TIMBS, Richard (c.1603-74), of Cambridge, Cambs.

There is strong circumstantial evidence that Richard Timbs was originally from Chatteris in the Cambridgeshire fens. If that is correct, his parents may well have been Richard Timbs (d. 1609) and his wife, Agatha.25A. Barclay, Electing Cromwell (2011), 61-2, 64. His own statements indicate that he had been born about 1603.26C21/B8/9; C24/872, Copping v. Terold; E134/16ChasII/Mich22. The Timbs of Chatteris were mostly farm labourers and Richard as a young man presumably moved away to become a tradesman.

In what may be the earliest reference to him in Cambridge, he was described as a glover.27CUL, Univ. Archives, CUR 37.3, no. 110. He later traded there as a fellmonger. He was also presumably the man who married Mary Watson in St Andrew’s the Great in Cambridge in 1631.28E134/16ChasII/Mich22; Cambs. Par. Regs. v. 10. By 1637, when his eldest son, Richard, was born, he had evidently remarried and, with this second wife, he had several children, none of whom survived him.29St Andrew the Great, Cambridge par. reg.; Al. Cant. His Ship Money assessment was 4s.30CUL, Univ. Archives, CUR 36.1, nos. 21, 25, 27, 28. The episcopal visitors sent to Cambridge by Matthew Wren, bishop of Ely, in 1639 singled out Timbs as a troublemaker, reporting that he refused to bow at the name of Jesus during the services at St Andrew’s.31Palmer, ‘Episcopal vis. returns’, 343. Later Timbs would be among those who signed the 1641 Cambridgeshire petition complaining about Wren and his policies.32Eg. 1048, f. 24v; Palmer, ‘Episcopal vis. returns’, pl. opp. 388.

Given this, there is nothing inherently implausible in the claim by James Heath (or the later reviser of his biography of Cromwell) that it was Timbs who contrived to get Oliver Cromwell* elected as MP for Cambridge in 1640.33J. Heath, Flagellum (1665), 18-22. According to Heath, Timbs was in the habit of attending a conventicle in the Isle of Ely, ‘having a brother who entertained them in his course’, and there he heard Cromwell preach

with such admiration, that he thought there was not such a precious man in the nation; and took such a liking to him, that from that time he did nothing but ruminate and meditate on the man and his gifts.34Heath, Flagellum (1665), 18.

Overwhelmed by Cromwell’s charisma, Timbs then allegedly plotted with several Cambridge citizens, William Welbore, Robert Ibbot and Bryan Kitchingman, to get Cromwell appointed first as a freeman and then as MP, deluding the mayor, Thomas French*, in the process. Another later source, John Nalson, who knew the fens well, told a similar but less detailed story about Timbs in the 1630s that may or may not have been independent of Heath’s. Nalson described Timbs as having been ‘the head of the faction thereabouts’ and claimed that Timbs and Cromwell had been members of the same group of nonconformists.35[J. Nalson], The Project of Peace (1678), 48; Barclay, Electing Cromwell, 69-70. Some of the details provided by Heath are clearly wrong, not least the assumption that Timbs, who was not yet even a freeman of the town, was then a member of the corporation. On the other hand, it is quite possible that Timbs, Welbore, Ibbot and Kitchingman were all members of a godly faction who did promote Cromwell’s candidature. Timbs is known to have been friendly with Welbore and it was through him that members of the congregation of St Peter’s, Colchester, made contact with Welbore’s son-in-law, John Ellis, in early 1643 to offer him a lectureship in their gift.36Add. 28930, f. 1v. Most intriguingly of all, Timbs had a brother, Thomas Timbs (d. 1634), who had lived in St Ives in the early 1630s and who had almost certainly known Cromwell as a fellow resident. Richard had since inherited from him leases on some property at St Ives.37Barclay, Electing Cromwell, 64-5. That the paths of Cromwell and Timbs had already crossed is entirely plausible.

Timbs was not admitted to the freedom of Cambridge until 1641, at what may have been a comparatively late date. Thereafter, however, he rose to the upper reaches of the corporation with a speed unmatched in this period. In August 1641 he was appointed to the common council. Three years later he was promoted to the rank of alderman, and a year to the day after that, he was nominated to succeed John Lowry* as the mayor of Cambridge for 1645-6.38Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archive, common day bk. 1610-46, pp. 339, 402, 415, 417; Barclay, Electing Cromwell, 165-6. He was moreover elected as mayor a second time a year later, although only after a former mayor, Richard Foxton†, who had resigned as an alderman earlier that year, was ejected from the council meeting.39Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archive, common day bk. 1610-46, pp. 426, 429; Barclay, Electing Cromwell, 167. Possibly Foxton was trying to protest against Timbs’s re-election because he had recently escalated the dispute which the corporation was pursuing against their traditional antagonists, the university authorities. Timbs’s predecessor, John Lowry, had in 1644 refused to take the oath by which the Cambridge mayors promised to protect the privileges of the university.40Barclay, Electing Cromwell, 166. Timbs had followed suit on first taking office, at a time when the matter was being considered by a Commons’ committee.41CJ iv. 241a, 301a. He had now added to the argument by inserting his name as mayor before that of the vice-chancellor, Thomas Hill, in an indenture purchasing land for the town’s workhouse.42C2/ChasI/C44/66; CUL, Univ. Archives, CUR 37.7, no. 103; LJ ix. 181a-182b. To Hill, this was a clear breach of the custom that the vice-chancellor always outranked the local mayor. A week after Timbs’s re-election the corporation agreed that the matter should be referred for adjudication to Harbottle Grimston*, the MP for Colchester, Nathaniel Bacon*, one of the university’s two MPs, and Oliver Cromwell*, the senior MP for the borough. The fourth member of this panel was to be nominated by Lowry, who was the town’s other MP.43Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archive, common day bk. 1610-46, p. 430. Although the recommendations made by this panel are not known, they were evidently considered unsatisfactory by Hill, for by January 1647 he had petitioned the House of Lords.44HMC 6th Rep. 151; LJ viii. 647b. The Cambridge corporation immediately agreed to meet Timbs’s legal expenses against Hill.45Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archive, common day bk. 1610-46, p. 442; Downing Coll. Cambridge, Bowtell MS 6, unfol.: Cambridge borough treasurers’ acct. 1646-7. The outcome of the case was never in doubt, however. The university had a statute, as well as long-established custom, to support their case and in May 1647 the Lords ruled unequivocally in their favour.46LJ viii. 699a; ix. 176a-b, 181b-182a. Later that year, Brian Kitchingman, as his successor as mayor, upheld Timbs’s honour and that of the corporation by again refusing the oath.47Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archive, common day bk. 1647-81, f. 4v. In June 1647, when the king (now in the custody of the army) passed close to Cambridge on his way to Newmarket, Timbs, as mayor, made a gift of £1 to one of the royal pages.48Downing Coll. Cambridge, Bowtell MS 6, unfol.: Cambridge borough treasurers’ acct. 1646-7.

It would appear that as early as March 1643 Timbs was sitting on the Cambridgeshire standing committee, an extraordinary honour given that he was neither a major landowner nor even an alderman.49Cooper, Annals Camb. iii. 340n. He did all he could to assist the parliamentarian war-effort. In 1643 and 1644 he and John Welbore (William’s brother) were among the local tradesmen who provided timber to the army of the Eastern Association.50SP28/223: bills from Blackley, Timbs and Welbore, June 1643-Apr. 1644. At some point he collected £1,000 in tax revenues for Parliament.51Bodl. Rawl. C.948, p. 24. During his time as mayor, he was inevitably preoccupied with the immediate affairs of the town, and indeed throughout he may have been largely concerned with county business only in so far as it affected Cambridge. Towards the end of his second term in office he was included for the first time on the Cambridge assessment commission; he was never included on that for the whole county.52A. and O. Apparently untroubled by the regicide, he willingly served the new republic from 1649 onwards and such devotion was, in time, rewarded with appointments to more local offices. As a member of the county standing commission and a militia commissioner, he was approached in about 1652 by some of the men in the militia company commanded by John Lowry with complaints that Lowry had failed to pay their wages.53E134/16ChasII/Mich22. In May 1652 he among aldermen present when it was agreed that Cromwell should be appointed high steward of the Cambridge corporation.54Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archive, common day bk. 1647-81, f. 38. The early months of the protectorate saw Timbs become a justice of the peace and a commissioner for gaol delivery.55C181/6, pp. 34, 55. It is perhaps not too much to speculate that Cromwell himself may have seen Timbs someone as a willing supporter of the new regime.

In choosing its MP for the 1654 Parliament, the Cambridge corporation may well have calculated that, with their former MP as lord protector, there was little point in bringing in a prominent outsider to represent them. Timbs, who understood their interests, was elected without a contest on 20 June 1654.56Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archive, common day bk. 1647-81, f. 56v. Shortly before taking his seat at Westminster he was named as a commissioner for ejecting scandalous ministers in the Cambridge area.57A. and O. During the course of the new Parliament he was named to just two committees – those on the petition concerning the drainage of the Lincolnshire fens (31 Oct.) and on the bill against the Quakers (30 Dec.).58CJ vii. 380a, 410a. The following year he was paid wages of £14 (at 2s a day) by the Cambridge corporation for his services in this Parliament.59Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archive, common day bk. 1647-81, f. 69; Downing Coll. Cambridge, Bowtell MS 6, unfol.: Cambridge borough treasurers’ acct. 1654-5. Timbs served on the Cambridgeshire commission for securing the peace of the Commonwealth in 1655.60Bodl. Rawl. C.948, p. 24.

Elected again as MP for Cambridge on 14 August 1656, Timbs played a far more active role in this Parliament.61Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archive, common day bk. 1647-81, f. 79. During its first session he was named to a large number of committees on local and private matters, in few, if any, of which he had any obvious personal interest. In so far as any theme emerges, it is his support for a preaching ministry (for many of the bills were for the maintenance of ministers in particular parishes), but these appointments reveal little beyond his regular presence in the House and his colleagues’ willingness to nominate him. Among the more important committees on which he sat were those on the bills against customary oaths (7 Oct. 1656), concerning recusants (1 June 1657), and to ascertain the debts on the public faith (19 June 1657).62CJ vii. 435b, 455a, 462b, 466a, 466b, 468a, 469a, 470b, 472b, 484a, 485b, 488b, 503b, 515b, 528b, 529b, 539a, 543b, 545a, 545b, 563a; Burton’s Diary, i. 202. He attended at least one meeting of the committee of trade (to which he had not been formally named), when the subject under discussion was the dispute between the clothworkers and the Merchant Adventurers.63Burton’s Diary, i. 175. He was also present at the committee meeting on 14 January 1657 at which the Stationers’ Company, led by Humphrey Robinson, complained about the quality of the bibles being produced by the official printer to the protector, Henry Hills. Much to Robinson’s annoyance, Timbs remarked that a Jesuit could hardly do worse than complain about the standard of English bibles. When Robinson protested, the committee reprimanded him rather than Timbs.64Burton’s Diary, i. 348.

It was during late April and early May 1657 that Timbs was most prominent in proceedings. On 29 April the votes on the bill for the registration of marriages were conducted amidst some confusion. The proposed bill was rejected and eventually it was agreed that the 1653 Act be continued. Lord Broghill (Roger Boyle*) then moved that all marriages since Michaelmas 1653 which did not conform to this measure should retrospectively be declared void. When the Speaker, Sir Thomas Widdrington*, declared that the vote by voices had gone in favour of those opposed to Broghill’s motion, Timbs objected and called for a full-scale division. He quickly backed down, presumably because the other supporters of the clause made clear their view that a division would be unwise.65Burton’s Diary, ii. 74. The following day he again intervened in debate. After it had been agreed that there was no need to confirm the legislation passed between 1642 and 1653 as it was already valid, John Disbrowe* moved the proviso that this should only apply to those measures which did not conflict with the Humble Petition and Advice. During the ensuing debate Timbs took issue with Edmund Fowell’s speech which argued that the Humble Petition conflicted with the 1649 Act abolishing the kingly office.66Burton’s Diary, ii. 93. Five days later Timbs tried the same trick he had attempted on 29 April, this time with greater success. An attempt was made by the ‘courtiers’ to adjourn the House shortly after the start of business, so as to prevent the House sitting while a reply was expected from Cromwell regarding the Humble Petition. This tactic almost succeeded when Speaker Widdrington declared that the majority of voices wanted an adjournment. The division on which Timbs then insisted instead revealed a majority against.67Burton’s Diary, ii. 107. Four days before the end of this first session Timbs sought permission to go into the country; in an unusual move, this permission was refused.68CJ vii. 570a. Timbs was present when this Parliament met again briefly in early 1658 and was included on two committees, that on the maintenance of ministers (added 23 Jan.) and that on the bill to unite the parishes of Huntingdon (26 Jan.).69CJ vii. 581b, 588a.

Timbs and Lowry were together elected as the MPs for Cambridge on 30 December 1658, but nothing is known of Timbs’s activity in this, his final Parliament.70Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archive, common day bk. 1647-81, f. 109v. By the end of 1660 he had been removed from all his local offices except as a Cambridge alderman. He lost that in July 1662 when he refused to take the oath repudiating the Solemn League and Covenant.71Bodl. Rawl. C.948, pp. 30-4; W.H. Palmer, ‘The reformation of the corp. of Cambridge July 1662’, Procs. Camb. Antiq. Soc. xvii. 83; Cambs. RO, Camb. corp. archive, common day bk. 1647-81, f. 154. In 1664, when he was questioned by the exchequer investigation into the allegations that Lowry had embezzled the wages of his militia troops in 1652, Timbs confirmed that a complaint had been made to him, but claimed that he could not remember all the details.72E134/16ChasII/Mich22.

Timbs died late in 1674 and was buried at Holy Sepulchre, Cambridge on 29 December.73Holy Sepulchre, Cambridge par. reg. In his will he left several properties in Cambridge, 80 acres of arable lands in the Backs and bequests totalling £281. The main beneficiaries were his sister, Mary Maxey, and her son, John Maxey.74Cambs. RO, AE will: R. Timbs, 1675. Several distant relatives survived to perpetuate the Timbs name, but none matched Timbs’s local eminence and none was elected to Parliament.