SPENCER, William (1591-1636)

Spencer was born at Althorp, in Northamptonshire, the second son of Robert Spencer^*, heir to a prosperous estate in Northamptonshire and Warwickshire, who was raised to the peerage in 1603. After receiving an extensive education with his elder brother John at Winchester and Oxford, Spencer was sent to travel abroad in 1610. However, John died of a fever in August of that year, whereupon Spencer became his father’s heir.23 Add. 75326, f. 2; W. Dugdale, Warws. (1730), 517. Following his return to England, Spencer was elected to the 1614 Parliament for Brackley, married the daughter of Henry Wriothesley^*, 3rd and 1st earl of Southampton, and became a deputy lieutenant for Northamptonshire, probably in place of his father, who had refused the post because he thought it beneath his dignity as a peer.24 HEHL, HA12541; HP Commons, 1604-29, vi. 399. As a deputy lieutenant, Spencer took part in the search for arms of the house of the Catholic peer, Edward Vaux^*, 4th Lord Vaux, in the autumn of 1625, and witnessed Vaux strike Spencer’s friend and kinsman, Richard Knightley^‡. At the subsequent hearing before the Privy Council, Vaux accused Spencer of lying, which resulted in a spell of prison for the peer.25 EDWARD VAUX; Misc. State Pprs. 1501-1726 (1778) ed. Hardwicke, i. 4; PROB 11/181, f. 387.

Spencer represented Northamptonshire in the last two Jacobean parliaments and the first two summoned by Charles I. On the last occasion (1626) he initially disclaimed any interest in sitting, but changed his mind on hearing that the custos rotulorum of Northamptonshire, Francis Fane^*, 1st earl of Westmorland, wanted the seat for his eldest son, Mildmay Fane^†, Lord Burghersh (subsequently 2nd earl of Westmorland). His decision caused a rift between the Spencers and the Fanes, who had previously been on good terms.26 J.K. Gruenfelder, ‘Parlty Election in Northants. 1626’, Northants. P. and P. iv. 159-65; SP16/139/44.

Shortly after the 1626 Parliament began, Spencer heard from George Villiers^*, 1st duke of Buckingham, that it had been reported to the king that he had not only opposed the privy seal loan levied in late 1625, but had also said at a meeting of Northamptonshire’s deputy lieutenants ‘that the king wanted no money, and if he did he might call a Parliament’. Spencer denied uttering those words, although he clearly disliked unparliamentary levies, having spoken out against benevolences in the 1624 Parliament. He appealed to the lord lieutenant of Northamptonshire, William Cecil^*, 2nd earl of Exeter, at the same time denying that he had ‘laboured’ his re-election to the Commons ‘underhand’. However, he received an evasive reply, and an undated draft letter from Spencer to Exeter indicates that the earl rescinded the Spencer’s deputy lieutenancy around this time. During the 1626 Parliament Spencer was more critical of Buckingham than his father or his younger brothers, Richard^‡ and Edward^‡, both of whom had seats in the Commons.27 Add. 75308, unfol., Sir William Spencer to earl of Exeter, 14 Feb. [1626]; same to same [1626]; earl of Exeter to Sir William Spencer, 18 Feb. 1626; HP Commons, 1604-29, vi. 391, 393, 401.

Spencer was a commissioner for the Forced Loan but, like his father, was not active in enforcing the levy. Nevertheless, he must have paid his contribution, as there is no sign that he was purged from the bench.28 R. Cust, Forced Loan and English Pols. 241. Lord Spencer died on 25 Oct. 1627, and consequently it was Spencer himself who was summoned to the upper House in 1628. Recorded as attending 82 of the 94 sittings of the 1628 session, 87 per cent of the total, Spencer was given leave of absence for two or three days on 31 Mar., and returned on 2 April. He was again excused on 14 June, returning on the 17th.29 Lords Procs. 1628, pp. 129, 642. Despite being a new member of the upper House he was named to a majority of the committees appointed by the upper House during the session (28 of 52), and made 10 recorded speeches.

Spencer was named to the privileges committee on 20 March. The following day he was appointed to the committee for petitions and the subcommittee for privileges; he subsequently checked the draft Journal on three occasions.30 Ibid. 73, 79, 112, 364, 367. On 22 Mar. he presented a petition for privilege on behalf of Thomas Willoughby, a servant of Henry West^*, 4th Lord De La Warr, arrested for debt the day after the 1626 Parliament was dissolved. Spencer subsequently spoke twice on behalf of Willoughby, who may have been related to Spencer’s mother.31 Ibid. 89, 356, 385. He attended a meeting of the privileges committee on 28 Apr., when he voted against granting privilege to the estranged wife of Buckingham’s brother, John Villiers^*, Viscount Purbeck.32 PA, HL/PO/JO/10/1/33 (31 Mar. 1628), no. 12. In the debate about the right of the nobility to be allowed to answer on their honour in the law courts, Spencer warned ‘that those that waive their privileges may waive them to themselves and their posterity’.33 Lords Procs. 1628, p. 378. In a further debate on the same subject the following day, he called for ‘deliberation’ and for precedents to be read ‘if any doubt’.34 Ibid. 385.

On 21 Mar. Spencer was appointed to help confer with the Commons about the petition for a fast and, the following day, was among those instructed to attend the king with this document. On 24 Mar. he was ordered to take note of the Lords who attended the fast service and, four days later, to distribute the money collected for the poor.35 Ibid. 78, 86, 95, 114. Four days later, he was named to consider a bill to regulate apparel, despite warning that ‘if this bill be committed it will lose the kingdom £20,000 by the year’. Spencer may have been concerned that the measure would reduce the demand for wool, the mainstay of his family’s wealth. On 23 June he was named to consider the bill to boost exports of dyed and dressed cloth.36 Ibid. 112, 116, 690.

When the disorder created by the soldiers at Banbury was debated on 2 Apr., Spencer, presumably opposing the use of martial law, argued against legal innovations ‘that we may keep our ancient laws of England’, and that it should ‘stand wheresoever the soldiers are placed’.37 Ibid. 139, 141. When, on 12 Apr., the attorney general, Sir Robert Heath^‡, answered the Commons’ arguments for the liberties of the subject, Spencer joined John Digby^*, 1st earl of Bristol, in asserting that William Fiennes^*, 1st Viscount Saye and Sele, was ‘nothing to the purpose’ in querying whether there were any specific incidents when habeas corpus had been denied. Later that same day, Spencer evidently asked why Heath made his controversial entry concerning the Five Knights’ Case, and, speaking again, moved for the attorney general to deliver his arguments to the Commons in writing.38 Ibid. 204, 213. On 23 Apr. he was appointed to prepare for a conference with the Commons about the subjects’ liberties, but played no recorded role in the subsequent debates about the Petition of Right.39 Ibid. 333.

Spencer was recorded as attending only nine of the 23 sittings of the 1629 session, 39 per cent of the total. He appears not to have taken his seat until 3 Feb., and consequently was presumably absent when he was reappointed to the privileges and petitions committees, and the privileges subcommittee, on 30 January. On 9 Feb., following the debate about the precedence of Englishmen who had purchased Irish and Scottish titles, Spencer was named to the committee which drew up a ‘proposition’ on that subject. He was not marked as present the following day, but was nevertheless appointed to a committee to turn the proposition into a petition to the king. He received a further four appointments during the session, including the committee to survey munitions, bringing his total to nine out of a possible 19, but made no recorded speeches.40 LJ, iv. 6a-b, 25b, 27b, 37b.

On 27 Mar. Spencer was appointed custos rotulorum of Northamptonshire in place of the recently deceased Westmorland, despite the protests of the earl’s widow, who wanted the position for her son.41 CSP Dom. 1628-9, p. 502. From October 1629, if not earlier, Spencer was in dispute with successive bishops of Coventry and Lichfield over money said to be due to the diocese from Wormleighton, the family’s house in Warwickshire where Spencer resided occasionally. In defending his refusal to pay, Spencer described himself as a ‘true honourer of the clergy’ and told the bishop, Robert Wright^*, that ‘I esteem both your person and calling and love the Church’. However, he maintained that he should ‘out of conscience’ preserve his estate ‘to my heir as I found it left unto me’, without any additional charge, ‘though never so little’.42 Add 75308, unfol., Edward Latham to Spencer, 7 Oct. 1629; Spencer to Latham, 13 Oct. 1629; Spencer to Charles Twysden, undated; Spencer to Robert Wright, undated. Despite the conservative nature of this statement, Spencer’s management of his estate was anything but traditional. In the 1630s he started to shift away from direct farming, which had been the family’s previous practice, towards renting out more of his lands.43 Finch, 48.

In 1632 Spencer was criticized by a puritanical friend for supporting the annual horse races then being established at Northampton. His friend complained of ‘the great dishonour it shall procure to God, by disorders (of all sorts) that always accompany such meetings’. Spencer replied by defending horse racing, and told his critic that ‘the greatness of noblemen, notwithstanding the pride of any man’s heart, must be remembered’.44 Add 75308, unfol. Richard Samwell to Lord Spencer, 1 Feb. 1632; Lord Spencer to Richard Samwell, Feb. [1632]; Add. 25079, f. 101; VCH Northants. ii. 382.

According to the inscription on his funeral monument and the records of the Court of Wards, Spencer died on 19 Dec. 1636 (although the parish register states he died the day before). He was buried at Brington, the parish church closest to Althorp, on the 27th. His wife commissioned a monument from Nicholas Stone, who delegated the work to his assistants.45 Brington par. reg. (Soc. Gen. microfiche); Baker, i. 98. Spencer made his will the day before his death, when he was so ill that he could only make a mark. He appointed as his executors his wife and his eldest son Henry^†, then only 16, who succeeded him as 3rd Lord Spencer. His brothers Sir Edward Spencer and Richard Spencer, and his son-in-law, John Craven^† (subsequently Lord Craven of Ryton), were named overseers of his will, and were charged with providing for his younger sons out of a lease of his lands in Warwickshire.46 PROB 11/173, ff. 206v-7. In January 1637 it was reported that Henry Rich^*, 1st earl of Holland, had secured the wardship of the 3rd Lord Spencer, but in fact it was sold to the ward’s mother for a fine of £5,000 and £399 a year rent.47 T. Birch, Ct. and Times of Chas. I, ii. 261; WARD 9/208, f. 216; 9/209, f. 260v.