister. Naturally
the negotiations» for an alliance-‘-did not

prosper; the Duke of Cleves  himseli
into the arms of Francis I, and on 20 J um
1541 Wotton was '

He had-in his absence been nominated first
dean of Canter
when the monks are replaced by seculai
canons, but he was not installed until 8 Apri
1542. He was also up ointed first arch-
deacon of Gloucester on Sept. 1541, whet
it was erected into a separate see. Subse-
guently, on 7 A . 1544, he was nominated

ean of York, he installed by proxy or
4 Dec. following. e retained with it the
deanery of Canterbury, and on 13 Marcl
1545-6 was collated to the prebend of Os-
baldwick in York Cathedral. But even them

semi-spiritual functions had no attraction: 3

for Wotton, and he soon found relief from
them in further diplomatic service. In spite
of the unfortunate and of his mission t(
Cleves, his ability was recognised by Henry,
and in March 1543 he was sent with Sii
ThomasSeymour afterwardsBaron So 011)
of Sudeley) [q.v. to the court of Char esV’e
sister Mary, regent of the Netherlands.
Their immediate object was to secure thc
exemption of English goods from import
duties in the Netherlands, but the imminence
of war between England and France and
France and the emperor soon led to nego-
tiations for an offensive alliance between
HenryVIII and Charles V, in which Wotton
took considerable part, endeavouring espe-
cially to persuade Charles to include the
Scots in his declaration of hostility (Stat:
Papers, ix. 363-604). On 24 Nov. 1543 hf
was transferred from the regent’s court t(
that of the em eror, and, the terms of the
alliance having een settled, he accompanied
Charles V durin his invasion of France 11
the summer of 544, while Henry besieged
and took Boulogne. His post was diflicult
for it soon became evident that the alliel
were pursuing not a common but so arat(
aims, and at the end of August Char as V
having penetrated as far as Vitry, madt
eace with France, leaving Henry at war
otton saw clearly enough what was going
to happen, but was powerless to prevent i1
(see Cal. State Papers, Spanish, vol. vii
throughout; State Papers, Henry VIII, vol
1:. passim; and FBOUDE, iv. 55 seq.) To in‘
duce Charles to carry out his en agernents
Hertford and Gardiner were in t e autumr
associated with Wotton as special ambas-
sadors to the em eror, but were recalled 11
December. In the following March Page1
joined Wotton in an endeavour to persuads
Charles to renew the war on France, and ii
A ril Wotton accompanied the emperor t<
orms. He was recalled in August, being

on 22 VMarch 1540-l ‘


 
 

 

 he sclmow.

, “duyhig-"5111?
=as- ._

 M’

 
    
  
 
 
 
 
   
  
   
   
  
  
     
   

  i it C ywords nd‘
, A“<‘B”3*"the-:council*_could)lafi'ord tbareciilll
Wotton. He took his leave on 8 Se t., and
re at the council board on 2P1 Oct.,
figflerhafm thelarrest of Somerset and
‘ ’ * g eightegn months Wotton remained in
 Ellfllflndp hiking‘ an_ active share in the pro-
, geedmss ofthe privy council. On 2 April
he was commissioned with Sir Thomas
0hal_on_er the_elder [(1. v.] to proffer England’s
mediation with a view to ending the war
between France and the emperor. The
ninsness-of the council’s desire for peace
is o n to doubt, as the war gave Northumber-
la_n his only chance of supplanting Mary
without Charles V’s interference. On the
failure of the duke’s conspiracy Chaloner
g was recalled as a pronounced reformer, and
p- Wotton was left as resident ambassador in

dfand: mvmm 'Bo_u1ogne 11; France. His chief difliculty consisted in the

~ '1 ‘ _ V . . , . _ niore,or less 0 en support the French king
. E-"ie.h’§owo1i"Z§o§i.i‘§"33°..‘2’l'1';i‘.i‘§‘.i’?i" B"‘2{“°" ”° ‘ ° P'°‘“““‘° “*1” 1”“ “N
2 V . .  about the limits f the u leys, Carews, and Staffords, and to their
- »-P.1°,,md mutm1mcfimimt~i°;!m 3 plots against Queen Mary, but at the same
- with regud to the fonifi M3111 tame their intrigues in France often enabled
thance took advmtca ion?’ Thottontoforewarn the English government.
8»- ierfal troubles, and aeméi .1032 3.?ti“ii’§§§§d1i’§‘§‘i’§E€“'E’§€ '$fa‘§.‘.’i“2E
, ., ‘  it ; and Wotton v - - ’
I  tiifaw‘ take partvigalxrigfig Staffords prcgect in 1557 [see Sru-roan,

. THOMAS an as earl as 1556 d
of hm. th .1 . i _ y reports
‘,th°.P:)°n°‘K“9l; 3:tob°er: French esigns on Calais. He also used his

. htdnnd him,“ ambassador to the influence on behalf of the exiles, such as Sir

Whfizflh 15 Oct. he was sworn one of Gawin Cuew’ his brother-imlaw’ and we"

. . _ cee_de_d in winning over his predecessor Sir
‘ -w3;1";P:.°t:‘:;:i‘v11'e;;9°:% iggllgglémfi William Pickering [q. v.], whose disafl'ecl:ion

:3! lmian of somerset. was especially dangerous, as he posessed the

.. , k f ch ' h ' - -
gtton remained secretary for less than dialfioomatid diiil-)re?pdivi1d1:i1i1ceV.VOlli)in7u.‘ls :.(!i16nl5h5l;

Q’: I  lace on 5 t. 1550 S’
W d moresgglgenial otgcsl 12 Mary declared war on France, and Wotton

» p g , , . _ was recalled resuming his attendance at the
g9':‘!;'f’é31:1hf.9£‘:;‘:;of°C1'h:I11;al{i,ApIr"i1l 1551 in a council board on 2 Aug. He had resigned
 6,, gm miss,“ V“ we amp-aofiergzigilgg gl111eg1§:l1;8"fi5§;Y]phurch_on 218ll\gay 1555, and

, I  w‘ En nib .. b do , e ewas in_sta e treasurer of
 -  his nniitlimusriiihliiiibiezriiginfii Em" Cathed'“1'b“° “"5 “1"° 11° ""“3"°“

_ f _ before March followin .
i: , '”.“hi’a“m‘i’m;fi1[°‘! InvSe tember 1558 otton was once mom

‘ I .~ : _ _ -sent to‘. mice as commissioner with Arundel
 Iufllcient, to deal and Thirlby for drawing up terms of peace,

  
     
 
   
        
 
   

  
    
    
  
 

   

  

     
 
   

  
    

  
      
     
   

            
       
       
   
 
 

  
  

Wotton 915

Wotton

in which England and Spain, France and
Scotland should be included. »Mary died
while the conference was sittin at Cercamp,
and Elizabeth immediate] or ered Wotton
to Brussels to renew with hilip the treaties
existing between {England and Spain. The
peace negotiations were continue there, and
subsequent] , at the congress of Cainbray.
The chief di culty was the English demand
for the restitution of Calais, and Wotton
advocated a continuance of the war rather
than acquiescence in its loss. Philip, how-
ever, was bent on peace, and eventuall on
6 May 1559 Wotton was commissions to
receive the French king's ratification of the
treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis. He was then
to return to England, leaving Sir Nicholas
Throckmorton as resident ambassador in
France.

Four days after Queen Mary's death the
Spanish ambassador, De Feria, had urged
Philip to offer Wotton a pension, as he
would be one of Elizabeth's most influential
councillors and possibly archbishop of Can-
terbury. The archbishopric seems to have
been offered him, but even this temptation
failed to move Wotton from his attitude of
nolo episcqnari. De Feria im lies that there
was some difliculty in persua ing Wotton to
take the oath of allegiance, ‘etcetera,’ but
while Canterbury was vacant Wotton per-
formed, ae he had done in 1553-5, some of
the archiepiscopal functions. His religious
opinions were catholic in tendency, and he
absented himself from convocation in 1562.

Meanwhile in April 1560 he laid before
the queen his views on the policy to be
ado ted with regard to Scotland, and on
25 ay he and Cecil were commissioned
ambassadors to Scotland to arrange terms
with the French envoys for the evacuation
of Scotland b the French, and other nes-
tions raised y the establishment o the
Reformation in Scotland and return of Mary
Queen of Scots. On 5 J uiie conferences were
held at Newcastle, and subsequentl at Ber-
wick and Edinbur h. Cecil comp ained of
havin all the war to do, ‘for Mr. Wotton,
thong very wise, loves uietness.’ On
6 July the treaty of dinburgh was
signed, and Wotton and Cecil returned to
London. Wotton remained in attendance
upon the privy council until March 1564-5,
when he was sent with Montagu and Haddon
to Bruges to represent the grievances of Eng-
lish merchants to the Netherlands govern-
ment, and to negotiate a commercial treaty.
The negotiations dragged on for eighteen
months, and it was not till October 1566
that W'otton returned to London. He died
there on 26 Jan. 1666-7, and was buried in

Canterb Cathedral- a in ficent tom
erected  nephew Thoigdld [see 
WOHON, Sm EDWAB-‘D]i _ is ‘ a in
Dart’s ‘ Canterbury Cathedral '..and in
Has_ted’s ‘Kent ’ (8vo edit. voL  p. i) - the
inscription on it, com osed by his ‘ yew,
hasbeen freguently;printed,\.lastly, an most
ia°°“i’*”°1 '$ii1.“"dii;£.°1 i'ia’97'I“'v°iiI.‘i”.
on in an a a , .
ton’s books and plgers were presented by his
no how and heir to Cecil in 1683.
otton was one of the ablest and most
experienced of Tudor diplomatists; his dex-
tep‘ity,dwarine;s, danld wisdom, constgntly
re erre to int e i omatic corres on once
of the time, were clbmbined with E perfect
self-control, and with a tenacit and courage
in maintaining his country's iyiiterests that
secured him the confidence of four succes-
sive sovereigns. He was no more incon-
sistent than mcidern diplomait-ists iln seiaving
ovemments o o osite o 'tica an re-
'gious views. ep madepno retence_to
theolo ical learning; his clerica profession
was a est a necessity for younger sons
ambitious of political service, and his resolute
refusal of the episcopacy on the ound of
pp}-sonal iinfitness is testimif)_nyhto(l]1ishon_estyi_
is simu taneous tenure o t e eaneries 0
Canterbury and York is unique, but his
ecclesiastical preferments were for the age
comparatively scanty. A master of Latin,
F regiclc1,(I1talian,  German, the hiéinorously
pro es e a me e appoin men as secre-
tary, on thg ground that he could neither
write nor speak En lish.  scholar himself,
Es was a patronf ph lealflllillg itn ptheg, and
uresasoneo ec ie inerocu rein
tlie ‘ De Rebus Albionicis’ (London, 1590,
Bvlp) pf John Tvyryne [q. v.g,_ the Cantprbppy
sc oo master. erses on im are ex an n
the Bodleian Librar (Rawlinson MS. .840,
if. 293, 297, 299). _ e was small and slight
in stature, and his effigy .111 Canterbury
Cathedral represents him with a handsome
bearded face.

[There is a sketch of Wotton’e life in ’l_‘odd’s
Deans of Canterbury, 1793, pp. 1-29, which_is
supplemented in ii. collectioirof notes about him
in Brit. Mus. Add. MS. 20770, but these are
quite superseded by the mass of information
about him contained in the various calendars of
state papers. For his early life and embassy
to Germany, 1640-1, see Brewer and Gn_irdne_r’s
Letters and Papers of Hem-yVIII, vols. iv—xvi. ;
for his embassies, 1543-5, see State Papers.
Henry VIII, vols. viii.x., and Spaiiisli Calendar,
vols. vi. and vii.; for his embassies in France,
1546-9, 1553-7, and l558—9, see State.Papers
Henry VIII, vol. xi., Correspond. Politiqne do
Odet de Selve, Foreign Calendar 1658-60,;


 

 

  .-  sec

   
 

_ _ friend of
fiul.of.tsir. Isaac Newton,
»noreseat‘msnt at the
 hirwife

 ; A »
 , Mns'y,"oned ,aranns(i7oo—1’7ss),
w married Wnia;n.o1ar1ne-(1696-1771)

i . .
*1 Wottoub Essay on the Education of
_ 4?, ,1th;aI£iInadon, 1758. The Cambridge Uni-
!0§'li$J’; .' brary copy” of this work "contains a
 note-eta 1:‘ that the original manu-
script of the essay was given to T. Waller the
, _ . who issued-it, by E. Umfreville. It
was written with a dedication to Charles II in
l973..‘bnt_not printed till 1753. The same
WP)‘ °°nta1ns_carefuJ. notes b Richard Porson.
%'I0!_Ith1y ReV1e_w,l»768; Mon ’s_'Lii'e of Bent-
ey, 1833, vol. 1-; _Le Neve’s Fasti Eccles. Angli-
cams. vol. u.; Nichols’: Literary Illustliptions;

‘ . M.

  
   
   
  
   
     
    
   
    
    
    

  

’»Wotton’s W ks]

« -~»wo'.i'Y, WILLIAM (1731 9-1791 , versi-
fieigwas possibly a native of the Isle o Wight,
an

   

“among his oems is an elegy on his
echoolmastei-',‘who 'ved nearA1ton in Hamp-
shire. He came to London as a clerk or

ihgeinall ems to the news apers. Some

one ‘pub

     
  
  
   
  
  
    

pieceof his composition called ‘ The Spouting-
.o_1iib.” {He himself issued in 1760, under the
pseudonym of "J.Co ywell of Lincoln's Inn,’

 
 

 mn,'and aflsei-fits a pearance he sub-

 

‘ .Ferrers,vwho created for hiabene t a rent-
‘ ; «of 1501. ,:(pi:}i;i":‘nnum on-the ‘family

 

K       1' Wpieces. The

  ‘Shrubs f
W ttestdyio his:‘deyotion~to tlie
    .-s.’~e...evs:.ae-
 ' utgeadl: 1. ‘Campg-

 a~*Poam invpgaiseof Ringing ’ [anon],

4.

 

    

.. n p I
“E I ‘ *1’?€1‘.~i”2;"“M1IAeAs’~Advice addressed to the
I

‘Poets of the? ’ 1761 (of. Monthly Review,
xxv: pp. 4-. 8. _ The Blossoms of
Helicon,’ 1768. 15 contained, with a hymn to
good ‘nature by Dr. Dodd, an ainusin de-

, scription by Wot of White Conduit ouse.

These lines, whic made their first appear-
ance in the ‘Gentleman's Ma ' e for-
1760 (p. 242),a.re noted at lengt inThorn-
buws ‘Old and ew London’ (ii. 280) and
in . roth’s ‘ London Pleasure Gardens’ (pp.
132-3). 4. ‘ The Poetical Calendar,’ a supple-
ment to Dodsley’s collection, 1763; twelve
volumes, one for each month in that year.
They were edited by Woty and Francis
Fawkes £q.v.] 5. ‘Church Lan tom’ a.
poem, n. . [1768 P], in praise of t e chari-
table prgects of the Rev. William Hanbury’
S . v.] . ‘The Female Advocate :’ a oem,
70, 2nd edit. 1771. 7. ‘Poetical orks,’
1770, 2 vols.; dedicated to Washington,
earl Ferrers. 8. ‘The Stage,’ n.d. [1770?)
9. ‘Particular Providencez’ a poetica
essay, 1774. 10. ‘The Estate Orators: a
Town Eclogue’ [anon.], 1774; a satire on
the London auctioneers. 11. ‘Poems on
several Occasions,’ 1780; this contained
reprints of several of his works. 12. ‘ Fugi-
tive and Original Poems,’ 1786, contains
‘The Country Gentleman: a Drama.’
13. ‘Poetical Amusements,’ 1789, dedi-
cated to Robert, earl Ferrers. It contained.
a Latin version of Gray’s elegy; ‘Sunday
Schools: 9. Poetical Dialogue between a
Noblemaii and his Chaplain;’ and ‘ The

writertoa‘ solicitor, and soon began speak- Ambitious Widow: a Comic Entertain-
ing in the debating societies and contribut- ment.'

[Gent Mag. 1791, i. 286, 379 ; Baker’: Biogi-.

M V _ ed clandestinely m 1758, with- Dramatica (1812 edit.), i. 760, ii. 24, 135;
out his consent, in a borrowed name,’a small Notes and Queries, 4th ser. ii. 479, 498 ; Works
of Woty; Nichols’s Leicestershire, in. ii. 917,

1142.] W. P. c.
WOULFE, PETER (1727 9-1803), che-

fiibiume entitled ‘ eS_hrubs of Parnassus,’ mist and mineralogist, was probably of Irish
consisting of the ‘poetical essa s, moral and origin. He first discovered native tin in
..;p9ixiio,’_"whiob he had contri uted to the Cornwall in 1766 (FOURCBOY, Systems ales

Connaissances Ohimiques, vi. 9), was elected

 forgedme years ass rub,-street writer. F.R.S. on 5 Feb. 1767, on the proposal of
A‘. at 1767 he became com anion and ad- Henry
' inlegal matters to ashin on, earl Charles Solander [(1. v.], Matthew Mat ,and
John Bevis, and was admitted on 12 arch
1767. On 18 Nov. of the same year he con-

Baker [q.v.], John Ellis, Daniel

, . . In] intervals of tributed a paper on ‘Experiments on the
 Distillation of Acids, Volatile Alka.l'iee,' 8:0.

 

 

Woulfe 979

‘ Woulfe

to the ‘Philoso hical Transactions’ (1767,
p. 617), in whic he describes an ap aratus
or the passing of gases thro h liquids,
which has since borne the name 0 ‘ Woulfe’s
bottle.’ Woulfe’s innovation consisted in
the introduction of water into a form of con-
denser previously used, and already figured
and described in Glauber’s work on ‘Philo-
sophical Furnaces’ (GLAUBEB, Works,transl.
by Packe, 1689, plate 1, pp.  But this
simple invention formed ‘ almost an era in
chemical discovery’ (Anmv), no convenient
method being known previously for obtain-
ing concentrated solutions of soluble gases,
or forpur' ' insoluble gases from soluble
impurities. e apparatus was improved
by the introduction of a ‘safety-tube’ by
Jean Joseph Welter. Woulfe a plied his
apparatus to the production of hydrochloric
other by passing gaseous hydrochloric acid
into alcohol. In 1768 the Royal Society
awarded him the Copley medal. In 1771
Woulfe investigated the composition and
preparation of ‘mosaic gold’ (stannic sul-
phide), and showed that on treating indigo,
cochineal, and other colouring matters with
strong nitric acid, a yellow dye ( icric acid)
may be obtained (Phil. Trans. 17;], pp. 114,
127). He was later nominated by the pre-
sident and council ‘ to prosecute discoveries
in natural history, pursuant to the will of
Henr Baker,’ and in 1776 (ib. p. 605) pub-
lishe an account of ‘ Experiments made . . .
to ascertain the nature of some mineral sub-
stances,’ in which he attempted to analyse
hornsilver, but found that it contained not
only ‘acid of salt,’ but also ‘acid of vitriol.’
The paper was published separately in 1777,
translated into German, and published at
Leipzig in 1778 (GMELIN, Gesch. der Chemie,
iii. 679). It was followed by another paper
on similar subjects in 177 9 (Phil. Tram.)
Woulfe generally spent his winters in
London, and his summers in Paris, and from
1784 most of his publications seem to have
appeared in Roziers ‘ Journal do Physique’
(1784 xxv. 352, 1787 xxxi. 362, 1788 xxxii.
370, 374, 1789 xxxiv. 99). They are of less
importance than those mentioned above.
He also contributed to the English edi-
tion of Crell’s ‘Chemical Journal’ (Gmelin ).
Woulfe was a firm believer in alchemy. He
thou ht that his ‘ new method of distillation
bid air to discover the mercurial and co-
louring earths of Beecher’ (Phil. Trans.
17 67, p. 534) ; he searched long for the elixir,
and ‘attributed his failure to want of due
preparation by pious and charitable acts’
(Bmmnn). He was altogether erratic, or,
according to Scherer. mad at the end of his
life; but Scherer only adduces as evidences

of his madness his adherence to the doctrines’
of the prophet Richard Brothers [q.v.Q, and
his strange alchemical ideas. He break sated
as fopr in tlhe morning, andlguefizz gained
amitance yaseoretsi to 'room
crowded with chemical\ aggiratus, in Ba:
nard’s Inn (No. 2, second floor). His remedy
for illness was a 'ourney b mail-coach to
Edinbur hand back; but in 1803 the remedy
provedd atalé Like Henry Cavendish, 1.13
insists on yin without medical care an
alone. Charles atchett [q. v.],Woulfe’s
neighbour and friend, presented an athanor
furnace formerly belonging to Woulfe to
the Royal Institution.

[Besides the sources quoted and information
from Professor James Dewar, F.R.S., the follow-
ing authorities have been used: Record of the
Royal Soc. p. 214; Archives of the Royal Soc.;
Poggendorfl's Biograpbisch-literarisches Hand-
wiirterbuch; A. N. Scherer’s Allgemeines Jour-
nal fiir Chemie, v. 128); Thomson’s Hist. of
the Royal Soc.; Fourcroy’s Systems des Con-
naissances dhimiques, an ix.v. 283, vi.9,pas.sim;
Brande’s Manual of Chemistry, 1848, i. p. xvii;
Gent. Mag. 1868, i. 187 (art. by John Timbs);
Kopp's Gresch. der Chemie, passim ; Gmelin’s
Gresch. der Chemie, iii. 623-626, passim; Aikin’s
Diet. of Chemistry, 1807, ii. 641 ; Chaptal’s
Chemistry, transl. Nicholson, 1860, i. 17; Glau-
ber’s Works, ti-ansl. Packe, 1689, plate 1, pp.
2-3; Priestley's Experiments [on] Natural Phi-
losophy, 1786, iii. 155, mentions Woulfe as an
acquaintance. Nicholson's Journal, 1803, iv.6 ;
Roscoe and Schoi-1emmer’s Chemistry, vol. iii. pt.
i. p. 342; Foster'sGray’s Inn Admission Register
gives the entry 1 Feb. 1771, ‘Peter Wonlfe of
West End, Middlesex, gent.] P. J. H.

WOULFE, STEPHEN (1787-1840),
Irish judge, born in 1787, was the second
son of Stephen Woulfe of Tiermaclane,Ennis,
co. Clare, who married Honora, daughter of
Michael McNamara of Dublin, sister of Ad-
miral James McNamara, and of Colonel John
McNamara of Llangoed Castle, co. Brecon.
The Woulfes of Tiermaclane settled in he-
land at Limerick at least as far back as the
beginning of the fifteenth century, and had
remained staunch Roman catholics. Stephen
was educated at Stonyhufst, where Richard
Lalor Sheil, Nicholas Ball, and Sir Thomas
Wyse were his companions. With them he
was one of the earliest Roman catholic
students to gain admission to Trinity College,
Dublin. He was called to the Irish bar in
Trinity term l8l4. He was a good advo-
cate and an effective speaker. He took from
an early period an active part in Irish poli-
tics, engaging in agitation for Roman ca-
tholic emancipation. He soon signalised
himself by ‘ withstanding the tyranny of


§2. Henry Wotton’s "Essay on the Education of Children". XV. Education. Vol. 9. FI‘Ol... Page 1 of 2

Register your

future

 

      

Great  Oflllfie Sean“ ‘Cambridge Hisiory  r 

Home Srslrjuects  Titiesl uuuu "Authors gfintydopedlal Bictlonary §Thesaurus§ Quntationsé Engftsh Usage
Reference > Cambridqe History > From Steele and Addison to Pope and Swift > Education > Henry
Wotton’s Essay on the Education of Children

,, The Sevente_enth_Centurgy Proposed supersession of Oxford and Cambridqe under the >
‘ Curriculum Commonwealth: Milton; Harrinqton; Hobbes

CONTENTS - VOLUME CONTENTS - INDEX OF ALL CHAPTERS ° BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD

The Cambridge History of English and American Literature in 18 Volumes (1907-21).
Volume IX. From Steele and Addison to Pope and Swift.

XvfEducafi0n.

§ 2. Henry Wotton’s Emay on The Education 0fClzildren.

Of the trivium, “grammar” meant Latin literature and, more particularly, its necessary 3
preliminary, Latin grammar, the special business of schools. Indeed, the seventeenth
century school course may be said to have consisted of Latin, supplemented by Greek; a
few schools added Hebrew, fewer still yet another eastern tongue. The underlying theory
is thus enunciated by Henry Wotton (An Essay on the Education of Children, 1672):
“Observe therefore what faculties are strongest in the child and employ and cherish them;
now herein it is agreed that memory and what logicians call simplex apprehensio are
strongest of all.” He infers that a child’s instruction should begin with Latin, passing to
Greek and Hebrew, since in these three languages are to be found “both the fountain of
learning as well philology as philosophy and the principal streams and rivers thereof.”
Wotton’s essay is an account of the method which he employed in teaching his son,
William (Bentley’s comrade in A Tale of a Tub), a child who learned to read before he
was four years old, began Latin without book at that age, and at five had already begun
Greek and Hebrew. It is not surprising, therefore, that William Wotton took his B.A.
degree when thirteen (1679); the surprising thing is that he lived to become the able,
judicious and modest collaborator of Bentley in the controversy of ancients and modems.
But his father had always refrained from overburdening the child, and the reformer’s note
is not entirely absent from his severely classical teaching, for the boy read English daily;
“the more gracefully he read English, the more delightfully he read the other languages.”

The official round of study and of exercises for degrees remained at both universities 4

what they had been in the later middle ages; this fact reacted upon schools supposed

chiefly to prepare for the universities. The medieval conception of the degree was that of

a licence to teach; the exercises which led to it were, in effect, trial lessons in disputation

or declamation given by novices before other novices and fully accredited teachers, the
topics being selected from the Aristotelian metaphysics and natural philosophy, school
divinity, or trite literary themes susceptible of rhetorical handling. At Oxford, the Laudian
statutes of 1636 had stereotyped these exercises, and had given them an appearance of life
which they retained to the close of the commonwealth. Speaking of that period, Anthony

http://www.bartleby.com/219/l502.html 06/09/01


§2. Henry Wotton’s "Essay on the Education of Children". XV. Education. Vol. 9. Fro]... Page 2 of 2

a Wood says, “We had then very good exercises in all matters performed in the schools;
philosophy disputations in Lent time, frequent in the Greek tongue; coursing very much,
ending alwaies in blows.” 2 The training manifested itself in much of the controversial
divinity of the time; at the Savoy conference (1661), both sides seemed to enjoy wit
combats greatly, whole pages of Reliquiae Baxterianae being filled with arguments and
counter—arguments stated syllogistically. But life and reality went out of these medieval
exercises at the restoration, and, though they remained part of the apparatus of both
universities, they were regarded throughout the eighteenth century as forms more or less
empty, to be gone through perfunctorily, mocked or ignored as the fashion of the moment
prompted.

During the seventeenth century and long afterwards, neither school nor university, as 5
distinct from the educational system of the colleges, took account of that advance in
knowledge which university men were very notably assisting; or attempted to adapt, for
disciplinary purposes, science, modern languages, history or geography, and the schools
neglected mathematics, teaching arithmetic for purely practical ends. Consequently,
educational reformers were many.

Note 2. Clark, Op. Cit. vol. 1, p. 300. “Coursing” (a term not confined to English universities)
was a fashion of disputation in which a team from one college disputed with a team from
another college; the reason for the usual issue will be appreciated. [ back ]

CONTENTS 0 VOLUME CONTENTS 0 INDEX OF ALL CHAPTERS - BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD

 I_h_e_W,S_eve_nte_e,nth_,Qe_n1gry Proposed supersession of Oxford and Cambridqe under the }
I Curriculum Commonwealth: Milton; Harrington; Hobbes

Sea rch Amazon: FT I

Click  to shop the 

 

Mlcome 'Eress 'AQE'.’l_iflflQ 'm.kJn9 -_T.m1§.<>_&§§. °© 2001 Bartleby-com

 8lntrniP5l*furrtfl1a:es Er 
an-munuurn sion‘ H

 

A _ ncliprelogya Q

http://www.bartleby.corn/2 19/1 502.html 06/09/01


Penny's Genealogy WOTTON Page Page 1 of 4

 

WOTTON

Thanks are due to WOTTON descendants Chris
Wootton, Derek Hutchinson. Bette Brooker and
Elizabeth Clarke, who have helped make this
page possible. The WOTTONS are ancestors of
my paternal grandmother. The name can be
spelled several ways. often WOOTTON, but
my line gradually settled on the single ‘'0'’.
Andrew ( 1627-1697) was a Tilemaker, living at
Tile Lodge Farm in Sturry. Kent, when he
wrote his will in 1697. The farm was passed
down through at least 4 generations, to Thomas
(1749-1831), father of Elizabeth who married
William 111?'l"CH1NS(.)?\’. Thomas’ father John
(1685-1769), whose tombstone is shown here,
was in his 60's when Thomas was born. He appears to have married at 60
a woman 30 years his junior, shortly after his own father died, leaving Tile
Lodge Farm to a nephew if John died without issue. Was this a marriage
of convenience? John's tombstone has the following verse:

 

All you that pass this way along
Think how sudden I was gone

God did to me no warning give
Therefore take care how you do live.

Remarkable words from a man in his 84th year!

Andrew's parents are presumed to be William and Lucia (WELLS)
WOTTON of Chislet. Be1o\v is a descendant list for 8 generations of
WOTTONs, down through Andrew only. He appears to have married four
times, and it's not certain which of the first two wives were the mothers of
his children. See my 1:-vl1.."l‘(]‘.§ l§:\iSON page for descendants of Elizabeth
WOTTON (1779-1835) and William HUTCHINSON.

1 William WOTTON b. ca 1589, Chislet ? & Lucia WELLS

m. 2 May 1617, Chislet

2 Thomas WOTTON b. 1619. Chislet

2 John WOTTON b. 1620. Chislet

2 Elizabeth WOTTON b. 1624. Chislet & Richard FOX

2 Andrew WOTTON* b. 1627, Chislet & Margaret

m.1 Feb 1651, Sturry
3 Thomas WOTTON b. 1652, Sturry & Hester
4 Thomas jr. WOTTON.* b. 1682, Sturry & Mary EWELL
m. 31 Oct 1711. Canterbury
5 Ann WOTTON b. 1713. Sturry & DADD ‘.7
5 Mary WOTTON b. 1717, Sturry &Thomas GURNEY
m.17 Nov 1743. Sturry
5 John WOTTON b. 1724, Sturry
4 Thomas jr. WOTTON* b. 1682, Sturry & Mary CULMER

m. 17 Jun 1727, Woodnesboro

http://peop1e.ne.mediaone.net/pvaughn/wotton.htm O9/04/01


Penny's Genealogy WOTTON Page Page 2 of 4

4 John WOTTON b. 1685, Sturry & Elizabeth CULLEN
in. 24 Apr 1746. St. Martin. Canterbury
5 Anne WOTTON b. 1746. Sturry
5 Mary WOTTON b. 1748, Sturry
5 Thomas WOTTON b. 1749, Sturry & Mary
in. ca 1771
6 John WOTTON b. 1772, Sturry & Ann REAKS

m. 28 Jan 1795, Sturry

7 Mary Ann WOTTON b. 19 Feb 1795 & John Marsh WOOD
m. 6 Nov 1816, Cantcrbury

6 William WOTTON b. 1773, Sturry
6 William WOTTON b. 1774. Sturry & Susannah BEAKE

m. 12 Sep 1795. Stodmarsh

7 Thomas WOTTON b. ca 1795 & Harriet Jane
8 Harriet Jane WOTTON b. 1833, Thanet
8 Susanne WOTTON b. 1833, Thanet
8 Richard Harris WOTTON b. 1835, Westbere
8 Sophia Beale WOTTON b. 1837, Westbere
8 John William Thomas WOTTON b. 1839, Westbere
8 Eliza Margaret WOTTON b. 1841, Westbere
8 Augusta WOTTON b. 1843, Westbere
8 John William Thomas WOTTON b. 1845, Westbere
8 James Philbrick WOTTON b. 1848, Westbere
8 Sarah Foulj am WOTTON b. 1849, Westbere

7 John WOTTON b. ca 1798 & Elizabeth Ann PRIOR
m. 18 Oct 1831. Sr. Mary Mag. Canterbury
8 Thomas WOT'l‘(’1;\’*‘ b. 1832, Fordwich & Lucy Elizabeth

in. ca 1855
8 Thomas W'OT'l‘();‘\'* b. 1832, Fordwich & Louisa ELLIS
8 Elizabeth WOTTON b. ca 1835, Fordwich
8 John Prior WOTTON b. 1837, Fordwich
8 Fanny WOTTON b. 1838, Fordwich
8 Ann Taylor WOTTON b. 1839, Eastry
8 Prior WOTTON h. 1840, Bridge
8 Susanna Ta} lor \VOTTON b. 1841, Fordwich
8 Frederick WOT'1‘O.\' b. ca 1843, Fordwich
8 Edwin WOTTON b. ca 1843, Fordwich
8 Julia WOTTON 13. ca 1845 & Thomas WESTBROOK
m. 28 Sep 1865. Sturry
8 Nicholas WOTTON b. 1846, Fordwich
8 Emily W()TTO.\ h. 1849, Fordwich
8 ;\/largaret Jciiiiiiigs WOTTON b. ca 1851, Fordwich
6 Eli‘/aheth W()TT().\1 '6. 1775, Sturry
6 Sarah WOTTON h. 1778, Sturry & Benjamin ADDLEY
m. 12 Nov 1799. \Ncsihe1'c
6 Elizabeth W()T'l‘()l\' b. 1779, Sturry & William HUTCHl.NS(fi)N
m. 8 Mar 1808. S1 .\lary Magdalen, Canterbury
6 James WOTTON h. 1780, Sturry & Martha FAIRMAN

m. 5 Jun 1813. Chislcl

7 George WO'l‘TO.\' h. 1814, Sturry & Hannah
8 Hannah WOTTON h. 1833

7 George W()TT(’).\"*‘ h. 1814, Sturry & Phebe GRAVENOR ?
in. ca 1837
8 Charles Aikey WOTTON b. 1838, Sturry & Jane Sarah
8 Martha Fairman W OTTON b. 1840, Sturry

http://peop1e.ne.mediaonc.net/pvau glm/\\'0I l011.htm 09/04/01


Penny's Genealogy WOTTON Page Page 3 of 4

8 Christian lgarkins WOTTON b. 1841, Sturry
8 Phebe Grax ener WOTTON b. 1843, Sturry
8 Fairman \\'OTTOl\'*‘ b. 1845, Sturry & Mary Ellen
LANGFORD
m. 1871, Shoreditch
8 Fairman WOTTON* b. 1845, Sturry & Mary FREEMAN
m. 1887, Minster
7 Martha WOTTON b. 1815, Sturry
7 Henry WOTTON b. 1817, Sturry & Sara Anne MIETTE
111. 17 ~.\/lay 1843. (“.mterbury
8 Ursula Frances .\+1icttc WOTTON b. 1845, Margate
8 Sara Annie WOTTON b. 1849, Thanet & Thomas James
LUCAS
m. 22 Oct 1878, Sturry
8 Henrietta WOT'l‘Ol\l b. 1853, Margate
7 Winifred V\'O'1‘T().\' b. 1819, Sturry & Charles WELBY
in. 23 Oct 1843. Slurry
7 Andrew WOTTON li. 1820, Sturry
7 Catherine \\’OTT<.).=‘\’ b. 1822, Sturry
7 Anthony WOTT(_)i\' b. 1824, Sturry & Catherine
in. ca 1845
8 Jane WOTTON b. 1846, Dover
8 Fanny WOTTON b. ca 1845
8 Ellen WOTTON b. 1848
8 Louisa WOTTON b. ca 1857, Cauldham
8 .\/lartha F. \\"OT’1‘O.\‘ b. ca 1860, Cauldham
8 Katie WO'l"l‘().\' b. ca 1864, Bishopsbourne
7 .-\nn WOT'li();\' b. 17 Mar 1825, Sturry
7 Fanny WO'1"l‘()N b. 1 1 May 1826, Sturry
7 Leonard W()T'l‘O.\7 b. 1828, Sturry & Elizabeth
111. ca 1866. Tlianct
8 Fairman L. WOT TON b. ca 1867, Margate
7 L'rsLi1aWO'l"l‘O.\ b. 1 1 Jun 1829, Sturry
7 William W(')'l‘"l‘O;\' b. 1830, Sturry & Caroline SHARP
in. 14 Feb 1854. Bircliington
8 Emily WOT'1‘O.\‘ b. 1855, Birchington
8 Henry WOTTON b. 1857, Thanet
8 John James WOTTON b. 1858, Thanet
8 William Edmund WOTTON b. 1860, Birchington
8 .V1arthaWOTTO;\1 b. 1866, Herne Bay
8 Richard Harris WOTTON b. 1870, Herne Bay
8 Fairman \\”OTTi' ).’\' b. ca 1872, Herne Bay
8 limma Lo;:i.\;i \\'()'l‘TON b. 1873, Herne Bay
7 lmili/.a\’VO'1"1‘().\' b 1833. Sturry
7 Thomas W(”)T'l‘O.\' b. 1834, Sturry & Mary Ann Elizabeth
NEWELI.
in. 17 Oct 1857. St. John, Thanet
8 Alfred W()’l"l‘O.\’ 1*. ca 1858, Margate & Agnes Julia
8 Mary A. \\'()’l‘T{)i\ b. ca 1862, Ramsgate & William
SOMERFORD
8 \\’;i1te1‘WO'17'1‘O.\l 1». ca 1864, Ramsgate
8 Emily WO'l"1‘O.\' Ii. ca 1867, Ramsgate
8 Francis b. ca 1869. Ramsgate
8 Bertha J . W OTTO.\' b. ca 1873, Margate & Alfred NOBLE
8 Ernest WOTTO.\‘ b. ca 1876, Margate

http://pe0p1e.ne.mediaonc.net/pvaughn/wot 1()l1.1l11’I1 09/04/01


Penny's Genealogy WOTTON Page Page 4 of 4

8 1.)ora Terrell WOTTON b. ca 1877, Margate
6 Richard I-la1‘1‘is WOT'1‘ON b. 1783, Sturry
6 Ed\\';n‘d WO'l‘TO,\' h. 1786, Sturry
3 Elizabeth WOTTOTV b. 1654, Sturry
2 Andre“ WOTT()N* b. 1627. Chislet & Catherine
m. ca 1660
3 John WOTTON‘*‘ b. cu 1661, Sturry & Elizabeth SANDERS
4 Andrew WOTTON b. 1690. Sturry & Ann EWELL
111.24 Way 1714. S1ur:'_\"
5 Anne WOTTON b. 1715. Sturry & James OMER
m. 8 Dec 1746. S1nn’_\
5 .\/l:n“\‘ \VOTT().\' h. 17 16. Sturry & Austin GORE
m. 27 .»'\p1‘ 1743
5 Eli/nbeth WC)TT(.):\ 11. 1718. Sturry
6 Anne WOT'l‘O.\' b. 17-10
5 Sarah WOTTON b. 1719. Sturry & John BUSHELL
In. 25 Jun 1748
6 Andrew BUSHELI. b. ca 1749
5 M;u'1h;1WO'l"'1‘O.\1 b. 1722, Sturry & Richard WHITE
5 Susanna WO'1‘TO,\.' b. 1724, Sturry & John BARHAM
m. 6 May 174‘). S1. .1o1m's Margate
5 Es1herWOTTOl\' b. 1726. Sturry & Richard TERRY
m. 25 Dec 1751. C‘;1n1erbL1ry
5 John WOTTON b. 1737. Sturry & Eleanor KEMP
m. 21 Oct 1741). Czmlerbury
6 John Marke \\'OT'l‘O.\’ b. 1751
5JuLIi1hWOTT()N b. 1731. Sturry
3 John \\'()TTOl\”' b. en 1661. Sturry & Ann YOUNG
m. 22 Dee 1690
4 Ann \\'()TTO.N h. 16 >1. Sturry
4 .\'11;n‘_\ \\'OTTO.\' b. 1691. Sturry
4 John \\'OTTO.’\ b. 161): & Rosamund
4 Thom;1s WOT'1’O.\' 1* 1694 & Margaret ATTWOOD wid.
m. 10 .\’o\' 1725. \\';111hznn
5 Anne WOTTON b. 1727. Sturry
5 :\/1;n‘_\ WOTT(.)1\' 6. ca 1730. Westbere
5 Small WOTT().\' h. i731.S1urry
5 Thoxnns WO'1‘TO;\ h. 1732, Sturry
5 Elizabeth WOTTON 11. 1733, Sturry
3 Ann \\'OTTON* b. 1666. Sturry & Thomas SAMPSON
3 Ann \\'OTTON* 1). 1666. Sturry & John KENNETT
m. 27 .\'o\’ 1700. (‘;1n1e1bLn'y
2 Andre“ \VOT"l‘().\"* b. 1627. Chislet & Mary SANDERS
m. 22 l)ee 1673. S1. .\1i1Ln'e11. Canterbury
2 Andra-xx’ \\'()"l"l‘().\‘5‘ '6 1627. Chislet & Ann DENN
m. 7 Feb 1687.VV'e»11m1 or Reculver

amp   ;;«n'ne.~; Anc:_estor_s C__on_ta,e1 Links

http://people.ne.medialone.ne1/pvaughn/\\‘< »11on.htm 09/O4/O1



(081 I wt;1(,;am (H) .4   Hm‘
Rb O»<z>m?u/aaa
#4» W’: Mm maqmbm
mama,  \«>‘%M AANL
210.2. 9% MW» Now WvX~,9>~<f L-X)‘“‘
(L35 IIQA 37rJ{\.../J
“-75- {L377 H4‘
C“3Deg 
[L40 ., 00  5   .
{ML 4'11] $‘\A~u»~«,  LU/»~lx~/u'°’ jw ’a’L"/ 
(Wrlm Mb fiwauhxgx Vwya, ‘M
N.‘t.lb“\‘v  ., k M  ‘
M3) “WA MD H11/vvvmovb [WW
3% £05’ ~17‘)/7 G1/-«”~?) go‘n"’"‘


Sir Henry Wotton — encyclopedia article from Britannica.com Page 1 of 1

rstenrtieomjsm

 

Search Sir Henry Wotton at Britannica.com for the Web's best sites,
magazine articles, and related books.

ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA Tools
W030": Sir He"|‘Y .E.mai|.t.h.i.s..a
Etint tI1i§_m

b. March 30, 1568, Boughton Malherbe, Kent, Eng.
d. December 1639, Eton, Buckinghamshire

I‘19.'iE,,é§.9.%§.!.331§
English poet, diplomat, and art connoisseur who was a friend of Donne and Milton.

§i;L|.e@;\AI«
Of his few surviving poems, "You Meaner Beauties of the Night," written to Elizabeth of g_:'__gu_-1
Bohemia, is the most famous. Izaak Walton's Life of Wotton was prefixed to the Re/iquiae
Wottonianae (1651), the volume in which most of Wotton's writings first appeared. [sir ‘|1§!1!-y W.
' Links

Wotton was knighted in 1604, served as ambassador to Venice intermittently from 1604
to 1623, and was a member of Parliament in 1614 and 1625. In 1624 he became provost
of Eton and in 1627 he took holy orders.

Long residence in Venice developed in Wotton a taste for architecture and painting far
more sophisticated than that of his contemporaries. In The Elements ofArchitecture
(1624) he expresses his views clearly and briefly.

Information about this topic in other articles:
Wotton, Sir Henry
polemic on ancients and modems
a_ncients ,a_r1d mqdgfi
from ancients and modems
theory of architecture

"Commoditv. firmness, and delight": the ultimate svnthesis
from architecture

About Britannica.com | Comments & Questions | Companv Information | Advertising Sales Kit
© 1999-2000 Britannica.com Inc.

http://www.britannica.com/seo/s/sir—henry—wottonl 7/ 17/00


The Village of Boughton Malherbe Page 1 of 2

The Village of Boughton Malherbe

The local pronunciation is ’Bortun Mallerby’, but today only a church and some scattered
farm buildings remain of the village that once supported the great mansion of the Wotton
family.

Successive Wotton’s held various high offices and left a heritage of legends about
themselves and their times. The family stemmed from that Nicholas Wotton who settled in
Kent during the reign of Elizabeth I after a prosperous City career that included being twice
Lord Mayor.

He married a Kent heiress whose family owned Boughton Place. Among the descendents
of that union was a Dean of Canterbury and York and that Sir Henry Wotton, diplomat and
poet who was born at Boughton Malherbe Place in 1568.

Another Thomas, who was jailed on a charge trumped-up by friends to prevent him joining
the i||—fated rebellion led by Thomas Wyatt in 1554 against Queen Mary’s plan to marry
Philip, heir to the Spanish throne. As a result, Wotton was able to continue in Royal favour
and inherit the Boughton estate where in 1573 he entertained Elizabeth I during her
Progress through Kent.

Another Wotton, Katherine, was courted as a young girl by Sir Anthony Van Dyck, but
refused him because he charged what she regarded as too high a price for painting her
portrait. She later married a Dutch nobleman and, when he died in 1660, she married a
soldier who she also outlived.

After the Wottons, the house was inherited by the Earl of Chesterfield and it was the 4th
Earl - he who introduced the Gregorian calendar in England in 1742 and was accused of
robbing common folk of eleven days of their lives - who plundered Boughton Malherbe
Place for his great house near Park Lane in London.

Ironically, the London house has quite disappeared while Boughton Malherbe Place
became a farmhouse which remains, having since been owned by the son of Galfredus
Mann, once MP for Sandwich and known as The King of Cricket. One of his more
memorable oddities was a game of cricket played on horseback which he promoted in
1800.

It was at Boughton Malherbe in 1574 that seventeen-year-old Mildred Norrington, known as
the Pythoness of Westwell, was tried before Thomas Wotton and George Darrell. Mi|dred's
‘possession by the Devil‘ attracted a lot of interest in Kent at the time. She was a servant
girl in Westwell where prayerful efforts were made to cast out the devil who, however,
roared his defiance at the lot of them and became so violent that poor Mildred had to be
held down by four strong men. When he calmed enough to speak rationally, he blamed an
old woman called Alice, who also lived in Westwell, saying that he had lived at the old
woman's house, shut up in a bottle, until the woman had sent him to Mildred, with
instructions to kill the girl because she did not love his mistress, Alice.

After more prayers, the Devil was finally persuaded to evacuate the girl's body and leave
her in peace. Later, though, Mildred confessed that she had faked the whole 'possession'

http://web.ukon1ine.co.uk/johnno/bma1.htm 7/ 17/00


The Village of Boughton Malherbe ' Page 2 of 2

and gave a demonstration to show that she could do it at will.

The Old Rectory at Boughton Malherbe is supposed to be haunted by the ghost of a hunch-
back monk, and there is a story that a former rector who lived there used to give lodgings to
passing tramps, just to test the reputation of the house’s haunted room. According to the
story, none ever stayed more than an hour or two in the room.

I9p.....of liagtec

http ://web.ukonline.co.uk/j ohnno/bma1.htm 7/ 17/00


Page 1 of 1

Birmingham City Archives: Rev R E h Duke, antiquarian and collector I

The contents of this catalogue are the copyright of Birmingham City Archives.
Rights in the Access to Archives database are the property of the Crown, © 2001-2003.

To find out more about the archives described below, Contact B_i_r_m__in_q_ham,__Qty..A1:ch1ves

Rev REH Duke, antiquarian and collector
Catalogue Ref. MS 3415

[Access Conditions]
Open

Deeds relating to various Counties
KENT.
Patrixbourne [etc.]

FILE [no title] — ref. MS 3415/78 - date: 28 November 1694

\_ [from Scope and Content] Indenture between (1 ) Thomas Adrian of Bifrons, Kent, esq., and Katherine his wife,
(2) the Hon. Elizabeth Hamilton of the parish of St. Martin in the feilds [St. Martin-in-the-Fie/ds, London], widow, the Rt. Hon.
John Lord Culpeper, baron of Thoresway [co. Lincoln], and Martin Fo/kes of Graies Inne [Gray's Inn, London], esq., (3) John
Lodington of London, merchant, and Elizabeth his wife, and (4) John Taylor of Hackney [London], esq., and Brooke Bridges of
the Inner Temple, Lonodn, esq., being a release of a mansion house called Bifrons, and messuages, lands and appurtenances
in the parish of Patrixborne alias Patricksborne alias Patrichborne [Patrixbourne], Beakesborne [Bekesbourne], Littleborne
[Littlebourne] and Bridge, Kent. Consideration: £7,800.

FILE [no title] — ref. MS 3415/79 - date: 18 June 1700

\_ [from Scope and Content] Counterpart of indenture between (1 ) Sir C/oudesly Shovell of London, knt., (2) John

Hill of Knowlton, Kent, esq., (3) John Taylor of Byfrons [Bifrons], Kent, esq., (4 ) Mathew Aylemer of the parish of St. Paul,
Covent Garden [London], esq., and George Dodington of Dodington, Somerset, esq., and (5) Henry Preistman of the parish of
St. Paul, Covent Garden, esq., being an assignment of the Manors of Patrixborne [Patrixbournej Cheney and Patrixborne
Merten alias Merton, with the rectory and advowson of the Vicarage of Patrixborne, and lands, messuages and appurtenances
in Bridge, Patrixborne, Bishopsborne [Bishopsbourne], Addesham [Adisham], Nackinton [Nackington], Nether Hardresse
[Lower Hardres] and Upper Hardresse, Kent, in trust to attend the inheritance.

FILE [no title] — ref. MS 3415/80 - date: 18 June 1700

\_ [from Scope and Content] Counterpart of indenture between (1 ) Sir C/oudes/ey Shovell of London, knt., (2) John
Taylor of Byfrons [Bifrons], Kent, esq., (3) Henry Preistman of the parish of St. Paul, Covent Garden [London], esq., and (4)
William Gun of London, merchant, and Thomas Coleby of Kensington [London], gent., being an assignment of mortgage of
messuages, lands and appurtenances in Bridge, Patrixborne [Patrixbourne], Bishopsborne [Bishopsbourne] Nether Hardresse
[Lower Hardres] and elswhere in Kent, and the Vicarage and church of Folkestone, Kent, with tithes, pensions and
appurtenances in Kent.

http://www.a2a.pro.gov.uk/search/documentxsl.asp?com=0&i=0&stylesheet=x:... 20/06/03


y 0

Historical Manuscripts Commission I ARCHON | ARCHON Directory ~\L\»5‘~\v"C‘"‘”W H\Page 1 of 1

 HSSTQRIEAL MANUSCRIPTS CQMMJSSIUN
. ‘ mii«im5i_.:i2.-r:ii=i:~.i’i l~£AI‘§€;‘.iJi~§l".(tlZ¥'

ABIJUT HMC NAYKINAL REGl5TER: BF ARCHWE5 §i.R£1~l{3H MANGRSAL DMUMEMS REGESTKF.‘ ADWCET ‘PUBLECAT1iDHS ARCZHIVES IN FOCUS

 

ARCHON DIRECTORY IN "mus SECTION

Archon Code : 0143

. . . . ARCHON Directory
Birmingham City Archives

A-Z of professional organisations
Add or amend an entry
ARCHON Portal

Contact Details

Central Library
Chamberlain Square
Birmingham B3 3HQ

E Print this page
England

Tel 0121 303 4217
Fax 0121 212 9397

Email archives@birmingham.gov.uk
URL http://www.birminqham.qov.uk/

Central Library Manager : Paul Hemmings
Senior Archivist : Sian Roberts

Access Information
. Open : Mon, Tues, Thurs—Sat 9—‘5
. Member of CARN scheme
. Readers ticket required
. Research service
NRA information for this repository
The NRA indeg contain the following entries for this repository :
. NRA catalogues (322)
- Eiflrlgfifles (304)
. Qrganisations (722)
- F_éi_fTLli€_S (57)
. Persons (261)
- Other (130)
Lists of major accessions available electronically for this repository :
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Last amended : 20/11/2001

About HMC | National Register of Archives 1 ARCHON l Manorial Documents Reciister I Advice I Publications 1 Archives in Focus
Design by Reading Room Ltd Technology by Sherwood Government © 2002 Crown Copyright

http ://www. hmc.gov. uk/archon/searches/locresu|t.asp?LR= 143 20/06/03


Take noteg

r~ Publications‘

5 SEARCH HI5

  

Rrsuustisr I Norssoox

 

Poge image

Crisp, Frederick Arthur,  (m] able f Con nt ]
Collections relating to the family of Crispe

London: Printed for private circulation only, 1882-1897, 321
P93-

  
    

 

Download
Images

 

zoom 

 

Browse by Page

Number

 

 
 

and undutifull now I doe hereby give and bequeath unto my said some
ffrancis Crisp the suite of one shilling sterling and me more ”—“ my
loveing and dutifull son Charles Crisp of Leader: hall market: aforesaid
in the said Parrish of S‘ Peters Cornhill "London Cooke and victualler ”
resid’ Legatee 8: sole Ex"‘—--Witnesses Edward Peach, Thomas Barker
Richard Annett servant to Benj Michell sc’ in Cornhil1”———Dated 22
July r698—-Proved 28 July 1698 by the said Ex“
I 58 Lott.

1698.

“ I SIR NICHOLAS CRISP of Westerham in the County of Kent
IBar""--“ Whereas by certaine Articles of Agreement made vpon
my Man-yage with Dame Judith Crispe my now Wife” dated 13 April
1674 “ I am obliged to settle Lands Tenements and I-Iereditamems over
and above all repriaesoftheclear yearlyvalue of”£5oo “to the use of
znyWi£e for her naturail life for her Joynture" &c “I the said Sir
Nipholas Crisp doe give and devise vnto mysaid dearewife Dame Judith
Cnspe‘ all that my Manna’ of Squirryes in the County of Kent and my
Mansion house in or near Westram airs Waterham in the said County
of Kent and called by thenxune of Squirries And alsoe all my Messuages
Cottages Lands” «Sac “in the parish of Westerham inthe said County
of Kent” for life remainder “ to my eldest some and heir Apparent
John Crispe and the Heires Male of his body” rem‘ “ to Charles Crisp
my second Sonneand the Heirs Male of his body” rem’ “To theuse
of the third fibnrth and fiifizh and every other Some of my body?»-
gotten on the said Dame Judith my Wife and the heires Males of their
bodies ” rem’ " no my Daughter Judith Crisp and all my other Daughters
which I shall have bymy said Wife Dame Judith Crisp andallthe
Daughtersof my Santos and the heires of theirbodyesas Tennantsin
ooifaon ” rem’ “ vnto my mme right Heires "-—-“ whereas I have an
Interest for three lives that is to say for my own: life and the Lives of
my two Vnclcs John Crisp and Thomas Crispein the Ofiiceof Collector
of the Subsidys outwards in the Port of London and have one third of
a Lease ofa Coperas work at Deptford in the County of Kent for Rive
yams to come and from the expiraéon of that Lease for Harry yeares and
alsoea smallparoell ofifreehold Land near the same And a Lease from
Sir Thomas Middleton of a Coperas worke at Blackwell in the County
oflliidxixfoa-about ten yeares to come And alsoe the ifourth partofthe
Eaiume of the Custome of Loggwood for about eleven yeares to come
Andwherezsl am seized or posses’: ofthree houses in Throgmorton
Street in the City of London And alsoe of three other houses called or
knowne by the several! names of the white Bear the two black boyes
and the Shepheazd in Breadstreetin the cam m... ..s- 2 __ ._ . - -

of one other H  neg; are iamebin a plat: dcglled 
London aforesai ’ c oe ere ivean vise e oe ”
&c “ vnto Thomas Adrian of Bifronsyig the said County of _Kent Esq’
and my said dear Wife Dame Judith Cnsp their heires" &c in trust to
pay out of the rents &:c of the same “ vnto my said Wife ” £800 “has at
Legacy” and to make up her yearly income to £500 free from taxes 8:1:
if the said Manor of Squirries &:c before devised to her fall short of that

amount and upon further trust to pay “vnto my Scene John Crisp” .

47


 

Page image

Crisp, Frederick Arthur,  ] | able of Contents]
Collections relating to the family of Crispe

London: Printed for private circulation only, 1882-1897, 321

Take notes 

 

        

pgs.
[_39LVfl|2§d Browse by Page
lflflfi Number

F, '43

£80 a year until he attains 19 and gm 3, year from then until the
£3099 “herein after appointed to be raised for him shall be raised " to
pay “ my Sonne Charles Crisp ” £40 a year until 24 and until his
portion of £1500 shall be raised to pay “my Daughuer Judith Crisp"
£502. year until 2.4, and her portion of grace shall be raised and to
pay my debts and raise the said portions-—Said sorn }oh'n’s £3ooo to be
invested in the purchase of 331165 &c to the use of him and his heirs
male rem‘ to said son Charies and his heirs male rein’ to the third fourth
fifth and every other son I shall have by my said wife and their heirs
maie rem’ to said. daughter }udith and all the other daughters I shall
have by my said wife and to all the daughters of said sons and the heirs
of their bodies as tenants in common with rem’ to the use of my own
right heirs»-After the said sums shall be raised out of the profits of the
said houses. 82:: said Trustees to he possessed of the premises “ in trust
for my Sorzne Iohn and the he-ircs Male of his body subject to the pay-
ment herein after mentioned to my Sonne Charies Crisp and if my sorme
John shali dye before the said suines of money shall be raised and other
trusts satisfyedwithout issue Male ofhis body then in trust for the said
Che; Crisp and the heircs Male of his body and if the said Charles
Crisp shall dye” &c “then in trust in like manner” forevery other son
I shall have by my wife and their heirs male rein’ “to my Daughter
Judith Crisp and all the other Daughters I shall have by my Wife and
all the Daughters of my Scans and the heires of their bodyes as
Tennants in common ” rem‘ to my own right heirs but if said son John
marries without the consent of his mother her ex” «Sac then I give
£1000 “ more to my Sonne Charles Crisp and doe charge allthe Estate
hereby given to my sonne Iohn with the payment thereof”——Said
daughter juditlfs £1000 to be invested in the purchase of some renter
an annuity in said Trustees’ names for her life but if she marries without
the consent of her mother her ex“ &c she to have but half of the said
annuity during her husband’s life-—«If my estate in the said Ofiice of
Collector shall continue after my debts and legacies are paid and shelf
come to said son John and his heirs male then one third part of the
profitsofthe sameto he paid to saidsonCha.ries his heirs&cforthe
increase of his portion-~“ veto my said Wife all the goodsand furniture
of her own: Chamber ” “ and all the jewells and dressingplaxe she shall’
have at the time of my decease and all the Coaches Horses and Harness
and ed} the Cowes Hoggs Carrie and Poultry I shall have at the time of
my decease and I give her for her Life all the use of all my plate
Lynnen Househoid Stufi‘ and utensilis of the House which I shall have
at my decease ”—-“And after my Wifes decease my Will is the said
Plate Household stuli‘ utensills and see much of the Lynnen as she
shall not dispose of shall goe with my said House czlied Squirries”-—
Residue of Real and Personal Estate in “the said Thomas Adrian and
name Tudith Cr-isn their I-Ieires” &c “ subiect to the trusts aforesaid ”

and they Ex“ 8: Ext‘ and to “ give Mourning to none out tnernseives
my Children brothers and Sisters and Ellis and Nicholas Terrill Sonns
of my brother Terrill and what servants my Executors think fitt and to
bury my body in the Vault in S" Mild;-ed’s Bread Street Church amongst
my Ancestors in a Leader: Coffin decently and without pomp And
lastiy I give the said Thomas Adrian” £50 “to buy him a. Ring”--
Witnesses “ E : Lane Arth: Hewes Geo: Harris Tho: l\1om.ll”--Dated
:1 Dec r693—-—}’roved 9 Dec 3698 by the said Ext‘ &: Ex°'——On 6 Feb
48

 


Take notes

Page image

 Crisp, Frederick Arthur, [View Qitatign| | Iable of Contents]
Collections relating to the family of Crispe

London: Printed for private circulation only, 1882-1897, 321

   

   

pgs.
 .  . _ . zoom 
Download Browse Qy Page
Images um er

 

1718.9 Adm“ &c of the Goods 8:: of the deceased unadministered by
Lady Judith Criqi & Thomas Adrian Esq the Ext‘ 8: Ex“ now both also
dec‘ granted to Sir john Crisp Bar‘ the Son and principal Legatee named
in the said Will.

24.7 Lora‘.

1698.

" I I01-IN CRISP of Wapping in the County of Ivliddx mariner”-

“my friend William ffrancklin of the same Wapping Taylor"
universal Legatee 8: sale Ex°'.--Witnesses “ Samuel Clarke W’ Page
Not" Pub' Wapping ”——Datcd 16 Nov 1696——Proved 4 Feb 1698-9
by the said .

2o Pett.

I 7oo.

“ I DAME JUDITH CRISP Widow Relict of S’ Nicholas Crisp late
of Westerham in the County of Kent Bzuonet deced ’’~---“ to be
interned at eleven 21 Clock at night as privately as may be in the parish
Church of S‘ Mildreds Breadstreet London ”-—“ unto my loving Daughter
Judith Crisp all’ the fiumitnre of my own Chamber dressing Room and
Closet withall the plate thereunto belonging (except my Books) my Gold
Watch with the Seals Locketts and things that I used to weare All my
wearing Apparel ” &c——“ unto my loving Sister M“ Katherine Adrian
wife of M’ Thomas Adrian my two Coaches and my Chazrriot with the
two Stone Horses and the old breeding Maire which was given me by
my said Brother M"I"hoznas Adrian Six dozen of Diaper Napkins ” &:c—-
“unto Dame Kathetine Reeves Widow my Picture that was ch-awn by
S’ Godfrey Kneller two dozen of Diaper Napkins ” &c-“ unto my Sons
Sir John Ctisp Barronett Charles Crisp and to my said Daughter Judith
Crisp all my said Books (except such Physick books as my said Sister
Adrian shall make choice of) to be divided equally between them ”—
Testatxix had a legacy of £800 under the Will of her said husband “ S‘
Nicholas Crisp deceit" dated 11 Dec 1693-—“ unto my said Son S'}ohn
' ” 5530-“ unto my said Son Charles Crisp ” £30-—“ unto my
said Brother M’ Thomas Adrian ” £3o—-—“ unto my said Sister Katherine
Adrian” g o-—‘‘ unto my niece Iuditii Adrian" £15--“unto Nurse
Dennis " 5-unto Mr. Smythey in Crippiegate parish Minister”
£10 £5 thereof for himself and for his own use and the remaining
" £5 ” theteof to be by him distributed amongst such poore people in
the said parish of; C;-iplegate as he shalltigink to have most need 1.*her\eof ”

. .o‘tt4¥.. -...'.i

--mi annuity 0: g, 14 to De purcnaseu tor me was 01 " toe $8.10 uame
Catherine Reeves and of my said Daughter judith C_risp ” and £1o_part
thereof to be paid yearly to the former for her life and the residue
to the latter for her life.-—0ther Legatees not called Relations——Said
daughter Judith resid’ Lega.tee—Said sister Catherine Adrian sole Ext‘.
Witnesses “ Tho: Rice William Foulk Sam‘ Wharton set‘ to M’ Shylling
Sc’-"’—~Dated 8 Feb 1699--Pr’oved 2 May xyoo by Catherine Adrian,
wife of Thomas Adrian, Esq, the said Ext‘-Adm“ with the Will annexed
granted 6 Feb 27:8-9 of the Goods &c of Lady Iudith Crisp late of
49 H

K}. “(R


Take notes

 

Downlggg
Images

Page Image

Crisp, Frederick Arthur, [View Citation] | lable of Contents}
Collections relating to the family of Crispe

London: Printed for private circulation only, 1882-1897, 321

P95-

, wevov..~oeu::~awNo>ov.v)c-vx«:v\‘:-ac:

zoom  100%

      

Browse by Page
Nggmber

Wsterham co. Kent, Widow, dec‘, unadministered by Catherine Adrian,
wife of Thomas Adrian, Esq, the Ext‘, now also dec‘, granted to Sir
John Crisp, Bar‘, the Brother and Administrator of Indith Crisp, Sp’,
doc‘, whilst living the resid’ Le-gates named in the said Will 6 Nod.

9

I701.

“ ABRAHAM CRISP Citizen and Plaisterer of London ”—“ vnto

Abraham Crispe my eldest some "one shilling”-V“ vnbo Sarah
Crispe my daughter and to her heires all that my messuage tenement
and lands lying and being in Ashstead in the County of Snrry”--“ vnto
William Crispe my Sonne and to Alice Smith my daughter all those my
messuages and tenements lying in the parish of S“ Mary Magdalen
Bunnondsey in the County of Sony with their and every of their appur-
tenances to be equally divided between them and to their heires for
ever ”—“vnto John Crispe my Sonne and to his heires all those my
two tenements Scituate in Southwarke in 9. place them called the Mint
and also all that my messuage and tenement Scituate and being in Princes
Street Moorefields with their and evexy of their appurtengmces ”—-“ my
two daughters Sarah Ckispe and Alice Crispe? ext” & res1d'I.egatees-—-
“ If my personal} estate does not pay my debts then my Executrixes to
sell the houses in Mooxefeilds to raisernoneytopay thesame”-—
Witnwses “ Eliz: Richardson John Richardson Step: Holland Attmney
in New fishstreet London”———Dated 26 Nov 17oo—-Proved 15 Feb
17oo-r bysarah Crispthe daughter are power reserved tolsiice Crisp
the daughter 821:. .

18 Dyer.

The Testator is described in the Probate ikct Book as late of St.
Michael’s Crooked Lane London.

1701.

" I EDWARD CRISPE now" Purser of her Majesties Shipp the Kings
fisher ”—-—“ Sarah my wife " universal Legatee———Witnesses Many
Bysell John Merett Cha. Bysell ”-—Da.ted I8 May r696—Adm"‘ with
the Will annexed granted r Sept :70: to Rowland Crispe the paternal
uncle & Guardian of Ann Crispe an infant the daughter and only child
of the deceased, no Ex” having been appointed in the said  and
- -- - c -s 5' . |\ ..:-..__-1 ‘l-.....g-.. ....:_,. ._,,._,“,,“.. nn
Sarah Cnspe the ltenct or unmnsm tcguanc Iusvuas ;euw......... ..
23 Oct 17o: Adm“ with the Will Ste granted to Sarah Crispe Widow the
Relic‘: 8zc, the Grant to Rowland Crispe the Uncle &c. of glnn Crispe, a
minor, the Daughter of the dec‘, having ceased and expired by reason

of his death.

:23 Dyer.

50

P5“


Page 1 of 1

Suffolk Record Office, Bury St Edmunds Branch: Deeds, associated Papers and administrative records relating to the estates of the
Hervey family, Marquesses of Bristol, of lckworth

The contents of this catalogue are the copyright of Suffolk Record Office, Bury St Edmunds Branch.
Rights in the Access to Archives database are the property of the Crown, © 2001-2003.

To find out more about the archives described below, Contact Suffolk Record Office, Bury St Edmunds Branch

Deeds, associated papers and administrative records relating to the estates in Suffolk, Lincolnshire, Essex,
Sussex and London of the Hervey family, Marquesses of Bristol, of Ickworth; family and personal records
relating to the Hervey and associated families

Catalogue Ref. HA 507

DEEDS OF TITLE AND ASSOCIATED PAPERS
Lincolnshire
Combinations of parishes
FILE - Mortgage of messuages and lands (unspecified) in Asgarby and Evedon - ref. HA 507/2/ 151 - date: 14

Apr 1677
L [from Scope and Content] Sir Robert Carr - Judith Adrian of London, widow and Thomas Adrian of London, esq
-Tm

http://www.a2a.pro.gov.uk/search/documentxsl.asp?com=1&i=0&stylesheet=x:... 27/O6/O3


/‘Ezra TI’/‘/z’.

I

THE

EHSTORY
AND
TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY

OF THE

COUNTY OF KENT.

cow:-Aunuc rm:
ANTIENT AND PRESENT STATE OF IT,

CIVIL AND ECCLESIASTICAL;

COLLECTED FROM PUBLIC RECORDS,

AND OTHER AUTHORITIES:

ILLUSTRATED WITH MAPS, VIEWS, ANTIQUITIES, &c.
THE SECOND EDITION,

IMPIOVED, COKRICTED’ AND CONTINUED 1'0
THE PKl5,§N1._‘ -TIME:
By EDWARD HASTED, Efq F.R.S. and S.A.
LA?! on caunzxnukv.
“ Ex his omnifiux, langefimt htmanffimi gut‘ Canlium 1'nrol1m1."

“ Forte: crcarzturfbrtibu: ct-éonix,
“ Ne: imhllem feroc:.r/zrogenerant.”

VOLUME X.

 

CANTIRBURY

YIINTED BY Wu BRISTOW, ON THE PARADI-

M.DCCC-


I04 EAS'I'R_Y HUNDRED.

continued till the diflblution of the priory in the 31!‘.-,
year of king Henry VIII. when it came into the king's
hands, where it did not remain long, for he fettled it,
among other premifes, in the 33d year of his reign, on
his new created dean and chapter of Canterbury, part
of whole pofleflions it continues at this time. A court
leet and court baron is held for this manor.

The manerial rights, profits of courts, royalties,
&C. the dean and chapter retain in their own hands ;
but the demefne lands of the manor, with the court-
lodge, which is a large antient manlion, fituated ad-
joining to the church-yard, have been from time to
time demifed on a beneficial leafe. The houfe is
large, partly antient and partly modern, having at
different times undergone great alterations. In the
{outh wall are the letters T. A. N. in flint, in large
capitals, being the initials of Thomas and Anne Ne-.
vinfon. Mr. Ifaac Bargrave, father of the prefent
leffee, new fronted the houfe, and the latter in 1786
put the whole in complete repair, in doing which, he
pulled down a confiderable part of the antient build-

ing, confifting of {tone walls of great firength and’

thicknefs, bringing to view fome gothic arched door
ways of fione, which proved the houle to have been of
fuch conl’tru€tion formerly, and to have been a very
antient building. The chapel, mentioned before, is
at the e21f’t end of the houlie. The eaft window, con-
fifting of three compartments, is ftill vifible, though
the {paces are filled up, it having for many years been
converted into a kitchen, and before the laf’t alteration
by Mr. Bargrave the whole of it was entire.

At this manlion, then in the hands ofthe prior and
convent of Clsrift-church,archbilhop ThomasBe<:l<et,
after his flight from Northampton in the year 1164,
concealed himlelffor eight days, and then, on Nov.
10, embarked at Sandwich for France.“

f See Lord l.ittleton’s Hillary of king Henry II.
THE

EASTRY. 105

The prefent le{i'ee is Ifaac Bargrave, efq. who re-
fides at the court-lodge, whofe ancefiors have been
leiiees of this eltate for many years paft.

THE Nnvmsoms, as leflees, refidetl at the court-
lodge of E-aliry for many years. They were originally
of Brigend, in VVetherell, in Cumberland. They bore
fortheir arms, Argent, a chevron, between Ibree eagles
dyp/a_yea', azure. Many of them lie buried in Ealtry
church.‘

THE FAMILY of Bargrave, alias Bargar, was origi-
nally of Bridge, and afterwards of the adjoining parilh
of Patrixbourne ; where John Bargrave, eldelt {on of
Robert, built the feat of Bifrons, and relided at it, of
whom notice has already been taken in vol. ix. of this
hiflory, p. 280. Ifaac Bargrave, the fixth fon of R0-
bert above-mentioned, and younger brother of john,
who built Bifrons, was ancefior of the Bargraves, of
Ealtry ; he was S. T. P. and dean of Canterbury, a
man of {triét honour and high principles of loyalty,
for which he fuffered the mo{’t cruel treatment. He
died in 1642, having’ married in 1618 Elizabeth,
daughter of john Dering, efq. of Egerton, by Eliza-
beth, fifler of Edward lord Wolton, the {on of john
Dering, efq. of Surrenden, by Margaret Brent. Their
defcendant, Ifaac Bargrave, efq. now living, was an
eminent {olicitor in London, from which he has re-
tired for fame years, and now relides at Ealiry-court,
of which he is the prefent lelfee. He married Sarah,
eldefi (laughter of George Lynch, M. D. of Canter-
bury, who died at I-Ierne in 1787,]. p. They hear
for their arms, Or, on a pale guler, afwora’, the blade
argent, pomel/ed, or, on a chief -uert I/area bezzmtr.

SHRINKLING, alias SHtNGt.EToN, the former of
which is its original name, though now quite lol’t, is
a {mall manor at the fouth—welt boundary of this pa-

‘ There is a pedigree of this family in the Heraldic Vifln. of
~Kr:nt, anno 1619.

ri lh


266 VVINGHAM HUNDRED.

a pew. In the ifle, near it, are monuments and grave-
fiones forleveral of the family of Netherlble.

The church ofWimlinglwold wasantiently efieemed
as ‘a chapel of eafe to that of VVingham, and was on
the foundation of the college there, in x286, fepa-
rated from it, and made a diftinét parilh of itfelf.
Very foon after which it appears to have been united,
as to its eccleliaflical jurifdiét-ion, as a chapel of eafe
to the church of Nonington, and continues to at this
time, being as it were but one and the fame curacy ;
and the appropriation of the parfonage of it, in like
manner as that of Nonington, was fettled on the col-
lege of VVingham, from which the curate, ofliciating
in this church, received a penfion, or fiipend of
41. 1 35. 4d. over and above all the fmall tithes ariling
in this parifh," and after the fuppreflion of it was

‘granted, with that parfonage, to the fee of Canter-.

bury, part of the revenues of -which it {till continues,
William Hammond, elq. of St. Albans, being the pre-
fent leffee of both parfonages.

Thelmall-tithes of this parilh, together with thole
of Nonington, were given to the minifter ferving the
cure of thefe parilhes, under certain reflriétions, ‘by
Edward Boys, elq. of Nonington, by his will in ‘1596,
as has been already fully related before. In 1640 here
were fifty-fix Communicants.

BEKESBORNE.

THE PARISH or BEKESBORNF. lies adjoining to
Adilham, heretofore defcribed, weflward, being a
member or limb of the town and port of Hafiings, in
Suflex, and as fuch within the liberty and jurifdi<.°cion
of the cinque ports, which it has been time out of

" See Dugd. Mon. vol. iii. pt. ii. p.-53. _
mind.

to-».:-.:.‘::.-r.—r7_‘~::r::::::s——

BEKESBORNE. 267
mind.‘ It is called-«in antient writings, Living/bar-no,
alias Be/ea/Izorne, but for a long time fince Bekcfbome
onl .

'l‘HE PARISH is a far difierent-fituation from thole
la{’c-delicribed, ‘lying great part of it pleafantly among
{mall inclolures, and lheltered with trees and wood."
lands, efpecially in the weliern part of it, and ltretCh-
ing éafiward up to the high downy country_. I t is but
fmall, being abouta mile and an half in length, and
not more than halfla mile "broad. The village, with
the church, is fituated in the valley among the mea-
dows, on the bank of the Lefler Stour. river, which
runs through the parilh, and abounds with good
trout. There are but five houfes in it, viz. the par-
fonage ; the feat to which the I-Iales’s removed when
Howlers-Tell down, and from that ‘time refided ‘in ; it
was in queen Elizabeth’s reign ‘fold to archbilhop Par-
ker, who gave it to his {on to refide in, as being near
his palace here, and John Parker, efq. fold it to Fogge,
whence it pafled by‘ fale to the I-la1e.s’s, it now be-
longs to Mr. Baugh; the Vicarage ; the remains of the
archbifhop’s palace ; and Cobham-court ; the latter
iituated on a rife clofe to the church. Further on, to-
wards Littleborne, in thevalerfacing the downs,—is the
fcite of Old Howlers ; at a ft‘nall"dif’tance above which,
on the high ground, Mr. Baugh has built a feat for
his refidence, commanding a beautiful view of the
neighbouring country and the feat, with Ranifgate
cliffs ‘beyond it. It ftands among, a beautiful fcenery
of park grounds, of hill and dale, well cloathedwith
trees and adjoining woodland, having the river run-
ning in the vale beneath. The {oil is moltly fertile
near the valley, and very kindly for hops, of which
t_here are feveral plantations. In the lalt century, and
before, there were feveral families of good account

" See Jeake’s Charters of the Cinque Ports, p. 25, 26-
120, 124.
refident


9.68 WINGHAM HUNDRED.

refident in it, as the Parkers, Contrys,’ Savins," and
Boys’s.‘ There ‘are three fmallparcels ofiland‘ which
lie feparated from the tell: of it, the parifh of Adilham
intervening.

This parilh being within the liberty of the town
andport of I-laftings, which it is {aid in the moit an-
tient charters of the cinque ports to have been ‘a mem-
ber of time out of mind, is exempt from thejurifdic-
tion of the jufiices of the county, and fubjeét only to
thofe of that town and port, and till within ‘thefen few
years -the mayor of Hafiings appointed one of the
principal inhabitants of this pariih his deputy, who
being {worn into his ofiice, aéted for him hereto the
great comfort of the inhabitants, but fince that has
been omitted, the inhabitants of this parilh have up-
wards of any miles to apply for redrefsupon every oc-
cafionwhatfoever, the inconvenience of which has made
this at prefent an ungovernable and lawlefsplace,

THE MANOR or BEKEsBoRN'1=., antiently called
Livingshorne, from one Levine, a Saxon, who held it
in the time of king Edward the Confefibr, and from
the fmall bourn or fireain which runs through it,
came, after the Norman conquefl, intothe poifeflion
of Odo, bifhop of Baieu-x, under the general title of
of ‘whole lands it is thus entered in the‘ furvey of
Domefday :

T he fame hifhop of Baieux hold: in deme/he Barnes.
It was .taxed at two _/ulings. The arahle land it fix ea-
rurates. -= In dernejize there are two, and twenty—fi=ve vil-
leinr, with four horderers havingfiven earueates. There
is a ohureh and fix fervantr, and one mill if thirty-eight
penee, and one faltpit of thirty pence, and half a fifhery,

’ Anno 1623, Prerog. off. Canterbury, Viftn. co. Kent, anno
1619. pedigree Contrie.

” John Savin, M. D. of Bekefborne, had a grant of arms in
1663‘. Harl. MSS. No. 1470-75. Guillim.‘Herald, p. 242.

’ Anno 1593, With. co. Kent, 1619, pedigree Boys.

of

saxesnoaue. 259

qffbnr pence. Qf pzgflure forty pence. PVoo[1fg;- ;b,_.
pannageofflxt hog: and an half.‘ '4. Levine 5514 it of
Icing Edwar;d.—In the time of king Edward the Con;
feflor it was worth tweltze pounds, and aflerwardrfwen
pounds, now twel-ve pounds, and _yet;it pay: eighteen
_12at4n_dr. What Hugo de' Montfort hold: is worth five
/ht//mgr. Thefe three l manor: (viz. this manor, and
Hardrer and Stel1ing,.hoth immediately hefore de/rrihed)
Rannnl de’Colmnhelr -hold: to enne o the hi
Baienxiq } f f /bop of
Four years after this, the. bifhop being difgracgd

this r_‘nanor, among the ref’: of his 'pofl'eflions, hécam;
con'fi{'cated to the crown, of which it was afterwards
held by a family of the name of Beke, whence it ac-
quired the name of Bekefborne likewife, and in king
Henry lII.’s reign William de Beke appears by the
‘Tefla de‘ Nevil to have held this place, called in it,
Bernes, then valued at ten pounds, in grand fer can-
try, by the fervice of finding one (hip for thetfiing,
when he paiied the feas, and a prefent to him of three
marcs, From -this name it pafi'ed -into that of Bourne -
for I findthat VValter de Bourne was pofléfliad of it if:
the 37th year of’ king Edward III. and he folcfit to
Walter Doget, whofe {on John p‘afi'e_d it away to Iohn
Cornwallis, John VVe{’ton, and Thomas Thornbury
and they anno 5 Henry IV. joined in the tale ofthi;
manor, and the. advowfon of the chantry adjoihing to
the lands of it,called Bonnie’: ehantry,to john Browne,
plumber, of Canterbury, who in the rft year of king
Henry VI. alienated it to William Bennet and Tho.
9135 C3-Clbllf)’, and they again joined in the {ale of this
manorto archbifhop Chicheley, and his truftees, and
they in the 22d year of that reign conveyed it to the
priory of hrifft-church, in Canterbury, and pripr
Goldl-l°“a 111 king Henry Vll.’s reign, rebuilt the

tprior’s apartment here, and the chapel adjoining, dc.

dtilcating itfo the An_nunc.iation and thepatron ofthis
c urch. he hkewile built the hall athorniqg tqthe
prior’s


270 WINGHAM HUNDRED.

prior’s dormitory, and all the other buildings H1993.
except the lodge and‘ the two barns. And. in this
flate it co.ntinued.till the fuppreflion of the priory in
the 3rf’t year of king Henry VIII. when it came into
the kings hands, who, in his gadryear, gra_n_ted it,
with the prior’s houfe, called Chrifichurch-h'oufe, and
all otherhis eftates in, this parilh, (except advowfons)
in exchange, to Thomas Colepeper, fenior, efq. of
Be,dgbury‘,,to hold in’ mpite by knight’s fervice,."__and
he-, by an act paffed in the 35th year of that reign,
fpecially for the purpofe, exchanged it -for the nianor
of Bilhopfbdrne, and other prernifes, w'ith archbilhop
Cranmer, to holdin free, pure, and perpetual alms.
After which the archbilhop made this houfe-one of his
palaces for his retirement, for which purpofe he made.
contiderable buildings at it, and probably would have
done more, had he continued in the prelacy ;° and
archbilhop Parker, who took great ,delight in the
lituation; intended further to enlarge it,.but- he.died
before he began his purpofe of it. After which, .in the
time of the civil wars, in Charles I .’s«reign, this palace
was not only pillaged, but almofl: the whole of 1t
pulled down by the fanatics of that time, fo that the
gatehoufe and a few of the oflices .on each tide of it,
were- all that were left-remaining, which after the
refioration were converted into ‘adwelling, and de-
mifed by the archbiihop, with the demefnes of -the
manor, on a beneficial leafe, -‘Robert Peckham, efq
beingthc prefent leffee, and reliding in it. The houfe
has lately been much modernized. But the manor of
Beketborne itfelf, his grace the archbilhop retains in
his own hands.

The gateway of the palace, which has been pulled
down within thefe few years, through very narrow and

" Augtn. off. box A. 56, inrolled March 15th following. See
liltewife Rot. Efch. ejus an. pt. 8.

° See Strype’s Life of Cranmer, p. 93. _
fordid

BEKESBORNE. 27!

fordid motives,_was-built of brick,.and had in the
middle of the front of it, the arms of Cranmer. On
theinfide of the gateway was a ‘Prone,’ on which was
A.-D—T C-——t 552, and underneath.t‘he archbil'hop’s
motto, Nafce Teijfum. On the gates were the arms of
Parker, and of the feeiof Canterbury impaling Parker.

HOWLETS, or Owlelr, as it was formerly called,
was an antient leatin this parifh, which was formerly
the inheritance of the family oflfaac, of the adjoining
parilh of Patrixborne, but how long they continued
owners of it, ‘I have not found; but that they had
quitted the poffeflion of it before the reign of queen
Elizabeth, is very certain, for in the tflz year ‘of that
reign, john Dorante, of this parith, who was a good
benefactor to the’ poor of Littleborne, was pofl'efl'ed
of it‘, and his defcendant, of the fame uame,‘alienated
it‘to Sir Henry Palmer, whofefamiily ‘was originally of
Snodland, near Rochefier, whence they branched; off
to Tottington, in Aylesford, and to - this, ,paril‘l_i of
Bek’efborne." He aft_erwards refided here, where he
died in 161 I, and by his will gaveit tohis fort inslaw
Sir Ifaac Sidley, bart. who conveyed his right in it to
his brother~in-law Sir Henry, Palmer, anti he about
the year 1620, alienated-it to Sir Charles Hales, of
Thanington. The original of this family of Hales has
been already related before,-' in Vol. vi. p. 88, down to
Thomas, fecond fon of john Hales, of the Dungeon,
one of the barons of the exchequer, who was featredat
Thanington, where he died, and was buried in 1583,
whofe fon Sir Charles Hales purchafed Howlers as
before—mentioned,, and removed thither ’before_ his
death in 16-23.‘ -His grandfon Sir Robert Hales was
created a baronet on July 12, anuo.12 Charles IL
1660, during the time of whofe grandfon Sir Thomas

" ~See vol. iv. of this hiltory, p. 467.

‘ See vol. vi. p. 88. Vol. viii. p, 23. There is a pedigree of
this family in Viftn. co. Kent, 1619. See’ likewife Kimber's Ba.--a
ronetage, vol. ii. p. 60.

this


272 WINGHAM HUNDRED.

this feat fell down, and ‘ t_he family removed to another
houfe nearer the church inithis parifh, where they af-
terwards refided. At length his defcendant Sir Philip

Hales, bart. in 1787 alienated” the fcite of it, with the

gardens and ofiices remaining. and belonging to it, to
Ifaac Baugh, efq. who_is the prefent poifeflbr of them,
and who having entirely pulled down the old feat,
has built for his relidence amanfion on thefe grounds,

on the hill, at a {mall diflance from the fcite of the

antient houfe, but within the prec‘in'€t of Well, in
Ickham parilh.

COBHAM-COURT is a manor, fituated near the
church in this parilh, which was once part of the pol-
felfions of the eminent family of Cobham, of Cob-
ham, in this county, from whom it aflbmed its name
of Cobbam-toitrha John", fon of Henry de Cobham, of
Cobham, by Joane, daughter of Robert de Septvans,
was pofl'efl‘ed of it in‘ the beginning of Edward III.’s
reign, in the 17th year of which the obtained a grant
of free.-‘warren for this‘ manor. ‘His {on John de Cob-
ham, lord Cobham, died anno 9 Henry IV. whofe
only daughter and heir Joane died in hislife-time,
leaving by her hufband Sir John de Poole, an only
daughter and heir, named Joanelikewife, who on the
death of her grandfather John, lord‘ Cobham, above-
mentioned, became heir to his eliates. She left an
only daughter and heir Joane, by her fecond hufband
Sir Reginald Braybrooke,‘ who becoming heir to_ her
eftates, as well as to the_barony of Cobham, entitled
her hulband Sir Thomas Brooke, of Somerfetlhire, to
them, in whofe defcendants, lords Cobham, it ,conti-
nued till Henry, lord Cobham, beingattainted in the
1ft year of king-James I.’s reign, this manor, among
the reft of his efiates, became forfeited to the crown.

‘ She had five hufhands, but left iffue only by her fecond, as
above-mentioned. See more of her, and of the family of Cob-
‘ham, vol. iii. of this hiftory, p. 407. V

How

asxczsnoxns. 273

I-IoW'it pafl'ed afterwards, I have not found, b'ut that
being granted from. i,t,_after fome intermediate owners,
it‘ pafled from the family of _ Palmer into that of
.Hales, of Bekefborne, in whit-:h it has continued, ‘in
like_ manner as Howlets before-mentioned, till" it was,
-with that eflate, fold among others, by Sir Philip
Hales, hart. in 1787, to Ifaac Baugh, efq. the prefent
owner of it.
CHARITIES."

Sm Hxmny Purina, of Bekelborne, by-will in iéh, gave’
the film of ms. to be yearly paid out of his manor: of Well—court,-
to the -minifler and churchwardens, towards the relief of the’
pooriof this patifh.

BaK1ssn’oiuaa,' alias Isituingsfiorne,tis-witliinthe aes-
cLi«:s1AsrrcA1. JURISDICTION of tl'1B'diartf€' .Q'fCan-
terbury, and _deanry-’ of Bridge.

The chu'-rch, which is dedicated to St. ‘Peter, con-
Iifts.Gf_one ifle, a high chancel, .and a final] foutli fepti

‘or crofs chancel, having a low roofed tower at the weft

end, in which are twobells. The building feems-. to
be very antient; it is long and narrow, andfrom. the
fmallnefs of the few windows in it, is Very obfcure,
even in ~ the middle of the day. In the high chancel
is a monument, with the figure of a knight in armour,
kneeling, for Sir Henry Palmer, obt. 161 I. A fmall
one for Capt.'Richard F ogge, of the royal navy, obt;
I68 I ; arms, Fogge, wit}: a are/Zen: for dtjfenence. A
hatchment, and under it an infcription for Edward
Ladbrook, rector of Ivychurch, and vicar here, obt."
Augufl: :7, 1676-. In the ifle are memorials for the
Porredge’s. A monument for Mary, wife of the Rev.
Philip Brandon, obt. 1780; another for William Bedé
ford, vicar of this parilh and of Smarden, obt. 1733;
A memorial for Nicholas Battely, A, M. ‘vicar here,
and reétor of Ivychurch, obt. May 19, r7o4._; and a.
monument and feveral memorialsgfor ‘others of the
fame name. In the north window are thefe arms : of
Sidley, per pale, azure and guler, a fcfl, tbequy, or, and

VOL. xx. T guler,


274- WINGHAM HUNDRED.

guler, between tbree goat:-beads. erajed, urgent. In the
north fept, or crofs-chancel, a monument for Sir Tho-
mas Py_m Hales, bart. obt. 177 3, leaving by his -wife
‘Mary, daughter of Gervas Hayward, cfq; five daugh-
ters. There is a vault underneath for this-family.

The church of Bekefborne belonged to the priory

of St. Gregory, perhaps part of its original endowment
by archbifhop Lanfranc in the reign of the Cohqueror.
It was very early appropriated to it, and was con-
firmed to the priory by arclibitliop Hubert, among its
other pofieflions, about king Richard I.’s reign, by
the name of the church of St. Peter of Lyvyngfborne.‘
The appropriation of it continued part-of the poH'ef-
{ions of the above priory till the" diffolution} of it in
king Henry VIII.’s reign, when it was furrendered
into the king’s hands, where this appropriation re-
-mained but a {mall time, before it was. granted, with
the {cite and other poffeflions of the priory, in ex-
change, a fpecial aft having *pafl'ed for the purpofe, to
the arclibilliop, part of the revenues of whofe fee’ it
continues at this time, George Gipps, efq. of Har-
bledown, being the prefent lefl'ee of it.

But the Vicarage of this church feems never to have
belonged to the priory, and in the 8th year of king
Richard II. ‘appears to have belonged to the abbot of
Pontiniac. How long itfiaid there Ihave not found ;.
but it became afterwards part of the poffeflions of the
fee of Canterbury, and remains fo at this time, his
grace the archbifhop being the prefent patron of it.

This Vicarage is valued in the king’s books at fix
pounds, and the yearly tenths at twelve Ihillings. It
is nowof the clearyearly certified value of 691. I as. 8§d.
Archbithop Parker augmentedthis Vicarage, by in-
creating the vicar’s ftipend to ten pounds per annum,
and with four quarters of wheat, and eighteen quar-
ters of barley, to be paid yearly .by the lefl'ee of the

5 See Dugdale’s Monaflicon, vol. ii. p. 374.
parfoiiage.

BF-KESBQRNE. 

arfonage. In .1588 here were communicantseighty;
11} 1649. one himdred, and it was then’ valued at fixtyr.
cight pounds. It is now of the yearly value of about
eighty pounds.
THEai_: was A CHANTRY, dedicated to St. ,Mary,
founded in this_ church anno 1314, by James (13
Bourne, owner of the manor of Livingfborne, alias
Bel<efborne, whence it came to be called Bourn.e’s
chantry, the revenues of which were given in I 362,,
by _his fucceffor Bartholoinew de Bourne, ‘then patron
of it, to the hofpital of Eaftbridge, in Canterbury;
and the fame were confirrncd to it by archbifliop Sud.
bury.1n the year i_ 3 7 5, under the defcription of which
h°fP1t'=11.m0rc of it rnay be feen.; It was fupprefled,
among other foundations of the like fort, in the firlt
year of king Edward VI.

CHURCH OF ޣKESBORNE.
Plrritoin,
of & wfiqm firqtatfed; _ VICAII.
H3 lrtléiflqfi. nuuouuunnovun y0fiIg6fd77l1lflJf,  Oh“
I .

Eaiwarzl Ladéinole, A. M. De¢,
14, I066, obt. .1676.

Obazlia/l Broke;/5 , A. M._ Feb.
23,1676, obt. 1685.

Nirfiolar Bartel , A. M. Augufl
24. I685, obt. May 19,
i7o4.“

folin Paris‘, A; M. Jung 9,
1704:: 013% NOV. 9, 17:19.

Clark’ -853”: A.- M. M3|'Ch 3,
_I7o9, refigned :7: i.‘

Tfiomar IV;/E, S. T. _P. Sept.27,
l7ll, obt. July 24, 1726,‘:

I Liltewife reélor of Ivyehurcli, and I Likcwife reétor of St. Alphag:
lies buried in this church. in Canterbury, prebendary of Lin:
1 -l-Ic rcfigucd this Vicarage for that coin, and one of the fix preachers‘ of
of Ltd. Canterburycathedrll. He licsburied
in the chancel of 5:. Alphage chiircli.

T 2 rawnoxs,


276 wmcrmm Humzuuzn.

u'n.om,' €‘J’c. VI’CARS'- . A a
‘ u uuuunnenuonuc  0I'd,An M; “E”,
M Arcihwi 6, 1726,‘? obt. oaobemr,
1783-‘ . .
Roam ,1=1.;1;,u, A. M. X784-
obt.’ January i798.“
join Talc, A‘..M._ Feb; 1798,‘
the prefent vicar.

I He held this Vicarage with the being prefentcd rt? V’lCl“5'-" H’
-reétqry of Smarden by difpenfauon. was alfo cunt: o I IN.‘ -
In He refigxied the curacy of Alb on

T!!!
HUNDRED

OI

BRIDGE AND PETHAM

LIES’ the next hundred fouthward from that of
Downhamford. It was formerly two feparate'hu‘n‘-
dreds, _viz. of Bridge, and of Petham, called in
Domefday, Brgge and ‘Pitebam, and they appear to
have been difiinét in king Edward IlI.'s reign.

IT CONTAINS WITHIN ITS BOVJNDS THE FOLLOWING
PARIS}-IE5:

,_ pA.”,xBoRN,;, 5. Upp1:nHAnmu:sz’n/za'rr.
2. BRIDGE.‘ 6. ‘PETHAM; and
3. Nncxruorow in/zart. 7. WA!-TEAM ifljmffo

4. LOWER Hnanxas.

And the churches of thofe parifhes; and livkew_ife part of the
pariflles of CHARTHAM, and ST. Sn*sPHEN’S, 31133 HACK1NG'
-row, the ‘churches of which are in other hundreds. T we con-
/labler have jurifdiétion over it. _

A court leet, of which the king is lord, 13 held yearly for
chafing a conftable for the hundred of Bridge, and the {everal
borlholders init.

PATRIXB ORNE

PAILRIXBORNE. 277

--oooo];$loeoo-—-

PATRIXBORNE

IS {ituated the next parifh fouthward; from Bekef-
‘borne‘lal’cedefcribed. It is called in Domefday, Borne,
which name it tool; from the bourn or’-{treazn which
‘runs through it; and it was afterwards -called Pa-
trixborne,-‘to diltinguilh it from th_e neighbouring
tparifhes of Borne, fit1'1ated— on the fame itream. There
are two boroughs in this parifh, viz. of~Marten, alias
Cheney, and of Patrixborne.

THE muusirt is-pleafantly (it-uated in a fine healthy
country: the bourn or Aftreatn of ‘the Little-Stourrunis
through this parifh, ,clo‘fe"to it- in the v'alley‘isi the vil-
lage, with the church, court-lodge, and Vicarage near
together, the latter a neat genteel habitation’ ; oppo-

. {ite'to- them is a houfe called Heart-hall, formerly be-
longing to the family of Sabine, orrSavin,‘ but now to

Mr. Taylor, of Bifrons. The upper, or north ‘part of
the village, is in the parifh of Bekefborne, in which is
a houfe, formerly the refidence‘ of the Coppins’, now
the property of Mr. Milles. of Nackington ; and
further on, one formerly owned by the Pordages, and
afterwards by Mr. Litheridgc. ,Eal’cwardvt-his parilh
extends up the hill, over the high downs, towithin
one field -of Ileden, and from the village fouthward‘,
acrofs the Dover road, to a wild hilly country, as far
as Whitehill wood, part of which is within this pa-
rilh. his well cloathed «with trees along the valley,
where the {oil is fertile, efpecially towards Hoath,
for both hops and corn, but the hill parts round the
outlkirts, are in general poor chalky land, covered
with (tones. There is no fair.

AT THE TIME of taking the {urvey ofDomefday,
in the year I084, this parifh was chiefly owned by

-Odo,bifhop of Baieux,under the eneral title of whofe

lands itis thus defcribed-in that urvey :
'1‘ 3 In

 

 


430 ADDITIONS 'ro voL. Ix.

PAGE 197, line 12. For coheir rezid /ble heir.

PAGE 198, line la/I. Mr. Gipps, before his death in Feb.
1800, purehafed of the archbilhop the fee Iimple of St.
Gregories and its spoffeffions, among which this portion of
tithes was included, which fince his death is become veiled in"
the trutt of his will for the benefit of his two fons. See
above, p. 6.

PAGE 200, line 6. After heir add flphra.

PAGE 203, lirze: 2 and 3. For Garret read Garrett.

PAGE 207, liize‘ 10. On Mr. Elgar-’s death in 1796, this
among the ref’: of his eliates became by his will the property
of his two‘ nieces, one of whom married Mr. Toomer, who,
onthe partition of them, became folely entitled to this ettate,
which he now poffefles. ’

PAGE 208, line la/I but one. For Thoma: read Wi'lliam.v

PAGE 209, line 1. After manor add which were.

Line 8. For antlenly read antlently.

Line 12. ~F or Jeri: read xircis.

PAGE 220, line 8. For Robert: read Roberts.

PAGE 223, line 17. Since Mr. Gipps’s death in Feb;
1800, who fome little time before had purchafed of the archa
bifhop the {cite of St. Gregories and its poffeflions, among‘
which this parfonage was included, it is become vefied in the’
null of his will for the benefit of his two fons.- See above, p. 6.-

——'j—.
'WINGHAM.

PAGE 2554, line’ 23. For Edward read Ealmum1._

PAGE 235, line 6from the bottom. After Thos. Hey, el'q'.
ado/, whofe father was a citizen of London. He himfelf had
been a merchant in Venice, and bore for his arms, Argent,
3 ofcuttjheons gu/er. He married lady Palmer in 1724, and
relided here for feveral years before his death, which hap-'
period in I747.~_ _

PAGE 236, line‘ 20'. For Pugett read Puget, and next
line after London, a‘da‘.and mother of john Puget, efq. now
one of the direétors of the Bank.

PAGE 240, line 26, laid to ‘be enjoyed by him and his
fucccflbrs fo long time as he and they fhould refide in the
{aid houfe, and ofliciatc in the {aid church, and not be abfent
from the parith one month at a‘ time, or two months in the‘
whole year.

PAGE 241. /Ida’ to the ll]? of curator, Mr. _Loftie’s long
abfence in India havingbeen looked on as a defcrtion of this

cure,

-G" « ..

Anbtrtotvs To voL. Ix. 43:
cure, the Rev. Richard Harvey has fupplied it ever fince, and
is the prefent refident and ofliciating curate, to whom the
patron pays the above mentioned endowments and emolu-
merits.

 

GOODNESTON.

PAGE 242, line 1. George Dezing, efq. is the youngeft
fan of the late Sir Edward Dering, and half brother to the
prefent baronet of that name. He married in I798 the only
daughter and heir of his uncle, Charles Dermg, efq. of
Barham.

PAGE 24.4, line 24.. Sir Brook William Bridges is un-
married; he refides at Gunflon, as does his mother, lady
Bridges, to whom the manfion and park was deviled for her
life, by her late hufband’s will.

Line 28. For ohjelete read ohfolete.

PAGE 245, line 1. For Thoma: Butler, a younger /51: of
Richard, read Henry Boteler.

Line 6 from the bottom. F or-Box’: read Boys.

PAGE 248, la/I line. For 1735 read 1736.

—_.j——
NONINGTON.
PAGE 2 5:, line 22. For Oxemlenden read Oxenden.
PAGE 2 58, note “'. For Dering read Deerirzg.

———--
VVIMLIN GS\VOLD.

PAGE 265, line‘ 24. For between read within.
-1‘-—
BEKESBORNE.

PAGE 267, line 26. Dele word has.

PAGE 268, line 24.. Dele 0 . _

PAGE 272, line 23. For yo/hn de Poole read _7ohn de la
Poole.

PAGE 274, line 22. From Mr. Gipps his intereft in the
leafe of this parfonage paired to Ifaac Baugh, efq. the prefivzt
leflee of it.

PAGE 276. In lift of vicars add—The Rev. Mr. Toke
is likewife vicar of Patrixborne by difpenfation.

P-
A PATRIXBORNE. 5

PAGE 28 5, line 5. A view of the call end of Barfon church
is given in the xcth vol. of this Hifiory, under the defcription
of that parilh, p. 76.

PAGE


#32 ADDITIONS TO VOL. IX.

PAGE 286. in Ii/I of-uicars. For William read _‘)"ibm" 7%:

Rev. A/Ir. Toke is likewife vicar of Bekefborne;
—j—
NACKINGTON.
PAGE 294‘, line" 4. from bottom. For Hevzngton read
' .0

Ifllfi-:=i1g:m2'9',‘, line 5. The prefent rents of_ the parilh are
about 7ool. 'per ann. being an increafe of 2151. fince the year
1724, . There are about 130 inhabitants. The church re-
gifier begins in r 568. A poor houfe was ereéted herein r789.

Line i2._ Dele t/2: cburcb is very fmall. _

PAGE 298, line 15. Since Mr. Gipps’s death in Feb- 1300;
his interelt in this eltate, the fee fimple of whtch he bought of
the archbilhop, is become vefted in the truf’t of his will for
the benefit of his two fans. See p. 6.

‘-

LOWER HARDRES.

PAGE 300, line 12. The number of acres in the‘ parifh
are about not), of which one fixth is woodland, the rents
per ann. are about 614i. _

PAGE 302, line 9. For Coop: read Coupe. _

PAGE 303, line 9. There is an infcription in’ the chance!
for William Pulford, re€tor, obt. I660. ,

Line 18. The vregifier begins 1558, in which are tW0
furveys of the‘ pari{h,one in 1712, the other in i725.

 

UPPER HARDRES.

PAGE 308, line i3. Add, of what was originally in this
church, but the handfoirie painted glafs rnentionetl in.vol. _8_th,
P- 94: 35 being-in Stclling_chu‘rch, has been fince removed,
and placed in the feveral windows of this church and chancel.

Line-2r. After and add fly: r/Jamel.

PAGE 309, nm ". Fcrfecmd read bead.

. .
PETHAM.

PAGE 31 r, line 19; There were" difcovered in r775, in a
field near Garlinge—gVreen, belonging to the Rev, Mr.
Thomfon, in this parilh, a leaden chef}, two feet five inches
long", eleven inches and a halfbroad, and 8 inches in depth.
lt lay about fix inches beneath the furface of the ground.
Wlien opened it was found to "contain two vellbls and a

5 See Madox's Exchequer, p. 112.
patent,

ADDITIONS TO VOL. IX-V 4.33

patere, and nothing more; the {mailer urn of the two was
four inches high, holding about half a pint,’ made of a
blackifh brown earth, the ornaments and letters white, thus:

@lB@lll%~lB@lE

The larger urn was fix inches high, holding about a quart,
the colouryand ornaments the fame as the {mall one. .The
patmz was {mall and fhallow, made of courfe black earth.
The fmaller urn, with the word BIBE, was molt probably a
drinking cup. (See Beger’s T72:/au. Blamlent, vol. 3, f. 4.62,
where fuch another is defcribed.) There can be no doubt
but that the remains are Roman; but how they came‘ to be
thus depofitcd by themfelves, that is without any human
bones, afhes, medals, or thelike, is very unaccountable.
No further fearch was made than merely deepening the hole
out of which the cheft was taken. "Nothing elfe was found.

lt is not improbable, however, that this fpot may have
been a Roman burying ground, and the tumult’ levelled by _a
long courfe of tillage. The fttuation is a gently declining"
hill, and faces the N. E.

Taken from the ‘notes of the Rev. Brian Fauflett, and
communicated to» the Editor by. his fon, Henry Godfrey
F auifett, efq. of Heppington.

PAGE 312, line 2i. For Thoma: read Henry.

Line 22. For Edward read _'7o/in-Edward.

PAGE 3i5,1ine to. After the word before add recited.

PAGE gig, in the 1y? of wirars. 7obn Honywoad, vicar,
died on Sept. [3, not i6.

Nate ". For 1598 read i698.

'5-T»
WALTHAM.

PAGE -320, line‘ 8. After chalky, add in fame parts a
very Riff clay, both. g

Lim"X2. For Kaéeflrect read Cake-/freer, and add, In
this and fome of the neighbouring parifhes, but chiefly in a
field between the above flreet ._which feems to have taken its
name from this circumflance) aiidthe church,there are found
numbers of cakes of a mineral or metallic fubfiance, not
unlike lava, being about twoiinclies or two inches and a half
thick, but broken into various breadths; they bear evident
marks of having been in fufion ; the under {ides are impreffed
with forms of pebbles, earth, &c. Theyare of a dark bronfe

colour, inclining to red.
voi.. x. r f Pace