COWPER, James (1622-83), of Westminster.

Cowper’s great-grandfather, William Cowper, was a citizen and dyer of London and his grandfather, John Cowper, made a fortune as a notary.15VCH Herts. Fams. 133-4. The MP’s father, William, further added to their wealth, not least because, from James I’s reign, he acted as the collector of imposts for the port of London.16Coventry Docquets, 187. He purchased the lease on Hertford Castle.17Chauncy, Herts. i. 499. He claimed to be ‘an eminent lover of the church’ and in 1633 he erected a monument to Richard Hooker (1554-1600) in the church at Bishopbourne, of which the famous theologian had once been rector.18CSP Dom. 1660-1, p. 600; P. Parsons, Monuments and Painted Glass (Canterbury, 1794), 176. In 1639 the archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud, granted him a lease on some of his episcopal lands at Croydon, Surrey.19VCH Surr. iv. 220. In early 1642 he was knighted and granted a baronetcy.20Shaw, Knights of Eng. ii. 212; CB, ii. 160, 439. However, on the outbreak of the civil war, his wealth attracted Parliament’s attentions. On 22 October 1642 he was among London residents whose arrests were ordered by the Commons after they had refused to contribute money to the parliamentarian war effort.21CJ ii. 819a. Four months later the Committee for Advance of Money* issued a similar order against him and one of his sons.22CCAM 127. That son was presumably James’s elder brother, John, who died as a prisoner in Ely House in 1643.23Clutterbuck, Herts. ii. 194; VCH Herts. Fams. 137. In September 1643 Sir William was among those targeted when the same committee took steps to seize the stock in the East India Company held by investors suspected of royalism. The following year he agreed to pay half of his £1,000 assessment.24CCAM 25, 128. But he seems never to have been an active royalist and he was never troubled by the Committee for Compounding*. At the Restoration he claimed that his royalism had cost him £17,000.25CSP Dom. 1660-1, pp. 600-1. That can only be plausible if it includes the loss of his rents from the lands at Croydon following the sale of bishops’ lands.

James Cowper was Sir William’s fifth and youngest surviving son. After attending Cambridge, he became a student at Lincoln’s Inn, where he was called to the bar in 1650.26LI Admiss.; LI Black Bks. ii. 387. He kept chambers in Stone Pace Row and may have practised as a barrister.27LI Black Bks. iii. 54. By the 1650s he had embarked on a rather different career, but his connections with Lincoln’s Inn would still prove to be crucial. In 1652 Sir William Cowper bought Cup Field, the eastern half of the site whose western half had recently been developed by William Newton as the square that became Lincoln’s Inn Fields.28Survey of London, iii. 11n. With the plan of extending eastwards the north and south sides of the square, Sir William took on partners – Robert Henley (d. 1656), the wealthy former chief clerk of the court of king’s bench, his son Robert Henley†, and finally James Cowper.29Aylmer, King’s Servants, 305-8; HP Commons 1660-1690. It was James who undertook the day-to-day management of their scheme.

The lawyers of Lincoln’s Inn had previously opposed the re-development of the area, so James may have been brought on board specifically in the hope that he could help persuade them to change their minds. In February 1657 he and Henley formally approached the inn with their proposals. Two months later the benchers of Lincoln’s Inn agreed to proceed.30LI Black Bks. ii. 415, 416, 417. Formal agreements were signed on 19 June. In the main indenture all the parties agreed that the Cowpers and Henley could complete the square, leaving the eastern side open.31LI Black Bks. ii. 469-71. In return, by other indentures of the same date, the Cowpers and Henley sold the central part of the square to Lincoln’s Inn for a nominal sum, with Lincoln’s Inn then leasing it back to them for 900 years.32Survey of London, iii. 12.

Legislation passed by the 1656 Parliament almost wrecked these plans. During the early months of 1657 the Commons was preparing a bill to raise money by imposing a fine on any buildings which had been erected in the London area since 1620.33CJ vii. 490b-491a, 504a, 516b, 531b-532a. Recognising this as a major threat to their interests, Henley and James Cowper presented a petition to the Commons, which was read on 23 May and referred to the committee considering the bill.34CJ vii. 538b. Having ordered the engrossment of the bill on 12 June, five days later MPs considered numerous prospective amendments.35CJ vii. 542b, 544b, 554b, 555b, 563b-564b; Burton’s Diary, ii. 258. The proviso in favour of Henley and Cowper was introduced from the committee by a prominent Lincoln’s Inn lawyer, Nicholas Pedley*, probably signalling that it had the backing of the inn. The proposal, that the bill should exempt any buildings they had constructed around Lincoln’s Inn Fields before 1 October 1659, on condition that one year’s rent on them was paid to the government, was a substantial concession, as the fine imposed on other new buildings was to be £100; it was accepted by the Commons.36CJ vii. 563b-564a. The bill was passed the next day, allowing all parties to conclude the agreements on 19 June, and received the assent from the lord protector on 26 June.37CJ vii. 564b-566b, 577b; A. and O.

Over the next few years the Cowpers and Henley completed both the south side (Portugal Row) and the north side (Newman’s Row).38Survey of London, iii. 12, 39. In a modest extension to their plans, in February 1658 they agreed a swap with another developer, Horatio Moore, by which Moore acquired one of the plots in Portugal Row in return for granting part of Fickett’s Field, the plot now bounded by Portugal Street and Carey Street.39Survey of London, iii. 48. Lincoln’s Inn then objected, arguing that this was contrary to their agreement and to the 1657 Act, but this seems to have been settled amicably.40LI Black Bks. ii. 421. They also had to deal with complaints from the 2nd earl of Clare (John Holles†) that they were encroaching onto his property.41LI Black Bks. ii. 422.

Cowper stood for Hertford in the election on 8 January 1659 on his father’s interest and was elected by ‘the major part of such as had the vote’.42CJ vii. 619b. But the mayor declared that he was ineligible, being neither a freeman nor resident, and returned the army officer William Packer*. Cowper made good his claim before the committee of privileges and its recommendation that he be seated was accepted by the Commons on 24 March.43CJ vii. 619b; Burton’s Diary, iv. 250-3. The mayor appeared at the bar of the House five days later to make the necessary alterations to the election return.44CJ vii. 621b; Burton’s Diary, iv. 299. Cowper presumably then took his seat, thus becoming the first of his family to enter Parliament, but this Parliament was dismissed less than a month later, without his making a mark on its proceedings. If Cowper had sought election out of a concern that this Parliament might introduce new legislation concerning London buildings, it turned out to be unfounded, although later that year the restored Rump investigated the revenues being raised under the 1657 Act.45CJ vii. 689a, 691a-b.

Cowper was re-elected as MP for Hertford on 4 April 1660, but he was no more visible in the Convention than he had been previously. Some work in Lincoln’s Inn Fields still continued. In November 1661 he was temporarily suspended as a member of Lincoln’s Inn because of his ‘disrespectful demeanour’ and ‘uncivil reflections’ against the benchers, seemingly over their demands that he and his partners pay for boundary wall repairs along the east side of the square.46LI Black Bks. iii. 7, 9, 12, 15. But once the Lincoln’s Inn Fields had been completed, despite the opportunities created by the Great Fire, Cowper seems to have lost interest in building work.

Cowper was buried in the cloisters of St Michael Cornhill on 8 August 1683.47Par. Regs. of St Michael, Cornhill, 267. In 1689 his widow became countess of Suffolk, when her second husband, George Howard, succeeded as the 4th earl. The male line from Cowper died out within a couple of generations.48VCH Herts. Fams. 136-7. As a result, none of his descendants sat in Parliament, although his nephew, Sir William†, sat six times as MP for Hertford, while his great-nephew, William†, was raised to the peerage, first as Baron Cowper and later as Earl Cowper.