Cecil Papers: February 1605

Pages 197-203

Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House: Volume 23, Addenda, 1562-1605. Originally published by Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1973.

This free content was digitised by double rekeying and sponsored by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. All rights reserved.


February 1605

Morris Nicholas.
[February 3, 1604–5]. "The examination of Moris Nicholas of Newporte in the county of Monmothe, taken before the right honorable Edwarde, Lorde Zouche, Lord President of the Kinges Matyes Councell in the Marches of Wales.
Beinge examined howe he was first made acquainted whye the pursevant was att this tyme sent for him to come befor the Kinges Matyes Councell in the Marches of Wales, sayeth that the first speaches that he harde of the occasion of his sending for, he harde the seme of Pears Madoxe the pursevant who was sent for him, and therupon went to Thomas Morgan, Esquier, for a certificate touchinge the seid matter.
He confessethe that it was a fortnight after he harde the words in his former examination layed downe first uttered before he did reveale the same words to any Justice of Peace, bye reasone that the plague beinge then in Newporte, wher this examinate dwellethe, did not dare to goe abroade to anye Justice of Peace.
He confessethe that att suche tyme as John Treherne, vicar of Newporte, did declare unto this examinate that it was William Jones that had spoken the seid words, the seid William Jones came into this examinates howse either presentlye after the seid wordes were uttered or the seme daye, but denyeth that the seid Jones did affirme anye suche wordes.
He confesseth that John Treherne aforenamed did saye that William Jones upon delivery of the seid words sayed that William Wrothe, servant in Mr Morgans howse of Lanternam (but whether he serveth the seid Mr Morgan or his mother in lawe he knoweth not) did speake the seid wordes.
This examinate beinge face to face with William Jones of Abergavenye, (the seid Jones doth affirme that the examinate did deliver the seid wordes unto John Morgan, brother in lawe unto the seid Jones, in the presens of the seid Jones), and sayeth it was the same daye that he had harde the seid wordes that he uttered the seme to the said John Morgan, he the seid John Morgan comminge then towards this honorable Councell, and did then wishe the seid Mr Morgan to advertise the seid Councell therof, and seith that William Jones was then in company of the seid Mr Morgan when he uttered the seid words unto him, which seid Mr Jones hathe sithens given information to the seid Councell.
Moris Nicholas of Newporte beinge agayne examined before the Kinges Matyes Councell in the Marches of Wales touchinge certen wordes delivered unto him by one John Treherne, clarke, vicare of Newporte aforesaid, sayeth that the seid Treherne came into this examinats howse and towlde this examinate that William Wrothe had spoken these words folowinge, that is, that the Kinges Matye was noe kinge of his but that he was more like unto a jugler then a kinge, and did not deliver the seid words before recyted unto this examinate in suche sorte as in his former examination is layed downe, but sayeth that all the reste of his former examination is trewe."—Undated.
Endorsed: "1601 [sic] The examination of Moris Nicholas of Newport." 1⅓ pp. (90. 128.)
[See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVI, p. 14. Also Vol. XVII, pp. 40, 45, and Vol. XIX, p. 485.]
William Say to Viscount Cranborne.
[? After February 6, 1604–5]. For a long time he has followed the Court from place to place, and spent much time and money in trying to establish his right to the office of the keeping of the Council chamber. It was lawfully assigned to him by Alexander Douglas and confirmed by the King's warrant. He is now inclined to yield up the post and his suit for it, and asks that the King bestow on him an extent out of the lands of William Kelling of Hertfordshire, which is an old debt of £30 per annum with some years yet to run.—Undated.
½ p. (P. 1422.)
[See Cal. S.P. Dom., 1603–10, p. 15, and also pp. 175 and 192.]
Nicholas Goodridge.
1604–5, February 7. Thomas Prestwood and Walter Goodridge submitted a petition to the Master of the Court of Wards concerning the alleged lunacy of Nicholas Goodridge, co. Devon. Since the feodary of that county has certified the Master of the lunacy of the said Goodridge, it is ordered that a commission be issued for the examination of the case.—vii Ffebruarie termino Hillarii A° 11 domini Jacob R.
Endorsed: "Sir William Strode, Sir George Southcott, Gilbert Yard, esq., John Vowell, esq., Humphrey Were, feodary, Thomas Thompson, esq., or to any 3 of them." ½ p. (P. 2165.)
Lord Cobham to Viscount Cranborne.
1604–5, February 9. He thanks him for intervening with the King on the matter of the leases. He does not doubt that judgment will be given in the King's favour, and so he must rely on his Majesty's favour which he can only hope to procure through Cecil. As for the validity of the trust, he has performed everything stipulated in his father's will. "It is true the leases wer never mayd over to me, yeat they wer min for so the scope of the secret trust will sheaw, I perfourming the will whi[ch] cannot be denyed. To the king my gratious soverayn I now prostrat my sealf." From the Towr the 9 of Feb, 1604.
Holograph. Seal. Endorsed: "1604. Lord Cobham to my lord." ½ p. (P. 2443a.)
Mary Sledd to Viscount Cranborne.
[After February 10, 1604–5]. She is the mother of 21 children, and the daughter and sole heiress of Philip Goodman who died two years ago. On the 10th of the present month of February she exhibited a petition to the Privy Council, together with one which she had formerly submitted to the King. These dealt with her complaint against the conspiracy of Thomas Archdale, James Colborne and others to convey and convert the lands, leases, plate and other estate of her late father to their own uses, in order to deny Goodman's creditors their lawful debts and deprive petitioner of her rightful portion of her father's estate. She asks that Sir Anthony Ashley produce the two petitions to be read and referred to Sir Edward Coke, the Attorney-General.—Undated.
Damaged. ⅓ p. (P. 793.)
Edmond Doyne to Viscount Cranborne.
[After February 11, 1604–5]. He is in the service of Sir Christopher St. Lawrence. Five weeks ago he submitted a petition on behalf of his master to Cranborne and the Privy Council, but cannot as yet procure it to be read by them. He asks Cranborne to use his influence that the petition may be read and answered, particularly as the Earl of Devonshire is ready to give his support to that effect.—Undated.
½ p. (P. 922)
[See Cal. S.P. Ireland, 1603–7, p. 252.]
Lord Cobham to Viscount Cranborne.
1604–5, February 12. He has spoken this morning to Sir John Leveson, "who hath acquainted me what the effect of the interrogatories wer that hee was swrone [sic] unto. His answer in substans was this, that the leases wer min and so now the kings". He begs Cranborne to have him in his thoughts since there is no other who will do so, "for otherwis I am not ignorant how my fortun stands and what wold becom of me".—From the Toure 12 of Feb. 1604.
Holograph. Seal. Endorsed: "1604. Lord Cobham to my lord." ⅓ p. (P. 2443.)
Sir John Fortescue to Viscount Cranborne.
1604–5, February 12. He has been informed by a servant of his, Gabriel Mathew, who was farmer of a part of the Queen's jointure within the manor of Hanslop, that it is proposed to pass the same in reversion to certain of the Queen's servants. He asks that Mathew be preferred before all others, since his father, grandfather and other ancestors of his have been tenants of the property for one hundred years, and the farm represents his whole estate. Mathew is ready to pay whatever money is thought reasonable either to the Queen or to those to whom the grant of reversion has been made.—At my howse at Westminster this xii of February, 1604.
Holograph. Endorsed: "Sir John Fortescu to my lord, 12 Febr. 1604." 1 p. (P. 2411.)
Abigail Smith to the King.
[After February 14, 1604–5]. She is the wife of Robert Smith, who has been imprisoned for presenting a petition justifying his nonconformity, and deprived of his benefice, (fn. 1) although he has publicly acknowledged his readiness to conform to everything which can be demanded of him by law. He is also prepared to yield further if the things required of him are agreeable to Holy Scriptures, according to the Royal proclamation, or his reasons to the contrary sufficiently answered. She requests that since "by the great charter of England none ys to be disseised of his freehold (of which nature his benefice is) but by the lawe of the land", her husband be allowed to enjoy his benefice until such time as he shall be evicted by due course of law.—Undated.
1 p. (P. 444.)
Sir Edward Pitt and William Smallman to Viscount Cranborne.
[Before February 16, 1604–5]. The site and demesne of Ivington, co. Hereford, was conveyed by the late Queen Mary to Sir Henry Jernyngham, whose heir made a lease of the same of which there are some years yet to run. It was purchased by Smallman who sold the reversion to Sir Edward Pitt. Mr Tipper now alleges that the title is defective, and although petitioners' counsel is not of that opinion, they prefer "for quietnes" to compound. Moreover the manor has been conveyed to the Queen as part of her jointure, and although the site and demesne are not part of the property so conveyed, petitioners will be obliged to pay a double charge for a settled composition. They ask that Cranborne be informed of the true state of affairs by the Queen's Attorney-General, and that he intervene on their behalf for a favourable composition both with the King and Queen.—Undated.
¾ p. (P. 1371.)
[See H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, p. 58.]
William Tooker to the King.
[After February 16, 1604–5]. If it is the King's pleasure that he relinquish an archdeaconry whose value is £40 a year, £10 more than that of the deanery that has been bestowed upon him, (fn. 2) he will submit and do so. But he points out that the late Queen Elizabeth and the King himself preferred many without taking anything away from them. For example, Dr King who was appointed Dean of Oxford and still remained an archdeacon. As for Mr Buckeridge, he is already Archdeacon of Northampton, and if he should get petitioner's archdeaconry he would be much more advanced than petitioner who has waited there twenty years.—Undated.
1 p. (P. 1296.)
Patrick Tipper to the King.
[1604–5, February 17]. He refers to his recent petition in which he prayed that the government of Ireland should be entrusted to the Duke of York as Vice-Gerent there. He now begs that his presumption should be forgiven, and enumerates the reasons which had impelled him to venture such a proposition. Firstly, the cause of the wars and disorders in Ireland reside in the misgovernment of the English and the discontent of the Irish gentry who have been excluded from office, and thereby deprived of the opportunity of establishing a stable and generally accepted administration. Secondly, many members of the Council in Ireland are not only English but military men, who have delegated their authority to inferior officers. These, in turn, have committed violence and outrages with impunity, and no redress can be expected from their military superiors. Thirdly, lands bestowed as a gift by the late Queen Elizabeth have been invariably sold and the money conveyed out of Ireland, to the consequent impoverishment of that country. This deliberate violation of the ordinance against transportation of coin to England still continues. Fourthly, Judges and Justices in Ireland are Englishmen and ignorant of the Irish language, and often fail to understand what is said by the prisoners arraigned before them. Consequently they are forced to employ interpreters, a system which is open to abuse and errors.
In view of these facts, petitioner submits the following proposals to be considered by the King. Firstly, that Charles, Duke of York, should have the regency of Ireland, and an Irishman of distinction and undoubted loyalty should be appointed his deputy, as was the Earl of Kildare to the natural son of Henry VIII (fn. 3) and to John after Henry II. Secondly, that the Irish gentry, who are well versed in Irish and English, should be appointed to judicial offices in Ireland, as well as to other positions of responsibility, "it being a matter in policie that every nation is best governed by their own people". Thirdly, that the military men should be withdrawn, and so relieve the financial burden on Ireland and England. Fourthly, that the Irish gentry who have been and still are students in England, and have the requisite qualifications for legal employment, should be appointed and preferred to those posts which have been denied them hitherto.
The adoption of these proposals would lead to a stable and prosperous Ireland, and the King's own revenues would be augmented to £10,000 annually.
Note by Sir Julius Caesar: "At Court at Whitehall, 17 Feb. 1604. This petition is referred to the consideration and annswer of the Lords of his Mats most honorable privie Counsell."
Endorsed: "To the Kinges most Excellent Matie. [? February] 1605. The humble petition of Patrick Tipper.
That havinge attended here to his verie great charge for fyve months space in the prosecution of a suite to your Highnes in the behalfe of his poore contry of Ireland, tending to the generall good of that kingdome and the encrease and advancement of your Mats revenues there, the substance of which is described in the articles here enclosed: and now wanting meanes to continue the prosecution thereof anie longer, he humblie beseecheth your Highnes gratiouslie to consider of his good intention proceeding from a loyall dutie to doe your Matie and his countrey service. And that your Highnes would bee pleased to grant a Commission to the nobility of Ireland to examine and certifie your Matie their opinions touching the said article or otherwise to signifie your Mats direct answer therein as may best stand with your Mats gratious pleasure in that behalfe."
1 p. (P. 284.)
Patrick Tipper to the King.
[After February 17, 1604–5]. He refers to two previous petitions concerning the state of Ireland, to which he has received no reply. His expenses in sojourning in London while awaiting the King's answer are exceeding his means. He requests either a private audience to discuss the matter with the King, or that it be referred to any "specyall" person approved of by the King that he may report on it. In the meantime, he solicits an allowance towards defraying his costs.—Undated.
½ p. (P. 1875.) See P. 284 supra.
William Curle to Viscount Cranborne.
1604–5, February 28. He sends him an account of the receipts of the court as requested by Cranborne. Discusses other matters of financial interest.—Aldersgate Streate, this xxviiith of Ffebruarie, 1604.
Holograph. Endorsed: "Auditor Tuck." ½ p. (P. 2195.)
William Walsh to the King.
[1604–5, February]. He refers to his services on behalf of the late Queen Elizabeth, and to the losses sustained by him during the wars in Ireland. He has been a suitor for relief in London for the past eighteen months, and he and his family are now in dire distress. He requests that, as a professional soldier, he be granted a passport to serve beyond the seas, and to take with him as many Irish volunteers as he can recruit. He asks also for financial assistance to further this scheme.—Undated.
Note by Sir Julius Caesar: "At the Court at Whitehall, ye — of Ffeb, 1604. His Matie hathe referred the consideration and answeringe of this petition to the L. Viscount Cranborne."
½ p. (P. 447.)
Erasmus Dryden to the Privy Council.
[? February, 1604–5]. He protests his sincerity in gathering signatures for a petition to the King. He has heard that the Council and the Judges have "sentenced it to be against the lawes to gather handes in favour of persons refusinge conformity", and expresses deep regret for having transgressed in this manner, and thus offended the King, the Council and the law. He hopes that this testimony, and the fact that he has suffered greater length of imprisonment than any other knight or gentleman implicated in the same affair, will satisfy the Council and convince its members of his integrity and affection to the King.—Undated.
1 p. (P. 57.)


  • 1. He was deprived of his benefice on or shortly before February 14, 1604–5. [See C. H. Cooper Athenae Cantabrigienses, Vol. 11, p. 479, and H.M.C. Salisbury MSS, Vol. XVII, p. 641.]
  • 2. Tooker was appointed Dean of Lichfield on February 16, 1605, and resigned his archdeaconry of Barnstaple. [See D.N.B. Vol. LVII, p. 52.]
  • 3. The Duke of Richmond.