Although he was to represent a Sussex borough in the Commons and to end his days as common serjeant of London, Baldwyn was not a native of either place. He belonged to a family which had been resident in Aylesbury from the early years of the century, if not before, and was probably one of the sons of a namesake, who in the 1450s came to be known as John Baldwyn ‘the elder’. The latter had attested five of the Buckinghamshire parliamentary elections held in their home town between 1420 and 1432, and his status among the more prominent men of the county is clear from his inclusion on the list of those required to take the oath against maintenance as administered there in 1434. Furthermore, he was closely acquainted with figures of consequence in the region, for he was named as a feoffee by William Whaplode*, the steward of the estates of Bishop Beaufort of Winchester.
Like two more of his fellow members of the legal profession, Thomas Molyneux* and Thomas Urswyk II* (who both came from Lancashire), Baldwyn was elected to Parliament for the west Sussex borough of Midhurst. None of these men had any connexion with the locality, so far as the surviving sources reveal, and how they came to be chosen in close succession in 1447, 1449 and 1453 remains a mystery. Nevertheless, it must be significant that all three belonged to Gray’s Inn, and that they knew each other well (indeed, Molyneux and Urswyk were related). It was perhaps while attending the Commons that Baldwyn first came to the attention of the government, for shortly after the dissolution in 1454 he was made a j.p. in his home shire, as a member of the quorum. This in turn led to his appointment as escheator of the neighbouring county of Northamptonshire later the same year. His reputation as a lawyer was growing fast. Like Urswyk he was among the apprentices-at-law retained by the duchy of Lancaster; and he received fees for the counsel he gave to duchy officials from 1455 to 1466.
Baldwyn’s putative father was still living in April 1458, when both Johns witnessed a conveyance at Aylesbury, but he is not recorded subsequently. There would not seem to be a political reason for the removal of our MP from the bench in Buckinghamshire in July 1459, as a few months later he was appointed as a j.p. in Oxford, where he served until the end of the reign. It is difficult to guess what, if any, significance should be attached to his appearance in May 1460 as a witness to a grant of certain manors in Essex and Buckinghamshire made by Thomas, Lord Richemount Grey, to Henry, duke of Exeter, and a number of lawyers headed by Judges Fortescue* and Prysote*, and although the Yorkist regime which came to power shortly afterwards had no use for him as a j.p., his continued service as legal counsel to the duchy of Lancaster implies that he was not regarded as a staunch opponent to the government of Edward IV.
Little is known about Baldwyn’s wife, save that she was probably the eldest of William Streteley’s three daughters, who by the autumn of 1468 had become his heirs-apparent. On 25 Oct. that year Streteley and his wife made a curious declaration, which they had enrolled on the close roll. They stated that their daughters (Edith Baldwyn, Anne, wife of Edward Lee, and Elizabeth, as yet unmarried) had been conceived in true wedlock, contrary to the assertion of ill-disposed persons that they were bastards.
Baldwyn had been last recorded acting as a feoffee of property in Buckinghamshire on behalf of the late Walter Brightwell. The latter had been a tenant-in-chief, holding his land of the honour of Wallingford, and in March 1469, after his death, it was alleged that the enfeoffment had been made by collusion to defraud the Crown of the wardship of his son and heir.
