TOLSON, Richard (1622-90), of Bridekirk, Cumb., and Wath-upon-Dearne, Yorks.

The Tolsons were established in Cumberland by the reign of Edward 1.26R.S. Ferguson, Cumb. and Westmld. MPs (1871), 444. They purchased the manor of Bridekirk, near Cockermouth, from the crown at the Reformation, and Richard’s father, Henry Tolson, acquired a further estate at Wath-upon-Dearne, Yorkshire, by marriage.27Hunter, S. Yorks. ii. 68. Richard Tolson embarked upon a career in the law, gaining admission to Lincoln’s Inn in December 1641.28LI Admiss. i. 248. His studies were probably interrupted by the civil war, and the radical Cumberland pamphleteer John Musgrave alleged in 1647 that Tolson had spent some time at Oxford while it was still a royalist garrison. He further claimed that Tolson and his father were ‘great persecutors of honest men under the name of sectaries and Independents but favour and protect papists and malignants’.29J. Musgrave, A Fourth Word to the Wise (1647), 18 (E.391.9). In fact, Henry Tolson was one of the most active members of the Cumberland county committee, although that is not to say that Musgrave’s charges were entirely groundless.30C.B. Phillips, ‘County cttees. and local government in Cumb. and Westmld. 1642-60’, NH v. 49. Richard Tolson had matriculated at Oriel College, Oxford, in 1637, and it is possible that he had continued his education after the outbreak of war not at Lincoln’s Inn but at Oxford. This may explain why in 1646 he chose to be re-admitted to the Inns of Court – although on this occasion at Gray’s Inn.31G. Inn Admiss. 242. There is certainly nothing to indicate that he was in Cumberland during the first half of the 1640s.

Tolson was elected as a ‘recruiter’ for Cumberland in the spring of 1646, along with William Armyne – the son of the prominent Westminster Independent MP Sir William Armyne.32Supra, ‘Cumberland’. Both men were only 23 at the time of their election, prompting Musgrave to refer to them as ‘beardless’ minors and to sneer that Tolson had been ‘taken the other day from grammar school’. According to Musgrave, Tolson was returned through the machinations of Sir Wilfrid Lawson* – the sheriff of Cumberland at the time – and Richard Barwis* and received the backing of the county’s ‘malignants and delinquents’.33Musgrave, A Fourth Word to the Wise, 18. Tolson’s father certainly appears to have been a member of the Barwis-Lawson faction, while Tolson himself subsequently opposed the release of Musgrave, who had been imprisoned by Parliament in 1645 after mounting a public attack upon this group.34CJ iv. 368a; A. and O. i. 707; Musgrave, A Fourth Word to the Wise, 18.

It is also clear that Tolson enjoyed the support of the Barwis-Lawson faction’s most powerful friend at Westminster – the Independent peer Algernon Percy†, 4th earl of Northumberland. Northumberland owned the honor of Cockermouth, which adjoined Bridekirk, and Tolson’s grandfather had served as estate officer to the Percys in James’s reign.35Phillips, ‘County cttees. in Cumb. and Westmld.’, 49. Tolson had approached Northumberland through the earl’s northern steward Hugh Potter* – as Potter informed his master in February 1646.

I received letters last night from Mr Tolson of Cumberland – a neighbour to Cockermouth and one that has been always very respective to your lordship – to recommend him to your lordship for the assistance of your freeholders’ voices for shire knight of that county, for which there is a writ lately come down and the election to be speedily. He is a hopeful young man, and I think his father is known to you, and there is little choice in that county.36Alnwick, P.I.3(n): Potter to Northumberland, 12 Feb. 1646.

This last remark may allude either to Tolson’s youth, to doubts concerning his past loyalty to Parliament, or to the fact that he did not belong to the county elite. Musgrave claimed (although with considerable exaggeration) that the Tolsons were ‘the meanest family of any of the gentry in the north’.37Musgrave, A Fourth Word to the Wise, 18. Northumberland agreed to give Tolson his assistance, even though he was aware that Tolson’s grandfather, Richard Tolson senior, had voted against the return of the Percy candidate, Francis Allein*, in the 1642 election at Cockermouth.38Alnwick, O.I.2(f): Northumberland to Potter, c.Feb. 1646; Cumb. RO (Whitehaven), DLEC/107 (‘A perfect list of such burgesses as gave their votes against Mr Allein’).

Tolson had taken his seat in the Commons by 27 May 1646, when he subscribed the Solemn League and Covenant.39CJ iv. 556a. Although granted leave of absence on 6 June, he seems to have been active on the Commons’ committee of the Northern Association* during July.40CJ iv. 568a; vi. 421b. This committee was dominated by friends of the Fairfaxes and men sympathetic to the New Model army, among them Sir Thomas Widdrington and Francis Thorpe – the retained legal advisers of the earl of Northumberland. That Tolson was broadly aligned with the Independent faction in 1646, or at least shared its dislike of the Scots, is suggested by his appointment with the radical Yorkshire MP Luke Robinson on 15 December 1646 to nominate the men whom Parliament would send to Scotland as ‘hostages’ for payment of the £200,000 voted to the Scottish army upon its leaving the kingdom.41CJ v. 14a. Like the Westminster Independents, the Barwis-Lawson faction was keen to see the back of the Scots, who had quartered in Cumberland and the other northern counties for several years.

With the Scots’ withdrawal from England, however, Tolson’s political loyalties may have shifted. None of his appointments during 1647 suggest that he was closely aligned with the Independents – indeed, rather the opposite.42CJ v. 47a, 51b, 60b, 112b, 171b, 265a, 278a. Having remained at Westminster after the Presbyterian ‘riots’ of 26 July and the flight of both Speakers to the army, he was named to a committee established on 2 August to investigate the authors of this ‘high breach’ of parliamentary privilege.43CJ v. 265a. Dominated by Presbyterian Members, this committee was probably set up in a vain attempt to appease the army and prevent it moving upon London. On 5 August, after the army had marched into the capital, Tolson was among a group of Presbyterian MPs who were summoned to attend Parliament.44HMC Egmont, i. 443.

Although Tolson was apparently not seriously implicated in the Presbyterians’ July 1647 counter-revolution and was named on 18 August to a committee for repealing the legislation passed during the Speakers’ absence, he seems to have lost much of his appetite for parliamentary politics thereafter.45CJ v. 278a. Granted leave of absence on 1 September, he was declared absent at the call of the House on 9 October and absent and excused on 24 April 1648.46CJ v. 287a, 330a, 543b. That same day (24 Apr.), a letter was read in the House from Barwis, Lawson and the Cumberland county committee, affirming Tolson’s ‘zeal and affection’ and his innocence of any offence deserving the House’s displeasure and asking that he be summoned to attend his seat: ‘we finding ourselves already prejudiced by his absence [at Westminster], to whom we have so often made our addresses’.47CJ v. 543b; Bodl. Tanner 58, f. 772. On 1 May, the Commons ordered that a report be made concerning Tolson and other Members ‘that forbear to come to the House in regard of the cases they have put in’.48CJ v. 548a.

Tolson had apparently resumed his seat by 1 June 1648, when he was added to a committee concerning soldiers’ accounts, and three days later he and Francis Allein were ordered to prepare an ordinance for payment of the arrears of Colonel Thomas Barwis (Richard Barwis’s uncle) and other Cumberland parliamentarian officers.49CJ v. 581b, 584b. The Commons evidently reposed at least some measure of trust in Tolson, for on 27 June, he was ordered into Cumberland to persuade the county’s gentry against joining with the English royalists and the Scottish Engagers.50CJ v. 613b. Back in the north west, he spent two weeks accompanying Major-general John Lambert* and his army on campaign, before withdrawing to the safety of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, from where he wrote a letter to the Speaker in August, requesting arms and ammunition for Parliament’s northern forces and declaring his readiness to sacrifice his life ‘for God and my country’.51Bodl. Tanner 57, f. 206. He was almost certainly still in Cumberland when he was declared absent and excused at the call of the House on 26 September.52CJ vi. 34b. A fortnight later (10 Oct.), he signed an order of the Cumberland militia commissioners appointing Sir Wilfrid Lawson captain of a troop of horse in the county.53SP28/226, unfol; Add. 5508, f. 208.

Despite his support for the war-effort against the Engagers, Tolson was among those Members who were secluded at Pride’s Purge in December 1648.54A List of the Imprisoned and Secluded Members (1648, 669.f.13.62). The precise nature of his offence against the army and its allies is not clear, although it is possible that they had not forgiven him for aligning with the Presbyterians during the July 1647 coup. Nevertheless, he retained his place on the Cumberland bench and assessment commissions under the Rump and remained active in local government.55Cumb. RO (Whitehaven), DCU/2/1. Moreover, in March 1652 he was added to the commission of the peace for the West Riding of Yorkshire, where he had inherited property from his mother.56C231/6, p. 234. He seems to have spent a large part of his time during the 1650s pursuing his legal career in London, and in February 1656 he became a Lincoln’s Inn barrister.57Cumb. RO (Whitehaven), DLEC/169/1655: Tolson to Potter, 1655; DLEC/169/1656: same to same, 27 Mar. 1656; LI Black Bks. ii. 411. It was perhaps his absence from Cumberland that explains his omission from the 1656-7 commissions of peace for the county. However, he had taken up residence at Bridekirk again by May 1659, when he wrote to the Speaker asking to be admitted to the restored Rump

residing now in my native county of Cumberland and viewing a declaration of the Parliament ... dated ... the 7th of May 1659 [announcing the re-assembly of the Rump] ...I own you in all fidelity and obedience. And ... having weighty affairs, and this county being one of the most remote from London, I humbly implore your honour’s favour to communicate my innocency, integrity and willingness that as a Member I may attend the Parliament and there discharge my trust in all faithfulness... And also I crave your honour to assure the Parliament that I shall devote myself for a blessing on their proceedings and in my sphere in a civil or martial way be ready ever to demonstrate a cordial and real activeness for the good old cause and peace of this commonwealth as a free state.58Clarke Pprs. iv. 277.

This extraordinary adoption of the language of the commonwealthsmen by Tolson did not persuade the Rump, and his plea to be allowed to resume his seat was ignored. Nevertheless, Tolson’s efforts to ingratiate himself with the post-protectoral regimes may not have stopped here, for it was alleged after the Restoration that he had collaborated with the committee of safety (the governing council set up by the army after it had dissolved the Rump in October 1659) – a charge that Tolson denied.59SP29/11, f. 167; CSP Dom. 1660-1, p. 216.

Following the re-admission of the secluded Members in February 1660, Tolson resumed his seat at Westminster.60The Grand Memorandum, or a True and Perfect Catalogue of the Secluded Members (1660, 669 f.24.37). He was apparently well regarded by the restored Long Parliament, being added to the Cumberland militia commission and restored to the county bench in March.61CJ vii. 867a; A Perfect List, 10. In the elections to the 1660 Convention, Tolson and Wilfrid Lawson – a younger son of Sir Wilfrid – were returned for Cockermouth.62Cumb. RO (Whitehaven), DLEC/107 (1660 election pprs.); CSP Dom. 1659-60, p. 415. On this occasion, Tolson was elected on his own interest, it seems, for he and Lawson defeated the earl of Northumberland’s candidate, Lord Broghill (Roger Boyle*), on a poll, although the result might have been different had not the bailiff of the borough suppressed the earl’s letters in support of Broghill.63Cumb. RO (Whitehaven), DLEC/169/1660: Potter to bailiff of Cockermouth, c.Jan. 1661; DLEC/107 (1660 poll lists). Tolson subsequently presented the townsmen’s apologies to Northumberland, assuring him that they still desired his patronage.64Cumb. RO (Whitehaven), DLEC/107: burgesses of Cockermouth to Potter, 10 Nov. 1660; same to Northumberland, 10 Nov. 1660; Potter to Sir Patricius Curwen*, 19 Jan. 1661. Listed by Philip Wharton, 4th Baron Wharton, as a likely supporter of a Presbyterian church settlement, Tolson contributed very little to the Convention’s proceedings.65HP Commons, 1660-90; G.F.T. Jones, ‘The composition and leadership of the Presbyterian party in the Convention’, EHR lxxix. 335. In about August 1660, he petitioned the crown for the stewardship of several Cumberland manors, claiming that he had been ‘faithful to his Majesty and also a great sufferer in his estate’.66SP29/11, f. 167. Although neither claim appears to have been justified, he was appointed steward of one of the manors in December 1660.67CTB i. 99.

Tolson’s political rehabilitation after the Restoration was probably helped by his close links with the under-secretary of state (Sir) Joseph Williamson†, who was the son of a former vicar of Bridekirk and had been employed by Tolson as his clerk during the 1640s.68CSP Dom. 1666-7, p. 163; ‘Richard Tolson’, HP Commons 1660-1690; ‘Joseph Williamson’, Oxford DNB. Williamson was probably instrumental in securing Tolson’s appointment at some point in the 1660s as a bailiff and collector of the queen mother’s revenues.69CSP Dom. 1663-4, p. 113; CTB iv. 394. Tolson’s chequered political career suffered a setback in 1661 through his failure to secure re-election at Cockermouth. It was reported that he had alienated the townsmen by supporting excise men against the borough. Yet even had he retained the good will of the Cockermouth voters it is doubtful whether he would have prevailed against the successful candidates, Sir Wilfrid Lawson and Hugh Potter.70Cumb. RO (Whitehaven), DLEC/169/1660: Curwen to Potter, 25 Feb. 1661; HP Commons 1660-1690, ‘Cockermouth’. As a Cumberland magistrate, Tolson was involved in arraigning Quakers and in an attempt in the late 1660s to suppress Cockermouth’s Congregationalist church.71CSP Dom. 1661-2, p. 263; The Cockermouth Congregational Church Bk. (1651-c.1765) ed. R.B. Wordsworth (Cumb. and Westmld. Antiq. and Arch. Soc. rec. ser. xxi), 27.

After settling his estates on his son in 1672, Tolson seems to have retired to his property at Wath-upon-Dearne in south Yorkshire.72Burke’s Commoners, ii. 135; HP Commons 1660-1690, ‘Richard Tolson’. When he failed to appear at Penrith in 1688 to answer the three questions on the repeal of the Test Act and Penal Laws, it was reported that he resided in Yorkshire and had ‘neither fortune nor interest considerable’ in Cumberland.73Penal Laws and Test Act ed. G. Duckett (1882), i. 49. He died intestate in the summer of 1690 and was buried at Wath-upon-Dearne on 2 July.74Wath-upon-Dearne par. reg.; Borthwick, Doncaster Deanery Act Bk. 24B, f. 35v. He was the first and last of his line to sit in Parliament.