HATTON, Sir Robert (1582-1653), of Oakington, Cambs. and Long Buckby and Benefield, Northants.

A younger son from one of the poorer branches of the Hattons, Robert Hatton had made his career in the service of successive archbishops of Canterbury, rising to become the steward of the estates of George Abbot. It was Abbot who probably got him elected as an MP for the first time in 1614, when he had sat for Queenborough, and he had gone on to represent Sandwich, one of the Cinque Ports, in a further three Parliaments. Only with his inheritance from his mother at Oakington in Cambridgeshire in 1626 did Hatton securely attain rank as a country gentleman.1VCH Cambs. ix. 197. Later he acquired lands at Benefield in Northamptonshire, the heartland of the Hatton family interests, and it was there that he seems to have been living in 1640.2CSP Dom. 1640-1, p. 177. By then he was probably serving as a Northamptonshire deputy lieutenant, as one of his servants was then involved in the collection of coat and conduct money.3CSP Dom. 1640, p. 242.

In February 1640, Hatton finally took his oath as a freeman of Cambridge, which strongly suggests that he was considering standing for the one of the Cambridge seats in the forthcoming parliamentary election, but, if so, he did not pursue the attempt.4Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archives, common day bk. 1610-46, p. 310; A. Barclay, Electing Cromwell (2011), 117. Later that year his nephew, Sir Christopher Hatton*, by opting for Higham Ferrers, opened the way for Sir Robert to get elected for the Long Parliament at Castle Rising on the Howard interest. That by-election took place on 20 November 1640.

Hatton was granted leave for the recovery of his health on 17 December but had returned by the end of the month, when he was named to the committee to consider the petition of Lady Elizabeth Hatton, his nephew’s wife.5CJ ii. 52a, 60a. Hatton, who had opposed concessions to nonconformists earlier in his career, spoke on 8 February 1641 against putting the question for the committal of the London petition against episcopacy.6Procs. LP ii. 391. Over the next month he was named to six committees, including those on the bill to confirm grants to the queen (17 Feb.), the ministers’ remonstrance (27 Feb.) and the bill against ecclesiastical plurality (10 Mar.).7CJ ii. 85b, 87b, 94a, 101a, 102b. Another of those committee appointments was for the conference with the Lords on 6 March concerning the trial of the 1st earl of Strafford (Sir Thomas Wentworth†).8CJ ii. 98a. Hatton may well have been opposed to the trial and he certainly opposed the subsequent attempt to proceed against Strafford by attainder. Defending George Digby* on 21 April for causing general offence ‘for his asperity against Sir Henry Vane’ during a speech in the earl’s defence, Hatton incurred a sharp rebuke from Harbert Morley* for his motion that ‘the House should not be so forward to call so great a person to the bar’.9Procs. LP iv. 45; CSP Dom. 1640-1, p. 560. At the end of that debate, Hatton voted against the attainder bill.10Verney, Notes, 57; Rushworth, Hist. Collns. iv. 248; Procs. LP iv. 51. He was granted leave ‘for a convenient time’ that same day, but had returned by 12 May, when he took the Protestation.11CJ ii. 125a, 144a; Procs. LP iv. 346. On 31 May he supported the move by John Coventry* to oppose the bill for the abolition of star chamber on the grounds that the committee which had drafted it had exceeded its terms of reference.12Procs. LP iv. 655.

Hatton left no further trace on the records until 24 November, when he attempted to intercede on behalf of Geoffrey Palmer* but was reminded by the Speaker, William Lenthall*, that he could not speak until the question was put.13D’Ewes (C), 195. Appointed to the committee on providing an armed guard for Westminster on 13 December, Hatton was teller two days later against bringing in candles to continue the debate on printing the Grand Remonstrance.14CJ ii. 340a, 344b; D’Ewes (C), 295. The next day, on the motion of Sir Guy Palmes*, he was given leave to sort out the affairs of his sister and brother-in-law.15D’Ewes (C), 296; CJ ii. 344b. He had returned to Westminster by 13 January 1642 when the complaints by William Strode I* about the queen’s evil counsellors prompted him to implore the House ‘to sweeten the business’.16Add. 64807, f. 28v. Two days later he unsuccessfully moved that the committee for elections be revived so that it could investigate the by-election at Arundel where the earl of Arundel's secretary, Nicholas Herman*, had been a candidate.17PJ i. 80. A month later, on 17 February, he acted as teller in the minority with his Castle Rising colleague, Sir John Holland*, against the fifteenth clause of the declaration of grievances, which asked that there be no prosecutions for omitting parts of the liturgy until Parliament had been able to revise it.18CJ ii. 438b; PJ i. 407, 408. Hatton played no further recorded part in the session until 16 June when he was teller in the minority in favour of excusing his nephew, Sir Christopher, who was absent at the call of the House.19CJ ii. 626b; PJ iii. 87. The next day Denzil Holles* obtained for him a month’s leave to go into the country.20CJ ii. 628b; PJ iii. 92.

Active in the execution of the commission of array in Northamptonshire, Hatton was summoned back to Westminster on 20 August but, having failed to appear, he and Sir Christopher Hatton were on 7 September disabled from sitting any further.21CJ ii. 729a, 755b; PJ iii. 311, 336. Arrested in Bedfordshire in November, he petitioned the House on 19 November but the motion that he be released on bail was rejected and his case was referred to the Committee for Examinations.22CJ ii. 837b, 856a. He appears to have remained in custody until February 1644 when he was exchanged for Sir Arthur Hesilrige’s* son, Thomas.23CJ iii. 372a, 373b. Under the terms of his release, he was given liberty to go to Oxford and required to provide a bond for £2,000 to Hesilrige, conditional on Thomas Hesilrige being handed over.24CJ iii. 393b. He was also required to pay the £200 for which he had been assessed by the Committee for Advance of Money.25CCAM 322. Prevented by his imprisonment from signing the letter from the Oxford Parliament to the 3rd earl of Essex in January 1644, Hatton later ‘concurred’ with its sentiments and took his seat in the Commons at Oxford.26Rushworth, Hist. Collns. v. 575. He received a pardon from the king on 30 March before being granted the office of one of the chamberlains of the exchequer (in succession to Sir Nicholas Carew alias Throckmorton†).27Docquets of Letters Patent ed Black, 205, 384; J.C. Sainty, Officers of the Exch. (L. and I. Soc. xviii. 1983), 12.

Hatton petitioned to compound under the Oxford articles in January 1647 but, forced to escape his creditors, he fled abroad and was in Paris in August 1648.28CCC 1581, 1649; Add. 29571, f. 10. His petition for composition was renewed by his brother, Sir Thomas, in May 1649 and his fine, which was initially set at £1,000, was reduced to £600, on condition that he settle annuities of £60 on the vicar of Long Buckby and £40 on the vicar of Rothwell.29Add. 29571, ff. 12, 13; CCC, 1649. But Hatton was either unable or unwilling to pay, so in July 1651 Parliament included his estates among those which were to be sold off by the act for the sale of delinquents’ estates.30CJ vi. 594a; A. and O. They were then bought by Lewis Audley*.31CCC 1649; VCH Cambs. ix. 197. Hatton was still believed to be abroad in the summer of 1652.32CCC 593. If that was indeed the case, he soon returned, for he died at the house of his son-in-law, Sir Anthony Aucher†, at Bishopsbourne, Kent on 10 January 1653.33Wedgwood, Staffs. Parlty. Hist. ii. 45. He left no will. Robert, his only surviving son, died without issue five years later. It was therefore left to Aucher to recover the Oakington lands after the Restoration.34VCH Cambs. ix. 197.