HOWARD, Charles (1610-81)

Although born into a minor branch of the wealthy and influential Howard family, much about Nottingham’s life remains obscure. The family had once been based in Surrey but what little correspondence survives suggests that Nottingham had taken up residence in Bristol and what little is known of his parliamentary career after 1660 suggests strong West Country loyalties. Nottingham seems to have possessed little in the way of family estates and his sole source of income appears to have been a royal pension worth just over £1,000 a year. This was over £4,000 in arrears by 1645 and reduced to £500 in 1646. It was increased in 1659 to £1,000, although £400 was earmarked for the countess. CP, ix. 789n. During the Civil War he was associated with the parliamentarian cause and he continued to attend the House after the death of the king.

On the list made by Philip Wharton, 4th Baron Wharton, in the spring of 1660, Nottingham was noted as a lord that had sat previously. His Civil War attendance meant that there was no objection to his resumption of his seat, a point recognized by John Mordaunt, Viscount Mordaunt, when writing to Edward Hyde, the future earl of Clarendon, on 19 Apr. 1660. Bodl. Clarendon 71, ff. 305-6. On the opening day of the Convention he was one of the peers written to by Edward Montagu, 2nd earl of Manchester, requesting him to take his seat. He duly did so two days later on 27 Apr. 1660, when he was named to the committee for privileges and also, perhaps significantly, to the committee for settling the affairs of the nation. On 3 May a crossed out attendance list suggests that he was present at the first meeting of the committee of privileges. PA, HL/PO/DC/CP/1, p. 4. On 4 May he was one of four peers who signed an order to prevent riots in London. He was present on 83 days, before the adjournment in September 1660, some 71 per cent of the total. Nottingham was present when the Convention reconvened on 6 Nov. 1660. He attended on a further 20 days, 49 per cent of the total. In total, he was named to a further three committees during the Convention.

Nottingham was not present when the new Parliament convened on 8 May 1661. He was absent from a call of the House on 20 May 1661, first attending on the following day. He was present on 25 days before the adjournment at the end of July, 39 per cent of the total. On 11 July he was expected to vote against the claim of Aubrey de Vere, 20th earl of Oxford, to the great chamberlaincy. At the end of July 1661 his original pension was confirmed. CTB, i. 276. Nottingham was absent when the session resumed on 20 Nov. 1661, but attended on the 22nd. He was present on 49 days, 37 per cent of the total. He was named to three committees in January and February 1662, the bills for allowances to curates (8 Jan.), for William Widdrington, 2nd Baron Widdrington (25 Feb.) and for Ellen Brisco (27 Feb.).

When the 1663 session began on 18 Feb. 1663, Nottingham was absent. He was also absent at a call of the House on 23 Feb., and on 28 Feb. he was excused attendance on the grounds of ill-health. He first attended on 4 May, but was absent from a call of the House on 23 May, and was not listed as attending between 20 May and 12 June. He was named to only one committee, for the bill on the herring fishery (14 July). He was present on 18 days, 22 per cent of the total. Nottingham was not present when the 1664 session met on 16 Mar., but attended on the 22nd. He was present on 31 days, 87 per cent of the total. He was named, as was everyone present, to the committee for petitions on 23 Mar. 1664. On the main business of this session, the attempt by George Digby, 2nd earl of Bristol’s attempt to impeach Clarendon, Wharton listed him as doubtful as to his intentions.

Nottingham was not present on the opening day of the 1664-5 session, 24 Nov., but attended on the 28th. He was present on 11 days, 22 per cent of the total. On 7 Dec. 1664 he was absent from a call of the House. He was present on only one day in January 1665. His only committee appointment, Sir Robert Carr’s^‡ bill (22 Feb. 1665), came during a period of attendance in February. At some point he examined the Journals, signing as such on 2 Mar. 1665, and on the prorogations of 21 June, 1 Aug. 1665 and 3 Oct. 1665. Nottingham was present when the session of October 1665 began on the 9th. He attended on 12 days, 75 per cent of the total. He was named to the committees for privileges and the journal (12 Oct.), as well as to committees for the bills to unite churches in cities (11 Oct.), ‘taking away damage clear’ (17 Oct.), restraining non-conformists from inhabiting in corporations and for the monthly assessment (both 27 October).

Nottingham was present on the second day of the 1666-7 session, 21 Sept., but was present on only 12 days in total, 13.5 per cent of the total. He was appointed to the committee for privileges on 24 Sept. 1666. He only attended once after the turn of the year (4 Feb. 1667) a visit that was probably associated with the attempted impeachment of Viscount Mordaunt. Nottingham first attended the 1667-9 session on 15 Oct. 1667, when he was named to the committee for the bill to suppress atheism. He was present on seven days of the session before the adjournment of 19 Dec., 14 per cent of the total. He was not present when the session resumed on 6 Feb. 1668, first attending on the 11th. He was present on 26 days of this part of the session before the adjournment in May, 39 per cent of the total. On 17 Feb. 1668 he was excused at a call of the House, and attended the following day. On 12 Mar. 1668 he was named to the committee to consider the sum to be awarded for relief to Skinner, and also to the committee on Sir John Weld’s^‡ bill. HL/PO/JO/5, 12 Mar. 1668. His last attendance of the session was on 7 May 1668. Nottingham was apparently facing severe financial embarrassment during 1668 and approached the secretary of state, Joseph Williamson^‡, to expedite payment of his pension, which had been unpaid for 18 months. CSP Dom. 1668-9, p. 27.

Nottingham did not attend the session of October-December 1669 until 25 Oct. when he was named to the committee to consider the decay of trade. He was present on 22 days of the session, 63 per cent of the total. On 25 Nov. 1669 he signed a protest against the resolution that the appeal of West Countryman Bernard Granville^‡ and Cuthbert Morley against a decree in Chancery in the case usually listed as Grenville v Elwes was properly before the House. On 9 Dec. he was added to the committee on accounts.

The end of the 1669 session saw the effective end of Nottingham’s parliamentary career. He did not attend any of the three sessions held between 1670 and 1673, probably because of ill health. He was absent at calls of the House on 21 Feb. 1670, 14 Nov. 1670 (sick), 10 Feb. 1671, and 13 Feb. 1673 (sick). He was absent from the House at the beginning of the 1674 session on 7 Jan., was absent from a call of the House on 12 Jan. 1674, and only attended on 28-29 Jan. 1674. Despite his absence from Parliament, a canvassing list compiled by Thomas Osborne, earl of Danby (later Duke of Leeds), during the first session of 1675 indicates that Nottingham was expected to support the non-resisting test and it was presumably at Danby’s request that Nottingham registered his proxy in favour of Danby’s ally Robert Bertie, 3rd earl of Lindsey on 21 Apr. 1675, and as such he was listed as having left a proxy at the call of the House on 29 April. On 11 Oct. 1675, two days before the commencement of the second session, Nottingham registered his proxy in Danby’s favour, and was noted as having done so at the call of the House on 10 November.

Danby had used his position as lord treasurer in Nottingham’s favour. In September 1673, Danby had issued a warrant for the payment of the arrears of Nottingham’s creation money, and he seems to have paid some of Nottingham’s pension. CTB, iv. 400. However, on 3 July 1676 Nottingham wrote to the countess of Danby, referring to the many favours he received from her father, Montagu Bertie, 2nd earl of Lindsey. He noted that his pensions were ‘the only means of my subsistence’, and that they were three and a half years in arrears from before Danby was appointed lord treasurer and a further one year in arrear to the previous midsummer. Eg. 3338, f.78. On 9 Sept. 1676 Nottingham wrote to Williamson of his being ‘reduced to a condition little better than miserable, being old, lame and wanting what should supply me with food and raiment and those necessary helps of physic my age and infirmities need’, and asking for his assistance in presenting his petition to the king ‘for all arrears of my pensions’, both before and after Danby became lord treasurer. On 27 Sept. his petition, claiming over £4,900 pension arrears, was referred to Danby. CSP Dom. 1676-7, pp. 317, 340. Nottingham’s lobbying may have had some effect, for on 25 Oct. the secretary to the treasury was ordered to show Danby what had been paid ‘in his time’ to Nottingham and then he would give some directions in the earl’s business. On 5 Dec. 1676, a warrant was issued for a half-year payment on his pensions of 1,000 marks and £500 per annum. CTB, v. 79, 400. Nottingham acknowledged Williamson’s assistance in February 1677. CSP Dom. 1676-7, p. 561.

Nottingham was again absent for the whole of the 1677-8 session when his proxy (registered on 8 Feb. 1677) was given in favour of the west country peer John Granville, earl of Bath (and brother of Bernard Granville), and he was noted as having left a proxy at the call of the House on 9 Mar. 1677 and on 16 Feb. 1678. At around this date Anthony Ashley Cooper, earl of Shaftesbury, classed Nottingham as ‘vile’ in his analysis of Parliament. Nottingham was absent for the sessions of May-July, and October-December, registering a proxy on 6 Nov. 1678 in favour of Richard Arundell, Baron Arundell of Trerice. Danby’s canvassing lists drawn up in the spring of 1679 show that he expected to be able to count on Nottingham’s support. On one he was listed as being deputed to the care of Charles Bertie^‡, Lindsey’s brother; on another he was listed as doubtful (absent); on a third as a supporter and on a fourth as an absent supporter, although this was scored through; Nottingham having struggled into the House on 1 Apr. 1679 when Danby’s bill of attainder received its first reading. This was to be his last appearance in the House, as that same day he signed a proxy in favour of Arundell of Trerice. On 12 Mar. 1679 he was listed as a court lord. He was excused attendance at a call of the House on 9 May 1679, and at a call of the House on 30 Oct. 1680 he was again excused on grounds of illness. He was listed as absent on the division on exclusion on 15 Nov. 1680.

Nottingham died at his Surrey house on 26 Apr. 1681. By his will he left over £100 in gold coins, his clothes and a substantial quantity of furniture and household goods to his servant John Syddall; the remainder went to his executor and ‘well deserving and faithful friend’ Richard Thorne, one of the king’s sergeants at arms. He made no other bequests. PROB 11/366. At his death the earldom of Nottingham became extinct; it was recreated less than a month later for Heneage Finch, Baron Finch. Nottingham’s cousin, Francis Howard, succeeded as 5th Baron Howard of Effingham.