left Oxford, and retired to Petworth in Sussex, where he resided till the restoration. The gentlemen of Sussex having recommended him to Dr. King, bishop of Chester,
, son of Lancelot Addison a.
clergyman, born at Mauldismeaburne in the parish of
Crosby Ravens worth in Westmoreland, in 1632, was educated at the grammar school of Appleby, and afterwards
sent to Queen’s college, Oxford, upon the foundation. He
was admitted B. A. Jan. 25, 1654, and M. A. July 4, 1657.
As he now had greatly distinguished himself in the univer?
sity, he was chosen one of the terras filii for the act celebrated in 1658; but, his oration abounding in personal
satire against the ignorance, hypocrisy, and avarice of those
then in power, he was compelled to make a recantation,
and to akk pardon on his knees. Soon after he left Oxford, and retired to Petworth in Sussex, where he resided
till the restoration. The gentlemen of Sussex having recommended him to Dr. King, bishop of Chester, as a man
who had suffered for his loyalty and attachment to th.e constitution of church and state; the bishop received him
kindly, and in all probability would have preferred him,
had he not, contrary to his lordship’s approbation, accepted of the chaplainship at Dunkirk; where he continued till
1662, when, the place being delivered up to the French,
he returned to England. The year following he went
chaplain to the garrison at Tangier, where he resided some
years; and came back to England in 1670, with a resolution to return to Tangier. He was appointed chaplain in
ordinary to his majesty soon after his coming over; but had
no thoughts, however, of quitting his chaplamship at Tangier, until it was conferred upon another, by which Mr.
Addison became poor in his circumstances. In this situation of his affairs, a gentleman in Wiltshire bestowed on
him the rectory of Milston, in Wilts, worth about 120l. per
annum. Soon after he was also made prebendary of Minor
pars altaris, in the cathedral of Sarum; and took the degrees of B. and D. D. at Oxford, July 6, 1675. His preferments, though not very considerable, enabled him to
live in the country with great decency and hospitality; and
he discharged his duty with a most conscientious diligence.
In 1683 the commissioners for ecclesiastical affairs, in consideration of his former service at Tangier, conferred upon
him the deanry of Lichfield, in which he was installed July
3; was collated to the archdeaconry of Coventry Dec. 8,
1684, and held it with his deanry in commendam. In the
convocation, which met Dec. 4, 1689, dean Addison was
one of the committee appointed by the lower house to acquaint the lords, that they had consented to a conference
on the subject of an address to the king. He died April
20, 1703, and was buried in the church-yard of Lichfield,
at the entrance of the west door, with the following epitaph
“Hie jacet Lancelotus Addison, S. T. P. hujus ecclesiae
decanus, necnon archidiaconus Coventrise, qui obiit 20
die Aprilis, ann. Dom. 1703, aetatis suae 71.
” He was
twice married; first to Jane, daughter of Nathaniel Gulston, esq., and sister to Dr. William Gulston, bishop of
Bristol, by whom he had, Jane, who died in her infancy;
Joseph, or whom in thenext article; Gulston, who died governor of Fort St. George in the East Indies; Dorothy,
married first to Dr. Sartre, prebendary of Westminster, secondly to Daniel Combes, esq.; Anne, who died young;
and Lancelot, fellow of Magdalen college, Oxford, an
able classical scholar.
arshal of England; sir Edward Cecil, second son to the earl of Exeter; sir John Howard, high sheriff of Sussex and Surrey; sir Edward Bowyer, of Camberwell; sir Thomas
It may appear surprising, how one of Mr. Alleyn’s profession should be enabled to erect such an edifice as Dulwich college, and liberally endow it for the maintenance
of so many persous. But it must be observed that he had
some paternal fortune, which, though small, probably laid
the foundation of his future affluence; and it is to be presumed that the profits he received from acting, to one of
his provident and managing disposition, and one who by
his excellence in playing drew after him such crowds of
spectators, must have considerably improved his fortune:
besides, he was not only an actor, but master of a playhouse, built at his own expence, by which he is said to
have amassed considerable wealth. This was the Fortune
play-house, near Whitecross street, by Moorfields. There
is a tradition in the neighbourhood of this place, that in
digging the foundation of this house, there was found a
considerable treasure; so that it is probable the whole or
greatest part of it might fall to Mr. Alleyn. He was also
keeper of the king’s wild beasts, or master of the royal
bear-garden, which was frequented by vast crowds of
spectators: and the profits arising from these sports are said
to have amounted to 500l. per annum. He was thrice
married; and the portions of his two first wives, they
leaving him no issue to inherit, probably contributed to this
benefaction. Such donations have been frequently thought
to proceed more from vanity and ostentation than real
charity; but this of Mr. Alleyn has been ascribed to a very
singular cause. Mr. Aubrey mentions a tradition, that
Mr. Alleyn, playing a daemon with six others, in one of
Shakspeare’s plays, was, in the midst of the play, surprised by an apparition of the devil, which so worked on
his fancy, that he made a vow, which he performed by
building Dulwich college. Whatever may be in this story,
he began the foundation of this college, under the direction of Inigo Jones, in 1614; and the buildings, gardens,
&c. were finished in 1617, in which he is said to have expended about 10,Ooo/. After the college was built, he
met with some difficulty in obtaining a charter for settling
his lands in mortmain; for he proposed to endow it with
800l. per annum, for the maintenance of one master, one
warden, and four fellows, three whereof were to be clergymen, and the fourth a skilful organist; also six poor
men, and as many women, besides twelve poor boys, to
be educated till the age of fourteen or sixteen, and then
put out to some trade or calling. The obstruction he met
with arose from the lord chancellor Bacon, who wished
king James to settle part of those lands for the support of
two academical lectures; and he wrote a letter to the marquis of Buckingham, dated Aug. Is, 1618, entreating him
to use his interest with his majesty for that purpose . Mr.
Alleyn’s solicitation was, however, at last complied with,
and he obtained the royal licence, giving him full power
to lay his foundation, by his majesty’s letters patent,
bearing date the 2 1st of June, 1619; by virtue whereof he did, in the chapel of the said new hospital at Dulwich, called “The College of God’s Gift,
” on the 13th
of September following, publicly read, and published,
a quadripartite writing in parchment, whereby he created
and established the said college; he then subscribed it
with his name, and fixed his seal to several parts thereof,
in presence of several honourable persons, and ordered copies of the writings to four different parishes.
Those honourable persons were Francis lord Verulam lord
chancellor; Thomas earl of Arundel, earl marshal of England; sir Edward Cecil, second son to the earl of Exeter;
sir John Howard, high sheriff of Sussex and Surrey; sir
Edward Bowyer, of Camberwell; sir Thomas Grymes of
Peckham; sir John Bodley, of Stretham; sir John Tonstal,
of L'arshalton; and divers other persons of great worth
and respect. The parishes in which the said writings were
deposited, were St. Botolph’s without Bishopsgate, St.
Giles’s without Cripplegate, St. Saviour’s in Southwark,
and the parish of Camberwell in Surrey. The contents or
heads of the said statutes, or quadripartite writings, containing the laws and rules of this foundation, are as follow:
1. A recital of king James’s letters patent. 2. Recital of
the founder’s deed quadripartite. 3. Ordination of the
master, warden, &c. 4. Ordination of the assistant members, &c. 5. The master and warden to be unmarried,
and always to be of the name of Alleyn or Allen. 6. The
master and warden to be twenty-one years of age at least.
7. Of what degree the fellows to be. 8. Of what degree
the poor brothers and sisters to be. 9. Of what condition
the poor scholars are to be. 10. Of what parishes the assistants are to be. 11. From what parishes the poor are
to be chosen, and the members of this college. 12. The
form of their election. 13. The warden to supply when
the master’s place is void. 14. The election of the warden. 15. The warden to be bound by recognizance.
16. The warden to provide a dinner for the college upon
his election. 17. The form of admitting the fellows.
18. The manner of electing the scholars. 19. Election of
the poor of Camberwell. 20. The master and warden’s
oath. 21. The fellow’s oath. 22. The poor brother’s and
sister’s oath. 23. The assistant’s oath. 24. The pronunciation of admission. 25. The master’s office. 26. The
warden’s office. 27. The fellow’s office. 23. The poor
brother’s and sister’s office. 29. Thac of the matron of
the poor scholars. 30. The porter’s office. 31. The office of the thirty members. 32. Of residence. 33. Orders
of the poor and their goods. 34. Of obedience. 35. Orders for the chapel and burial. 36. Orders for the school
and scholars, and putting them forth apprentices. 37. Order of diet. 38. The scholars’ surplices and coats. 39.
Time for viewing expences. 40. Public audit and private
sitting days. 41. Audit and sitting chamber. 42. Of
lodgings. 43. Orders for the lands and woods. 44. Allowance to the master and warden of diet for one man a
piece, with the number and wages of the college servants.
45. Disposition and division of the revenues. 46. Disposition of the rent of the Blue-house. 47. The poor to
be admitted out of other places, in case of deficiency in
the parishes prescribed. 48. The disposition of forfeitures.
49. The statutes to be read over four several times in the
year. 50. The dispositions of certain tenements in St.
Saviour’s parish, Southwark.
to return to England, where, in 1705, he was chosen member for the borough of Bramber, in the county of Sussex, and sat for several years but in the interval of privilege
In the year 1698, Mr. Asgill published a treatise on the
possibility of avoiding death, intitled “An argument,
proving that, according to the covenant of eternal life,
revealed in the scriptures, man may be translated from
hence into that eternal life without passing through death,
although the human nature of Christ himself could not
thus be translated till he had passed through death,
” printed
originally in De jure
divino; or, an assertion, that the title of the house of
Hanover to the succession of the British monarchy (on failure of issue of her present majesty), is a title hereditary, and of divine institution,
” Defence on his Expulsion to which is added, an Introduction and Postscript,
” Mr. Asgill’s Apology for an omission in his late publication, in which are contained summaries of all the acts
made for strengthening the protestant succession.
” 3. a The
Pretender’s declaration abstracted from two anonymous
pamphlets, the one entitled Jus sacrum the other. Memoirs of the chevalier de St. George; with memoirs of two
other chevaliers in the reign of Henry VII.“1713, 8vo.
4.
” The succession of the house of Hanover vindicated,
against the Pretender’s second declaration, in folio, entitled, The hereditary right of the crown of England asserted, &c.“1714, 8vo. This was in answer to Mr. Bedford’s
famous book. 5.
” The Pretender’s declaration from
Plombiers, 1714, Englished; with a postscript before it
in relation to Dr. Lesley’s letter sent after it,“1715, 8vo.
Besides these, hewrotean
” Essay for the Press,“the
” Metamorphoses of Man,“”A question upon Divorce,“1717,
” A treatise against Woolston," and several other pieces.
e late earl of Buchaii lady Mary, and lady Anne O'Brien, daughters of the earl of Inchiquin the earl of Sussex and his brother Mr. Yelverton the earl of Haddington,
, an ingenious and diligent naturalist, the son of William Baker, a clerk in Chancery, was born in Chancery-lane, London, May 8, 1698. He was placed in 1713 with John Parker, whom he left in 1720, to reside for a few weeks with Mr. John Forster an attorney. Mr. Forster had a daughter of eight years old, who was born deaf and dumb. Mr. Baker, possessed with the idea that he could instruct her in reading, writing, and understanding what was spoken, made the attempt, and was so successful that her father retained him in his house for some years, during which he succeeded equally well with a second daughter who laboured under the same privation. He afterwards made this the employment of his life. In the prosecution of so valuable and difficult an undertaking, he was very successful. Among his pupils were the hon. Lewis Erskine, son of the late earl of Buchaii lady Mary, and lady Anne O'Brien, daughters of the earl of Inchiquin the earl of Sussex and his brother Mr. Yelverton the earl of Haddington, the earl of Londonderry, and many others. At the end of his instructions, he is said to have taken a bond for lOOl. of each scholar not to divulge his method, an instance of narrowness of mind which we wish we could contradict.
arable lady Savile; but the place he chose for his residence was the house of sir Thomas Eversfield, of Sussex, a man of great integrity as well as learning, with whom
, an eminent English divine, was
born at Wetherslack, in Westmoreland, April 20, 1612.
His parents were not considerable either for rank or riches;
but were otherwise persons of great merit, and happy in
their family. John, the third son, was intended for the
church, but being sent to school in the neighbourhood,
he lost much time under masters deficient in diligence
and learning. At length he was sent to Sedberg school,
in Yorkshire, where, under the care of a tolerable master,
he gave early marks both of genius and piety. In the
year 1631, and the eighteenth of his age, he was admitted
of St. John’s college, at Cambridge, under the tuition of
Mr. Thomas Fothergill, who proved at once a guardian
and a preceptor, supplying his necessities, as well as instructing him in learning. By this help Mr. Barwick
quickly so distinguished himself, that when a dispute arose
about the election of a master, which at last came to be
heard before the privy-council, the college chose Mr.
Barwick, then little above twenty, to manage for them,
by which he not only became conspicuous in the university, but was also taken notice of at court, and by the
ministry. In 1635 he became B. A. while these affairs
were still depending. April the 5th, 1636, he was created
Fellow, without opposition, and in 1638 he took the degree of M. A. When the civil war broke out, and the
king wrote a letter to the university, acquainting them
that he was in extreme want, Mr. Barwick concurred with
those loyal persons, who first sent him a small supply in
money, and afterwards their college-plate, and upon information that Cromwell, afterwards the protector, lay
with a party of foot at a place called Lower Hedges, between Cambridge and Huntington, in order to make himself master of this small treasure, Mr. Barwick made one
of the party of horse which conveyed it through by-roads
safely to Nottingham, where his majesty had set up his
standard. By this act of loyalty the parliament was so
provoked, that they sent Cromwell with a body of troops
to quarter in the university, where they committed the
most brutal outrages. Mr. Barwick also published a piece
against the covenant, entitled “Certain Disquisitions and
Considerations, representing to the conscience the unlawfuluess of the oath entitled A Solemn League and Covenant for Reformation, &c. as also the insufficiency of
the urgiiments used in the exhortation for taking the said
covenant. Published by command,
” Oxford, distemper, so that
in November, 1662, he was confined to his chamber: he
heightened his disease by officiating at the sacrament the
Christmas-day following, after which he was seized with
a violent vomiting of blood. Upon this he was advised to a change of air, and retired to Therfield in Hertfordshire, of which he was rector, but finding himself
there too far from London, he returned to Chiswick, where
he in some measure recovered his health. As soon as he
found he had a little strength, he applied himself there to
the putting in order the archives of St. Paul’s church, but
this return of active employment was followed by an extraordinary flux of blood, which rendered him very weak,
and defeated his favourite design of retiring to Therfield.
When he first found his health declining, he made choice
of and procured this living, intending to have resigned
his deanery and office of prolocutor, to those who had
vigour enough to discharge them, and to spend the remainder of his days in the discharge of his pastoral office,
to which he thought himself bound by his taking orders.
But coming upon some extraordinary occasion to London,
he was seized with a pleurisy, which carried him off in
three days. He was attended in his last moments by Dr.
Peter Gunning, afterwards bishop of Ely, and as he lived,
so he died, with all the marks of an exemplary piety, on
the 22d of October, 1664, after he had struggled almost
twelve years with this grievous distemper. By hrs will he
bequeathed the greatest part of his estate to charitable
uses, and this with a judgment equal to his piety. His
body was interred in the cathedral of St. Paul’s, with an
epitaph composed by Mr. Samuel Howlet. The character
of Mr. Barwick may be easily collected from the preceding
sketch, but is more fully illustrated in his life published by
Dr. Peter Barwick, a work of great interest and amusement. His printed works are very few. Besides the tract
on the covenant, before mentioned, we have only his
” Life of Thomas Morton, bishop of Durham, and a funeral sermon,“1660, 4to; and
” Deceivers deceived,“a
sermon at St. Paul’s, Oct. 20, 1661,
” 1661, 4to. Many
of his letters to chancellor Hyde are among Thurloe’s State
Papers.
, probably a native of Sussex, was of the Roman catholic persuasion, being secretary
, probably a native of Sussex, was of the
Roman catholic persuasion, being secretary to queen Mary,
the wife of James II. and one who followed the fortunes of
his abdicating master; who rewarded him first with knighthood, and then with the honorary titles of earl Caryl and
baron Dartford. How long he continued in that service is
not known: but he was in England in the reign of queen
Anne, and was the intimate friend of Pope, to whom he
recommended the subject of the “Rape of the Lock,
” and
who at its publication addressed it to him. From some of his
letters in the last edition of Pope’s Works, he appears to
have been living in 1717; but he was not the intimate
friend of Pope’s unfortunate lady, as asserted in the last
edition of this Dictionary. It is plain from one of his letters, dated July 1717, that he had no knowledge of her, and
asks Pope “who was the unfortunate lady you address a
copy of verses to?
” to which Pope does not appear to have
returned any answer.
om his selfimportance, is thus related. Having been invited down to a gentleman’s house on the coast of Sussex, where he was very kindly entertained, as he was walking
In 1704, our author brought out a tragedy, entitled
“Liberty asserted,
” the scene of which is laid at Agnie
(which name, he says, for the sake of a better sound, he has altered to Angie) in Canada; and the plot is an imagined one, from the wars carried on among the Indian
nations. In the dedication to Anthony Henley, esq. Mr.
Dennis owns himself to be indebted to that gentleman for
“the happy hint upon which it was formed.
” This was
by far the most successful of all our author’s dramatic productions; having been represented many times at Lincoln’s-inn Fields with very great applause. This was probably owing, in a considerable degree, not to its own merit,
but to the abuse which is plentifully scattered through it
upon the French nation, which, during a season of war,
was congenial to the feelings of the auditory. Its success,
however, produced an odd effect on Dennis’s imagination,
which was never well regulated. Thinking that the severity of the strokes against the French could never be forgiven, and consequently, that Louis XIV. would not consent to a peace with England, unless be was delivered up a
sacrifice to national resentment, he carried this apprehension so far that when the congress for the peace at Utrecht
was in agitation, he waited on the duke of Marlborough,
who had formerly been his patron, to entreat his interest
with the plenipotentiaries, that they should not consent to
his being given up. With great gravity the duke informed
him, that he was sorry it was out of his power to serve him,
as at that time he had no connexion with the ministry,
adding, that he fancied his case not to be quite so desperate
as he seemed to imagine; for that, indeed, he had taken
no care to get himself excepted in the articles of peace;
and yet he could not help thinking that he had done the
French almost as much damage as even Mr. Dennis. Another instance of our author’s terror, arising from his selfimportance, is thus related. Having been invited down
to a gentleman’s house on the coast of Sussex, where he
was very kindly entertained, as he was walking one day
near the beach, he saw a ship sailing, as he imagined, towards him. Upon this, supposing that he was betrayed,
he immediately made the best of his way to London, without even taking leave of his host, whom he believed to
have been concerned in the plot against him, and to have
decoyed him to his house, with no other view than to give
notice to the French, who had fitted out a vessel on purpose to carry him off, if he had not luckily discovered their
design.
her own command, though he should be at one half of the expence. Afterwards he applied to the earls of Sussex and Leicester, and the lord Burleigh, to induce the queen
, the first earl of Essex of this
name and family, a general equally distinguished for his
courage and conduct, and a nobleman not more illustrious
by his titles than by his birth, was descended from a most
ancient and noble farrr!“, being the son of sir Richard Devereux, knight, by Do 'thy, daughter of George earl of
Huntingdon, and gra.idson of Walter viscount of Hereford,
so created by king Edward the Sixth. He was born about
1540, at his grandfather’s castle in Carmarthenshire, and
during his education applied himself to his studies with
great diligence and success. He succeeded to the titles of
viscount Hereford and lord Ferrers of Chartley, in the
nineteenth year of his age, and being early distinguished
for his modesty, learning, and loyalty, stood in higii favour
with his sovereign, queen Elizabeth. In 1569, upon the
breaking out of the rebellion in the north, under the earls
of Northumberland and Westmoreland, he raised a considerable body of forces, which joining those belonging to
the lord admiral and the earl of Lincoln, he was declared
marshal of the army, and obliged the rebels to disperse.
This so highly recommended him to the queen, that in
1572 she honoured him with the garter, and on the 4th of
May, the same year, created him earl of Essex, as being
descended by his great grandmother from the noble
family of Bourchier, long before honoured with the same
title. In the month of January following, he was one of
the peers that sat in judgment upon the duke of Norfolk.
At this time he was such a favourite with the queen, that
some, who were for confining her good graces to themselves, endeavoured to remove him by encouraging an inclination he shewed to adventure both his person and fortune for her majesty’s service in Ireland. Accordingly, on
the 16th of August, 1573, he embarked at Liverpool, accompanied by lord Darcy, lord Rich, and many other persons of
distinction, together with a multitude of volunteers, who
were incited by the hopes of preferment, and his lordship’s
known reputation. His reception in Ireland was not very
auspicious landing at Knockfergus on the 16th of September, he found the chiefs of the rebels inclined apparently to submit; but having gained time, they broke out
again into open rebellion. Lord Rich was called away by
his own affairs, and by degrees, most of those who went
abroad with the earl, came home again upon a variety of
pretences. In this situation Essex desired the queen to
carry on the service in her own name, and by her own
command, though he should be at one half of the expence.
Afterwards he applied to the earls of Sussex and Leicester,
and the lord Burleigh, to induce the queen to pay one
hundred horse and six hundred foot; which, however, did
not take effect; but the queen, perceiving the slight
put upon him, and that the lord deputy had delayed sending him his commission, was inclined to recal him out of
Ulster, if Leicester and others, who had promoted his removal, had not dissuaded her. The lord deputy, at last,
in 1574, sent him his patent, but with positive orders to
pursue the earl of Desmond one way, while himself pressed
him another. The earl of Essex reluctantly obeyed, and
either forced or persuaded the earl of Desmond to submission; and it is highly probable, would have performed
more essential service, if he had not been thwarted. The
same misfortune attended his subsequent attempts; and,
excepting the zeal of his attendants, the affection of the
English soldiers, and the esteem of the native Irish, he
gained nothing by all his pains. Worn out at length
with these fruitless fatigues, he, the next year, desired
leave to conclude upon honourable terms an accommodation with Turlough Oneile, which was refused him. He
then surrendered the government of Ulster into the lord
deputy’s hands, believing the forces allowed him altogether insufficient for its defence; but the lord deputy
obliged him to resume it, and to majrch against Turlough,
Oneile, which he accordingly did; and his enterprize
” being in a fair way of succeeding, he was surprized to receive instructions, which peremptorily required him to
make peace. This likewise he concluded, without loss of
honour, and then turned his arms against the Scots from
the western islands, who had invaded and taken possession,
of his country. These he quickly drove out, and, by the
help of Norris, followed them into one of their islands;
and was preparing to dispossess them of other posts, when
he was required to give up his command, and afterwards
to serve at the head of a small body of three hundred men,
with no other title than their captain. All this he owed to
Leicester; but, notwithstanding his chagrin, he continued
to perform his duty, without any shew of resentment, out
of respect to the queen’s service. In the spring of the
succeeding year he came over to England, and did not hesitate to express his indignation against the all-powerful
favourite, for the usage he had met xvith. But as it was
the custom of that great man to debase his enemies by
exalting them, so he procured an order for the earl of Essex’s return into Ireland, with the sounding title of earl -marshal of that kingdom, and with promises that he should be left
more at liberty than in times past; but, upon his arrival
at Ireland, he found his situation so little altered for the
better, that he pined away with grief and sorrow, which at
length proved fatal to him, and brought him to his
end. There is nothing more certain, either from the
public histories, or private memoirs and letters of that age,
than the excellent character of this noble earl, as a
brave soldier, a loyal subject, and a disinterested patriot;
and in private life he was of a chearful temper, kind, affectionate, and beneficent to all who were about him. He
was taken ill of a flux on the 21st of August, and in great
pain and misery languished to the 22d of September,
1576, when he departed this life at Dublin, being scarcely
thirty-five years old. There was a very strong report at
the time, of his being poisoned; but for this there seems
little foundation, yet it must have been suspected, as an
inquiry was immediately made by authority, and sir Henry
Sidney, then lord deputy of Ireland, wrote very fully upon
this subject to the privy-council in England, and to one
of the members of that council in particular. The corpse
of the earl was speedily brought over to England, carried
to the place of his nativity, Carmarthen, and buried there
with great solemnity, and with most extraordinary i<
monies of the unfeigned sorrow of all the country round
about. A funeral sermon was preached on this occasion,
Nov. 26, 1576, and printed at London 1577, 4to. He
married Lettice, daughter to sir Frances Knolles, knight
of the garter, who survived him many years, and whose
speedy marriage after his death to the earl of Leicester,
upon whom common fame threw the charge of hastening
his death, perhaps might encourage that report. By this
lady he had two sons, Robert and Walter, and two daughters, Penelope, first married to Robert lord Rich, and
then to Charles Blount, earl of Devonshire; and Dorothy,
who becoming the widow of sir Thomas Perrot, knight,
espoused for her second husband Henry Percy earl of
Northumberland.
d that two years after he obtained a grant of the stewardship of the rape of Hastings, in the county of Sussex. This was one of the last favours he received from his
In the parliament held in 1504, Dudley was speaker of the house of commons; and in consideration, as it may be presumed, of his great services to his master in this high station, we find that two years after he obtained a grant of the stewardship of the rape of Hastings, in the county of Sussex. This was one of the last favours he received from his master who, at the close of his life, is said to have been so much troubled at the oppressions and extortions of these ministers, that he was desirous to make restitution to such as had been injured, and directed the same by his will. Some writers have taken occasion from hence to free that monarch from blame, throwing it all upon Empson and Dudley: but others, and Bacon among them, have very plainly proved, that they did not lead or deceive him in this affair, but only acted under him as instruments. The king died at Richmond the 2 1st of April, 1509, and was scarcely in his grave, when Dudley was sent to the Tower; the clamour of the people being so great, that this step was absolutely necessary to quiet them though Stow seems to think that both he and Empson were decoyed into the Tower, or they had not been so easily taken. At the same time, numbers of their subordinate instruments were seized, imprisoned, tried, and punished. J-;ly the same year, Dudley was arraigned, and found guilty of high treason before commissioners assembled in Guildhall. The king, taking a journey afterwards into the country, found himself so much incommoded by the general outcry of his people, that he caused Empson to be carried into Northamptonshire where, October following, he was also tried and convicted, and then remanded back to the Tower. In the parliament of January 1510, Dudley and Empson were both attainted of high treason; but the king was unwilling to execute them; and Stow informs us, that a rumour prevailed, that queen Catharine had interposed, and procured Dudley’s pardon. The clamours of the people continually increasing, being rather heightened than softened by seeing numbers of mean fellows, whom they had employed as informers and witnesses, convicted and punished, while themselves were spared, the king was at last obliged k> order them for execution and accordingly they both lost their heads upon Tower-hill, Aug. 18, 1510.
she accordingly did, and was probably prepared to grant the request. At court, however, Thomas earl of Sussex shewed himself averse to his counsels, and strongly promoted
, baron of Denbigh, and earl of
Leicester, son to John duke of Northumberland, and brother to Ambrose earl of Warwick, before mentioned, was
born about 1532, and coming early into the service and
favour of king Edward, was knighted in his youth. June
1550 he espoused Amy, daughter of sir John Robsart, at
Sheen in Surrey, the king honouring their nuptials with
his presence; and was immediately advanced to considerable offices at court. In the first year of Mary he fell into
the same misfortunes with the rest of his family; was imprisoned, tried, and condemned; but pardoned for life,
and set at liberty in October 1554. He was afterwards
restored in blood, as we have observed in the former article. On the accession of Elizabeth, he was immediately
entertained at court as a principal favourite: he was made
master of the horse, installed knight of the garter, and
sworn of the privy-council in a very short time. He obtained moreover prodigious grants, one after another,
from the crown: and all things gave way to his ambition,
influence, and policy. In his attendance upon the queen
to Cambridge, the highest reverence was paid him: he
was lodged in Trinity college, consulted in all things, requests made to the queen through him; and, on August 10,
1564, he on his knees entreated the queen to speak to the
iruversity in Latin, which she accordingly did, and was probably prepared to grant the request. At court, however,
Thomas earl of Sussex shewed himself averse to his
counsels, and strongly promoted the overture of a marriage
between the queen and the archduke Charles of Austria;
as much more worthy of such a princess than any subject
of her own, let his qualities be what they would. This
was resented by Dudley, who insinuated that foreign alliances were always fatal; that her sister Mary never knew
an easy minute after her marriage with Philip; that her
majesty ought to consider, she was herself descended of
such a marriage as by those lofty notions was decried: so
that she could not contemn an alliance with the nobility of
England, but must at the same time reflect on her father’s
choice, and her mother’s family. This dispute occasioned
a violent rupture between the two lords, which the queen
took into her hands, and composed; but without the least
diminution of Dudley’s ascendancy, who still continued to
solicit and obtain new grants and offices for himself and his
dependants, who were so numerous, and made so great a
figure, that he was styled by the common people “The
Heart of the Court.
”
enwich, and would have committed him to the Tower, if she had not been dissuaded from it by the earl of Sussex. Lord Leicester being now in the very height of power
In 1576 happened the death of Walter, earl of Essex,
which drew upon lord Leicester many suspicions, after his
marriage with the countess of Essex took place, which,
however, was not until two years after. In 1578, when
the duke of Anjou pressed the match that had been proposed between himself and the queen, his agent, believing
lord Leicester to be the greatest bar to the duke’s pretensions, informed the queen of his marriage with lady Essex;
upon which her majesty was so enraged, that, as Camden
relates, she commanded him not to stir from the castle of
Greenwich, and would have committed him to the Tower,
if she had not been dissuaded from it by the earl of Sussex.
Lord Leicester being now in the very height of power and
influence, many attempts were made upon his character,
in order to take him down: and in 1584 came out a most
virulent book against him, commonly called “Leicester’s
Commonwealth,
” the purpose of which was to shew, that
the English constitution was subverted, and a new form
imperceptibly introduced, to which no name could be so
properly given, as that of a “Leicestrian Commonwealth.
”
In proof of this, the earl was represented as an atheist in
point of religion, a secret traitor to the queen, an oppressor of her people 1 an inveterate enemy to the nobility, a
complete monster with regard to ambition, cruelty, and
Just; and not only so, but as having thrown all offices of
trust into the hands of his creatures, and usurped all the
power of the kingdom. The queen, however, did not fail
to countenance and protect her favourite; and to remove
as much as possible the impression this performance made
upon the vulgar, caused letters to be issued from the privycouncil, in which all the facts contained therein were declared to he absolutely false, not only to the knowledge of
those who signed them, but also of the queen herself.
Nevertheless, this book was universally read, and the contents of it generally received for true: and the great
secrecy with which it was written, printed, and published,
induced a suspicion, that some very able heads were concerned either in drawing it up, or at least in furnishing the
materials. It is not well known what the original title of
it was, but supposed to be “A Dialogue between a scholar, a gentleman, and a lawyer;
” though it was afterwards
called “Leicester’s Commonwealth.
” It has been several
times reprinted, particularly in 1600, 8vo; in 1631, 8vo,
the running-title being “A letter of state to a scholar of
Cambridge;
” in Leicester’s Ghost;
” and again in Secret Memoirs of Robert Dudley earl of Leicester,
” with a preface by Dr. Drake, (see Drake) who
pretended it to be printed from an old manuscript. The
design of reprinting it in 1641, was, to give a bad impression of the government of Charles I.; and the same was
supposed to be the design of Dr. Drake in his publication.
In Dec. 1585, lord Leicester embarked for the protestant Low Countries, whither he arrived in quality of governor. At this time the affairs of those countries were in
a perplexed situation; and the States thought that nothing
could contribute so much to their recovery, as prevailing
upon queen Elizabeth to send over some person of great
distinction, whom they might set at the head of their concerns civil and military: which proposition, says Camden,
so much flattered the ambition of this potent earl, that he
willingly consented to pass the seas upon this occasion, as
being well assured of most ample powers. Before his departure, the queen admonished him to have a special regard to her honour, and to attempt nothing inconsistent
with the great employment to which he was advanced:
yet, she was so displeased with some proceedings of his
and the States, that the year after she sent over very severe
letters to them, which drew explanations from the former,
and deep submissions from the latter. The purport of the
queen’s letter was, to reprimand the States “for having
conferred the absolute government of the confederate provinces upon Leicester, her subject, though she had refused
it herself;
” and Leicester, for having presumed to take it
upon him. He returned to England Nov. 1585; and,
notwithstanding what was past, was well received by the
queen. What contributed to make her majesty forget his
offence in the Low Countries, was the pleasure of having
him near her, at a time when she very much wanted his
counsel: for now the affair of Mary queen of Scots was
upon the carpet, and the point was, how to have her taken
off with the least discredit to the queen. The earl according to report, which we could wish to be able to contradict, thought it best to have her poisoned; but that scheme
was not found practicable, so that they were obliged to
have recourse to violence. The earl set out for the Low
Countries in June 1587; but, great discontents arising on
all sides, he was recalled in November. Camden relates,
that on his return, finding an accusation preparing against
him for mal-administration there, and that he w^as summoned to appear before the council, he privately implored
the queen’s protection, and besought her “not to receive
him with disgrace upon his return, whom at his first departure she had sent out with honour; nor bring down
alive to the grave, whom her former goodness had raised
from the dust.
” Which expressions of humility and sorrow wrought so far upon her, that he was admitted into
her former grace and favour.
, author of the first Latin grammar of any noie in England, was a native of the county of Sussex, flourished about the latter part of the fifteenth century.
, author of the first Latin grammar of
any noie in England, was a native of the county of Sussex,
flourished about the latter part of the fifteenth
century. After having been for some time usher of the school
next to Magdalen college gate in Oxford, he took his
degree of B. A. and in 1491 was admitted fellow of that
college. He afterwards completed his degrees in arts, and
commenced schoolmaster, in which capacity he acquired
great reputation, and prepared for college many students,
who were afterwards men of eminence. When he died is
unknown, but he was alive in 1511. The grammar he
published was entitled “Lac Puesorum. M. Holti. Mylke
for chyldren,
” 4to, printed by Wynkyn de Wprde,
ion in 1745. On the revival of the order of the Bath in 1725, he was one of the esquires of the earl of Sussex, deputy earl-marshal. He was elected F. A. S. March 2,
, a herald and antiquary,
son of captain Stephen Martin, mentioned in the preceding
article, was born April 5, 1702. He was educated at the
school of Mr. Michael Maittaire, and was admitted of the
Middle-temple. In 1724 he was appointed a deputylieutenant of the Tower-hamlets; in which station he afterwards distinguished himself by his exertions during the
rebellion in 1745. On the revival of the order of the Bath
in 1725, he was one of the esquires of the earl of Sussex,
deputy earl-marshal. He was elected F. A. S. March 2,
1726-7. In the same year he was created Lancaster herald, in the room of Mr. Hesketh; in 1729 constituted
Norroy; in 1741 Clarenceux; and by patent dated December 19, 1754, appointed garter. In all his situations
in the college Mr. Leake was a constant advocate for the
rights and privileges of the office. He obtained, after
much solicitation, a letter in 1731, from the duke of Norfolk to the earl of Sussex, his deputy earl -marshal, requesting him to sign a warrant for Mr. Leake’s obtaining
a commission of visitation, which letter, however, was not
attended with success. In the same year he promoted a
prosecution against one Shiets, a painter, who pretended
to keep an om'ce of arms in Dean’s-court. The court of
chivalry was opened with great solemnity in the paintedchamber, on March 3, 1731-2, in relation to which he had
taken a principal part. In 1733, he appointed Francis
Bassano, of Chester, his deputy, as Norroy, for Chester and
North Wales; and about the same time asserted his right,
as Norroy, to grant arms in North Wales, which right was
claimed by Mr. Longville, who had been constituted
Gloucester King at Arms partium Walii<t, annexed to that
of Bath King at Arms, at the revival of that order. He
drew up a petition in January 1737-8, which was presented
to the king in council, for a new charter, with the sole
power of painting arms, &c. which petition was referred
to the attorney and solicitor general; but they making
their report favourable to the painters, it did not succeed.
He printed, in 1744, “Reasons for granting Commissions
to the Provincial Kings at Arms for visiting their Provinces.
” Dr. Cromwell Mortimer having, in
, an English artist, at one time of considerable fame, was born at Eastbourne in the county of Sussex, in November 1739. His father, who was a collector of
, an English artist, at one time of considerable fame, was born at Eastbourne in the county of Sussex, in November 1739. His father, who was a collector of the customs at that port, was descended from Mortimer earl of March, and a man of most respectable character. His uncle was an itinerant painter, of merit much above mediocrity; from frequently seeing his productions, the nephew imbibed an early fondness for that art, which he afterwards practised with considerable success. His taste for the terrific he is said to have acquired from the scenery of the place, and the tribe of ferocious smugglers, whom it was his father’s duty to watch, whose countenances, unsoftened by social intercourse, were marked with that savage hardihood, which he afterwards so much admired, and sometimes imitated, in the banditti of Salvator Rosa.
, an English nonconformist, was a native of Sussex, descended of a genteel family there, and born about
, an English nonconformist, was a native of Sussex, descended of a genteel family there, and born about 1596. After a proper foundation at the grammarschool, he was sent to Oxford, and entered a commoner of Brazen-nose college in 1615; whence he removed in a little time to Magdalen-hall, for the sake of a puritanical tutor to whom he was greatly attached. He took the degrees in arts in 1619 and 1622; about which time he entered into holy orders, and was, some time in 1620, admitted to officiate, it does not appear in what capacity, in St. Michael’s church, Cornhill, London. Here having disclosed some of those opinions which were hostile to the constitution of the Church of England, he became obnoxious to the censures of the episcopal court; to avoid which, he went, with others of his persuasion, to Holland, in 1633. He continued for the most part at Arnheim in Guelderland, till 1640; when, his party gaining the ascendancy, and he fancying that his services would not only be useful but safe, he returned home, and was soon after made minister of Kimbolton, in Huntingdonshire, by Edward earl of Manchester.
, an unfortunate poet, was born at Peasmarsh, in the county of Sussex, in 1706, and was the son of a farmer at that place,
, an unfortunate poet, was born
at Peasmarsh, in the county of Sussex, in 1706, and was
the son of a farmer at that place, who rented a considerable estate of the earl of Thanet. He discovered excellent
parts, with a strong propensity to learning and his father,
not being in circumstances to give him a proper education,
applied to his noble landlord, who took him under his protection, and placed him at Appleby school in Westmoreland. Here he became acquainted with Mr. Noble, a clergyman of great learning and fine taste, who promoted his
studies and directed his taste. Upon his leaving Appleby,
he went to Sidney college in Cambridge, where he pursued the plan Mr. Noble had given him, and went through
the classics, as well as all our English poets, with great
advantage. Of these last, Spenser’s “Fairy Queen
” and
Brown’s “( Britannia’s Pastorals
” are said to have given him the greatest delight. He had, however, unfortunately contracted a habit of desultory reading, and had no relish for academical studies. His temper could not brook restraint; and his tutor, he thought, treated him with great rigour. A quarrel ensued; and, to avoid the scandal of expulsion, with which he was threatened, he took his name out of the college book, and went to London. Even now his friends would have forgiven him, and procured his readmission; but the pleasures of the town, the desire of
being known, and his romantic expectations of meeting
with 0u,e generous patron to reward his merit, rendered
him deaf to all advice. He led a pleasurable life, frequented Button’s, and became acquainted with some of
the most eminent wits of the time. As he had no fortune,
nor any means of subsistence, but what arose from the
subscriptions for the poems he proposed to publish; and,
as he wanted even common prudence to manage this
precarious income, he was soon involved in the deepest
distress and most deplorable wretchedness. In a poem,
entitled “Effigies Authons,
” addressed to lord Burlington, he describes himself as destitute of friends, of money;
a prey to hunger; and passing his nights on a bench in
St. James’s park. In a private letter to a gentleman, he
thus expressed himself: “Spare my blushes; I have not
enjoyed the common necessaries of life these two days,
and can hardly hold to subscribe myself,
” &c. Curll, the
bookseller, finding some of his compositions well received,
And going through several impression>, took him into his
house; and, as Pope affirms in one of his letters, starved
him to death. But this does not appear to be strictly true;
and his death is more justly attributed to the small-pox,
which carried him off in 1727, in his 21st year. His biographer says, that he had a surprising genius, and had
raised hopes in all that knew him, that he would become
one of the most eminent poets of the age; but surh of his
poems as we find in the collection published in 2 vols. 8vo,
in 1728, would not in our days be thought calculated to
Support such high expectations.
, archbishop of Canterbury in the reign of Edward 1. was born in the county of Sussex, about 1240, and educated in the monastery at Lewes,
, archbishop of Canterbury in the
reign of Edward 1. was born in the county of Sussex, about
1240, and educated in the monastery at Lewes, whence
he was sent to Oxford, and became a minorite friar. Hid
name occurs in the registers of Merlon-college, which was
founded in his time, but not with sufficient precision to
enable us to say that he was educated there. He was,
however, created D. D. at this university, and read public
lectures. Pits says he was professor of divinity, and afterwards provincial of his order in England. He appears to
have been twice at Paris, where he also read lectures with
great applause. He went from Paris, after his second
visit, to Lyons, where he obtained a canonry in the cathedral, which Godwin and Cave inform us was held with
the archbishopric of Canterbury for two centuries after.
Fuller says it was a convenient half-way house between
Canterbury and Rome. He then went to Rome, where
the pope appointed him auditor or chief judge of his palace, but Leland calls the office which the pope bestowed
upon him that of Palatine lecturer or reader, “lector, ut
vocant, Palatinus.
” In 1278, this pope consecrated him
archbishop of Canterbury, on Peckham’s agreeing to pay
his holiness the sum of 4000 marks, which there is some
reason to think he did not pay; at least it is certain he
was so slow in remitting it, that the pope threatened to
excommunicate him.
orthamptonshire, which he held with the rectory of Wilbye, in the same county, given him by the earl of Sussex. In 1761 he began his literary career, by publishing
, a late learned prelate, a descendant
of the ancient earls of Northumberland, was born at
Bridgenorth in Shropshire, in 1728, and educated at Christ
church, Oxford. In July 1753 he took the degree of M.A.;
and in 1756 he was presented by that college to the vicarage of Easton Mauduit, in Northamptonshire, which he
held with the rectory of Wilbye, in the same county, given
him by the earl of Sussex. In 1761 he began his literary
career, by publishing “Han Kiou Chouan,
” a translation
from the Chinese; which was followed, in 1762, by a collection of “Chinese Miscellanies,
” and in Five
Pieces of Runic Poetry,
” translated from the Icelandic language. In Song
of Solomon,
” with a commentary and annotations. The
year following he published the “Reliques of Antient
English Poetry,
” a work which constitutes an aera in the
history of English literature in the eighteenth century.
Perhaps the perusal of a folio volume of ancient manuscripts
given to the bishop by a friend, in early life (from which he afterwards made large extracts in the “Reliques,
”) led
his mind to those studies in which he so eminently distinguished himself. It appears likewise that Shenstone encouraged him in publishing the “Reliques.
” The same
year he published “A Key to the New Testament,
” a concise manual for Students of Sacred Literature, which has
been adopted in the universities, and often reprinted. After
the publication of the “Reliques,
” he was invited by the
late duke and duchess of Northumberland to reside with
them as their domestic chaplain. In 1769 he published
“A Sermon preached before the Sons of the Clergy at St.
Paul’s.
” In The Northumberland
Household Book
” through the press; the same year he
published “The Hermit of Wark worth,
”' and a translation
of Mallet’s “Northern Antiquities,
” with notes. A second
edition of the “Reliques of Ancient Poetry
” was published
in Don
Quixote.
” In Select Collection of
Miscellany Poems.
” When elevated to the mitre, Mr.
Nichols was also under further obligations in the “History
of Hinckley,
” Surrey’s Poems,
” and also
with a good edition of the Works of Villiers duke of Buckingham; both which, from a variety of causes, remained
many years unfinished in the warehouse of Mr. Tonson in
the Savoy; but were resumed in 1795, and nearly brought
to a conclusion, when the whole impression of both works
was unfortunately consumed by the fire in Red Lion
Passage in 1808. His lordship died at his episcopal palace,
Dromore, on Sept. 30, 1811, in his eighty-third year. So
much of his life had passed in the literary world, strictly
so called, that authentic memoirs of his life would form an
interesting addition to our literary history, but nothing has
yet appeared from the parties most able to contribute such
information. The preceding particulars we believe to be
correct, as far as they go, but we cannot offer them as satisfactory.
, Earl of Sussex, a statesman of the sixteenth century, was the eldest
, Earl of Sussex, a statesman of the sixteenth century, was the eldest son of Henry Ratcliffe, the second earl of Sussex, by Elizabeth, one of the daughters of Thomas Howard, second duke of Norfolk. His first public service was in an honourable embassy to the emperor Charles the Fifth, to treat of the projected marriage of Queen Mary to Philip, which he afterwards ratified with the latter in Spain. Upon his return he was appointed lord deputy of Ireland, and chief justice of the forests north of Trent. The order of the garter, and the office of captain of the pensioners, were likewise conferred on him in that reign, a little before the conclusion of which he succeeded to his father’s honours. Elizabeth continued him for a while in the post of lord deputy, and recalled him to assume that of the president of the North, a situation rendered infinitely difficult by the delicacy of her affairs with Scotland, and the rebellious spirit of the border counties. The latter, however, was subdued by his prudence and bravery in 1569; and the assiduity and acuteness with which he studied the former, will appear from his own pen. The unfortunate affair of the duke of Norfolk, to whom he was most firmly attached, fell out in the course of that year, and would have ended happily and honourably if the duke had followed his advice. That nobleman’s last request was, that his best george, chain, and gafter, might be given to my lord of Sussex. He was the prime negociator in those two famous treaties of marriage with the archduke Charles and the duke of Alenson, Elizabeth’s real intentions in which have been so frequently the subject of historical disquisition. In 1572, he retired from the severer labours of the public service, in which he had wasted his health, to the honourable office of lord chamberlain, and the duties of a cabinet minister; and died at his house in Bermondsey, June 9, 1583, leaving little to his heirs but the bright example of a character truly noble. The earl of Sussex was twice married; first, to Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Wriothesley, earl of Southampton, by whom he had two sons, Henry and Thomas, who died young; secondly, to Frances, daughter of sir William Sydney, afterwards the celebrated foundress of Sydney-Sussex college in Cambridge; by whom having no children, he was succeeded by Henry, his next brother.
dge justly esteems himself peculiarly fortunate in having been the instrument of disclosing the earl of Sussex’s letters to the public. They form a very valuable part
“This great man’s conduct,
” says Mr. Lodge, “united
all the splendid qualities of those eminent persons who
jointly rendered Elizabeth’s court an object of admiration
to Europe, and was perfectly free from their faults. Wise
and loyal as Burghley, without his blind attachment to
the monarch; vigilant as Walsingham, but disdaining his
low cunning; magnificent as Leicester, but incapable of
hypocrisy; and brave as Ralegh, with the piety of a primitive Christian; he seemed above the common objects of
human ambition, and wanted, if the expression may be allowed, those dark shades of character which make nien the 1
heroes of history. Hence it is, probably, that our writers
have bestowed so little attention on this admirable person,
who is but slightly mentioned in most historical collections,
unless with regard to his disputes with Leicester, whom he
hated almost to a fault.
” Mr. Lodge justly esteems himself peculiarly fortunate in having been the instrument of disclosing the earl of Sussex’s letters to the public. They form
a very valuable part of the “Historical Illustrations,
” and,
a small number excepted, are the only ones to be met with
in print. These letters display both his integrity and ability in a very striking light, and are written in a clear and
manly style. Four of them are particularly curious two to
the queen, onthe treaty of marriage with the archduke of
Austria; one to sir William Cecil, on the state of parties
in Scotland; and one to her Majesty, concerning the duke of
Alen$on. The letter on the affairs of Scotland is considered
by Mr. Lodge as an inestimable curiosity. Farther light
will be thrown on the earl of Sussex’s character, by transcribing the manly language in which he complains that
his services were neglected, and declares his purpose
of retiring to private life. It is in a letter to sir William Cecil. “I was firste a Lieuten‘te; I was after
little better than a Marshal; I had then nothing left to me
but to direct hanging matters (in the meane tyme all was disposed that was w th in my comission), and nowe I ame
offered to be made a Shreif’s Bayly to deliver over possessions. Blame me not, good Mr. Secretarie, though my
pen utter somewhat of that swell in my stomake, for I see
I ame kepte but for a brome, and when I have done my
office to be throwen out of the dore. I ame the first nobel
man hathe been thus used. Trewe service deserveth honor
and credite, and not reproche and open defaming; but,
seeing the one is ever delivered to me in the stede of the
other, I must leave to serve, or lose my honor; w^h, being
continewed so long in my howse, I wolde be lothe shoolde
take blemishe wth me. These matters I knowe procede not
from lacke of good and honorable meaning in the Q,’ ma 1
towards me, nor from lacke of dewte' and trewthe in me
towards her, which grevethe me the more and, therefore,
seing I shall be still a camelyon, and yelde no other shewe
then as it shall please others to give the couller, I will content my self to live a private lyfe. God send her Mate others
that meane as well as I have done; and so I comitt you to
th* Almightie.
” From the next letter it appears that the
queen had too much wisdom to part with so faithful a counsellor and servant. The earl of Sussex had a high regard
and esteem for Lord Burghley. In one of his letters,
dated June 28, 1580, he expresses himself, to that great
statesman, in the following terms: “The trevve fere of
God w^h yo r actyons have alwayes shewed to be in yo r harte,
the grete and deepe care wch you have always had for the
honor and salfty of the Q‘. Ma*’s most worthy p’son; the
co‘tinual troubell w ch yqu have of long tyme taken for the
benefyting of the com’on-welthe and the upryght course
wich ye have alwaye’s taken, respectying the mattr and not
the p’son, in all causes (wch be the necessary trusts of him that ferethe God trewly, s’rveth his Soverayne faythfully, and lovethe his countrey clerely) have tyed me to yo r L. in
that knotte w cli no worldly fraylty can break; and, therfor,
I wyll never forbere to runne any fortune that may s’rve
you, and further you' godly actyons. And so, my good L.
forberyng to entrobell you w th words, I end; and wysh
unto you as to my self, and better, yf I may.
”
years. Being called to the bar in 1796, he attached himself to the home circuit, and to the sessions of Sussex. His first opportunity of displaying professional ability
After passing three winters at Glasgow, he attended thecourts of law in Edinburgh, and here obtained an introduction to the celebrated Dr. Adam Smith, who was so highly pleased with him, that as long as he resided in Edinburgh,, Mr. Rose was constantly invited to the literary circle of that eminent philosopher. His subsequent intimacy with Cowper appears in Mr. Hayley’s interesting volumes, and perhaps Cowper’s visit to Mr. Rose in Chancery-lane is one of the most affecting incidents in the eventful history of that poet. Mr. Rose had the misfortune to lose his ex* cellent father, while he was pursuing his studies in the North; but a loss so unseasonable did not induce him to shrink from the first irksome labours of an arduous profes^ sion. Having entered his name at LincolnVInn, Nov. 6, 3786, he devoted himself to the law, for which he seemed equally prepared by nature and education. With a mind acute and powerful, with a fund of classical learning, and of general knowledge, with an early command of language, and with manners, as we have already noticed, peculiarly conciliating, he had every thing to hope. Though his spirit was naturally ardent, he submitted to the most tire-r some process of early discipline in his profession, placing himself under a special pleader in 1787, and attending him three years. Being called to the bar in 1796, he attached himself to the home circuit, and to the sessions of Sussex. His first opportunity of displaying professional ability occurred in Chichester, where, having a clergyman for his client, he conciliated the esteem of his audience byexpatiating with propriety, eloquence, and success, on the character of a divine. He was still more admired for the rare talent of examining a witness with a becoming ture of acuteness and humanity; and upon the whole his friends were persuaded, from this first display of his talents^ that he was destined to rise l>y sure, though slow degrees, to the highest honours of his profession.
, an elegant poetess, was born in 1749. She was the daughter of Nicholas Turner, esq. a gentleman of Sussex, whose seat was at Stoke, near GuiU ibrd; but he had
, an elegant poetess, was born in 1749. She was the daughter of Nicholas Turner, esq. a gentleman of Sussex, whose seat was at Stoke, near GuiU ibrd; but he had another house at Bignor Park, on the banks of the Aru.n, where she passed many of her earliest years, amidst scenery which had nursed the fancies of Otway and Collins, and where every charm of nature seems to have left the most lively and distinct impression on her mind. She discovered from a very early age an insatiable thirst for reading, which was checked by an aunt, who had the care of her education; for she had lost her mother almost in her infancy. From her twelfth to her fifteenth year, her father resided occasionally in London, and she was introduced into various society. It is said that before she was sixteen, bhe married Mr. Smith, a partner in his father’s house, who was a West India merchant, and also an East India director; an ill-assorted match, and the prime source of all her future misfortunes. After she had resided some time in London, and partly in the vicinity, Mr. Smith’s father, who could never persuade his son to give his time or care sufficiently to the business in which he was engaged, allowed him to retire into the country, and purchased for him Lyss farm in Hampshire.
d flight of her husband abroad; and she removed with her children to a small cottage in another part of Sussex, whence she published a new edition of her “Sonnets,”
It now became necessary to exert her faculties again as
a means of support; and she translated a little novel of abbe
Prevost; and made a selection of extraordinary stories from
“Les Causes Celebres
” of the French, which she entitled
“The Romance of Real Life.
” Soon after this she was
once more left to herself by a second flight of her husband
abroad; and she removed with her children to a small cottage in another part of Sussex, whence she published a new
edition of her “Sonnets,
” with many additions, which afforded her a temporary relief. In this retirement, stimulated by necessity, she ventured to try her powers of original composition in a novel called “Emmeline, or the Orphan of the Castle,
” The success of this novel encouraged her to produce others for some successive years,
” with equal felicity,
with an imagination still unexhausted, and a command of
language, and a variety of character, which have not yet
received their due commendation.“” Ethelinde“appeared
in 178!;
” Celestina“in 1791;
” Desmond“in 1792;
and
” r \ ht- Old Manor House“in 1793. To these succeeded
” The Wanderings of Warwick“the
” Banished Man;“”Momalbert;“”Marchmont;“” The young Philosopher,“and the
” Solitary Wanderer," making in all 38 volumes.
They weie not, however, all equally successful. She was
led by indignant feelings to intersperse much of her private
history and her law-suits; and this again involved her sometimes in a train of political sentiment, which was by no
means popular, and had it been just, was out of place in a
moral fiction.
ender to the English. It is probable, that, as master-tyeneral of the ordnance, he attended the earl of Sussex, president of the North, into Scotland, with an army
His father Richard Sutton, steward of the courts in Lincoln, died in that city in 1558, and his son, on his return home in 1562, found himself in possession of considerable property. He was now about thirty years of age, and reckoned an accomplished gentleman. He was first retained by the duke of Norfolk, whose favours he acknowledges in his will by a legacy of 400l.; and afterwards became secretary to the earl of Warwick, and occasionally also to his brother the earl of Leicester. In 1569, the earl of Warwick being master-general of the ordnance, appointed Mr. Sutton master of the ordnance -at Berwick, a post of great trust at that time, Berwick being a frontier garrison to Scotland. In this situation he distinguished himself much on the breaking out of the rebellion in the north by the earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland; and by the recommendation of his two patrons, he obtained a patent the same year for the office of master-general of the ordnance in the north, for life; and in 1573, he commanded one of the five batteries, which obliged the strong castle of Edinburgh to surrender to the English. It is probable, that, as master-tyeneral of the ordnance, he attended the earl of Sussex, president of the North, into Scotland, with an army in 1570, though he is not expressly named in Camden’s annals for that year. But in 1573, he is named as one of the chief of those 1500 men who marched into Scotland to the assistance of the regent, the earl of Morton, by order of queen Elizabeth, and laid siege to Edinburgh castle.
pressing the other. He was familiar with Cecil, allied to Leicester^ and an oracle to Hadcliffe earl of Sussex. His conversation was insinuating, and yet reserved.
Sir Francis Walsingham was a puritan in his religious
principles, and at first a favourer of them in some matters
of discipline. To them he offered, in 1583, in the queen’s
name, that provided they would conform in other points,
the three ceremonies of kneeling at the communion, wearing the surplice, and the cross in baptism, should be expunged out of the Common-prayer. But they replying to
these concessions in the language of Moses, that “they
would not leave so much as a hoof behind,
” meaning, that
they would have the church-liturgy wholly laid aside, and
not be obliged to the performance of any office in it; so
unexpected an answer lost them in a great measure Walsingham’s affection. His general character has been thus
summed up, from various authorities: “He was undoubtedly one of the most refined politicians, and most
penetrating statesmen, that ever any age produced. He
bad an admirable talent both in discovering and managing
the secret recesses of human nature: he had his spies in
most courts of Christendom, and allowed them a liberal
maintenance; for his grand maxim was, that
” knowledge
is never too dear.“He spent his whole time and faculties
in the service of the queen and her kingdoms; on which
account her majesty was heard to say that
” in diligence
and sagacity he exceeded her expectation.“He is thought
(but this, we trust, is unfounded) to have had a principal
hand in laying the foundation of the wars in France and
Flanders; and is said, upon his return from his embassy
in France, when the queen expressed her apprehension
of the Spanish designs against that kingdom, to have answered*
” Madam, be content, and fear not. The Spaniard hath a great appetite, and an excellent digestion.
But I have fitted him with a bone for these twenty years,
that your majesty shall have no cause to dread him,
provided, that if the fire chance to slack which I have
kindled, you will be ruled by me, and cast in some of your
fuel, which will revive the “flame.
” He would cherish a
plot some years together, admitting the conspirators to
his own, and even the queen’s presence, very familiarly;
but took care to have them carefully watched. His spies
constantly attended on particular men for three years together; and lest they should not keep the secret, he dispatched -them into foreign parts, taking in new ones in
their room. His training of Parry, who designed the murder of the queen; the admitting of him, under the pretence of discovering the plot, to her majesty’s presence;
and then letting him go where he would, only on the
security of a centinel set over him, was an instance of
reach and hazard beyond common apprehension. The
queen of Scots’ letters were all carried to him by her own
servant, whom she trusted, and were decyphered for him
by one Philips, and sealed up again by one Gregory; so
that neither that queen, nor any of her correspondents ever
perceived either the seals defaced, or letters delayed.
Video et taceo, was his saying, before it was his mistress’s
motto. He served himself of the court factions as the
queen did, neither advancing the one, nor depressing the
other. He was familiar with Cecil, allied to Leicester^
and an oracle to Hadcliffe earl of Sussex. His conversation
was insinuating, and yet reserved. He saw every man, and
none saw him. “His spirit,
” says Lloyd, “was as public
as his parts; yet as debonnaire as he was prudent, and as
obliging to the softer but predominant parts of the world,
as he was serviceable to the more severe; and no less dextrous to work on humours than to convince reason* He
would say, he must observe the joints and flexures of
affairs; and so could do more with a story, than others
could with an harangue. He always surprized business,
and preferred motions in the heat of other diversions; and
if he must debate it, he would hear all, and with the advantage of foregoing speeches, that either cautioned or
confirmed his resolutions, he carried all before him in
conclusion, without reply. To him men’s faces spake as
much as their tongues, and their countenances were in*
dexes of their hearts. He would so beset men with questions, and draw them on, that they discovered themselves
whether they answered or were silent. He maintained
fifty-three agents and eighteen spies in foreign courts; and
for two pistoles an order had all the private papers in Europe. Few letters escaped his hands; and he could read
their contents without touching the seals. Religion was
the interest of his country, in his judgment, and of his
soul; therefore he maintained it as sincerely as he lived
it. It had his head, his purse, and his heart. He laid the
great foundation of the protestant constitution as to its policy, and the main plot against the popish as to its ruin.
”
eron of civil discourses,” 1582, 4to. 5. “The remembrance of the life and death of Thomas, late earl of Sussex,” 1583, 4to. 6. “A mirrour of true honour, &c. in the
, is an author of whom very
little is known. From the circumstance of his being a
kinsman to serjeant Fleetwood, recorder of London, it is
probable that he was of a good family. It appears that he
first tried his fortune at court, where he consumed his patrimony in fruitless expectation of preferment. Being now
destitute of subsistence, he commenced soldier, and served
abroad, though in what capacity is unknown. Such, however, was his gallant behaviour, that his services were rewarded with additional pay. He returned from the wars
with honour, but with little profit; and his prospect of advancement was so small, that he determined to turn farmer,
but being unsuccessful in that undertaking, was under the
necessity of applying to the generosity of his friends. This
he found to be “a broken reed, and worse than common
beggary of charity from strangers. Now craft accosted
him in his sleep, and tempted him with the proposals of
several professions; but for the knavery or slavery of them,
he rejected all: his munificence constrained him to love
money, and his magnanimity to hate all the ways of getting
it.
” At last he resolved to seek his fortune at sea, and accordingly embarked with sir Humphrey Gilbert in the expedition to Newfoundland, which was rendered unsuccessful by an engagement with the Spanish fleet. From this
period, Mr. Whetstone seems to have depended entirely on
his pen for subsistence. Where or when he died has not
been ascertained. He is entitled to some notice as a writer
whose works are in request as literary curiosities, but of
little intrinsic value. Mr. Steevens pronounced him “the
most quaint and contemptible writer, both in prose and
verse, he ever met with.
” He wrote, 1. “The Rock of Regard,
” a poem in four parts. 2. “The Life of George Gascoigne,
” English Poets,
” Promus and Cassandra,
”
a comedy, Measure for Measure.
” 4. “Heptameron of civil discourses,
” The remembrance of the life
and death of Thomas, late earl of Sussex,
” A mirrour of true honour, &c. in the life and death, &c,
of Francis earl of Bedford,
” &c. 1,585, 4to. 7. “The English mirror, wherein all estates may behold the conquest
of error,
” Censure of a dutiful subject of certain
noted speech and behaviour of those fourteen noted traytors at the place of execution on the 20th and 21st of
Sept.
” no date. 9. A poem “on the life and death of sir
Philip Sidney
” by him, and supposed unique, a very few
leaves only, was lately sold at Messrs. King and Lochee’s
to Mr. Harding for 261. 5s. An account of some of these
curiosities may be seen in our authorities.
tt (afterwards lord Chatham). In 1762 he was made lord lieutenant and custos rotulorum of the county of Sussex. He died of an apoplectic fit in June 1763. He was succeeded
He was succeeded in dignity and estate by his eldest son, sir Charles Wyndham, who succeeded to the titles of earl of Egremont, and baron of Cockermouth, by the death of his grace, Algernon, duke of Somerset, without heir male, who had been created earl of Egremont, and baron of Cockermouth, in the county of Cumberland, by George II. with limitation of these honours to \r Charles Wyndham. His lordship, whilst he was a commoner, was elected to parliament as soon as he came of age, for the borough of Bridgewater in Somersetshire. He sat afterwards for Appleby, in Westmoreland, Taunton,. in Somersetshire, and Cockermouth, in Cumberland. In 1751 he was appointed lord lieutenant and custos rotulorum of the county of Cumberland. In April 1761 he was nominated the first of the three plenipotentiaries on the pnrfc of Great Britain to the intended congress at Augsburg, for procuring a general pacification between the belligerent powers; and in the same year was constituted one of the principal secretaries of state, in which it was his disadvantage to succeed Mr. Pitt (afterwards lord Chatham). In 1762 he was made lord lieutenant and custos rotulorum of the county of Sussex. He died of an apoplectic fit in June 1763. He was succeeded by his son, George, the second and present earl of Egremont.
, a divine and poet, the sixth son of Mr. John Yalden, of Sussex, was born at Exeter in 1671. Having been educated in
, a divine and poet, the sixth son
of Mr. John Yalden, of Sussex, was born at Exeter in 1671.
Having been educated in the grammar-school belonging to
Magdalen college, Oxford, he was, in 1690, at the age of
nineteen, admitted commoner of Magdalen Hall, under
the tuition of Josiah Pullen, a man whose name is still remembered in the university. He became next year one
of the scholars of Magdalen college, where he was distinguished by a declamation, which Dr. Hough, the president,
happening to attend, thought too good to be the speaker’s.
Some time after, the doctor, finding him a little irregularly busy in the library, set him an exercise, for punishment; and, that he might not be deceived by any artifice,
locked the door. Yalden, as it happened, had been latelyreading on the subject given, and produced with little difficulty a composition which so pleased the president that
he told him his former suspicions, and promised to favour
him. Among his contemporaries in the college were Addison and Sacheverell, men who were in those times friends,
and who both adopted Yalden to their intimacy. Yalden
continued throughout his life to think, as probably he
thought at first, yet did not lose the friendship of Addison.
When Namur was taken by king William, Yalden made an
ode . He wrote another poem, on the death of the duke
of Gloucester. In 1700 he became fellow of the college,
and next year entering into orders, was presented by the
society with the living of Willoughby, in Warwickshire,
consistent with his fellowship, and chosen lecturer of moral
philosophy, a very honourable office. On the accession of
queen Anne he wrote another poem; and is said, by the
author of the “Biographia,
” to have declared himself one
of the party who had the distinction of high-churchmen.
In 1706 he was received into the family of the duke of
Beaufort. Next year he became D. D. and soon after he
resigned his fellowship and lecture; and, as a token of his
gratitude, gave the college a picture of their founder. The
duke made him rector of Chalton and Cleanville, two adjoining towns and benefices in Hertfordshire; and he had
the prebends, or sinecures, of Deans, Hains, and Pendles,
in Devonshire. In 1713 he was chosen preacher of Bridewell Hospital, upon the resignation of Dr. Atterbury. From
this time he seems to have led a quiet and inoffensive life,
till the clamour was raised about Atterbury’s plot. Every
loyal eye was on the watch for abettors or partakers of the
horrid conspiracy; and Dr. Yalden, having some acquaintance with the bishop, and being familiarly conversant with
Kelly his secretary, fell under suspicion, and was taken
into custody. Upon his examination he was charged with
a dangerous correspondence with Kelly. The correspondence he acknowledged; but maintained that it had no
treasonable tendency. His papers were seized; but nothing was found that could fix a crime upon him, except
two words in his pocket-book, f< thorough- paced doctrine.“This expression the imagination of his examiners had impregnated with treason; and the doctor was enjoined to
explain them. Thus pressed, he told them that the words
had lain unheeded in his pocket-book from the time of
queen Anne, and 'that he was ashamed to give an account
of them; but the truth was, that he had gratified his curiosity one day by hearing Daniel Burgess in the pulpit,
and these words were a memorial hint of a remarkable sentence by which he warned his congregation to
” beware of
thorough-paced doctrine, that doctrine, which, coming in
at one ear, paces through the head, and goes out at the
other.“Nothing worse than this appearing in his papers,
and no evidence arising against him, he was set at liberty.
It will not be supposed that a man of this character attained high dignities in the church; but he still retained
the friendship, and frequented the conversation of a very
numerous and splendid body of acquaintance. He died
July 16, 1736, in the sixty-sixth year of his age. Of his
poems which have been admitted into Dr. Johnson’s collection, his
” Hymn to Darkness“seems to be his best
performance, and is, for the most part, imagined with great
vigour, and expressed with great propriety. His
” Hymn
to Light" is not equal to the other. On his other poems it
is sufficient to say that they deserve perusal, though they
are not always exactly polished, though the rhymes are
sometimes very ill sorted, and though his faults seem rather the omissions of idleness than the negligences of enthusiasm.