Described by Macky as ‘a very honest gentleman’, though one that ‘will never make any great figure, but in his own house’, Compton succeeded both to the earldom of Northampton and his father’s lieutenancy of Warwickshire while still underage.
In spite of the powerful interest of his uncle, Henry Compton, bishop of London, negotiations for Northampton to marry the recently widowed dowager countess of Conway broke down in December 1685.
James II and the Revolution
In January 1687 Northampton was forecast as an opponent of repealing the Test and in May he was also included in a list of those opposed to the king’s policies. His concerns did not prevent him from taking the lead in the welcome offered to the king by the gentry of Warwickshire during his tour in the late summer but the following month, unwilling to put the three questions in his lieutenancy, Northampton wrote in an effort to justify himself. He explained that he hoped that he:
had satisfied his majesty with the answer I gave and am very sorry the king should propose anything to me wherein I can not show my ready compliance … these are points of so high a nature, that I cannot take any resolution until I have heard them argued in the place, where I have never had as yet the honour to sit.Sherborne Castle, Digby mss vol. ii. f. 319; Castle Ashby ms 1108, Northampton to ?, 7 Oct. 1687.
The following month Northampton was again assessed as opposed to the Test and, as a result of his refusal to put the three questions he was removed from his lieutenancy in favour of his rival, Sunderland.
Northampton again featured on a list of the opposition peers in January 1688 and the same month he was included in a further assessment of those opposed to the repeal of the Test. In March he moved to his new London residence in Bloomsbury Square, where he appears to have remained until the summer, unwilling to leave town while his debts there remained unsettled.
Northampton was among the first to mobilize in favour of the revolution in the winter of 1688 (presumably through his uncle’s influence) and he played host to Princess Anne at Castle Ashby on her journey north. He then accompanied her to Nottingham.
Northampton had returned to London by the latter stages of December and was present at the meeting of the provisional government that convened in the queen’s presence chamber at St James’s Palace on 21 December. He then attended three subsequent sessions held in the Lords.
In the interval following the close of the first session of the Convention, Northampton responded to a demand for a self-assessment of his personal estate for tax purposes, in which he declared himself ‘willing to be assessed at two thousand pounds.’
In spite of his influential position in both Northamptonshire and Warwickshire, in the face of broad hostility to Tory candidates Northampton was unable to bring his interest to bear successfully during the ensuing elections for the new Parliament. Daniel Finch, 2nd earl of Nottingham, reported that Northampton intended to set up his kinsman, Hatton Compton, for Northamptonshire but in the event the Whigs, Sir St Andrew St John‡ and John Parkhurst‡, appear to have been returned without a contest.
since your lordship has honoured us with your patronage, you will forgive us if we humbly represent to your lordship our sense in this matter. That although we are conscious of our past demerit in being concerned in an affair so mischievous in its design, yet the specious pretences by which it was insinuated to some and the threatenings and fears by which others of us were made easy in that affair, and considering the condition of affairs at that time we hope will be allowed in part of an excuse.
Castle Ashby ms 1091, mayor and aldermen of Northampton to Northampton, 12 Jan. 1690.
The corporation of Northampton again appealed for Northampton’s assistance a few days later, when they requested his aid in the disputed choice of a new minister for the parish of All Saints. Northampton undertook to represent the matter to his uncle, Bishop Compton.
The 1690 Parliament
Northampton took his seat at the opening of the new Parliament on 20 Mar. 1690 after which he was present on half of all sitting days and was named to three committees. Absent from the session after 26 Apr., on 6 May he registered his proxy with Nottingham, which may have been intended to be used during the numerous divisions on the City of London bill between 10 and 14 May. The reason for his absence from the closing weeks of the session is unclear but might have been on account of his duties in Warwickshire from whence he reported the state of the militia in July.
During the summer Northampton was engaged in attending to his estates under the critical gaze of his father-in-law, who complimented him on making ‘an advance in letting as much of your land as Mr Middleton will give leave to be let.’ Premature news of the death of the ailing John Lovelace, 3rd Baron Lovelace, in July encouraged Fox to approach the queen on Northampton’s behalf for the succession to one of Lovelace’s offices (probably that of chief justice in eyre Trent south). Although Fox was among the first to petition, the queen cautioned him that he was one of many, leading him to advise Northampton that he ‘should be prepared for a disappointment.’
Northampton took his seat in the new session on 7 Nov. 1693, after which he was present on approximately 62 per cent of all sitting days. Named to the privileges committee on the opening day, he was nominated to a further seven committees during the course of the session. The death of Sir Thomas Samwell‡, Member for Northampton, in February 1694 triggered a by-election in the town, where once again Northampton’s interest as recorder proved significant. Having initially intended to support Christopher Montagu‡, Northampton was obliged to redirect his interest in favour of Sir Justiniam Isham, who claimed a prior undertaking.
a person every way so well qualified for it … he was early in this happy revolution, he is a very worthy honest gentleman and has a sufficient stake in the country, all which you very well know: and therefore I do earnestly desire your assistance in promoting his interest.Castle Ashby ms 1091, Northampton to the mayor of Northampton, 28 Feb. 1694.
In accordance with Northampton’s desires, and after having been assured that Montagu had laid aside his intention to stand, the corporation duly backed Isham.
Northampton’s countess was the victim of a robbery while staying at Copt Hall (seat of his cousin, Dorset) in the early autumn of 1694.
Following the dissolution Northampton’s brother, Spencer Compton, stood unsuccessfully for East Grinstead in the 1695 general election on Dorset’s interest but there is no reason to believe that Northampton exerted himself on his brother’s account. Spencer Compton and Northampton were on very poor terms following a violent disagreement and the feud had propelled Compton towards the Whigs and away from his traditionally Tory family.
The Parliaments of 1695-1701
Northampton took his seat in the new Parliament on 9 Dec. 1695. Present for just under 70 per cent of all sitting days, on 1 Jan. 1696 he was named to the committee for Lord Francis Powlett’s bill and on 29 Feb. he signed the Association. A further royal visit to Northamptonshire in March required the mayor and aldermen of Northampton to write in abject terms to Northampton when they accepted an invitation to wait on the king at Althorp, Sunderland’s seat, not realizing that Northampton had intended to present them to the king himself at Castle Ashby. Their embarrassment proved all the more acute when they discovered Northampton also present in the party at Althorp.
Northampton faced difficulties of a different kind in Warwickshire. The unwillingness of four of his deputies to sign the Association in the summer of 1696 caused them to resign their commissions in anticipation of their imminent removal.
I do not doubt but you have thoroughly considered it, therefore shall not repeat what I have formerly said to you upon this subject; but am sorry that you still persist in the same mind, and that you will not consider your own and country’s good, but leave them both exposed to the pleasure and disposal of other men; and though you have now forsaken me I shall not forsake you.Ibid. Northampton to Lord Digby, 16 June 1696.
Despite his injunction that the deputies should toe the government line if at all possible, Northampton was himself reprimanded by the council in August for failing to supply a return of those members of his lieutenancy that had taken the Association.
Northampton took his seat in the next session on 9 Nov. 1696 after which he was present on just under 60 per cent of all sitting days. Named to 11 committees in the course of the session, on 18 Dec. he registered his dissent at the resolution to read the bill of attainder of Sir John Fenwick‡ a second time. On 23 Dec. he voted against passing the bill and the same day he subscribed the protest at the resolution to attaint Fenwick. The passage of the leather bill in April of the following year was presumably the occasion of Northampton receiving a petition from the shoemakers of the town of Northampton, who sought his interest to represent their complaints against the measure.
Northampton returned to the House for the following session on 3 Dec. 1697 when he introduced Edward Villiers, Viscount Villiers, as earl of Jersey. Named to 31 committees in the course of the session, of which he attended 63 per cent of all sitting days, on 15 Mar. he voted against committing the bill to punish Charles Duncombe‡. On 22 Mar. the House considered a case of breach of privilege committed by Joseph Wilson and others in contravention of Northampton’s fishing rights. The case was referred to the committee for privileges and on 18 Apr. the matter was resolved in Northampton’s favour. Northampton failed to sit after 24 June but on 30 June he registered his proxy with Sidney Godolphin, Baron (later earl of) Godolphin.
Having taken his seat in the new Parliament on 31 Jan. 1699, Northampton proceeded to attend on 15 per cent of all sitting days but he was named to just two committees in the course of the session. His attendance increased slightly in the ensuing session. He returned to the House on 27 Jan. 1700 and was thereafter present for approximately a third of the session during which he was named to three committees. On 8 Feb. he acted as teller for the contents on the question of whether to agree to the resolution concerning the Scots settlement at Darien, and on 23 Feb. he voted against adjourning the House into a committee of the whole for consideration of the bill for continuing the East India Company as a corporation.
In anticipation of the first general election of 1701 Sir John Mordaunt‡ sought Northampton’s support for his return for Warwickshire in partnership with Sir Charles Shuckborough‡, undertaking not to send to any freeholder until they had secured Northampton’s approbation. Following a county meeting, the two were returned unopposed.
Northampton took his seat in the new Parliament on 3 May 1701 but attended on just 14 per cent of all sitting days during which he was named to three committees. Following the dissolution, Mordaunt and Shuckborough were again returned for Warwickshire in the second general election of that year.
The reign of Anne to 1710
The death of William III promised Northampton and his kinsmen greater opportunities for advancement. In May Northampton was appointed to the Privy Council. He took his seat in the new Parliament on 20 Oct. 1702. In November it was discoursed that he was to play host to the queen’s husband, Prince George, who sat in the House as duke of Cumberland, and who was in need of a rural retreat for his convalescence.
Although Northampton was marked as a Jacobite in an analysis of the peerage of 13 Apr. 1705, there seems little reason to suspect that he was an active supporter of the exiled royal house. He took his seat in the new Parliament on 25 Oct. but sat for just two days before absenting himself for almost a month and on 12 Nov. he was excused at a call of the House. He resumed his seat on 19 Nov. and on 30 Nov. he registered his dissent at the resolution to give no further instructions to the committee of the whole considering the bill for securing the Protestant succession. Northampton subscribed a series of protests on 3 Dec. concerning the resolution not to read riders to the bill limiting the power of the lords justices, and on 6 Dec. he subscribed the protest at the resolution to agree with the committee that the church was not in danger. Northampton registered three more dissents on 31 Jan. 1706 in protest at resolutions concerning the bill for securing the Protestant succession, and on 9 Mar. he dissented once more at the resolution to agree with the Commons that Gwynne’s letter to Thomas Grey, 2nd earl of Stamford, was a ‘scandalous false and malicious libel.’ On 12 Mar. 1706 he acted as one of the tellers on the question of whether to agree to the wording of an address concerning the colony of Carolina, which was reported to the House by his Northamptonshire neighbour, Sunderland.
Northampton took his seat in the ensuing session on 10 Dec. 1706. On 3 Feb. 1707 he subscribed the protest at the resolution not to instruct the committee of the whole considering the bill for securing the Church of England to insert a clause declaring the 1673 Test Act to be ‘perpetual and unalterable’. On 4 Mar. 1707 he voted in favour of giving a second reading to the rider declaring that nothing in the Union bill should be construed as an acknowledgement of the truth of Presbyterianism. He then registered his dissent when the motion to read the rider was defeated. The same day he dissented once more at the resolution to pass the Union bill. Northampton attended for eight days of the brief fifteen-day session of April 1707. On 23 Apr. he registered his dissent at the resolution to consider the judges’ refusal to offer an answer to the question of whether existing laws were sufficient to prevent frauds concerning duties on East India goods the following day. He was omitted from the Privy Council in May but returned to the House for the new Parliament of Great Britain on 6 Nov. 1707, after which he was present for just under 19 per cent of all sitting days.
News of the anticipated Jacobite incursion in the spring of 1708 found Northampton again preoccupied with lieutenancy affairs as his officers furnished him with precedents from the rebellion of James Scott, duke of Monmouth, to help him with his mobilization of the Warwickshire militia.
The spring of 1709 found Northampton criticized for providing his daughter, Mary, with only £6,000 by way of portion on her marriage to the wealthy merchant and director of the Bank of England, William Gore‡. Gore was later a member of the October Club and the alliance perhaps indicates something of Northampton’s political inclinations at the time as well as the limitations of his fortune, though Lady Mary’s equipage on her arrival at her new home in Tring was said to be ‘the envy … of the ladies’.
The Ministry of Harley
Following the dissolution Northampton was again active in the elections for Warwickshire, where Sir John Mordaunt joined with Northampton’s heir, James Compton, styled Lord Compton (later 5th earl of Northampton).
the assurance you give me in your letter that I have the happiness to be in your thoughts, makes me presume to acquaint you that all those lords who had the honour to wait upon her majesty at the Revolution have received some mark of the queen’s favour, except myself; I do not know that in the late reign or in this I ever neglected any opportunity wherein I could be serviceable to her majesty, which makes me hope that distinguishing mark shall not always be.Add. 70027, f. 165.
The same month (May) Northampton employed his own interest to recommend one Mr Gostelowe to Henry Paget, later earl of Uxbridge, to a place in the leather office.
pardon my importunity in behalf of my Lord Northampton, who was with me yesterday to tell me he was going down into the country. I found him a little uneasy, that after so constant a service as he has paid to her majesty and her interest, he should see so many rewarded, and himself yet left in the dark. I beseech you therefore to put him out of pain so soon as you can prevail with the queen to declare her pleasure.Add. 70219, Bishop Compton to Oxford, 21 June 1711.
In advance of the new session, William Bromley‡ conveyed a blank proxy form from Edward Leigh, Baron Leigh, to Oxford requesting that he fill it with the names of Northampton, Nottingham or Thomas Thynne, Viscount Weymouth.
Despite his loyalty to the ministry during the session, there is evidence that Northampton’s patience was flagging. He told Oxford that it was:
a great honour to be in your thoughts, and [I] am very sensible of the trouble I have given your lordship; if I could have obtained the favour to have known what her majesty designs for me, I should have ordered my affairs accordingly, but the long delays and uncertainty obliges me to go into the country.Add. 70283, e. 97.
Northampton’s patience may have been on the wane but on 28 Dec. 1711 his son, James, was summoned to the House by a writ of acceleration as Baron Compton: the first of Oxford’s ‘dozen’ new creations. Northampton resumed his seat after the recess on 2 Jan. 1712, the same day on which Compton took his seat in the House, and towards the end of the month it was rumoured that Northampton was at last to be offered a place as constable of the Tower.
Northampton was in communication with Oxford in London during the autumn of 1712 and in advance of the new session the following spring he was listed by Swift as a likely supporter of the ministry.
You both aimed at the same end with so uniform justice and integrity, that as it is said, you never differed in any vote … It is our great happiness, my lord, that having been near forty years under his spiritual jurisdiction, we are now with our fellow citizens, in another capacity, under your lordship’s government and protection, by her majesty’s having put into your trust, the Tower of London. May this city never want the advantages it has long received, and now enjoys from that auspicious name, which has been the defence of our holy religion for so many years, under your pious uncle; and is now, under your lordship, and his honourable executor, the present security of our peace and civil rights!W. Whitfield, Sermon on the Death of the Late Lord Bishop of London, (1713).
Northampton took his seat in the new parliament on 16 Feb. 1714 and on 3 May he again received Leigh’s proxy, which was vacated by the close of the session. The following month (2 June) he was entrusted Thanet’s proxy, which was also vacated by the close of the session. On 27 May he was forecast by Nottingham as a likely supporter of the schism bill. Following the death of Queen Anne, Northampton attended ten days of the brief August session and on 10 Aug. he again received Thanet’s proxy (which was vacated by the close of the session).
Northampton’s activities in preparation for the new Parliament provoked the ire of Sir Justinian Isham, who excoriated Northampton for his ‘evasive duplicity’ over Isham’s efforts to be re-elected. Even so Isham comforted himself (inaccurately) that Northampton’s interest in the county ‘was not great.’
Northampton continued to be active in the House for the remainder of George I’s reign. He remained a frequent holder of proxies and teller in divisions. Details of his activities after 1715 will be dealt with in the next phase of this work. Northampton attended for the last time on 23 May 1726. In October of that year he created a stir in society by remarrying, his alliance mercilessly lampooned by one of Abigail Harley’s correspondents, Duncombe:
I have not heard of anything that has created a laugh amongst us of some time except the account of Lord Northampton’s addresses to my Lady Thorold and I can imagine a very pleasant scene to myself from my lady’s prudery and my lord’s formality and as my mother says such a match cannot but be carried on with great decorum.Add. 70144, M. Duncombe to A. Harley, 27 Oct. 1726.
Certainly, Northampton was aware that his actions might be viewed askance and was at pains to reassure his children that their interests would not be infringed by the alliance.
