CAREY, Robert (c.1560-1639)

The youngest son of the Elizabethan lord chamberlain, Henry Carey^†, 1st Lord Hunsdon, Carey spent much of his early life at court, where he enjoyed the favour of his cousin, Elizabeth I, though he also cut a dash with military exploits on the Continent and in northern England. Noted for his extravagance and personal charm, it was later observed by Thomas Howard^*, 1st earl of Suffolk:

There was none in the late queen’s court that lived in a better fashion than he did. He so behaved himself, that he was beloved of all in court and elsewhere. … He ever spent with the best … and he exceeded in making choice of what he wore to be handsome and comely.34 Clutterbuck, iii. 181; Mems. of Robert Carey, 70.

Carey achieved notoriety with his dramatic ride to Edinburgh in March 1603, bearing the news of Elizabeth’s death to James VI and heralding Stuart rule in England. This exploit had been a major gamble, since he pre-empted the English government’s official messengers, but it cemented his place at the Jacobean court. He also struck lucky two years later, when he became governor to the sickly duke of York, Prince Charles (Stuart^*, later prince of Wales). Treated gently by Carey and his wife, the prince thrived, and in 1612 emerged as heir to the throne, following the sudden death of his elder brother Henry. During the next few years, Carey faced repeated attempts by rival courtiers to supplant him in Charles’s household, where he served successively as master of the robes and chamberlain, but he clung on to his position, and retained the prince’s affections.35 Chamberlain Letters, i. 189; Mems. of Robert Carey, 68-9, 75; HMC Portland, ix. 14.

In 1622 Carey was elevated to the peerage as Lord Carey of Leppington, at Charles’s behest. Thereafter, contemporaries frequently referred to him as Lord Leppington, perhaps to distinguish him from George Carew^*, Lord Carew (later earl of Totness). It was widely assumed that this promotion heralded his retirement, but in fact Carey had lost none of his influence, and continued as usual with his duties.36 Chamberlain Letters, ii. 424. Leppington was one of Carey’s Yorks. properties: C142/579/62. Although excluded from the secretive planning of the prince’s dramatic journey to Spain in early 1623, Carey was selected by the king to lead the contingent of courtiers who followed Charles by sea five weeks later.37 Chamberlain Letters, ii. 485; Mems. of Robert Carey, 77; SP14/139/46; CSP Dom. 1619-21, pp. 523, 528, 552. One of the few royal servants permitted to join the prince in Madrid, where accommodation was severely limited, Carey in fact spent barely a month in the Spanish capital, as he was now aged around 63, and his young master became concerned that the summer heat would be too much for him. Sent back to England, he was quickly drawn into the preparations being made to receive the prince’s intended bride. However, he had been able to bring no substantive news of progress with the marriage negotiations, which had now reached stalemate. According to his memoirs, he welcomed Charles’s return home that autumn, and the eventual abandonment of the Spanish Match.38 Mems. of Robert Carey, 77-8; G. Redworth, Prince and the Infanta, 187; CSP Dom. 1619-23, p. 589; HMC Mar and Kellie, ii. 171-2.

As a member of the prince’s council, Carey undoubtedly influenced the choice of candidates put forward for duchy of Cornwall boroughs in the 1624 parliamentary elections. His younger son Thomas was nominated unsuccessfully for a seat at Grampound, but secured a burgess-ship at Helston instead. Carey’s heir, Sir Henry (Carey^*, later 2nd earl of Monmouth), was omitted from the initial round of nominations, but was subsequently returned in the Beverley by-election at the council’s request.39 DCO, ‘Prince Chas. in Spain’, f. 33; HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 56, 58; iii. 436.

Carey was formally introduced in the Lords on 25 Feb., supported by Robert Spencer^*, 1st Lord Spencer and Charles Stanhope^*, 2nd Lord Stanhope of Harrington. (Carey’s nephew Henry Carey^* (later 1st earl of Dover) was by now Viscount Rochford, and therefore too senior to perform this task.) However, he first took his seat on 19 Feb., for the state opening, and thereafter attended assiduously. Present for four-fifths of the session, his longest absence covered just four consecutive sittings, in late April.40 LJ, iii. 218a; Add. 40087, f. 21. During the course of the Parliament, Carey was appointed to 21 committees, one fifth of the total number. Naturally he was closely linked to Prince Charles’s personal legislative agenda, and for this reason he was named to consider bills concerning duchy of Cornwall leases, the nuisance caused by brewhouses near St James’s Palace, and the prince’s acquisition of both Kenilworth Castle, Warwickshire and some lands belonging to Sir Lewis Watson^† (later 1st Lord Rockingham). The Kenilworth bill must have been of particular interest, as Carey had for some years been negotiating to rent the castle himself once it came into the prince’s hands. Charles favoured the enfranchisement of County Durham, which could have increased his own scope for electoral patronage, and perhaps for this reason Carey was appointed to that legislative committee too.41 LJ, iii. 246a, 254b, 263b, 269a, 402b; T. Birch, Ct. and Times of Jas. I, ii. 80.

The prince’s chief priority during the 1624 Parliament was to push for war with Spain, and unsurprisingly Carey was linked to this campaign as well. Nominated on 12 Mar. to confer with the Commons about the size of contribution Parliament would make towards military expenditure, he was also named to a further conference which generated a more specific proposal. He was then appointed to attend the king when this new offer was communicated to James. A proposal on 1 Apr. by the lord admiral, George Villiers^*, 1st duke of Buckingham, to fund the fleet with short-term loans secured against subsidy payments prompted a further conference, to which Carey was named. As the drive to war intensified, he was also nominated to the committee for the bill to ban English subjects from receiving foreign pensions.42 LJ, iii. 258b, 273b, 275a, 285a, 410b.

The prospect of conflict with Catholic Spain inevitably raised fears about the threat posed at home by recusants. Carey was appointed to confer with the Commons about a proposed joint petition to the king about recusancy, and also to a committee of both Houses for addressing remaining differences. He was then nominated to help present the completed petition to James. Carey was further named to a conference about the Commons’ petition requesting the dismissal of recusant officeholders.43 Ibid. 287b, 289a, 304a, 393b. His remaining seven appointments were all to bill committees. These concerned a broad range of issues, from reform of purveyance and of legal process, to the Welsh cloth trade, and some almshouses founded by Robert Sackville^*, 2nd earl of Dorset.44 Ibid. 284a, 288b, 303b, 397a.

Shortly after the session ended, Carey obtained the desired lease of the palatial Kenilworth Castle, and in August 1624 he entertained Charles there with a masque by Ben Jonson.45 Hist. of the King’s Works, iii. 260; J. Nichols, Progs. of Jas. I, iv. 996; Chamberlain Letters, ii. 577; W. Dugdale, Antiqs. of Warws. (1730), 251. However, a major disappointment now loomed. Carey had long assumed that he would be promoted to a senior role in the royal household when the prince came to the throne. In the event, when James died in the following March, there was no wholesale replacement of the existing officers. Carey was reportedly offered the post of vice chamberlain, but nothing came of this. According to the newsletter-writer John Chamberlain, Carey turned down the office in the vain hope of obtaining a more senior one. However, he may actually have lost out to political expediency. The existing vice chamberlain, John Digby^*, 1st earl of Bristol, was in disgrace for refusing to endorse Charles’s narrative of the failed Spanish Match negotiations. At the outset of the new reign a fresh attempt was made to end this impasse, and with Bristol reluctant to resign, Charles may have left him in office as an incentive to cooperate. At any rate, the king retained Carey merely as a gentleman of the bedchamber, though he was granted lands worth £500 per annum as compensation for the loss of his other offices.46 Mems. of Robert Carey, 79; HMC Hastings, ii. 67; Chamberlain Letters, ii. 610-11; CSP Dom. 1625-6, pp. 535, 553-4; JOHN DIGBY.

Although Carey was appointed a member of the duchy of Cornwall council, which replaced the prince’s council following Charles’s accession, this new body did not make electoral nominations in 1625, when the first Caroline Parliament met. While Sir Henry and Thomas Carey once again found seats in Cornwall, at Tregony and Helston respectively, it is unclear how far they were assisted by their father.47 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 58, 80. Carey himself attended nearly two-thirds of the sittings of Parliament held at Westminster. Most of his absences occurred in the latter stages, and he was formally excused on 6 July. He also attended Parliament when it reconvened at Oxford, but only for three sittings (4-6 Aug. inclusive).48 Procs. 1625, p. 96.

Carey was named to the committee for privileges, and received five other nominations at Westminster. Of these, three were to bill committees, the legislation in question dealing with crown estates within the duchy of Cornwall and at Macclesfield, in Cheshire, and the maintenance of almshouses. He was also appointed to confer with the Commons about the proposed joint petition to the king for a general fast, and to a conference at which the Lords communicated the king’s wishes about adjourning the session.49 Ibid. 43, 45, 58, 88, 95, 116. While at Oxford, he received just two nominations, to draft proposals for the relief of plague victims in London, and to take the accounts for the money being collected to redeem Englishmen enslaved by north African pirates.50 Ibid. 139.

Following the dissolution, Carey passed the rest of the summer in Warwickshire, out of reach of the plague, rejoining the court in the autumn. In November, he was appointed keeper of Kenilworth, a subtle reminder that the latter property remained, officially at least, a royal castle. Carey was spending Christmas there when news arrived that a new Parliament had been summoned.51 Mems. of Robert Carey, 80; CSP Dom. 1625-6, p. 149. The grant was finalized in 1626: SO3/8 (unfol., Feb. 1626). At the ensuing elections, Sir Henry and Thomas Carey were returned for St Mawes and Tregony respectively, through the mediation of their cousin, Charles Trevanion^‡. Carey himself presumably encouraged this electoral patronage.52 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 78, 80.

On 7 Feb., the day after the state opening, Carey was created earl of Monmouth, one of the honours bestowed by Charles to mark his coronation five days earlier.53 Mems. of Robert Carey, 80; C231/4, f. 195. The date of his creation given by CP (5 Feb.) is incorrect. The new earl was formally reintroduced to the Lord on 18 Feb., by which time he had already been named to the committee for privileges.54 Procs. 1626, i. 48, 57. He attended just over four-fifths of this session, with no major gaps in his service, though he was excused on 28 Feb. on account of illness, and again on 17 and 24 March.55 Ibid. 80, 172, 206. Monmouth’s only bill committee nomination concerned the estates of the Starkey family of Cheshire. Behind the scenes, he signed off the accounts of the collection for redemption of the English slaves held in north Africa, fulfilling the responsibility assigned to him in August 1625. His only speech was made during the 29 Apr. debate on whether the earl of Bristol should be allowed to take his seat, Monmouth observing that the earl was currently in the custody of the gentleman usher.56 Ibid. 57, 322; Lords Procs. 1628, p. 216. On 15 Mar. Monmouth’s son Henry, now styled Lord Carey, wrote to his father describing current events in the Commons, but it is not known whether this letter formed part of a regular correspondence.57 Procs. 1626, iv. 258-9.

It was probably at around this time that Monmouth composed the well-known memoir of his life, since the account ends with the acquisition of his earldom. Now in his mid-sixties, he was evidently adjusting to semi-retirement.58 Mems. of Robert Carey, p. xxxi. However, the failure of the 1626 Parliament to grant supply obliged the government to turn to arbitrary taxation later that year. Monmouth was expected to throw his weight behind these measures, and in January 1627, along with Fulke Greville^*, 1st Lord Brooke, he held a meeting at Warwick to promote the Forced Loan. One of the Loan’s more notable opponents in this region was Robert Devereux^*, 3rd earl of Essex, and in June 1627 a startled Monmouth was informed that he was to replace Essex as lord lieutenant of Staffordshire. In an exchange of letters shortly afterwards, Monmouth assured Essex that he had both defended him and tried to dissuade the king, explaining that he himself had no connections with the county, but all to no avail. This change of personnel lasted until early 1629, when Essex was finally reinstated. In the meantime, Monmouth attempted to fulfil his new duties from a distance, either at court or from Kenilworth. There is no evidence that his involvement improved the Loan’s collection in Staffordshire.59 R. Cust, Forced Loan, 109; A. Hughes, Pols., Soc. and Civil War in Warws. 95; Add. 46188, ff. 102, 107; APC, 1627, pp. 74-5, 457, 493-5; 1627-8, p. 229.

The Trevanion family connection again bore fruit in the 1628 parliamentary elections, with Henry, Lord Carey and Thomas Carey returned at Grampound and St Mawes respectively.60 HP Commons, 1604-29, ii. 56-7, 78. Monmouth himself attended just under four-fifths of the 1628 session, and was never absent for more than two consecutive sittings, despite being formally excused five times.61 Lords Procs. 1628, pp. 146, 167, 320, 558, 579. He was again named to the committee for privileges, but attracted only two other appointments. Nominated to the bill committee concerning the lands of William Morgan, on 31 May he was included in a delegation of peers which visited the king to propose a short adjournment of the upper House.62 Ibid. 73, 565, 574. Monmouth was also one of the peers directly affected by Charles’s decision to grant William Knollys^*, earl of Banbury, precedence over several other earls whose creations predated his own. This issue was debated by the committee for privileges on 31 Mar., with Monmouth in attendance, but the latter was content to accept the king’s assurance that this was a personal favour which would apply only during Banbury’s own lifetime.63 Ibid. 128, 137. Monmouth attended all but four sittings of the short 1629 session, but apart from again securing membership of the committee for privileges, he left no mark on the Lords’ proceedings.64 LJ, iv. 6a.

During the next decade, Monmouth continued to receive small grants of money, land or wardships, demonstrating that he still retained the king’s favour, even if his influence at court was now negligible. Indeed, he was one of the select group of courtiers chosen to accompany Charles to Scotland in 1633.65 Coventry Docquets, 253, 258-9, 469; CSP Dom. 1628-9, p. 558; 1631-3, p. 296; SO1/2, f. 38v; SO3/10, unfol. (Apr. 1631); 3/11 (Mar. 1635); Northants. RO, IC4313. His financial position secure, in 1631 Monmouth purchased another lavish seat, at Moor Park in Hertfordshire, recently rebuilt by Edward Russell^*, 3rd earl of Bedford, and with famous gardens laid out by the countess of Bedford and William Herbert^*, 3rd earl of Pembroke.66 Clutterbuck, i. 195; R. Strong, Renaissance Garden in Eng. 141, 144. In 1632 Monmouth recovered the captaincy of Tynemouth Castle, which he had first held 47 years earlier. Unfortunately for him, in 1638 the Privy Council ordered the slighting of the castle, as part of the restructuring of England’s northern defences against the renewed Scottish threat.67 Hist. Northumb. viii. 180; HMC Cowper, ii. 194; CSP Dom. 1638-9, p. 15. The earl was summoned to attend the king at York in the following year, but settled for contributing £300 towards the costs of the royal army.68 SO1/3, ff. 114v-15; CSP Dom. Addenda, 1625-49, p. 604.

Monmouth died at Moor Park in April 1639, and was buried at Rickmansworth, despite requesting interment with his parents at Westminster Abbey. In his will, drawn up on 3 Sept. 1635, he bequeathed his wife a life interest in Moor Park, to supplement her jointure, having already settled the bulk of his other properties on his son Henry. An undated codicil made provision for the clearing of debts which he had previously overlooked, a failing which he blamed on his weak memory. The will was proved in June 1639 by Henry, who succeeded his father as 2nd earl of Monmouth.69 CSP Dom. 1639, p. 36; Clutterbuck, i. 196; Strafforde Letters (1739) ed. W. Knowler, ii. 351; PROB 11/180, ff. 243v-5v.