CORYTON, William (1579-1651), of West Newton Ferrers, St Mellion, Cornw.

The Corytons had been settled at West Newton since the early fourteenth century, and by the early Stuart period they were one of the most influential gentry families in eastern Cornwall, and one of the richest, owning nine manors amounting to perhaps 9,000 acres of land in the county. Little is known of William Coryton’s early life, and he remained fairly obscure until his early forties, when he was appointed vice-warden of the Stannaries by William Herbert, 3rd earl of Pembroke. Thereafter he was Pembroke’s main agent in the south-west, and also entered Parliament, as knight of the shire and MP for Liskeard from 1624. He was heavily involved in the opposition to George Villiers, 1st duke of Buckingham, in the mid-1620s, working closely with Sir John Eliot†. When Pembroke made his peace with Buckingham in 1626, Coryton was quickly dropped, but he continued to be a leading figure in the Eliot circle, and was arrested briefly in 1627-8 for refusing the Forced Loan. In 1628 he was again returned as knight of the shire, with popular acclaim, and became an even more pronounced critic of the government. He was again arrested when Parliament was dissolved in March 1629, and was sent with Eliot to the Tower of London. Unlike Eliot (who died, unrepentant, in 1632), Coryton soon lost stomach for the fight, and petitioned for release. He was freed in June 1629, and again courted Pembroke, who reinstated him as vice-warden at the end of the year. This change of allegiance provoked outrage from his former allies in Cornwall and beyond, who compared him unfavourably with the ‘martyred’ Eliot.23HP Commons 1604-1629.

During the 1630s, Coryton worked closely with Philip Herbert, 4th earl of Pembroke (who had succeeded to the title, and to the wardenship of the Stannaries, in 1630). The new earl confirmed Coryton’s local offices in December 1630, and in December 1634 also made him under-steward of the duchy.24Cornw. RO, CY/7242-3. Coryton’s activities as vice-warden of the Stannaries were particularly controversial. In July 1635 there was a complaint to the king from one Ralph Preston that he had been wrongfully arrested by Coryton, acting in Pembroke’s name.25CSP Dom. 1635, p. 308. In March 1636 the privy council considered another complaint, from Thomas Adams of Calstock in Cornwall, ‘of hard measure done him by William Coryton, vice-warden of the Stannaries’.26CSP Dom. 1635-6, p. 290; PC2/46, p. 29. There followed another case in June 1637, in which Coryton was accused of false imprisonment by John Connock, but failed to appear before the king’s bench at the specified time and was fined and imprisoned for contempt. Pembroke intervened, and the officers of the king’s bench were hauled before Charles I, who sought to calm matters by promising to hear the case himself in the next legal term. It was generally thought that Charles favoured Pembroke and ‘excuses the chamberlain’, as a result of which ‘some of the judges were hot’.27Strafforde Letters ii. 85-6; CSP Dom. 1637, p. 244. Coryton, who had been released in order to justify himself before the king, certainly did not suffer from his run-in with the legal establishment, and in December 1637 he was appointed as gentleman of the privy chamber extraordinary.28Cornw. RO, CY/7244; LC5/134, p. 218. Although Coryton refused to give money towards the first bishops’ war in 1639, in June 1640 he was active in recruiting soldiers in Cornwall for the more unpopular second war, working with Pembroke as lord lieutenant of the county and with Sir Thomas Jermyn*, Pembroke’s deputy, despite his irritation that the main burden had fallen on him as most of his fellow deputy lieutenants were unwilling to act.29PC2/50, p. 300; PC2/51, p. 79; CSP Dom. 1640, pp. 372-3.

Coryton’s apostasy made him a marked man. His notoriety may have influenced his failure to secure a seat for the Short Parliament, as the return from the borough of Grampound included three Members, of whom only John Trevannion* was deemed ‘well returned’ by the Commons.30CJ ii. 7a. It was later claimed that he was also returned for Callington and given a blank indenture to complete at his leisure, but as he served as mayor for the same borough he had ‘declined the place and put another man’s name into the said blank indenture’. Parliament was, however, apparently in ignorance of this second irregularity.31Procs. LP v. 313. Coryton was elected without any challenge for Launceston in the elections for the Long Parliament, but he was named to only one committee and made only one brief speech before he was again under attack.32CJ ii. 28b; D’Ewes (N), 535. This time it was not his own election that was investigated, but his role, as mayor of Bossiney, in attempting to fix the election of others. On 14 November 1640 John Maynard reported from the committee of privileges that blank indentures had been sent from Bossiney, and Coryton was ordered to withdraw, along with two of the candidates, Sir Richard Buller* and Sir Charles Herbert*. Ominously, it was also ordered that Coryton’s ‘undue proceedings … as vice-warden of the Stannaries, contrary to the Petition of Right’ would be investigated.33CJ ii. 29a-b. A committee was established to look into both matters, and witnesses were called, but it was soon clear that the real issue at stake was not the election but Coryton’s abuse of power in the Stannaries.34CJ ii. 47a; CSP Dom. 1640-1, p. 262. In February 1641 the Commons resolved that the committee would be revived, but ‘as to the bill of the Stannaries only’.35CJ ii. 83b. The Bossiney election, after ‘a new dispute’ in the Commons’ chamber, was declared void, and new writs sent out – with John Pym moving that ‘Mr Coryton the mayor of Bossiney might have no hand in this new election’.36D’Ewes (N), 362. In the meantime, Coryton was dealt with severely, with Sir Guy Palmes moving on 15 February that he ‘might not sit in the House’, and on 10 March, when Coryton asked for leave to go into the country, ‘the House bade him go without licence for he was as yet no member of this House’.37D’Ewes (N), 362n, 464n. On 24 June Coryton begged ‘to be again restored to the favour of the House’, but was slapped down, as ‘his former offence was accounted to be so extreme’.38Procs. LP v. 313. It was only on 13 August that it was formally resolved that he should not be admitted as an MP, even though his own election was not in question.39CJ ii. 261b.

There is little doubt that Coryton’s treatment by Parliament contributed to his decision to side with the royalists by the beginning of 1642, and the presence of his signature on the Cornish petition against ceremonies, evil counsel and regulation of the Stannaries, was probably a forgery.40Coate, Cornw. 29; The Humble Petition of the Knights, Justices of the Peace, Gentlemen, Ministers… of Cornwall (1642), passim (E.143.19). At the end of June 1642 Coryton was appointed as a commissioner of array in Cornwall, and he mobilised his regiment of the trained bands.41Northants RO, FH133, unfol.; Newman, Royalist Officers, 87. In the autumn of 1642 he attended the royalist quarter sessions at Lostwithiel, and authorised the raising of the posse comitatus, but he was counted among the moderates who still hoped that conflict could be averted. With his old colleague from the Eliot group, Ambrose Manaton*, Coryton, ‘being willing to mediate a right understanding and to prevent the shedding of blood’, met the parliamentarian leaders, Sir Richard Buller* and Sir Alexander Carew*, at Launceston, but no terms could be agreed.42Bellum Civile, 21. In the early months of 1643, Coryton was among the royalist leaders entertained by the mayor of Bodmin, and he was involved in raising soldiers for the new offensive into Devon.43Cornw. RO, B/BOD/285; B/LAUS/179/2/3. After the victory at Stratton, Coryton was accused of being one of the more unscrupulous royalist commissioners in Cornwall. According to Joseph Jane*, ‘there were many public meetings and very disorderly, and… the resolutions were wholly by the Lord Mohun [Warwick Mohun, 2nd Baron], the sheriff, Sir Francis Bassett, [Sir Piers] Edgcumbe*, Coryton, and that privately, whatever was talked in public, others generally absent from meetings’, and during this period ‘delinquents’ estates were seized but without commissions other than public agreement, and the means uncertainly disposed of’.44Bodl. Clarendon 26, f. 163v. Despite these allegations, Coryton was clearly still an important figure in the royalist administration in August 1644, when he was one of the Cornish commissioners at Liskeard who were busy planning an attack on the parliamentarian stronghold at Saltash.45Add. 15750, f. 21. In December 1645 Coryton was regranted the stewardship of various duchy lands within the manor of West Looe and the borough of East Looe by the prince of Wales.46Cornw. RO, CY/7245.

The advance of Sir Thomas Fairfax* into the south-west in the spring of 1646 marked the end of royalist hopes, and Coryton, whose regiment was stationed at Milbrook in eastern Cornwall, was prepared to negotiate. In February his daughter Philippa, ‘in disguise’, attended the parliamentarian headquarters at Plymouth with letters from Coryton, Piers Edgcumbe and other officers, promising to surrender without a fight when Fairfax entered Cornwall. The Independent minister (and Cornishman) Hugh Peter then visited Mount Edgcumbe, and the final deal was struck when Fairfax reached Bodmin on 4 March.47Coate, Cornw. 207-9; CCC 1678. At the end of the month Fairfax’s letter recommending Coryton and the others ‘as person whose interests and endeavours have been very useful in reducing of the west’ was read in the Commons.48CJ iv. 495a. There was a period of anxious activity as Coryton tried to secure his estates against the consequences of Parliament’s victory. In October 1646 he settled his principal manors on his son, John, as part of the latter’s marriage to Elizabeth Yonge (a bride who brought with her a portion of £3,410).49Cornw. RO, CY/1559. Thus, when Coryton petitioned to compound for delinquency in March 1647, he could claim not only that he and his daughter had ‘assisted in the reducing of Cornwall’, but also that all his estates had already been transferred to his eldest son, John.50CCC 1678 In the event, Coryton was treated leniently. On 2 April the Committee for Advance of Money ordered that Coryton and ‘the officers of Mount Edgcumbe’ were to have their assessments respited until the state decided their fate.51CCAM 423. On 5 April Coryton’s fine was set at a tenth, or £1,244, but when his daughter pointed out that he only had a life interest in the estate, and that he was 67 years old, the fine was reduced to £828.52CCC 1678. His case was not decided until November 1647, when he was admitted to compound on payment of the fine, and the fine was assigned to his daughter in compensation for sums seized from her by the Committee of the West. Coryton’s pardon was passed by the Commons in December 1647 and the Lords in January 1648.53CJ 353a-b, 381b; LJ ix. 633a.

As the composition process shows, Coryton was not without friends in Parliament. Apart from Fairfax and Peter, he could still call on long-standing associates in Cornwall, like Francis Buller*, the eldest son of Sir Richard. Coryton had acted as trustee on Buller’s marriage in the early 1630s, and also shared with Buller and Sir William Wray* a financial obligation towards the infant son of Thomas Wise*, and in September 1642, perhaps mindful of the hostilities that had already broken out in Cornwall, Buller wrote to Coryton begging his ‘help and assistance to compose those affairs which will expend time and money and beget a prejudice amongst us’.54Antony House, Carew-Pole BS/14/3; Cornw. RO, CY/6829. In May 1648 Coryton was on good terms with Buller, writing to him from Cornwall that ‘all at Shillingham and Golden are well’ and sending news of ‘your son’s well-being in France’, as well as praying that God might show ‘courage and confidence in the performance of righteous duties for His glory and the public good and give you wisdom and moderation’.55Buller Pprs. 100-1. It is uncertain whether Buller was able to help Coryton at this time, but the two remained friends at least until October 1650, when Coryton wrote to arrange security for his good behaviour.56Antony House, Carew-Pole BO/21/24. This last measure was necessary for Coryton’s survival under the new commonwealth regime. His sequestration had been finally discharged on 12 July 1650, but there were suspicions that he had concealed some of his lands, and they were once again confiscated in November – to be released, finally, on Hugh Peter’s intervention a few weeks later.57Cornw. RO, CY/7237; Coate, Cornw. 226; CCC 1678-9. Despite this, rumours of Coryton’s disloyalty still circulated. In the spring of 1651 it was alleged that he was one of those ‘people less active, but which will immediately repair to a body’ if a royalist rising occurred in the west country.58HMC Portland, i. 584. It seems unlikely that Coryton, now aged over 70, was an active conspirator; indeed, he may have already been on his deathbed. He died, intestate, at the end of April 1651.59Cornw. RO, CY/7049; PCC Admins. (Index Lib. lxviii), 84. He was succeeded by his son, John Coryton†, who was a Cornish MP from 1660, and was created a baronet in February 1662.