LANE, Thomas (1583-1652), of Perivale, Mdx. and the Inner Temple.

The Lanes were originally from Northamptonshire, but had been based in Buckinghamshire since the mid-1570s, when this MP’s grandfather, John Lane, had bought the manor of Overhall at Hughenden.23Vis. Bucks. 1634, 80; VCH Bucks. iii. 59. Although born at Hughenden, the young Thomas was probably brought up at Hedgerley, eight miles away.24Hughenden par. reg.; I. Temple database. Despite being an eldest son, his inheritance may have been modest and he became a career lawyer. By 1627 he was sufficiently distinguished to be promoted to the bench of the Inner Temple and over the next quarter of a century he played an active part its affairs, in due course holding most of its senior offices. While few details are known about his legal practice, he was clearly a successful and well respected barrister and probably a wealthy one. His frequent employment by the Commons as a draftsman during the Long Parliament confirms that his expertise was recognised. Lane’s sister-in-law inherited a house at Perivale in Middlesex and by 1634 the heraldic visitation of Buckinghamshire listed Lane as being resident there.25VCH Mdx. iv. 124; Vis. Bucks. 1634, 80. He seems to have leased it from his brother, presumably as a convenient base when working in London.26PROB11/229/95.

Lane nevertheless retained strong links with Buckinghamshire, especially with the borough of Chipping Wycombe, the nearest town to Hughenden. By 1620 Lane had been appointed as its recorder, probably succeeding Thomas Waller.27First Ledger Bk. of High Wycombe, 13-14; J. Parker, The Early Hist. and Antiquities of Wycombe (Wycombe, 1878), 84; W.H. Summer, ‘Some docs. in the State Pprs. relating to High Wycombe’, Recs. of Bucks. vii. 306, 309. It may have been in that capacity that he wrote to the board of green cloth in 1623 to complain about the imposition on the county of cartage for the royal household.28Ship Money Pprs. ed. C.G. Bonsey and J.G. Jenkins (Bucks. Rec. Soc. xiii), 20. However, earlier that year he had actively assisted in the collection of the benevolence the king had requested.29CSP Dom. 1619-23, p. 406. He sat as the MP for Chipping Wycombe in the 1625 and 1628 Parliaments.30HP Commons 1604-1629. His second marriage, in 1629 to one of the Duncombes of East Claydon consolidated his position among the Buckinghamshire gentry.31East Claydon par. reg.; Vis. Bucks. 1634, 45-6; Bucks. RO, D/DU/2/5-6; D/DU/2/316.

Lane would later be accused of having supported some of the more controversial aspects of Charles I’s personal rule. In 1641 a petition was submitted to Parliament alleging that he had promoted the collection of Ship Money and encouraged the implementation of the Book of Sports. According to Sir Simonds D’Ewes*, the specific allegation was that he had complained to the privy council about the conduct of the sheriff of Buckinghamshire and his failure to collect the county’s full quota for Ship Money.32Procs. LP ii. 827. This was probably a reference to the problems encountered at Chipping Wycombe. In March 1639 the privy council told the town’s mayor that they had been informed that their copy of the 1637 writ had gone missing following the death of the previous mayor and none of the money collected there had been passed on to the sheriff.33Privy Council Regs. v. 147. It has been suggested that Lane might have been the Thomas Lane who was a Ship Money assessor at Great Kimble in 1636; confusingly, one of the defaulters in that parish was also called Thomas Lane.34Ship Money Pprs. 109. Neither is likely to have been the future MP: it seems improbable that a justice of the peace would also have held the lowly position of assessor, and the Ship Money defaulter at Great Marlow was probably the yeoman of that name who lived in the town.35Ship Money Pprs. 71, 80; Bucks. RO, D/D/11/4.

As the town’s recorder and its MP from the two previous Parliaments, Lane was well placed to get re-elected as MP for Chipping Wycombe in 1640. He was duly returned with Sir Edmund Verney* on 7 March 1640. His experience was recognised in the Commons by his appointment to the committee for privileges, but otherwise he played no known part in the proceedings of the Short Parliament.36CJ ii. 4b. From the spring of 1640 the government began including him on the Buckinghamshire commission for oyer and terminer.37C181/5, ff. 169v-218v.

The following October he and Verney were re-elected. In the early days of this Parliament Lane was included on the committee investigating the dispute arising from another Buckinghamshire election, that involving John Borlase* and Peregrine Hoby* at Great Marlow. He was also included on the committee for recusants.38CJ ii. 40b, 42b; Procs. LP i. 399. However, his more immediate concern seems to have been the Ship Money controversy.39CJ ii. 45b. Potentially vulnerable on his own account, he went out of his way to condemn it. In one debate he claimed that Sir John Denham, one of the barons of the exchequer who had advised the king of the levy’s legality, had told him that Lord Keeper Coventry (Sir Thomas Coventry†) would have objected to its introduction had he known it would be collected every year.40Northcote Note Bk. 44. Then, in the debate about the new lord keeper, he compared Lord Finch (Sir John Finch†) to the keeper of a deer park who had removed all the fences, killed the deer and then turned the park into a wilderness.41Northcote Note Bk. 95. If Lane hoped to divert attention from his own record, he failed. On 20 March 1641 the Commons considered a petition from William Widucere which accused Lane of having supported Ship Money and the Book of Sports. This was then referred to the committee considering complaints against judges.42CJ ii. 108b; Procs. LP ii. 827; Two Diaries of Long Parl. 111. Nothing more was heard of the matter. Lane later assisted in moves to prosecute John Bartlett for his support for Ship Money.43CJ ii. 571a. His only other recorded intervention in this period was a comment on a point of legal technicality during one of the debates on the laws against Catholic recusants (28 Nov. 1640).44Procs. LP i. 358.

Lane’s burst of activity in the opening months of the Long Parliament was followed by a prolonged period of apparent inactivity. Apart from taking the Protestation on 14 July, two months after it had first been introduced, he played no known role in Parliament until early 1642.45CJ ii. 209b; Harl. 479, f. 59. He then reappeared in the records as the conduit to the Commons of two pieces of news. On 3 January he arranged for Sir Samuel Duncombe to appear before MPs to report comments by one of the inhabitants of the St Martin-in-the-Fields’ workhouse, that the Irish should seek revenge for the execution of the 1st earl of Strafford (Sir Thomas Wentworth†).46PJ i. 2-3; CJ ii. 366a. Lane was responding to (or exploiting) the widespread fear that the Irish rebellion would spread to England. Other evidence confirms Lane’s concerns about events in Ireland, not least his investment of £400 in the Irish Adventure.47CJ ii. 415b, 498a; CSP Ire. Adv. 1642-59, pp. 131-3; Bottigheimer, Eng. Money and Irish Land, 185. Then, on 28 January, John Glynne* informed the Commons that the attorney general, Sir Edward Herbert*, was claiming that Lane could provide details of who had drafted the accusations against the Five Members. Lane was not then present in the House, but he turned up the following day to explain that a source, whom he refused to name, had told him that Henrietta Maria’s attorney, Peter Ball*, had been the person responsible. Lane was added that same day to the committee for informations – or the Committee for Examinations as it would come to be known.48PJ i. 212, 216, 220, 222; CJ ii. 402b.

Lane remained moderately active during the rest of 1642, generally supporting Parliament as it moved into open conflict with the king. Having been included on the committee appointed on 11 May to consider how to levy the poll tax on the London yeomanry, Lane probably chaired its meetings, as he reported on its deliberations to the Commons six days later.49CJ ii. 566b; PJ ii. 330. In some cases his colleagues made use of his professional expertise. On 1 July he was one of three MPs sent to inspect the exchequer records to establish whether Henry Hastings had been appointed as the sheriff of Leicestershire; Lane reported back that they had found no record of that.50CJ ii. 646b, 652a; PJ iii. 160. He took an interest in the celebrated case of John Bastwick and helped draft the impeachment articles against Sir John Lucas, the prominent courtier who had been the focus of riots at Colchester.51CJ ii. 712b, 743a. It may have been with Lucas in mind that he argued that Parliament should seize the estates of those to be impeached even before they had been convicted.52Add. 18777, f. 16. When John Fountaine, a prisoner brought before the Commons in October 1642, refused to answer, Lane presented legal arguments to justify actions being taken against him anyway.53Add. 18777, f. 27. Once both sides began to raise armies, he showed a concern to discourage disorders and plundering by soldiers.54CJ ii. 725b, 879b. He made his own contribution to the military preparations by promising to lend a horse.55PJ iii. 58n, 473.

Lane’s involvement in the proceedings of the Commons tailed off very sharply during 1643. His inclusion on the committee to ask the treasurers of the Inner and Middle Temple to lend their altar plate to Parliament and to remove the altar steps from the Temple Church simply reflected the fact that he was a prominent Inner Temple barrister.56CJ iii. 106b. Apart from that, his only known contributions were to take the oath imposed in the aftermath of the plot of Edmund Waller* on 6 June and to take the Solemn League and Covenant on 22 December.57CJ iii. 118a, 349b. Since the latter had first been promoted the previous September, it is likely that Lane had been absent from Westminster since then. He resurfaced in January 1644, when he was named to the committee considering evidence gathered for the prospective impeachment of the archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud.58CJ iii. 357b.

If he had been absent, he quickly made up for it during the second quarter of 1644. With full military campaigning resuming for the summer, Buckinghamshire was once again the crucial frontline between London and Oxford. Lane’s immediate concern was the local impact of the renewed fighting. In April 1644 he helped organise an immediate payment of £3,000 for the garrison at Aylesbury and several weeks later he and Thomas Fountaine* pressed for a substitute to be appointed to take the place of that garrison’s absent governor.59CJ iii. 452b, 503b, He also backed extra funding for the garrison at Windsor Castle, another stronghold vital to the defence of Buckinghamshire.60CJ iii. 507b. When the soldiers in the army of Robert Devereux, 3rd earl of Essex, made themselves unpopular with the locals in Buckinghamshire by claiming free quarter, Lane raised the matter in Parliament.61Harl. 166, f. 64. When more troops were needed in Oxfordshire, he helped negotiate for them with the common council of London.62CJ iii. 523a Special favours were given to a donor who had given £500 towards the troops there as a result of a bill drafted by him, and Lane had probably lent £100 of his own money for the same purpose.63CJ iii. 504a, 525b, 528a-b. Success in securing control of those counties made it possible for Parliament to legislate for new civil administrations. Lane was then responsible for piloting the required legislation, the bill for Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire, through the Commons.64CJ iii. 538a. Naturally, he was one of the Buckinghamshire commissioners named in it.65A. and O.; Luke Letter Bks. 341. Although he was less visible during the second half of 1644, when he did contribute to the debates in the Commons it was to raise these same issues. He promoted the bill for the maintenance of the Abingdon garrison in October 1644, and then tried to persuade Parliament to accept a plan to sell the royal plate from the jewel house to help finance it.66Harl. 166, ff. 127, 128.

As long as the royalists continued to control Oxford, Lane remained keen that Parliament should capture that city. This was most obvious in the summer of 1645 when he took the lead in raising loans from the excise commissioners and from London to finance the siege and in promoting the bills to underwrite them.67CJ iv. 156b, 157a, 164a, 210b, 211a. He continued to support funding for garrisons in the vicinity and, when it became necessary to demolish Donnington Castle, he helped find the money.68CJ iv. 313b, 319a-b. The Commons also used him to communicate with the governor of Abingdon, Richard Browne II*.69CJ iv. 85a, 235a, 337a. Lane apparently backed the creation of the New Model army, being one of the three MPs who were given the task in January 1645 of drafting the bill to authorise the reform.70CJ iv. 18a. The reorganisation meant that many soldiers were paid off and, since there was a large concentration of troops in and around Buckinghamshire, Lane was particularly keen that they should be remunerated promptly.71CJ iv. 238a, 259a, 260a, 435a.

Lane was still willing to consider a negotiated deal with the king. When, in November 1645, the Commons prepared terms to be offered, Lane took part in the drafting.72CJ iv. 354b. However, the following April, when the Scots published their demands for a speedy settlement, he was less conciliatory. On 14 April Lane headed the list of MPs added to the committee which drafted the Commons’ reply distancing themselves from the Scottish demands for hard-line Presbyterianism.73CJ iv. 508a. He may not have been too disappointed when the Scottish commissioners left later that year. With Sir Thomas Widdrington* and John Wylde*, he played a central role in October 1646 in the preparation of the bill appointing commissioners for the great seal.74CJ iv. 688a-b, 691a-b. Other issues with implications for the legal system, such the reform of probate or the abolition of the court of wards, interested him as well.75CJ iv. 696b, 710a, 727a. Moreover, as a lawyer and as a steadfast supporter of the parliamentarian victory, he was regularly appointed to those committees handling the legislation on the proceedings against the defeated royalists.76CJ iv. 708a, 712b; v. 61b, 74a, 85a, 166a, 186a.

During the crisis of late July and early August 1647, Lane sided with the Independents. Although he did not withdraw to join the army – and indeed may not have been at Westminster since the previous May – he was included on the committee which handled the bill to repeal all the votes passed during the Speakers’ absences.77CJ v. 272a. Later, in November 1647, when the Independents favoured the Lords’ wish that their Four Propositions be converted into bills, Lane was included on the committee appointed to prepare the necessary legislation.78CJ v. 371a. Meanwhile, he seems to have thought that the army’s demands for the swift payment of their arrears should be heeded with some urgency.79CJ v. 395b, 397b.

However, in religious policy, it is plausible that Lane favoured a moderate Presbyterian settlement. He certainly approved of the final dismantling of the last vestiges of episcopacy, as represented by the sale of the bishops’ lands and the abolition of the palatinate of Durham.80CJ v. 274a, 344a, 400a. But on other matters he was more conservative. In December 1647 he and another prominent lawyer, Nathaniel Bacon*, were added to the committee to protect the rights of patrons to ecclesiastical livings, presumably so that they could act as trouble-shooters after it had been decided to revive the bill. Lane, in particular, was instructed to supervise its passage.81CJ v. 380b. In April 1648 he was one of only three MPs to whom the bill to maintain preaching ministers in Bath was committed and he favoured legislation to enforce observance of the sabbath.82CJ v. 522a, 539a. He evidently also approved of tithes, as later that year he was asked to prepare the bill extending for a further 12 months the previous order for their continued collection.83CJ vi. 48b.

On the outbreak of the second civil war in the summer of 1648, Lane gave his support to the military preparation in and around London. He sat on the committee which finalised the legislation to merge the London, Westminster, Tower Hamlets and Southwark militias, and he was appointed as a militia commissioner to assist recruitment within Middlesex.84CJ v. 630b, 655b. Moreover, like many of his fellow MPs, he had little sympathy with those regarded as having resumed the bloodletting. He therefore supported the confiscation of the estates of the rebels in Wales and Essex, the granting of the estates of James Stuart, 4th duke of Lennox, to John Bastwick and the banishment of the 1st earl of Holland (Henry Rich†).85CJ v. 630b, vi. 52a, 60a, 67a, 77a-b. He also sat on the three-man committee which drafted the bill to prevent delinquents travelling more than five miles from their homes.86CJ vi. 72a.

Still prepared to pursue peace negotiations, on 15 November 1648 he was added first to the committee on the king’s propositions after it was specifically asked to consider the issue of purveyance.87CJ vi. 77a. Thomas Pride* and those others who carried out the purge of the Commons on 6 December evidently regarded him with some suspicion, as he was among those MPs imprisoned. This may be a measure of how far he had become disillusioned by events since 1647. He was released six days later following the intervention of Widdrington.88Underdown, Pride’s Purge, 158-9, 377. Now in his late sixties, Lane thereafter began to withdraw from public life. In February 1651 he failed to act as one of the joint auditors of the Inner Temple, breaking his long record of devoted service to that institution. By then he may already have resigned or been removed as the recorder of Chipping Wycombe, being replaced by Edmund Petty†.89First Ledger Bk. of High Wycombe, 144. It is entirely possible that he was already ill, as he made his will early the following year and died on 31 December 1652.90PROB11/229/95; Brown, Chronicles of Greenford Parva, 80 With no surviving children, he left the remainder of his lease on the lands at Perivale to his wife and then to his brother John. The lands he leased at Hughenden passed to Thomas, the son of his other brother, Samuel.91PROB11/229/95. His great-niece, Mary Lane, married Paul Foley†, Speaker of the House of Commons between 1695 and 1698.92HP Commons 1690-1715.