PAULET, William (by 1568-1629)

Descended from the medieval Lords St John of Basing, whose barony fell into abeyance in 1429, the Paulets returned to prominence in the mid sixteenth century, when Sir William Paulet^† held high office under successive monarchs from Henry VIII to Elizabeth I. Created Baron St John in 1539 and marquess of Winchester 12 years later, he served as lord treasurer from 1550 to 1572, amassed a large estate, and rebuilt Basing House on a palatial scale.12 CP, xii. pt. 2, pp. 757-62; VCH Hants. iv. 117, 119. However, the 1st marquess died heavily in debt, owing the crown alone over £34,000, a burden which weighed heavily on the next three generations of the family. This situation was exacerbated by the 3rd marquess^†, Paulet’s father, who lavished money and property on his numerous illegitimate children.13 L. Stone, Crisis of the Aristocracy, 423-4; HMC Hatfield, xi. 447; C2/Jas. I/W30/28.

Paulet thus inherited considerable challenges, for which he was singularly ill-equipped. His limited mental capacity was general knowledge by the time he came of age, and remained a source of jest years after his death. Married in 1587 to a granddaughter of William Cecil^†, 1st Lord Burghley, it was rumoured that on his wedding night he did ‘not know at which end to begin’.14 CSP Dom. 1581-90, p. 597; HMC Portland, iii. 38. Paulet compounded his difficulties by embracing Catholicism. The details of his conversion are unclear, but several of his children followed his example, while many of his closest associates, such as Sir Anthony Mayney^‡, who managed his estates, and Sir Richard Weston^* (later 1st earl of Portland), were suspected or covert papists.15 M. Questier, Catholicism and Community in Early Modern Eng. 94, 424; CSP Dom. 1603-10, p. 558; Chamberlain Letters, i. 512; SP16/229/20; C2/Jas.I/W20/48; T. Birch, Ct. and Times of Jas. I, ii. 306; C142/448/102. Consequently, Paulet played little part in public life. He acted as lord steward at Mary, queen of Scots’ funeral in 1587, but rarely appeared at court. Although his father was an active lord lieutenant of both Hampshire and Dorset, Paulet himself received only minor local offices, even after inheriting the marquessate in 1598.16 CSP Scot. 1586-8, pp. 457-8; CSP Dom. 1581-90, pp 352, 405. At this juncture his estate was so encumbered that he possessed a disposable annual income of barely £1,400. Nonetheless he entertained the queen at Basing in September 1601, extravagantly deepening his financial problems in the process.17 Hatfield House, CP Petitions 494; Chamberlain Letters, i. 130; J. Nichols, Progs. of Eliz. I, iii. 566. Under pressure from Elizabeth to repay what he owed her, and thus obliged to sell land, he promoted an estate bill in the 1601 Parliament, though he attended the House of Lords for just three days during this session.18 HMC Hatfield, xi. 447, 494; LJ, ii. 227a-8a.

By the start of James I’s reign Winchester had reached a financial settlement with his illegitimate siblings, and made considerable headway in clearing his debt to the crown. Nevertheless, further retrenchment was unavoidable. Around this time he demolished a large part of Basing House to save on maintenance, taking up residence instead at nearby Hackwood House, a former hunting lodge.19 C2/Jas. I/W30/28; HMC Hatfield, xi. 410-11; VCH Hants, iv. 119, 122. Although his electoral patronage was significantly weaker than that of his father, Winchester was normally able to control one seat at St Ives, Cornwall, where he was a major landowner. In 1604 he was therefore presumably responsible for the borough’s election of William Brocke^‡, a Hampshire gentleman.20 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 139.

Winchester attended the opening two days of the 1604 session, long enough for him to receive appointment as a trier of petitions from England, Scotland and Ireland, doubtless on the basis of his status rather than his abilities. However, he then absented himself, giving his proxy to his kinsman Charles Blount^*, 1st earl of Devonshire, and stayed away for the rest of the session.21 LJ, ii. 263b; HMC Hatfield, xi. 410. Winchester was also missing when Parliament resumed on 5 Nov. 1605, though there is no evidence that he was one of the Catholic peers who were warned to avoid the House of Lords on account of the Gunpowder Plot. Nevertheless, the resultant anti-Catholic fervour must have made Westminster an uncomfortable environment for him. He attended on 9 Nov., and again on 21 Jan. 1606, the first day after the Christmas recess, but thereafter largely avoided the House. Although listed as present on 6 and 18 Feb. and 27 May, clerical error may account for at least one of these dates. Winchester attracted no appointments during this session.22 There is evidence of inaccuracy in the attendance list for 6 Feb. 1606: LJ, ii. 368b-9a.

In the autumn of 1606, when the Parliament next met, the marquess evidently obtained permission to be absent, though no record of his licence survives. By now the earl of Devonshire was dead, so this time Winchester gave his proxy to a fellow Catholic, Edward Somerset^*, 4th earl of Worcester.23 LJ, ii. 449b. Just a few months earlier Winchester had declined a summons to court for the king of Denmark’s visit, on grounds of illness, but whether he employed the same excuse to avoid Parliament is unknown.24 HMC Hatfield, xviii. 455; Add. 11402, f. 113. He never attended the 1606-7 session.

Winchester may have helped Sir Anthony Mayney to secure a Commons seat at the Cirencester election of January 1610.25 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 139. He was himself present in the Lords for five days of the first session of 1610, despite the fact that he again awarded his proxy to Worcester. He attracted no business in the upper House, but was a conspicuous figure when Prince Henry was created prince of Wales on 4 June, carrying the cap of maintenance at this ceremony, and then sitting at the prince’s table during the ensuing banquet at Whitehall Palace.26 LJ, ii. 548b; Harl. 5176, ff. 203-4; HMC Downshire, ii. 316. On 14 Oct. 1610 he was again licensed to be absent from Parliament, subsequently giving his proxy to Worcester, and missing the entire autumn session.27 SO3/4, unfol.; LJ, ii. 666b-7a.

In early 1612 Winchester’s London house was twice the venue for court-related festivities, but such events were unusual.28 Chamberlain Letters, i. 328, 339-40. Two years later the marquess increased his isolation from elite society by marrying his eldest son, Lord St John, to the daughter of another prominent Catholic, Anthony Browne^*, 2nd Viscount Montagu. The union proved unhappy, and much of the bride’s dowry was never paid, a further blow to Winchester’s finances.29 Ibid. 512; ii. 45; Questier, 94; CSP Dom. 1611-18, p. 558. At the 1614 parliamentary elections, Sir Anthony Mayney was returned at both St Ives and Cirencester, but chose to sit for the latter. The vacancy in Cornwall was filled by Thomas Tyndall^‡, an obscure figure who was presumably also the marquess’ nominee.30 HP Commons 1604-29, ii. 76, 139. Winchester himself was once more permitted to absent himself from the Lords, never attending during this session; his proxy this time was held by the lord treasurer, Thomas Howard^*, 1st earl of Suffolk.31 SO3/6, unfol. (4 Apr. 1614); LJ, ii. 686a.

Mayney left Winchester’s service following the marchioness’s death in October 1614, and the two men subsequently fell out, the marquess suing Mayney in January 1619 for alleged theft.32 C2/Jas.I/W20/48. Four months later, Winchester stayed away from Anne of Denmark’s funeral, sending as his representative his younger son John^*.33 J. Nichols, Progs. of Jas. I, iii. 538. In 1620 he reluctantly contributed £100 towards the defence of the Palatinate, paying up only after two months and a reminder from the government.34 SP14/117/2, 96; 14/118/60. With anti-Catholic feeling again running high, Winchester predictably chose to avoid the 1621 Parliament. Indeed, he presented his proxy to the earl of Worcester on 12 Dec., 16 days before he secured his licence of absence. His nominee at St Ives this time was his younger son John^*.35 SO3/7, unfol.; Soc. Antiq. SAL/MS/40, f. 64v; LJ, iii. 4a; OR. Winchester was marked as present in the Lords on 27 Nov. 1621, but this was almost certainly a clerical error: LJ, iii. 171.

During the summer of 1621 Lord St John died, his courtesy title and inheritance rights passing to his brother John, who 18 months later married the daughter of a fellow Catholic, Thomas Savage^*,1st Viscount Savage.36 Chamberlain Letters, ii. 396; Bp. of London Mar. Lics. 1611-1828 ed. G.J. Armytage (Harl. Soc. xxvi), 118. Despite his blatant recusancy, John was summoned to Parliament in 1624 as Lord St John of Basing, the government clearly assuming that his father would not attend. Winchester duly obtained leave of absence yet again, this time appointing his son as his proxy. The marquess was presumably responsible for providing a seat at St Ives for William Lakes^‡, whose identity remains uncertain.37 SO3/7, unfol. (10 Feb. 1624); LJ, iii. 205b, 214b; HP Commons 1604-29, ii. 76.

In June 1625 Winchester attended the new king, Charles I, at Canterbury, Kent when Queen Henrietta Maria arrived from France.38 CSP Dom. 1627-8, p. 121. Nevertheless, almost immediately thereafter he secured permission to miss the forthcoming Parliament. Lord St John also stayed away, and the marquess is not known to have supplied a proxy. At St Ives his nomination went to Sir William Parkhurst^‡, a kinsman of Sir Anthony Mayney; the latter had remained on good terms with Lord St John, who was effectively now exercising the family’s electoral patronage.39 Procs. 1625, p. 45; CSP Dom. 1625-6, p. 540; HP Commons 1604-29, ii. 76; PROB 11/151, f. 131v.

The war with Spain heralded a clampdown on prominent English recusants, and consequently in October 1625 the Privy Council ordered the confiscation of Winchester’s personal armoury. A proposal by St John’s wife, that the family be allowed to sell the weapons instead to help clear their debts, was rejected, though in the event nothing was actually done until the following February.40 APC, 1625-6, pp. 228, 336, 342; CSP Dom. 1625-6, p. 157. Not surprisingly, neither Winchester nor his son attended the 1626 Parliament. At a call of the House of Lords on 15 Feb. the marquess was noted as absent through sickness, a diplomatic illness perhaps, for which reason he gave his proxy to Thomas Howard^*, 21st (or 14th) earl of Arundel. Despite the prevailing climate, St Ives provided a Commons seat for Edward Savage^‡, cousin to Lady St John, while another of Winchester’s sons, Lord Henry Paulet^‡, was returned at Andover, Hampshire.41 Procs. 1626, i. 49; iv. 12; HP Commons 1604-29, ii. 76, 147; v. 616-17.

By January 1627 the government was clearly willing to rehabilitate Winchester, who manifestly posed no threat to the state, and appointed him a Hampshire commissioner for the Forced Loan. However, he is unlikely to have cooperated with its collection, for in April that year he declined to lend the crown any money himself, claiming that his attendance on the king at Canterbury in 1625 had left him heavily in debt, and again proposing the sale of his confiscated arms to raise funds. Unimpressed, the Council issued a final demand for payment in July, and the marquess eventually contributed £300.42 CSP Dom. 1627-8, p. 121; APC, 1627, pp. 419-20; E401/2443, unfol. (15 Nov. 1627).

The 1628 parliamentary elections saw the return at St Ives of Edward Savage’s brother-in-law, John Payne^‡, another man doubtless nominated by Winchester at St John’s request. As usual the marquess stayed away from the Lords, his dispensation being granted on 21 March. His proxy for the 1628 session was given to his daughter-in-law’s kinsman Henry Rich^*, 1st earl of Holland, who, though widely considered a puritan, was also steward of the household to Charles’s Catholic queen.43 HP Commons 1604-29, ii. 76; SO3/9, unfol.; Lords Procs. 1628, pp. 27, 88. A record in the ms Journal that Winchester attended on 4 Apr. 1628 is apparently a clerical error: Lords Procs. 1628, p. 28 n. 1. Winchester failed to supply a proxy for the second session of this Parliament, and died intestate at Hackwood House on 4 Feb. 1629, while the Lords were still sitting. His titles descended to his son, Lord St John, who secured letters of administration for the marquess’ estate 12 days later.44 VCH Herts. iv. 123; PROB 6/13, f. 74.