HEXTALL, Thomas (d.1486), of Dover, Kent.

Hextall enjoyed a successful career which, like that of his elder brother, William, was a function of his place in the service of the great baronial family of Stafford. William, perhaps through the patronage of their stepfather, Hugh Stanford*, was, by the mid-1420s, in the service of Humphrey, earl of Stafford and (from 1444) duke of Buckingham, but it was some years before Thomas, who was probably some years William’s junior, followed him, beginning his career, at some point before the autumn of 1441 as one of the clerks of the earl’s household. Rawcliffe, 197. After William, partly at least as the result of marriage to a wealthy widow from the south-east, moved from Staffordshire to take a place in the earl’s administration in Kent (where the Hextalls already held lands at East Peckham), Thomas did the same. Indeed, the fates of the two brothers were also tied together in another way, for William’s marriage appears to have led to Thomas’s. William’s wife was the widow of a London ironmonger, Nicholas James, and Thomas married her daughter, Anne. The match was an excellent one for the younger son of a modest family. Under the terms of James’s will, proved in November 1433, Anne was to have a marriage portion of £200 together with a remainder interest, expectant on the death of her mother, in property in Croydon in Surrey. The date of the marriage is uncertain but presumably followed that of William to the bride’s mother. It had certainly been made by 19 Apr. 1446 when William named the couple as beneficiaries in a will. PCC 18 Luffenham (PROB11/3, ff. 138v-141); Loseley mss, LM/2011/40.

A marriage made in the mid-1440s is consistent with Thomas’s first appearance in an active role in the south-east. In the accounts prepared by William as the duke of Buckingham’s receiver in Kent and Surrey in 1445-6 several payments were recorded as having been made to Thomas. Most striking are the expenses of £4 17s. 5d. which he and other of the duke’s household men received for riding from Kent to Writtle in Essex, to meet the King who was travelling from Walsingham to London. In the same accounting year, Thomas spent 15 weeks at Tonbridge attending on the duke. His service was rewarded (either in this year or earlier) with a lease of some of the Stafford lands at Caterham and elsewhere in Surrey at an annual rent of seven marks. Stafford fam. mss, D641/1/2/233. It was thus as a servant of the duke that Thomas was returned to the Parliament of 1447 as a representative of the Surrey borough of Bletchingley, a borough which belonged to the duke and which William was to represent in the following Parliament. C219/15/4, 6. Although neither man appears to have acquired property in the Bletchingley area, their two brothers, Hugh and Henry, became prominent residents there. In 1451 Hugh, formerly rector of Blymhill in Staffordshire, was presented by the duke of Buckingham to the living of Bletchingley; and Henry acquired from the duke a significant landholding, comprising some 200 acres, in the neighbourhood, which later became known as the manor of ‘Hextalls’. U. Lambert, Blechingley, 236-7; VCH Surr. iv. 258; PCC 23 Dogett (PROB11/9, f. 175).

Thomas Hextall’s links with the south-east did not prevent him from occasionally returning to the Midlands where, in the late 1440s, he was involved in a serious incident of local disorder. In a petition submitted to the Parliament which met in November 1449, Thomas, son and heir of Thomas Ferrers of Tamworth in Staffordshire alleged that he had been attacked and left for dead by Hextall and a number of other men who had ‘gydred to theym other mysgoverned people to the nombre of lxxx persones ... arraied in riotouse wyse’ at Coleshill in Warwickshire. The rioters were then said to have moved on to Tamworth where they laid seige to the castle belonging to Thomas Ferrers the elder, ‘to the entente to have slayne hym yf they might have goten the same castelle with the same assaute’. The context of this alleged offence is unclear, although there can be no doubt that Hextall was acting as an agent of his master the duke. The matter was resolved at an inquisition held at Warwick on 15 Jan. 1451, when damages of £160 were awarded against the assailants. SC8/111/5528; Wm. Salt Arch. Soc. n.s. iii. 195-6; KB27/758, rot. 63; C. Carpenter, Locality and Polity, 426-7.

Soon after this incident Hextall was to find another sphere for his activities with Buckingham’s appointment as constable of Dover and warden of the Cinque Ports following the murder of James Fiennes*, Lord Saye and Sele by Cade’s rebels in the summer of 1450. Hextall’s involvement in the affairs of the Ports had begun by June 1452: in that month he was both appointed by the duke to act as bailiff of Hythe and nominated by delegates of the Cinque Ports at a special Brodhull to represent the interests of fishermen seeking safe-conducts. The following year, at one of the regular Brodhulls, held on 24 July, he was nominated along with the mayor of Sandwich and others as an arbiter in a dispute between two residents of the Ports. White and Black Bks. of Cinque Ports (Kent Recs. Ser. xix.), 30-31; Hythe jurats’ acct. bks. H 1055, f. 153v. These duties suggest that he had already been appointed by Buckingham as receiver of the revenues pertaining to the offices of constable and warden (a post he had certainly taken up by the autumn of 1454, when surviving accounts compiled by him for the port of Dover commence).

As well as administering the revenues from the Ports, Hextall had a number of other duties for which he was paid by the individual corporations themselves. Among these was the supervision of executions: at Rye on one occasion expenses of 6s. 8d. were paid to him ‘and the ffelyship that cam with hym when the theff was hangyd’. More mundane matters included the collection of taxes in the Ports, for which he was also paid expenses, and as a result their governors made every effort to curry favour with him. In 1455-6 the town of Lydd paid 4s. 8d. ‘for fysshe sente to the Luetenaunt and to Hexstall ... for frenship to be hadde for the maysturs of botys of Lyde’. Fish was also delivered to Hextall by New Romney ‘to have his frendship in a certain inquisition and resumption’. E. Suss. RO, Rye mss, acct. bk. 60/2, ff. 42v, 48; HMC 5th Rep. 491-2, 520-1, 543. The accounts rendered to the Exchequer by Hextall as Buckingham’s receiver reveal the extent to which the posts of constable and warden had become a drain on the duke’s personal resources. In June 1460 arrears of £1,262 were listed, comprising farms and customs that had proved impossible to collect over the past ten years. As a result, even Hextall’s own fees and expenses were in arrears: in September 1459, for instance, he had been owed a total of £15 11s. from the accounting year 1456-7 and another 10s. 5¼d. from 1457-8. Rawcliffe, 118-19; E101/54/17.

During this period there is little evidence to show that Hextall was active in Kentish county society. He attested the shire election in 1453, but this probably had as much to do with the fact that his brother, William, was returned as one of the MPs (presumably with the active support of Buckingham) as with his own position in the county. C219/16/2. During the late 1450s he served on several royal commissions in Kent, but these were all connected in some way with his duties at Dover. In September 1457, for example, along with John Roger III*, he was a member of a commission charged with purveying munitions for the defence of Dover castle. Similarly, in May 1458 he was appointed to others, headed by Buckingham, which were to investigate the seizure by pirates of foreign ships bound for England. CPR, 1452-61, pp. 401, 438. These assignments emphasized Hextall’s close links with Dover, and were very different from the more overtly ‘political’ commissions to which his brother was appointed during these years. Such was Hextall’s prominence in that Port that, on 8 Sept. 1457, he was chosen for the first time as one of the 12 jurats, an appointment followed a year later by his first election as mayor. Add. 29615, f. 77; 29616, f. 15.

For both Hextall brothers the death of the duke of Buckingham at the battle of Northampton in July 1460 left them vulnerable to dismissal from the offices they had acquired as a result of his patronage. In the event, however, both managed to survive the purge of Crown officials that took place in the aftermath of the Yorkist victory and the accession of Edward IV. Key to their survival, as it was to that of several other Stafford retainers, was the kinship of the duke’s widow, Anne, with the Nevilles: she was a sister to the earl of Salisbury and an aunt to the earl of Warwick. In October 1460 Hextall acted as a mainpernor for the duchess, who, along with the late duke’s half-brother, Thomas Bourgchier, archbishop of Canterbury, was granted the keeping of the Stafford estates during the minority of the young heir Henry. CFR, xix. 284-5. These connexions, combined with Hextall’s own prominence in Dover, may have ensured his survival as receiver to the new constable of Dover, the earl of Warwick, who was appointed on 7 May 1461. CPR, 1461-7, p. 45.

The next decade saw Hextall consolidate his position in Dover: as well as serving as a jurat he was frequently appointed as one of the Port’s representatives at Brodhulls, and in July 1465 he was chosen as one of the bailiffs to be sent by Romney and Dover to Yarmouth. In September 1467 he was chosen as mayor for the second time, an office to which he was re-elected in 1468 and 1469. White and Black Bks. of Cinque Ports, 53; Add. 29616, ff. 28, 40, 103; S.P.H. Statham, Dover, 166. By 1470, therefore, Hextall was probably one of the two or three most important residents of Dover, a status which inevitably plunged him into the midst of the controversies and tensions that accompanied the Readeption of Henry VI in the autumn of 1470 and, most relevant to the county of Kent, the rebellion led by the Bastard of Fauconberg in May 1471 against the newly- restored Edward IV.

The records of Dover reveal something of the conflicting loyalties of the town: negotiations with Faunconberg are reflected in expenses of 4d. ‘paid for wyn geven to mayster Faconbregge man’, and a similar sum paid to Hextall may indicate that he was involved in the discussions. Add. 29616, f. 65v. The failure of the revolt prompted the King to take action to punish those inhabitants of Kent and the Ports who were found to have sided with the rebels. To this end, on 9 July, the liberties and franchises of Dover and the other Ports were taken into the King’s hands and their administration entrusted to wardens appointed by the Crown instead of to the elected mayors. Rather than an outsider, however, the ‘custos’ of Dover was to be ‘dilectum et fidelum Thomas Hexstall’. CPR, 1467-77, p. 276; Dover Chs. ed. Statham, 246. Although he was now officially representing the Crown’s authority rather than the burgesses of Dover, Hextall’s appointment does not seem to have caused resentment in the town. Indeed, the townsmen probably viewed him as a valuable ally in their efforts to secure the restoration of their liberties. In the two months that followed his appointment as royal warden Hextall was paid expenses by the town for a number of journeys to Canterbury to meet the King for this purpose. He was supplied with horses and wine as well as 10s. for a ‘reward’ paid to two unnamed members of the Household. On another occasion the corporation allocated 10s. ‘when Thomas Hexstall rod to London for þe fraunchise’. Add. 29616, ff. 65v-66.

These initial efforts appear to have failed, for Hextall was still described as warden when the new mayoral year began on 8 Sept. The reason for the lack of progress was the Crown’s reluctance to restore the liberties of the Ports until a full inquiry into the events of the spring had been completed. On 3 Nov. the justices appointed to investigate the support given to Fauconberg named 79 men whom they had examined and who were to receive general pardons. Hextall was among them, but it seems clear that his inclusion was in his capacity as a representative of the borough community at Dover, possibly in the expectation that he would be responsible for exacting any fines that were levied upon the inhabitants. In a similar position was another of the ‘rebels’, John Sutton†, who had been appointed as warden of the Port of Rye. Three weeks later, on 19 Nov., Hextall was appointed to act on behalf of the justices in the pursuit and investigation of rebellions and treasons in Dover. CPR, 1467-77, pp. 301-3; C.F. Richmond, ‘Fauconberg’s Kentish Rising’, EHR, lxxxv. 687-9; Dover Chs. 246; SC1/57/108.

Once again, however, Hextall’s involvement with these doubtless unwelcome investigations did not prevent him from continuing to put Dover’s case to the Crown. In December a meeting of the Brodhull decided that a joint approach might meet with more success, and Hextall was one of several men appointed to travel to London to labour on behalf of the Ports the following month, for which he was to receive 2s. a day while in the capital and 3s. 4d. for each day’s travelling. Despite their lobbying, matters were still not resolved by April 1472 when Hextall received a further payment of 16s. 8d. for pursuing the suit of the Ports, ‘for the commissions of the custodye’. White and Black Bks. of Cinque Ports, 64. In the event it is probable that the liberties of the Ports were not restored until the late summer, for it was only on 8 Sept. that Dover’s rulers once more began electing their own mayors. Add. 29616, f. 68; Dover Chs. 256. Later that autumn Hextall was chosen as one of the two representatives of the town of Dover to attend the Parliament summoned to meet on 6 Oct. 1472, and which was to last for seven sessions until it was dissolved on 14 Mar. 1475. Both Hextall and his fellow Member, William Mytron†, received expenses for their attendance: for the second session, which met from 8 Feb. to 8 Apr. 1473, Hextall was reimbursed for a total of 48 days, including expenses for journeys made by him on 1, 2 and 6 Feb. and on 9 Mar. Add. 29616, f. 88v.

For the rest of his career, Hextall continued to occupy a prominent role in Dover. He was chosen as mayor on another five occasions, including consecutive terms in 1473-5, when he was still attending Parliament, and in 1477-9. Furthermore, in those years when other individuals were elected mayor he continued to serve as both a jurat and one of the town’s deputies at meetings of the representatives of the Cinque Ports. Ibid. ff. 103, 121, 137, 152, 168, 182, 196, 215, 230; White and Black Bks. of Cinque Ports, 62, 66, 80, 82. He also continued to represent Dover in Parliament. For his attendance at the Parliament of 1478 he was paid wages of £3 10s., that is for 35 days’ service at the daily rate of 2s. Hextall confirmed his position as a natural spokesperson for Dover’s interests at the next two Parliaments, the last of Edward IV’s reign and the only one of his brother, Richard III. At the former, he once more received expenses from Dover’s coffers, covering the period from his departure on 20 Jan. to his return home on 22 Feb. 1483. Add. 29616, ff. 230, 242.

Little evidence survives of Hextall’s interests outside his service to the Staffords and his long involvement in the administration of Dover. One significant reference, however, shows that, at least at the end of his career, he had shipping interests. In January 1482 he conducted certain ships called ‘passengers’, which were carrying French ambassadors from Dover to Boulogne, a task for which the Crown paid him £10 18s. 4d. E405/70, rot. 4d.

Hextall was listed as a jurat of Dover for the final time in September 1484, and he did not survive long thereafter. He drew up his will on 29 Apr. 1486, asking to be buried in St. Nicholas’s church in Dover. He established a chantry there to be funded for five years from the revenues of his property at Maxton near the Port. His eldest son, Edward, a future mayor of Dover, was to inherit the rest of his lands in Kent and elsewhere, but the nature or extent of these properties is not specified. Edward was also to be his father’s principal executor, and one of his duties was to ensure that his half-brother, William, received the sum of 40 marks on completion of his apprenticeship ‘if the said William fortune to lyve so long’. Arrangements were also to be made to return various household possessions to his second wife’s son, John Copledyke†, probably goods that had belonged to her second husband. The will was proved in the consistory court of Canterbury at some point during 1486 although a precise date is not given. Centre for Kentish Studies, Maidstone, consist. ct. of Canterbury wills, PRC32/3, ff. 98-99; Statham, 178; J.B. Jones, Annals of Dover, 291-2. Hextall’s death must, however, have occurred after July that year, when he was among various ship-owners and masters in Dover who were paid a total of £107 11s. 1d. after their vessels had been commandeered by the Crown for a period of five months. Materials for Hist. Hen. VII ed. Campbell, i. 494.