GREY, Henry (1547-1614)

The Groby branch of the Grey family was founded by Edward Grey^† (d.1457), the younger son of Reynold Grey^†, 3rd Lord Grey of Ruthin (d.1440). Edward married Elizabeth, granddaughter and heir of William de Ferrers^†, 6th Lord Ferrers of Groby (d.1445), whereby he acquired Groby Castle in Leicestershire. From 1446 he was summoned to the Lords in right of his wife. Edward’s son, Sir John Grey, was killed at the second battle of St Albans (1461) without having been summoned to Parliament. His widow, Elizabeth Woodville, married Edward IV in 1464. As a consequence, Sir John’s son and heir, Thomas Grey^†, became the king’s stepson and, in 1475, marquess of Dorset. In the early sixteenth century the Greys contended for primacy in Leicestershire with the Hastings family. However, in 1554, Henry Grey^†, 3rd marquess of Dorset (who had been created duke of Suffolk), was executed for supporting Wyatt’s rebellion (having been captured by Francis Hastings^†, 2nd earl of Huntingdon), whereupon all his titles and estates were forfeited to the crown.24 CP, iv. 421; v. 358-62; vi. 158; R. Cust, ‘Honour Rhetoric, and Political Culture: the Earl of Huntingdon and his Enemies’, Political Culture and Cultural Pols. in Early Modern Eng. ed. S.D. Amussen and M.A. Kishlansky, 87; VCH Leics. ii. 105.

Suffolk’s younger brothers, Thomas and John, also participated in Wyatt’s rebellion. Unlike Thomas, however, John secured a pardon and survived, becoming head of the family, and consequently stood to inherit the marquessate of Dorset should Suffolk’s attainder be reversed. After the accession of Elizabeth, John was granted the manor of Pirgo in south-west Essex, where he settled. However, he became too closely involved in the cause of his niece, the queen’s cousin Katharine, who had been disgraced for her clandestine marriage to Edward Seymour^*, 1st earl of Hertford. He was briefly imprisoned and died in 1564 without having won back any of his ancestors’ lands or titles.25 Oxford DNB online sub Grey, Lord John, d. 1564 (Jan. 2008).

Henry Grey, the subject of this biography, was the eldest surviving son of John. He was a minor when his father died and consequently became a ward of the crown, being placed in the custody of the master of the Court of Wards, Sir William Cecil^† (subsequently 1st Lord Burghley), his father’s friend, to whom he was related by marriage.26 Lansd. 10, f. 135; S. Alford, Burghley, 77. After coming of age he spent much of his Elizabethan career in attendance at court as part of the band of gentleman pensioners, becoming lieutenant in the latter part of the reign. In 1575 he secured a grant of much former Grey property in Leicestershire, including Groby and Bradgate, a mansion house near Leicester. However, in the Elizabethan period Pirgo remained his main country residence. Active in Essex local administration, he was elected for the county in 1588, though only after intervention from the Council.27 CPR, 1572-5, pp. 524-6; HP Commons, 1558-1603, ii. 222-3. His eldest son, Sir John Grey^‡, took up residence at Bradgate instead, though not before the Hastings family assumed a position of dominance in Leicestershire. Although Sir John was initially unwilling to challenge them, conflict arose over the county election to the 1601 Parliament and in local administration.28 Recs. of the Bor. of Leicester ed. M. Bateson, iii. 385-6; Bodl., Carte 77, f. 518; Carte 78, f. 361v.

In 1588 Henry Grey was identified by Burghley, now lord treasurer, as a suitable candidate for ennoblement, the House of Lords being now rather small. He argued that Grey was ‘meet to bear the title of a baron’ because he was heir male to the Dorset marquessate. However, he realized that Grey would have to be summoned to Parliament by a new title in the first instance, because he could only be restored to his ancestors’ peerages by an act of Parliament; ‘lord of Groby’ was one possibility Burghley considered. On 18 Jan. 1589 Burghley confidently reported to George Talbot^†, 6th earl of Shrewsbury, that Elizabeth would make Grey a baron, but in fact his proposal to expand the Lords largely came to nothing.29 Lansd. 104, f. 52r-v; HMC Bath, v. 97. In the late 1590s it was reported that Grey ‘looketh to be restored to the dignity of marquess of Dorset’, but he was still a commoner when the queen died in 1603.30 Lansd. 860A, f. 58v.

Sir John Grey was among those who hurried north hoping to ingratiate themselves with James I on the latter’s accession.31 HP Commons, 1604-29, iv. 474. The Greys were no doubt eager to dissociate themselves from the suggestion that the descendants of Henry’s cousin, Katharine Grey, had any claim to the throne. They were evidently successful, as in July 1603 Henry Grey was created Baron Grey of Groby at Hampton Court.32 ‘Camden Diary’ (1691), 2. However, the elevation came at a price, for at the time of the ceremony James ‘signified his pleasure’ that Grey should resign the lieutenancy of the gentleman pensioners in favour of Allan Percy^‡, brother of the recently appointed captain of the band, Henry Percy^*, 3rd earl of Northumberland, on the grounds that the new lord’s ‘indisposition’ disabled him from attending court. Grey, however, was reluctant to surrender a post which, he subsequently claimed, had netted him nearly £200 a year. He therefore did not resign until the Privy Council passed on to him a direct order from the king at the end of August.33 SP14/3/42; HMC Hatfield, xvi. 387.

At the time of the meeting of the first Jacobean Parliament, in March 1604, Grey was still resident in Essex. Writing from Pirgo on the 3rd of that month, he nominated Sir William Skipwith^‡ and Sir Henry Beaumont^‡ of Gracedieu, returned for Leicester two days before, as commissioners to help hear a complaint from some of his Leicestershire tenants. However, there is no evidence that he played any role in their election.34 Add. 12506, f. 315. Similarly, there is no indication that he influenced the choice of Leicestershire’s knights of the shire, although one of them, Sir Thomas Beaumont^‡ of Stoughton, subsequently became one of Grey’s leading political allies. Shortly before the Parliament met, Grey’s hopes of securing the restoration of the marquessate of Dorset suffered a major blow when the lord treasurer, Thomas Sackville^*, Lord Buckhurst, was created earl of Dorset.

Grey was recorded as attending 26 of the 71 sittings of the upper House in 1604, 37 per cent of the total. He suffered a severe illness in the latter stages of the session, subsequently writing that he would have died had he remained in London. Consequently he did not attend the Lords after 16 May. It was presumably in May that Grey granted his proxy to William Knollys^*, Lord Knollys (subsequently earl of Banbury), who had served with him in the band of gentleman pensioners.35 LJ, ii. 263b; Add. 25079, f. 62; Tighe, 399. In view of his limited attendance of the House, it is not surprising that Grey was named to only eight of the 70 committees appointed by the Lords during the session. On 29 Mar. he was named to consider the bill against witchcraft. The same committee was instructed to consider a further measure on the same subject, on 11 Apr., although Grey was not then marked as present. Other public bills he was required to help consider concerned drunkards, poaching and deceits in painting. He was twice instructed to confer with the Commons about the Union, and was appointed to consider two private bills, one to restore in blood the son of an Essex knight and the other to pay the debts of the Elizabethan diplomat, Sir Henry Unton^‡.36 LJ, ii. 269a, 269b, 274a, 275a, 278a, 284a, 292a, 294b. He made no recorded speeches. After the prorogation in July he wrote to thank Robert Spencer^*, 1st Lord Spencer for ‘staying the preferment of the bill to the Parliament House’, but the measure referred to is unknown.37 Add. 25079, f. 62.

After the 1604 session, Grey took up residence in Bradgate while Sir John moved to Pirgo.38 Ibid.; Lansd. 89, f. 44. Grey quickly began to involve himself in the local administration of Leicestershire.39 Recs. of the Bor. of Leicester ed. H. Stocks, iv. 21. Following the death, on 30 Dec. 1604, of George Hastings^*, 4th earl of Huntingdon, he wrote to the king’s chief minister Robert Cecil^*, Viscount Cranborne (son of the late Lord Burghley and subsequently 1st earl of Salisbury), asking to succeed Huntingdon as lord lieutenant and custos rotulorum of the county, as Huntingdon’s grandson and heir, Henry Hastings^*, was only 18.40 HMC Hatfield, xvi. 387. The new 5th earl of Huntingdon was evidently furious, and petitioned the king. His cause was doubtless aided by Grey’s prominent signature, on a letter dated 7 Jan. 1605, from Leicestershire’s puritan gentry, protesting against the deprivation of clergymen who refused to subscribe to the 1604 Canons. Consequently, the lieutenancy was left temporarily vacant while Sir Henry Beaumont^‡ of Coleorton was appointed custos.41 HMC Hatfield, xvii. 7-8 (where Grey’s signature is mis-transcribed as Henry George, see Hatfield House, CP103/100), 603; Cust, 87. Grey subsequently wrote to Huntingdon seeking to excuse his behaviour, but the earl ‘saw the truth of his pretences’. Nevertheless, in the spring of 1605 Sir John Grey managed to establish a truce between the two families, apparently blaming his father’s behaviour on old age.42 Carte 77, f. 518; Cust, 89. This may have led to some antagonism between Lord Grey and Sir John; in July the king wrote to the former ‘in favour of his son’. However, the truce with the Hastings family endured even after Huntingdon came of age in 1607 and was appointed lord lieutenant and custos.43 SO3/3, unfol. (July 1606).

On 3 Nov. 1605, two days before the opening of the second session of Parliament, Grey was granted leave of absence. He gave his proxy to Salisbury who, on 21 Jan. 1606, informed the upper House that Grey would not be sitting.44 Ibid. (3 Nov. 1605); LJ, ii. 355a, 561a. Three days before the third session began, on 18 Nov. 1606, Grey again received leave of absence, his licence being delivered to Salisbury, who again received Grey’s proxy. The clerk was therefore probably in error in recording that Grey attended the upper House on 15 December.45 SO3/3, unfol. (15 Nov. 1606); LJ, ii. 449a.

In October 1607 Grey wrote to Salisbury on behalf of a kinsman, John Duport, the moderately puritan master of Jesus College, Cambridge.46 HMC Hatfield, xix. 287; Oxford DNB online sub Duport, John (Jan 2008). This letter, together with his earlier public support for nonconformist clergymen, suggests that Grey himself was a puritan. However, he was also a patron of Francis White^*, subsequently bishop of Ely, whom he appointed rector of Boughton Astley in 1587. Although White espoused Calvinist views in the early stages of his career, he was never a puritan. Closely connected with Grey until the latter’s death, he attended Grey’s wife on her deathbed and became a party to indentures concerning Grey’s estates.47 FRANCIS WHITE; PROB 11/124, f. 341r-v.

Grey was granted leave of absence for the fourth and fifth sessions of the Parliament, held in 1610, when he again granted his proxy to Salisbury.48 SO3/4, unfol. (8 Feb. and 20 Oct. 1610). LJ, ii. 548b, 666b. However, he was evidently active in Leicestershire local administration and, as such, may have contributed to the re-emergence of the feud between the Grey and Hastings families. It was subsequently alleged in Star Chamber that Huntingdon’s cousin, Sir Henry Hastings^‡ of Leicester Abbey, obstructed Grey in his duties as a Leicestershire magistrate after Grey sought to investigate a murder committed by one of Hastings’ servants in January 1610. Hastings certainly fell out with Sir John Grey and, in May of that year the two men crossed to the Netherlands to fight a duel. The combat was averted but, the following month, Sir John clashed with Huntingdon over the collection of arrears for Leicestershire’s composition for purveyance.49 STAC 8/54/13; Cust, 94-5; Bodl., Carte 77, f. 519.

The feud between the Greys and the Hastings worsened in 1611, initially over purveyance, but eventually more generally over Leicestershire’s administration.50 HMC Hastings, iv. 198; Bodl., Carte 77, f. 519; Carte 78, f. 325. In late September the Greys and their allies wrote to the lord chancellor, Thomas Egerton^*, Lord Ellesmere (later 1st Viscount Brackley), calling for the dismissal from the bench of John Bale, a long serving man of business for members of the Hastings family. They attacked Bale for his ‘mean … birth … and education’, for his ‘sacrilegious converting’ of church property, for his ‘devouring the rest of a town by depopulation’ and for his ‘lewd and incontinent life’. Huntingdon quickly realized that he himself was the real object of the attack.51 HEHL, HA4328; Cust, 95-7; Bodl., Carte, 78, f. 308v. On 8 Oct., under cover of seeking a ‘general reconciliation’, Lord Grey sent Huntingdon ‘such considerations as I hold worthy the ratification’. These amounted to a programme to reform local administration and existing political arrangements, including taxation, the workings of the county bench and the election of knights of the shire, which in future were to be ‘free … without any underhand labouring’. Grey’s aim seems to have been to prevent arbitrary interference by Huntingdon, his kinsmen and retainers in Leicestershire affairs.52 HEHL, HA4329. Copies of Grey’s programme can be found in Bodl., Carte 78, f. 322 and FSL, V.a.402, ff. 5-6. There is a more detailed version, with instances of specific abuses by members of the Hastings clan in Bodl., Carte 78, f. 361.

Grey, however, suffered from several weaknesses in his struggle with Huntingdon. His support on the Leicestershire bench was limited, as only five of his fellow magistrates signed the September letter. Moreover, Huntingdon could count on the support of Ellesmere, who was married to the earl’s mother-in-law. Indeed, the latter wrote to Huntingdon assuring him of his sympathy.53 Cust, 96-7; HEHL, HA2412. Moreover, Grey’s son, Sir John, who (unlike Grey himself) still held court office, died suddenly in early October.54 HP Commons, 1604-23, iv. 473-4. Huntingdon soon went on the offensive, attacking the past misconduct of Sir George Belgrave^‡, one of Grey’s most prominent supporters and accusing his enemies of being motivated purely by ‘faction’. In December Grey and his supporters again wrote to Ellesmere requesting a commission to examine Bale’s fitness to be a magistrate; however, they were unsuccessful. The following February Huntingdon and his supporters, including 11 j.p.s, proposed that the dispute be examined at the forthcoming Lent assizes by the judges, one of whom was a friend of Huntingdon. Ellesmere approved this proposal but Grey, probably realizing that defeat was imminent, absented himself from the hearing the following month, which duly found in favour of Bale.55 HEHL, HA4330-1, HA5436-8; Cust, 97-9; Bodl., Carte, 78, ff. 308-10.

Huntingdon emerged victorious from the conflict with Grey, and was still using his connection with Ellesmere’s wife to block Grey’s nominations to the Leicestershire bench as late as 1614.56 HEHL, HA2513. When a fresh Parliament was called that year, Grey seems to have persuaded the chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, Sir Thomas Parry^‡, to nominate his grandson, Henry Felton, for the borough of Leicester. However, Parry withdrew Felton’s nomination before the election, perhaps because of opposition from Huntingdon.57 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 226. Grey played no discernible role in the county election that year, and was granted leave of absence, on 4 Apr., the day before the Parliament convened. With Salisbury having died in 1612, Grey granted his proxy to his first cousin once removed, Henry Wriothesley^*, 3rd and 1st earl of Southampton. He was nevertheless recorded as attending the upper House on 23 May, probably in error. He left no further trace on the records of the Parliament.58 SO3/6, unfol. (4 Apr. 1614); LJ, ii. 686a.

Grey died at Bradgate on 26 July 1614, where he was buried in accordance with his wishes. His funeral was not held until 7 November. He had made his will on 20 June, in which he appointed Sir Thomas Beaumont of Stoughton and Francis White as his executors, and Southampton as his overseer. He was succeeded by his grandson and namesake, to whom he bequeathed his robes. His grandson Henry Grey^* succeeded to his title and was created earl of Stamford in 1628.59 ‘Camden Diary’, 11; Nichols, ii. pt. 2, p. 628; PROB 11/124, ff. 340v-2.