STOURTON, Edward (c.1555-1633)

The Stourton family were resident in Stourton, in south-west Wiltshire, from the middle of the twelfth century, and were members of the lesser gentry until William Stourton^‡ (d.1413) brought them to greater prominence. William was a successful lawyer and local administrator, who was returned to the Commons for Wiltshire, Dorset and Somerset in the early fifteenth century, becoming Speaker of the lower House in 1413. By the time of his death, William had become one of the wealthiest landowners in the south-west. His marriage to the heiress of a significant estate meant that the Stourton lands were further augmented on the death of his father-in-law in 1429. William’s son John^† rose to national importance, becoming a privy councillor in 1437, treasurer of the household in 1446, and a baron two years later.5 Oxford DNB, lii. 974-5; HP Commons, 1386-1421, iv. 492-3, 496, 498.

The Stourtons failed to retain the 1st Lord’s national prominence, and in the sixteenth century were handicapped by their continued adherence to the Catholic religion, and by the execution for murder of Charles Stourton^†, 8th Lord Stourton, in 1557. As the inheritance of entailed properties, including hereditary titles, was not liable to forfeiture for felonies other than treason, the 8th Lord’s eldest son, John^†, was summoned to Parliament after coming of age in 1576, when a bill was introduced to restore John and his siblings in blood. However, this measure was lost after the upper House refused to accept a proviso insisted upon by the Commons.6 CP, xii. pt. 1, pp. 307-9; M.A.R. Graves, House of Lords in the Parls. of Edward VI and Mary I, 104; G.R. Elton, Parl. of Eng. 306-9. Although the manor of Stourton (having been entailed) was inherited by John, the 8th Lord’s unentailed properties were forfeited to the crown, significantly diminishing the family’s wealth.7 Stourton, 413-15, 417, 426-7.

The 9th Lord Stourton’s marriage was childless, and therefore, on his death in 1588, his title passed to his brother Edward, the subject of this biography. Edward himself married into the Tresham family, prominent Northamptonshire recusants whose faith he undoubtedly shared. It was presumably because of his Catholicism that he seems never to have been appointed to public office. Nevertheless, he had one important connection with the innermost circle of the late Elizabethan regime, as the 9th Lord Stourton’s widow was sister to the wife of Secretary of State Sir Robert Cecil^* (subsequently 1st earl of Salisbury). Consequently, when Stourton’s mother was indicted by the notorious recusant hunter Thomas Felton in 1601, the dowager Lady Stourton appealed to Cecil to stop the proceedings. She was successful, the Council concluding that Stourton’s mother ‘doth not in any other sort behave herself offensively by harbouring or maintaining any evil-disposed persons’.8 HMC Hatfield, xi. 566-7; APC, 1601-4, pp. 28-9.

It is likely that the Council regarded Stourton as similarly harmless. On being returned in 1599 for failing to contribute to military charges his excuse, that he ‘held it an injury to myself to be [as]sessed’ by such a mean officer as a tithing-man, seems to have been accepted. Despite his ‘small and mean ability’, he was evidently concerned to maintain his dignity as a peer.9 APC, 1598-9, p. 502; Hatfield House, CP176/99. Stourton subsequently attempted to regain part of his family estates by offering to buy back from the crown one of his father’s forfeited manors, but the property was sold to others.10 Hatfield House, CP178/143; Stourton, 308, 426. His sole success was to obtain, in November 1603, a lease in reversion from the crown of the Northamptonshire manor of Rothwell, as trustee for the Treshams, a meagre sign of favour following the recent accession of James I.11 SP14/60, f. 9; M.E. Finch Wealth of Five Northants. Fams. (Northants. Rec. Soc. xix), 80.

Stourton was recorded as attending 64 of the 71 sittings of the 1604 session of the first Jacobean Parliament, 90 per cent of the total, but otherwise played no recorded part in its proceedings. Shortly after the second session convened in November 1605, he fell under suspicion, as his brother-in-law, Francis Tresham, was one of the Gunpowder plotters, and he himself was absent from Parliament on 5 Nov. without the king’s licence. On interrogating the surviving plotters, it also emerged that Stourton had been one of the Catholic peers whom the conspirators hoped would escape the conflagration. However, Guy Fawkes claimed that Stourton’s absence on the 5th had been no more than a fortuitous accident. He had learned that Stourton would not arrive at Westminster until the following Friday, a statement which accords well with Stourton’s recorded attendance of the upper House on Saturday 9 November. Nevertheless, suspicions persisted that Stourton had been forewarned of the Plot, and he was committed to the Tower shortly before 26 November. Reporting the news, the courtier Philip Gawdy^‡ described Stourton as a ‘silly’ man.12 SP14/17/2; 14/216/1, f. 150; Letters of Philip Gawdy ed. I.H. Jeayes, 162-3.

Examined on 4 Feb. 1606, Stourton admitted that several of the conspirators had visited him the previous year, but he denied having received warning of the Plot. He attributed his absence from Parliament to shortage of money and the weakness of his wife, who had recently given birth and lost her father. By late February the king had concluded that Stourton and the two other Catholic absentees, Henry Mordaunt^*, 4th Lord Mordaunt and Anthony Maria Browne^*, 2nd Viscount Montagu, had not received specific warnings. However, Stourton and Mordaunt were tried in Star Chamber the following June for absenting themselves without permission, whereupon Stourton was sentenced to pay a fine of 6,000 marks (£4,000) and to remain in the Tower during the king’s pleasure.13 SP14/216/2 f. 114; J. Hunter, Hallamshire, 122; Reportes del Cases in Camera Stellata ed. W.P. Baildon, 287, 289, 291, 438.

On 12 Aug. 1606 Stourton appealed to Cecil, now earl of Salisbury, ‘for my speedy enlargement in pity of my health, and my decaying estate, unable to support so great charges, and supply the wants of so many children’. He asked Salisbury to assure the king ‘how far I have always been from the least purpose to offend’.14 Hatfield House, CP192/119. Stourton’s sister-in-law also lobbied Salisbury on his behalf, apparently to greater effect; she wrote a thankful letter to the earl having received Salisbury’s assurance that ‘for my sake you will do your best for his releasement’ and a promise that he ‘would speak to the king’ for that purpose’.15 Hatfield House, CP193/52. On 22 Aug. Stourton and Mordaunt were transferred from the Tower to the Fleet prison, something that was welcomed in Catholic circles as ‘a disposition to further liberty’. However, Stourton remained incarcerated until April 1608, when he was allowed to return to his town residence in Clerkenwell, albeit under house arrest.16 Add. 11402, ff. 115, 138v; H. Foley, Recs. of the Eng. Province of the Soc. of Jesus, i. 65. During his imprisonment, he was erroneously recorded as present in the upper House on 20 Feb. 1606, 15 Dec. 1606 and 27 Apr. 1607. In addition, on 16 Sept. 1606 he suffered the indignity of having his Clerkenwell house burgled, during the course of which various items of clothing were stolen, including his Parliament robes, valued at £74. One William Bray was tried for the crime, but acquitted.17 Mdx. County Recs. ed. J.C. Jeaffreson, ii. 23.

Stourton was not recorded as attending any of the sittings of the fourth session. In the fifth session he was only once marked as present, possibly in error, on 6 Dec. 1610, when Parliament was prorogued. His financial difficulties presumably explain his inclusion among those peers to whom the Privy Council wrote in June 1613 for failing to pay the aid for the marriage of Princes Elizabeth.18 APC, 1613-14, p. 77.

Stourton received a writ of summons to the 1614 Parliament but, being still formally under restraint, he was uncertain whether he should attend and sought clarification from the Council. On 23 Mar. he was informed that the king required him to stay away and appoint a proxy instead. However, whether he actually appointed a proxy before the short-lived Parliament was dissolved is unknown.19 Ibid. 392. Two days before the Council’s letter was written, Stourton paid £500 of his Star Chamber fine. This payment, together with his dutiful concern to know whether he should attend the Addled Parliament, may have contributed to the king’s decision in April of that year to pardon the remainder of the fine in return for a further £500 that autumn.20 SO3/4, unfol. (Apr. 1614); E401/1891, unfol. (21 Mar. 1614); C66/2038/12; G.R. Batho, ‘Payment and Mitigation of a Star Chamber Fine’, HJ, i. 43.

Stourton received a significant mark of favour in November 1616, when his heir was made a Knight of the Bath on the creation of Prince Charles (Stuart^*) as prince of Wales.21 Shaw, Knights of Eng. i. 160. However, he was not finally freed from restraint until February 1619, by which time he had agreed to conform to the Church of England.22 APC, 1617-19, p. 384. In 1620 he contributed 100 marks towards the benevolence levied for the defence of the Palatinate.23 SP14/117/2.

Stourton was free to attend the 1621 Parliament, which he did regularly, as he was recorded as present at 38 of the 44 sittings before Easter, 86 per cent of the total, and only missed one sitting between Easter and the summer recess, on the morning of 27 April. He did not attend the meeting to adjourn the Parliament on 14 Nov., but was constantly present in the upper House after the session resumed six days later, although he missed the dissolution meeting on 8 Feb. 1622. He took the oath of allegiance on 12 Feb. 1621, and was named to four of the 74 or 75 committees appointed by the upper House before the summer recess. These concerned the estate bill of Edward Russell^*, 3rd earl of Bedford, a naturalization measure, legislation to confirm the establishment of hospitals and schools and a bill to limit lawsuits. He made no recorded speeches and received no committee appointments after the long adjournment.24 LJ, iii. 16a, 24a, 132a, 136a, 149b.

Despite his conformity, Stourton was still widely regarded as Catholic. During the 1624 Parliament he was erroneously listed as one of the ‘petty [Catholic] lords’ who had refused to take the oath of allegiance at the start of the Parliament and would, consequently, be unable to attend.25 Bodl., Rawl. B151, f. 61. In fact, as Sir John Davies^‡, one of the upper House’s legal assistants, reported on 8 Mar., Stourton attended the Lords and was ‘present at prayers every day’.26 ‘Hastings 1621’, p. 35. Stourton appears to have attended the prorogation meeting on 12 Feb. that preceded the start of the 1624 session, although not the meeting held four days later. In the session itself he was recorded as present at 82 of the 93 sittings, 88 per cent of the total. However, his attendance deteriorated towards the end of the session, and he did not attend any of the prorogation meetings after the session ended. He was again appointed to four committees (out of the 105 created by the Lords during the Parliament), this time for bills concerning restitution of possession, the West Country fishing industry, Sir Peter Vanlore and delays in lawsuits.27 LJ, iii. 296a, 313a, 363a, 397a. He left no further trace on the parliamentary records.

In the 1625 Parliament Stourton received the proxy of his first cousin, Edward Sutton^*, 5th Lord Dudley.28 Procs. 1625, p. 591. He was marked as attending the prorogation meetings on 17 and 31 May, and 22 of the 31 sittings of the session, 71 per cent of the total. Absent on the afternoon of 4 July, he nevertheless attended the morning sitting, and was excused on the 5th, returning to the House three days later.29 Ibid. 88. He again made no speeches, but his appointment to six of the 25 committees named by the Lords suggests either that his stock had risen or a shortage of alternatives, many peers being absent because of the plague. On 23 June he was named to attend a conference with the Commons about the petition for a fast and was appointed to the privileges committee. Eight days later he was among those instructed to consider the bill to improve the arms of the militia. During the Oxford sitting he was appointed to consider measures to preserve the king’s revenue, explain the 1606 Recusancy Act, and allow free fishing on the north American coast.30 Ibid. 43, 45, 72, 127, 174, 179. The second of these bills was presumably of particular interest to Stourton because, although he himself probably continued to conform, his eldest son was convicted of recusancy in April 1626.31 APC, 1625-6, p. 458.

Stourton attended the coronation of Charles I on 2 Feb. 1626.32 SP16/20/8. The second Caroline Parliament convened four days later, during which time Stourton was recorded as attending 77 of the 81 sittings of the upper House, 95 per cent of the total. He again took the oath of allegiance and received more committee appointments than in 1625, although the proportion of the total, eight out of 49, was lower. Four of his committees were reappointments to committees to which he had been named in 1625: namely the privileges committee, and those for measures concerning the arms of the militia, recusancy, and the fishing industry. His fresh appointments included a bill to enable a ward of the crown to sell the manor of Barrington in Somerset, a measure which may have interested him given the proximity of Stourton to Somerset’s eastern border (although Barrington itself is in the west of the county). On 17 May he was added to the committee for petitions.33 Procs. 1626, i. 48, 53, 127, 128, 137, 496.

In November 1626 Stourton paid £100 towards the Forced Loan.34 E401/1386, rot. 30. He attended the third Caroline Parliament less regularly than previous assemblies in which he had been free to participate, being recorded as present at 63 of the 94 sittings of the 1628 session, 67 per cent of the total. He was absent from 31 Mar., returning on 14 Apr., and again on 7 June, when he was excused, although on this occasion he resumed his seat two days later. He last attended on 17 June, although he was not formally excused until three days later. His reduced attendance led to a smaller number of committee appointments: four out of 52. Reappointed to the committees for privileges and petitions, he was named to consider a further bill concerning the arms of the militia and a measure to pay the debts of Richard Sackville^*, 3rd earl of Dorset. He made no recorded speeches.35 Lords Procs. 1628, pp. 72, 79, 88, 554, 500, 678. His attendance further deteriorated in 1629, when he attended 12 of the 23 sittings, 52 per cent of the total. He was absent from 31 Jan. and was excused on 3 Feb. on grounds of ill health (the reason given when the House was called six days later). Nevertheless, he returned to the Lords on 12 February. He received only two committee appointments (out of a possible 19), both on 20 Jan., the first day of the session, when he was reappointed to the committees for privileges and petitions. He left no further trace on the parliamentary records.36 LJ, iv. 6a-b, 19a, 25a.

In April 1629 Charles I ordered that Stourton should not be prosecuted for recusancy, because the attorney general, Sir Robert Heath^‡, believed that he was going to church.37 Stourton, 452; CSP Dom. 1628-9, p. 522. However, during the early 1630s, having obtained immunity from prosecution, he probably resumed his open Catholicism. He was certainly active in the internal conflicts within the Catholic Church, supporting the secular priests against the Jesuits.38 Newsletters from the Caroline Ct. ed. M.C. Questier (Cam. Soc. ser. 5 xxvi), 113. In February 1632 Stourton was obliged to pay £200 for his knighthood composition.39 E401/1395, rot. 27.

Stourton made his will on 4 July 1632, adding codicils on 30 Apr. and 4 May 1633. Taken together, these documents suggest that his eldest son, whom he did not appoint as executor, was heavily in debt and that Stourton was worried for the future of the family estates. Indeed, he required a bond for £20,000, taken from his son, to ‘remain in force’ in order ‘to prevent the sale of any of his land or estate’. Stourton also initially bequeathed the residue of his personal estate to his eldest son’s children, suggesting that he did not trust his heir to provide for his own family. However, he changed his mind, instructing his executors to sell these goods and use the proceeds to pay off £1,600 of his eldest son’s debts, ‘which debts I have formerly undertaken to discharge’. In addition, he bequeathed his eldest son his Parliament robes, presumably bought to replace those stolen in 1606. By the time he wrote his second codicil he was so worried that his personal estate would not suffice to pay ‘debts, legacies and funeral charges’ that he revoked a bequest of plate to his heir. Stourton died on 7 May 1633. His funeral certificate (which mistakenly states he died in 1632) says he expired at his house in Clerkenwell, but his inquisition post mortem records that he actually died at Stourton. Given that his burial at Stourton did not take place until 18 days after his death, the former is more likely than the latter. He was succeeded by his eldest son, William^†.40 PROB 11/163, ff. 472v-4; 11/166, f. 323r-v; Coll. of Arms, I.8, f. 37; Stourton, 491; Stourton, 66.