GREY, Henry, 1st earl of Stamford (1600-73), of Bradgate House, Groby, Leics.

The Greys of Groby and Bradgate were a cadet branch of the Greys, earls of Kent; and thus Grey was a distant relation of Henry, Lord Grey of Ruthin*.50Nichols, Leics. iv. 245; Richards, ‘The Greys of Bradgate’, 33. They had acquired the manor of Groby – near Leicester – of which Bradgate was a parcel, by marriage in 1445.51Nichols, Leics. iii. 661; iv. 633; PROB11/124, f. 340v. The family had figured prominently in the Wars of the Roses; had prospered under the early Tudors; and had gained renown and notoriety in the person of the zealously Protestant Edwardian statesman, Henry Grey†, 1st duke of Suffolk. It had fallen from power spectacularly in 1553-4, following the swift collapse of the reign of Suffolk’s daughter, Lady Jane Grey, and Suffolk’s own (fatal) involvement in Wyatt’s rebellion. Most of the Greys’ lands and all of their titles had been forfeited to the crown, and they had been eclipsed in Leicestershire by their rivals, the Hastings of Ashby-de-la-Zouch. The duke’s younger brother had become head of the family and, in 1559, had been granted the royal manor of Pyrgo, Essex.52Nichols, Leics. iii. 662-4, 670-1, 673-4; Cogswell, Home Divisions, 78; Richards, ‘The Greys of Bradgate’, 33-4. His heir, Grey’s grandfather, had represented Essex in the Parliament of 1589, but in the 1590s he had re-established the family’s main residence at Bradgate, and at the beginning of James I’s reign he had been created Baron Grey of Groby.53Nichols, Leics. iii. 675; HP Commons 1558-1603, ‘Sir Henry Grey’; Cogswell, Home Divisions, 78-9. Grey’s father, who sat for Grampound in 1601, died in 1611 and Grey’s wardship was granted to his mother.54WARD9/162, f. 183; HP Commons 1558-1603, ‘Sir John Grey’. Grey succeeded his grandfather in 1614 and sold Pyrgo seven years later to Sir Thomas Cheke*.55C142/346/170; VCH Essex vii. 16. In 1620, Grey acquired through marriage the castle, borough and manor of Stamford, from which he took the title of the earldom conferred on him in 1628.56Nichols, Leics. iii. 676.

Grey was a leading figure in Leicestershire’s government under Charles I, having been appointed a deputy lieutenant for the county in 1625 by Henry Hastings, 5th earl of Huntingdon, who was keen to avoid a resurgence of the old feud between their two families.57Cogswell, Home Divisions, 28; Oxford DNB, ‘Henry Grey, 1st earl of Stamford’. Grey worked closely with Huntingdon to suppress the perceived threat of Catholic insurgency in the county and in supporting local resistance to the Forced Loan and the crown’s disafforestation schemes.58Leicester Bor. Recs. iv. 244; Cogswell, Home Divisions, 53, 162; Cust, Forced Loan, 102, 113. His efforts from the late 1620s to enclose and improve parts of his estate – notably Wildmore Fen – brought him into legal dispute with Robert Bertie, 1st earl of Lindsey, John Broxolme* and other Lincolnshire gentlemen.59E214/723; E134/10&11Chas1/Hil27; E134/11Chas1/Mich39; LJ iv. 590a; Oxford DNB, ‘Henry Grey, 1st earl of Stamford’. Similarly, his attempt to monopolise the brewery trade in Leicester, for which he enlisted royal support, drew protests from the corporation.60Leicester Bor. Recs. iv. 250, 286-7; CSP Dom. 1631-3, p. 559; HMC Cowper, ii. 111; Cogswell, Home Divisions, 260; Oxford DNB, ‘Henry Grey, 1st earl of Stamford’.

Following his elevation as earl of Stamford in 1628, Grey began to chafe under Huntingdon’s authority, and by the mid-1630s he was angling to be made joint lord lieutenant of the county. A royal visit to Bradgate in 1634 reflected his growing status at court but did not bring him the preferment he sought. When Huntingdon’s son Henry was made joint lord lieutenant in 1638, Stamford regarded it as a personal affront.61HMC Cowper, ii. 217; Cogswell, Home Divisions, 192, 260; Richards, ‘The Greys of Bradgate’, 35; Oxford DNB, ‘Henry Grey, 1st earl of Stamford’. In 1639, having joined the royal army at Berwick, he underlined his growing disenchantment with the personal rule by praising the Scottish Presbyterian minister Alexander Henderson and his colleagues as ‘holy and blessed men, of admirable, transcendent and seraphical learning’.62CSP Dom. 1639, pp. 330, 331; Russell, Fall of British Monarchies, 84; Richards, ‘The Greys of Bradgate’, 36.

In the elections to the Short Parliament early in 1640, Stamford joined Sir Arthur Hesilrige* to mobilise Leicestershire’s anti-court interest – with the result that the county rejected Huntingdon’s nominees in favour of Hesilrige and Henry, Lord Grey of Ruthin.63Supra, ‘Leicestershire’; Cogswell, Home Divisions, 260-4. In the elections to the Long Parliament that autumn, Stamford successfully challenged Huntingdon’s long-established electoral interest at Leicester by securing the return of his eldest son Thomas Lord Grey of Groby for one of the borough places.64Supra, ‘Leicester’; Cogswell, Home Divisions, 270-2. In the period between the opening of the Long Parliament and the outbreak of civil war, Stamford consistently aligned in the Lords with the leaders of the parliamentary opposition to the king.65LJ iv. 645a, b; Harl. 6424, f. 58v; PJ i. 168, 195, 284; Russell, Fall of British Monarchies, 294, 440, 467; Adamson, Noble Revolt, 258, 285, 291. He clearly approved of the Militia Ordinance of March 1642 by which he displaced Huntingdon and Hastings as lord lieutenant of Leicester.66LJ iv. 587b, 589a, 599a, 625b; PJ i. 288, 422. The following month, he was a member of the parliamentary delegation that petitioned the king at York against a proposed royal visit to Ireland and that assisted Sir John Hotham* in consolidating parliamentary authority at Hull.67LJ iv. 722a; v. 9a, 27b, 88a; PJ ii. 214, 234, 236, 282; HMC 5th Rep. 182. That summer, Stamford headed Leicestershire’s nascent parliamentarian interest as it struggled for control of the county’s military resources – for which the king branded him a traitor. In August, Stamford suffered the indignity of having Bradgate House sacked and partially demolished by the royalists.68LJ v. 142b, 191b-192a, 202b-203a, 232b-233a; PJ iii. 71, 95, 141, 143, 145, 156, 159, 166, 168, 180, 197, 211; Leicester Bor. Recs. iv. 312; Nichols, Leics. iii. app. iv. 19, 22-4, 25, 30; Cogswell, Home Divisions, 283-8; Richards, ‘The Greys of Bradgate’, 37, 38-9; Oxford DNB, ‘Henry Grey, 1st earl of Stamford’.

Stamford’s humiliation in August 1642 was occasioned, in part, by his preference for seeking honour and command under Robert Devereux, 3rd earl of Essex rather than attending to his duties as lord lieutenant of Leicestershire. Stamford spent late July and early August in London, receiving a commission as a colonel of foot in Parliament’s main field army under Essex. His lieutenant colonel was Edward Massie* and his regimental chaplain was the godly divine John Sedgwick.69SP28/143, pt. 6, ff. 6v, 14; CSP Dom. 1641-3, p. 366; Oxford DNB, ‘Henry Grey, 1st earl of Stamford’; ‘John Sedgwick’. Late in September, Essex sent Stamford and his regiment to occupy Hereford – ‘that the power of Wales might not fall in upon Gloucestershire and upon the river of Severn’ – and hence they were not present at the battle of Edgehill.70LJ v. 415b, 440b, 444a, 453a; Articles of Agreement between his Excellency Prince Maurice and the Earle of Stamford (1643), 3 (E.67.27); Eight Speeches Spoken in Guild-Hall (1642), sig. A3 (E.124.32); Richards, ‘The Greys of Bradgate’, 39. Although Stamford was appointed parliamentary general (under Essex) of Wales and of Herefordshire and the adjoining counties, he was forced to withdraw his troops to Gloucester in December, and from there he proceeded to Bristol and then to Exeter, where he assumed command of Parliament’s forces in Devon.71Supra, ‘Committee of the West’; LJ v. 488a, 511a, 575b; Articles of Agreement, 3; Webb, Memorials i. 205-7; Oxford DNB, ‘Henry Grey, 1st earl of Stamford’.

Stamford blamed his defeat by the royalist commander Sir Ralph Hopton* early in 1643 on his subordinates – a favourite excuse of his that would not bear much repeating.72Harl. 164, f. 289. Pursuing Hopton into Cornwall that spring, Stamford’s 5,500 strong army was defeated by a royalist force half its size at Stratton on 16 May 1643. This time, Stamford blamed the defeat upon his major-general, who had defected on the battlefield. However, not everyone at Westminster accepted the earl’s attempt ‘to take off from himself the miscarriage of the business’. Sir Edward Hyde* claimed that Stamford had ‘stood at a safe distance all the time of the battle’ and had beaten a hasty retreat ‘as soon as he saw the day lost, and some said sooner’.73Mercurius Aulicus no. 23 (4-10 June 1643), 297-8 (E.55.14); Articles of Agreement, 4-5; Clarendon, Hist. iii. 71; Oxford DNB, ‘Henry Grey, 1st earl of Stamford’. Besieged in Exeter by Prince Maurice, he wrote to the king on 4 August pleading his loyalty and that Charles dismiss his ‘subtle, damnable and Jesuitical’ counsellors and be guided instead by Parliament.74Clarendon SP ii. 150-1. On 5 September, he was given terms by Maurice, and, ‘full of virtue and honour, [he] crept out of Exeter after he had begged his life’. The fifth article of surrender – that the king should pardon Stamford – ‘was much disgusted by many of the two Houses and there was discourse of calling the earl of Stamford in question ... and for his whole conduct in this service’, but in the event he escaped investigation.75Mercurius Aulicus no. 36 (3-9 Sept. 1643), 497 (E.67.25); Rushworth, Hist. Collns. v. 272-4. Lampooned in the press as ‘this cubit and an half of commander’, his military career was now over.76J. Cleveland, Character of a London Diurnall (1645), 4 (E.268.6); Webb, Memorials i. 215-16; Oxford DNB, ‘Henry Grey, 1st earl of Stamford’. But his political career would undergo a modest revival following his appointment that September to the Committee of Safety*; although his attempt to pin some of the blame for the defeat at Stratton upon the influential Commons-man Anthony Nicoll backfired spectacularly when Nicoll presented counter-charges of treachery and incompetence against his accuser.77Infra, ‘Anthony Nicoll’; LJ vi. 229b; Mercurius Aulicus no. 44 (29 Oct.-4 Nov. 1643), 624-5 (E.75.37); Oxford DNB, ‘Henry Grey, 1st earl of Stamford’. Indeed, Stamford narrowly avoided having impeachment proceedings begun against him by the Commons in 1644 for his role in the ‘loss of the west’.78CJ iii. 529; Add. 31116, pp. 275, 288, 302; Harl. 166, f. 73v.

During the first half of 1644, Stamford figured prominently in the efforts of Essex and his supporters at Westminster to frustrate the pro-Scots party – and particularly the establishment of the Committee of Both Kingdoms* – reportedly quarrelling violently with William Fiennes, 1st Viscount Saye and Sele in the process.79Infra, ‘Committee of Both Kingdoms’; LJ vi. 423a, 527a, 528a, 528b, 535a, 542a, 554a, 559a, 564a, 566a, 574b, 610b; Add. 31116, p. 294; CSP Dom. 1644, pp. 368-9; Mercurius Aulicus no. 4 (21-7 Jan. 1644), 793 (E.32.17). In August 1644, the Commons concurred with the Lords in voting that Stamford receive £1,000 from the fine imposed upon the royalist peer Charles, Lord Stanhope of Harrington. But no order was passed giving legislative force to this resolution.80LJ vi. 346a; CJ iii. 606b. The war-party dominated Committee for the Revenue* apparently ignored the Lords’ recommendation to it that same month that Stamford be appointed keeper of various royal houses and parks by way of compensation for his arrears of pay and war-damage to his estate.81LJ vi. 687b.

Despite his apparent misgivings about the establishment of a clericalist Presbyterian church and his occasional readiness to put self-interest before political principle, Stamford tended to line up behind Essex, Manchester and the Presbyterian interest from late 1644 in their opposition to the New Model army and their support for the Scots.82LJ vii. 39a, 194a, 258a, 277b; viii. 250b, 322a; J. Lilburne, The Free-mans Freedom Vindicated (1646), 4 (E.341.12); J. Adamson, ‘The English nobility and the projected settlement of 1647’, HJ xxx (1987), 569; ‘The Peerage in Politics 1645-9’ (Cambridge Univ. PhD thesis, 1986), 149, 153, 157, 290, 292, 293, 295. The assault that he and his servants committed against Sir Arthur Hesilrige in 1645 seems to have reflected this bias, for it arose from an altercation between the two men in which the earl had repeated the ‘many aspersions’ that he had cast upon the Leicestershire county committee ‘at the House of Commons door and other places’. The committee was dominated by Hesilrige and other men of Independent sympathies. This time the Commons went ahead with impeachment proceedings, but the case against Stamford foundered in the Lords.83CJ iv. 188a; LJ vii. 462, 503, 614a, 639; Add. 31116, pp. 421, 422, 433-4; Harl. 166, ff. 212r-v; A Narration of the Siege and Taking of the Town of Leicester (1645), 8-9 (E.289.6). He was fêted by the Presbyterian interest at Newcastle-upon-Tyne in May 1647, and early in 1648 he opposed the vote of no addresses.84Perfect Occurrences no. 21 (21-28 May 1647), 135 (E.390.7); Adamson, ‘The Peerage in Politics’, 300, 301. But he managed to rise above party politics during the second civil war, recommending (among others) Hesilrige and the future regicide Thomas Waite* as his deputy lieutenants for Leicestershire.85LJ x. 356b. He withdrew from the Lords immediately after Pride’s Purge, and although he subscribed the Engagement in 1650, he was very far from sharing the enthusiasm of Grey of Groby either for the regicide or the Commonwealth.86LJ x. 624b; HMC De L’Isle and Dudley, vi. 474, 598; Richards, ‘The Greys of Bradgate’, 46.

Stamford was one of seven candidates who stood for Leicestershire in the elections to the first protectoral Parliament in the summer of 1654. One observer discerned two parties on election day, with Stamford, Grey of Groby, Thomas Beaumont* and Thomas Pochin* constituting the dominant interest. In the event, the voters returned Stamford in second place behind Thomas Beaumont, with Grey of Groby in third place and Pochin in fourth.87Supra, ‘Leicestershire’; The Faithful Scout no. 192 (11-18 Aug. 1654), 1519 (E.233.5). On 21 August, the supporters of the defeated candidate, Francis Hacker*, petitioned the council, alleging not only that Beaumont and Stamford had been unduly elected, but also that they were disqualified according to the Instrument of Government for having ‘assisted the late king’s party’ and being ‘not of a good conversation’. No evidence was produced to support any of these allegations.88SP18/74/100, ff. 214-15, 217; CSP Dom. 1654, p. 316. Stamford and Groby were not included on the list of Members approved by the council early in September.89Severall Procs. of State Affaires no. 258 (31 Aug.-7 Sept. 1654), 4093 (E.233.22). Shortly afterwards, however, the French ambassador reported that the earl ‘and another [Member] were not allowed to take their place, and they declared that if their country had done them the honour of choosing them, they could not be prevented from serving...and the same evening they had their tickets [to sit in Parliament]’.90PRO31/3/96, ff. 365v-366. On 20 September, the committee for privileges approved the returns for Leicestershire.91Severall Procs. of Parl. no. 260 (14-21 Sept. 1654), 4128 (E.233.5).

Stamford was named first to a committee on 25 September 1654 to review the provisions of the ordinance for ejecting scandalous ministers.92CJ vii. 370a. And four days later (29 September), he was nominated to the committee for Scottish affairs.93CJ vii. 371b. On 5 October, he was added to the committee for privileges. His last appointment, on 3 November, was to a committee to consider the petition of William Lord Craven, some of whose estate had been purchased by Grey of Groby.94CJ vii. 373b, 381a; LJ xi. 52a. On 7 November, the corporation of Leicester wrote to the earl, requesting that he represent their interests in the House, as their own MPs had been prevented from sitting for their refusal to take the oath recognising the lord protector.95Leics. RO, BR II/18/27, f. 761.

Removed from the Leicestershire bench in March 1658, Stamford complained to Bulstrode Whitelocke* early in 1659 of ‘mean men being put into the commission [of peace], who insult over their betters’.96C231/6, p. 387; Whitelocke, Diary, 507. In August, he joined the Presbyterian-royalist uprising led by his son-in-law, (Sir) George Boothe*, and, declaring for the king, ‘gathered together two or 300 persons in arms’. At the approach of government troops, his scratch force dispersed and he himself was arrested and committed on a charge of high treason.97Ludlow, Mems. ii. 108; Clarke Pprs. iv. 44-5, 50; CSP Dom. 1659-60, pp. 113, 120, 125, 137, 164, 166; HMC 7th Rep. 114. In November, he was released by order of the committee of safety, which set his bail at £10,000.98Bodl. Rawl. A.259, p. 141.

In March 1660, Stamford was restored to the Leicestershire bench and appointed custos rotulorum.99Perfect List of...Justices of the Peace, 27. His influence probably helped ensure that Grey of Groby’s corpse was not disinterred and gibbeted, as were those of many other regicides, and that his estate was not exempted from the Act of Oblivion. Plagued by ill health, Stamford attended the House of Lords only fitfully and contributed little to the politics of the restoration period.100HP Lords 1660-1832, ‘Henry Grey’. Having conveyed Wildmore Fen and the manor of Armtree to Charles II in 1663 in order to obtain royal assistance for their improvement, he had this arrangement terminated in 1666 on the grounds that it was profiting neither party.101SP29/159/48, f. 56; CSP Dom. 1660-70, p. 628; 1663-4, pp. 82, 155, 509; 1665-6, pp. 448, 449.

Stamford died, intestate, on 21 Aug. 1673 and was buried at Bradgate.102CP. His son Anchitel sat for Derby and his son John for Leicester and Staffordshire in many of the Parliaments between 1660 and 1695.103HP Commons 1660-1690, ‘Grey, Hon. Anchitell’; ‘Grey, Hon. John’. Stamford was succeeded in the earldom by his grandson, who became one of Queen Anne’s privy councillors.104Oxford DNB, ‘Thomas Grey, 2nd earl of Stamford’.