LEY, Henry (1595-1638)

With his father’s backing, Ley qualified as a barrister at the unusually young age of 21, and became an associate bencher at Lincoln’s Inn four years later; it is unclear whether he ever pleaded. Immediately after his call to the bar, he married the daughter of a Hertfordshire landowner; the couple established a household at Heywood, Wiltshire, but ultimately separated. Local influence secured Ley’s return for Westbury and Devizes on four occasions, while in 1625 his father, newly appointed lord treasurer, persuaded the local magnates Philip Herbert^*, earl of Montgomery (and later 4th earl of Pembroke) and William Seymour^*, 2nd earl of Hertford, to secure his election as one of the knights for Wiltshire.12 HP Commons 1604-29, v. 126; C142/551/108.

Ley took his seat in the Lords by a writ in acceleration on 2 Mar. 1626, at the instigation of his father’s patron, George Villiers^*, 1st duke of Buckingham. The only addition to the ranks of the favourite’s supporters at this early stage of the session, Ley was doubtless summoned because his father, having collapsed shortly before the opening of the session, missed most of the first month of the session. As Buckingham correctly feared that the activities of his enemies in the Commons would lead to an impeachment, the writ was presumably issued to make sure of the vote of one of his key supporters.13 T. Birch, Ct. and Times Chas. I, i. 106; Procs. 1626, i. 94-5. Ley attended just over half of all the sittings thereafter, but played little recorded part in the House’s proceedings, being named to only one committee, for the bill to confirm the London Charterhouse hospital. On 22 May he also helped introduce to the Lords his Wiltshire neighbour Oliver St John^*, Lord Tregoz, another of those whom Buckingham had ennobled to support his cause in the upper House.14 Procs. 1626, i. 128, 540-1.

In 1627 Ley was appointed a commissioner for the Forced Loan in Wiltshire and Somerset, but in September he was licensed to travel with six servants, perhaps to escape marital difficulties. He attended the opening of the third Caroline Parliament on 17 Mar. 1628, but presumably went abroad thereafter, as he did not sit in the House again. If so, his travels were cut short by his father’s death on 14 Mar. 1629. He was subsequently confined to Heywood by illness, and surrendered his chambers at Lincoln’s Inn in the following year.15 SO3/8, unfol. (Sept. 1627); CSP Dom. 1629-31, p. 82; LI Black Bks. ii. 299.

Even after succeeding as 2nd earl of Marlborough, Ley appears to have been of little account outside his local area, and in July 1636 he was replaced as chairman of the county bench. The most likely reason for his poor standing was his separation from his wife: in 1635 John Ashburnham^‡ approached him about selling his manor of Teffont Evias, which he had inherited from his uncle Matthew Ley in 1632, only to be informed that he and his estranged wife had resolved to do nothing to jeopardize a possible reconciliation.16 Wilts. IPMs ed. G.S. and A.E. Fry (Brit. Rec. Soc. xxiii), 219-20; CSP Dom. 1634-5, pp. 572-3. He may also have had financial difficulties, as, while not involved in any serious litigation, the settlement of his father’s bequests, and the claims on the family estate from his wife and stepmother clearly reduced his income.17 C3/412/12; C6/153/117. Nor was he universally respected: when he chided a neighbour, Thomas Bennett, for shooting game on his estate without permission, he was told ‘the Bennetts were as good as the Leys’. However, he was awarded £1,000 in damages by Star Chamber in compensation for this insult.18 CSP Dom. 1635-6, pp. 226, 435; 1637, pp. 220, 472.

In the preamble to his will of 2 Nov. 1636, Marlborough referred to himself as ‘of sinners … the chiefest’. This was perhaps more than Calvinist rhetoric, as he forgave his wife for the wrongs she had done him, and hoped she could do the same for him. Despite their estrangement, he left her half the plate and goods in her house at Heywood. His daughter received a portion of £2,000, his brother William, despite his ‘most ungodly and most riotous life’, was bequeathed £1,000 and various properties, while the remainder of his estate, together with his earldom passed to his heir, James Ley^*, following his death on 1 Apr. 1638.19 PROB 11/177, ff. 116v-17; C142/571/155. He was buried, as requested, in the family chapel at Teffont church. His widow subsequently married his estate steward Thomas Wanklin, who had presumably been the source of his marital problems.20 PROB 11/177, f. 116v; HP Commons 1604-29, v. 126.