BERTIE, Montagu (1608-66)

Members of the Bertie family had sat in Parliament since the mid sixteenth century. Through a judicious marriage to the de Vere heiress they inherited the barony of Willoughby of Eresby (otherwise known as Willoughby d’Eresby or de Eresby) and with it a claim to the hereditary office of lord great chamberlain and to the earldom of Oxford. Although the earldom was settled in the male line, in 1626 Robert Bertie, 14th Baron Willoughby, was confirmed as hereditary lord great chamberlain and compensated with the earldom of Lindsey. In 1640 his heir, Montagu Bertie, then styled Lord Willoughby, previously in Parliament as the underage member for Lincolnshire and then Stamford, was summoned to the Lords in his father’s barony. Unflinchingly loyal to Charles I, Willoughby served alongside his father at the battle of Edgehill, where he allowed himself to be captured so that he could tend to the mortally wounded earl, who had been taken prisoner by the Parliamentarian army. HMC Ancaster, xxx. Following a period of imprisonment in Warwick Castle, Lindsey (as Willoughby had become on the death of his father) was released as part of an exchange of prisoners. He proceeded to serve in the royalist army for the duration of the conflict, including a spell as commander of the detachment defending Woodstock. Following the king’s trial he was one of four peers to offer themselves for punishment in the king’s stead, and he was then one of the principal mourners at the king’s funeral at Windsor.

Lindsey was treated severely both by the terms of his compounding, for which he was fined £4,360 (later increased to £5,372 13s. 6d.) and by the decimation, through which he was compelled to pay £1,200 to save his estate. CCC, 1501-2, p. 1504. By 1654 he was involved with royalist plotting, for which he was briefly imprisoned in the Tower, and the following year he was placed under house arrest. Schoenfeld, Restored House of Lords, 43. For the greater part of the Interregnum, though, he appears to have eschewed political activity. He was primarily concerned with defending his rights in the Lindsey Level, the subject of frequent attacks by disgruntled locals, while his marriage in about 1650 to Bridget, Baroness Norreys, brought him new interests in Oxfordshire, Hereford and Worcester. The Earle of Lindsey his title … in the Fennes in Lincolneshire, (1654); Kent HLC (CKS), Sackville mss, U269/C68/1. The marriage in 1659 between Lindsey’s heir, Robert Bertie, styled Lord Willoughby (later 3rd earl of Lindsey), and Elizabeth Wharton, daughter of the parliamentarian Philip Wharton, 4th Baron Wharton, was probably of more significance to the Whartons, signalling their growing distance from the Cromwellian regime, than evidence of any shift of loyalty on the Berties’ part. In March 1660 when Wharton compiled his list of peers and their allegiances, Lindsey was firmly attributed as a lord with the king, and the following month Lindsey was at the head of the signatories of the declaration of the nobility, knights and gentry of Oxford welcoming the king’s return and undertaking to ‘disclaim, and with perfect detestation disown, all purpose of revenge, or partial remembrance of things past.’ Bodl. Carte 81, f. 63; Declaration of the Nobility, Knights and Gentry of the County of Oxon which have adhered to the late King, (1660). Lindsey was also identified by John Mordaunt, Viscount Mordaunt, as one of the leaders of the royalist peers seeking to negotiate with George Monck, later duke of Albemarle.

In spite of his prominent role as a supporter of the Restoration, Lindsey was not among the first of the ‘young lords’ to take his seat in the restored House. This may have been the result of him being distracted by a challenge to his right to the hereditary office of lord great chamberlain made by Aubrey de Vere, 20th earl of Oxford, which served to revive the dispute that had been settled in favour of Lindsey’s father during the previous reign. HMC 7th Rep. 82. Before Lindsey was able to take his place in the Lords, Oxford submitted his petition for Lindsey’s execution of the office to be suspended, but the case was allowed to rest for a few months during which time Lindsey continued to officiate. It was thus with the matter still unresolved that Lindsey took his seat in the restored House on 16 May, after which he was present on 55 per cent of all sitting days. The following month it was rumoured that either he or William Fiennes, Viscount Saye and Sele, were to be appointed to the lieutenancy of Oxfordshire. The suggestion prompted Henry Carey^‡, 4th Viscount Falkland [S], to stress his opposition to both candidates. In the event Falkland secured the lieutenancy for himself, while Lindsey was compensated with the arguably more onerous lieutenancy of his native Lincolnshire. CCSP, v. 41; Bodl. Clarendon 73, f. 64.

Lindsey was ordered to wait on the king along with George Berkeley, 9th Baron (later earl of) Berkeley, on 13 July to convey the House’s thanks for his conferring the dukedom of Albemarle on George Monck, and three days later he was named to the committee for the bill to nominate commissioners for sewers, a cause in which he was closely interested through his drainage activities in Lincolnshire. On 27 July in his capacity as lord great chamberlain, Lindsey introduced James Butler, marquess (later duke) of Ormond [I], as earl of Brecknock, and on 18 Aug. he was nominated to the committee considering the ultimately unsuccessful claim of Edward Somerset, marquess of Worcester, to the dukedom of Somerset. On 6 Sept. Lindsey was named to the committee for the bill for the increase of shipping and navigation and the following day he was nominated one of the commissioners for disbanding the army.

Lindsey’s role as the senior royal officer in the palace of Westminster dominated his activities for the remainder of his career in the House. At the beginning of September 1660 he directed a letter to the surveyor of the king’s works ordering the construction of a writing room for the use of the Lords, one of a series of alterations and improvements that were made to the decaying fabric of the palace over the ensuing years. PA, LGC/5/1, ff. 37-44. Lindsey resumed his seat following the adjournment on 6 Nov. on which day he introduced Sir Edward Hyde, later earl of Clarendon, as Baron Hyde. He was thereafter present on 25 of the 45 days of the session and on 12 Nov. he was nominated to the committee for appointing receivers and triers of petitions. The following month Oxford revived his case for the lord great chamberlaincy by appealing to the king, who referred the matter back to the Lords. HMC 7th Rep. 139. Oxford’s pretensions encouraged others to request the office too and on 28 Dec. the House received petitions claiming the great chamberlaincy from Oxford, Charles Stanley, 8th earl of Derby, and Thomas Windsor, 7th Baron Windsor. Lincs. Archs. 10-ANC/354, Capt. Forster to John Pridgeon, 28 Dec. 1660. In response, Lindsey launched a counterclaim for the earldom of Oxford but having read the petitions the House adjourned discussion of the matter to the fourth day of the following Parliament.

Lindsey was closely involved at Westminster with preparations for the king’s coronation during the elections to the Cavalier Parliament. His interest in Lincolnshire came under fierce assault from George Saunderson^‡, Viscount Castleton [I]. PA, LGC/5/1/4. Lindsey’s heir, Willoughby, was thwarted in the county, prompting Lindsey to criticize him for mismanaging his campaign and not giving him an opportunity to strengthen his interest. Lincs. Archs. 10-ANC/ 346/2. Willoughby was forced to settle for the borough seat at Boston instead, while Lindsey’s second son, Peregrine Bertie^‡, was also unsuccessful, being beaten into fourth place at Stamford (though he eventually secured the seat at the by-election in October 1665 triggered by the death of William Stafford^‡). HP Commons 1660-90, i. 299, 306. Despite his loss of interest in his home county, Lindsey retained his influence at court, and in May he was awarded the garter after Hyde recommended Lindsey receive the distinction rather than himself, Hyde noting how Lindsey’s father had fallen at Edgehill wearing his garter: Lindsey, Hyde wrote, ‘ever lived with great civility towards the chancellor to his death’. Clarendon, Life (1857), i. 351-2.

Lindsey took his seat in the House at the opening of the new Parliament on 11 May 1661. He was named to the committees for privileges and petitions as well as to the subcommittee for the Journal and was thereafter present on almost 70 per cent of all sitting days. On 13 and 16 May discussion of Oxford’s claim to the lord great chamberlaincy was again put off. On 16 May Lindsey was named to the bill for draining the Lindsey level and on 24 May he was named to that for the bill for preserving the king’s person. Discussion of the claims to the lord great chamberlaincy resumed on 8 June but was again put off to a later date still unresolved, prompting Oxford and Derby to submit further petitions on 15 June desiring that the matter be debated once more. On 25 June Oxford’s petition was read again after which it was ordered that a day should be set aside for hearing the claim, though a resolution that the words ‘or new matter’ should be appended to the order was rejected after the votes (with proxies) were found to be even and therefore determined in the negative. Legal advice, based broadly on that presented during the previous dispute in 1625, encouraged the Lords to continue the status quo. They resolved to support Lindsey’s claim to the great chamberlaincy as heir general of Henry de Vere^†, 18th earl of Oxford, but rejected his claim to the earldom of Oxford on the grounds that even were the present earl to die without heirs the peerage would not descend to Lindsey but rather be rendered extinct. PA, LGC/5/1/15-16. On 11 July Oxford’s counsel was appointed to draw up the errors insisted on by him and to present them to the House on the following Monday (15 July) but no consideration was given to the matter on that day and the affair was then allowed to drop again until after the adjournment. Bodl. Carte 109, f. 314.

Lindsey resumed his place following the recess on 20 Nov. and on 26 Nov. he was nominated to the committee for the heralds’ bill. During the remainder of the session he was named to a further nine committees, including that for drawing up a bill for repealing the acts of the Long Parliament. On 16 May 1662 Lindsey was again named to a committee in which he was closely interested, that for the bill confirming the acts for draining the fens. A close friend of Albemarle, Lindsey’s connection with the duke’s family was presumably reflected in his invitation to attend the funeral of Albemarle’s younger brother, Nicholas Monck, bishop of Hereford, in December 1661. HMC Popham, 192. Following the close of the session, Lindsey wrote to Clarendon (as Hyde had since become) thanking him for his kindness and advice, ‘which smoothed the storm of importunate pretences’, presumably a reference to Clarendon’s support for Lindsey against the claims of Oxford, Derby and Windsor. CCSP, v. 264; Bodl. Clarendon 77, f. 322.

Lindsey took his seat at the opening of the new session on 18 Feb. 1663. On that day he acquainted the House that during the indisposition of black rod, Sir John Ayton, the office would be executed by his deputy, Sir Edward Carteret. Present on 74 per cent of all sittings days in the session, on 20 Feb. Lindsey was one of four peers appointed by the House to draw up an order concerning protections. Excused at a call of the House on 23 Feb. Lindsey resumed his seat two days later when he was nominated to the committee for petitions. On 19 Mar. he was added to the committee for the heralds’ bill and again to that for the bill for repealing the acts of the Long Parliament. On 2 Apr. he was entrusted with the proxy of Wingfield Cromwell, 5th Baron Cromwell, which was vacated by the close of the session. Lindsey was one of those present at a riotous evening hosted by Oxford in May, ‘where there was high words and some blows and pulling off of periwigs,’ before order was eventually restored by ‘Lord Monck’ (Albemarle) who confiscated the quarrelling lords’ weapons and called out the watch to restrain them. Pepys Diary, iv. 136. Tensions between Lindsey and Oxford may have contributed to the fracas but the French envoy attributed the incident to high spirits and too much alcohol and was at pains to stress that although blows were struck by some of the company, this was done ‘in quite a friendly way.’ TNA, PRO 31/3/111, pp. 146-7. When not brawling, Lindsey remained active in the House’s business. He was named to a further seven committees during the session. On 13 July he was noted by Wharton as being doubtful on the question of the attempted impeachment of Clarendon and on 18 July he was nominated one of the commissioners for assessing the peers.

Lindsey entrusted one of his sons to Ormond’s service in the summer of 1663, insisting in his letter of recommendation that his son’s ‘observance to your grace shall be the measure of his duty to me.’ Bodl. Carte 214, f. 507. He took his seat in the following session on 21 Mar. 1664, after which he was present on 94 per cent of all sitting days. Named to the committees for privileges and the Journal, on 23 Mar. he was named to the committee for petitions and on 21 Apr. to the committee for the bill against gaming. On 26 Apr. in company with Albemarle and Charles Stuart, 3rd duke of Richmond, Lindsey was appointed to wait on the king to discover when the House might attend him, and on 9 May Lindsey was appointed to the committee for the bill to prevent the delivering up of merchants’ ships.

Reporting on the condition of Lincolnshire during the previous session, Lindsey was able to conclude that the sectaries were ‘more modest and less frequent in their meetings than formerly’ thanks to ‘the checks that have been given them’ by his robust leadership. C. Holmes, Seventeenth-Century Lincs, 222. It was, thus, presumably with a degree of confidence that he returned to the House for the following session on 25 Nov. 1664 when he was again nominated to the committee for privileges (though he was omitted from the other sessional committees). Present on almost 72 per cent of all sitting days, Lindsey was named to nine further committees in the course of the session, a number of which concerned navigation schemes. At a meeting of the privileges committee held on 1 Dec. it was resolved that Lindsey should give orders ensuring that the doors to the Lords’ chamber were closed during debates to prevent non-members from overhearing their deliberations. PA, HL/PO/DC/CP/2, p. 3. Early in 1665 he was actively involved in assisting with the Yarmouth fishery bill promoted by his nephew, Sir Robert Paston, later earl of Yarmouth. Paston commended him for taking ‘as much pains in my business as an horse’ and Lindsey later in the proceedings saw to it that he took ‘a great many home with him’ to help ensure a substantial turnout at the committee considering the measure. When the bill came to be discussed before the committee, which its chairman, Richard Sackville, 5th earl of Dorset, noted was ‘a fuller committee than was ever observed’, and an amendment was suggested, Lindsey ‘stood up and said he would be bound [Paston] should perform whatever [he] said.’ Norf. RO, BL/Y/1/7; Add. 27,447, f. 338; Swatland, 66, 124. The bill also received warm support from the king, who instructed Dorset to let it be known that he would not prorogue the House until the bill had been passed. When Paston pushed himself forward at the prorogation in the hope of a word with the king, Lindsey joked that if he had his vote again he would give it against him for ‘crowding so hard.’ Norfolk RO, BL/Y/1/11.

Lindsey was absent from the House on 21 June which necessitated the Lords delegating to the lord chamberlain his responsibility in undertaking the introduction of Henry Bennet, as Baron Arlington. He was absent again in August, but towards the end of September he gave orders to the surveyor of the king’s works for preparing rooms in Oxford for holding the ensuing session of Parliament there. PA, LGC/5/1, f. 45. Lindsey was excused again on account of poor health at the opening of the new session on 9 October. Although he took his seat in the House in its temporary home on 23 Oct., he attended on just that day before quitting the chamber for the final time.

One of Lindsey’s servants, Captain Edward Christian, was involved in a dispute with the warden of the Fleet prison in May 1666 over the right to install scaffolding in Westminster Hall for the trial of Thomas Parker, 15th Baron Morley and Monteagle. There is no evidence that Lindsey took much interest in the affair and the warden’s pretensions in his capacity as hereditary housekeeper of the palace were supported by Clarendon acting as lord high steward for the trial, who threatened to ‘lay’ Christian ‘by the heels if he meddled any more’. CSP Dom. 1665-6, p. 387.

A newsletter of 24 July reported that Lindsey lay ‘a-dying’ in Kensington, where he had been brought for a change of air. Bodl. Carte 222, ff. 107-8. He died the following day at the London home of his son-in-law, Baptist Noel, 3rd Viscount Campden. His body was then returned to Lincolnshire to be buried in the family vault at Edenham. In his will, qualified in his final years by numerous codicils, Lindsey divided his estates not already settled on his heir between his remaining sons, Peregrine, Richard^‡, Vere, Charles^‡ and James, Baron Norreys (later earl of Abingdon), Henry^‡ and Edward Bertie, the first four of whom were named executors. Guardianship of the younger sons was entrusted to Peregrine and Richard Bertie and to Lindsey’s daughter, Elizabeth, Viscountess Campden. Provision was also made for raising a portion for his younger daughter, Lady Mary Bertie. To his ‘noble friends’, Albemarle and Campden, to whom he entrusted oversight of the terms of his will, Lindsey bequeathed his best (and second best) horses. He was succeeded by his eldest son from his first marriage, Robert, Lord Willoughby de Eresby, as 3rd earl of Lindsey.