GOODWIN, Robert (c. 1601-81), of Horne, Surr. and East Grinstead, Suss.

Goodwin’s family had lived on the Surrey/Sussex border since the middle ages, and had represented East Grinstead in Parliament since 1529. Robert Goodwin owed his return to Parliament for the same borough in 1626 and 1628 to the family’s possession of four burgages in the town (which came into his own possession on the death of his father in 1627).42C142/568/122. Goodwin stood for re-election for the Short Parliament in March 1640, but was opposed by John White I*, secretary to the borough’s principal patron, the 4th earl of Dorset. In these elections Goodwin also stood at Reigate, where he held a moiety of the manor with his cousin Sir William Monson*. The Reigate election was also disputed, and after a report to the Commons on 20 April the matter was referred to a committee but remained unresolved.43CJ ii. 7a. At East Grinstead, Goodwin was returned with a slim majority, but White petitioned against the decision, citing the irregular nature of the contest and intimidation of voters by the bailiff of the borough.44T.W. Horsfield, Suss. (2 vols. Lewes, 1835) ii. appx. 40; W.H. Hills, Hist. of East Grinstead (1906), 34. It was not until 24 April that the Commons upheld Goodwin’s election for East Grinstead, and there is no evidence that he took his seat in the few days of the session that remained.45CJ ii. 10b.

Opposing the king, 1640-2

Goodwin was re-elected for East Grinstead in October 1640 but the return was again challenged, this time by another nominee of the earl of Dorset, Sir William Colepeper of Wakehurst. On 16 November the rival candidates were ordered not to sit, and after an investigation Goodwin was declared elected on 24 December.46CJ ii. 30a, 58a; D’Ewes (N), 188. As his fellow MPs included his brother, John, and the unrelated Arthur Goodwin, identifying Robert Goodwin in the Journals is not straightforward. It seems that during the first year of the Long Parliament he was the least prominent of the three. He became a regular member of the House only in the spring of 1641. His first recorded appearance was on 8 February, when he moved that the London petition against episcopacy should be committed.47D’Ewes (N), 338. He was added to committees for the godly Emmanuel College Cambridge (2 Mar.) and for a case involving fen drainage (9 Mar.), and he was subsequently appointed to the committees on bills for tonnage and poundage (18 Mar.) and the new subsidy (30 Apr.).48CJ ii. 95a, 99b, 107a, 130b. On 1 April he returned to religious matters when he was named to the committee on a bill to prevent bishops and clergy from holding secular office.49CJ ii. 115a. Goodwin took the Protestation on 3 May, and in the weeks that followed he was named to further religious committees, including those on bills to divide parishes in Lancashire and Westminster (24, 25 May) and to confirm the statutes of Emmanuel College (2 July).50CJ ii. 155a, 156a, 197a. He was also named to a smattering of politically sensitive committees, such as those to prepare heads for the disbandment of the English army (25 June), to prosecute the former secretary of state, Sir Francis Windebanke* (10 July) and to secure arrears owed to Scotland (5 Aug.).51CJ ii. 188b, 205b, 239a. On 9 September he was appointed to the Recess Committee alongside John Goodwyn and Arthur Goodwin.52CJ ii. 288b.

It was only when Parliament resumed in October 1641 that Goodwin emerged as a leading opponent of the crown. On 28 October he was named to a committee to prepare heads for a petition to the king against his evil counsellors, alongside such heavyweights as John Pym, Denzil Holles, Sir Walter Erle and John Glynne.53CJ ii. 297b. In the debate that followed, Goodwin moved that unless Parliament took ‘a course to remove such as now remained and to prevent others from coming in hereafter, all we had done this Parliament would come to nothing and we should never be free from danger’. He was seconded, ‘with great violence’, by William Strode I.54D’Ewes (C), 44. The next day Goodwin joined Sir Thomas Barrington, Sir John Clotworthy, Sir Arthur Hesilrige and Oliver Cromwell on a committee to prepare heads for a joint conference against the creation of five new bishops.55CJ ii. 298b. On 29 November Goodwin showed his frustration with moves to complicate the tonnage and poundage bill by moving that all the ‘particulars might be put to the question together’.56D’Ewes (C), 207.

Goodwin continued to be prominent critic of the crown in the new year of 1642. He was added to the committee charged with examining all suspicious information coming before the House on 17 January.57CJ ii. 327b, 376b. On 20 January he returned to the customs business, declaring that the recommendations of the committee considering the abuses of the farmers were too lenient.58PJ i. 111. On 8 February he made strong objection to the Lords’ decision to omit the words ‘Lords and Commons’ in the joint petition to the king concerning control of the militia, saying that ‘by leaving out these words, the Lords had endeavoured to rest in themselves the sole body and power of judicature which he conceived was not in them’.59PJ i. 315. The strong religious dimension to Goodwin’s activities can be seen in his appointment to committees on bills against pluralities (14 Feb.), suppressing innovations (17 Feb.), bishops (5 Mar.) and the maintenance of the ministry (25 Mar.), and the committee to prepare a declaration on church doctrine and the importance of preaching ministry (4 Apr.).60CJ ii. 431b, 437b, 467b, 496b, 510b. He was granted leave of absence on 5 April.61CJ ii. 517a. This may have been to allow him to influence the reception of the militia bill in the southern counties. He had been made deputy lieutenant of Sussex in March, and in the same month was made a member of the committee to consider the situation in Kent.62CJ ii. 485b, 501b.

On his return to the Commons in early June 1642, Goodwin became an enthusiastic supporter of Parliament’s aggressive approach toward the king. On 6 June he joined Pym, Holles, Glynne, Strode, Sir Henry Vane II and others on a committee of both Houses to consider a formal reply to the king’s message from York.63CJ ii. 609b. He was named to a committee to negotiate for a loan from the Merchant Strangers on 14 June; he was added to the committee for requisitioning horses on 15 June; and on 18 June he was one of those chosen to visit the City of London to advise on king’s letter protesting about subscriptions being levied there.64CJ ii. 623a, 626b, 632b. In the same period he himself pledged to contribute ‘one horse and £50 in money or plate’ to the parliamentary coffers.65PJ iii. 470. On 20 June Goodwin was appointed to a committee to consider information concerning Newcastle, and the next day he was among those selected to meet the Lords to consider the king’s latest declaration.66CJ ii. 634a, 635b. It was recorded that the debate on the Nineteen Propositions proceeded on Goodwin’s motion on 30 June.67PJ iii. 154. On 9 July he was also named to the committee on the militia bill, alongside Holles, Strode, Glynne, Barrington, Oliver St John and other prominent opponents of the crown.68CJ ii. 663b. As civil war approached, Goodwin increasingly concentrated his attention on local affairs. On 21 June he and Morley were ordered to visit the circuit judges for Sussex to demand the reason for moving the assizes from East Grinstead.69CJ ii. 635b. He accompanied Sir John Evelyn of Surrey* on a search for arms in Vauxhall on 6 July, and on 22 July he was granted a fortnight’s leave to attend the Sussex assizes.70CJ ii. 656a, 685b; PJ iii. 250. After his return, on 12 August, he was named to a committee to consider moving the Surrey assizes from Kingston-on-Thames to Dorking, and three days later he was sent to consult Sir Robert Coke about an order for the same.71CJ ii. 716b, 720b. In September Goodwin was confirmed in his post as deputy lieutenant of Sussex and he was named to a committee to consider the clerkship of the peace in Kent and other counties.72CJ ii. 760b, 787b.

Irish committeeman, 1642-3

Goodwin’s support for the parliamentary cause in England in the period before the outbreak of civil war was influenced by his growing concern for the state of Ireland. Goodwin had family connections with Ireland, as through his mother he was related to the Elizabethan vice-treasurer and lord justice, Sir Henry Wallop†; but he does not appear to have been a leading figure in Parliament’s initial attempts to put down the Irish rebellion of October 1641.73Vis. Hants. (Harleian Soc. lxiv), 26. He moved on 16 December that the departure to Ireland of the lord lieutenant, the 2nd earl of Leicester, should be hastened.74D’Ewes (C), 301. At the end of the same month the Commons sent him to Leicester to recommend Sir Faithful Fortescue for an alternative command, as Carrickfergus Castle had been handed over to the Scots.75CJ ii. 364a; D’Ewes (C), 370. Thereafter he seems to have had played no part in Irish affairs until April 1642, when he invested £600 in the Irish adventure as part of a consortium that included his brother, John.76CSP Ire. Adv., 100. The investment appears to have piqued Goodwin’s interest in Irish affairs, which grew steadily during the summer. On 2 June he was added to a committee to receive propositions from merchants for supplying corn to Ireland, and on 9 July he moved that the Commissioners for Irish Affairs should take steps to retake Limerick Castle, which had recently fallen to the rebels.77CJ iii. 600a; PJ iii. 190. He became involved in the adventurers’ committee, from which he reported to the Commons on 18 and 25 August.78CJ ii. 727a, 736b.

In a report from the same committee on 3 September Goodwin made an impassioned plea for the adventurers’ loan to Parliament to be repaid, for ‘things in that kingdom began to grow into a very bad condition for want of money’. He also criticised the ‘not sitting’ of the Commissioners for Irish Affairs, and demanded the appointment of a ‘special committee’ to replace them.79PJ iii. 331. As a direct result of this speech, the Commons created a new executive body, the Committee for Irish Affairs, which was chaired by John Goodwyn and included Robert among its members.80CJ ii. 750b. Robert Goodwin soon became the new committee’s most important spokesman in the Commons. He reported letters concerning Munster to the Commons on 7 September, instructions for a committee to be sent to Dublin (comprising, by the request of the adventurers, Robert Reynolds* and Sir Henry Mildmay*) on 12 and 14 September, and intelligence that the rebels were attracting support from France and Spain on 15 September.81CJ ii. 756a, 765b, 768a; PJ iii. 346, 350; LJ v. 353b. Also on 15 September he joined Pym, John Hampden and Reynolds as manager of a conference on the affairs of Ireland, taking the opportunity to criticise the Lords for their failure to consider orders from the Commons concerning Ireland more promptly.82CJ ii. 768a. On 23 September Goodwin reported from the Irish committee that £20,000 to be shipped to Dublin with Reynolds and Mildmay was now ready at Bristol.83CJ ii. 779b; Add. 18777, f. 9. On 29 September he and Reynolds were ordered to manage a conference on letters from Munster, and recommended that Lord Inchiquin should be the president of that province in place of the late Sir William St Leger.84CJ ii. 787a. On the same day the Commons resolved that Goodwin would replace Mildmay as Reynold’s partner on the committee to go to Dublin, and news of the change was taken to the Lords by John Goodwyn.85CJ ii. 787b; LJ v. 376a. On 5 October he again reported from the Irish committee concerning the regiment of Lord Kerry and the situation in Munster.86CJ ii. 795b.

Goodwin and Reynolds and Captain William Tucker (who had joined the committee as a representative of the adventurers) arrived at Dublin on 29 October. They carried with them money and ammunition as well as instructions which gave them ‘the credence and power of a committee sent hither by the advice and authority of both Houses’, to whom the king had entrusted the conduct of the Irish war under the terms of the adventurers’ act. The lords justices in Dublin were thus ‘required, from time to time, to give their best furtherance and assistance to the said committee in putting the said instructions … in due execution’ and allow them ‘to be admitted to be present and vote at all consultations concerning the same’.87HMC Ormonde n.s. ii. 219; LJ v. 365a-b, 388b. The committee’s remit was highly irregular in constitutional terms; and it did not go uncontested. The king had already refused to recognise the committee, issuing a blunt statement that ‘he had already given a commission to the earl of Leicester … and that he could give no other commissions to any persons’.88Add. 31116, pp. 1-2. Edward Hyde* would years later sum up the royalist attitude when he dismissed Goodwin and his colleagues as ‘no other than spies’.89Clarendon, Hist. ii. 494. When the Irish councillors met on 2 November they tried a compromise in which ‘those persons might be admitted to sit apart and separate from us, and behind the council, but not to sit with us at the board’, from which position they could still contribute ‘what they propounded concerning the army’.90HMC Ormonde n.s. ii. 237-8. When the king got wind of this, he sent an angry letter to Dublin giving his ‘express command that they should not be permitted to sit or be present any more at his majesty’s council table here’.91HMC Ormonde n.s. ii. 331.

The king’s order did not reach Dublin until the beginning of February 1643.92Harl. 164, f. 309; Add. 31116, p. 56. In the meantime, Goodwin and his colleagues managed to ‘give some heart to the Protestant party there’ by advancing money on their own credit and funding a military expedition led by Viscount Lisle (Philip Sidney*).93Harl. 164, ff. 296v-7. They were also privy to state secrets, including the alarming news that the earl of Ormond and others who ‘steered… by the court compass’ had been instructed by the king to start peace negotiations with the rebels.94R. Reynolds, True State and Condition of the Kingdom of Ireland (1643, E.246.31); Harl. 164, ff. 296v-7; Add. 31116, p. 50. This turn of events made the position of Goodwin, Reynolds and Tucker precarious, and by mid-February they were preparing to leave, fearing arrest - although it was later denied that they had ‘stole[n] away from Dublin in a little barque’.95Harl. 164, ff. 309, 329-v. As a sign of their continuing good faith, Ormond’s opponents in the Irish council wrote to Speaker Lenthall on 21 February with their ‘special thanks’ to Goodwin and Reynolds, ‘[who] have been very diligent to take observation of our condition … and engaged themselves for monies to help us for furtherance of the public service’.96HMC Ormonde n.s. ii. 236.

Westminster, Ireland and Scotland, 1643-6

Goodwin had returned to Westminster by 27 March 1643, when he was added to the committee for despatches when it considered abuses in the marshalsea court.97CJ iii. 20a. He was added to the committee for the Eastern Association on 24 May and showed himself eager to further the interests of Sir Thomas Barrington: ‘There is nothing yet done in your committee since you went although I pressed it for the other business which concerned Essex. I will do anything you shall command’.98CJ iii. 100a; Eg. 2426, f. 293. During the summer, Goodwin was involved in a variety of matters. He was teller in favour of sequestering the parsonage of Lambeth from the royalist incumbent, Dr Featley, on 11 July; and he was named to committees to draft an ordinance for the association of the southern counties (18 July) and to consider a petition from the Westminster Assembly concerning the observation of the sabbath (19 July).99CJ iii. 161b, 171a, 173b. In August he was teller with Edmund Prideaux I against publishing the order to punish army deserters (1 Aug.) and he was one of the MPs sent to the City of London to press for more money for the 3rd earl of Essex as lord general and to raise more troops for the campaign to relieve Gloucester.100CJ iii. 190b, 210a. In a letter to Barrington he lamented the loss of Bristol but predicted that the ‘consequence of it will be worse than the thing itself’.101Eg. 2647, f. 108. The collapse of the parliamentarian interest in the south west no doubt prompted Goodwin to pledge £100 of his own money to the fund to allow Sir William Waller* to march.102CJ iii. 241a. As the autumn continued, Goodwin was involved in the financing of the army. On 28 September he was appointed to the committee for money, on 5 October he was named to a committee to consider the wine excise, and on 12 October he was given care of a committee to consult with Essex on the best way to supply the army.103CJ iii. 257b, 263b, 274a. On 17 October he joined Vane II, Glynne, Hesilrige, Waller and Sir Gilbert Gerard on a committee of both Houses for army affairs.104CJ iii. 278b. He was briefly chairman of this new committee before relinquishing the position to Michael Noble a day later.105CJ iii. 280b. On 21 October Goodwin reported the state of Parliament’s forces from the committee for the lord general’s army.106CJ iii. 284b.

Goodwin had assiduously attended the select Committee for Irish Affairs since his return from Dublin in March, and he replaced his brother as its chairman for a brief period in late August and early September.107Add. 4782, ff. 113v-260v; CJ iii. 231b. In the Commons, Goodwin promoted Irish affairs when the urgency of the military crisis in England would allow. On 25 May he joined Reynolds in arguing that ‘the former diverting of money intended for the relief of Ireland had brought a scandal upon the Parliament’, and demanded the loan from the adventurers must be repaid.108Harl. 164, f. 393. Goodwin and Reynolds were instructed to prepare ‘evidences and proofs’ against captured Irish rebels on 5 June, and in a report from the select committee on 9 June Reynolds reported from the adventurers’ committee ‘that it was fit that we should think of some speedy course for the relieving of Ireland’.109CJ iii. 115a, 119b, 121b; Harl. 1655, f. 98v. In this Goodwin was seconded by Sir John Clotworthy, and the Commons agreed to print a narrative of the king’s actions to prevent the committee from assisting the Irish council, ‘whereby the Protestant party were in a manner wholly disheartened and the rebels emboldened’.110Harl. 165, ff. 98v, 108v. On 23 June he was appointed alongside Reynolds and John Goodwyn to a committee to meet with a Lords’ delegation at the Guildhall to consider improving supplies to Irish garrisons. The contributions of Reynolds and Goodwin ‘caused a great hum among the citizens, expressing their willingness to advance money for the relief of that distressed kingdom’ and there were hopes that ‘the business begins to take root’ more generally.111CJ iii. 142a; Bodl. Carte 5, f. 611. On 4 July a declaration on the course of the rebellion was entrusted to Goodwin, Reynolds, Holles and William Jephson.112CJ iii. 154a. On 12 July he was messenger to the Lords with another ordinance for Ireland.113CJ iii. 164a. Goodwin was, however, wary of trusting the Irish Protestant establishment too far. When in Dublin, he and Reynolds had suspected key officials were guilty corruption, and when, on 18 August, Clotworthy and Jephson ‘would have had the new treasurers trusted for the whole… Goodwin opposed it, saying that they had been unfaithful already in that charge’.114Harl. 164, f. 111; 165, f. 152; Add. 31116, pp. 21-2. A few days later Goodwin read a letter from Ireland announcing that the Irish council had been purged by Ormond and his allies, ‘and that there was likely to be a cessation of arms and that there was a strong endeavour to root out all the Protestants out of Ireland’.115Add. 31116, p. 143.

The agreement between the king and the Irish Confederates was signed in September, and Goodwin joined Clotworthy as managers of a conference with the Lords concerning a declaration against the cessation of arms on 29 September.116CJ iii. 259a. Subsequently, Goodwin was appointed a member of the committee to consider how to respond to the cessation on 16 October; on 18 October he joined Reynolds and William Wheler as manager of a conference on the worrying advance of popery in England and Ireland; and the next day he was named, with Clotworthy and Viscount Lisle, to a committee to meet with the Lords to discuss the cessation and other pressing issues.117CJ iii. 276a, 280b, 282b. Goodwin’s concern for Ireland also led to his greater involvement in the affairs of Scotland. On 16 September he was named to a committee to consider letters received from Parliament’s commissioners in Scotland, concerning the brokering of a new alliance between the two kingdoms.118CJ iii. 244a. A month later, on 17 October, he was chosen as one of a commission of four MPs and two peers to travel north to implement the terms of the treaty that accompanied the Solemn League and Covenant. The commission was approved by the Lords on 26 October and instructions issued on 1 November.119LJ vi. 273b, 288a. Before leaving for Scotland, he was added (19 Oct.) to the Committee for Scottish Affairs, which was tasked with raising money for the Scots’ forces in Ulster and those soon to enter England. This body would evolve in 1644 into the Committee for Compounding.120Supra, ‘Committee for Compounding’; CJ iii. 279a, 282b; Harl. 165, f. 200.

For the next 18 months Goodwin was absent in the north as one of Parliament’s commissioners to Scotland, charged with concluding the treaty between the two kingdoms, consulting on matters of mutual interest, particularly Ireland, and accompanying the Scots army in England.121LJ vi. 288a-b. He had reached Edinburgh with other commissioners by 14 November, and the initial talks centred on attempts ‘to prevail with the Scots that their army in the north part of Ireland might yet continue awhile longer there’.122Harl. 165, f. 242. The terms of the treaty had been finalised by the end of November, and during the winter the commissioners supervised preparations for the Scottish army to march across the border.123LJ vi. 357b, 365b, 400b. When in Morpeth in February 1644, Goodwin was able to report that ‘the county of Northumberland north of the Tyne is now in the power of Parliament’.124HMC Portland, i. 169. In March and April he accompanied the remaining units of the Scottish army in their march south to Sunderland, and had joined the forces besieging York in June.125Harl. 166, ff. 35, 43, 48v, 76. He informed the House of the allied victory at Marston Moor in July and signed the letter from the commissioners after the surrender of York earnestly desiring that Parliament would now ‘take the building of the House of God and the settlement of Church government into their chiefest thoughts’.126CSP Dom. 1644, p. 359. He was in York with the 2nd Baron Fairfax (Sir Ferdinando Fairfax*) and Sir Thomas Fairfax* during the winter of 1644-5, signing letters to the Committee of Both Kingdoms concerning the relief of Yorkshire and the garrison at Bolsover Castle.127CSP Dom. 1644-5, pp. 104, 279; LJ vii. 120a.

Goodwin remained closely involved in the prosecution of the war in the north after his return to Westminster in April 1645. He was added to a committee to consider further papers from the Scottish commissioners on 2 May and he was added to the committee for the Northern Association on 10 May, with instructions ‘for ordering and carrying on the war’ in the north now that the Fairfaxes had stepped down.128CJ iv. 130a, 138b; LJ vii. 367b. He supported the New Model army’s campaign during the summer, being named to committees to consider news of the sack of Leicester (4 June) and to provide security for the City’s loan to the army (5 June); and after the victory at Naseby he was named to committees on the disposal of prisoners (18 June) and the publication of the ‘king’s cabinet’ (3 July).129CJ iv. 163a, 164a, 177b, 194b. On the latter occasion it was said that he managed the conference with the Lords and ‘read many letters’ himself.130Harl. 166, f. 232v. Goodwin was also concerned to ensure that the plight of Ireland was not ignored at Westminster. On 1 July Goodwin was appointed to a committee to examine information received from Munster, and on the same day he joined Reynolds, Holles and Jephson as founder-members of the Star Chamber Committee of Irish Affairs, initially established to promote the relief of that province.131CJ iv. 191a. Scottish affairs soon distracted Goodwin’s attention, however. When the Scots’ decision to establish garrisons at Carlisle and other northern towns precipitated a new crisis in the relations between the two kingdoms, Goodwin was manager of the conference on 3 July to consider the business.132CJ iv. 194b. On 5 July he was involved in drawing up instructions for new commissioners to attend the Scottish Parliament to negotiate the return of the garrisons, and as Zouche Tate* excused himself on the grounds of ill health, Goodwin was chosen to replace him.133CJ iv. 198a, 199a-b, 206a; Whitelocke, Mems. i. 466; Corresp. of Scots Commrs. in London, 1644-6, ed. H.W. Meikle, 93. The ordinance appointing the commissioners was passed by the Lords on 28 July.134LJ vii. 515b. The commissioners had reached York by 11 August before travelling north to Newcastle by 13 August and Berwick by 16 August.135HMC Portland, i. 243, 247; Harl. 166, f. 227v; LJ vii. 566b. At Berwick they at last made contact with the Scottish representatives, but with little success, as their arrival had coincided with the demoralising defeat of the covenanting army by Montrose at Kilsyth.136CSP Dom. 1645-6, p. 92. Goodwin and his colleagues were unsympathetic, seeing the delays as a sign of Scottish bad faith. After weeks spent kicking their heels at Berwick or Newcastle, on 7 October the commissioners wrote to Parliament complaining bitterly of the unwillingness of the Scots to negotiate, as seen in the many cancelled meetings and broken promises.137HMC Portland, i. 264, 271, 271, 276, 280, 286; LJ vii. 690b. Goodwin had returned to the Commons by 12 November, when he and the other commissioners were given the thanks of the House for their endeavours.138CJ iv. 339b; LJ vii. 702b.

The failure of this latest mission seems to have been the turning point in Goodwin’s relations with the Scots. No sooner had he returned to Westminster and received the thanks of the House, he took charge of the committee to prepare a letter to the Scots insisting upon the English demand that they relinquish the northern garrisons established without parliamentary approval.139CJ iv. 340a. He reported the draft through the Commons and took it up to the Lords on 14 November.140CJ iv. 341a-b. On 24 November he was added to a committee to consider the funding of the Scottish army, and how it might be made more ‘serviceable’, especially in bringing the long-running siege of Newark to an end.141CJ iv. 353b. Goodwin’s religious views may have been affected by his growing impatience with the Scots. On 25 July 1645, before his departure for Scotland, he had been made a member of the committee to advise the Westminster Assembly on the choice of elders for the London presbyteries.142CJ iv. 218a. On 14 November, shortly after his return, he was messenger with the Commons’ approval of the Lords’ attempt to reconcile differences between Presbyterians and Independents over church government.143CJ iv. 342a. Having lost confidence in the Scots, it seems that Goodwin was prepared to support an Erastian church settlement. Goodwin’s role in Irish affairs also demonstrated an increasingly anti-Scots bias at the end of 1645. On 15 December he was appointed to a sub-committee of the Star Chamber Committee ‘to consider and state what power the chief governor or governors of Ireland have’.144Bodl. Nalson XXI, f. 49. This was part of the process of wresting control of the Irish war from the Scots and vesting it in a new governor, chosen by Parliament. It may also be relevant that Goodwin was a regular attender at the Star Chamber Committee during December and January, the crucial period before the appointment of Viscount Lisle as lord lieutenant on 26 January 1646.145CSP Ire. 1633-47, pp. 422, 424, 427-36.

Despite his growing lack of sympathy with the Scots, Goodwin continued to be involved in negotiations with them. At the beginning of December 1645 he was included in a delegation to the City to make a report on progress on the peace propositions, which would necessarily involve the Scots.146CJ iv. 365a. He was named to a committee to confer with the Lords on instructions to be sent to those MPs despatched to monitor the progress of the Scots before Newark on 5 December and on 7 January 1646 he joined Vane II, Hesilrige and St John on a committee to consider a paper from the Scottish commissioners concerning the inadequacy of their cavalry and dragoons.147CJ iv. 366b, 399b. On 26 January Goodwin was teller with John Ashe in favour of a motion that the peace process should be ‘speeded’, with the proposals being sent to the Scots commissioners and the king without further delay. This was easily defeated by the Presbyterian interest, whose tellers were Sir Philip Stapilton and Sir Walter Erle.148CJ iv. 419a. Three days later Goodwin was again dispatched to Scotland on a mission to ‘preserve and continue a good correspondency between the two nations’ with Col. William White* and Lord Montagu (Edmund Montagu I*).149CJ iv. 422a; Whitelocke, Mems. i. 566. On his return in mid-March Goodwin was named to a series of committees on Scottish affairs: to consider a paper of the Scottish commissioners on the peace proposals to be presented to the king (18 Mar.), to consider a complaint against the behaviour of the Scottish army in the north (20 Mar.), and to treat with the Scottish commissioners on the peace proposals (26 Mar.).150CJ iv. 478b, 481b, 491a. In the spring of 1646 Goodwin was able to turn his attention to Ireland. He was named with Reynolds, Clotworthy, Viscount Lisle and Sir John Temple to the committee on an ordinance for an assessment to raise money for Ireland (24 Apr.), he again became a regular at the Star Chamber Committee (25 May-18 June), and joined Clotworthy and Temple in questioning Lord Inchiquin on the situation in Munster (9 July).151CJ iv. 521a; CSP Ire. 1633-47, pp. 451-2, 455-60; HMC Egmont, i. 299. During June and July Goodwin juggled Irish and Scottish affairs. He was added to the committee on complaints from northern England on 1 June, and on 9 June he was named to committees to prepare the resultant declaration on the abuses, to be sent to the Scottish commissioners and the Scottish Parliament.152CJ iv. 560b, 570b. On 25 June he was included in the committee of both Houses that was sent to meet the marquess of Argyll (Archibald Campbell*).153CJ iv. 586b. Goodwin’s opposition to the Scots was all too plain on 30 June when he was teller with Sir William Brereton against the Lords’ order that the Scots should be informed of alterations made to the peace propositions. The tellers in favour were Holles and Waller.154CJ iv. 593b. On 7 July Goodwin replaced Sir John Danvers* as one of the commissioners to the king at Newcastle, collected the peace propositions from the speaker on 14 July and he was present when the commissioners were received by the king.155CJ iv. 606b, 616b; Whitelocke, Mems. ii. 47; Add. 31116, pp. 552, 554. He received the thanks of the Commons for his efforts at Newcastle on 12 August.156CJ iv. 643a.

Flirting with Independency, 1646-8

After the failure of the Newcastle Propositions, the recovery of the king from Scottish custody and the withdrawal of the Scottish army from the north of England became Parliament’s priorities. Goodwin was involved in negotiating both. He was appointed to committees to prepare estimates of Scottish army’s arrears (21 Aug.), to consult with the Scottish commissioners ‘concerning the disposal of the person of the king’ (24 Sept.) and to consider a conference with the Lords concerning letters received from the commissioners (15 Oct.).157CJ iv. 650b, 674b, 694b. He was also involved in discussions with Ormond over the possible surrender of Dublin to Parliament, becoming a member of the Derby House Committee of Irish Affairs, which handled the negotiations, on 14 October.158CJ iv. 693b; Rushworth, Hist. Collns. vi. 419. Goodwin attended both the Derby House Committee and the Star Chamber Committee in the days that followed, and for a while he was considered as a commissioner to negotiate with Ormond face-to-face.159CSP Ire. 1633-47, pp. 529-30; 1647-60, pp. 33, 35, 726-7; CSP Dom. 1645-7, p. 479. Although he was not chosen to negotiate the Dublin treaty, in the winter of 1646-7 Goodwin continued to be an important figure in Irish affairs. On 23 December he reported to the House the Derby House Committee’s recommendations concerning the new expedition to be mounted by Parliament’s lord lieutenant, Viscount Lisle; on 4 January he reported from the Star Chamber Committee the instructions for Lisle; and the next day he took those instructions to the Lords and with them recommendations for providing the lord lieutenant with a council and suitable regalia.160Add. 31116, p. 588; CJ v. 25b, 40b, 42b.

Goodwin’s omission from Lisle’s council was not surprising, as it had been clear for some time that his destination was to be Scotland, not Ireland. On 23 December 1646 the Commons had made its initial resolution that Goodwin and William Ashhurst were to travel north to supervise the withdrawal of the Scottish army and the surrender of the northern garrisons to Parliament’s control.161CJ v. 25b; Whitelocke, Mems. ii. 95. On 31 December it had been decided that the 1st earl of Stamford would make a third member of the party, and the next day their instructions were considered.162CJ v. 35b, 36b; LJ viii. 642b. The commissioners were allowed £600 to cover the expenses of their journey.163Add. 31116, p. 600 When the final set of instructions was issued on 4 February it included putting pressure on the Scots to deliver up Belfast as well as the strongholds in northern England.164CJ v. 69b, 74b. The commissioners had reached Newcastle by the time their instructions were completed, and on 5 February the Lords decided they should continue on into Scotland, in an attempt to ‘continue and maintain a brotherly affection and a good understanding and correspondency between the two nations’ and to raise the awkward matter of the surrender of Belfast.165CJ v. 82b; LJ viii. 701a, 702a-b, 707b, 709a. Shortly after his departure, on 6 February, Goodwin was appointed a commissioner for compounding.166CJ v. 78a. He reported the ‘marching away of the garrison at Carlisle’ on 18 February and proceeded to Edinburgh to assure the Scots of the desire of the English to maintain good relations.167HMC Portland, i. 411. In his absence, on 7 April, he was among the 12 MPs whose appointment to the Derby House Committee of Irish Affairs was confirmed by the Lords. It was this committee that considered the renewed peace negotiations with Ormond and, more contentiously, the deployment of New Model regiments to Ireland. Most of these 12 were Presbyterians (including Holles, Lewis and Clotworthy); Goodwin had presumably been chosen for his Irish expertise rather than his political affiliations.168LJ ix. 127b; CJ v. 135b. It was perhaps in connection with this business that he was recalled from Scotland on 30 April, but he seems to have arrived in London only at the end of June, when he resumed his seat at the Derby House Committee of Irish Affairs.169CJ v. 157a-b; LJ ix. 160b; SP21/26, p. 83. He was added to a parliamentary committee on an ordinance to force soldiers to leave the ‘lines of communication’ unless resident in London, on 1 July; but otherwise he played no other recorded role in the House in the early summer.170CJ v. 229a.

During the Presbyterian-backed ‘forcing of the Houses’ of late July and early August 1647, Goodwin was among those MPs who joined Speaker Lenthall in seeking the protection of the army.171HMC Egmont, i. 440. He returned to London after the army’s occupation of the capital shortly afterwards, and attended the Derby House Committee from 11 August.172SP21/26, p. 99. On the same day he was named to the committee on an ordinance to repeal all the votes and orders passed during the Speaker’s absence.173CJ v. 271b. His stance in two important divisions on 13 August suggests he was by this stage a firm supporter of the army and its Independent allies: he was teller in the minority in favour of giving the Lords’ declaration that the Presbyterian-dominated London militia committee should be answerable for its actions in the City a second reading; and, also in the minority, in favour of annulling, rather than repealing, the votes and orders of the Commons during Speaker Lenthall’s absence.174CJ v. 273b. Goodwin’s support for the army perhaps led to his appointment to the committee on the ordinance against the votes and orders on 18 August and to the committee on an ordinance to make Colonel Robert Hammond* commander of the Isle of Wight on 3 September.175CJ v. 278a, 291a. Goodwin retained his involvement in Irish affairs, being ordered to report on business on 23 and 25 September and joining Arthur Annesley as reporter from the Derby House Committee of Irish Affairs on 5 October.176CJ v. 312b, 316b, 327a. On 12 October Goodwin was given leave of absence, but he had returned to the House by 6 November, when he was teller with John Bulkeley in favour of reading an account of the army council’s debates sent from Putney by its secretary, William Clarke.177CJ v. 331b, 352a. On 14 December Goodwin was named to the committee on an ordinance to punish soap monopolists, and on the same day he was chosen to be one of the commissioners to present the new peace proposal, the Four Bills, to the king at Carisbrooke, a service for which he received the thanks of the House on 1 January 1648.178LJ ix. 575b, 621a; Whitelocke, Mems. ii. 249; CJ v. 383a-b, 415a

On his return from the Isle of Wight, Goodwin resumed his parliamentary duties. On 4 January he was appointed to the committee for grievances; on 5 January he was teller with Sir Robert Pye I against the rejection of an ordinance abolishing first fruits and tenths; and on 12 January he was ordered to report the business of the earl of Roxburgh.179CJ v. 417a, 419b, 428b. On 25 January, however, he was again chosen as a commissioner to Scotland, this time to dissuade the Scots from military intervention in England on the king’s behalf and to re-establish ‘brotherly correspondence and right understanding and perpetual agreement between the two kingdoms’.180CJ v. 442b, 446a, 447a; Whitelocke, Mems. ii. 266; LJ x. 7a-b. The frustrations of this mission were detailed in the commissioners’ reports to the Lords, which complained of long delays and lack of co-operation in Scotland, while the situation in the north of England became increasingly unstable, culminating in the seizure of Carlisle and Berwick by royalist insurgents in early May.181LJ x. 112a, 128a-9a, 228a, 250a; CJ v. 544a, 556b In June the commissioners had reached Edinburgh, but their hopes of success were dealt a further blow when the Scottish Parliament dissolved itself, leaving the government in the hands of the committee of estates.182HMC Portland, i. 456, 458. During his absence, the Commons ordered the Committee for Advance of Money to investigate the register of chancery and ‘how it stands in relation to Mr Robert Goodwin’; and on 2 March Goodwin and Miles t* were granted the register’s place, worth £700 a year, in place of the disgraced Walter Long* -- an order approved by the Lords on 25 April.183CJ v. 450b, 477a; LJ x. 231a-2b.

Goodwin returned to London with his fellow-commissioners at the beginning of August, receiving the thanks of the Commons on 14 August, and on 17 August he was given leave to go into the country.184HMC 4th Rep., 370; CJ v. 670a, 674b. He appears to have been absent from London for nearly two months. He is recorded as having attended occasional meetings of the Derby House Committee of Irish Affairs from 4 October and he joined the compounding commissioners for the first time, for a six-week stint from 10 October.185CSP Ire. 1647-60, pp. 30, 33, 35; SP23/5, ff. 11v, 19, 22, 27v, 28. He returned to the Commons only a month later, perhaps prompted by disquiet at the apparent success of the Newport peace negotiations with the king. On 11 November he was teller with Thomas Erle against putting the question that the king’s answer concerning the use of the Book of Common Prayer was satisfactory. The tellers in favour, and in the majority, were the Presbyterians Annesley and Bulkeley.186CJ vi. 74a. On 24 November he was teller with Edmund Ludlowe II against giving a definite end-date to the negotiations and ordering the return of the commissioners with the king’s final answer.187CJ vi. 86b. On 1 December he joined John Ashe as teller in favour of putting the question that the king’s answers should be considered by the House, despite opposition from Sir Samuel Luke, Bulkeley and the majority of the MPs.188CJ vi. 92a.

Reluctant commonwealthsman, 1649-53

Despite his assertion, made ten years later, that ‘the Long Parliament did great and glorious things for the first eight years. Then, I confess, it is best to sigh them out in sorrowful silence’, Goodwin was prepared to return to the Rump only a few weeks after the regicide.189Burton’s Diary, iii. 119. He took the dissent on 19 February 1649, and was attending the House by 12 April, when he was ordered to replace Vane II in a committee to attend the City to raise a loan of £120,000 for the new Irish campaign.190Underdown, Pride’s Purge, 374; CJ vi. 185a. Goodwin’s attendance during the remainder of the year was, however, lacklustre. On 12 July he was given leave to attend the southern assizes; on 22 August he was named to the committee on a petition of the 10th earl of Rutland; and in early October he was appointed to a committee on the selection of jurors and reported the arrears owed to Colonel Algernon Sydney* for his service in Ireland.191CJ vi. 259a, 284a, 301a, 302b. His enthusiasm did not revive during 1650, and only six committee appointments can be attributed to him with certainty. He was named to committees on assessment legislation (18 Feb.), the claims of William Cecil*, 2nd earl of Salisbury (15 Apr.) and the petition of the inhabitants of Sackville College, East Grinstead (31 May).192CJ vi. 368a, 398b, 418a. He was also added to the committee on regulating the excise (20 June), and he was included in the committee to investigate corruption charges against Lord Howard of Escrick (Edward Howard*).193CJ vi. 417a, 469a. On 27 December he was put in charge of securing warrants from the commissioners of compounding to pay the creditors of Peregrine Pelham*.194CJ vi. 516a. On 24 January 1651 he was named to a committee to receive claims for exemption from the bill for sale of delinquents’ estates.195CJ vi. 528a.

Although not the most prominent member of the Rump, Goodwin was chosen as a teller for the elections to the third council of state on 7 Feb. 1651 and was himself comfortably elected.196CJ vi. 531b, 532b. He was not an active member of the council of state. He was appointed to only a handful of committees, and his term was marked by long absences, especially in the early autumn.197CSP Dom. 1651, pp. xxv-xxxv, 135, 182, 262, 450; 1651-2, p. 8. Prominence at Whitehall did not lead to an increase in Goodwin’s activity at Westminster. He made one report from the council to the Commons on continuing the admiralty court (2 Apr.), was named to a committee to examine who was in possession of crown goods (21 May) and reported the bill to put into execution the raising of the London militia as part of the preparations to defend the commonwealth from Charles II’s Scottish army (15 Aug.).198CJ vi. 555a, 576b; vii. 1a; CSP Dom. 1649, p. 112. He lost his place on the council in November 1651. Goodwin was no more assiduous in 1652. He was teller against exempting the claims of Alderman John Fowke against the East India Company from the oblivion bill on 13 February, and two weeks later he was named to the committee on a bill concerning the company.199CJ vii. 88b, 100a. On 15 July he was named to a committee for raising money from forfeited estates and on 7 October he was appointed to the committee to consider a declaration incorporating Scotland into the commonwealth with England, alongside such prominent figures as Cromwell, St John and Vane II.200CJ vii. 154b, 189a.. On 12 October Goodwin and Henry Darley* were added to the committee to take charge of negotiations with the Scottish deputies.201CJ vii. 190a. On 12 November the council of state instructed Goodwin to report to the House some letters and papers from the Irish commissioners, but after a delay the report was re-assigned to Gurdon instead.202CSP Dom. 1651-2, pp. 14, 40. Somewhat surprisingly, Goodwin topped the poll for new members to the council of state when elections were held on 25 November.203CJ vii. 220b, 221a. Thereafter he concentrated his attentions on the council, which he attended regularly, and he was appointed to the committees for the ordnance and for Ireland on 2 December.204CSP Dom. 1652-3, pp. xxviii-xxxii, 2. There is no record of his attendance in the Commons from November 1652 until the Rump was dissolved in April 1653.

Irish councillor, 1654-7

Goodwin seems to have welcomed the establishment of the protectorate, ‘owning his highness with the first’.205TSP vi. 650. In August 1654 he was chosen as one of the members of the new Irish council, who would govern Ireland under Charles Fleetwood* as lord deputy.206TSP ii. 493, 545; Clarke Pprs. v. 199, 201; Abbott, Writings and Speeches iii. 407. Fleetwood made no objection to Goodwin’s appointment, telling the secretary of state, John Thurloe*: ‘I know him very well, and cannot except against him, if his age will not hinder his dispatch of business’.207TSP ii. 493. From his arrival at Dublin in September, Goodwin became an important part of the Irish administration, attending meetings of the council, signing letters and attending to a wide range of business from private petitions to the regulation of foreign coins.208TSP ii. 602; iii. 18; iv. 308, 668, 673, 701, 707; v. 121, 159, 238, 309; vi. 96; Dunlop, Ireland under the Commonwealth ii. 529, 536, 578, 655; CSP Ire. 1647-60, pp. 589, 619, 644, 669, 835; Add. 4165, f. 8; Add. 4157, f. 170. He also increased his fairly modest stake in the Irish adventure lands by purchasing, in November 1654, the allocation in Co. Westmeath recently granted to Sir Thomas Dacres.209CSP Ire. Adv., 40, 100. Despite being an administrator and adventurer, Goodwin was generally sympathetic towards the Irish Protestants. He was involved with individual petitions and group actions in October 1654, April 1655, April and December 1656, and in April 1657 he had private discussions with the 2nd earl of Cork (Richard Boyle*) concerning the effect of the indemnity act on his extended family.210TSP iv. 668; CSP Ire. 1647-60, pp. 589, 607; Chatsworth, CM/29, unfol.: 6 Oct. 1654, 24 Apr. 1657.

After Fleetwood’s recall to London in the autumn of 1655, Goodwin became a staunch supporter of the acting governor, Henry Cromwell*, but this made him vulnerable to the faction-fighting that surrounded the protector’s younger son. When Henry was promoted to lord deputy in November 1657, Goodwin was immediately dropped from the Irish council.211Dunlop, Ireland under the Commonwealth ii. 672-3. According to Thurloe, the decision was made by the English council, which expressed ‘no satisfaction’ in Goodwin, and he added that he thought the chief reason was his ‘insufficiency, which was affirmed to be very great, and that room might be made for some other more able.212TSP vi. 599, 648. Although Henry conceded that the reasons for ‘discarding [him] might have some weight’, he feared the repercussions at Westminster

For at the next sitting of the Parliament, I fear that such as know him may make an ill use of it, since most men think he was excluded upon the account of his judgement. The poor gentleman takes it much to heart that I wish it could be remedied without too great inconvenience; for men do not only wonder, why a man of so eminent affections to his highness should suffer above all others, but do make very odd reflections both upon his highness and myself about it.213TSP vi. 648.

Goodwin’s case reflected badly on the new lord deputy, for ‘people say I have left one of my friends in the lurch’.214TSP vi. 665. By mid-December Henry told Thurloe that ‘I know not what to do with [him]; if you do not restore him, I wish, for my own ease, some of his friends would advise him to return’.215TSP vi. 683. By February 1658 Goodwin had despaired of being re-instated, and instead Henry lobbied for his return to ‘his former place of register in the chancery, which he says is of course revived by the ending of the last Parliament’.216TSP vi. 820. This position was also to elude Goodwin, who instead received the less lucrative reward of a knighthood, bestowed in Dublin in May 1658 by his friend and patron, Henry Cromwell.217Shaw, Knights of Eng. ii. 224.

From Cromwellian to Rumper, 1659-60

In Richard Cromwell’s Parliament, Goodwin was one of a small group of Members whose parliamentary experience went back to the 1620s. Although he was only appointed to four committees, including those for elections (28 Jan.) and Irish affairs (1 Apr.), he made moderate and authoritative speeches, as befitted a veteran of the House.218CJ vii. 594b, 623a, 627a, 632a. On 8 February he said he was anxious to ‘settle and compose’ the government, and urged MPs to ‘eschew what may cause difference hereafter’. He supported the bill to recognise Richard as protector, but also admitted that ‘we have another trust from the people’ which meant ‘we cannot proceed so far as to establish the Lords now sitting’, as it would ‘not consist with the fundamental constitution of the nation’.219Burton’s Diary iii. 119. On 23 February he reminded the Commons that involvement in the Baltic war would cost money at a time when the nation was facing a financial crisis, ‘it is not good to discontent the people at this time’, and argued instead for the protector to ‘endeavour a reconciliation’ between Sweden and Denmark instead.220Burton’s Diary iii. 439. He spoke in debates on the revenue on 29 March and 1 April. Although not against the bill for the perpetuity of the revenue in principle, he was concerned that it came in ‘irregularly’; and when it came to the new impost on the excise he and echoed a speech he had made in 1628, saying that MPs should bear in mind ‘the liberties of those that sent us hither’ and not pass defective legislation (‘there are not above two lines of the 12 that are fit to be retained’).221Burton’s Diary iv. 298, 320. On 21 April, as the Commons began debating the controversial issue of settling the armed forces as a militia, he claimed that as the issue was central to the future of the protectorate, it should be debated in grand committee, as ‘to make this haste swerves from all form of proceedings in former times’.222Burton’s Diary iv. 477.

Goodwin played only a minor part in the restored Rump Parliament which succeeded the protectorate. On 14 May he was named to the committee to prepare the bill for indemnity and pardon, and two days later he was appointed to the committee on a bill to choose new admiralty commissioners.223CJ vii. 654b, 656b. After this he appears to have been absent from the Commons for nearly two months, as his next committee appointment was on 5 July, when he was named to the committee stage of a bill for removing royalists from London.224CJ vii. 705b. On 6 July he was named to two committees concerning Ireland: to consider the right of his former colleague, Robert Reynolds, to inherit the lands in Munster acquired by his brother, Sir John Reynolds*, and to consider a petition from the Irish adventurers. He was joined on the latter by Reynolds and John Goodwyn.225CJ vii. 705b, 706a. On 7 July Goodwin was appointed as commissioner for the government of Ireland to replace Henry Cromwell and his council, alongside former councillors such as Miles Corbett and William Steele*.226Dunlop, Ireland under the Commonwealth ii. 697-8. Goodwin did not travel to Dublin, however, and continued to be appointed to committees in late July and early August.227CJ vii. 731a, 751a, 752b. In a division on 10 August he was teller with John Weaver in a vote against ministers reading in every church the proclamation concerning the treachery of (Sir) George Boothe* and the other royalist insurgents.228CJ vii. 754b. Goodwin was named to further committees in the late summer and early autumn, including those on bills for the assessment across the three nations (1 Sept.) and for the better government of Newcastle (17 Sept.).229CJ vii. 755a, 756b, 772a, 780a, 782a.

There is no evidence for Goodwin’s activities after the military coup in October 1659 and he only re-emerges after the return of the Rump at the end of December. On 3 January 1660 he was appointed to the committee to consider what qualifications should be imposed on MPs in the round of elections planned to fill vacant seats.230CJ vii. 803a. In the next few days he was also named to committees to nominate commissioners for the great seal, judges and admiralty commissioners.231CJ vii. 806a, 808b. On the impeachment of the former Irish commissioners for encouraging the usurpation of the army, on 19 January Goodwin was chosen as one of the new commissioners of Irish affairs.232CJ vii. 815b. At the end of January, George Monck* wrote to Lord Broghill (Roger Boyle*), praising Goodwin and his fellow commissioners as

all honest men, and such as your Lordship will be well satisfied in, for I am confident they are persons of ability and conscience and such as will act conscientiously in reference to the ordinances for magistracy and ministry and that love and favour such as are for order and discipline in the church of God.233HMC Var. vi. 439.

He joined Reynolds, St John and Hesilrige as a member of the committee to justify and approve Monck’s actions on 31 January, and on 11 February acted as teller with Carew Ralegh in favour of appointing Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper* a commissioner for the army.234CJ vii. 827a, 841a. On 13 February he was named to a committee to examine the papers of ‘the pretended committee of safety’ – the executive that the army had set up after dissolving the Rump in October.235CJ vii. 842a. Goodwin appears to have supported the re-admission of the MPs secluded in 1648 and the dissolution of the Long Parliament. On 22 February he was named to a committee to consider qualifications for MPs elected for a new Parliament, and on 13 March he was teller with Sir John Potts against extending the sitting.236CJ vii. 848b, 874a. With the termination of the Long Parliament, Goodwin lost more than his seat. His position as Irish commissioner also came to an end, and on 15 March it was resolved that his interest in the register of chancery would be cancelled.237CJ vii. 877b.

With the restoration of Charles II, Goodwin retired from public life, although he retained considerable local standing and, as a former MP ‘who said he had known the borough for 60 years’, he came forward to give evidence to an enquiry into the disputed election at East Grinstead in February 1679. 238HP Commons 1660-90 i. 422; Hills, East Grinstead, 39. Having survived his younger brother, John, by seven years, he was buried at East Grinstead on 29 Mar. 1681.239Soc. Gen., East Grinstead par. reg. In his will, drawn up in November 1672, he bequeathed land in Surrey, Sussex and Ireland to his daughter, with an annuity for his wife and a donation to the poor of East Grinstead.240PROB11/366/279.