^{page 2 note *} Rot. Soacc. Norman, lx. lxii. clxxiv.

^{page 3 note *} Rot. Claus. 7 and 8 Henry III. pp. 541b, 557, 557b, 558, 578, 581.

^{page 3 note †} 15 April, 17 John. Rot. Claus. p. 262.

^{page 3 note ‡} Rot. Fin. 5 Henry III. i. 70.

^{page 3 note §} Rot. Claus. p. 261.

^{page 4 note *} Rot. Claus. p. 576.

^{page 4 note †} There is mention in Rot. Fin. i. 109, of a Ranulph de Verney who had married one Agnes Wae. This may have been a younger son of Ralph de Verney of Pitchcombe. That he had sons is clear from Rot. Pin. i. 110, and that John was his heir from Rot. Fin. i. 188.

^{page 4 note ‡} Rot. Claus. 8 Henry III. 624, 649b; Rot. Fin. i. 110; Cal. Rot. Chart. 46.

^{page 4 note §} Rot. Claus. p. 597.

^{page 4 note ║} Rot. Fin. i. 188.

^{page 4 note ¶} Testa de Nevill, pp. 111, 113, 114.

^{page 5 note *} Sciant presentes, &c. quod ego Radulphus de Vernay dedi, &c. Johanni Nernuit, pro servicio suo, et pro decem marcis argenti quas michi dedit in gersumam, medietatem advocaeionis et donacionis ecolesie beate Marie de Fletmerston, et illam acram terre mee que abuttat in Nowelmere ex parte meridionali juxta terram Ricardi filii Reginaldi in eadem villa, cum omnibus, &c. Habendis et tenendis de me, &c. dicto Johanni Neyrnuyte et heredibus suis, et cuicunque dictam advocacionem, &c. dare legare vendere et assignare voluerit, et quando, exceptis Judeis et viris religiosis, libere quiete et bene, et in pace, cum toto iure et clameo quod habui et habere potui in eisdem, jure hereditario, imperpetuum; Reddendo, &c. unum clavum gilofrie ad Natale Domini, pro omnibus serviciis consuetudinibus secularibus et demandis. Et ego Radulphus de Verney et, &c. warrantizabimus, &c. dictam meam medietatem, &c. dicto Johanni Neyrnute et, &c. contra omnes homines et feminas Judeos et Christianos imperpetuum. Ut autem premissa omnia perpetua fidei firmitate et warrantia teneantur hanc presentem cartam meam sigilli mei iinpressione roboraui. Hiis testibus, Roberto Malet, Ricardo de Arches, Johanne Carbonell, Alexandra de Arches, Roberto de Arches, et aliis.

This abstract is printed from a copy of the deed in a collection of charters relating to Fleet Marston in the possession of Mr. Thoms, the Secretary of the Camden Society.

^{page 5 note †} Esc. 28 Edward I. No. 44; and Fleet Marston Charters, No. 7, 13 Edward II.

^{page 6 note *} Inq. post mort. 42 Edw. III. 2d nos. No. 9.

^{page 6 note †} There is the greatest difficulty in establishing this part of the pedigree with anything like certainty, partly from a deficiency of evidence, and partly from the blunders and hasty conclusions of previous writers. I have taken as my chief authority the valuable collection of Fleet Marston charters with which I have been favoured by Mr. Thoms. After an examination of the records vouched by Dr. Lipscomb, I have been obliged in several cases to depart altogether from the pedigree published in his Hist, of Bucks, i. 178.

^{page 7 note *} incitare?

^{page 7 note †} Lotorium or Lavatorium, a lavatory or laver. The word is used to signify both a piscina and the general washing-place found in many monastic buildings.

^{page 12 note *} Strype's Stowe, ii. 222, edit. 1755.

^{page 13 note *} Warkworth's Chron.p. 21; Restoration of Edward IV. p. 47.

^{page 13 note †} Prynne's Brief Register, iv. 1046.

^{page 15 note *} Probate at Claydon. Proved at Lambeth.

^{page 16 note *} Rot. Parl. vi. 27.

^{page 16 note †} Hist. of Herts, 594.

^{page 16 note ‡} Baker's Northamptonshire, i. 492.

^{page 16 note §} Proc. of Privy Council, v. 27, 284.

^{page 17 note *} Rot. Parl. v. 477.

^{page 17 note †} All that I have found respecting the wife of the second Sir Robert Whittingham is that her name was Catherine.

^{page 17 note ‡} Addit. MS. 4613, art. 2.

^{page 18 note *} Rot. Parl. v. 477.

^{page 18 note †} Warkworth's Chron. p. 18.

^{page 19 note *} Rot. Parl. vi. 27.

^{page 20 note *} 1 Rot. Pat. 12 Ed. IV. m. 20.

^{page 20 note †} 4 Rot. Pat. 1 Ed. IV. m. 86.

^{page 20 note ‡} 2 Rot. Pat. 4 Ed. IV. m. 19.

^{page 20 note §} Rot. Parl. vi. 90.

^{page 21 note *} This must not be understood as if the Robert Whittingham here mentioned was never knighted. The fact that he was so is unquestionable. The designation seems intended to allude to his office in the household of Henry VI.

^{page 21 note †} Rot. Parl. vi. 317.

^{page 22 note *} The grant from Edward IV. to Sir Ralph is dated 22nd August, 7th Edward IV. Wansford's release is dated on the 1st September, 7th Edward IV. Both these deeds are at Claydon, and also Wansford's purchase deed, dated 18th June, 33rd Henry VI.

^{page 23 note *} Among the ancient deeds relating to Middle Claydon is one of the time of Edward I., by which William de Cantilupe, then lord of the manor of Middle Claydon, granted for the health of his own soul and the souls of his ancestors a rent-charge of 13s. 4d. for the provision of two wax tapers of twelve pounds weight, to be ready annually on Easter eve, and to be used daily at every mass, at the elevation of the host. The provisions of the deed are so curious that it is thought worth while to give an abstract of it.

“Omnibus ad quos, &c. Willielmus de Cantilupo salutem, &c. Cum dominus rex Edwardus filius regis Henrici michi per cartam suam concesserit et licentiam dederit, &c. Noueritis me dedisse, &c. pro salute anime mee et antecessorum meorum ac etciam heredum meorum Thome de Sancto Andree rectori ecclesie de Middel Claydon unum toftum jacens juxta curiam dicti Thome rectoris, &o. nomine redditus annualis tresdecim solidatarum et quatuor denaratarum, &c. Habendum, &c. sibi et suceessoribus suis inperpetuum, Inueniendum inde annuatim et sustentandum ipse et successores sui duas torchias cere ponderis duodecim librarum cere in ecclesia predicta singulis diebus ad singulas missas in eadem celebratas ardentes ad elevacionem corporis Christi inperpetuum duraturas; Ita, videlicet, quod torchie predicte quolibet anno in vigilia Pasche noue sint parate per visum ballivorum dominorum de Middel Claydon quorumcunque et custodum operis ecclesie predicte qui pro tempore fuerint; et quod de torchiis predictis in vigilia Pasche remanserit eadem die predictis custodibus operis ecclesie predicte per predictum Thomam, &c. per visum dictorum dominorum ballivorum sub pondere liberetur; Ita quod per visum ipsius Thome, &c. ac etiam dictorum dominorum ballivorum, inde faciant luminaria coram sancta cruce, et beata Maria virgine, et alibi in ecclesia predicta prout salubrius videant expedire; et quod ipsi custodes totam gutteram torehiarum predictarum ad luminaria predicta facienda pro voluntate sua annuatim percipiant. Et si contingat prefatum Thomam vel ejus successores cessare vel deficere in aliqua parte in predictis, &c. extunc liceat mihi et heredibus meis dominis, &c. predictum Thomam et ejus successores in predictis tofto et terris, &c. distringere, et districtiones retinere quousque de omnibus defeetis, &c. plenarie fuerit satisfactum. Ita tamen quod nullum jus terre predicte mihi vel heredibus meis ob defectu servicii, &c. possit in futurum; vel quod aliquis heredum meorum servicium predictum potestatem habeat relaxandi. Et si contigat, quod absit, me vel heredes meos remissos vel neggligentes esse in servicio torchiarum predictarum exigendo volo et concedo quod quilibet parochianus predicte ville de Middel Claydon predictum Thomam vel &c. in predictis tofto et terris nomine nostro distringere possit. Et quotienscunque contingent ecclesiam predictam fore vacantem volo et concedo pro me, &c. quod custodes operis eeclesie predicte custodiam totius terre predicte habeant quousque rector ecclesie predicte predictis dominis vel suis ballivis fecerit sacramentum fidelitatis ad servicia predicta facienda et non ulterius custodiam habeant; Ita, videlicet, quod omnes custus, &c. per rectorem secundum visum legalium hominum restituantur. Et ad hæc omnia fideliter facienda predictus Thomas mihi sacramentum fidelitatis super hoc facto fecit, et sic quilibet successorum suorum consimile sacramentum faeiet priusquam aliquod proficuum percipiat. Et ego predictua Willielmus de Cantilupo et heredes, &o. contra omnes homines warantizabimua inperpetuum. In cujua rei testimonium presenti carte in tribus partibus cyrograffi penes predictum Thomam remanenti sigillo meo apposui, et alteri parti penes me remanenti dictus Thomas sigillum suum apposuit, ac tercie parti penes custodes operis ecclesie predicte et parochianos remanenti sigillum meum et sigillum predicti Thome sunt apposita. Hiia testibus, Dominis Johanne Neyrnuit, Johanne de Chetewode, Roberto Malet, Johanne Gyffard, militibus; Waltero de Sancto Andrea, Georgio Gyffard, Waltero de Craunford, Willielmo de Hagworthingham, Henrico filio Johannis de Middel Claydon, et aliis.”

^{page 24 note *} Inq. post mort. 18 Edw. IV. no. 28. A panel portrait at Claydon House has been supposed to represent Sir Ralph, but there is a date upon it which is fatal to the supposition: “Ann. æt. 54, 1594.”

^{page 30 note *} Manning and Bray's Surrey, ii. 511; Lysons's Environs, i. 95.

^{page 30 note †} I am unable to explain this word. It is here printed as it stands in the MS., Julius B. xii. fo. 34. Hearne printed it “latkies.”

^{page 30 note ‡} Leland's Collect, iv. 220.

^{page 31 note *} Pedigree shewing the connection between the Verney family and king Henry VII.

^{page 31 note †} Privy Purse Expenses of Elizabeth of York, edit. Nicolas. Lond. 1830. In addition to the items relating to lady Verney referred to in the Index at p. 228, a notice there omitted to be mentioned will be found at p. 54.

^{page 32 note *} Ella's Brand, edit. 1841, vol. i. p. 169. Henry VIII. and Katharine of Arragon rode through the streets of London on one occasion to witness the city carnival on St. Peter's eve. It was also one of the sights exhibited to the king of Denmark on his visit to England in 1524. Ibid.

^{page 37 note *} Leland's Collect, iv. 231.

^{page 37 note †} Rot. Parl. vi. 537.

^{page 37 note ‡} Feed. xii. 356.

^{page 37 note §} Fuller's Worthies, i. 366.

^{page 37 note ║} There is a view of the old manor house of Penley in Chauncy's Hist, of Hertfordshire, p. 594. It would seem to have been a building partly of the age of Edward III. but greatly altered about the time of Henry VII. Its wreck is now occupied by farm labourers, and an old chimney-piece is all that remains of its ancient state.

^{page 37 note ¶} Verney MS.

^{page 37 note **} Inq. post mortem, 18 Edw. IV. no. 28, and 21 Henry VII. no. 20.

^{page 38 note *} During the continuance of the present system of management at the Prerogative Office in Doctors’ Commons the slightest item of information respecting the old wills in the keeping of the registrars is valuable. On this account, and also because it may save some future inquirer trouble, I mention that the will of John Verney proved in 1508 is not the will of sir John Verney, nor of any member of this family. It is the will of a John Verney of Somersetshire or Dorsetshire, I forget which, and, contrary to the practice in all other record offices, no one who searches in that office is allowed to take notes. The testator is merely described as “John Verney esquire.” In the course of researches in connection with my present subject I have been frequently stopped by the barrier which the regulations of the record office at Doctors' Commons oppose to all literary inquirers. To the best of my knowledge and belief, that office is the only depository of historical documents—I had almost said the only office of any kind in the kingdom—in which there is no feeling whatever in favour of literature and historical inquiry.

^{page 40 note *} Penley or Pendley, for which this seems intended, although on the border of the county, is really in Hertfordshire.

^{page 41 note *} Husband of sir John Verney's sister Margaret.

^{page 41 note †} The second sir Ralph.

^{page 41 note ‡} Possibly the husband of the Nell Gwynne of Edward IV., or more probably Richard Shore, draper, who was sheriff of London in 1505.

^{page 41 note §} Christian wife of sir Henry Colet, lord mayor of London, and mother of Dr. John Colet, dean of St. Paul's, and founder of St. Paul's school.

^{page 42 note *} John Iwardby left three daughters: 1, Elizabeth, married first to William Elmes, and secondly to Thomas Pygott; 2, Margery, who was married to the third sir Ralph Verney; and 3, Elena, married first to William Cutlard, serjeant-at-law, and secondly to Thomas Clyfford, gent. Harl. MS. 756, fo. 18.

^{page 43 note *} If we may judge from various items in the Privy Purse Expenses of Elizabeth of York, the court-gowns of that period must have been articles of a very tremendous character. Witness the following among many entries which all tell the same tale: “Item, the xxiij^ti day of July to Richard Justice, page of the robys, for his costes going from Richmount to London for a gowne of cloth of gold furred with pawmpilyon ayenst Corpus Xp'i day, by the space of twoo days, every day viijd.—xvid. Item, for bote hire for the same gowne, xijd.” (p. 33.) On the following 26th November the same person was paid “for his costes going from Westminster to London in the night for a gowne of blewe velvet for the quene and for his bote hyere, viijd. Item, for conveying alle the quenes lyned gownys from Westminster to London by water, and for mens labour that bare the same gownys to the water and from the water, vd.” (p. 68.) There are many other items of the same character.

^{page 44 note *} A blank left in the original Inspeximus of the probate from which we print.

^{page 47 note *} Inq. post mortem 20 Hen. VIII. no. 150.

^{page 49 note *} Inq. p. m. 20 Henry VIII. no. 150.

^{page 49 note †} Decretal copy under the seal of king Edward VI. for the prerogative court, at Claydon.

^{page 50 note *} Inq. post mortem 17 Henry VIII. nos. 74 and 91.

^{page 51 note *} Roger Gyffard died on the 23rd January, 1542. A brass in Middle Claydon church commemorates this Roger, with his wife, and their family of thirteen sons and seven daughters. A deed of release at Claydon seems to prove that only four of the sons survived until the 8th May, 37th Henry VIII. A.D. 1545. At that time John, Ralph, William, and Nicholas Gyffard released all their interest in the Claydon lease under their father's will to their brother George, in consideration of a payment to them of 300l. and of his great expenses in repairs.

^{page 52 note *} Sir Reginald Bray, K.G. servant of Margaret countess of Richmond, was instrumental, with Morton, afterwards bishop and cardinal, sir John Cheyne, and sir William Sands (the two last friends of the Verneys), in procuring the success of Henry VII. It was sir Reginald Bray who is said to have opportunely found the crown in a bush after the battle of Bosworth.

^{page 52 note †} Leland's Collect, ii. 676, edit. 1774.

^{page 52 note ‡} Chron. Calais, 174.

^{page 54 note *} This clause is expressed in words which mark in a very striking way the difference between the general state of manners in the class of society to which these ladies belonged in their day and in our own. Besides the imposition of penalties in case of their being obstinate or wilful, possibilities not now to be contemplated, similar penalties are provided in case they “dishonest themselves by open” incontinence (I do not quote the very word) before marriage.

^{page 55 note *} Manning and Bray's Surrey, i. 522.

^{page 55 note †} Inq. p. m. 38 Henry VIII. no. 99.

^{page 55 note ‡} Office copy among Verney MSS.

^{page 55 note §} These hospitals with some lands attached were held of the king by the service of a thirtieth part of a knight's fee, and were subject, after the death of Richard Hordern, to a yearly rent of twenty shillings. Inq. p. m. 38 Henry VIII. no 99.

^{page 57 note *} He attained 18 on the day of St. James the Apostle (25 July) next following the death of his father. Inq. p. m. 38 Hen. VIII. no. 2.

^{page 57 note †} Nicolas, Test. Vet. 42, 44.

^{page 57 note ‡} Excerpt a Hist. pp. 298, 299, 302. Machyn's Diary, 145.

^{page 57 note §} Haynes's Burghley Papers, 155, 159.

^{page 57 note ║} Ellis's Letters, 2nd Ser. ii. 253.

^{page 58 note *} Addit. MS. 5751, fo. 307.

^{page 58 note †} Haynes, 167; Chron. of Queen Jane, 33.

^{page 58 note ‡} Haynes, 168.

^{page 58 note §} Addit. MS. 5751, fo. 317; Strype's Mem. iii. pt. 2, p. 160.

^{page 58 note ║} Harl. MS. 1533, fo. 75.

^{page 58 note ¶} Dugdale's Baron, ii. 311.

^{page 58 note **} Willis, in his History of Buckingham, describes a monumental brass to lady Verney, which existed in his time. It was the figure of a woman, with the following legend on a label, which proceeded from her mouth: “Sancta Trinitas, unus deus, miserere nobis.” Under the figure was inscribed, “Here lyeth buryed, under this stone, the body of Dorothy Verney, in her life-time wife to Edmund Verney, esq. and daughter to sir Edmund Peckham, knyght, who died the 23 day of May, in the yere of our Lord God 1547; on whose soul Jesu have mercy. Amen.” (Willis, 154.)

^{page 59 note *} In an original document in the State Paper office (Domestic, 26 March, 1556,) there occurs the following passage: “He likewise told me of the talk between the queen and my lady Dudley, that she asked her where her brother Henry was? and she made answer, ‘In France, as I hear say, for I knew not of his going.’ And then the queen asked her for what cause he went over; and then she answered, she thought for debt. To whom the queen answered, that he needed not for debt, for we have given him iiij^{xx li} by year. And my lady affirmed and said, ‘And like your grace, that is true, but, notwithstanding all, that did not serve him. He was so afeard of his creditors that be durst not tarry here any longer.’ To whom the queen's majesty said, ‘If it had been for debt, if we had been made privy he should not have gone to the French king to pay his debt, for as we are credibly advertised, he is so received at the king's hand, and so entertained, that if he had been the most noble man coming from-us thither [he] could not have been better or the like—marvelling much,’ said the queen's majesty, ‘for what cause the French king should entertain any subject of ours in such sort.” We have quoted the whole of this long passage, because the conversation is characteristic, and will be found to tell upon the future history of the conspiracy; but in reference to the question, of Who was Dudley the conspirator, the chief importance of the extract consists in establishing that he was a brother of a lady Dudley who was in the court temp. Mary. The lady Dudley whom this description at once brings to mind was Katherine Brydges, daughter of the first lord Chandos of Sudeley, and wife of Edward lord Dudley of the family of Sutton de Dudley, one of the gentlewomen in ordinary attendance on queen Mary. By letters patent, dated 31st December, 2 and 3 Philip and Mary, A.D. 1555, the queen made a settlement upon that lady and her intended husband, and she was then described as “una generosarum ordinariarum super personam dictæ reginæ attendentium,” whom lord Dudley, “deo favente, in uxorem ducere intendit.” (Rot. Pat. 2 and 3 Philip and Mary, part 2.) This looks very like the lady who was Henry Dudley's sister, that is, sister-in-law; nor is proof wanting that a brother of Edward lord Dudley might have been called by the name of Dudley. The family name was Sutton, Sutton de Dudley, but the branch of the family seated at Yanwith in Westmorland, and which was descended from Edmund the eldest son of John the fourth lord Dudley, was called Dudley and not Sutton. One of them, a John Duddeleye, lies buried in Stoke Newington church. His widow (a connection of the Verneys) was afterwards married to another Sutton, the founder of the Charter house. (Nicholson and Burn's Westmoreland, i. 412; Hist. Stoke Newington in Bibl. Topog. 10, 33). If it be thought that Henry Dudley was a son of some nearer connection of the duke of Northumberland as, for example, of sir Andrew Dudley, K.G., then the question arises: Who was Henry Dudley's sister, the lady Dudley mentioned in the quotation we have just given? It is altogether a puzzle which at present we cannot unravel with any certainty.

^{page 62 note *} Ambassades de Noailles, v. 354.

^{page 63 note *} State Paper Off. Dom. Mary, 24th March, 1556. Confession of Uvedale.

^{page 64 note *} Probably the same sum which was conveyed with great ostentation through London to the Tower on the 2nd October, 1554. It was then packed in “four-score and seventeen lytell chests of a yard long and four inches broad,” says one authority (Chron. of Queen Jane, 83); “It was matted about with mats and mailed in little bundles about two foot long and almost half a foot thick,” says another authority (Foxe, vi. 560). When removed to the exchequer it was kept in chests locked up. (Fourth Rep. of Dep. Keep. of Records, 256.)

^{page 65 note *} Machyn, 102.

^{page 66 note *} Gent. Mag. for Sept. 1851, 227.

^{page 66 note †} Harl. MS. 643, fo. 68, 69, 70, 70 a.

^{page 66 note ‡} MS. State Paper Office, Domestic, April, 1556. Confession of John Daniel.

^{page 66 note §} Stowe's Annales, ed. Howes, 628.

^{page 67 note *} This connection will be seen at a glance from the following genealogical table:

^{page 67 note †} The proclamation may be seen in the noble collection of proclamations in the possession of the Society of Antiquaries of London. It is dated 1st April, 1556. Machyn says it was proclaimed through London on the 4th April. Diary, 103.

^{page 67 note ‡} The apartment complained of was in the Broad Arrow Tower. The name, “John Daniell,” and the date, “1556,” carved on a stone in the wall by the prisoner's own hand, still remain visible. Bayley's Hist. Tower, i. 207.

^{page 68 note *} “Then, said Throgmorton, I fear I shall be put to it again, and I will assure you it is a terrible pain.” MS. State Paper Office, Domestic, May, 1556.

^{page 69 note *} MS. State Paper Office, Domestic, May, 1556. Statement of Peekham.

^{page 70 note *} Calendar of Baga de Secretis, Fourth Report of Deputy Keeper of Records, p. 252.

^{page 70 note †} MS. State Paper Office, Domestic, 24th April, 1556.

^{page 70 note ‡} Machyn, 104.

^{page 71 note *} This was money intended to be coined out of the bars of Spanish silver to be stolen from the exchequer.

^{page 71 note †} Cal. of Baga de Secretis, Fourth Report, as before, 253.

^{page 71 note ‡} Machyn, 105, 106, 109.

^{page 72 note *} Cal. Baga de Secretis, Fourth Report, 255.

^{page 72 note †} Machyn, 107.

^{page 72 note ‡} Daniel and Peckham were the witnesses against the Verneys, and may have been respited with a view to their trials. The following examination of Daniel, which is in the State Paper Office (Dom. 28th May, 1556), indicates the willingness of the council to implicate, if possible, some others of their parliamentary opponents: sir William Courteney and sir John Pollard were both members of the late parliament, and also two of the protestant party which met at Arundel's. “28 May, 1556. John Daniel being examined this day above written denieth that ever Edmund Verney axed him any question of sir William Courteney or sir John Pollard being privy to this matter of the conspiracy. Item, he also denieth that he knew nor heard that ever the lord Bray or Francis Verney were privy to any part of the late conspiracy. (Signed) By me, John Danyell.”

^{page 72 note §} “He had but ae saxpence, he brake it in twa,

And gi'ed me the half o't, when he gaed awa.”—Logie o'Buchan.

^{page 72 note ║} Verney MS. 12th July, 1556. Letters patent under great seal.

^{page 73 note *} Machyn, 108.

^{page 73 note †} Orig. under great seal at Claydon.

^{page 73 note ‡} Mary's temper was frequently tried by similar conduct on the part of her husband, and if all that was rumoured may be credited, it did not always stand the test. On another occasion of this kind, which took place some months before the one above alluded to, the disagreeable tidings put her majesty “in a rage.” She “caused the king's picture to be carried out of the privy chamber, and she in a wonderful storm, and could not be in any wise quieted.” (MS. S. P. O. 26th March, 1556. Dom.) On such occasions the spirit of her father made itself manifest.

^{page 73 note §} Lodge's Illustrations, i. 217.

^{page 74 note *} Lodge's Illustrations, i. 216.

^{page 75 note *} Rot. Pat. 3 and 4 P. and M. 7th part.

^{page 75 note †} Dated 13th May, and enrolled on Rot. Pat. 3 and 4 P. and M. 7th part.

^{page 75 note ‡} Manning and Bray's Surrey, ii. 723.

^{page 76 note *} The herald says he “made no will,” (Lysons's Env. ii. 97, Faulkner's Chelsea, i. 204,) but, in fact, he made a verbal will the day before his death, in the presence of Feckenham abbot of Westminster and Edmund Verney. It contained merely a general bequest of all his estate and effects to his mother, couched in terms which indicate that he did not suppose his effects would suffice to pay his debts. His mother was appointed executrix, and proved the will on the 20th November, 1557, in the prerogative court of Canterbury, where it is absurdly entered as the will of “the right honourable John lord Bray Braye, knight.” I believe I have stated the contents of the will correctly, but I was obliged to depend upon my memory for the accuracy of my note. I was uncivilly interrupted by the jealous custos even whilst making a memorandum of the date of the will and the probate.

^{page 77 note *} Faulkner's Chelsea, i. 204. Lysons's Environs, ii. 97.

^{page 77 note †} Dugdale, Bar. ii. 282.

^{page 78 note *} The grant was dated 17th June, 1563, and was made to John Simpson, of Penley. Verney MS. of that date.

^{page 78 note †} A “master Verney,” described as “master of the jewel-house,” is said to have been buried within the tower, on the 11th December, 1558 (Machyn's Diary, 182), only two days before the death of Edmund Verney. The register of burials in the tower, for access to which I am indebted to the Rev. Mr. Evans, confirms the burial in the chapel of a person of that name and his wife, both between 1557 and 1565—the wife having died first. I have not found any evidence that the master Verney alluded to was strictly speaking “master of the jewel-house,” but he may have been employed in the jewel-house, and may have been John Verney, the second son of the fourth sir Ralph. He was a liberal man and a person of some station, for it is said that “he gave to xij. poor men good gowns.” (Machyn, ibid.) There is no will of any suoh person at Doctors’ Commons.

^{page 78 note ‡} She was seised of lands at Northmarston as her jointure under her former marriage, which were leased to Thomas Redmayne the son for 40 years, at the rent of 3l. 6s. 8d. per annum. Verney MS. 20th October, 22nd Elizabeth.

^{page 79 note *} By deed dated 3rd February, 1st Mary, A.D. 1554. See Inq. p. m. 1st Elizabeth, 2nd part, no. 4.

^{page 79 note †} Inq. p. m. 1 Elizabeth, 2nd part, no. 4.

^{page 79 note ‡} Harl. MS. 168, fo. 170.

^{page 79 note §} This knight must not be confounded with the well-known sir Peter Carew who was involved in the religious troubles of the reign of queen Mary, and of whom there is a curious biography printed in the Archseologia, xxviii. 96. Sir Peter Carew the younger was son of the rev. George Carew, dean of the queen's chapel. Sir Peter died intestate and without issue. Letters of administration were granted to dame Audrey. (Bill in Chancery, Verney versos Carew, 18th June, 1588. Orig. in Tower Lond.)

^{page 81 note *} Blomfleld, iv. 412.

^{page 81 note †} Tradition, as stated by Dr. Lipscomb (Hist. Bucks, i. 182.), has affirmed that this child was “brought into the world by the Csesarean operation, his mother dying durante partu.” Upon the strength of this “popular and uncontradicted tradition,” and because, as Dr. Lipscomb further states, this Edmund “was found, by an inquisition held on his father's death in 1599, to have been ten years of age and upwards” Dr. Lipscomb has given him a place in the Verney pedigree as the son of dame Awdrey Verney, the mother of Francis. In reply it is sufficient to remark: 1. That the inquisition referred to states that his age was “10 years and 10 days” at the death of his father, and that such death took place on the 11th Jan. 1599–1600; and 2. That it is stated on the commemorative tablet pilt up at Albury, that dame Audrey Verney died in 1588. There are innumerable evidences at Claydon that Mary the third wife and widow of sir Edmund, and not Awdrey the second wife, was the mother of this Edmund. She died in 1642.

^{page 82 note *} On the 11th Jan. 1589–90.

^{page 82 note †} As to the one date see Inq. p. m. 42 Eliz. 2nd part, no. 126; as to the other, Journals of House of Lords, ii. 222.

^{page 82 note ‡} Lords’ Journals, ii. 222, and D'Ewes's Journals, 544. The bill was entitled, An act for the confirmation of the jointure of lady Verney, wife of sir Edmund Verney, knight. It was reported with some amendments to the house of lords, by the earl of Shrewsbury, “the second of the committees,” on 1st February, 1597–8, and was read a third time and passed the lords on the 3rd February.

^{page 83 note *} Marriage settlement, 4th June, 1599, at Claydon.

^{page 83 note †} Gent. Mag. N.S. ii. 364.

^{page 85 note *} Engraved in Clutterbuok's Hertfordshire, vol. i. p. 287.

^{page 85 note †} There is the following inscription upon the portrait, “Anno aetatis suae 59, 1594.”

^{page 85 note ‡} There is at Claydon, under date of 9th February, 1580–1, an archiepiscopal licence confirmed by letters patent under the great seal, by which sir Edmund was allowed to eat flesh on days forbidden, with a good conscience, for the term of his life, on the ground that eating of fish was injurious to his health by reason of the great weakness of his stomach. His wife and any three persons whom he chose to select were allowed to be co-partakers in this indulgence.

^{page 87 note *} ? dozen.

^{page 87 note †} Sic.

^{page 87 note ‡} Verney MS. contemporary transcript.

^{page 88 note *} A parish in Buckinghamshire near Winslow.

^{page 92 note *} Of course Sackville, under treasurer of the exchequer.

^{page 92 note †} Chancellor of the exchequer.

^{page 93 note *} Collect. Topog. v. 382.

^{page 94 note *} Commons’ Journals, i. 277, 286, 290.

^{page 94 note †} This deed was recited and overturned in the act of the 39th Elizabeth (Com. Journ. i. 290). Sir Francis sought “to set” it “on foot” again. (Ibid.)

^{page 96 note *} A true historicall discourse of Muley Hamet's rising to the three kingdomes of Moruecos, Fes, and Sus, &c. &c. Lond. 4to. 1619. cap. xv.

^{page 97 note *} A true historical discourse of Muley Hamet'a, &c. cap. xv.

^{page 98 note *} See proclamations of 30th September, 1603; 12th November, 1604; 1st March, 1604–5; 8th July, 1605; 13th June, 1606; 8th January, 1608–9.

^{page 99 note *} Stowe's Annales, ed. Howes, 893.

^{page 99 note †} Proclamation of 8th January, 1608–9.

^{page 99 note ‡} Stowe, as before, 893.

^{page 100 note *} Stowe, as before.

^{page 100 note †} Court and Times of James I. i. 134, 136, 141.

^{page 101 note *} Ego Don Petrus Garsia, pater magni Xenodochii sanctæ Mariæ Pietatis, hujus nobilis civitatis Messanæ, fidem facio, Dominum Franciscum Verneyum Anglum circiter viginti sex annos natum in prædictum Xenodochium ægrotum venisse, die vigesimo quinto Augusti anno Domini MDCXV. et die sexto Septembris eodem anno post Christum natum MDCXV. mortuum esse in dicto Xenodochio, sicut notatum reperitur in libro prædicti Xenodochii in quo scribi consueverunt ægroti folio CCCLXX.; et hujus veritatis fidem faciens has literas præsentes dedi, nomenque proprium subscripsi et usitato hujus Xenodochii sigillo obsignavi. Messanæ, die x. Januarii, anno MDCXVI. Idem qui supra, Don Petrus Garsia, pater dicti Xenodochii.

^{page 101 note †} Verney MS. 13th January, 1616.

^{page 102 note *} See an excellent pedigree of the family furnished by its late representative, Charles St. Barbe, esq. of Lymington, Hants, in Hoare's South Wiltshire, Hundred of Frustfield, p. 10; also in Burke's Commoners, ii. 448.

^{page 102 note †} “Sir William Clarke's eldest son, without his privity, is lately married to the lady Verney, widow to him that turn'd Turke; and though there be no great inequality between them, either for wealth or yeares (he being four or five and forty, and she two or three and thirty), yet the old knight is so much offended that he threatens to disinherit him, and hath vowed they shall never come within his doors.” Chamberlain to Carleton, 15th July, 1619. MS. State Paper Office.

^{page 103 note *} Collection of Household Ordinances, pp. 323, 327.

^{page 104 note *} There are two fine portraits of her at Claydon.

^{page 104 note †} Verney MSS. 2nd Dec. 1612; 27th Jan. 1612–13; 22nd May, 1615.

^{page 107 note *} Additional MS. 12,496, fo. 240.

^{page 108 note *} They were struck at Santander with that which still continues to amaze English visitors, that the women are the porters. “Wonderful populous the town is, the men from the highest to the lowest going in the habits of gentlemen, ever in cloaks and swords. Drudgery they will do none at all, for their wives they make their slaves, which do not only till the ground and plant and prune their vineyards, but also carry all our luggage as our porters do in England. We have seen when these women have come with great trunks upon their heads from the shore, and ready to sink under the burthen, their own husbands standing by, their pride was such they scorned to put their helping hands o t help their wives, when they were ready to fall under the burthen, and suffered our people to help them, when they stood by and laughed.”

^{page 112 note *} Sir Richard Wynne of Gwedir, at that time a knight, but afterwards, on the death of his father, the second baronet. His narrative was printed by Hearne in the Appendix to his Historia vitoe et regni Ricardi II. a monacho quodam de Evesham eonsignata. 8vo. Oxon. 1729, pp. 299–341.

^{page 113 note *} Howell's Letters, vol. i. no. xx.

^{page 113 note †} Archeeologia, xxi, 148.

^{page 114 note ‡} Lloyd's Meraoires, p. 351, Prynne's Hidden Workes, 52.

^{page 115 note *} Fortunes of Nigel, cap. iii. and note at the end of the chapter.

^{page 115 note †} Proclamation of 29th July, 1603.

^{page 119 note *} The letter may be seen in Rushworth, i. 194.

^{page 120 note *} “Two and twenty.” Rushworth, i. 195.

^{page 121 note *} Sir P. Goodwin underscored these words, evidently by way of querying them.

^{page 121 note †} Sir P. Goodwin suggested to read here, “used our best endeavours therein, being somewhat hindered by reason of necessarie attendance vppon some other of his majestyes servyces in this country, as also by your graces absence out of the kingdom.”

^{page 122 note *} Sir P. Goodwin suggested, “they have not received full satisfaction of much due from the councell of warr for the charges of count Mansfield's forces out of this county.”

^{page 122 note †} “6 Jan. 1625.” On which day it was settled by sir Francis Goodwin; who wrote thus under the draft from which we print: “I approoue this letter with the alterations exceedingly well. FRA. GOODWIN.”

^{page 122 note ‡} Rot. Pat. 1 Car. I. pt. 5, no. 38. It is mentioned in the Fœdera, xviii. 629, as a grant to sir Edward Verney, knight.

^{page 122 note §} This was the ancient title. The later holders were knights, and so the office came to be called that of knight-marshal. There is no list of the holders of the office, but the following are enumerated in the grant to sir Thomas Vavasour:—Sir Thomas Gerrard, John Carewe, John Turbervile, Henry Sherborne, John Digby, John Russell, Thomas Wentworth, William Puckering, sir Ralph Hopton, sir George Carey late baron of Hunsdon.

^{page 123 note *} Rot. Pat. 1 Car. I. pt. 10, no. 1; and see Feed, xviii. 637.

^{page 123 note †} Rot. Pat. 2 Car. I. pt. 5, no. 38; Feed, xviii. 716.

^{page 125 note *} David viscount Buttevant, created earl of Barrymore on 30th November, 1627. He married Alice, eldest daughter of the earl of Cork.

^{page 125 note †} A brother by the half blood to sir Edmund Verney. Lord Fermanagh's Genealogical Notes, Verney MS. p. 43.

^{page 125 note ‡} Richard lord Barry, eldest son of lord Buttevant, and afterwards second earl of Barrymore.

^{page 125 note §} Smerwick, co. Kerry. The incident alluded to took place in 1580. See Camden's Elizabeth, Hearne's ed. ii. 341.

^{page 126 note *} So much interest is attached to these forced loans, especially in Bucks, that I shall print the account of the privy seals sent into that county in 1604 and 1626, with the sums received upon them, in an Appendix, Nos. I. and II.

^{page 127 note *} Howell's State Trials, ii. 91.

^{page 132 note *} “Gendarmes des ordonnances;” companies of men-at-arms instituted, or first placed muder orders, by Charles VII. of France.

^{page 135 note *} Verney MS. 3rd March, 1622–3.

^{page 135 note †} Verney MSS. 1619–20.

^{page 138 note *} “A Monument of Christian Munificence, wherein the honorable memory of the chief benefactors both to the old fraternitie of the holy Cross and the new foundation of the hospitall of Christ in Abingdon, in the county of Berks, is registered, &c. By Francis Little.” Verney MS. 20 Sept. 1627, p. 38.

^{page 138 note †} Ibid. p. 39. There died of the plague in Abingdon during that year 74 persons.

^{page 142 note *} Trinity Term, 4 Car. I. Verney MS.

^{page 148 note *} Wood's Fasti, ii. 390

^{page 148 note †} p. 125.

^{page 149 note *} Misprinted “Beke” in Collins (Peerage, iv. 365, ed. Brydges). Sir Nathaniel died on 19th February, 1673–4. (Lord Fermanagh's Genealogical Notes, Verney MS.) One of Nathaniel Hobart's letters, published in Cary's Mem. of the Great Civil War, i. 154, is addressed to a cousin, J. Hobart, and makes mention of a brother lately deceased. This letter is dated by the editor, Oct. 15, 1647.

^{page 150 note *} Lines commencing—

The famous duke supposed he could have tamed

Rebellious hearts, and in their stead have framed—not worth printing.

^{page 150 note †} Rev. J. Crowther to Ralph Verney, dated from Oxford.

^{page 150 note ‡} Rev. William Hodges, of Exeter college, and afterwards vicar of Bampton, who had been preaching against the ceremonial reintroductions of this period. See Wood's Hist, and Antiq. ii. 375–384.

^{page 150 note §} William lord Russell, eldest son of Francis the fourth earl, and himself afterwards the fifth earl of Bedford. He was of Magdalen College, Oxford.

^{page 150 note ║} Perhaps John Maynard the puritan divine, rector of Mayfield in Sussex, and one of the Westminster assembly of divines. He was of Magdalen Hall. Wood's Athena), iii. 892, ed. Bliss.

^{page 151 note *} Some publication of the very learned Thomas Bilson bishop of Winchester, author of “The true difference between Christian subjection and unchristian rebellion,” “The perpetual government of Christ's church,” and various published sermons. The first of these books, written by command of queen Elizabeth in defence of the revolt of the Low Countries against Spain, was used with great effect in support of the anti-royalist cause in the time of Charles I.

^{page 151 note †} The reverend John Aris, rector of Middle Claydon from 1630 to 1657. He also was of Magdalen Hall.

^{page 151 note ‡} The rev. J. Crowther to Ralph Verney, dated from Oxford.

^{page 151 note §} His college, Magdalen Hall.

^{page 151 note ║} The rev. J. Crowther to Ralph Verney, dated from Oxford.

^{page 151 note ¶} The same to the same. I have inserted this and other notices of the educational helps for which Ralph Verney was indebted to Mr. Crowther, principally to shew under what difficulties the men of that day laboured in the acquisition of even the simplest elementary information.

^{page 152 note *} “William Denton, M.D. youngest son of sir Thomas Denton, mentioned before, at p. 137. After practising physic for some years at Oxford, he removed to London, and was appointed physician to Charles I. He lived in the metropolis through the whole time of the Civil War, and was a constant friend and correspondent of his nephew Ralph Verney.

^{page 152 note †} The Estates, Empires, and Principalities of the World. Translated from the French of P. D'Avilly, by Edward Grimstone. Lond. 1615. Fol. (Watt's Biblioth.)

^{page 152 note ‡} The Generale Historie of the magnificent state of Venice. Translated from the original of Thomas de Fougasses, by W. Shute. Lond. 1612. Fol.

^{page 152 note §} Rev. J. Crowther to Ralph Verney, dated from Oxford.

^{page 153 note *} There are thre e other letters at Claydon upon this subject, dated 4th September 1628, 7th November 1628, and 7th June 1629. The writer, a niece of old lady Verney, sir Edmund's mother, held a bond for 200l., dated 18th March 1617, given by lord chancellor Bacon to Thomas Sugar esquire, which was “all her poore estate.” Through lady Verney she had been applying for several years, without effect, to the administrators of lord Bacon's property—sir Robert Rich, sir Richard Young, and sir Thomas Meautys.

^{page 153 note †} A councillor of Gray's Inn.

^{page 153 note ‡} Ann Blakeney to lady Verney.

^{page 153 note §} Venetia, daughter of sir Edward Stanley, of Tongue castle, in Shropshire, and wife of sir Kenelm Digby, a lady celebrated for beauty, frailty, and, after her marriage, for the strict practice of a ceremonial religion. Ben Jonson commemorated what he terms her “fair fame,” in his poem of Eupheme, and the other wits of the time were no less affected by her death than Mr. Dillon. Her husband, it will be remembered, racked his chemical skill to preserve her beauty by cosmetics, and, after her death, strove to immortalise her features by a bust of copper gilt, set up in Christ church, Newgate street. The cosmetics availed but little against the great conqueror. The bust was injured in the fire of London, and was last seen, ten years afterwards, by a strolling antiquary, at a broker's stall in Newgate street. Equally unfortunate were the plaster casts which sir Kenelm possessed of her hands and feet, as well as of her face. Every memorial of her beauty has disappeared, except the lines of Ben Jonson— “Sitting and ready to be drawn”—and her portraits by Vandyke. These constitute a double immortality, whatever else may have been lost.

^{page 154 note *} Christopher Scheibler, a professor of the university of Giessen, and afterwards of Dortmund, who wrote on logic and metaphysics, is doubtless the author alluded to. Two of his books were reprinted at Oxford, in 1637 and 1657.

^{page 154 note †} Some work of the celebrated Peter Ramus, the first to assault the Aristotelian logic. There had been editions or translations of the most important of his works printed before this time in England.

^{page 154 note ‡} Audomar Talseus, an author of the sixteenth century, who wrote principally upon rhetoric.

^{page 154 note §} Probably some book of Dr. Hakewill, alluded to at p. 148, but I do not find it in the list of his published works.

^{page 154 note ║} “Degorie Wheare [the first Camden professor of history at Oxford] is not at Oxford, therefore have I not sent awaye my letter.” J. Dillon to Ralph Verney, 13th August, 1633.

^{page 154 note ¶} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 154 note **} James Hay earl of Carlisle, a favourite of James I., remembered principally for his singular extravagance.

^{page 154 note ‡‡} Ralph Verney to James Dillon, from Claydon.

^{page 155 note *} Lord Strafford, then viscount Wentworth.

^{page 155 note †} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 155 note ‡} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 155 note §} Ralph Verney to James Dillon, from Claydon.

^{page 155 note ║} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 156 note *} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 156 note †} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 156 note ‡} Carlisle’s Gentlemen of the Privy Chamber, p. 108.

^{page 156 note §} Verney MS. 24th June, 1633.

^{page 156 note ║} Baillie's Letters, i. 215.

^{page 157 note *} Laud's Diary, p. 48, ed. Wharton.

^{page 157 note †} Verney MS., 27th September, 1633.

^{page 157 note ‡} Ralph Verney to James Dillon, from Claydon.

^{page 157 note §} In a sentence of such frightful enormity, 1000l. more or less is of little moment, but the amount was 5000l. It was customary in the Star Chamber to take the average of the suggested sums.

^{page 158 note *} Coventry.

^{page 158 note †} Weston, created earl of Portland in 1632.

^{page 158 note ‡} Histriomastix. The players’ scourge or actors’ tragsedie. Lond. 4to. 1633.

^{page 158 note §} Dorothy Leake, between whom and Dillon there was great romping and familiarity. In a previous letter we find that she had complained of him for rubbing the skin off her lips. He replied— “See my goodness! I am readie to rubbe of the skinn of my owne, and tha t uppon hers, to make her amends.” In another recent letter he sends her “a dozen of gloves. Tenn of them,” he continues, “were (Iconfess) long since due unto her; the other tow I mean to make her deserve when I meet her next.”

^{page 158 note ║} Dr. William Denton.

^{page 158 note ¶} To Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 159 note *} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 159 note †} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 159 note ‡} See before, p. 150.

^{page 159 note §} Ralph Verney to James Dillon, from Claydon.

^{page 159 note ║} On the death of the earl of Sussex, the lord chamberlain of Elizabeth, the title descended to his brother, who died without issue in 1629. The next heir was sir Edward Ratcliffe, son of sir Humphrey Rateliffe, of Elstow, co. Bedford. This is the gentleman here alluded to.

^{page 159 note ¶} Sir George Ratcliffe, friend of lord Strafford, whose correspondence was edited by Dr. Whitaker, 4to. Lond. 1810.

^{page 159 note **} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from Dublin.

^{page 160 note *} Ralph Verney to James Dillon, from Claydon.

^{page 162 note *} Verney MS. 30th July, 1634.

^{page 163 note *} Verney MS. 1st August, 1634.

^{page 165 note *} Sir John Murray, a well-known personal attendant and favourite of James I. oreated earl of Annandale, 13th March, 1624–5. He had many grants of lands from king James.

^{page 166 note *} In what sense Dillon applied the title of grandfather to sir Edmund Verney does not appear. It was probably merely a term of familiarity and affection. Sir Edmund on his side termed Dillon grandson.

^{page 167 note *} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from Dublin.

^{page 167 note †} Murrough, sixth baron, and afterwards created first earl of Inehiquin, distinguished for military skill and many soldierlike exploits during the Irish rebellion. He married Elizabeth daughter of sir William St. Leger, president of Munster.

^{page 167 note ‡} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from Dublin.

^{page 167 note §} Edmund, who had just left Winchester. He was entered of the favourite Magdalen hall.

^{page 167 note ║} In sir Edmund's next letter, dated 11th January, he says, “for Munn, it is trew I did ever intend to paye for his gowne over and above his allowance; but what the other charges will come to I knowe not. But if hee will provide his gowne himself, I will allow him for that and his entrance 10l. besides his allowance. You shall herewith receave a letter to his tutor.”

^{page 167 note ¶} Sir Edmund Verney to Ralph Verney, from the court.

^{page 167 note **} Sir Edmund Verney to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 167 note ††} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from Dublin.

^{page 168 note *} “March 6th, Sunday. William Juxon, lord bishop of London, made lord high treasurer of England; no churchman had it since Henry the Seventh's time.”—Laud's Diary, p. 53, ed. Wharton.

^{page 168 note †} Sir Edmund Verney to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 168 note ‡} Every body knows the history of the first marriage and divorce of Robert earl of Essex. This letter discloses the fate of his second marriage, contracted in 1631. The lady was Elizabeth daughter of sir William Paulet of Edington, in the county of Wilts, knight. They had one child, a son, who died in infancy.

^{page 169 note *} The sir William Uvedale who was a party in this affair was of the Hampshire family before referred to (pp. 61, 69). He was paymaster of the royal forces during the civil war. Lloyd designates him as “the most accomplished,” and describes him as “a handsome man, and as knowing as much learning, long travels, and great observation could make him.” (Mem. of Loyal Sufferers, p. 655.)

^{page 169 note †} In a subsequent letter sir Edmund Verney remarks:—“I find the citty and the country differs in oppinion, for here my lord and his brother are most despised, and the ladye by most much doubted, and her descretion by all condemned, but Will Uvidall blamd for nothing but not having care inoughe to advise her to be more circomspect.”—Sir E. Verney to R. Verney, 23rd March, 1635–6, from London.

^{page 170 note *} Sir Edmund Verney to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 170 note †} The circumstances of this journey form the subject of a scarce little volume entitled “A true relation of all the remarkable places and passages observed in the travels of the right honourable Thomas lord Howard earle of Arundel and Surrey, primer earle and earle marshall of England, and ambassadour extraordinary to his sacred majesty Perdinando the Second emperor of Germanie, anno domini 1636. By William Crowne, gentleman.” Lond, 4to. 1637.

^{page 170 note ‡} Sir Edmund Verney to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 170 note §} See before, pp. 150, 159.

^{page 170 note ║} Son of sir Edward Villiers, brother of George Villiers duke of Buckingham. He died during the civil wars of a wound received at the taking of Bristol by prince Rupert. Clarendon's character of him, which is in the noble historian's best manner, describes him as a man of the purest virtue as well as of the highest courage. (Hist. Rebell. lib. vii.)

^{page 170 note ¶} George lord d'Aubigny, one of the sons of Esme Stewart duke of Richmond, by Catherine daughter and heir of Gervase lord Clifton of Leighton Bromswold.

^{page 170 note **} Sir Edmund Verney to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 171 note *} Ralph Verney to James Dillon, from Claydon.

^{page 171 note †} The well known commander of the king's horse under prince Rupert during the civil war; beyond all question one of the most infamous men of his day. Clarendon's delineation of the character of this great master of all kinds of wickedness, in which he introduces a comparison between Goring and Henry Wilmot earl of Rochester (Hist. Rebell. lib. viii.), is a masterpiece.

^{page 171 note ‡} Sir Edmund Verney to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 171 note §} See p. 154. Sir Edmund Verney “to his much loving sister lady Verney, at Middle Claydon.” This and another letter commencing and directed in the same way seem to be intended for sir Edmund's wife. He had no sister Verney, nor was there any lady Verney, except his mother, who was now residing with him in London, and his wife. The widow of his brother Francis was indeed alive, but she had married Mr. Clarke (see p. 101), and there is no trace of her being at Claydon, or intimate with sir Edmund or his family.

^{page 172 note *} Verney MS. 1st November, 1634.

^{page 176 note *} Verney MS. 28th November, 1638.

^{page 177 note *} See p. 160.

^{page 179 note *} Rushworth, ii. 150.

^{page 182 note *} Appointed secretary of state in 1632.

^{page 183 note *} Sir Thomas Barrington, second baronet, and head of the Essex family of that name.

^{page 183 note †} Son of the first lord Maynard, and himself afterwards the second lord.

^{page 183 note ‡} Probably sir Thomas Wiseman of Rivenhall, knighted 1604, and a man of large wealth. Morant's Essex, ii. 146.

^{page 184 note *} Sir Edmund's partner in his garbling patent.

^{page 185 note *} George Goring created lord Goring in 4th Charles I. and earl of Norwich in 20th Charles I. father of the colonel Goring mentioned before at p. 171.

^{page 185 note †} Fœdera, xx. 116.

^{page 185 note ‡} Fœidera, xix. 721. The proclamation is dated 19th Jan. 11th Car. I.

^{page 186 note *} Fœd. xx. 159.

^{page 186 note †} Verney MS. 27th July, 1638.

^{page 187 note *} Memorandum indorsed: “The original of this petition was delivered the 25th of May, 1637.”

^{page 187 note †} Nathaniel Hobart to Ralph Verney, from Highgate.

^{page 188 note *} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 188 note †} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from Windsor.

^{page 188 note ‡} The gentleman whose intimacy with lady Essex led her into so much trouble. There is amongst the Verney papers a very furious love-letter addressed by him to mistress Ann Temple, one of the family at Stowe, in May, 1635.

^{page 188 note §} Ralph Verney to James Dillon, from Claydon.

^{page 188 note ║} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from London.

^{page 188 note ¶} Edmund Verney to Ralph Verney, from Magdalen Hall.

^{page 188 note **} James Dillon to Ralph Verney, from Hackney.

^{page 189 note *} William, first baron and ultimately earl of Craven, one of the prime notabilities of this period. Three of his peculiarities are touched upon in the present letter; his want of a pedigree, evidently deemed a great offence; his vast wealth; and his almost boundless liberality. He soon afterwards proved himself in the wars of the palatinate to be a brave soldier, and was finally united, as is thought, by a private marriage, with the rash but beautiful princess who stirred up all that strife. The ambition which led her to urge her incompetent husband to accept the proffered crown, in order that she might be a queen, probably induced her to prefer an ambiguous connection rather than an open marriage with the titled but meanly descended man whose wealth was her support, and his devotion to her service her best protection, for many years. Lord Craven's father was a London tradesman. He was lord mayor in 1611. Lord Craven contributed 10,000l. at one time for the purpose alluded to in this letter. Charles II. received from him 50,000l. at the least before the Restoration.

^{page 190 note *} In his answer to this letter, dated the 11th February, 1636–7, Ralph Verney remarks, “Wee heare much of a great navie, but more of my little lord Craven, whose bounty makes him the subject of every man's discource. By many hee is condemned of prodigallity, but by most of folly.”

^{page 190 note †} Nathaniel Hobart to Ralph Verney, from Covent garden.

^{page 190 note ‡} Nathaniel Hobart to Ralph Verney.

^{page 190 note §} Sir Edmund to lady Verney.

^{page 190 note ║} Choicest: the writer had been so long in France, that his English was often at fault.

^{page 190 note ¶} Henry Verney to Ralph Verney. This letter relates to the siege of Breda, an atchievment of great importance in those days. The Spaniards had taken the place by famine, after a dreadful siege of nearly eleven months, in 1625. Their garrison had been a great trouble to the surrounding country, and the prince of Orange determined to regain the town. After long preparations, the object of which was kept profoundly secret, the prince suddenly concentrated his forces round Breda, at the end of July 1637. The result appears in the report of young Henry Verney. Among the prominent Englishmen who served and suffered on this occasion, one to whose after career we have already alluded was in considerable danger. We read, in a contemporary account, that on the 23rd August, young colonel Goring, whose valour, it was said, appears in his youth, not “in blossomes but in fruits,” received “a fauleon-shot in his ancle, which, to the eye of the chirurgeons, appeared so dangerous that they concluded he could not escape unlesse his legge were cut off: the noble gentleman bore the hurt patiently, but not the conclusion of his chyrurgeons; he resolved rather to lose his life than his limb.” His chaplain, “Doctor Calfe,” ultimately induced him to give his consent, and the surgeons were preparing to perform the operation, when “an old expert chyrurgeon cpmmeth in, undertaketh the cure, and performed it happily, it being now scarce a blemish to the eye, and discernable onely by a little halting.” Biatelesma. The second part of the moderne history of the world, containing this last summers actions. 4to, Lond. 1638, p. 82.

^{page 191 note *} Verney MS. 18th October, 1638.

^{page 191 note †} Wife of Nathaniel Hobart and sister of “Doll” Leake.

^{page 192 note *} Verney MS. 9th January, 1638–9.

^{page 192 note †} Robert Rich, second earl of Warwick, afterwards the commander of the fleet for the parliament, “a man,” says Clarendon, “in no grace at court, and looked upon as the greatest patron of the puritans, because of much the greatest estate of all who favoured them.” (Hist. Rebell. book 3.)

^{page 192 note ‡} The invoice was afterwards amended and enlarged: see it at p. 197.

^{page 193 note *} Barbadoes was first settled under the authority of letters patent, granted by James I. (hence James town) to James Ley, afterwards earl of Marlborough. A subsequent grant was made by Charles I. to James Hay, earl of Carlisle, to whom the earl of Marlborough surrendered his rights on payment of a perpetual rent of 300l. per annum.

^{page 197 note *} An inventory of such necessaries as are usefull for mee in this countrey.

Imprimis; twenty able men, whereof two to be carpenters, two sa[w]yers, a weauer that can weaue diaper, and the other a taylor.

Item; twelve dozen of drawers, twelve dozen of shirts, and twelve dozen of shoes; six dozen of cours neckcloths, six dozen of cours linnen stockins, larg enough or els they will not be seruiceable, six dozen of cours munmoth oapps. Now for ammunition; twenty good musketts, twenty amunition swords, with twenty belts and twenty pair of bandiliers.

Item; two great iron kettles containing twelve gallons a peece, two great iron potts, one holding eight gallons the other six, two little potts about two or three gallons a peece, and a stew pan: Now for necessaries for the plantation; flue dozen of broad hoes and three dozen of narrow hoes, flue dozen of axes, a dozen of bills, and two dozen of hatchetts. Nayles of all sorts to build with, ten thousand of double tens, ten thousand of single tens, and ten thousand of six peny nayles. Now for thread to mend their cloths, and twine to mend their shoes, and cours bedtick to make them hamacks to lye in; for thread ten pound, ten dozen of twine, and an hundred yards of cours bedtick with fifty dozen of hamack lines; soe much for that; yet I had allmost forgott fouer dozen of spades, and fouer dozen of pickaxes, a hunderd pound weight of powder, half a hunderd of pistoll bulletts, and a quarter of a hunderd of good cotton match. Now for some necessaries concerning myself. As first, for one good cloth sute, and one taby or good stuff sute. Now for necessaries concerning houshold prouision: First, fouer hogsheads of good beef, fouer firkins of butter putt up in earthen potts, beeaus of keeping, fouer jarrs of good sweet oyle, ten pound of sugar, [a proof that the cultivation of the sugarcane had not then been introduced into Barbadoes,] as much pepper, some nuttmeggs, cloues, and cinamon, twenty holland cheeses, or good chessheir chees, a hogshead of good bay salt, an hunderd weight of good castle sope, three pound of starch, and a pound of blew starch, an hunderd weight of good wax light, that keeps best from melting in this countery. Six cases of strong waters that the men may euery morning drink a dram to keep them in health; for my part I drink non. I need not putt downe tooles for euery tradesman, for I beleeue you will not send them unfurnished, for if you doe they will doe mee but little seruice.

Fouer bolts of canvas to send cotton home in.

^{page 204 note *} Rushworth, ii. 752.

^{page 204 note †} Ibid.

^{page 206 note *} Verney MS. Jan. 1638–9.

^{page 206 note *} A mistake for “Covent Garden,” where other letters, as well as this, prove Ralph to have been at this time.

^{page 210 note *} Dalkeith.

^{page 210 note †} Sir Edmund was mistaken respecting the strength of Dalkeith. The earl of Traquair consulted a military authority upon the subject, and was told that it might be made defensible against a sudden assault, but, “considering tha t they were all covenanters round about,” it was not possible to retain possession of it. The earl states that the country, almost to a man, was favourable to the covenanters; “few or none daring so much as appear to give advice in anything might seem against them.” They seized the regalia “in great joy and triumph, and carried them away with all the reverence they could show, and placed them in Edinburgh castle.“ Rushworth, ii. 908.

^{page 210 note ‡} The earl of Traquair.

^{page 211 note *} Henry, lord Clifford, afterwards the fifth and last earl of Cumberland.

^{page 211 note †} The king, writing to the marquess of Hamilton on the 2nd April, says, “I have commanded Traquaire to keep his chamber until he give me an account how he left Dalkeith without striking one stroak, and before any cannon was brought before it.” The account was given and Traquair was discharged within a few days. (Rushworth, ii. 904, 906, 908.)

^{page 211 note ‡} That is, the countess of Sussex, who, as we have stated, occupied Gorhambury.

^{page 212 note *} Memorandum by Ralph Verney: “Received 5 Aprill, 1638.” [sic]

^{page 213 note *} Memorandum of Ralph Verney: “ Received 8 Aprill, 1638.” [sic]

^{page 213 note †} Verney MS. 5th April, 1639.

^{page 217 note *} Indorsed by Ralph Verney: “Received 10 Aprill, 1639.”

^{page 219 note *} Memorandum, indorsed “Received 16th Aprill, 1639.”

^{page 219 note *} “Robin Lesly,” one of the king's pages, was engaged with sir Edmund in the new patent respecting hackney-coaches, which was now pending.

^{page 220 note *} Memorandum, indorsed “Received 23 Aprill, 1639.”

^{page 221 note *} Verney MS. 18th April, 1639.

^{page 221 note †} Ibid. 21 May, 1639.

^{page 222 note *} Probably a nickname for one of the suitor lords.

^{page 222 note †} “put,” in the sense of “put aside.”.

^{page 224 note *} Rushworth, ii. 917.

^{page 224 note †} Sir John Banks.

^{page 225 note *} Lesly had an opinion that if his name were “in it, my lord keeper, who is his bitter enemy, will stopp it.” Verney MS. 20 April, 1639.

^{page 226 note *} In the first apprehension resulting from the suddenness with which the covenanters overran the whole of Scotland, it was rumoured that they intended to seize upon Berwick. The earl of Essex, “the most popular man of the kingdom, and the darling of the swordmen,” as Clarendon terms him, and who was lieutenant-general in this expedition under the earl of Arundel as commander in chief, was sent forward to secure that important station, which he did in all haste against an enemy who had no such design. Such was the imperfection of the king's intelligence. Essex would have marched at once into Scotland, but the king forbade.

^{page 227 note *} Memorandum, indorsed “Received 29 Aprill, 1639.”

^{page 228 note *} One of the gentlemen of the privy chamber.

^{page 228 note †} “The earl of Arundel, who was commander-in-chief under the king.

^{page 229 note *} “Received 6 May, 1639.” The commitment of lord Saye arose thus:—Strafford, then viscount Wentworth, imposed upon all the Scots employed in the royal service in Ireland an oath that they would submit to all his majesty's royal commands, and not enter into any covenant or bond for mutual defence without the king's authority. The king, approving the example, not only imposed the same oath upon all Seotish persons employed in his service in England, but caused it, or something very like it, to be tendered generally. Two English peers, lord Saye and lord Brooke, “ positively refused,” says Clarendon, whose statement of the contents of the oath is very inaccurate, “in the king's own presence, to make any such protestation. They said,” If the king suspected their loyalty, he might proceed against them as he thought fit; but that it was against the law to impose any oath or protestation upon them which were not enjoined by the law; and in that respect, that they might not betray the common liberty, they would not submit to it. ‘... They two were committed, at least restrained of their liberty; yet they discovered too much the humour and spirit of the court in their daily discourses upon that subject, so that the king thought it best to dismiss those lords, and require them to return to their houses.”—Hist. Rebell. lib. ii.

^{page 230 note *} Page 152.

^{page 230 note †} Dr. Alexander Read, a celebrated London physician of those days, published in 1638 a “Treatise on the first part of chirurgery, containing the methodical doctrine of wounds.” 4to. Lond.

^{page 231 note *} Memorandum indorsed, “Received 8 May, 1639.”

^{page 232 note *} In a letter of the same date as this from Edmund Terney, he states, “We rose from Celby within a little after the writing of my first letter [p. 213 J, and then upon the march I had divers shrewd fitts of an ague, but now I thank God it hath left me, and I am as well as ever I was in my lyfe. We are now at Ryton, within five miles of Newcastle, but we dayly expect orders to march away, though I beleeve it will not be above twelve miles beyond Newcastle, when I am confident we shall stay till the foote come up to us, which I beleeve will be at least this fortnight, for wee left them at Celby, and not half of them gathered together. * * * I verily beleeve that within one month or sixe weekes wee shall see what businesses will come to. Wee that either are or would be souldgers feare the best and hope the worst.”

^{page 232 note †} “Received 8th May, 1639.”

^{page 232 note ‡} Dalzell [?]

^{page 233 note *} The king offered “indemnity” to such as should within eight days lay down their arms, declaring such as would not obey rebels, and setting a price upon their heads. Burnet's Lives of Hamiltons, p. 120.

^{page 233 note †} “Received 17 May, 1639.”

^{page 219 236 *} No direction; “Received 18 May, 1639.”

^{page 237 note *} “Received 18 May, 1639.”

^{page 237 note †} The king, according to Burnet, was so gracious as to tell lord Roxburgh that he believed him innocent, yet, for example's sake, he found it necessary to keep him under some mark of his displeasure. Lives of Hamiltons, p. 138.

^{page 237 note ‡} J The marquess of Hamilton in command of a fleet with a considerable body of troops on board: two regiments of which were shortly after landed at Berwick.

^{page 238 note *} “Received 23 May, 1639.”

^{page 238 note †} “Received 21 May, 1639.”

^{page 239 note *} The king's encampment was at the Birks, a rising ground above Berwick, and commanding a considerable view of the Scotish frontier.

^{page 241 note *} “Received 27 May, 1639.”

^{page 242 note *} “Received 11 June, 1639.”

^{page 242 note †} Old lady Verney, sir Edmund's mother, who was still alive.

^{page 243 note *} “That day proved sultry hot, the like not known in the memory of man.” Rushworth, ii. 935.

^{page 244 note *} “Received 12 June, 1639.”

^{page 245 note *} Rushworth, ii. 936.

^{page 245 note †} Ibid.

^{page 245 note ‡} According to Baillie, our acquaintance Robin Leslie was sent into the camp of the covenanters to visit some of his relations, and encourage them to send their petition to the king. Letters, i. 215.

^{page 246 note *} The earl of Antrim was to have landed in the west of Scotland, with a body of men from Ireland.

^{page 247 note *} “Received 13 June, 1639.”

^{page 247 note †} Addit. MS. 15,914, fo. 98.

^{page 248 note †} Baillie's Letters, i. 215.

^{page 249 note *} “Received 15 June, 1639.”

^{page 249 note †} This title has been added by some modern hand. The earl of Leicester was Robert Sydney, of Penshurst, second earl of that creation. He was at this time ambassador in Paris.

^{page 250 note *} The earl of Arundel.

^{page 250 note †} Sir Henry Vane.

^{page 252 note *} This letter, formerly in Upcott's Collection, is now Addit. MS. Brit. Mus. 15,914, fo. 98. It is indorsed, in a hand almost contemporary, “Sir John Temple, 11 June, 1639.”

^{page 252 note †} “Received 18 June, 1639.”

^{page 254 note *} “Received 19th June, 1639.”

^{page 254 note †} “Received 20 June, 1639.”

^{page 255 note *} “Received 22 June, 1639.”

^{page 256 note *} “Received 24th June, 1639.”

^{page 256 note †} “Received 23 July, 1639.”

^{page 257 note *} Rushworth, ii. 946.

^{page 257 note †} Lord Fermanagh's Genealog. Notes, p. 33. Verney MS.

^{page 258 note *} Sir Francis Henry Lee, son of Elenor countess of Sussex, by her first husband, sir Henry Lee of Quarendon.

^{page 258 note †} “Received 24th July, 1639.”

^{page 259 note *} “Received 28th July, 1639.”

^{page 261 note *} Verney MS. 25th May, 1639. Letter of Mrs. Isham; Mrs. Pulteney having an attack of ague.

^{page 263 note *} Verney MS. 24 July, 1639.

^{page 264 note *} Sir Henry Lee, of Ditchley, the third baronet; well known to all readers of the history or the romance of the reign of Charles I.

^{page 264 note †} She married, secondly, Henry Wilmot earl of Rochester. She is mentioned in Clarendon's Autobiography, in connection with himself, Falkland, and Chillingworth. Part II.

^{page 264 note ‡} Sir Francis Henry Lee, the fourth baronet.

^{page 265 note *} Verney MS. 27th July, 1639.

^{page 266 note *} Verney MS. 27th July, 1639.

^{page 267 note *} Verney MS. 12th June, 1639.

^{page 268 note *} Verney MS. 28th Jan. 1639–40.

^{page 269 note *} Of Greenway court, in Hollingbourne, co. Kent. See Hasted, ii. 466.

^{page 269 note †} Verney MS. 5th November, 1639.

^{page 270 note *} Verney MS. 9th November, 1639.

^{page 270 note †} Ibid. 8th December, 1639.

^{page 271 note *} See p. 170.

^{page 271 note †} Verney MS. 18th December, 1639.

^{page 272 note *} Verney MS. 28th January, 1639–40.

^{page 272 note †} The Rev. Robert Bolton, incumbent of Broughton in Northamptonshire, described by Anthony Wood as “a most religious and learned puritan.” He was also a very popular writer. Wood gives a list of his works. (Athense Oxon., ii. 515, ed. Bliss.)

^{page 272 note ‡} Verney MS. 30th January, 1639–40.

^{page 273 note *} Verney MS. 10th September, 1639.

^{page 273 note †} “I believe you mistook my hand and readd a ‘paper’ booke for a ‘prayer’ booke, for that it is I would desire you to send me.” Verney MS. 20th February, 1639–40.

^{page 274 note *} Verney MS. 29th October, 1639.