CLIFTON, Gervase (c.1569-1618)

Clifton’s family background was comparatively humble. His grandfather, who hailed from Norfolk, made his fortune as a London merchant, and invested his profits in Somerset property, including the manor of Barrington, where he built a notable mansion.19 VCH Som. iv. 115. Under Clifton’s father, Sir John, sheriff of Somerset in 1586-7, the family consolidated its place among the West Country gentry. However, Clifton himself relocated to the east Midlands following his marriage in 1591 to the heiress of a Huntingdonshire squire, through which he acquired the substantial manor of Leighton Bromswold. From this point onwards, it is necessary to distinguish him from the Cliftons of Nottinghamshire, particularly Sir Gervase Clifton^‡, KB, who sat in Parliament for the latter county during much of the early Stuart period.20 C142/237/131; 142/555/83; Hughes, 124; VCH Hunts. iii. 88; HP Commons 1604-29, iii. 546-7.

In 1593 Clifton’s father died, leaving him an estate reputedly worth more than £50,000. During the next decade or so, Clifton sold much of this property in order to fund further purchases in Huntingdonshire, notably the manors of Little Gidding and Buckworth. He also began work on an ambitious new house at Leighton Bromswold, but may not have completed this project.21 Add. 38170, f. 302v; VCH Som. iv. 114; CPR, 1596-7, pp. 84-5; 1599-1600, pp. 30-1, 196; 1601-2 ed. S.R. Neal and C. Leighton (L. and I. Soc. cccxlix), 55; VCH Hunts. i. 299, 400; iii. 24, 54, 86-7. Knighted in around 1597, he was pricked as sheriff of Huntingdonshire later that year, and also represented the county in the 1597 and 1601 parliaments. By now he had acquired a reputation as a forceful character. Following the abortive 1601 rising led by Robert Devereux^†, 2nd earl of Essex, a plot was hatched to secure the latter’s release from prison by sending a small band of ‘men of resolution’ to surprise the queen at court. Those identified as suitable for this task included Clifton, though he was never a significant member of Essex’s circle. In the event, nothing came of this plan, nor was Clifton questioned about it after its discovery by the crown. As if to confirm his tough image, in 1602 he fought off a bear which attacked his son after escaping from a baiting pit. Sadly, his bravery proved futile, for the boy died shortly afterwards, leaving Clifton with an only daughter, Katherine, as his heir.22 CSP Dom. 1598-1601, p. 562; Diary of John Manningham ed. R.P. Sorlien, 52.

Clifton evidently possessed puritan tendencies, numbering among his friends William Chaderton^*, bishop of Lincoln, Oliver St John^*, 3rd Lord St John, and Sir William Russell^* (later 1st Lord Russell).23 H. Beddows alias Hajzyk, ‘The Church in Lincs. c.1595-c.1640 (Cambridge Ph.D. thesis, 1980), 10; Chamberlain Letters ed. N.E. McClure, i. 160; C54/2140/23. Following the accession of James I, Clifton travelled to Berwick-upon-Tweed to deliver loyal greetings from St John, Russell, Henry Grey^*, 6th earl of Kent, and Edward Russell^*, 3rd earl of Bedford. This message having been well received, Clifton was appointed a gentleman of the privy chamber in May 1603.24 Eg. 2877, f. 80; Harl. 6166, f. 68v. However, this toe-hold at court did little to advance his career, and he failed to secure a seat in the first Jacobean Parliament. Despite enjoying strong local support to stand as a Huntingdon shire knight again, he apparently withdrew after the king openly backed Clifton’s principal rival, Sir Oliver Cromwell^‡, by visiting the latter’s house just before the election. In a further setback, Clifton was dropped from the Huntingdonshire bench around a year later, for reasons unknown, and not subsequently reinstated.25 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 183.

It must therefore have caused some surprise when, in late 1607, the news broke that James’s cousin Esmé Stuart^*, Seigneur d’Aubigny [S] (later earl of March in the English peerage) had resolved to marry Clifton’s daughter, in consequence of which Clifton himself would receive a barony.26 Illustrations of Brit. Hist. ed. E. Lodge, iii. 331. The marriage settlement, which was not finally agreed until the following June, was decidedly unconventional. The heavily indebted d’Aubigny, who owned little or no land in England, was unable personally to provide a jointure for his bride, though the king promised to bestow lands worth £1,000 per annum on the couple. Clifton, in return, offered to settle on d’Aubigny by way of a dowry the inheritance of his three principal Huntingdonshire manors of Leighton Bromswold, Little Gidding and Buckworth, worth £2,000 annually. However, during negotiations, he became concerned that this generous offer would leave him with too little room for manoeuvre in the event of future financial difficulties. Accordingly, Clifton proposed instead to assure only the inheritance of Leighton Bromswold to the young couple in the short term, retaining absolute control over the other two manors, but paying the couple £500 a year in lieu. D’Aubigny and his brother Ludovic Stuart^*, duke of Lennox [S] (later duke of Richmond in the English peerage) were unhappy about this proposition, but eventually consented.27 Add. 38170, ff. 304, 308, 310v-11, 312v. In July 1608, Clifton received a writ of summons to the Lords, thereby becoming Lord Clifton of Leighton Bromswold, and the marriage went ahead a few weeks later.28 HMC Hatfield, xx. 289; CP, iii. 308-9; iv. 187; Annales (1631) ed. E. Howes, 891-2.

Now effectively a peripheral member of the royal family, Clifton soon began to involve himself more closely in the affairs of his Stuart kinsmen. D’Aubigny was heir apparent to his childless brother, Lennox, but the latter’s finances were in a similarly poor state. With considerable hubris, Clifton offered to take over the management of Lennox’s affairs, convinced that he could improve the duke’s income. Accordingly, in 1609 Lennox leased Clifton his Yorkshire estates, including the manor of Temple Newsam, along with the Northamptonshire manor of Grafton, and the duke’s interest in the alnage of woollen cloth.29 SP14/64/28; C54/1961/21. Clifton subsequently claimed that he had increased Lennox’s annual revenues from £500 to £7,000, but his methods were heavy-handed. The duke’s servants were accused of fraud and replaced by Clifton’s own men. Refractory tenants were subjected to violent intimidation. A rival alnage patentee, Sir George More^‡, was threatened with litigation.30 Add. 38170, f. 304; SP14/64/28; L. Stone, Crisis of the Aristocracy, 226-7; Surr. Hist. Cent., LM/COR/4/27L. Within months, Lennox was deeply dissatisfied with Clifton’s conduct, accusing him of defaulting on rent payments and failing to implement the terms of their agreement. Meanwhile, Clifton himself was running into financial trouble, and in February 1610 made over half of Buckworth manor to his brother Amyas, as security for an unpaid debt of £4,000.31 SP14/64/28; Add. 38170, f. 302v.

Parliament reconvened that same month, but Clifton was now persona non grata at court. Instead of taking his seat in the Lords, he obtained leave of absence, and presented his proxy to the lord treasurer, Robert Cecil^*, 1st earl of Salisbury.32 LJ, ii. 548a. However, this attempt to maintain a low profile proved unsuccessful. In the following October, the king summoned him to London to report on progress towards resolving his dispute with Lennox.33 Add. 11402, f. 161. Accordingly, Clifton attended the second parliamentary session of 1610, though he appeared in the upper House only six times, and received just two nominations. On 25 Oct. he was selected for a conference with the Commons about Salisbury’s Great Contract, while on 8 Nov. he was named to the committee for the bill about lawsuits over bequests of property.34 LJ, ii. 671a, 675a.

By mid 1611 Clifton was beginning to grasp the extent of his folly in meddling with Lennox’s affairs. The duke was one of James I’s closest relatives, and a major player at court. If the government or the judiciary had to choose between Lennox and Clifton, there was an automatic bias in favour of the former. First, the Privy Council ordered the cancellation of the offending leases, which the duke interpreted as permission to re-enter his estates without compensating Clifton for the money he had spent on improving them. Clifton appealed to the king to intervene, but to no avail. Meanwhile d’Aubigny, sensing his father-in-law’s vulnerability, began questioning the terms of the 1608 marriage settlement. When this dispute went to arbitration in November 1611, Clifton was instructed to surrender possession of Leighton Bromswold and Little Gidding to his daughter and son-in-law immediately, in return for £12,000, a huge sum which they proved unable to raise. Clifton was instead persuaded to accept a mortgage of Temple Newsam as security for the payment of £8,000 in 1614, on the dubious grounds that Lennox owed his brother the same amount, and was therefore cancelling out that debt through this new deal. The d’Aubignys were still obliged to settle the remaining £4,000, but wriggled out of this payment by claiming that Leighton Bromswold and Little Gidding were heavily encumbered. Clifton retaliated by refusing to complete the conveyancing on the two manors, in consequence of which the lord chancellor, Thomas Egerton^*, Lord Ellesmere (later 1st Viscount Brackley), ruled that their default was justified.35 SP14/64/27; Add. 38170, ff. 304, 306v, 310v, 313; C54/2140/23. Stalemate ensued. Starved of cash, Clifton descended ever further into debt, with no immediate prospect of redeeming his situation. In April 1612 his frustration and outrage at his daughter’s behaviour boiled over, and he reportedly ‘vowed he would keep half a dozen whores, and if he got any of them with child he would marry her’.36 Add. 38170, f. 306v; Chamberlain Letters, i. 345-6.

In the Huntingdonshire parliamentary elections of 1614, Clifton is thought to have backed the return of Sir Robert Payne^‡ and Sir Robert Bevill^‡, but only the former was successful, the other seat going to the baron’s rival, Sir Oliver Cromwell.37 HP Commons 1604-29, ii. 183. Clifton himself once again obtained leave of absence from the Lords, but his proxy failed to reach Westminster before the end of this brief session. Even so, he left his mark on the Lords’ proceedings, as his friend Lord St John successfully requested privilege for one of Clifton’s servants, who had been arrested in London. This case established a precedent in the upper House that ‘any lord … being absent with licence … may enjoy the privilege of this House for his servants, as if such lord were personally present’.38 HMC Hastings, iv. 248, 286; LJ, ii. 700b, 702a-b.

By August 1614 the Temple Newsam mortgage was due for redemption, but predictably the £8,000 owed to Clifton was not forthcoming. Instead, following another intervention by Lord Chancellor Ellesmere, Clifton agreed to buy the manor outright, borrowing a further £1,221 to meet Lennox’s asking price. While this deal meant that the baron could finally exploit the Temple Newsam estate unhindered, he was now ‘in great extremities for monies’. In October that year, he handed the remaining portion of Buckworth manor to his brother Amyas in return for £2,000, half of which was immediately claimed by d’Aubigny. Meanwhile, the dispute over Leighton Bromswold and Little Gidding remained unresolved; both Clifton and the d’Aubignys claimed ownership and arranged mortgages of these properties, but the latter still refused to pay the £4,000 required to secure their title.39 Add. 38170, ff. 302v, 304, 306v.

In April 1617, with their latest lawsuit pending in Chancery, the king ordered the new lord keeper, Sir Francis Bacon^* (later Viscount St Alban), to settle the matter once and for all. However, the resultant hearings dragged on into December, at which point Bacon ordered a fresh valuation of Clifton’s property. By now, the baron was cooling his heels in the Fleet prison, having recently been ‘censured … in the Star Chamber for some foul misdemeanour’, the details of which are unclear. Convinced that Bacon must be paving the way for yet another unfavourable decree, he threatened to kill the lord keeper if he found against him. Clifton was promptly hauled before the Privy Council, and committed to the Tower.40 Ibid. f. 310v; STAC 8/27/6; APC, 1616-17, p. 418; CSP Dom. 1611-18, p. 505; Chamberlain Letters, ii. 126. There he remained for the next three months, before being returned to the Fleet as a gesture of royal clemency. Nevertheless, in April 1618 he stood trial in Star Chamber, accused of perverting the course of justice by attempting to intimidate Bacon. The verdict was never in doubt, but Clifton lacked the means to pay the fine imposed on him. After a decent interval he was released from prison again, and went to stay at the d’Aubignys’ London house, the family quarrels seemingly at an end.41 APC, 1618-19, pp. 74, 86-7; STAC 8/27/6; Chamberlain Letters, ii. 170. In August 1618 d’Aubigny was granted the benefit of certain other fines imposed by STAC, ‘for benefit of Lord Clifton’s fine’: SO3/6, unfol.

In reality, Clifton remained unreconciled to his miserable condition. In October 1618, having complained of vitae taedio [weariness of life], he committed suicide, stabbing himself in the stomach with a penknife, and perhaps also slashing his throat. Several commentators drew a parallel with the similar death a few months earlier of a prominent Dutch politician, Gilles van Ledenberg.42 T. Birch, Ct. and Times of Jas. I, ii. 91; HMC Downshire, vi. 535, 539; Chamberlain Letters, ii. 170; CSP Dom. 1611-18, p. 585; Letters from and to Sir Dudley Carleton (1780) ed. P. Yorke, 279, 297-8. As a suicide, Clifton was presumably denied burial in consecrated ground. His goods and chattels were declared forfeit to the king, who promptly bestowed them on the d’Aubignys.43 HMC Downshire, vi. 557; CSP Dom. 1611-18, p. 596. The Clifton barony fell into abeyance, but was revived in 1674 for Clifton’s great-granddaughter, Katherine O’Brien, on the grounds that a peerage created by writ of summons was an inheritance in fee simple, and could therefore pass to female descendants.44 HMC 9th Rep. ii. 37; LJ, xii. 629b-30a.