STANLEY, William (c.1561-1642)

The Stanleys first achieved prominence in the late fourteenth century, when John Stanley, a distinguished soldier, married the heiress to a great Lancashire estate, thereby acquiring the seats of Knowsley and Lathom. Having transferred his loyalties from Richard II to Henry IV, John was rewarded in 1405 with the lordship of the Isle of Man, which was settled on his family in perpetuity. His heirs proved to be astute politicians, holding high office at court under both the Lancastrian and Yorkist dynasties, and steadily augmented their property. John’s grandson Thomas Stanley^† was created Lord Stanley in 1456. His son Thomas Stanley^†, 2nd Lord Stanley, became stepfather to the future Henry VII, who granted him the earldom of Derby and yet more lands as a reward for his pivotal intervention at Bosworth in 1485. By the time of his death in 1504, the 1st earl was one of the greatest magnates in England, with estates stretching across Lancashire, Cheshire, Staffordshire, Cumberland and Westmorland, north Wales and the Welsh marches, and several midland and southern counties. Successive earls during the sixteenth century served as lord lieutenant of Lancashire and Cheshire, and chamberlain of the county palatine of Chester. The 4th earl, Henry Stanley^†, whose wife Margaret Clifford was descended from Henry VIII’s sister Mary, also became lord steward of the royal household.37 Coward, 2-7, 9-15; CP, iv. 209-12.

Early career, 1593-1603

The 4th earl was succeeded in September 1593 by his eldest son Ferdinando (Stanley^†), who died barely six months later, leaving three daughters as his direct heirs. Accordingly, the earldom of Derby passed to Ferdinando’s younger brother William, the subject of this biography. However, the family’s minor titles, such as the barony of Strange (first acquired in 1482), fell into abeyance.38 CP, iv. 207, 212-13. The new earl was immediately plunged into a protracted property dispute, since shortly before his death Ferdinando had placed the Stanley estates in trust, for the exclusive benefit of his wife and daughters. Derby successfully overturned this settlement, but was nevertheless obliged to come to terms with the dowager countess in order to enjoy unchallenged possession of his lands. A final agreement, whereby Derby paid £20,400 to settle all disputes, was not reached until 1600, shortly after the dowager countess married the lord keeper, Thomas Egerton^* (later 1st Viscount Brackley), who had been assisting her cause for several years. However, this deal did not cover the Isle of Man, which was adjudged in 1595 to have reverted to the crown, on somewhat questionable grounds.39 Coward, 41, 44-7; HMC Hatfield, xii. 571.

Early in this dispute, Derby significantly strengthened his own bargaining position by marrying Elizabeth de Vere, the granddaughter of the lord treasurer, William Cecil^†, 1st Lord Burghley. This connection undoubtedly sustained him through his property battles, but he was disappointed in his hopes of political advancement. While Derby was seemingly a cultured man, the patron of several minor poets and a company of actors, he lacked political acumen and administrative ability.40 Vis. Lancs. 282-3; HMC Hatfield, v. 181; vi. 3; ix. 401; xii. 157-8; Oxford DNB, lii. 249; HMC 8th Rep. i. 428; HMC Middleton, 463; Letters of Rowland Whyte ed. M.G. Brennan, N.J. Kinnamon and M.P. Hannay, 375. Elizabeth, a favoured lady-in-waiting to the queen, effortlessly outshone him at court, and soon took charge of his personal finances too. The earl’s jealousy of his talented wife initially put their marriage under strain, but at length Derby became resigned to his situation, allowing Elizabeth to do as she pleased, and spending most of his time on his northern estates, where he enjoyed a degree of deference not afforded him in London. He took his seat in the Lords in 1597, and was created a knight of the Garter in 1601, but secured only minor offices while Elizabeth I remained on the throne.41 H.M. Payne, ‘Aristocratic Women and the Jacobean Court, 1603-25’ (London Univ. Ph.D. thesis, 2001), 282; Letters of Rowland Whyte, 204; HMC Hatfield, vii. 327, 339-40; viii. 281, 283.

Securing the Stanley estates, 1603-10

The accession of James I in 1603 initially seemed to change little. Derby was not in London when the old queen died, the news reaching him via the mayor of Chester. However, the countess, whose uncle Robert Cecil^* (later 1st earl of Salisbury) was now effectively chief minister, was quickly installed as a lady-in-waiting to Anne of Denmark.42 HMC Hatfield, xv. 18-19; Payne, 281; E. Lodge, Illustrations of Brit. Hist. iii. 88. With Cecil’s backing, Derby soon began to lobby the king, arguing that he should hold the lordship of Man, as his ancestors had done, along with the chamberlainship of Chester, which had been granted in 1594 to his adversary Egerton (now Lord Ellesmere). The first of these requests was rebuffed, but Derby was appointed chamberlain in October 1603. Around the same time he was also elected mayor of Liverpool, in which capacity he procured a new borough charter for the town, though it failed to pass the great seal, ostensibly because of a clerical error. According to a subsequent account by Giles Brooke^‡, a Liverpool burgess in the first Jacobean Parliament, the privy seal warrant for the charter was incorrectly dated. However, it must be suspected that it was Ellesmere, now lord chancellor, who blocked the borough’s efforts to get this mistake rectified.43 HMC Hatfield, xv. 381; xx. 17; xxiv. 3; CSP Dom. 1603-10, pp. 27, 50; Coward, 134.

During the previous decade Derby had neglected to exercise electoral patronage in Lancashire, and, despite his mayoralty, that pattern continued in the elections to the first Jacobean Parliament in 1604.44 HP Commons, 1558-1603, i. 189; 1604-29, ii. 207. He also attended just 30 per cent of the Lords’ sittings during the first session, missing the final two weeks completely. As befitted his status, he was named on the opening day as a trier of petitions from Gascony and other overseas territories, but he attracted just four appointments thereafter. Nominated to scrutinize both versions of the bill against witchcraft, he chaired the legislative committee concerning a trade dispute between the London guilds of painter stainers and plasterers, reporting this bill with amendments on 12 May. He was also appointed on 18 June to attend a conference on the tunnage and poundage bill.45 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 213; LJ, ii. 264a, 269a, 275a, 294b, 297a, 323a.

By the autumn of 1604 Derby was back in Lancashire, writing from Knowsley in September in support of a petition from Chester corporation to be spared privy seal loan requests. Two months later, his London house in Canon Row was used to house Anne of Denmark’s brother, the duke of Holstein, when he visited England.46 HMC Hatfield, xvi. 315; Lodge, iii. 106-7. Although Derby conformed to the Church of England, he was evidently seen as sympathetic to Catholics. Following the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot in November 1605, one of the conspirators, Sir Everard Digby, confessed that he and his fellow plotters had hoped to persuade the earl to raise a force in the north of England to support them.47 CSP Dom. 1603-10, p. 261. However, there is no evidence that Derby was implicated in their treason, and it was apparently pure coincidence that the earl missed the first two sittings of the 1605-6 parliamentary session, not attending until the afternoon of 9 November. After the winter recess he appeared in the Lords only twice, on 21 and 25 Jan., attracting no business. No formal explanation was given for his subsequent withdrawal, but he returned to Knowsley where, at the end of that month, his wife gave birth to a son, James (Stanley^*), the future 7th earl.48 T. Birch, Ct. and Times of Jas. I, i. 49.

When Parliament resumed in the autumn of 1606 Derby was ill, and obtained leave of absence, handing his proxy to Cecil, now earl of Salisbury.49 HMC Hatfield, xviii. 340; CSP Dom. 1603-10, p. 335. He was missing until the following February, and thereafter he attended the Lords only sporadically until early March. He then withdrew again through illness for two months. Whether or not he designated a proxy this time is unclear, though in April he assured Salisbury that he would not choose anyone likely to obstruct the proposed union of England and Scotland.50 CSP Dom. 1603-10, p. 355. Derby reappeared in the Lords during the session’s final two months, but in total he attended just 12 sittings during this session. Unsurprisingly, he attracted only one nomination, to the committee for the bill to abolish hostile laws between England and Scotland.51 LJ, ii. 520b.

In Derby’s absence, it was Salisbury who promoted a bill in Parliament to confirm the settlement reached in 1600 between the earl and his three nieces. He not only commissioned Sir Cuthbert Pepper^‡, the surveyor of the Court of Wards, to draft the bill, but also, when the legislation ran into trouble during the Lords’ committee stage, helped to arbitrate between the 5th earl of Derby’s coheirs. These were all now represented in the upper House, the three women having married respectively Gray Brydges^*, 5th Lord Chandos; Sir John Egerton^* (later 1st earl of Bridgwater), Lord Ellesmere’s son and heir; and Henry Hastings^*, 5th earl of Huntingdon.52 HMC Hatfield, xviii. 440; LJ, ii. 482b; CP, iv. 212-13. The initial draft bill was deemed so defective that on 20 Mar. 1607 it was scrapped and replaced with a new version, which completed its passage through the Lords with minor amendments. However, the drama was not yet over, for the Commons in turn found fault with the revised bill, querying whether it adequately protected the rights of third parties who had purchased Stanley lands. Accordingly, a third version was drafted, which at last cleared both Houses on 1 July, and received the Royal Assent three days later.53 LJ, ii. 492a, 507a, 508b, 531b, 532b, 534b; Bowyer Diary, 320-1, 350; PA, HL/PO/PB/1/1606/4J1n16; Coward, 46.

With the bulk of the Stanley estates finally settled, there remained just the question of the Isle of Man to resolve. Around May 1607 Derby revived his claim to the lordship, and the king, having consulted his judges, decided to sell the island back to the Stanleys for £2,000. With Egerton in particular continuing to agitate about the rights of Derby’s nieces, Man was initially granted to trustees, Salisbury and Henry Howard^*, earl of Northampton, with the profits divided between all the rival claimants. However, this arrangement soon proved to be unworkable. In 1609 Derby bought out his nieces’ interest, and obtained a sole grant of the island, quickly entrusting its management to his wife.54 Coward, 48-9, 58; HMC Hatfield, xix. 143, 162, 251; xx. 269; xxi. 133; CSP Dom. 1603-10, p. 435; HMC Hastings, ii. 52-3; SO3/4, unfol. (Mar. and June 1609). The advantageous outcome of this saga undoubtedly owed much to the backing the earl received at court from Salisbury, who had become lord treasurer in 1608. The same factor accounts for Derby’s appointment in December 1607 as lord lieutenant of Lancashire and Cheshire, a development which confirmed his pre-eminence in these counties. A month later, acknowledging his debt to Salisbury for this and other honours, Derby undertook to fulfil his new duties faithfully. He subsequently proved to be relatively efficient, even if he relied heavily on his deputy lieutenants to implement the government’s instructions.55 HMC Hatfield, xix. 199; xx. 17-18; CSP Dom. 1603-10, p. 441.

When Parliament met again in February 1610, Derby as usual attended only intermittently, missing the first sitting, and rarely appearing on consecutive days thereafter. In total he was present for just 22 sittings, less than a quarter of the session, and absented himself entirely for the final six weeks without explanation. Unsurprisingly, he attracted a paltry three appointments. Nominated in February to attend conferences with the Commons on supply and a controversial publication, Dr Cowell’s Interpreter, he did not feature again in proceedings until mid May, when he was named to the committee for the bill to promote husbandry in Devon.56 LJ, ii. 550b, 557b, 593b. Derby participated in Prince Henry’s creation as prince of Wales on 4 June, carrying a golden staff in procession, and dining at the prince’s table at Whitehall. Four days later, he took the oath of allegiance, and then withdrew from the House.57 Procs. 1610, i. 96, 98; HMC Downshire, ii. 316; LJ, ii. 609b. In his absence, two bills relating to his estates passed through the Lords. The first of these, which confirmed the crown’s exclusive grant of the Isle of Man to Derby and his heirs, was steered through committee by Salisbury, ‘a good friend in the business’, and was questioned only by the aged archbishop of Canterbury, Richard Bancroft^*, who apparently misunderstood the basis on which Derby received impropriated tithes on the island.58 LJ, ii. 593a, 601a, 610a, 612a, 633a; Procs. 1610, i. 106; PA, HL/PO/PB/1/1609/7J1n28; Desiderata Curiosa (1779) ed. F. Peck, ii. 431. The other bill cancelled certain trusts set up by the earl for the management of his estates, which were now deemed to interfere with the provisions of the 1607 Act for settling his property. The Lords found no fault with this measure, but the Commons added a proviso protecting a lease granted by Derby to Sir Baptist Hicks^* (later 1st Viscount Campden). Both bills received the Royal Assent at the end of the session.59 LJ, ii. 614b, 616a-b, 617b, 620a, 642a, 643b-4a; PA, HL/PO/PB/1/1609/7J1n29.

Derby attended the first and last sittings of the short parliamentary session in late 1610, and five isolated sittings in between, receiving two nominations. Named to the bill committee concerning timber supplies, he was also appointed to confer with the Commons about the Great Contract. A commissioner for proroguing Parliament on 6 Dec., he was also nominated to help dissolve the assembly in the following February, but failed to attend the latter meeting.60 LJ, ii. 669a, 671a, 683b, 684a.

A country magnate, 1610-25

While his kinsman Salisbury remained at the head of the government, Derby was assured of his continuing support, even over such minor matters as securing additional land on which to build in Canon Row. However, after the lord treasurer’s death in 1612, Derby found his actions coming under closer scrutiny from the Privy Council. During the next two years, he was twice criticized, once for neglecting an instruction, once for excessive zeal in levying soldiers for service in Ireland, then keeping them on standby at public expense after the immediate crisis passed.61 HMC Hatfield, xxi. 291-2; APC, 1613-14, pp. 109, 112, 286-7, 501. In 1613 he was also found to owe the crown more than £1,100 for taxes left unpaid by him and his parents, though it is unclear whether he settled this debt.62 Lansd. 169, f. 135v.

During the 1614 parliamentary elections, Derby secured a seat at Liverpool for Thomas Ireland^‡, one of his attorneys. He presumably also backed the return of a kinsman, Sir Cuthbert Halsall^‡, as a knight of the shire for Lancashire.63 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 208, 213. In marked contrast to his usual pattern, the earl apparently attended the entire session, with the possible exception of 7 Apr., for which the attendance records are missing. On 5 Apr., having carried the sword of state in the king’s procession, Derby was again named as a trier of petitions from Gascony. However, he made no speeches, and received only two further appointments, to legislative committees concerned with timber supplies and, appropriately, lawsuits over bequests of property.64 Chamberlain Letters ed. N.E. McClure, i. 522; LJ, ii. 686b, 694a, 697b.

The remainder of this decade passed quietly for Derby. His finances were healthy enough for him to bestow a £5,000 dowry on his daughter Anne when she married Sir Henry Portman^‡ in 1615. Moreover, his wife continued to wait on Anne of Denmark until the queen’s death in 1619.65 Coward, 57; Chamberlain Letters, ii. 17; CSP Dom. 1619-23, p. 1; J. Nichols, Progs. of Jas. I, iii. 540. Derby himself participated in the creation of Prince Charles (Stuart^*) as prince of Wales in 1616, and hosted the king at Lathom in the following year, as James returned south from visiting Scotland. However, the earl rarely appeared at court himself, in 1619 staying away from the annual Garter feast on the grounds of ‘severe illness’.66 Harl. 5176, f. 224v-5; CSP Dom. 1611-18, p. 482; HMC 7th Rep. 673. His conduct as a lord lieutenant earned him no further rebukes, and he levied men and mustered the Cheshire and Lancashire militia when required in a competent fashion. Indeed, he was not criticized by the Privy Council again until 1620, when he proved slow to contribute to the benevolence for the relief of the Palatinate.67 APC, 1613-14, pp. 433, 555; 1615-16, pp. 90, 231; 1616-17, p. 74; 1618-19, p. 365; CSP Dom. 1611-18, p. 325; 1619-23, p. 33; SP14/117/96.

Derby apparently failed to make any electoral nominations ahead of the 1621 Parliament, though he may have supported the election of Sir John Radcliffe^‡, a long-term client, as senior knight for Lancashire.68 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 208. The earl himself probably missed the whole of this session, procuring a licence of absence, and awarding his proxy to his distant kinsman William Herbert^*, 3rd earl of Pembroke. A record that he attended the Lords on 6 Feb. is almost certainly a clerical error.69 SO3/7, unfol. (6 Jan. 1621); LJ, iii. 4a, 14b. In May the Commons heard a complaint against Derby, in his capacity as chamberlain of Chester. The petitioners alleged corruption in the palatine exchequer court, and one of them claimed he had been warned ‘that if he clamoured against the said court in Parliament … it would some day be remembered against him’. However, proposals on 1 June for these matters to be investigated further were not pursued.70 HMC 4th Rep. 121-2; CD 1621, iii. 382-3; Nicholas, Procs. 1621, ii. 149.

During 1621 Derby’s daughter Anne remarried, her new husband being Sir Robert Kerr^‡, a favoured Scottish courtier, and keeper of the privy purse to Prince Charles. Any advantages accruing from this connection were offset in the short term by the disgrace of the earl’s brother-in-law, Henry de Vere^*, 18th earl of Oxford, who was imprisoned in the following year for offending the king. The countess certainly intervened on her brother’s behalf, but Derby himself seems to have stayed out of this dispute, instead attending as usual to his duties in the north-west. In August 1622 he was obliged to report that only the Lancashire militia foot had been mustered, on account of the number of horses then out to pasture, but all was in good order the following year.71 HP Commons, 1604-29, v. 12; Chamberlain Letters, ii. 444; CSP Dom. 1619-23, pp. 438-9; 1623-5, p. 94. Derby again failed to attend Parliament in 1624, obtaining permission to stay away, and once more handing his proxy to Pembroke.72 SO3/7, unfol. (11 Feb. 1624); LJ, iii. 205b, 214b. Notwithstanding his absence, parliamentary privilege was awarded to one of his servants, Sir Edward Osbaldeston, who had been arrested in London; this case established a new rule that the Lords’ period of privilege dated from the issuing of writs of summons.73 LJ, iii. 261b, 262b, 264a; PA, HL/PO/JO/10/1/22, f. 138; P.M. Hunneyball, ‘Development of Parlty. Privilege, 1604-29’, Managing Tudor and Stuart Parls. ed. C.R. Kyle (PH, xxxiv. pt. 1), 119-20. In the following months Derby was kept busy with levying more soldiers for Ireland, but the exercise was marred by tragedy, five transport ships being wrecked off the Welsh coast in April 1625. The earl responded vigorously to this disaster, ordering local collections for the relief of survivors, and undertaking to reimburse this money himself if the Privy Council failed to do so.74 APC, 1623-5, pp. 372, 467; CSP Dom. 1625-6, pp. 5-6.

Shared responsibilities, 1625-9

Following the accession of Charles I in March 1625, Derby was reappointed lord lieutenant of Lancashire and Cheshire, and was soon recruiting men for the forthcoming Cadiz expedition.75 Sainty, 14; APC, 1625-6, p. 44. When the first Caroline Parliament was summoned, he arranged the election of his son James (Stanley^*), Lord Strange, at Liverpool, and possibly had a hand in the return of a distant kinsman, Henry Stanley^‡, at Thirsk. However, the earl failed to attend either the Westminster or Oxford sittings, as usual presenting his proxy to Pembroke.76 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 213, 508; Procs. 1625, pp. 45, 591. By the autumn, Derby’s local duties were multiplying. In addition to the constant levying of men for military service, he was expected to implement the new privy seal loan, which met with some opposition, and to oversee the disarming of prominent recusants in his two counties.77 CSP Dom. 1625-6, pp. 129, 157, 162; APC, 1625-6, p. 189. By late December the earl had fallen ill, and deputed his son Strange, still aged only 19, to confiscate the weaponry of Henry Parker^*, 14th Lord Morley. The young man’s confident performance of this task impressed the Council, and paved the way for Derby to share his administrative burdens in future.78 APC, 1625-6, pp. 229, 268-9, 308; CSP Dom. 1625-6, p. 180.

In the elections to the 1626 Parliament, Derby’s younger son Robert Stanley^‡ was returned as junior knight for Lancashire. The earl, an absentee from Charles’s coronation, probably never attended this session either, despite being recorded as present on 10 June. As usual he was granted leave of absence, with his proxy going to Pembroke.79 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 208; SP16/20/8; SO3/8, unfol. (10 Feb. 1626); Procs. 1626, i. 49; iv. 11. One of the subjects considered by the Lords in 1626 was who should hold the office of lord great chamberlain, as the earl of Oxford had died the previous year, leaving the countess of Derby as one of his coheirs. On the basis that this office had been held by the de Veres for generations, Derby and his wife joined the ranks of claimants, their petition to the king being referred to the upper House on 20 March. Legal counsel, apparently instructed at Westminster by Lord Strange on his parents’ behalf, presented the earl’s case on 1 April. However, when the Lords reached their verdict, Derby attracted only one vote, the office being awarded instead to the countess’ cousin Robert Bertie^*, 14th Lord Willoughby de Eresby (later 1st earl of Lindsey).80 Procs. 1626, i. 183, 216, 226, 231, 240, 245.

As the war with Spain dragged on, Derby came under increasing pressure to improve militia training in his two counties. He helped to establish a new artillery yard at Chester, but in July 1626 clashed with the Privy Council over funding for military equipment, earning himself another rebuke for supposedly misinterpreting his instructions.81 CSP Dom. 1625-6, pp. 305, 387; APC, 1625-6, p. 465, 486; 1626, pp. 75, 185. In September, the government decided to appoint Lord Strange as joint chamberlain of Chester and lord lieutenant, the revised grants being sealed by the end of that year.82 CSP Dom. 1625-6, pp. 438, 461; Sainty, 14. This nearly backfired when Strange fell dangerously ill in January 1627. Assuming that the young man was on his deathbed, the king tactlessly arranged a marriage between Derby’s younger son Robert and a maid of honour, Elizabeth Gorges. Strange recovered, but the countess of Derby, who had opposed this match, shortly afterwards sickened and died.83 T. Birch, Ct. and Times of Chas. I, i. 184, 206; Vis. Lancs. 283. This succession of personal blows prompted Derby to withdraw further from his responsibilities. Unwilling to resume management of his estates following his wife’s death, he offloaded this task onto Strange, reserving to himself £1,000 of the annual rental income. The earl also handed his principal seats to his heir, and henceforth lived almost exclusively in Cheshire, spending the summer months at Bidston Hall, in the Wirral, and the wintertime at Chester.84 Desiderata Curiosa (1779) ed. F. Peck, ii. 443; Stanley Pprs. ed. F.R. Raines (Chetham Soc. lxvi), p. xviii; Witt, 25. From here he successfully promoted the 1626-7 Forced Loan in Cheshire, while failing to pay his own £400 contribution promptly. It was probably at around this time that he began to focus his energies as lord lieutenant on Cheshire, leaving Strange to attend to Lancashire business, though the earl ostensibly continued to exercise authority over both counties.85 CSP Dom. 1627-8, pp. 184, 379; APC, 1627, pp. 372, 420, 479, 501; E401/1914.

The crown effectively recognized this modified state of affairs when a new Parliament assembled in 1628, summoning both Derby and Strange to the Lords. In the event neither man attended this session, though the earl’s son-in-law, Sir Robert Kerr, represented Preston in the Commons. Derby as usual presented his proxy to the 3rd earl of Pembroke.86 Lords Procs. 1628, pp. 26, 595; HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 217. In the earl’s absence the Lords heard a privilege claim on behalf of his servant John Moore, who had been arrested, but the matter remained unresolved when the session abruptly ended in June.87 Lords Procs. 1628, pp. 550, 546, 665, 672-4. Predictably Derby also missed the 1629 session, this time awarding his proxy to Strange, who had now taken his seat.88 LJ, iv. 25b; Lancs. RO, DDK/11/11a.

Final years, 1630-42

While Derby was happy to shed some of his responsibilities, he remained protective of his privileges. During 1628, probably taking advantage of the assassination of George Villiers^*, 1st duke of Buckingham, he extracted an admission from the Privy Council that the lord high admiral possessed no jurisdiction over the Isle of Man. Five years later he resisted attempts by the archbishop-elect of Canterbury, William Laud^*, to interfere in the appointment of the bishop of Sodor and Man.89 CSP Dom. 1628-9, p. 434; HMC Cowper, ii. 29, 31-2; Coventry Docquets, 397. Derby also remained the senior figure in local administration. It was he, rather than Strange, who normally sent the militia certificates to London, once his son had supplied a report on the Lancashire musters. Similarly, while the earl undoubtedly left the Cheshire j.p.s to implement the new Book of Orders in 1631, he sent the resultant report to the government himself.90 CSP Dom. 1629-31, pp. 78, 108, 191, 530; 1631-3, p. 173; 1636-7, p. 240; APC, 1630-1, p. 214. Nevertheless, as the 1630s wore on, it became increasingly apparent that Derby was now neglecting his official duties. His efforts at resolving a dispute over some mills at Chester proved so ineffectual that, after two years of delays, the Privy Council itself settled the matter in 1635 without further reference to the earl.91 PC2/42, ff. 191v, 210v-11; 2/44, ff. 174v, 280r-v; CSP Dom. 1631-3, p. 534. In December 1632 he was criticized by the Council for failing to supply the names of defaulters in the latest Lancashire musters. Instructed in May 1637 to investigate opposition in Chester to Ship Money contributions, Derby took an entire year to respond, despite a reminder from the Council after six months. By 1638 he was six years in arrears in submitting his vice admiralty accounts.92 PC2/42, f. 168; 2/47, f. 232v; 2/48, f. 269v; 2/49, f. 109r-v; CSP Dom. 1637-8, p. 362.

Unsurprisingly, by the time of the Scottish crisis in the late 1630s, Derby was content to let Lord Strange take the lead in mobilizing the local military response. Although the earl was summoned to attend the king at York in the spring of 1639, he was by now ill and bedridden, and left his son to act on his behalf.93 SO1/3, ff. 114v-15; CSP Dom. 1638-9, p. 419; Farington Pprs. 64-5. Derby was recorded as present on the opening day of the 1640 Short Parliament, perhaps in error, since he had been granted leave of absence five days earlier. There is no evidence to suggest that he ever attended the subsequent Long Parliament.94 LJ, iv. 45a; SO1/3, f. 176v. Appointed a commissioner of array in June 1642, he authorized the mobilizing of the Chester trained bands, but died in the following September, just as the Civil War began to impact on the north-west. His body was initially interred at Chester, before being reburied at Ormskirk, in Lancashire in 1662. The earldom of Derby descended to his son James, Lord Strange.95 HMC 5th Rep. 350-1; VCH Lancs. iii. 163.