MORICE, William (1602-76), of Churston, West Putford, and Werrington, Devon.

The statement that William Morice’s paternal family originated in Carmarthenshire seems to have originated in the nineteenth century, and is unfortunately repeated in a modern authority.32Al Ox.; HP Commons 1660-1690. Evan Morice in fact came from Caernarfonshire, at the other end of the principality. A near contemporary source correctly identifies the family as that of Clenennau, and Evan Morice as a younger son of that house.33Prince, Worthies (1701), 474. Clenennau is in Eifionydd, the ancient name for that part of south Caernarfonshire around Porthmadog, where it borders Merioneth. The house has been described as ‘the most important residence in south Caernarfonshire during the later years of Elizabeth and the early years of James I’.34Clenennau Lttrs. and Pprs. Pt 1 (Aberystwyth 1947), v-vi. Evan Morice himself is harder to identify in the sparsely documented pedigree of the family, which in the person of Sir William Maurice† had represented both the county and the borough of Beaumaris in three Parliaments between 1593 and 1604. Evan Morice (to use the Anglicised form of the forename Ifan recorded in pedigrees) seems likely to have been a younger son of John Morice, brother of Sir William Maurice, and his wife Gwenllian, daughter of Cadwaladr ap Griffith ap Robert Fychan.35Dwn, Heraldic Visitations ed. S.R. Meyrick, ii. 156-7. Evan’s academic and clerical career led him from a fellowship at All Souls, Oxford, in 1577, via a doctorate in civil law in 1592 to the chancellorship of Exeter diocese in 1594, which brought the family to Devon. Evan Morice married into the west Devon family of Castell, but he lived in Exeter, in 1602 in St Martin parish, where he was taxed on lands valued at £7.36Exeter in the Seventeenth Century, 3. It was there that his eldest son, William, was born that year on 6 November.

William Morice was less than four years old when his father died. Mary, his mother, married again, to Sir Nicholas Prideaux of Padstow, Cornwall, a match which brought many benefits and opportunities for her son. Morice was educated in various places, including at Exeter grammar school, and at 18 was despatched to Oxford, where the rector of his college was his kinsman by his mother’s marriage, Dr Humphrey Prideaux. Prideaux took a particular interest in Morice’s academic career, which prospered at Oxford.37Prince, Worthies (1701), 474. Morice is said to have composed ‘spirited’ but unpublished verse there, and graduated in 1622. Five years later he sealed the knot which bound him to the Prideaux family by marrying Elizabeth, the grand-daughter of Rector Prideaux.38Gilibert, Parochial Hist. Cornw. ii. (1st pagination), 590-1. After graduating, he returned to Devon, to live at Churston, a house in West Putford, in the upper Torridge valley. He seems to have lived an unremarkable life as a country squire, producing poetry in manuscript that was passed around the gentry families of north-west Devon.39Prince, Worthies (1701), 474. He was nearly 38 before he was named to the commission of the peace, the delay perhaps reflecting his rather uncertain social standing among the Devon gentry, as the son of a deceased Welshman and the adopted son of a Cornish family. Evidently among his most devoted friends was Sir Bevill Grenvile*, a kinsman, who wrote solicitously to Morice from Newcastle-upon-Tyne in 1639, to enquire after his health but also to impart detailed news of the king’s campaign against the Scots.40TSP i. 2-3. Grenvile made Morice a trustee of his estates when he drew up his will, and other west Devon gentry entrusted estates to him in the late 1630s.41Clarendon, Hist. vi. 194; CCC 2214; Coventry Docquets, 728.

If Morice played any part in Devon local government before the civil war, it must have been very limited. During the civil war, the king’s side claimed him for the commission of the peace in January 1643, but he was dropped the following November. He was among the Devon gentry who were enthusiastic for a cessation of armed hostilities between king and Parliament in 1643, along with Thomas Monck, brother of George Monck*.42Add. 44058, ff. 20-1. These conciliatory views probably made him of no further use to those directing royalist military administration in Devon. When Parliament secured its grip on the county in 1646, Morice cautiously emerged from seclusion. He was named to the commission of the peace by March 1647, and by October that year was acting as a tax commissioner in the western hundreds of his county.43SP28/153, file ‘unfit parts’. It was probably this experience that persuaded Morice in February 1648 to petition Parliament, with a number of other justices of the peace and committeemen, including William Fry* and John Quicke* against the burden of taxation in Devon. While careful to urge that relief be sent to the Protestant army in Ireland against the Catholic rebels, their complaint notwithstanding, the petitioners, claiming to speak for the Devon populace as a whole, asserted that the county contributed disproportionately heavily towards the assessment.44Devon RO, Devon QS rolls, summer 1647, misplaced petition.

Morice maintained his stance of support for Parliament, but with reservations, throughout 1648. On 4 August, as a member of the Devon standing committee and in company with Arthur Upton*, Robert Shapcote*, William Fry and Sir John Northcote*, he wrote to Speaker Lenthall to report problems in securing the county militia. The Devon men warned of local dissidents – ‘intestine seditions’ – and feared the consequences of a revival of royalist military strength from outside the county. Despite the recent stand-off between the Exeter authorities and the New Model regiment of Sir Hardress Waller*, they requested that Waller remain in the county. It was against this background of fear and uncertainty that Morice was elected on the 15 August to Parliament as knight of the shire. Among his supporters were Northcote and Shapcote, his committee colleagues.45C219/43/2. Morice never went to Westminster to take his seat in this Parliament, so far as can be established; like Shapcote, he maintained a disapproving aloofness from the House probably because of the tightening grip of the Independents and the army on proceedings there.

Morice attended the Devon quarter sessions diligently in 1648, and put in an appearance there while the trial of the king was proceeding at Westminster. The death sentence and execution repelled him, however, and he stayed away from sessions until the autumn of 1651. His reconciliation was with the duties of local government rather than the political regime in London, it seems, for it was not until after the founding of the Cromwellian protectorate that he came to sessions again, and for the rest of the 1650s he kept in touch with the bench with attendances that were occasional rather than frequent or regular.46Devon RO, Devon QS order bks. 1/8, 1/9. He never renounced his place in the commission of the peace, however, and acted regularly if discreetly, as a magistrate in his own locality.47Devon RO, Devon QS rolls; HMC 4th Rep. 428. He appointed tax collectors in west Devon late in 1653, and was involved in the reform of Devon jury selection in April 1655.48E113/6, answer of William Mill; Add. 44058, f. 42v. He managed to retain authority locally, despite orders against him which arose from the zeal of informers. In December 1649, he was noted as an associate of Sir John Grenvile, son of the late Sir Bevill, and an informer persuaded one of the London agencies for penal taxation that he was a delinquent whose estate should be seized. The order seems not to have been acted upon.49CCAM 1160. He remained a trustee of the Grenvile estates, and in July 1650 complained to the commissioners for compounding in London of their continuing sequestration.50CCC 2214.

Morice’s term as high sheriff in 1651-2 is further evidence of his willingness to co-operate with interregnum regimes. By that time, he had recently bought the manor house of Werrington, on the Devon-Cornwall border, from Sir Francis Drake*.51Prince, Worthies (1701), 474. His godly piety was recognised by the government in his appointment as an ‘ejector’ under the ordinance of the lord protector’s council in August 1654. Elected as one of the eleven knights of the shire for Devon in the Parliament of 1654, he was typical of the Presbyterian squires who were returned from the county to the Cromwellian assemblies. He was a confidant of the Cornish Presbyterian, Thomas Gewen*, who gave him an account of how he and Thomas Bampfylde* had visited Cromwell on the eve of the Parliament to argue about the constitution.52Archaeologia, xxiv. 139-40. That Morice was less than entirely comfortable with this Parliament is suggested by his low profile in it. He was named to the important privileges committee on 5 September, but to no other committees for the duration of the assembly.53CJ vii. 366b.

Returned again for the third time for the county to the second protectorate Parliament in 1656, he was this time unable to take his seat as the protector’s council declined to provide him with the necessary credentials.54CJ vii. 426a. It is not difficult to account for this, as he was among a group of Devon Presbyterians that included Sir John Northcote, John Doddridge and Sir John Yonge. None of these figures was intent on overthrowing the regime, but in the wake of the 1655 disturbances which the major-generals were conjured into existence to tackle, the government was taking no chances. In November 1656, his standing as a champion of the Presbyterian position on matters such as admission to the Lord’s Supper was enhanced by the publication in London of his huge book, Coena quasi Koinh: The New-Inclosures Broken Down, a refutation of the arguments for restricting access to the Lord’s Supper, put forward by the Devon minister Humphrey Saunders.

Morice’s purchase of Werrington in 1651 was complemented around the same time by another property investment, in Launceston. This enhanced his standing in the nearby Cornish boroughs, and in 1659 he was returned to Richard Cromwell’s* Parliament for Newport on the pre-1654 constitutional arrangements. In the Commons he was soon identified with those Presbyterians who continued to criticise the protectorate. In early March he made several lengthy speeches. On 1 March, he urged the Commons to assert its right to define the powers of the Other House and to choose the membership, and on 7 March he argued that only the admission of hereditary peers, for ‘persons anciently there, were persons of interest, that would be a bulwark’ against protectorian tyranny.55Burton’s Diary, iii. 558; iv. 59-60; Schilling thesis, 140, 181. It was the latter intervention that led to his inclusion in a list of ‘country gentlemen’, including Sir George Boothe, Richard Knightley and Henry Hungerford, who ‘had been very earnest in asserting the right of the old peers’ to sit in the Other House, and in pursuit of this ‘fell in with the commonwealth party’.56Henry Cromwell Corresp. 472. Immediately afterwards, on 9 March, Morice widened his attack to include the Humble Petition and Advice, which he denounced as not a proper law, and although he conceded that the protector was a ‘most high and benign influence’, he again questioned the legality of the Other House: ‘there is no law either of God or man for these persons to sit’, and argued that they should be made to withdraw until the Commons had made a decision.57Burton’s Diary, iv. 98-9; Schilling thesis, 191-2 On 18 March, Morice became involved in the debate on the right of the Scottish MPs to sit, making a speech laden with classical references which ended with a blunt request that the Members in question should withdraw while their case was debated.58Burton’s Diary, iv. 190-1; Schilling thesis, 245-6.

In the last weeks of the Parliament, Morice continued to argue against dealing with the Other House, insisting on 28 March that it would be folly ‘to transact with them unbound, unapproved etc, and that everlastingly’.59Burton’s Diary, iv. 289. He was also involved in religious affairs. He was named to a committee on the arrangements for a fast day on 30 March, and in debate on the declaration for it on 2 April he responded to criticism of the Covenant by attacking liberty of conscience, as ‘you must not give them liberty to destroy their souls, if the conscience be erroneous it is be restrained, that the truth be not prejudiced’.60Derbs. RO, D258/10/9/2, f. 17. Despite the religious scruples of Morice and others, debate on the fast day soon reverted to a discussion of the constitution. A series of votes in the House on the details of the fast on 5 April led to a division in which Morice told with the Hampshire MP, Robert Wallop, for those seeking to establish that Parliament could set bounds and limitations on either the ‘single person’ (the lord protector) or the Other House. His side lost the division by 50 votes.61CJ vii. 622a, 626a. On 6 April Morice was named to the committee to discuss the ways and means of dealing with the Other House, and in debate he again delivered a grandiose speech, full of allusions to ancient authorities, against transacting with the Other House.62CJ vii. 627a; Burton’s Diary, iv. 355. It was his parting shot. Morice was give leave of absence on 7 April, and this marked the end of his service in this Parliament.63CJ vii. 627a.

There seems nothing to associate him with George Monck’s circle of confidants in the summer of 1659, and Morice may have been deliberately lying low.64Baker, Chronicle (1679), 653. He began to take a more active part in politics towards the end of the year, and by early January 1660 at the latest, probably in fact much earlier, he was convinced of the need to allow those secluded from Parliament in 1648 to take their seats. Thomas Bampfylde* presented the Speaker of the revived Rump with a petition from Devon in 1660, which called for the return of the secluded Members and the filling of vacant seats as a remedy to the collapse of trade. The versions of this petition published in London suppressed the names of the signatories, but a manuscript draft of it indicates that Morice’s was the first name among them, glossed as ‘knight of the shire’ a title which he was now willing to own.65A Declaration of the Gentry of the County of Devon (1660); A Letter from Exeter (1660, 669. f. 22.); Som. RO, DD Baker 9/3/3. But it is significant that it was the former Speaker, Bampfylde, who journeyed to London; there is no evidence of any direct action by Morice in January 1660, and those close to the king felt confident to make predictions as to who would hold high office under a restored Charles II, Morice’s name not among those touted.66Mordaunt Letter Bk. 175.

Beyond being a known country supporter of a readmission of the secluded Members, there is nothing to connect Morice with their readmission on 21 February, and no suggestion that he was part of the group of them that met in London to debate their tactics.67T. Gumble, Life of George Monck (1671), 260-1. Morice seems rather to have made contact with George Monck by letter, perhaps on the eve of the readmission, arguing the case of his fellow-Members for a place in managing the nation’s affairs but not the case of the king. But by 9 March he was in the House and had supplanted William Pierrepont* as Monck’s ‘greatest confidant’.68CJ vii. 868b; Nicholas Pprs. iv. 194-5. According to the king’s advisers, the Devon Presbyterians including Sir John Northcote* and Sir Coplestone Bampfylde* were by that point steering the Long Parliament towards an imminent dissolution before fresh elections. Morice’s part in their strategy was reported to be to make himself Monck’s shadow, to fend off approaches by the commonwealthsmen. Another commentator attributes to Morice personally the role of winding up the Long Parliament.69Bodl. Clarendon 70, 110; Hist King’s Restauration, 131. Morice was in London, so his appointment as governor of the fort and island of St Nicholas, Plymouth, seems singular in terms of his availability for the post, let alone in terms of his highly un-military background. The posting pleased royalists and dismayed republicans, but it is evidence of Monck’s reliance upon Morice above all the other Devon gentry with a similar Presbyterian outlook, and was also possibly prompted by Monck’s hopes that Morice would be a persuasive influence in meetings of the council of army officers. If this really was Monck’s plan, it was quickly frustrated, as Morice, eloquent and learned though he doubtless was, showed no interest in chancing his arm among the conferences of soldiers.70Bodl. Clarendon 70, 110; Baker, Chronicle (1679), 694; CCSP iv. 609.

Morice’s emergence, seemingly from nowhere, to prime position among Monck’s counsels, provoked the jealousy of the general’s longer established advisers, notably of Thomas Clarges* and probably also of the Devonian military associate of Monck’s, John Clobury.71CCSP iv. 592, 629; Prince, Worthies (1701), 315; Baker, Chronicle (1679), 700. According to Clarges, the close association between Monck and Morice was forged late, and was brokered by Monck’s brother; in his account, Morice turned up late to the first sitting in the House of the secluded Members.72Baker, Chronicle (1679), 690. Whether or not Morice was merely a Johnny-come-lately, the commentators are agreed that he played a crucial part in the first meeting between Monck and Sir John Grenvile, the latter representing the king’s interest. Whatever Clarges may have done to suggest that the relationship between Morice, Monck and Grenvile was fortuitous, the surviving evidence suggests that Morice was the fulcrum between them by dint of estate management duties that he had formerly undertaken for the other two.73Clarendon, Hist. vi. 192, 194 Clarges recounted how Grenvile approached Monck through Morice. Grenvile and Monck met on 17 March, the day after the Long Parliament had dissolved itself after hearing a letter of Monck’s to the Parliament. Both men had to work to overcome their suspicions of each other, which were compounded by the discrepancy in their ages. Morice was the only other person present.74CJ vii. 880a; Baker, Chronicle (1679), 695. Sir Edward Hyde* appears to add two days to the date the meeting, and describes it as a brief encounter from which a nervous Monck withdrew quickly, leaving Morice to explain to Grenvile how the general was unable to trust any of his own officers. Nevertheless, from this rather inauspicious first contact sprang the suggestion that the king should write to Monck with a letter to the forthcoming new Parliament, the Convention.75Clarendon, Hist. vi. 194; Hist. King’s Restauration, 135-7. By the 24th, other informants of the king were telling him of Monck’s willingness to receive a royal letter from Grenvile.76CCSP iv. 618.

Meanwhile, although Morice declined to become a voice at army council meetings, he must have visited Plymouth in April in order to report to the council of state (16 Apr.) on how dilapidated the fort had become during the interregnum, expressing the hope that the council would not allow ‘so noble a fabric to fall to ruin’. After the Restoration, there was indeed a significant investment in the fortifications at Plymouth, but not so much in St Nicholas fort as in the new citadel which overawed the town.77PRO30/24/3/84/1; F.W. Woodward, Citadel (Exeter, 1987), 24-39. As governor of Plymouth, Morice secured a seat for the borough in the Convention, which opened on 25 April, although a delay in his return to Westminster ensured that a speech probably in favour of the restoration of the monarchy by Heneage Finch† was not made.78CCSP iv. 674. On the 27th, Morice’s attendance was anticipated by the royalists, and on 1 May he made a speech in favour of the monarchy, reputedly the first in that Parliament.79CCSP iv. 680, v. 2, 5-6. The hostility between Morice and Clarges persisted, and in a further illustration of Morice’s capacity to arouse suspicion, John Mordaunt reported how he had ‘broken the ice’ between him and Geoffrey Palmer*.80CCSP iv. 681; v. 10. Edward Harley* was another with whom Morice had had sharp words, proving at least that his continuing exclusive access to Monck was provoking Presbyterians as well as royalists.81CCSP v. 9, 10, 12.

The post of secretary of state was bestowed on Morice through the combined advice of Grenvile and Monck, and confirmed Morice’s pivotal position between the king’s two most important advisers. Hyde’s somewhat barbed gloss on the appointment was that Morice was ‘as well qualified for it as any man who had not been versed in the knowledge of foreign affairs’.82Clarendon, Hist. vi. 202; Hist King’s Restauration, 145. The testimony of Monck’s biographer confirms the suggestion that not only was Morice lucky to acquire the office, but was dependent on Monck both for his coming into it and his leaving it

And after the acquisition of a good estate, being aged, he dismissed his office for an equivalent consideration; and this procured by the general’s solicitation, so that he did not unrivet but secure him.83Gumble, Life of Monck, 379.

This was a reference to the terms of the sale of Morice’s office, arranged in 1668 after a lacklustre period as Member for Plymouth in the Cavalier Parliament.84HP Commons 1660-1690. Following his retirement to Werrington, he resumed his studies but not his activities in Devon local government. When he drew up his will in December 1674, he bequeathed his library, including his globes, maps and cabinets, to his eldest son, Sir William Morice† the 1st baronet, urging him never to neglect his studies. He stipulated that his books should never be sold. He was evidently out of sympathy with the times and with the court he had worked to restore, abhorring ‘vicious excess of drinking and great vanity of frequent and customary taking of tobacco wherein this age and this land are too obnoxious and culpable’.85PROB11/354/351. Morice died on 12 Dec. 1676 and was buried at Werrington. His son sat for Newport in 1689, but only after his own deceased son had preceded him in the seat in two Parliaments. In contrast to the family’s Exclusionist politics in the 1680s, the 1st baronet’s eldest surviving son sat for Newport as a high tory in seven Parliaments between 1702 and 1726.86HP Commons 1660-1690.