WHETHAM, Nathaniel I (1604-68), of Chard, Som.

The Whethams had been established among the Dorset gentry since the reign of Edward II, while Nathaniel’s mother came from another prominent county family, the Hoopers of Burstock. His elder brother Joseph settled in Buckinghamshire, where the Whethams also had connections. As a younger son Nathaniel adopted a trade, and in 1620 or 1621 was apprenticed to Edward Tirrell, a baker to the Inner Temple. Whetham took up his freedom some three years late on 4 May 1630, perhaps having been diverted by engagement in a colonial enterprise in East Maine. Following the death of his former master in the summer of 1632, Whetham not only succeeded to his place but also married his widow.21GL, MS 5177/4, ff. 130, 174, 190; HMC Leyborne-Popham, 209. When the marriage was entered in the register of St Dunstan-in-the-West that December, Whetham was recorded as living in Fleet Street.22St Dunstan-in-the-West par. reg.

Having been a member of the regiment of his neighbour Colonel Richard Browne II* in the London trained bands, when civil war broke out in 1642 Whetham was recruited as a major into the parliamentarian dragoons, under Browne and Colonel Arthur Goodwin*.23Nagel, ‘Militia of London, 1641-1649’, 66. Writing to Goodwin in January 1643, Whetham evinced his ‘unfained respect for the cause’: for ‘though I left a son dead overnight and a sorrowful woman having long had a wounded conscience and troubled spirit ... yet I most willingly in the morning left all to obey orders’.24Bodl. Carte 103, f. 125. In December 1642 and January 1643 he received money for Browne upon warrants issued by the commander-in-chief, Robert Devereux, 3rd earl of Essex, and for the rest of the year his signature appears on papers relating to the quartering of troops in Middlesex.25SP28/4, ff. 192, 325; SP28/5, f. 124; SP28/131, pt 10. In December 1643 he assisted in the taking of Grafton House near Uttoxeter, and early in 1644 he was recommended for service in Northampton, where before July he was appointed governor.26A True Relation of the Taking of Grafton House (1643), 2 (E.79.24); Whetham, Nathaniel Whetham, 50; HMC Portland, iii. 124; CSP Dom. 1656-7, p. 367; SP18/155, f. 27. In this capacity Whetham was engaged in the siege of Banbury Castle in August and September, and he signed the documents relating to its surrender in May 1646.27A Full Relation of the Siege of Banbury Castle (1644, E.8.9); CSP Dom. 1644, p. 472; 1644-5, p. 365; LJ vii. 4; Whetham, Nathaniel Whetham, 106. During this period Whetham’s duties brought him into regular contact with members of the Fiennes family and with Sir Samuel Luke*, with whom he corresponded on military and political matters, including rumours of secret negotiations with the king (14 June 1645).28Letter Bks. of Sir Samuel Luke, 1644-45, 313, 320, 563, 567, 574, 576, 615.

Whetham’s military career came to a temporary end after the first civil war, and he returned to London, where he became under warden of the Bakers’ Company (29 Nov. 1647).29GL, MS 5177/4, f. 434. He soon acquired the manor of Chard in Somerset, however; the local minister was assured that he was ‘a very godly man’.30Som. RO, DD/HI/461, unfol. That his reputation was high among political leaders under the republic is attested by his appointments as a contractor for the sale of dean and chapter lands on 30 April 1649 and to various national commissions thereafter.31A. and O. On 17 September 1649 he was commissioned as governor of Portsmouth, and remained in the post until 1655.32Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke MS LXVII (ii), p. 21; SP28/69, f. 102-SP28/82, f. 269; CSP Dom. 1649-50, pp. 362, 420, 423, 488, 566; 1650-1, pp. 275, 285, 290, 297, 323, 329, 330, 352, 361, 462, 468, 490, 546, 579, 600, 608; 1651, pp. 4, 16, 33, 100, 137, 242, 254, 263, 335-6, 418, 451; 1651-2, pp. 45, 74, 131, 173, 175, 279, 300, 387, 553, 601; 1652-3, pp. 12, 17, 41, 61, 76-7, 88, 180, 438, 499; 1653-4, pp. 191, 256-7, 406, 521, 530, 537. He appears to have acted zealously to secure money for repairs, to suppress dissent and mutinous behaviour, and to monitor suspicious people arriving at the port from the continent, while in 1653, in playing host to George Monck*, he probably made a friend of vital importance to his later career.33CSP Dom. 1650-1, p. 430; 1651, pp. 175-6; 1652-3, pp. 28, 137, 236, 432; 1653-4, p. 3; Bodl. Rawl. A.184, f. 383; Whetham, Nathaniel Whetham, 145. He was added to the commission of the peace in Hampshire in May 1650, on the orders of the commissioners of the great seal, and in January 1651 received a commission as colonel of the militia foot.34CSP Dom. 1650-1, p. 143; 1651, p. 513; C231/6, p. 187. By March 1654 he had been appointed commissioner of oyer and terminer for the western circuit.35TSP iii. 296.

As an apparently zealous supporter of the protectorate, and a prominent figure in Portsmouth, Whetham was an obvious candidate for the town’s seat in the Parliament which assembled on 3 September 1654. He did not appear in the Journal until 22 September, when he was named to the committee addressing abuses in printing, but in succeeding weeks he received numerous appointments, including those to consider the ordinance for ejecting scandalous ministers (25 Sept.), problems arising from Irish elections (5 Oct.) and relief for imprisoned debtors (25 Oct.), and most importantly those concerned with the establishment of the new regime: the ‘recognition’ of the government to be taken by all MPs (25 Sept.); the army and navy (26 Sept.); and ‘the enumeration of damnable heresies’ which was to signal the limits of toleration (12 Dec.).36CJ vii. 369b, 370a, 370b, 373b, 378b, 380a, 381a, 387a, 389b. According to the Memoirs of Edmund Ludlowe II*, Whetham expressed opposition to Cromwell’s rise: he recognised ‘that a design was on foot to make Cromwell king’ and ‘applied to him the saying of the prophet to Ahab “Hast thou killed, and also taken possession?”’37Ludlow, Mems. i. 384 However, there is no evidence of what use he made, two days before MPs voted to increase the financial grant to the protector, of his membership of the committee to establish the government’s revenue (13 Jan. 1655).38CJ vii. 415b. In other respects there are indeed clear indications that Whetham enjoyed the confidence of the regime. Following the dissolution of Parliament, on 26 March he was among Hampshire justices of the peace given the responsibility for ensuring local security in the wake of the Pendruddock rising.39CSP Dom. 1655, pp. 93, 98. Four days later he was also appointed to the protector’s council for Scotland, although Ludlowe claimed that he was chosen partly as someone of a different temper from Lieutenant-general George Monck, and in order to act as a ‘guard upon his actions’, and partly as a means of removing from Portsmouth someone who was ‘not for Oliver’s turn’.40CSP Dom. 1655, pp. 108-10, 152; Firth, Scotland and the Protectorate, 306; Warriston Diary, iii. 18; Ludlow, Mems. i. 384. His salary for duties in Edinburgh commenced at the beginning of May, although he may have remained in London for a few months.41CSP Dom. 1655, p. 290; Whetham, Nathaniel Whetham, 160.

Whatever the attitude of the Cromwellian court towards Whetham, he was not prevented from taking his seat in the 1656 Parliament, this time as Member for St Andrews Burghs. He was evidently in Westminster in time for the opening of Parliament on 17 September, being named to the privileges committee the next day and the committees for Scottish and for Irish affairs soon afterwards.42CJ vii. 424a, 427a, 491b. Engagement with related business is evident in succeeding weeks. On 10 December Whetham proposed the investigation of the debts of troubled Edinburgh financier Sir William Dick, although it took until 9 February for a committee to be nominated to consider the claims of Dick’s creditors.43Burton’s Diary i. 95; CJ vii. 488b. His efforts, with others, to secure confirmation of the grant of Scottish land to General Monck achieved much more rapid success (30 Dec.).44Burton’s Diary, i. 267; CJ vii. 476b. Apparently a promoter of the Anglo-Scottish union (23 Dec.), Whetham was none the less keen that, when the Commons voted to extend the collection of assessments to Scotland and Ireland, ‘you should leave out the isles of Scotland, for they are as poor as can be’ (8 Jan. 1657).45Burton’s Diary, i. 215, 325.

Evidently considered to be an important ally by the leaders of the ‘resolutioners’ within the Scottish church, in December 1656 Whetham was lobbied by them to assist in obtaining the free exercise of the Presbyterian church government, against the dissenters, or ‘protesters’. When the resolutioner leaders thanked him for his ‘activity and care in behalf of us and the affairs of our church’, he replied that their case ‘carries so much reason with it’. He assured them that England too was moving towards the cause of ‘the gospel and minsters and worship of Jesus Christ, that have so long lain under reproach’, and that ‘those at the helm begin to perceive it’; there was a need ‘to close with and encourage those who stand upon settled principles and sure foundations. We have had turnings and shakings long enough. It is now time to settle’. In March 1657 one of the resolutioners described Whetham as ‘a person of integrity and for readiness to do us good and affectionate pity towards our church and country he is second to none I know here’.46Regs. of the Consultations of the Ministers of Edinburgh ed. W. Stephens (Scottish Rec. Soc. 1921-30), i. 246, 255, 290-1; ii. 31-3.

Meanwhile, Whetham was duly playing his part in the advance of the gospel in England. He received committee appointments to suppress popish recusants (3 Dec.) and to maintain ministers and preaching in Northamptonshire and Exeter (17 Dec., 9 Feb.).47CJ vii. 463b, 469a, 488a In December he made several contributions to the long-lasting debate about the response to the alleged blasphemy of James Naylor, although their scope is not entirely clear. While in discussion of dealing with rogues and vagabonds he was happy to permit strolling musicians to raise their voices (5 Dec.), he seems to have been more hostile to Quakers, in that he advocated that such punishment as was to be meted out to Naylor should be executed in Bristol, the scene of his offence, where ‘they most abound’ and the spectacle might (presumably) have greatest deterrent value.48Burton’s Diary, i. 23, 35-6, 156.

In the array of other matters in which Whetham was involved – including several private petitions – wide interests and some signs of a reforming mindset are apparent.49CJ vii. 472a, 472b, 477a, 505b. Placed on the committee for trade (20 Oct.), on 19 December 1656 he supported a London petition which sought to place qualifications on the appointment of freemen.50Burton’s Diary, i. 178; CJ vii.442a, 470b. He was also named to committees to clarify arrangements for the probate of wills (27 Oct.) and to consider the petition from the beleaguered civil lawyers (1 Dec.), both representing fall-out from the abolition of ecclesiastical courts, and to settle the maintenance of Wyggeston’s Hospital and almshouse in Leicester (9 Dec.).51CJ vii. 446a, 462b, 466a.

Already tailing off somewhat in the early weeks of 1657, Whetham’s service in this Parliament ended from 19 March, when he was appointed one of the commissioners for managing the affairs of Scotland and granted leave to travel north.52CJ vii. 507a; Worcester Coll. Oxf. Clarke MS XXXIII, f. 1; Regs. of the Consultations, ii. 31-3. He was thus absent from Westminster during much of the debate on the Humble Petition and Advice, to which his attitude does not appear. In August he petitioned for a lease under the great seal of Scotland for the discovery of concealed lands, as a compensation for arrears of £1,600 due to him for state service.53CSP Dom. 1657-8, p. 60. Whetham seems not to have returned to Westminster for the second session of the Parliament, beginning in January 1658 was evidently in Scotland for most of that year. In September he signed the proclamation announcing there the succession of Richard Cromwell* as protector.54Nicoll, Diary, 218.

Whetham was returned to Parliament in 1659, as Member for both St Andrews Burghs and Edinburgh, although there is no evidence of his attendance before 11 March, when he made a speech during a debate on union with Scotland, in which he claimed that ‘they desire union as much as may be’.55Nicoll, Diary, 221, 226; Burton’s Diary, iv. 137. Thereafter, he was named to the standing committees on Scottish and Irish affairs, and in April to a number of less important committees dealing with private matters.56CJ vii. 622b, 623a-b, 627b, 632a, 634b, 637b. On the crucial issue of the ‘Other House’, Whetham supported the motion that the Commons should transact with the new chamber (28 Mar.), although he was later a teller in a successful attempt to ensure that no messages should be received other than by Members of the Commons (8 Apr.).57Burton’s Diary, iv. 293; CJ vii. 632b. This indicates that Whetham was not an uncritical supporter of the government, a conclusion reinforced by his speech in favour of giving a hearing to Major-general William Boteler* before his removal from military command (12 Apr.), and his willingness to speak in opposition to the farming of commodities (13 Apr.).58Burton’s Diary, iv. 407, 417.

The dissolution of this Parliament in 22 April and the restoration of the Rump in May deprived Whetham of his seat, but he was clearly favoured by the republican regime at Westminster. He was soon appointed to replace suspect Hampshire MP Richard Norton* in the governorship of the strategically important garrison at Portsmouth where, as he resumed a former post, he was urged to be vigilant in the face of political uncertainty and increased royalist activity.59Ludlow, Mems. ii. 80; CSP Dom. 1658-9, p. 355. His first report back on 13 May to the committee of safety at Wallingford House offered reassurance: ‘the officers I find very well satisfied and, I may add, rejoicing, that God has returned us to the present government’.60Wetham, Nathaniel Whetham, 183. On 30 June he was added to a committee vetting men for service in the army 61CSP Dom. 1658-9, pp. 395. Apparently in close touch with the Rump (which endorsed his appointment on 22 July), over the summer he was involved in discussions with other military leaders, and with men like John Disbrowe*.62CJ vii. 653a-b, 721a, 724a, 727b, 731a; Warriston Diary, iii. 127; CSP Dom. 1658-9, pp. 359, 364, 368; 1659-60, pp. 30, 61. In mid-September Whethan sought temporary relief to go to his estate at Chard, but the council of state declined the request (28 Sept.), on the ground that his presence in Portsmouth could not be dispensed with.63CSP Dom. 1659-60, p. 228.

As the Rump split between military and civilian factions, Whetham pledged his loyalty to Parliament rather than the army. The papers of Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper*, and the recollection of John Locke, attest that in October the former was able to secure a promise of support from Whetham, ‘his old acquaintance and friend’.64Cooke, Life of Shaftesbury, i. 208; Christie, Shaftesbury Papers, 148. Whetham was lobbied by the army as well, and Charles Fleetwood* felt that he had received assurance from Whetham that ‘he would observe no orders but from myself, and that he would do nothing in opposition to the army’. Nevertheless, he was later obliged to recognise that Whetham had ‘deceived his trust’, when in December the latter admitted Harbert Morley* and Sir Arthur Hesilrige* into Portsmouth, and declared for Parliament before travelling to see Monck.65Clarke Pprs. iv. 166, 169-70, 188; Ludlow, Mems. ii. 157; Rugge, Diurnal, 15, 21; Nicoll, Diary, 259. Hesilrige called Whetham ‘a very noble true spirited Englishman’ and the Commons ordered that he be thanked for his ‘fidelity and good service’ (29 Dec.).66Whetham, Nathaniel Whetham, 194; CJ vii. 799a.

In the early weeks of 1660, Whetham was an influential figure at Westminster. He was reported to have attended meetings with Monck, and in early February was commissioned as colonel of a regiment of foot, awarded chambers in Whitehall, granted an annual pension of £200, and confirmed as a commissioner for Scotland.67HMC Leyborne-Popham, 146, 209; CJ vii. 836b, 839b, 840a; CSP Dom. 1659-60, p. 351; Rugge, Diurnal, 37; Mercurius Politicus no. 607 (9-16 Feb. 1660), 1100 (E.775.4); Nicoll, Diary, 277. Whether Whetham then went to Scotland is unclear. On 12 April he wrote to Monck from Somerset bemoaning the success of the royalists in the parliamentary elections and seeking Monck’s support to obtain a place himself. He added that ‘if we must have [government by] a single person I desire if it be the Lord’s will the Parliament would pitch upon your excellency’.68HMC Leyborne-Popham, 173; Whetham, Nathaniel Whetham, 217-18. Whether or not such flattery gained Monck’s support is uncertain, but Whetham failed to secure a seat in the Convention, and by the middle of June had lost his military commands. In September 1662 he was removed as an alderman of Portsmouth.69Portsmouth RO, PE7, unfol. Nevertheless, with support from Monck (by then 1st duke of Albemarle), he evaded the attempt by Lord Paulet to regain control of the manor of Chard in 1661, although he was described as ‘late of Chard’ in his nuncupative will of 8 September 1668.70CSP Dom. 1661-2, pp. 35-6; PROB11/329/64; Whetham, Nathaniel Whetham, 226. His eldest son, Nathaniel Whetham II*, had also sat in the 1659 Parliament, but similarly failed to secure a seat thereafter; his other surviving son, Joseph, was living as a gentleman in Upham, Wiltshire, in 1663, but died within a few years.71PROB11/350/336.