, lord Say and Sele, a person of literary merit, but not so well known
, lord Say and Sele, a person of
literary merit, but not so well known on that account as
for the part he bore in the Grand Rebellion, was born at
Brpughton in Oxfordshire, in 1582, being the eldest son
of sir Richard Fiennes, to whom James I. had restored and
confirmed the dignity of baron Say and Sele: and, after
being properly instructed at Winchester school, was sent
in 1596 to New-college in Oxford, of which, by virtue of
his relationship to the founder, he was made fellow. After
he had spent some years in study, he travelled into foreign
countries, and then returned home with the reputation of
a wise and prudent man. When the war was carried on in
the Palatinate, he contributed largely to it, according to
his estate, which was highly pleasing to king James; but,
indulging his neighbours by leaving it to themselves to pay
what they thought fit, he was, on notice given to his majesty, committed to custody in June 1622. He was,
however, soon released; and, in July 1624, advanced from a
baron to be viscount Say and Scle. At this time, says
Wood, he stood up for the privileges of Magna Charta;
but, after the rebellion broke out, treated it with the utmost contempt: and when the long-parliament began in
3640, he shewed himself so active that, as Wood says, he
and Hampden and Pym, with one or two more, were
esteemed parliament-drivers, or swayers of all the parliaments in which they sat. In order to reconcile him to tne
court, he had the place of mastership of the court of wards
given him in May 1641 but this availed nothing; for,
when arms were taken up, he acted openly against the
king. Feb. 1642, his majesty published two proclamations,
commanding all the officers of the court of wards to.
attend him at Oxford; but lord Say refusing, was outlawed,
and attainted of treason. He was the last 'who held the
office of master of this court, which was abolished in 1646
by the parliament, on which occasion 10,000l. was granted
to him, with a part of the earl of Worcester’s estate, as a
compensation. In 1648 he opposed any personal treaty
with his majesty, yet the same year was one of the parliament-commissioners in the Isle of Wight, when they
treated with the king about peace: at which time he is
said to have urged against the king this passage out of
Hooker’s “Ecclesiastical Polity,
” that “though the king
was singulis major, yet he was universis minor
” that is,
greater than any individual, yet less than the whole community. After the king’s death, he joined with the Independents, as he had done before with the Presbyterians;
and became intimate with Oliver, who made him one of
his house of lords. “After the restoration of Charles II.
when he had acted,
” says Wood, “as a grand rebel for
his own ends almost twenty years, he was rewarded forsooth with the honourable offices of lord privy seal, and
lord chamberlain of the household; while others, that had
suffered in estate and body, and had been reduced to a bit
of bread for his majesty’s cause, had then little or nothing
given to relieve them; for which they were to thank a
hungry and great officer, who, to fill his own coffers, was
the occasion of the utter ruin of many.
” Wood relates
also, with some surprise, that this noble person, after he
had spent eighty years mostly in an unquiet and discontented condition, had been a grand promoter of the rebellion, and had in some respect been accessary to the
mupdler of Chailes I. died quietly in his bed, April 14, 1662,
and was buried with his ancestors at Broughton. On the
restoration he was certainly made lord privy seal, but nut,
as Wood says, chamberlain of the household. Whitlock
says, that “he was a person of great parts, wisdom, and
integrity:
” and Clarendon, though of a contrary, party,
does not deny him to have had these qualities, but only
supposes them to have been wrongly directed, and greatly
corrupted. He calls him, “a man of a close and reserved
nature, of great parts, and of the highest ambition; but
whose ambition would not be satisfied with offices and preferments, without some condescensions and alterations in
ecclesiastical matters. He had for many years been the
oracle of those who were puritans in the worst sense, and
had steered all their counsels and designs. He was a notorious enemy to the church, and to most of the eminent
churchmen, with some of whom he had particular contests.
He had always opposed and contradicted all acts of state,
and all taxes and impositions, which were not exactly legal,
&c. In a word, he had very great authority with all the
discontented party throughout the kingdom, and a good
reputation with many who were not discontented; who
believed him to be a wise man, and of a very useful temper
in an age of licence, and one who would still adhere to
the law.
” But from a comparison of every authority, a
recent writer observes, that he appears to have been far
from a virtuous or amiable man; he was poor, proud, and
discontented, and seems to have opposed the court, partly
at least with the view of extorting preferment from thence.
He had the most chimerical notions of civil liberty, and
upon the defeat of those projects in which he had so great
a share, retired with indignation to the isle of Lundy, on
the Devonshire coast, where he continued a voluntary prisoner until the protector’s death.
good man by those who knew him, and an able writer, as appears by the testimonies of lord Clarendon, lord Say and Sele, Dr. Pearson, bishop of Chester, Dr. Heylin, Andrew
He died May 19, 1656, aged seventy-two, and was buried, according to his own desire, in Eton church-yard,
where a monument was erected over his grave by Mr. Peter
Curwen. In person, he was of an ingenuous and open
countenance, sanguine, cheerful, and vivacious; his body
was well proportioned, and his motion quick and sprightly.
As to the excellence of his character, all writers seem
agreed. Whatever his errors, he was esteemed a good
man by those who knew him, and an able writer, as appears by the testimonies of lord Clarendon, lord Say and
Sele, Dr. Pearson, bishop of Chester, Dr. Heylin, Andrew Marvel, Wood, Sailing-fleet, and others, quoted by
sir David Dalrymple lord Hailes, in his fine edition of
Hales’s works, and in the Biographia Britannica. “They,
”
says lord Hailes, “who are acquainted with the literary
and political history of England, will perceive that the
leading men of all parties, however different and discordant,
have, with a wonderful unanimity, concurred in praise of
the virtues and abilities of the ever memorable Mr. John
Hales of Eton.
”