WODEHOUSE (WODEHOWSE), Philip (1608-81), of Kimberley, Norf.

Philip Wodehouse took after his father in that he ultimately preferred a private life in the country with his books, his music and his poetry. He was probably the author of the substantial history in verse of the Wodehouse family and, in updating it following his father’s death, he said of himself, ‘He knows himself so well, he loves the shade;/He knows the world so well, he hates parade’.18R.W. Ketton-Cremer, ‘The rhyming Wodehouses’, Norf. Arch. xxxiii. 39. But he differed from his father in politics. As an MP during the 1640s, Sir Thomas clearly supported Parliament. Philip’s loyalties, on the other hand, were evidently viewed by others as more ambiguous. In the summer of 1642, when Sir Thomas had already been confirmed in office as a deputy lieutenant by Parliament, Philip was thought to be sufficiently sympathetic to the king to be nominated to the commission of array for Norfolk.19Northants. RO, FH133, unf. He probably never tried to act as a commissioner, but the king seems not to have given up hope that Wodehouse might support him. As late as May 1645 Charles named him to the Norfolk commission of the peace, an appointment that by then was completely meaningless.20Docquets of Letters Patent ed. Black, 270. As there seems never to have been any suggestion that Wodehouse might be proceeded against by Parliament as a delinquent, presumably he remained neutral throughout. He was not appointed by Parliament to any local office.

With poor health probably preventing his father from standing, Wodehouse put himself forward as a parliamentary candidate for the first time in 1654. That he had thus far stayed out of county politics was probably an advantage. He came seventh in the Norfolk poll (with 1,439 votes). That was enough to secure him one of the ten county seats.21R. Temple, ‘A 1654 protectorate parliamentary election return’, Cromwelliana, ser. II, iii. 58. On 12 September 1654, nine days after Parliament had assembled, Oliver Cromwell* demanded that all MPs take an oath recognising his authority as lord protector. The various Norfolk MPs then dined together ‘purposely to consult what was fittest to be done’ and, according to one of them, Guybon Goddard*, Wodehouse joined with John Hobart* and Barnard Church* in refusing to take the oath.22Burton’s Diary, i. pp. xxxv-xxxvi. Like the other two, he probably did not hold out for long, but he may have been unwilling to perform his parliamentary duties to the full. On 4 November he was granted permission to go to the country for a month.23CJ vii. 382a. His only committee appointment was made five days later when he was among MPs asked to investigate claims that the local sheriff was refusing to hand over money that had been raised for the construction of a county gaol in Surrey.24CJ vii. 383b.

Almost two years later, at the time of the next election, Wodehouse discussed his conduct in this Parliament with an army officer, John Balleston, who then reported those comments to Hezekiah Haynes*. Balleston claimed that he had told Wodehouse that

I had heard that the last Parliament he either acted or said something which rendered him suspicious; his answer was very modest, that he did not remember he spake at all in the House only once.25TSP v. 370.

Wodehouse apparently also admitted to Balleston that during the 1654 Parliament he had spoken to Henry Cromwell alias Williams* and Henry’s second cousin, Henry Cromwell*, the lord protector’s younger son, about restoring ‘prelacy’. When Henry Cromwell alias Williams indicated that he would be willing to put forward a motion for this in the House, Henry Cromwell suggested that Wodehouse should second it, to which Wodehouse agreed. But the Cromwell cousins had then admitted that they had said this only in order to test him.26TSP v. 370. That Wodehouse’s religious views were so conservative was therefore well known to at least some close to the lord protector.

Identifying him with the ‘adverse party’ in Norfolk, Haynes*, as deputy major-general for East Anglia, worked hard to prevent Wodehouse's re-election in 1656.27TSP v. 311. Meanwhile, according to Balleston, Sir Thomas Wodehouse encouraged him in trying to dissuade Philip from standing but Philip ignored their warnings that his religious views would count against him. Wodehouse told Balleston that,

he was but one and must speak freely his thought, and would discharge his conscience in speaking, but did not desire any such employment, and did much entreat me to use all my endeavours to keep him from being elected...28TSP v. 370.

Ralph Woolmer* also worked to block Wodehouse’s election.29TSP v. 371. On the day Wodehouse polled 2,201 votes, putting him in fifth place.30Norf. Arch. i. 67. Unsurprisingly, Wodehouse was then among those prevented by the council of state from taking their seats.31CJ vii. 425a. He signed the printed remonstrance of the excluded Members.32To all the Worthy Gentlemen ([1656], E.889.8).

On the death of his father in 1658, Wodehouse inherited the family estates and the baronetcy. At about this time Roger Whitley†, in urging the exiled court to support a royalist uprising, included Wodehouse on his list of Norfolk gentlemen whom he thought might be willing to take up arms on their behalf.33Bodl. Eng. hist. e. 309, p. 43. Sir Philip was on good terms with Sir Horatio Townshend*, who by 1659 was the leading royalist plotter in the county.34Ketton-Cremer, ‘Rhyming Wodehouses’, 39. Even so, in early 1659 Wodehouse was added to the Norfolk commission of the peace, presumably being viewed as a replacement for his father.35C231/6, p. 427. In early 1660 he signed the Norfolk address to George Monck* for a free Parliament.36Address from Gentry of Norf. ed. Rye, 63. Later that same year he was returned to the Convention for Thetford. By the end of his life he was a tory.37HP Commons 1660-1690. He died in 1681 and was buried at Kimberley.38Blomefield, Norf. ii. 556.