Skip to main content

Full text of "History of the family of Maunsell (Mansell, Mansel)"

See other formats





3 1833 01328 8797 


B. 1560 C'); died U>.;i; Knighted 1501 ; cr.aiod B:ironet [611. 
I /Vi-i-lVi' ( ,7//, 









"D BT THI VSC-HOK r. '- :.Ti r.l-.NFT 1 -fFA F.XOI.A> 

By Colonel C. A. Maunsell 

" , ra r N the first volume Commander Statham has carried this history 
p down to the end of Sir Robert Mansel's interesting career, 
l| dealing fearlessly with all the corrupt practices of those who 
M, held office in the days of Queen Elizabeth, James, and Charles. 
This proud Welshman appears to have been of a domineering and 
tactless nature, and thus he made many enemies. The most fruitful 
cause of enmity was no doubt his possession of the great monopoly for 
the manufacture of glass. 

Commander Statham has cleared up as far as possible the 
polemic problem of the parentage of Sir John Maunsell, Treasurer 
of York. 

He has given an account of the advent of the Maunsells 
to Ireland, where thev held high and important posts in the time 
of Henry III. 

He has placed before us interesting events in Irish history, 
the rebellion of Silken Tom, temp. Henry VIII. , a rising in a great 
measure due to the vacillating and weak government of the Deputy, 
Skeffington, the Settlement of Captain Mansel on a grant of land 
near Lifford, etc. 

On Irish history the veil is again lifted in an interesting 
account of the Rebellion of 1641, when Captain Thos. Maunsell was 
driven by the rebels from his properties in Ireland, Derryvillane, etc. 
This rebellion was also due to the weakness and ineptness oi the 
Government of those days ; and now we have passed through another 
rebellion, due to exactly the same cause. 

He has renascenced the Memoirs of great Clerics and learned 
Professors: Dr. Francis Mansel, the great Royalist Principal of 
Jesus College, Oxford, who devoted his life to the rebuilding of his 
beloved College and its library, in which he was financially assisted by 
his cousin, Sir Lewis Mansel. Francis Mansel, like many other 
followers of the spendthrift Stuarts, ended his life at Oxford in 
anything hut affluence. His portrait hangs in Jesus College Hall, 


and by the kind permission of the present Principal is reproduced 
in this volume. 

He deals with the life of Dr. J. Mansell, the Principal of 
Queen's College, Cambridge, a somewhat remarkable man. 

Also with that of Bishop Lort Mansel, Principal of Trinity 
College, Cambridge, the intimate friend of one of England's greatest 
Prime Minislers/Spencer Perceval, v. ho met his death at the hands 
ol an assassin on the floor of the House of Commons. The Bishop ot 
Bristol was a noted satinet, and many of his witty sallies will be 
found in the Satirist. 

Then he comes to the great Dean of St. Paul's, Henry Longue- 
ville Mansel, one of Dr. Burgon's (Dean of Chichester) " twelve- 
good men." 

Then lie deals with Charles Granville Mansell, a great Indian 
Civil Servant, one of the " sleeping and travelling triumverate " of 
the Punjab, the others being Joan and Henry Lawrence. 

Of soldiers he deals in the second volume with the memoirs of 
Major-General John Mansel of Cosgrove, who commanded the heavy 
Cavalrv at the battle of La Cateau. a battle of which Fortescue, in 
concluding his description of this great tight, writes, " So ended 
this, the greatest victory in the history of British Horse." 

Then he deals with Major-General J. Maunsell (Ballywilliam) , 
whose report, during a visit to England in 1775, of the reception of 
the Earl of Chatham's scheme for the pacification of the American 
Colonies was quoted by ministers in condemnation of the schema. 

Then he tells us of Colonel J. Mansel, C.B., of Smedmore, 
who, after a brilliant career in the Peninsula, commanded the guard 
over Napoleon in St. Helena; 

Of General Frederick Maunsell, 85th (Shropshire) Regiment, 
also a Peninsula veteran who heads five generations of Maunsells in 
that grand old Corps ; 

Of Sir Thomas Maunsell, K.C.B., of Ballywilliam, who 
fought and bled in the Sikhs Wars, Moultan, Chillianwallah, and the 
Crimea ; 

And of General Sir Frederick Maunsell, Colonel Commandant, 
R.E., who has lately passed away , whose last words were, " Napoleon 
would have done otherwise." 

Command-r Statham has unquestionably carried out his 
onerous work in the spirit of the true-hearted genealogist and family 


historian. Given a name and a date, he puzzles out the true position 
of the individual and places him or her in the proper niche in the 
family tree ; he has the real sense of proportion which enables him 
to neglect the unessential, end keep things clear, and above all has 
the historian's wit which reveals a situation or human character with 
the fresh light of happy phrases. 

I have watched him pounding away steadily and competently 
from fact to fact, always keeping in view the hunted hare, and, as a 
true huntsman, never lifting the hounds until he has run his quarry 
to death, and thus with the cumulative results of good sense and a 
right instinct, he makes himself a safe and certain guide. 

It is an intense pleasure to me to again record my thanks to 
Commander Statham and 10 look back to the many pleasant after- 
noons which we enjoyed together at the Junior United Service Club 
and Constitutional Club, discussing the various chapters in this 

Moreover, it is a real joy to have found an author and a friend 
who is even more keen on this work than I am myself, after having 
spent many, many years and much money in collecting information 
and placing it in his willing and careful hands. 

The thoroughness and narrative skill with which Commander 
Statham has carried out this biography is worth}" of whole-hearted 
praise. He has spared no pains. It is certainly astonishing how 
much material he has gathered together under the dust of over eight 

Not only printed books, but strange, almost unreadable MSS. 
in the British Museum, the Record Office, Somerset House, and old 
newspaper hies, etc., has he assiduously searched for evasive details, 
and to these fruits of industry must be added a lively and sensitive 
style and a brilliant faculty for unravelling character and motive. 

Commander Statham writes admirably well, and in many 
respects this book is a model of the biographers' art. Profuse, 
picturesque, and critical, he has shewn us how members of the family 
have fought for England, the home of Shakespeare and Keats and 
Dickens, for truth, honour, liberty, and civilisation, and how our 
immediate kinsmen, children of the Empire, have come from all 
corners of the earth to fight against " scientific barbarism," and for 
everything that Christian manhood holds dear. 

J. U.S. Club. 


*^\HERE should have been no need of a preface to this 
volume, the scope of the work and other matter having 

I been fully dealt with in that of the first volume. 
Unfortunately, some errors have found their way 
into the first volume, which demand more ample explanation than 
is conveyed in a mere list of corrections. 

It will be recollected that John Maunsell, Provost of Beverley, 
etc., died, according to certain chronicles quoted, about January 20, 
1265 ; ' but whether he died in England or, as the writer of " Chronica 
de Mailros " has it, " in partibus transmarinis," remained doubtful. 
The editor of the "Century Encyclopedia of Names" appears, 
however, to have found in some old record more definite information, 
for it is stated in that work that Maunsell died at Florence, in Jan- 
uary, 1265. Tins statement was not discovered until after the first 
volume was in print ; there is no indication of the authority upon 
which it is based, and a considerable amount of further research has 
failed in discovering the record. The statement may very possibly 
be true, though it is not easy to conjecture why John Maunsell, who 
had had at least a portion of his lands restored to him by the king a 
year previously, 2 should have elected to end his life in' Italy ; but 
there is a good deal of mystery attached to his last days, and probably 
there are complications which, for some reason, have not come to 
light. j , 

The most prominent errors which have to be corrected are, 
however, in the titles attached to certain portraits in the first volume, 
to wit : Sir Hugh Mansel (p. 234) ; Sir Rhys Mansel (p. 2S3) ; and 
Sir Edward Mansel (p. 336). 

These portraits, as will be seen in the reproductions, have each 
a label at the upper right-hand corner giving the name of the subject ; 
and it was assumed — too hastily— that these labels would have been 
placed there by some member of the family who was well acquainted 

1 See vol. i., p. 169. 
' Ibid., pp. 1S0, 181. 


with the facts. Such labels on family portraits are very common, 
and are probably in most instances correct. 

These, however, are very far from being so. This had been 
realised long before this work was undertaken, but unfortunately the 
evidence which condemns them was overlooked at the time of writing, 
as were also some anachronisms in the matter of costume, etc., 
which, indeed, were commented upon by several of the reviewers, 
who were better versed in such matters than the author. 

It remains, therefore, to make amends, however tardily, for 
these mistakes ; and for the means of so doing the author and the 
reader are chiefly indebted to Mrs. Story Maskeleyne, whose place 
in the family pedigree is clearly set forth in the present volume. 1 

Mrs. Maskeleyne has for many years taken an immense 
interest in the Mansels of Margam and their forebears, and is very 
familiar with the portraits and monuments at Margam and Penrice. 
Some years ago she obtained the valuable expert opinion of the 
Director of the National Portrait Gallery as to the dates at which 
these portraits were painted, which, together with the dress, 
sufficiently discredit the titles displayed in the labels, and adopted 
at foot. 

Sir Hugh Maxsel. The approximate date of the portrait is 
1600 to 1630, and Hugh Mansel flourished in the fourteenth century. 

This may very possibly be the portrait of Sir Lewis Mansel, 
who was living circa 1584-1638; he is represented with a similar 
pointed beard on his monument in Margam church. 

% Sir Rhys Maxsel, with his second wife, Anne, daughter of Sir 
Giles Bridges, and their daughter Catherine. The approximate date 
is 1610 ; Sir Rhys died in 1559, and liis second wife, Anne, died 
before 1527, in which year his third marriage took place. 

This may very probably be Sir Thomas Mansel, eldest son of 
Sir Edward Mansel of Margam, with his second wife, Jane (widow 
of J. Bussy), and their daughter Mary. Thomas Mansel was created 
a baronet in 161 1 ; this portrait may very likely have been painted 
at that time. Sir Thomas certainly looks old for his age, which 
would be about live and fifty. 

Sir Edward Maxsel, who married Lady Jane Somerset. The 
approximate date is 1665 ; Sir Edward was living 1 531 -1585. 

This may be the portrait of Sir Edward, son of Sir Lewis 

1 See pedigree, p. 45. 


Mansel ; he was living 163S-1706, and accompanied the Duke of 
Beaufort on his " progress " in Wales, in 1684, as described hereafter. 

Mrs. Maskeleyne is of the opinion that the names were in- 
scribed upon the canvases at a late date, and has a shrewd suspicion 
as to the identity of the perpetrator ; this, however, she has not 
divulged, nor would it be desirable that the name should be here 
mentioned ; the faux pas has been atoned for as far as is possible, 
and there the matter must rest. 

In the review of the first volume (The Times Literary Supple- 
ment, September 13, 1917, p. 437) is the following comment : " The 
authors appeal iio have overlookc J the existence of the Syrian branch 
of the family, which rose to high and well-authenticated honour in 
the States of the Crusaders during the thirteenth century," etc. 

In response to an enquiry concerning these Syrian Mansels, 
the reviewer kindly supplied some details, for which he gives full 

From these it appears that Robert Mansel witnessed a charter 
of Bohemund III., Prince of Antioch, in 1163, and again in 1171. 
In March, n 75, another charter of the same prince was witnessed by 
Thomas, son of Robert Mansel, who on August 20, n 78, granted the 
Manor of Beaude, with its appurtenances and an annual payment 
of two hundred bezants from his rents in Latakia and Antioch, to 
Roger de Moulins, Grand Master of the Order of the Hospital of St. 
John in Jerusalem. Thomas Mansel was also Baron of Gabala, near 
Latakia, in n 87 ; but he lost his lordship in 11S7-SS, when Saladin 
drove the Franks from all their pos-essions save Antioch, Tripolis, 
and Tyre. Robert, probably son of Thomas, was Constable of 
Antioch in 1210 and 1216. Another Mansel is recorded as having 
been severely wounded and taken prisoner by the Sultan Beibars in 
1277, and is described as nephew to Bartholomew, Bishop of Tortosa 
(in Syria). This Bishop Bartholomew may very probably have been 
a Mansel, as it was the almost universal practice at that time to 
allude to high ecclesiastics by their titles rather than their surnames. 

The subject is an interesting one, and it is to be regretted that 
space does not admit of enlarging upon it in the present volume. 

It must be admitted, however, that these records tend to 
discredit the early pedigree in respect of Sir Robert and his issue. 
" Thomas, son of Robert," who was of responsible age in 1175, could 
nut have been the son of Sir Robert in the pedigree, even if the 
latter had been married much earlier than the approximate date 
therein mentioned. William of Tyre, it will be recollected, alludes 
to Sir Robert as " a knight from Wales " ; probably this crusader 


was distinct from Robert of the pedigree, or possibly the latter is 
wrongly included. There does not appear to be any record of Mansels 
in Syria later than the thirteenth century. 

Since the first chapter of the present volume was printed, the 
death has occurred of Miss Emily Charlotte Talbot, the possessor of 
the Margam and Penrice estates. She died on September 21, 191S, 
at the age of seventy-eight, at her town house, 3, Cavendish Square, 
and was buried on the 26th in the family vault in Margam church. 

Miss Talbot was reputed the wealthiest woman in England ; 
very probably this was the case, and the fact of her>great riches was 
sutncient in nseii 10 draw attention to her when her death was 

The possession of inherited wealth entails responsibilities 
proportional to its magnitude, and Miss Talbot fully realised her 
obligations in this respect. She administered her huge estates 
wisely and well, displaying great business capacity and beneficence 
towards her tenants and dependents. The following extract from an 
obituary notice in the press is of interest : 

" One of the wealthiest women in Great Britain, her great 
gifts to benevolent, educational, and religious purposes were often 
anonymous, and few knew what a large portion of her riches she 
devoted to the needs of others, particularly in South Wales, of which 
she was the true Lady Bountiful. During the last two 3'ears, owing 
to failing health, she was unable to spend much time in the Princi- 
pality, but lived in quiet and retirement in London, only seeing her 
intimate friends. Despite her indisposition, she took a deep interest 
in war charities, providing two large Y.M.C.A. huts in Glamorgan, 
and converting Penrice Castle into an officers' hospital, which she 
equipped and maintained at her own expense. Only recently she 
provided a capital sum sufficient to produce £1 ,500 a year for a chair 
of preventive medicine at the medical school in connection with 
Cardiff University. ... To the Church, too, she was a queenly 
benefactress, and her name was a household word in Wales. . . . 
She combined with a benevolent spirit a rare business aptitude, and 
to her foresight and energy may be largely attributed the develop- 
ment and prosperity of Port Talbot from a small village to a thriving 
town possessing docks, steel works, and important railway junctions. 
In the welfare of the folk dependent on her she took the deepest 
interest, and on one occasion, an unremunerative colliery falling into 
her hands, she, rather than discharge the miners and close it down, 
kept it working for several years for the sake of the women and 
children, at a loss to herself of nearly {" 

Miss Talbot spent the greater part of her time upon her Welsh 


estates ; before the war she was accustomed to give herself a holiday 
from the laborious administration of these by a visit to the Riviera 
in the spring. \ 

By the provisions of Miss Talbot's will, the Penrice estate is 
settled upon her niece, Lady Blythswood, her husband and issue ; 
and the Margam estates and contents of Margam Abbey, after 
provision for legacies to nieces (amounting to about £168,000), and 
death duties, are settled upon trusts primarily for the benefit of her 
nephew, Captain Andrew Manuel Talbot Fletcher, his wife and issue. 
Captain Fletcher is the only son of John Fletcher, of Saltoun Hall, 
Haddingtonshire, out of a family of eight. 

It has been suggested to the present writer that Gabriel 
Ogilvy, in his French pedigree, which was discussed at length in the 
first volume, was justified in maintaining that " Richard 
Cenomarmicus," who gave lands in 1088 to the Priory of Brecknock, 
bore the surname of Mansel, and that some injustice has consequently 
been done to him. 1 

This suggestion is based upon the fact — which certainly 
escaped notice in the first volume— that the old Roman name for 
Maine or Le Mans was Cenomannum, and that Cenomannicus would 
signify a man of Le Mans, or of Maine — i.e., a Mansel, in the sense 
implied in the Roman de Rou. 2 

■This may be very tine ; but it does not justify Ogilvy in his 
assumption He gives as reference " Monasticon Anglicanum," 
and, as has already been pointed out, the benefactor of the priory 
is alluded to, both in the text and in the index, simply as " Richardus 
Cenomannicus," i.e., Richard, a man of Maine or of Le Mans. Ogilvy 
has added the prefix " Mansellus," which would be superfluous 
otherwise than as the surname Mansel ; but his own reference 
contradicts the assumption, as " Mansellus " does not occur in 
" Monasticon " ; the view which was expressed concerning this 
column of Ogilvy 's pedigree must therefore be maintained. 3 

In the great war of 191 4-1 91 8 many members of the Maunsell- 

1 See vol. i., p. 61 ; and Appendix I., second column. 

* Ibid., p. 10. 

' It may be noted, further, that in Latin dictionaries of repute (White and Ridley, 
Lewis and Short) Cenomani are described a; Celtic peoples of Cisalpine Gaul ; i.e., of North 
luly between the Alps and the Apennines; France and Belgium, with parts of Holland, 
Germany, and Switzerland, constituted Gallia Transalpina (Encycl. Brit.). This is in conflict 
•■> '.•■!•> the '• Dictionnaire Universe-lie de Trevoux," in which Cenomannum is given as the ancient 
rumc of Main i or Le Mans ; it does not, however, affect the question of Ogilvy's unwarrantable 
• -::^n vi " Mansellus." 


Mansel family took an active part, and bore themselves manfully ; 
it is therefore suitable and proper that their names and deeds should 
be recorded in this volume, and Chapter XIV. is devoted to this 

I cannot close this preface without some allusion to my 
association, in the long and interesting work, with Colonel Charles 
Albert Maunsell, R.A.M.C., the prime mover in the compilation of 
this family record. 

This association has been to me a source of unmixed pleasure 
and satisfaction. Colonel Maunsell's unvarying courtesy and kind- 
ness, his generous — i would almost say too generous — appreciation 
of my work, his ready and cordial acceptance of my suggestions at 
our numerous conferences, all have combined to afford me most 
pleasing reminiscences, and the present enjoyment of a delightful 
friendship. " • 

Colonel Maunsell's diligent and exhaustive investigation of 
records during a number of years produced a mass of matter almost 
bewildering in its amplitude, the sifting of which was no light task ; 
with his able assistance, however, this has been successfully ac- 
complished, and each detail appropriated to its place in the history. 

E. P. S. 

M - K^ 



Foreword by Colonel C. A. Maunsell v 

Preface ......... i X 

List of Illustrations ....... XVI[ 

Pedigrees - ------- xxi 

I. Barons Mansel of Marcam i 

II. The Baronetcy of Muddlescombe - - - - - "93 

III. Baronets of Trimsaren - - - - - - ~ I2 5 

IV. The Great Rebellion - - - - - - - 157 

V. Maunsells of Thorpe Malsor ...... ,16 

VI. Mauxsells (Mansels) of Cosgrovj ...... 2 -g 

VII. The Yorkshire Maunsells ....... ^ 

VIII. Mansells (Mavs sells) of Dorsn and Somersii .... ~^ 



Sir Thomas Mansel, First Baronet of Margam - Frontispiece 


Martha Millington, Wife of Thomas, First Lord Mansel - - 24 

Thomas, First Lord Mansel ....... 32 

The Second Lord Mansel, Grandson of Thomas Lord Mansel - - 36 
John Ivory Talbot --.------40 

Elizabeth Mansel, Daughter of Sir Edward Mansel, Bart. - - 48 

Christopher Rice Mansel-Talbot, M.P. - - - - - - 64 

Charles Cokayne, First Viscount Cullen ------ 276 


Mary, Daughter of Lewis, Third Lord Mordaunt ----- 2 

Sir Lewis Mansel --------- 8 

Katherine, Daughter of Robert Sidney, Earl of Leicester - - - 16 

Barbara Gamage, Countess of Leicester, and her Children - - 17 

Anne, Daughter or Lord Mansel ------- 20 

Six Thomas Mansel of Margam ....... 28 

Mary, Wife of John Ivory Talbot - - - - - 29 

Christopher, Third Lord Mansel - - - - - - 4 2 

The Rev. Thomas Talbot -------- 46 

Martha, Daughter of First Lord Mansel - - - - - 54 

Portrait (unnamed) --------- 72 

The Rt. Rev. Wm. Lort Mansel, D.D., Lord Bishop of Bristol - - 73 

Martha, Dauchter of Sir Edward Mansel - ... - - 82 

Sir Francis Mansel, First Baronet ------- 96 

Francis Maunsell, LL.D. --...-. - 106 

Rtv. W. John Mansel --------- 107 

Su \Vm. Mansel, Ninth Baronet, of Muddlescombe .... 112 


( " List, Daughter of B. B. Hopkins ...--- 114 


Major Edward Berkeley Phillips - - - - - - - 115 

Major Courtney Mansel -------- nr 

Julia, Lady Mansel - - - - - - - - -120 

Sir Edward Berkeley Mansel ------- l;o 

Sir Courtney C. Mansel, Thirteenth Baronet - - - - -121 

James Temple Mansel ------- .. 137 

Mansel Dawkin Mansel - - - - - - - -138 

Portrait of Louis XVIII. 138 

Charles Grenville Mansel - - - - • - - » 1 . 2 

Anna, Wife of Charles Grenville Mansel - - - - - - 143 

William Maunsell, of Thorpe Malsor - - - - - -21S 

Thomas Fhilif Maunsell, or Thorpe Malsor - - - - -2:2 

Captain John Edmund Maunsell, R.A. - - - - - 226 

The Honble. Georgiana Cokayne ------- 227 

The Rev. Georce Edmund Maunsell ---... 232 

Thomas Cokayne Maunsell ----_... 234 

The Rev. Cecil Henry Maunsell ------- 2 ;S 

Captain Cicil John Cokayne Maunsell -.-... 2 \o 

Sir Aston Cokayne 264 

Mary, Wife of Sir Aston Cokayne ------- 2 6y 

Sir William Cokayne, Lord Mayor of London - - - - - 272 

George Edward Cokayne - - - - - - - " -74 

Chief Justice Rainsford - - - - - - - "275 

George Hill, Skrgeant-at-Law ------- 2 ,g 

Brjen Cokayne, Second Viscount Cullen ------ 2S2 

Charles Cokayne, Third Viscount Cullen ------ 1^3 

Charles Cokayne, Fifth Viscount Cullen ------ 286 

Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester ------- 288 

Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex ------- 289 

Major-General John Mansel ....... 294 

Major John Mansel --------- 294 

Mrs. R. Mansell, Wife of Admiral Mansell ..... 296 

Admiral Robert Mansell, R.N. ------- z <)6 

Dr. H. L. Mansel. D.D., Dean of St. Paul's 320 



Robert Stanley Mansel -...-.. 

Rev. J. Christopher Maksell -.-..__ ^28 

Col. J. Mansel, C.B., of Smedmoke ------. ^4 

C01.. Edmun'd Morton M ansel-Pleydell, J.P., D.L. ----- ^25 

John Clavel Mansel-Pleydell, B.A., F.G.S.. F.L.S. - - - - 425 

Rtv. Canon Maxsel-Pleydell -------- 425 

Colokel John Delalynde Mansei ----.._ ^ 2 $ 

Major Ernest Dicby Mansel --.-... ^ 2 6 

George Pleydell Mansel ........ ^ 2 6 

Captain Eustace Gambier Mansel -.---.. ^ 2 6 

Lieutenant-Colonel George Clavell Mansell, D.S.O. .... ^ 2 6 

Evan Morton Mansel-Pleydell, R.H.A. .---._ 430 

Lieutenant Morton Grove Mansel ... ... ^ 2 

Rev. Owen L. Mansel, M.A. - 433 


St. Donat's Castle - - - - - - - - - 86 

Briton Ferry, Glamorganshire - - - - - - 87 

The House at Margam - - - - - - - 88 

The Approach 10 the House at Margam - - - - - 88 

Margam, from the Park (two illustrations) - - - - - 89 

Iscoro Manor ---------- 97 

Jesus College, Oxford - - - - - - - - no 

Founders and Benefactors of Jesus College, etc. - - - - - ill 

The Park, Latubury - ..--..-- 126 

Sketty Hall, Glamorganshire - - - - - - - 136 

Thorpe Malsor Hall -------- 216 

Rushton Hall --------- 256 

Cosgrove Hall, Stoney Stratford ------- 290 

Charlton Kings --------- 304 

Smedmore, Back View -------- 431 

Whatcom be House - - - - - - - - -43 1 


Lathbury Church, Newport Pagnell - - - - - - 126 



Cokayne Shield .__•_-.-.. 273 

Seals: Millicent Mansell; John Maunsel - - - - - -291 

Seals: Frances Saxton ; G. Westley ...... j 12 

Seals: Thomas Maunsel; J. A. Mansell; Nich. Maunsel - - - 313 

Shield compiled by Captain E. G. Mansel ------ 427 


H.M.S. Procris --------- 2 ^S 

H.M.S. Alfred ......... 249 

H.M.S. Penguin ........ . 297 



Caricatuker's Stock- in -Trade Key -------92 

Tablet to Sir Francis Mansel - ...... m 

A Tale of Love - - - - - - - - -122 

Order of Fleur-de-Lis, presented to Mansel Dawkin Mansel ... j-g 
Golden Box, presented to Mansel Dawkin Mansel - - - - 139 

Silver Candelabra, presented to Gre.nville Mansel .... r ^ 2 

The Cokayne Loving-Cups - - - - - - - - 257 

Funeral Banner of George Hill ------- 279 

Note. — It has not been possible to include the portrait group referred to on p. no 



Arthur Mansel — Jane, Daughter of Wm. Price - - - - 30 

Pedicree of Penrice, Oxwich and Margam Estate? - - - 44-45 

Mansel, Stradling, and Bowen Families - - - - - 5 2 

Robertus Pen-res Mills and Ricardus Penres Frater Dicii Roblrti - - 53 

Sn; Edward Mansel of .Margam ------- 54 

Philip oi Swan-sea = Elizabeth, Daughter of Henry and Dorothy Mansel - 55 
Thomas Mansel = Rachel Ray of Tenby ------ 68 

Rr. Rev. Wm. Lort Mansel = Isabella Haggerston - - "74 

Mary, Daughter of Lewis Lord Mordaunt = Sir Thomas Mansei.l - - 77 

Sir Edward Mansei.l, K.nt. --------78 

Pedigree of Wm. Manselt. of Slade ------- 90 

Sir Francis, First Baronet -------- 97 

Mansel Baronets of Muddlescombe ------ 9 8 "99 

Stepney-Mansel Pedigree -------- 126 

Mansels, Baronlts of Trimsaren ------ 128-129 

Thomas Lewis of Steadey = Catherine, DaUchter of Damel Lloyd - - 133 

Dawkin-Mansel Pedigree ------- I4 t, " 1 47 

The Quinell Pedigree - - - - ■ " " ' J 94 

Philip Mansell of Oxwich = Mabel, Daughter of Griffith ap Nicholas - - 217 

Richard Maunsell = Joane, Daughter of Thomas Potter - - - - 219 

Pedicree of Mansel— Maunsells of Thorpe Malsor - - - 22 4" 22 5 

William Maunsell of Chicheley = - - - - " " * 22§ 

Maussells of Chicheley and Thorpe Malsor ... - 230-231 

Sir John Cokayne, Knight of Ashbourne = Cecilia - - 2 -' 2 

Sir Richard Raynsford = Catherine, Daughter of Rev. Samuel Clerk - - 277 

Pedigree of Maunsells of Cosgrove or Cosgrave - 280-2S1 

Rev. Wm. Thorold = Frances, Dauchter of Wm. Hildyard - - - - 3 2 9 

Plantagenet Harrison's Pedigree ------ 33 2 -33." 

Wm. Le Maunsell = - 33 6 

Michael De Ryhill, 1258-9= Alice de Fla.mville - - - - "345 

Maunsell = (?) - - - 37 ° 

Maunsell = Elianor Lewes 3 8S 

Maunsells of Dorset and Ireland ------- 4 01 

Thomas Maunsell = Honor ------- 4°4 

Clavell-Mansell Pedigree - - - " " " * "4° 

Pi : ;ree of Mansels of Dorset ------- 43° 

Jo.MtiisET Maunsells - - ' - - " " " ~ " *35 

Psiup Maunsell = - - 44 2 

Barons Manse) of Mamam 

J HOUGH much space has already been devoted to the 

Mansels of Wales, and in particular to Sir Rhys and 

Sir Robert, who figure so prominently among them, 

there is yet a great deal to be said about them, and it 

will now be convenient to continue the account of the family and 

immediate descendants of Sir Edward Mansel. 

Sir Robert Hansel's life and death brought the record up to 
the year 1656 ; it will now be necessary to retrace our steps to the 
commencement of the seventeenth century. 

Thomas Mansel, eldest son of Sir Edward, must have been 
considerably older than Robert,, who has been reckoned as sixth 
son ; but the date of his birth does not appear to be recorded. It 
maybe assumed, however, that he was born not later than about 1561, 
as his marriage with Mary, daughter of Lewis, third Lord Mordaunt, 
is recorded in the Register at Chelsea parish church. July 30, 1582.' 
He was knighted before 1503,'- and was created baronet 
May 22, 16x1, being third in precedence of the first batch of baronets 
created on the institution of that order by Ring James I. 3 

1 Lewis, third Lord Mordaunt, was born in 1538, and was knighted in 1568, succeeding 
to the tide on the death of his father, John Lord Mordaunt, in 1 571 . In die following year he 
was one of the peers who sat at the trial of Thomas Howard, fourth Duke of Norfolk. Sub- 
sequently, in 15S6. he was one of the twenty-four noblemen assembled at Fothcringay Casde 
for the trial of Mary Queen of Scots. He died June 16, 1601, and was buried at Turvey, Beds, 
the ancient holding of the Mordaunts. 

1 In 1591, according to Sylvanus Morgan ; " Sphere of Gentry," Bk. iii., p. 91. 

3 Sir Nicholas Bacon, of Redgrave, Suhoik (brother-in-law to Sir Robert Mansel}, was 
first in precedence, Sir Richard Molyneux, of Sefton, Lanes, the second ; eighteen were created 
at this date. The institution of some such order, intermediate between baron and kr.ight, 
had been suggested to the king by Lord Bacon some ri\ e years previously, in connection with 
what was termed the "plantation " of Lister — '■ knighthood with some new differences and 


Sir Thomas was sheriff of Glamorganshire, 1593-1594,1603-1604, 

and 1622-1623, and was for many years a justice of the peace in that 

He was well known at court, as was his father, Sir Edward, 
and was apparently intimate with the ill-fated Sir Thomas Overbury. 
the alter ego and subsequent victim of the king's favourite, Robert 
Carr, Earl of Somerset ; for when, two years after Overbury's 
murder, Sir Dudley Digges was being examined as to his knowledge 
of certain events in that connection, he said that " on expressing 
to Sir Henry Neville his fear that Rochester (Carr was then Viscount 
Rochester) was desirous to be rid of Overbury, both he and Sir 
Thomas Mansell told him, from Overbury's own mouth, that he was 
confident Rochester would not dare to abandon him." 1 

Confidence which was most grievously misplaced ! It is 
remarkable what a number of men about the court were suspected 
of being involved in this tragedy, or were called upon to give evidence 
in the matter. Probably they had all been very anxious to be on 
good terms with Carr, when he became a pet of King James, not 
reckoning that the handsome lad would develop into an adulterer 
and a murderer of the most callous type ; and would, moreover, 
eventually be found oat. 

In the year 1626 Sir Thomas Mansel found himself in the 
unpleasant position of being trounced by the Council for alleged 
hindrance of the measures and regulations issued by that very 
jealous and autocratic board. His letter of explanation is illustrative 
of the mutual relations between the Council and the local authorities 
at that period ; he writes as follows : 

precedence ; it may no doubt work with many." Thai is to say, it might " work " so as to 
bring in some aid towards the " plantation " ; and in this spirit the order of baronet was event- 
ually instituted, the condition of the grant being that each candidate for the honour should 
pay for the maintenance of thirty soldiers in Ulster for three years, at eightpence per head per 
Hem, the amount for one whole year (£365) being paid at once ; so the new baronets had each 
to contribute £1,095 for the title. The Bacon family naturally came first in precedence, Lord 
Bacon having originated the idea of the new honour. See " Notes and Queries," Third Series, 
vol. xii., p. 168 ; " Display of Heraldry," Jno. Guillim, p. 177 ; " Complete Baronetage," by 
G. E. C, vol. i., p. 4. 

1 Cal. State Papers, Dora., 1611-1618 ; p. 315. Sir Robert Mansel was also a friend of 
Overbury. See Trial of Robert Carr, Earl of Somerset, in Hargrave's State Trials, vol. i. 




.£ : 



• .'■ 






" Right honourable my very good Lords : by letters of the 
fifth of May last from your Lordships unto me directed I find that 
Matthew Thomas, Portreeve 1 of the town of Swansea in this county 
of Glamorgan, was convented before your Lordships for his respect- 
less and undutiful carriage in hindering the execution of the directions 
of the honourable Board, and hath sought to excuse himself by 
imputing the cause thereof unto me ; whereupon your Lordships 
thought good to signify so much unto me, and withal to will and 
require me hereafter on all occasions to carry myself in such sort as 
may stand with my duty to the authority of that honourable 

" My honourable Lords, I find myself muchbounden unto your 
honours for the admonition given me to have respect to the authority 
of that honourable Board, and I desire no longer to live than that I 
should most dutifully and respectively (sic) do so ; though Mr. 
Matthew Thomas layeth the imputation thereof upon me, in which 
he wronged both himself and me ; for both he and myself, with my 
son, did perform the execution of the service from that honourable 
table presently upon receipt of your Lordships' letters of the last of 
December, and after the Justices of this county had perused them, 
I sent them presently unto the said Justices. And because I was 
Steward under my very good Lord the Earl of Worcester, Lord Privy 
Seal, of the honour of Gower, whereof Swansea is the chief state, I 
required the Portreeve to send me the names of some persons of the 
fittest and of good ability to have a license for selling of beer and ale, 
being a port and market town of some consequence ; the which 
when he did, in that 1 was then troubled with the stone, I sent my 
son Lewis to join with the Portreeve, who executed the service, then 
commanded the warrants to be made to me and my son. and by reason 
of my absence I sent by my clerk that the Portreeve should put his 
hand with my son's, the which he did. as Portreeve, not as Justice, 
as bv their license may appear. I most humbly desire pardon for 
my boldness in thus advising your Lordships herewith, being it did 
much trouble me that having been a Justice of the Peace these six 
and twenty years I did always my best endeavours to the uttermost 
of my power to fulfil all directions and commandments of His Majesty 
and such as came from that honourable Board as from His Highness 
himself, without any complaint or information ; and now in mine 
old age to be complained on. I hope your honourable Lordships 
will not be offended with me to make manifest the truth of the 
business whereof I have been accused to be the cause of hindering 
your Lordships' directions, being not able for my debility of 

1 Portreeve, a municipal office, at one time equivalent to that of mayor, but later more 
of the nature of town-bailiff. 


body to come in person before your honours to testify the same, 
which 1 humbly refer to your honours' most just and great 

" Thus with my most humble duty I take leave and ever 

" Your Lordships' most humbly to be commanded, 
" Thos. Mansell. 

'* MARGAM, 10/// July, 1626." ' 

The impression conveyed hereby is that there was a good deal 
of unnecessary fuss about a trivia! matter : but the Council was 
nothing if not fussy. 

In 162S Sir Thomas Mansel and Sir John Stradling were 
called upon to investigate a charge against two sailors, who it was 
alleged had spread a report that the king was dead, poisoned by the 
Duke (of Buckingham ? — an unlikely story). 2 This was the year in 
which the famous " Petition of Rights " was presented ; one of the 
complaints embodied therein was : " That certain persons had been 
empowered, by Royal Commissions, to punish by the summary 
process of martial law offences committed by soldiers, mariners, and 
persons connected with, them, though such offences ought to have 
been dealt with hi the usual courts of law." 

Perhaps in the case of these seamen the wish was father to 
the thought ; King Charles's unconstitutional and tyrannical 
proceedings had already evoked almost universal resentment, the 
development of which, culminating in the Great Rebellion, will be 
dealt with in a subsequent chapter, together with the part played by 
the Mansels in this connection. 

In September. 1629, Sir Thomas was concerned in a dispute 
about a vessel which was driven on shore at Oystermouth. Appar- 
ently this ship was in reality a pirate, but this was not in the first 
instance recognised. Oystermouth is, of course, in Gower, and 
Mansel claimed rights on behalf of Henry, Karl of Worcester, while 
William Herbert of Swansea claimed for the king. The case was 
referred by the Council to the Admiralty Court, September 26, 1629, 

State Papers, Dom., Charles I. Vol. xxxi., no. 44. 
Cal. State Paper!, Dora., 1628-16.29; p. 272. 


but apparently hung" lire for many months. On December 14, 1630, 
William Herbert and others, writing to Philip (Herbert), Earl of 
Pembroke and Montgomery, say that a messenger from Sir Thomas 
Mansel gave an assurance that Sir Thomas had submitted himself 
to the earl ; but Mansel and his supporters would not admit any 
such submission. William Herbert sends a number of depositions on 
the matter. The chief offenders, they say, are Henry Mansel, 
Matthew Francklyn, and Rowland Yaughan. Henry was fourth son 
of Sir Thomas. It is stated in the brief on behalf of the king that 
" after the ship had been taken possession of by Thomas and Henry 
Mansel, the latter examined the captain as to his papers. He 
denied that he had an)-, save some of little importance which had 
been given up. Bartholomew Bullinger, a passenger, advised a 
search under the capstan, winch was accordingly taken up, and 
' searching the sole thereof, they discovered therein a hollowness, 
wherein they found a white latten bux with divers writings ' ; 
which being shewn to the captain, he was very pensive and 
wept, and exclaimed against his company for discovering the 
same." : 

The final decision of the Court of Admiralty does not appear 
in the Calendar of State Papers ; but it would seem that Mansel was 
in a fair way to lose his ca>e, despite the diligence of his search, and 
the " crocodile " tears of the pirate captain. 

Sir Thomas died December 20, 1631, and was buried at 

Sir Lewis, his eldest son, who succeeded as second baronet, 
was not prominent as a soldier or courtier. He matriculated at 
Oxford, January 30, 1600. aged sixteen, and was admitted to Lin- 
coln's Inn, February 5, 1603, and knighted on July 23 of the same 
year. 2 

Mr. G. T. Clark says of him : "He was an Oxford man, of 
studious habits, and increased his knowledge by foreign travel. It 
is recorded of him that he was a valiant soldier, though of a peaceable 

1 CA. State Papers, Doni., 1629-1631 ; pp. j:, 408, 409, 495. 

2 " Complete Bironeuge," by G. E. C. Vol. i., p. 4. 


turn of mind, a kind husband and father, a patron of the liberal arts, 
and exceedingly charitable to the poor." 1 

It is stated by Anthony Wood that Sir Lewis gave £50 per 
annum for several years towards the completion of the library at 
Jesus College, Oxford ; his first cousin, Dr. Francis Mansel, was 
principal of the college, and was exceedingly zealous in respect of 
the maintenance and improvement of the various buildings — of 
whom more hereafter. 3 

Sir Lewis Mansel was thrice married ; his first wife was Lady 
Katherine Sidney, second daughter of Robert Sidney, Viscount 
Lisle, created Earl of Leicester on August 2, 1618, by Barbara 
Gamage, daughter and heir of John Carnage, of Coity, Glamorgan. 
This Barbara was a lady of some importance, by reason of her 
lineage — she was a descendant of Sir Payne Turberville, one of Robert 
Fitzhamon's twelve knights who took part in the conquest of Gla- 
morgan — and also of her riches, for she was one of the wealthiest 
heiresses of that time. Her guardian was Sir Edward Stradling, 
of St. Donat's Castle ; but Queen Elizabeth, after the manner of 
monarchs at that period, was determined to have her say concerning 
the marriage of Barbara, and it is said that, some rumour of her 
engagement to Robert Sidney having reached the court, the queen 
sent an intimation, through Sir Walter Raleigh, that no marriage 
was to take place without her royal approval and consent. The 
young people, however, resenting this peremptory interference with 
their plans, and encouraged by the Earl and Countess of Pembroke, 
were united, malgri Good Queen Bess, on September 23, 15S4, at 

1 Arch. Camb., Third Series ; vol. x., p. 1 20. 

Sir Lewis Mansel appears to have presented or sold to one Dr. John Davies, in 1634, a 
curious and valuable MS. entitled "The Red Book of Hergest." Dr. Davies (1570-1644) was 
a clergyman, a scholar, and lexicographer of some repute. The manuscript takes us name from 
Hergest Court, a seat of the Y'aughans, near Knighton, Radnor, and was probably compiled for 
them. Dr. Davies left it to Thomas Wiikins of Llanbethian, who in 1 701 presented it to Jesus 
College, Oxford, where it now remains. It is a thick folio of three hundred and sixty leaves 
of vellum ; the contents consist almost entirely of poems. Dr. Davies was four years at Jesus 
College, and Sir Lewi; Mansel, a? here stated, contributed for some years towards the building 
fund. Welshmen were, indeed, especially intere ted in this college, hence the ultimate bestowal 
of the book ; how it came into the hands of Sir Lewis Mansel does not appear. (See " The 
Four Ancient Books of Wales," by William F. Skene, vol. ii., p. 4:5.) 

' " History of the Colleges of Oxford," by Anthony Wood (17S6) ; p. 580. 


St. Donat's Castle — and a few hours later there arrived a messenger 
with the royal veto on the marriage, and orders that Robert Sidney 
should return to London forthwith. One cannot help sympathising 
with Sidney and his bride ; these royal interferences with the 
marriages of heiresses appear so gratuitous and unnecessary ; and 
there was, of course, some mercenary motive in the background. 1 

The Hon. Mary Sidney, in a pamphlet entitled " Historical 
Guide to Penshurst Place " — the Sidneys'' mansion in Kent — 
tells us that Barbara damage, " though possessed of an exacting 
disposition and somewhat shrewish temper, was really a devoted wife 
and mother and a clever and capable woman." She appears, indeed, 
to have had some fame as a housewife, for Ben Jonson, the poet, 
in his " Ode on Penshurst," enthusiastically commends her from this 
point of view. 

Such was the mother of Lady Kathcrine. who married Sir 
Lewis Mansel. Kathcrine herself appears as a child to have attracted 
the favourable notice of Queen Elizabeth : " My Lad) 7 Huntingdon 
says that the Queen often speaks of the children, and said she never 
saw any child come towards hei with a better grace than Mrs. 
Katherine did." 

The date of the marriage of Sir Lewis and Lady Katherine 
does not appear to be precisely recorded ; the fact of the marriage 
is mentioned in Hasted's " History of Kent." Mr. R. G. Maunsell 
states that it took place " about 1600 " ; this seems full early, since 

1 In connection with this episode, the following letter is of interest ; it is given in the 
" Stradling Correspondence,'"' by J. M. Traherne, p. 22. The English is here modernised. 

" Sir Edward, Her Majesty hath now thrice caused letters 10 he written unto you, that 
you suffer not my kinswoman to be bought and sold in Wales, without Her Majesty's privity, 
and the consent or advice of my Lord Chamberlain and myself, her father's cousin germans. 
Considering she hath not any nearer kin nor better ; her father and myself came of two sisters, 
i-ir Philip Champnowne's daughters ; I doubt not but, all other persuasion set apart, you will 
satisfy her Highness, and withal do us that courtesy as to acquaint us with her matching. If 
you desire any match for her of your own kin. if you acquaint us withal, you shall find us ready 
to yield to any reason. I hope. Sir. you will deal herein mo=t advisedly ; and herein you shall 
ever find us ready to iequite you in ail :h:r._ • to our rower. And so with my very hearty com- 
mendations I end. In haste. From the Court, the 26th of September 1584. Your most 
willing friend, W. Raleigh." 

Barbara had been married three days previously. (Sir Walter Raleieh, born in 1552, was 
• fourth son of Walter Raleigh, who married Catherine, daughter of Sir Philip Champ ernoun 
of Modbury, Devon.) 


Sidney's marriage occurred in September, 15S4 ; Katherine was not 
the eldest of his family, and so could not have been more than 
fourteen in that year, probably younger, while Lewis, according to the 
University record, was then only sixteen ; but child marriages were 
only too prevalent in those clays. There was no issue of this marriage. 1 

Lady Mansel died at Baynard's Castle on May 8, and was 
buried at Penshurst May 13, 1610. Baynard's Castle was of Norman 
origin ; it was situated beyond Blackfriars Bridge, immediately 
below St. Paul's Cathedral, and was the scene of many meetings and 
incidents. It was burned down in 1428, but was rebuilt by Hum- 
phrey, Duke of Gloucester. It was made a royal residence by 
Henry VI., after Gloucester's death, and was made use of by 
Richard III. in some of his murderous intrigues. Henry VIII. ex- 
pended large sums in converting the building from a fortress into a 
palace. Eventually it came into the possession of the Earls of 
Pembroke, and hence Lady Mansel, their relative by marriage, died 
there. Baynard's Castle was destroyed in the great fire of 1666. 3 

From the accounts kept by the Earl of Leicester's steward, 
we learn that the marriage portion of Lad)' Katherine was £3,000 ; 
in order to make up this sum £1,000 was borrowed upon plate and 
jewels ; and at her death her father expended £100 on her funeral 
and the embalming of her body- 3 

By his second marriage, with Katherine. daughter of 
Sir Edward Lewis, Senior, of Van, Sir Lewis had only two 
daughters ; by his third, with Lady Elizabeth, daughter of 

1 The Sidney coat-of-arms is, or, a pheon azure. The " pheon " is an arrowhead ; and 
Lady Mary Sidney relates that when Henry Sidney — son of Robert, second Earl of Leicester, 
and afterwards Earl of Romney — was Master of the Ordnance, in 1695, finding that there was 
no mark by which government stores could be distinguished, instituted the pheor., or " broad 
arrow," as a label. This mark, as is well known, remains to the present day, and may be seen 
upon government stores of every description, ordnance boundary stones, etc., and likewise upon 
the dress worn by convicts in Portland Prison and elsewhere. 

Sir Philip Sidney, the poet and statesman, in a sonnet to Love (" Astrophel and Stella," 
No. 65), indulges in a play upon this coat-of-arms — 

"That I perhaps am somewhat kinne to thee ; 
Since in thine armes, if learn'd fame truth hath spread, 
Thou bear'st the arrow, I the arrowhead." 

* " Old and New London," by Walter Thornbury ; vol. i., p. 281 et siq. 
' " Antiquarian Repertory," vol. i., pp. 2S5, 2S6, 290. 

Died 4 April, 1638. 


Henry Montague, Earl of Manchester, 1 however, he had male 


The Earl of Manchester resided for several years at Totteridge 
—about ten miles north of London, bordering upon Hendon and 
Finchley— where most of his children by his first marriage were born ; 
and here, in the church register, is recorded the marriage of Elizabeth 
with Sir Lewis Mansel, August 15, 1627. 2 

Sir Lewis only held the title for seven years, dying in 1638 ; 
he was succeeded by his son Henry, then seven years of age, who! 
however, died soon after his father, the title passing to Edward! 
second sen then but little over one year of age. 3 Henry has been 
ignored in some records ; Mr. R. G. Maunsell (p. 24) inserts his name, 
but places him as younger than Edward ; he is vouched for, however! 
by "G. E. C." and by the Inquisition Post Mortem upon Sir Lewis; 
Sir Edward must therefore be placed as fourth baronet, instead of 
third, as in some genealogies. 4 

Henry Montague, first Baron Montagu of Boughton (Northants) ; Baron Montagu 
«>™t Iton (hunts); \,scount Mar.deville, created Earl of Manchester February 5, 1626. 
Elizabeth was his eldest daughter by his first marriage, by which he had three daughters, and 
by hi = third n:,;ri.. r e two. Bi.rke only mentions one daughter, Susannah, by the third marri-ee 
who married George Bridges, sixth Lord Chandos. "Complete Peerage." Vol. v.,"p. 206. 
burkes Peerage, ur.aer Manchester. 

' Lysons' " Environs of London." Vol. iv., p. 46. 
r , .V' C ° raFhte Baronetage," by G. E. C. Vol. i., p. 4. Inquisition Post Mortem, 
Cowbndge, Glamorgan, August 9, 165S (Charles I.,' vol. 570, no. 137). (See The Geneal- 
ogist. Vol. xxxii, p. 67). 

... ? T h " e is , fur *5 r e "dence « ncerning Henry, son and heir to Sir Lewis, in the Maigam 
{. b 7^ f- ' '* W J l V-;, Bond of Elizabeth Lady Mansel, of Margin, Edward Viscount 
Mandeville (brother to Lady Mansel) and Robert Dixon of St. Martin's-in-the-Fields, to the 
Kong, m £500, for payment to the Receiver-General of the Court of Wards and Liveries, for the 
hne of the Custody V. ardship, and Marriage of Henry Mansel, Bart., son and heir of Sir Lewis 
•Mansel, Knt. and Bart." (Penrice and Margam MSS, Second Series, p. 28, no. 630.) 

_ " Royal Grant by Charles I., King of England, to Elizabeth Ladv Mansel, widow, of an 
annuity of twenty shillings, in co. Glamorgan, from lands belonging to the late Sir Lewis Mansel 
l^nt and Bart., and custody of the body and marriage of Henry Mansel, Bart, his son, now a 
*ard, etc, without rendering accounts." (Ibid., p. 29, no. 6}i.) 

.,•■„• ' ?}* Lewis Mansel ' s e!d ^ daughter, Elizabeth, by his third marriage, married Sir 
«UUam Wiseman, of Rivenhall, Essex, created baronet June l S , 1660, died June, 1688, when 
-M title became extinct, he ha-, ng fa id >nly one daughter, Elizabeth, who married John Lamctte 
H- njrwood, of Markshall, Essex, and secondly Sir Isaac Rebow. Lady Wiseman died about 

Mary, the younger daughter, married, August 16, 1655, Sir William Leman, Bart., of 



It was during the lifetime of Sir Edward that Thomas Dineley, 
travelling in the train of the Duke of Beaufort during his progress 
through Wales and the Marches, in 16S4, visited Margam Abbey, of 
which he gives some account, as also of the entertainment afforded 
to the duke and his followers. 1 

" Saturday August 16 towards the evening the Duke of 
Beaufort accompanied with the Earl of 'Worcester, Sir John Talbot, 
and a numerous train of gentry, where having come to Margam in 
Glamorganshire, the Capital seat of the Mansclls, where having 
received the compliments of Sir Edward Mansell and his son. his 
Grace and company were conducted by them to his summer ban- 
queting house, built after the Italian, where regular symmetry, 
excellent sculpture, delicate graving and an infinity of good Dutch 
and other paintings make a lustre not to be imagined. The pave- 
ments are of marbles, black, red. mixed, and white, chiefly the 
product of his own quarries in lands in this county. There nothing 
was spared that this noble place could afford of diversion ; hence his 
Grace was entertained with the pastime of seeing a brace of bucks 
run down by three footmen, which were afterwards led into Margam 
antecourt alive, and there judged fit for the table before the huntsman 
gave the fatal stroke with his scimitar. . . . This chase ended, and 
his Grace and company returned to the house, we found several 
tables spread with splendid services of fish, flesh, dessert, and a 
variety of wines, an open house for all. 

" The next morning, August 17, His Grace and the Earl of 
Worcester were attended by Sir Edward Manse! and all the gentry 
there to Margam Church, where Divine Service being ended a learned 
and loyal sermon was preached by the reverend . . . Margam is 
a very noble seat ; it appears by some noble ruins about it to have 
been formed out of an ancient Religious House ; the modem addi- 
tions are very stately, of which the stables are of freestone with fair 
standings capable of . . . horses ; the roof being ceiled and adorned 

Nin Hall, Northall, Hertford; he succeeded to the baronetcy in September, 1667, and died 
July 18, 1701. She died April 21, 1722. They had a son, Mansel Leman, who died vita patris. 
Sir John Leman, grandfather of Sir William, was Lord Mayor of London, 1616-17 ; there is 
a Leman Street in Stepney, probably named after him, and Mansel Street, running parallel to 
it, named after Mansel Leman, or perhaps after Mary Mansel, wife of Sir William. 

1 Henry Somerset succeeded his father, Edward, as third Marquess of Worcester in 1667, 
and was created Duke of Beaufort December 2, icSz. He was nephew to Lady Jane Somerset. 
who married Sir Edward Mansel. He made his " progress " as President of Wales. Thomas 
Dineley (or more properly Dingley) was son of Thomas Dingley, Controller of Customs at 
Southampton. He made several tours on the Continent and in Ireland, and his MS. notes of 
his travels, with spirited pen-and-ink sketches, are highly valued by antiquarians. 


with cornishes and fret-work of goodly artifice. The arms over the 
entrance into the new stables as in the margin set forth. 1 An ancient 
Gate-house before the court of the house remains unaltered because 
of an old Prophesie among the Bards thus concerning it and this 
family, viz., that as soon as this Porch or Gate-house shall be pulled 
down this family shall decline and go to decay. Its situation is 
among excellent springs, furnishing all the offices thereof with 
excellent water, at the foot of prodigious high hills of woods, 
shelter for the deer, about a mile distant from an arm of the sea 
parting this shire and the county of Cornwall in England. 3 Below 
which, and washed almost round with the salt water, is a marsh 
whereto the deer (the tides being low) resort much by swimming, 
and thrive to such an extraordinary weight and fatness as I never 
saw or heard the like, unless in the Kingdom of Ireland, in a super- 
scription upon the bedchamber door of the Rt Honble Henry Earl 
of Thomond in his Lodge of Deer Island in the county of Clare, where 
are these remarks thus dated — Axn Dxi mdclvi a' Hare was then 
cropt and turned on Deer Island, and in A c MDCLXXIII the 
said noble Earl was at the death of the same hare there. Again : 
A° Domini mdclxxii. A Buck was killed there by the same noble 
Earl weighing XVI stone and II pounds. To this I may add myself 
as a witness to the death of another in the hunting season of the 
year 16S1, when one fell before us upon the place in weight 15 stone 
and an half ; yet many of these deer quit the island, and as many in 
the time of chase are frighted over again from the county of Clare ; 
even as here part of Sir Edward Mansel's herds leave the parks for 
the marsh, and the marsh for the park by swimming the salt water ; 
according to Horace — ' Et Superjecto pavidae Natarunt /Equore 
damaa.' " 

1 Mansel impaled v.ith Came ; i.e., Gules, a pelican with wings displayed feeding her 
young, or. (Burke's "General Armory.") The first Sir Edward's daughter, Anne, as shown 
in the pedigree, married Edward Carne of Nash ; and this present Sir Edward married Martha, 
daughter of Edward Carne, of Ewenny, by his second wife. There is some account of this 
Edward Carne in " Ewenny Priory," by Colonel I. P. Turbervill, who says : " Edward Carne 
would seem to have been born under some malignant star. His shore life was darkened by 
bereavement at home and constant ill-fortune abroad, his death sudden 3nd untimely. . . . 
Before he had even come of age he was pricked as High Sheriff at a time when the great Civil 
>V>r was still raging, and his position forced him to take an active part in the strife." After 
N.iseby, Carne declared for the Royalists, and met the king, with a large assemblage, in Wales. 
Subsequently he led a spirited assault upon the town and castle of Cardiff, which was, however, 
'•■.'irnately unsuccessful owing to the arrival of strong reinforcements for the Parliamentarians, 
v-irne was imprisoned at Cardiff, and fined £i,oqo as a penalty for "malignancy." He died 
in 1650. Martha, who married Sir Edward Mansel, was a posthumous child. 

J Thomas Dineley is somewhat wild in his geography for such a travelled person ; Mar- 
gins ii, in fact, opposite the north-west portion of Somerset. 


(Dineley is profusely addicted to appropriate classical 
illustrations of his narrative ; the above shall suffice as a sample.) 

The " summer banqueting house " alluded to by Dineley 
would appear to have been distinct from the mansion. This latter 
was erected by Sir Rhys Mansel some twelve or fifteen years after he 
became possessed of the estate. It was a long, low, nondescript sort 
of building, constructed in part from the stones of the Abbey, and 
incorporating some portions of the latter ; it was probably quite 
devoid of any architectural merit. 

One of the most remarkable objects in Margam Park is the 
huge orangery. Tradition traces the origin of this unusual adjunct 
of a modern estate to the wreck of a Dutch vessel which was con- 
veying a large number of choice orange-trees, etc., as a gift from a 
Dutch merchant to Wary, consort of William III. The ship being cast 
up within the wreckage claim of Margam, the cargo was seized as the 
legal property of the lord of Margam, and a large house, one hundred 
and fifty feet in length, was built for the accommodation of the 
orange-trees, then, no doubt, of small size. However, they flourished, 
and in 1787 Thomas Mansel Talbot built a huge structure, three 
hundred and twenty-seven feet in length, and later an annex one 
hundred and fifty feet long ; and there these exotics— orange, lemon, 
citron, pomegranate, all strangers in the land — have grown and 
fruited ever since. They are planted in large boxes, so as to be capable 
of removal to the outer air in summer ; many of them are fine trees 
standing twenty or thirty feet in height. 1 

• Among the archives at Margam Abbey there are some details in connection with the 
coat of the construction of the great greenhouse : 

"An account of what the building of anew greenhouse will come to at the usual rate in 
this county, computed by Joseph Kirkman, gardener, Edward Harries, carpenter, etc. Mar- 
gam, 26 March, 1725.*' (No. 2507.) 

" Affidavit of Joseph Hickman (sic) chief gardener to Thomas, late Lord Mansel and the 
Hon. Bussy Mansel, with'estimate of the cost of building a new greenhouse at Margam. 3 May, 
1725." (No. 3522.) 

" An inventory of the greenhouse plants now in Margam Garden, and are m perfect 
health, and full of fruit and beautiful in their leaves as near as can be ; the sizes and stature of 
everv sort of tree given per me Joseph Kirkman gardener at Margam this sixteen year and half.' 
3 July. I727-" (No. 3057.) See ;l Peruke and Margam MSS." Series IV., pt. ii., pp. 3c, 47. 

The original MSS. are not accessible for this present work ; it wnuld have added to the 
interest of these summaries had the editor of the documents stated the amount of the estimate, 
which must be given in the original. 


The present mansion was built by Christopher Rice Mansel 
Talbot, Esq., about the year 1832. (The acquisition of the estate by 
the Talbots is fully dealt with further on.) 

In Margam Church there are many elaborate and interesting 
monuments to members of the Mansel family, which are described at 
great length by Thomas Dineley, with numerous pen-and-ink 
illustrations, and shields of arms, which are reproduced in this 
volume, together with copies of the various inscriptions, recently 
made for insertion in these pages. Dineley is not always reliable 
in his transcriptions, having been probably compelled in many 
instances to make them hurriedly, with one eye on the movements of 
the Duke of Beaufort. 

The Calendar of Slate Papers contains many references to 
Sii Edward Mansel, illustrative of his local importance and activity 
in various affairs, as well as minor incidents of his life. 

On December 4, 1635, a pass was granted for Sir Edward and 
four servants to go to France, and in March of the following year lie 
had permission to take six horses over. 1 In March, 1658, he appears 
to have been seized on suspicion in Westminster during a search — 
lot " malignants," presumably — and confined at the "Bear" in 
Kin Street until he could prove his identity, or his innocence ; he 
.' ■ released and his horse restored to him, by order of the Council 
1 n March 25." 

(n 161 1 there is a grant to Sir Edward Mansel, Bart., and 
Arthur Manse', in reversion after Edward Earl of Manchester, of 
the office of Chamberlain and Chancellor of counties Carmarthen, 
Pembroke, and Cardigan, and Steward of the Honour of Pembroke, 
and manor of Penkelly, county Brecon. 3 

In a letter, dated August 5, 1666, from John Man to Secretary 
Williamson, occurs the following : " The Glamorganshire volunteer 
troops have met for the first time, and make a handsome appearance ; 
eiehty enlisted themselves under Sir Edward Mansel, Bart., of 

Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1655-1656; pp. 576, 579. 

Ibid., 1 657- 1658 ; p. 344. 

Ibid., 1660- 1661 ; p. 368. Edward (Montague), Earl of Mancheiter, wai uncle to Sir 


Margam, a person of great interest and integrity in those parts, 
and declared themselves ready to venture all for king and 
country." 1 

In another letter John Man states that " Sir Edward Mansel, 
Bart., of Margam, has been chosen a Knight of the Shire for county 
Glamorgan, without any opposition, in place of Lord Herbert, called 
to the House of Peers by the death of his father, the Earl of Pem- 
broke." 2 

In the year 1672 King Charles II., for various reasons of his 
own, among which it is said that the promise of money from Louis 
XIV. of France figured largely, was at some pains in picking a quarrel 
with Holland, and eventually succeeded in his object ; war was 
declared upon Holland by Charles on the 19th, and by Louis on 
the 27th March. 

On such an occasion men were, of course, required for the 
navy, and they were obtained, for the most part, by the summary 
process of impressment— a process which frequently involved 
considerable cruelty, but was nevertheless recognised as a necessary 

Men being required for the Holmes, frigate, lying in Milford 
Haven, Sir Edward Mansel, vice-admiral of South Wales, received 
orders to pat the press-gang in operation. Two hundred men were 
requisitioned on April 15. and on the 29th John Man reports to 
Secretary Williamson : " Yesterday 100 pressed men went hence 
towards Milford, where 100 more are ready, all able seamen, who with. 
much industry were impressed by Sir Edward Mansel, Vice Admiral, 
in his precincts.'' 3 

On May 16, Man again writes : " There are about fifty pressed 
last week and this, to go on board a vessel at Newton, about twelve 
miles off, to be sent to Bristol, and more are daily pressing by the 
carefulness of Sir Edward Mansell." ' 

1 Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1666-1667; p. 13. John Man was Collector for the port 
of Swansea. 

3 Ibid., 1670 ; p. 108. 

' Ilnd > l6 72 ; pp- 394. 583- 

4 Ibid, 167;; pp. 304, 5S3. 


In due course the Holmes — probably named after Sir Robert 
Holmes, admiral, and governor of the Isle of Wight — and the 
remainder of the fleet received their complement of men ; and there 
was a naval battle off South wold, on the Suffolk coast. The Duke 
of York, lord high admiral, was in command of the English and 
French fleets. Owing to a lack of foresight on the part of the 
English commander-in-chief, and his neglect of some very sound 
advice offered by Lord Sandwich, his second in command, the allied 
fleet was taken somewhat at a disadvantage ; and the French 
admiral nut displaying much enterprise or initiative, what should 
certainly have proved a victory for the allies, who were in con- 
siderably stronger force, was converted into a drawn battle. 

Sir Edward, writing to Secretary Williamson, January 18, 
1677, assures him " that none would have been more concerned, had 
the}' heard of his recent indisposition, nor exceed the writer in 
rejoicing at his recovery " ; adding " that the notice he takes of a 
' mountainous Welshman ' justly claims the return of his humble 

Mr. John Man, in Ids letters to the Secretary of State, loses no 
opportunity of praising Sir Edward ; on one occasion he writes : 
" Last Tuesday there met two companies of the militia in this town 
— the rest are to appear this week in other parts of the county, the 
whole being commanded by Sir Edward Mansel, a person of great 
worth and integrity both to his Majesty and the country, who takes 
all imaginable care for the good appearance of the militia." : 

In a letter from William Morgan of Tredegar to Secretary 
Williamson appears the following: "Your most kind favour by 
the hackney man. Met your friend Sir Edward Mansel at my house, 
where you were not forgot, and when we received your letter, it cost 
me at least half-a-dozen bottles in my cellar." 2 

The fifth baronet, Sir Thomas Mansel, was a man of con- 
siderable prominence, and held various offices of importance at 
court, etc. He was sheriff of Glamorgan 1700-1701 ; M.P. for Cardiff, 
1689-1698, and for Glamorgan (in six Parliaments), 1699-1712 ; 

1 Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1676 ; p. 3 1 9. 
* Ibid., 1675, 1676 ; p. 571. 


Controller of the Household to Queen Anne, 1704-1708, and 1711-1712 ; 
one of the commissioners of the Treasury, 1710-1711 ; one of the 
tellers of the Exchequer, 1712-1714 ; vice-admiral of South Wales ; 
and war. made a privy councillor in 1704. 

From all this it is easy to assume that he was a very well- 
known man in social and political circles ; and there is independent 
evidence of this in some contemporary records. 

John Macky, who made it his business to be acquainted with 
the persons and characters of the men about the court in his time, 
thus describes Thomas Mansel : 

" Mr. Mansel is a young gentleman of a very good estate in 
Wales. He always made an agreeable figure in the House of Com- 
mons, was generally an opposer of the measures of King William's 
reign, yet was very civilly entertained by that Prince, in a visit he 
made him at Loo (King William's palace in Holland), two years 
before he died. He is a gentleman of a great deal of wit and good- 
nature, a lover of the ladies, and a pleasant companion ; is very 
thin, of a fair complexion, middle stature, and turned of thirty 
years old." l 

This was probably written about the year 1705, just before 
Mansel succeeded to the baronetcy; he was then certainly fully 
" turned of thirty years old," having been born not later than 166S. 

Below John Macky 's observations is a manuscript note by 
Dean Swift : " a very good nature, but a very moderate capacity." 

That Swift was on ultimate terms with Mansel is apparent 
from numerous passages in " The Journal to Stella " ; there are 
frequent allusions to meetings at dinner and elsewhere. On May 27, 
1711 : " As I was coming home to-night. Sir Thomas Mansel and 
Tom Harley met me in the Park, and made me walk with them till 
nine, like unreasonable whelps." On January 2, 1712 : " This 

1 John Macky was a court agent, or spy, and in this capacity performed various useful 
sen-ices from time to time. He left a volume entitled " Memoirs of the Secret Services of John 
Macky, Esq.," which contains a great number of sketches similar to the above, under the heading 
" Characters of the Court of Great Britain." He died in 17:6, and this book was published 
in 1733, from the original MS., attested by his son. The famous Dean Swift, who was much 
addicted to the writing of marginal notes in contemporary books, amused himself in this fashion 
in Macky 's volume ; his remarks are rarely complimentary either to author or subject, and he 
had his fling at Thomas Mansel. (See p. 114.) 


1 ■■ ■■- 




Died S Mav, 1610. 

.-■ tb**~ T^% 






being the day the Lords meet, and the new peers to be introduced, 
I \\\nt to Westminster to see the sight ; but the crowd was too great 
in the house. So I only went into the robing-room, to give my four 
brothers joy, and Sir Thomas Mansel, and Lord Windsor ; the other 
six I am not acquainted with." On January 13, 1713 : " I was to 
have dined with Lord Keeper, but would not, because that brute 
Sir John Walter was to be one of the company. You may remember 
he railed at me last summer was twelvemonth at Windsor, and has 
never begged in)- pardon, though he promised to do it ; and Lord 
Mansel, who was one of the company, would certainly have set us 
together by the ears, out of pure roguish mischief." 

At an earlier date — March 31, 1711 — Swift has the following : 
" I dined to-day with Sir Thomas Mansel. We were walking in the 
Park, and Mr. Lewis came to us. Mansel asked where we dined ? 
We said, together. He said, we should dine with him, only his wife 
desired him to bring nobody, because she had only a leg of mutton. 
I said, 1 would dine with him to choose ; but he would send a servant 
to order a plate or two ; yet this man has ten thousand pounds a-year 
in land, and is a Lord of the Treasury, and is not covetous neither, 
but runs out merely by slattering and negligence. The worst dinner 
I ever saw at the Dean's was better ; but so it is with abundance of 
people here." 

All very well, but Dean Swift had no right to expect a 
sumptuous dinner under the circumstances ; and it was somewhat 
hard on Lady Mansel that her husband should bring him, after her 
warning. Swift's attitude was always critical, however, whether 
towards men or things, and probably the dinner was not as bad as 
he makes out. 

Mansel must, however, have been a useful and capable man, 
something more than a mere " lover of the ladies and pleasant 
companion " ; and he was destined to be singled out, together with 
eleven others, for elevation to the peerage, under somewhat unusual 

The opening of Parliament on December 6, 171 1, inaugurated 
a conflict. between the ministry and the Commons on one side, and 
the House of Lords, under the Whig leaders, on the other. In the 



queen's speech occurred the following : "I am glad that I can now 
tell you that, notwithstanding the arts of those who delight in war, 
both time and place aie appointed for opening the treaty of a general 
peace. Our allies (especially the States-General), whose interest I 
look upon as inseparable from my own, have, by their ready con- 
currence, expressed their entire confidence in me." 

This was declared by the Whig lords to be a misleading state- 
ment, and the peace preliminaries were denounced by them as a 
violation of our engagements. They managed to pass an opposing 
and condemnatory clause in the House of Lords by sixty-two to 
fifty-four votes. Robert Harley, first Earl of Oxford, lord high 
treasurer, responded by engineering the rejection of a similar clause 
in the Commons by two hundred and thirty-two to one hundred and 
six votes, and followed this up with an accusation against the 
Duke of Marlborough, as commander-in-chief, and Walpole. as 
secretary for war, of peculation in public affairs ; with the result 
that Walpole was sent to the Tower, and Marlborough was dismissed 
from all his employments. 

This, however, was not sufficienl ; Marlborough, the most 
formidable opponent of peace, had been removed ; but it was 
necessary that the Tories should have a majority in the Lords. The 
Earl of Oxford therefore advised the queen to sanction a coup d'elat 
by creating a certain number of peers, who would, of course, be 
pledged to support Harley and the ministry. 

It was not a very ferocious coup d'etat, such as was threatened 
a few years ago, when the creation of five hundred peers was glibly 
discussed ; on this occasion only twelve were created, and Sir 
Thomas Mansel was one of them. 

These creations took place within five days ; one peer was 
made respectively on December 28, 29, and 31, 1711 ; the remaining 
nine were created on January 1, Mansel coining sixth in precedence 
out of the twelve, with the title of Baron Mansel of Margam. 

While it cannot be maintained that any great lustre attaches 
to the acceptance of a title under such conditions, there can be little 
doubt that Mansel was a man who was likely to do credit to his new 
rank ; but the baronv was not destined to continue for manv 


generations, nor did it pass in a single instance directly from father 
to son. 1 

The first Lord Mansel fol'ovved the example of those early 
progenitors of the family in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, in 
respect of their youthful assumption of the responsibilities of matri- 
mony. He matriculated at Oxford on March 7, 1685, and was then 
stated to be of the age of seventeen. On May 14 in the following 
year, 16S6, we find this entry in " Marriage Allegations in the 
Registry of the Vicar General of the Archbishop of Canterbury " : 
" Thomas Mansell, of Margam, eo. Glamorgan, Bachelor, about 20 " 
— but he was probably under nineteen ; while his bride, Martha 
Millington, is stated to be about seventeen. The marriage de- 
manded, of course, the consent of the parents on both sides, which is 
duly recorded ; and it was solemnised four clays later, on May iS, in 
Westminster Abbey, as appears in the register of that church. 

From this early union, however, as has already been stated, 
Lord Mansel was not destined to procure a direct inheritor of the 
title, although he had three sons and three daughters. 

We get a glimpse of Martha Millington. in her capacity as the 
wife of a courtier and politician, a good many years later. In a 
letter to Robert Harley (created Earl of Oxford in the following 
year), dated May 2S, 1710, she writes — 

" I am almost fright'd to death, with the threats of a great 
lady who is now retired from court, which one that lately came from 
the Lodge tells of. In a little time she says she shall return with as 
full power as ever, and that both you and every friend you have 
shall feel the effects of her utmost revenge. Lady Orkney is often 
with her, and at the table begins a health to her and all that's for 
the Duke's interest, and total destruction to all that are not for it. 
Duke Hamilton thinks himself neglected by you, and others are 
caressing him to be of their party, but he is still more inclined to 
yours, and if there was occasion for going into Scotland would 

1 The Treaty of Utrecht, which ended the great War of the Spanish Succession, was not 
concluded until April, 171 ~, England obtaining recession of Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, 
Hudson's Bay Territory, Gibraltar, and the Island of St. Kitts (St. Christopher), in the West 


convince you of his interest there, and would readily join with whom 
you approve, and very particularly give the character and in- 
clinations of his countrymen. The terrible apprehensions I am 
now under have took all rest from me, and I was forced to send for 
my doctor, who ordered me something that I had a tolerable night 
of it ; but without some good news I sha'n't recover mighty soon. 
I won't mention the writing this to any body living, hope you will 
pardon the doing it, for the terror that enraged Lady has put me 
into is not to be expressed." 

Endorsed by Harley : " Answered immediately." J 

Robert, the eldest surviving son, married Anne, second 
daughter of the famous Admiral Sir Cloudesley Shovel, of May Place, 
Crayford, Kent, - and had issue ; he died, however, before his father, 
April 29, 1723. 

In Crayford church there is a monument to Elizabeth, wife of 
Sir Cloudesley Shovell (formerly married to Sir John Narbrough) ; 
and near this is one to Robert Mansel, sun of the hrst Baron of 
Margam — a handsome mural monument of white marble, enclosed 
within iron rails, and bearing the following inscription : 

"Near this place is deposited the body of Robert Mansel. 
eldest son and heir of Thomas Lord Mansel, of the antient and noble 
family of the Marvels of Normandy, removed into England in the 
time of William the Conqueror, established in Wales in the time of 
Henry the First, where they have flourished ever since in great 
splendour and dignity ; fust at Oxwich Castle, then at Margam, in 

1 Hist. MSS. Con:. Portland MSS., vol. iv., p. 542. The "'great lady" who inspired 
so much apprehensi n ... : . : ._■-.■: ul - ,■..!_• S.,:ah Jennings, Duchess of Marlborough. 
There had been increasing region between Queen Anne and .Marlboro.;??., and the Duchess 
had, as usual, busied herself very industriously in these affair:, admonishing and bullying the 
queen until the latter lost patience, and on Apri! 6 there was a final severance, with floods of 
tears and mutual recriminations. Sarah did not, however, return to power as she had predicted, 
and Lady Mansel's fears pro 1 e ! groundless. 

2 Sir Cloudesley Shovel (or Shovell) was originally of county Norfolk, where his father, 
John Shovell, of Cockthorpe, was a man of some property. Sir Cloudesley was born in 1650, 
and went to sea at the ^et of fourteen. His exploits atloat are matter of history, and need not 
be here enlarged upon. He met his death in 1707, when his flagship, the Association, struck 
upon a rock in the Sciliy Islands, and very shortly broke up. Sir Cloudesley died immediately 
after landing, and was buried in Westminster Abbey, where there is a monument to him. In 
the year 1604. he purchased,. from the heirs of Colonel Cresheld Draper, certain manors and 
estates in Kent, including May Place. 



the county of Glamorgan. He married Anne, one of the daughters 
and co-heirs of Sir Cloudesley Shovell, Knight, Commander in Chief 
of the Royal Navy under King William the Third, and Queen Anne, 
and Rear Admiral of England ; he had by her three children, two 
since dead, and Thomas Lord Mansel now alive, and died in May, 
1723. He gave early proofs of an uncommon pregnancy of parts 
and glowing wit ; and to the accomplishments of a fine gentleman 
added the virtues of a patriot. In the flower of his youth he was 
snatched away from the hopes of his country and the arms of his 
friends ; but in their hearts and memory will always live. His 
widow, among other signal marks of her affection, has caused this 
monument to be erected to his memory." 

Over the monument are these arms, viz. : Quarterly, first 
and fourth argent, a chevron between three maunches, sable (Mansel) ; 
second and third argent, an eagle displayed, sable (Millington) ; 
escutcheon, gules, a chevron ermine, two crescents in chief, argent, 
in base a fleur-de-lis, or (Shovell). 1 

Robert's widow afterwards married John Blackwood, Esq., 
by whom she had issue. 

As will be seen from this inscription, upon the authority of his 
wife, Robert had three children ; only one is named, Thomas ; a 
point arises in connection with this, which will be discussed a little 
further on. 

There is some correspondence in the Stuart Papers, during the 
year or two following the futile Mar rebellion of 1715, which may, for 
reasons which will presentlv appear, be fittinglv dealt with here. 

John Erskine. Earl of Mar (1675-1732), after loudly pro- 
claiming his loyalty to King George on his accession in 1714, but 
having been nevertheless dismissed by that king from his office as a 
secretary of state, suddenly transferred his allegiance to James 
Stuart, the Pretender. Mar had attended a levee at court on the 
evening of August 1. 1715, and had then comported himself as a 

1 " Registrum," J. Thorpe, p. looo, et seq. 

Robert Mansel is Slid, in "The Complete Peerage," to have died April 29, 1723, while 
the inscription upon the tomh has .May ; possibly one date is " old style," and the other " new 
ityle." The latter would mate the date May 9 ; the calendar was not rectihed until 1752. 


loyal and even a servile courtier ; this over, he disguised himself as 
a workman, and took ship at Gravesend for Scotland, where he was 
speedily busy proclaiming " King James " at Braemar on Septem- 
ber 6. Two months later ensued the Battle of Sheriffrnuir, con- 
cerning which the well-known rhyme was written ; if the contest 
was indecisive, it was very much to the discredit of Mar and his 
army, which outnumbered King George's by three to one. The 
Pretender having landed at Peterhead on December 23, Mar accom- 
panied him to Scone, near Perth, and on his public entry into that 
town, January 2, 1716. By the end of the month, however, James 
was compelled to seek refuge in flight, and, together with Mar and 
some others, landed in France February n following. 

Then ensued much futile scheming and correspondence 
among Jacobites at home and in France : they wrote most frequently 
in cypher, or with pseudonyms ; and they were speedily joined by 
Henry St. John, Viscount Bolingbroke, who, together with the Duke 
of Ormonde, the Farl of Strafford, and the Farl of Oxford, had 
been impeached, on the death of Queen Anne and the accession 
of the Whigs to power, for their share in promoting the Treaty of 

Bolingbroke was for some time Secretary of State to the 
Pretender, but was dismissed from this office in 1716 ; Mar was 
created Duke under that title by James in 1715. but was, of 
course, never acknowledged by it in England. He continued to be 
the Pretender's chief adviser and counsellor for nine or ten years. 

In the Jacobite correspondence of the next year or two there 
is mention of one Mr. Mansel, then on the Continent ; he was appar- 
ently, although, by inference, quite a young man, held in considerable 
esteem by the Jacobite leaders. 

On November 11, 1716, the Duke of Mar, in a letter to the 
Marquess of Wharton, writes : "I heard t'other day from Brussels 
that Mansel had passed again there who is now as angry with Boling- 
broke as ever he was pleased with him." 1 

On November iS Mar writes again: " I did not know Mr. 

1 Stuart Papers at Windsor Castle (Hist. MSS. Com.). Vol. iii., p. 202. Philip, second 
Marquess and afterwards first Duke of Wharton. 


Mansel was returned to Paris. I am not acquainted with him, but 
his good character gets him the esteem of everybody." x 

On January 7, 1717, Mar writes to Mr. Panton from Avignon : 
" By the King's {i.e., the Pretender's) orders returning him his best 
thanks for his endeavours for his service, and acknowledging his 
friend Mr. MansePs message, which the King took very kindly, who 
relies on his doing him all the service in his power." 2 

On February 6, 1717, Mr. Panton writes to Major Simon 
Fraser, at Avignon : " Lord Bolingbroke is not yet gone, but is 
preparing, he says, to go into Champagne, and for carrying with him 
some half a dozen of English horses, a few servants, dogs, and any- 
thing else his Lordship may have occasion for, and there he proposes 
to live and laugh at all Courts. How true this last may be, or whether 
Champagne be the place, are two of the articles I will not warrant the 
truth of ; if it is, then it is probably in order to his return to the 
Island. Stair and he pretend to make a mystery of their being 
frequently together, sometimes tete-a-tete, and sometimes with some 
French man or woman foi a third, but they know that I have been 
told of their being together by one who was more than once the 
third, where the expressions in conversation were ' Dear Stair,' ' Dear 

" He is still at as much pains as formerly to court and entertain 
with a supper every Tory as he comes to town, but, as I know most 
of them, his Secretary or he seldom fail to meet me with them next 
morning. I have not met with anyone yet but one, who seemed any 
way in danger of being deluded by him, and I am sure he is so far 
from it now that nobody believes or esteems him less. I met him, 
some days before I fell ill, at Mr. Mansel 's, that is, I had lain there 
and he came in there pretty early in the morning, and surprised us 
in our nightgowns. I went out soon after to my own room to dress, 
and Mr. Mansel having said something obliging of me after I was 
gone, he said he could not deny but I was a very honest man, and 
added further that which I did not deserve, a man of extraordinary 
good sense, but so bigoted a Jacobite that, though he advised Mr. 
Mansel to take my advice in everything else, yet to take care not to 
do it in that particular, otherwise he would ruin himself. Mr. 
Mansel told him that he resolved to be directed by my advice as to 
his particular affairs, and as to that he had chosen his party long ago 

1 Stuart Papers at Windsor C.-.stJe (Hist. MSS. Com.). Vol. iii., p. 229. 

' Ibid., p. 409. The Duke of Mar and the Marquis of Wharton disguise their names 
as " J. Clarke " and " Mr. Coatsby," or other pseudonyms. Mansel is referred to in one letter 
in cypher, and elsewhere his name is " disvowelled." 


in which the conversation he had had with his Lordship about a 
year ago or some more had perfectly confirmed him, and that he could 
not think lie, Lord Bolingbroke, "could have discovered since that 
time anything in the affairs of Britain that could have made him 
change his sentiments so entirely ; upon which his Lordship rose, 
and going out, told him he was sorry to see him so far gone. 

" Mr. Mansel is very urgent with me to go to England with 
him. My own little affairs seem to persuade me to the same, because 
my little fund is near exhausted, and 1 must be in England myself 
to raise more. These reasons, and that i may be of use to Mr. 
Mansel, whom his father designs to many and settle immediately, 
and who will want very much to be advised in several bargains he 
will have to end with "the most covetous father in England, have 
almost determined me, but 1 am not altogether without apprehension 
of being taken up ; yet, though all the world should believe me a 
Jacobite, I hope few or none can prove me so. In that case I should 
come out by virtue of the Habeas Corpus, but then Mr. Mansel asking 
to have me put in his pass will be one way of trying whether Lord 
Stair will give me one or no." ' 

Here we have one Mr. Mansel, a Jacobite, and evidently held 
in some consideration ; a friend of " Mr. Panton " (obviously a 
pseudonym ; his real name is not disclosed in the introduction to 
the Stuart Papers), and on more or less intimate terms with Lord 
Bolingbroke, who had, just about this time, abjured his Jacobite 
policy, thereby arousing Mr. Mansel's indignation. 

This Mr. Mansel, it may be assumed from various allusions, 
was a young man ; his father, we are told, designed his immediate 
marriage ; and marriages were almost invariably contracted in those 
days at a more or less youthful period ; furthermore, this young 
man's father would naturally wish to see him married and settled in 
England, rather than being concerned with Jacobite schemes in 
Fiance. The Duke of Mar — as he was termed in France — says of 
Mansel : " his good ciiaracter gets him the esteem of everyone." 

It appears to be quite a reasonable hypothesis that this 
Mansel was no other than the Honourable Robert, son of Thomas, 

1 Stuart Papers at Windsor Castle (Hist. MSS. Com.). Vol. iii., pp. 515, et seq. Major 
Simon Fraser was of tie family of Simon Eraser, Baron Lowat, a great Jacobite schemer up 
to 1715, when he took the other side, and rendered important service to the Government. 
Lord Stair was English ambassador in Paris. 

MARTHA, daughter of Francis Millington, wife of Thomas, 1st Lord Mansel. 
Born 1669, died 1718. 

[face p. 24 



first baron of Margam. He was born, according to a pedigree among 
the MSS. at Margam, on November 2, 1695, 1 so he would at this time 
be only about two-and-twenty. His widow says of him, in the 
epitaph at Crayford, " He gave early proofs of an uncommon 
pregnancy of parts and glowing wit ; and to the accomplishments of 
a fine gentleman added the virtues of a patriot." 

This last phrase is scarcely to be reconciled with Jacobite 
leanings, in the eyes of the daughter of Sir Cloudesley Shovel ; but it 
may very well be that Robert's " settling " included his abstention 
from further excursions in this respect. 

Moreover, the year of "Mr. Panton's " letter corresponds 
with the time of Robert Mansel's marriage, which took place 
in April, 1718. His son Thomas, second baron, was born December 

26, 1719* 

The Deed of Settlement on the occasion of the marriage of 
Robert Mansel is among the Penrice and Margam MSS. ; it is 
described as quadrapartite, the parties being Thomas Lord Mansel, 
Karon of Margam, the Hon. Robert Mansel, Esq., his son and heir, 
and Ann (Shovel! ), his wife of the first part ; Dame Elizabeth 
Shovel) of May Place, widow of Sir Cloudesley Shovell of the second 
part ; Edmund Probyn of the Middle Temple, Esq., and Thomas 
Cory of Margam, and others of the third part ; and Edward Mansel 
of Swansea, Esq., of the fourth part ; and it provides that, in con- 
sideration of a marriage portion of £20,000 the said Thomas Lord 
Mansel conveys the Glamorganshire estates to trustees, to the use 
of the said parties now married, etc. It is dated April 5, 1718, 
probably the day of the marriage. Edward Mansel of Swansea is 
evidently the son of Edward Mansel of Henlys, whose will was 
proved in 1694. 3 

In the absence of any Christian name or other means of 
identification in the letters, it is not, of course, possible to declare 
with absolute certainty that this was the Honourable Robert ; but 

1 Penrice and Margam MSS., ed. by W. de G. Birch. Series II., p. 109. The Register 
of Robert Mansel's birth has not been found elsewhere. 
» Ibid. 
* Ibid. Series III., p. 17, no. 1156. 


the circumstantial evidence is strongly in favour of the hypothesis, 
which is supported also by the fact that, if it were not Robert, it does 
not seem possible to find any member of the family who would fit in ; 
Christopher and Bussy were both under age at the time, and others 
who might be eligible were already married. 

Thomas, the first baron, died December 10, 1723, and was 
buried at Margam. 

Lord Mansel appears to have been on intimate terms with 
the Harleys— Robert, first Earl of Oxford, and Edward, his 

In the Portland MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com.) there occurs, in a 
letter from William Stratford, of Christchurch, Oxford, to Edward 
Harley (with whom Stratford kept up an enormous correspondence), 
dated December 30, 1723, the following passage : " I have not yet 
condoled with you on the loss of Lord Mansel. One part of his 
character was very commendable, his honourable behaviour to your 
father. I hear he died of a broken heart, partly at the loss of his son, 
but more for the marriage of his daughter." 3 

Lord Mansel's "honourable behaviour" to the Earl of 
Oxford probably consisted in his scrupulous adherence to the con- 
ditions under which lie accepted the peerage — namely, unswerving 
support .of the Tory faction in the House of Lords. 

As to Stratford's story that he " died of a broken heart," the 
expression is, of course, a vague sort of commonplace frequently 
made use of without much consideration. The loss of his eldest 
son and heir, a young man apparently possessed of many admirable 
qualities, must have been a great shock to Lord Mansel, but according 
to the writer the marriage of his daughter was a still heavier blow. 
This statement may be taken for what it is worth ; it is probably a 
bit of gossip. Lord Mansel's daughter Mary was married to John 
Ivory Talbot, Esq., of Lacock, Wilts ; Martha is stated in one 
pedigree to have married " Morgan Thomas, clerk " ; it does not 
appear to which of these marriages William Stratford alludes : but 
a man whose gossiping letters fill some four hundred and fifty 

1 Portland MSS. Vol. vii., p. 371. 


closely- printed pages would probably include every idle on dit 
extant. 1 

Lord Mansel was succeeded by his grandson, Thomas, son of 
the Hon. Robert Mansel ; the latter, according to the inscription 
upon his tomb, had two other children, who presumably died young, 
but one of whom, under the name of Robert, is introduced in the 
pedigree by Robert George Maunsell as the successor of his grand- 
father ; Thomas, his brother, succeeding him. 

This, however, is an error ; whether there was any such 
Robert is not certain, but if so he certainly died before his brother 
Thomas, and probably before the Hon. Robert, his father, and so 
could not have inherited the title. 

This mistake has crept in through a somewhat careless mis- 
reading of records, and also, more excusably, by reason of a slip in 
the register in Crayford church. 

Thomas Mansel, second baron of Margam, died unmarried on 
January 29, 1744 ; he was buried in Crayford church, February 3 ; 
but R. G. Maunsell has misread the record " 3 Feb. 1743-4 " as 
signifying 1743, and has given this as the date of the death of his 
apocryphal Robert ; following which he has " Thomas Mansel, 
6 Bart, and 3rd Baron, who died unmarried 29 January, 1744," 
whereas these two dates are those of the death and burial of Thomas, 
the second baron. 

Curiously enough, however, there is a mistake in the entry at 
Crayford church, where, on February 3, 1743 — which, in the register, 
means 1744 — appears the record: "The Hon. Robert, Lord 
Mansell (sic), from London." There can be no doubt that Robert 
is here erroneously substituted for Thomas, administration of whose 
estate was granted March 2, 1744. 2 

Thomas Mansel was therefore fifth baronet and second baron. 
We do not hear about him as taking any great part in public affairs ; 

1 Dr. William Stratford, canon of Christchurch, Oxford, was son of Nicholas Stratford, 
Bishop of Chester. Previously to his appointment a? canon, he had been chaplain to Robert 
Harley, hence his intimacy with the family. 

1 See "History of Maunsell or Mansel,"' by R. G. Maunsell, p. 27. "The Complete 
Peerage," by G. E. C, vol. .-., p. 214. " Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica," Second Series, 
vol. iv., p. 69. Also original record' of administration granted, at Somerset House. 


this is not surprising, since he inherited at the age of four years, and 
died at five-and-twenty. 

He took his seat in the House of Lords in 1743 ; his name 
appears m the list of barons present on December 1 in that year, 
and upon the same day lie was appointed a member of a Committee 
of Privilege, " To consider of the Orders and Customs of the House, 
and the Privileges of Parliament, and of the Peers of Great Britain 
and Lords of Parliament." 1 

His death ensued two months later ; and, as he was unmarried, 
the title passed to Christopher, second son of the first Lord Manse], 
who also died unmarried, his brother Bussy, third son of the first 
Lord Mansel, inheriting the title. 

Christopher Lord Mansel died at Newick Place, near Lewes, 
county Sussex, which had formerly belonged to John Millington, 
either father or elder brother to Francis Millington, whose daughter 
manied Thomas Mansel. Prior to the marriage a lease was granted 
to John Millington, Esq., of Newick. and John Emilie of London, 
merchant, of certain lands and manors of Sir Edward Mansel's 
Margam estate, which, by the subsequent Deed of Settlement, were 
conveyed to trustees for the use of the parties under specified 

In Horsfield's History of Sussex it is stated that Newick was 
in the family of Sir Stephen Boord until 1680, and that in 1716 John 
Longley, of St. Mary-le-Savoy, London, was the owner. The estate 
appears, at any rate, to have passed from the Millingtons. and to 
have been purchased by Christopher (afterwards Lord) Mansel about 
I734, upon whose death it passed to Bussy Lord Mansel ; his daughter 
bequeathed it, according to Horsfield, to the Dowager Lady 
Fortescue. (Vol. i., p. 224.) 

After her death it became the property of Mr. James Powell ; 
he sold it in 1819 to Mr. James Henry Sclater, whose grandson is 
the present possessor (1917). 

The register of Newick Parish has the following entries : 
" 1710. March 5. Vincent Cooper. M.A., instituted upon 
the Presentation of the Honble. Sir Thomas Maxsel, Bart." (who 

1 Lords' Journals. 

Burn ior.8; dit-tl 10 Derember, 17J3. 

- - 




was in the following year, as already recorded, created Baron Mansel 
of Margam). 

" 1744. Nov. 30. The Right Honble. Lord Mansel buried. 
His Lordship died on Monday, Nov. 26th." 

" 1 761. June 2i. The Right Honble. Lady Barbara Man- 
sel, relict of the Right Honble. Lord Bussy Mansel." 

" 17S6. Feb. 24. The Right Honble. Louisa Barbara, 
Baroness Vernon, wife of the Right Honble. George Yenables 
Vernon, Lord Vernon, and daughter of the Right Honble. Bussv 
Lord Mansel." 


" To the memory of the Right Honourable Lady Barbara 
Mansel (relict of the late Right Honble. Lord Bussy Mansell) who 
died June 19th 1761." 

" To the memory of Louisa Barbara, Lady Vernon, wife 
of George Lord Vernon ; daughter to Bussy Lord 
Mansel by Barbara daughter to William the 2nd Karl of Jersey. 
She died Feb. 16th 17S0, aged 53. Ever to be regretted by the poor 
of this parish." x 

" To the memory of George Vernon, son of the Honble. 
George Vernon by his* wife the Honble. Louisa Vernon daughter 
and heiress of the Right Honble. Bussy Lord Mansel. Born Nov. 
19th 1 761. Died of measles at the age of 18 months." 

In the list of " Priests of this Parish " : 

" 17S4. Rowland Dawkins Mansel was Vicar of Newick 
till 17S9." 

All trace of the Millingtons has disappeared from Newick ; 
it is on record, however, that Francis Millington settled {10,000 on 
his daughter Martha upon her marriage with Thomas Mansel. 2 

Bussy Mansel was M.P. for Cardiff in 1722, 1727, 1734, and 
1741. He survived his brother Christopher by only six years, dying 
November 29, 1750 ; and having issue only one daughter, the 
baronetcy and barony alike became extinct. 

In connection with some collateral branches of the Mansels 
of Margam, there are one or two interesting points to be discussed. 

Arthur Mansel, third son of Sir Thomas, the first baronet, 
married, as shown in the pedigree, Jane, daughter and co-heir of 
William Price, of Britton Ferry ; and she afterwards took as her 

1 L^dy Vernon, among other charities, founded some schools, which still bear her name. 
* Penrice and Margam MSS., Third Series, p. 73, nos. 1443, 1444. 


second husband Sir Anthony Mansel, her late husband's first cousin, 
second son of Sir Francis, first baronet of Muddlescombe— of whom 
more hereafter. 

Arthur Mansel had issue a son, Bussy, 1 who married Catherine, 
daughter of Hugh Perry of London, and widow of Sir Edward Strad- 
ling, of St. Donat's Castle. 

The points at issue will be most readily set forth, first 
by the following sketch pedigree, illustrating the devolution of 
the Britton Ferry estate ; and secondly, by a letter from Jane 
Mansel, Arthur's widow and Sir Anthony's wife, to her son Bussy. 

Arthur Mansel, 3rd son 
of Sir Thomas, 1st Bart, 
of Margain 

Jane, dau. and co-heir of 
Wm. Price, of Britton 
Ferry, d. 1638 

Bussy, named in a deed, 
166S, " of Britton Ferry 
(Cartas, vol. vi., 2230) 

Catherine, dau. of 
Hugh Perry, widow 
of Sir Ed. Strad- 
ling, of St. Donat's 

Sir Anthony, 2nd son of Sir 
Francis, 1st Bart, of Mud- 
dlescombe ; named in 2 
deed, 1632, "of Britton 
Ferry " (Carte, vol. vi., 
2 1 97 ) 


Sir Edward, 4th Bart, 
of Muddlescombe, d.s.f. 

Thomas [p.v.p. 


Elizabeth, dau. and heir 
of Rich. Games, of 
Penderin, co. Brecon 
(Penrice and Margam 
MrS., 3rd Se-ies, no. 
1 126) 

Thomas, named " of Britton 
Ferry" in a deed, 1694 
(Carts, vol. vi., 2250) ; 
and also named as heir 
under his grandfather's 
will, 1699 (Cartar. vol. vi., 
2257), d. Jan. 1706. Origi- 
nal 'will at Somerset House 

ussy, 4th Baron of 
Margam, inherited 
Britten Ferry 
through this last 
Thomas (" Com- 
plete Peerage," 
vol. v., 214) ; will 
at Somerset House 

Lady Barbara, dau. 
of William (V'il- 
li,-rs) 2nd Earl of 
Jersey, widow of 
Sir Walter Black- 

I.ouisa Barbara (m. = George, 2nd Lord 
July 16, 1757, d. J Vernon, d. June 

Feb. 16, 17S6) I iS, 1S13 

Louisa, d. unmarried 

(The Britton Ferry Estate thu9 passed by 
marriage to the Vernons, and on the death 
of Louisa reverted to the Villiers family. 

1 Mr. R. G. Maunsell (p. 241 gives Arihur a son Thomas, elder than Bussy. Mr 
Clark says that Arthur had issue one son, Bussy. Arch. Camb. Series II., vol. ii., p. Z\ 

G. T. 


According to the monumental inscription in Westminster 
Abbey, Thomas, son of Bussy Mansel, had one son, Thomas (as 
shown in the pedigree), and two daughters, Mary and Elizabeth. 

Mary married William Cary of Clovelly, a member of an old 
family established in Devonshire since early in the sixteenth cen- 
tury ; ' she died in February, 1701. 

Elizabeth married Sir Thomas Powel (or Powell), of Broad- 
way, near Laugharne, county Carmarthen, Bart. 2 

From the deeds quoted above, which are given in extenso 
in Clark's " Carta; et Munimenta de Glamorgan," it would appear 
that Jane Mansel (nie Price) held the estate of Britton Ferry for her 
lifetime, and thus her second husband, Sir Anthony, is named in 
1632 as " of Britton Ferry." 


" My Dear Dear Bussy, I bless you again and again, 
heartily, in the Lord ; the request of my dying heart, which upon 
my blessing 1 charge you to observe, you shall understand as 
folio we th : 

" 1. I intreat and earnestly exhort you first, and above all 
things, to be diligent and careful in the service of my great God, who 
hath gratuitously manifested his mercies towards your poor mother 
in all her straightness, and will deal no less favourable with you, if 
you walk uprightly in his ways, and unfeignedly observe his Laws ; 
for he will be the God of the faithful, and of their seed, for ever. 

" 2. Secondly, as soon as you hear of my death, be ruled by 
your Father, and go with him to London, to express yourself earnestly 
upon your knees to the Master of the Court of Ward (whom I hear 
to be a Noble and just Lord), that he may have your wardship, for I 
am persuaded that your will and inclination will be much available 
to obtain it ; and you know that no man living will be so careful of 
you, and so sincerely just and upright in all his dealings, as he ; for 
he never injured any tenant or neighbour since he came among them. 3 

"3. I desire you that what Leases or Grants soever you find, 

1 "Visitations of the County of Devon." J. L. Vivian, p. 159. There is a very full 
pedigree given of the Carys. 

J Monumental inscription in Newton Church, Montgomery. 

* Meaning, of course, Bussy 's step-father, Sir Anthony ; the construction is somewhat 
obscure. The Master of the Court of Wards in 1638 was Francis, Lord Cottington. 


under the hands of either of your Grandfathers or mine, 1 that you 
will confirm and make them good. 

"4. I beseech thee, my dear child, be good unto thy poor 
Brothers and Sisters, and suffer them not to want in what thou canst 
supply them ; and I trust in my God they will be on all occasions 
of joy and comfort unto thee. 

" 5. My dear heart, consider that your poor servants and 
friends will be utterly undone, if they be bereaved of your Father to 
protect them from the injuries and oppressions of others ; therefore, 
renouncing all others, cleave to his protection with all love and 
union, till it will please God to make you a man able to govern and 
look unto your tenants and poor friends yourself ; and for your 
better inducement so O do, lie was your Father's dear Cousin- 
German, and hath been a loving and tender husband to 3 our mother 
ever since the day 1 met with him ; and be assured that he never had a 
hand or intelligence in the hinderance of you to the value of a farthing. 

" 6. Good Son, as you tender my blessing, read this, my 
last letter, every Monday morning for seven years ; and then I hope 
that the God of Wisdom will give you understanding in all that I 
have said, and plant in your dear heart Grace and obedience to do 
accordingly. 1 was ail the Parents that you can well remember ; 
and I hope you will so much the more \v( igh my request and advice. 

" 7. ' When you come to the age o! one and twenty years (if 
it be God's gracious will that you accomplish so many), 1 pray you, 
for God's blessing and mine, that you will be resolved to come and 
live in the country, and not go abroad to consume and waste your 
estate, and discomfort your poor Friends and Tenants, whom I 
charge you, as you shall answer before God. to use well .and eon- 
scionably, and not to wrong or oppress them in any way ; and thus, 
my dear Child, your dyin._ r mother commends you to the Bles; ing and 
Grace of the Lord, before whose glorious throne I am shortly to 
appear, and the Grace of my Lord topossess and sanctif y your heart and 
keep your Soul and Body Blameless unto the day of His appeaiance. 

"Your dying (but I trust ere long) eternally living Mother, 

" Britton Ferry, nth Nov., 1638." 

Endorsement on back of letter. 
" Mrs. Jane Mansel's letter to her son Bussy, 16 days before 
her death, the nth day of November, 1638, Dyed the 27th Nobre, 
between the hours of 12 and 1." - 

1 I.t., either Sir Thomas Mansel, first baronet, or William Price of Britton Ferry. 
1 Arch. Camb. Series II., vol. ii., pp. 235, ei seq. The original letter was in the possession 
of the Rev. J. M. Traherne in 1 851. 

Thomas First Lord Mansel. Born 1663, died Dec. 10, 1723. (Penrice 


(Misnamed Bussy Lord Mansel.) 

[face p. 32 



The inquisition post mortem upon Jane, Lady Mansel (spelt 
Maunsell and Mansell in the original), is in the Record Office. It is 
a very long and wordy document, and the chief points of interest 
affecting this present account are, that Jane is found to have had a 
son Thomas, by her first marriage, who died during her lifetime, and 
a second son, Bussy, who is found to be her heir, and of the age of 
fifteen at the time of her death., i.e., in November, 1638 ; the 
inquisition is dated January 2, 14 Charles I. (1639). 1 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell is thus shown to be correct with re- 
gard to the issue of Arthur Mansel and Jane Price, and Mr. G. 
T. Clark is wrong in his statement as recorded in the footnote 
on a preceding page ; the discrepancy is not, however, cf any 

Bussy Mansel was therefore born, according to the in- 
quisition, in 1623, a fact worthy of notice, in view of the following 
entry in the Journal of the House of Lords, dated December 20, 
1645 : 

" The Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament do nom- 
inate and approve of Bushy Mansell, Esquire, to be Commander in 
Chief of the Forces of the County of Glamorgan, subordinate to Sir 
Thomas Fairfax ; and that the members of both Houses that are 
of the Committee of both Kingdoms do grant him a Commission 
accordingly." a 

This is somewhat surprising, as Bussy Mansel was then only 
twenty-two years of age ; the appointment of so young a man to such 
a command would appear to indicate either that he was precociously 
experienced and capable, or that he was possessed of powerful 
influence in high quarters. 

1 Inq. Post Mortem. Second Series, vol. 569, no. 125, P.R.O. In a summary of this 
inquisition in The Gene.iijtisi, vol. xxxii., p. 136, Jane Mansel is described as a widow; this, 
however, is incorrect. In the original she is named as " Jana Dornina Maunsell, nuper uxor 
Antonii Militis defuncta "; the gender of "defuncta " appears to have been overlooked by 
the transcriber. 

2 Lords' Journals. Vol. viii., p. 52. The appointment is also recorded in VVhitelocke's 
" Memorials of the English Affairs," p. i?o. Whitelocke also mentions the appointment of Mr. 
Prichard as Governor of Cardiff : this is probably Co'onel Edward Prichard,who married Bussy 
Mansel's sister Mary. 



Bussy Mansel's will, quoted in Clark's " Carta? ct Muni- 
mcnta," has been verified at Somerset House ; it is dated March 30, 
1699, and was proved in the same year. Bussy must then have 
been seventy-six years of age. 1 

The Westminster Abbey register records the burial 
of his son, December 23, 1684, and of his grandson, 
January 15, 1706: "in the North aisle, near the Mansells' 

The will of this last Thomas was proved on May 21, 1706, by 
Thomas, afterwards fust Lord Mansel of Margam, to whom he left 
his estates, with remainder to his sons in succession. 

There will be sume more to be said about the Mansels of 
Britton Ferry in connection with the Great Rebellion, to be dealt 
with in a subsequent chapter. 

The marriage of Mary, daughter of the first Lord Mansel, 
already alluded to, with John Ivory Talbot, Esquire, took place in 
London on July 1, 1716. Lord Mansel's residence was in Soho 
Square, at that time a fashionable quarter ; the Rev. J. M. Traherne 
supplies the menu of the wedding supper on the day of the marriage, 
and the dinner on the following day, with the cost —which is of some 
interest from more than one point of view, as illustrating the notions 
of the time regarding such feastings, and also the prices paid for the 
various commodities. 

1 It is remarkable that Bussy Mansel is said by Mr. G. T. Clark (in an editorial note to 
Mn. Jane Mansel's letter) and others, to have been buried at Britton Ferry on May 26, 1669. 
There is no question, however, about the will above a!!ud:d to ; it is certainly dated as described, 
and as it was proved in the same year (1699), it appears probable that Bussy was buried on 
May 26 in that year; the year 1669 may be a printer's error, which has been accepted and 
copied by several writers. An appeal to the present vicar of Britton Ferry has elicited the reply 
that similar enquiries had previously been made, but that there is no definite evidence on the 
point ; so it does not even appear to be certain that Bussy was buried at Britton Ferry, though 
it is most probable that he was. The will must, however, be accepted as proof that he died 
in 1699 : there is no other Bussy who would fit in. 

In further testimony of the survival of Bussy Mansel subsequent to the year 1669, there 
was a Warrant of Justices i-sued, July 25, 16S5, to the Governor of Chepstow Castle, for the 
release of Bussy Mansel and others, who had been arrested as " disaffected and suspicious per- 
sons." Bussy apparently adhered obstinately to his anti-Jacobite views. (See Penrice and 
Margam MSS., Third Series, p. 13, no. 1 1 37.) 

IGo /'. r :?V3 





, 1716. 

Stewed Carps 


Fricasse and marinade of chickens 


Ham pasty 



Squab pigeons in comp 1 


Scotch collips laided and :oasted sweetbread 


A forct meat pattee and pot d eggs 


Butter d Crabbs 


4 pheasants. 6 Quails 


1 1 

4 Turkey poults 


9 dishes of fruit and Sw' meats 


Coaches and porterage 


Paid M. Renaugb £25 

WEDDING DINNER, July 2, 1716. 

A Cray fish soope 



A pease soope with 2 forct ducks 


A haunch of Venison 


Four boiled chickens with a tongue 


A green goose pye 


Vealc Olives 


A skillet of beef stewed 


Surtoot of trouts 

Little pyes a la mazarine 



Cutlets a la Maintenon 

Isle of Thames Salmon 



Roasted pike 


5 Squabs. 4 ruffs. 1 larded turkey 



1 leveret. 4 pheas. 4 quailes 



Sturgeon and prawns 


Roasted lobsters 


Fryed soales 


Murrells (morells) with cream 


Ragout of sw c bread; and mush* 


Roundsefall pease 


Hartich (artichokes) Bottoms and froyd 


Nule of pistashes (a sort of cake) 


Forct oranges 


A desert of 15 dishes of fruits and sw' meats 




These festivities thus cost Lord Mansel £30 ; whether the sum 
was well laid out it is not possible to form an opinion, not knowing 
the number of the guests ; but the prices in many instances do not 

1 Arch. Camb. Series II., vol. ii., pp. 24c. 241. Mr. Traherne alludes to the wedding 
as that of Mary, daughter of Thomas Lord Mansel, to the Rev. Thomas Talbot ; but this was 
Mary's son. 


strike one as greatly below what might have been paid nowadays— 
before the war. 

John Ivory Talbot apparently received the sum of £5,000 
as marriage portion with Mary Hansel, and a subsequent addition, 
under Lord Man-el's will, of £2,990. (See Pemice and Margam MSS.,' 
Third Series, p. 18, no. 1162.) 

There are some interesting details concerning the first and 
second barons of Margam in " Historical Notices ... of West 
Gower," by the Rev. J. 1). Davies. 

Copy of a letter by Mr. Edward Hancorne of Oxwich to 
Thomas, first Lord Manse) o f Margam. with the present of a lar^e 
turbot caught on Oxwich sands. Dated August 31, 1721. 

" My Lord, 

"One of the fishermen brought here a Turbot last night, 
and it being one of the best as ever I saw, has occasioned me to send 
it to your Lordship, it being too good for any of your Lordship's 
Creatures in this part of the world, for which this my presumption I 
hope your Lordship will pardon me (for I remember some part of 
the ancient. Romans Law which was that if any common man did 
eat a mullet that did exceed 12 inches, they were "to be punished with 
death), _ from which it may be thought reasonable that we your 
Lord-hip's tenants here, ought to be lined etc. in case your Lordship 
had not the good things of this country sent to Marram. I paid 
the money to Captain Man-ell, as also I called at Feryill and gave 
Mr. Phillips whatever your Lordship sent him bv me ; my brother 
Mansell when I was last horn home talked at a great rate of his 
non referring his concerns to any man. 1 am afraid in a short time 
he will disown a supreme power, or that (there ?) is any mortal that 
can stop his pleasure of hunting and betting in these parts etc." 1 

Concerning this Mr. Edward Llancorne, and his " brother 
Mansell," there is some interesting information in certain of the 
manuscripts preserved at Margam Abbey, as follows : 

" Statement of the case between Thomas Mansel, Elizabeth 
Mansel, wife of Edward Hancorne, and Katherine Mansel, wife of 
William Frampton, children of Thomas Mansel, senior, respecting 

1 " Historical Notices of the Parishes of Peruke, etc.," by J. D. Davies. Pt. iv., p. 327. 


LORD MAXSEL, ob. ,74;. .,-,,] 2 _, years, 


Painted b\ Alan Ramsay, i; 4 o. 

(Penrice Collection.) 


the possession of Penrice Farm. With opinion of Samuel Mead, 
Counsel, 18 May 1721." : 

" The case stated concerning the following matter : 27 Dec, 
1669. Sir Edward Mansel, in consideration of £200 paid by Thomas 
Mansel, by indenture granted to him Penrice Castle Farm with 
appurtenances, valued at £30 yearly rent, to hold during life at 20/- 
yearly rent. By virtue of this deed Thomas Mansel entered, and 
having afterwards two daughters, Elizabeth and Katherine, and a 
son Thomas, by Elizabeth Thomas, his housekeeper, which he owned 
as his natural children, he came to an agreement with Sir Edward 
Mansel to add the lives of the said Thomas and Elizabeth in the said 
farm, for £100. With subsequent proceedings relating to the 
premises ; and the opinion of William Peere Williams, a chancery 
conveyancer, thereon. 29 July, 1721." " 

From these documents it would appear that Edward Han- 
corne — who was apparently agent to Lord Mansel— married Eliza- 
beth, natural daughter of one Thomas Mansel, who became tenant 
of Penrice Castle farm in or about 1669. The " brother Mansel " 
alluded to in Hancorne's letter must have been Thomas Mansel, 
junior, natural son of Thomas the elder. 

There is another deed which serves to throw some light upon 
this matter, though it appears 10 clash in some particulars with the 
cases above cited. 

" A deed containing a declaration of trust by Edward Han- 
corne of Pitt, co. Glamorgan, ' touching the £500 mortgage upon 
sundry lands in cos. Glamorgan and Brecon, assigned to him by the 
Hon. Christopher Mansel Esq., which is to be a provision for Catherine 
Mansel and Mary Mansel, the two reputed natural daughters of 
Thomas Lord Mansel by Mrs. Catherine Thomas of Margam.' 
6 Dec. 1722. Signed and sealed by Edward Hancorne and Lord 
Mansel." 3 

Here is a formal acknowledgment by Lord Mansel that he 
was the " reputed " father of two children by Catherine Thomas of 

1 Penrice and Margam MSS. Series IV., pt. ii., p. 515, no. 2452. 

1 Ibid., no. 3793. 

' Ibid., pt. i., p. 76, no. 6544. 


Margam; but they are named Katherine and Mary, and their 
mother's Christian name is given as Catherine, in place of Elizabeth. 
These discrepancies, however, are not of sufficient importance to 
discount seriously the obvious deduction that Hancorne's wife was 
actually a daughter of Lord Mansel. There was frequently great 
carelessness in the matter of Christian names in such documents at 
that time, and the qualifying participle " reputed " carries no weight 
against the assumption ; Lord Hansel's signature to the deed must 
be accepted as testimony to his acknowledgment of parentage. 

The date, December 27, 1669, given in the " case stated " 
above, apparently as that on which the indenture between Sir 
Edward Mansel and Thomas was executed, raises another point. 
Thomas, afterwards first Lord Mansel, was at that time only about 
two years of age, and consequently could not be the Thomas therein 
mentioned ; unless the year, 1669, has been wrongly transcribed from 
the original document. Probably it should read 1699; but the 
original is not now accessible. 

There is another document in the catalogue bearing upon 
the matter, which is labelled only " early iSth Century." It runs 
as follows : 

" Draft award by Thomas, Lord Mansel, Baron of Margam, 
in the matter of the differences between Thomas Mansel of Penrice, 
co. Glamorgan, gentleman, and Edward Hancome, Elizabeth his 
wife, Wm, Frampton of Swansea, and Katherine his wife, respecting 
the right and title to Penrice Farm." > 

Here Thomas Mansel, " gentleman," is obviously the brother 
of Katherine and Elizabeth, alluded to in the document first quoted 
above, and, by inference, the natural son of Lord Mansel. 

This is all that can be made of the episode ; apparently 
Christopher Mansel, half-brother to this Thomas and his sisters, 
intervened at one time on their behalf. The marriage of the agent 
or steward of the estate with the natural daughter of his employer 
is a curious and unusual— perhaps an unique— incident. 

Hancorne adds in a postscript : "I called at Britton Ferry 
to see Mr. Burroughs who was very ill in the gout but as soon as I 

Penrice and Margim MSS. Series IV., pt. ii., 

p. 314, no. 5445. 



told him of the great mortification which was like to in . . . family 
he recovered strangely, and I believe another such piece of news 
would have made a thorough cure of him." 

Mr. Burroughs may have been the agent at Britton Ferry, 
which was held at that time by Lord Mansel, in accordance with the 
will of Thomas Mansel, above referred to. The imminence of a 
" great mortification " presumably threatening the family of his 
employer appears to be an unusual agent in the cure of gout ; but, 
as Mr. Weller senior reminded Mr. Pickwick, it is an ailment arising 
from too much ease and comfort. The impending mortification may 
have been the marriage of Lord Mansel 's daughter, Martha, alluded 
to in Dr. Stratford's letter to Edward Harley, quoted above. She 
was not married in 171S. as there is a letter from her to her father, 
transcribed by Mr. Davies, in that year, signed with her maiden 
name — an exceedingly " dutiful " letter, almost priggish in its 
submissive precision. 

Mr. Davies also gives some details relative to the allowance to 
be made to Thomas, second Lord Mansel, during his minority. It 
appears that during his sojourn at Christ Church College, Oxford, he 
was in the first instance allowed £400 a year. His guardians were 
his mother — then Mrs. Blackwood — the Hon. Bussy Mansel (his 
uncle), John Dawney and John Talbot, Esqrs. Mr. Davies tells us 
that his stepfather, John Blackwood, was objected to as a guardian 
by his near relatives, on the ground that he (Blackwood) was a 
Scotchman, and also that his affairs were in a somewhat embarrassed 
condition. This letter was found upon closer examination to be 
untrue ; but the disability of Mr. Blackwood's Scots nationality 
was apparently permitted to stand — not very greatly to the credit 
of the Mansels ; one would imagine that a Scotsman would make as 
good a guardian as anyone else. 

It appears from a schedule prepared, upon application from 
the young lord for an increased allowance, that the margin remaining 
for clothes, linen, and personal expenses was deemed inadequate by 
his lordship ; which contention was confirmed by Robert Holford, 
a Master in Chancery appointed by the Lord Chancellor to deal with 
the matter. The schedule runs as follows ; it is of some interest, as 



illustrating the allowances, etc., considered suitable for a young 
nobleman at college at that period. 

Mr. Ffawlkner the Governor's yearly salary 

loo o 

His diet and Washing 


Dr. Ffranshaw his Lordship's Tutor, year!) 

r salary 


Mr. Keith his sub-tutor's salary 

10 10 

A footman's Wages, clothing and Diet 


The Keeping of two Horses 


Chamber Rent 


A Servitor's salary 


Commons in the College 


T p.undress 



5 c 



So that if the maintenance be incre:sed tc 

hundred pounds yearly his Lordship 

will have 

left for clothes linen and personal 




500 o o 
Examined R. H. 

Mr. Robert Hoi ford's examination of this document would 
appear, however, to have been somewhat perfunctory, for he did not 
take the trouble to check the addition. As a matter of fact, the 
expenses only amount to £345 ios., so that Lord Mansel would 
have, under the former allowance, £54 ios., and with the £500 
allowance £154 ios. for these incidental expenses. However, it was 
not by any means wildly extravagant for a youth of his position ; 
and let us hope that he contrived to elude the wiles of the Oxford 
tradesmen, and avoided the too frequent accumulation of " college 

Subsequently, having completed his studies at the university, 
it was deemed advisable that Lord Mansel should, as was customary, 
make the " grand tour " on the continent ; whereupon the Lord 
Chancellor was again appealed to, and an allowance of £1,200 a 
year was sanctioned ; it was stated by the guardians that Lord 
Mansel had an estate of £4,000 per annum and upwards. 1 

The manner in which the Mansel estates passed to the Talbots 
requires some comment. 

1 " Historical Notices of the Parishes of Penrice, Oxwich, and Nicholaston, in the Rural 
Deanery of West Gower," by J. D. Davies. Part iv., pp. 327, 328, 350, 331, 332. 33 s - 

John Ivory Talbot. Born 1672. Married Mary Mansel, daughter of 
1st Lord Mansel in 1716. (Perake Collection.) 

[face p. 40 


Christopher, Lord Mansel, after his accession to the title and 
estates in January, 1744, made a will, dated May 17 in that year, 
in which, after providing for the payment of his debts, etc., in the 
usual terms, he bequeathed all his real estate to his brother Bussy, 
for the term of his natural life ; then to the Rev. Thomas Talbot, son 
of his brother-in-law, John Ivory Talbot, and his heirs male ; failing 
such heirs, to the first son of John Talbot, brother of Thomas, and 
his heirs ; failing such heirs, to the other sons of John Talbot suc- 
cessively, in precedence of age. Lord Mansel also left £3,000 to 
Robert Marsham, Lord Ruinney, in trust for Mary, daughter of John 
Blackwood, Esq. 1 Theie are other legacies which are not of interest. 
The will was proved May 2S, 1745. 

The Talbots thus inherited the Mansel estates indirectly by 
marriage, and directly through testamentary decree — a fact which is 
perhaps not always recognised. Had Christopher, Lord Mansel left 
his real estate to Bussy Mansel and his heirs absolutely, it would have 
gone presumably, as in the case of Britton Ferry, to the Yernons, 
and ultimately to the Villiers, Earls of Jersey. 

Lady Elizabeth (or Betty) Hervey, first wife of Bussy, Lord 
Mansel, was daughter of John Hervey, of Ickworth, Suffolk, by his 
second marriage with Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Thomas Felton. 
Hervey was created Earl of Bristol on the accession of George I., 
in 1714. 

By this second marriage the Earl of Bristol had no less than 
sixteen children, of whom Lady Betty was the eleventh. 

The Herveys came into possession of the manor of Ickworth 
through the marriage of Jane, sole heiress of Henry Drury, the 
former possessor, with Thomas Hervey, who died before 1470. 
Jane died before 1475. 

Various members of the family of Hervey have been prominent 
as statesmen, etc. John, eldest son of Sir William (1G16-1679) was 

1 This was the second Baron Romney ; the first married Elizabeth, elder daughter and 
co-heir of Sir Cloudesiey Shovell, whose sister married Christopher Lord Mansel's brother 
Robert, and afterwards John Blackwood, as already recorded. The Rev. J. D. Davits, alluding 
to this will, says : " Christopher, Lord Mansel, however, entaiLd the estates on his son-in-law, 
the Rev. Thomas Talbot "—an extraordinary slip ; on the opposite page is a sketch pedigree, 
setting forth tie undoubted fact that Christopher died without issue. 



a favourite of Charles II., and on the Restoration was appointed 
treasurer to the queen. Burnet, in his " History of my Own Time," 
relates how Hervey — who was M.P. for Hythe — voting upon one 
occasion adversely to the king's wishes, was afterwards severely 
rebuked by Charles. Next day, however, he voted in accordance 
with the royal desire. " You were not against me to-day," said the 
king that evening. " No, sir," replied Hervey, " I was against my 
conscience to-day " — a very pretty rejoinder, which Burnet tells us 
was " so gravely delivered, that the king seemed pleased." The 
consciences of kings' favourites have suffered severely in all ages ; but 
the bald statement of the fact to the monarch's face is a rare incident. 

John, eldest son of the first Earl of Bristol— commonly known 
as Lord Hervey, as he died before his father— was a very well-known 
character. He was addicted to the writing of verses, and was 
member for Bury St. Edmunds in 1725. He joined with William 
Pulteney (afterwards Earl of Bath) in opposition to Walpole ; but 
upon the adoption of Walpole as his minister by George II., Hervey 
found it convenient to change sides, and was granted a pension of 
£1,000 a ycuv. Hervey 's pen got him into trouble with Pulteney, 
and they fought a duel, without damage on either side. He also had 
a deadly feud with Pope the poet, probably owing to their rivalry 
for the favours of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu. 

Lady Betty, who married Bussy, Lord Mansel, was a great 
beauty, and also, if we may accept the testimony of her brother, 
Lord Hervey, a very admirable character. 

There are many Hervey monuments in Ickworth church, and 
among them is the following, the panegyric in verse being written 
by Lord Hervey : 

" Here lieth interred the Lady Elizabeth 

Wife of the Hor.ble Bussy Mansel, 1 

And daughter of John Earl of Bristol, 

Who died the 3rd Septr 1727. 

Vive pius : moriere pius : cole sacra colentem : 

Mors gravis a templis in cava busta trahet." 

" Beneath the covering of this little stone 
Lie the poor shrunk yet dear remains of one 

1 Bussy Man;el did not succeed to the barony until 1744, seventeen years after Lady 
Bettj-'s death. 

Died .6 November. 1744. 


With merit humble, and with virtue fair, 
With knowledge modest, and with wit sincere. 
Upright in all the 5ocial paths of life. 
The friend, the daughter, sister, and the wife ! 
So just in disposition of her soul, 
Nature left reason nothing to control : 
Firm, pious, patient, affable of mind, 
Happy in life, and yet in death resigned. 
Just in the zenith of those golden days 
When the mind ripens ere the form decays, 
The hand of Fate untimely cut her thread, 
And left the world to weep that virtue fled, 
Its pride when living, and its grief when dead." 

A very beautiful epitaph ; and who would ungenerously 
question its truth, or murmur " de mortuis nil nisi bonum " ? 
Bussy Mansel was obviously supremely fortunate in his first marriage, 
though it left him childless. 

The present mansion at Ickworth Park was commenced about 
the year 1792, by Frederick Augustus, fourth Earl of Bristol, and 
Bishop of Deny in Ireland. He had taken holy orders, probably 
not expecting that, by the death of his two brothers without heirs, 
he would succeed to the earldom. It is said that he visited the crater 
of Vesuvius when a violent eruption was imminent, and being 
severely mauled by a falling stone, accepted the incident as a hint 
to study volcanic phenomena ! 

The mansion at Ickworth Park is a remarkable building ; the 
centre portion is a huge oval construction, one hundred and twenty 
by one hundred and six feet in plan, with a domed summit rising to 
the height of one hundred and five feet. From this centre two 
quadrantal wings extend some two hundred feet on either hand, 
joining a straight portion at either extremity of the south 

The mansion contains many very valuable works of art, 
including a large number of reliefs illustrative of classical subjects, 
from the designs of John Flaxman. 1 

The passing of the Mansel estates to Miss Emily Charlotte 
Talbot, the present owner, is clearly indicated in the pedigree. 

1 " History of Suffolk : the Thingoe Hundred," by John Gage ; pp. 298 et stq. 


Eich.vbd Maun- ~ Lucy.dau 

Ui ,,,' 

if Lord - Lady Barb? ra.dau. 
ago o! Scu Nov. I of William (Vil- 
Castlo liersi 2nd Furl of 

Jers e v;w:dofSir 
sabel. dau. I Walter BlackeM 

1 ..:.-,- ~- 
P-". ■,arbara 

Sir Uich. Mac 

Elizabeth, a 

Sf ■ J— 

Cccilv, dan. ( 

Philip Hansel of 
Oxwich and P< n- 


"William Davcn - Lady Elizabeth 
port Talbot, of I r-'ox Strangw&ys 
Laycock Abbey 

Jfc-urv Fox Talbot 

'M.Ira- Isabella CUierL-ie, = Fart: rd FmnkU 
Editl . : c-ns ob. b. 1804 I 

(Kyne) of K 

[ IS1 

iJa. = h.o. 

Hansel = M.C. F. Allen 

5b. 1S62 Edwin, ob. 1K4 


in 1510 


Sik Edward Ma: 

SEL, Of w ■ 


paui (b. 1031, 

Dhu D b 

)urt ib. 1. I 

I -ily ■'■'•-• ~--n Tilbot Dill- = Jul 
-t-t. J.K. of ,,.., r.v^lyn, 
E u I of -. n^ %; -t M P t 

b. 1S39 = Hen. Crichton WiHiamMan- Eli 
Bel.ob.lS8d 1: 

Mary Lacy =- ES. Hon. H. O. 


L-: .: = , .'., 
M-ri., :..', 

Hus'n Christophe 

Sir Lewis m insel 
of Oxwic'n, Peu- 
riee md VI r m 
(-.6. 1638) 

Lady Eliz 
o Henrj 

sel of Ox rich, 
Pi aril ■ ■ : M ir- 

Martba da 


5m Thomas Mak- 
3EI ci Baron 
Har.ael of Mar 
gam. Jan. 1, 1712 
■ • 
10, 17231 


Sib Hr 


age ol Scurlage 

Isabel, dan. and 

Kicn. Hatts- 
xl of Oxwicli 

= CVcily, ,.b>u. cf Sir 

*m.rp SIaxsel of 
Oxwicb and Pon- 

Editb. dau. of Sir 

Sir. Rhys Mansel 
of Oswicb a;il 


■■x a Lady Elizabeth 

sex. of Oi-Tich, 
Penriccfccd Mar- 


U - 

gz^:. Jan. 1, 1712 

10. 1725! 

Mariba, dau. £ T>d 
beir f Francis 


Tbos.Tii. :.-a 

Jta U,, w 

pher Lord Man- 

rThereza.b. Janofa 

Chiodobe Max- Olive Emma, oo. Bertha Isabella, = John Fletcher of Emtlt Cham otie 

si [,t.ilboi,b». liOl od.1913 I fenltown Hall, Taiboi iv ntr 

l l ™ Haddingtonshire holder of till 

:.vy =-- Gny Spiers of I'.rnily = George C 

I.a.H" Hf.ty Ilarrey. - Bu 

, u U»r>-_ Lucy 

L'^w-i.port, D.D. 

William Davcn- ~ Lady 




1 Llewellyn, b. 

SB'* *S 

3, d. 


d. Charles ,i 


1 ton,' d. 19H 


as Hansel 

= M.C.F. Al 

en Jane, oo. 1S6J 

Edwin, ob. 1664 

Three flaugbt 


Tiiareza Mary, « Nevil Story Maske- = Julia Einma, b. 1S39 - Hen. Cr. 

1 ivr^.M 1' .K K S., ^vj Llevrelvn, 
o'f basset Down Bart. M.P. ' 


Mary Lacy ^ Kt. Hon. E. 0. 

i M 1 ■.'■'••'.: ...'■■' 

. Charlotte = Sn 

Hr.:;b Christoph? 


Lacock (or Laycock) Abbey, county Wilts, the property of 
the Talbots, was founded in 1232 by Ela, dowager Countess of 
Salisbury, widow of Longspe (familiar to readers of Shakespeare as 
" Longsword "), the natural son of Henry II. by Fair Rosamond. 
Tanner, in " Notitia Monastica," states that, on April 16 of that 
year, this pious lady laid the foundation of Lacock Abbey, for 
nuns, in the forenoon, and a monastery for Carthusian monks 
at Henton, Somerset, in the afternoon ; the exact position of 
Henton is not clear, but Lacock is some eight or nine miles from 
the nearest point on the Somerset boundary: Countess Ela was 
evidently a very energetic lady. She was afterwards Abbess of 

After the dissolution of the monasteries, Lacock Abbey 
was purchased, in 1541, by Sir William Sharrington (or Shering- 
ton) ; he was succeeded by his brother Henry, one of whose two 
daughters and co-heirs married John Talbot of Salwarpe, county 
Worcester. 1 

In an account of the life and works of one Sanderson Miller, 
an architect of the eighteenth century, there is a good deal about 
Lacock Abbey, in the rebuilding of which Miller played an important 

In 1754 he wrote : " I believe there is not a religious house 
in England better preserved ; it has been inhabited ever since the 
Dissolution by Sir Wm. Sharington (who. by the way, was the man 
who made restitution to King Edward VI. on account of Latimer's 
sermon) and the Talbots. There are many curiosities here, par- 
ticularly Magna Charta and Henry III.'s Great Seal quite fair and 
compleat, and directed at the back to the Sheriff of Wilts, who at 
that time was Ela the Foundress of Lacock, 2 and there it has been 

1 Sir William Sharrington was vice-treasurer of the Mint at Bristol, and appears to have 
misused his office in the perpetration of extensive frauds, to his own great enrichment. He 
persisted in the coining of ; ' testons," or shillings, two-thirds of which were alloy, in spite of 
official prohibition, ar.d made about £4,000 in three y~:-j- by the clipping and shearing of coins, 
falsifying the books of the Mint to conceal his transactions. He was at length detected and 
arrested ; but, throwing himself on the king's (Edward VI.) mere}-, was ultimately pardoned 
and restored. He is said to have been described by Latimer in a sermon as " an honest gentilman 
and one that God icveth " ; upon which he made restitution of some property ! 

* This is confirmed in Hoare's " History of Modern Wiltshire." 



ever since. There are the old ledger books of the Nunnery and the 
nuns' great pot, as big as that at Warwick ; it holds 4 gallons 
less, viz., 92 gallons. Mr. Talbot has set it upon a pedestal 
in his garden (an inscription shows it was made at Mechlin in 1500) 
and it is not a bad conceit. He says the bell metal is worth £80. 
There is a great salting-trough which belonged to the nuns? 16 
feet long and 4 feet wide, etc. But what pleased me best was a 
noble picture of Charles I. by Vandyke at full length with Sir T. 
Warwick as a page. He has another picture of the King's family 
just like your brother's little one, and a fine Henry VIII bv 
Holbein." 1 " ' 

Sanderson Miller was employed by Mr. Talbot to rebuild the 
great hall, and upon sundry other works of embellishment, etc., about 
the abbey ; he appears to have been a very successful and popular 
architect, but by no means a genius, as some of his suggestions 
and designs carried out at the instance of Mr. Talbot clearly demon- 
strate. The great hall at Lacock Abbey is not, at least exteriorly, 
a building which would be expected to add to the fame of any 

The ancient treasures and curiosities mentioned by Miller 
remain at Lacock Abbey to this day. 

It will be recollected that Robert Fitzhamon, when he 
conquered Glamorgan, bestowed upon Sir William Esterling, or 
Stradling, the manor and castle of St. Donat's, as a reward for his 
services in the Conquest. 3 

The Stradlings, as will be seen in the pedigree, twice inter- 
married with the Mansels of Margam, and the widow of Sir Edward 
Stradling likewise married a Mansel. 

St. Donat's lies on the south coast of Glamorgan, about fifteen 
miles south-east from Cardiff. Samuel Lewis, writing in the year 
1849, says— "The castle is situated on the sea-coast, and is an 
extensive pile of building, occupying a spacious quadrangle, over the 
gate leading into which are the arms of the Stradlings ; part of it is 

1 "An Eighteenth-Century Correspondence," edited by Lilian Dickina and Mary 
Stanton ; p. 299. 

3 See Vol. i., p. 2a. 


habitable, and in the later style of English architecture. The park 
lies to the west of it ; the gardens are on the south, between the 
walls of the castle and the sea, and are formed on terraces descending 
to the shore of the Bristol Channel, of which they command a fine 
view. Within the park is a quadrangular watch tower of lofty 
elevation and picturesque appearance, which, according to local 
tradition, was erected for observing vessels in distress, not for the 
purpose of rendering assistance, but with a view to take immediate 
possession of the wreck. In the neighbourhood is a cave of con- 
siderable extent and grandeur, accessible at low water." 1 

Lewis further states that : " The lordship of St. Donat's 
was given by Fitzhamon to Sir William le Esterlmg, or Stradling, 
in the possession of whose descendants it continued without in- 
terruption for more than six hundred years, until the decease of Sir 
Edward (Thomas ; ') Stradling, Bart., at Montpelier, in 173S." 

Mr. George T. Clark, however, entirely dissents from this 
account ; he says : " St. Donat's, which has long been connected 
with the Stradling name, probably belonged, soon after the entrance 
of Fitzhamon, to the family of Mareross, whose fee bordered on St. 
Donat's." 2 

He then assigns possession of St. Donat's to the De Alweia, 
or Haweiy family, of Somerset until, in the reign of Edward III., 
Joan, daughter and heir of Thomas de Hawey, married Sir Peter 
Stradling. Mr. Clark does not give references for these various 
statements, but says, speaking of this Sir Peter, " the first of the 
name appearing in Glamorgan records." 

This may be very true, inasmuch as the records to which Mr. 
Clark had access contained no earlier information concerning the 
connection of the Stradling family with St. Donat's ; but it is im- 
possible to ignore the testimony already adduced 3 as to the bestowal 
of St. Donat's by Robert Fitzhamon upon Sir William Stradling, after 

1 "Topographical Dictionary of Wales," by Samuel Lewis. Vol. i., p. 316. 

a " Limbus Patrum Morganjje," by Geo. T. Clark ; p. 434. Mareross is about five 
miles westward from St. Donat's. 

• See Vol. i., ut ju/ra. 

ELIZABETH M.4NSEL, daughter of Sir Edward Mansei. Bart. Born 1674. 
Married Sir Edward Stiadling. (Penrice Collection.) 

\Jacc p. 4S 


the conquest of Glamorgan ; nor is it possible to form any con- 
jecture as to the ground of Mr. Clark's opinion that it " probably 
belonged, soon after the entrance of Fitzhamon, to the family of 
Marcross " ; it appears far more probable that it belonged to Sir 
William Stradling. 

However, the intermediate steps of the family pedigree are 
somewhat obscure ; there is no doubt that St. Donat's belonged to 
Sir Edward Stradling early in the fourteenth century, when his name 
appears in State Records as " of St. Donat's," and thenceforward the 
descent is clear. 

The Stradlings were very prominent in Glamorgan for many 
generations, all successively holding important offices, as sheriffs, 
escheators, etc. ; three were Knights of the Sepulchre, and one Sir 
Edward was knighted in the church of Tournay, under the royal 
banner, by Henry VIII. 1 

Sir Thomas, son of this Edward, was brought into somewhat 
prominent notice by reason of his staunch adherence to his old 
faith, and his strong opposition to the assumption by the sovereign 
of the headship of the Church in England. His attitude in this 
respect was emphasised by the lively interest he displayed in an 
incident which occurred, or was alleged to have occurred, in his own 
grounds at St. Donat's, in 1559. 

A large ash-tree was broken by a gale, and it is stated that 
there was a remarkable semblance of a cross displayed on the face of 
the fracture. This is by no mean? an impossible or even a very 
improbable story ; the growth of successive layers of fibre in a tree 
frequently assumes, upon cutting or breaking the trunk, a fantastic 
form, which ma}- readily be likened to some more or less familiar 
object. Probably most people are aware of the form of a squat, 
sturdy oak-tree which is displayed upon cutting through the thick 
part of the stem of a large fern. 

However, Sir Thomas, enthusiastic for his faith, hailed this 
lusus nature? as a protest against the belittling of the Cross, which 
Catholics were unjustly accused of elevating to the position of an 

1 " Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII." Vol. i., p. 676. 


idol ; and he caused pictures to be made of the cross in the trunk of 
the ash-tree— pictures which probably exaggerated the resemblance 
to the sacred Symbol. For this he was arrested and sent to the 
Tower. On June 5. 1561, he petitioned for his release ; and in 1570 
he gave his bond for his personal appearance when called upon, 1 
though there is reason to believe that he had been liberated some 
years previously. 

Sir John Stradling was one of the baronets created under 
James I., in 1611, upon the institution of that order, being fifth in 

Sir John's son Edward, successor in the title, married Mary, 
daughter of Sir Thomas Mansel, first baronet of Margam ; and Sir 
Edward Stradling, great-grandson of the above, married Elizabeth, 
daughter of Sir Edward Mansel, fourth baronet ; while Bussy Mansel 
married Katherine, daughter of Sir Hugh Perry, and widow of a 
former Sir Edward Sti aching. * 

Sir Thomas Stradling, 1710-1738, was the last of the line, 
dying unmarried at Montpellier, in the south of France. Administra- 
tion of his estate was granted, December 15, 173S, to Hon. Christopher 
Mansel and Bussy, afterwards fourth Baron Mansel, the latter 
holding the estates during his lifetime. At bis death there was a 
series of lawsuits concerning the disposition of the estates, which 
was finally decided by Act of Parliament, St. Donat's being awarded 
to Sir John la Fountaine Tyrwhit. Ii eventually passed to J. Herbert 
Williams, Esq., J. P., the present owner. 3 

1 Cal. State Papers, Dorn., 1.547-15S0 ; pp. 176, 361. 

2 There is among the Penrice and Margam MSS. the draft of a deed of settlement on 
the approaching marriage of Sir Edward Stradling with Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Edward 
Mansel ; it is dated September 3, 1694. (Third Series, p. 14, no. 1143.) 

* In Collinson's History of Somerset, vol. iii., p. 335, he says : " Sir William de Esterling, 
the first who came to England, was one of these knights who 'in 1090 attended Robert Fitz- 
Hamon, Earl of Gloucester, in his expedition into Wales against Prince Rhese, and for his services 
therein obtained of that prince (knight :) the castle and manor of St. Donat's in Glamorganshire, 
which became the principal seat of hi, descendants. Sir John his son succeeded him and . . . 
had issue Sir Maurice . . . which Sir Maurice was father of Sir Robert, who first wrote his 
name Stradling ... he had is.ue Sir Gilbert Stradling, father of Sir William, grandfather of 
Sir_ John, and great-grandfather of S.r Peter Stradling, who married the heiress of Hawey." 
This fills up some gaps, but it is somewhat vague, and no authorities are cited. 


The annexed pedigree is of interest, as showing the inter- 
marriages of the Mansel, Stradling, and Bowen families. The 
Bowens do not appear in most other pedigrees ; this one accounts 
for one of Arthur Manscl's daughters, who married Charles Bowen 
of Kettlehill, whose son married a daughter of Sir Edward Stradling, 
third baronet, and grand-daughter of Mary, daughter of Sir Thomas 
Mansel, first baronet of Margam. 1 

The Bowens were of Welsh descent, of Court House and 
Kittle (or Kettle) Hill in Gower. They had intermarried in previous 
generations with the Dawkins of Cilvrough (or Kilvrough), who were 
also connected by marriage with the Mansels of Trimsaren, as will be 
shown in due course. George Bowen, father-in-law of Elizabeth 
Mansel, married a daughter of Thomas ap William Lloyd, of 
Altycadno, whose family also intermarried with the Trimsaren 

Edward Mansel of Swansea mentions in his will— dated 
1694 — Charles, son of George Bowen of Kittle Hill ; this was, no 
doubt, the son of George Bowen and Jane Stradling, who died 
in 1 75 1, and who would at this date have been eighteen years 
of age. 

There was another Charles Bowen, of Lower Gower, who 
married Elizabeth, daughter of Wm. Price of Britton Ferry ; but not 
the sister of Jane Price, who married Arthur Mansel, unless she was 
twice married. This Charles appears among the Bowens " un- 
placed " by Mr. G. T. Clark. 3 

The pedigree is introduced for the purpose, as has already- 
been stated, of showing the Stradling-Bowen connections : the 
genealogy of the baronets and barons of Margam, as given therein, 
is obviously valueless. 

1 See Penrice and Margam Abbey Manuscript?, Second Series, p. 113. The pedigree 
apparently dates from about the middle of the eighteenth century. Bussy Lord Mansel's 
daughter, Louisa Barbara, was evidently unmarried at the time ; she was married in 1757 ; while 
the death or Charles Bov.en of Oystcrmouth is recorded in 1751. 

* " Limbus Patrum Morganiffi,". by G. T. Clark ; pp. 228, 513, 514. 


Sir Elw.rd Mansel of Mar- = Lady Jane Somerset, dau. to 
gam, Knt. 

Mari, diu. to Le 


Sir Thon 
Kilt, at 


Henry, Earl ot Worcester 
tt ot Margarn 

Jane, dau. to — Pole 
of Lincolnshire, 

Sir Lewis Mansel 
of Margam, Knt. 
and Bart. 

Elizabeth, dau. 
to Henry- 
Earl of Man- 

Arthur Mansel, 


ne, dau. and co-heir 
to Wm. Pryce of 
Britton Ferry, Esq. 


Mansel of 


Sir Thomas 


Lord Man- 

Martha, dau. Bussy Mansel, = Catherine, dau. to Elizabeth, dau. = Ciiarlfs Bowtn, 

The late Bussy, 
Lord Mansel 

to Edward 
Carne of 

lartha, dau. 
to Francis 
of the City of 
London, Esq. 

"he Lady 


dau. of 
Earl of 

of Britton 
Ferry, Esq., 

married April 
17, 1646 

Sir Hugh Perry, 
and widow of Sir 
Edward Strad- 
ling, who died 
Sept. 3, 1695 

of Arthur, 

Thomas Mansf.i 


beth, dau. and 
sole heir to Rich- 
ard Games of Pen- 
dery in Brecon- 
shire, Esq. 

of Kettlehill, 

Sir Edward Strad- = Ms 
LiNcof St. Donat's 
Castle, Bart. 

Thomas Mansel 
of Britton Ferry 
Esq., who died 

"he Honourable Miss Loui 
Barbara Mansel 

Sir Edward 
of St. Donat's 
Castle, Bart. 

= Catherine, dau. to Sir Hugh Perry, 
Knt., Alderman of London, who 
survived Sir Edward S., and 
afterwards married Mr. Bussy 
Mansel of Britton Ferry, April 
17, 1646 


George Bowen 
of Kettlehill, 

Edward Strad- 
ling, of St. 
Donat's Castle, 
Bart., born April 

The late Charlvs Bowen of Oyster- 
mouth, Esq., who died without 
issue, born Aug. 19, 1676, died July 
8, i 7S i 


Sir Edward Stradling 
of St. Donat's Castle, 
Bart., who married 
Nov. 20, 1667 

Elizabeth, dau. to 
William Hun- 

gerford of 



Sir Edward Stradling 
St. Donat's Castle, Bar 

Elizaeith, dau. to Sir 
Edward Mansel of 
Margam, Bart. 

The late Sir Thomas Stradlinc, 
Bart., who died unmarried. 



There is an old pedigree of Penrice and Mansel among the 
Margam Abbey MSS., which is here transcribed ; it is interesting 
from one point of view, namely, the spelling of the name — Mauncell 
— throughout. 

The pedigree is prefaced as follows : " Robertus Femes 
Miles dedit Maneria de Penres et Porteynon Johanni Penres et 
heredibus de corpore suo procreatis, qui quidem Johannes Penres 
habuit exitum Robertum Penres, qui habuit exitum Johannem 
Penres, qui habuit exitum Johannem Penres Militem. This is proved 
by a recorde and jugement hadde by the said John Penres knyght 
of the said maners ayenst Thomas ap Rees ap Gr., which record 
restith of record in the Chekere at Swaynsey anno XXII Ricardi 
Secundi (1398). Serene amonges the evydences y trust ye shall 
fynde the dede of entaille of the seid Robert Penres knyght to John 
his son." 


Robertus Penres = Burga uia 
(primus) Miles ejus 

. I 

Johannes Penres 


Ricardus Johannes Alicia Sibilli 

Penres Penies (soror) (soroi) 

(secundus) (tercius) 

I I 

Robertus Penres Willelmus 

(primus) Penres 


Johannes Penres 

Elizabeth Penres 

(soror) uxor 
Hugonis Mauncell 

Ricardus Mauncell 

Hopevn Penres 


Robertus Penres 


Ricardus Penres 

Johannes Penres 
Chevaler obiii 

sine entu 

Joh. Mauncell 

Willelmus Johanns* 
I Penres Penres 

Philippus Mauncell (primus) (secundus-) 

Jenkyn Mauncell 
qui nunc est * 

This pedigree was made out, as will be noticed, during the life of 
Jenkyn Mauncel, "qui nunc est " ; i.e., between about 1450 and 1510. 

1 Penrice and Margam MSS., Series II., pp. 109, 1 10, no. 549. 


Dr. William Lort Mansel, Bishop of Bristol and blaster of 
Trinity College, Cambridge, was a man very well known in his day ; 
and as he came of the Margam branch of the family it is fitting that 
some account of him should appear in the present chapter. 

There appears, however, to be some little question regarding 
Dr. Mansel's derivation. 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell (p. 20) has a footnote, with reference to 
the marriage of Hugh, second son of Jenkyn Mansel, with Jane, 
daughter of Richard Wogan of Kent, as follows : " The Rt. Rev. 
Wm. Lort Mansel, Bishop of Bristol, was most probably a descendant 
of Hugh Mansel by his wife Jane Wogan." 

This hypothesis appears to be based solely upon the fact 
that Bishop Mansel's father was William Wogan Mansel ; it may be 
dismissed as unjustifiable. 

Lieutenant Mansel- Pleydell, in his pedigree, derives Dr. 
Mansel from Philip, sixth (?) son of Sir Edward Mansel of Margam, 
but acknowledges uncertainty in respect of two steps : 

Philip Mansel 

Thomas Mansel = 


Edwafjj Mansel of Hen'y: 

Thomas Mansel 

" Thomas Mansel was probably the grandfather of William Wogan 
Mansel, of Pembroke, who married Anne, daughter of Major Roger 
Lort, Royal Welsh Fusiliers, and had issue : William Lort Mansel," 
etc, 1 

The living descendants of Bishop Mansel are, however, quite 
confident on the subject, and give his ancestry as follows (this 
pedigree is supplied by S. W. S. Mansel-Carey, Esq., of Uppingham 

pp. 251-252. 



School, a great-grandson of Bishop Mansel, who adopted the prefix 
of Mansel to his name about eleven years ago). 

Philip of Swansea, mar. his second 
cousi:i. Elizabeth, dau. of Henry and 
Dorothy .Mansel 

Thomas Mansel of Swansea, = Jane, dau. of David Gwynne of 
d. 1695 Glamorgan 


Edward of HenH 
1695, m. — , da 
— Tanner 

s, d. 
a. of 



Thomas of Penrice = 
Castle ; oh. 1704. 
Will dated 1705; 
bur. in the chan- 

= Elizabeth, dau. of 

ob. Sept. 5, 1689 ; bur 
in Penrice church 

cel of Penrice 



sel of 
rice C 

Man- = R 
Fen- 1 
astle | 

achel, dau. of 
— Ray of Ten- 
by, widow in 

= Anne, dau. of Maj. 
| Roger Lort of 

Elizabeth, m. — - Han- 
corne of Pitt, co. Gla- 


liam Wocan Mansel 

Wm. Lort 

Mansel, Bishop 

(Some collateral connections are omitted, as they are not material to 
the matter at issue.) 

The parentage of William Wogan Mansel is vouched for by 
the following entry in the Tenby register : " Wm. Wogan Mansel, 
son of Thomas Mansel, Esq. and Rachel his wife, was bapd28 March, 

The father of this Thomas is the weak link in the chain ; 
Lieutenant Mansel-Pleydell cannot vouch for him, beyond the 
probability that he was Thomas, grandson of Sir Edward of Margam. 

The above pedigree may, however, be accepted as probably 
correct, though it cannot be said to be established by adequate proof. 

In addition to the entry from the Tenby register above 
quoted, it contains the following, some of which confirm the 
pedigree : 


Mary, the wife of Alderman Ray, was buried January 7, 


Thomas Mansel, junr., was buried March 31, 1730. 

Humphrey Ray (Alderman) was buried December 13, 1738. 

Thomas Mansel, the son of Mr. Robert Mansel, and Betty his 
wife, was baptised September 24, 1744. 

Mrs. Rachel Mansel (widow) was buried March 17, 1767. 

Mr. William Mansel (doctor) was buried October 15, 1782. 

William Lort Mansel was born at Pembroke April 2. 1753 ; 
he was educated at the Gloucester Grammar School, admitted a 
pensioner at Trinity College, Cambridge, January 2, 1770, graduated 
B.A. 1774, M.A. 1777, and D.D. in 1798. His college appointments 
were : scholar, April 26, 1771 ; junior fellow, 1775 ; full fellow, 
1777 ; sub-lector secundus, 1777-8 ; lector linguse Latinae, 17S1 ; 
lector primarius, 17S2 : lector lingua? Greecse, 1783 ; junior dean, 
1782-3 and 1785 ; and catechist, April 9, 17S7. He was ordained 
June 30, 1783, was recommended by Trinity College to the Bishop of 
Ely for the sequestration of the living of Bottisham, near Cam- 
bridge ; and was presented by his college, November 6, 178S, to the 
Vicarage of Chesterton, Cambridgeshire (now incorporated in the 
borough of Cambridge). 

It is apparent, from the above list of offices held by him, that 
Mansel soon came to the front as a man of unusual capacity ; he 
was also distinguished by bis aptitude at witty and epigrammatic 
sayings, many of which have been recorded by various friends and 
admirers ; and Mansel was a man of many friends. 

Among his junior contemporaries at Trinity College were 
William Frederick, Duke of Gloucester, 1 and Spencer Perceval, 
afterwards prime minister, with whom he maintained a close friend- 
ship to the last, and who were always ready to exercise their influence 
on his behalf ; he numbered among his friends and acquaintances 
nearly all the prominent men of his time, including William Pitt. 

Mansel was a man of quick intelligence, keen observation, 

1 William Frederick (1776-1834), second duke of Gloucester, only son of William Henry, 
first Duke of Gloucester of the latest creation, who was third son of Frederick Louis, Frince of 
Wales. William Frederick married Mary, fourth daughter of George III. 


and independent mind ; also of courage and determination, of which 
the following anecdotes afford some illustration. The)- are related 
by his granddaughter, Mar)- Isabella Peacock. 

" It was quite early in Dr. Mansel's married life, that one 
evening, when he was sitting with his young wife in the Vicarage at 
Chesterton, a shot was fired through the window, happily without 
hurting either of them. Dr. Mansel exclaimed. ' Those fellows 
came from Cambridge, and will go back there,' and at once, not- 
' withstanding his wife's entreaties, he started off in pursuit. He 
soon came up with two men. and heard them say that they had 
given the parson a fright, etc. Dr. Mansel instantly collared them, 
and with one in his right hand and one in his left he marched them 
into Cambridge, and left them safely lodged in the lock-up there. 
The men were so cowed by his coolness and determination that they 
made no resistance. Another anecdote from the same source shows 
the fearlessness and strength of his character. Once when there was 
a ' town and gown ' row, or an election riot, some person or persons 
who had excited the anger of the mob took refuge within the gates 
of Trinity College. The crowd of roughs were soon raging before the 
closed gates, and demanded that the offending party should be 
given up to them. This was of course refused, and they began 
battering the doors and threatened to beat them in if their demand 
was not at once complied with. In the meanwhile Dr. Mansel, who 
was then Master, was with the Fellows and others of the college 
inside, and vainly tried what persuasion would do ; but as the mob 
only became more furious, he determined to go out and try and 
reason with them. This the Fellows strenuously opposed, saying 
he would undoubtedly be killed or injured, and they kept on urging 
him to stay within the gates, and not expose himself to the fury of 
the mob. At last he got angry, and commanded them on their 
obedience to him, as Master of the College, to desist. Then he 
ordered the porter to open the small gate and let him out, immediately 
bolting it behind him. This was done, and alone he faced the excited 
crowd, perfectly fearless and undaunted. By his eloquence or 
powers of persuasion, after a short time he got them to disperse 
peaceably and quietly, and moreover they were so pleased with 


his bravery that they cheered him very heartily as they went 

Certainly, a very unusual success with a " town and gown " 
or electioneering mob, who are not much addicted to listening quietly 
to such an appeal. From several allusions, it appears that Mansel 
had a powerful and resonant voice, which always carries weight, 
whether in a public ovation or upon such an occasion as the above. 

Of Dr. Hansel's originality, and independence of the shackles 
of ordinary usage, the following entry in the register at Bottisham 
affords an example : 

S-iame Jenyns, in the 83rd year of 

his age. 

What his literary character was 

The world hath already judged for itself ; 

But it remains for his parish-minister 

to do his duty 

by declaring 

That while he registers the burial of 

Soame Jenyns, 

he regrets the loss of one of the most 

Amiable of men, 

And one of the truest Christians. 

To the parish of Bottisham he is an 

irreparable loss. 

He was buried in this Church, December 27 (1787) 

near midnight, 

By William Lort Mansel, sequestrator ; 

Who thus transgresses the common forms 

of a Register, 

Merely because he thinks it to be 

The most solemn and lasting method 

of recording to posterity, 

That the finest understanding 

has been united 

to the best heart. 1 

The writing of the entry in the form of a monumental in- 
scription, by way of emphasising its import, is quite characteristic 
of Dr. Mansel. Why the burial should have been performed near 
midnight does not appear ; perhaps it is another instance of Hansel's 

Of Dr. Hansel's witty sallies and epigrams many specimens 
are extant. 

1 "The tnglish Portion of the Library of the Venble Francis Wrangham " ; p. 296. 
Soame Jenyns (1704-17S7), of Bottisham Hall, a miscellaneous writer of note in his time. 


He had not been long resident at Trinity College when, 
entering the rooms of a friend who was absent, he saw upon the 
table a paper containing the first two lines of what was perhaps 
intended to be a sentimental effusion in verse : 

"The sun's perpendicular heat 
Illumined the depths of the sea ; " 

Mansel took up the pen and completed the stanza thus : 

" The fishes, beginning to sweat, 
Cried Dam." it, how hot we shall be ! " J 

When Dr. Watson, who had at one time been a tutor of 
Trinity, was made Bishop of Llandaff, a worthy publican in Cam- 
bridge, who had for his sign " Bishop Blaise" — whoever he may 
have been — upon the promotion of Dr. Watson substituted his head 
for that of Blaise. Mansel appears to have had some grudge against 
Watson, and perpetrated the following somewhat ill-natured 
epigram : 

" Two of a trade can ne'er agree, 
Xo proverb ere was juster ; 
They've ta'cn down Bishop Blaise, you see, 
And put up Bishop Bluster." 

Hansel's witticisms, it must be admitted, were most com- 
monly displayed at the expense of some person whom he exposed 
more or less to ridicule. 

When Dr. Jowett, Master of Trinity Hall, had an unsightly 
angle at the entrance fenced off and planted with flowers, but 
subsequently, finding the little garden was the subject of some 
ridicule, laid the space with gravel, Mansel was down upon him as 
follows : 

" A little garden little Jowett made, 
And fenced it with a little palisade ; 
Because this garden caused a little talk, 
He changed it to a little gravel walk. 
And now, if more you'd know of little Jowett, 
This little garden won't a little show it." 

1 These four lines were somehow familiar to young naval officers forty or fifty years ago. 
They had not the least idea of the origin of the verse, but perhaps it appealed to their nautical 
sense of humour. It was not infrequently recited, perhaps during a specially hot, glaring calm 
at sea — or at other times, <! propos to nothing in particular. Possibly it is stiil in vogue in the 
Navy, though the experience of rolling about in a hot calm, with flapping canvas, has bee me 
a thing of the past. 


One day Dr. Manse] met two undergraduates of his college, 
who passed him without paying the respect due to their master by- 
raising their caps. He stopped them, and enquired if they knew 
him ; they flippantly replied that they really did not. " How long 
have you been in college, then ? " he said. " Only eight days," they 
answered. " That accounts for your blindness," the master replied ; 
" puppies never see till they are nine days old." 

Upon one occasion, however, a scholar of Trinity "scored" 
off the master very neatly. The well-kept grass of the quadrangle 
was supposed to be sacred, and forbidden to undergraduate feet. 
Mansel often observed, from the window of the Lodge, a certain 
gentleman persistently disregard this law, and one day he threw up 
the window at which he always sat, and hailed the culprit. " Sir, I 
never look out of my window but 1 see you walking across the grass 
plot." " My lord." replied the offender, promptly, " I never walk 
across the grass plot but J see you looking out of your window." 

Such an audacious reply might well have got the under- 
graduate into serious trouble ; but Mansel was too good a sports- 
man to resent such a ready thrust ; he shut down the window, 
convulsed with laughter, and the young man, no doubt, went on his 
way rejoicing. It is not everyone who has the chance of scoring off a 
bishop, or the readiness and audacity to avail himself of it. 

The bishop, on another occasion, appears to have received a 
rebuke, perhaps not unmerited, for a somewhat arrogant assertion 
of his nobility— if the story be true. It is related by the late J. \V. 
Clark, of Cambridge. " Sir Busick Harwood, Professor of Anatomy, 
between whom and Mansel there had been a feud of long standing, 
gave a breakfast in the garden of his house, near Emmanuel College. 
Being anxious to show every consideration to the great man, he 
placed a young nobleman, who was at the time an undergraduate of 
Trinity, at the same table, unconscious or oblivious of the fact that 
it was sacrilege to bring a human being so low in the social scale of 
the University ' between the wind and his nobility.' Before break- 
fast was half over Mansel got up suddenly, ordered his carriage, and 
took his leave. Next morning Lady Harwood entreated her husband 
to go to Trinity Lodge and enquire whether he was ill. or whether 


they had unconsciously offended him in any way. Sir Busick found 
Mansel in his stud}'. ' I have come, my Lord, on the part of myself 

and Lady Harwood. to enquire ' began the professor. Before 

he could finish his sentence, Mansel thundered out, ' Sir Busick, I am 
a peer of the realm — God knows how unworthy ! ' ' God knows, and 
so do I,' said the other, and vanished." 

According to the Dictionary of National Biography (under 
Harvvood) the quarrel between Sir Busick and Dr. Mansel arose in 
connection with some portraits in water-colour. The professor, 
apparently, was always pestering his friends to sit to one Harding, 
whose small portraits were exhibited in Harwood's room, six or 
eight in a frame — an irritating kind of fad, certainly. The quarrel 
between the bishop and the professor appears to have had the 
unexpected result of the despatch of a challenge from the latter to 
Sir Isaac Pennington, the Regius Professor of Physic, who, however, 
took no notice of it. The bearer of Sir Busick's defiance was an 
undergraduate, and naturally the incident did not long remain a 

Lord Byron, who was at Trinity taking his degree in 1S0S, 
wrote, in " Thoughts suggested by a College Examination," the 
following lines in allusion to Dr. Mansel : 

" High in the midst, surrounded by his peers, 
Magnus his ample front sublime appears ; 
Placed on his chair of state, he seems a god, 
While sophs, and freshmen tremble at his nod. 
As all around sit wrapped in speechless gloom, 
His voice in thunder shakes die sounding dome, 
Denouncing dire reproach to luckless fools 
Unskilled to plod in mathematic rules." 

Lord Byron thought fit to affix a note to this passage : " No 
reflection is here intended against the person mentioned under the 
name of Magnus. Indeed, such an attempt could only recoil upon 
myself, as the gentleman is now as much distinguished by his 
eloquence as he was in former days for wit and conviviality." 

Dr. Mansel was, however, something a good deal more than a 

1 If the bishop actually made use of the expression attributed to him, " I im a peer of 
the realm," he displayed a lamentable ienorar e t hi wn status. !■"■: . . c peers ; they 
arc " Spiritual Lords of England." 1 rather tends to discount die credibility of tin anecdote, 


dealer in epigrams ; he was a good scholar and linguist, and a kind 
and wise dispenser of such patronage as came in his way. 

He was appointed Master of Trinity College by Pitt, upon 
Perceval's recommendation, on May 25, 1798, in order, it is stated, 
that his strong discipline might correct some abuses which had crept 
in ; and on this occasion he was warmly backed up by his friend and 
former pupil, the Duke of Gloucester, as the following letter shows : 

" Canterbury, 

May S, 1798. 

" Dear Sin, xl . 

" I had the pleasure to receive your letter of the oth this 
morning, and was much concerned at hearing of the death of my old 
friend Dr. Pos.tlethwaite. 1 I have now to answer you that 1 im- 
mediately wrote to Mr. Pitt to ask him to give you the Mastership of 
Trinity," and that if you do not succeed to it, it will not be from want 
of exertion or sincere good wishes on my part. I think no person 
should be appointed to that situation but a member of the College, 
and I can fairly say that I think you are the properest person for it. 
" I am ever, with great regard, 
" Dear Sir, 

" Yours very sincerely, 
" William Frederick." 

King George also expressed his satisfaction at Mansel's 
appointment in the following letter to Mr. Pitt : 

" Windsor, 

May 13, 179 s - 
" It gives me infinite satisfaction to find Mr. Pitt can recom- 
mend on the vacancy of Master of Trinity College a person according 
to the character he "gives me of Dr. Mansel, so exactly qualified to 
fill that arduous and honourable station. I flatter myself this 
appointment will restore discipline in that great seminary, and a 
more correct attachment to the Church of England and the British 
Constitution, than the young men educated there for some time 
have been supposed to possess. — G. R." 

Dr. Mansel's correspondence bears witness to the number and 
intimacy of his friendships with men and women of distinction, and 
of the high estimation in which he was held by them. Among others 

Postlethwaite was Master of Trinity from 17S9 until his death, May 4, 179S. 


are letters from William Pitt (the younger), expressed in affectionate 
terms. Pitt was a not infrequent visitor at Trinity Lodge, and the 
sofa upon which he habitually sal was much valued, and preserved 
as an heirloom by Mrs. Lort Mansel, the bishop's daughter, who 
always called it " Pitt's sofa." 

With Spencer Perceval Dr. Mansel was on even more intimate 
and affectionate terms, though Perceval was not, as has been 
alleged, his pupil at Trinity College. When the news of Perceval's 
tragic death was suddenly communicated to Mansel, the shock was 
so severe that he became temporarily deaf, and did not recover his 
normal power of hearing for more than a year. 1 

The Rev. Charles Simeon, a well-known clergyman of Cam- 
bridge, and a Dean of King's College, wrote to Mansel in 1S1S on 
behalf of a young student of Trinity ; his letter is very expressive of 
admiration for Mansel's character, and confidence in his kindness— 
which was not misplaced, as the bishop's very cordial reply shows. 

That Dr. Mansel was regarded as an appreciative judge of 
literature is demonstrated by letters from him to Hannah More 2 and 
George Crabbe, the poet, acknowledging the receipt of copies of their 
works. The book which was sent to him by Hannah More, in 1S19, 
was " Moral Sketches of Prevailing Opinions of Manners, Foreign 
and Domestic, with Reflections on Prayer," and the bishop writes as 
follows : 

" Trinity Lodge, 

" September S, 1819. 
" Madam, 

Having been very much indisposed of late, I have been 
unable until now to say how much gratified and honoured I am by 
receiving from yourself a copy of your incomparable ' Moral 
Sketches.' I wish I knew how sufficiently to express the estimation 
in which I hold any attention from you, to whom the world has so 
long looked up for instruction, and by whom it has been so ably and 

1 Spencjr Perceval, statesman (1762-1812), was shot dead in the lobby of the House of 
Commons on May II, 1812, by a bankrupt, probably of disordered brain, named Bellingham, 
who imagined that he had a grievance against the Government. He was hanged. 

2 Hannah More, religious writer (1745-1833) ; her writings are ail of the evangelical 
j , md would not be acceptable, save among a minority, at the present day : but they display 

a high religious purpose, combined with strong common sense. 


eloquently taught, that there is something far beyond a name in 
religion and virtue. My veneration for you, madam", is infinitely too 
great to allow me anything like an approach to flattery, and I am 
convinced that I do but speak the language of the better part of the 
world, when I say that you have indeed used the ten talents with 
which God lias been pleased to entrust you, to a great and glorious 
end, that you have made them exclusively subservient to His honour 
and service, and during a life of unvarying attention to the best 
interests and happiness of your fellow creatures, have, at least as 
much as anyone now living, laboured to bring many to Salvation. 
. ^. .It is therefore to be humbly hoped that those "talents so em- 
ployed for the best and noblest purposes in this life, will be the 
source of endless felicity to you in another. With the most respectful 
and sincere wishes of my family and myself for the continuance of a 
life so essential to the furtherance of everything good, I have the 
honour to remain, mv clear Madam, 

" Your very faithful, obedient and humble servant, 
" W. L. Bristol." » 

Mansel's letter to Ciabbe 3 is as follows : 

" Trinity Lodge, Cambridge. 
" Oct. 29, 1807. 
" Dear Sir, 

I could not resist the pleasure of going completely through 
your delightful poems, before I returned you. as I now do", my best 
thanks for so truly valuable a proof of your remembrance." The 
testimony of my opinion is but of small importance when set by the 
side of those which have been already given on this occasion to our 
Standard National Poetry, but 1 must be allowed to say that so 
much have I been delighted with the perusal of the incomparable 
descriptions which you have laid before me, with the easiness and 
purity of the diction, the knowledge of life and manners, and the 
vividness of that imag ination which could produce and so well sustain 
and keep up such charming scenes, that I have found it to be almost 
the only book of late times which I could read through without 
making it a sort of duty to do so. Once more, dear sir, accept of 
my best thanks for this very flattering remembrance of me, and be 
assured of my being, with much regard, 

" Your faithful, etc. 
" W. L. Mansel." 

1 This letter is to be found in the Life of Hannah More, by William Roberts. 

3 George Crabbe, poet (17:4-1832) ; the volume which he presented to Dr. Mansel 
was probably that containing " The Parish Register" and some other roems, which was published 
in 1807. r 

Christopher Rice Mansel-Talbot, MP. Born 1803. died Jan.. 1890. 
Painted by George Hayter, 1834. {Penrice Collection) 

[face p. 64 


These letters are certainly appreciative enough ; if that 
addressed to Hannah More errs somewhat on the side of fulsome- 
ness, no one will be disposed to cavil at Dr. Mansel's eulogy of 
the delightful, and, as he says, incomparable lines of George 

Dr. Mansel was vice-chancellor of Cambridge University for 
the year 1799-1800 ; and on October 30, 1808, was consecrated 
Bishop of Bristol, on the selection of his friend Spencer Perceval, then 
prime minister ; who also, in his capacity as chancellor of the Duchy 
of Lancaster, presented Mansel to the rich rectory of Barwick-in- 
Elmet, in Yorkshire 1 — so the bishop became a very comfortable 

Dr. Mansel married, on January 20. 1789, at Cambridge, Isa- 
bella, eldest daughter of John Haggerston, Esq., of St. Rhadegund's 
Manor, Cambridge, The marriage is said to have been a very happy 
one. Mrs. Mansel died on April 2, 1S03. some three weeks after the 
birth of twins, who died in infancy. In their fourteen years of 
married life they had thirteen children (including two sets of twins), 
nine of whom lived to grow up. 

Thus widowed after a comparatively short span of matri- 
mony, Mansel devoted himself to his young children, the eldest only 
fourteen years of age. 

The reminiscences of a member of the college contain the 
following allusion to the bishop and his family : " Wide open to my 
view lay the walks of St. John's and Trinity, the Cam winding its 
devious way down to Ely ; . . . and close under my window the 
Master's gardens and the Fellows' bowling-green. Many hours of 
pleasurable recreation have I and my friends bewildered over these 
scenes. The sweet and ever amiable daughters of Dr. Mansel, 
Bishop of Bristol and Master of the College, in their playful and 
lamb-like antics, whilst meandering the beautiful shrubberies of the 
garden — their affectionate fondling with the fine venerable old 
widower, I oft mused upon, with feelings of .exquisite sympathy, 
deluding myself even into the reverie of being an actual participator 

1 The living is now worth /950 per annum, with 900 acres of glebe, and residence 



of their elegant and tender endearments. Miss Fanny's tricks and 
fantasies were, like herself, strikingly pretty and bewitching. In 
these apartments I had, indeed, not only the friendship of my dear 
defunct authors, and my fellow students, but . . . the society, as it 
were, of one of the most lovely and interesting families in the 
kingdom." ' 

The Duke of Gloucester wrote to Dr. Mansel as follows, on 
May.}, 1811 : 

" My dear Lord, 

" I am very happy to find that I shall have the pleasure 
of seeing your lordship at dinner to-morrow se'nnight. I have many 
thanks to return to you for the information you have been so good 
as to communicate to me respecting my Installation, and it lias 
afforded me great satisfaction to learn by your lordship's letter of 
the 2nd inst. that it has not been uncustomary for the Chancellor at 
his Installation to give a dinner to his own College and not to the 
University, as it is, I think, a highly proper measure, and it is a 
gratification I am anxious to give myself. I am very much flattered 
by Trinity College proposing to invite me to dine with our own 
College, of which invitation T shall accept with the greatest satisfac- 
tion, and I should recommend that the dinner intended to be given 
to me should take place on the Monday, as I am desirous of giving 
my dinner on the Saturday, the day on which I shall have been 
installed. As it will be necessary that preparations should be made 
as soon as possible, I have requested of Mr. Curry to go down to 
Cambridge immediately, and he proposes being there on Monday 
next. I hope j ou will have the goodness to give him every necessary 
information and assistance, and I have desired him to wait upon your 
lordship and to consult you upon every point. With the truest 
regard and the highest esteem, I am ever, 

" My dear Lord, 

" Most sincerely yours, 

" William "Frederick." ' 2 

Again, under date March 13, 1S20, the Duke writes : 

1 " Aim?. Mater, or Seven Year; at the University of Cambridge," by 3 Trinity man. 
Vol. i., p. 174. (This reference is given in a collection of papers held by the bishop's descen- 
dants ; the book could not be found in the British Museum. " A Trinity man " was evidently 
more of a sentimentalist than a skilful prose-writer !) 

2 The Duke of Gloucester was elected Chancellor of the University on March 26, and 
installed June 29, 1811. 


" My dear Lord, 

" I had on Friday last the pleasure of receiving your 
letter, which I immediately transmitted to the King, who has directed 
me to state to you that he does not feel that he can interfere upon 
the subject of your application to him, but must refer you to the 
Archbishop of Canterbury. His Majesty has also desired me to 
express his regret at learning your Lordship's indisposition. I need 
not, I am sure, say how truly I lament to hear such a very unfavour- 
able account of your health, and to find that you do not talk of 
coming to Town this spring. It would have been a great gratification 
to the Duchess and myself to have seen your Lordship and the 
Misse^ Mansel here. In requesting you to remember me in the 
kindest and most particular manner to them, I must state that it is 
with the greatest satisfaction I avail myself of every opportunity of 
renewing to you an expression of the sincere attachment and esteem 
with winch I am always, 

" My dear Lord, 

" Very truly yours, 
" William Frederick." l 

Dr. Man-el died on June 27, 1820, at Trinity Lodge, and was 
buried in Trinity College Chapel, July 3. 

On Julv 5 the Princess Mary. Duchess of Gloucester, wrote to 
his eldest daughter : 

" My dear Miss Mansel, 

" I trouble you with this letter in the Duke's name and 
my own to express howdeeply we feel for you all under your present 
affliction, and to hope your health has not suffered any more than 
your sister's from the sudden and unexpected blow this melancholy 
event must have occasioned you all. We heard with great concern 
of the death of the Bishop, and the Duke laments him as one of his 
oldest and kindest friends. I shall ever remember with true 
pleasure and gratitude all the kindness I received from him and all 
of you at Cambridge last year, and the hospitable reception you gave 
us. I beg you will remember me kindly to your sisters, and 

believe me 

" Your sincere friend, 
" Mary.' 

Dr. Mansel left three sons and six daughters, as shown in the 
accompanying pedigree. 

1 The three letters of the Duke of Gloucester transcribed above are in the ; l, 

in the originals, of Lieut. -Col. Maiuei Sympson, Deloraine Court, Lincoln, a connection of the 
family by marriage. 


= 5- ? r- J 



5 S r : i SO 


3 :— llg^ll 

c g" 







! £ 

_J j 

i ^ 


His eldest son, named afier him, entered the Royal Navy, and 
was taken prisoner under the following circumstances, while serving 
in the brig Vencejo, 1 of eighteen guns, under a very gallant com- 

" At daylight on May 8th (1804), the Vencejo, 18, Commander 
John Wesley Wright, found herself becalmed near the mouth of the 
Morbihan, and driven by the ebb close to the Teigneuse rock, off 
which, for safety, she had to drop anchor. The Vencejo was a 
quarter-decked and forecasted brig, mounting eighteen iS-pounder 
carronades. but pierced for twenty guns, and carrying fifty-one men 
and twenty-four boys. Although more formidable in appearance 
than in reality, she was of only zjj tons, and was scarcely a fair 
match for a couple of French gun-brigs. While, nevertheless, she 
was endeavouring, after she had weighed and warped into the 
channel, to sweep clear of the coast, she was approached from the 
mouth of the river by six brigs, each of three guns ; six luggers, each 
of two guns, and five luggers, each of two guns ; the total force 
arrayed against her being seventeen vessels, thirty-five guns {i.e., 
six long 24-pounders, twenty-four long iS-pounders, and five 36- 
pounder carronades), and between 700 and Soo men, under Lieutenant 
Laurent Tourneur. The enemy rowed down within range, and at 
8.30 a.m. they began to fire. By 9.30 a.m. they had so decreased 
their distance that Commander Wright swept his brig broadside on 
to them. For nearly two hours he engaged them within about a 
cable's length ; but, having his rigging cut to pieces, his hull badly 
mauled, three of his guns disabled, two men killed, and twelve, 
including himself, wounded, and most of his armament temporarily 
put out of action by the fall of the booms, he at length ordered the 
colours to be struck. Wright, carried prisoner to Pans, died in the 
Temple on October 28th, 1805, in circumstances which strongly 
suggested foul play. Napoleon denied having used any violence 
whatsoever to the brave officer ; but the true facts of the affair, some 
of which will be found very fully set forth in the Naval Chronicle, 

1 Erroneously named, in some instances, Vincejo. From her name, this vessel would 
appear to have been a Spanish prize, but she does not appear among the Spanish losses, 1S04- 
I80S. In the British looses she is put dqwn as of sixteen, not eighteen guns. There was another 
' encejo, a small privateer, captured from Spain in 1S07. Vencejo is Spanish for swift, or swallow. 


are to this day involved in mystery. Wright, before his capture, had, 
in his ill-manned little craft, maintained his station almost con- 
tinuously for three months, without a pilot, in the enemy's waters, 
and in presence of a largely superior force ; had repeatedly chased 
into port more powerful vessels of the enemy ; and had on one 
occasion hauled his brig ashore on a French island only four miles 
from the mainland in order to repair her. It is satisfactory to be 
able to add that, before his untimely death, this active and gallant 
man heard of his advancement to post-rank." 1 

In this gallant affair, under the brave and resourceful Wright, 
Midshipman William Lort Mansel took part, being then in his 
fourteenth year. In common with the remainder of the brig's crew, 
he was taken prisoner, and was in the first instance sent to Paris, 
with his commander and other officers, and confined in the 

In an account written in an old family bible, by young Han- 
sel's grandmother, Mrs. Haggerston, it is stated : " The captain and 
my grandson were imprisoned in the Temple at Paris as state 
prisoners of war, where the unfortunate Captain Wright was mur- 
dered, after which my grandson was liberated on his Parole of Honour 
and removed to Verdun, but was afterwards removed by an order of 
Bonaparte to Valenciennes with a great many prisoners, where his 
parole was not continued, upon which he remonstrated and deter- 
mined to escape, which he did on the 17th Nov. 1S0S, and after 
suffering great hard-hips arrived at Dover in a Dutch boat the 14th 
March, 1809, and on Sunday the 19th of March at Cambridge, to the 
great joy of the Bishop his lather and of the family, in good health 
and spirits." 

In a further account Mrs. Haggerston says : " On the 12th 
of September 1S10 died my dear grandson William Lort Mansel. . . . 
This fine and amiable young man was taken a prisoner at the age of 

1 " The Royal Navy," by \V. Laird Clowes. Vol. v., pp. 65, 64. There is a long statement 
by Commander Wright in the Naval Chronicle (vol. xxxv., pp. 441 et seq.), from which it would 
appear that, after treating him in die first instance with humanity and generosity, the French 
authorities subsequently made various charges against him ; but, as is stated above, there is 
much mystery about the affair. The action took place in Quiberon Bay, on the south side of 
the jutting shoulder of France. 


13 years with the unfortunate Captain Wright in the Voicejo, and 
carried into France ; after continuing there about live years, during 
which time he underwent much hardship and many cruelties on 
account of the firmness of his determination, even at that tender age, 
not to give information which might affect his captain, against 
whom the enemy was bitterly incensed, he finally succeeded in 
making his escape ; but the suffering which he enduied from his long 
and repeated concealment in wet ditches, woods, marshes, etc., for 
upwards of three months during the course of that escape too visibly 
affected his constitution. His friends were often anxious with him 
to change his profession, but his attachment to it was unalterable, 
and after staying witli them for a few weeks only, he sailed as mid- 
shipman on board the Circe frigate, Captain Woolcombc ; who has 
now in a letter from Gibraltar announced his dissolution at the early 
age of 19." 

In the account by his niece, Mary Isabella Peacock, is the 
following : " He escaped after many years' detention, and landed on 
the Kentish coast, penniless and with nothing but the clothes he 
wore. At first he thought of walking to London, but finding he 
made very slow progress, he took the wise step of calling on a clergy- 
man by the way. to whom he stated that he was an escaped prisoner 
from France, etc., adding that the then Prime Minister, Spencer 
Perceval, was a great friend of his father's. Dr. Mansel of Trinity and 
Bishop of Bristol, and that if the clergyman would help him, such 
help would be thankfully and promptly repaid. The good man was 
puzzled between the youth's tale and his very shabby appearance, 
so he wisely ordered some refreshment, and then went and consulted 
his wife, asking her to come in and hear and judge. She did so, and 
then told her husband that he need not fear, as she was sure the story 
was true, and the poor weary young fellow was sent on his way 
rejoicing. Once in London, Mr. Perceval supplied him with all he 
needed, and sent him down to Cambridge in a chaise and four horses, 
which, when he got near the town, were, I believe, taken out, and the 
young sailor was dragged in triumph to the college gates." 

This story appears to be discounted by the following 


Crown Inn, 

March 16, 1809. 
"Dear Sir. 

"It is with the greatest pleasure 1 inform yon that, after 
a variety of extraordinary events, and innumerable dangers, I have 
most fortunately made my escape from France, and am now restored 
to my friends and country. It will add to the many obligations I 
ahead}' owe to you if you will have the kindness to let my dear 
father know of it. I should certainly have written to him mvself, 
had I not feared that such an unforeseen incident would have made 
too sudden an impression on his mind. I should not have delayed 
one moment coming to town, but the state of my finances obliges me 
to remain at this place until I receive some cash from my father to 
pay my conveyance, and to purchase a few articles of dress which 
are absolutely necessary. Give me leave not to enter into any 
detail at present concerning my escape. But I have the satisfaction 
of acquainting yon that I have not disgraced myself by violating 
that sacred tie, my Parole of Honour. Have the goodness to present 
my respects to Airs. Perceval and all your family, and believe me to 
remain, dear Sir. 

" Your most obliged humble servant, 
" W. L. Mansel." 

Having despatched this letter, one would imagine that Mansel 
would await a remittance from his father or his friend, instead of 
starting to walk to London. However, these are the accounts to 
hand of his adventures ; it is stated elsewhere that he made his 
escape in the company of another gentleman, disguised in women's 
clothes, in an open boat, and that they were two days and two nights 
at sea. 

In an old manuscript note-book in the possession of the Rev. 
Lort Mansel (who, as will be seen in the pedigree, married his cousin 
Isabella, Bishop Mansel's eldest daughter), said to have been written 
by William YVogan Mansel, is the following : 

" Extract from Tales of a Tar. 
" Mr. Edward YVogan Mansel was a fine high-spirited fellow 
as ever trod the deck of a king's ship. YYe had served together in 
the West Indies, and again on the Boulogne station, when a circum- 
stance occurred which stamped his character in the squadron, and 

PORTRAI'J (unnamed 


which (if merit had claims to promotion P^tkula^Th7"l£; 
served h,s time) would have immediately raised him , the rank J 
Lieutenant. It was simply this : on the rSth of July, , w " had ' 

with the main hod, at U^J^Z^Z^ 
1. it employed crushuig a group of gundugs • ■ which had griunded 

lose ,n with Cape Grisnez, a thirteen-inch shell struck the Z t 
knocked away our mam cross and trestle-trees destroved . 

oardjeerhhock.fe„mthe hooms, and thence in" tt^k^ 
seaman in its descent. Manse! sprang from the forecastle i 'to fhe 

punched the mischievous mtruder out of the port. The shell wa 

' y m u :i T ra - , of the ship ' s com ^"y lo ba -< - 

' ' ' ; JIjn =eh. intrepidity made some little noise the ca-e 
-s investigated and reported, and the Committee of the' Pa riot 
-';" ™t ? d him a sword of honour of the value of 50 g um ea o 
- mm m money. :do,,e, poured , ,,, .word, but sub^u ™" 
r. d ; ,° ° fficml i: "°"" in S him that '„•„, bein. a con 
tie money was at his He remained a midshipman 

Aeb/e.-",:;:.r : £ , q ";- n,v drm , ned in the command ° f ** 

erected hvth» Hel 'gola„d, when a handsome monument was 

k mdneJ 7 1 °' "* P""^" He WaS a5 fal1 of "lour ns 

Kindness, princely in both.' " 

It is suggested that this Edward Wogan Mansel was a sten 

J,:'', 1 K iSh ? th ° Ugh thWe b "° " Kntiaa »< Wi »^ « 
to trT -\ m f rried ' " 0r " '" a date of his ^h known. 

in tlie Ynrtit c - u- ! Mansel, on May 20, 

tht .North Sea,- which confirms the above story 

The ^onnectionof Mnand Mrs. Mansel-Carey, of Uppingham 

' ° r Ferh ^ 5 ^"-^-snudl vessels filled with explosives 
' "The Royal Navy." Vol. v., F . 5 6 5 . 


School, with Bishop Hansel's family is indicated in the annexed 
sketch pedigree. 

Isabella Haggerston 

Rt. Rev. Wii. Lort = 
Mansel, Bishop of | 
Bristol (1753-1820) I 

Rev. Edward Miller, 
Trin. Coll., Camb. ; 
Vicar of Bot-nor 

Rev. J. D. Hustler 

Grace = W. J. Carey, Esq. Augusta Fredef 


Rev. Owen Jones, Jesus 
Coll., Oxford; Vicar of 
Ferryside and St. Ish- 
roael's, S. Wale, 

Spencer Wood-pill Sey- — Mary Mansel 
mour Mansel-Carey Owen Jones 

(of Uppingham School) j 

Marv Frederica 

?pencerLort Mansel, 
2nd Lieut., 8th 
Devon Regt. Kil- 
led in France, Feb. 
24th, 1916. 

David Vernon Man- 
sel, 2nd Lieut., 
Devon Regt. 

Augusta Hope 

Dr. Sympson, of Lincoln, is connected as follow: 

= Isabella Haggerston 

William Lort M/ 
Bishop of Bri u 

Rev. Edward Peacock 

Thomas Sympson, surgeon, of 
Lincoln, d. Feb. Io, 1S92 


Caroline, d. March 27, 

Edward Mansel Sympson of 
Deloraine Court, Lincoln, b. 
March 22, i860 

There is a pedigree of Sympson, dating from 1622, in Lincoln- 
shire Notes and Queries for April, 1917. 

Dr. Michael Lort (1 725-1790), brother-in-law of William 
Wogan Mansel, and uncle to the bishop, was a man of some note. 
He was an accomplished scholar and antiquary, and held various 
posts as librarian, etc. From 1759 to 1771 he was Regius Professor 
of Greek at Cambridge : he was domestic chaplain to Archbishop 
Cornwallis at Lambeth from 1779 to 1783, and in 1785 was appointed 


librarian there. About 1761 he was vicar of Bottisham, a living 
afterwards held by his nephew, as above described. 

Lort was intimate with Madame D'Arblay {nee Fanny 
Burney) and the circle of eminent men who formed her acquaintance. 
Madame D'Arblay says of him that he was " reckoned one of the most 
learned men alive, and a collector of curiosities, alike in literature 
and natural history. His manners are somewhat blunt and odd, 
and he is altogether out of the common road, without having chosen 
a better path." 

She also describes how Dr. Lort, at a gathering in which Dr. 
Johnson. Mrs. Thrale, and others were present, suddenly confounded 
her by asking, " Pray, ma'am, have you heard anything of a novel 
that runs about a good deal, Evelina ? " 

The query was probably addressed to Mrs. Thrale ; she and 
Dr. Johnson were in the secret of Fanny Burney's authorship. 
The conversation which ensued so harassed the authoress that, when 
Dr. Lort went to look for " Evelina " on the side-table, she ran from 
the room, " heartily wishing Mr. Lort at Jerusalem." Meeting Mrs. 
Thrale in the passage immediately afterwards, the latter exclaimed, 
" This is very good sport ! The man is as innocent about the matter 
as a child, and we shall hear what he says to it to-morrow morning 
at breakfast. I made a sign to Dr. Johnson and Seward not to tell 
him." 1 

Dr. Lort met his death in 1790, the result of a carriage 

It is necessary that, in this present work, the claim of William 
Washington Manseil to the baronetcy of Margam should be dis- 
cussed. The honour, as already stated, is officially declared to be 
extinct ; but Mr. Manseil claimed that he was the representative and 
heir, through his lineal descent from Edward, fourth son of Sir 
Thomas Mansel. first baronet. 

Mr. Mansel's book, " An Historical and Genealogical Account 
of the Ancient Family of Manseil, "has repeatedly been alluded to in 
these pages ; and it appears that he was induced to enter upon the 

1 " Diary and Letters of Madame D'Arblay." Vol. i., pp. 91 tt seq. 


task after some years spent in collecting data to prove his right to 
the baronetcy. In the preface the following passage occurs : 
" Where I have been more particularly anxious to clear up points 
in the pedigree, was solely to show and prove my right, legally, to 
the baronetage (sic) of 1611 ; of which there is not the slightest 
question, heraldically or genealogically, if I may so express myself, 
but which the political troubles of bygone times has rendered difficult 
to establish in all its legal and technical points." Mr. Mansel 
disavows all intention of disputing claims to certain properties, and 
promises to treat of the matter of the baronetcy in its proper place. 

His book, however, never got beyond a small instalment, 
printed in 1850 ; but there is evidence available as to the nature of 
his claim in certain documents among the MSS. in the British 
Museum. 1 

These shall be transcribed as they stand in the first instance, 
and analysed afterwards. 

On June 5, 1835, Mr. Charles George Young,' 2 registrar of the 
College of Arms, writes as follows to Sir Frederick Madden : 3 
"Dear Sir, I enclose a copy of Le Neve's 4 statement respecting 
Mansel, which is in red ink ; the black ink is additional matter (and 
corrects Le Neve's statement as to Arthur) supplied by the will of 
Sir Thomas. From the nature of that will I should have but little 
doubt that Edward Mansel was dead sine prole. There is not any 
mention of him in his father's will, and Le Neve has probably put 
s.p. to Arthur instead of Edward. I do not find any pedigree 
giving any account of the said Edward. Yours most truly, C. G. 

1 Egerton MSS., 2S40, fol. 326 ei seq. 

2 Charles George Young (1795-1S69) was York herald in 1820, registrar of the College 
of Arms in 1822, a post which he held until August 6, 1842, when he was made Garter King-at- 
Arms ; he was knighted on August 27 in the same year. 

5 Sir Frederick Madden (1S01-1S73), antiquary, was employed for two years at tile British 
Museum in classifying and indexing some manuscripts ; in 1828 hewas made an assistant keeper 
of manuscripts on the staff, and in 1837 was head of the MSS. Department; hewas 
knighted in the same year. 

* Peter Le Neve, antiquary, of Norfolk (1661-1729). He was a most industrious col- 
lector and compiler data, both in respect of Norfolk families and others ; a large 
number of his MSS. are in the College of Arms, the British Museum, and elsewhere. 



A note on the back ot this letter, by Sir Frederick Madden, 
runs as follows : " This letter was written in reply to some enquiries 
by me relative to the Pedigree of Mansell, in consequence of a con- 
versation with my friend Mr. W'm. Washington Mansell who believes 
himself the lineal descendant of Edward Mansell, and consequently 
representative of the Margam family, and claimant of the baronetcy. 
He placed a copy of .a pedigree in my hands, a transcript of which I 
annex to this.— F. M." 

The following is Le Neve's pedigree, alluded to in Young's 
letter ; the additions mentioned by Young as written in black ink 
are here given in italics. 

Mary, dau. of Lewi; 

age settlement i: 
History of the House of | 
Mordaunt, p. 611 ; £2,000 j 

L, -d 


1 the 

Sir Thomas Manszll of 
Margam, ban., so cre- 
ated May 22, 1611. 
■'■ 1631, proved 

March io, 103 1-2 

Jane, dau. of Thoir 
Bishop Hall, aea 
widow of — Bu 

us Pool of 
London ; 


Sir Leu-is 
Mansel, ba 

Arthur Massi "-• l.s.p., 
as I >U] pose; see His- 
tory of Ho 

daunt, p. 6: :. Se nd 
so:, as apt, 

father's :cill, r\d was 
dead at in date 

= Jane, dau. of 
| //■>•:. Price f 

BrittonFt ■;". 
co. ( ,. 

:...:r f:\-.\l. -'-re 

I l6 3 l, Sir Jn- 

ty Mantel, 

:■ <ie ! in 

ling, son 
and heir 
of Sii Ed. 

Bussy M. 
and heii 


only son 




t \~n:r 

The pedigree placed in Sir F. Madden's hands by YVm. W. 
Mansell need not be here reproduced in full beyond the first genera- 
tion from Sir Thomas, as it raises no new question, and teems with 
inaccuracies. A copy is given on next page. 

" The people in Ireland who were acquainted with the 
Mansells say that William Mansell called the place he built ' Slade ' 
in remembrance of a place he cither resided at in England, or that 
belonged to his family. Others again, particularly the old servants, 
state that he came from Preston. Both in some degree might have 


Sir Edward Mansell, knt., ob. 
Aug. 5, 159s 

Jane, dau. 
Bp. Hal 

wid. of 

of Thos. Pool, = Sip Tho. M., bart., cr. May 22, 

, near London; 161 1, mar. at Chelsea, July 

— Bu:-sy 30, 1582, Mary, dau. of 

Lewi?, Lord Mordaunt of 

Turvey, d. at Margam, co. 

Glarr., Dec. 20, 1631 

Sir Francis M., bart., 
Muddlescombe, cr. Jum 
162 1 


Lrthur M 

. of 


M. of 

Sii Lewi 

s M., 


Edw. Mai 

.-sell (not men- 








in his 





5 to be { 



("Qv. if a descent is not 
ing ?-F. M.") 

William Mansell of Slade, co. 
Wexford, d. before 1763, 
aged about 100. Mar. Eliza- 
beth, dau. and co-heir of — 
Crev.kerne of Exeter, sister of 
Lady Loftus, mother of the 
first Lord Loftus, ancestor of 
the Marquess of Fly. 1 

Henry Mansell of Slade, d. 
1773, at. 84 

William Mansell 

William Washington Man- 
sell (die claimant of the 
baronetcy,^! S35) 

been correct, for most probably he often spoke of Presteigne, Radnore, 
as Dr. Jenkins, who educated most of the young Welshmen of 
family, resided there, and which consequently might have led many 

1 William Mansell 's sister-in-law was not " Lady Loftus " ; she was the wife of Henry 
Loftus, Esq., of Loftus Hal!, ,.nd mother of Nicholas Loftus, first viscount of the creation of 


persons to conceive that he came from thence ; but it is more than 
probable that he came from Slacle, a small village in the hundred of 
Swansea, Glamorgan, not far distant from Margarn." 

" Sir Lewis, eldest son of Sir Thomas, died April 4th, 1638, 
leaving several children, and the eldest, Henry, being then only 8 
years of age, admits of the supposition that he married about 1628 
or 1629, and, if he did not marry extremely young, must have been 
born about the year 1605 or 1606 ; therefore it is only fair to argue 
that Edward, he being a younger son of Sir Thomas, was born in 
1610 or 1611 ; and presuming that he married at the age of 25 
(an. 1635), his son, at the time of the battle of Sedgmoor, 1685', 
would be about 48 or 4c, years of age. Moreover, his cousin Mary! 
Sir Lewis's daughter, was married in 1664 aged about 19. Why 
then should not the son of a younger son of Sir Thomas be about the 
same age as the 5th child of the elder son ? Thomas of Britton 
Ferry, another cousin, died in 1705, and Bussy, Thomas's brother, 
survived. Again, Henry, my grandfather, died in 1773 aged 84! 
ergo was born in 1689, four years after the battle of Sedgmoor! 
Upon the whole, therefore, I think I am justified in supposing 
William to be the son of Edward." 

" Edward Mansell of Shropshire, whose will is dated Nov. 1674, 
speaks of his wife Blanche, and of his children Edward. Adam,' 
Nicholas and Sarah. Hark 31 SS. 6831 mentions Lewis. Arthur and 
Robert as sons of Sir Thomas." 

" Edward Mansell, 1630, of Chedington, co. Warwick, wills 
money to Edward and Thomas Mansell of Chedington, ' his brother's 
sons,' and makes his sister Elizabeth his executrix." 

" Wills of Mansel and Maunsell proved in Dublin between 
1685 and 1730. 

" Mansell Wills 
Jane of Dublin - . . Sept. 1739 

Thomas of Anawsly, co. Limerick - 1711 

" Admons. 
John of Bally voreen, co. Limerick - 1685 

Eliza, a minor - 

Boyle, do. - 


Boyle, do. . 1?12 



Thomas of Mace Collop, co. Waterford (will) 1692 

Henry of London - - (will) 1700 

Thomas of Gaulestown, co. Kilkenny (admon.) 1704 
Boyle of Gaulestown - - (admon.) 1704." 

" Received fune 22nd, 1835, from 
Mr. Wrn. W. Mansell." 

(Note by Sir F. Madden : Brit. 
Mu-5. stamp underneath.) 

(Here follows a quotation from Collinson's "History of Somerset.") 
Irish Records, p. 116, Acts of Settlement : " Margaret Crook- 
horne, relict of Captain Henry Crookhorne. and Anne, daughter and 
heir of said Henry. Ballylane5iiAetc, etc. Total rent £22. 12. 5 J. 
Date 28 Nov. 19th year. Enrolled 10th Dec. 1667. By patent 
dated Feb. 26. 1677. an abatement of £8. 4. 5 J was granted to them 
of the quit rent of £22. 12. 5-J, with an abatement of /S. 18. 4 
of the quit rent of £30. 11. 6 to Mary Deacon, reserved on the lands 
of Chappie etc. as mentioned in the patent which recites that the 
same had been passed in patent dated 16 Nov. 16G6 to John Deacon, 
Gent., but are not enrolled under the Acts of Settlement." 

Letter from C. G. Young to Wm. W. Mansell, June 13, 1835 : 

" My dear Sir, I was not at the club until yesterday, when 
your packet was given to me, or I should sooner have thanked vou ; 
indeed, it was opened only this morning. As Henry the son' died 
young Le Neve had not put him in the line in the pedigree, but he 
was aware of the existence, as over the line he has a note saying there 
had been such a son, and referring to the H. of Mordaunt for his 
authority. The non-mention in the will of Edward is not absolutely 
proof, but_ I judge from the tenor of the will. Examination of the 
wills of his brother and others of the family might throw some 
light. . . . 

" Yours sincerely, 
" C, G. Young." 

Thus far the Egerton MSS. : we have in these documents an 
indication of the basis of Mr. Mansell's claim for the baronetcy, of 
which, he states. " there is not the slightest question, heraldically or 


It is not easy, however, to perceive upon what he grounds this 
absolute conviction. 

He assumes that Sir Thomas, first Baronet of Margam, had a 
son Edward, who is not mentioned in his father's will ; and, as will 
be noticed, Mr. Young, then registrar of the College of Arms, in his 
first letter, says : " From the nature of that will I should have but 
little doubt that Edward Mansell was dead sine prole." 

It is the most obvious inference ; Sir Thomas mentions his 
sons Lewis and Arthur, his grandson Bussy, and his five grand- 
daughters, but he names no oilier son ; therefore, if he had any such 
other sons they must have died before the will was executed, and 
died without issue, else why should their children be excluded ? 

Sir Thomas is credited by Le Neve with three sons, Lewis, 
Arthur, and Edward ; but he apparently made a note afterwords 
on the pedigree that there was a son Henry, and .that he was the 
third, Edward being the youngest. Mr. Young also says that Le 
Neve " probably put s.p. to Arthur instead of Edward " ; if he did, 
it was an inexcusable blunder on the part of an antiquary and 
genealogist ; but, in view of his note. " died s.p. as I suppose," it is 
not possible to accept the mistake as a slip of the pen. There was 
and is ample evidence that Arthur Mansel had issue, and Le Neve's 
introduction of a fourth son, Edward, is discounted by this obvious 
lack of carefulness. 

Mr. Win. W. Mansell gives the four sons, and derives his own 
immediate progenitors from Edward, who, as he reiterates, is not 
named in his father's will ; the assertion is repeated as though it 
constitutes in some degree a proof of Mr. Mansell's right to the 

Well, neither is Henry named in the will ; but there is absolute 
evidence of his existence in the will of Lewis, third Lord Mordaunt, 
Sir Thomas Mansel's father-in-law, who alludes to " Arthur and 
Henry Mansel, the sons of my daughter Mary." 1 

There is not, however, any evidence to show that Sir Thomas 



>tory of .Mordaunt, 

Genealogies of the Noble and Ancient Families of AJno ... and Mor- 

. P- 623. This volume is very, looselr alluded to by Le Neve and Young as " Tl 
tlntorv of Mor.^npf » 


had a son Edward, except Le Neve's rough pedigree. Mr. Mansell, 
at any rate, does not adduce any such evidence in his correspondence 
with Sir F. Madden and Mr. Young ; and tiie note on the pedigree, 
" this remains to be proved," by Sir F. Madden, shows that he, at 
least, was sceptical on the subject ; he also suggests that a generation 
has been omitted in Mr. Mansell's pedigree. 

Now, if Mr. Mansell had any evidence to show that Sir 
Thomas Mansel had a fourth son Edward, i f is certainly remarkable 
that, in his correspondence with two such genealogical experts as Sir 
F. Madden and Mr. Young, he should not have brought it forward. 
One would have imagined that this would have been his primary 
point ; but he adduces no such evidence for his assumption. The 
only testimony on this head is produced by Mr. Young, in Le Neve's 
pedigree ; and Le Neve cannot be accepted as an authority regarding 
the Mansel genealogy ; he " supposes " that Arthur Mansel died 
s.p., and his supposition is, as has been pointed out, inexcusably 
erroneous ; where he found Edward does not appear. 

Mr. Mansell is very much at sea in his conjecture as to the date 
of Sir Lewis Mansel's birth ; he was born, in fact, in 1584, as is 
witnessed by the fact that lie matriculated at Brasenose College. 
Oxford, on January 30, 1601, at the age of sixteen. 1 Mr. Mansell is 
not far out, however, as to the date of his third marriage, by which 
alone he had male issue ; this took place August 25, 1627 ; his two 
former manias 1 r are : . nored. What the writer designs to prove by 
the statement that " Mary, Sir Lewis's daughter, was married in i66j 
aged about 19 " is not apparent ; but the assertion is certainly not 
true, as Sir Lewis died in 165S, and his daughter could not have been 
less than six-and-twenty in 1664. 

Mr. Mansell, ignoring the obvious importance of establishing 
this first link in the chain, proceeds to dilate upon the probability of 
William Mansell, the alleged son of the hypothetical Edward, having 
gone to Wexford from Slade, near Swansea, and to contest Sir F. 
Madden's query as to a missing generation. He had, however, found 
himself compelled to tide over the difficulty presented in the long 

1 " Alumni Oioniensij.'' Vol. iii., p. 967. 





period covered in his genealogy, by the assumption that William 
Mansell lived to the age of " about 100." 

There is, indeed, a suspicious vagueness about this William ; 
he is said to have fought at Sedgmoor in 1(1,85, when he would be 
" 4S or 49 years of age," and to have died " before 1763 "—a long 
while previously, for had he been born in the year of Sedgmoor he 
would have been seventy-eight years of age in 1763. 

Mr. Mansell then alludes to the wills of two Edward Mansells, 
the one of Shropshire, the other of Warwickshire, and quotes a 
passage from Collinson's " History of Somerset " ; none of these things 
having the least value in respect 0,' his claim. The quotation from 
Collinson is apparently inserted solely because " Slade " appears as 
the name of the purchaser of certain lands in Somerset which were 
formerly held by Mansells ; it is as though the writer were clutching 
at straws. 

Mr. Mansell's account of his family— which was originally 
intended to run into three large volumes— has already been re- 
peatedly alluded to in the first volume of this present history. It 
does not present him as a careful or reliable genealogist and historian ; 
it abounds in positive assertions based upon inadequate evidence, or 
upon no evidence whatsoever ; in gratuitous assumptions and false 
deductions ; and where references are given they frequently fail to 
prove the point in question, and in some instances directly traverse it. 

His arguments in favour of his right to the baronetcy are 
stamped with the same character ; he has certainly some information 
concerning his grandfather, Henry, and his great-grandfather, 
William ; but his assumption of the existence of Edward, fourth son 
of Sir Thomas of Margam, and of his relationship with William 
Mansell of Slade is quite unjustifiable— unless he was in possession 
of some evidence which has not been disclosed ; and indeed, it would 
need some very potent testimony to overrule the disabilities and 
discrepancies already indicated. 

Mr. William Washington Mansell appears to have been upon 
friendly terms with Mr. W. Mansell, of Guernsey (now living), and 
to have left some documents to him at his death. Among these 
there is a lease of property at Slade, county Wexford, from Lord 


Ely l to Henry Mansell of Slade, son of William of Slade. with 
remainder to William Mansell of Fethard, who is stated to have been 
nine years and three months old on February 6. 1769. 

These are evidently Win. W. Mansell's father, grandfather, 
and great-grandfather ; his father, recording to this, was born at 
the end of 1759, and there is evidence of his death in the records of 
the Military Knights of Windsor, from which it appeals that he died 
on August 21, 1825, and was buried in front of St. George's Chapel at 

Mr. Mansell of Guernsey states that Mr. Wm. W. Mansell once 
wrote to him as follows : "J descend from the 4th and youngest son 
of Sir Thomas Manse!, first Baronet. His son. my great-grandfather, 
joined Monmouth, and after Sedgmoor fled to Ireland ; but as no 
registers were then kept in that country, there was difficulty in 
legally tracing back, and as I have neither fortune nor children I 
have never assumed the title. But I am 3rd Baronet in precedence 
dating from 1611." 

Early in last century Elizabeth, a sister of William Washington 
Mansell. married Captain Richard Frederick Angelo, of the H. E. I. 
Co.'s Service ; and a few years ago his son, Colonel Richard Fisher 
Angelo, of the Indian Army, compiled an account of the Mansell and 
Angelo families. 

Mr. Mansell's mantle of inaccuracy appears to have fallen 
upon Colonel Angelo. In a short preface he says :" This abridge- 
ment is made from two sources — (1) That of the Mansell Family 
from a work published in 1846 a by William, the only son of Sir 
John Mansell, knight of Windsor." The matter concerning the 
Mansell family is obviously taken, mostly word for word, from the 
account by William Washington Mansell, whose father's name was 
not John, but William ; and on p. 72 we are told that it was William 
who was made a knight of Windsor, and " his sons were Henry, John, 
and William (the compiler of his history) " ; moreover, the appoint- 

1 Nicholas Hume-Loftus, second Earl of Ely, sixth Viscount Loftus of Ely ; he died 
unmarried in November, 1769, the s.ime year in which this lease was dated. 

' Both copies of \V. W. .Mansell's book in die British Museum bear the date 1850 on the 


ment as a military knight of Windsor does not confer the title 
of " Sir." 

However, this account proceeds almost verbatim en the lines 
of Mr. Win. Mansell's, until it arrives at Sir Thomas Mansell, first 
Baronet of Margam. Mr. Mansell states that Sir Thomas had four 
sons by his first marriage, but only mentions Lewis and Arthur. In 
Colonel Angelo's book it is stated that " he had four sons, of whom 
the eldest was Sir Lewi-., who succeeded to the title and estates, and 
the youngest was Edward, into whose time this history now 

" Edward Mansell resided at Henllys in Gower, in his time a 
residence of some consequence. ... He died in 1723, after marrying 
and leaving issue William Mansell, well known to this day in that 
part of the country as ' Old Will Mansell of Henllys.' " 

Here is another instance of extraordinary longevity ; this 
Edward was, as is alleged, the son of Sir Thomas by his first wife 
Mary, daughter of Lewis, third Lord Mordaunt ; the} 7 were married 
in 1582. The date of Mary's death has not been found, but she was 
married young, almost certainly tinder twenty ; in the year 1620 
she would be at least fifty-four or fifty-five years of age, and even 
admitting the extremely improbable hypothesis of her having borne 
a son at thai age, Edward would be one hundred and three years of 
age if he lived until the year 1723. From the tenor of Colonel 
Angelo's preface it must be inferred that he derived this information 
from W. W. Mansell, or from some document or statement emanating 
from him. It seems scarcely worth while to discuss such an 
obviously " manufactured " pedigree, in which it has been found 
necessary to present this father and son as centenarians ; it cannot 
for a moment be considered as genuine or accurate. 

It is stuted in Colonel Angelo's book that William, the alleged 
son of Edward Mansell, is well known in Wales to this day as " Old 
Mansell of Henllys." In the succeeding paragraph we are told that, 
after Monmouth's defeat at Sedgmoor, " his partisans soon found 
themselves obliged to retire from observation. . . . William Mansell 
consequently went to Ireland and settled on the coast of Wexford 
at a place called Slade." 


One would imagine that William would be better known as 
" Old Mansell of Slade " ; he is alleged to have been under fifty at 
the time of the battle of Sedgmoor, and to have retired to Ireland 
soon afterwards, so he could not have been regarded as an old man 
at Ilenllys. But the whole story bristles with discrepancies. 

The claim to the baronetcy did not originate with Mr. Win. 
W. Mansell, as is proved by a letter from his mother to her eldest 
son, Henry, dated March 8, 1821. Henry was captain in the 14th 
Regiment, and was for some time aide-de-camp to Lord William 
Bentinck, viceroy of India. 

Mrs. Mansell, after some preliminary remarks, writes : " The 
Mansell family came into England with William the Conqueror, who 
granted to them the estate of Margam, in Glamorganshire, where 
they settled. After the death of Charles the 2nd his illegitimate son, 
the Duke of Monmouth, aspired to the Throne, and many friends to 
the reformed religion, from a conviction that James favoured the 
Catholics, joined Monmouth's standard, amongst the rest William 
Mansell (your father's Grandfather), and son to . . . Mansell of 
Margam. . . . On your father's coming of age, he was not in pos- 
session of a single paper belonging to his father, and although he 
always understood that he was undoubted heir to the Margam 
estate, yet not having any document to show that claim, he never 
took a step to find out how he might make that claim good. I 
undei stand that the Law allows 60 years . . . (for the claiming ? 
words illegible) of property. I don't know when Lord Mansell, or 
as I am most accustomed to hear him called, Bussy Mansell died, 
but supposing him to have died immediately after your grandfather, 
there remain still twelve years, or to be more certain let us call it 
eleven years to make a claim, yet remaining. The estate is now I 
understand in the possession of a Mr. Talbot, and John accidentally 
heard when he was last at home that he had been striving to sell it — 
does this not look something like a bad title ? It now strikes me that 
if a Proctor in Doctors Commons was employed to investigate every 
will of the Family from the reign of Charles the 2nd that something 
might be found to work on." 

The writer is evidently supremely ignorant of the manner in 


1 1 'v 'Y& 

H-# v 


■- ■ .-.-. 

\ .. >' . . ';■ S CA STL E 



which the Margam estates came into the possession of the Mansels ■ 
she is also probably in error as to the limitation of action for claim 
of property ; in any case, Bussy Lord Mansel died in 1750 s that 
seventy-one years had already elapsed ; this, however, is not of any 
importance. y 

Mrs. Mansell describes her husband's grandfather, William 
Mansell, who died, as is alleged, before 1763, as " son to . . Mansell 
of Margam " ; she alludes to the relationship as a fact which was 
known to the family. The ground of this conviction does not appear, 
nor does (lie writer concern herself with the genealogical difficulty 
presented by the long period covered in two generations, which has 
been commented upon above. 

The idea had got into the family by some means, and Mr Wm 
W. Mansel! inherited it, so to speak ; but there is nothing to show in 
the way of evidence ; and Mr. Mansell, it may be remarked, in his 
assumption that Edward, alleged son of Sir Thomas, was born about 
1 610 or 1 61 1, evidently ignores the fact that Lady Mansel— nee Mary 
Mordaunt— if she were married at eighteen, would have been about 
srx-and-forty at this time, and married eight-and-twenty years ; it 
is, of course, quite possible that she may have had a son at this age, 
but it is, on the face of it. improbable, and the introduction of im- 
probabilities in a matter of this kind is always open to suspicion. 

To sum up the case : it is very improbable that Sir Thomas 
Mansel had a son Edward ; if he had, then it is almost certain that 
the said Edward died, without issue, vita pairis ; and if he did not, 
how did it come about that William Mansell, of Henllys, and after- 
wards of Slade, or his son Henry, did not claim the title on the death 
of Bussy Lord Mansel in 1750 ? Had he been indeed the son of 
Edward, and grandson of Sir Thomas, why should there have been 
any concealment in the matter ? His existence would certainly 
have been known to Bussy and others; yet the Barony and 
Baronetcy were permitted to become extinct without protest, and 
the estates passed, also without protest, to the Talbots. under the 
will of Christopher Lord Mansel, Bussy 's elder brother, and his 
predecessor in the title. 

These considerations, together with the suspicious stretching 


of the two generations next after Sir Thomas Mansel, render it 
practically impossible to accept the claim as just or genuine. 

According to the account given of William Mansell in Colonel 
Angelo's volume, he was a generous benefactor to the community in 
Wexford ; he is said to have housed his Irish tenants comfortably, 
to have built a clock and pier, and erected salt works at his own cost. 
He is also stated to have been a " mechanic, astrologer, and 
magician," and likewise interested in astronomy, etc. It is alleged 
that he constructed a clock " which went for 3S years [without 
winding, presumably] and did not stop until some years after his 

The final paragraph concerning him runs as follows : " By 
his union with Susan Crewkerne, William Mansell had only two 
children, Henry and Anne (wife of Richard Turner). William 
Mansell died about 1820 and was buried at Feathard, co. Wexford, 
aged 96." 

Here is a marvellous statement ! If William died in 1S20, 
aged ninety-six, he was obviously born in 1724, forty years after the 
battle of Sedgmoor, in which he is said to have taken part ! 

It is obviously not worth while to discuss further such 
wild and irreconcilable statements : but it may be possible to 
trace the descent of Wm. Washington Mansell from another 

The deeds, already alluded to, in the possession of Mr. Mansell 
of Guernsey, establish the immediate ancestors of W. W. Mansell, in 
agreement with the pedigree which he supplied to Mr. Young and 
Sir F. Madden. He breaks down at the parentage of William Mansell 
the first, whom he asserts, without proof, and against all probability, 
to have been the son of one Edward, fourth son of Sir Thomas, first 
Baronet of Margam. 

It is very possible, however, that this William may have been 
the son of Edward Mansell of Henlys and Swansea, whose father, 
Edward of Henlys, died in 1605. leaving his estates much encum- 
bered and mortgaged — as is described hereafter in dealing with 
the Mansels of Trimsaren. who had sundry transactions with 





•>! ■ liol SI- VI M \Ki, \M. 






1 ' i 

'- - : : 


- _ ■ 


.. v 




• iT ...«1 



- • - 

MARC! \M FROM I HE l'.\l 


Edward the younger, of Henrys and Swansea, married 
Margaret Ducke, in or before the year 16S2 ; and apparently, 
at his father's death, in 1695, he had no male issue, only a 
grandchild Martha being named in the will of Edward Mansell 

If William Mansell of Slade was the son of Edward the 
younger of Henlys, he could not have fought at Sedgmoor in 16S5 ; 
probably this Edward hud no son until after 1695 ; but is it certain 
that William was at Sedgmoor ? The tradition that he was does not 
appear to haw any more solid foundation than that other, that he 
was the son of Edward, fourth son of Sir Thomas. William Washing- 
ton Mansell was greatly addicted, as has already been noticed, to 
making assertions without offering any evidence in support of 

From the deeds alluded to above, William Mansell of Slade 
was apparently dead in 1709 ; probably he died just about then, and 
the lease was renewed to his son Henry on February 6. If he 
was born about 1696 he would be seventy-three years of age at 
his death, and there is here no occasion for introducing lives of 
a century's span ; it all tits in with Edward's will and other 

Moreover, it is stated that Edward Mansell resided at Henlys, 
hich is the date, in all probability, of the death 
of Edward the younger above referred to. 

The weak point about this tentative derivation of William of 
Slade is that no mention is made in Edward Mansell 's will of any 
William, grandson or otherwise ; nor can any will of Edward the 
younger be found ; but it is a very reasonable hypothesis that the 
latter had a son, William, born after the death of Edward senior ; 
and it is here presented, as far more probable than the laboured and 
inconsistent allegations put forward by the claimant, without any 
attempt at adequate proof. 

The annexed pedigree shows the suggested derivation of 
William Mansell of Slade, as given above, with some collateral 
additions in later years. 

•3 § 

« * 3 

O n 

■B ■£ 

J .5 d 

■s 3 


h" H 






crj ^ 



w d 


* & 

• ~ 


o o 




o 3 



£ ^ 


co w 


m Q 



S Q 



*! W 



U fe 







1 o 

-2 U3 

O to 






•O S 



3 "0 


— ;i 








e g 


■D 3 




o « 


1 ii 


ii — 


II — 


-a ►"" 



s J 








2 "° 

< fi. 

5 £ 



:■ ^ 

S ;_ 

2 § 


3 ffi 2 



"g u d 


Ii — 

S 60 

t! 9 

« o «< 

l-H M 

"5 § 




William Mansell and Charity his wife had eleven children, of 
whom two died in infancy, and the remainder appear in the pedigree. 

It is said that Charity Mansell was very intimate with Oueen 
Charlotte, frequently playing cards with her, and that her children 
used to play with the royal children ; also, that after the birth of 
her eleventh child she suddenly developed a passion, and considerable 
aptitude, for painting ; her subjects were chiefly flowers, and were 
most frequently obtained from the royal gardens and hothouses. 

Mr. William Washington Mansell appears to have been at 
one time well off, and was a favourite in society ; he is said to have 
been very good-looking. He was kind and generous to his sisters 
in his prosperous days, but latterly he fell upon evil times, as he 
acknowledges in his letter to Mr. Mansell of Guernsey, already 
quoted. He was married, but not very happily, or at any rate not 
suitably to his position, and had no children. 

Captain William Mansell, father of William Washington, 
appears to have been known in society and at Court as a caricaturist. 

In the Reminiscences of Henry Angolo, the writer, after 
alluding to some of the ridiculous fashions in vogue at the end of the 
eighteenth century, and the " squibs and crackers " aimed at these 
absurdities by one Mercer, a military officer, among others, proceeds : 

" Mansell, another military officer, also made a figure as a 
humorous draughtsman and caricaturist, a few years prior to this 
period. Some of his last works were satis es upon Fox and Lord 
North's memorable coalition. One, however, which preceded this, 
represents these two celebrated statesmen, stripped in buff, fighting 
with fists, d la Broughton. It may be observed that Mansell was 
the first who represented the ' man of the people ' as a hairy man. 

" One subject from his witty pencil is truly amusing, as it 
represents, playfully enough, the materiel upon which he and his 
colleagues made their means ; it is entitled, ' The Caricaturist's 
Stock in Trade.' This exhibits a group of heads, very like their 
prototypes, being the rulers of politics, fashion, etc. ; or, in other 
words, the prevailing -tars of the time, with some significant sign : 
The King, the Heir Apparent, Fox. North, Pitt, Burke. Sheridan, 
George Hanger, and the Duke of Richmond. The Oueen ; Mrs. 


F t (Fitzherbert), ci< signated Queen Would-be ; Mrs. Siddons as 

Queen Rant ; Mrs. Abington as Queen Scrub ; and the Duchess of 

D e (Devonshire), as Queen of Westminster, in allusion to her 

Grace's powerful influence in the memorable election of Fox, Hood, 
and Wray." » 

The caricature is given in Angelo's book, and is here repro- 
duced ; it will be noticed that it is inscribed " Drawn by W. Mansell, 
1786." There can be little doubt that this was William, military 
knight of Windsor ; his position, and his wife's intimacy with Queen 
Charlotte, would afford ample opportunity of becoming familiar with 
all the royal and distinguished persons of the day, and the gossip 
concerning them. 


Key to "The Caricature's Stock in Trade." 

1 Reminiscences of Henry An.gelo." Vol. L, pp. 32S, 3:9. Colonel George Hanger 
(1751-1824), afterwards fourth J: ron Coleraine (though he refused to assume the tide), was a 
very prominent figure in society, and notorious by reason of his eccentricities. He was for 
several years one of the Prince Regent's coterie, but eventually his manners became too free and 
coarse for the royal taste. F \ . ton (1737-1815), v •■ in actress of humble origin ; 

her maiden name was Barton She acquired . ... : society of the 

most influential persons. She married her musi -master, one oi the r d trump cers she 
played upon one oc • . -comedy part of 'Scrub" in the " ; Beaux's Stratasem," 

hence the " tag " in ManselTs caricature. 



' ~ 

_ _--^-^„- 

//j*, ""^ -^ . \^S 

The Baronetcy of Muddlescombe 

UDDLESCOMBE is situated in Kidwelly, which lies 
near an inlet on the eastern side of the Bay of 
Carmarthen, about nine miles south of the town of 
Carmarthen. It is said that Maurice de Londres, 
a son or grandson of William de Londres, one of Fitzhamon's twelve 
knights, fortified the town and built a castle. 

According to Samuel Lewis, Kidwelly was the scene of some 
stirring military events. " In 1114 the town and castle were sur- 
prised and taken by Griffith ap Rhys, who retained possession only 
for a short time ; and alter their recapture, Gwenllian, wife of 
Griffith, a woman of masculine intrepidity, with a view to recover 
her husband's territories placed herself at the head of a body of 
force.-, and, attended by her two sons, attacked Maurice de Londres 
at a place in the vicinity of the castle, where she was defeated, made 
prisoner, and put to death by her adversary, one of her sons being 
also slain, and the other made captive ; the place where this battle 
was fought is still (1849) called Maes Gwenllian, or ' Gwenllian's 
Field.' In 1:148, Cadell, one of the sons of Griffith ap Rhys, issuing 
from Carmarthen with a powerful body of forces, ravaged and laid 
waste the country around this town. The castle was repaired and 
strengthened, in 1190, by Rhys ap Griffith, but was subsequently 
demolished in 1233 by Griffith, son of Lleweln ap Iorwerth, Prince 
of North Wales." l 

In addition to these stormy vicissitudes, Kidwelly has also, 
as related in a previous chapter, some reputation as the scene of 
ghostly demonstrations." 

1 "Topographical Dictionary of Wales," by Samuel Lewis. Vol. ;., p !•" 
' See Vol. i., p. : + 2. 



Francis, second son of Sir Edward Mansel of Margam, was 
created a baronet January 14, 1622 ; the baronetcy remains to this 
day, the present holder of the title being Sir Courtenay Cecil Mansel. 

Sir Francis married, first, Catharine, daughter and co-heir 
of Henry Morgan of Muddlescombe ; hence the affix " of Muddles- 
combe " ; his elder brother. Anthony, married Mary, also daughter 
and co-heir of Henry Morgan. 1 

Although the title has survived, and, as will presently be 
demonstrated, the successive steps are clearly authenticated, seme 
genealogists have failed to trace them, and there are various dis- 
crepancies in the several versions extant, involving, strangely enough, 
in most instances, the entire omission of two steps in the earlier 
period ; moreover, there appears to be a general tendency among 
these chroniclers to introduce or admit errors of more or less im- 
portance, and to ignore the testimony of sundry authorities. 

Mr. Robert George Maunsel (p. 29) commences with a double 
discrepancy ; he alludes to Sir Francis as second son of Sir Edward 
Mansel, whereas lie has himself placed him as third son (p. 22) ; and 
to Anthony as eldest brother of Sir Francis, whereas the eldest 
brother was Sir Thomas, who became first baronet of Margam. 

Sir Francis married, secondly, Dorothy, daughter of Alban 
Stepney, of Prendergast, county Pembroke ; the issue of this 
marriage will be dealt with later on. 

Sir Francis had issue a son, Walter, by his first marriage. 
Mr. R. G. Maunsell says that Walter had male issue that died young 
or issueless ; and in a footnote he remarks : " Some authorities 
state that Walter Mansel succeeded his father as second Bart., but, 
dying without surviving male issue, his nephew Edward inherited 
the estates and Baronetcy." 

This statement would appear to argue that there is some 
uncertainty concerning Walter's tenure of the title ; this, however, 
is not the case. 

1 Lieutenant Mansel-Pleydell places Francis as fourth son cf Sir Edward (• : 
p. 240) ; it appears, however, from a more caret J scrutiny of the MarEram monui t, 1 l 
the second of the small kneeling figures is labelled "Francis," and they would r U 
placed according to precedence in age. 


Sir Francis, the first baronet, died about the year 1628, 
administration of his estate being granted to Sir Walter Mansel, 
Bart., December 2 of that year. Further letters of administration 
were granted, also to Sir Walter, June 27, 1631 ; while on April 3, 
1641, another grant is recorded to Sir Anthony Mansel, knight, of 
Britton Ferry, " son of deceased, the said Sir Walter being now 

This is sufficiently clear ; Sir Walter also receives mention 
in the Calendar of State Papers ; in the year 1629 he is twice alluded 
to as justice of the Peace ; and in 1638, cr earlier, Dome Dorothy 
Maunseli (so spelt) apparentl} 7 brought an action of debt against 
him upon a bond of £6,000 ; 3 of which more hereafter. 

Sir Walter is thus doubly vouched for ; he is said to have 
married, in August, 1623, Elizabeth, daughter of Charles Fotherby, 
Dean of Canterbury, and died in April, 1640, his burial being recorded 
on April 12 in Kidwelly church ; administration was granted to 
Elizabeth, his widow, February 10, 1641. 2 This Elizabeth was 
apparently baptised, according to the Register of Canterbury 
Cathedral, April 24, 1614 ; so, unless her baptism was for some cause 
long postponed, she would be under ten years of age at the time of 
her marriage. She died, according to the " Complete Baronetage," 
at the house of Mr. George Norbury, at Great St. Bartholomew's, 
London, September 11, and was buried in Canterbury Cathedral 
September 20, 1643. 3 

Regarding Sir Walter's immediate successor in the title there 
is likewise a conflict of views among the various authorities, appar- 
ently the outcome of a lack of enterprise on the part of some of 
them in the matter of research. 

There is no doubt that Walter had a son Francis, who survived 
his father, and therefore inherited the title. The evidence for the 
existence of Francis would appear to have been overlooked, however, 
in the first instance, by the author of the " Complete Baronetage," for 
he records of Sir Walter that " he died s.p.," while Francis appears 

Cal. State Papers, 16:9-1631 ; pp. 62, 85. Ibid., 1637-163S ; p. 508. 
" Complete Baronetage," by G. E. C. Vol. i., p. 1 86. 
Harleian Society, Registers. Vol. ii., pp. 3, 119. 


immediately below as " only son and heir "—obviously a slip in 
neglecting to delete " s.p." after the existence of Francis had been 
established. It is here stated that "he was living 10 Sept. 1643, 
being then a minor, and under the age at which he could make 
choice of a guardian." » We are not told whence this information 
was derived, probably from his mother's will ; there is, however, much 
more precise information concerning Sir Francis than is here adduced. 
Sir Leoline Jenkins, Judge of the Court of Admiralty, wrote 
a short account of the life of Dr. Francis Mansel, Principal of Jesus 
College, Oxford : and here it is stated (p. 20) that the Principal, 
in 1 651, returned to Oxford, " partly out of a regard to the young 
scholars now settled at Mi. White's ; for one of them was Sir Francis 
Mansell, the heir of his father's house ; Sir Fdward and Arthur his 
brother, Sir Anthony Man-ell's two sons," etc. 

From this it is apparent tiiat Francis was living eight years 
later than the date above mentioned, and was then under age — 
"heir to his father's house:"' It is noteworthy that Sir Leoline 
Jenkins alludes to Fdward. eldest son of Sir Anthony, as Sir Fdward, 
■ possibly an anticipatory looseness of diction ; he was certainly heir 
presumptive to the title, Francis being under age and unmarried, 
but it is difficult to believe that he was of age and had been knighted ; 
and if not, whence the style of " Sir " ? 

There appeared in " Notes and Queries" (September 2, 1916), a 
communication under the pseud »nym " Ap Thomas " concerning 
the Mansels of Muddlescombe, which contains matter of considerable 

The writer herein states that he has discovered the will of 
Sir Francis Mansel, which is wrongly indexed as Mandell at Somerset 
House ; that it was executed October 23, 1654, and proved Novem- 
ber 14 following ; and this statement has been duly verified. The 
date of Francis Mansel's death is thus made clear, approximately, 
and is precisely indicated by another piece of evidence, to be 
adduced presently. 

» There does not appear to have been any legal definition of the age at which a minor 
was entitled to choose his guardian ; it is not laid down in any of the Statutes of the Realm 

anterior to trns npnJ 

anterior to this period 

r ■ • • 

Died 1628. 


A i 


. , *•:-• - ! 



:ZS- ,1-v 






'i SIR \VM. MAXSliL 



" Ap Thomas" continues: "The will enables me, with 
some other matter, to soke that ' obscurity in the succession to this 
baronetcy ' which G. E. C. found to exist from c. 1651 to 1691, and 
which, I am afraid I must say, his account of the family tended to 
make worse. The following abbreviated pedigree will, I hope, 
explain the descent of the title to 1691. 

Sir Francis, ist Bt. (cr. 1622, d. 16:9) 

I. Sir Walter, 2nd 2. Sir Anthony, 3. Dr. Francis, D.D., 4. Richard of Iscoed, 

Bt., d. 1639 Kt.,d. 1644 d. 1665 d.1635 

I H r- "i 

Sir Francis, only son, I. Sir Edward, 4th Francis, Arthur, 

3rd Bt., d. 1654 Bt., d. Feb. 1691 d.v.J.,s.f. d.v.f.,s.p. 

jtiiony of Iscoed, 
before 1 690-91 

I I 

1. Anthony, 2. Edward, 

d. 1679 d. 1678 I 

I, Sir Richard of Iscoed, 
' 5th Bart., d. Aug., 1691 

I I 

1. Sir Richard of Fcoed, 2. Sir William of Iscoed, 

6th Bart., d. (?) 1699 7th Bart. 

" In his account of the baronetcy, G. E. C. calls Anthony 
(d. 1679) the son (and h. app.) of Anthony of Iscoed (whom he queries 
as 5th Bt.). In my little pedigree I show Anthony as the elder (I 
believe) son of Sir Edward of Muddlescombe, the 4th Bt. That 
this Anthony was the son of Sir Edward, and not the so-called 
' eldest ' son of Anthony of Iscoed, may be inferred from two things : 
(a) an undated letter in the Penrice and Margam MSS. (No. 760), 
written by this Anthony to his father, Sir Edward, then living at 
Margam (the seat of another Sir Edward Mansell of Margam, 4th 
Bt.) ; (b) that in the pedigrees of the family Richard is stated to 
be the first son of Anthony of Iscoed, and Anthony is called the 
second son." 

The above pedigree may be compared with the one on pages 
98 and 99, which agrees in the descent with that in the "Complete 
Baronetage " by G. E. C. 

Baronets of ly 

Rice Davis 
of Pennnen 

thur Mansel 
i Britton 
erry (ist 


Francis, D.D., 
Principal of 
Jesus College, 
Oxford, b. 
1589 , d. 1665 


Arthur, living 

d. 1635 

dau. and 
co-heir of 
Rees Mor- 
gan of Is- 





Robert, b. 

Rice, b. 

bap. 1772 

btp. 1 


Esq , R.N. 

Charity = William Dawkin (or Djwkiai) 

Mary — Jeanne Baptiste Ayrnand, 
Marquis de Choiseul 

Richard of Coed = Caroline, dau. 
Gainge (as;iim- I and heir of 
ed name of | Bond Hop- 
Phillips in 1 793) kins, M.P. 

George, Rebecca 
b. 1773, b.1778 
d. 1797 d. 1797 

resumed the 
tansel, 1866, 

Scotch marriage with Eliza, dau. cf Rev. 
John Sidney. 1838; remarried in 1847 

ey, b. of Scotch, marriage, 1839; assumed the title in 1903, 
nsent of his nephew, Courtenay. Obtained recognition of 

Scotch marriage in 1906, in Scottish Court of S« >ns ; 
erred to the Lord Advocate in 1007, who declared that it 
in respect of the succession to the Er.p!i = h Baronetcv ; it 
r, not registered ai the College of Arms; th is i IwarJ 
never officially recognised as Baronet. 


Baronets of Muddlcscombe 

Dorothy, dau. of Alban 
Stepney, of Prender- 
gast, co. Pembroke 
(2nd wife), liv.i662(>) 


Francis Llwdd 
of Glyn 

Thomas Broome, = 
d. 1673. (Mus- 
grave's Obituaiy.) 

I i 

Janet II. Sir Waltir, b. 
1588, m. Dec. 
II, 1623, d. 
April, 1640 

III. Sir Francs, b. 
- 1633, d. Oct. 27, 
1654, i.p. 

Pice D,v 

bap. 1615 

I I 

Francis, Anne, bap. 
bap. 1616 1617 

April, 1679 



Edward Carne . Anthony of Iscoed, 
ofCowbridge bap, Mar. 6, 161 3, 
dj 673 


V. Sir Richa 

VI. Sir Richard, 
d.i.p., in Lon- 


Susanna Wa: 
(1st wife) 

VIII. Sir I 
d. 1749 

Amy = John Ree3 ol 
■ lloyd' 

IX. Sir William, b. 
Mar., 1739, d. Jan. 
5, 1804 (M. I. St. 

bap. 1 76 1 

W. G. Br! 
Esq., , 

tocke, John.ofSmed- = 
Elaar more, Dor- 

. Car- set, d. 1858 

heir of Wm. Mor- 
ton Pleydell, of 
Whatcombe, Dor- 

. Sir William, 
b. April, 1766, 
d. Aug., 1S29 

( Mansells of Do- .-e t) 

bap. 1771 b»p. 1774 Esq, R.N. 

7. Wm. John, rector 
f EUesborough, Bucks, 
. 1791, d. 1823 

= Harriet, dau. of 
Laver Oliver, 
Esq., Brill 

I House, Bucks 

sir Thomas Phillipps, 
Bart.,of Middle I liil, 
co. Worcester, b. 
July 2, 1792, d. Feb. 
6, 1872 


XI. Sir John (2 

son), b. 0< 

1806, d.s.p. 

April, 1883 

XII. Sir Richard, b. 
Dec, 1S50, d.July. 

XIII. Sir Courtinay Cicil Ma 
holder of the title in 1918, b. 

= Ladrja 
I Henry, 

Somerset, dau. of 
nd Earl of Wor- 

ts 1585 
I S.».Fi 

«ancis Mansel 
,6n ; created 
Jjn 14, 1622, 


J cester, d. 1597 

= Catherine, dau. 
nry Morga 


. Elizabeth, dau. of Sir Anthony, 
Charles Fother- slain at New- 
by.DcanofCaft- bury, Sept., 
terbury, d. Sep., 1643 
"43 J 

, D.D. 

IV. Sif.Edw; 

Mary, dau. 
Edw. Car 
of Nash 


Humphrey Wind 




ne, dau. of = Arthur Mansel Franc 
Wm. Price of Britton Prin,.,^, 

of Britton Ferry (1st Jesus College, 

Ferry, d. husband) Oiford, b. 

l6 3 8 1589, d. 1665 


d. 1635 

Sir Roger Lou of 
Stacpoole, co. 
Pembroke (1st 


1618, d.s.p. 


John, b. 


b. If 2 


Robert, b. 


Rees Mor 
gan of Is 


Alice, dau. and co-heir of 
Rees Davits of Pentre- 

Dcc. 16S9 


VII. SirWillia 
b. Mar. 1670,1 
Oct. 18, 1700, 
'7 J- 

Amy, dau. of Sir 
Richard Cox ; 
d. before her 

Rebecca, dau. of William 
Ware of Farranalough, 
co. Cork, d. Dec, 1 791 

Three daughters 

Mary, dau. and heir of John 
Phillips of Coedgaing, co. 
Carmarthen, d. Dec. 1811, 
(M.I. St. Ishmael's) 

Elizabeth, dau. and 
he.r of John Bell 
of Harefield, Mid- 
dlesex, d. Aug., 
■ 8 43 

hzibeth, dau. and 
heir of John Dy- 
moke of Scrivels- 
by, Lincoln, b. 
Feb.. i8ni A 

I I 

Robert, = Emilia, dau. of 
General Admiral Sir 

Chas. Tyler 

Charity = William Dawkin (or Dawkins) 
Mary = Jeanne Biptiste Aymand, 
Marquis de Choiseul 



Gainge (assum- 
ed name of 
Phillips in 1793) 

Caroline, dau. George, Rebecca, 

and heir of b. 1773, b. 1778, 

Bond Hop- d. 1797 d. 1797 
tins. M.P. 

Edward Berkeley 



Courtenay, resumed the 
name of Mansel, 1866, 
d. 1875 


vith Eliza, dau. of Rev 
838; remarried in 184- 

M'lld, dau. of John Jones 
__ of Macs-y-Crugian, Car- 
marthen, d. Sept., 1885 

Edward Berkeley, b. of Scotch marriage, 1 839 ; assumed the titl 
with the consent of his nephew, Courtenav. Obtained recu 
his parents' Scotch marriage in 
this was referred to the Lord A 

1 1003, 

was, how-eve 

Berkeley was 


Scottish Court cTSessioiu; 

1 1907, who declared that it 
respect of the succession to the English Baronetcy ; it 
not registered a' the Coll -t'L- of Atith ; thus 1 rwird 
ever officially recognised as Baronet. 


It will at once be apparent that " Ap Thomas" lias not 
cleared up any obscurity in the genealogy, with regard at least to 
the successive holders of the title ; in this he is at one with G. E. C, 
though the latter has, perhaps over-cautiously, queried the steps 
of descent. 

With regard to the parentage of the Anthony in question, it 
is not of great importance, as both sons are stated to have died 
before their alleged father, Sir Edward ; but the inference which the 
wiiter draws from the letter in the Penrice MSS. is not a sound one. 
He alludes to it as an " undated " letter, which is quite correct in 
so far that the year is omitted ; it is, however, labelled May 29, 
and this has an important bearing upon the matter in question, 
which has obviously escaped the notice of " Ap Thomas." 

The summary of the letter in Dr. Birch's collation of the 
Penrice MSS. rur^ as follows : 

" Letter of Anthony Mansell to his father Sir Edward Mansell, 
Knt., describing the result of an interview with the Earl of Leicester, 
etc. ; announcing the death of the Master of the Rolls, etc." 

The style of " knight," instead of " baronet," as applied to 
this Sir Edward, at once arouses suspicion ; but there is a much 
more precise test of the accuracy of the deduction in "Notes and 
Queries " supplied by the date of May 29, and the mention of the death 
of the Master of the Rolls, obviously a recent event. 

Now we learn from Foss's " Judges of England," that Sir 
Henry Powle, Master of the Rolls, died in November, 1692 ; his 
predecessor, Sir John Churchill, died in October, 1685 ; so it is 
obvious that this announcement cannot refer to either of these. 

There is, however, a Master of the Rolls the date of whose 
death agrees with that of the letter, and demonstrates that the latter 
is misplaced chronologically in the collection, between two deeds 
dated respectively 1697 and 1702. 

Sir Edwaid Mansel. son of Sir Rhys, had likewise a son 
named Anthony ; also, Sir Edward was a knight, not a baronet, the 
order not having been then instituted ; and it is on record that 
Sir William Cordell, Master of the Rolls for three-and-twenty years 
under Queen Elizabeth, died May 17, 1581, four years before Sir 



Edward Mansel — hence the allusion by Anthony when writing on 
May 29. There appears to be no doubt that this letter was written 
in 1581 to Sir Edward of Margam knight, and not to Sir Edward of 
Muddlescombe " then living at Margam," as maintained by " Ap 
Thomas," perhaps a century later. It may therefore be assumed 
that G. E. C. is correct in his placing of this Anthony. 

The writer in " Notes and Queries " is also incorrect in stating 
that Sir Francis was only two years of age at the death of his father, 
Sir Walter, in 1640 ; there happens to have been a monument 
erected in memory of Sir Francis, from which it is apparent that he 
was of the age of one-and-twenty when he died, and consequently 
must have been seven years old at that time. 

A facsimile of the inscription upon this monument is to be 
found in a publication of the Camden Society, two volumes entitled 
" History from Marble," a production of that industrious traveller/ 
Thomas Dineley (here named Dingley, as was his father), of whum 
we have already heard in connection with the Duke of Beaufort's 
progress in Wales. 1 

These two volumes contain an immense number of inscriptions 
in London churches and elsewhere, reproduced in Dineley 's well- 
known style ; that upon the tomb of Sir Francis Mansel is here 
given as written by Dineley. 

It will be seen from this that Sir Francis was buried in the 
church of St. Gregory, under the shadow of St. Paul's — " St. Gre- 
gorie by Paul's," as Dineley terms it. 

The English translation of the inscription is as follows : 

" In Sacred Memory of that which remains of Sir Francis 
Mansell, from the county of Carmarthen in South Wales, Baronet. 
Simple of manner, cultivated in mind beyond his age, holy of life, 
whose dust near by awaits a happy resurrection. He died 27 
October in the year of our Salvation 1654, aged 21. His only sister 
sorrowing erects this monument." ! 

1 see ante, p. 10. 

• Camden Society, 8113/87. " History from Marble." Vol. ii., No. ccccxxiii. 
date here given is equivalent to the pedantic entry " V Cal. Nov." in tile original. The 1 
of St. Gregory was destroyed in the Great Fire of 1666. 


This record fixes the year of the birth of Sir Francis as 1633, 
or thereabouts, and also concurs with the date of his death as indi- 
cated in his will. His "only sister" was Elizabeth, who married 
at a mature age, in 1672, Thomas Broome, Sergeant-at-Law, and was 
left a widow in the following year. 1 

In his will Sir Francis leaves £100 to Dr. Francis Mansel, and 

makes bequests to his cousin Edward Mansell, of Britton Ferry 

who succeeded him in the baronetcy — his cousin Anne, Sir Edward 
of Margam, Sir Leoline Jenkins, his cousin Anthony, his cousin 
Walter, his cousin Edward, his cousin's son Anthony, his cousin 
Walter Thomas, his cousin Francis, his cousin Edward Game's 
widow ; to his cousin Roger Williams he remits a debt of £ro ; his 
dear sister Elizabeth is residuary legatee and one of the executors, 
the others being Edward Mansel of Britton Ferry, and his cousin 

This Walter Mansel is difficult to place ; he may have been a 
younger son of Richard of Iscoed. 

From the will of Sir Francis, and the inscription upon his 
monument, it is obvious that the date of Sir Edward's succession to 
the title is fixed at October 27, 1654, and not " about 1650," as in 
the " Complete Baronetage." 

On the death of Sir John Mansel, the eleventh baronet, in 
1883, as is apparent from the pedigree, without issue, he was suc- 
ceeded by Richard second son of Courtenay (who resumed the name 
of Mansel in 1S66), to the exclusion of Edward Berkeley Mansel, his 
elder brother. This exclusion was clue to the fact that Courtenay 
Phillips (afterwards Mansel) contracted a Scotch marriage, in 1S3S, 
with Eliza, daughter of the Rev. John Sidney ; and although this 
union was probably recognised as regular in Scotland, it was held to 
be invalid in England for the purpose of succession in the baronetcy. 
Courtenay Phillips appears to have himself entertained some doubt 
as to his position, for in 1847 he and his wife were remarried in 
England, and Richard, born in 1850, succeeded, as above stated, 
to the title. 

At his death, in 1S92. his son. Courtenay Cecil, then twelve 

1 Musgrave's Obituarv. 



years of age, assumed the title : but meanwhile his uncle, Edward 
Berkeley Mansel, had not renounced his claim, and alter Courtenay 
came of age, being persuaded of the validity of his uncle's position, 
he relinquished the title to him, in 1903. 

In the year 1906 Edward Berkeley obtained in the Scottish 
Court of Sessions a declaration of the validity of his father's marriage 
in 1S38 ; but this was challenged by the College of Arms, where his 
title had not as yet been recognised or registered ; and at the request 
of the authorities there the Home Secretary referred the case to the 
Lord Advocate, who decided in favour of Edward Berkeley Mansel, 
ruling that the Scottish decision was binding in the case of an English 
baronetcy. The title was not, however, registered at the College of 
Arms. Sir Edward Berkeley Mansel died in 190S, and the title was 
then resumed by Sir Courtenay, the present holder (1918). 

It is stated in the " Complete Baronetage " that Sir Richard 
(twelfth baronet) " succeeded to the title but not to the family 
estate." Sir John (eleventh baronet) had, in fact, disentailed the 
Iscoed estate, and on his death (in 18S3) it passed to his daughters ; 
the property of Courtenay Mansel (d. 1875) came to Sir Richard, and 
that of his brother, Edward Berkeley Phillips, to Edward Berkeley 

Allusion has already been made to a suit by Dame Dorothy 
Maunsell against Sir Walter Maunsell, in the year 163S. The sum- 
mary in the Calendar of State Papers runs as follows : 

" June 12. Petition of Dame Dorothy Maunsell, widow, to 
the King. Petitioner brought an action of debt upon a bond of 
£6,000 against Sir Walter Maunsell, and thereupon had judgment at 
the Great Sessions in co. Carmarthen. Defendant brought a writ 
of error at the Council in the Marches, and there obtained a reversal 
of the former judgment. She is informed by her counsel that the 
reversal is erroneous, and that there is just cause to have a writ of 
error in the Court of King's Bench, but the Lord Keeper makes some 
difficulty thereof, except he were warranted by your Majesty. Prays 
the King to require the Lord Keeper to order the Chief Justice and 
the rest of the Judges of the King's Bench to deliver their opinions 
to the Lord Keeper of what is agre. u . to law in this case. 


" i. Direction to the Lord Keeper to require certificate. 
from the Lord Chief Justice and other Judges of the King's Bench 
to the effect above mentioned." 

Now Sir Francis, first baronet, married as his second wife 
Dorothy, daughter of Alban Stepney ; of this Dorothy it is stated 
in the " Complete Baronetage " that she " was living Dec. 
1G2S. In the calendar of the (now missing) admons. for 1662 are 
two of ' Dame Dorothy Mansell,' one in April as of ' co. Carmarthen,' 
and the other in July as of ' co. Pembroke,' both being, presumably, 
of this lady." 

The most obvious assumption is that Dame Dorothy, widow of 
Sir Francis, was in litigation against her stepson, Sir Walter Mansel. 

There is, however, among the MSS. in the repository of the 
House of Lords, the record of another petition of Dame Dorothy 
Mansell, the summary of which is as follows : 

" Petition of Dame Dorothy Mansell {sic). Petitioner ob- 
tained a writ of error for the recovery of certain records out of the 
Court holden by the Lord President and Council in the Principality 
and Marches of Wales in a cause against her late husband, Sir Walter 
Mansell. The records are ready to be returned into their Lordships' 
House, but the Lord President, on account of his great infirmity and 
sickness, is unable to bring them. Prays that some order may be 
made whereby the records may be certified, and brought before their 
Lord. -iiips." l 

This is dated in the year 1645, seven years later than the 
former record, Sir Walter Mansel, the second baronet, having died 
during the interval ; but this Dorothy could not, according to the 
pedigree, have been the widow of this Sir Walter, for his wife, Eliza- 
beth Fotherby, is there stated to have survived him by three years, 
so there can be no question of a second marriage. 

The petition of Dorothy Mansell above cited, in 1645, alludes 
to the petitioner having obtained a writ of error in connection with a 
cause against Sir Walter Mansell, and this was what Dorothy Maunsell 
was seeking in 163S ; and although the surname is spelled differently, 

Hist. MSS. Com. Report VI., A n . p. 89 b. 


l °S 

the obvious inference is that the Dorothy of the one petition is 
identical with Dorothy of the other, in spite of the interval of seven 
years. The law moves slowly in such matters, and the petitioner may 
have delayed, from some cause or another, to make her application • 
but her " late husband " Sir Walter remains to be accounted for — 
and it does not appear very easy to account for him without clashing 
with other facts or evidences. 

There is the possibility that Dorothy, widow of Sir Francis 
Mansel, the first baronet, was married a second time to one Sir 
Walter ; but the hypothesis cannot be presented as feasible or 
probable ; and even if it be entertained, there is no evidence of the 
contemporary existence of a second Sir Walter of any branch of the 
family. Indeed, it is almost impossible to imagine that Sir Walter 
and Dorothy, named in the two petitions, are not the same persons ; 
that there should have been two of either name engaged in such 
similar litigation appears wildly improbable. 

Dorothy Maunsell, of the first petition, in 1638, though she 
is described as a widow, does not allude to Sir Walter Maunsell as 
her " late husband " ; nor is there any indication in the petition as 
to the date of the action upon a bond of £6,000 ; but if she was the 
widow of one Sir Walter Maunsell, this action and his appeal against 
the judgment must clearly have been prior to the year 1638. 

The problem is a curious one, and difficult of solution ; accord- 
ing to the genealogical account in the " Complete Baronetage," Sir 
Walter Mansel married Elizabeth, daughter of Charles Fotherby, 
Dean of Canterbury. The author states that this Elizabeth is " often 
erroneously called Mary," and he comments upon her extreme 
youth at the time of her marriage, in 1623, as evidenced by the 
record of her baptism in 1614, which has already been noticed above. 
Furthermore, he states that the marriage settlement is dated August 2, 
1623 ; this should be explicit as to the Christian names, but it does 
not appear where it is to be found. 

There are certain discrepancies to be noted concerning the 
Fotherbys, which may, together with Elizabeth's age at the time of 
her alleged marriage, warrant some hesitation in accepting these 



In the first place, Charles Fotherby was not Dean of Canter- 
bury in 1623 ; he held the post from May 12, 161 5, to March 29, 1619, 
the elate of his death ; * and the fact of his death in 1619 would 
account for his daughter's marriage having taken place elsewhere. 
They were, in fact, married at St. Mary le Strand, December 11, 1623, 
as testified by the Register. 

Now, as to Elizabeth Fotherby 's age ; assuming that it is she 
who is referred to in the Register as having been baptised in 1614, 
she would, as already noticed, have been under ten years of age at 
her marriage, while Walter Mansel, her alleged husband, was about 
five-and-thirty at that time. It appears vastly improbable that 
such a marriage should have been permitted ; child marriages were 
becoming more rare in those days, but when they were, for reasons 
of family policy, etc., arranged, most usually the bridegroom was 
likewise of childish age, and the two dwelt apart until they had 
attained years of puberty. 

There is, however, very strong evidence that Elizabeth, 
baptised in 1614, could not have been Walter Mansel's wife ; for the 
Register records, on October 14, 1624. the baptism of a daughter, 
Cyslye (or Cecily) of Mr. Waller Mansel, and it will scarcely be 
maintained that Elizabeth became a mother at the age of ten or 
eleven. Nor is it more probable that she was withheld from baptism 
until she was sixteen or seventeen ; the date of baptism is invariably 
accepted as equivalent, within a week or two, to that of birth, and 
there is no ground for making an exception in this instance. 

Nor is it by any means certain that this Elizabeth was daughter 
to Charles Fotherby. 

On October S, 1610, appears the record of the baptism of 
" Richard and Marye, ye sonne and daughter of Doctor Fothersbye, 
one of the worshipful Prebendaries " — this was Martin Fotherby. 

1 " Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanse," by John Le Neve. Vol. i., p. 33. In the Diet. Nat. 
Biog. appeals a notice of Martin Fotherby, who is there stated to have been appointed to the 
Deanery in 1615 ; but the writer, while referring to Le Neve's Fasti, has apparently confused 
Martin and Charles ; he gives March zq, 1019, as the date of Martin's death, whereas Le Neve 
cites the epitaph on the tomb ia Canterbury Cathedral a; evidence of the death of Charles on 
this date. Martin Fotherby, according to Le Xeve, was a Prebendary of Canterbury in I 596, 
and was consecrated Bishop of Salisbury in 1 61 8 (p. 60). 


Principal of Jesus College, Oxford. Born 1581,: died 1665. 

\ - 



Rector ol Ellesborough, Bucks., 

Chaplain in Ordinary to King George HI. 

Burn 170, ; died 1S-. 

[See page roc,.) 


Charles was Archdeacon at that time, and afterwards held the 
Deanery and Archdeaconry concurrently until his death. 

Again, on April 24, 161 4 : " Being Easter Day, Elizabeth, the 
daughter of Mr. Doctor Fothersbye " ; both dignitaries would be 
styled " Doctor " in the Register, and Elizabeth, for all the evidence 
contained therein, may as well have been the daughter of one as of 
the other. 

Since it is clear that this Elizabeth of the baptismal Register 
in 1614 could not have been the wife of Sir Walter Mansel, and very 
possibly was the daughter of Martin and not of Charles Fotherby, 
some discredit, as has already been noted, is cast upon the pedigree 
as set forth in the " Complete Baronetage." 

If Sir Walter married one Elizabeth Fotherby in 1623, she 
must have been born nut later than about 1607, and most probably 
earlier, though marriages at the age of sixteen were not infrequent ; 
and assuming that she was the daughter of Charles Fotherby, the 
record of her baptism might reasonably be sought in the Cathedral 
Register. No such record, however, is to be found therein ; and this 
may be accounted for by the fact that Charles Fotherby was at that 
time Archdeacon, and as such would not necessarily be resident at 
Canterbury, either then or in 1614, when the other Elizabeth was 
baptised ; his residence there perhaps commenced with his pro- 
motion to the Deanery in 1615. It is extremely improbable that a 
child of his, born within the Cathedral precincts, should not have 
been baptised there, and the baptism duly recorded in the Cathedral 

Among the " Collections " of White Kennett, Bishop of 
Peterborough, there are many biographical memoranda, mostly 
concerning church dignitaries. One of these notices treats of Charles 
Fotherby, and a transcript is given of the epitaph on his tomb, in 
the Chapel of the Blessed Virgin, Canterbury Cathedral, the second 
paragraph of which runs as follows : "He had one and one only wife 
for thirty-one years. Cecilia Walker of Cambridge, by whom he had 
ten children, of whom five dying left the following : John, married 
to Elizabeth daughter of Anthony Cook, Knight ; Phoebe married 
to Henry Palmer, Knight, of Kent ; and Prisciila married to Robert 


John Moyle Esquire, of Buckwell in the same county. Two remain 
unmarried, Elizabeth and Mabel." 

A pedigree in manuscript corroborates these marriages, etc., 
Elizabeth and Mabel being shown as unmarried ; according to this 
pedigree Charles and Martin Fotherby were both sons of Martin (or 
Maurice) Fotherby of Lincolnshire, Charles being the elder. In 
another notice by Bishop Kennett it is stated that Martin was 
consecrated Bishop of Salisbur}' in April, 161S, and died in the 
following year, a week or two before his brother Charles ; this is 
corroborated by Dugdale. 1 

There appears to be no doubt that Charles Fotherby had a 
daughter Elizabeth ; but as there is only one Elizabeth in the 
Register, and it has been demonstrated that she could not have been 
Sir Walter Mansel's wife, it is quite possible that she ma}- have been 
Martin Fotherby's daughter ; he is credited with a daughter of that 
name in the pedigree above alluded to. 

The administration of Sir Walter Mansel's estate, granted to 
Elizabeth his widow, has been verified in the original at Somerset 
House. Who, then, was the Sir Walter who was married to one 
Dorothy ? The reply does not appear to be forthcoming ; possibly 
some further light may be thrown upon the subject later on. The 
point does not immediately affect the genealogy, so far as can be 
seen ; there is no doubt that Sir Francis was the son of Sir Walter 
by Elizabeth his wife. 

Later on another apparent discrepancy in the genealogy 
presents itself. 

Sir John Bell Mansel, who succeeded to the title in 1829, is 
noted as being second but eldest surviving son of Sir William, the 
tenth baronet ; and this is corroborated by the following record in 
the Gentleman's Magazine : " At Southgate, of a son and heir, 
Mrs. Mansel, relict of the Rev. William John Mansel, late rector of 
Ellesborough and Hithe, and eldest son of Sir William Mansel 
Bart." - The date is October 1, 1823, six years before the death of 

1 Lansdowne MSS. 983, fol. 349 ; ibid. 9S4, fol. 13 ; Addit. MSS. 5509, fol. 70. Mon. 
Ang]. (second edition). Vol. vi., p. 1292. 

* Gentleman's Magazine. Vol. iciii., pt. ii., p. 367. 


Sir William. This posthumous child of the Rev. William John 
Mansel is correctly styled " son and heir " ; he was undoubtedly 
heir to the baronetcy, and Sir John could only have succeeded to the 
title in 1829 in the event of the previous death of this buy. 

There is, however, a further announcement in the Gentle- 
man's Magazine, as follows : " Deaths. 21 July, 1S29. Sir 
William Mansel, eighth Baronet of Muddlescombe, co. Carmarthen. 
He is succeeded by his grandson, a minor, son of the late Rev. Wm. 
John Mansel, who died in 1823." l 

Here, of course, is an error, in that Sir William is alluded to 
as the eighth baronet, whereas he was the tenth ; but the Gentle- 
man's Magazine is merely repeating the extraordinary blunder of 
which nearly every genealogist was guilty at that time, in omitting 
all reference to Sir Walter and Sir Francis, the second and third 

The Gentleman's Magazine is usually accepted as reliable 
in respect of such announcements, though it is not quite clear upon 
what authority the records are inserted ; the natural assumption 
would be that the information was imparted by some number of the 
family. In this instance, however, it certainly was not so imparted, 
for, as a matter of fact, this posthumous child only survived its 
birth by a few hours, and the members of the Mansel family most 
nearly concerned were much annoyed at the time by this unwary 
and inaccurate assertion. Had ii. been true, the present baronet 
would have been the fourteenth ; but in the face of precise informa- 
tion from him as to the true facts, the genealogy of the Baronets 
Mansel of Muddlescombe as here set forth must be maintained as 
strictly accurate. 

The Rev. William John Mansel was born about the year 
1 791 ; there is a mural tablet to him in Ellesborough church, upon 
which it is stated that he was thirty-two years of age when he died. 
He was presented to the living of Ellesborough, Bucks, August 28, 
1818, by Robert Greenhill Russell, Esq. He was also presented 
to the Rectory of Heath (spelled Withe in the obituary notice), 

1 GentUman'i Magazine. Vol. icix., pt. ii., p. 648. 


co. Oxon, by the king, in 1 817, and was appointed a Chaplain in 
Ordinary. 1 

He married, July 2, 1814, Harriet Charlotte, daughter of 
Laver Oliver, Esq., of Brill House, Buck^. Mr. Oliver's three 
daughters were married on the same day : Harriet to Mr. Mansel ; 
Mary to Lieut. -Colonel Charles Manners Sutton, son of the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury ; and Eliza to the Rev. William Stephen 
Gilly, of Wanstead, Essex ; 3 rather an unusual family incident. 
From the portrait group here reproduced it would appear that these 
three ladies were all blessed with more than ordinary good looks. 

The most prominent member of this branch of the family is 
undoubtedly Francis, third son of Sir Francis, first baronet. 

Francis Mansel was born, according to his intimate friend and 
biographer, Sir Leoline Jenkins, on Palm Sunday, 1588, which almost 
certainly means 1589, Palm Sunday occurring before March 25 ; 
this is confirmed by the record of his matriculation at Jesus 
College, Oxford, in 1607, when he is stated to have been eighteen 
years of age. 3 

There is in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford a MS. Life of Dr. 
Francis Mansel ; this is stated by William Wynne, sergeant-at-law, 
in a biography of Sir Leoline Jenkins, to have been written by Sir 
Leoline with his own hand/ It was printed in 1854, and presents 
Mansel's life and personality with brief and straightforward sim- 
plicity and affection. 

From this history it appears that Francis was educated at 
Hereford, and thence went to Jesus College, Oxford, where he took 
his degrees as Bachelor and Master of Arts as a Commoner. Sir 

1 "History of Buckinghamshire," by Geo. Lipscomb. Vol. ii., p. 183. 

- Ibid. Vol. i., p. 112. 

5 "• Alumni Oxoniensis." Vol. iii., p. 967. " Register of the Visitors of the University 
of Oxford " (Camden £ ci n 503. In the Diet. Nat. Biog. he is stated to have been born 

in 1579 i thisj however, is an error. 

1 Sir Leoline J r:- [6S5), wa= 1 cholar of Jesus College under Francis Mansel, 

: terms with him. Sir Leoline had a distinguished 
career, being up ml tic missions; he was Judge of the Court of 

Ad [661, and Privy I rv of Sta : in 1 679. He also succeeded 

Francis Mansel a: Pri icipal f Jesus College. 1L was of Welsh extraction, and a staunch 



■> .,- ! 



< c 

k . 



i- - 



• ■ ■• 


//<■<■ &■& 

Sir Francis Miinsel in back-round. 

■),,-/ rl- fr» I ' . i • - 

/V./*,,- ft, (fill "uny:> .■ ■ ( 

M 5 

QVCD \-"K">\-. ?'" EST 

j mc-wm CAroo.H 1 ' .-'T-t ;".\»i:TnATr.S'U:A! 

cerr-rv Cal .VvC . 

! £ ctatis su/Errai; ' 

;^X'.: ^.ALLITIS NR€ 
'-'^4 £ 


' .--, 

"\ M/L5TISS 


IX si (iRKCOR^i 's ( IH'RI I! 


Leoline Jenkins tells us that : " In the year 1613 he stood to be 
fellow of All-Souls as Founder's Kinsman ; but that pretension being- 
little welcome there, he was forced to waive it, and came in the 
following election ; whence upon the death of Mr. Griffin Powell, 
Principal of Jesus College, he was in the year 1620 elected to succeed 
him in the Headship." 

With regard to Francis Mansel's claim to become a fellow of 
All Souls College " as Founder's Kinsman," it will be recollected 
that his great-grandfather, Jenkin Mansel, married a granddaughter 
of Agnes Chicheley, who was grandniece to Henry Chicheley, Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, the founder of All Souls. 1 Certainly this 
claim on the part of Francis appears somewhat far-fetched, and it is 
not wonderful that it should have been " little welcome " ; his 
" kinship " with the founder was considerably watered down by the 
lapse of time. 

However, he was duly elected a fellow of All Souls upon his 
merits; and this fact, together with his selection fe>r the important 
post of Principal of Jesus College, at the comparatively early age of 
thirty-one, undoubtedly indicates that he was regarded as a man of 
high character and unusual attainments ; nor was this estimate of 
his worth in any degree stultified, but rather enhanced, in his sub- 
sequent career. 

Mansel's election as principal was, however, by no means 
unanimous or unopposed ; probably there was considerable jealousy 
among other Fellows who considered that they had more claim to 
the advancement. He was appointed on June 28, and on July 13 
he expelled from their fellowships three of those who had opposed his 
election ; a few days later he proceeded against a fourth. This was 
not a happy commencement in his new office, nor was his tenure of 
it a lengthy one on this occasion. In the following year, 1621, 
before his " year of grace " at All Souls had expired, he resigned, and 
retired on his fellowship. 

This retirement Sir Leoline Jenkins states was effected in 
favour of Sir Eubule Thehvall, " in contemplation of his greater 
abilities to enlarge the buildings, and to increase the revenue of the 

1 Ste Vol. i., p. 276. 


College.'' This is corroborated in Wood's " Fasti Oxoniensis "— 
" Francis Mansell resigned on a prospect of some advantage which 
would accrue to this society thereby." » 

Sir Leoiine also tells us that the fellowship was more lucrative 
than the headship., and entailed less expense ; but he is by no means 
a good biographer, in spite of his affectionate admiration of his 
subject, and does not succeed in making a clear consecutive story 
Having recorded Hansel's resignation, after less than twelve months' 
tenure of office, he proceeds to dilate upon his success in the choice 
of Foundation-men," and names a number of these who, to Han- 
sel's credit, became afterwards distinguished ; quite ignoring the 
obvious fact that it was impossible, during a few months, by no means 
free from internal disagreements, that the principal should exercise 
any such permanent influence. 

It must have been after his resumption of the headship, in 
1630, that Mansel got a hold on affairs, and doubtless effected much 
good by his counsel and example. Sir Leoiine does not mention his 
return at this date, but proceeds to dilate upon the troubles which 
followed the visitation of the University by the Parliamentary 
officials, in 164;. 

Anthony a Wood, in his History of the University of Oxford, 
gives a very full account of the visitation, commencing with the not 
unnaturally bitter sentence : " It being now thought convenient 
by ' the blessed Parliament * (so it was now called bv those that 
assumed to themselves the name of ' beloved Saints ')' that it was 
high time for the University of Oxford to be visited (eagerly desired 
also by a pitiful sort of people called Seekers, that had since the 
surrender thrust themselves into the University) an ordinance was 
made by them for that purpose on the 1st of May." 

In accordance with this ordinance, a committee of four-and- 
twenty visitors was appointed, with ample powers to deal with every 
possible and probable contingency ; to call before it all or any of the 
officials and scholars of the various colleges and require their accept- 
ance of the " Solemn League and Covenant," the " Negative Oath," 

1 - Fj=:i Oxoniensis," by A. Wood ; p. 577. 


:;'•■/ ■">* | 








SIR \\"M. 






Burn 1750 

; died 1S04. 



- ■ 

-.. 'd 




and such other formulas as had been invented and instituted by 
Parliament to meet the extraordinary circumstances of the times. 

The visitors, having behind them the whole force of the 
" Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament," were bound, of 
course, to prevail in the end ; but their summons was met in the 
first instance by a most determined and logical non ftossumns on the 
part of the Heads and Scholars of the University, who demanded to 
be informed of the nature of the Commission upon which the visitors 
acted— whether it was issued by the king, or in his name, or under 
the Great Seal ; declaring that by their statutes and ordinances the 
king himself was their only authorised visitor, or some person or 
persons directly delegated by him. 

Receiving no satisfactory reply to these demands, the Heads 
repeatedly refused when summoned to present themselves before the 
visitors ; and when any of them did attend, they framed their replies 
in such a fashion — pre-arranged among them — that the visitors 
obtained no kind of satisfaction therefrom. Dr. Samuel Fell, the 
vice-chancellor, was so persistently hostile and obstructive that he 
was imprisoned. 

The University, in short, was practically a Royalist com- 
munity, and none was more loyal than Francis Mansel, who, with the 
great majority of officials and scholars, was deprived of his post and 
compelled to leave Oxford. 

Sir Leoline Jenkins asserts that " of sixteen Fellows and sixteen 
Scholars (of Jesus College) there remained but one Fellow and one 
Scholar that was not outed at the Visitation of the two Houses in 

During these seventeen years since his reappointment in 
1630, however, Francis Mansel bad devoted himself entirely to his 
College, with a whole-hearted zeal and untiring energy which could 
not fail of success. 

His exemplary life and pleasing personality procured him 
immense and beneficial influence over the scholars, in whom, and all 
who came in contact with him, he appears to have inspired the 
deepest admiration and affection. 

Nor was he content with thus contributing to the moral and 



scholarly tone of the College ; he interested himself deeply in the 
various buildings, and inaugurated a scheme of renovation and 
reconstruction on generous lines, not doubting but that, through the 
generosity of friends, and through his own private means, the neces- 
sary funds would be forthcoming. Nor was he disappointed, though 
the Civil War caused the loss of large contributions which had been 

Sir Lewis Mansel, as we have seen, subscribed for several years, 
and other Welshmen were not backward. Indeed, Jesus College 
was founded, in 1571, by a Welshman, one Hugh ap Rhys; and 
among the list of benefactors in Wood's History there are very few 
who are not either Welshmen, or from the Marches or border counties 
of Wales. Hugh ap Rhys (or Dr. Hugh Price, as he is subsequently 
styled) bequeathed the sum of £700 to the College. 

Anthony a Wood says that " the Building being finished, was 
possessed forthwith by Welsh Scholars, they in the mean time 
having inhabited in Whyte Hall, which stood on the place on which 
afterwards was built the west side of the Quadrangle." ' The 
buildings were, however, finished only in a restricted sense ; much 
remained to be done, and Francis Mansel, as before stated, devoted 
himself to the task of completion. 

With regard to Wood's statement that the Welsh scholars 
formerly occupied Whyte (or White) Hall, the following is of interest : 
" We had not anciently as we have now (1781) Colleges for the 
habitation of Scholars ; but Scholars lived in hired houses, amongst 
those of the Town. And when a Master or Tutor hired a house, for 
the use of himself and his scholars, such House was wont to be called 
a Hall, and he the Principal of that Hall. The number of such Halls 
being indefinite, sometimes more, sometimes fewer, as there was 
occasion." 3 

Although Mansel was prevented by the war from canying 
out all his building designs, he accomplished a great deal ; and 

Fasti Oxoniensis," p. 57: 
Collectanea Curios," by 
»yman and antiquary of s< 
"History and Antiquities of the University of Oxford," with valuable additions ot his own. 

* "Collectanea Curiosa," by John Gutch. Vol. ii., p. 5?. John Gutch (1746-iS^l) 
clergyman and antiquary of some note. He edited the best English edition of Wc d's 





\ j,f, 


t -. 

* - 



through the munificence of various Welshmen, and finally of Sir 
Leoline Jenkins, who succeeded Mansel as Principal, the College was 
at length completed as it now stands. 

Sir Leoline tells us that Mansel was in Wales at the com- 
mencement of the Civil Wat, arranging with various prospective 
benefactors for the supply of funds ; and that he, together with 
Dr. Frewyn. later Archbishop of York, and Dr. Sheldon, afterwards 
Archbishop of Canterbury, resided for several months at the house 
of Sir Anthony Mansel, brother to Francis ; they all returned to 
Oxford, however, ai the end of the year 1642. 1 

Dr. Mansel was now under orders from the Court to house 
certain " person^ of quality " ; to wit, Lord Herbert and others, 3 
who had come out of Wales upon the king's service. 

In September, 1643, however, he was horrified by receiving 
the news of the tragic death of his brother. Sir Anthony, at the 
battle of Newbury, and, according to his biographer, was so over- 
whelmed by the shock that his life was in danger. Recovering his 
health, Dr. Francis hastened to Wales to settle his brother's affairs, 
and attend to the welfare of his orphaned children. Sir Leoline 
Jenkins remarks that his zeal for the king's cause, and his faith in its 
justness, exceeded his solicitude on behalf of Sir Anthony's children. 
for lie lent all the money, amounting to upwards of £1,000. which 
Sir Anthony left, to the Commissioners of Array for Charles's aft'aiis, 
and never saw a penny of it again. 

However, he continued to exert himself in the king's cause, 
by precept and example ; and as Glamorgan was exempt for the time 
from the inroad of Parliamentary forces, he found plenty of scope for 
his zeal among the refugees who lied thither, having been driven 
from their homes. " And 'twas prodigious to observe how careful he 
was for the accommodation and supply of such persons, since it may 
be truly averred, that there was no stranger of quality, military or 

1 Frewyn (or Frewen) was President of Magdalen College ; Sheldon was Warden of All 
Souls. The latter was imprisoned for refusing to surrender his lodgings to the Co:: ' iktee I 
Visitation, in 164S. Frewen was also .1 staunch Royalist. 

3 Henry Somerset, Marquess 01 Worcester, April 3, 1667; created Duke of Bcufort 
December 2, 1CS2. 


civil, clergy or lay, cither in that or the neighbour counties of Mon- 
mouth or Carmarthen, who did not cither receive a supply of ready 
money at Ids hands, or else an affectionate tender of such supply or 
of any other service." 

Apparently Mansel, placing the king's cause before all else, 
and deeming his presence in Wales more serviceable in this regard 
than the resumption of his duties at Oxford, remained absent there- 
from until the year 164;, when, hearing of the approaching visitation 
by the Parliamentary Commission, lie hastened to Oxford, with 
characteristic courage and enthusiasm, to " face the music." 

Jenkins states that the Earl of Pembroke, who was connected 
by marriage with the Mansels, and whose two sons had been scholars 
under Mansel at Oxford, offered to make things smooth for him. 
Pembroke was at that time, on behalf of the Parliament, Chancellor 
of Oxford, and he could, no doubt, have exerted sufficient influence 
to retain Dr. Francis in his post, if the latter would have consented 
to some compromise between his loyalty and his own interests. 

The earl discovered, however, that he was " up against " a 
stone wall, upon which no offer of favours, whether sincere or other- 
wise, could make the least impression. 1 

"When his turn came," says Jenkins, "he published his 
non-submisdon with that excellent mixture of modesty and courage, 
as made his visitors ashamed of their Reformation, and open to 
bemoan the difficulty of the times that forced them to turn out a 
person not on 1 }' in his life and conduct unblameable even to the 
highest rigour and partiality (his adhering to the King, which was his 
only crime, excepted;, but so highly useful to the College he related 

1 Philip Herbert (fourth Earl of Pembroke of the creation of 1551, directly descended 
from Philip }.Iansel of Oxwich), was not thesort of man of whom such an one as Francis Mansel 
would be prone to accept favours. He is described as " an ingrate, an ignoramus, a common 
swearer, a bully, and a coward." Samuel Butler wrote of him — 
"Pembroke's a covenanting Lord 

That ne'er with God or man kept word ; 

One day he'd s%vear he'd serve the king, 

The neit 'twas quite another thing ; 

Stiil changing with the wind and tide 

That he might keep the stronger side." 
Probably his reputation was well known to Francis Mansel. 


1 17 

to, that they seemed (in their confession) to take from it the only 
stay and pillar that was likely (as the times then went) by his pru- 
dence, interest, and zeal to preserve it from utter ruin and 

Whether or not the usurpers of the principal's office were as 
deeply impressed as is here indicated by Sir Leoline, perhaps an over- 
enthusiastic narrator, there appears to be no doubt that Dr. Francis 
exhibited a noble patience and dignity under such trying conditions, 
and that his solicitude lor his beloved College occupied the first 
place in his mind. 

The actual older of eviction did not come into force until 
May, 1648 ; during the interim Manse! busied himself over the 
affairs of the College with as much care and solicitude as though he 
were to continue in charge. He obtained from Lord Herbert of 
Cherbury the promise of the legacy of his Greek and Latin books to 
Jesus College, which was duly fulfilled ; : he secured the promise of 
certain benefactions to the College, and conveyed the emoluments of 
sundry Church appointments which he held for a like purpose ; and 
he left behind him his private library of some six or seven hundred 
volumes of theological and other works. 

When at length the time of compulsory departure arrived, 
Mansel had prepared a statement of accounts with scrupulous 
accuracy ; and having handed over his charge to the intruders, he 
betook himself once more into Wales, to the house of Sir John 
Aubrey (who was at that time in prison by reason of his uncom- 
promising loyalty to King Charles) at Llantrithyd.- 

This residence, Sir Leoline Jenkins remarks, " afforded him 
the convenience of a more private retirement and of having several 
young gentlemen of quality, his kindred, under his eye, while they 
were taught and bred up by a young man of his college that he had 
chosen for that employment." 

We learn from William Wynne, of the Middle Temple, in his 

1 Lord Herbert nude hi; will August I, and died August 20, 1648. His bequest remains 
in Jesus College library. 

1 Sir John Aubrey was son of Sir Thomas, by his marriage with Marv, daughter of 
Anthony, son of Sir Rhys Mansel. At the Res [oration' Sir John was crested a baronet, July : ;, 
1660. The title became extinct in iS?6. 


Life of Sir Leoline Jenkins, that this " young man," of whom Man- 
sol's biographer speaks, was none other than Leoline Jenkins himself : 
that he was in the first instance entrusted with the tuition of Sir 
John Aubrey's son, and proved himself so industrious and efficient 
that other young men of good family were soon placed under his 
instruction, to be " improved in just and virtuous principles, as well 
as letters." 

Thus was established at Llantrithyd a sort of " Hall," in 
imitation of those at the University, with Leoline Jenkins as tutor, 
and Dr. Francis Mansel exorcising a capable and beneficent super- 

This state of things was not, however, destined to continue 
for very long ; the Parliamentarians soon invaded the neighbour- 
hood, and displayed but little appreciation of the studies of the little 

Mansel was soon selected as the butt of the soldiery, by reason 
of his personality. 

" For the Doctor's very grave and pious aspect, which should 
have been a protection to him among savages, was no other than a 
temptation to those (who reputed themselves Saints) to act their 
insolencies upon him ; once meeting him in his walk they took him 
foi an old priest (as they called him) and searched his pocket for 
letters ; another time they came to Llantrithyd House, and a 
barbarous crew of them, not contented to deride him openly to his 
face for his canonical habit (which he constantly wore) and for his 
using the Liturgy in public twice a day, which lie never omitted, 
among the young scholars in the house, they fell a searching for 
Common Prayer Books, and finding about a dozen of them in the 
parlour where he used to officiate, they pleased themselves hugely 
with making one blaze of fire of so many books ; but, which was yet 
more barbarous, the)' laid hands on his person, and one Clements 
(a farrier by trade) but a preacher by profession ripped and tore his 
canonical cassock about him that it dangled from his girdle down- 
wards, in so many small shreds or thongs as made them great sport ; 
the pious old man with eyes and hands lifted up to Heaven saying 
no other ' but that his Blessed Saviour had suffered for him and his 


martyred Sovereign had suffered by them infinitely more than he 
was able to suffer or they to inflict upon his poor person.' And 
having satiated themselves with insolencies, in defacing the Kiiv's 
arms not only in several windows but in chimney pieces and other 
curious pieces of art and ornament about the house, they ended the 
scene of mirth upon the Common Prayer Book and Apocrypha, 
which they tore out of the great Bible in the neighbour church, and 
carried away the young man prisoner for the better dispersing of his 
scholars, which was a reformation they principally aimed at in this 
affront upon the Doctor." 

Jenkins was indicted at the Quarter Sessions for holding " a 
Seminary of Rebellion and Sedition " ; and as he refused to renounce 
his principles as a Royalist, he was compelled to leave the neigh- 

By the advice of Dr. Mansel, Jenkins went to Oxford, accom- 
panied by his pupils, and settled there in the house of Alderman 
White, in the High Street, which became known by the title of the 
" Little Welsh Hall." 

This was in the year 1651 ; and shortly afterwards Dr. 
Mansel, as previously related, followed them to Oxford, where he 
took up his abode at a baker's in Holy Well. But the Parliamen- 
tarians, realising his worth, and the interest which he took in the 
College, so far relaxed as to offer him a room therein. " This motion 
was accepted, and he lived in the College, near the stony stairs near 
the gate, for eight years, where he had leisure to observe many 
changes and revolutions, within those walls, as without them, till 
that happy one of his Majesty's Restoration, by God's infinite mercy 
to the College as well as to the nation, happily came on." 

Here Mansel busied himself in acts of charity, in visiting the 
little community at Mr. White's house, and in constantly collecting 
money for the king's cause, and for the relief of the exiled clergy, 
practising great austerities in his mode of living, in order that he 
might have more funds available for these ends. 

The Covenanters naturally regarded these matters with 
disapproval ; and after a time they resolved to break up the gathering 
at Mr. White's house. This decree reaching the ears of Dr. Sheldon 


and others, they advised that these scholars should voluntarily 
disperse, without waiting for orders, and this suggestion was adopted. 

When the Restoration supervened Mansel was indignant at 
the haste with which many pressed for restitution, before the more 
important affairs of the Church and State were settled ; nor would 
he make any application to the committee or visitors appointed to 
restore order in the University, patiently waiting until they sent for 

When at length restored to the headship of his beloved 
College, his chief care was to settle all his available property upon it, 
and to see a successor appointed who would take an equal interest 
in all that concerned it. 

By his will he gave all that he possessed to the College, naming 
his successor in the headship executor ; and Sir Leoline Jenkins 
tells us that " the College hath at this Time of his Benefaction about 
£1600 in buildings erected in his time, £40 a year in free-hold im- 
proveable to fourscore. £05 a year in Lease, under the Prebends that 
succeeded him, besides several other Benefactions which came to 
the College by his solicitation and in ids time." 

Mansel wished that he should be succeeded by Dr. William 
Bassett, Fellow of All Souls, and Justice of the Peace and Deputy- 
Lieutenant of Glamorganshire ; but Dr. Bassett's health would not 
admit of his undertaking the office, so it was by unanimous consent 
bestowed upon Sir Leoline Jenkins, on March 1, 1661. 

Dr. Francis Mansel lived for over four years after he resigned 
his office : he appears to have spent this time in preparing for death, 
and greatly to have edified those who surrounded him by his piety 
and devotion. 

He died May 1, 1665, at the age of seventy-six. 

In the chapel of Jesus College there is a monument to Francis 
Mansel, in white marble, with a long inscription in Latin; the 
original is given in the Appendix, with a translation. 

There is a record among the Margam Abbey MSS. of " an 
acquittance by Francis .Mansel to the Lady Elizabeth Seabright of 
Margam, 1 for the use of the Wardens and Fellows of AJ1 Souls' 

1 Formerly the wife of Sir Lewis Mansel, married to Sir Edward Seabright. 

SIR COl'K 1 M-:\ I". MAXSML, 13th BARON I 
Burn 1880. 


College, Oxford, for £66 n 6kl. rent for the tithes of Langewith 
and Penarth, for a year due last Michaelmas. 7 Feb. 1645." J 

There is another document among the Margam Abbey MSS. 
which gives rise to some further conjecture regarding the Mansels 
of MuddJeseombe ; the summary runs as follows : 

" Lease for ninety-nine years by Sir Edward Mansel of 
Muddlescombe, co. Carmarthen, Bart., to Robert Mansel of Muddles- 
combe, gentleman, of a messuage and tenement called Sythin-y- 
garreg, ' within the liberty of the town of Kidwelly,' if the said 
Robert, and Francis Mansel his nephew so long live!' at an annual 
rent of £10. 4 Feb. 1657 (1658). "« Among the witnesses appear 
Henry Mansel and Walter Mansel. 

The lessor is obviously Sir Edward the fourth baronet of 
Muddlescombe, who succeeded to the title in 1654. Robert (b. 162S) 
and Walter (b. 1618) confirm the pedigree ; Francis, apparently 
nephew to Robert, is not so readily accounted for ; Anthony of 
Iscoed (d. 1673) may have had another son of this name. Henry 
is also problematical ; he may have been the fourth son of Thomas, 
first baronet of Margam— he would be an old man— or third son of 
Sir Edward, fourth baronet. 

Sir Richard, sixth baronet, of whom little is known otherwise, 
appears to have got into trouble in the year 1693 in consequence of 
a brawl with an apothecary named Pickering. The apothecary 
demanded payment of an overdue account, in terms which appeared, 
in the judgment of the baronet, somewhat too peremptory. To 
quarrel, i.e., to fight a duel, with a person in the position of an 
apothecary would have been considered " impossible " for a man of 
Sir Richard's rank ; it was, however, regarded as quite permissible 
that he should "draw" on the offender, 3 and this Sir Richard 

1 Penrice and Margam MSS. Series iv., pt. ii., p. 154 ; no . 6293. 

* Ibid. Series iv., pt. iii.. p. 139. 

• Henry Howard, afterwards sixth Duke of Norfolk, according to Whitelock " sl-w one 
Mr. Holland in the passage going to the Star Chamber, where a Committee sat." Holland 
was a member of a family which had for some generations supplied a steward or a-ent for the 
Howard estates ; obviously the future duke could not fight him— so he kil'ed him within a 
few yards of the Star Chamber ! (See - The House of Howard," by G. Brenan and E. P 
otatham. Vol. u., p. 576.) 


proceeded to do. Whethei he intended to run the other through is 
not clear ; but the result was that Pickering, starting back hastily 
from the drawn sword, fell off the raised walk, breaking his leg, and 
otherwise injuring himself so that he died shortly afterwards ; and 
Sir Richard was arrested on a charge of murder. On July 18 the 
queen commands Sir John Trenehard (Secretary of State) to send 
Sir Richard Mansel's petition for bail to the Lord Chief Justice, 
which she is willing should be granted, if in accordance with the law. 
On August ii a warrant was issued for granting a pardon to Mansel, 
"condemned to death for being concerned in the death of William 
Pickering." On August i; this is repeated, with slightly different 
wording : " convicted of the murder or manslaughter of William 
Pickering." 2 

So the apothecary paid with his life for his temerity in 
" dunning " the baronet, and the latter obtained a free pardon from 
the sovereign ; but perhaps there were circumstances in the case 
which do not appear on the surface. 

Through the marriage of John, fourth son of Sir William, the 
ninth baronet, a branch of the family became settled in Dorset ; they 
will be dealt with in another chapter. 

Sir Thomas Phillipps (1792-1872), who married Elizabeth, 
daughter of the Rev. W. j. Mansel, Rector of Ellesborough, was a 
famous antiquary and collector of manuscripts and books. He had 
married first, in 1819, Harriet, daughter of Lieut-General Sir 
Thomas Molyneux, Bart. ; his marriage with Elizabeth Mansel took 
place in 1S42. 

Sir Thomas gives his own pedigree in his additions to Big- 
land's " Gloucestershire " ; it has already been transcribed in the first 
volume. 2 

His taste for reading and for the collection of books developed 
while he was a schoolboy at Rugby, where he spent all his pocket- 
money in this manner. At Oxford his fervour increased ; and on the 
death of his father, in 181 S, he found himself a wealthy man, with 

Ca!. State Papers, Dom., 1693 ; pp. 2:9, 262, 273. 
See Vol. i., p. 93. 



.... . . *• i^ \ 


■ i 

-E • ' I 

C\^ A Tau oi- Lavr..(~\ 


large estates in Worcestershire ; and thenceforth he made the 
collection of rare manuscripts the business of his life. 

An antiquary who is possessed of ample means is obviously 
in a very happy position for the pursuit of his hobby, being able to 
outbid other competitors at home and abroad. 

Sir Thomas, in the preface to a catalogue of MSS., says : 
" In amassing my collection of manuscripts, I commenced with 
purchasing everything that lay within my reach, to which I was 
instigated by reading various accounts of the destruction of valuable 
manuscripts. My principal search has been for historical, and 
particularly unpublished, manuscripts, whether good or bad, and 
more particularly those on vellum. My chief desire for preserving 
vellum manuscripts arose from witnessing the unceasing destruction 
of them by goldbeaters ; my search for charters or deeds by their 
destruction in the shops of glue-makers and tailors. As I advanced 
the ardour of the pursuit increased, until at last I became a perfect 
vello-maniac (if I may coin a word), and I gave any price that was 
asked. Nor do I regret it, for my object was not only to secure good 
manuscripts for myself, but also to ra>se the public estimation of 
them, so that their value might be more generally known, and, 
consequently, more manuscripts preserved. For nothing tends to 
the preservation of anything so much as making it bear a high 

Sir Thomas was a very happy and fortunate enthusiast, and 
he acquired an unrivalled collection of manuscripts of every descrip- 
tion. He spent four or five years on the Continent, purchasing 
manuscripts in Belgium, Holland, France, Germany, and Switzer- 
land. Some of the illustrated and illuminated specimens which he 
acquired were of great beauty and immense value. He also obtained 
some very rare copies of manuscripts bound in ornamental metal 
and studded with gems. 

He also purchased many old and interesting printed 
books ; while coins and pictures did not escape his voracious 

With the view of facilitating access to some of his manu- 
scripts, he erected a private printing-press in a tower on his estate 


at Middle Hill, where he printed catalogues, notes, etc., in great 

xt- u Jf 7 ?° maS W3S Created a bar0net J uJ y 2 7- iS 3 i, and was 
High Sheriff for Worcestershire in 1825 ; he was a trustee of the 
British Museum, a Fellow of the Royal Society, and of the principal 
learned societies at home and abroad. He died February 6 1872 

Baronets of Trimsaren 

IK FRANCIS MANSEL, first baronet of Muddlescombe, 
married as his second wife Dorothy, daughter of Alban 

Stepney, of Prendergast, county Pembroke. 

The Mansels and Stepneys intermarried several times, 
and there are some points of interest to be noted in connection with 
the Stepney pedigree, which is here given as probably correct, though 
authorities differ in some, respects. 

In most genealogies Sir Alban, second baronet, is ignored ; 
but the will of Sir John, first baronet, is proved by Sir Alban 
Stepney, baronet, of whose estates also administration is granted, 
January 5, 1629, under the same title. 

Sir John, first baronet, is stated, in Betham's Baronetage, 
to have died in August, 1634, and in the " Complete Baronetage," 
by G. E. C, in August, 1624. His will, however, is dated July 20, 
1625, and proved February 4, 1626, so he must have died between 
these dates. His wife is named Katherine in Wotton's and Betham's 
genealogies, and Mr. R. G. Maunsell (p. Z7) has " Catherine (Jane) " ; 
but both in Sir John's will and in the grant of administration of Sir 
Alban's estate she is named Jane. It does not appear how the name 
of Katherine came to be introduced. 

This lady is placed in all the genealogies as daughter of Sir 
Francis Mansel of Muddlescombe by his second wife, Dorothy, 
daughter of Alban Stepney : Sir John Stepney, therefore, 
according to this contention, married the daughter of his sister 

The marriage of uncle and niece has been within the " pro- 
hibited degrees " from Elizabethan times ; in " The Laws of Eng- 
land " it is stated that "a marriage between persons within the 


Henry Stepney, of Aldenham, Herts = 

Ralph, = Dau. of — Cressey 
d. 1544 I 

William of 



= Dau. 

se y 

of John Wyndc 
Wylde of Ram- 
-, Hunt?. 

T ' 




t Of Al- = 


Margaret, dau. and = 
co-heir oi Thos. 
Cotharn of Pren- 
dergast, co. Pem- 

= Albak = Mary, 
of' \ 


t >o!e 

DoRO'lHY, liv. 

1629, and 
possibly in 

= Sir Francis Mansel, 1st 
Bart, of Muddlescombe ; 
d. 16:8 (2nd wife) 



dau. and co-heir 
Win. Phillips of 

Sir Johk, 1st Hart, (created Nov. 24, 1621) ; 
b. 1531 ; d. between July 20, 1625 and 
4 Feb., 1626 

Jane, liv. Jan., 1629 

SlRALSAN,2nd SirJoHN", jrd = 

Bart., d. be- Bart., d.s.p.m. 
fore Jan. 5, about 1650 

Magdalen, dau 
co-heir of 
Henry Jones, 
of Albemarle 




Thomas, b. 
cir. 1 6 10, 
d.v.p., be- 
fore 1625 

Sir 1 

= Price, dau. 

and co- 
heir of 
Sir Henry 
Jones, Bt. 

OHN, 4th Bart., 
>. 1632 ; d. 1681 

Henry Mansel, son of = 
John Mansel, eldest 
son of Sir Francis by 
Lis second marriage ; 
d. before 1 632 

— Fra 


s, dau. aud -- 
d. Dec, 

Rawleigh, son of 
Edward, son of 
Sir Francis of 
b. 1649, d. Nov. 




Sir Edward Mansel, 
1st Bart, of Trim- 








I he Resides e of Colonel Maxell Dawkin Mansell. 


prohibited degrees of consanguinity or affinity is absolutely null and 
void for all purposes whatsoever." This disability does not appear, 
however, to have been definitely enforced by law until 1S35 ; such 
marriage was formerly "only voidable by sentence of the Eccle- 
siastical Court during the lifetime of the parties " ; 1 and it may 
therefore be assumed that, in the absence of appeal to the 
Ecclesiastical Court, it would be recognised, and the issue would be 

The evidence upon which Jane is placed as issue of Sir 
Francis Mansel's second marriage is not clear, and the confusion 
in respect of her Christian name gives rise to some doubt upon 
this point ; it has not, however, been found possible to clear it 
up, so the union of uncle and niece must be tentatively accepted 
as a fact. 

The Stepney baronetcy became extinct in 1825. Sir John, 
fourth baronet, married, in 1653, the daughter and heir of Sir 
Anthony Vandyke, the famous painter ; she was only twelve years 
of age. 

The baronetcy of Mansel of Trimsaren was created in the 
third generation from Sir Francis of Muddlescombe, in the 
person of Edward Mansel, Esquire, of Trimsaren, son of Henry 
Mansel of Stradey, son of John, son o! Sir Francis by his second 

Sir Edward of Trimsaren became possessed of the Trimsaren 
estate through his marriage with Dorothy, widow of Thomas (or 
Theophilus) Lloyd, and daughter of Philip Vaughan of Trimsaren ; 
she became sole heir on the death of her brother, Edward Vaughan, 
and Edward Mansel is described as "of Trimsaren " in the patent 
of creation of the baronetcy, February 22. 1697. 

The genealogy of the Mansels of Trimsaren is given in the 
following pedigree, which is probably correct, though there is 
one step which has been questioned, viz., the parentage of Sir 
Edward Vaughan Mansel, the third baronet ; this will be dealt with 
in due course. 

" The Laws of England," by the Earl of Halsbury. Vol. ivi., p. 2S3. 


Jn H N, b. 
1612(f) 5 

Mary, dm. of Sir 
Hen. Vaughan, 
of Derwydd, 
widow of Chas. 
Phillips of Lewes 
Lodge, Carmar- 

Henry, of Stradey, = 

= Frances, d 

Carmarthenshire ; 


d. before 16S2 

Dec. i6< 

2nd wife 

James, 2nd 
son, d. 

widow of 

IJ15, s.p. Lloyd of 

(Chancery Proceedings, 

Mary, d. un- 
mar.Jul;. 6, 
1720 (Pem- 
brey Parish 

Ann, dau. of Sir Rich. 
Phillips of Pic ton 
Castle, co. Pembroke 


George Jonts ( 
Abcrcoi thy 

awleigh, b. Feb. 26, 
1682 (Llanelly 

Church Reg.) 

Mary = William DawHn 
of Kilvrough 1 

Rawleigh Dawkin (Man- 

scl), 3rd son, b. 1705 ; 
d. 1749 1 


Sam. Towns- 


Lawford Cole 
of Glouces- 
ter (Pem- 
biey Parish 

oceedings, 171 5) 


rmarthenshire Notes, vol. iii., p. 25). 

:d to have mamcub.ed at Wadham College, June 1 ;, 1627, i; 

ive been admitted Aug. 9, 1624—1'.?., at twelve years c: .i^e. 11 

' ; in this case the year of his birth would be 1602. 

129) S 


Sir Francis Mansel, ist 
Bart, of Muddlescombe 
d. 1628 (admon. 1628) 

Jo,,-, b. 

■ 6i2(.>)' 

I Si 


of Dcrwydd, 
widow of Chas. 
Phillips of Lewes 

Lodge, Carmar- 


r John Stepney, Bart 
b. 15S1, d. 1625-26 

Edward, s 
1671 > 

Iisry, of Stradey 
d. before 16S2 

Sir John Stepney = 
d. dr. 1650; I 

Magdalen, dau. of 
Sir Hen. Jones, 
,Bart., of Albe- 
marlais, Car- 

ta wleigh of Killa 
etc., b. 1649; 
Nov. 27, 1722 1 

= Widow of Chas. 

Gwempa, d. 
June, 1716, 
i.p., 3rd wife 1 

.Mice, da 
ton, d. 
1675, Is 

Edward, d.i.p., 16S0 1 


ir Edward Mansel, = 

1st Bart, of Trim- j 

saren, created Feb. | 

22, 1697; d. Feb. : 
19, or Mar. 6, 1720 

Djrothy, dan. of Alban Stepney of 
Prcr.dergast, co. Pembroke, 2nd 
ivife, liv. 1629, and possibly 1662 
(Cal of Admons.) 

Honor, dan. of Thos. 
Lloyd of AUt-y- 
Cadnoj d. Dec., 

iwleigh, of Aber- 

Dcrothv, dau. of Philip Vaughan 
of Tiimsaren, Carmarthen, 
and heir to Edward Vaughan, 
her brother ; widow of Theo- 
philus Lloyd; d. Sept., 1721 

nn, dau. of Sir Rich. 
Phillips of Pic ton 
Castle, co. Pembroke 

I! .Heigh, b. Feb. 26, 
16S2 (Llanelly 

Church Reg.) 

George Jones c 

William Dawkin 
of Kilvrough 1 

Rawleigh Dawkin (Ma 
sel), 3rd son, b. 170 


James, 2nd = 

= Katherinc, 

son, d. 

widow of 




Lloyd of 







Mary, d. un- 
niar.July 6, 
1720 (Pem- 

brey Parish 



= Mary, dau 


Anne, dau. of Thos. - 

= Sir Edward, = 

"id or 5th ; Morgan 

Price of Garth Ll- 

2nd Bart., 

son, d. 


wyn, Carnarvon, 

d. May 10; 


d.s.p.j'Noy. 1, 1 73 1 
(Gent. Mag., vol. 
1 i., p. 500 ; Hist. 

bur. May 
'4. '754 




Bridget = Dan. Shewen 
(Llanelly Church Reg., 1 75S) 

Margaretta Maria = Geo. Daw 
(Llanelly Church Reg., 1765) 

(Will dated Feb. 5, 
1807; proved Mar. 
8, 1S0S) 

Edward Wm. Richard Shewen 
(Mansel), of Thistleboon ; 
b. 1778 ;d. Oct. 22, 1806 

Inscr., Llanelly Church.) - 

Mary, Vi 

Joan = Wm. La 

Hereford, d. 
88 (will pr.), 

Sam. 1 


(Chancery Pn 

Edward Samuel 

Townsend Townser 

reedings, 1713) 

Sir Edward Vaughan, 3rd = 


b. dr., 

1730; d. 


27, 17 

S3 (Mon. 


, Pcmbrey Church) 

Magdalen = 

Mary, dau. of Joseph 
Shewen 01 S\vii.;cj, 
d. l8o\ {Gent. Mag., 
vol. Irxi., p. SS) 


Sir Edward Joseph Shewen 
Mansel, 4th Bart., d. un- 
married, April 6, 179S 
{Gent. Mag., vol. lrviii., 
P- 359) 

| Monumental Inscriptions, Llangendeirne Church (Carmarthenshire Notes, vol. iii., p. 2 
1 In Foster's "Alumni Oxoniensis " John Mansel is stated to have matriculated at VVadha 
in the register of admissions to Gray's Inn he is said to have been admitted Aug. 9, 1624— .. 
'« very improbable ; possibly 1627 is a misprint for 1017 ; in this case the year of his birth 

Lawford Cole 
of Glouces- 
ter (Pem- 
brey Patiih 

ollege, June 

IS, 1627, aged 

twelve year 

s oj jge. This 

Id be 1602. 


There is a curious discrepancy concerning the dale of the 
deatli of Sir Edward, second baronet, which appears to demand some 
investigation. In the " Complete Baronetage " it is given as " 10 
May or 4 Nov. 1754." There is a vagueness about this which at 
once attracts attention, and suggests a search for authorities ; these 
are to be found in two contemporary publications. 

In the Gentleman's Magazine for 1754 (p. 243), appears the 
following : " 13 May Sir Edward Mansel of Trimsaren, Bart.'" This 
is clear enough ; but the announcement is falsified, or at least called 
in question, by another entry (p. 530) : " 7 Nov. Sir Edward Mansel. 
Bart., of Trimsaren, Carmarthenshire." 

The London Magazine follows suit with the double announce- 
ment, giving the dates, however, as May 10 and November 4, and 
supplementing the later entry with the statement : " succeeded by 
his son, now Sir Edward Yaughan Mansel " (p. 524). 

This double record, in two separate contemporary journals, 
with an interval of six months, and four different days of the month, 
is very remarkable ; there is no death of a knight or baronet in 
another branch of the family at this time which could have occa- 
sioned any confusion of identity. Such entries in the two maga- 
zines alluded to are almost invariably accepted by genealogists as 
reliable evidence ; references thereto are innumerable in obituaries 
and genealogies, and are rarely questioned ; indeed, it is only 
reasonable that these contemporary records should be so accepted, 
just as similar entries in the Times are accepted in later years. And 
yet here is a man's death recorded twice, with absolute precision, at 
an interval of six month? ; and with the circumstantial statement 
appended to one of the later announcements, that he is succeeded by 
his so>i, Edward Yaughan Mansel. 

Fortunately, the mystery is at least partially cleared up by 
an entry in the Parish Register of Pembrey, Carmarthenshire, as 
follows : "Sir Edward Mansel, Baronet, buried 14 May 1754." J 
It is scarcely possible to question this entry, and it must therefore be 
concluded that Sir Edward died in May, and not in November, 

1 Carmarthenshire Antiquarian 'Society. Vol. via., p. 26. (Pembrey Parish Registers.) 


1754 ; but the announcement at the later date in the two magazines 
remains a mystery. 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell (p. 37) and Lieut. Mansel-Pleydell, with 

equal confidence place Sir Edward Vaughan Mansel as the son of 
Rawleigh ; but, in view of the statements above alluded to, they 
should have been careful to cite authority for this. 

Lieutenant Mansel-Pleydell gives Musgrave's obituary as his 
authority for the date of the death of Sir Edward, second baronet ; 
had he followed up Musgrave's references, he would have lighted 
upon the anomaly cf the two different records, which c ertainly should 
not be passed over without remark, and the statement that he was 
succeeded by his son. 

Dame Mary Mansel, widow of Sir Edward, second baronet, 
made a will, March 4, 17S7, and this might reasonably be expected 
to throw some light upon the matter, but it fails to do so. From her 
will it appears that she married as her third — or perhaps her second 
— husband one Barry St. Lcger, a colonel in the army (late of the 
34th Foot), and that when she executed the will she did not know 
whether or not he was living ; so she left alternate terms, viz., in 
case the colonel was dead, she left all her real and personal estate 
to her nephew Samuel Townsend, Esquire, major-general; in case 
he was living, she left £500 to Samuel Townsend, " winch I have a 
right to charge on the Trimsaren estate under the marriage settlement 
made between me and the said Colonel St. Leger "—Samuel Town- 
send was sole executor. It appears that Colonel St. Leger survived 
the testatrix, for on November 8, 17SS, administration is granted 
jointly to him and to Samuel Townsend, who was the son of Lady 
Mansel's sister-in-law, Dorothy Mansel, by her marriage with Samuel 
Townsend the elder. In the letter of administration Dame Mary 
Mansel is described as " formerly of Trimsaren in the county of 
Carmarthen, but late of the parish of St. George, Bloomsbury." 

The will of Sir Edward Vaughan Mansel, third baronet, is 
equally uninstructive in the matter of his parentage. 

In Wotton's " Baronetage" no statement of his relationship 
to his predecessor in the title is ventured upon, though the book was 
written during his lifetime; in the " Complete Baronetage " he is 


said to be " presumably son and heir by second marriage : but 
possibly nephew and heir, as son and heir of Rawleigh, a younger 
brother of the late Baronet." 

Sir Edward Mansel, second baronet, as appears in the pedigree, 
was twice married, and there is a general agreement among the 
various chroniclers that he had no issue by either marriage; but 
there does not appear to be any absolute proof of this, though the 
will of dame Mary Mansel gives colour to it. Sir Edward appears to 
have died intestate. 

The hypothesis put forward in the " Complete Baronetage," 
that Edward Vaughan Mansel was the son of Sir Edward by his 
second marriage, cannot be maintained in the face of a monumental 
inscription in Pembrey Parish Church : "In memory of Sir Edward 
Vaughan Mansel, Bart., of Stradey, who departed this life the 27th 
day of December, 178S, in the 58th year of his age." 2 

The second marriage of Sir Edward, second baronet, is 
recorded in the Gentleman's Magazine : "3 Nov. 1 740. Sir Edward 
Mansel, Bart., to Miss Bayly of the Vineyard, Hereford " (not 

" widow of Bayly Esq.," as in the pedigrees) ; 2 and on the same 

day, " Mr. Bayly to Miss Langdon, niece to Sir Edward Mansel " ; 
this was the daughter of Sir Edward's sister, Joan, and Mr. Bayly was 
presumably either brother or brother-in-law to Sir Edward's bride. 9 

From these records it is obvious that Edward Vaughan 
Mansel, who must, from the monumental inscription, have been born 
about 1730, could not have been the son of Sir Edward by his second 
marriage in 1740. 

Sir Edward's first wife, Ann Price, died, according to records 
in contemporary journals, at Hampstead, November 1,1731 ; so it 
is possible that she may have been mother of Edward Vaughan 
Mansel ; it is, however, extremely improbable, as Edward Vaughan 's 
sisters were almost certainly his juniors. 

It appears quite justifiable, therefore, to place Sir Edward 

1 Communicated by the courtesy of the Rev. D. A. Jenkins, vicar of Pembrey. 

1 Lieutenant Mansel-PIeydeli states that this lady was otherwise known as " Lady Mai 
Mackenzie, ' but doe, not cite his authority ; thus she is severally placed by this name, as Mr 
Bayly, widow, and as Miss Bayly, at the time of her marriage. 


Vaughan Mansel in the pedigree as the son of Rawleigh Mansel, and 
nephew to Sir Edward, second baronet. 

At the death of Sir Edward Joseph She wen Mansel, fourth 
baronet, the title became extinct, and Mary Anne Mansel, who 
married Edward William Richard Shewen, surviving her brother, 
the last baronet, by nearly ten years, was left sole heir to Sir Edward 
Vaughan Mansel, third baronet. 

Mary Anne Mansel. by her will, left the Stradey estate to 
Thomas Lewis, in whose family it still remains. 

Thomas Lewis = Catherine, dau. of 
of Stradey ■ Daniel Lloyd of 
(by the will i Laques, co. Car- 
of Mar,' Anne marthen 



David Lewis, = Lajtitia, dau. of 

marriedjunc | Benjamin Way, 

9,i8}6;died j of Denham 

1872" Place, Bucks. 


Charles William = 


Edith Clara, Fanny Louisa 

Rowena Harriet Man 

Mansel Lewis 



of Stradey, born ! 


■ Philip 

Dec. 2, 1845 


lies, Bart. 

Hubert Edward Mas: 


Charles Ronald 

Eric David 

1 : 

Archie Mansel, Three 

1st son, born 1876 

Mansel, 2nd 


4th son, born daughter; 

son, born 18S0 

3rd son, 
born 18S6, 
died un- 
Dec. 9, 


(These particulars are taken from Burke's '' Landed Gentry," 
1914 ; Charles William Mansel Lewis was then living. It will be 
noticed that he and all his sons have the prefix of Mansel before the 

The Mansels of Trimsaren do not appear to have been 
prominent in public affairs ; but they were somewhat addicted to 


In January, 1715, Sir Edward, first baronet, preferred a very 
long indictment against the widow and trustees of his second son, 
James, deceased. 1 From this it appears that James, being very 
young at the time, desired to marry Katherine, widow of Thomas 
Lloyd of Allt-y-Cadno (probablyson to Thomas Lloyd of Allt-y-Cadno, 
whose daughter Honor married Edward, son of Sir Francis Mansel 
of Muddlescombe). Apparently it was one of those cases of the 
infatuation of a youth for a woman considerably his senior, with 
the additional attraction in this instance of a very substantial 
income. Jam.:s and Katherine kept their engagement secret, and 
were resolved to marry whether Sir Edward approved or not — James 
was presumably under age — but realising, no doubt, that it would 
make things more comfortable if they could obtain his consent, they 
enlisted the good offices of some friends and relatives as mediators. 
Sir Edward, however, altogether disapproved of the whole business, 
and refused his consent. Apparently, like many parents similarly 
situated, he deemed it ultimately more prudent to modify his opposi- 
tion, seeing that James had got the bit between his teeth, and was 
determined to marry Katherine; so he consented to interview that 
lady at her own house. She was evidently a very wide-awake person, 
and had summoned her solicitor, Thomas Williams, to be present. 
Sir Edward, having visions of a quiet family arrangement, had not 
thought it necessary to bring a lawyer with him. The lady had it all 
her own way ; Sir Edward consented to a form of settlement whereby 
Katherine was to retain after her marriage full and absolute control 
of all the real and personal effects of which she was then owner, as 
though she were a " single and unmarried " woman, except ^oo to be 
settled upon her and James Mansel, Sir Edward to settle a like sum, 
the whole to be devoted to the purchase of lands ; that after the 
expiration of the lease of Allt-y-Cadno, James and Katherine should 
have the use and enjoyment of the estate of Stradey, except the 
coal-mines, which Sir Edward was free to work. 

This agreement was put into writing by Thomas Williams, 
with an additional clause that in case Sir Edward and Lady Mansel 

1 This James does not appear in all the pedigrees ; he is vouched for, however, by the 
Chancery Proceedings. 


objected to James and Katherine living at Stradey, the former 
should pay them £20 a year ; and was apparently duly executed. 

James Mansel died intestate, because, it was alleged, Katherine 
would never allow anyone to come near him for the purpose of 
making a will ; she refused to pay his creditors, telling them that 
James had left no effects to meet his debts, etc. 

Sir Edward agreed to contribute £200 towards payment of 
the debts, and to resign his claim on James's estate. Thomas Williams 
made a note of the terms in his pocket-book, promising to draw up 
the agreement in due course, which, however, lie failed to do, perhaps 
acting upon a hint from Katherine, who was obviously what is 
termed a very " having " individual. Williams died, and Katherine 
then endeavoured to hold Sir Edward to his part of the agreement, 
while repudiating it on her own part as having been only a verbal 
undertaking. She asserts that Sir Edward and Lady Mansel pressed 
her to marry their son, as she had been left very well off by her late 
husband ; telling her that Sir Edward's estate would probably come 
to James (which appears somewhat disingenuous, seeing that Edward, 
the eldest son. was living, and ultimately survived James by many 
years) ; whereupon she was " induced to hearken to the said court- 
ship," and at length — in 1711 — married James. 

Katherine further asserted that she had no effects of her late 
husband other than his clothes and his sword, worth about £5, and 
Sir Edward was welcome to these — though she paid a great deal more 
than this for James's funeral. A very glib young woman, this mistress 
Katherine ! 

However, she was not permitted to benefit by the verbal 
arrangement, and Sir Edward retained his £.200, and whatever 
claims he had upon James's estate — which very possibly consisted 
only of his personal belongings, as alleged by Katherine, who had 
taken good care to retain a firm hold upon her own estate when she 

In the year 1756 Lad}' Mansel, widow of Sir Edward, second 
baronet, commenced a suit in Chancery, to which response was made 
by defendants, to wit — Samuel Townsend, Dorothy Townsend, 
Edward Townsend, and Samuel Townsend the vountrer — that is to 


say, Dorothy, daughter of Sir Edward, first baronet, together with 
her husband and her two sons. 

This was a very long affair, and it is not very clear from the 
Chancery report in the Record Office what it was all about. The 
Townsend defendants make a long recital of certain obvious facts, 
and wind up by professing ignorance upon the legal points raised, and 
submitting themselves to the Court. 

The suit dragged on apparently until December, 1759, when 
the following appeared in the Gentleman's Magazine : " The great 
cause brought by Lady Mansel, relict of Sir Edward Mansel, against 
the heir-at-law of that gentleman, for a satisfaction for her jointure, 
of which she had been evicted, was argued in the Court of Chancery 
before the Lord Keeper, who made a decree in her favour, and 
ordered her claims to be made good out of the great estate in Car- 
marthenshire, called the Yaughan estate, which is very considerable." 

Sir Edward died intestate, and, as is very frequently the case, 
thereby caused trouble. 

Failing direct male issue, his heir at law would be Edward 
Vaughan Mansel —indeed, lie was heir at law in any case, whether 
he was, as alleged in some quarters, Sir Edward's son, or his nephew, 
son of Rawleigh Mansel, who died six years previously. Rawleigh 
also, apparently, died intestate ; no wall is to be found, back to ten 
years before his death, nor is there any grant of administration of 
his estate. 

However, Lady Mansel obtained a verdict, as recorded in the 
Gentleman's Magazine, and lived for nearly thirty years afterwards. 

There had previously been a suit by Rawleigh Mansel against 
Sir Edward ; the whole family appear to have conspired to keep the 
Court of Chancery busy. 

In the year 1693 there were several transactions concerning 
the Manor or Lordship of Henlys. near Llandewy, Glamorgan, in 
which Edward Mansel of Trimsaren was intimately concerned. 

1 There is, no doubt, much further detail of this suit, but the Chancery Proceedings in 
the Record Office, by rea?on of the reduction of the staff during the war, are 3 o difficult of 
access that the further investigation of the matter does not appear to be of sufficient importance 
to compensate for the trouble dnd delay. 



i E 

<■ 1 

1 5 I 

i = s 


:A (t .^ 




:ldi:s'i son oi- yiaxshl-dawkix maxsi 


r 37 

From these articles it appears that Edward Mansel, senior, 
late of Henlys, and Edward Mansel, junior, his son, of Swansea, were 
in financial difficulties, and compelled to mortgage their estates. 

The parentage of this Edward Mansel of Henlys is not very 

Lieutenant Mansel-Pleydell places him as the son of Thomas, 
son of Philip of Swansea, and grandson of Sir Edward of Margam. 
This, however, is by no means certain : it has already been demon- 
strated in a previous chapter that there was some irregularity about 
the period of this Thomas's birth, 1 and the writer, as usual, produces 
no evidence as to this step, beyond the somewhat vague reference, 
" Penrice MSS." He is compelled to admit that there is some 
vagueness about another step in the pedigree, viz., the parentage of 
William Wogan Mansel ; and the obscurity is certainly not absent in 
the case of Thomas, " probably " grandfather of William Wogan — 
but who was the " probable " father of William Wogan Mansel not 
even a conjecture is hazarded. The omission indicates a large measure 
of uncertainty as to these several links. 

These two Thomas Mansels, the alleged son of Philip of 
Swansea, and his son, have already been subjected to some scrutiny 
in a previous chapter. Lieutenant Mansel-Pleydell says that Thomas, 
son of Robert, and grandson of the second Thomas mentioned above, 
was " possibly the Thomas Mansel who, in 171 5, was leased Penrice 
Farm, and was the father of Thomas Mansel, baptised at Penrice in 
1715." It is most probable, however, that these two were issue of 
the irregular connection of Lord Mansel with Catherine Thomas, 
before alluded to. 

However, there is no doubt that there was one Edward 
Mansel of Hentlies (or Henlys) living in the year 165S, and that he, 
on June 5 in that year, sold the manor and lordship of Henlys to 
Edward Mansel, Esq., of Oxwich, for /300, and an annuity of £50.- 

This Edward Mansel of Oxwich, Esquire, is also somewhat of 
a puzzle; in 165S Sir Edward, fourth baronet, held the title, and 

Penrice md Margin MSS., Serie; iv., pt. ii., p. 160. 


would not, of course, be alluded to as " Esquire " ; also, in a sub- 
sequent deed, his wife, Anne, is mentioned. Possibly some clue may 
here be found to an alleged eon, Edward, of Sir Thomas, first baronet 
of Margam, upon the strength of whose existence a claim for the 
baronetcy was made by William Washington Mansell. about 1850; 
this will be considered later. 

In the year 1685 there are some bonds and acquittances by 
Edward, son and heir of Edward Mansel of Henlys ; J and on October 
13, 1693, there is an indenture between Edward Mansel, senior, late 
of Henlys, and Edward Mansel, junior, of Swansea, his son ; Thomas 
Mansel, of Penrice Castle ; Marmaduke Gibbs of Gray's Inn, and 
Edward Mansel of Trimsaren, concerning the mortgaging and 
settling of the Manor or Lordship of Henlys.' 3 On the same day 
Edward Mansel of Trimsaren covenants to raise £1,575, of which 
£513 2s. is to be applied in discharge of a mortgage made to Thomas 
Mansel by Edward Mansel, senior, of Henlys, etc., in consideration 
of the transfer of the said mortgage to Edward Mansel of Trimsaren. 3 

In these and subsequent deeds of the same nature there is 
abundant evidence that Edward Mansel of Henlys and his son and 
heir were in monetary difficulties, and that Edward of Trimsaren — 
afterwards first baronet — acquired mortgages on their estates. 

Edward Mansel, senior, of Henlys, died in 1695, and left a 
will, dated February 5 in that year, which contains some information 
concerning his son's marriage, etc. 

It appears from this document that Edward Mansel, junior, 
married Margaret, daughter of Richard Ducke, or Duck. Edward 
Mansel, senior, leaves all his estate to his son Edward, remainder to 
his sons by his wife, Margaret, in seniority. Testator mentions his 
wife, Anne ; Lieutenant Mansel-Pleydell says she was daughter of 
Sir Theobald Gorges, and refers to " will of Colonel Edward Mansel " ; 
but this information is not contained in the will. Testator also 
mentions his brother, Thomas Mansel, which lends some colour to 

Penrice and Margam MSS., Series iv., p. '205. 
Ibid., pp. 232, 233. 
Ibid., p. 205. 

M \\M I. !) WVKIX M.WSI-'I.. 

■ ^rS 


- <# s<..:>: ^.^-, 

■„1. MmiwI [>:i\ikin M 

" (# 

! 1 




i_ .. 





Lieutenant Mansel-Pley dell's introduction of Thomas of Penrice as 
a son of Philip of Swansea; after this brother, "remainder to 
Thomas Mansel of Margam Esq., and heirs male of body" (after- 
wards fifth baronet and first baron of Margam) ; to Thomas Mansel 
of Briton Ferry (grandson of Bussy Mansel) and heirs male- 
remainder to Edward Mansel, Esq. of Trimsaren, etc. 

However, the upshot of all this business was, that in 1699 Mrs. 
Mansel, widow of Edward, junior, of Henlys, petitioned Parliament 
for a special settlement of her affairs. In a letter to Mr. Thomas 
Drew— probably a lawyer— she states that "Mr. Mansel's father" 
left a great incumbrance on the estate; so she was Margaret Duck, 
wife of Edward Mansel, junior. There was not, she says, sufficient 
provision in his settlement for discharging the debt. 

" She therefore, to prevent the ruin of the estate, joins to 
have an act passed for the sale or mortgage of part of the estate to 
pay off the debt and raise a portion of £2,000 for her younger child 
or children, with remainder on herself and her son." 

She tells Mr. Drew that she has written to her " sister Duck " 
to send him the deed of settlement ; Mr. Thomas Mansel, son of Sir 
Edward Mansel of Margam. will act with Mr. Drew. 

Mrs. Mansel gained her ends ; the Bill was sent up from the 
Commons March 14, 1699 (1700), and received the royal assent 
April 11 following. 1 

The connection of the Mansels of Trimsaren with the family 
of Dawkin, and the estate of Lathbury in Bucks, is a matter of 
considerable interest, which must be dealt with at some length. 

Rawleigh Mansel, either second or third son of Edward 
Mansel (second son of Sir Francis of Muddlescombe), had a daughter 
Mary, probably by his second marriage with Frances, daughter and 
heir of Sir John Stepney, and widow of Henry Mansel of Stradey. 
It appears most probable that this Mary was the issue of Rawleigh 
Mansel's second marriage, but it has not been found possible to 
prove this abso lutely. Rawleigh's first wife died in 1675 ; the year 

1 Hist. MSS. Com. House of Lords MSS., vol. iv\. p. 131. The act was entitled " An 
Act to enable Edward .Mansel Esquire to Mortgage or sell," etc. ; so it would appear that 
Edward Mansel was then living, and that the petition, though presented by his wife, was 
actually granted to him. 


of the death of Henry Mansel of Stradey, first husband of Frances 
Stepney, is not certain. 

There is, however, an entry in the register of Llanelly Church, 
Carmarthenshire, which throws some light upon the matter : " Anno 
Dom. i68i. Raw: Mansel filius Rawleigh Mansel Armigeri natus 
fuit Vicessimo sexto die Feb. et Baptizatus fuit Vicessimo die Martii 
Anno Dom. prodiit." 1 

A glance at the pedigree will demonstrate that this son 
Rawleigh was born of the second marriage, and consequently that 
Henry Mansel of Stradey must have died before 1682 ; it is probable 
that he died considerably earlier than this, and that Mary was the 
elder of the two. 2 

This Mary, daughter of Rawleigh Mansel, married William 
Dawkin, Esquire, of Kilvrough, Glamorganshire. 

There is some misapprehension regarding this marriage on the 
part of more than one family chronicler. 

In one instance Mary is described as second daughter and 
third child of Rawleigh Mansel, and " sister of Sir Edward Vaughan 
Mansel, third Baronet of Trimsaren " ; born 1676, married William 
Dawkin July 11. 1607. These statements appear in some genea- 
logical notes supplied by a member of the Mansel family. 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell has the following : " Margaretta Maria 
Mansel, daughter of Rawleigh Mansel, and sister of Sir Edward 
Vaughan Mansel, third Baronet, married about 171 5, William 
Dawkin, of Killyrough, Carmarthenshire." 

Here is a wild discrepancy in the matter of the date of the 
marriage, while the two authorities agree in the assertion that Mary 
was sister to Sir Edward Vaughan Mansel, thud baronet. The said 
Sir Edward died in 17SS, so if this Mary was born in 1676, one hundred 
and twelve years before his death, it is scarcely probable that she 
was his sister. 

On the other hand, the chronicle first quoted above is very 
possibly correct as to Mary's marriage, though altogether wrong in 

1 " History of Llanelly Church/'' by Arthur Mee ; the Registers, p. 2. 

1 Henrv Mansel's will is stated by Lieutenant Mansel-Fleycell to have been dated 1673 ; 
it is not, however, to be found in the Calendar of Wills at Somerset House, from that year to 



respect of her relationship to Sir Edward Vaughan Mansel. The 
year of her birth, as here stated, gives rise to some further question. 
Ravvleigh Manscl's first wife died in August, 1675 ; if Mary was born 
in the following year the second marriage must have ensued with 
very unusual haste — or else she was a posthumous child of the first 
marriage. Unfortunately, as is so frequently the case in these 
family records, there is an entire absence of authority for the various 
statements, which are supposed apparently to be blindly accepted 
upon the ipse dixit of the writer — who, in tin's instance, might very 
easily have avoided the somewhat ridiculous faux pas of placing 
Mary as Sir Edward Vaughan Mansel's sister ; as will be demon- 
strated in due course. 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell commits the same blunder, and names the 
lady Maria Margaretta Mansel. Sir Edward Vaughan Mansel had a 
sister Maria Margaretta, or Margaretta Maria, whose marriage with 
one George Dawkiu is recorded in the Llanelly Church Register, many 
years later — to wit. on October 9, 1763 ; Sir Edward, in his will, 
alludes to his " sisters Bridget Shewen and Margaretta Maria Daw- 
kin " ; and on January 8, 1758, the marriage of Daniel Shewen, 
widower, and Bridget Mansel, spinster, is registered. 1 

This later Dawkin-Mansel marriage has clearly led Mr. R. G. 
Maunsell into a trap : probably, or indeed certainly, he had not come 
across the valuable information contained in " Carmarthenshire 
Notes," from which many of the dates inserted in the pedigree hove 
been taken. In elucidation of the matter at issue it will be con- 
venient to transcribe the " notes " verbatim. 

Mansel Inscriptions at Llangendeirne Church. 
No. j (Tablet) 

" Interr'd here Edwd. Mansel Esq., son of Sir Era. Mansel, of 
Muddlescombe, Bart., in June, 1671 ; Honor his wife, daughter of 
Tho. Lloyd of Allt-y-Cadno, Esqr.. in Deer. 1660 ; and Rawleigh 
Mansel Esqr., their ^on, in Deer. 1722. In the next grave their son 
Francis, in 1OO4 ; Alice, the said Rawleigh's first wife, daughter of 
Henry Middleton Esqr., in Aug. 1675 ; Edward, their son, in June 

1 "History of Llanelly Church," the R-egister, p. 21. Daniel Shewerrs first wife was 
the youngest daughter of Robert Rodci, Esquire, of the Temple; ^he died June 7, 1757, -and 
he married Bridget Mansel seven months later. (Ibid., p. lu.) 


1680 ; and Frances his second wife, sole daughter and heir of Sir 
John Stepney. Bart., in Deer. 1602. And in this chancel, Mary, 
his 3d wife, Relict of Cha. Gwynn, of Gwempa, Esqr., in June 1716. 

" The said Rawleigh Mansel d}-'d ye 27th of Nov., 1722, Anno 
Aetat. J2, having devised his estate to his grandson, Rawleigh, 3rd 
son of William Dawkin, E.-qr., and Mary his wife, by whom this 
monument was erected. He assuming the name of Mansel." 

No. 2 (Tablet) 

" Be this Inscription sacred to truth and to the Character of 
Rawleigh Dawkin Mansel Esq., who died under the agonizing pains 
of the Gout in the 44th year of his age. 1 749. This gentleman was 
conspicuous for his great talents, and was adorned with many 
amiable qualities ; had a dignity in his manner and countenance 
peculiarly his own, was endowed with a heart full of benevolence, 
and ornamented (with ?) every social virtue which attracted a most 
general esteem. In justice to the memory of so valuable a man and 
the kindest of husbands, his afflicted widow as the last token of her 
regard has caused this monument to be erected near the vault which 
she made for the repository of his Remains within this Chancel. 

" His only daughter, Anna Maria Mansel, who died the 30th 
March, 1752, aged 14 years, is also interred in the same vault." 

No. 3 (on Church floor) 

" In this vault lies interred Montacute Brown Mansel " (two 
lines defaced — roughly cut out with a chisel) " sun of Mansel Mansel 
Esq., by Mary his wife, daughter of John Morris Esq.. of the county 
of Middlesex, died May 28, 1707, aged six years and three months and 
seven days. He was all his affectionate parents could have wished 
him to be. 

" Here also lies interred Mansel Mansel, of New Hall, in the 
county of Glamorgan, Esq.. who departed this life the 29th day of 
August, 1767, aged hfty-six years." 

It is at once apparent that No. 1 Tablet places beyond question 
the identity of Rawleigh Mansel, whose daughter Mary married 
William Dawkin ; he was the son of Edward Mansel, and grandson 
of Sir Francis, first baronet of Muddlescombe ; his daughter ob- 
viously could not have been the sister of Sir Edward Vaughan 
Mansel, third baronet of Trimsaren. This tablet, the details upon 
which must be accepted as good evidence, also furnishes the dates of 








- ■ : 




the decease of several members of the family, and these have been 
duly inserted in the Trimsaren pedigree. 

There are seme discrepancies in the dates among various 
authorities. Lieutenant Mansel-Pleydell gives the date of the death 
of Sir Edward, first baronet of Trimsaren, February 29, 1720 ; in 
the " Complete Baronetage " it is given February 19 ; while in the 
Pembrey Parish Register occurs the following : " Edwardus Mansel, 
Baronettus (mei amantissimus) obiit Londini, sexto die Martii, et 
sepultus Vigesimo nono die ejusdem mensis, 1720, apud ecclesiam 
parochialem de Pembrey." 1 

A much mure remarkable entry appears in this Register 
twenty years later. 

The death of Ann, first wife of Sir Edward Mansel, second 
baronet of Trimsaren, is recorded in the Gentleman's Magazine, and 
also in the Historical Register Chronicle, as having occurred at 
Hampstead, November i, 1731 ; 2 and Sir Edward's second marriage 
is also entered in the Gentleman's Magazine as having taken place 
November 3, 1740, nine years after the death of his first wife. 

In the Pembrey Parish Register is the following (translated 
from the original Latin* : " Ann, wife of Sir Edward Mansel, Baronet, 
of Trimsaren, buried the 6th day of September, 1740." 3 

This is soimwhat startling at first sight ; there is, however, 
a very feasible explanation of the discrepancy. It appears probable 
that Sir Edward, two months before his second marriage, caused the 
remains of his first wife to be removed from London, where she died, 
to Wales, and deposited in Pembrey Church. The interment being 
entered in this bald fashion, without explanation, becomes a source 
of possible error, and it is therefore considered advisable to notice it ; 
there does not seem to be any other way of accounting for the entry. 

Both Mr. R. G. Maunsell and Lieutenant Mansel-Pleydell 
place the marriage of Maria Margaretta, daughter of Rawleigh 
Mansel, and niece of Sir Edward, second baronet, with one Dawkin, 

1 " Carmarthenshire Antiquarian Society." Proceedings. Vol. viii., p. 26. " Died in 
London 6 March, and buried in the parish church at Pembrey 29 March, 1720." He was 
"greatly beloved " by the parson, presumably. 

' Gent. .1%. Vol. i., p. 500. Hist. Reg. Chron., 1731 ; p. 49. 

* " Carmarthenshire Antiquarian Society." Proceedings. Vol. viii., p. 36. 


as having occurred " about 1715." Mr. Maunsell has William, and 
Lieutenant Mansel-Pleydell George Dawkin ; no authority is given in 
either case. 

To set off against this statement there is the entry, already 
noticed, of the marriage of Maria Margaretta Mansel with George 
Dawkin in 1763. It is extremely improbable that any such marriage 
took place in 1715. Lieutenant Mansel-Pleydell's perfectly correct 
statement, that Sir Edward Vaughan Mansel was fifty-eight years of 
age. when he died in 17SS, is absolutely against it. He places Mar- 
garetta Maria as fourth child of Rawleigh Mansel, while Edward 
Vaughan, the eldest, must, according to the data above quoted, 
have been born in 1730. It does not appear whence this alleged 
marriage of 1715 is derived, but the evidence for that in 1763— which 
would tit in with Margaretta Maria's probable age, as fourth child — 
is straight and conclusive. It is remarkable that Lieutenant Mansel- 
Pleydell should have overlooked the very broad anachronism in- 
volved in the marriage, in 1715, of a younger sister of Sir Edward 
Vaughan Mansel, who was born, according to the writer's own 
testimony, in 1730. 

The date of the marriage of Mary Mansel with William Dawkin 
has been given in one account, as above mentioned, July 11, 1607. 
No authority is cited for tins statement ; very possibly the record 
of the marriage is to be found in the register of some church in 
Carmarthenshire, or at least in some part of Wales, but it cannot 
readily '.be verified. 

There is, however, no inherent improbability in this date, 
except that Mary must have been very young ; as has been pointed 
out, it is extremely improbable that she was born, as alleged, in 
1676, seeing that she is stated by the same writer to be the issue of 
Rawleigh Mansel's second marriage— as, indeed, she almost certainly 
was. She may have been born about 16S0. if Rawleigh Mansel's 
marriage with Frances followed quickly upon the death of her first 
husband, Henry Mansel. 

William Dawkin J and Mary Mansel had five sons, of whom 

1 Tiie name is thus spelled in the monumental inscription?, but Lieutenant Mansel- 
Pleydell spells it Daukins, erroneously, it would appear. 


Rawleigh, the third, receives special mention on the tablet in 
Llangendeirne church. It is there stated that his grandfather, 
Rawleigh Mansel, devised his estates to him in his will, and this 
statement is repeated in every account of this branch of the family. 
It may be accepted as fact, on the strength of the inscription, but 
Rawleigh 's will is not to be found in the Calendar at Somerset House 
between 1711 and 1726 ; he died 1722. 

This Rawleigh Dawkin, upon inheriting his grandfather's 
estate, assumed the name of Mansel ; he was only seventeen when 
his grandfather died, and he lived to the age of forty-four, as recorded 
upon the tablet in Llangendeirne church ; his only child, Maria, 
died three years after her father, in 1752, at the age of fourteen. 

The Dawkins were of ancient descent, deriving from Sir 
William Langton, or rather from a natural son of his, who married 
the daughter of Dawkin " the Smith "—probably temp. Edward II. ; 
their son took the surname of Langton, but subsequent generations 
were known as Dawkin (or Dawkins). 

The Langtons possessed, among other estates, the Castle of 
Kilvrock, Glamorganshire, and near the site of this castle one Row- 
land Dawkin, in 15S5. built Kilvrough (or Cilvrough) House. 

Colonel Rowland Dawkin of Kilvrough was Governor of 
Carmarthen under Cromwell ; his third son, Richard, is stated to 
have married a daughter of Henry Mansel of Stradey (father of 
Edward, the first baronet of Trimsaren). 1 

Colonel (afterwards Major-General) Dawkin was grandfather 
to William Dawkin of Kilvrough, who married Mary Mansel. 

The Dawkin-Mansel pedigree is here given, as deduced from 
notes by Colonel Charles Grenville- Mansel and Lieutenant Mansel- 
Pleydell, verified as far as has been found possible by reference to 
contemporary magazines, monumental inscriptions, etc. Both of 
these family chroniclers have made somewhat inexcusable blunders 
in respect of certain marriages and relationships, as has already been 
pointed out ; neither of them gives any precise reference for his 
confident assertions. "Swansea Monuments," or "Carmarthenshire 
Monuments " are useless as references ; the inscription may be in 

1 " Limbus Pattum Morganix," by G. T. Clark ; p. 483. 

Rowland, i 
b. 1702; 


William, 2nd 
son, b. 1703, 
d. 1755 

Charity, dau. of Sit 
Rich. Mansel, 8th 
Baronet of Mud- 

Mary — Marquis de 

\rm (or Jane), dau. 


Richard, 4th son 

Mary Alice 


of John Williams 

b. l-]Q<),d.s.f. 



of Carmarthen. 

(Mon. inscrip., 

St. Peter's church, 


J. of William 
edford Row, 
ur. at Clap- 


u. of — 



Jane, dau. of = George Barclay, and 
John Bell sop, d.s.p., 1869 

Mary Eliza- 

Rev. Ant. 

Kate, d.ut 

Charles A. Benn, 
of Moor Park, 
near Kingston, 

May, wid. of — Salter, 
Esq. (2nd wife), d.s.f. 
Jan. 9, 1902 


Frederick, son of 
S. Pitman of 
Oulton Hall, 

= Fanny 
i Maria 



William Daw 
Kilvrough, b. 1668 

of = => 

1 761 

Hizabeth, dau. 
of Capt. Lobb 

Ann Hudso 
d. Nov. 

n,b.i 7 i6; = 

o, 1752 

= Mahsei, 

b. Oct. 

d. Aug 


■ Mansel 

5th son, 
18, 171 1 ; 
J 7> "767 

. h 

Charity, dau. of . c i: 
Rich. Mansel, 
Baronet of Mud 

— Marqui3 de 



iciiMakizi, = 

= Ma 


, dau. 





Captain R.N., 
b. 1767; d. Feb. 
17, 1S09 

Rowland, 3rd son, 
d. Nov. 17, 1769 

Rawleigh, 4th son, 
d. June 16, ,775 


Jfred, son of Fred 

Charles Gren 

Glover, Judge 

1st son, colon 

of High Court, 

Indian Army. 

Calcutta ; of 

Middle Court, 

Hampton Court 



dau. of Ino. 


of Kensing- 

Charles A. Bcnn, 
of Moor Park, 
near Kingston, 

Mary, dau. of Rawleigh 
Mansel of Killay, etc., 
b. cir. 1680 (0 ; d. Mar. 
29, 1726 

Mary, dau. of 
Robt. Morris, 
Barrister, of 

Rawleigh, 3rd son, 
b. 1705; d. 1749 
(assumed name of 
Mansel in 172a) 

Ann (or Jane), dau. 
of John Williams 
of Carmarthen. 
(Mon. inscrip,, 
St. Peter's church, 

Richard, 4th ! 
b. 1709, d.i 

Mary Alio 

Montacute Browne Mansel, 
b. Feb. 21, 1761; d. May 
28, 1767. (Mon. inscrip., 
Llangendeirne church) 

Mansel Dawicin Mansel, 
1st son (became possessed 
of the Manor of Lath- 
bury, near Chicheley, 
Bucks, under the will of 
Miss Jane Symes),b. 1763; 
d.Aug. 11, 1823 

Elizabeth, dau. of William 
Browne of Bedford Row, 
London (mar. at Clap- 
ham, July 1, 1799) 

Iharles Grenville, 3rd s 
(a distinguished official 
Indian Civil Service), 

Mary, dau. of General 
Grant (1st wife) 

knnaMary.dau.of — 
0'R)an of Bally- 
glass, co. Tipperary 

Jane, dau. of 
John Bell 

William James, =■ May, wid. of — Salter, 

2nd son; Lt.- Esq. (2nd wife), d.s.p. 

Colonel, 7th Jan. 9, 1902 
Bengal Infantry. 

George Barclay, 2nd 
son, d.s.p., iBfiy 

Frederick, son of 
S. Pitman of 
Oulton Hall, 

William, d. unmarried, 
Mar. 31, 1909 

G. C. Darwall, 
Royal Canadian 


any one of a dozen churches. If it has been found, as is so frequently 
the case, in a local book of reference, the title and full name of the 
author should be given, with chapter and page. It appears, how- 
ever, to be useless to expect such reasonable precision, and the 
pedigree is not guaranteed, except in respect of such steps as are 
vouched for by detailed particulars, the result of independent 

One of the chief points of interest in this pedigree is the 
acquisition by Mansel Dawkin Mansel of the manor and estate of 
Lathbury, in the county of Buckinghamshire. 

Lathbury (or Lateberie) receives mention in Domesday, and 
Lipscomb, in his " History of Buckinghamshire," traces its devolution 
through a number of families. It is not necessary, however, to go 
into these early records ; the estate was apparently purchased in 
the sixteenth century by one Anthony Cave, of Chicheley, who died 
in 1558, having also acquired other lands there of the family of 
Ardres ; : the said Anthony left three daughters, by whom, or 
by their heirs, the estate was sold, about 1599, to the family of 
Andrewes, in the person of Sir William Audi ewes. A descendant of 
Sir William, viz., Henry Andrewes, who died in 1744, left one son, 
who died in infancy, and five daughters, one of whom, Jane, married 
the Rev. W. Symes, and had a daughter, jane ; another, Margaret, 
married Captain Dalway, of Carrickfergus. 

Eventually the estate came into the possession of Jane 
Symes, daughter of the Rev. W. Symes aforesaid ; she died in 1799, 
leaving a somewhat remarkable will, which is given in extenso by 

After making provision for the clearing oft of sundry mort- 
gages, etc., she devises the whole of her real and personal estate 
"unto my cousin Margaret Dalway, of Newport, in the county of 
Bucks, spinster, and to my friend, Mansel Dawkin Mansel, of Lath- 
bury aforesaid Esquire ... to hold the same, with the appur- 
tenances, unto them the said Margaret Dalway and Mansel Dawkin 

_ » It will be recollected that Richard de Ardres married one of the daughters and co-heirs 
of William de Alneto, and that another daughter is said to have married Sir Robert Maunsell, 
the Crusader, in the twelfth century. (See vol. i., p. 5;.) 


Mansel, and their assign?, for and during the term of their natural 
lives and the life of the survivor of them ; and from and after the 
decease of the said Margaret Dalway and Mansel Dawkin Mansel, and 
the survivor of them, I give, devise, and bequeath all and every my 
said estates, both real and personal, unto Elizabeth Brown, daughter 
of William Brown of Bedford Row of the city of London Esq. and 
her assigns, fur and during the term of her natural life, in case she 
shall hereafter marry the said Mansel Dawkin Mansel, but not 
otherwise," etc. 

This was nil very pleasant for Margaret Dalway and Mansel 
Dawkin Mansel and Elizabeth Brown, provided the marriage came off. 
Miss Symes seems to have placed Elizabeth Brown in a somewhat 
delicate position ; unless Mansel came forward she would be forced, 
if she were to profit by the will, to take the initiative. 

This very agreeable arrangement was, however, followed by 
sundry stipulations which were to come into force after the death of 
the last of the three principal legatees ; the mansion at Lathbury was 
to be converted into an orphanage for boys and girls from two years 
old, to be sent on. when of sufficient age, to St. Paul's Charity School 
in London. The most complete and elaborate provision is made for 
superintendence, maintenance, insurance, etc. The whole of the 
available funds of the Lathbury estate are to be used for these 
purposes, and none of her own family, or that of the late Mr. Perriam 
of Lathbury, are to receive any benefit from this charity ; any 
further funds which may be available from all the estates are to be 
used in the purchase of the advowson of a living, to be given to 
Christchurch College, Oxford, in exchange for the advowson of the 
living of Lathbury. Henry Stebbing, Mansel Dawkin Mansel, and 
Margaret Dalway are named executors ; the will is dated April iS, 
1799, and is witnessed by John Dore, A. H. Hardy, and Win. Lucas. 

The provisions of Jane Symes' will apparentlv became known 
immediately to her nearest relatives ; whether she, scorning conceal- 
ment, published abroad her intentions, or whether the trustees or 
witnesses were unduly talkative, cannot now be determined, but the 
result of the publication of the terms is very much in evidence. 

Three days after she signed her will, viz., on April 21, Jane 


Symes found it advisable to add a codicil to the following effect : 
Whereas I am aware that my heir-at-law, or some other person, 
may endeavour to frustrate my charitable intentions, by attempting 
to set aside and render of no effect my bequest to charitable uses, 
and that suits of law may be commenced and prosecuted to that 
end ; now I do, by this writing, which I declare to be a Codicil to my 
said will . . . revoke and utterly make void all and every gift, 
devise or bequest of the residue of my real and personal estates, 
furniture, and effects to charitable uses, in case I shall not live twelve 
months from the date of my said will ; and I do hereby give, devise 
and bequeath all the residue and remainder of my said real and 
personal estates, furniture chattels and effects, whatsoever and 
wheresoever, unto Margaret Dalway and Mansel Dawkin Mansel, 
their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, for ever," etc. 1 

So the orphans were left out in the cold ; and Mansel Dawkin 
Mansel, as will be seen in the pedigree, duly married Elizabeth 
Brown, by whom he had several children. 

Lathbury was a fine estate. Lipscomb says: "The manor 
now (1S47) comprehends the greater part of the parish, and extends 
over more than a thousand acres of land . . . the mansion, which 
was rebuilt at the beginning of this century, is situated a little south- 
west of the Parish Church, fronting the northern part of the town of 
Newport Pagnell, between which and the house, the River Ouse flows 
in a fine stream, and affords a very pleasing object from the windows 
. . . the estate produced, in 1824, an annual rent of £1,350, subject 
to the land-tax." : 

Assuming possession of this estate in 1709, Mansel Dawkin 
Mansel immediately proceeded to put it in order. He rebuilt the 
house, lived there until his death, and became a person of considerable 
consequence in the county, of which he was successively high sheriff 
and deputy lieutenant ; he held a commission in the Buckingham- 
shire Gentlemen and Yeomanry, and was eventually colonel of that 

1 " History of Buckinghamshire," by Geo. Lipscomb. Vol. iv., pp. 199, 200. 

z Ibid., pp. 196, 202. 



When Louis XVIII. of France, in the course of his wanderings 
and vicissitudes of fortune, took refuge in England, Mansel was 
Commissioner of the French Emigration Committee appointed to 
look after Louis and his staff and the French emigrants. 

The French Icing resided first — 1807 — at Gosfield, in Essex, 
and subsequently — 1809 — at Hartwell in Buckinghamshire, which 
lies some two or three-and-twenty miles south from Lathbury, until 
about 1814, when he returned to France. 

During the period of his residence in Buckinghamshire, Louis 
was apparently in frequent contact with Mansel, probably in the 
official capacity of the latter as well as in friendly intercourse. Louis 
was a hard-headed, practical man, with a keen eye to his own 
interests, which he was sufficiently wide awake to realise would best 
be served by urbanity towards those with whom his lot was thrown ; 
and Mansel, in the discharge of his official duties, appears to have 
behaved tactfully and wisely, so that a cordial feeling prevailed 
between the two, which was emphasised by the gift of a gold snuff- 
box, with the king's portrait painted on the lid, encircled with 
diamonds, and an inscription inside, and the older of the Fleur-de- 
Lys, with white satin ribbon. 

Accompanying this gift was a handsome letter written on 
behalf of the king by Ludin d'Auspatre ; and later another, evidently 
a rejoinder to a letter of Mansel's. These two letters are here 
transcribed, and an illustration of the snuff-box, with the royal 
inscription, is given j 1 it is now (1917) in the possession of Colonel 
Charles Grenville Mansel, of Bentley, Hants. 

" Aux Tuilleries, 

"27 Aout, 1 Si 6. 
" Monsieur, 

" Je suis charge par mon Auguste Souverain S. M. T. C. a 
de l'agreable soin de vous faire parvenir de sa part une boite avec 
son portrait, comme un temoignage de sa parfaite estime et de sa 
sensibilite pour tons les services que vous n'avez cesse de rendre a 

1 It will be noted that the two letters are written in August, 1S16, and September' 
1819, two and five years after Louis (May 2, 1814.) entered Paris on the restoration of the Bour- 
bons ; so bis recognition of Mansel's sendees, if cordial, was somewhat tardy. 

* Sa Majeste Tres Chretien. 


ses fidcles sujets, retires en Angleterre pendant les malheurs de leur 
patrie. Cette occupation genereuse qui vous avait fait consacrer 
tant de moments a l'adoucissement de leur peines est restee gravee 
dans la memoire de tons, et e'est leur reconnaisance done S. M. me 
charge de vous faire parvenir le gage en y joignant en son nom 
I assurance de ses sentiments personnels, J'ai l'honneur, avec une 
veritable consideration, d'etre, Monsieur, votre tres humble, tres 
obeissant Serviteur, 

" Ludin d'Auspatre." 

" Paris, 
" 21 Seplr. 1810. 
Mon cher Monsieur Mansel, 

" J'ai recu la lettre que vous m'avez fait l'amitie de 
rn'ecrire, et jc n'est pas manque d'entretenir le Roi. Sa Majeste 
ma expressement charge de vous tcmoigner de nouveau sa gratitude 
pour tons les soins que vous etes clonne dans la distribution des 
secours dont vous avez dirige si loyalement l'emploi a ses infortunes 

"Le bonheur que j'ai eu d'en etre temoin pendant tout 
o annees m'a penetre pour vous de la plus haute estime, et ^i ma 
faible voix pouyait se joindre a celle de mon Auguste Souverain, je 
vous prierais d'en agreer les assurances. 

" Si Sa Majeste etait dans 1'usage d'ecrire ses lettres privates 
elle aurait saisi avec plaisir cette occasion de vous mander elle-meme 
ce qu'elle-m.-me me charge de vous communiquer iei. j'ai l'honncur 
d etre, 

" Moncher Monsieur Mansel, 

" Votre tres humble et obeissant Serviteur, 


Colonel Mansel died suddenly, August n, 1823, in the sixtieth 
year of his age, and his wife died a fortnight later. 

Mansel Dawkin Mansel left three sons, the youngest of whom, 
Charles Grenville, rose to a position of considerable importance in 

Born in 1806, he obtained, at the age of twenty, an appoint- 
ment as "writer" in the service of the East India Company— the 
narrow gateway through which many a youth passed, in those and 
earlier days, to the ultimate charge of weighty affairs, to a heritage 
of strife and often of bloodshed. Lord Chve and Warren Hastings 

■:-/:, , 


I'RESEN I'ED TO C. G. MAXSEL, H.E.I. Co.'s Service, 



had passed through it before him, each to win immense distinction, 
not unmixed with blame. 

Young Mansel was evidently regarded as singularly capable 
for his years ; at the age of two-and-twenty he was registrar and 
assistant magistrate at Agra (1828) ; acting magistrate in 1830, 
joint magistrate and deputy collector in the following year, magi- 
strate and collector in 1835, and temporary secretary to the lieutenant- 
governor in iS^y. From December, 1838, to April, 1841, he was 
sudder settlement officer in Agra, and in 1842 published a valuable 
"Report on the Settlement of the District of Agra." In 1841 he 
became deputy accountant-general at Calcutta, and in 1843 one of 
the auditors. Thus, at the age of thirty-seven, Charles Grenville 
Mansel had risen to a position of high responsibility ; and in the 
following year, having been continuously occupied in India since 
1826, he went to England on long furlough. 

During his absence came the long trouble in the Punjab, 
entailing the desperate battles of the First and Second Sikh wars, in 
which more than one Maunsell participated: Frederick Maunsell of 
the Royal Engineers, and Thomas Maunsell of the 32nd Light 

With the battle of Gujerat, in 1849, the resistance of the brave 
Sikhs was finally broken, and the Punjab was annexed. 

It was apparent to every experienced administrator in India 
that the government of this large province, with its proud and war- 
like people, smarting under defeat, and only waiting, perhaps, for an 
opportunity of once more trying conclusions with the British forces, 
would be a difficult and delicate business. 

Sir Charles Napier, the newly-appointed commander-in-chief, 
was all for military government ; he was prone to regard civil 
authority with a contemptuous and disapproving eye, though he 
could not close it to the immense services which had been rendered 
in India by civilians and " soldier-politicals." 

Lord Dalhousie, the governor-general, on the other hand, was 
averse from military rule, but was still somewhat apprehensive as to 
the result of an entirely civil government under the circumstances. 

In the end he arrived at a very wise and statesmanlike 


solution of the problem ; instead of entrusting the administration of 
the province to any single man, either soldier or otherwise, it was to 
be governed by a board of three ; and the two leading and principal 
members of this board were to be the brothers Henry and John 
Lawrence — a selection which was approved by everyone with any 
knowledge of India and of the two men in question : both men of 
exceptional courage, ability, and experience in dealing with the 
natives of India, and more especially with these brave and somewhat 
truculent men of the Punjab. 

Lord Dalhousie — as events proved — was wise in adopting 
this course ; he was also very wise in making the board of government 
a small one. Boards and committees consisting of ten, or fifteen, or 
twenty members usually end by making confusion worse confounded, 
unless there are one or two dominating personalities who practically 
control the whole business. 

Three is a good working number : and who was the third to 
be ? Charles Grenville Mansel, returning refreshed after his long- 
furlough, in 1849, was selected as the colleague of the two Lawrences 
in their formidable task — a selection which must be held to indicate 
the possession of very high attributes on Mansel's part, and perhaps 
also some recognition on the part of the governor-general and his 
advisers of his special qualifications to act with the two Lawrences. 
Professor Bosworth Smith, in his "Life of Lord Lawrence," 
says: "He (Mansel) was a man of contemplation rather than of 
action, and it was perhaps well that he was so, for the two brothers 
— with all their high mental gifts — were pre-eminently men of 
action. Mansel thus served as a foil to them both, in a different 
sense from that in which they served as a foil to each other. He was 
admirably fitted to discover the weak points in any course of action 
which was proposed, and, with somewhat irritating impartiality, 
would argue with John in favour of Henry's views, and with Henry 
in favour of John's." 

These three performed invaluable service in the pacification 
of the Punjab, which cannot here be entered upon in detail ; but 
Mansel's association with the famous brothers was not, after all. 
destined to be of long duration. Professor Bosworth Smith explains 


how this came about : " Both brothers appreciated highly his 
intellectual gifts, and regarded him with the most friendly feelings. 
But both looked upon him, also, as a drag upon the coach. They 
were always, or nearly always, for action ; he was always, or nearly 
always, for talking about it. . . . When, as often happened, Henry 
Lawrence had one plan for the solution of a difficult problem, and 
John another, and they were both brought to Mansel for his deciding 
voice, he ' cushioned ' both of them ; that is to say, he put them into 
his pocket, and the question was shelved sine die. He would some- 
times, as I have been told by an eye-witness, walk for an hour or 
two up and clown the verandah in front of the Residency arguing 
seriously against some project which Henry was pressing upon him 
with characteristic earnestness. At the end of the discussion he 
would say quietly, ' Well, though I have been arguing thus with you, 
I have not been speaking my own views ; I have only been showing 
you what might be said by John against your project ' ; and he 
would often do the same with John." ' 

The excellent Mansel was, in other words, just a trifle irritating 
to the highly-strung, strenuous brothers, who loved the tag, "deeds, 
not words " ; and so, the Residency in Nagpore falling vacant in 
1850, they recommended him to Dalhousie for the post, which he 
held until his retirement in 1855. 

Mansel's son, Colonel Charles Grenville Mansel, states that he 
was practically the founder of the Agra Bank in India, and for his 
services as director he was presented with a silver candelabra worth 
£200. A tablet was erected to him in Lathbury Church in 1903 ; 
and in the church at Southam Delabere, Prestbury, Gloucestershire, 
his name appears among a number, inscribed upon the walls, to 
whose assistance Lord Elienborough was more especially indebted for 
the success of his administration in India.' 3 In 1843 he presented a 
new organ to Lathbury Church. 

Charles Grenville Mansel was undoubtedly a very worthy and 
excellent civil servant and administrator ; one of the long succession 

1 "The Life of Lord Lawrence," by Re 3 J. Bosworth Smith ; pp. 156, 193. 
1 Lord Eiknborough was buried at Oxenten Church, near Cheltenham; Prestbury is 
some fifteen miles about south-\ve:t from Oienton. 


of Englishmen who, by their courage, probity, tact, and humanity, 
have rendered such immense services both to their own country and 
to the peoples of India. It is perhaps remarkable that he should 
have retired at the relatively early age of forty-nine. 

He married— during his long furlough in England, previous 
to his appointment to the board of administration in the Punjab — 

Anna Mary, daughter of O'Bryan, of Balliglas, county Tip- 

perary, and had issue as set forth in the pedigree. 

His eldest son, Colonel C. G. ManseJ, commanded the Third 
Punjab Cavalry. His war services are as follows: Mahsud Waziri 
Expedition, 1S81 ; Waziristan Expedition, 1894-5 — medal with 
clasp; North-West Frontier of India, 1897-8; operations on the 
Samana and in the Kurram Valley, August and September, 1S97; 
Relief of Gulistan; operations of the Flying Column in the Kurram 
Valley, August 20 to October 1, 1S97 ; Line of Communication, 
Tirah Field Force, 1897-8— medal with two clasps. Specially 
employed in surveying and reporting upon the fords and ferries of 
the Indus. Received the " Thanks of H. E. the Commander-in- 
Chief, 19 Sept. 1SS7." Special employment under Government of 
India in collecting trans-border commissariat and transport statistics, 
on North- Vest Frontier, in Punjab, and Beloochistan, 1SSS-90. 
Received the " Thanks of the Governor-General in India in Council, 
19 April, 1892." 

He retired from the service in 1900, and married Gwendolen 
M. Poison, only daughter of John Poison, Esquire, deceased, and 
Mrs. Poison, of Kingston Lodge, Kensington, London. 

After the death of Mansel Dawkin Mansel, in 1823, the 
Lathbury estate was sold to the trustees of Mary Isabella, sole 
heiress of Richard J. Tibbits, Esquire, of Barton Seagrave, North- 
amptonshire, afterwards Viscountess Hood. She married, secondly, 
Dr. G. Hall, and thirdly, J. Borlase Maunsell, who assumed the name 
of Tibbits. He was of the Maunsells of Thorpe Malsor, of whom more 

The Great Rebellion 

IN dealing with the life and times of Vice- Admiral Sir 
Robert Mansel and others of the family, some of the 
characteristics of the two first Stuart monarchs have 

already been incidentally illustrated. 

We have seen how James, driven by the representations of 
the Earl of Northampton and others, ordered a rigorous and sorely 
needed enquiry into the condition of the Navy, which, neglected and 
maladministered during the later years of Elizabeth's reign, went 
from bad to worse in that of her successor ; and how the latter, upon 
receiving the very condemnatory report of Northampton's com- 
mission, shrugged his shoulders and avoided " unpleasantness " by 
shelving the whole business, while corrupt and unscrupulous officials 
continued to enrich themselves from the public purse. 

We have seen how he tied the hands of Sir Robert Alansel in 
the matter of the Algiers expedition, compelling him to treat with 
robbers and pirates as though they were honourable and responsible 
statesmen, and keeping him in ignorance of ulterior motives which 
clashed with the avowed object of the undertaking, with the resuli 
that the admiral was crushed by a load of censure, in a great measure 
unmerited, which has been tardily and only partially removed by the 
more just and lenient judgment of a recent historian, and in respect 
of which the searching investigation in this present work presents the 
last word, and places the conduct of the expedition in its true light. 
We have seen how Charles, with characteristic rapacity and 
immorality, permitted and encouraged, through his Council, the 
abominable abuses of the monopolies, whereby his own privy purse 
was swelled, and honest traders were plunged in ruin, until the 
scandal became too outrageous to be borne. 


These deplorable amenities, however, sink into nothingness 
compared with the progressive tyrannies of the reign of Charles, 
which exasperated his ministers and subjects beyond bearing, and 
culminated in the most terrible civil war in English history. 

From the earliest days of his reign, Charles displayed a callous 
indifference to the rights and liberties of his subjects, and a growing 
tendency to the assumption of absolute autocracy. He arbitrarily 
dissolved his two first parliaments, in 1625 and 1626, to save his 
favourite, Buckingham, from well-merited condemnation and pro- 
bable impeachment. 

When the third parliament was called, in 1628, it became 
obvious that the " country party," the strenuous advocates of the 
liberties of the people, were in strong force, and Charles was compelled 
to make some concession? ; amongst others was the release of a 
number of gentlemen who had been imprisoned for resisting a forced 
loan in the preceding year. Five of these gentlemen succeeded, in 
virtue of the Habeas Corpus Act, in arguing their case before the 
King's Bench, maintaining that their imprisonment was contrary to 
the provisions of Magna Charta ; but the crown lawyers ruled 
otherwise, on the ground that they were committed by the king's 
special command ; and back to prison they went as the reward of 
their effort. 

This arbitrary proceeding produced the Petition of Right, to 
which Charles, in the first instance, vouchsafed a merely evasive 
reply, characteristic in its callous insolence : " The King willeth that 
right be done according to the laws and customs of the realm." 
This, however, elicited such a storm of protest that he speedily sub- 
stituted a very different answer : " Let right be done as is desired." 
thus practically accepting the terms of the petition. But when the 
Commons proposed to remind the king that the levying of tonnage 
and poundage without the previous consent of parliament was 
contrary to its spirit, he took refuge in the summary prorogation of 
parliament, while copies of the Petition of Right were circulated, 
with the king's first evasive reply appended, thus convicting him in 
the public eye of flagrant duplicity. 

When parliament assembled again, in 1629, the session 


terminated in the imprisonment and lining of several members for 
moving certain resolutions which were obnoxious to the king, who 
again dissolved parliament, and announced his intention of dis- 
pensing with its services in future, and governing the kingdom 
alone ; and this he actually did during the eleven ensuing years. 
"We shall account it presumption," he says in his proclamation, 
" for any one to prescribe any time unto us for parliaments, the 
calling, continuing, and dissolving of which is always in our power." 

This assumption of absulute power naturally afforded oppor- 
tunity of unbounded impositions on the people ; the Petition of 
Right became a dead letter., and no method of raising money was to 
be disputed or held to be unconstitutional. Compositions and fines, 
tonnage and poundage, and other exactions of the most flagrantly 
tyrannical and unjustifiable nature, were freely imposed and rigor- 
ously extorted ; monopolies in salt, soap, coals, wine, leather, beer, 
liquors, etc. — including also the manufacture and sale of glass, 
concerning which much has already been said — were revived. The 
soap company paid £10,000 for its charter, and £8 for every ton of 
soap manufactured ; it was empowered to exercise an inquisition on 
the trade, and those who resisted were mercilessly fined, upon the 
ex parte representations of the favoured company, by the Star 

Then there was the much-disputed matter of the " ship 
money," imposed at first only upon seaport towns, but subsequently 
upon inland counties, which elicited bitter opposition. The judges, 
however, gave it as their opinion that it was a lawful measure when 
the welfare and safety of the kingdom demanded it, and that the 
king was the sole judge of the necessity. John Hampden, a gentle- 
man of Buckinghamshire, refused to pay, and his cause came before 
the judges, a majority of whom decided in favour of the crown ; but 
this very disagreement amony them served to accentuate the exas- 
peration of the people under the innumerable impositions, impressing 
them with the conviction that there was to be no limitation to the 
king's absolute power, »talgre judges or anybody else. 

And so the dismal tale goes on ; the king, with Thomas 
Wentworth — afterwards Earl of Strafford— and Archbishop Laud 


as his principal advisors, pursued his relentless course, every year 
drawing nearer to inevitable catastrophe. 

In 1640, after the dispute with Scotland over the new liturgy, 
and the futile display of arms at Berwick, followed by the abolition 
of episcopacy by the General Assembly in Scotland, Charles bethought 
him that it would be as well once more to convene his English 
parliament, which met in April of that year. 

Its session was of very brief duration ; Hampden, and others 
of the country party, true to their colours, brought forward measures 
for the redress of grievances in various directions ; but Charles 
wanted money, not measures, and finding that this was not likely to 
be forthcoming, dissolved parliament after a sitting of three weeks 
—from which circumstance this is appropriately known as the 
" Short Parliament." 

Charles, obtaining money from Convocation, voluntary sub- 
scriptions—said to have amounted to £300,000, a pretty clear proof 
that a little tact and toleration on his part would have secured him 
the support of the people— ship money, and other more drastic 
means, was enabled to raise an army against the Scots, which again 
yielded and retreated, after being beaten at Newburn, to York, where 
negotiations for an understanding were opened. 

The king endeavoured by every means to avoid calling 
another parliament, but at length was compelled to yield to pressure 
and in November, 1640, issued the necessary writs, which inaugurated 
the •* Long Parliament," so called on account of its duration, amidst 
civil war and every phase of administration, culminating in regicide 
for nearly twenty years. 

The Commons made an honest attempt to secure the liberties 
of the people, and to reconcile religious differences ; but all to no 
purpose. In 1 64.2 no solution appeared possible save in the appeal to 
arms; and the setting up of the king's standard at Nottingham on 
August 22 was regarded as an open declaration of hostilities. 

Among the many deplorable attributes of civil war is the 
almost inevitable ranging of near relatives upon opposite sides In 
normal times a divergence of political views may exist, side by side 
with tnendly intercourse, between fathers and' sons, brethren and 


cousins, and so forth — though it cannot be denied that it sometimes 
engenders bitter, if somewhat illogical, hatred; illogical, for where 
all claim liberty of opinion, why should either side hate the other for 
exercising the privilege ? 

When, however, political differences develop rancour so fierce 
and relentless that nought save the arbitrament of arms will serve to 
settle the dispute, those nearest of kin, and not infrequently upon 
intimate and affectionate terms in all other respects, may find 
themselves pledged to mutual deadly combat. 

Such instances are not lacking in the history of the Maunsells. 
In the. Barons' Wars of the time of Henry III., Sir John Maunsell, 
the king's principal counsellor and right-hand man, beheld his near 
relatives — in all probability his sons, Thomas and Henry — fighting 
on the other side, together with Henry Hussey (or Hoese), his great- 
nephew by marriage ; while John— probably another son — and his 
nephew of the same name were loyal to the king. 

In the Wars of the Roses, while Philip Mansel and bis kinsman 
Griffith ap Nicholas fought for Lancaster, Thomas Maunsell, of 
Yorkshire and Essex, was with the Yorkists, as were likewise the 
Dwnns and Wogans, connected by marriage with the Mansels. 

When Charles set up his standard at Nottingham, Sir Anthony 
Mansel and his relative Sir Edward Stradling were among the first to 
join him. The splendid, if passive, loyalty of Dr. Francis Mansel of 
Jesus College has already been described, while Bussy Mansel, their 
cousin, speedily attained a position of command and responsibility 
under the Parliament. 

It is not, of course, proposed to deal with the Civil War in 
detail ; the foregoing sketch or summary of the circumstances which 
led up to it was deemed necessary in order to avoid a crude em- 
barkation upon the account of the part played by some of the 
Mansels in the struggle, to which attention must now be devoted. 

After a futile attempt at peace negotiation, early in 1643, 
and some successes by the Royalists during the ensuing summer, 1 the 

1 At the minor engagement of Chalgrove Field, June iS, J;hn Hampden, the stout 
champion of the liberties of the people, received his death-wound in trying to intercept Prince 
Rupert's cavalry. 



two armies encountered at Newbury in Berkshire on Sep- 
tember 20. 

There were two battles fought at Newbury, the second 
occurring October z~, 1644 ; and it was in one of these encounters 
that a member of the Mansel family met with a tragic death under 
peculiarly horrifying circumstances— according to the account of a 
connection of the family. 

Anthony Mansel, second son of Sir Francis, first baronet of 
Muddlescombc, was knighted in 1629, and in the following year was 
governor of Cardiff Castle, and subsequently of Ragland Castle, 

His daughter, Anne, married Thomas Duckett, Esquire, of 
Steeple Morden, Cambridgeshire, and their only daughter married 
the Rev. Joseph Bent ham, prebendary of Lincoln Cathedral. In 
Shaw's "History and Antiquities of Staffordshire" (Appendix to 
vol. ,i, p. y) there appear some letters from Joseph Bentham to Ids 
son Anthony, in one of which, dated May 5, 1714, occurs the following 
passage: "She" (i.e., Joseph Bentham's wife) "was the only 
daughter of Thomas Duckett, of Steeple Morden, in the county of 
Cambridge, a very ancient and honourable family. Her mother's 
maiden, name was Anne Mansel, an incomparable lady both in 
person and in parts ; she was daughter of Sir Anthony Mansel, and 
sister to Sir Edward Mansel, Bart., late of Muddlescombe, in Car- 
marthenshire. Your name. Anthony, was given you at your 
baptism by your god-father and great uncle, Bussy Mansel Esq., 
late of Britton Ferry, in eo. Glamorgan, in memory of your stout 
and loyal (great) grandfather, Sir Anthony Mansel, Governor of 
Ragland Castle, in Monmouthshire, who gloriously lost his life in the 
service of his Royal Master, King Charles I., in the bloody and fatal 
battle fought on Newbury Plain, in Berkshire, on October 27th, 
1644, where the rebels gut the day ; and a cannon ball, with chain 
shot, took off Sir Anthony's head with the upper part of his body, 
while he was briskly charging and routing the enemy. After that 
sad disaster his horse ran up and clown the ranks with the lower part 
of his dead master's body, being fast locked in his war saddle, with 
terror and affrightment both to friend and foe." 


This story, handed down through a couple of generations, 
must be accepted as fact, with regard at least to the ghastly and 
tragic manner in which the gallant Sir Anthony met his death ; but 
it may be questioned as to the date of the incident. 

There were, as already noted, two battles at Newbury, and 
Mr. Bentham is at variance with another authority as to that in 
which Sir Anthony Mansel was slain. 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell (p. 29) has a footnote to the following 
effect, giving verbatim some information supplied to him by Walter 
Money, Esquire, F.S.A., of Snelsmore, Newbury : " Anthony 
Maunsell (sic) was Governor of Cardiff Castle, and it is recorded in 
the ' Historical Register of Lords. Knights, and Gentlemen who were 
slain in defence of their King and Country during the unnatural 
Rebellion begun in 1641,' that ' he fell at the first battle of Newbury, 
20th September, 1643.' The name is also thus given in a contem- 
porary list in the possession of the R. Catholic Chapter of London." 

Where this " Historical Register " is to be found Mr. Maun- 
sell's informant does not state ; but the testimony of a local 
antiquary may be accepted without hesitation with regard to the 
existence of this categorical assertion ; whether it should be permitted 
to outweigh the family tradition, as recorded by the Rev. Joseph 
Bentham, is matter of opinion ; but a little consideration of the two 
battles may afford ground for arriving at a probable decision. 

On September S, 1643, the Earl of Essex, with his Parlia- 
mentary force, arrived at Gloucester, the king being then at Sudeley 
Castle, some eight miles distant. The royal scouts were not suffi- 
ciently vigilant, and Essex, who had previously marched to Tewkes- 
bury, left that place on a dark night, surprised and captured some of 
the king's horse at Cirencester, together with a large quantity of 
provisions, and set forth towards London. 

The king's forces had, however, waked up ; Prince Rupert, 
making a forced march, contrived to intercept Essex, and did 
considerable execution with his horsemen, so that the Parliamentary 
troops were obliged to stay their march at Hungerford, instead of 
going on, as had been designed, to Newbury. 

This delay gave the king time to get up, and when, on 


September 19, Essex advanced from Hunger ford, he found the 
royal forces in possession of Newbury. 

" It was now thought by many that the King had recovered 
whatsoever had been lost by former oversights, omissions, or neglects, 
and that by destroying the army which had relieved Gloucester, he 
should be fully recompensed for being disappointed of that purchase. 
He seemed to be possessed of all advantages to be desired. ... So 
that it was conceived that it was in the King's power whether he 
would fight 01 no, and therefore that he might compel them to 
notable disadvantages who must take their way or starve : and this 
was so fully understood, that it was resolved overnight not to engage 
in battle but upon such grounds as should give an assurance of 
victory. But contrary to this resolution, when the Earl of Essex 
had with excellent conduct drawn out his army in battalia upon a 
hill called Bigg's Hill, within less than a mile of the town, and ordered 
his men in places to the best advantage, by the precipitate courage 
of some young officers, who had good commands, and who unhappily 
always undervalued the courage of the enemy, strong parties became 
successively so far engaged that the King was compelled to put the 
whole to the hazard of a battle, and to give the enemy at least an 
equal game to play. . . . The Kind's horse, with a kind of contempt 
for the enemy, charged with wonderful boldness upon all grounds of 
inequality, and were so far too hard for the troops of the other side 
that they routed them in most places, till they had left the greatest 
part of their foot without any guard at all of horse. But the foot 
behaved themselves admirably on the enemy's part . . . and when 
their wings of horse were scattered and dispersed, kept their ground 
so steadily that, though Prince Rupert himself led up the choice 
horse to charge them, and endured their storm of small shot, he could 
make no impression upon their stand of pikes, but was forced to 
wheel about. "... It was fought all that day without any such 
notable turn as that either party could think they had much the 
better. Eor though the King's horse made the enemy's often give 
ground, yet the foot were so immovable that little was gotten by 
the other ; and the first entrance into the battle was so sudden, and 
without order, that during the whole day no use was made of the 


King's cannon, though that of the enemy was placed so unhappily 
that it did very great execution upon the King's party, both horse 
and foot." ' 

Here was ample opportunity, in these daring cavalry charges 
under artillery fire, which, confessedly, could not be returned, for 
Sir Anthony Mansel to meet with his death in the manner described- 
Turning to the other battle, thirteen months later, let us see how 
the circumstances compare with those of September 20, 1043. 

After the relief of Banbury, which had been effected on 
October 115, 1644. by the Earl of Northampton, with a strong body of 
horse detached from the king's army at Newbur}-, the enemy joined 
forces and advanced upon the king, having received information, as 
is alleged, through one Colonel Hurry or Urry, 2 a turncoat, of the 
absence of Northampton's force, and consequent weakening of the 
royal army. 

The king resolved to stand upon the defensive, having the 
advantage of the position, and hoping that the enemy would soon 
grow tired of camping in the open, and retire. 

" On Sunday morning, the 27th October, by the break of 
day, one thousand of the Earl of Manchester's army, with the train- 
bands of London, came down the hill, and passed the river that was 
by Shaw, and, undiscovered, forced that guard which should have 
kept the pass that was near the house that was intrenched, where 
Sir Bernard Ashly lay, and who instantly, with a good body of 
musketeers, fell upon the enemy, and not only routed them but 
compelled them to rout two other bodies of their own men, and who 
were coming to second them. In this pursuit very many of the 
enemy were slain, and many drowned in the river, and above two 
hundred arms taken. There continued all that day very warm 
skirmishes in several parts, the enemy's army having almost en- 
compassed the King's, and with much more loss to them than to the 
King ; till about three in the afternoon Waller, with his own and the 

1 Clarendon's "History of the Rebellion." Vol. iii., pp. 1 73-175. 

* John Hurry, a Scotsman ; he joined the Parliamentary Army in 1642 ; in the following 
year he went over to the Royalists, and was knighted June 18, 1643, for his services. In August, 
1644, however, believing the Royal cause lost, he returned to the Parliament. 


forces which had been under Essex, fell upon the quarter at Speen, 
and passed the river, which was not we'll defended ... by this 
means the enemy possessed themselves of the ordnance which had 
been placed there, and of the village of Speen ; the foot which were 
there retired to the hedge next the large held between Speen and 
Newbury, which they made good. i\t the same time, the right wing 
of the enemy's horse advanced under the hill of Speen, with one 
hundred musketeers in their van, and came into the open field, 
where a good body of the King's horse stood, and which at first 
received them in some disorder ; but the Queen's regiment of horse, 
commanded by Sir John Cansfeild, charged them with so much 
gallantry that he routed that great body, which then fled, and he 
had the execution of them near half a mile, wherein most of the 
musketeers were slain, and very man}' of the horse ; insomuch that 
that whole wing rallied not again that night." 1 

Other charges of horse, led by Goring, the Earl of Cleveland, 
and Sir John Browne, are described ; but the whole account does not 
convey the impression of incessant cavalry encounters, as in the 
first battle, nor is there allusion to a heavy attack by cannon — 
artillery, in fact, is barely mentioned, save with regard to the capture 
of two " drakes " from the enemy, 2 

The first battle of Newbury was indecisive, and the second, 
though Mr. Joseph Bentham says " the rebels got the day," was by 
no means as adverse 10 the royal forces as King Charles at first 
feared, or the rebels hoped. Clarendon maintains that the losses on 
the Parliamentary side were far heavier than on the king's ; " but 
because the King's army quitted the field, and marched away in the 
night, the other side thought themselves masters, and the Parliament 
celebrated their victory with their usual triumphs ; though within a 
few days after they discerned that they had little reason for it." 

There is a detailed account of the two battles of Newbury in a 
volume by Mr. Walter Money, of Newbury, who has made a special 
study of the events connected with the neighbourhood. 

In this account Sir Anthony is unhesitatingly placed as having 

'Clarendon's' History of tl Re! ' n." Vol. iii., pp. 433, 434. 
8 "' Dr.ike," or '" dragon," a small piece of artillery. 


been slain in the first battle, in accordance with the Historical Register 
alluded to elsewhere ; and there can be little doubt that this state- 
ment i^ correct, and that Mr. Joseph Bentham is in error in placing 
the second battle as the scene of Sir Anthony's death. 1 

Sir Edward Stradling of St. Donat's is also mentioned as 
having fought on the Royalist side in the first battle of Newbury ; 
" and after the loss of that day, retired to Oxford, where he died of 
consumption." 3 

In the " Complete Baronetage " Sir Edward Stradling is 
stated to have " fought for the Royal cause at the battle of Newbury, 
Oct. 1644 " ; buL it appears more probable that he fought only in 
the first battle. 

It was this Sir Edward whose widow — daughter of Hugh 
Perry, of London — afterwards married Bussy Mansel of Britton 

Of Bussy Mansel, the first mention in state records as con- 
nected with the Great Rebellion appears to be in a letter written by 
him to Sir Jacob Astley (Baron of Reading), 3 a very staunch Royalist, 
in 1645. 

Bussy Mansel was only nineteen when the Civil War broke 
out, so it is scarcely to be expected that anything would be heard of 
him at that time ; and lie was only two-and-twenty when he wrote 
to Sir Jacob Astley. The letter i^ somewhat obscure in its meaning, 
but some of the expressions therein can only be interpreted as 
indicating that the writer was at that time on the king's side, though 
perhaps wavering in his allegiance. 

"13 Sept. 1645. Before I received your letter and his 
Majesty's command. I had in effect given up what his Majesty is 

1 "' The Battles of Newbury," by Walter Money, F.S.A. ; pp. 29, 42, 76. Mr. Money 
styles Sir Anthony as " of Trimsaren," but this is obviously an err^r. The Trimsaren estates 
did not come to the Mansel family until forty years later. See account and pedigree, ante, p. 127. 

2 Ibid., p. 76. 

3 Sir Jacob Astley was second son of Isaac Astley, of Hill Morton, county Warwick, and 
Melton Constable, Xorf 11. .:. r. :. \\ named county York in the " Complete Peerage "). lie 
was governor of Plymouth in 1. ;S, and ... nel of the ki:ig" = 3rd Regt. of Foot in the Scottish 
campaign of 1640. In 1142 he was sergeant major-general of the king's army, and was created 
Baron Astley of Reading, Nov. 4, [644. lie distinguished himself by his gallantrj at Naseby 
in 1645. 


now pleased to recall from me, for since the madness of the multitude 
took me off from performing conditions with your Lordship, myself 
and Colonel (Humphrey) Matthew left them, not without danger to 
our persons, with a resolution never to return to them again. Where 
our persuasions might prevail we effected your commands. We are 
confident that all would have disbanded, but for the plundering of 
the soldiers marching out of the county. I stay for a boat to carry 
me for Cornwall from this county, that I may clear up all doubts of 
my encouraging the people this way they are now upon. You may 
be assured I can render nothing back with more content than what 
is commanded from me. since I was so unfortunate as not to be better 
able to serve his Majesty." l 

Whence this letter was written does not appear, but it was 
certainly from some place in South Wales, whence the most ready 
means of getting to Cornwall would be by sea. Bussy's object in 
going there was obviously to avoid being implicated in " the madness 
of the multitude " to which he alludes, and which he and Colonel 
Matthew had been powerless to allay. There is no mention in 
Clarendon's " History of the Great Rebellion," or Gardiner's work on 
the subject, of these popular disturbances in Glamorganshire, but 
from Bussy Mansel's letter the madness of the multitude must 
have been exhibited against the king and his army. 

We hear no more of Bussy Mansel for three months ; whether 
he took boat to Cornwall, or how he was employed during tins time 
does not appear : but on December 20, 1645, he was appointed to 
command the Parliamentarian forces in Glamorganshire. 3 

The appointment of so young a man to this responsible post 
has already been commented upon ; perhaps some explanation may 
be found in the fact of the wealth and prominence of the Mangels in 

Richard Symoncls, in his Diary, enumerates, among the Chief 
Inhabitants of Glamorganshire : 

" Bushie (Bussy) Maunsell (sic) Esq. of Burton (Britton) 
Ferry. £1100 per annum. 

1 Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1645-1647 ; p. 136. 
• Lords' Journals. Vol. viii., p. 52. 


"Sir — Maunsell, Baronet of Margham. £4000 per annum. 

" Sir Edward Stradling, Bart, of St. Donat's Castle. £4000 
per annum if out of lease." 1 

It is somewhat remarkable that Symonds spells the name 
Maunsell : the Mansels of Margam and Britton Ferry never spelled 
it so ; the more simple and strictly phonetic method would appear 
to come naturally to a stranger. 

On January 26, 1646, Bussy Mansel, Edward Carne, and 
others wrote to Major-General Laugharne from Cardiff : " About 
the time of the receipt of yours of the 22nd of January . . . we 
received intelligence of an increase of misery happened to Mon- 
mouthshire by the sudden surprise of their forces by the enemy from 
Ragland or Caerleon, which without some speedy assistance hath 
laid that country open to the violence and rapine of that barbarous 
and bloody crew, now much animated by that advantage. The 
gentry of that country therefore and ourselves have instructed the 
gentlemen, bearers hereof, to crave your best aid, and to let you 
know the condition of our both counties and the sad consequences of 
the prevalency of the enemy, not only to rush as a torrent on that 
and the adjacent counties to their ruin, but likewise the danger of 
their moulding a new considerable power to the disturbance of the 
kingdom for the prevention whereof we desire as many forces as you 
can spare." 3 

At the surrender of Cardiff to the Parliamentary forces, on 
February 19 following. General Laugharne stipulates that the 
gentlemen of the town " shall not draw to any rendezvous without 
order or warrant from Colonel-General Bussy Mansell." The terms 
of surrender are couched in manly and generous terms, and redound 
to the credit of Laugharne. 3 

General Laugharne, in 164S, had gone over to the Kovalists. 
apparently from jealousy of Colonel llorton, who had been sent into 
his district of command, and also on account of the alleged injustice 

1 " Diary of the -Marches of the Royal Army" (Camden Soc.) ; p. 216. Symonds was 
among the troop of horse which formed the king's lifeguard. 

2 Portland MSS. Vol. i., p. 345. 
• Ibid., pp. 351, 352- 



towards his soldiers, who, in disgust, had joined the king's standard 
in a body at Pembroke, whither their general also betook himself — 
being, in fact, left otherwise with no army to command. He was 
defeated by Horton at St. Fagan's — a village about four miles 
north-west from Cardiff — on May S, 164S, and was afterwards, 
together with Colonels Poyer and Powell, tried by court martial and 
sentenced to death. The three officers were, however, permitted 
to draw lots for their lives ; Poyer was the unlucky one, and was 
duly executed. 

Bussy Mansel does not appear to have followed the example of 
his superior officer at this time, as we find him being appointed, in 
1651, by the Parliamentary authorities, one of the commissioners 
and justices who were instructed to investigate concerning the 
insurrection in the county of Cardigan ; x seven or eight years later, 
however, when the cause of Charles II. was gradually becoming more 
hopeful, Bussy appears to have transferred his allegiance once 

In a lettei written on April 1, 1659, from Brussels, by Sir 
Edward Nicholas (secretary of state under Charles I. and Charles II.), 
to Mr. Steere, occurs the following: " I have acquainted the King 
with all your letters ; he is glad to hear that Bussy Mansel is so well 
recovered, and that the business under his care is in so good a con- 
dition. . . . The King wishes me to tell you that what you and your 
friend and Mansel send shall be very welcome to him, and he will 
send his resolutions on hearing of the particulars of the affairs 
committed to your care." - 

Mansel was, of course, only one out of many who adapted 
their conduct to the turn of the wheel of fortune at this period. 
Subsequently to the date of the letter above quoted, however, he 
was still in the employ of the Parliament, for on July 13, 1659, 
Bulstrode Whitelocke, president of the Council of State, wrote to 
hirn to take command of the militia in counties Pembroke, Car- 
marthen, and Cardigan, and a fortnight later he was directed by 
the same authoritv to assume command of the whole of the militia 

1 Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1 65 1 ; pp. 266, 267. 
• Ibid., 1658-1659; p. 325. 


forces in South Wales. 1 Whitelocke was at this very time secretly 
favouring the schemes of Royalists, and thus, like Mansel, keeping a 
foot in either camp — which was certainly politic, but scarcely 

On September 19 in the same year Bussy Mansel writes to 
Samuel Mover : " By the care of our small forces in South Wales, it 
was so kept from insurrection that there will be little work for 
Sequestration Commissioners." etc. ; he recommends some in case 
their services should be required. 2 

How Bussy Mansel fared after the Restoration there is but 
little evidence to show ; he appears to have kept aloof from political 
intrigue, save in one instance, already alluded to in a previous 
chapter. 3 

The Stradlings, so nearly related to the Mansels by marriage, 
fought consistently on the king's side, and their names appear 
frequently in accounts of the fighting in Wales. 

Sir Edward Stradling is said to have brought a thousand men 
from Wales to Shrewsbury, 1 and perhaps took them on into Warwick- 
shire, for his name appears among the prisoners taken at Edge Hill, 
on October 24, 1642 ; 5 he must, however, have been liberated, for. 
as we have seen, he took part in the first battle of Newbury in the 
following year, having pi eviouslyalso fought, together with Lieutenant- 
Colonel Jehu Stradling. at the siege of Bristol, where Waller was de- 
feated, and King Charles, on the strength of this and other successes, 
issued a declaration to the people, conjuring them " by their memory 
of that excellent peace and firm happiness with which it pleased God 
to reward their duty and loyalty in time past ... to remember 
their duty and consider their interest," etc. 6 Unfortunately, 
" excellent peace and firm happiness " had been conspicuously 
absent under Charles's rule ! 

1 Cal. State Paper?, Dora., 1659-1660 ; pp. 24, 56. 

* Proceedings of the Committee for Compounding, etc. Vol. i., p. 747. 
« See ante, p. 54. 

* Ibid. Vol. i., p. 128. 

5 Clarendon's " History of the Rebellion " (iSSS). Vol. ii., P.J371. 

* Ibid. Vol. iii., p. 120. 


Major-General Stradling, jointly with Major-General Egerton, 
in command of a force of some 1,500 horse and foot at Haverford- 
west, fought a battle, against a Parliamentary force under General 
Laugharne. on Colby Moor, about three miles from the town, on 
August 1, 1645. The light began about six p.m., and only lasted 
about an hour, resulting in the defeat of the Royalists by an inferior 
force ; about one hundred and fifty were slain, and some seven hundred 
were taken prisoners. Neither Stradling nor Egerton are among 
the prisoners named. 1 They retired on Carmarthen with the remnant 
of their force, and endeavoured to recruit more men in this and the 
bordering counties, but in vain. 

At Rowton Heath— September 24, 1645— Colonel Sir Henry 
Stradling was taken prisoner, and subsequently, after the siege of 
Pembroke, in July, 164S, he and Lieutenant-Colonel Stradling were 
among those Royalists who were sentenced to two years' banishment 
from the kingdom. 

Lady Stradling, Sir Edward's wife, and daughter of Sir 
Thomas Mansel, first baronet of Margam, was very active, in col- 
laboration with her sister-in-law, Lady Elizabeth Mansel (afterwards 
Lady Sebright), 3 in furthering as far as possible the Royal cause. 

On October 1, 1642, Dame Mary Stradling wrote from St. 
Donat's Castle to her " dear sister " the Lady Elizabeth Mansel : 
" Mr. Stradling wished me to tell your Ladyship that lie is your most 
humble and obliged servant, and giveth yram Ladyship many thanks 
for the muskets, with the appurtenances, which he received from 

On November 26, 1645. Lady Stradling writes to Lady- 
Elizabeth Sebright : " I have sent you six muskets and some matches. 
As for wethers, here are a great many fat. but I cannot as yet get 
such a settlement as to sell any of them ; but I hope before the end 
of Christmas I shall, for God knoweth I should be gladder that they 

1 " Memoirs of the Civil War in Wales ar.d the Marches," I. R. Phillips. Vol. ii., p. 266. 

3 She was, as will be recollected, daughter of the Earl of Manchester, and wife of Sir 
Lewis Mansel, v. ho died in 163S ; she afterwards married Sir Edward Sebright, apparently 
between 1642 and 1645, as Lady Stradling addresses her as Mansel in the first, and : 
the second letter. 


might serve your turn than anybody's in the world. ... I beg your 
Ladyship's pardon that I do not now send you your muskets ; for, 
since the writing of my letter unto you. 1 understand that they went 
amongst others which I sent unto Jack for Cardiff. They will be 
back here on Saturday next, and by God's leave I will send them 
unto you by Monday or Tuesday next at the latest." : 

Lady Stradling also housed at St. Donat's Royalists who were 
in straits or difficulties : among others James Usher, Archbishop of 
Armagh, who was the guest at Cardiff Castle of his son-in-law, Sir 
Timothy Tyrrell, but was compelled to leave on account of the 
evacuation of the castle. 2 

Sir John Stepney (third baronet), grandson of Sir Francis 
Mansel of Muddlescombe, was also a Royalist. He was member for 
Haverfordwest, and governor of that town. It was apparently 
taken for granted in the first instance that Sir John would be on the 
side of the Parliament, for in an order issued on August 18, 1642 — 
four days before King Charles hoisted his standard at Nottingham — 
by the Lords and Commons, his name is included among a number 
of gentlemen who are instructed to take immediate steps for calling 
out the militia in the county of Pembroke. 3 

In the following yea'", however, he is one of the signatories to 
a " Protestation " of loyalty, which commences with the statement 
— not an accurate one' — that " the famous haven of Milford, Tenby, 
■Haverfordwest, and all other places in Pembrokeshire bung reduced 
to His Majesty by that noble and prudent Earl of Carberrv, 4 his 
Majesty's Lieut. -General of the comities of Pembroke, Carmarthen, 
and Cardigan, there now remained only Pembroke town and castle 
out of his Majesty's possession, for the gaining whereof the noble 
gentry of this county made a protestation," etc. 5 

1 "Stradling Correspondence." ed. by J. At. Traheme ; pp. xiv., xv., xvi. "Jack" 
was Major-General John Stradiine, alluded to above. 

2 " The Lite of Dr. James Usher," by Richard farr, D.D. ; pp. 58, 60. 
a Lords' Journals. Vol. v., p. 304. 

4 Richard Vaughan, second Earl of Orberry. 

5 This pronouncement was published in Mcrcurius Aulicus, a spasmodic weekly 
journal issued intermittently from Oxford. It professed to communicate "The Intelligence 
and affairs of the Court to the rest of the Kingdom, "as is implied in the title, which means "Court 
Mercury." It was. not, however, a very reliable informant, being addicted to bombast and 


This is followed by the announcement that the Protestation had 
so affected the townsmen of Pembroke, that they sent a letter to 
Lord Carberry proclaiming their loyalty to the king. Pembroke was 
not, however, held for the king at that time, nor until four years later 

111 X f 4 4 Sir J° h " Stepney was one of the members who formed 
he somewhat farcical King's Parliament at Oxford-it numbered 
lorty-five Lords and one hundred and eighteen Commoners The 
only business done " was the inditing of a Ion- letter to the Earl 
ol Lssex, begging him to try and persuade " those whose confidence 
ne possessed -i.e., the Parliament at Westminster-to bring about 
peace. Sir John Stepney was among those who signed this futile 
document, which was returned by Lssex without a reply The king 
soon tired of this travesty of a parliament, and it was dissolved after 
a session of four months. 1 

Sir John Stepney was taken prisoner at Hereford in December 
1045 ; " he died in 1650. 

On July 2, 1651, the Council of State and the Admiralty 
Committee granted a pass for certain persons to proceed to Holland, 
to wit-Sidney Fotherby, John Moyle. Mary Mansell, Francis 
Whi taker, and Elizabeth Cock. The Fotherby family, it will be 
recollected, was connected by marriage with the Mansels of Muddles- 
combe Elizabeth, probably daughter of Charles Fotherby, late Dean 
of Canterbury, having married Sir Walter Mansel, second baronet of 
Mudd escombe. Tins Mary Mansell was therefore probablv of the 
Muddlescombe branch. The Movies were also connected with the 
Fotherby family, for Priscilla, daughter of Dean Fotherby, married 
one Robert Moyle *-this John Moyle was probably his son ; Sidney 
fotherby may have been a son or grandson of either Dean Fotherby 
or his brother Martin, Bishop of Salisbury. At any rare, three of the 
members of this party of five were connected with the Mansels of 
Muddlescombe ; and who was this Mary ? She may have been 

P- 196,- voL ,r p rS i t:ie CUI] Wai m WaIes and tKe Marches '" h >' r R - ?^- Vol. l, 
3 ibid. 

Vol. ii',p A it' MSS " 55 °°' f °' 7 ° ; Regi?ter? ° fanterbur ^ Cathedral, Harl. Soc. Registers. 


married to a Mansel. Possibly she was Bussy Mansel's sister Mary, 
who was married to Colonel Edward Prichard ; but as this marriage 
probably took place before the date of the wairant, and as Prichard 
was a Roundhead, it is difficult to account for her sailing under her 
maiden name ; unless, indeed, the name of Prichard was held to be 
more likely to arouse suspicion abroad than that of Mansel ; and there 
does not appear to be any reason why it should be so. If this party 
of live was setting out upon Parliamentary business, the fact would 
involve the deduction that the Fotherbys and the Movies were of 
that side, which does not appear very probable ; perhaps, after all, 
the warrant was granted merely for private affairs. It does not 
appear possible to identify Mary Mansel with any certainty. 

There is a tradition that one Mansel, or Maunsell, fought at 
Naseby on the Parliamentary side. 

The Rev. John Mast in, in his " Antiquities of Naseby," has 
the following : " The late Dr. Hill informed me that he had a relative, 
a Mr. Mansell, who fought in the battle of Naseby field, that he was 
wounded in the breast and left for dead. Being stripped to be 
buried, a young woman, daughter to an apothecary, happened to 
be upon the field, and finding his hand very soft exclaimed, ' This 
certainly was a gentleman ! ' She further observed that she felt a 
pulse, and consequently lie was not dead. She pulled oft her under 
petticoat, and wrapping him in it, had him conveyed to a neighbour- 
ing village, where he recovered and lived some years after. He kept 
the young woman as housekeeper to the time of his death, when he- 
left her a handsome annuity." 

This romantic story must be accepted for what it is worth. 
The Maunsells of Northamptonshire intermarried with the Hills, as 
will be seen in due course. 

Another version of the story is that John Maunsell, a captain 
in Cromwell's bodyguard, was left for dead on the battlefield, but 
recovered, and afterwards purchased and rebuilt Thorpe Malsor 
House and estate. Whatever may be the truth as to one John 
Maunsell being left for dead, and so forth, the circumstantial em- 
bellishment concerning the purchase of the Thorpe Malsor estate is 
certainly inaccurate ; Naseby was fought on June 14, 1645, and the 


Thorpe Malsor estate passed into the hands of the Maunsells about 
the year 1622, when it was bought of John Watkyn by John Maun- 
sell, of Chicheley. ] hicks. 

The story has. no doubt, some foundation ; but it cannot be 
verified, and so must remain as a family tradition, probably true in 

The flight and adventures of King Charles II., after the battle 
of Worcester, and his final escape to France, possess a special interest, 
in that one Francis Hansel, or Mansell, played a prominent part in 
providing the vessel which conveyed the king. 

There are numerous accounts of the flight of the king after the 
battle was hopelesslv lost ; they are mostly, however, compiled from 
one or two records, with some extra incidents or embellishments 
thrown in. which may or may not be authentic. 

The two narratives which carry the most weight are Charles's 
own account, given to Samuel Pepys in 1680 (nine-and-twenty years 
after the events), and " Boscobel ; or the most miraculous preserva- 
tion of King Charles II. after the battle of Worcester,'' written in 
1660 by one Thomas Blount ; 1 aiso an account by Colonel Gunter, 
who played a prominent part in the matter. 

To transcribe in full any of these detailed narratives would 
occupy too much space ; the summary of tire king's adventures 
which follows will give a sufficiently clear account of his flight, up to 
the appearance of Francis Mansell upon the scene. 

That Charles bore himself gallantly during the fateful battle, 
all accounts agree ; but Cromwell had taken care that the " big 
battalions " should be on his side, and the Royal army was hopelessly 

When, in the afternoon (September 3, 1651), the king and his 
immediate followers realised that all was irretrievably lost, they 

1 Thomas Blount (161S-1679) was a barrister by profession, though he does not appear 
to have practised much ; he was handicapped, no doubt, by being a zealous Catholic. He must 
have gathered the details of his account by diligent enquiry, as he could nit have had personal 
knowledge of them, and King Charles's narrative to Pepys was told after his death. Thomas 
Nash, in his " Histor) and Antiquities of \\ orcestershire," denies the authorship of Biount, and 
even quotes an alleged letter i .. the 1 itter, in which he disclaims it. (Vol. ii., Su] p. p 90.) 
Nevertheless, it is almost unh ersally believed that Thomas Biount was the author of '' Bo-xcbel." 


made their escape from the town of Worcester by St. Martin's Gate ; 
and then arose the question as to the most prudent direction of their 
flight. The king, with his advisers. Lord Wilmot and others, were 
encumbered and harassed by the attendance of a large detachment 
of beaten and disorganised cavalry: "We had such a number of 
beaten men with us, of the horse, that I strove, as soon as ever it was 
dark, to get from them ; and though I could not get them to stand 
witli me against the enemy, I could not get rid of them, now I had a 
mind to." ' 

The fust idea was to get away to Scotland ; and at last the 
king, with some sixty officers, contrived to elude the ruck of beaten 
horsemen. Charles had by that time made up Ins mind to try for 
London instead. Lord Wilmot alone being in his confidence. 

They reached that night a house named Whiteladies, about 
five-and-twentv miles from Worcester ; and here " there came in a 
country-fellow, that told us there were three thousand of our horse 
just hard by Tong-castle, upon the heath, all in disorder, under 
David Leslie and some other of the general officers" ; whereupon 
the officers endeavoured to persuade Charles to start with this 
escort for Scotland. Bu1 he very wisely declined any such perilous 
venture, " knowing very well th it the country would all rise upon us, 
and that men who had deserted me when they were in good order, 
would never stand to me when they have been beaten." 2 

So all these g ntlem :n ex< ept Lord Wilmot and one or two 
others, went off to join the disorganised horsemen, and were im- 
mediately attacked and routed ; while Charles, resolving to go to 
London on foot, proceeded to disguise himself. 

While hiding in a wood, however, lie again changed his mind, 
and determined to get over the Severn into Wales, where, at Swansea, 
or some other port, he hoped to take ship for France. 

However, Swansea was not to be gained any more than 
London, for the fords were closely watched ; and concealment was 
found in the wood-; at Boscobel, near Whiteladies, both houses 

1 From the king's account, in Samuel Pepys' MS., edited by Sir David Dalrymple 
Ed. 1803 ; p. 4. 

2 IM-> PP- S» 9- 



belonging at that time to Mrs. Cotton {nee Giffard), whose relatives 
lived there — one Giffard, presumably Mrs. Cotton's brother, having 
been the king's guide thither. 

It was in the woods around Boscobel that Charles hid during 
one day in the oak, with one Colonel Careless, or Carlos ; from their 
hiding-place they saw the Parliamentary soldiers searching the wood, 
but remained undiscovered, though, we are told in one account, the 
king slept with his head on Careless's arm, which became numb from 
the pressure, so that he feared he would not be able longer to keep 
the king from falling out of the tree ; nor did he dare speak, for the 
enemy was at that moment quartering the wood close by ; so " he 
was constrained to practise so much incivility ^s to pinch his majesty 
to the end he might awake him to prevent his present danger." 1 

Thence the king passed to the house of Colonel Lane, at 
Bentley ; and finding that the colonel's sister, Jane, had a pass to go 
to Bristol, to visit her cousin, Mrs. Norton, Charles, disguised as her 
servant, under the name of William Jackson, accompanied her to 
her cousin's house, where he was recognised by the butler, one Pope, 
who had been a trooper in the army of Charles I. After considerable 
alarm, the kin;; took Pope into his confidence, and lie proved entirely 
worthy of it, going to Bristol to enquire about a ship to convey the 
king to France, which, however, he did not find. 

The king remained in the same company until they arrived at 
the house of Frank Windham, at Trent, in Dorset ; and there it was 
decided to attempt to obtain a ship at Lyme (Regis), whither Wind- 
ham betook himself upon this errand, and succeeded in persuading a 
merchant there to arrange for the hire of a vessel ; but he was forced 
to disclose the name and status of the intending passenger. How- 
ever, they went to Lyme, or close by ; but the master of the vessel, 
on the persuasion of his wife, who appears to have suspected the 
nature of the service required, declined to keep to his bargain. 

Then a ship was found at Southampton, but she was "com- 
mandeered " to convey Cromwell's troops to Jersey, and so they were 
again disappointed. 

During this period — from September 3 to about October 6 — 

1 " The Flight of the King," by Allan Fea ; p. 56. 


which has been briefly covered. Charles had many very narrow 
escapes, and there are some amusing incidents recounted by various 
writers ; it will now be necessary to enter somewhat more into detail. 

It was for some reasons deemed imprudent for the king to 
remain longer at Trent, both on his own account and that of his 
host ; before he left, however, Frank Windham's brother-in-law, 
Edward Hyde, coming to dine, mentioned that he had seen in 
Salisbury on the previous day one Colonel Robert Phelips, then living 
in Salisbury, his family seat at Montacute, in Somerset, being at that 
time under sequestration. 1 Windham mentioned this to the king, 
thinking that Phelips might be of assistance in procuring a vessel at 
one of the ports on the south coast ; and with this idea Lord Wilmot, 
still in faithful attendance upon the king, left for Salisbury on the 
following day. 2 It was through Colonel Phelips that the vessel was 
hired at Southampton, but, as has been related, was not after all 

On Monday, October 6, Colonel Phelips acted as guide to the 
king, who departed, after nearly three weeks' residence at Trent, for 
Heak House, near Salisbury, the seat of Mrs. Hyde, a widow lady 
whose loyalty could be depended upon. 

Meanwhile Lord Wilmot, after the conference with Phelips at 
Salisbury, bethought him of a friend who dwelt in Hampshire, to 
wit, Mr. Lawrence Hyde, a brother-in-law to the king's hostess at 

Rristol, Southampton, and Lyme Regis had failed them as 
possible ports of embarkation ; it was obvious that some immediate 
steps should be taken, the risk of discovery and disaster becoming 
daily more imminent ; why not try for a ship at some Hampshire or 
Sussex port ? 

Mr. Lawrence Hyde lived at Hambledon, a village about 
twelve miles north from Portsmouth. After some conference, he 

1 This splendid old mansion is still in the possession of the Phelips family. It is said that 
a valuable collection of books was wantonly destroyed by Cromwell's 

1 Henry Wilmot (1612 .M65S), third son of Charles, first Viscount Wilmot. He hid 
served with distinction in the Scottish war?, and in the earlier battles of the Civil War. arid was 
created Baron Wilmot of Add r: ury, 0: . rdshire, June 29, 1643. Subsequently (Dec. 13, 1652), 
he was created Earl of Rochester. 


recommended Lord Wilmot to ride over and consult with Colonel 
George Gunter, at Rackton, near Chichester, who he thought was a 
man likely to be in the way of rendering some assistance ; the Hydes 
and Gunters were connected by marriage. 

It was a happy inspiration, and eventually led up to the 
successful achievement of their design. 

Colonel Gunter was ready and willing to further the king's 
escape by all means in his power ; he had been absent upon some 
very important and unpleasant business, involving the risk of 
sequestration of his estate, and did not get home until after 
Lord Wilmot's arrival. 

His wife met him at the door, and informed him that there 
was in the parlour " a Devonshire gentleman/' sent by Mr. Hyde, 
upon business which none but he — Colonel Gunter — could decide. 

The colonel, somewhat puzzled by this mysterious com- 
munication, entered the parlour after his wife, and there found the 
"Devonshire gentleman," and iris cousin, Thomas Gunter, seated 
upon either side of the fire. 

Lord Wilmot, with necessary caution, had presented himself 
as " Mr. Barlow " ; but his disguise was indifferent, and inad< quate 
for its purpose in the presence of one to whom he was known by 
sight, and it speedily became apparent that he was recognised by 
his host, though Thomas Gunter appears to have been successfully 

Seizing an opportunity, Lord Wilmot took Colonel Gunter 
aside, and whispered, " I see you know me ; do not own me." 

And so they went to supper — it being then about nine o'clock 
— -and there was a further alarm, for Lord Wilmot's servant, a man 
named Swan, who was presumably in his master's confidence, 
coming in to attend at table, whispered to him to be careful, as there 
was " my Lord Wentworth's boy Lonie without . . . being taken by 
Captain Thomas Gunter in distress at Chelsea, and clothed by him to 
wait upon him." And so. with " Lonie " presumably in attendance, 
supper passed off with some discomfort and anxiety for Lord Wilmot. 

However, the colonel speedily made opportunity for a con- 
ference, courteoush o ndu ti ii: neat to hi; tt, and 


recommending his wife and his cousin to go to bed. as " he was bound 
to wait upon this gentleman awhile." 

Once behind the carefully closed door, Lord Wiimot, with a 
sigh, let himself out. 

" The King of England, my master, your master, and the 
master of all good Englishmen, is near you and in great distress ; 
can you help us to a boat ? 

The colonel replied that, lor all he lived so near the sea, there 
was no man living so little acquainted with seafaring men ; but felt 
himself bound to do his utmost lor the king, and faithfully promised 
to perform his part as far as was possible ; and so bade his guest 
good-night and repaired to his own rooms, only to find fresh trouble ; 
for his wife was sitting up for him, eager to learn the nature of his 
business with " Mr. Larlow." lie endeavoured to put her oft with 
the assurance that it did not concern or endanger tier ; but intense 
curiosit}- and some pardonable apprehension on the part of a wife 
are not so easily parried. " She was confident there was more in it 
than so, and enough, she doubted, to ruin him and all his family ; 
and in that, she said, i am concerned, breaking out into a very great 
passion of weeping ." 

Under these awkward circumstances, Colonel Gunter felt that 
the best plan would be to take her into Ids confidence ; he slipped 
out of the room on some pretence, and consulted Lord Wilmot, who 
agreed ; and so the good colonel returned to his room, " unfolded 
the bu-iness, wiped the tears off his lady's eyes, who smiling said, 
' Go on and prosper ; yet I fear you will hardly do it.' " 

Thus reassured and contented, Colonel Gunter, after an 
almost sleepless night, rose very early and rode to Emsworth, about 
two miles distant, taking with him one Joim Day, formerly a servant 
of his, a trustworthy man and a very loyal subject ; but, although 
Day was related to some seamen of good account, they met with no 

Lord Wilmot, impatient for news, met the colonel a short 
distance from the house, and together they rode to Langstone 
Harbour — a large, shallow expanse of water running lound Hayling 
Island, and the seaport of Chichester— but there they found no better 


fortune, so they lunched off oysters and parted for the time, Lord 
Wilmot going to Mr. Hyde's house at Harnbledon, and the colonel 
to his home, where he induced his cousin, Captain Thomas Gunter, 
to make further endeavour in various quarters, and to meet him next 
day at Chichester to report progress. 

Progress, however, there was none to report, though Thomas 
Gunter and a loyal kinsman of his, William Rishton, had done all 
they could — and time was passing, the king all the while in peril of 
discovery and capture. 

" Then the colonel bethought himself, and conceived the 
next and best expedient would be to treat with a French merchant, 
one that usually traded into France, and went to one Mr. Francis 
Mansell, a stranger then to the colonel, and only known unto him by 
face, as casually he had met him with several other companies, 
pretending to give him a visit and to be better acquainted with him. 
He received him courteously, and entertained him with a bottle or 
two of his French wine and Spanish tobacco. After a while the 
colonel broke the business to him, saying — ' I do not only come to 
visit you, but I must request one favour of you.' He replied ' Any- 
thing in his power.' Then the colonel asked him if he could freight 
a bark, for, said he, ' I have two special friends of mine who have 
been engaged in a duel, and there is mischief done, and I am obliged 
to get them off if I can.' * He (Mansell) doubted not but he could 
at such a place, at Brightemston (Brighton) in Sussex. The colonel 
pressed him then to go with him immediately, and if he could effect 
the business he would give him fifty pounds for his pains, but it 
being Stowe fair day there (i.e., at Chichester) and las partner out of 
the way, he could not possibly until the next day, and then he 
promised him faithfully he would go with him and do his best, so 
accordingly they agreed. Then the colonel, who had promised to 
the noble Lord Wilmot an account at Mr. Hyde's house, aforesaid, 
once in twelve or twenty-four hours at the furthest, repaired thither 
accordingly, and told him all that was done. The noble lord ap- 
proved and liked the way wondrous well. It being very late, and 

1 Duelling was struck opposed by the Puritans, who were then in power ; some years 
later Oliver Cromwell issued very stringent regulations against it. 


very dark and boisterous weather, the colonel look his leave. His 
horse being almost spent, he borrowed a horse of his kinsman, Mr. 
Hyde, who lent him his falconer's horse . . . which served to carry 
him home, and the next morning to Chichester. The colonel took 
his own house in the way, and rested upon a bed for a while, and 
went unto Chichester, the 10th of October, being a Friday, according 
to former appointment. The merchant being destitute oi a horse, 
the colonel horsed him upon the horse borrowed of Mr. Hyde, and 
borrowed one for himself of his kinsman. Captain Thomas Gunter, 
and went away accordingly, desiring his kinsman to repair to my 
Lord YYilmot. 'and to give him the account of his departure from 
Chichester, in further prosecution of the business, and to remain 
with him in order to his commands during Ids absence. 

"They arrived to Brightemston by two of the clock that day. 
The merchant went immediately to inquire : but the seaman he 
chiefly depended upon was gone for Chichester, who had bargained 1 
for a freight there ; but, as Providence would have it, he touched at 
^horeham, four miles from Brightemston. The colonel persuaded 
the merchant to send to him to come to him immediately upon 
earnest business, and T doubted not but that he would come, which 
took effc ~t accordingly. The colonel had agreed with the merchant 
to treat with the boatman, being his affair and trade, he to sit by as 
neuter promising the merchant to make good and to pay him 
whatever he should agre^ for, but withal desired to get it as low as 

he could. , 

" They stayed there that night, and by Saturday, the nth oi 
October by two of the clock, made a perfect agreement, which was 
that he (ie., the master of the vessel) was to have £60 paid him in 
hand before he took them into the boat, for he would know what he 
should carry or he would not treat, so that the merchant was forced 
to tell him, himself knowing no more than what the colonel had said 
to him. of two friends, etc. 

" He was to be in readiness upon an hour's warning, and the 
merchant to stay, under pretence of freighting his bark, to see all 
things in readiness a^nst^l^U^^ 

1 Should obviously read, " having bargained." 


For the colonel knew no! when he should come, but privately prom- 
ised the merchant to defray all his charges and to give him £50 as 
aforesaid for his pains, which was afterwards accordingly done ; but 
this £50, and the £60 paid to the boatman, the king himself, before he 
went away, took order for, and his order was executed." ' 

The various accounts of the interview with Francis Mansell, 
and the engaging of the vessel, all agree in essentials with that of 
Colonel Gunter ; King Charles, however, in his narration to Pepvs, 
says, " the merchant only knowing me, as having hired her to carry- 
over a person of quality, that was escaped from the battle of Wor. 
cester " ; whereas Colonel Gunter gave Mansell to understand that 
he was anxious to provide means of escape for two friends of his 
who had been concerned in a duel. This discrepancy might have 
been awkward had it come to light. Fortunately King Charles was 
not called upon to explain the motive in hiring the vessel. 

The master of the ship, in whom Francis Mansell had so much 
confidence, was named Nicholas Tettersell ; - little is known con- 
cerning his family and origin. His ship was a small coasting vessel, 
engaged in the coal trade. There will be something more to say 
about his subsequent history later on ; at present we find him pledged, 
upon certain conditions, to convey two apprehensive duellers across 
the water ; and one of his stipulations was that " he would know 
what he should carry, or he would not treat " — this being the very 
point upon which Colonel Gunter intended that both Mansell and 
the skipper should remain in ignorance. Circumstances, however, 
were too strong for him. 

On the following day— Sunday, October 12 — Colonel Phelips 
went off to acquaint the kirn; with all that had been arranged, while 
Colonel Gunter and his cousin Thomas and Lord Wilmot, by way of 
diverting attention from the business, did a little coursing on the 

1 This account - and much that follows — is mainly taken from "Tract No. 5 " in "The 
Flight of the Kin S ," by Allan Lea (1S97), pp. 2S1 et seq. This tract is said to be written from 
the mouth of Colonel Gunter (or Gounter). The use ot" the third person, varied occasionally 
by the first, is somewhat confusing, and the style is sometimes obscure ; but it is no doubt an 
authentic story. 

% The name is spelled in a variety of ways in the several accounts : Tattersall, Tettersall, 
Tattershall, etc. ; but it appears that Nicholas himself spelled it as above. 


downs near Hambledon, eventually meeting the king and Phelips as 

The colonel had a sister married to one Thomas Symons, 
living near Hambledon, and thither they arrived about dusk. Mrs. 
Symons, in ignorance as to the quality of one of her guests, received 
her brother and his friends hospitably ; but, when they were half- 
way through supper, in came Mr. Thomas Symons, " who, as it 
plainly appeared, had been in company that day " ; and who was 
not at first disposed to friendliness in his cups. " ' This is brave,' 
said he ; ' a man can no sooner be out of the way but his house 
must be taken up with I know not whom.' " 

Recognising his brother-in-law, however, he welcomed him 
and his friends. 

" Passing round the table and viewing all the company, he said, 
' These are all Hydes now ' ; but, peeping in the king's face, said of 
him, ' Here is a Roundhead. ... I never knew you (Colonel 
Gunter) keep Roundheads' company before.' To which the colonel 
replied, ' It is no matter ; he is my friend, and I will assure you no 
dangerous man.' Ac which words he clapped himself down in a 
chair next the king and look him by the hand, shaking him and 
saying, ' Brother Roundhead, for his sake thou art Welcome,' all the 
while believing the king to be so indeed, and making himself to be 
one too as well as he could act it, the king all the while complying 
with him, to all their admirations." 

This is a specimen of the numerous instances in which detec- 
tion, or at least strong suspicion of some mystery and disguise, 
threatened the king and his faithful adherents ; not that Mr. Thomas 
Symons would have betrayed him, but, his identity once recognised, 
the difficulty of preserving absolute secrecy would obviously be 
much augmented. 

However, the king slept soundly at the house that night, and 
on the following day, preceded by Colonel Gunter, he and Lord 
Wilmot arrived safely, after some alarms on the road, at the George 
Inn at Brighton, where, by previous arrangement, Francis Mansell 
and Captain Tettersell joined them at supper. 

And now all the colonel's ingenious tale about his duelling 



friends fell to pieces ; for it so happened that the king was known 
both to Tettersell and the landlord — by name Smith. 

The king's account of the business is as follows : " As we 
were all sitting together, I observed that the master of the vessel 
looked very much upon me. And as soon as we had sapped, calling 
the merchant (Mansell) aside, the master tuld him that he had not 
dealt fairly with him ; for though he had given him a very good 
price for the carrying over that gentleman, yet he had not been clear 
with him ; for, says he, he is the King, and I very well know him to 
be so. Upon which, the merchant denying it. saying that he was 
mistaken, the master answered, I know him very well ; for he took 
my ship, together with other fishing vessels at Bright-helmstone, in 
the year 1048 (which was when I commanded the King my father's 
fleet, and I very kindly let them go again). But, says lie to the 
merchant, be not troubled at it ; fur I think I do God and my country 
good service, in preserving the King, and by the grace of God I will 
venture my life and all for him, and set him safely on shore, if I can, 
in France. Upon which the merchant came and told me what had 
passed between tin '111 : and thereby found myself under a necessity 
of trusting him. But I took no kind of notice of it presently to him ; 
but thinking it convenient not to let him go home, lest he should be 
taking advice of his wife, or anybody else, we kept him with us at 
the inn, and sat up all night drinking beer and taking tobacco 
with him." 

This was a very natural precaution on the part of the king, 
who would preserve a lively recollection of his disappointment at 
Lyme Regis, where the skipper's wife dissuaded him from the under- 
taking. King Charles, however, told his story to Pepys nine-and- 
twenty years later, and his recollection may have been at fault, for 
other authorities differ on this point, stating that Tettersell went 
home for a bottle of aqua vitas, that his wife divined his secret, 
and, so far from protesting, declared that she did not care if she 
and the children went fasting, so long as the king's safety was 
assured. 1 

The question here arises as to Francis Ma nsell's knowledge of 

1 See Bates' Chronicle, ed. 1730 ; p. 541. 


the king's identity. Both Colonel Gunter and the king himself state 
that Mansell's services were secured upon a false pretence ; and the 
king, in the passage above transcribed, obviously alludes to Tettersell 
when he says he found himself " under a necessity of trusting him." 
Mansell's denial to Tettersell may or may not have been genuine ; but 
it is not easy to believe that, after his conversation with the king 
concerning Tettersell's avowal, he could have remained in ignorance. 
There is no direct testimony, in any of the narratives, that Mansell 
was purposely enlightened, by Colonel Gunter or Lord YVilmot, as to 
the king's identity ; it may safely be assumed, however, that from 
the moment of Tettersell's statement, and Mansell's subsequent 
interview with Charles, the merchant was aware of the importance 
of the business in which he had played a principal part. 

Meanwhile Smith, the landlord, who had formerly been one 
of the Guards of Charles 1., had also recognised the king ; and 
seizing the opportunity when they were left alone together after 
supper, he kissed the king's hand, and said : " God bless you, where- 
soever you go. I do not doubt, before 1 die, but to be a lord, and 
my wife a lady " — which certainly displayed a keen sense of favours 
to come, though it does not appear that any such exalted dignity was 
in store for the worthy Smith. However, he proved himself staunch, 
and was doubtless rewarded afterwards, in some sort, if not with a 

About four o'clock in the morning the king and Lord Wil- 
mot rode to Shoreham, where the vessel lay high and dry, and 
climbing on board by means of a ladder, lay down in the small 

At seven o'clock, the tide being high, the little ship, named 
the Surprise, was tinder way ; and after some preconcerted acting 
on the part of the -kipper and the king, in order to hoodwink the 
crew of four men and a boy, the)- steered for the French coast, and 
landed at Fecamp on Octobei 16, 1651. 

Nearly nine years later, when Samuel Pepys, in his capacity 
of secretary to Sir Edward Montagu, sailed with the ileet which went 
to bring back the banished king, the diarist has the following entries : 
" 19 April, 1660. This afternoon came one Mr. Mansell on board as 


a Reformado, to whom my Lord did shew exceeding great respect, 
but upon what account I do not yet know." x 

This was before the fleet sailed from England ; and evidently 
Mr. Mansell accompanied it, for on the return, when landing at Dover, 
Pepys writes : " 1 went, and Mr. Mansell, and one of the king's foot- 
men ... in a boat by ourselves, and so got on shore when the king 
did," etc. 

Subsequently, on October i in the same year : " I drank a 
glass of wine privately (at the Mitre) with Mr. Mansell, a poor Re- 
formado of the Charles, who came to see me." 

From the expression, " a poor Reformado of the Charles," it 
appears probable that this Mr. Mansell was on board the same ship 
as Pepys when the king returned, under the last clause in Murray's 
definition of a Reformado (see footnote). Pepys was on board the 
Naseby, and in 1660 the king caused this ship to be renamed the 
Charles, or Royal Cha ' s. 2 

It will be observed that Pepys does nut, in any of these 
allusions, give Mansell's Christian name, so that his identity with 
Francis Mansell of Chichester is not absolutely certain ; it appears 
most probable, however, that this was Francis Mansell. and that Sir 
Edward Montagu — whom Pepvs stvlos " my Lord " in anticipation 
of his subsequent title, Earl oi Sandwich — being aware of Mansell's 
loyalty and zeal in promoting the king's escape in 1651, held him in 
great respect for this valuable service. 

It is, indeed, pretty clear that Charles's prospects of getting 
away to France had dwindled to the most shadowy proportions when 
Colonel Gunter so happily bethought him of the merchant of Chi- 
chester. Three times his faithful adherents had failed in their scheme, 
and the news that the king was about had gradually percolated 
through the inevitable chinks in all such secret enterprises ; there 

1 " Reform.-ido. A military term borrowed from die Spanish, signifying an officer who, 
for some disgr.ue, i.- J ; ■ .■:; command, but retains his rank and perhaps his pay " (" A 

Glossary of Words, Phrase-, etc.," by Robt. Nares). " An officer left without a command (owing 
to the ' r [c rming ' or ir hi .• ; hi :■ mp. a\ \ but retaining his rank and seniority, and 

receiving full or half-pa) . A volunteer serving in the army (or navy) without a commission, but 
with the rank of an officer " (Murra) - Dictionary). 

3 -The Royal Navy," by W. Laird Clowes. Vol. ii., p. no. The Royal Charlts 
was captured by the Dutch in their daring attack in the Thames and Medway, June 1 2, 1667. 


was a reward of £1,000 upon his head, a very potent spur to any 
disloyal or wavering individual in the neighbourhood. The final 
escape of the king was. in truth, as Thomas Blount puts it in the title 
of his tract, miraculous ; and it is not easy to see how it could have 
been achieved hut for the intervention of Francis Mansell, who, by 
virtue of his intimate connection with local seamen, was able at once 
to place his hand upon the right man. over whom, moreover, he 
evidently possessed very strong influence, as is indicated by the 
peremptory recall of Tettersell from Shoreham, which was im- 
mediately obeyed. 

It would be pleasant to record that Francis Mansell received 
immediate and adequate recompense for his loyalty, upon the return 
of the king ; but this does not appear to have been the case. He 
was, indeed, appointed July 3, 1660, collector of the Customs on 
wool, leather, skins, etc., in the Port of Southampton, with a salary 
of £"60 1 — equivalent perhaps to £"230 at the present clay. In Decem- 
ber of the same year there is the record of one Francis Mansell 
having petitioned for certain profits — not stated — " For conferring 
a Baron's tit!.: on a gentleman appointed by him. whereby he may 
repair his sufferings ; the place of receiver of fines on penal statutes 
granted to him having been previously conferred on another.'" '- 

In June, 1661, Francis Mansell presented a petition for relief 
to the king, in which he states that he " was forced to fly for life for 
being one of the instruments of his majesty's happy escape, and has 
spent more in solicitation than the £60 per annum which he receives 
from his small office in the port of Southampton." 

This application met with immediate response ; on June 29 
there appears : " Grant to Francis Mansell of a pension of £200 for 
faithful services." 3 

In February, 1662, Francis Mansell petitions to be superseded 
in his post at Southampton, on account of ill-health. 

1 Cal. State Papers, 1660-1661 ; p. 141. 

2 Ibid., p. 438. Francis Man ell, that i to say, rec imn :nded some gentleman for a 
barony, on the under t 1 : 1 - tl 11 he -.\ is to receive a certain gratuity upon the J being 
conferred. This appears to have been a method adopted tor the enrichment of persons in favour. 

' Ibid., 1661-1662 ; pp. 21, ZZ. 


It is notorious that the pensions which were granted to 
various persons for their services to the king were by no means 
always punctually paid, and Francis Mansell was a sufferer in this 
respect. In April, 1664, he petitioned the king " For relief from the 
privy seal dormant, the £200 a year granted him from the exchequer 
being £300 in arrear." 

The king appears to have been moved by this appeal, for the 
entry immediately follows : " Privy seal for £200 to Francis Mansell, 
as the king's free gift." ' 

In the following year this entry appears in the records of the 
Heralds College— 

" Francis Mansell, now of Guildford, Surrey, who provided 
the ship and with great loyalty and fidelity assisted his majesty's 
transportation after the unfortunate battle of Worcester ; or, three 
maunches sable, on a chief gules a lion passant gardant or ; 14 Feb. 
1665. By Walker, Garter." 2 

Mansell was at the same time permitted to adopt a significant 
and appropriate crest, viz., a one-masted ship of the period in full 
sail ; flags and pennons, arg. St. George's cross gu. ; on the stern, 
gules, three royal crowns or. 

(This coat-of-arms, as already noticed, lias been erroneously 
attributed to Sir Robert Mansel.) 

It is apparent from this record that Francis Mansell had not 
previously borne any coat-of-arms ; had he done so, the lion on a 
chief gules would have been added as an "honourable augmenta- 
tion " only ; but here the right to bear the three maunches is also 

The question naturally presents itself: of what branch of the 
ancient family was this Francis Mansell ; In the tracts and other 
accounts his name is sometimes spelled " Mansel," but orthographic 
differences are too frequently quite arbitrary, and cannot be relied 
upon as evidence. 

Mansell is first heard of in these records as a merchant of 

1 Cal. State Papers, 1663-1664 : p. 552. 

2 " Grantees of Arms," Har. Soc. Publications. Vol. lxvi., p. 163. Original record at 
Heralds College, already quoted ; see vol. i-, p. 467. 



Chichester ; but this does not, of course, necessarily imply that he 
was a native of Sussex. 

It is, however, roundly asserted by some writers that he was 
of Ovingdean Grange, near Brighton, and that King Charles rested 
at this house before embarking for France. 

There does not appear to be any solid foundation for this 
statement ; the Rev. T. W. Horsfield, in his " History and Anti- 
quities of Lewes," says of Ovingdean : "If on no other account, it 
is worthy of being mentioned, as the refuge oi Charles the Second 
before his escape to the continent. The house was at that time 
occupied by Mr. Maunsell (sic), who entertained the vanquished king 
during several days of suspense, which preceded the engagement of 
Tattersall's coal brig." 

This was published in 1S2'/ ; in his " History and Antiquities 
of the County of Sussex," published eight years later, the writer 
says : " The ancient manor house, which has been modernised, is 
worthy of notice, if on no other account, yet as the erroneously 
supposed refuge of Charles II. for a few days before his escape to the 
continent." Mr. Horsfield evidently had occasion to alter his views 
pending the publication of his second book. 

Tn " Ancient and Modern History of Lewes and Brightelm- 
stone," by William Lee (1705), there is a circumstantial account of 
the concealment of the king at Ovingdean, the house of Mr. Maunsell, 
" within a false partition " ; but this idea probably emanates from 
some account of such concealimnt elsewhere. 

Harrison Ainsworth. the novelist, in "Ovingdean Grange," 
works out the alleged visit of King Charles in great detail, with copious 
accessories of encounters between Roundheads and Royalists, and 
a suitable accompaniment of Lve-making. He names the elderly 
Royalist owner of Ovingdean Colonel YVolston Man-ell. Possibly this 
book has assisted in maintaining the tradition, but it is, like most 
fl//<'.s!'-historical novels, quite valueless as evidence ; the novelist 
must always be permitted ample licence, and there are almost 
invariably in such books misrepresentations of facts and more or 
less glaring anachronisms. 

Among the manuscripts bequeathed to the British Museum 


by Sir William Burrell (1732-1796), an antiquary particularly 
interested in Sussex, there is the following note concerning Oving- 
dean : " Ovingdean consists (March, "17S0) of a considerable farm, 
the property of Thomas Holies Payne Esq., of Red Hill, Surrey ; 
about two-thirds of another farm (the other third lying in Rotting- 
dean) now belonging to Mr. Payne of Patcham, which he lately 
purchased of the family of Streatfield. . . . When the Geers lived 
in Ovingdean farm. Charles the 2nd lay concealed here till he had an 
opportunity of embarking at Brighton for France ; his person had 
such an effect on the good woman of the house that her next child 
(a very fine boy) was said to be the picture of the King." 1 

Here is another story, from which it would appear that 
Ovingdean Grange (or farm) was in occupation at that time by a 
family named Geer. 

It is certainly possible that Francis Mansell, or someone else 
of the name, held or Laird Ovingdean Grange at one time ; the 
reiterated association of the name with the place is probably not a 
gratuitous invention ; but that Mansell dwelt there, and concealed 
the king in his house on this occasion, there is not a shred of con- 
temporary evidence. In all the tracts, etc.. Ovingdean is not once 
alluded to, while there arc several circumstantial accounts of the 
king's last journey to the shore, in which Mansell appears as the 
merchant of Chichester. 

In 1665 he is alluded to in the grant of arms as of Guildford in 
Surrey, and in 1667 we hear of him again in Pepys's Diary : " Feb. 
20. ... So I back by coach to London to Sir Robt. Viner's and 
there got £100. and come away with it and pay my fees round, and 
so away with the 'Chequer men to the Leg in King Street, and there 
had wine for them ; and here was one in company with them, that 
was the man that got the vessel to carry over the King from Bred- 
hemson (Brighton), who hath a pension of £200 per annum, but ill 
paid, and the man is looking after getting of a prize-ship to live by ; 
but the trouble is, that this poor man, wiio hath received no part of 
his money these four years, and is ready to starve almost, must yet 
pay to the Poll Bill for this pension. He told me several particulars 

1 Burrell MSS., No. 50S4, fol. 93 (old numeration). 


J 93 

of the King's coming thither, which was mighty pleasant, and shews 
how mean a thing a King is. how subject to fall, and how like other 
men he is in his afflictions." 

From this and other allusions already quoted it is obvious 
that Francis Mansell suffered severely for his loyalty. Compelled to 
leave Chichester, he probably lost his business there entirely ; his 
pension was greatly in arrear, and after living for some time at 
Guildford, we find him confiding his difficulties to Samuel Pepys in 
London — almost ready to starve, as Pepys states, and yet compelled 
to pay tax on the pension which was not forthcoming. The grant 
of arms — which probably involved the payment of certain fees at the 
Heralds College — was but meagre compensation for such deprivations. 

Nor is this the end of his troubles : in February, 1667., appears 
the " Petition of Francis Mansell, merchant, to the King, to permit 
him to enjoy his pension of £200 a year, stayed four years ago ; was 
outlawed and ruined, and was promised to be made eminent on the 
Restoration. Captain Tattersall and others instrumental in the 
same service towards the safety of His Majesty's person have had a 
similar favour." l 

Immediately ensuing upon this record is the following: 
" Warrant for continuance of the pension of {,200 a year, granted to 
Francis Mansell, for si .vices, especially in the King's escape from the 
battle of Worcester, notwithstanding the late order for stay of 
pensions." l 

This warrant would appear to have put matters right, 
especially if arrear- were to be paid. No such thing ; only a few 
months Liter Francis Mansell petitions : " For a grant of the old 
prize ship ' Lainseroone,' now at Plymouth, appraised at £180 ; his 
pension of £200 ayear for his actings towards the safety of his majesty's 
person has failed, on account of tiie late wars and troubles." 2 

This was evidently presented at the time when Pepys met 
Mansell at "the Leg in King Street." upon which occasion the 
merchant's story elicited the not uncalled-for reflections of the diarist 
upon the fickleness of kings. 

1 Cal. Suite Papers. 1666-1667 ; p. 525. 

2 Ibid., 1667-1OC3 ; p. 131. 


There is no record as to Mansell's success or otherwise in 
obtaining the old prize ship ; ' nor is there, indeed, much more to be 
learned about his life. 

In the Visitation of Surrey, 1662, there is, however, in the 
pedigree of Quinell (or Ouynell), the marriage, previous to 1662, of 
Francis Mansell with Barbara, daughter of Peter Ouynell of Field 
Place, in the parish of Compton, which is near Guildford. As it is 
very probable that Francis Mansell, the former merchant of Chi- 
chester, was living in Guildford about the time of this marriage, it 
may reasonably be assumed that it was he who married Barbara 
Cjuinell ; and this assumption is confirmed by the Register of West- 
minster Abbey, from which we learn that Captain Francis Mansell 
was buried there April 10, 1GS6. in the cloisters ; and that his widow, 
Mrs. Barbara Mansell, was buried in the West Cloister, June 13, 16S7. 2 

The Quinell pedigree is as follows — 

Robert Ql'ynell, of = Elizabeth, dau. and 

Lygh Hill, in ye | heire of George 

pish, of Chidding- \ Hall, of Compton 

fold in Co:n. Sur- ' in Com. Surrey, 

rey, gent . gent. 


Peter Quynell, of = Alicia, dau. and heire of 

Lygh Hill, in ; Emery Cranley of 

Com. Surrey ,gent. ] Field, in ye pish, of 

Dunsfold, in' Com. 

. v '.:r: -.y. 


Petep Quyneil, of = Elizabeth, dau. and heire of 

Field Phce in ; Edm. Gray of Woollbed- 

Compton pish, in I ing in Com. Sussex, Cleric 

Com. Surrey, Esq. ; 

I ! i 1 1 

Peter, son and Thomas Elizabeth, tix. Barbara, ux. Bridget Marcaret 

heire, est. 32, Richard Fran. Jane Alicia 

an 1662 Bickley Mansell 

Arms : Azure, a cross between two roses in chief, and as many fleurs-de-lis in base argent. 


1 It appears probable, however, that he did obtain the vessel, and fitted her __. 
privateer; for on Jan. 29. 1666-7, or <- Francis Malory writes Secretary Williamson"" The 
Dutch ship laden with iron and woo! from Bilbao lies there still, but not a is been near 

for six week,. Sent for Capt. Mansell's privateer, but she lacks her sails " (Cal. State Papers, 
1666-1667 ; p. 476.) The date 1 : Francis Mansell's application for the ship is vague— 1667 ? 
— and may have been earlier. 

Jj ' Westminster Abbey Registers (Har.Soc. Publications). Vol. x. j pp.216, 21S. 



Mansell is nut previously alluded to as " Captain," but in a 
footnote under the entry in the Register the following appears : 
" His will, as of St. Margaret's, Westminster, Gent., dated 16 June 
1685, was proved 6 May 16S6, by the relict Barbara. His children 
were Charles, Francis, Elizabeth, Barbara, Frances, Anne, Mary, 
William, and Rachel, all in their minority. He held a pension of 
£200 a year from King Charles II. for the lives of himself and wife, 
and his suns Charles and Francis." 

This will has been verified at Somerset House. The testator 
firstly leaves all his real and personal estate to Barbara his wife, 
whom he names as sole executrix. After her death, he leaves to his 
son Charles £100 " to be paid yearly and every year out of the 
annuity rent or pension of £200 per annum which his late majesty 
King Charles the Second of glorious memory was graciously pleased 
to grant unto me. my executors and assigns for the term of minority 
in years, if Barbara my said wife, Charles and Francis my sons, or 
any or either of them should so long live (my said son Charles paying 
all fees costs and charges for the receipt of the said annuity as by the 
grant thereof under the Great Si_al of England bearing date on or 
about the 18th July in the 29th year of his said Majesty's reign) 
relation being thereunto had more fully and at large as it cloth and 
may appear." 

After his wife's death, if Charles is still living, he leaves 
£12 1 os. od. yearly to Francis out of the annuity ; after Charles's 
death, £100 a year to Francis ; to each of his children, Elizabeth, 
Barbara, Frances, Anne, Mary. William, and Rachel £12 10s. od. 
yearly out of the annuity, " if his Majesty's said grant shall su long 
continue " ; in case of the death of any of these, the said sums to 
be equally divided among the remainder. 

The Royal Warrant under the Great Seal, above alluded to, 
is dated June 22. 1677, not July iS. as stated in the will, and is 
worded as follows : " Royal warrant to the Attorney or Solicitor 
General for a great seal for a grant to Francis Mansell, his executors 
and administrators, of the yearly annuity or pension of £200 for 99 
years terminable on the lives of Barbara his wife and Charles and 
Francis his sons, to be payable quarterly from the first quarterly 


feast which shall happen after the death of said Francis Mansell, said 
Francis having been very instrumental in the King's preservation 
after Worcester light, and having prayed an extension as above of 
his present pension in view of his numerous family." 1 

The Treasury Books contain records of the pa) meat of 
Hansen's pension, at very irregular intervals, and it is obviously in 
arrears. In one instance it was £1,000 behind, and he is awarded 
£900 ; this was in June, 166S. 

Curiously enough, the last payment entered in the printed 
Calendars of the Treasury Books in the British Museum, dated 
December 16, 1684, is to Mistress Mansell, £100, from which it would 
naturally be inferred that Mansell was dead; whereas his will is 
dated June 16, 1685, and proved May 6, 168b, his burial appearing 
in the Westminster Abbe)- Register, as above recorded, April 10, 
16S6. There does not appear to be any explanation of this anomaly 
forthcoming, unless it be that Mansell was in such bad health as to 
preclude his personal application ; but he describes himself as sound 
in mind and body, in the preamble to his will in the following year. 

More than twenty years later, on October 13, 1708, Anne, daugh- 
ter of Francis Mans* 11, and wife of Morris Rawson, petitioned " for 
payment of an a near of pension of £200 a year granted by King 
Charles II. to her father, mother, and brothers for 99 years, if any 
of them so long lived." 2 

Anne was not entitled to the pension under the warrant of 
June 22, 1677, which only applies to Barbara Mansell and hei sons 
Charles and Francis. The words " Certificate connected therewith " 
are appended in the Calendar. It does not appeal that the petition 
was granted. 

As is well known to genealogists, a coat-of-arms will frequently 
afford a clue to the connection of the bearer with others of the same 
name ; the coat adopted by Francis Mansell of Guildford does not, 
however, give any clue to his derivation. He assumed, it is true, the 
three maunches sable, but without the chevron, and the held is or 
instead of argent ; a solitary instance, so far as B known, of this held 

1 Cal. State Papers. Treasury Books, 1676-1 
3 Cal. Treasury Paper;, 1708-1714; p. 66. 



on a Manseil coat. The Mansels of Cosgrave, Northants, have 
discarded the chevron, but retain the field argent. 

It is not unreasonable, however, to assume that Francis 
Manseil was originally of Surrey, his connection with Chichesto being 
merely incidental to his business. There were Mansells (or Matin- 
sells) in Surrey from early times, as will presently appear in treating 
of the family connection with that count)- ; and although there is 
no direct evidence that Francis was related to them, it may be 
remarked that in the Sussex Archaeological Societv's records the only 
mention of the name — except that of Sir John Maunsell, temp. 
'demy III., in connection with Bilsington Priory — occurs in an 
account of the Civil War in Sussex. Here there is naturally some 
allusion to Francis .Man-ell — erroneously named Thomas in one 
instance — and his services on the king's behalf ; he is described as 
" of Chichester," which was of course at that tunc hi; place of 
business and residence. 

It appears probable that, on being compelled, by reason of his 
loyalty, to give tip hi- business at Chichester, he returned to his 
native county until, after the Restoration, he was given the appoint- 
ment at Southampton, having previously married Barbara Ouinell. 
Upon relinquishing hi- post at Southampton, in 1662, he probably 
once more returned to Surrey, as he is named, in the grant of arms, as 
" of Guildford " ; this was in 1665. 

Subsequently he came to Fondon, hoping, perhaps, to obtain 
the more regular payment of his pension by being on the spot, and 
possibly also with some business ventures in view, though there is no 
evidence of this. 

There is no record, so far as can be ascertained, of Mansell's 
domestic affairs in connection with Southampton ; his children 
appear to have been born later. 

There is mention of Francis Manseil in a paper written by one 
Mr. Carleton. a clergyman, and a strong Royalist, in 1657. Carleton 
addressed two letters, or " repiesentations " to Ring Charles — then 
in Bruges — from Brussels, in October of this year. The third letter, 
in which Mansell's name appears, is also dated in October, but it is 
not stated whence it was written, or to whom it was addressed ; it is 


most probably, however, written from Brussels, and the writer 
commences : " Messages I am to deliver from several persons." 

Among these messages is one " From Francis Mansell ; to 
tell the Chancellor that his little friend and the rest are well, and to 
bring his business if it be done." l 

The inference is that Carleton had received these messages 
from Fngland. Mansell's message bears the stamp of secrecy in the 
veiled wording ; " the Chancellor " was Edward Hyde, chancellor 
of the Exchequer, afterwards Earl of Clarendon (created April 20, 
1661), who was with the king at Bruges ; the identity of the chan- 
cellor's " little friend " is not so clear ; the " business " no doubt had 
connection with the various plans successively formed at that time 
to achieve the king's return and the discomfiture of his enemies. 

This Franeis Mansell was most probably our friend of Chi- 
chester, of whom we here obtain a glimpse in the interval between 
his valuable assistance in obtaining Tettersell's ship, and his voyage 
in company with Samuel Pepys on the occasion of the king's 

The name of Francis Maunsell (so spelled) appears in " A list 
of persons' names who were lit and qualified to be made knights of 
the Royal Oak, witli the value of their estates, Anno Dom. 1660," 
at the end of Wotton's " English Baronetage." 

YVotton, in a footnote, says : " This order was intended by 
King Charles II. as a reward to several of his followers ; and the 
knights of it were to wear a silver medal, with a device of the king in 
the oak, pendant to a ribbon, about their necks ; but it was thought 
proper to lay it aside, lest it might create heats and animosities, and 
open those wounds afresh which at that time were thought prudent 
should be healed ... no li?t of them was ever published." 

There are, in fact, four Maunsells included in this list. viz.. 
Captain Edward Maunsell, Arthur Maunsell, Esquire, and Francis 

1 Cal. of the Clarendon Sure Papers. Vol. iii., p. 374. There is also a message to the 
chancellor from Clement Spelman : it will be recollected that S:r John Spelman, of Narburgh, 
Norfolk, married a daughter of Sir \\ ill! im Manns ell in the fourteenth century ; and there is a 
monument in Narburgh Church to Clement Spelman. who died in 1607. The Clement here 
mentioned is of the same family ; he was a son of the other Clement, and was recorder oi 
Nottingham, and justice of the peace in Nottingham and Norfolk. (See vol. i., p. S9. ) 



Maunsell, Esquire — all of whom arc named a^ of London and Middle- 
sex — and Henry Maunsell, Esquire, of Carmarthen. 1 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell (p. 30) suggests that this Francis was the 
famous principal of Jesus College, Oxford, but this appears very 
improbable ; it is far more likely that Francis the merchant of 
Chichester was a candidate for this distinction. 

Genealogists and biographers of the Maunsell family have in 
several instance.-, alluded to the bestowal of this order upon its 
members with some little flourish of trumpets, and have implied 
that the recipient was granted a pension of £'600 or £"Soo a year — a 
very snug income at that time. 

There is no warrant for any such assumption ; the order was, 
indeed, a very barren honour, even if it was actually bestowed upon 
any or all of those who are mentioned by Wotton. It will be noted 
that his list purports to give the names of persons who were " fit and 
qualified " to be invested with the new order, together with the 
value of their estates ; the sum which i^ appended to each name 
simply gives this value, which was probably required as a guarantee 
that the individual was of sufficiently good position to be a suitable 
recipient of the honour. The sums vary from about £"600 to ten times 
that amount. 

Moreover, this hypothesis carries with it the reasonable 
assumption that, the king having notified his intention of instituting 
such an order, those who desired to obtain it were tacitly, if not 
explicitly, invited to apply for it ; and this assumption is supported 
by the fact that Wotton's list — which, he informs us, he obtained 
from a MS. of Peter I.e Neve, Norroy king-at-arms — comprises no 
less than sL\ hundred and eighty-seven names. 

Le Neve, in his official capacity, was probably deputed to 
receive the names of candidates for the honour, but " no list was ever 
published," which is equivalent to stating that the proposed order 
was, as Wotton says, laid aside as inexpedient. 

It appears probable, as lias alreadv been suggested, that the 

1 Edward is probably the son of Sir Francis Mansel of Muddlescombe, by his second 
marriage ; Henry is probably the grandson of Sir Francis ; Arthur is racit likely the third son 
of Sir Anthony, who was slain at Newbury; the spelling of the name, Maunsell, in Wotton's 
(or Le Neve's) list may be disregarded. 


" some misconduct in an engagement " ; this may have been during 
what is known as the " Four Days' Fight " with the Dutch in the 
previous summer, or on the occasion of the Dutch attack up the 
Thames and Medway in 1667. 

In " A Short Account of Brighton, by a gentleman who resided 
there a month last Summer," which appears in the Gentleman's 
Magazine for 1766, p. 50, and contains the allusion to Tettersell 
given above, it is stated that there is a monument in the church to 
Captain Nicholas Tettersell, with an inscription as follows — 

" P. M. S. 

" Capt. Nicholas Tetter-ell through whose prudence valour 
and loyalty Charles the lid Kin.-, of England and after he had escaped 
the sword of His merciless rebels and his forces received a Fatal 
overthrow at Worcester Sept 3d 1651 was faithfully preserved and 
conveyed into France departed this life the 26th of July 1674." 

Following this somewhat awkwardly composed inscription is 
a very laudatory epitaph in verse, which will not repay transcription ; 
then the record of the death of Susanna his wife, May 4, 1672. 1 

It is stated in some of the " Boscobel Tracts " that Tettersell's 
vessel, the Surprise, was brought up the Thames and moored off 
Whitehall, in memory of the king's escape in her. There does not 
appear to be any evidence on this point ; but it is a fact that a small 
vessel named the Royal Escape — which is said to have been the new 
title bestowed upon the Surprise — was purchased lor the Navy in 
1660 ; she figures, in a list of the Navy as it stood December iS, 1688, 
as a " smack " of thirty-four tons, carrying eight guns and a crew 
of ten men.- This small complement might be accounted for as 
merely temporary, the vessel being under repair at the time ; but 
there is official evidence which points to the deduction that she was 
then, or soon after, relegated to the position of a " dummy " ship ; 

1 Mr. Sawyer^ however, quotes the church register, which gives the date as May 6, 1670. 
Gentlemen who write the history of a place after a month's residence are usually ver\ inaccurate, 
even in so simple a matter as the copying of a monumental inscription. This gentleman adds, 
with charming simplicit) : " It is likewise -aid that not very long ago there were some persons 
in the town who used to boast oi their descent from this prince, who, as Dryden so justly said 
of him, ' Scattered his Maker's image through the land.' " 

1 " The Royal Navy," by Sir X. Laird Clowes. \ ol. ii., p. 247. 


for we find, by a letter or warrant of Charles II., dated August 29, 
1672, that in the previous year Nicholas Tettersell had been, by order 
of James, Duke of York (lord high admiral), " borne in pay, 
together with one servant, as captain of our vessel called the Royal 
Escape ; and that he should be allowed pa}- as captain of a fifth-rate 
ship, and he and his servant paid with the yard at Deptford " ; and 
furthermore that, on Tettersell's petition, his son Nicholas was to 
receive the same favour after his father's death. 1 

As the Royal Escape could not by any possibility be reckoned 
as a " fifth-rate " — a small frigate — this is obviously an appointment 
bestowed in order to give Tettersell the pay of the rank named, as 
further reward for his services, in spite of his dismissal in 1667, above 

Paul Dunban, in his " History of Lewes and Brightelmston," 
says that the Royal Escape was after a while moved down to Deptford, 
where she lay rotting until, in 1691, she was broken up for firewood. 

There is a story of one Captain or Colonel Roderick Mansell, 
who got into trouble in Ireland in 1677-7S. by reason of his association 
with a Presbyterian preacher named Douglas. 

On December 26. 1677, Mansell wrote from Belfast to the 
Earl of Arran, 2 saying that he had had notice of the arrival of 
Douglas at Belfast — Scottish " fanatic " preachers were regarded 
with much suspicion at that time — and " presently had him in my 
chamber, where after spending some heavy sighs and groans with 
him, and promising unto him kindness and friendship, and that he 
would be provided for in this kingdom, provided that he wuuld 
disclose what was truth to his knowledge of the designs now on foot 
in Scotland, he did condescend to it. I went immediately and 
acquainted my Lord Granard 3 therewith, and brought him unto his 

1 Ol. St.ue Pipers Dom., Aug. 29, 1672. The letter is given in in " The History 
of Brightelmstone,'' by J. A. Erredge ; p. 151. 

1 Richard Butler, fifth son of James, first Duke of Ormonde, who was then lord lieutenant 
of Ireland. Arran was colonel of a regiment of _:u.;:d?, but also held several responsible posts 
in Ireland under his father, for whom he was deputy during his absence. Butler adopted Arran 
(or Aran) a; his title, having purchased the Lie; of Aran, Galway Bay, from Erasmus Smith. 

5 Sir Arthur Forbes, created Viscount Granard. Nov. 2:, 1675, and Earl of Granard, 
Dec. 30, l6?4. At this time he was marshal and commander-in-chief of the Arm;,- in Ireland. 


Lordship, and after my Lord had a while discoursed with him, he 
commanded me to take Master Douglas out with me, and to try what 
I could get out of him, for lie could not gather anything out of him 
to purpose. I took him to my chamber again, and after renewing 
my promLes unto him. he has related unto me — ' That there is a 
full purpose in the fanatics of Scotland to take the sword in hand, 
and that the covenant is there renewed. That there is (as Master 
Douglas calls them) papers past and subscribed throughout the 
greatest part of the kingdom, and the greatest noblemen and gentle- 
men therein concerned.' . . . Master Douglas doth expect within 
two or three days to have some letters out of Scotland, whereby to 
confirm what he has now declared, and much more, and has promised 
me that if I will but keep him here secret, thai he will in short time 
do very eminent service for God, his king, and country. My Lord 
Granard would have confined him. but I have prevailed for his 
liberty, and have taken his parole that he will not stir from hence," 
etc. This letter is signed Rod. Mansell. 

On December 29 Mansell writes again to say that Douglas has 
not yet received the letters from Scotland, but that he has supplied 
the names of a number of " fanatic " preachers, the tenor of their 
discourses, and so forth, and promises to send these particulars 
shortly. This letter is written in a style much more characteristic, 
as to spelling, of the period, than the other, which needed btit little 
modernising in this respect ; and it is signed Rich. Mansell. 

Perhaps he possessed both Christian names ; it is impor^sible 
to doubt that the two letters are from the same person, as the second 
so obviously refers to passages in the first ; but the difference in 
orthography and signature is curious. 

On January 7 Mansell writes from Belfast to the lord lieu- 
tenant, enclosing communications from Douglas, who, he says, 
promises that " besides letters and subscriptions which he will 
produce unto your Grace, and that under the hands of those your 
Grace doth least suspect, he will further disclose unto your Grace 
the whole contrivances of affairs now on foot in Scotland, which 
shall be greatest service unto his Majesty and the good of the 


Then follow the enclosures — 

" That lie (Douglas) would certainly deliver unto his Grace 
the subscriptions of the nobility and gentry. 

" Next that, to confirm them, he would also deliver the 
several letters both of the nobility and gentry concerned in this 

" Also what sums of money were collected, and by whom, both 
in England, Scotland, and Ireland. 

" Also produce two letters from two knights out of England 
concerned herein ; and that he had received those letters from the 
Earl of Quinsburrow's ! own hands. 

" Also several letters from my Lord Granard. He said that 
to the best of his memory he had seven of them. . . . 

" Also that they had certainly risen in arms in October last, 
all things being fully prepared ; but my Lord Duke Lauderdale 
advised the contrary. 

" Also he bid me be assured and observe that in case that the 
parliament of England would declare a war against France, that 
then Duke Lauderdale 2 would soon leave these kingdoms. 

" Also that there was yearly paid unto the chief of the Pres- 
byterian ministers {40 per annum, and that by my Lord Granard unto 
them, and that there was more of those ministers that came out of 
Scotland into Ireland ; but before they were placed or provided for 
they behoved to have my Lord Granard's approbation, and without 
it were not provided for." 

These enclosures are endorsed by the Duke of Ormonde : 
" Given me by Lieut. Col. Mansell, the 19 January 1G7S, and in the 
presence of the Lord Chancellor and Sir William Flower." 3 

The letter is dated January 7 ; from Ormonde's endorsement 
it would appear that both letter and enclosure were delivered by 
Mansell in person ; but " given me " may probably be read as 

1 William Douglas, third Earl of Queensberry. 

3 John Maitland, first Duke of Lauderdale : he was president of tr. 
and for years held the whole power and patronage in S ■ itland. 
s Hist. MSS. Com, Report VI. ; pts. I. and II.. p. 717. 


" sent me," an hypothesis which is supported by certain State 
Papers, as will presently appear. 

On January 25, 1678, Lord Granard writes to the Duke of 
Ormonde : " Colonel Jeffreys will give your Grace a full account of 
his progress in Scotland, and how affairs stand there. By what I 
can learn from thence. Douglas is a mountebank and almost as great 
a knave as his prompter Mansell, who has treated me with so many 
and so great aspersions that I must fly to your Grace's justice for 
reparation. I humbly propose that he may be confined till I be 
heard, which will be as soon as I shall receive your Grace's license to 
repair to Dublin." 1 

On January 29 the Duke of Ormonde writes to the Earl of 
Arran : " Colonel Jeffreys is returned out of Scotland, and says 
Douglas is a notorious cheat, and so esteemed by those of all sides 
there, and by some held to be frantic. . . . He has drawn Mansell 
into a very ill condition, for I find my Lord Granard so enraged 
against him as I think he would not be but upon high provocation 
and proof. ... I believe upon the credit Mansell gave to Douglas 
he has spoken too freely of my Lord Granard. which may bring him 
within some article of war ; certain if is Mansell has conducted the 
whole matter very unskilfully and impertinently." 2 

On February 5 the Earl of Arran writes to the Duke of 
Ormonde : " I am sorry Mansell has run himself into such a business 
as no friend can help him out of if prosecuted ; his way must be 
submission to my Lord Granard that he may avoid a trial. I have 
the greater compassion for him because I know all the officers of the 
regiment hate him, and he has little or nothing but his command to 
live upon." 3 

On February 13 Sir George Rawdon writes from Lisburn 
(Londonderry) to Viscount Conway ' : " Five packets have come 
over since the receipt of your letter of 15 Jan., which I communicated 
to Lord Granard, and a few davs after Douglas was sent to the Lord 

Ormonde MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com.). New Scries. Vol. 

Ibid., p. 99. 

Ibid., p. io 1. 

Edward, third Viscount and first Earl of Conway. 


Lieutenant by Captain Manseil (a Lieut. Col. in the light (?) Brigade), 
who gave Lord Granard such offensive words and reports that his 
lordship has sent for some officers here to witness them on his trial 
at a Council of War in Dublin." 1 

On February 20 Lord Granard write s from Dublin to Viscount 
Conway : " The preacher, Douglas, is still here in prison, but makes 
nothing good he deposed. Col. Manseil, to whose custody I com- 
mitted him, was last night cashiered by a Council of War for speaking 
words to my disparagement, which were that I gave money to the 
Presbyterian ministers here, and that Lead Lauderdale and I held 
intelligence with them ; which, although lie denied, I made appear 
he had spoke, which by the general vote of the Council of War lias 
made him incapable of serving ever in this army." 2 

On February 23 Sir George Rawclon writes to Viscount 
Conway from Lisburn : "I suppose you have some account from 
Lord Granard that Lieut. Col. Manseil is cashiered for some reflecting 
words that his lordship and Duke Lauderdale were favourers under- 
hand of the Fanatic party in Scotland, which he said he had some 
cause to suspect by some discourse with Douglas, which was denied 
by Douglas." 3 

The impression conveyed by the above rorrespondenee is that 
Manseil was not fairly treated, being made a scapegoat bv Douglas, 
though the Earl of Arran writes to the Duke of Ormonde, March 2, 
167S : " I hear from several tint Mansell's crime was so fully proved 
that nothing could be said for him." 4 Douglas was obviously a 
most untrustworthy individual, a mischief-making fanatic, and 
perhaps on the borderland of mania. Certainly, unless Manseil 
spoke or wrote further in some other sense than is conveved by these 
letters, he was not guilty of the misdemeanour with which he was 
charged ; it is quite clear that he was merely reporting, as in duty 
bound, the probably wild and unfounded statements of Douglas, 
who subsequently disclaimed them. 

1 Sute Pap^r; (Ireland), C'urle, II. Vol. 338, No. 141. 
» Ibid., No. 142. 

* Ibid., No. 143. Sir George Raw don was Conway'^ agent and secretary in Ireland. 

* Ormonde MSS., New Series Vol. iv., p. 125. 


It is quite conceivable, however, that, Mansell having in the 
first instance written to Lord Granard, and then, alter he had received 
the papers from Douglas which purported to incriminate Granard, 
had sent them direct to the lord lieutenant, his action may have 
been construed by Lord Granard and the Duke of Lauderdale as 
indicating that he credited and upheld the preacher's accusations ; 
but Lord Granard must surely have had some more precise evidence 
to justify his statement that, in presence of the Council of War which 
tried Mansell, he " made it appear " that the latter had actually 
spoken as alleged. Perhaps the "preacher " rounded on him, and 
put the words into his mouth — it is a common practice with gossips 
and mischief-mongers. 

Mansell, however, was cashiered, and declared incapable of 
serving again in " this army," i.e., the army then in Ireland. 

He appears, notwithstanding, to have retained his military 
title, and gone to London, for in the following year there was a good 
deal of talk about one Colonel Roderick Mansell, who was for some 
reason selected by the conspiracy-monger, Thomas Dangerfield, as a 
tool in one of his numerous plots. 

Dangerfield was an unscrupulous scoundrel — a thief, a coiner 
of false money, a perjurer, but withal of attractive personality, 
capable of influencing those with whom he came in contact. 1 He 
also professed to be a Catholic : his account of his reception into that 
Church is not sucli as would convince anyone who is conversant with 
the practice of priests upon such occasions, but the pose was useful 
to him in the furthering of his numerous schemes and plots. He 
appears to have sometimes adopted the alias of YVilloughby. 

Dangerfield wrote a " Particular Narrative " of his own doings 
and his trial in connection with the alleged " Popish Plot " engineered 
by Titus Oates, which is much too profuse for transcription here. 

When Dangerfield was in Newgate prison, in 1679, for some 
of his misdeeds, he was visited by one Mrs. Cellier, who is said to 

1 In the Diet. Nat. Biog. he is described as '" Thomas Dangerfield, false witness," about 
the only title or occupation w] ich could justly be attached to him. He shares the distinction in 
the same v.ork with " Titus Oates, perjurer," whose machinations he professed to be engaged in 


have been a midwife, of loose character, and who assisted him in 
various ways ; she appears to have been in some degree instrumental 
in procuring his release, and subsequently, when he was in the Kings' 
Bench for debts, provided a sum of money with which he was able 
to compound with lus creditors, and so once more regain his liberty ; 
but there was always in her conversations with him a hint of some 
" great business " in which he was to be chiefly concerned. 

Mrs. Cellier introduced Dangei field to the Countess of Powis, 
whose husband was then in the Tower by reason of the perjuries of 
Titus Oates, 1 and who gave Dangerfield to understand that she would 
require him to undertake some other " business." 

The first mention of Colonel Mansell occurs in a Jist of prom- 
inent members of certain clubs ; his name is included with those of 
seven other men of military rank as frequenters of a club held " In 
Westminster-Market, at a Chandler's House." These lists occur in 
Dangei field's narrative. 

Then the Countess of Powis bids Dangerfield find out the 
lodging of " one Colonel Mansfield (fur so she said his name was) " ; 
which he did. and sent it by Mrs. Cellier to the Tower ; i.e., pre 
sumably, to the live Catholic lords, to whom Dangerfield elsewhere 
alludes as his ''great masters." lie states later that the colonel's 
name was really Mansell. 

Whether the Countess of Powis actually believed that Danger- 
field had either the will or the power to befriend her husband and his 
fellow-prisoners does not seem la be cleat ; nor is her motive and 
that of Mrs. Cellier apparent in their next move concerning Mansell ; 
he seems, on the surface, to have been quite gratuitously dragged 
into an intrigue — and a very futile and stupid intrigue at that. 

1 The Ear! of Powis was one of the "five Popish lords'' who were sent to the 
Tower in connection with the apocryphal Popish Plot; tiie others were William Howard 
(Viscount Stafford). Lord Petre, Lord Arundel of Wardour, and Lord Bellasyse. Stafford was 
beheaded after a farcical trial, at which Oates and some of his associates made a very poor 
show; Lord Petre died in the Tower, and the other three were liberated nearly five years 
later, when, the true character of Titus Ctes having been demonstrated, it was decided that 
they had beei 1 on fal c e :: ice. John Evelyn, the diarist, who Was present at 

Staffor i's trial, i = Proies! . expn :s very warmly his ; urpri;e and indignation 

at the unfair treatment of Stafi rd, and the blind acceptance ot Oates's inconsistent and 
incredible allegations. 


However, what actually occurred was that the countess and 
Mrs. Cellier induced Dangerfield to secrete some treasonable papers in 
Mansell's room, and then, on pretence that some valuables were 
hidden there in order to evade excise charges, to bring along the 
Customs officials to search the room, and to take care that they should 
discover the hidden papers, of which Dangerfield, in order to avoid 
the risk of his handwriting or that of Mrs. Cellier being recognised, 
had procured a copy written out by a " scrivener " — the originals 
remaining with Mrs. Cellier. 

Dangerfield, after some difficulty, procured a room in the 
house where Mansell lodged, and succeeded in secreting the papers 
in Mansell's room, pinning them at the back of the bed-head. 

Then he brought along the Customs officers, in Mansell's 
absence, and, of course, engineered the discovery of the compromising 
packet, which was seized, together with some of Mansell's papers, by 
the officers. 

Mrs. Harris, the landlady, who appears to have been an honest 
and straightforward person, sought out Mansell at some resort near 
St. Paul's, and informed him of these doings, advising him to get 
lodgings in the city, arid she would forward his belongings to him. 

Mansell, however, replied that he was not conscious of any 
misdoing, and went boldly to the Custom House to demand an 
explanation. There he was informed that his papers had been 
returned to his lodgings, and, on repairing thither, found that the 
incriminating papers had also been returned. 

Calling the landlord, Harris, to witness their number and 
contents, he immediately swore information against Dangerfield 
before Mr. Justice Warcup, who, having also heard the depositions 
of Mr. and Mrs. Harris and the Customs officials, promptly issued a 
warrant for the arrest of Dangerfield. 

The latter exhibited a good deal of " bluff," and was released 
on bail, promising to appear before the Council on the following 
morning ; and he kept his promise, but in the lobby he had an 
unexpected and very unwelcome encounter with one D'Oiley, an 
officer of the Mint, who " wanted " him for false coining. A bitter 
altercation ensutd. which being partially overheard bv Chief Justice 



North in passing, Dangerfield found himself further arraigned for 

When Mansell was called before the Council, the Lord Chan- 
cellor asked him : " What correspondencies these were that he held ? 
Here are papers, says he, of dangerous consequence, such as import 
of the levying of men, and raising rebellion against His Majesty ; 
here is also a catalogue of men's names whom you have listed." 

Mansell replied that he neither had held, nor ever would hold 
treasonable correspondence with anyone, and begged to call wit- 
nesses ; to which end the Council was adjourned until the following 
day. Dangerfield again endeavoured to obtain bail, "but Mr. 
Justice refused my impertinent offer " — scarcely surprising ! 

Eventually Mansell was entirely exonerated ; and a few days 
later Sir William Waller — son of the famous Parliamentary general 
— who was very busy collecting evidence against Catholics in con- 
nection with the alleged Popish Plot, and who had for some time had 
an eye on Mrs. Celiier, on searching that lady's premises discovered 
the original draft of the papers concealed at the bottom of the meal- 
tub, where Mrs. Celiier 's maid afterwards swore that she had placed 
them, in accordance with an urgent injunction from her mistress to 
hide them safely. 

And so this mischievous and miserable fiasco became known 
as the " Meal Tub Plot." Why Colonel Mansell was dragged into it 
does not appear ; but if as is practically certain, he was identical with 
the cashiered colonel in Ireland, it may be that the unscrupulous Mrs. 
Celiier, knowing him to be already under a cloud, hoped that he might 
be induced to join in some of her intrigues. Mansell, however, 
behaved on this occasion like an honest man, and was very properly 
treated as such. 

Dangerfield. for his varied and persistent crimes and perjuries, 
was sentenced in 1685 to ^tand twice in the pillory, to be whipped at 
the cart-tail from Aldgate to Newgate, and thence to Tyburn. 
Whether he would ultimately have survived this terrible punishment 
is doubtful ; but on his way from Tyburn, in a coach, one Robert 
Francis, a barrister, shouted some insulting remarks to him. Danger- 
field retorted with foul language, and Francis, aiming a stroke or a 


lunge at him with a small bamboo cane, thrusl him in the eye, 
inflicting fatal injur}-. So the perjurer died, and the barrister was 
subsequently executed for the murder— truly a miserable and sordid 
business from beginning to end ! 

We hear of Colonel Mansell later as an agent or informer for 
the Earl of Shaftesbury. In a letter from the Earl of Ossory (Thomas 
Butler) to his father, the Duke of Ormonde, dated April 5, 1679, 
from London, he says : " By the Journals of our House (i.e., the 
House of Commons) you will be informed how they proceed in the 
Irish affairs. 1 wish I had notice what numbers of Popish families 
are in the town of Dublin, us well as in other seaports of the kingdom. 
One Mansell, that was cashiered, I find very. great with my Lord of 
Shaftesbury, who employs all manner of creatures to find him matter 
of complaint. I think it were not amiss if you sent me the reasons 
for the proceedings against him, as all things of this nature, that I 
may know what to answer when objections are made." x 

On May 13 Ossory writes again : " To your last relating to 
discourses of accusations. I am confident my Lord of Shaftesbury 
docs all he can, and employs Thornhill and one Mansell that was 
cashiered in Ireland." 2 

Mansell appears after he had successfully vindicated himself 
of the charges trumped up by Dangerfield, to have become a sort of 
political go-between or adventurer ; for we find him in the following 
year mixed up with the business of the king's alleged marriage with 
Lucy Walters, who had been his mistress on the Continent about the 
year 1649. James Scott (otherwise Fitzroy and Crofts), afterwards 
Duke of Monmouth, was the issue of this intimacy; and in 16S0 
there was a clamour raised by reason of the allegation that the king 
had been married to Lucy Walters, and that Monmouth was heir to 
the throne, instead of James, Duke of York. 

There was a story of a certain black box, said to have been left 

1 OrmondeMSS., New Series. Vol. v., p. 29. Anthony \ hley Cooper, first Earl of Shaftes- 
bury (1621-1683), h ; J made a violent attack upon the Duke of Ormonde ar i the Duke of Lauder- 
dale for misgovernment in Ireland and Scotland ; it was pr, ibably without much foundation, and 
was a political more. 

3 Ibid., P . 94. 


by the Bishop of Durham 1 to his son-in-law, Sir Gilbert Gerard, 
which upon being opened was found to contain evidence of the king's 

According to an account contained in a letter from Francis 
Gwyn - to the Duke of Ormonde. April 27, 1680, the king held an 
Extraordinary Council on April 26 to deal with the story of the 
marriage ; and Sir Gilbert Gerard having solemnly sworn that he 
knew nothing of any such documents or evidence, the king called 
upon all the lords of the Council and the judges present to state 
what stories they had heard on the subject ; they ail replied that 
they had heard " nothing but a flying and imperfect report lately 
discoursed of ; only the Earl of Essex acquainted His Majesty that a 
gentleman (Col. Roderick Mansell) had told him of some particular 
discourse he had lately heard relating to that matter. His Majesty 
thereupon commanded the said Earl of Essex and Mr. Secretary 
Jenkins to examine the said gentleman or any other person named by 
him in order to trace up the said false report to the first authors and 
inventors of it." 3 

The Earl of Essex and Sir Leoline Jenkins were very prompt 
in their execution of the king's command, for they had Colonel 
Mansell before them on the same day, April 26. His examination 
extracted nothing mure than a number of vague stories, at second 
hand, chiefly from one Disney — obviously mere idle gossip. Disney, 
in his turn, could produce nothing more substantial. At the end of 
Mansell's examination there is a note : " N.B. He was full of hesi- 
tation and his memory failed him." Disney, in reply to the last 
question put to him, said : " Nobody employed him to make this 
enquiry, unless it be Colonel Mansell." 4 

Sir Leoline Jenkins, writing to Sidney Godolphin on the 
following day, says, speaking of Disney : " He pretends he was led 
to do all he did by his curiosity, but 'tis scarce credible that a man 
should search as he did without being employed by others. . . . The 

John Cosin, Bishop of Durham (1594-1672). 

FrancisGwyn,politidan(l648?-l734); M.P. for Chippenham and afterwards for Card: 
Ormonde MSS., New Series. Vol. v., p. 311. 
Cal. State Papers, 1679-1680 ; pp. 447, 448. 


corresponding between Col. Mansell and him makes it not the less 
suspicious, who in his depositions has still his reserves." 1 

As Shaftesbury was a strong partisan of Monmouth, and 
favoured his succession to the crown, and Colonel Mansell was 
alleged to be in Shaftesbury's employ as an informer, it appears to be 
quite probable that Mansell employed Disney to ferret out evidence 
concerning the king's marriage. There is not a scrap of reliable 
evidence, however, to support the allegation, and the Bishop of 
Durham's " black box " is held by most people to be an apocryphal 
embellishment introduced to give colour to the story. 

On July 27 in the same year the Earl of Arlington, writing 
to the Duke of Ormonde (whose son, the Earl of Ossory, was then 
dangerously ill in London), says : " I opened his (Ossory 's) letters 
from Ireland, and amongst them that your Grace sent with copies 
of what correspondence is held betwixt the Bishop and Col. Mansell." ' 2 
So the colonel's correspondence had evidently been placed under 
espionage; there is nothing to identify "the Bishop." 

We hear no more of Roderick Mansell in connection with the 
Earl of Shaftesbury, for whom very stormy times were in prospect 
during the three ensuing years : he died in 16S3. How much longer 
Colonel Man-ell lived is not known ; but it is obvious from the 
above correspondence that the cashiered colonel in Ireland, the tool 
of Dangerfield, and Shaftesbury's informer, are one and the same 

It is stated in some accounts of the family — amongst others 
in Lieutenant Mansel-Pleydell's and Mr. K. G. Maunsell's genealogies 
— that Thomas Mansel of Swansea, the son of Philip, sixth son of Sir 
Edward of Margam. had a son, Roderick, who married in Ireland, 
and had a daughter Jane. No authority is given for these state- 
ments, nor has the evidence upon which they are presumably based 
been discovered. 

If, however, it be true— and it is quite probable — that there 
was such a son Roderick, and tku h< n. \ tied in Ireland, the date of 
the trouble with Lord G; the subsequent episodes in 

F- 354- 


London in the following year would lit in well enough with the 
assumption that this colonel was a sun of Thomas of Swansea afore- 
said ; lie would be elderly at this time. It is possible that the colonel 
might have been a younger Roderick, grandson of Thomas ; but it 
is not very probable. 

Mr. G. T. Clark, in his pedigree of the Mansels of Oxwich and 
Margam, states that Thomas of Swansea had issue : (i) Edward, 

(2) Philip, (3) R , (4) Thomas, (5) Joan. 1 

R may, of course, stand for Roderick, also possibly 

named Richard. Unfortunately, Mr. Clark gives no authority for 
his genealogical details and deductions, beyond a general statement 
in his preface to the effect that the}- are based mainly upon a series 
of genealogies which appeared in the columns of the Merthyr 
Guardian, about the year iS6i, and which, he remarks, exhibited 
" a fulness of detail unusual even in Wales." 

The redundancy of unauthenticated detail in Welsh genealogies 
has already been dwelt upon in this work. These pedigrees do not 
appear to be now accessible for reference. 

However, it may fairly be assumed that this Roderick was 
directly descended from Sir Edward Mansel, Knight, of Margam, 
though, in common with some other assumptions, it lacks absolute 

There is a curious allusion to the name of Mansel in a letter 
written by the Princess Anne— afterwards Queen of England— to her 
sister, Princess Mary. It is dated March 14, 1688, and Princess Anne, 
alluding to the condition of her step-mother, Mary of Modena, wife 
of James II., writes : " I cannot help thinking that the ' grossesse ' of 
Mansel's wife is rather suspicious ... it is very strange that the 
baths, which, according to the opinion of the most celebrated 
doctors, should have done her a great deal of harm, have had such 
a good effect, and so promptly, that she became ' grosse ' from 
the first minute that Mansel and she met after her return from 

The letter is quoted by the author of " Princess and Queen of 

Limbus Patrum Morgania:," by G. T. Clark ; p. 495. 


England " ; the original was written in French, and is headed with 
the editorial note : " N.B. Mansel est le Roy. Mad. Mansel la 
Reine." 1 

It would be very interesting to know how this pseudonym 
for her father and stepmother came to be adopted by the Princess 
Anne, and apparently also by her sister ; but some research has 
failed to discover it. Most probably it is quite fortuitous, a surname 
just caught up as a safeguard in writing upon delicate and intimate 

1 " Princess and Queen of England," by Mary F. Sandars ; p. 17;. " Lettres et Memoires 
de Marie Reine d'Angleterre, - ' edited by Mechtild, Comtesse Bentinck ; p. 31^ 

Maunsells of Thorpe Malsor 

f p ^HORPE MALSOR— originally named Malsover, from the 

Malsoveres, ancient lords of the manor — lies about two 

^|_ and a half miles west from Kettering, Northamptonshire, 

in Roth well Hundred. 

"In the lordship (about the year 1720) are about eight 

hundred acres ; in the town thirty-three houses, and about two 

hundred inhabitants. Here are two brooks, one dividing Thorpe 

from Cranesley, the other from Rowell (or Rothwell) ; and over a 

water running in this lordship between Thorpe and Kettering is 

Fordbridge. Here are several quarries of a good red building stone. 

At a small distance from the church is a fine spreading elm, and near 

it in the way within the town a spring walled in, and on a square 

stone in the west wall an inscription in Greek signifying ' To the 

worship of God ; Anno Dom. 1507.' " • 

Thorpe is not mentioned in Domesday ; in the reign of 
Henry II. Fulk Malesoveres held one hide and three-quarters of the 
see of William Avenel ; but the devolution of the manor is recorded 
intermittently, and the next holder mentioned is William de Trussell, 
24 Edward I. (1205). 

The Trussells held it for many generations, until, about the 
year 1500, Elizabeth Trussell became sole heiress, through the death 
of her brother John in infancy. She afterwards married, in 1510, 
John de Vere, sixth Earl of Oxford, whose grandson, Edward, sold 
the estate to John Watkyn, in or about the year 157S. 

In 1622 it was purchased of John and George Watkyn by 
John Maunsell of Chicheley, Bucks. 

Such is the record supplied by John Bridges, who gives 

1 "History and Antiquities of Northamptonshire"; from the MSS. of John Bridges, 
Esq., by Peter Whalley. Oxford, 1791. Vol. n , p. 77. Bridges was a most accomplished and 
painstaking antiquary; he died in 1724, and there was much delay in editing and publishing 
his MSS. A second edition, in five volumes, with many additions and illustrations, edited by 
Thos. Dash, of Kettering, is in the MS. Room of the British Museum— Addit. MSS. 321 18-32122. 


horim: malsor hall, kxirwci: i-kc 


references for all his statements ; the account proceeds : " His 
successor was John his son, upon whose decease it came to Robert 
Maunsell, Esq., his nephew, who left it at his death in 1716 to Thomas 
Maunsell, Esq., his uncle, whose relict, Mrs. Catherine Maunsell, the 
present possessor, inherits it as her jointure, and lives in the manor- 
house " (about 1720). 1 

According to Mr. Robert George Maunsell, in his family 
history (p. 39), the derivation of John Maunsell, who bought the 
Thorpe Malsor estate of John Watkyn, is as follows— 

Philip M> 

Mabel, dau. of Griffith 

ap Nicholas 



ofCh ieley( 4 th | 


Elizabeth, dau. of Roger 
Uingfield of Xorfolk 

Richard Maunsell = 
of Chicheley (ist 

- Margaret, wid of Wm. 
Sayre of Worsall, 
and 2nd dau. of Sir 
Thomas Fairfax, of 
Walton and Gilling 

Thomas Maunsell 
of Chicheley (ist 


John Maunsell of 
Balney M.inor, 
Malsor (in son) 

Agnes, vvid. of Wm. 
I . rid dau. of 

John Morton, of 

Katherine, dau. of Sir 
Richard Ward of Hurst, 
co. Berks 

John Maunsell of 
Thorpe Malsor 

jusan, dau. of Hum- 
phrey Phipps,of Lon- 


f " : 

Martha, dau. of 

Catherine, dau. of Rev. John 
Courtman, rector of Thorpe 


Catherine, widow of Robert, is here stated to have possessed 
the estate in dower for her life, and to have died in March, 1728, when 
it passed, under the will of her husband's uncle, Robert Maunsell, to 
the latter 's cousin, Thomas Maunsell, youngest son of John Maunsell 
of Ballyvoreen. 

This is not by any means in agreement with John Bridges ; 
the discrepancy will be discussed more fully later on. 

The " Victoria County History " has a good deal to say about 
the Maunsells of Thorpe Malsor. 1 

The genealogy there presented agrees with that of Mr. R. G. 
Maunsell, though no attempt is made to trace the derivation further 
back than the second Richard of Chicheley, in Mr. Maunsell's account. 

The " Victoria County History," however, differs from Mr. 
Maunsell in respect of the marriage of this Richard, assigning him 
one Joan, daughter of Thomas Potter of Newport Pagnell, Bucks, 
instead of Margaret, daughter of Sir Thomas Fairfax of Walton and 
Gilling Castle, and widow of William Sayre of Worsall. 3 

It is true that Margaret, second daughter of Sir Thomas 
Fairfax, was married to William Sayre, of Worsall, who died July 18, 
1 531, and subsequently, before August 5, 1535, married Richard 

1 The writer of this section, in some introductory remark;, has the following : " In the 
case of the Maunsells the pedigree maker Ins been at work, as is shown by the fact that a very 
famous Maunsell, John Maunsell, the rich clerk and faithful counsellor of Henry III., has found 
his way into most of their genealogies as the descendant of a knight who came over with the 
Conquerrr, and as ancestor of the Lords Man-ell of Margam, the Carmarthenshire Mansells, 
and the Maunsells of Ireland and Thorpe Malsor. This, although we have no document 
throwing light upon his ancestry save his description by Matthew Pans, his contemporary, as 
the son of a country priest and the suggestion that he was not born in wedlock. For his descen- 
dants, it is enough to ■ . . th I ! : was a clerk in priest's orders, and that the inquest taken after 
his death shows that no heir of his could be found. That a family genealogy compiled in the 
twentieth century should still exhibit him as a link in the chain of a pedigree which derives the 
existing house of Maunsell from a cup-bearer to the Conqueror, is enough to show that this 
branch of English archeology is still in its childhood." This writer has apparently taken his 
cue from the account in the Diet. Nat. Biog. Had he been a little more diligent in his' researches, 
he would have been aware of the very different aspect of Maunsell's birth conveyed in the Papal 
Letter ; he would likewise have realised that it is quite possible that Maunsell was married as a 
young man, and became a priest after his wife's death ; and he would also have discovered that 
the inquisition to which he alludes was not concerned with Sir John Maunsell, but with another 
John, probably his nephew. Maunsell's place in the pedigree has been repeatedly acknowledged 
in this work to be incapable of actual proof ; but it certainly cannot be disproved by any such 
superficial and ill-informed strictures as those cued above. 

a " V. C. H. Northampton, Genealogical." Vol. ii , p. 229. 



Maunsell (or Mansell) ; x but that this Richard was of Chicheley 
appears to admit of some question. 

Worsall, Walton, and Gilling are all in Yorkshire ; and 
Mr. R. G. Maunsell, in a footnote, draws attention to the fact that, 
on June 2j, 1548, Sir Michael Stanhope wrote to Sir Edward North 
praying him to expedite the lease of the manor of Hothome (Hotliam), 
county York, to Richard Maunsell, and that the lease was granted on 
July 6 following. 2 

In the Visitations of Essex, 1634. this marriage of Richard 
Maunsell with Joan Potter is given in the pedigree declared to the 
visiting herald by John Maunsell, the living representative of the 
family, who describes himself as of Woodford in Essex, while the 
aforesaid Richard is named as of Chicheley. 3 

Richard Maun- = Joane, dau of Thomas 
Potter of S'ewpi rt 

ratjutli, co. Bucks 

of CI b 
ley, in 


Dorathev, dau. of 

chiey. i to 1 reli 
I Will 

I 0! .. ile 

Maun- 3 Rich Mao ■ !, = Nightingale, dan. 

i] cf t • .Middle of the Millie ar,d o -heir of 

1 .- Temple o.j.p Temple, eouc- Edward Furtho, 

... fHum 

2. Tho. Matmsell 

oi Wo.- .: >■ ; .'- 

r- • ■ 1 

. >n, mer- 



Anno 1634 

1. Eobkbt Mai-n- i Charlea 

sell, 5 ycrs old 
and more, 

1 "Herald and Genealogist," by J. G. Nicols. Vol. vii., p. 151. 

2 Cal. State Papers, Dora., 1547-1580 ; p. 9. 

3 Visitations of Essex (Harl. Soc). Vol. i., p. 446. 

The original record of John MaunseiTs declaration of his pedigree, at Thorpe Malsor 
Hall, has the following prefix : " Mem. Sir John Borough (Burroughs) being Garter K.ii 3 it 
Arm?, there was a visitation made by Mr. Yorke and Mr. Lilly, and 1 being absent at the visitation 
of Romford, entered rav arms and pedigree as followeth, 23 Sept. 1634, for wch I paid 27s. 6d. 
John Maunsell." 

The pedigree as given in the visitation of Essex is a; above : Arms, argent, a chevron 
between three maunches sable (Maur 


Mr. R. G. Maunsell has taken an infinite amount of tronble 
over this genealogy of the Maunsells of Thorpe Malsor, no doubt on 
account of the close interlacing with it of the Irish Maunsells, of whom 
he was one : but in the instance of this marriage he is probably in 
error ; there were plenty of Richard Maunsells in Yorkshire, and the 
lease of Hot ham Manor to one of them— almost certainly he who 
married Margaret Sayre, n'ee Fairfax— serves to harden the deduction 
that Richard Maunsell of Chicheley sought a wife in his own county ; 
indeed, the Heralds' Visitation in this instance cannot be ignored. 
The identity of this Richard of Yorks may presently be established 
when dealing with the Maunsells of that county. 

There are one or two other points to be noticed in Mr. Maun- 
sell's account. 

He places the purchase of the Thorpe Malsor estate with John 
Maunsell of Woodford, Essex, the second and eldest surviving son of 
John Maunsell of Chicheley (who married the daughter of Richard 
Ward, Esq.. of Hurst, Berks— he was not knighted until after his 
daughter's marriage) ; but this purchase was made in the year 
1622, ! when John of Woodford could not have been of age. for his 
elder brother. Thomas Ward Maunsell, who died in infancy, was 
born in 1602. 

The estate was undoubtedly purchased by John Maunsell of 
Chicheley, father of John of Woodford. 

This John of Chicheley matriculated at Magdalen Hal!, Oxford, 
October 27 ■, 1592, aged seventeen, 2 and was admitted to the Middle 
Temple, October 30, 1594 ; 3 he was born in 1575, and there is a 
monument to him in Bromley Church, Kent, with an inscription as 
follows : " Here lyeth the body of John Maunsell, sometime of 
Chicheley in the county of Buckingham, Esq. He had two sons, John 
and Thomas, and departed this life 19 Oct. 1625." 

John Maunsell must have been a religious enthusiast of the 

1 Feet of Fmes, 20 James I. 

a Alumni Oxoniensis. Vol. iii., p. 967. 

■ Middle Temple Records. Vol. L p 546. He U described .« " son and heir apparent " 
of Thomas V . n ..... irate, hi- father having died in 1582: it should read 

'• heir-at-law. "' J >hn was then nineteen years of age. 


Puritan type ; this is apparent in the wording of his will (which is 
dated July 20, 1621, and was proved February 4, 1626). There is a 
lengthy preamble to this document, consisting entirely of what can 
only be termed pious platitudes, with copious scriptural references ; 
then he proceed-, as was the common practice in wills of this period, 
to commend —or bequeath, as such testators somewhat illogically 
and incongruously expressed it — his soul to God ; but he cannot 
get through this process under another half-page of closely- written 
matter, with more scriptural allusions. His religion, however, was 
consistent and practical in the matter of remembering the Church and 
the poor, who come hist among the legatees, with many bequests; 
then, after legacies to his brothers Thomas and Richard, his nephews 
Nicholas and William Conney (or Comry ?), follows a long list of 
various relatives and friends, to each of whom he bequeaths " a gold 
ring of twenty shillings price, with a death's head made or engraved 
thereon, with this inscription — Memento Mori." 

A most depressing legacy ! One cannot help speculating as 
to the inner sensations of these favoured individuals when the will 
was read out ; some of them had perhaps been reckoning upon some 
more substantial token of the testator's regard. 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell (p. -7; states that John Maunsell was " of 
Balney Manor, Chicheley, and of the Middle Temple, London, Bar- 
rister-at-Law. Over the doorway of the manor, evidently on the 
occasion of his marriage, the following was engraved, ' Sobrie, 
Justi, 1 Pie, 1601.' A portion of the house is still standing. It is 
now known as Grange Farm." 

Mr. Maunsell appears to have visited the locality., and to have 
seen this inscription over the doorway ; it is quite characteristic of 
John Maunsell to have placed it there ; the writer proceeds : 

"About 1615-1620 he sold the estate to Sir Anthony Chester, 
Bart., subject to a charge of £2 12 0. per annum, created by one of 
his predecessors (said to be a Ladv Maunsell) for the poor widows and 
widowers of the parish. This bequest is designated in the Charity 
Commissioners' Report as ' Mansell's Gift.' " 

1 It should read juste : Juni d ,< 
Soberly (or t.vnr .:.' > . , . \ • :- -.•:;>. 


The " Victoria County History " says : " Part of their old house 
at Chicheley, which they sold to the Chesters in the time of James I., 
is still in existence as the Grange Farm." 

There is corroboration of these statements in an excellent 
genealogical account of the family of Chester : " Sir Anthony Chester 
added considerably to the family estates by judicious purchases in 
Northamptonshire and Bedfordshire. . . . He also made himself the 
sole proprietor of the parish of Chicheley, by purchasing from John 
Mansel [sic] Escp of the Middle Temple the manor house and lands of 
Balney in Chicheley, which had belonged to the Mansels from time 
immemorial. The old house at Balney is still standing, but has long 
been degraded into a farmhouse. It is built of stone, and has over 
the front doorway this inscription: ' Sobrie. Juste. Pie. 1601.' The 
historians of Buckinghamshire haw failed to identify the Mansels' 
estate in Chicheley, and therefore have fallen into the mistake of 
supposing that it was the estaie purchased by the Chesters in 1565. 
But it is certain from the parish registers that the Mansels were 
resident in Chicheley until after 1607, and that Balney was sold by 
John Mansel some few years before the date of his will in 1621." 1 

The Mansell (spelled Mcnsill in the report) benefaction to the 
poor of Chicheley is duly recorded in the Report of the Commissioners 
of Inquiry into Charities, 1S42. The question of the identity or 
existence of " Lady Mansell " may be left for future consideration, in 
connection with the Maunsells of Bucks ; we are now concerned 
more immediately with the history of the Maunsells of Thorpe 
Malsor, but it was necessary to discuss these points in respect of 
John Maunsell of Chicheley. 

1 "Genealogical Memoirs of the Chesters of Chicheley," by R. E. Chester Waters, 
1878. Vol. L, p. 112. William Chester married Judith Cave, heiress of large estates in Chiche- 
ley. Anthony Chester, his son (born 1506), was knighted in 1605, and created a baronet 
March 25, 1620. The author's allusion to the historians of Bucks, and their error with regard 
to the Maunsell and Chester estates, is illustrated in Lipscomb's history (vol. iv., pp. 93, 94) ; 
it is there stated that the manor of Chicheley came, bv marriage with Judith Cave, " to William 
Chester, Esq., who. or his ancestors, had purchased a capital mansion here, -.aid to have belonged 
to Lady Mansell ; and who is presumed by Cole to have been another daughter of Cave." 
Lipscomb is not quite accurate in his quotation from Cole's MS. ; the precise wording is : 
"Query if she is not descended from another dau. of Cixc ? " which points to the possibility 
of a Maunsell-Cave marriage in some generation previous to that of Lady Mansell : there does 
not appear to be dny record of such a marriage /': it Iddit. MSS., S^59> i- I0 3)- 


Died i8b6. 

ICKI'I-: M \i.SOIi 


The marriage of John Maunsell of Chicheley with Katherine 
Ward is stated in several accounts to have taken place January 25, 
1601/2 ; the •■ Victoria Count)' History " says that they were married 
at Chicheley, and in a Maunsell pedigree in the "Genealogist " afoot- 
note, referring to this marriage and other data, runs as follows : 
" Baker's Northamptonshire, vol. ii., p. 132, under ' Cosgrave.' It 
is probable (though not certain) that the dates of baptisms, marriages, 
and burials there given are from the Parish Register of Chicheley." ' 

There is, however, no record of any such marriage in the 
Chicheley register, and it is not clear upon what ground the writer 
in the " Victoria County History " bases his positive assertion. 
Baker does not give the place of the marriage, but he gives the 
precise date, and also states that Katherine died August 13, 1607, 
aged twenty-eight years, with other particulars concerning the 
births, deaths, and marriages of various members of the family about 
this time, which it is certainly difficult to conceive were obtained 
from any source other than the Register, or possibly in some in- 
stances from monumental inscriptions ; but Baker gives no references 
for these details. The present vicar (1917) of Chicheley states that 
there is reason to believe that the registers were not carefully kept at 
this time, and that the marriage may have been omitted ; this, 
however, does not solve the problem as to where these alleged facts 
were obtained. Ii would appear more probable that Katherine was 
married from her father's house at Hurst, in Berkshire. The data 
given in Baker's work appear, however, to have been accepted by 
Mr. G. E. Cokayne, and so may be permitted to pass in these pages. 

It is interesting that Baker gives a pedigree of Mansel, Longue- 
ville, and Biggin, of Cosgrave, in which he derives the Maunsells of 
Thorpe Malsor from Ralph Maunsell, the benefactor of Tickford 
Priory in the twelfth century. This is in agreement with Gabriel 
Ogilvy's genealogy, which stops short at the second Samson, of 
Chicheley and Turvey. 2 Baker continues the pedigree: " The early 

1 " Victoria County- History," op. at., p. 229. "History and Antiquities of the County 

of Northampton," Geo. Baker ; vol. ii., p. 132. ''The C .>■_•!•■ t " (New Series), vol. six., 
p. 12 (Pedigree of Maunsell, £ nmerly of Chicheley, Bucks, and subsequently of Thorpe Malsor ; 
contributed by G. E. Cokayne, Clarenceux King-at-Arms). 

2 See Vol. i., App. I. ; left-hand column, at foot. 

ssion of 

's when 
ey have 
:h data 

>ed ; it 
nst ; it 
> it, and 

by the 
1 by Sir 
has had 

ong the 
id John 
son of 

nds are 
he deed 
•. Hugh 
ving in 

John le 
■ of the 


| andMwdl 

■ aii-1 co-beir of H 

IttUiWJ BeJf.: 

Cbiebeluy. co. hue 

.Tcr:-. ' : ll. i-.f (.'!..:-!.t \-'. , .' Li.:r, ■■.--. . iv- ! ,-,v of — S. ;.i"-:i M:uiu=i-;i l.i.har.l Mi'iin-tll William llaMjsell Jons M.vr\ :i i i - 

co. Uuoks I Tbicktborn 

Ilif.'i Mir>SLiLof L---rry End 

l'l.icb-1. i.e.. l:u. !.. liv 
III. 11333) 

. 1 Ed. 1 II. lljAii 

in CL. :.-' ', co. be ks. liv 7 1 
Ed. III. U333) 

Jon:; MArNsi.LL, Eenr.. of Chiclie- 

- A 6 ne a RichLdMannsell 

' "lev.'c^'ri'i'i.'ifi'. 1 !':'/ '.' ■" I".V III 1 
(1319). and 2 Kicb. 11. 1137s) 

„u, - 

"" HtU 

John Menuse]! of Welling- = Joan 
borough, liv. '2 Henry IV. 

Richard MAtrKSZLL. liv : 111 had - Marga 
II. (137S), and i Henry VI. (U«) 1 

John M.'.'-NS! ll of Chichelev. co. = 

! : h. j 11- - .- IV. ■.-.., 1 
.ui.ll Henry VI illiji | 

John Mavsseli 

I.cck = . )r. I.; 
and 16 Henry 

.of = Joan, dan. of Roger Savage; dead 

viMiaJoi :' ' ' I 

Ralph MAUN3ELL, liv. 13 Edward - 

Jorrs Mai. \-fli. of < bicheley, co. = Isabel 
Buck- , 2U.iii.-v Vfl. dioSi." bur. 1 
then, Nov.. 1513 



™reS^!S| J '^ P oc;^I^" POtt " ' 

Henry Mauosell. o.n.t'. Margery Joan 


Thomas Macnseli. of CbicbBlev, = AgDes, da i. of 

co. Bmk,, mi, -,, ,.-. 1!, i:.,T, 1 u-.ud.le 
bur. there April 8, IV I | ' 

Mauneella of Tborpe Malsor 

».^-™ ar ,- ( «.« 

John Macnsell of Haversbam, - Dorothy, dan. 

of —Smith 


descents of Maunsell or Mansel from a MS. pedigree in possession of 
Thomas Philip Maunsell of Thorpe Malsor, Esq." 

This pedigree, down to Thomas Maunsell (d. 1582) of Chiche- 
ley, is here given. It will be noticed that Baker gives dates when 
certain persons were living— or rather, the author of the MS. pedigree 
at Thorpe Malsor gives them— and it must be assumed that they have 
some solid foundation ; but the usual records in which such data 
should be, at least in most instances, contained have been ransacked 
in vain for corroboration of these details. 

However, this interesting pedigree is here transcribed ; it 
bears evidences of very careful investigation, and is well worth 
attention as the work of a conscientious and capable genealogist ; it 
is to be regretted that the author's name cannot be affixed to it, and 
it will therefore be alluded to in these pages as Baker's pedigree. 

Some of the steps in Baker's pedigree are confirmed by the 
terms of certain deeds in a collection which has been acquired by Sir 
Brien Cokayne, K.B.E., of Exeter House, Roehampton, who lias had 
them carefully transcribed. 

hi a deed by Ranulf, son of Henry " at the Well," among the 
witnesses appear William le Maunsel, Richard le Maunsel. and John 
de Tykethornes (Thickthorn) ; this John is probably the son of 
Sampson le Maunsel ; he married, according to Baker and Ogilvy, 

Julia, widow of Thickthorne ; at any rate, the Thickthorne 

connection is hereby confirmed. The deed is not dated. 

hi a deed by Simon Brer of Great Linford certain lands are 
confirmed to Hugh Mansel of Chicheley and Sibyl his wife ; the deed 
is dated March iS, 1313, and. as will be seen in the pedigree, Hugh 
Maunsell of Berry End in Chicheley is said to have been living in 
1333, and his wife Sybil in 1323. There is mention of Hugh Maunsel 
in several other deeds, the dates of which correspond, so the allusion 
is no doubt to this same Hugh. 

In a deed of Simon Tyle, of Chicheley, he gives to John le 
Maunsel some lands in Chicheley, and Hugh Maunsell is one of the 
witnesses : the deed is dated November 26, 1340. This John appears 
in Baker's pedigree as the son of Hugh of Berry End ; apparently 
Hugh was living in 1340, and later. 













Died i860. 

■ '■• 


w ii-i-: of < ■ mm \i 


• ii 

A.\ \ ( OK \\ VI 

.. .,—.-■: 



In two deeds, dated respectively January 0. 1342, and April 14, 
1349, Hugh Maunsell mentions John his elder son, and John his 
younger son. This confirms Baker's pedigree, in which appear these 
two Johns, sons of Hugh of Berry End. Baker may have obtained 
his date, "living 1349," for the younger John from this latter deed. 

In a deed dated November 20, 1351, Richard Ranulf gives 
lands to John Maunsell the elder, and John his son, which further 
confirms Baker's pedigree. Roger (son of William in the pedigree ?) 
is also a witness. 

In a deed dated February 18, 1370, John the younger son of 
Hugh .Maunsell gives land- to John his son and Joan, his son's wife ; 
this also confirms Baker's pedigree. 

On June 16, 1370, John Maunsell the elder grants lands to 
John his son ; the two brothers each had a son John, who are duly 
inserted by Baker. 

In a deed dated March 20, 1397, one of the witnesses is Richard 
Maunsell of Chicheley, " aged fifty years and upwards, of free 
condition." This is evidently Richard son of John Maunsell, junior, 
son of Hugh ; Baker states that he was living in 137S and 1422. 

On October 31, 1400, John Maunsell of Wellingborough and 
Joan his wife give lands to Richard Maunsell of Chicheley. This is 
the elder son of John junior, son of Hugh ; Richard is probably his 
brother, as in the pedigree. 

On March G, 14-4, Richard Maunsell gives all his goods and 
chattels to Richard Stafford, Robert Clerk, of Newport Pagnell, John 
Maunsell and Robert Colyer 01 Chicheley. This may be Richard 
son of John junior, son of Hugh, and John his son ; Baker agrees 
with this hypothesis. 

A deed dated July 20, 14.25. confirms Baker, who has John, 
son of Richard (see above) living, 1422 ; he may also, by another 
deed, have been living in 1452. 

A deed dated June 13, 1632, confirms the Thorpe Malsor 
pedigree in respect of the marriage oi Dorothy, widow of Humphrey 
Phipps, with Richard, third son of Thomas Maunsell of Chicheley 
{oh. 1582!. 

Articles of agreement, relating to the intended marriage 


between Thomas Haselwood and Dorothy Maunsell, of Woodford, 

Essex, widow, dated September 7, 1638, confirm the Thorpe Malsor 

An indenture dated May 2, 1663, confirms the marriage of 
John Maunsell of Thorpe Malsor {ob. 1677) with Susanna, daughter 
of Humphrey Phipps, by his marriage with Dorothy Mordaunt, who 
afterwards married Richard Maunsell and Thomas Haselwood. 

In a printed proof of a pedigree in the possession of Lady 
Maunsell of Burghclerc, Berks, William Maunsell of Chicheley, father 
of Hugh Maunsell of Chicheley and Berry End, is derived as follows— 

William Maunsell of = 

Chicheley, ce. Bucks, I 
3rd sen of John M.uin- 

sell, Provost of Beverley | 

Sir Robert Maunsell, 
Km. of the Shire, Bed- 
ford, 26 Edward I. 

William Mau: 

Hugh Maunseli. of Chiche- = Sibil, d. of 

lev and Berry End, 6 
Edward IE(I3I3) 

This derivation is very improbable ; Mr. W. W. Man sell, it 
will be recollected, gives John Maunsell, Provost of Beverley, a third 
son William, but lie supplies no authority. 

In Baker's pedigree Hugh Maunsell is stated to have been 
living 7 Edward III. (1333), while in that given above occurs 
6 Edward II. (1313) ; this is probably a misprint for 6 Edward III., 
as Sir Robert is said to have been living in 1298, and William comes 

There is absolutely no evidence to show that John Maunsell, 
Provost of Beverley, had a son William, and it is most probable that 
he had not. Baker's pedigree is far more convincing. 

The pedigree was purchased by Lady Maunsell of Burghclerc 


(widow 01 General Sir Thomas Maunsell) from a bookseller, and its 
authorship is unknown ; it is accurate in later details, both in respect 
of the Cosgrove and the Irish Maunsells, giving very full details of 
the latter, down to about 1840, so it may be assumed that it was 
compiled about thai period. The alleged derivation from William, 
third son of Sir John .Maunsell, Provost of Beverley, is, as far as can 
be ascertained, unique, and, as has already been remarked, is 
probably erroneous ; it may have occurred in some herald's pedigree 
which has not come under present notice. 

From the excellent chart pedigree of the Maunsells of Thorpe 
Malsor in the " Victoria County History," a copy of which is here 
given, with some authorities appended from monumental inscriptions 
in Thorpe Malsor church and elsewhere, the devolution of the Thorpe 
Malsor estate is readily traced clown to the present holder, Captain 
Cecil John Cukayne Maunsell, R.A. 

It is also apparent that John Biidges is wrong in his account 
of the successive owners of the estate. Mrs. Catherine Maunsell, 
whom he rightly states held the estate during her lifetime, in 1720, 
was the widow of Robert, not of Thomas Maunsell. 

It has already been remarked that the Maunsells of Thorpe 
Malsor and those of Ireland are closely inter-related, the possession of 
the Northamptonshire estate reverting, after the lapse of nearly a 
century, to the Irish Maunsells, as is clearly set forth in the pedigree. 

The several branches which continue to flourish in Ireland will 
be dealt with more fully in another chapter ; meanwhile, since the 
present holder of the Thorpe Malsor estate derives from Thomas 
Maunsell of Derryvillane, it will be convenient to give here some 
account of him and his family. 

This Thomas Maunsell was born April 6, 1577, at Chicheley. 
He matriculated at Magdalen Hall, Oxford, October 10, 1594, being- 
entered as " Thomas Mansell {sic) of Bucks, gentleman." 1 He was 
admitted to Gray's Inn, August 14, 1599, as "Thomas Maunsell of 
Chicheley, Bucks, gent., late of Barnards Inn." - He seems, however, 

1 '-Alumni Oxonien=es." Vol. ii ; .. p. Q^7- 

- Register of Adrni to < ' ■ F iter), p. 97. 

Mailha, v.ifu of [lei.rv 
Kdvar.l-. ('.'■HI of 
In? Mannsell) 

.;;".; Rl wT c Th^ a ^*on A1 S«.r 5: ^;:; 

A ■ Ir.s.,Cuh : r 

Conlish Church. 
i is eri k) 

,.',: v. ::^-n~-H ir Ti-j,? Maivmli. T,>n< ; , hi. Joseph Mar 

| a i7 it i Men. Ins., 

UaiiEsell of Bally- 

msell of Krt- Catharine, d. Mary (d. Thoruasine 

-ii t- Lvl. • ■ ; "TM id young) 

,.nf '. : f ■ 

Thorp. Mai 

ane, d 17 2, in T, 

S3* '.'' ..." -' ' M 
ts.iT, I l>'. .-. V.' 

Sophia Caroline, d. Bart.ara. Anne, d L 1642 

Sir Philip iMo.i. Ins., Thorpe 

Paurr:e:or-..:-Dun- Maleor) 

sabella Louisa W» Cecilia Cokayne 





" — r i 1 

I ho.,,,., Jlni'« 11, Tk,y„w«:,i- W.::er Ma-,:. 
.1 in-.,Vo„ Ins , e..'!. ■ m . ■■:■ • :, d i-:j 
TLorpo Maborl lop. d. ,'ko 


Maunsel] of Limerick 
and liallyinlliani 



. Conuy Wdliai.vConny 

Mao. Maunsells will) 

lii.h.iidMn.,-, M<rv |„,.., h ,M „. „ Jons Mi 

= Campbol 

r'ao'.'ck ,"°' 
Anna (Hon. Ins., 

Vnne. in. no- 



os. Baton 

Andrews h-iic.w .: 

, Robert Mauascll of CbarU- 
Thorpe Malsor, d. sellld 
May J7 170... III. 
Jr.d'ith _ Hrookc. d. 

Ins.. Thorpe Malsor) 

,' '"' ' ','iVi ■ i,.i»i. 

d. 1717 iMon. In, d. liiNnlit Maunsell of John . _ lln.uu- 
ipi 11 

F,l M'.ooreU of Roy- Cal 

'! : , ... .'!.. An,,.' 1 

■ . ■• Hi'l ,1. Dec 1 ,. . Tbn> Cr- 
17?1 I of TLo, | 

1 d.lS!5,n 
thy broc 

Jane Catharine, d. 1. n nnr',1 

1 >J, :, 1 rid Kti - » 
Lj Mt.*,iriii. Caplain. 3 Diana 

Win l!,,}L;,:i Maun- Geo );,:lroun, 

Inn , 1 horpa .Malsor) Thorpe Ma 

Cecil H-'nry Msunsell 


Jobn Mawitall. d 

Robert Mauasell, d. 

Diana. J. 177:. m. Mary, d. 1 
Ambrose Wilson 


sol, d. 18<H 

RoH. Charles Shun- 
sell, Captain, lis, 

Ins., Thorpe Malsor) 

John Edrannd llano- 
sell. Captain. K A . 
d.le'M.n, u« r „•:..-..» 
Co'.!,,: no. « ii in 
Beatty's troop at 

os CobatneMacx- 

FLL of Sparrows 

e'.h (.'.-.v.'i-.dirh 


Joo. Bor E.-e M..:,nsell 

i. 19J.'. ni. Mary Isa- 
bella libbils 

Charles Cullen Maun- 
soll, d. ISM, in. Anno 

Illusion ^rOcli Kegt., 
i«9 ; 53rd Kent., 
laB; retired 1858) 

Lucy Diana, d. 13&J. 

CrciL John Coratne 

sent holder ol' the 
Tbnrpe Mallor Es- 
tate (1018) 

Cirol'ne Emily 

Beatrice El;ra!,..'.l, 

Susanna, a. I'M 

,e!la Louisa Wa Cecilia C 

(a) Robert M.iumell, hv his will in 1704, left his estates, after the death of his wife, Judith, to his nephew (b) Robert; with remainder 
o (c) Thomas, youngest son of John Miunscll of Balhvoreen, who eventually succeeded. The thick lines indicate the devolution or - •- 
i-.tate in the dcxcr.t fro-n Thomas M u;rsc!l of Den-. vi!].,ne. 

(j, John Maunsell was the first of ins family to' hold the Thorpe Malsor Estate, purchasing it in 1622 of John and George VVatkyn. 



to have made up his mind to forsake the law, immediately after 
his entry at Gray's inn, for ten years later he appears as a captain 
in the Navy. In the visitation of Essex, already alluded to, he is 
described as " now (1634) living in Ireland-, a sea captain." He 
migrated to Ireland, in fact, in 1609 ; at any rate, one Captain 
Thomas Maunsell did so migrate in that year, and it has been assumed 
— quite justifiably, as it appears — that this Thomas is identical with 
Thomas, the second son of Richard of Chicheley ; the allusion in the 
Essex visitation constitutes evidence amounting to certainty. 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell (p. 41) says : " As u youth he distinguished 
himself against the Spanish Armada " ; but Thomas was only eleven 
years of age at that time (15SS). 

In an account of Thorpe Malsor Hall which appeared in the 
Northampton Herald. August 15, 1863, it is said that : " At the hall 
is a great silver bowl and salver, which Captain Robert Maunsell had 
as his share of the spoil of the Vigo Ba}- galleon, which was captured 
by Drake, under whom he served. 1 Captain Maunsell also assisted 
in the attack up m 'he Spanish Armada, for which he received the 
large gold medal struck by order of Queen Elizabeth to commemorate 
the event." 

Here, it will be noticed, it is Caj tain Robert Maunsell who is 
mentioned as having taken part in the att ick upon the Spanish 
Armada, and as having served under Sir Francis Drake. There is, 
however, no Robert connected with the Maunsells of Thorpe Malsor to 
be found at this period. It may be that Robert has been inadver- 
tently substituted for Thomas : these accounts which appear in 
local journals are frequently careless and inaccurate in such details. 
It is clear, however, that Thomas, second son of Richard of Chicheley, 
could not have been with Drake at Vigo when he was only eight years 
of age. There is obviously some discrepancy here, which may 
possibly be explained later. 

Thomas Maunsell did not, however, pursue his calling at sea 
for very long ; he elected instead to go over to Ireland, and the 
following-letter from the Lords of tiie Council to Sir Arthui 

1 Drake'* v: it to \ igo Bay took pi ice in I :~ ; ; he i ive carried oft spoil to the 

amount of thirty thousand ducats— - . £14,000. 


lord deputy in Ireland, explain* the conditions under which he 
went : " Recommend the bearers, Captain Thomas Maunsell, 
Captain William Fisher, Nicholas Isaac, and Thomas Tinder. 
employed by divers gentlemen and merchants of good worth, thai 
are desirous to undertake the whole count}' of Donegal, and propose 
not only to build upon the several proportions according to the rules 
prescribed in the printed articles, but also to erect and fortify a port 
town near the seaside where they shall find most convenient. The 
gentlemen employed by them are to take view of the place and report. 
But since the captains of the forts thereabouts, as Sir Henry Folliot 
at Ballyshannon, and the rest at Donegal, Donnalong and Castle- 
nc-do, out of doubt of their own hindrance and loss of entertain- 
ments, may haply use some secret and underhand means to dis- 
hearten them from their enterprise, he (Chichester is to take all care 
to prevent such practices. Whitehall, n July, 1609." 

This is endorsed by Mr Arthur Chichester : " Of the 10th (?) 
of July 1609. From the Lords of the Council, in the behalf of certain 
captains and merchants for lands in the county of Donegal. Delivered 
by Captain Maunsell and C: ptain Fisher, the 28 eodem." 1 

From the tenor of this letter it is evident that Captain Maims 11 
and the others named therein wt re merely acting as agents for certain 
"gentlemen and merchants of good worth," who were desirous of 
taking an active part in what is termed the plantation of Ulster. 

Sir Arthur Chichester lost no time in acting upon the directions 
of the Lords of the Council; he issued a separate recommendation, 
apparently, for each of the persons named in the letter, in the follow- 
ing terms (the English is here modernised) : 

" Arthur Chichester. By the Lord Deputy. 

"We greet you well. Whereas this gent.." Captain Thomas 
Maunsell, is come into this kingdom with intent to take a view and 
inform himself of the ports and most convenient places for him to 
settle in. and especially in the Province of Ulster, and some parts of 
Connaught, to which end he brought unto us letters of recommenda- 
tion in his behalf from the Lords of his Majesty's most honourable 
Privy Council which we received this day signifying his Majesty's 
and their pleasures in that behalf. These are therefore to will and 

1 Cal. State Paper;, Irish Series, 1608-1610 ; p. 346. 


require you and every of you his Majesty's officers, Ministers, to 
take notice hereof, and not only to suffer and permit the said Captain 
above named with his servants peaceably and quietly to pass by you 
to and fro as he shall have occasion to view, search, and enquire as 
aforesaid, but also to be aiding, comporting, and assisting unto him 
with post-horses and guides from place to place in his travels, and if 
need require, to give him the best knowledge and furtherance you 
may in your own means for effecting his desire according to his 
Majesty's and the Lords' pleasure unto us signified as aforesaid, 
whereof you and every of you may not fail, as you will answer the 
contrary at your perils. Given at Melefont, this 28th July, 1609. 

"To all Governors, Captains, Mayors, Sheriffs, Justices of 
Peace, Headboroughs, Constables, and to all other his Majesty's 
officers and loving subjects to whom it shall or may appertain. 

"(Signed) Geo. Sexten." 

(This letter is given in extenso, and in contemporary English, 
by Mr. R. G. Maunsell [p. 41]. It is not clear at the moment whence 
he obtained it ; it is not to be found in the Irish Siate Papers. It 
may, however, be quite confidently accepted as genuine.) 

Here, as will be perceived, we have a somewhat different 
story as to Captain Thomas Maunsell's status in connection with 
Ireland; he is recommended, not as an agent, but as a principal, 
seeking the most convenient places to settle in, especially in Ulster, 
but also in some parts of Connaught ; whereas the Lords of the 
Council obviously had in view the plantation of Ulster alone. This 
apparent discrepancy may be due to laxity in the wording of the 
communication of the lord deputy : the letter of the lords must be 
accepted as conveying the true purpose of Maunsell's mission. 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell proceeds : " He sold the estate at Newport 
Pagnel left him by his father's will, and sailing for Ireland he landed 
at Waterford and settled at Derryvillane, co. Cork." 

Here the impression distinctly conveyed is that Maunsell 
sailed for Ireland, armed with the letter from the Lords of the 
Council, in order to settle, not in Ulster or Connaught, but in Cork 
This is most probably quite a wrong deduction ; Maunsell would 
naturalh', after he had accomplished his mission in the north of 
Ireland, return to England to report having perhaps meanwhile 
travelled about and viewed othei • ■ island ; and. being 





Died 1887. 


attracted by it, subsequently sold his English estate and settled at 

Here he dwelt for more than thirty years, presumably in 
prosperity, in common with others of the crowd of imported English- 
men who were encouraged to settle in Ireland, and to become pos- 
sessed of large estates, to the exclusion of Irishmen, who were every- 
where hunted and suppressed. Not that any individual blame is to 
be attached to Thomas Maunsell or others ; they took what was 
offered, perhaps without proper realisation of what was involved for 
the Irish ; it was the English policy which was in fault, the inveterate 
purpose of retaliation and humiliation after the suppression of the 
Tyrone rebellion and the flight of the earls. 

But a smouldering fire of deep hatred and anger burned in 
the hearts of the Irishmen, and at length, in 1641, suddenly burst 
into flame. 

The insurrection commenced in Ulster, on the night of 
October 23. and speedily spread in every direction. 

Thomas Maunsell did not escape from the effects of this 
outbreak ; his house was pillaged and burned, and he sustained 
losses to the amount of neatly {2,500, as sworn to by his son Richard 
in 1642. 1 

Thomas Maunsell married Aphra, daughter of Sir William 
Crayford. of Great Monyhan, Kent. This worthy couple are said to 
have had no fewer than twenty-three children, of whom eleven, as 
shown in the pedigree, survived then father. He died in Gloucester- 
shire, circa 1446. 

There is nothing much to be said about this large family ; 
the fortunes of Thomas, the eldest son, will be treated of in dealing 
with the Irish Maunsells ; John, the third son, merits some present 

This John was born at Knockrnore, county Cork, about 1622, 
as is evidenced by the record of his matriculation at Trinity College, 

1 Mr. R. G. Maunsell, in Appendix Xo. 54 (p. 166), give; a detailed ace unt of th 
deposition of Richard Maunsell concerning his father'; losses, with other matters incidents 

thereto. It is an interesting statement, and doubtless a true one, though Mr. Maunsell give 
no authority. It is given in full in Appendix I. to this volume. 


Dublin, Juh o 1640, at the aye of eighteen. He was of Ballyvoreen, 
count)' Limerick, and is said also to have had a grant of lands at 
Ballybrood (or Ballybrode) Drumbane, Ballyphillip, and other 

estates in Limerick. 

He was captain-lieutenant in the Life Guard of Henry 
Cromwell in 1653 1 ; and he is also stated to have been wounded 
at the Battle of Xaseby ; so here is another story of a Maunsell 
or Mansell having been there wounded. John Maunsell could 
not be identical with the Mansell of the romantic story which 
is related in the Rev. J. Mastin's book, before alluded to ; a he was 
only twenty yeai s of age at that time, had been born and brought up 
in Ireland, and had matriculated two years previously at Trinity 
College, Dublin. The story appears somewhat improbable ; it is 
based upon a statement in a pedigree of Maunsell of Ballybrood, in 
the possession of H. Farnham Burke, Esq., Norroy king-at-arms ; 
such circumstantial details are frequently inserted in pedigrees, 
without much solid foundation. 

It is, however, certain that a number of Irishmen came over 
at the commencement of the Civil War, so the story may be true ; 
and it is evident that John Maunsell fought on the Parliamentary 

In a long list of persons who were granted a free pardon, 
April 25, 1661, at the instance of the Earl of Orrery, appears the 
name of Captain John Mansell (so spelled), of Bittall, 3 who is assumed 
in the "Victoria County History "to be identical with John above 
mentioned ; and it is further stated that he was high sheriff of 
Limerick in the same year, but no authority is appended. The 
assumption is quite reasonable ; Bittall may have been one of 
Maunsell's estates in the barony of Clanwilliam, Limerick, where he 
is said to have possessed several in addition to those already 

1 Cal. State Papers, Irish Series (Adventurers for Land), 1642-1659. Henry Cromwell 
— fourth son of Oliver — was commander of the army in Ireland, a member of the Irish Council, 
deputy lord lieutenant, and subsequently lord lieutenant. He died in if". 74, having lived in re- 
tirement on an estate he had purchased in England, after the Restoration. 

3 See ante, p. 17;. 

3 Cal. State Papers, Ireland. 1 660- 1 662 ; p. 318. 


John Maunsell apparently petitioned, in 1649, to be employed 
in Ireland, for at the meeting of the Council of State, on June 30, 
"The petition of Lieut. Jno Mansell is referred to the Leicester 
Committee, who are to dispatch him that he may forthwith go to 
Ireland." ' 

The Leicester Committee appears to have been dilatory in the 
matter, for on July 2 the Council of State writes : " The Parliament 
and this Council have been petitioned by Lieut. John Maunsell, and 
the House has made an express order therein, which has been offered 
to you, but as yet without full effect. He is presently to be employed 
for Ireland, and that service is of great concern to be promoted in 
the general, and as to particular persons ; although we can add 
nothing further to the order of the House of the iSth ultimo, yet in 
regard of the consequence of the Irish service, we require that the 
order of the House be forthwith complied with, and the money 
therein mentioned paid, so that he may attend the service." - 

In the account of Maunsell of Thorpe Malsor, in the " Victoria 
County History," it is stated that Dorothy, wife of Richard Maunsell 
of Woodford in Essex (d. 1631), "was probably married, after the 
death of Richard Maunsell, to Richard Haslewood of Belton in 
Rutland, and was living in 1645." 

There is evidence in support of this in the reports of the 
proceedings of the Committee for Compounding — though Haslewood 
is here named Thomas : 

"17 Sept. 1649. Order in the Committee for county of 
Gloucester. John Maunsell of Thorpe Malsor, county Northampton, 
desired discharge of the sequestration of lauds in the parish of 
Avening sequestered by this Committee from Thomas Haslewood. 
It appearing that Haslewood held the lands in right of Dorothy, 
his late wife, who had a life interest therein, and that she died iS 
Aug. last, when the profits came to Robert Maunsell, son of the said 
John Maunsell, 3 and to Lieut. John Maunsell, now in the Parliament 

1 Cal. State Papers, Duiu., 1 64.9- 1 650 ; p. 2 1 5. 

: Hid., p. 21S. 

' That is, John Maunsell (J. 1077) and Robert (d. 1705). See pedigree. 


service under the Lord Governor of Ireland, for the residue of a term 
of 99 years, the possession and profits of the said lands are to be 
left to them for the remainder of the term aforesaid ; what rent was 
due from the tenant before the death of Dorothy is to be paid to 
this Committee, and all subsequent rent to Robert and Lieut. John 
Maunsell." ' 

On December 28, 1650, is the following : " Col. Hen. Ireton 
to the Committee for Compounding. Lieut. John Mansel [sic] came 
into Ireland with the Lord Lieutenant. His employment since has 
not allowed him liberty to attend to his own affairs. Please to take 
cognizance of his business, and expedite his procuring the benefit of 
his order of Parliament, and consequently his return here to his 

On February 25. 1651 : " Order on a Parliament Order for 
paying to Lieut. (John! Mansell the balance of £'620 due for arrears, 
and /70 for the Duke of Hamilton's diet during imprisonment, 
ordered him from sequestrations in co. Leicester — that he shall 
account with the auditor that Col. Wayte shall certify what he 
knows, and then auditor Sherwin is to report." 

Then follows : " Report of Rich. Sherwin that the sum due 
to him is C5S7. 12. 6., he having only received £102. 7. 6." 

Juhn Maunsell was subsequently, in 1672. accused of being 
concerned, together with one Captain Walcott, in fomenting dis- 
content among the English residents in Ireland ; they resented the 
Act of Indemnification of the Irish rebels, and, expressing their 
views too freely, were called to account by the lord lieutenant and 

Captain Walcott — who was afterwards executed for taking 
part in the Rye House Plot — was born in Warwickshire, but his 
family had removed to Ireland. During the rebellion of 1641 his 
father was murdered, and the family scattered, homeless, so it was 
perhaps not unnatural that he should resent an}- favour being 
extended to the rebels. Walcott had, however, before this time 

1 Cal. State Papers. Committee for Ccmpoundins ; vol. i., p. 155. This de\ lution :: 
the lands of Avening, Gloucester, is in accordance with the terms of the will of Richard of 

Died 14 Oct., mi i. 



become a man of substance : he is said io have possessed estates in 
Clare and Limerick of the value of £700 or /800 a year, and to have 
been a person of some consideration under Cromwell. 

When examined before the lord lieutenant, Walcott at first 
denied, but afterwards confessed " that he had some conference 
with Captain Maunsell, bemoaning the condition of the English, and 
concerning the discontents against the Irish." l 

Subsequently Captain Thomas Cullen gave information before 
the Privy Council. 

" On 31 October Captain Walcott came to my house at 
Ballyneclogh, co. Clare. He said that the Tuesday before he dis- 
coursed with Captain Maunsell of the condition of the English, and 
the Act of Indemnity, and further that he, Walcott, had expended 
£200 of his own money, to bring it to this pass, and that there was a 
great store of wool in Limerick, which they would send for Holland. 
and bring arms and ammunition from thence." " 

On December 14, 1672, the lord lieutenant writes to Lord 
Arlington (a member of the " Cabal " ministry) : 

" The man most probably we can yet discover to have joined 
with him is one Maunsell, who had been an officer in Cromwell's 
army, whom Walcott himself owned before the Council he had 
discoursed with of his discontents, but Maunsell, on his examination 
in the country before a J. P., denied having seen him these last three 
years ; but being pressed hard at List confi ssed to have twice spoken 
with him of late, but said it was only about borrowing and lending 
money. These two examinations contradicting one another, I have 
ordered Maunsell to be sent for to town, to try what we can learn 
from him." 3 

On January 7, 1673, Walcott, being examined before the 
lord lieutenant and Council, said that "his discourse with Captain 
Maunsell was only about Cioo he had borrowed of Captain Maunsell's 
sister. 4 He acknowledged speaking to Captain Maunsell in a few 

1 Cal. State Papers, Dora., 1672-73 ; p. 180. 

1 Ibid., p. 198. 

• Ibid., P . 272. 

4 John Maunsell had. as shown in the pedigree, six sisters : they were all married. 


words something concerning the Irish, and that asking Captain 
Maunsell the news, he said ' Worse and worse,' and that there was a 
proclamation for indemnifying the Irish." : 

On January S Captain Maunsell, being examined on oath 
before the lord lieutenant and Council, said that Captain Walcott 
" asked him what rv ws, to which he answered that he had read the 
proclamation for indemnifying the Irish, but did not believe there 
was any great matter in it. ... A few days later Walcott told him 
he was going to the Earl of Thomond lobe examined, and asked him 
whether he would be bound for him, which he refused. Being 
demanded why he d disowned to the Earl of Orrery that he spoke 
anything to Captain Walcott, but only about his sister's money, he 
said he so little regarded what Walcott said to him that he did not 
then remember what he said to him. but since upon recollecting with 
himself, he remembers and now acknowledges that the said discourse 
concerning the proclamation passed between them. Being further 
asked whether, on Walcott demanding what news, he did not answer, 
'Worse and worse,' he absolutely denies the remembrance of any 
such word. Asked whether at his meeting with Walcott he had any 
discourse with him of the discontents of the English in relation to 
the Irish, he remembers no such thing, and verily believes that 
nothing of that nature was discoursed between them." - 

Tiie authorities eventually arrived at the conclusion that 
Walcott " intend i • uschief, and as a preparatory thereto, cherished 
all the discontents he could, but that he was prevented before he 
could form it into a design." 3 

Both Walcott and Maunsell appear to have prevaricated 
somewhat discreditably when giving statements upon oath ; but 
Maunsell's denial was seemingly accepted. 

The proclamation alluded to was issued by the lord lieuten- 
ant on October 21, 1672, in pursuance of orders contained in a letter 
from the king, of September 28.. that " all prosecutions in criminal 

Cal. State Papers, Dom., Jan. 7, 1673. 
Ibid., Jan. 8, 16-5. 
Ibid., Jan. 14, 1673. 

Late R.A., 


causes on account of the rebellion and war were ordered to he 
stopped, as it was his intention at the first session of the parliament 
of Ireland to pass an Act of general pardon, indemnity, and 
oblivion." ' 

John Maunsell died in Ireland, November 14, 1GS5 ; his will 
was proved February 9, 1686, in the Prerogative Court of Ireland.' 2 

John, son of the purchaser and first holder of the Thorpe 
Malsor estate, appears to have been a Nonconformist, and to have 
lent his house for Congregationalist meetings. 

In a " Catalogue oi the nonconforming ministers now or late 
of Northamptonshire who desire licences for themselves, with the 
places wherein they desire to be allowed," April 11, 1672, appears 
the name of " John Courtman, John Maunsell's house, Thorp 

There is also application for a similar privilege at the house 
of Robert Maunsell, at Newton. Northamptonshire ; 3 this, no doubt, 
is John's eldest son. 

On May 25, 1672, a list of the licences issued includes the 
name of John Courtman, to hold servicer in the house of John 
Maunsell at Thorpe Malsor ; also permission — though without the 
minister's name — for the same in the house of John Maunsell at 
Newton ; probably a slip instead of Robert. 4 

John Maunsell appears to have been a Puritan of a very 
aggressive type, for many vears previously, in 1639, when he was 
about five-and-thirty years of age, the following letter was written 
by one Humphry Ramsden to Sir John Lambe ; 5 it is dated March 20, 
from " Dr. Isaacson's house at Woodford " : 

1 Cal. State Papers, Dom., Sept. 2S, 1672. 

2 " Victoria County History," op. cit. : ; . 232. 

3 Cal. State Papery Dom., 1671-1672 ; pp. 305, 690. 

4 Ibid., May-September, 1672 ; pp. 62, 63. 

6 Sir John Lambe (1 566-1647), ecclesiastical lawyer. He held sundry office* under ecclesi- 
astical authorities, i-.i v.-..; appointed in 1617 by the Dean and Chapter of Lincu n : 1 
oi their "peculiars" in tic :ountie: oi Xorthamp; n, R '. ii ■ :.::.-don, and Leicester. 

11: carried matters with a high hand against the Puritan-, compelling them to attend church 
on "..: days, and so forth. In I' : 1 the mayor and Corpoiation of Northampton presented a 
petition to Pariur;.- : • , ; ■-. oi these grievances, but die King stopped the proceedings, 
and knighted Lambe on July 20 of the same year. 

I I 


'; I beseech you pardon rnv boldness in presuming to write tn 
you, being a mere stranger and of such inferior cond on Tc OU Id 
not refrain for that. I have often heard von are very '" ort wK 
gen , zealous for the Church discipline and those ancient cere on^ 
used in the. primitive Church, now practised and enfoved bv the 
superiors and governors of our own, in imitation of tha : «3i old 
ay whereof 1 being convinced in conscience of the lawfulness of 
hose harmless laudable and pious ceremonies bv read ng exampk 
auidpract^ce ,n St. John's Cambridge, but most especially n revei e 
to Goa Almighty and obedience to the Church as I "have so f\3 

fellow in Lincoln's Inn. and I was ever jealons of £ knoS he 
did not imvardly approve of what I did : 'and 1 have heard Mm wish 
burl- to-h , L ' m0 '- 1K had 1Mver b «" thought of, for they are a 
ca! a Purl ■,,, "f ,CC n ° ! many guod nK ' n - a " d that "'<*<= who are 

but he took- ,t patiently and ,ovfuily„Lreas a v,^ " ' „ " ' 

nis wife found il b 5 chance, acquainted him with it and thev could 
S,e ^utTen ri nCe „ L "V Va I hcd a " «PP«Iu..i t y'to be richofnf 

s'^n-^rL 1 fu-s ..* : tV -rs^ Tin ?t me , so , ,ha; 

m ,6,- L^Xi^XS STS^T^v™ 1 ^ h '""" 


disgrace sith they had me in the sessions, at which time lie repaired 
to Dr. Clark and gave him to understand I was no such man and I 
appeal to himself when he did see me in that case. I had not come 
in tavern or ale house in a quarter of a year ; neither ever would if I 
had lived in Northampton twenty years, because I would not give 
them the least advantage since they were so fully bent against me ; 
'for he did drink ergo he is drunk ' hath been an argument strong 
enough to condemn me in Northampton ; thus they make no 
conscience at all to murder me with their mouths, but I commit my 
cause to Him who knows my heart ; and my prayers shall ever be 
that 1 may never fall again into the hands of Puritans, for 1 am sure 
there is no mercy at all with them. Mr. Forsyth was urgent with me 
about Michaelmas to tend you this story, but I was so fearful that it 
might come to Mr. Maunsell's ear that I durst not let it go abroad 
which made me take boldness now to trouble you with it. 

" My request to you is that you would write to some who 
know them well to take special notice of them at Easter, and without 
doubt such may be eye-witnesses that may receive [the sacramental 
bread and wine sitting and leaning, and every first Sunday in the 
month you may find it so, except there has been a sudden change. 

" I pray you have special care of your choice if you employ 
any in Northampton herein, for they are sofethered on a wing that 
such are difficult to be found who will truly inform without partiality. 
I only show y< »n a nest i A Puritans it you can haply catch them before 
they fly, and I hope well it vou light rightly on them you will not be 
backward to reduce them to some better conformity, since it is in 
your power to do it. which is the utmost of my desire. Thus beseech- 
ing your worship to pardon abundantly my presumptuous boldness, 
praying God to continue you long, and all other powerful instruments 
of His glory in His Church, to defend it from malignant refractory 
spirits who disturbe the peace thereof. 

" P.S. — If at any tune you write, I pray direct it to be left 
at Dr. Isaacson's parsonage in St. Andrews Wardrobe, London." 

Ramsden appears to have filled some office in Maunsell's 
household, possibly that of secretary. 

This licence for John Courtman — who married John Maunsell's 
daughter, Katherine, in 1G5S — to hold Congregational meetings, is 
somewhat remarkable, for he was at this time, and until his death 
in 1691, rector of Thorpe Malsor ; l his son, who succeeded him as 
rector, could not have been old enough in 1672 to occupy any such 

1 " History and Antiquities of Northamptonshire," by John Bridges. Vol. ii., p. 78. 


position as a minister — indeed, he was only thirteen, having been 
born in 1659. : 

It is evident, from the reference to Robert Maunsell of 
Newton, Northamptonshire, that Robert had an estate, or at least 
was located at Newton ; after his father's death, in 1677. however, 
he went to live at Thorpe Malsor, as is evidenced by a somewhat 
unusual entry in the Thorpe Malsor parish register : " R. M. and 
family came from Newton to live at Thorpe. 6 Oct. 1077." (Wood 
Newton lies about fifteen miles to the north-east of Thorpe Malsor ; 
Water Newton about twenty miles in the same direction ; there does 
not appear to be any other Newton in the county.) 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell gives (p. So) a facsimile of the royal 
warrant granting permission to hold these meetings ; the original is 
at Thorpe Malsor Hall. It runs as follows : 

" Charles R. 

"Charles by the Grace of God. King of England, Scotland, 
France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, etc. To all Mayors, Bayliffs, 
Constables, and other Our Officers and Ministers, Civil and Military, 
whom it may concern, Greeting. In pursuance of Our Declaration 
of the 15th of March, 107D We have allowed, and we do hereby 
allow a Roome or Roomes in the house of John Mansell in Thorp 
Malsor in Our Count} of Northampton to be a place for the use of 
such as do not conform to the Church of England, who are of the 
Perswasion commonly called Congregationall, to n t and assemble 
in, in order to their publick Worship and Devotion. And all and 
singular Our Officers and Ministers, Ecclesiastical Civil and Military, 
whom it may concern, are to take due notice hereof ; And they arid 
every of them, are hereby strictly charged and required to hinder 
any Tumult or Disturbance, and to protect them in their said 
Meetings and Assemblies. Given at Our Court at Whitehall, the 

1 The Encylop;edia Britannica affords a possible explanation of tie apparent anomaly: 
" During the Protectorate, with its practical establishment : Pi ' tei ;, Independents, and 
Baptist;, the poriti<^ < ; L ; ->. was really anomalous, in so far .1- any of its pastors 

becam.- parish mini 1 .-'. ai d or cer : :. ' pul lie r ainten . :e,' and were expected to administer 
the sacraments 1 1 ill ai 1 " : ear 1672 appears, hov :ver, to be =omewhat late for 

this state of affairs, nor d -it n clear why John Court] n. supp rig him a G ingregation- 
alist rector, ■':■• uld apply : >r permi- i n to hold meetings in a private house. There may, of 
course, have been ai < E the same family who .vas thus concerned ; this, 

indeed, appears to be die most probable explanation. 


24th day of May in the 24th year of Our Reign, 1672. By His 
Majesties Command." (The signature is not clear.) ' 

In 1 lie State Papers for 1673 occurs the following: 
" Humphrey Maunsell, Chaplain to Viscount Conway, to Viscount 
Conway. Concerning his attempt to procure at Cambridge a minister 
for Ballinderry, and, as the person to whom it was ottered was, as 
man'.' were, very unwilling to hear of a living in Ireland, proposing 
himself for the plai e, as the taking of it would not cast him out of 
the College, since no presentation was neces-arv. the tithes being 
impropriate." J 

This Humphrey was sixth son of John Maunsell of Chicheley 
and Thorpe Malsor (d. 1677). His will — in the form of a lettei to 
his father— was proved April 14, 1677. He mentions his brother 
Henry Maunsell, and his "brother Bhmdell " ; this was Daniel 
Blundell who married his sister Mary ; he leaves £3 to the poor in 
the parish at Ragley, and £5 to those uf Thorpe (Malsor). Humphrey 
was a gradu iteof Kin/- College, Cambridge : B.A. 1O66. M.A. 1670, 
and afterwards a Fedow; 3 hence his mission of obtaining a Cam- 
bridge man for the living oi Ballinderry. Apparently he contem- 
plated retaining his fellowship while living in Ireland ; but there is 
nothing to show that he went there after all, nor does it appear 
whence his will was dated. 

Captain Robert Maunsell, R.N., fourth son of the Rev. 
William Maunsell. Archdeacon of Kildare, did some good service 
afloat and ashore. 

In Thorpe Malsor church there is a tablet in his memory, 
placed there in 1S4S by his brother, Thomas Philip Maunsell, Esq. ; 
the inscription is as follows : 

"In the vault beneath lie the remains of Robert Maunsell, 

1 The counsels of toleration contained in the royal declaration of March 15, 1672, 
above alluded to, are ba;ed upon the realisation " that the forcible course? adjpted during the 
pait twelve rear; to ;ecu e uniformity in religion h?.ve produced little fruit." Xonconf jrmists 
and recusants are to be permitted to wor.-hip in places duly lii ed. A:; exception i; made, 
ho\ve\cr, in the case of Popiih recu nts, to tvhum no iuch toleration :- extended. 

- Cab State Papers, Dom., 1673-1675 ; p. 59. The letter is dated Dec. 15, from 
Ragley, Lord Conway's estate in Warwickshire. 

3 " Graduati Cantabrigien : c ; ." 165 j- 1 S 2 ; ; p. 517. 


Esq., a post captain in the Royal Navy, a Companion of the most 
Honourable Older of the Bath, and a Commissioner of Greenwich 
Hospital. It pleased God to remove him from his attached and 
sorrowing relatives and friends, after a short and very severe illness, 
Aug. 24, 18-15, aged 60. As a midshipman of H.M.S. Maidstone, in 
the year 1S04, he was most severely wounded by a musket ball 
through the body, in cutting out some French vessels in Ilveres Bay, 
in the Mediterranean. For tins gallant service he was made Lieu- 
tenant, and in 180S a Commander into H.M.S. Piocris, of iS guns, 
in the East Indies. In 1811, leading the boats of that ship in person, 
he captured, off the coast of Java, six French gunboats, each mount- 
ing one 32 and one iS-pounder carronade on pivots, and manned 
with upwards of Go men each. For this, and for having commanded 
a body of seamen on shore in the reduction of the Island of Java, 
he was made post-captain into the Illustrious, 74 guns, and after- 
wards C.B. Duri ig the peace he commanded the Alfred, of 50 guns, 
and the Rodney, of 92 guns, in the Mediterranean, and was appointed 
in 1SJ4 a Commissioner of Greenwich Hospital." 

The action, or " cutting out " exploit, in which the boats of 
the Procris were engaged was a very gallant affair ; one of those 
minor incidents of warfare, of which British naval history affords a 
vast number. " Cutting out " vt s;eis by means of an attack in boats 
appears to have been an operation almost entirely confined to the 
British Navy, and many of these episodes afford examples of almost 
incredible daring. 1 The statement, in the inscription above tran- 
scribed, that Maunsell led the attacking boats "in person," is, however, 
probably erroneous ; it was not the usual custom on these occasions 
for the captain to lead the attack, this dangerous and honourable 
post being generally held by the senior lieutenant ; and this practice 
was, in all probability, adhered to on the occ ision in question. There 
is, however, as will be seen, some little uncertainty on this point. 

1 One of the most remarkable exploits c : this nature was performed by Acting-Lieutenant 
Jeremiah Coghlan, of the cutter Viper, in 1S00. He started with three boats to cut out the 
French gun : i ig C ■ ■' t the were, however, left far astern, but Cosrhhn, although 

the Frenchmen were at quarters, prepared f r him, went . r v ith hi; one h it, cc nt; 
twenty men, ar.J acl .:.._■ and towing out the prize. For this feat 

Coghlan \va presented wit , sword bj Lord St. Vincent. 


In the year 1811 it was known ttiat Napoleon had in con- 
templation a grand coup in the East Indies — a very ambitious 
scheme, seeing how full his hands were at home. 

The Dutch had, with varying fortunes, held the Island of 
Java since about the close of the sixteenth century ; their sway was 
at first only partial, but was gradually extended, in spite of strenuous 
intermittent resistance on the part of the native tribes and magnates, 
until, in the year iSn , they held a very large proportion of the island. 

In view of Napoleon's aspirations, and to prevent the estab- 
lishment of strong French influence in the Java Sea, it was determined 
in this year to despatch a British force to seize and occupy the island. 

The expedition sailed from Madras on April lS ; there were 
some delays, and it was the end of June when the whole force — 
consisting of two and twenty men-of-war of various dimensions, and 
about 12,000 troops, nearly half of which were Europeans — arrived 
off the mouth of Indramaya River. 

Meanwhile a series of brilliant exploits had been performed 
by some naval officers and men already on the spot, but there is not 
space to give an account of them, and Commander Robert Maunsell 
was not concerned in them. 

A small British squadron was cruising off Batavia under the 
orders of Captain George Saver, of the Leda, a thirty-six gun frigate, 
the Procris being one of this squadron. 

On July 30 Maunsell, in obedience to orders from Captain 
Sayer, stood in during the night and anchored near the mouth of 
Indramaya River. 1 What followed is very clearly related in his 
report to his superior officer : 

" H.M. Ship Procris, off the mouth of Indramaya River, 
31 July, 1811. 


" I have the honour to inform you that in obedience 
to your orders I proceeded in shore, and at daylight this morning 
discovered six gunboats with a convoy of forty or fifty prows, close 

1 Indramaya (or Ir.dcrurr ! : ind River are about eighty-five miles to the < 

of Krawanu Point, the north eastern extremity ot Batavia Roads. 


in with the mouth of Indramaya River, upon which we immediately 
weighed and ran into ] less 3 fathoms water, and were then scarcely 
within gunshot of the gunboats ; : finding that our tire made very 
little impression on them, and conceiving the destruction of this 
force to be an object of immediate importance, I proceeded to the 
attack of them with the boats of His Majesty's sloop under my 
command, together with two tlat boats, an officer and twenty men of 
His Majesty's 14th Regt., and an officer and the same number of 
men from His Majesty's 89th Regt., and succeeded in boarding and 
carrying five of them successfully, under a heavy fire of grape and 
musketry, their crews jumping overboard after having thrown their 
spears into the boats ; the sixth blew up before we got alongside of 
her. The whole of the convoy, on their first seeing us. hauled 
through the mud up the river, or they must also have fallen into our 
hands. The gunboats carry each of them one brass 32 pounder 
carronade forward, and one r8 pounder aft, with (as appears by the 
papers found on board) upwards of sixty men each. They are 
excellent vessels, and in my opinion might be found of considerable 
service to the Expedition. 

" In performing this service I am happy to observe that our 
loss has been comparatively small, when it is considered that the 
boats, during the whole time of the advancing, were exposed in the 
open clay to the fire ( : tw< lve guns of the calibre I have mentioned 
and a constant hie 01 musketry (the gunboat which blew up being of 
equal force with the rest). 

" I cannot conclude without performing the pleasing duty of 
noticing the very steady and determined bravery of every officer and 
man employed on this occasion. From Mr. Majoribanks, my first 
lieutenant. I received that able support I had reason to expect from 
his general good conduct whilst under my command, and I cannot 
too strongly mark the high sense I entertain of the gallantry of 
Lieut. H. J. Heyland of H.M. ijth Regt. and Lieut. Oliver Brush 
of H.M. 89th Regt. ; their keeping up a steady well-directed lire of 
musketry from the men under their respective commands must have 
proved considerably destructive to the enemy. I have also to 
express the satisfaction I felt in the steady behaviour of Messrs. 
George Cunningham, William Randall and Charles Davies. master's 
mates, supernumeraries on board the ship for a passage to join the 
Commander in Chief, and the other Petty Officers, non-commissioned 
officers, seamen and soldiers ; in short the conduct of the whole was 
such as to make me feel confident that had the force opposed been 

1 - Quarter less three " 
probably draw nearly [his amour 

■ i 

# ■ 


;.| >'Ur.a O.tlio in :tWa,\ 


considerably greater it would have met the same fate. Enclosed I 
transmit a list of the wounded on this occasion, and have the honour 
to remain, 


" Your very obedient humble servant, 
" Robert Maunsell. 
"George Savers. Esq.. Captain of H.M. Ship Leda, etc., etc. 
" (The wounded comprise nine naval and two military 

Such is Commander Maunsell's official report, which leaves 
nothing to be desired as a faithful account of the exploit ; and from 
the wording of this letter it would certainly be inferred that Maunsell 
adopted the somewhat unusual course of commanding the boat 
attack in person. 

In the captain's log (or journal), however, there would 
appear to be a contradiction of this assumption : 

"31 July. At anchor off Indramaya Point. Daylight 
discovered several prows in shore. Discovered six to be gunboats 
with a convoy of several smaller prows with French colours. Com- 
menced firing, which was returned by the gunboats. Finding them 
at too great a distance weighed and stood further in. q. Came to in 
3 fathoms with springs on the cable. Commenced firing again, but 
finding we were not able to reach them, and the water too little to 
stand further in. sent all boats manned and armed to attack them. 
10. Observed all the gunboats commence firing on our boats with 
round and grape. 10.15. Observed one of our boats board one of 
the gunboats. 10.20. Observed one of the enemy's gunboats to 
blow up. 10.40. Tne enemy ceased firing. Observed our boats to 
be in possession of five gunboats. At 12 boats returned and came 
on board ; 5 wounded. Found the gunboats to mount each one 32 
pounder and one iS pounder ; manned by from 50 to 60 men each." 
Here the impression given is that Commander Maunsell, in 
accordance with precedent, sent the boats in under the command of 
Lieutenant Majoribanks, while he watched the enterprise, glass in 
hand, and noted each step on the spot, recording precisely the time 
at which he " observed " it. These notes he must afterwards have 
transcribed verbatim in his journal ; it will be noticed that he puts 


the number of wounded as five, whereas later in the day, when lie 
wrote his official report, he had ascertained that nine of his own men 
and two soldiers had been wounded. 

The expression, " I proceeded to the attack of them with the 
boats," which occurs in the official report, should perhaps read, "I 
proceeded to attack them with the boats " ; at any rate, it is im- 
probable that Maunsell led the attack in person ; it was a kind of 
tradition in the Navy that on such occasions the senior or other 
lieutenant should "have his chance," and, save in unusual circum- 
stances, the captain abstained from active participation in the 

It was, however, a very gallant and well-conducted affair, and 
owed its inception, of course, entirely to Commander Maunsell. 1 

Maunsell was shortly afterwards appointed acting captain of 
the Illustrious, seventy-four guns, and'during the short time in which 
he held this command he served with a Naval Brigade of five hundred 
men, which took part in the reduction and capture of Batavia. A 
battery of twenty eighteen-pounders was manned entirely by sea- 
men : in Rear-Admiral Robert Stopford's report occurs the follow- 
ing : " The fatigue of the seamen was great, and much increased, by 
being exposr-d to the hot sun of that climate for three successive days, 
during which time the fire was kept up with little interruption ; but 
it was borne with their characteristic fortitude, Captain Saver and 
the other officers above mentioned (including Captain Maunsell) 
setting them noble examples." 

Previously to the successful boat attack already described, 
Maunsell is said to have been ordered to convoy a transport with 
four hundred troops on board from the Strait of Sunda (between 
Sumatra and Java) to join the expedition assembling off Batavia. 
The captain of the transport, however, was apprehensive about 
night navigation, so Maunsell embarked the troop^ on his own 
ship, and conveyed them promptly to their destination. 2 

1 In O'Byrne's " Naval Biographical Dictionary " it is also staled that Commander 
Maunsell led the attack in person ; but the writer had evidently not compared the captain's log 
with the official report ; it is impossible to reconcile the statement with > Iaunsell's recorded 
"observations," obviously made from the deck of his ship. 

2 This is related by O'Byrne ; he does not give any authority for the story. 


On September 10, 1811, he took possession, with a division of 
boats under his orders, of a large sloop-rigged gunboat, mounting 
four heavy guns and two brass swivels, a Malay-rigged gun-vessel, 
carrying one twelve-pounder carronade, and a despatch-boat. On 
this occasion it appears that Maunsell conducted the attack in 
person, and hence some possible confusion between this and the 
affair off Indramaya. 

Maunsell was confirmed as post-captain on February 7, 1812, 
and was afterwards appointed to the Chatham, seventy-four guns, 
bearing the flag of Rear- Admiral Matthew Henry Scott, in the North 
Sea, a post which lie held until May 26, 1814. 

Then ensued a long period of idleness, until on February 22, 
1831, he was appointed to the Alfred, fifty guns, in the Mediterranean. 

While serving in this ship Maunsell was present at the landing 
of Prince Otho of Bavaria to assume his newly-conferred position as 
King of Greece. 

Greece had for years been in a condition of anarchy ; from 
the time of the French Revolution a spirit of unrest had been foment- 
ing, culminating in a struggle which lasted for six or seven years in 
the endeavour to shake off the hateful rule of the Turks. This was 
terminated at the Battle of Navarino, on October 20, 1S27, when the 
Turkish fleet was destroyed by the combined fleet of Britain. France, 
and Russia ; the final settlement, however, still hung fire. By the 
Protocol of London, March 22, 1S29, Greece was constituted an 
independent monarchy ; but who was to be king ? 

Farly in 1830 Prince Leopold, of Saxe-Coburg, was offered, 
and accepted trie sovereignty, and his nomination was hailed by the 
people of Greece as a boon. Leopold, however, mistrusting, with or 
without justification, some of the conditions attached to the new 
monarchy, declined after all to assume the position. 

Ultimately, in 1S32, the three Powers nominated Prince Otho, 
son of the King of Bavaria ; and early in the following year he was 
duly installed, Greece being thus finally removed from the Balkan 

Captain Robert Maunsell was at Malta in tiie Alfred at the end 
of this year ; and on December 17 Vice-Admiral the Honble. Sir 


Henry Hotham, commander-in-chief in the Mediterranean, hoisted 
his flag on board Maunsell's ship. 1 

In January tiie Alfred sailed for Nauplia (or Napoli), 5 at the 
head of the gulf of the same name, on the eastern side of the Morea, 
and about twelve miles south of Corinth, there to await the arrival 
of the new Ming of Greece. 

Then there ensued considerable expenditure of powder by way 
of salutes, which are all recorded, in accordance with the naval 
usage, in the log. On January 30, at one o'clock, the Greek flag was 
hoisted and saluted with twenty-one gun? ; and at half-past two : 
" H.M.S. Madagascar anchored also a Russian frigate, a French 
corvette, two Greek corvettes (one bearing the flag of a Rear- 
Admiral) and thirty-eight sail of transports." 

The Madagascar (a frigate of forty-six guns) carried King 
Otho, the otla-r men-of-war formed an escort, while the transports 
carried an army of 3.500 Bavarian troops, which the King of Bavaria 
had stipulated that his son should be permitted to import into his 
new kingdom. The Madagascar was commanded by Captain 
Edmund Lyons, afterwards Lord Lyons, a very distinguished 
officer, who, after a term of nearly twenty years employed in diplo- 
matic duties, resumed his naval career at the outbreak of the Crimean 
War in 1854, as commander-in-chief in the Mediterranean. 

There was. of course, a vast amount of ceremonial : visits of 
respect to the king, and of the king to the several admirals, upon all 
of which occasions many gun salutes were fired, and. when the king 
went afloat, yards were manned on board the men-of-war. 

King Otho landed at Nauplia on February 6, 1S33, with a 
great procession of boats, and the thunder of salutes ; and there we 
must leave him — with the reflection that his present successor (191 7) 
has not shown much friendliness to the Powers which tendered such 
signaLservice to Greece in the beginning of last century. 

1 This i; vouched for by ihe captain's log : but there is no mention in the Navy List 
at the time of Hotham's flagship, and it is not clear upon what ship he had previously flown his 
flag ; he had been appointed to the command of the station in January, 1S31, nearly two years 
previously. The A.jred was not the class of vc.-sel ordsnarily selected as flagship ; a seventy- 
four gun-;h : T was usually appropriated for the purpose. 

- Nauplia was the old Greek name ; Xapoli will be found in most modern atlases. 


The Alfred was paid off during the summer of i S34,and Maunsell 
remained unemployed until May i j. 1S40, when he was appointed to 
the Rodney, of ninety-two guns, and sent to the Mediterranean. 

Maunsell arrived on the station in time to take part in the 
final act of the contest which had been for some years in progress 
between the Porte and Mehemet Ali, a bold and clever adventurer, 
who had contrived, by a combination of force and intrigue, to land 
the Turks in a very awkward predicament. The situation was 
complicated by the conflicting jealousies of Britain, France, Russia, 
Austria, and Prussia, each and all of whom had separate ideas as to 
the manner in which the business should be settled, though all were 
agreed that the Great Powers should step in and compel a settlement 
of some sort. 

There is not space here to enter upon a detailed account of 
the various actions in which the British and other fleets took part. 
Sidon was bombarded and taken on June 25, 1840, from Mehemet 
Ali's forces ; and on November 3 the strong fortress of St. Jean 
d'Acre was also 1 educed by the fire of the fleets and occupied by 
troops and marines on behalf of Turkey. 

Acting under Sir Robert Stopford, the admiral commanding, 
was Commodore Charles Napier, a bluff seaman of the bulldog type. 
A few days after the fall of Acre, (lie admiral despatched Napier to 
Alexandria to take command of the squadron there assembled, 
among which was Captain Robert Maunsell's ship, the Rodney, 
recenth' arrived upon the station. 

Napier, with the characteristic assurance of seamen of his 
type, had frequently expressed his views with regard to the diplo- 
matic aspect of the matter, which he felt sure he could handle far 
better than the legitimate diplomatists ; and being shown, at 
Alexandria, a despatch from Lord Palmerston to Lord Ponsonby, 
British ambassador at Constantinople, suggesting certain terms of 
submission to be offered to Mehemet Ali, immediately perceived an 
opportunity of exeiei-ing his skill in this direction. 

Accordingly he decided to enter upon direct negotiations with 
Mehemet Ali ; and, as it turned out, be had at hand a very suitable 
envoy for his purpose. 


This was no other than Captain Robert Maunsell, who, during 
his former commission in the Alfred, had come in contact with 
Mehemet, and was on friendly terms with him. 

" Napier decided to invest him with the office of negotiator, 
and sent him, under a flag oi truce, to Alexandria, with a letter to 
Boghos Bey. the ministt r and chief adviser of Mehemet Ali. In this 
letter he strongly urged the Pasha to set at liberty the Syrian emirs 
and sheiks who were prisoners in his hands, to evacuate Syria, and 
to restore the Turkish fleet, pointing out the hopelessness of pre- 
serving his dominions unless he came to an arrangement with the 
Sultan, supported as the latter was by the Allies, who, however, in 
case of his immediate submission, were well disposed to secure for 
him the hereditary Pashalic of Egypt." 1 

This message received a most encouraging reply, and Napier, 
elated with the initial success of his diplomatic adventure, resolved 
that he would visit Mehemet Ali in person, and endeavour to clinch 
the matter. "Meanwhile, Captain Maunsell was despatched with 
a second letter, in which the Commodore pressed for the immediate 
surrender of the Turkish fleet as the first step in the proposed arrange- 
ment. The reply was to the effect that the Ottoman fleet should be 
restored and Syria evacuated, so soon as the Pasha received the 
official and positive guarantee of the advantage that he was to 
receive in return for these concessions." ■ 

The whole scheme " came off " to admiration, and on Novem- 
ber 26 the terms of the Convention were duly set forth and 

It is related that, at their first interview : " The Pasha asked 
the Commodore for his credentials to act in such an affair ; to which 
the other replied that the double-shotted guns of the Powerful, with 
the squadron under his command to back him, his honour as an 
Englishman, and the knowledge he had of the desire of the four 
Great Powers for peace, were all the credentials he possessed." 3 

1 - The Life and Letter; of Admiral Sir Charles Napier," by H. Noel Williams (1917) ; 

pp. 202, 203. 

2 Ibid., p. 203. 
a Ibid., p. 205. 


This naively arrogant rejoinder, instead of irritating Mehemet, 
delighted him, for he was at bottom a good " sportsman " ; and so 
the whole thing was arranged. 

Napier was delighted with himself ; he commenced his letter 
to Lord Minto, " My Lord, I do not know whether I have done 
right in settling the Eastern question " — hut in reality he had but 
little misgiving. He was, of course, severely censured for his un- 
licensed excursion into strictly diplomatic territory ; but eventually 
his convention was practically adopted ; he received a handsome 
letter of thanks from Lord Palmerston, was promoted to com- 
modore of the First Class, and made K.C.B. 

In later years, another naval officer — Admiral Gerard Noel- 
performed a similar exploit by settling the Cretan question " off his 
own bat " ; he also was knighted, and Lord Salisbury is said to have 
remarked that a naval officer of Nod's type was a good deal better 
than any number of Cabinet Councils ! 

The Rodney was paid off between September 20 and December 
20, 1843, and Maunsell was not again employed afloat. He had been 
made a C.B. in 183S, and in 1844 was appointed a commissioner of 
Greenwich Hospital. He died in the following year, as recorded in 
the monumental inscription, at the age of sixty- 
Thomas Philip .Maunsell, who placed the monument and 
inscription to his brother Robert, was a magistrate and deputy- 
lieutenant for Northamptonshire, and high sheriff for the county in 
1 821 ; he was also colonel in the Northampton Militia, and M.P. for 
the northern division of the county from 1835 to 1S57. He died 
March 4, 1S66, aged eighty-five. 

Of his son. William Thomas Maunsell, an obituary notice in 
the Gentleman's Magazine says : " Mr. Maunsell was a truly charit- 
able, kind, and benevolent friend to many in adversity ; a well- 
known, able and ready adviser in cases of necessity ; remarkably 
humble in mind and unassuming in demeanour, and one whose 
memory will ever be cherished by numbers, both at his native 
village and in the towns in its vicinity. His death is deeply 
lamented." Mr. Maunsell was a captain in the Northamptonshire 
Militia under his father, and a justice of the peace for the county. 



There is at Thorpe Malsor Hall a curious old genealogical 
account o£ tl MaunseI1 , lm „ y fa ^ rf ^ ^^ 

ThetfanSih • ' C f eCtanea Tl WI**» * Genealouc - 
The ranscnbers introductory remarks and notes are given as thev 

conapos.t.on of an earlier period. I, is followed in the volume ,v 

n Esse x m but !f/ "' .T-r'' b " ri *" W »- < h ™ of Woodford 
in Essex, but afterwards ot Thorpe Malsor. commencing with the 
bulls, marnages, and burials of the family from 153 o to 1606 a 
rough genealogical sketch front Sier le Maunsell, w, e , no r , c ' or 

7°;: :;" ' e T"; - and is vmf,ed bv referencra to d "» 

of Chfchel ElK -' a " d , endl , n 8 » ith '•' Pedigree from Richard Mannsell 
of Chicheley, in Buckinghamshire, buried 1539. 

the le " ? 6Se Pri J ' a ' e documents f "™«h a general corroboration of 
the legendary tradit.on of the story ; but it is a most remarkable 
circumstance that almost every fact related, except ,he acSenta 
murder iseouurnied by historical evidence from extraneous sour t 
as will be shown in the accompanying notes." 



In this table here may you see 
How manye generations nowe gone we be 
Some tyme by course we li vede h-re 
VUn cark and care troubled we wear'e : 
«ut at ye laste we were soone gone 
And soner forgotten cverye one • ' 
Had we not some thinge lefte be'hinde 
He h id bene worne quite out of minde 
by v.-ritinge it may appeare 
in Chicheley were. 



iigned - G. Li 

?9-394- Thii work was ed;:ei by John Gough Nichols, bu, 

- • . • v 


, '- 

>/ . 

, r It' 




'■' : 


-i \ i 


, ., , . ■ ;. : .. .. , . .-.. 

b\ the kind permission of Sir Briun C'oka\ne 







the cokayxk loving cups. 
:i;si:\ ! i:d to the worshipfcl company of 
b\ sir william cokayxe. 


Some riche, some pore, some simple, some wise. 

Some fortuned to pood, some unfortunate thrise. 

For yt some got othar did spende, 

But blessed be God yt all doth sende. 

Of us sometyme, some knightes made weare, 

And in this coutrye greate rule 'lid bene 

Ontill yt brother of brothei was slayne, 

For vayne possession & worldelye gayne. 

Then fortune begane to tnrne hir wheele 

And caused awayeward all to rede. 

Forthewith did Allmightye God begine 

To punishe & plague us for our synne. 

But yet at ye laste he of his grace 

Agayne in Chichelye did us place ; 

In Berrye end, & cste end, seates he us sente 

That we our sinnes ther mighte repente ; 

But when he see it would not be, 

One braunche of us eftesone cut of did he. 

But yet of his mercye for to extende 

He preferred the other in Berrye ende ; 

And yt they mighte repente agayne, 

Both land and goods he parted in twayne, 

And for ye one lie cut of ye name 

The other he keepte wthouten shame. 

Wherefore remember children all 

Yt sinefull lyfe hath had a fall ; 

And that God wth mercye his plagues did sende, 

And with pbcue? his mercye did extende, 

That we migl amende ; 

To him be glory worlde with oute ende. 

Sier ' the syer of us all, a man of micle grace, 

Above ye comei (as I reed) at Tickthoms : had his place ; 

1 !..- - • did at Turvye take a wife as may appeare, 

For yt thre lovelve sisters then of Turvye ladves weare, 

The eldest ilordane, ye second Ardes, ye 3 Mausell did take,' 

1 Sier is doubtless intended for Saher or S her, no uncommon name in the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries, and the orthography is not improbably varied for the purpose of producing 
the pun excited by it = synonym. Ralph Mansel held a fee of the new feoffment from Gervase 
Paganell in 14 He;-.. II., 1167 (Lib. Nig., p. 140); and by deed s. d. with the consent of Cecilv 
his wife, and Seher hi' son and heir, and for the souls of his father and mother, and his sons 
Gilbert, Roger, Simon. William, and Hugh, gave his hind of '' Cuculmes ho " (<;:/. where :) to 
Tickford priory, near Newport Pagnell, in Bucks (Mom Ang., vol. ih, p. 912). This grant was 
made in the presence of, and connrmed by, his lord Gervase Paganell {ibid.), and must have 
been anterior to 11S7 (35 Hen. II.), as the general confirmatory Charter from Gervase to the 
priory, in that year, includes all the men and lands, meadow and pasture, and woods, liberties, 
and ways, of the gift of Ralph Mansel! and Cecily his wife {ibid., p. 911). 

8 The manor of Tickthornes or Thickthornes, in Chicheley and H.irdmead, near Newport 
Pagnell, was part of the original endowment of Tickford Priorv by Fulke Paganell {ibid., vol. i., 
p. 6S6). 

3 The " three lovely sisters " were the daughters of William de Alneto, and sisters and 
co-heires;es of Hu~h de Alneto. of Turvey in Bedfordshire and Maidford in Northamptonshire. 
Of this family an ample ... mt will be found in t! ;t exc edingly rare and splendid work, 
Halstead's " Gem ." i th portion of the History of Northamptonshire now in the 



And these thre men wth one accorde thcr living thei did make. 

And Arde yt so ernestc was tlier mindinge to abide, 

Ferste placed was uppon ye hill under ye hard wood syde. 

And Mordanc yt soe dealye was to the yt him wth stoode, 

Placed was in ye midle vale under ye selfe same woode. 

And Sier le Mausell was, accordinge to his will, 

Placed nere unto ye ioppe of ye other hill. 1 

This Sier ther a sonc begotte, & Willia - did him name, 

Who did his mother ther succeed inheritinge ye same ; 

For when his mother buried was, & Willia of age pleine, 

Then did his father suffer him at Turvye still remeanc. 

And he himselfe at Tickethornes blood = wher was hi:' great delight, 

And yet he had at eche place ye companye of ij knightes. 

For as ser Mordan & ser Arde at Turvye dwelt him nere. 

Soe at Tickthornes by him dwelt ser Gedney & ser Bublere ; 

This to be true thai 1 here wrote all ye yt doute I praye 

That ye will take ye paynes to reede yc booke called Domesday. 

Then Will did at Turvye get a soe Sapso by name, 

Whom Sier did to Tickthome take & gave to him ye same. 

For when bier was dedde and gone, Sampson at Tickthomes dwelte, 

And William like a good father wth Turvye was contcnte. 

This Sampson did a soe begett, and John ' he did him call, 

Whom he broughte upp in knowledge greate, & in ye vertues all. 

This John, in knowledge of ye lawe who lerned was right well, 

Henrye ye therd chcefe Justice made of Englande I you tell. 

And after one of ye xij peer, as chronicli - v itnesse, 

Those he was in ye v,:/'". realmc to seet at qmetnesse ; 

Wherof aftei ensued greate strive, for yt ye barrons wente 

Press. The matches with Mordane, or Mordaunt, and Andres, are historically correct. William 
de Alneto gave tc Eustace le Mordaunt .'■. t< - of the Earls of Pet rl i with Alice his 

eldest daughter, .; moietyof all the lands of his vill of Turvey, to hold by the service of half a 
fee (Halstead, p. 447), and Hugh de Alneto gave to Richard, the son of his sister Sarah, a moiety- 
of his land of Turvey. tree from ail sendee save what belonged to the king for so much of the 
said fee (ibid., p. 13) ; which Richard, by the name of Richard de Ardres, sold to his cousin 
William le Mordaunt, son of Eustace, his share in the vill of Turvey (ibid., p. 455). The 
existence of the third sister is apocr) phai, and the poem is the only authority, if it can be deemed 
such, for the marriage with Maunsell ; which, however, is not unsupported by presumptive 
evidence. It will subsequently appear that the family certainly had an interest in Turvey; 
that local spots within the lorddhp were designated by their name ; and the variation in the 
terms of the grants from William de Alneto the father, and Hugh the son, must not be forgotten. 
The former expressly includes a moiety of his will by the service of half a fee ; consequently a 
moiety only of the vill would descend to Hugh ; his grant is only of a moiety of his lands, and the 
remaining moiety of his lands, or quarter of the vill, might pass to Maunsell with the third sister. 

1 Eustace de Mordaunt, for the soul; of himself and his wife (Alneto), granted to Caldwell 
Priory, near Bedford, lands in Turvey abutting upon the way which leads to the Church of 
Turvey over " Mansellshull '" (Halstead, p. 449). 

2 William Mancell attested more than one conveyance of lands in Turvey from Eustace 
le Mordaunt (Halstead, pp. 14 and 448). 

' Abode. 

4 This John is an interpolation introduced for the embellishment of the tale. There 
was, however, a contemporary John Mansell, ancestor of the Lords Mansel (Collins's " Peerage," 
1741, vol. iv., p. z66), who was Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, not Chief Justice of England, 
and it seem; the poet was not able to resist the temptation of appropriating him. 


Wth ye comons agaynst yc kinge in Oxford parlamte. 

This John, then at Thickthomes had ij sons as doth appeare, 

The youngest Willia, ye eldeste was Thomas to him full dere ; 

This Thomas then at man's estate his father's parte did take, 

And wth ye comons did aviso ye barrens warre to make. 

To Nottinghame strayghte waye he vvente, as Polidore ' expresse, 

Wher at ye last he taken was ec put in greate distn sse. 

But when ye barrons warre was done & he delivered was, 

Eftesone herto his father's home wth him his time to passe, 

Whom he then fonde maried ogayne to one yt was full wod,- 

She was some time one Tickthome's wife, and came of saving Blud. 

Woode : she was for yt Thomas unto his father came, 

For then she had here doughter dere betrothed to Willia, 

Meaninge therby to gett Thickthorne to ye blud agayne 

Of her hi sband yt some tyme was, by joyning of them twayne. 

Wch thinge she now perceaved well she could not bring to passe, 

For yt it was her husbande minde to geve it to Thomas. 

Wherfore she sought meanes all she could this Thomas for to kill, 

And her daughter at Thickthome's place, such was her wicked will. 

She never lefte until Willia wth him a huntinge wente, 

And eche of them thcr standinge took with his boo readye bente. 

And when the game chanced to come to Thomas somewhat nye. 

Then eche of them aimed at the game ther arrowes to let five. 

And Thomas did the game then strike, but stroake he was wth all, 

His brother's arrow did him hitt yt to ye grounde lie fall ; 

Then ' owe alasse,' cried ail men ther, ' what cruell chance is this, 

That in pastime of brothers twayne ye one now thus slayne is,' 

And one strayghte way to ther father went & sayd, ' Ot yor soncs twayne, 

Alas (good lord) by cruell chauce one hathe ye other slavne.' 

' Th ' (quoth he) Lord why live I to se this woeful! daye ; 

Yf this be true, the eldeste is then slayne I dare well say ; 

The yonger hathe ye inarke it selfe then hit wherat i ;hett, 

But yet (by . . .) I assure ye game he never gett.' 

Forthwth his father in greate rage his lande conveyde awaye, 

And gave Tickthomes to Tickford house for his soulle for to prav. 

Soe he in places manye moe bestoed as he thoughte goode, 

And little lefte his sonne Willia he was with him soe woode. 2 

But at ye laste, by meanes of frende, Turvye he lefte his wife, 

And yt Willia should have ye same when she ended her life. 

But Willia . . . unthrifiie still, soe sone :.s his frende wente. 

To Mordane strayghte waye Turvye sold ' & all yt he had, spente. 

And in Chichelye likewise he sold land * wch cae by his wife, 

1 Polydore Virgil. 

- Of an ill-temper, angry. 

3 Then (?) 

1 Substituting Sampson for John, as the father of Thomas and William, this portion of 
the narrative is completely authenticated by unquestionable evidence : for William, ;on of 
Sampson le Manseil of Turvey, by deed dated on the day of the Annunciation of the Blessed 
Virgin (March 25) 15 Edw. I. (1287), sold to William, son of William le Mordaunt, .ill hi- lands 
in " Chechle " (Hdstead, p. 45O), and diough the conveyance of Mansell's lands ia Turvey i^ 
not extant, yet the fact is placed beyond doubt by the license which William le Mordaunt had 
in 25 Edw. I. (1297), to enclose his wood of " Mancels-grove," with otlier lands in Turvey, and 
convert them into a park {ibid., p. 457). 


And shortlye had her nothinge lefte, had he not lcfte his life. 

But at ye laste when lie gone was, little yt did remeane 

Betwene her sones Hughe & Willia she parted them in twayne. 

Thus when Mansell wth Thickthornes blud mingled, Tickt homes he loste, 

And Turvye sold then quite awaye, so maried to his coste ; 

But thoughe he be fro Turvye thus with arde 2 worne qite awaye, 

Yet Arde wod & Mausel lull tber names beare to this daye, 

And thoughe he have thus Thickthornes loste, yet for remebance good, 

The piore for him did daylye praye soe long as a bestode, 

In Tickthorne's Chappell mas he songe untill yt it was done, 

And after yt his . . . sayde at churche in Chichelye towne. 

Thus Manselle land was made awaye, unknone be of his nae, 

Save yt when men olde writinge reed yey chance ... on ye sae. 

Thus women more wicked than ought was never well contente 

Untill she had her purpose wrought, wch we may all repente. 

Thus God justelye his plagues did sende, desyring quit the place, 

As he had done, ther stocke alsoe, save j t he shewed grace. 

But wth justice he mercye shewed, & Hughe in Buriende 

Tcrste place he did, the Willia is placed in Estende ; 

from Estend nowe ye stocke is gone, & nae worne qite awaye, 

Save yt wher Willia" dwelte caled is, Will Manscle at this daye. 

The transcriber, it will be noticed, regards the third sister of 
Hugh de Alneto, who is here alleged to have married Seller Maunsell, 
and is assigned by Mr. R. G. Maunsell to Sir Robert the Crusader, as 
apocryphal, in agreement with the views expressed in vol. i. of this 
work ; 2 possibly there may have been a daughter born out of wed- 
lock. The marriage here given is in accordance with that in Gabriel 
Ogilvy's pedigree, 3 but there is no means of comparing the previous 
genealogy, as the writer of the poetical pedigree does not go back 
beyond Seher. 

As will be seen in the Thorpe Malsor pedigree, the Maunsells 
intermarried more than once with the Cokaynes, a family of ancient 
origin and honourable traditions, of which some account will be of 

The family of Cokayne * can be traced back with certainty 
to one John Cokayne, of Ashbourne, county Derby, who flourished 

1 Thomas D'Ardres in 49 Edw. III. (1575), conveyed to Robert Mordaunt of Turvey 
all his lards of Turvey, in exchange for lands at Shephale, Herts (ibid., p. 471). 

3 P. S3- 

* See Appendix I, to vol. i. 

1 Tlit :. v riously spelled Cokayne, Cokeine, Cockain, Cockayne, Cockaine, Cokain ; 

the term " Coi . " '. ill be adopted here, save when referring to record?, or writings of 
members of the familv, in w'-.-.h a dirlerence occurs. 


about the year 11 50. There is, indeed, a tradition that a knight of 
the name dwelt at Henningham Castle, in Essex, during the reign of 
William the Conqueror — a tradition which is embodied in some lines 
by Sir Aston Cokain, addressed to his kinsman, Mr. John Cokaine, 
of Rushton : 

" When at your Pigeon-house we meet sometime 
(Though bawling Puritans call it a crime) 
And pleasant hours from serious thoughts do steal 
With a fine little glass, and temperate Ale, 
Talk of Sir — Cokaine, and how- near 
He was alli'd to Will the Conqueror, 
Liv'd in his reign at Henningham Castle, and 
That lately there his Bow and Arrows did stand. 
Thai there his Sword and Buckler hung, and that 
(If the}' have ' ca] V. tl :se times) th'are all there." 

A note to these lines states that the fact of the existence of 
these weapons was vouched for by this same John Cokaine, and that 
he " had antient evidence to prove it." 1 

There is some corroboration of this legend, in the fact that 
there was in Essex a manor of Cokayne, said to be " named after an 
ancient family that had estates in these parts."- This manor is not 
precisely located, but it lay in Tendring Hundred, as also did 

There is a very good account of the Cokayne family extant, 3 
from which much of this history is extracted. 

The main stock of the family is that of Ashbourne, Derby, with 
offshoots of Cokayne — IIatle\ , Beds, and of Rushton Hall, North- 
ants. It will be convenient to deal with these separately, giving some 
account of the more prominent members of each. 

There is in Ashbourne church a very interesting series of 
monuments, covering practice lly eight generations of Cokaynes, and 

1 " Small Poems of Divers Sorts,"' written by Sir Aston Cokain ; p. 197. This collection 
was published in 165S ; hence the allusion to " bawling Puritans," and the doubt expressed 
as to whether the old arm:- had escaped the depredations of the Roundhead-. Sir Aston's name 
is spelled Cokain on the title-page : in the British Museum index it is, for some reason, spelied 

■ "History of Essex," by Philip Morant. Vol. i., p. 455. 

J -Cockayne Memoranda," by Andreas Edward Cockayne. The author pells the 
name Cockayne through- at; the two volumes were published in 1S69 and 1S73, and bear 
evidence of painstaking research. 


constituting a sectional pedigree of the family in the main line, 
which, as it affords a convenient key or reference to the monuments, 
is here given — 

Sir John Cokayne, Knt., of = Cecilia, relict of Robt. Ireton 

Ashbourne (8th in succes- 
sion from John Cokayne, fi. 
1150); ob. 137:; bur. at 

)f Ireton, co. Derby 

Edmund Cokayne of Ash- = Elizabeth, dau. and heir of Sir 

bourne ; slain at the Battle [ Richard de Herthull : heir- 

of Shrewsbury, 1404 ; bin. 1 ess of Pooley Hall, Warwick 
at Ashbourne 

Sir John Cokayne, Knt., of = Isabel, dau. of Sir Hugh Shirley, 
Ashbourne and Pooley ; ob. ■ Knt. 
1447, bur. at Ashbourne 

John Cokayne of Ashbourne = Agnes, dau. of Sir Richard Ver- 
and Pooley \ob. 1 505, bur. at non, Knt., of Haddon Hall, 

Ashbourne co. Derby 

Thomas Cokayne of Ash- = Agnes, dau. of Robert Barlow- 
bourne and Pooley ; slain vita 

palri , 14'?, bur. at You!' 

of Barlow, co. Derby 

Sir Thomas Cokayne, Knt., of = Barbara, dau. of Jno. Fitz- 

Ashbourr.e and Pooley; ob. \ herbert of Etwali and Ash, 

April, 1537, bur. at Ash- I co. Derby 

Francis Cokayne of Ash- = Dorothy, dau. and heir of Thomas 
bourne and Pooley ;ob. 1538, I Marrow, Serjeant-at-Law 

bur. at Ashbourne 

Sir Thomas Cokayne, Knt., of = Dorothy, dau. of Sir Humphrey 

Ashbourne and Pooley ; ob. Ferrers of Tamworth Castle; 

150:, bur. at Ashbourne ob. 1595 

The monuments, taken in chronological order, are as 

1. John and Edmund Cokayne. father and son ; their 


effigies are placed side by side on a fine altar-tomb. On the tomb 
are thirteen shields, displaying various quarterings, which there is 
no need to give in detail. 

2. Sir John Cokayne (eldest son of Edmund), who died in 
1447, and his first wife, Jane (or Joan), daughter of Sir John 
Dabridgecourt. The tomb is entirely of alabaster, with recumbent 
effigies of Sir John and his wife. 

3. An inscribed slab of alabaster, to the memory of John 
Cokayne, who died in 1505. This slab was formerly laid in the 
iloor of the chapel, and one side was completely worn away ; the 
remainder was at one time fixed into the wall, but both halves were 
subsequently mounted on a plain altar-tomb. Two shields remain, 
bearing the quartered arms of Cokayne and Harthill, impaling those 
of Vernon. 

(Thomas, son of the last-named John, was buried in Youl- 
greave church ; of whom more presently.) 

4. Sir Thomas, grandson of John (06. 1505) ; an altar-tomb 
of Purbeck marble. Effigies of Sir Thomas and Ids wife Barbara 
drawn in scroll lines on the alabaster slab. 

5. Francis, son of Sir Thomas. Altar-tomb with effigies of 
Francis and his wife Dorothy ; surmounted by an enriched canopy, 
on spiral shafts. 

6. Sir Thomas, son of Francis ; mural monument of marble ; 
kneeling effigies of Sir Thomas and his wife Dorothy, and their children. 

Thomas Cokayne, slain vita patris in 14SS. was, as already 
recorded, buried in Youlgreave church. There is a beautiful monu- 
ment to him, consisting of a small altar-tomb, with an effigy in 
armour, sculptured with great skill. 

As this Thomas died — being, in fact, killed by a neighbour in 
some quarrel— before his father, the descent in the main line is 
completely included in the Ashbourne monuments, as above men- 
tioned. These monuments, though most of them had at one time 
been defaced or fallen into decay, have since been repaired and 
restored by members of the family. 1 The heraldry displayed upon 

1 These descriptions are taken frcm '"The Churches of Derbyshire," by J. C. Cox: 
vol. ii., pp. 327, 351-5. 


or adjacent to the monuments is given with the illustrations 

Sir Thomas Cokayne (d. 1537) was knighted by Henry VIII. 
at Lille, October 14, 1513, after the siege of Tournai, together with 
many others who had assisted thereat. 1 King Henry was very busy 
with the accolade during those days after the siege ; no fewer than 
one hundred and thirty-two were dubbed " knight." 

Sir Thomas, grandson of the above, was one of the most 
prominent members oi the family. In his youth he was a friend of 
the Earl of Shrewsbury, a and was intimate with the two succeeding 

Sir Thomas was knighted in 1544 ; his name is included in 
Shaw's knights among those who were " made in Scotland by the 
Earl of Hertford, the king's lieutenant, 2544, at the burning of 
Edinburgh, Leith, and others." 3 

Sir Thomas refers to this campaign in his " Treatise of Hunt- 
ing " ; in recommending certain food for hounds, he proceeds : "I 
have myself proved all manner of other feedings, but used this as the 
purest and best, for this ilftie two yeres, during which time I have 
hunted the bucke in summer, and the hare in winter, two years only 
excepted. In the one. having King Henry the VIII. his letters to 
serve in his wanes in Scotland, before his Majesties going to Bullein. 
And in the other, King Edward the VI. his letters to serve under 
Francis the Earle of Shrewsburie Ins Graces Lieutenant to rescue the 
siege at Haddington, which towne was kept by that valiant gentle- 
man Sir James Wilford, knight." ' 

1 Shaw's " Knights " ; vol. ii.. p. 4:. Mr. J. C. Cox, treating of the monuments in Ash- 
bourne church, states that this Sir Thomas " was the author of a curious book, now extremely 
rare, 'A Treatise on Hunting.'" This, however, is an error: it was his grandson, another 
Sir Thomas, who wrote this book, as d< scribed herein. 

3 Francis Talbot, fifth Earl of Shrewsbury, creation of 1442. 

3 This was the sanguinary expedition against Scotland, in which Sir Rhys Mansel took 
part afloat, as vice-admiral (see vol. i., p. 319). Sir Thomas Cokayne doubtless did his duty in 
obedience to the commands of his king and Hertford ; but it was not a creditable business for 
any man to be mixed up with. 

4 The English force with which Sir Thomas acted did not, however, succeed in " rescu- 
ing " the besieged. The town of Haddington was he'd in the mo.-t gallant re inner for nearly 
eighteen months, again t combined 1 rem h 1 1 sec n h fi rccs, by Sir James Wilford, who was 
forced in the end to capitulate. 






;ir ash »x cok.-u xi:, twt. 

»>] 'fX* 


Died [683. 


Sir Thomas Cokayne was one of a number of gentlemen who 
were called upon by Sir Ralph Sadler to escort Mary Queen of Scots 
on her approach to Derby, in 15S5. when she was on her journey to 
Tutbury, en route for Fotheringham Castle. A stage was made at 
Derby, and Sadler was taken to task by Burleigh for his leniency in 
providing rest and shelter in the town for the unhappy queen. 

Sir Thomas also contributed £50 towards the defence of the 
kingdom against the attack of the Spanish Armada, in 15SS. 1 

Apart from these episodes. Sir Thomas was best known as a 
famous master of hunting, and expert in all appertaining thereto ; 
and he employed his It isure in his later years in the composition of a. 
quaint little volume, entitled " A Short Treatise of Hunting, com- 
pyled for the delight of Noblemen and Gentlemen." 

The book is printed in black-letter ; the title-page is em- 
bellished with a print of a dog of some unknown breed, with its tail 
curled over its back, and a pipe (apparently) in its mouth ; the use 
of tobacco had then (1591) only been in vogue for three or four years 
in England ; hence, perhaps, this pictorial allusion to a novelty 
which was attracting a good deal of attention at the moment. 

The volume is inscribed to " The Right Honorable and my 
singular good Lord the Earle of Shrewsburie " ; - the inscription is 
dated, " From my house neere Ashborne, this last of December. 

Then follows an address " To the Gentlemen Readers," in 
which the author commends hunting in all its brunches as a means of 
keeping body and mind in a wholesome condition " to serve the 
Prince and country in the wars " ; and winds up " with this caution, 
that this disport of hunting bee used by you only as a recreation to 
enable both your bodies and minds thereby to better exercises, and 
not as an occupation to spend therein daies, months and yeres, to 
the hinderance of the service of God, her majestic or your countrey." 

Very sound advice, and Sir Thomas appears to have practised 
what he preached — to a certain extent ; by his own admission. 

1 •• Hi tory and Antiquities of Derby,'' by Robert Simpson. Vols. i. and ii., pp. So, 85 

- Gilbert (1 t), th . ' : : h i succeeded to the title on the death of hi 

father, George, on November iS preceding, only a few weeks before the date of the inscription 



however, he spent a very large proportion of the " claies, months and 
yeres " in his favourite pastime. 

The book contains instructions in detail for breeding and 
training hounds, and for hunting the fox, the hare, the roe, the stag, 
the buck, the otter, and the marterne (martin) ; and winds up with 
a long catalogue of the notes on the horn to be used on various 
occasions. Altogether a very c i uaint little volume, characteristic of the 
man and of the times in which he lived. 

A still more famous Cokayne was his great-grandson, Sir Aston 
of Ashbourne. He was son and heir of Thomas Cokayne, who married 
Anne, daughter of Sir John Stanhope of Elvaston, county Derby. 

Sir Aston was born at Elvaston in 1608, and was educated at 
Chenies School and Cambridge ; he then, according to Anthony a 
Wood, entered the Inns of Court, dwelling there some time " for 
fashion's sake." 1 He is said 10 have been a learned man. and to 
have been upon intimate terms with many of the noted men of his 
day ; and he acquired considerable fame as a poet and dramatist. 
He was addicted to greeting his relatives and friend:, in verse ; he also 
described his travels or. the Continent through the same medium, in 
response, it is said, to a request from his sen for some account of them. 

Wood says of him that " he was esteemed by many an in- 
genious gentleman, a good poet and a great lover of learning, yet by 
others a perfect boon fellow, by which means he wasted all he had.'' 

These two estimates, though they appear on the surface to 
clash, are both, in fact, accurate enough. 

1 "Athens Oxoniensis." Vol. iv., col. 128. Sir Aston if stated in the Cockayne 
" Memoranda " to have been "' educated in the University of Oxford, where he took the degree 
of M.A., and in Trinitv College, Cambridge." Wood says he was "educated in both the 
universities, especially in that of Cambridge ... as he himself confesseth in one of his works, 
and therefore I was sometime doubtful whether I should pat him hi these Athense ; yet con- 
sidering that he had the degree of M. of A. conferred on him in this University in the time of 
the civil broils, I aid therefore allot him a place among the Oxonians." According to the 
Oxford University Regi.-ter he was " created M.A. -I Feb. 1643 ; fellow, commoner of Trinity 
College, Cambridge " ; i.e., he received the complimentary degree of M.A. of Oxford at the 
age of hve-anrl-thirty, so he cannot be said to have been educated at Oxford ; and he claims to 
be of Cambridge in his poems : 

'* 1 hough I of Cambridge was, and far above 
Your mother Oxford did my Cambridge love." 

,:-• -: - - ■ i igram , no. 32, p. 207; to Mr. Ralph Rawson.) 


There can be no doubt that Sir Aston was a man of learning ; 
his plays, poems, and epigrams bear witness to the fact ; his verses 
are both original and well expressed, though not free from that 
element of coarseness which is characteristic of contemporary plays 
and poems. They are also very instructive as to family relation- 
ships, and the characters and attributes of sundry prominent men to 
whom he was used to address himself in this fashion. 

In the Gentleman's Magazine for July, 1707, there appears an 
" Authentic Account of Sir Aston Cokaine, Bart., collected from his 
poems, and rectifying the Contradictions in Wood, YVinstanley, 
Jacob, Cibber, and the Biographia Dramatica." 

This account includes a summary in prose of Sir Aston's 
poetic description of his travels ; and this elicited a very elaborate 
and somewhat pedantic effusion, in September, from one " Viator 
A.," who essays to indicate mis-spelling, discrepancies, and im- 
possibilities in the account. Sir Aston might surely have been 
permitted a certain amount of " poetical license." The first writer, 
however, in a rejoinder, vindicates the poet, pointing out that the 
spelling of names is taken literatim from Cokayn's lines. 1 

Sir Aston Cokayne was also the subject of commendatory 
comment in Thomas Bancroft's " Epigrammes ": 2 

" To Aston Cokayne Esq. 

" He that with le.irnlng venue doth combine 
May (though a kick) passe for a divine 
Piece of perfection ; such to all tn :n's sight 
Appeares yourselfe ; who, if you take delight 
In these composures, your applausive show 
Will stampe conceit, and make them currant goe." 

To this rather fulsome tribute Cokayne replies as follows : 

'" Sir, in your Epigrams you did me grace, 
T' allow me 'mong your many friends a place. 
T' express my gratitude (if Time will be, 
After my death, so courteous to me, 
As to vouchsafe some few years to my name) 
Freely enjoy with me my utmost fame." 

1 See Gent. Mag., vol. lxvii., pt. ii., pp. $;;, 756 ; vol. lxviii., pt. 1., p. 17. 

2 Thomas Bancroft (died 1658) : "Two Bookes of Epigrammes and Epitaphs," i' M ; 
Epig. No. 120. Bancroft was born .:: Swarston, in Der : ire. id was probably on visiting 
terms with ?ir Aston. It will be noticed that he spells the n„me Cokayne. 


Both somewhat laboured effusions, it must be admitted ! 
Some doubt has been cast upon Cokayne's right to the title 
of Baronet ; there is no patent or enrolment to substantiate it ; but 
—as is pointed out in the " Complete Baronetage," by G. E. Cokayne 
—this is owing to the fact that the creation was made after January 4, 
1641-2, when all acts of the king were declared illegal. It would, 
however, be recognised after the Restoration ; and it is so recognised 
in the Heralds' Visitation of Derbyshire in 1662, as recorded at the 
College of Ai ms. The creation was probably made about January 10 
in the year above named. 

Sir Aston, like so many others, suffered heavy pecuniary 
losses by reason of his loyalty to his religion— he was a staunch 
Catholic'— and his king. His extravagance and generosity— as 
briefly summed up in the phrase " boon fellow," quoted above— so 
depleted. his resources that he was compelled, in 1671, with the 
consent of his son, Thomas, to sell the Ashbourne estate, which had 
belonged to the family for so many generations. 1 

The sale of Pooley Hall, Polesworth, Warwickshire, followed 
in 16S3 ; here Sir Aston had chiefly resided, and he alludes to " dear 
Pooley " in one of his poems ; the purchaser was Humphrey 
Jennings, Esq. 

Sir Aston Cokayne died in lodgings at Derby, February 13. 
16S3-4, and his son Thomas having died without issue a year or two 
previously, the original family of Ashbourne thus became extinct. 
Sir Aston was buried in Polesworth church. 

Mr. Andreas Cockayne, in his " Memoranda," writing of 
Ashbourne, has the following : " Its ancient Hall, so long the 
residence of the Cokaynes, and whereof many legendary tales con- 
nected with the family are told in our own day ; wherein is shown 
the narrow chamber in which a ' Lady Cokayne ' was starved to 
death by close confinement, or starved herself to death for grief or 
some other dreadful reason ; the Long Walk, the avenue of stately 
trees, where another ' Lady Cokayne ' is said still to appear, and 

» The purchaser was Sir William Boothby, Bart.' His father, Sir Henry, was nominated 
baronet Nov. c, 1644. but, owing to the Civil War, the patent never passed the Great beai 
Sir William succeeded to the baronetcy on his father's death in 1648, but was created oaronet 
de novo July 13, lOOO-a parallel case with that of Sir Aston Cokayne. 


about whose midnight visits more than one strange story is told. 
The private Chapel, now the dining-room of the mansion, round 
whose walls the quaint legend ran — 

' Do anye manner off Slaverie, 
Rather than sellc thye Patrimome, 
But rather selle thye 
Than borrowe monie on usurie.' " 

A copy of this verse, engraved on a solid bra^s plate, is said to 
have been placed over the fireplace in the entrance hall. 

Sir Aston Cokayne appears to have acted upon the advice 
contained in the two last lines of the verse— and so the " Patrimonie " 
was finally alienated from the family. Ashbourne Hall is now an 
hotel. 1 

St. Oswald's church at Ashbourne is a very fine building, with 
a beautiful spire. 

Sir William Cokayne, Lord Mayor of London in 1619-1620, was 
descended from William, second son of Sir John Cokayne (ob. 1447), 
by his second marriage. 

Sir William was a very prominent man in his day ; he was the 
first governor appointed for carrying out the scheme for the Planta- 
tion of Ulster, and he founded the city of Londonderry. This business 
was, however, conducted from London ; Sir William was never 
resident in Ireland. Lie was on the Council of the Merchant Adven- 
turers and the East India Company ; - and was knighted at Cokayne 
House, in Broad Street (now the City Club), June S, 161 6, after 
entertaining King James I. at dinner. 

During the year of his mayoralty, at Easter, 1620, the marriage 
of his eldest daughter, Mary, with Charles, Lord Howard of Effing- 
ham 3 was made the occasion of one of those elaborate pageants 
which were in vogue at that time— and which have been even more 
elaborately revived in recent years. This fete was of unusual 
magnificence, and was the talk of the town. 

The avenue is still known as " Lady Cokayne's Walk." 
As was likewise Vice-Admiral Sir Robert Mansel. See vol. i., p. +07. 
Son and heir of Charles Howard, Earl of Nottingham, of Armada fame, by his second 
;, who died in 1624, when Charles above-named succeeded to the earldom. 


Sir William was a very successful and wealthy man, and 
during his mayoralty, in 1619, he purchased some line estates in the 
country, including that of Rushton Hall, Northants, which became 
the principal family seat. 1 

His son, Charles, married, June 24, 1627, Mary, daughter and 
co-heir of Henry (O'Brien), fifth Earl of Thomond ; and August 11, 
1642, he was created Baron and Viscount Cullen, county Tipperary, 
in the peerage of Ireland. 

Brien Cokayne (afterwards second viscount) got into trouble 
in 1652 under Cromwell's strict veto upon duelling. On October 15 
he was summoned before the Council, and a few days later we find 
" John Mordant to be committed to the Tower for sending a challenge 
to Brien Cokayne, and Brien Cokayne for accepting it." 2 

Lady Mary Cokayne (Brien's mother) intervened with a 
petition on her son's behalf, and eventually he was liberated, the 
authorities " being satisfied with his admission of offence and sub- 
mission to the Council." :! 

In a newspaper cutting attached to Bridges' "Northampton- 
shire" (enlarged and annotated edition, Additional MSS., 32120), 
there is a long and detailed account of an alleged incident at the 
marriage of Brien Cokayne. After his betrothal to Elizabeth 

1 Sir William Cokayne purchased, in 1621, certain estate; in Leicestershire. He bought 
the lord.-hip of Swepston of Sir Tiv .mas ! lurnphrey, and in 1639 the feoffees were "Mary, Countess 
of Dover (Sir William's vvidw, remarried to the Earl of Dover), William Cokayne, Matthew 
Cradock, and James Price. His son, Charles Cokayne (afterwards first Viscount Cullen), war- 
lord of Swepston in 1641, and eventually conveyed the manor, in 1660, to Thomas Charnell 
(see " History and Antiquities of the County of Leicester," by John Nichols ; vol. iii., p. 1036). 
Sir William also purchased the lordship of Elmesthorpe of Sir John Harrington ; and it is stated 
that the family made this their principal residence for three generations. Eventually it passed 
to Mary Noel, widow, of Kirkby Malory, and so to her descendant, Thoma; Noel, second Ms- 
count Wentworth (ibid., vol. iv., p. 607). It is interesting to find members of two Welsh families 
— Cradock and Price — who in past time; had intermarried with the Manscls, associated with 
the Cokaynes ; the Welsh pedigree; — absolutely devoid of authorities and dates — throw no 
light upon the derivation of this Matthew Cradock and James Price, but they may quite possibly 
have been collateral descendants of Sir Matthew of Swansea and Thomas Price of Pjritton Ferry. 
Sir Matthew had only one child, Margaret, who married Sir John Malefant (see vol. i., p. 28S). 
William Cokayne mentioned above may h ive been William, Skinner, of London (d. 1663), first 
cousin to Sir William, and sometimes confused with him ; or his son (d. 1660). There was a 
great wealth of Williams about this period ; there were four living in 1603, all nearly related. 

2 Cal. State Paper;, Dcm., 1651-165: ; pp. 441, 461. 

3 Ibid., p. 567. 


Trentham, it is said— he being then sixteen and she twelve years of 
age — he travelled abroad, and while in Italy he had an ardent love- 
affair with a young girl of high birth. He returned, however, for his 
marriage in England. The young Italian lady followed him, and 
drove up to Rushton Hall in bridal attire, in a coach and six, while 
the wedding-banquet was in progress, entered the great hall, seized 
a goblet of wine and drank to the confusion and ruin of the newly 
married pair, cursed them in true legendary fashion, threw down the 
goblet, and drove off. 

On the death of Borlase Cokayne, the sixth viscount, August 
11, 1810 — the anniversary of the Patent of Creation, one hundred 
and sixty-eight years before — the title became extinct. 

The estates, including Rushton Hall, became vested in the 
ten daughters and co-heirs of the Honble. William Cokayne, younger 
brother of Borlase, who had died unmarried in the previous year. 

Two of these ladies, the Hon. Georgiana and the Hon. Caroline 
Eliza, married respectively John Edmund Maunsell and Thomas 
Philip Maunsell, as shown in the Thorpe Malsor pedigree. Their 
mother (Barbara, daughter of the learned and eccentric Sergeant 
Hill of Rothwell), also had Maunsell blood, her great-grandfather, 
Edward Hill, having married Susan, daughter of John Maunsell of 
Thorpe Malsor [ob. 1677), while her only sister Anne Hill, married, a? 
his second wife, Thomas Cecil Maunsell of Thorpe Malsor — as is also 
apparent in the pedigree. 

Mary Anne, second daughter of the Hon. William Cokayne, 
married William Adams, Esq., LL.D., and their son, George Edward 
Adams, assumed, after the death of his mother, in accordance with 
her testamentary injunction, the name and arms of Cokayne, 
August 15, 1S73. 

Mr. George Edward Cokayne was connected with the College 
of Arms for more than fifty years, and was very well known under 
his initials, G. E. C, as the editor and compiler of the " Complete 
Peerage " and " Complete Baronetage," works which are universally 
recognised as standard authorities. Both in the text and in the 
copious and instructive notes they bear witness to the laborious 
research and immense knowledge of the writer in respect of the 


origin, descent, and vicissitudes of the vast number of families with 
which he had to deal. The notes frequently contain allusions which 
throw fresh light upon some knotty point of inheritance or what not, 
most welcome to the biographer and genealogist. 

Mr. Cokayne died August 6, 1911, at the age of eighty-six 

His son, Sir Brien Cokayne, K.B.E., now (1917) deputy 
governor of the Bank of England, is the present representative of 
the family. 

By a royal order and declaration dated September 23, 1836. 
three daughters of the Hon. William Cokayne, viz., Matilda Sophia, 
wife of the Rev. Dr. William Austen ; Georgiana, wife of John 
Edmund Maunsell, Esq. ; and Caroline Elizabeth, wife of Thomas 
Philip Maunsell, Esq., were authorised to " have, hold, and enjoy the 
same titles, place, pre-eminence, and precedence, as if their late 
father, the Hon. William Cockayne, had survived his elder brother, 
Borlase Viscount Cullcn, and had succeeded to the title and dignity 
of Viscount Cullen ; and His Majestv has also been pleased to 
command that the said royal order and declaration be registered 
in the College of Arms." (See London Gazette under the above 

Early in the seventeenth century there was one George 
Cokayne who was factor or agent for the East India Company at 
Succadama (or Sukudana ? on the west coast of Borneo). There is 
a good deal of discussion over his reports .it the Council Board of the 
Company, and he- appears to have been in good repute, but badly 
served by his local associates and assistants, of whom he writes bitter 
complaints. One, Hugh Greete, was a " lewd fellow, impossible to 
live with," and another, John Collins, was hopelessly lazy and 
incapable. After serving ten years in this post, and just when he 
was looking forward to coming home for a spell, George Cokayne was 
cruelly murdered by some Chinese pirates or robbers, in 1620. His 
sister, Mary Jack-on. a widow, who appears, by inference, to have 
been the only person who had any claim upon his estate, was awarded 
a certain sum by the Council, but insisted that she was entitled to 
more, and continued to press her claim, both in person and by 







Died i6j6. 


• ■- . 

■ ■ - -.<■-, ■ • " 

>'*? ■...■ 

U B ■ • 

RcpruckKfil lj\ kind permission ..f iht Rev. C. H. Maun- 
Thorpe Manor Hall. 


attorney, for over two years, until the Council got tired of her, and 
refused to hear her again. 1 

The identity of this George Cokayne does not seem to be 
clear ; the natural inference is that he was nearly related to Sir 
William, who held such an influential position in the East India 
Company ; but the pedigrees do not show any George who fits in, 
unless it be George (o.s.p., no date), son of Francis and grandson of 
George Cokayne of Ballidon, who appears in the pedigree in the 
" Memoranda " by A, E. Cockayne. 2 

There arc oilier references to the Cokaynes in various State 
Papers, but they are not of any special interest. 

There is a very good description of Rushton Hall in Neale's 
" Views of Family Seats." and in A. Gotch's " Gothic Architecture " 
and " Buildings, of Sir Thomas Tresham." 

" At the extremity of the Grounds is a very curious triangular 
lodge, built by Sir Thomas Tresham, at the same period as the Hall, 
and his arms, over the door, and, underneath.. 
Trcs Testimonium Dant, 
5555 ■ 
It is two stories in height, and bears the following different dates, 
1580. *5V>- 1595. 1626, 1640: likewise 389S, 3509; with emble- 
matical sculptured designs. The following inscriptions appear in the 
centre of the gables. ' Mentes ' ' Tuorum ' 'Visita/ and on a 
fillet, round the whole building, ' Aperiatur terra, ct gerrninet 
salvatorem. Ouis separabit nos a charitate Christi. Consideravi 
opera tua, Domine, et expavi.' The interior of the Lodge contains a 
chamber of hexagonal form, with a table corresponding to it in the 
centre. It was in this building, according to local tradition, and 
also in a summer-house at Newton, belonging to another branch of 
the Tresham family, that the conspirator^ used to meet and arrange 
their plans in maturing that plot which had so nearly been attended 
with fatal consequences to the kingdom." 3 

1 Cal. State Paper-, East Indie;, 1622-1624. 

2 This George's father. Franc!,, was In 1575 apprenticed to Wm. Cokavne of the Skinners 
lpany, doubtless Sir William's father, which render, the assumption quite probably correct. 

3 From Neale's " Views of the Seat, of Noblemen and Gentlemen," etc. (1826). 



In the enlarged edition of Bridges' "Northamptonshire" 
(Additional MSS., 32120, p. 67), there are three eoloured drawings, 
showing each side of this curious structure in detail. 

Another estate which was held by the Cokayne family for 
many generations was that of Bury-Hatley, in Bedfordshire — named 
Cokayne-Hatlcy after it was purchased by John Cokayne. 

Tins John was second son of Sir John of Ashbourne {oh. 1372), 
whose tomb, together with that of his elder son, Edmund, has 
already been alluded to. 

Early in the fifteenth century John Cokayne was chief baron 
of the Exchequer, a position which appears to have been assumed 
by many persons to have carried the dignity of knighthood, for he 
is universally styled Sir John, and has also been confused in some 
instances with his nephew, Sir John Cokayne of Ashbourne, son of 
Edmund. 1 He was not. in fact, a knight. John Cokavne had been 
trained in the law, probably a necessary qualification for the tenure 
of this responsible post. 

The Cokayne-Hatley estate remained in possession of the 
Cokaynes foi more than three hundred years, until, in 1745, Samuel 
Cokayne, the last of his line, bequeathed it to the representative of 
the Cust family, with whom the Cokaynes had intermarried. The 
devolution of the estate through, all these generations is given, with 
profuse details concerning testamentary provisions and family 
disputes, by R. J. Cust. and embodied in A. E. Cockayne's " Memo- 
randa " ; it is a somewhat tedious effusion, and no particular object 
would be gained by inserting it here. The Maunsells were not im- 
mediately connected with the Cokaynes of Cokayne-Hatley. 

The Maunsells and Cokaynes both married with the family of 
Hill, of Rothwell, 2 Northants. 

Susan, or Susanna, daughter of John Maunsell (d. 1677), 
married, about 1666, Edward Hill ; and her great-granddaughter, 

1 There were six barons of the Exchequer— a chief juice and five puisne or junior judges, 
whose office it was to administer justice in causes relating to matters of revenue. The style 
" Baron " is misleading on tl e surface, conveying the impression of a title of nobility : it was 
}'■•''■■'' ' '■'■■•■■/ were officers of the King's Curi i, or court, which wji, 

theoretically, ( ed of 1 i -■. The title was abolished in 1875. 

' K chv - ;; (named 1 rail; R .. ■;.) lies about six mile: north-east from Thorpe Malsor. 



v, .- 

:<)R(,1-; HOWARD (OR \y_\F 

flar L -n«-i,ux |<in K ,. Arms. 
;,Jrn -S-.SJflK-dhAuirust. 

.... . . 







Anne Hill, married, December 2», 1781, Thomas Cecil Maunsell of 
Thorpe Malsor. This Anne was daughter of George Hill, Esq., 
serjeant-at-law; her sister, Barbara, married, October 11, 1777, 
thi Hon. William Cokayne, second surviving and youngest son of 
Charles, fifth Viscount Cullen. 

The I Jills were derived from the Rev. Martin Hill, rector of 
Asfordby, county Leicester, who died probably about 15G2. The 
Rothwell branch is derived from the Rev. John Hill, fourth or fifth 
sun of Rev. Martin aforesaid. 

George Hill, serjeant-at-law, married, October 22, 1744, 
Anne Barbara, daughter and co-heir of Thomas Medlycott, of Bury 
House, Cottingham, Northants. She assumed by Act of Parliament, 
1763, in compliance with the provisions of her father's will, the name 
and arms of Medlycott ; and her daughter Barbara, wife of the Hon. 
William Cokayne, under the same will, also took this name and 
arms ; so that both she and her mother, curiously enough, held 
different sin names from their husbands during the lifetime of the 

As has already been related, the viscounty of Cullen became 
extinct at the death of Boriase, sixth viscount, his brother William 
having predeceased him by less than a year, without issue ; and 
Barbara Cckayne-Medlycott, William's wile, died at Northampton, 
June 2, 1838, aged eighty-five, the last surviving member of the 
family of Hill of Rothwell. 

George Hill, serjeant-at-law. was a very well-known char- 
acter in Ins time. He was born in 17x6, was admitted to the Middle 
Temple on January 5. 1733 ; barrister, November 27, 1741 ; and 
admitted to Lincoln's Inn April 2^, 27G5. He was a scholar and 
mathematician of considerable learning, and he also acquired a 
great reputation for his minute knowledge of " case " law. He was, 
however, a very eccentric character, and it is stated of him in the 
Dictionary of National Biography that " he was so overwhelmed by 
his memory for cases that he was unable to extract from them clear 
general principles, and earned for himself the nickname of Serjeant 

There are sundry anecdotes extant concerning the serjeant, 


illustrative of his eccentricities and his somewhat truculent and 
independent attitude towards the judge before whom he chanced to 
be pleading ; also of his occasional inconvenient detachment of mind 
from all else save the legal business on hand at the moment. 

" The story goes, that on the morning of the day appointed 
for the wedding the Serjeant went down to his chambers as usual, 
and becoming immersed in business, forgot entirely the engagement 
he had formed. The bride waited so long that it was feared the 
canonical hour would elapse before his arrival. A messenger was 
accordingly despatched to require his immediate attendance. He 
obeyed the summons, and having become a husband returned again 
to his business. About dinner-time his clerk, suspecting that he had 
forgotten entirely the proceedings of the morning, ventured to recall 
them to his recollection : fortunately the Serjeant had, at that 
moment, discovered the case for which he had been hunting, and he 
returned home to spend the evening in a gayer circle." l 

Absti action of mind could scarcely go further than this ; nor 
was it very complimentary to the bride. Serjeant Hill is, said also 
to have chafed somewhat— not unnaturally— under his wife's 
resumption of her maiden name, after they had been married nearly 
twenty years ; it is said that he insisted upon her signing her name 
Hill, save upon occasions when the other was legally imperative. 
" My name is Hill." he would say, " and my father's name was Hill, 
and a very good name too." She, on her part, though she was very 
much attached to her Serjeant, appears to have exercised a certain 
domestic tyranny upon him, insisting, for instance, that he should 
leave the house in the morning by the kitchen door, lest he should 
sully the immaculate whiteness of the front steps. 

Upon one occasion, when a case had gone against him before 
Lord Mansfield and other judges, Lord Mansfield said— perhaps with 
the intention of " drawing " Hill—" Now, brother Hill, that the 
judgment is given, you can have no objection on account of your 
client to tell us your real opinion, and whether you don't think we 
are right. You know how much we all value your opinion and 

Lives of Eminent Serjeants-at-Law," by H. VV. Woolrych ; vol. ii., p. 637. 

Charles Cokayne, 1st Viscount Cullen. Born July 4, 1602, died June, 1661. 

[face p. 27 


judgment." The Serjeant said he would very much rather be 
excused, but he always thought it his duty to do what the court 
desired, and " Upon my word." lie said, " I did nut think there were 
four men in the world who could have given such an ill-founded 
judgment as you four, my Lords Judges, have pronounced." 

It was said by some that if Serjeant Hill had devoted himself 
to mathematics instead of to the law, he might have been the most 
distinguished mathematician of his day. He was universally 
acknowledged, however, as one of the most learned of lawyers. His 
eccentricities were always accepted in good part, and he appears to 
have had many friends and no enemies. He died February 21 , 1 80S, 
at the age of ninety-two, having continued to practice to within 
three or four years of his death. 

The Cokaynes were remotely connected by marriage with the 
family of Rain-ford (or Raynsford), of Dallington, Northants ; the 
annexed sketch pedigree illustrates the relationship. 

Sir Richard Ray.vs- = Catherine, cL 

FORD,Lord Chief Jus- Samuel Cle 

tice; b. 1603, d. Feb. tor oi St. 

17. 1CS0 Nortlumpt. 

1, 1698 

u. of Rev 

rke, Rcc- 



Mary- = William Buckbv, Serjeant- 
.it-Law, d. Nov, 30, 16S5 


!'■ r-at-Lavv, 
d. 171S 

Ann = Thomas Medlycott, 
d. 1767 

Anne Barbara = George Hill, Serjeant- 
at-Law, d. 180S 

Barbara = Hon. Wi 

The Raynsfords were derived from John Raynsford of 
Raynsford Hall, Lancashire, who lived early in the sixteenth century. 

Sir Richard Raynsford was born in 1605, and matriculated at 
Exeter College. Oxford, on December 13, 1622 ; was called to the 
Bar at Lincoln's Inn.. October 16, 1632 ; was subseuuentlv recorder 


of Northampton, and M.P. for that borough. His name appears in 
the huge list of nominees for the projected but abandoned honour of 
knights of the Royal Oak. so he was evidently a strong Royalist. He 
was knighted about 1662 1 and made baron of the Exchequer in 
1663. Eventually, on Api i! 12, 1676. hesucceeded Sir Matthew Hale 
as lord chief justice, briny promoted from the King's Bench. 
Lord Campbell, in his " Lives of the Chief Justices." says of Rayns- 
ford : " No one having dreamed of his going higher, the news of his 
appointment as Chief Justice of England caused considerable 
surprise ; but. on account of his inoffensiveness and gentlemanlike 
deportment there was a general inclination to support him and to 
speak well of him." 

Sir Richard was called upon to give a decision in the case of 
the Earl of Shaftesbury, who, having been sent to the Tower under 
a warrant of the House of Peers, for " high contempts committed 
against this House," argued that he could be liberated under the 
Habeas Corpus Act. Raynsford, however, gave it against him, on the 
ground that the courts had no jurisdiction under the circumstances. 

Ther-' is at Thorpe Malsor Hall a fine portrait of Chief Justice 
Raynsford. which came into the possession of the Maunsellsas follows. 

Catherine, widow of the chief justice, left it in her will to her 
graud-on, Richard Ruckb} - (see sketch pedigree above), through 
whom it came to Barbara, wife of the Hon. William Cokayne, and 
after her death to her daughter, the Hon. Caroline Eliza Cokayne, 
who married Thomas Philip Maunsell of Thorpe Malsor. 

Sir Richard Raynsford's widow also left to her granddaughter, 
Mrs. Anne Griffin, a portrait of her late husband " set in gold with 
diamonds round it." Anne (or Anna) was the daughter of Richard, 
eldesl -on of the chief justice: she married James Griffin, second Baron 
Griffin of Braybrooke (who appears not to have assumed the title); 
and after the death of his son, Edward, without issue, this portrait also 
passed into the possession of the Maunsells. It is not quite clear 
why it should have so passed, unless by testamentary disposition. 

' F . '-■■ J 1 -- ,"p 544. 1 i S ...■.'■■• ! \: ights" his knighthood is dated Jan. ?24, 1685: but 
FossstatesThat •-.:..- . .:.•: ..; baro; of the Exchequer; moreover, 

he died in 1680, so Shaw is obviouslj at fault. 

' - - 

>]<«.!■: HILL, SKRJKAN I'-AT-L \\\ 
Din 17m; .lir.l 21 Fchriwn-v, 1H08. 


{From a I'hotograph by John Beusley.) 

^produced In kind permission of Mrs. L.-mgton, I elton Hall, Xorthants. 

Maunsells (Mansels) of Cosgrove 

r~W~ V lE Maun-ll- (or Mansels) of Cosgrove, Northants, are 
descended from John Maunsell of Haversham, county 
j ^ Bucks, second son of Richard Maunsell oi Chicheley 

(d. 1559) - 1 

Cosgrove (or Cosgrave) lies about twelve miles south-west 
from Northampton. There is a full manorial history of it in Baker's 
" Northampton." the earlier portion of which is of no especial interest 
with regard to the Maunsell family. 

John Maunsell married Dorothy, daughter of (Samuel?) 
Smith (or Smyth) ; there is a brass in the chancel of Haversham 
church, with a skeleton and the following inscription : " Here 
resteth the body of John Maunsell, gent., who departed this life the 
25th January, 1605, when he had lived LXY1 years lower months 
and five days, whose Christian life and godly end God grant us all 
to follow." 

Oil a shield above are shown the Maunsell arms, viz., a fesse, 
with a mullet for difference, between three maunches. (The mullet 
is, however, the " difference " for tin."- third son.) 

Samuel Maunsell, elder son of John, married, in 1621, Nightin- 
gale, sister and co-heir of Edward Furtho Esq., who died in the same 
year, seised of the manor of Furtho. and a capital messuage in 
Cosgrove held of Sir Arthur Throgmorton, and another capital 
messuage there, parcel of the honour of Leicester and the duchy of 
Lancaster. At his death. Cosgrove was assigned to Nightingale, 
wife of Samuel Maunsell who thus became Maunsell of Cosgrove 
through the right of his wife. 

1 In the pedigree in Baker' " Histon and Vntiquuies of Xnrthampi inshiic," the name 
is spelled Maui 1! in the c thi j ..■ 1 - ■ n, .- imuel : L.i.v ird, :; oi the Utter, is 

named Manjeu ; and hi; sons are M.imd, pr ibably on the authority of title-deedi. 


i. t;:l!l'!i 

5. Thomas li 

iev. John Mav 
Musti rofK' icl 
ton School, I 

lata to 11 r: 

Cosgi ivean . 
d. .Inn. 31, 1730 




liiO. ncv.asof Hi 

■ ■ . . 
1I.U 13 

5. 1 hrtma*? Monnsdl 
.M.isKrof JVficliiu.iii- 


Uay S7. 
11. 1113 

Maty, d . u: 

..';■. t! F i.: 


Mnry. hnp. Oct 0., 
d, Mar. :i. 1707 

- ? ..i..i:s M \* •■ ■ ■ ■ -' 

iarn M a r]-.- Hiiro h, .1. un.n , April 

bur Fun. 

Markham of Kortfcau 


Ma' SI '.'"■'■:,' 

'■!■:■. iF ■.■ " M.i-i,! . 

U.v.? r r., r. . ■ H.jIjltH " ";'.ji,oi- 

l . . .i v : . .,,. .. li.nrv Thomlil 

= Charlotte Aug- 2. Robki 

of Murismie. I. EU-o 

I.T-Ud May 

' - a -vr - '■:'"■ f»;'"«-l (iM.mJ'inii July 6. Ib'J, Ant- 31. l~i 

S t ; 1 ' ° e »- 117. in. Hen Christ. Mun- m.XIf.Searlo d. L 

li-iiium Lr. 


The accompanying pedigree of the Maunsells of Cosgrove is 
taken from Baker's " History of Northamptonshire " ; the manner 
in which the Maunsells are associated with Cosgrove is clearly 
illustrated therein. The pedigree bears the impress of careful in- 
vestigation, and is in accord with that in Mr. R. G. Maunsell's 
history, though it necessarily stops short at about the year 1834, 
when Baker was compiling his history. More recent steps are 
appended in the present pedigree. 

Among the more prominent members of the family whose 
names appear in this pedigree is Major-General John Mansel, second 
son of the Rev. Christopher Mansel. 

On the outbreak of war in 1793 it was decided to send an 
English contingent to Flanders to co-operate with the Prussian and 
Austrian armies, under the Prince of Coburg. Frederick Augustus, 
Duke of York, second son of King George III., being in command. 

The inclusion of England in this war was precipitated by the 
advent of the Reign of Terror, the execution of Louis XVI., and all 
the horrors of those days, which aroused such universal indignation 
and loathing that the French Convention, realising that England 
would eventually join against France, took the initiative and declared 
war against her and against Holland. 

The campaign of 1703 and 1704 is not one upon which we can 
look back with any feeling of pride or satisfaction. It commenced 
with more than one defeat, and ended in a more or less disastrous 
retreat and the evacuation of Flanders under the most trying and 
perilous conditions. 

These results were due in part to the bitter jealousy which 
existed between the Prussians and Austrians, who could never 
amalgamate effectually, and consequent lack of concentration and 
initiative : while the French, under Pichegru, one of the younger 
generals who made their names in the revolutionary wars, displayed 
remarkable aptitude in these important particulars. 

There were, however, in one area of the field, some remarkable 
achievements on the part of the allied cavalry, which appeared at 
one time to presage further and more decisive successes ; and in 
these the British cavalry played a prominent part. 

kkii;\ (. OKA'S \l 
Horn Scptcml 

)L"\T < I' 
|ulv, 1(187 

? November, 105K; died ;,o December, ib88. 


York was by no means a brilliant general, but the kins; 
insisted that he should have the command, so there was no more to 
be said about it. 1 

The British contingent consisted of three battalions of guards, 
with a fourth formed out of their flank companies, and a brigade 
formed of the 14th, 37th, and 53rd Regiments— not a very formidable 

The cavalry numbered twenty-eight squadrons, divided into 
four brigades, probably as follows: Harcourt's Brigade: 1st, 5th, 
and 6th Dragoon Guards. Mansel's Brigade : The Blues, 3rd Dragoon 
Guards, the Royals. Laurie's Brigade : The Bays, the Greys, the 
Inniskillings. Dundas's Brigade: 7th, nth, 13th, 16th Light 
Dragoons, 1st Squadron Carabineers. 2 

This was, at any rate, the British muster on April 16, 1794, 
when the allied armies were reviewed by the Emperor of Austria on 
the heights of Cateau. 

The British and Austrian cavalry were known to be far superior 
to the French, who would never stand up to them, and in the course 
of the following ten days they performed some brilliant feats. 

Mansel with his cavalry brigade was sent on the night of 
April 23, in response to an appeal from the Austrian General, Otto, 
to reinforce the small body of cavalry acting under the order- of the 
latter. Otto had with him two squadrons of the Fifteenth Light 
Dragoons and as many of the Austrian Leopold Hussars ; this was 
augmented late at night by the advent of Mansel's brigade, the 
Eleventh Light Dragoons, and two squadrons of the Austrian 
Cuirassiers, bringing up the total force to ten squadrons. 

Otto had already made a reconnaissance from St. Hilaire, and 
located the enemy, about ten thousand strong, near the village of 

" Early on the following morning (April 24) he again moved 
northward down the valley of the Selle, keeping the Fifteenth 

1 Prince Frederick was elected Bishop of Osnaburg when he was six months old, and was 
known by this title until, in 1784, when he was one-and-twentv, he was created Duke of York 
and Albany. He was then major-general in the Army, and colonel of the Coldstream Guards. 

1 " History of the British Army," by Hon. J. W. Fortescue. Vol. iv., pt. 1., p. 231. 


(Light Dragoons) and Leopold Hussars in advance and the remainder 
in support ; and at about seven o'clock the four advanced squadrons 
came upon a force of French light cavalry of twice or thrice their 
strength in a long belt of dwarf coppice, near the village of Montre- 
court. and about two miles east of Villers-en-Couches. Being 
attacked on their left flank the French horsemen at once retreated 
with precipitation for a quarter of a mile, when they rallied, and then 
retired steadily westward, covered by a cloud of skirmishers. Finally 
they reformed between Villers-en-Couches and Avesnes-le-Sec, 
fronting to eastward, and masking a force of unknown strength in 
their rear. Otto appears to have followed up this cavalry with great 
speed, for. on looking round for his supports, he could nowhere 
discover them. He halted the advanced squadrons, but, perceiving 
that he had already committed them too deeply, he assembled the 
officers and told them briefly that there was nothing for it but to 
attack. The English and Austrian officers then crossed swords in 
pledge that they would charge home ; and it was agreed that the 
British should attack in front, and the Austrians on the enemy's left 
flank towards Avesnes-le-Sec, which was already a name of good 
omen in the annals of the Austrian cavalry. 

"The Fifteenth, led by Captain Aylett, then advanced at a 
rapid trot, breaking into a gallop at one hundred and fifty yards from 
the French cavalry. These did not await the shock, but wheeled 
outwards, right and left, and retired at speed, unmasking a line of 
French skirmishers and gun-, which opened hre before their front 
was clear, and killed several of their own soldiers. In rear of the 
artillery six French battalions, or about three thousand men, were 
massed together in quadrate formation of oblong shape, with the 
front rank kneeling. A volley from the eastern face of this square, 
together with a discharge of grape from the guns, checked the attack 
for a moment ; but, cheered on by their officers, the Fifteenth swept 
through the battery and dashed straight upon the bayonets. The 
French infantry seems to have stood till the last moment, for Aylett 
fell with a deep thrust through the body, and four other officers had 
their horses wounded under them ; but the onset of the Dragoons 
was irresistible. One half of the square was dispersed instantly; 


and the other half, after firing a volley, broke up likewise after the 
charge of the Fifteenth, and fled in wild disorder. . . . 

" Leaving, however, the Austrians to puisne the infantry 
towards Cambrai, the Fifteenth, now commanded by Captain 
Podding ton. passed on to the road from Villers-en-Couches to 
Bouchain, dispersed a long line of fifty guns and ammunition- 
waggons, which were retiring to the north-west, and continued the 
pursuit until the guns of Bouchain itself opened fire upon them, and 
a relieving force came out to save the convoy. Meanwhile not a 
sign appeared of the supporting squadrons which would have ensured 
the capture of the artillery ; and Pocklington, observing other forces 
of the enemy closing in upon him from every side, rallied his men 
and retired at a trot. The blue uniform of the Light Dragoons, 
however, caused the French to mistake them for friends ; and it was 
not until they were close to Villers-en-Couches that Pocklington 
perceived that he was cut off. The enemy was, in fact, established in 
his front, blocking the road with infantry and artillery at a point 
where a causeway carried it across a valley, though to the south of 
the village there were visible the scarlet coats of Mansel's brigade. 
Wheeling about, therefore, for a short time, Pocklington checked the 
pursuers that were following him from Bouchain, and then, wheeling 
once more to his proper front, he galloped through the French amid 
a heavy lire of grape and musketry with little loss, and safely joined 
his comrades." * 

This was certainly a very brilliant affair, the British cavalry 
displaying the dash and intrepidity which is characteristic of them ; 
but the}' were deprived of the full fruits of their exploit by the non- 
arrival of the supporting squadrons ; and the question arises, who 
was responsible for this failure ? 

General Otto advanced with the four squadrons which had 
composed his original force before the arrival of the reinforcements 
on the preceding night — viz., the Fifteenth Hussars and the Leopold 
Hussars, and, says the historian, " the remainder in support." These 
would be Mansel's brigade, the Eleventh Light Dragoons, and the 
Austrian Cuirassiers, six squadrons in all — and they failed to come 

1 •' History ot { - I.::*:-'.. \:~v." Vol. iv., pi. 1., pp. 236-23S. 


up to time, though we are told that Captain Pocklington could see 
the scarlet coats of Mansel's brigade, at no great distance, to the 
south of the village of Yillers-en Couches. 

Fortescue's account dues not state explicitly that Mansel was 
in command of the whole of the supporting squadrons ; he confines 
himself to criticism of Mansel's handling of his own brigade, and 
proceeds as follows : 

" Things, however, had not gone well with Mansel and his 
brigade. Whether it was by Otto's fault or by his own that he hod 
gone astray, and whether lie attempted and failed in an attack upon 
the French who were obstructing Pocklington's retreat, is a mystery. 
We only know that Craig reported, with great regret, that the brigade 
had behaved ill ; that he attributed the fault mainly to Mansel, whom 
after the action of the 17th he had already reported as an incom- 
petent officer ; but that the troops also were to blame, though the 
Royals had immediately rallied and covered the retreat of the other 
two regiments. More curious still, the list of casualties shows that the 
Third Dragoon Cuards suffered the very heavy loss of thirty-eight men 
and forrv-six hoi ses killed.besides nine more men wounded and missing, 
though the casualties of the Royals and the Blues were trifling." l 

It docs not appear from this account what part Mansel took 
in the affair of April 17 ; it seems to have been a somewhat futile 
business, the initial success of the allies not having been followed up. 
Mansel's name is not mentioned. 

Sir George Arthur makes ihe following comment : " Un- 
fortunately, the gallant Fifteenth were robbed of the full fruits of 
their success by an inexplicable lack of the support expected from 
Mansel and his brigade, which consisted- — as has been said — of the 
Royals, the Blues, and the Third Dragoon Guards. Having hope- 
lessly clubbed his brigade, the commander of the support, by his 
blundering irresolution, brought the Third Dragoon Guards under a 
severe enfilading lire, and threw the whole of the six squadrons into 
confusion, from which, however, the Royals quickly rallied, and 
covered the retirement of the other two regiments. 

1 Op. at., p. 23S. 




Born j September, 1710; died 7 June, iS.u. 


" The Duke of York in his despatch alludes to the contretemps 
as a ' mistake,' having evidently had no opportunity of examining 
the officer in command. 

" ' Catena, 25 April, 1794. 

" ' Had they been properly supported, the entire destruction 
of the enemy must have been the consequence, but by some mistake 
Mansel's brigade did not arrive in time for that purpose ; the enemy 
however were obliged to retreat in great confusion into Cainbray, 
with the loss of 1 ,200 men killed in the field, and 3 pieces of cannon.' Ml 

Sir George Arthur is more drastic and circumstantial in his 
censure of Mansel than is the historian of the British Army ; it will 
be observed, however, that both writers admit some element of 
obscurity in the matter : the Hon. J. W. Fortescue says that it is 
" a mystery " whether General Otto or General Mansel was in fault ; 
while Sir George Arthur describes the failure of the supports as 
" inexplicable." 

These expressions immediately suggest the question as to 
what were General Otto's precise instruction? with regard to the 
actiun of the supporting squadrons, or whether he gave any such 
instructions. He galloped away at a headlong pace with his four 
squadron':, and then was surprised to find that his supports, which 
were not supposed to attack immediately, were not up with him. 
There would appear to have been a lack either of definite orders on 
the part of Otto, or of initiative on the part of Mansel — or perhaps a 
combination of the two. 

A good deal has been written upon the matter, the relatives 
and descendants of General Mansel naturally resenting the imputation 
of incapacity or lack of courage on his part. 

Sir Evelyn Wood, in an account of the action of April 24, 
which corresponds entirely with that quoted above from the " History 
of the British Army." remarks, in allusion to the fifty guns and 
ammunition- waggons dispersed by Captain Pocklington on the road : 
" Some of these guns would have been retained by the captors if the 

1 '• The Storj of ilie Household Cavalry," by Sir George Arthur ; vol. ii., 
Jamei Henry Craig (1748-1812) was adjutant-general to the Duke of York'- army. 


advanced guard had been properly supported." And again : "If 
the cavalry division had not mistaken its road, and had followed the 
advanced guard at proper supporting distance, a large number of 
guns would have been taken, and with but little loss to the Allies." ' 

Here is implied no lack of courage or initiative, but of a 
reliable guide, or a connecting link with the advanced guard. 

Before inserting the various letters and communications which 
have appeared from time to time in vindication of General Mansel's 
character and conduct, it will be as well to give the account of the 
battle of April 26, as contained in the " History of the British 
Army " : 

"' Early in the morning of the 26th the French engaged the 
covering army simultaneously at all points. On the east General 
Fromentin with twenty-two thousand men assailed Ma.roilles and 
Prisches, and after a long and severe struggle captured the latter 
position, severing for the time communications between Alvintzy 
and Kinsky. Alvintzy himself was disabled by two wounds, and the 
situation was for a time most critical until the Archduke Charles, 
who had succeeded to the command of his force, by a final and 
skilful effort recovered the lost ground and drove the French over 
the Little Hehpe. Tins enabled him to reinforce the centre under 
General Bellegarde, who with some difficulty was defending the line 
from Oisy to Nouvion against twenty-three thousand men. There- 
upon Bellegarde instantly took the' offensive, completely defeated 
the French, and captured from them nine guns. 

" But far more brilliant was the success of the Allies on the 
west, where Chappuis led one column along the high-road from 
Cambrai to Le Cateau, while a second column of four thousand men 
advanced upon the same point by a parallel course through the 
villages of Ligny and Bertry, a little farther to the south. Favoured 
by a^deme fog the two columns succeeded in driving the advanced 
posts of the Allies from the villages of Inchy and Beaumont on the 
high-road, and of Trcisville, Bertry, and Maurois immediately to 
south of them ; which done, they proceeded to form behind the 
ridge on which these villages stand, for the main attack. Before the 
formation was complete the fog cleared ; and the Duke, observing 
that Chappuis' left Rank was in the air, made a great demonstration 
with his artillery against the French front, sent a few light troops to 
engage their right, and calling all his cavalry to his own right, formed 

1 "Achievement; of Cavalry," by General Sir H. Evelyn Wood ; pp. 14, 15. 



Born 153J ; died 4 September, 158S. 
I Portrait at Thorpe Malsor Hall.) 



rn ig Xovember, 156b; beheaded 25 February, K 

'Portrait ,!< Thorpe Muhor Hall.) 


them unseen in a fold in the ground between Inchy and Bethencourt, 
a village a little to the west of it. The squadrons were drawn up in 
three lines, the six squadrons of the Austrian Cuirassiers of Zeschwitz 
forming the first line under Colonel Prince Schwarzenberg, Mansel's 
brigade the second line, and the First and Fifth Dragoon Guards and 
Sixteenth Light Dragoons the third, the whole "of the nineteen 
squadrons being under command of General Otto. 

"In this order they moved off, Otto advancing with great 
caution, and skilfully taking advantage of every fold in the ground 
to conceal his movements. A body of French cavalry was first 
encountered and immediately overthrown, General Chappuis, who 
was with them, being taken prisoner. Then the last ridge was past, 
and the squadrons saw their prey before them— over twenty thousand 
French infantry drawn up with "their guns in order of battle, serenely 
facing eastward without thought of the storm that was bursting on 
them from the north. There was no hesitation, for Schwarzenberg 
was an impetuous leader, and the Cuirassiers had been disappointed 
of distinction at Villers-en-Couches ; the Blues, Royals, and Third 
Dragoon Guards had a stain to wipe away ; the King's and Fifth 
Dragoon Guards were eager for opportunity to show their mettle ; 
and the Sixteenth Light Dragoons, being the only Light Dragoons 
present, were anxious to prove that they could do as well as the 
Fifteenth. The trumpets rang oat, and. with wild cheering, white 
coats, red coats, and Hue coats whirled down upon the left hank and 
rear of the French. The French guns, hastily wheeled round, opened 
a furious fire of grape, while the'" infantry began as furious a fire of 
musketry ; but the charging squadrons took no heed. Mansel, 
stung by the imputation of cowardice, which had been thrown out 
to account for his mishap on the 24th, had vowed that he would not 
come back alive, and dashing far ahead of his men into the thick of 
the enemy, went down at once ; but Colonel Vyse, of the King's 
Dragoon Guards, taking command of both brigades, led them as 
straight as Mansel. In a very few minutes the whole mass of the 
French was broken up and flying southward in wild disorder, with 
the sabres hewing mercilessly" among them. 

" The misfortunes of the enemy did not end here, for one of 
their detachments, which had been pushed forward to Troisvilles, 
was driven back by a couple of British guns under Colonel Congreve, 
and joined the rest in flight. Meanwhile Chappuis' second column 
had advanced a iittle beyond Maurois with its guns, when the 
appearance of the fugitives warned them to retire ; but in this 
quai 1 too. there was a vigilant Austrian officer, Major Stepheicz, 
with two squadrons of the Archduke Ferdinand's Hussars and four 
of the Seventh and Eleventh British Light Dragoons. Following up 
the French column, he drove its rearguard in upon the main body 



also, dispersed it utterly, and captured ten guns. Twelve hundred 
Frenchmen were killed in this part of the held alone, so terrible was 
the Austrian hussar in pursuit ; two thousand more had fallen under 
the sabres of Otto's division, which likewise captured twenty-two 
guns and three hundred and fifty prisoners. The shattered frag- 
ments of the French army fled by a wide detour to Cambrai ; and 
Pichegru's attack on this side was not merely beaten off, but his 
troops were literally hunted from the field. 

" So ended the greatest day in the annals of the British Horse, 
perhaps the greater since the glory of it was shared with the most 
renowned cavalry in Europe. The loss of the Austrians was nine 
officers, two hundred and twenty-eight men, and two hundred and 
eight horses ; that of the British, six officers, one hundred and fifty- 
six men, and two hundred and eighty-nine horses, killed, wounded, 
and missing. The British regiments that suffered most heavily were 
the Blues and the Third Dragoon Guards, each of which had sixteen 
men and twenty- five horses killed outright ; and the determination 
of the Third to prove that the harsh criticism of their comrades on 
the 24th was unjust , is shown by the fact that five out of the six 
officers injured in the charge belonged to them. Mansel, the Bri- 
gadier, who was also their Colonel, died as has been told. Of the 
Captains one, his own son, was overpowered and taken in a desperate 
effort to extricate his father, and another was wounded. Of the 
Lieutenants one was killed and another, if not two more, wounded. 
The Major in command, however, had the good fortune not only to 
escape unhurt but to receive the sword of General Chappuis. The 
total loss of the covering army was just under fifteen hundred men ; 
that of the French was reckoned, probably with less exaggeration 
than usual, at seven thousand, while the guns taken from them 
numbered forty-one." 1 

Sir George Arthur, in remarking upon the Duke of York's 
brief report of this victory, says : " The vindication of the courage 
and capacity of Mansel and his brigade had been only a matter of 
forty-eight hours — the General himself meeting with a soldier's 
death at the victorious cavalry action usually known as Cateau, but 
more appropriately designated as Bethencourt." 2 

By this comment Sir George in a measure stultifies his own 
severe criticism already quoted ; " vindication " undoubtedly 
implies the removal of a more or less unjust stigma ; and there is 

1 Op. cit., pp. 240-243. 

2 Op. cit., vol. ii., p. 521. 

f ■" 







■ • 














John Malnsei 



evidence to hand which tends to discount strongly the allegation 
that Mansel was guilty of neglect, and far less of cowardice. 

In the year 185;, there was some correspondence in " Notes 
and Queries " with reference to these actions ; it was initiated by 
W. Sparrow Simpson. B.A.. who enquires where he can find a copious 
and accurate account of the Battle of YiHers-en-Couches, and mentions 
that there is in the possession of his family a medal " worn by an 
officer on that occasion," inscribed " Fortitudine Villers-en-Couches, 
24th April 179-1." The medal could certainly not have been worn 
by an officer on the day of the action ; it may have been struck later 
in commemoration of a gallant feat of arms. Mr. Simpson also 
confuses the actions of April 24 and 26, alluding to General Mansel 
as having taken part in the first. 1 

In reply to this query appeared the following : 

" I possess a singular work, consisting of a series of Poetical 
Sketches of the campaigns of 1793 and 1794, written, as the title-page 
asserts, by an ' officer of the Guards ' ; who appears to have been, 
from what he subsequently states, on the personal staff of His Royai 
Highness the late Duke of York. This work, I have been given to 
understand, was suppressed shortly after its publication ; the 
ludicrous light thrown by its pages on the conduct of many of the 
chief parties engaged in the transactions it record-, being no doubt 
unpalatable to those high, in authority. From the notes, which are 
valuable as appearing to emanate from an eve-witness, and some- 
times an actor in the scenes he describes, I send the following extracts 
for the information of your correspondent ; premising that the letter 
to which they are appended is dated from the ' Camp at Inchin, 
April 26, 1794.' 

" 'As the enemy were known to have assembled in great force 
at the Camp de Caesar, near Cambray, Prince Cobourg requested the 
Duke of York would make a reconnaissance in that direction : 
accordingly, on the evening of the 23rd. Major-General Mansel's 
brigade of heavy cavalry was ordered about a league in front of their 
camp, where they lay that night at a farmhouse" forming part of a 
detachment under General Otto. Early the next morning an 
attack was made on the French drawn up in front of the village of 
Villers-en-Couchee (between Le Cateau and Bouchain) bv the 15th 
regiment of Light Dragoons, and two squadrons of Austrian Hussars : 
they charged the enemy with such velocity and force, that, darting 

1 " Notes and Queries," First Series, vol. viii., p. 


through their cavalry, they dispersed a line of infantry formed in 
their rear, forcing them also to retreat precipitately and in great 
confusion, under cover of the ramparts of Cambray ; with a loss of 
1,200 men, and three pieces of cannon. The only British officer 
wounded was Captain Aylett : sixty privates fell, and about twenty 
were wounded. 

Though the heavy brigade was formed at a distance under 
a brisk cannonade, while the light dragoons had so glorious an 
opportunity of distinguishing themselves, there rue none who can 
attach with propriety any blame on account cf their unfortunate 
delay ; for which General Otto was surely, as having the command, 
alone accountable, and not General Mansel, who acted at all times. 
there k no doubt, according to the best of his judgment for the good 
of the service. 

The Duke of York had, on the morning of the 26th, observed 
the left flank of the enemy to be unprotected ; and. by ordering the 
cavalry to wheel round and attack on that side, afforded them an 
opportunity of gaining the highest credit by defeating the French 
army so much superior to them in point of numbers. 

General Mansel rushing into the thickest of the enemy, 
devoted himself to death ; and animated by his example, that very 
brigade performed such prodigies of valour, as must have convinced 
the world that Britons, once informed how to act, justify the highest 
opinion that can possibly be entertained of their native courage. 
Could such men have ever been willingly backward ? Certainly not. 

General Mansel's son, a captain in the 3rd Dragoon Guards, 
anxious to save his father's life, had darted forwards, and was taken 
prisoner, and carried into Cambray. Since his exchange, he lias 
declared that there was not. on the 20th., a single French soldier left 
in the town, as Chapuv had drawn otit the whole garrison to augment 
the army destined to attack the camp of Inchi. Had that circum- 
stance been fortunately known at the time, a detachment of the 
British army might easily have marched along the Chaussee, and 
taken possession of the place ere the Republicans could possibly have 
returned, as they had in their retreat described a circuitous detour of 
some miles.' 

" Mr. Simpson will perceive, from the above extracts, that 
the brilliant skirmish of Villers-en-Couches took place on April 24th : 
whereas the defeat of the French army under Chapuy did not occur 
until two days later. A large quantity of ammunition and thirty-five 
pieces of cannon were then captured ; and although the writer does 
not mention the number who were killed on the part of the enemy, 
yet, as he states that Chapuy and near four hundred of his men were 
made prisoners, their loss by death was no doubt proportionately 


"The 15th Hussars have long borne on their colours the 
memorable words ' Villers-en-Couches ' to commemorate the daring 
valour they displayed on that occasion. 

" T. C. Smith." 

In Cruttwell's Universal Gazetteer (1808), this village, which is 
five miles north-east of Cambray, is described as being " remarkable 
for an action between the French and the Allies on the 24th of April, 
1794." The following officers of the 15th Regiment of Light Dra- 
goons are there named as having afterwards received crosses of the 
Older of Mario Theresa for their gallant behaviour, fi om the Emperor 
of Germany, viz. : 

" Major W. Aylett, Capt. Robert Pocklington, Capt. Edw. 
Michael Ryan, Lieut. Thos. Granby Calcraft, Lieut. Wm. Keir, 
Lieut. Chas. Burrel Blount, Cornet Edward Gerald Butler, and 
Cornet Robert Thos. Wilson. 

" [Signed) D. S." l 

It will be observed that the writer of these notes, said to be 
an officer of the Guards and an eye-witness, entirely and spontane- 
ously exonerates General Mansel of blame. 

The subject was further discussed a month or two later in a 
contribution signed Pi. L. Mansel, 3.D., and dated from St. John's 
College, Oxford; this was no doubt Henry Longueville Mansel, 
afterwards Dean of Si. Paul's. He writes as follows : 

" I am in a position to furnish a more complete account of 
this skirmish, and of the action of April 26, in which my grandfather, 
General Mansel, fell, from a copy of the Evening Mail of May 14, 
1794. now in the possession of J. C. Mansel. Esq., of Cosgrove Hall, 
Northamptonshire. Your correspondent Mr. T. C. Smith appears 
to have been misinformed as to the immediate suppression of the 
Poetical Sketches by an officer of the Guards, as I have seen the 
third edition of that work, printed in 1796. 

" ' Particulars of the Glorious Victory obtained by the 
English Cavalry over the French under the Command of General 
Chapuis, at Troisvilles. on the 26th of April, 1794. 

" 'On the 25th, according to orders received from the Com- 
mittee of Public Safety, and subsequently from General Pichegru, 

1 '■ Notes and Queries,*' First Series, vol. viii., pp. 127, 128. 


Genera] Chapuis, who commanded the Camp of Carsar, marched from 
thence with his whole force, consisting of twenty-five thousand 
infantry, three thousand cavalry, and seventy-five pieces 
of cannon. At Cambray he divided them into three columns ; the 
one marched by Ligny, and attacked the redoubt at Troisvilles, which 
was most gallantly defended by Col. Congreve against this column 
of ten thousand men. The second column was then united, con- 
sisting of twelve thousand men. which marched on the high road as 
far as Beausois ; and from that village turned off to join the first 
column ; and the attack recommenced against Col. Congreve 's 
redoubt, who kept the whole at bay. The enemy's flank was sup- 
ported by the village of Caudry, to defend which they had six pieces 
of cannon, two thousand infantry, and five hundred cavalry. During 
this period Gen. Otto conceived it practicable to fall on their hank 
with the cavalry : in consequence of which. Gen. Mansel, with about 
fourteen hundred and fifty men— consisting of the Blues, ist and 
3rd Dragoon Guaids, 5th "Dragoon Guards, and ist Dragoons. 15th 
and 16th Dragoons, with Gen. Dundas, and a division of Austrian 
cuirassiers, and another of Archduke Ferdinand's hussars under 
Prince Swartzenburg — after several manoeuvres, came up with the 
enemy in the village of Caudry, through which they charged., putting 
the cavalry to flight, and putting a number of infantry to the sword, 
and taking the cannon. Gen. Chapuis, perceiving the attack on the 
village of Caudry. sent down the regiment of carabineers to support 
those troops : but the succour came too late, and this regiment was 
charged by the English light dragoons and the hussars, and im- 
mediately gave way with some little loss. The charge was then 
continued against a battel)- of eight pieces of cannon behind a small 
ravine, which was soon carried : and, with equal rapidity, the heavy 
cavalry rushed on to attack a battery of fourteen pieces of cannon, 
placed on an eminence behind a very steep ravine, into which many 
of the front ranks fell ; and the cannon, being loaded with grape, 
did some execution ; however, a considerable body, with Gen. 
Mansel at their head, passed the ravine, and charged the cannon 
with inconceivable intrepidity, and their efforts were crowned with 
the utmost success. This event decided the day, and the remaining 
time was passed in cutting down battalions, till every man and horse 
was obliged to give up the pursuit from fatigue. It was at the mouth 
of this battery that the brave and worthy Gen. Mansel was shot : 
one grape-shot entering his chin, fracturing the spine, and coming out 
between the shoulders ; and the other breaking his arm to splinters ; 
his horse was abo killed under him, his Brigade-Major Payne's horse 
shot, and Ins son and aide-de-camp, Capt. Mansel, wounded and taken 
prisoner : and it is since known that he was taken into Arras. The 
French lost between fourteen and fifteen thousand men killed ; we 









>d Dray 1 Cuarcls. 

Died JO April, 171)4. 






MAJOR JOHN \l WSEL, 3rd Dragoon 

A.D.C. to his father .it the Battle of Le 

Burn jo August, 1771 ; died .; \pril, 1 


took five hundred and eighty prisoners. The loss in tumbrils and 
ammunition was immense, and in all fifty pieces of cannon, of which 
thirty-five fell to the English ; twenty-seven to the heavy, and eight 
to the light cavalry. Thus ended a day which will redound with 
immortal honour to the bravery of the British cavalry, who, assisted 
by a small body of Austrians, the whole not amounting to fifteen 
hundred, gained so complete a victory over twenty-two thousand 
men in sight of their corps de reserve, consisting of six thousand men 
and twenty pieces of cannon. Had the cavalry been more numerous, 
or the infantry able to come up, it is probable few of the French 
would have escaped. History does not furnish such an example of 

" ' The whole army lamented the loss of the brave General, 
who thus gloriously terminated a long military career, during which 
he had been ever honoured, esteemed, and respected by all who knew 
him. It should be some consolation to those he has left behind him, 
that his reputation was as unsullied as his soul was honest ; and that 
he died as he lived, an example of true courage, honour, and humility. 
On the 24th General Mansel narrowly escaped being surrounded at 
Villers-en-Couches by the enemy, owing to a mistake of General 
Otto's aide-de-camp, who was sent to bring up the heavy cavalry : 
in doing which he mistook the way. and led them to the front of the 
enemy's cannon, by which the 3rd Dragoon Guards suffered consider- 
ably.'"" » 

In the Times of January 26, 1855, appears a letter from Mr. 
Mansel — signed with his initials, H. L. M. — commenting upon an 
eloquent eulogy bv Lord Ellenborough upon the gallantry of the 
famous charge o f the Light Brigade at Balaclava. Lord Ellen- 
borough expresses the view that this feat of arms was unprecedented ; 
Mr. Mansel gives the account from the Evening Mail as an instance 
in which a small body of cavalry had performed a similar action, and, 
while disclaiming any intention of underrating the gallantry of the 
Light Brigade, expresses the view that the achievement of the 
cavalry under General Otto furnishes no unworthy parallel to the 
heroic charge of Balaclava — a view which will certainly be heartily 
endorsed bv those who have read the various accounts of the action 
of April 26. 1794. 

In an " Historical Record of the Fifteenth Hussars " it is 
stated that : " The allied detachment felt itself committed to a 

1 " Notes and Queries," First Series, vol. viii., pp. 370, 371. 


desperate conflict with the force in view, for no sign of the supporting 
column was perceptible— by some mistake of orders it had pursued 
a wrong direction " — General Mansel being thus once more explicitly 
acquitted of blame. 

Captain Levis Tobias Jones, of the 14th Regiment, in a 
journalistic account of these events, says : " From the situation of 
the country, the heavy dragoons could not get on fast enough to 
support the light corps, or the entire destruction of the enemy must 
have been the consequence." 1 

A correspondent of " Notes and Queries ."in allusion to the battle 
of Villers-en-Couches and the engagement of April 26, mentions that 
he has access to a copy of Captain Jones's book with MS. marginal 
notes by the author, one of which he quotes : " The same officer of 
this corps (3rd Dragoon Guards!, who bore off the corpse of General 
Mansel, relates some particulars in the action of the 24th," 2 etc. 

There is an apparent allusion here to another MS. note ; 
there is no mention in the text of an officer who carried off General 
Mansel's body. 

In another account of these actions appears the following : 
" The charge should have been supported bv the Heavy Cavalry 
under Mansel, but, by some blunder in the orders, no support was 
given, end this brought much discredit on the ' Heavies.' These 
had to execute a somewhat desperate charge two days after, and the 
Duke of York, in riding down the line, said, ' Gentlemen, you must 
repair the disgrace of the 24th.' Mansel, the genera] commanding, 
by way of ' repairing the disgrace,' deliberately threw away his life. 
He despatched his aides-de-camp on various errands, forbade his 
orderly dragoon to follow him, coolly rode alone into the enemy's 
ranks, and died fighting." 3 

This very perfunctory and probably misleading account of 
these episodes elicited a strong remonstrance from a great-grand- 
daughter of the general — Miss Eleanor Maria Mansel. daughter of 

1 " An Historical Journal of the British Campaign on the Continent in the Year 1794," by 
Captam L. T. Jones of the 14th Regiment, 1797 ; p. 1-. 
; " Notes and Queries," First Ser es, vol. viii., p ; : 
'• " How England saved Europe," by W. H. Fitchett. Vol. i., p. -;. 

■ ' 


I i 

1 I II 

y - = 

. ■ 




. . ,.., 



Robert Stanley Mansel ; which, together with a reply — from A. N. 
not W. H. Fitchett — is here appended. 

" 16 July, 1900. 
" On page 75, Vol. I., speaking of the events of the unfortunate 
Flanders campaign, you state that ' by way of repairing the disgrace 
Genera] Mansel deliberately threw away his life.' As a descendant 
of the General may I be pardoned for asking if this statement is 
derived from any authentic, historical account ? When compared 
with the account we have of the engagement the only one I knew had 
ever been publi 1 • ] it , >pears to me unjust to the memory of my 
great-grandfather, making it appear that he incurred disgrace and 
then had not courage to face the situation and retrieve his honour. 
Of course a General who fails to appear when summoned does incur 
disgrace, but I believe it is perfectly true chat General Mansel was 
both ready and eager to obey the summons, and the aide-de-camp's 
blunder caused the greatest annoyance to him and his men, and, 
naturally, he felt keenly the Duke of York's sarcasm. Then you 
say, ' He despatched his aides-de-camp on various errands, forbade 
his orderly dragoon to follow I im, coolly rode alone into the enemy's 
ranks.' etc. Nov/ Major Mansel most certainly was fighting beside 
him, and saw him receive the fatal wound just before he was himself 
wounded and taken prisoner, and tfc ; General, even if he had devoted 
himself to death, first led his men all day, and had not only charged 
but defeat* d th< enemy b< ' re he fell. The original edition of the 
Evening Mail 1 om which the enclosed extract is copi d is still 
pr< serv d in the family. 1 may add that my own father as a boy 
spent most of his holidays at Cosgrove Hall with the Major Mansel 
who was wounded in that ch •: ^e, and the description of i1 . as well as 
some anecdotes in connection with it. were often related to him by 
his unci, and thus handed down to us. I have always understood 
that the charge was intended to cover the Duke of York's retreat." 

" Methodist Ladies' College, 
" Hawthorn, Melbourne. 
7. 11. 00. 
" Dear Madam, 

" Your note of July 16 with inclosure has reached me 
here. 1 am sorry if a sentence in my history has seemed to reflect 
unjustly on the memory of a gallant soldier. I fancy — I speak from 
memory— my autl - rity foi tl .. was Sir Robert Wilson's 

book, i am sure i did not make the statement without what 
seemed reliable authority ; but it is difficult, when one's notes have 
been destroyed, to trace each statement to its origin. The extract 



you ave good enough to send me from the Evening Mail is very 
interesting, and I may find some occasion to make use of it. With 
thanks for yr. letter. 

" Yrs. very truly, 

" A. N. FlTCHETT. 

•'Miss E. M. Mansel." 

Miss ManseFs protest, it must be admitted, is reasonable 
enough. She appears, however, to accept the statement that the 
Duke of York made use of the words attributed to him— very bitter 
words in the car of soldiers, whether or not they are conscious of 
default. It may be questioned whether such speech was really 
uttered ; if it was, it constituted an injustice to the men addressed. 
If the various accounts are to be credited, Mansel's brigade remained 
inert through non-delivery of orders, or else was misled in advancing 
to the support. Mr. Fitchett himself, in fact, contravenes the 
accusation of neglect 01 cowardice in the preceding sentence, " by 
some blunder in the orders, no support was given." 

That General Mansel, as stated in Mr. Fitchett's account, 
deliberately and uselessly threw away his life in chagrin over some 
camp gossip about the non-arrival of the supports on the 24th, is not 
for a moment to be credited. 

That there would be such gossip goes without saying; the 
precise facts would not be known to many, and soldiers, in common 
with other mortals, are apt to be uncharitable without deliberate 
intention of being so. There were probably some who hinted that 
Mansel and his men were ready enough to remain inactive, and so 
forth ; and everyone knows how rapidly such gossip flies round. 
Some of Mansel's dragoons may have heard a whisper, which would 
be passed on to the troop sergeant, by him to some young cornet, 
and so at length reached the general. 

However this may be, there is certainly not adequate evidence 
to convict General Mansel of neglect or cowardice ; he may possibly 
have displayed a lack of initiative. The non-arrival of the supports 
was no doubt a matter of very bitter regret to him, and whatever the 
cause, one can well imagine him saying to himself, "Well, they 
shan't say I didn't arrive this time ! " 


As Miss Mansel points out, however, very justly, the general, 
so far from being guilty of what might be termed military suicide, 
most gallantly led his men into action, and by his splendid and 
fearless conduct contributed, beyond all doubt, immensely to the 
success of the charge. 

When the leading ranks found themselves on the brink of 
that precipitous slope of the ravine, with the guns playing upon them, 
and not a few of their comrades' horses rolling helplessly down into 
the chasm, there might well have been some hesitation among them. 
But no! there was the general ahead of them, scrambling down the 
slope, holding up his charger with consummate skill and coolness, 
and riding straight for the guns. Who could refuse to follow such 
a lead ? 

And so he fell, as a soldier would wish to fall. 

His son was straining to keep pace with him, realising in- 
stinctively, perhaps, his frame of mind that morning ; but hiial 
devotion is powerless against showers of grape at close range, and 
Captain Mansel himself, before he could get to his father's side, was 
badly wounded and eventually taken prisoner. 

Of his capture there is a full account extant, from a gallant 
and humane French officer, which is here given in extenso. 

Copy of Memorial forwarded from a friend at I.ychfield to 
Sir Thomas Cottox Sheppard ; and by him sent to Major 

" On the 26th of April. 1794, in the Engagement at Cateau, 
Cambray, Captain John Mansel of the 3rd Regt. of Dragoons, the son 
of General Mansel, was made prisoner by a French Dragoon. It was 
in the heat of the engagement, and the fury on both sides was such 
that in a moment he was surrounded with bayonets and would have 
been run through on every side. I perceived him. I pressed 
through the crowd and protected him by throwing myself upon him. 
I addressed the soldiers and conjured them in the name of honour 
and humanity to spare this defenceless victim. I succeeded in 
appeasing them. Captain Mansel escaped this dancer, only to fall 
a moment after into a situation a thousand times more horrible. 
There were four brothers in the Company in which I served ; scarcely 
had I succeeded in tranquilising the fury of my comrades, the battle 


still continuing, when the eldest was stretched on the ground by a 
ball, which struck his head. The three brothers cried for vengeance, 
and arousing all the Company they rushed forward to attack the 
prisoner, Captain Mansel ; I precipitated myself upon him, took him 
in my arms. I entreated a second time "for his pardon. All the 
soldiers cried, ' Vengeance on the monster.' Mildness being now 
unavailing, I called out to them ' Murderers, retire ; this is my 
prisoner, he who darc-s to touch him shall perish by my hand.' They 
answered me only by abuse. ' You are a Royalist,' the-)- cried, 'a 
traitor to the Republic' All this while I was obliged to keep moving 
round the unhappy prisoner to protect him from them. On hearing 
this disturbance, several officers of my corps joined me and declared 
their horror and their indignation. Their harangue had an effect 
and the soldiers joined their ranks again. John Mansel overwhelmed 
me with expressions of gratitude, and said he considered me his 
preserver. We retreated, and arrived that night at Cambrai. To 
secure Captain Mansel from all danger when we were some miles 
from the town I gave him in charge to an officer who went before us 
into the town ; he was sent to Prison. There were at that time in 
the same prison a great number of victims detained by the orders of 
the too famous Representative of the People, Joseph Lebon. As 
soon as I arrived, I went to the Prison to enquire alter the prisoner. 
but was refused admittance. On the third day I obtained admission, 
and he told me that he had been left two days without food. This 
barbarity arose from the cruelty of Joseph Lebon. I recommended 
the English Of] cer to m\ friend, M. Rapailler de la Croix, who was 
arrested as a suspected Royalist . Pie promised to divide all his meals 
with his English companion, and he kept his word. I remained 15 
days at Cambrai, during which time 1 visited my unhappy friend 
ever}- day. hie always received me with transports of joy. He 
talked of nothing but his gratitude and his desire to prove it to me. 
He told me often that he should be happy to see me in England. 
Sometimes he said that ' If the fate of war should lead you to our 
country remember that you have there a friend who considers you as 
a second father.' On my arrival in England eight years ago while I 
was yet on board the prison ship the Royal Oak, I wrote to Mr. 
Mansel with the address he had given me at Cambrai. I received no 
answer. I wrote to him a second and a third and a fourth letter 
after 1113- arrival at Lichfield, but I received never an answer. I 
suppose my letters have remained in the Transport Board, or have 
been lost in the Post Office. 

" Poitevin, Captain, 
" Prisoner of War at Lichfield. 
" Lichfield. The 6th Maw 1811." 


The enclosed .Memorial is, I believe, a true account of the 
escapt from death of Major (then Captain) Mansel. He was badly 
wounded in the knee, and was never able to return to active service. 
He was 2 years a pi iso ier and was then exchanged (I think through 
the interest of the Duke of York). 

" Of course he never received Captain Poitevin's letters, and 
afterwards was able to procure his release, somewhere about May, 

" [Signed) Ci \rissa Searle." l 

Major .Man;e! added a slip to tins letter from Captain Poitevin : 
" Letter relating to my being taken prisoner 26th April, 1794, from 
Capt. Poitevin. the French officer who saved my life." 

There is a brief reference to the actions of April 24 and 26 
in the correspondence of Sir Harry Calvert : 

" The enemy retired to Villers-en-Couches that night, but 
occupied Saultzoir and Haussy. Otto, finding their strength greater 
than he expected — about fourteen thousand — early in the evening 
sent in for a brigade of heavy cavalry for his support, which marched 
first to Fontaine Antarque, and afterwards to St. Hilaire (this was 
evidently Mansel's brigade), and in the night he sent for a further 
support of four battalions and some artillery. Unfortunately, he 
confided this important mission to a hussar, who never delivered it, 
probably having lost his way, so that, in the morning, the General 
found himself undei the necessity of attacking with very inferior 

There appeared in the Nineteenth Century of May and 
November, 191 6, under the title " Fighting in Flanders in 1793 and 
1794," written by Mrs. Stirling, an article containing copious extracts 

1 Daughter oi Rev. Henry Longueville Mansel,Rector of Cosgrove : she married Alfred 
Searle, Esq. 

2 " The Journals and Correspondence of General Sir Harry Calvert, I'.art." (1 763-1 S26) ; 
p. 194. Sir Harry n-as iide-de-camp to die Duke of York, and subsequently adjutant-general. 
He tells 3 story which would appeal to our men in the war of 1914, etc. It was during the 
preparation for the siege of Landrecy. " Since Sunday, the enemy have tired very little, which 
gave occasion to a b;n : : of die Austrian engineer Orlandini. A stupid Dutch major, who had 
been boring him for a considerable time, at last observed : ' On est assez sur dans ces. tranchees, 
mon Colonel : ' ' Oh, pour ceh,' replied Orlandini, : on ne meurt ici que de 1'ennui.' " One 
can imagine a Scotsman, or a Cockney " Tommy," making just such a remark to the relief as it 
arrived to occupy d:e trenches ! 


from the diary oi Charles Hotham, 1 a young officer in the Coldstream 

In this diary there occur some entries hearing upon the 
actions now under review, which throw further light upon General 
Hansel's conduct, and lend entirely to exonerate him of blame. 

Writing on April 26, Hotham says : " Just as the Dutch army 
had completed their first parallel the French made a sortie (from 
Landrecy) with nearly ah their Garrisons ; many men were killed on 
both sides, but in the end the French were driven into the town with 
considerable loss. It was, however, universally reported in camp 
that the loss which the Light Dragoons sustained might have been 
entirely prevented, and that the enemy, on the contrary, would have 
suffered more materially, had they been properly supported by 
General Hansel's brigade, which either did not, or could not, arrive 
in time. 

" There was unfortunately much rivalship between the Light 
Dragoons and the Heavy Cavalry. The former were repeatedly 
engaged during the former campaign and had always behaved 
extremely well, but it so happened, from accident alone, that the 
Heavy Cavalry were not engaged once." 

Here is an interesting sidelight upon the circulation of 
injurious gossip concerning Hansel and his troops, which finds no 
place in official reports or in the accounts of historians. Such 
jealousy would obviously be a most fruitful source of depreciative 

Hotham proceeds : " Now what gave rise to such a dis- 
paraging report I cannot say ; but I do not credit it. It is not 
possible that one set of English troops could for a moment see their 
friends in any scrape without instantly Hying to their assistance ; 
and it cannot have happened for another reason. Our Brigade of 
Guards marched at eleven in the morning to the rising ground above 
Fontaine, about five miles in front of our camp on the Cambrai Road, 

1 Charles Hotham, eldest son of Sir John Hotham, ninth baronet of the name. He was 
twenty-seven years of age when he was sent to Flanders with his battalion, and his diary embraces 
the whole period of the campaign. He was evidently a keen soldier and a brave and observant 
man. At the death of Sir John in 1795 he succeeded as tenth baronet. He died in 1S11. 


in order to cover any retreat of the Dragoons, by defending a narrow- 
pass, or, by presenting a considerable front on the hill, to prevent any 
pursuit, and, in fact, to be a portee to anything which might happen. 
We remained on this ground until the evening, during which time we 
saw nothing of this misconduct in the Heavy Cavalry : and from our 
commanding situation almost everything was within our sight, as 
the country is one entire cornfield, without any obstruction to the 

This is : admittedly, somewhat negative evidence ; but the 
enthusiastic young officer's conviction that " i! is not possible that 
one set of English troops could for a moment see their friends in any 
scrape without instantly hying to their assistance " is amply main- 
tained by experience and tradition ; and the assumption that Mansel 
and his brigade deliberately refrained from rendering such aid is not 
warranted by any evidence worthy the name. 

Alluding to the events of April 26 (under date of the following 
day), Hotharn writes: 

" General Mansel was killed in this engagement under circum- 
stances which made his life more regretted, if possible, than it 
otherwise would have been. As previously mentioned, it had been 
whispered about that he had not brought up his brigade on the 
preoedin?, day when he might have saved the Light Dragoons — that 
he deliberately kept aloof and did not exert himself to get to their 
assistance, which might have been effected with the greatest ease. 
I believe that he received some very galling and heart-breaking 
expressions from the Commander-in-Chief, and the impression 
regarding his conduct was publicly known, as even the Gazette records 
that ' owing to some mistake General Mansel's Brigade did not arrive 
in time.' He naturally felt very miserable at such reflections thrown 
upon his character (which had always been unblemished, he having 
served before in a most respected situation) ; and being a man of 
delicate feelings, he was induced to do more by way of clearing 
himself from these cruel aspersions than was his duty. When his 
Brigade charged he put himself at their head (which is never done; 
and led them on, by which he was the very first man killed. He did 
it in a most marked and pointed manner, which made all near him 


conclude that he was determined to wipe away any slur on his reputa- 
tion either by throwing himself into the most immediate danger, or 
to receive his death blow — the lat ter of which, poor man, was his fate. 

" Another corroborating circumstance that his intention was 
what I conceive is that as soon as his Brigade was ordered forward 
under his sole command, and that he knew he should have an oppor- 
tunity of doing what he chose, he immediately dispatched his son 
(who was his aide-de-camp) upon some trifling message, which 
prevented the latter being with him all day . . . and from the 
insignificance of the message I am confident he wished his son not 
to be with him that dry. However, during the morning, in ridins. 
about to find his father's Brigade (as it was conjectured) the young 
man lost himself, was taken prisoner, and was sent to Arras." 

There are some discrepancies or inaccuracies here ; Hotham 
alludes to the former action a? having been fought " on the pre- 
ceding day." whereas it took place on the .14th. Also, he is wrong in 
stating that General Mansel dismissed his son on some trivial message 
before the advance, as it is well known in the family, from Major 
Mansel' s own lips, that he was near his father at the time. 

There is soin. tion here of Mr. Fitchett's story that 

the Duke of York reproached the Heavy Cavalry for their conduct 
on the 24th ; the language of the official despatch, however, stultifies 
any such proceeding. Mr. Fortescue accounts for the tone of the 
despatch by the assumption that the Duke had not had opportunity 
of seeing Mansel when he wrote it ; it is dated, however, upon the 
following day, and one would imagine that opportunity would have 
been easy enough to compass. But the historian's view of Mansel's 
conduct appears to necessitate some such explanation. 

It would appear that General Otto was in two instances badly 
served by his messengers ; the incident of the hussar has been 
confounded with the summons to Mansel's brigade on the following 
morning, but the two episodes are quite distinct, and in Mansel's case 
it was an aide-de-camp, not a trooper, who is alleged to have 

Alluding to the ac tion of the 2t th Sii Harry Calvert says that 
the cavalry performed' their part "in a style beyond all praise, 




charging repeatedly through the enemy's column, and taking 
twenty-six pieces of cannon " (p. 196). 

This is, indeed, the universal verdict of eye-witnesses and 
historians alike, and it is much to be regretted that General Mansel, 
who so gallantlv led this historic charge, should have been subjected 
to some inexcusable aspersions respecting his conduct in the previous 
affair ; a careful siudv of all the evidence leads to the conclusion that 
the failure of the supports to arrive was due to a blunder, and not 
to any neglect on Mansel's part. 

Such statements as those already quoted, in the accounts of 
Sir George Arthur, Mr. Fortcscue, and Mr. Fitchett, should not be 
made in any book professing to be a history, without reference to 
authorities ; nor can they be accepted without such authority. 

It has been said that General Mansel's body was found, after 
the action, in a ditch, stripped naked, and with the throat cut. 

This, however, is untrue, as the coat in which he fell, with the 
shot-holes in it. was brought home by Sergeant Smith and preserved 
at Cosgrove Hall, until it was presented by Mrs. Randolph (daughter 
of John Christopher Mansel i - [.), to the museum in Peterborough. 

There is also in Peterborough Museum a diaiy of General 
Mansel, attached to wl ich is a rote eml lying a not very complete 
account of the action of April 26 : it does not contain any details 
which have not already been given here. 

General Mansel was buried in a redoubt in the camp with the 
fullest military honours, six generals acting as pall-bearers, the Duke 
of York, the Stadtholder, the hereditary Prince of Orange, and all 
available officers being in attendance. 

One hundred and twenty years after the stirring episodes here 
related, a British army was once more engaged upon the same ground 
— an army which, though reckoned relatively small by the standards 
of the present day, outnumbered enormously the force which fought 
under the command of the Duke of York. 

The men who composed this ami)- proved themselves to be 
of the same stuff a? those invincible troopers who charged more than 
tenfold their number at Villers-en-Couchcs and Le Cateau. 

Transported, by skilful org 1 : line mitable energy, 



across the Strait, and over seventy miles inland to the neighbourhood 
of Mons, the British troops, like General Otto's force on April 24, 
found themselves in a position which necessitated a light with an 
enormously preponderating army : a fight which they could not hope 
to win, while anything like a precipitate retirement would have 
involved practical destruction ; indeed, the general in command 
stated that in the first instance the men were too fatigued for any 
such flight, and must perforce remain and give battle. 

It was an heroic rearguard action on a huge scale, and the 
enemy had a foretaste, thus early in the war, of the stamp of men he 
had to encounter. hEd the odds been reversed, there can be little 
doubt but that the German force would have been cut up beyond 
reprieve, if not absolutely wiped out. 

The British army occupied the post of danger and also of 
honour ; had the enemy succeeded in rolling up the left flank of the 
allied armies it would have been disastrous beyond calculation ; and 
to all appearance he possessed ample means to that end. 

It was the heroic stand of our men against huge odds which 
warded off the catastrophe. 

For four days, from Sunday, August 23, to the afternoon of 
the 26th. the)' were fighting almost without cessation, and though 
our losses were heavy, the Germans, advancing again and again in 
massed formation to swallow up the " contemptible little army," 
suffered far more severely. 

The retirement was at first in the direction of Maubeuge, a 
fortified town about twelve miles south of Mons, and the enemy tried 
hard to force us to occupy it, and thus assume the condition of a 
besieged army ; but we would have none of it, and on the 25th we 
had occupied the line Cambrai-le Cateau-Landrecies, the ground 
covered during the battles of 1794. 

Eventually the British force was extricated, battered indeed, 
but unbeaten, having achieved an end of almost inconceivable 
importance, and taught the Germans a lesson which they have not 
forgotten — a lesson which Napoleon was grudgingly compelled to 
admit that he had learned : " These English never know when they 
are beaten." 


And now the sword must give place to the pen, the soldier's 
tunic to the parson's gown. 

John Mansel the soldier, as is testified in the preceding pages, 
lived and died in a manner worthy of his calling. His grandson 
attained far greater celebrity, however, a? a metaphysician and an 
author, than General John had achieved as a soldier. 

Henry Longueville Mansel, the second of the name, was born 
at Cosgrove rectory, October 6, 1820. His father was youngest son 
of General Mansel ; his mother was daughter of Admiral Sir Robert 
Moorsom. 1 

There is an excellent account of Mansel's life in " Lives of 
Twelve Good Men," by Dean Burgon of Chichester ; and a very 
sympathetic sketch also by the Earl of Carnarvon, a former pupil and 
intimate friend of Mansel, in the introduction to a volume of essays ; 
from these sources chiefly is culled this present account of a very 
remarkable and estimable man. 2 

Mansel was very happy in the surroundings of his childhood 
and early years ; his father, the rector of Cosgrove, was a man of 
admirable character and of considerable intellectual capacity ; his 
mother is described as " a woman of great strength of character, 
clearness of understanding, and quickness of judgment . . . the 
very pattern of a clergyman's wife — a pattern mother too." She 
was possessed of an extraordinary memory, which her son inherited, 
and, in the course of his studies, fostered and developed in an amazing 
degree. He was always very well equipped when, as children, on 
"coming downto dessert," he and his sisters were expected to " say 

1 Sir Robert Moorsom commanded the Revenge at the battle of Trafalgar, and was 
subsequently master-general of Ordnance. The Revenge had a hot time at Trafalgar, twenty- 
eight of her crew being killed and titty-two wounded, Captain Moorsom among them. His 
son, Yice-Admiral Constantine Richard Moorsom. was a man of some note ; and Captain 
William Moorsom, first cousin of Constantine and nephew of Sir Robert, was the inventor of 
an ingenious fuse for the spherical shell in vogue at that time. " Moorsom's fuse " was a very- 
familiar term in the Navy, and it remained effective until smooth-bore guns became obsolete. 
A biography of Sir Robert Moorsom is given in Appendix III. to this volume. 

1 " Lives of Twelve Good Men, by J. W.Burgon, Dean of Chichester. Vol. ii., pp. 149- 
238. "The Gnostic Heresies of the F:r:t a'. : i^ nd Centuries," 1 Henry I leville Mansel ; 

introduction b\ Henry F ward H ' rt, . v. i iri 01 Carnarvon, treating of 


something by heart," whereby they earned their fruit or other 

Among their youthful recreations a favourite was " The Siege 
of Troy." which consisted in attacking and defending a stack of 
faggots in the rectory yard, the children severally personating the 
chief characters of the " Iliad." This classical entertainment was, 
however, at length abandoned by reason of the inconvenience 
involved upon some of the characters by the realistic presentment of 
sundry episodes : Eleanor (afterwards Mrs. Gates) found the ex- 
perience of being dragged bv the heel, round the walls of Troy a 
trifle too drastic ; and Clara (afterwards Mrs. Searle) protested when 
called upon to part with her tresses in order to supply the besieged 
with bow-strings. 

Henry at an early age derived from his father his first lessons 
in the use of language in the expression of his thoughts. He is said 
to have learned from his father " never to use a word of two syllables 
where a word of one would do " — an axiom which is certainly liable 
to be destructive of " style," and of the adoption of which there is 
no indication in the beautiful and polished periods of his mature 

He evinced from his earliest years ? precocious thought fulness, 
would constantly display in speech or action a remarkable originality, 
and was always on the qui vive to know " why "—a somewhat 
disconcerting habit which many clever children have developed, not 
infrequent!)' to the discomfiture of their elders. His mother once 
overheard him soliloquise, a.- he lay on his back — a favourite attitude 
— " My hand ; my foot : but what is vie ? " — a query which goes 
to the root of psychology and metaphysics, of which he was destined 
to become a most eminent exponent. 

His remarkable memory was apparent at a very early age ; 
before he was considered old enough to be taught, while apparently 
engrossed with his toys — which he would sometimes pull to pieces to 
find out how they were made — he would pick up portions of his 
sisters' lessons by ear, and was able to prompt them if they were at 
fault in repeating then, to ' ii mother. 

At ... • . f was sent to a preparatory school at 


East Farndon, in Northamptonshire, under the Rev. John Collins, 
where he speedily attracted notice by his assiduity and his love of 

He only remained there, however, for two years ; in the year 
1830, through the friendly offices of the Rev. Philip YVynter (at that 
time President of St. John's College. Oxford), he obtained a presenta- 
tion to Merchant Taylors' School ; there he was entered on September 
29, iSjo, and there he remained for nine years. 

During this period of the most rapid physical and mental 
development, Mansel more than fulfilled the promise of his childhood. 

Already equipped with an intellect, even in this incipient 
stage, far above the average, his assiduity very quickly placed him in 
advance of his contemporaries. He was possessed of a remarkable 
power of abstraction, which enabled him to pursue his studies in 
spite of any noise or racket ; but the other lads did not " rag " him 
as they are apt to do in such instances, for he had speedily ingratiated 
himself with them by reason of his amiable temper and pleasing 
personality ; and they probably realised, moreover, that Mansel was 
somewhat apart from the ordinary schoolboy. He was never very 
enthusiastic about games, though he did not decline to join in them. 
He is said to have displayed sometimes a violent temper, which, 
however, was always short-lived, and which he apparently outgrew 
as he advanced to manhood. 

To his masters Mansel was a source of unalloyed delight ; his 
bright intellect, his amazing power of concentration and assimilation, 
his abnormal zeal and assiduity all combined, with his amiable and 
amenable temperament, to render him a model pupil. Moreover, as 
he approached adolescence, they were compelled to be on the watch, 
lest his active brain, his constant and intelligent cogitation upon 
many subjects, should place him in advance of his instructors, if not 
in precise knowledge, at least in some legitimate field of speculative 

His fame spread to St. John's while he was yet a schoolboy ; 
it was known that at the age of thirteen he had been a contributor to 
the School Magazine. " As time went on we heard more and more 
of him " ; great things were expected of him when he should come 


up to Oxford ; and, as will be seen, he did not fail to satisfy all 

An extract from a letter of the Rev. Leopold Bernays, an old 
schoolfellow, may be quoted with advantage, as it sums up Mansel's 
character and attainments at this period of his life: 

" I did not know him intimately until the last two years of 
our school time together— from the middle of 1S37 to the June of 
1839, in which year we were both elected to scholarships at St. 
John's. There was, during the greater part of that time, a close 
intimacy between our families, and 1 knew thoroughly all that was 
going on in his mind both at school and college. We were alike 
devoted to the reading of poetry, and the composition of verses of 
our own ; always comparing notes with one another, and mutually 
affording each other such help and criticism as we could. Manse! 
published a little volume of poems when he was seventeen, of more 
than schoolboy merit, which made him a sort of school hero. And 
although he never took to writing poetry as a serious occupation, he 
had a great power of expression, was an elegant versifier , and 
possessed very considerable humour, which superseded the somewhat 
severe tone of his earlier waitings. His literary tastes were even then 
remarkable. He spent all his pocket-money on books, arid possessed 
quite a large library of the English Poets. He sought after all the 
less-known writers at every bookstall. I often assisted him in 
hunting for scarce volumes. He had such a wonderful memory, that 
we used to say of him at school that if all the English Poets were lost 
Mansel would be able to reproduce them. He was always a great 
reader, and had few tastes to draw him off." 

Archdeacon Hessey also writes : 

" Already was he noted for the jocular epigrammatic power 
which he retained through life. His classical work of all kinds lie 
got through with much ease ; and by consequence had so much time 
at his disposal, that those about him half thought he must be idle, 
until the\- were undeceived by finding that he knew what he had 
spent one hour upon, as well as they did what had cost them two." 

The volume of poems abo^e alluded to. 1 of which the title- 


piece is by far the most considerable, occupying nearly half of the 
pages, is not intrinsically of any great merit as a literary production ; 
it is, however, a somewhat remarkable performance for a lad of 
seventeen. The principal poem, " The Demons of the Winds," is 
original and romantic in conception, consistent in metaphor, correct 
and refined in versification and language ; and some of the shorter 
pieces are \ ery pleasing, bearing evidence alike to deep thought fulness 
and refinement of mind, with not a little command of expression. 

To go back a year or two, Mansel's father, the much beloved 
and respected rector of Cosgrove, died somewhat unexpectedly in 
March, 1S35. 

Henry was sent for in haste from school, but he arrived too 
late to see his father alive. 

As in all similar instances, the pain of bereaval was sharpened 
by the nece-sitv of quitting the rectory, the beloved scene of such 
happy family life, in order to make room for the newcomer. 

A house in the village had been left to Mrs. Mansel to meet 
this eventuality ; but she did not immediately take up her residence 
there, living successively at Cheltenham, Buckingham, and Ember- 
ton, until, in iSjS, her younger son Robert Stanley being then also 
at Merchant Taylors' School, she took up her abode in London to 
make a home for her boys, Henry remaining on as a day scholar until 
he went to college. 

In this same year Mansel can ied off the chief prize for English 
verse, and a medal, founded by Sir Moses Montefiore, for the 
encouragement of the study of Hebrew. Mansel was named in 
advance as the must probable winner of this distinction. As was his 
wont, he went in for it in earnest, reading in his spare time with a 
Rabbi, and richly merited his success. 

On June n, 1S39, Mansel's school career terminated, and he 
went up for matriculation as a scholar of St. John's College, having 
won, besides the Hebrew medal, the prizes for Greek and Lathi verse. 

Thus commenced his connection with Oxford University, 
which was destined to continue unbroken for thirty years. 

Mansel entered upon his university course with characteristic 
energy and thoroughness. He is said to have risen every morning at 


six o'clock, and for some time even two hours earlier ; and to have 
devised an arrangement by which an alarm clock operated a weight 
which pulled the bed-clothes off him. 1 He was induced, however, 
to abandon this four o'clock rising, as such long hours of application 
were obviously telling upon his health. 

No trouble was too great, in his view, in the pursuit of the 
thorough mastery of any subject ; but lie was by no means a recluse, 
and would keenly enjoy the society of a congenial companion, with 
whom he would discuss some subject which the}' had been reading, 
with an astonishing insight and acumen, as they tramped along 
together on a king walk. The thoroughness of his knowledge would 
frequently arouse the wonder of his friends as to how lie had found 
the time to acquire it ; but this was Mansel's great asset : the power 
of using every moment of study to the best advantage — a faculty 
more rare, perhaps, than is commonly realised, and which, when 
combined with a powerful intellect and a retentive memory, con- 
stitutes, maybe, a more just definition of " genius " than the some- 
what hackneyed phrase, "an infinite capacity of taking pains" 
— though Mansel was also liberally equipped in respect of this 

Mansel's delightful temperament and ready wit also made him 
a most welcome addition to an}' gathering, whether of a genial or 
serious character. He was much courted and appreciated, but never 
spoiled or rendered conceited and arrogant by such spontaneous 

The combination of such high intellectual gifts with almost 
heroic application naturally ensured a high place among the under- 
graduates ; indeed, there can be no question but that Mansel was by 
far the most brilliant scholar of his year. 

During the last two years of his academical career, Mansel 
took up the study of Logic and Moral Science privately with James 

1 "This ingenious device, thus actually employed by Mansel, was, a good many \_:rs 
later, made the subject of a humorous sketch in Punch, the rudely-awakened sleeper being 
represented in a coi ''; : ' fill il amazement, hi : r standing n end, and his hand; mating 
futile grab at the receding covering*. Possibly Mansel's ado] i of i 1 

was the occasion of the sketch. 




^--■-:V..'- a - ■"* 

Frances S.wrt 


I A. M 





;,M\-, MMN-FI 



Hessey, then a lecturer at the College ; l and the " coach " is com- 
pelled to admit that his pupil " was in reality titter to occupy the 
teacher's chair "- — an experience which has befallen other teachers, 
in the universities and elsewhere. 

Mansel's laborious and conscientious studies resulted, as might 
reasonably have been expected, in a " double-first " degree — i.e., a 
first class both in Classics and Mathematics, the highest attainable 

It is characteristic of him that, in the viva voce examination, 
he took exception to the attitude involved in a question, touching 
moral and mental science, which was propounded by the examiner. 
He declined to accept what he held to be a false premiss, and 
proceeded, with a splendid disregard of their relative positions, to 
argue the point out with the examiner, who was apparently com- 
pelled to yield ! Truly, a most inconveniently capable candidate : 
by the time he had vanquished his foe in the field of moral and 
mental science, there was but little time left for history and poetry. 
Mansel's place on the class-list was, however, safe, and this remarkable 
passage of arms in no sense endangered it. 

Mansel took his degree in the Easter term of 1843 ; and, had 
he followed up his original intention, he would immediately have 
sought ordination, and embarked upon a parochial career. 

His father's death had, however, materially modified his 
prospects and his mother's circumstances, and he felt bound to 
pursue a course which, with his high attainments, wa^ sure to be far 
more lucrative. 

Returning to Oxford in the October term, he was immediately 
besieged by would-be pupils, and speedily became a famous and 
successful tutor ; nor did he suffer his own studies to lapse. Meta- 
physics, French, German, and English Divinity were assiduously 
pursued in the intervals of tuition. His fame as a teacher was mean- 
while widely spread, until he was recognised as holding the foremost 
position of his time. 

1 James Augustus Hessey, eldest son of J. A. Hessey, of St. Bride's, London, Gent. 
Matriculated June :;, l8j2 ; lecturer, 1839-1842 : Archdeacon of Middlesex, and subsequently 
head-master of Merchant Taylors' School. 



Many of his pupils rose to distinction in various departments 
of life ; the most eminent among them was the Earl of Carnarvon, 
who also took his degree, 1 ten \ears later., with the highest honours. 
His testimony to the high character and attainments of his former 
tutor and intimate friend, written about the year 1S73, may well 
find a place here. 

" My first acquaintance with Dean Mansel was made twenty 
years ago at the University, when he had everything to give, and I 
had everything to receive. As I think of him, his likeness seems to 
rise before me. In one of those picturesque and old-world colleges, 
in rooms which, if I remember rightly, on one side looked upon the 
collegiate quadrangle with its sober and meditative architecture, 
and on the other caught the play of light and shade cast by trees 
almost as venerable on the garden grass— in one of those rooms, 
whose walls were built up to the ceiling with books, which neverthe- 
less overflowed on the floor, and were piled in masses of disorderly 
order upon chairs and tables, might have been seen sitting day after 
day the late Dean, then my private tutor, and the most successful 
teacher of his time in the University. Young men are no bad 
judges of the capabilities of a teacher ; and those who sought the 
highest honours of the University in the Class schools thought 
themselves fortunate to secure instruction such as he gave, trans- 
parently lucid, accurate, and without stint, flowing on through the 
whole morning continuously, making the most complicated questions 

" But if. as chanced sometimes with me, they returned later 
as guests in the winter evening to the cheery and old-fashioned 
hospitality of the Common Room, they might have seen the same 
man the centre of conversation, full of anecdote and humour and wit, 
applying the resources of a prodigious memory and keen intellect to 
the genial intercourse of society. . . . Looked up to and trusted by 
his friends, ht was viewed by his opponents as worthy of their highest 
antagonism, and whilst he reflected the qualities which the lovers of 

1 He matriculated on October 17, iS+c 
hter, when he inherited the earldom. 


an older system have delighted to honour, he freely expressed 
opinions which modern reformers select for their strongest con- 
demnation. . . . Dean Mansel's mind was of the highest order. Its 
greatness, perhaps, was not such as best commands immediate 
popular recognition or sympathy, but it was not on that account the 
less powerful. The intellect was of such a kind that some may have 
failed to appreciate it, and to understand that they were close to a 
mind — almost the only mind in England — to which all the heights 
and all the depths of the recent speculation respecting the highest 
truth that can be grasped by the human understanding were per- 
fectly familiar." 

These are weighty words, and need careful perusal in order to 
realise their full import ; but they are probably very true words, as 
the testimony of other of Mansel's contemporaries entirely 
corroborates them. 

Another friend writes: "In 1849 he contested the Chair of 
Logic with the late Professor Wall, and was largely supported. I was 
able to render him some aid hi his canvass. This service he never 
forgot, and from that time our acquaintance passed into a friendship 
which continued without interruption until his death. In the 
various political and academic contests of the succeeding years, we 
were much together. To these I allude only for the purpose of 
mentioning one characteristic of him, viz., his extreme kindliness and 
sweetness of disposition. In a period of controversy he opposed 
himself to parties and to principles — never to persons. \\ 'ith all his 
epigrammatic power, I cannot recall a single ungenerous or ungentle 
expression towards any opponent. 

" One more phase in his character must be noticed — his humble- 
ness of mind. He was always ready to defer to others, and to weigh 
with patient attention the opinions of those but little entitled to 
advance them. In no man could there be less of self-assertion. It 
was the same with him in conversation. He never talked for effect, 
or sought an audience for the wit he uttered. His most brilliant 
sayings were also the most unpremeditated." ' 

1 From the Rev. E. E. Turner, Fellow of Braienose, Registrar of the Universitv. 
January 3, 1S74. 


Similar testimony might be multiplied many times over ; but 
sufficient has perhaps been said in illustration of Mansel's beautiful 
character and high attainments. 

On August 1 6, 1S55, Mansel married Charlotte Augusta, third 
daughter of Daniel Taylor, Esq., of Clapham Common. 

He had previously (in May) been elected Reader in .Moral and 
Metaphysical Philosophy in Magdalen College ; and on this he felt 
himself justified in resigning his Fellowship at St. John's in order to 
get married — the tenure of a Fellowship at that time, of course, 
precluded marriage. 

In 1859 he became the first " Waynflete Professor " ' in the 
same subjects, thereby vacating his Readership, according to the 
college ordinances ; as Waynflete Professor he was, however, re- 
elected professor-fellow of St. John's (under an ordinance of 1S60). 
On his marriage he had entirely given up reading with private pupils, 
and lived at Xo. Sj, High Street. 

Mansel subsequently became known as one of the highest 
authorities upon Metaphysics, and a doughty champion of Chris- 
tianity and Revelation against various materialists and others. Those 
whom he chieiiy encountered were of the more formidable descrip- 
tion : men of learning, whose subtle arguments demanded a con- 
troversialist to be well equipped to deal with them. 

To treat of these matters in any detail would here be in- 
appropriate and wearisome. Suffice it to say that Mansel's essavs 
and letters are models of sound argument and of lucid literary style ; 
nor could his antagonists shake his position or convict him of error 
in any one instance. His wide reading, his immense and highly 
developed intellect, his lofty but always strictly logical attitude in 
dealing with these subjects, rendered his writings of more weight than, 
perhaps, those of any other living man ; and this view has been both 
tacitly and explicitly expressed in the comments of his con- 
temporaries. - 

1 Founded about 1859 m memory of the founder ofMaed.ilen College — William Patten 
(or Patron), of Waynefleet (1395 .'-1486), Bishop of Winchester and Chancellor of England. 
The stipend attached to the Professorship was ^600, but Mansel did not receive the lull amount 
until 1862. 

1 A complete list of Dean Ma ..* ,vri tings will be f ir.d i .... i, 11. of this volume. 


As has ahead)' been remarked, hansel was always a welcome 
acquisition to any social gathering, whether in the Common Room of 
the University, or in circles without the College precincts. His 
spontaneous bonhomie, his ready wit, his ability and good humour in 
discussion— and there were few subjects likely to come on the tapis 
at such gatherings upon which he was not fully competent to express 
opinion — combined to render his presence most acceptable ; and 
when he spoke, whether in jest or in earnest, every eye was turned 
upon him, every ear attentive. 

He was a very ready punster of the higher order —though his 
friends are compelled to admit that some of his puns were atrocious. 
This, however, is inevitable, even in the case of so brilliant a man 
as Mansel ; the habit of punning necessarily involves the occasional 
perpetration ol " atrocities " — fortunate if it be only occasional ! 

Mansel 's puns and other witticisms were always spontaneous, 
without premeditation or the effort for effect, and sometimes they 
were very witty and pungent, but never ill-natured. Some apology 
is perhaps due for the insertion of a few samples here ; the excuse 
must be that they tend to illustrate more complete!)", in its lighter 
vein, the character of a very remarkable man. 

When Mansel was dining out on one occasion, the menu 
contained the item " Cutlets a la Reforme." Someone said to 
Mansel (who was, of course, a strong Conservative), " You cannot 
eat Reform cutlets." The host pointed out that the word was 
differently spelled, with an " e " at the end. " Ah," said Mansel, 
" but Reform often ends in entente " — purposely mispronouncing 
it " e mute." 

His friend Professor Chandler, as they were passing the statue 
in a niche on the Clarendon building in Oxford, remarked, " Some- 
body told me the other day that the statue has no back to it — that 
it is a mere shell." " You mean," said Mansel, " that it is the Hyde 
without the Clarendon " — really a very neat pun. 

Someone whom he was showing round St. Paul's Cathedral 
asked, pointing to a huge figure of Neptune on a monument : " What 
has that got to do with Christianity ? " Mansel suggested : " Tri- 
dentine Christianity, perhaps." 


Sometimes his witticisms were in the form of verse. There 
was some controversy concerning the conditions of qualification for 
the degree of Doctor in Divinity, which had lapsed into a perfunctory 
form ; and it was proposed that in future two Theological Disserta- 
tions should be required of the aspirant for the honour. Mansel was 
sitting in the Council and while the point was being discussed he 
wrote on a slip of paper and passed to his neighbour the following : 

- The degree of ' D.D.' 
'Tis proposed to convey 
To an ' A double S ' 
B } a double 1 ss-aj " 

Mansel was Hampton Lecturer in 1858, "Select Preacher" 
from October i860, to June. 1862, and again from October, 1S69, to 
June, 1 871. At the end of 1866 he was appointed Regius Professor 
of Ecclesiastical History in the University, a post which carried with 
it a canomy and residence at Christchurch, where Mansel and his 
wife in due course took up their abode. 

Mansel's Bampton Lectures were, as might be expected, of an 
exceptionally high order : they were published under the title 
" Limits of Religious Thought." » 

In the spring of 1865 Mansel was persuaded to go abroad for 
three months as his constant and strenuous mental activity was 
obviously telling upon his health. He and Mrs. Mansel went to Rome, 
and other places in Italy, returning in the middle of June. 

In 1 SOS Mr. Disraeli, then prime minister, proposed to Mansel 
that his name should be submitted to the queen for the Deanery of 
St. Paul's, an offer which was gladly accepted. Much as he loved 
Oxford, he had latterly been very apprehensive for the future of the 
University, and, moreover, his brain was being constantly over- 
worked, to the detriment of his physical state. 

He found his new office by no means a sinecure ; there was a 
vast amount of work to be done in connection, among other matters 

,. . T Ji e . Bara Ftori Lectures were instituted under the will of John Bampton (1690-1751), 

dlvin !> °f Tnmry C : . Oxford : eight lectures were to be delivered upon SundajTin each 
year to confirm and establish the Christian Faith," etc. The lecturer was selected annually 
by the heads of the college;, and. received £120; the lectures were to Le published within 

two montns 


with the commutation of the Cathedral estates ; the decoration of 
the interior of the Cathedral also had been for some time under 
contemplation, and Mansel resolved to give the scheme a fresh 
impulse. 1 n response to his appeal more than £35,000 was subscribed 
within a year : he did not. however, live to see any practical result. 

He went clown each year for a six weeks' holiday to his 
brother-in-law, John Christopher Mansel, at Cosgrove Hall. It was a 
keen delight to visit the scenes of his happy boyhood and youth ; 
but the term " holiday " could scarcely with justice be applied to 
these visits ; he gave himself no real relaxation, and was constantly 
being summoned to London on some matter connected with St. 

On July 15, 1 871, Dr. and Mrs. Mansel arrived at Cosgrove 
Hall upon their annual visit. It was observed by his wife and those 
about him that he seemed to be more weary and oppressed than 
usual : but they had no doubt that the country air and rest would 
soon recuperate him. 

On July 22 he went to Oxford to attend the Magdalen Com- 
memoration ; and he is said on that occasion to have surpassed 
himself in the fluency and felicity of his utterances. This was a 
Saturday : he returned to Cosgro\ e on Monday, and on the following 
Sunday — July jo — after attending morning and afternoon service, 
he went early to bed, as was his habit — and from that bed lie was 
destined not to rise again. He died very quietly between ten and 
eleven, death being due to the rupture of a blood-vessel in the 

So passed away this \ery good and learned man, of whom the 
family has more reason to be proud, perhaps, than of any other 
member who has gone before. 

Gifted with immense intellectual powers, he always employed 
them to the noblest ends : the advancement of truth, the interests of 
religion as he conceived of it — and his conception was in all essentials 
a very fine and consistent one — and the good of mankind. Xo one 
ever had a harsh word to say of him. nor he of others : he died as he 
had lived, in peace and kindness with all the world ; and, since it was 
ordained that death should come thus suddenly and unexpectedly, it 


was surely good that it should come while he was in those surround- 
ings for which he never lost his deep affection. 

He was buried, as he had desired — and. rather strangely, had 
reiterated his desire only two days before his death, as he and Mrs. 
Mansel passed the spot— beside his father. 

In the North Chapel in St. Paul's there is a stained glass 
window to Dean Mansel, with an inscription in Latin by Archdeacon 
Hessey ; which, with a translation attached, will be found, together 
with the list of Mansel's writings, in the Appendix. 

It may be of interest to state that Dean Mansel's father was 
appointed domestic chaplain to Frederick, Duke of York. The 
original warrant is extant at Cosgrove ; it is not dated, apparently, 
but the appointment must have been made some time prior to the 
year 1827, when the Duke of York died. Possibly this favour was 
conferred in memory of General John Mansel, his father, who was 
killed at Cateau when fighting under the duke's command, as already 

Dean Mansel's brother. Robert Stanley Mansel, made his 
mark as a railway manager ; a notice appeared in Herapath's Railway 
Journal at the time of his death, which is here appended: 

" On the sixth of last month there died of pneumonia, at his 
residence m Devonshire PL, Mr. Robert S. Mansel, one of the most 
unobtrusive but most useful of railway managers of the present 
generation. His railway experience both in the administrative and 
executive departments was larger and more varied than falls to the 
lot of most railway men ; his powers of mind fitted him for almost 
any position ; whatever he undertook he did as well as it could be 
done. His ability was of the class which made M. Huish C \Y 
Eborall, Seymour Clarke, W. Cawkwell. and E. W. Watkin con- 
spicuous among their fellow workers, but the modesty of his retiring 
character restrained him from seeking prominence ; his merits led 
others to seek him out. Hard-working, industrious, straightforward 
in his dealings, his judgment in questions between man and man was 
appreciated by his superiors and equals, and accepted bv his inferiors 
in cases where justice and fair plav.had to be executed. " His intimate 
acquaintance with railway forms and records, and his knowledge of 
the scope and bearing of railway agreements, have caused his advice 
to be sought, and well qualified him to act as arbitrator in disputed 
matters. Strong in purpose without obstinacy, and firm in his own 


Dr. H. L. MANSEL, D.D. 

Dean of St. Paul's. 
3 October, iSju; died ;,u Jul; 



Railway Manager. 
Born iSjh: died iSSi. 


convictions, he set his mark on many railway improvements, un- 
recognised as his handiwork. He was an even-tempered man, who 
never said a harsh word : a genial, agreeable companion with a ready 
fund ol anecdote and pleasantry, as all his associates can testifv ; 
and with a legion of friends, he never knowingly made an enemy, as 
his sterling qualities never deserved to have one. A host of testi- 
monials from all ranks and conditions of men evidences the opinions 
of his contemporaries. 

" Mr. Mansel was born in 1826 at Cosgrove in Northampton- 
shire, of which locality his father was rector, and of an ancient family 
of high standing in the county. Educated at Merchant Taylors' 
School, in early lite he was articled to an eminent firm of locomotive 
builders, Messrs. Bury, Curtis & Kenneciv. of Manchester ; here he 
learned practical mechanical engineering, working at the bench and 
the lathe, and was required to drive the locomotives he helped to 
construct for a certain number of miles before they were accepted as 

" Owing to his father's death he was compelled, while still 
young, to strive for himself. The Liverpool. Crosby, and Southport 
Railway was at this time bi ing constructed. He was appointed its 
secretary, and afterwards the line was worked under his management. 
This short railway of 18 or 19 miles was subsequently leased by the 
Lancashire and Yorkshire Comp; rn t part of that system. 

In 1S52 Mr. Mansel, at the age of 26, was selected to be sei retary 
of the Chester and Holyhead Railway, the late Mr. J. O. Linger 
being traffic manager. In March. 1S59, this line was amalgamated 
with the London and North We tern Lcmpanv. "1 i ■■»:■ i;i • i. u.-n:- to 
accomplish this were principally conducted by Mr. Mansel. and 
although the Shareholders acknowledged his services they perhaps 
never knew to what extent their interests had been protected by his 
foresight and judgment. On the amalgamation the London' and 
North Western, recognising Mr. Mansel's abilitv. appointed him to 
the important post of traffic superintendent for the 1 i 
district, which comprised perhaps the most valuable division of their 
system, Mr. Linger being named superintendent of the Chester 

" The London and North Western Company held the greater 
part of the North London Railway capital in 1862, and selected Mr. 
Mansel for the office of secretary and manager of that line, on the 
resignation of .Air. Harry Chubb, the duties ot which he fulfilled until 
his resignation, on the score of bad health, in 1S79. His services to 
the North London Company were warmly acknowledged by the 
Directors in their half-yearly report to their Shareholders. 

"In 1870 lie was elected a Director oi the Great Western 
Railway of Canada, the vacauc} being caused by Mr. Childers' retire- 



ment. In the autumn of that year he visited Canada with two of his 
colleagues at the Board, and contributed to bring to a successful 
issue some delicate negotiations then pending. 

" Mr. Mansel was also a Director of the North and South 
West Junction Railway, a short connecting link from Willesden to 
Kew and Hammersmith, worked jointly by the London and North 
Western and the South Western Railways. 

" Dr. Henry L. Mansel. Dean of St. Paul's, and author of 
several works on logic and metaphysics, was his brother. His uncle, 
on his mother's side, was Admiral C. R. Moorsom, some time deputy- 
chairman of the London and North Western Railway. 

" Later in life Mr. R. S. Mansel inherited considerable property 
in the north of England, which thereafter rendered his railway work 
a labour of love rather than of necessity. 

" Mr. Mansel proposed and carried out the Poplar Dock 
scheme which has proved so remunerative for the London and North 
Western Company." 

On Mr. Mansel's retirement, in 1879, from the managership of 
the North London Railway, he was presented by the officials and 
employes of the company with a handsome silver loving-cup and an 
illuminated address. A brass tablet has been placed to his memory 
in Marylebone Church. 

General John Mansel's second son, Robert, was an officer in 
the Royal Navy, and eventually became an admiral.' 

In the year 1S01 Mansel was in command of the Penguin, of 
eighteen guns, and on Febiuary 18 in that year he fought an action 
against great odds, and succeeded in maiming and beating off the 
enemy, though his own vessel was so much damaged aloft that he 
was unable to pursue him. 

The action is thus summarised in " The Royal Navy " : 

" On February iSth, in the Southern Atlantic, the British 
Penguin, 18, Captain Robert Mansel, fought a sharp action with three 
unknown French ships, one looking like a corvette, and the other two 
apparently merchantmen. The Penguin gave chase, and compelled 
one of them to strike. On this she was assailed by the corvette, and 
was so damaged in masts and rigging that she could not pursue her 

1 Mansel's name appears in the Navy List for 1S37 — the year before his death — .)> 1 
rear-admiral, with seniorin ir. Jul) 22.1830. On the occasion of the Peiigu -. ait h 
he was just promoted to " post-capi .: . but had not n i ;d his commission in that rank. 


antagonists, who then sheered off. Her foremast went overboard, 
but her loss was only one man wounded." 1 

A letter, from an officer of the Penguin, which appeared in the 
Naval Chronicle of the same year, gives a more detailed account of 
the action. It is dated April 7. Lat. 2° 31' S., Long. 21 15' W. : 

" On the 18th February we observed three ships in chase of 
us, one of which came up very fast. 'We shortened sail to receive her, 
when she made signals to her consorts, and lay to, to wait for them. 
They soon came up to her, when they formed in line and hoisted 
French colours. We made no scruple to attack them, and as we 
neared each other we found they were a corvette of 24 guns, and two 
large ships of 28 guns each. A hard match for our 3 8 guns. How- 
ever, when we came within musket shot we exchanged broadsides 
with the three. The broadside of one of the armed ships told as 
heavily as that of the corvette. The action continued three hours, 
when we got the weather gage of the sternmost ship, and bore up to 
cut her off. We succeeded in breaking the line and throwing them 
into confusion, and having got close under the lee of the large ship, 
she bore up with the intention of running us down, but a well- 
directed fire when about half-pistol shot from her obliged her to 
strike her colours, let fly everything, and hail for quarter. The 
other two bore down to her assistance, and after a fight for about an 
hour in the dusk, we had the misfortune to lose our foretopmast, 
which fell in such direction that the whole foreyard became useless, 
which, together with the disabled state of the rigging and our sails 
all cut to pieces and on fire, made the brig quite ungovernable. But 
Captain Mansel, just on the crack of the topmast, took hold of the 
hand of the man next him, and the whole crew followed Ins example. 
There was a moment of awful silence, not a word was spoken, but we 
all knew what it meant — to stand to each other to the last, and 
never to strike. Three cheers for our brave captain followed. Our 
enemy, however, soon got enough of it, for, taking advantage of the 
dark night and our shattered condition, they made off. We repaired 
our rigging in the night and next day pursued them into Teneriffe. 
We luckily had no one killed and only a few wounded. Yesterday 
we fell in with a Swedish East Indiaman, which we detained, and by 
whom you will receive this letter." 

From the Captain's log of the Penguin, it appears that the 
action took place on February 19 ; the enemy was not sighted until 
late in the afternoon, and it was about 5.30 when he fired a gun and 

1 " The Royal Navy," by W. Laird Clowes. Vol. iv., p. 537. 


hoisted French colours ; so the greater part of the fight— which was 
not over until about 9.45 p.m. — took place in the dark. 

Moreover, the scene of the action was not the Southern 
Atlantic, as stated in " The Royal Navy." but the North Atlantic. 
The Penguin's position at noon on February 10 was thirty-four miles 
south-west from Palma, in the Canary Islands, which renders more 
explicable the statement that Captain Mansel on the following day 
chased the enemy into Tenerifi'e. This, however, is not mentioned 
in the log ; on the contrary, the Penguin's course, after repairing 
damage?, was directed to the south-westward : she anchored after- 
wards at St. J ago, in the Cape Verde Islands, whence she made her 
course for the Cape of Good Hope. On April 7, the date of the letter 
from an officer, given above, she was a little south of the equator on 
her way thither, which accords with the statement in Marshall's 
"Biography" that she sailed from the Cape in May following. 

The account of the action in the Captain's log is essentially 
the same as that in the officer's letter, though there is not, of course, 
any allusion to the thrilling moment when the foretopmast went by 
the board, and the crew graspt 1 hands as a pledge of " no surrender." 
There are many such moments in battle, ashore and afloat, which 
find no mention in official d« spatches, but are told in the attentive 
ear of wife or brother, chum or sweetheart. 

In Marshall's " Royal Naval Biography " there is an account 
of Robert Mansel's services : " He entered the naval service as a 
midshipman on board the Sampson, 64, bearing the flag of Vice- 
Admiral Milbanke. in 17S4 : sailed for the West Indies with Captain 
Peter Rainier in the Astrea frigate about October 17S6 ; removed 
with that officer into the Monarch, 74, at the period of the Spanish 
armament ; and subsequently accompanied him into the Suffolk of 
similar force, from which latter ship he was promoted to the rank 
of Lieutenant in November 1793. His first appointment as such was 
to La Prompte, of 20 guns, commanded by Captain Taylor, under 
whom he afterwards served as senior Lieutenant of the Andromeda 
frigate, on the North Sea. Newfoundland, and Halifax stations. In 
1797 we find Lieutenant Mansel serving as first « f th L ; frigate, 
Captain Thomas Surridge, under the orders of Admiral Duncan , 


from which ship he- appears to have been appointed to the Mary 
yacht, when our late monarch made an attempt to visit his fleet at 
the Nore. 1 His advancement to the rank of Commander took place 
in 179S. Captain Mansel commanded the Adventure, armed en 
fliite, during the expeditions against the Helder and Quiberon, and 
subsequently the Penguin of jS guns. . . . In May following (1801) 
Captain Mansel sailed from the Cape of Good Hope, with three 
vessels under his convoy, bound to the Red Sea, but was compelled 
to put back in consequence of a heavy gale, during which two of the 
vessels parted company, and are supposed to have sunk. On his 
return he found himself promoted to post rank, by commission 
bearing date 14 February, 1801, and accordingly took passage to 
England in the Adamant, of 50 guns. Soon after his arrival Captain 
Mansel was appointed to the Berschermer, 50, the command of which 
he retained until December. 1803, when he received a severe wound 
by the splitting of the maintopsail clew-line block, one half of which 
in its descent towards the deck struck him on his head, and rendered 
him incapable of serving any longer afloat. In addition to this 
severe injury, by which Captain Mansel was doomed to a state of 
inactivity during the late war, he was four times slightly wounded 
in the service of his country." -' 

This mishap accounts for the long period between Mansel's 
last employment and his death in 183S. 

After his retirement Admiral Mansel lived at Charlton Kings, 
near Cheltenham, until his death. Charlton Kings has known 
Mansells in the past, as noticed in the first volume of this work, in 
the chapter upon the Gloucestershire Maunsells. In Bigland's 
" Gloucestershire " the name is spelled Mansell. 

The admiral lived at Charlton Park, of which an illustration 
is here given ; but when he became possessed of it, or to whom it 
afterwards passed, is not clear ; according to the Gloucestershire 
Directory for 1914, it belonged in that year to Albert Brassey, Esq. 

1 On October 30, 1797, George III. embarked in the Rcyal Charlotte yacht to visit the fleet 
under Admiral Duncan, after the victory o\er the Dutch. The wind, however, was foul, and 
the king was compelled to put back to Gravesend. 

* " Royal Naval Biography," by John Marshall. Vol. ii., pp. 560-62. 


Another son of General Mansel distinguished himself in a less 
admirable fashion. 

This was Captain George Mansel, of the 25th Light Dragoons ; 
there is an account in Northamptonshire " Notes and Queries " of some 
escapades of his, which elicited a memorial from the mayor and 
Council of Northampton to the Duke of York. 

These gentlemen were very weak in the matter of spelling 
and composition, and their effusion called forth some humorous 
comment from Charles Markham, afterwards Clerk of the Peace for 
the countw He proceeds : 

" Captain Mansel of the 25th Light Dragoons having on some 
account or other rendcied himself obnoxious to the Mayor and 
Corporation of the Town of Northampton, they thought proper in 
October last (1806) to transmit the following Memorial, complaining 
of his conduct. 

" The Mayor and Corporation were considerably embarrassed 
how to spell the word ' combustible,' when one of them assured the 
meeting that ' cum ' was ' com ' ; and thus the orthography of the 
word was accordingly fixed, to the entire satisfaction of his Worship, 
etc., etc. A gentleman of known orthographic talents is now com- 
posing a Spelling" Book, which he intends to dedicate to the Mayor 
and Corporation of the Town of Northampton." 

Then follows the memorial. Captain Mansel had been sent 
to Northampton for the purpose of obtaining recruits, and he appears 
to have arrived at the conclusion that the best way of proceeding, 
with this object in view, was to indulge in various noisy antics which 
are tersely, if somewhat vulgarly summed up, in the modern phrase, 
" painting the town red." 

" Field Marshall Hi- Royal Highness the Duke of York, etc. 
etc. The Memorial of the Mayor and Magistrates of the Town of 
Northampton Humbly Sheweth — 

" That your Royal Highness Memorialists are under the 
necessity of stating the disorderly conduct of Captain Mansel of the 
25th Light Dragoons now recruiting here. 

" That Captain Mansel having taken a ready furnished house, 
in one of the principle streets of this Town, makes a constant practice 
of having a number of disorderly Persons frequent his House and in 


the dead of the Night by beating Drums and otherwise making a 
great noise and disturbance, thereby annoys and alarms the whole 
Neighborhood, added to this, Captain Mansel and his associates are 
very frequently in the Habits of discharging Numbers of Firc-YVorks, 
loaded with cumbustible matter, which in many instances, have 
vtry nearly involved the Town in a general conflagration. The 
frequent transactions have so seriously alarmed the whole Neighbor- 
hood, that a general complaint has been made to us, from a great 
number of the respectable Person^ residing on the Spot. Captain 
Mansel has been admon'shed of these practices to no Effect. He 
perseveres in the same conduct ; and the Authority of the Civil 
Power appears to us insufficient to restrain him. 

"Your Memorialist- therefore humbly request that your 
Royal Highness will be pleased to recall or remove Captain Mansel ; 
or othcrwi-e by your Royal Highness' Interferance check these 
disorders and thereby prevent the ill consequences which may 
otherwise take place. 

" Which is humbly submitted. 

" Joshua Cooch, Mayor. 
"Wm. Ring. 
" T. Hall." 
"Northampton, 22nd Oct. 1806." 

" (A true copy). 

" Nicholas Sorel, Lieutenant and 
" Adjutant of the Bedford District." 

The Mayor's Memorial appears to have been preserved in this 
copy chiefly by reason of Mr. Charles Markham's sarcasm concerning 
its literary demerits ; and it certainly is very ill-spelled and clumsily 

Captain Mansel apparently went with his regiment — including 
probably his very noisy Northampton recruits — to India not long 
afterwards, as he died in 180S while on his return voyage thence. 

John Christopher Mansel, eldest son of Major Mansel, appears 
to have held the ancient office of " Verderor " for YVhittlebury 
Forest. " The verderors are judicial officers elected by the free- 
holders of the county by the king's writ, and sworn to maintain 
the laws of the forest . . . since the abolition or cessation of the 
forestrial courts, they are honorary rather than efficient officers. 
There were usually four verderors in each forest, but they are now, 
and have been for many years past, reduced to two. They are 


selected from the gentry of the county, and the present verderors 
are John Christopher Mansel, of Cosgrove, Esq.. and the Hun. Henry 
Hely Hutchinson, of Weston by Wedon. They receive no salary, 
but have severally half an acre of underwood in every coppice 
whenever it is cut. and a fee buck and doe each yearly." ' 

In the London Gazette, October 8, 168S, appears an advertise- 
ment by Edward Mansel of Cosgrove, offering 20s. reward for the 
recovery of a horse ; notice to be given either to Edward Mansel, or 
" to Mr. John Mansel, grocer, at the White Lyon in Wood Street." - 

This may have been Edward's second son. John, of J ondon 
(see pedigree) ; probably of the Grocers' Guild. 

His eldest son, Edward, was vicar of Eccleshcld, five miles 
from Sheffield, as shown in the pedigree, from 1691 until his death in 
1704. He appears to have been highly esteemed, and is alluded to 
in a poem by a contemporary parson — the Rev. Henry Parke, curate 
of Wentworth— as "Judicious Mansel, grave and holy." Mansel 
rebuilt the vicarage in 1605, and placed over the door the following 
inscription : 

" Edward Mansel, Vicar 1695. 

Nemo soli sibi Natus. 

Vivat Rex. 

Floreat Ecclesia." 

The vicarage was again rebuilt in 1S25, but this inscription was 

Mr. Mansel, in his will, bequeathed certain lands in the 
neighbourhood to the successive vicars of Ecclesfield in perpetuity, 
on condition " that upon every Sunday during summer time they 
preach or cause to be preached a sermon in the church, or expound 
the catechism " : failing which, the funds are to go to the church- 
wardens and overseers of the poor. Doubtless the sermons were 
punctually delivered as stipulated. 

1 " History of Northamptonshire," b; George Baker. Vol. ii., p. So. It has been assumed 
that this John Christopher, and not his father, is here indicated, though the paragraph was 
probably written before 1839, the year of Major Ms 's d r He v» ul !, h ''.ever, almost 
certainly have been alluded to, b> hi* military title. 

' Gcii. Mag., vol. c, p. 514. 



urn i September. : s ! .; ; died -'7 M:iy, iS 


Mr. Mansel framed " off his own bat " a form of catechism, 
entitled " Questions and Proofs out of the Scriptures, composed for 
the benefit of Youth." 

He died January 26, 1704. There is a tablet with a Latin 
inscription to him in the chinch, iacluding also the name of his 
infant daughter, Frances — his only child — who died December 28, 
1698, aged fifteen months. ' 

John Christopher Mansel sold Cosgrove Mall to Alexander 
William Grant, Esq., whose mother, Helen Thorold, was sister to 
Frances Charlotte, wife of Admiral Robert Mansel ; the several 
connections arc clearly illustrated in the following sketch pedigree. 

Rlv. War. Thobold, = Frances, dau. of Wm. 

5th bod o< .lessor i Hfldvard of Gcxi.:il 

Ti.-r-- ' .• r . . . ■-,- anitrjeces 

'■ Bt \..-. ■ diu of K-y. <Y:,i,b- 

M Gl lb] \ ; 1 cote. d. Ian 20, ISfM 

Maeia Antonia q. 1S7-2 =-- H; = . Thorold o' C'ix- 
j wold. d. 1571 

Ales Wa i i - 




: ■■ ■; 


, • =■. ■_,,! 

Thorold or . e 1 

in? \v«'.!b'. 

e Etc 


Hen G-a.v-1 

i, J'-;, : 

Bent otnci of Cos- 

(Cosgrove Hall was leased for some years to the Dowager 
Countess Temple [nee Helen Mabel Montgomery, daughter of Sir 
Graham Montgomery], and in Burke's Peerage she is named at the 
time of her marriage, in 1870. as " of Cosgrove Hall, Stony Strat- 
ford " ; this, however, is an error.) 

History of the Parish of Ecclestield," by Rev. Jonathan Eastwood : pp. 202, 296, 519. 


The Yorkshire Maunsells 

f g~"^HERE is abundant evidence in various official and other 

J records of the existence of many Maunsells in Yorkshire. 

but there is very scant} - material available in elucidation 
of their mutual relationship. Here and there a lawsuit, 
fines, or other data serve to establish a family group of, perhaps, 
two or three generations, but the records, in most instances, merely 
prove the existence of certain individuals at some stated periods, 
leaving them isolated. 

The construction of a full pedigree of Yorkshire Maunsells is 
therefore obviously a very difficult, in fact an impossible task. The 
most that can be achieved is the record of the existence of these 
persons, and the linking of them up, wherever this is possible, in 
detached family sections. 

The earliest record with regard to Maunsells in this county, 
so far as can be ascertained, appears in Liber Niger Scaccarii and 
the " Red Book of the Exchequer " — an identical record, stating 
that Robert Maunsell held lands in one knight's .fee of the Archbishop 
of York in the year 1166. 1 

This Robert is mentioned in Gabriel Ogilvy's pedigree, and 
is placed as— presumably- -grandson of Richard Manscl Cenoman- 
nicus. who gave lands to the Priory of Brecknock in the year 1088. 
There does not, however, appear to be any evidence which justifies 
the assumption of this derivation. The Mansels with whom Ogilvy 
is here dealing are located in Wales, or in the Marches of Wales. 
William Mansel, apparently brother to Robert, is stated— quite 
correctly — to have held lands in the same year of Henry Newmarch ; 
but in the Exchequer books Robert is placed under Yorkshire, and 

1 Liber Niger Scaccarii. Vol. i., p. 304. " The Red Book of the Exchequer." Vol. ii. 


William under Gloucester . while both are derived by Ogilvy from 
the aforesaid Richard Cenomannicus, who, as has already been 
demonstrated, is more 01 less apocryphal. 1 There dues not, in fact, 
appear to be any enlightenment available from Gabriel Ogilv\ 
concerning the derivation of Robert ; lie and William are here 
placed by Ogilvy, who gives the references which testify to their 
existence in uG6 ; but there is not the smallest evidence to justify 
the connection of Robert with Wales 01 Gloucesb i ; he is placed, 
apparently at random, as the brother of William. 

Robert must therefore be held to have been oi Yorkshire ; 
but there is no evidence to show where he was locat< d. 

There is one Thomas Maunsell, a contemporary of Robert, or 
possibly of earlier date, v. ho occurs as witness to several grants or 
charters which were executed apparently during the episcopate of 
Bishop Hugo, of Durham, 1153-1194 ; they are not dated, so they 
may be of any year within these limits. Gerard Maunsell also 
witnesses one of them. 

There does not appear to be anv further information available 
concerning Thomas and Gerard ; but their existence at this period, 
together with Robert, seems to point to an earlier entry of the 
Maunsells into Voikshire ; possibly Robert was the son of Thomas. 
If the grant:, in question were executed early in Bishop Hugo- 
episcopate, this might very easily have been the case ; but there is 
nothing decisive about the matter. 

In " The History of Yorkshire." by Plantagenet Harrison, 
there is a " Pedigree of the Family of Maunsell." which starts from 
" Robert le Maunsell. held one knight's fee in the county of York 
temp. Henrv I. and King Stephen " ; and this Robert is given a son, 
" Robert Maunsell temp. Hen. II." Tins appears to point to the 
tenure of land by one Robert prior to the year 11 66 ; but he may 
very well have been identical with Robert of the Exchequer records 
above alluded to : and there is no allusion to tenure of land by the 
son Robert. Whether or not Robert the first-mentioned was the 
pioneer of the Maunsells in Yorkshire i- uncertain ; it is quite 
probable that he was not. but his derivation is unknown. 

1 See vol. i., p. 61, and App. I., second column of pedigree. 


r Rich 
King ] 

ki igl •-■ 










Adam Mauxsell, sci :d of the = Juliana, dau. of 

manor of Sedbury-juxta-Gil- Rich, de Bern- 

ling in right of his wife, 50 ingham, m. 56 

Hen. III. Hen. 111.(1251) 

of debt, : 

oan, dau. and co-heir 

-.vile : a wid., 
8 Ed. III. ; 

in Newton 

M ■ 

— , dau. and co-heir 

:. i 

Thomas Maunsell <j t 
III. ; claim 
Rokeby certain '. 
was plaintifi in . 
against Acrisius a 
h d concord with' 
touching lands i 
Gilling, 33 Ed. I 

Adam Maunsell, p 
de Richmond in a 
with Richard de I 
and with Juliana 
Richard de Berai 

■rell. one if the jurymen at * 

: iirignall, 

i. ,.- M: ? dal< ne, ! Ed III. : was a de- 

the suit of >.!.-. in :. ivh ) was t 1 I 

[II. : and ii ea at the suit of 

ax v.-!. en lie was 

I Ellerton-in-Swaledale 

iu. of Thomas, Alanji/. Adam = AHcia, 

d iu 

; : Ri hmond, deMortham, j of Roger de 

;" William de 6 Ed I. Bernin 

.'.. 11! 

V c 



Jvliana, dau. and 
heir, o.s.p. 


a : 
l\ I . 

s, by the gift of her father 


Iobee.t le Maunsell, held one 
knight's fee in the county of York, 
temp. Henry I. and King Stephen 

William Maunsell, temp. Hen 
paid half amaikforaplea, S Ri 



= Robert Maunsell, temt — 
Hen. II. 

Sir Rich. Maunsell, knt., temp. = 
King John; was one of the | 
knight? who were fined for not 1 
attending York Arizes, 4 Hen. 

Galfred Maunsell, paid two marks for - 
a plea at Westminster, against Alan 
de Hovington and Matilda his wife, 
5 John (120+) 

William Maunsell, of Mortham in 
surety for Richard de Berningham i 
Hen. III. 

John Maunsell, parson of i 
church of Kirkby Rave 
worth, 43 Hen. III. (12 

7homas Maunsell of Mortham, claimed against Willia 
de Berningham in a plea of land, 7 Ed. I, ; held six 
in Mortham of Alexander de Rokeby, 15 Ed. I. 

Henry M 

unsell of Mortham 

w IS 

pa. In. for Matilda, f.l 

Elie de Mid- - 

dleton, t 

OLiehing lands in ker 


the, and 

or Robert 



n a plea of land, 21 

1 d 

:. ; paid the 



Ed. I.; 

Kvas defendant in a 


of trespass 

it the su 

t of Eciv 


Charles of lirignall, 34 Ed. I. 

returned In 

the Sheriff of Yorks 


as one of the lords of the to\ 

nship of Mortharr 

, 9 Ed. II 



'homas M u-NstLLof Siainton, 31 Ed. 
III.; claimed against Sir Thomas de 
Rokeby certain lands in Mortham ; 
was plaintiff in a plea of account 
against Acrisius de Richmond, and 
had concord with Thomas de Rokeby 
touching lands in Sedburv-juxta- 
Gilling, 33 Ed. III. 

ahn Maunsell of Eryum- 
upon-Tees, cc. York ; 
paid the subside rhcrc, 
1 Ed. III. 

^dam Maunsell, paid the subsidy, 30 Ed. I.; chimed against Acrisius = 
de Richmond in a plea of account, 31 Ed. I. ; same year had concord I 
with Richard de Berningham touching lands in Sedbury-juxta-Gilling, 
and with Juliana his wife gave lands in E.^Lv-juxta-Richmond to j 
Richard de Berningham, 2 Ed. II. 

Juliana, liv. 
(130$), and in 
Edward HE 
lands in E 
Richmond i 


Sir Thomas de Rokeby, Lord of Roke 
by, knt., o.i.p., April 23. 1358 

Richard Maunsell, surety = Anna, dau. 
for Roger de Aske in a of Hugh 
plea touching common de Lelay 
of pasture in Ryth, 32 1 (?) 
Hen. III. ' V 

Aoam Maunsell, sci .,-d of the 
manor of Sedbury-juxta-Gil- 
ling in right of his wife, 50 
Hem III. 

ea of debt, 21 1 

Henry Maunsell 
defendant in a p 
Ed. I. ; living I 

1 1 
Joan, dau. and co-heir B — , dau 

Alex. Maunsell of Newton -- 
Alonell in Richmond- 
shire, defendant in a 
plea at the suit of Ave- 
lina, dau. of Roger 
Mynyot, 21 Ed. I. 

= Alicia. 1st = Margaret, 2nd 
wife wife: a wid., 

S Ed. III. ; 
claimed dower 


Hugh Maunsell of Newton Mo.-rell, one uf' die jurymen at the Inq 
tion/jjt mortem of Edward LI rles of lirignall, takenai Richmond 01 
Saturday in the Feast of St. ?I,ry Magdalene, 3 Ed III. : v.- as a 
fendant in a plea of dower at the suit of Margrret, who was the 
of Alexander Maunsell, 8 Ed. III. ; and in another plea at the su 
Sir William le Scrope, who c' a reasonable account when he 
plaintiff's bailiff in Caldwell and Ellerton-in-Swaledale 

Stephen Maunsell of Nortlu'.ler- 
ton, S Ed. I. ; claimed lands 
near Richmond against Tho., 
fi\. Richard de Laton, as the 
dower of Matilda, his wife, 
by the dotation of her first 
husband, William de Laton 

ve, dau. and heir, to whom at h 
father gave six tofts, ar.d seven t 
Burgh-justta-CatencL, 21 Ed I. 

Matilda, dm. of Thomas, 

f.l. Hue'! de Richmond, 


Alan,/:/, Adam = Alicia, dau. 

de Mortham, I of Roger de 

6 Ed. I. Berningham 

y 6 Ed. r. 

m. 21 Ea 1. i Burgh-juxta- 

Caterick, jure uxorii, by the gift of her father 


Harrison's pedigree is he-re transciibcd as being of i onsiderable 
interest, though it is nut very informative ; it appears to be well 
authenticated as far as it goes, but it must be admitted that the 
author's references have not been actually verified, save in one or 
two instances. The pedigree is indeterminate ; we are left in doubt 
as to whether the line from Robert, temp. Henry I. and King Stephen, 
became extinct with the daughters oi Adam and Stephen, who 
married respectively Sii Thomas de Rokeby and William de Burgh, 
or was earned on by the i- tie of one oi more ol the Maunsells who 
come earlier, and whose offspring is nut indicated, though they 
apparently had children. The obvious inference is that the author 
was unable to trace them. 1 

The Maunsells weir- known for several generations, according 
to this pedigree, as " of Marti am," the I ords oi Rokeby also holding 
lands therein. The connection ol the Maunsells with this manor 
apparently ceased with the marriage of Juliana, daughter and heir 
of Adam Maunsell, with Sir Thomas de Rokeby, Lord of Rukeby. 
who was afterwards Chief Justice of Ireland, and died there, without 
issue, April 23, 135S J ; the line of the Rokebys was continued from 
his younger brother, Robert. The Rokeby estates were purchased 
in 1611 by "William Robinson, citizen and haberdasher of London, 
and. were sold by his descendant, Sir Thomas Robinson, to John 
Morritt in 1770. 

Robert le Maunsell, who heads the pedigree, is credited with a 
sou William, win. paid h df a mark for a plea, 8 Richard I. (1197) ; 
this William may be identical with William who is misplaced by 
R. G. Maunsell as fifth son of Sir Robert the Crusader, and who was 
of Rucks, Beds, and Leicester. 3 the Archbishops of York held lands 

1 "The History of Yorkshire," by Marshal-General Plantagenet Harrison, H.K.G., 
iSyq ; p. 419. The authoi ■■_■':: .: s pe ligr s of his own family, tracing his descent from Odin, 
K» - ' ' A gardia, " about seventy-six years before the birth of Christ." He heads the Maunsell 
pedijree with a coat-of-arms : ■-,: 1. ' Sable, a chevron between three manacles, ermine." 
The tricked coat displays, however, three maunches ermine. The confusion between maunche 
and manacle is quite inexcusable ; the latter is a handcuff, as dissimilar from the maunche as 
it is possiole to be. This blunder discredits the coat entirely ; nor is there any record elsewhere 
of a Maunsell bearing three maunche; em ■■ 

- Rokeby pedigree. Ibid., p. 410. 

J See vol. i., p. - .. 



in Leicestershire for many years, and William may have been in 
this manner connected with Yorkshire ; his wile's name i=> not 
given in the pedigree. 

In the years 1210-1212 there is a Robert Maunsell who held 
lands in capite of the king in Yorkshire, and by serjeanty in the same 
period ; in which also Robert Maunsell paid one knight's fee for 
lands in Leicestershire , > so that here is another link between the 
two counties, if these Roberts are identical — which of course is not 
by any means certain. 

In the Coram Rege Rolls there is mention of several Yorkshire 

Richard, 3 Henr\ III. (1219) is probably identical with Sir 
Richard in the pedigree, who is said to have been lined for not 
attending York assizes. 

Richard, probably his son. had an agreement in 1247 with 
Hugh de J elav and Anne his wife touching the manor of Methelegh, 
which the said Richard was to have on his marriage with Anna. 
daughter of the said Hugh and Anne. 

John Maunsell, paison of [virkby Ravensworth, had litigation 
in 1259 with Bryan Pycot and Cassandra his wife concerning lands 
in Neusum (Newsome), which he claimed as pertaining to the church. 
This John is placed by Harrison as the son of Sir Richard, temp. 
Henry III., upon what authority does not appear, but it is quite 
probable that he was so. 

In 1260 Richard le Poer had a plea against Ralph Maunsell at 
York, and there was agreement between Richard, son of Gamel, 
father of the said Richard, and Beatrice, who was wife of Galfridus 
Maunsell. grandmother of the said Ralph, whose heir he is. 

This may very well be Galfridus who appears in Harrison's 
pedigree as the son of William Maunsell. 

Beatrice may have been related to Richard le Poer. 

In 1279 Osbert de Arcubus had a suit against Annam de 
Kelly, concerning the custody of Edmund son and heir of Richard 
Maunsell, who held land in some locality (name illegible- by military 

1 " Red Boo! r," p\ yji, (.95, 551 


In 1249 Thomas Maunsell had a suit against Basilia, wife oi 
Robert de Berkeworth, concerning lands in Towneley. 

Robert le Maunsell, temp. Henry I. = 

and King Stephen j 


William Maunsell, temp. — 
Hen. II. I 

Gaxfridus Maunsell (liv. = Beatrice (liv. 1260) 
1204) I 

— Maunsell = 


Raxph Maunsell (liv. 1260), 
heir to Beatrice 

The volume embodying what is familiarly known as " Kirkby's 
Inquest," and " Nomina Villarum " foi the county of York contains 
numerous allusions to the Maunsell family. 1 supplemented ir. several 
instances by furthei informaiton of a later date in footnotes. 

From these records we learn that one Edmund Maunsell 
claimed, in the year 1309, a third part of the lands of Aston, in 
Yorkshire, as son snd heir of Alice, one of the three sisters of Osbert 
de Arches ; he brought Ins action in 13 12, but when the cause came 
to a hearing the jury found that Alice was a bastard, and Edmund 
was consequently " in mercy," i.e., non-suited. This incident is 
evidently connected with the suit of Osbert de Arcubus against 
Annam de Kelly, quoted above ; Arcubus is the Latin equivalent of 
the surname Arches, so it is apparent that Osbert claimed the 

1 " The Survey of the County of York," taken by John de Kir', by. John Kirkby (d. 1290) 
was a prominent cleric of the time of Edward I. He held the Gre3t Seal repeatedly, and about 
the year 1282 the king, being in much need of money by reason of the expense of the Welsh 
wars, despatched Kirkby on an inquest or commission throughout England, to ascertain the 
holdings of land, etc., and to collect money. The Inquest of Yorkshire was made about the 
year 1285, a- is testified byintenal evide ice (see preface to " Kirkby's Inquest"). Kirkby v k 
rewarded for hi; services — h? was a very successful collector of c i: — with '■-> man- benches 
that it was regarded, even in those days, - • mdil, \r. A . ' • -igible tor the 

bishoprh of R-;-:htn-.r 1 ; ■ 1 Li;.. At the time 

nf th« Yc .: . . - ... ■ i Villarum " are returns 


guardianship of the son — Edmund — of his half-sister, Alice, who was 
married to Richard Maunsell. It is probably this same Edmund 
who, in 1285, held one carucate 1 of land in Naburn of Richard de 
Malbyse, who held it of the Earl of Cornwall, 3 who held it in capite 
of the king. 

There is mention in Kirkby's Inquest of the connection of the 
Maunsells with Brudeford (Birdforth) in the year 1285 : " In the 
vill of Brudeford are four carucates of land, of which Henry Maunsell 
holds two carucates of land of Ranulph de Nevill, and Ranulph of 
John Maunsell, and the remaining two carucates the said John 
holds of Eclrnund Maunsell, and the said Edmund of Richard Malbyse, 
and the said Richard of Edmund Earl of Cornwall, and the said Earl 
in capite of the King in the honour of Eye." 

This " house that Jack built " sort cf record does not afford 
much assistance in arriving at the mutual relationship of Henry, 
John, and Edmund Maunsell ; but the last named is almost certainly 
identical with Edmund, son of Richard, who held lands in Naburn, 
the tenure being on precisely similar terms. 

There is an earlier record, of the year 1253: "Grant to 
Thomas Maunsell and Richard Maunsell, and their heirs, of free 
warren in their demesne lands in Brudeford, provided that they are 
not within the King's forest ; gram also of a weekly market there on 
Thursday, and of a yearly fair on the vigil, the feast, and the morrow 
of the nativity of St. Mary " (September S). 3 

This Thomas and Richard are placed by Mr. R. G. Maunsell 
(p. 15) as the sons of John Maunsell, Provost of Beverley ; and 
Thomas has, in fact, been tentatively accepted in the first volume of 
this work as the eldest son of the said John. 4 

1 " Carucate " — a* much a? a team of eight oxen could plough in c ne year. The extent 
of the carucate varied, however, according to the nature of the land and other conditions. 
In old documents of this type it usually means one hundre I and twenty acres. A " hide " of 
land was die same as .1 carucate ; a " bovat " was one-eighth of a carucate, or as much as one 
ox could plough in one ye ir. A " toft " signifies a homestead with its immediate surroundings, 
outbuildings, etc. 

' Edmund, Earl of Cornwall, son of Richard Plantagenet, and nephew of King Henr.- III. 

! Cab Charter Rolls 1226-1257 ; p 4.34 

1 Set vo1 - '•» F- 79- 


It is by no means certain, however, that this Thomas of 
Brudeford is identical with Thomas above mentioned ; nor is there 
any evidence that Richard was brother to Thomas, the alleged son 
of the Provost of Beverley. That the Thomas and Richard named 
in the Charter Roll were brothers seems probable. 1 

There is evidence of the existence of one Thomas Maunsell of 
Birdforth at a later date, who had no sons, and more than one 
daughter ; one of these, named Anne, married, early in the sixteenth 
century, Christopher Tomlinson (or Thomlynson) of Birdforth ; 
she is styled " daughter and co-heir of Thomas Maunsell of 
Birdforth.'" 3 

It appears doubtful whether this Thomas can be identical 
with Thomas of Burford, or Brudeford. who has been dealt with in 
a former chapter, and who, it will be recollected, was held to be 
possibly the same man who was entrusted 'by Henry VI. with the 
responsibility of receiving the money, jewels, etc., subscribed for 
the cost of the expedition against France. 3 He married in Kent, 
was escheator of Somerset in 1464 and 1469, and died between the 
latter year and 1473 ; but he may, notwithstanding, have been 
originally of Yorkshire. 

In the Visitation of Yorkshire there is a pedigree of Manby, 
of Elsam (or Elsham), Lincolnshire, and Middleton, Yorkshire, from 
which it appears that Robert de Arkbow— possibly identical with de 
Arches, or Arcubus, before mentioned— married Sybil, daughter and 
heir of Ingram Mancell ; their daughter. Hawisia, married Alan 
Malkake, Lord of Elsham.' 1 

1 It will be noticed that, m the charter, the lands held in Brudeford by Thomas and 
Richard are alluded to a; - their demesne lands." There is more than one meaning attached 
to the word "demesne " : it signifies, primarily, possession, but this is modified, according to 
Murray's Dictionary, as follows : - Applied either to the absolute ownership of the king or to 
the tenure of the person wh ) held land t his own use, mediately or immediately from the king 
Opposed to ' to hold in service ' ; if A held lands, immediately or mediately of the king, part of 
which he retained in his own hands, and part of which were in turn held of him by B, he was 
said to hold the former : in demesne,' and the latter 'in service.' B, in his turn, might hold 
his portion wholly ' in demesne,' or partly also ' in service,' by admitting a tenant under him." 

; Visitation of Yorkshire ; Rooert Glover, p. 217. 

1 S:e vol L, pp. :; ; 26c 

1 \ isitation of Yorkshire, p. 624. 


There are records of the tenure of lands in Middleton by 
Maunsells. In 1245 Alan de Kneton gave lands there to Henry 
Maunsell and his daughter Agnes ; and in 1528 there is mention of 
Richard Maunsell of Middleton ; l so possibly Ingram Mancell was 
of Middleton. Later, in 1645, Sir Thomas Dauby, Francis Danby, 
and Stephen Maunsell were parties in some litigation in connection 
with the compounding commission. The lands in question were in 
South Cave and Driffield, both of which are at some considerable 
distance hum Middleton ; but it appears probable, from the Danbys 
being concerned in the matter, that Stephen cam*? of the Middleton 

These pedigrees are, as is usual in the case of visitations, 
almost entirely devoid of dates ; Sybil Mancell may have been 
married about the year 1300, or somewhat earlier ; Sir William 
Manby, who married her granddaughter, is labelled " temp. 
Edward III.," which is sufficiently vague, covering a period of fifty 

Glover, in this pedigree, gives the arms of Mancell as follows : 
Sable, a chevron between three estoiles argent, a crescent in fess point 
for difference. This may be compared with the shield of the Dorset 
Mansells — sable, a chevron between three mullets argent. There 
is a curtain affinity between the estoile, or star, and the mullet, or 

In the Yorkshire Star Chamber Proceedings there is a petition 
by Christopher Tomlinson, who married Anne, daughter and co-heir 
of Thomas Maunsell, from which it appears that his other daughter, 
Jane, was married to Matthew Metcalfe ; also that the father of 
Thomas Maunsell was William of Birdforth. Tomlinson presents a 
long indictment against Matthew Metcalfe, his son John, and others 
for breaking and entering his house, etc. ; the result of his petition 
does not appear. Christopher Tomlinson's will was proved March 
28, I553- J 

Possibly Henry Maunsell of Birdforth, whose will was proved 

1 Yorb .^rch. Soc. Record Serie;. Vol. xii. : pp. 266. 267 ; vol. six., p. 216. 
>;A,7. Vol. u., F . 8. 


December 9, 1484, was father of William above referred to, and 
grandfather of Thomas. He makes bequests to his son Thomas, his 
daughters Elizabeth and Alice ; and to " William my son my best 
dish " — William being apparently the youngest, and perhaps under 
age when the will was made. 1 

Ic appear-- reasonable to assume that Thomas and Richard 
Maunsell held their lands in Brudeford " mediately " of the king— 
i.e., in the same manner as Henry, John, and Edmund subsequently 
held them in 1285, the year of Kirkby's Inquest ; and the use of the 
word " demesne " in the charter would confine the privilege of free 
warren to that portion which they held and occupied themselves, 
excluding any part which might be let to a sub-tenant. The grant 
of a weekly market and an annual fair in Brudeford indicates that 
they were persons of importance in the locality. 

Richard Maunsell was subsequently, in the year 1261, granted 
licence to hunt the hare, the fox, the badger, and the cat throughout 
the king's forests in the county of York ; - but this cannot have been 
the father of Edmund, as the suit concerning the guardianship of the 
latter occurred in 1.759, and it must be assumed that Richard was 
then dead. 

The charter of 1253 was issued in favour of Thomas and 
Richard Maunsell, and their heirs; it is therefore reasonable to 
assume that Henry, John, and Edmund, mentioned in Kirkby's 
Inquest in 1285, were the heirs of Thomas and Richard ; Edmund 
was son and heir of Richard, and the Richard who is named in the 
charter of 1261 was probably a younger son. Henry and John may 
have been sons of Thomas. 

There is one John Maunsell of Brudeford, already alluded to 
in the first volume, 3 who is placed by Mr. R. G. Maunsell as son of 
Richard ; he may, however, have been the son of Thomas. He 
married Isabel, daughter and co-heir of Sir Richard de St. Dennis, 
lord of the manor of Hempsted, in Norfolk ; her sister, Joan, married 
Roger le Ken, and the lordship was divided between them. Roger 

1 "Testaments Ebcr." Vol. v., p. 243. 
1 Cal. Patent Rolls, 1158-1:66; p. 194. 
3 See vol. i., p. 80. 


and Joan >o\d their moiety to Alexander de Walcote, August 24, 
1332. J 

The Yorkshire Maunsells thus became connected with the 
count}" of Norfolk about the beginning of the fourteenth century. 
The only earlier mention of the name in Norfolk occurs temp. 
Richard I. (1189-1199), -when Stephen le Mansel was lord of the 
manor of South Hall, otherwise named Carleton Hall.- This 
Stephen is isolated, and his derivation cannot be traced. 

Mr. R. G. Maunsell (p. 16) gives Richard Maunsell two other 
sons — Walter of Hoton, Cumberland, and Adam Walter and his 
son Patrick are vouched for by official documents as of Hoton, 3 
and though there is no actual proof that they were respectively son 
and grandson of Richard of Brudeford, their tenure of land in 
Cumberland appears to warrant the assumption. 

With Adam, however, the case is difierent. Mr. Maunsell 
states, correctly, that the king granted, in the year 1280, to Aunger 
de Chaucombe, " the office which Adam le Maunsell, of Horton, had 
in the priory of St. Swithin, Winchester, of the gift of Henry III., 
and which by the demise of the said Adam is in the king's gift by 
reason of the voidance ot the bishopric of Winchester." 4 

The alleged association of this Adam Maunsell of Horton, in 
Yorkshire, with Winchester demands some scrutiny before it can be 
accepted, Hampshire being so very remote from Yorkshire. It 
does not appear what " office " Adam held in St. Swithun's Priory ; 
but there are several villages or manors of Horton in England, and 
of these one is situated in Surrey and another in Hampshire. Mr. 
Maunsell has assumed that Adam belonged to Horton in Yorkshire, 
or, perhaps, to another of the same name in Cumberland ; but it is 
much more probable that he was of the Surrey Maunsells. who were 
settled in that county considerably before the date of this charter, 
and one of whom was constable of Guildford Castle in the reign of 
Henry III. : or possibly he was of Horton in Hampshire. 

1 '" History of Norfolk," by B'orneield. V,l. ix., p. 309. 
: Ibid., vol. ii., p. 405. 

3 Cal. Inq. Poit Mortem, Edward [. ; vol. iii., p. 99. Cal. Fine Rolh ; vol. i., p. 340. 
' Cal. Patent Rolls, 1272-1:81 ; p. 370. Tne See of Winchester was vacant through the 
death of Nicholas, formerly Bishop of El}-, in the ?ame year. 


The point is nut of great importance, however, as it neither 
furthers nor hinders the formation of any continuous pedigree of the 
Yorkshire Maunsells. 

At p. 385 (Nomina Villarum, 1316), " John Mansel is answer- 
able for one knight's fee in Tyverington " (alias Tirlington, or Tur 
Langton, in the parish of East Langton, Leicestershire). In a long 
footnote there is further reference to this John Maunsell, or Mansell, 
and others. In the year 1293 John .Maunsell did homage to the 
Archbishop of York, " in aula de Totenhale," in the presence of 
Richard de Eyvesby and others. John Maunsell did homage for a 
tenement in Tirlington in 1303 ; Isabella, Lady of Tirlington, 
formerly wife of John Maunsell. did homage in 1308 ; and Elias de 
Renede, who married Isabella, relict of John Maunsell, did homage 
in j 31 1. 

In February, 1308, Archbishop Greenfield granted to Isabella, 
" who was wife of John Mau lsell of Tirlington, the marriage of 
John, son and heir of the said John Maunsell, which pertains to us 
by reason of the minority of the said John, son of John, because the 
said John, father of the said John, held the manor of Tirlington from 
us by military service ; reserving to us the custody of all lands and 
tenements which the said John, father of the said John, held of us 
by the aforesaid service, together with the custody of one third part 
of the aforesaid manor of Tirlington, which Christiana, wife of 
Ranulph de Rye, holds as a marriage portion, when it takes place." 

On May 5, 1310, the archbishop acknowledged the receipt of 
twenty marks " from the Lady Isabella formerly widow of the 
lord 1 John Maunsell of Tirlington in the county of Leicester, in part 
payment of sixty marks in which the said Lady Isabella is indebted 
to us for the marriage of John Maunsell, her son." 

Early in the fourteenth century there was one John Maunsell 
who was of Ossett ; - his name occurs many times in deeds, Court 
Rolls, etc. ; indeed, he appears to have been frequently fined for 

1 I.e., Lord of the Manor ; the terms " dorninus " and " domina " are frequently made 
u=e of in this sense, implying the possession of any title of nubility. 

* Ossett is near Wakefield, a considerable township, with about 14,000 inhabitants. In 
1S34 the population was over 4.000. (Alle l's " History of York.!. ire " ; vol. iii., p. 294.) 


various petty delinquencies, and to have been of a quarrelsome 
disposition. In 1309 John's cattle got into the cornfield of Thomas 
le Pindcr ; Thomas was proceeding to impound the cattle, pending 
a plea of trespass, but John forcibly prevented him ; whereupon they 
came to blows. Thomas, having presumably struck the first blow, 
was made to pay 4d. damages and 6d. fine ; while John was also 
fined and had to pay damages for not fencing his cattle ; so justice 
seems to have been impartially administered. 

In September, 1314, there is record of an agreement between 
John Maunsell and Richard Snart ; this arrangement, however, 
apparently led to some serious disagreement in the following year, 
for on October 18, 13:5, an inquisition found that Richard, son of 
John de Ossett (possibly John Maunsell of Ossett) and others procured 
Reginald Snart to assault John Maunsell. Reginald may have been 
brother to Richard, or possibly identical with him ; there was 
frequently great carelessness in the matter of Christian names. This 
is undoubtedly the same John who came to blows with Thomas le 
Finder five or six years previously ; on this occasion, however, the 
inquisition found in his favour, and Reginald, in fear of punishment, 
wrote to John suggesting a compromise. John replied that, as the 
matter was before the court, no amercement: — i.e., penalty or com- 
pensa ion — was possible ; Reginald and the others went to prison. 
There is no indication of the derivation of this litigious John Maun- 
sell ; all that is certain about him is that he held some land or 
property in Ossett. 

There is one Edmund Maunsell, whose name appears as 
witness to a great number of deeds, etc., from about 12S0 to 1357 ; 
he is of Horton, and is probably the son of Richard and Alice, the 
bastard half-sister of Osbert de Arches ; the later deeds, in 1353 and 
1357, were probably witnessed by Edmund's son, of the same name. 

There is no manner of certainty, however, about the mutual 
relationship of these various Maunsells. Harrison appears to have 
discovered a consideral l< amount of evidence concerning the several 
generations which are included in his pedigree ; but it is probable 
that some of the steps in this are no more than assumptions. 

1 information concerning the issue of Henry 


Maunsell of Wynton (Winton) in a reprint from the "Yorkshire 
Archaeological Journal." 1 

From this it appears that, about the year 1268, John, son of 
Michael, and Joan his wife bound themselves to pay scutage a for 
their land in Foxton, in the parish of Sigston, to Philip de Colville. 
Among the witnesses was Sir Thomas Maunsell ; possibly that same 
Sir Thomas, knighl banneret, who was taken prisoner and wounded 
at the siege of Northampton, in 1264, 3 and who is placed tentatively 
in the family pedigree as the eldest son of John Maunsell, Piovost of 

In the same year John, .-on of Michael, and Joan his wife 
figure in a plea concerning lands in Foxton. Michael's eldest son, 
Brian, who held land in Sigston, died without issue, and was suc- 
ceeded in the tenure by his brother John, who then assumed the title 
of John of Sigston (sometimes spelled Sixton). In the year 1283 
John, son of John, son of Michael de Sigston, and his wife Ilria, relict 
of Geoffrey de Mannby, gave certain lands to the master and brethren 
of St. Leonard's Hospital, York. 

In the year 1314 John son of John, son of Michael de Sigston, 
and Joan his wife brought an action against John de la More and 

B his wife for a division of the estates in C of Henry Mancell 

(or Maunsell. , father of Joan and B , who died without male 

issue. .Maunsell had granted the manor of Berreford * in frank 
marriage 5 with his daughter Joan. 

In the year 1323 John de Wauxand (or\Yassand) and Joan 
his wife granted to Sir John de Sigston, knight, certain lands in 
Winton, part of Joan's inheritance ; from which it is evident that 

p \Tc H f* 1< i i - C ^ lr0m Ins!sby Arnecliffe and Kilkb -'- % 5 ^ Churches," by William 

Brawn, F.S.A. ; kindly contrib ited, with some notes and references, by the author. ' 

2 " Scutage "—a tax !< ied u; m knights' fees. 

* See vol. i., p. S3. 

' Berreford-not to be confounded with Brudeford-sometimes spelled Burdford 
Berre.ord (on^ully Berefcud, i.e., B.rley Field, and later Bereseude) was near Sigston Bridge 
now known a; Sigston Cs tie, though in the -ari.h of Winton. 

s " Frank marriage"- a t-ru-?:.-. i ..-.:■■ ,,i •,,y-,\ , ■■ - id his wife held lands wanted 
to them by the father or other near relative of 1 , estate being heritable to the fourth 

generation of heirs oi th< : bodie wii n .- . - [eaity 


Joan Maunsell, after the death of John of Sigston, married as her 
second husband John of Wassand. 

The subjoined sketcli pedigree shows the relationships more 

Michael de Ryiiiix, 1238-9 = Alice de Flamville 

John, son of Michael, = Joan Colvillc, =Henry Maunsell of Wynton. son 

'264-68 126S I ofWilliamof Mortham, 1314 

I (Harrison' s Pedigree) 


Bryan, 1284- Ilria, relet of = John, son of = Joan, dau. = John de Was- 
85, o.s.p. Geoff. Mann- John, son j and co- sjnd, 1323 

by, 1283 (1st of Mich- I heir, 1314, 

wife) ael, 1283- j 1323 

1314 (1st j I 

husband) B— , dau. and = John de la 

co-heir, 1314 More, 1314 

Sir John of Sigston, Lnt., 

Henry Maunsell held lands in Birdforth, Winton, and Hali- 
keld in 12S4-5 : John de Wassand and John de la More held lands in 
Brudeford in 1316. 1 

In discussing the coats-of-arms displayed in the windows and 
elsewhere in Sigston church, the author of the article writes : " The 
attribution of the arms on the remaining shield is not free from 
doubt. The arms depicted are, argent, a cross sable with two cres- 
cents of the second in chief. The nearest approach to this is that of 
the family of Waxand, which derived its designation from a place 
now called Wassand, in the parish of Sigglesthorne, near Hornsea. 
Their arms were : argent, a fess gules and two crescents in chief of 
the second. Although these arms are also carved on a stone now 
lying on the sill below, it seems not unlikely that they are a variation 
of the Wassand bearingb. especially as that family was connected 
with Sigston." In a footnote with reference to this paragraph is the 
following : " On the same block is carved a shield with a cross 
patonce. Papworth and Burke attribute, but without giving their 
authority, Sable, a cross sarcelly (cercelee), quarterlv gold and silver, 

1 - Kirkby's Inquest," pp. 04, 103 ; ihul. (■• Nomina Villaruin "), p. 323. 



to Mornsell. If this is a form of Maunsell, the association with 
Wassand is explained later on." 

It is quite possible that Mornsell is a form of Maunsell ; the 
fantastic variations in the spelling of the name have already been 
noticed. The relevancy of the allusion in the footnote is not, 
however, very apparent. A cioss patonce is about as different from 
a cross ccrcelce as one cross can be from another ; but perhaps the 
writer intends to suggest that tie introduction of the cress sable in 
the Wassand coat-of-arms is due to the Maunsell marriage. As Joan 
and her sister were co-heirs of Henry Maunsell, this may quite 
possibly be the c?se. 

This record supplements Harrison's pedigree in a minor 
point, showing that Henry Maunsell of Wynton had two daughters 
and no son, and connects one daughter with Sigston. 

The Maunsells appear to have held lands in Ossett con- 
tinuously, as there is a record of Alice, daughter of John Maunsell of 
Wakefield, in 1364, and of William in 1557 in this connection ; but 
the intervening links are wanting. 

The will of William Maunsell of Ossett. in the parish of 
Dewsbury. was proved on January 21, 1557. He desires to be 
buried in the parish church of Dewsbury ; he gives " one-third of all 
my houses, lands and personal estate to Agnes my wife. To Thomas 
my son my head house that I dwell in, also my fields and lands at 
Ossett, and one acre at Horbury. To Roger my son two closes 
called Raven Roods, one cottage, etc. To Alys my daughter £20 in 
money and goods ; to Anne my daughter the same ; residue to 
Agnes my wife, Thomas and Roger my sons, whom I make 

Here are the sons Thomas and Roger to continue the con- 
nection with Ossett, but we hear no more about them. Horbury 
is about six miles north from Ossett. 

In the year 1402 the following charter patent was issued : 

" 1 May, Westminst' License for the king's knight Hugh 
de Waterton, Robert a-:- Waterton, John Nevylle of Shirwoode, 
Richard, vicar of the church of Darthyngton (Darrington), and 
Thomas Mountefort, chaplain, to found a chantry in honour of St. 


Mar}' in the said church and to grant in mortmain 1 lands and rents 
to the value of 10 marks yearly to a chaplain to celebrate divine 
service in the church for the good estate of the King and his heirs 
and lor his soul after death and the souls of Ids progenitors and of 
Thomas Maunsell and Agnes his wife and their ancestors, heirs and 
benefactors." - 

Darrington is about two and a half miles south-east from 
Pontefract. That this chantry was duly founded and maintained 
there is evidence in the year i5-)6, when King Henry VIII. bethought 
him that lie had been neglecting opportunities of further plunder in 
the matter of the numerous chantries, etc., scattered about the 
kingdom. Sir Rhys Mansel. it will be recollected, was one of the 
king's commissioners in Wales upon this business. 3 viz., the visitation 
of the chantries and a report of their history, their respective founders, 
their endowments, and the value of plate and other articles contained 
in them. 

The report of the commission is as follows : " Thomas 
Hawkesworth, priest, incumbent. The same is of the ordinance of 
Thomas Maunsell. whereof they show no writing. The said incum- 
bent should pray for the soul of the founder and all Christian souls, 
by the report of the curate of the same church and other parishioners 
there. The same is within the said parish church, etc. Goods 
7s. 6d. Plate nil." 

Then follows an inventory of the various lands, with their 
values in rental, the total being £6 9s. ad. ; deductions for the yearly 
tenth payable to the king, and other sums to various persons, amount 
to £1 10s. od., leaving a balance of £4 19s. ad. ; not a very richly 
endowed chantry. 4 

The opening sentence of the commissioners' report appears 
to clash with the terms of the Patent above quoted, wherein it is 

1 " Mortmain " — the condition of lands or tenements held inalienably by an ecclesiastical 
or other corporation. 

2 Cal. Pat. Rolls, 1401-1405 ; p. 96. 

3 See vol. i., p. 324. 

1 "Certificates of the Commissioners appointed to Sur.'ey the Chantries, Guilds, Hos- 
pitals, etc., in the County of York." Vol. ii., pp. 354, 355. (Sartees Society's publications, 
vol. xcii.) The English is here modernised. 


clearly set forth that Sir Hugh de Waterton, Robert de Waterton, 
and the others have licence to found a chantry in Darrington church 
for the soul of Thomas Maunsell and his wife Agnes ; prayers for the 
" O ood estate of the King," etc.. form merely a customary pre- 
liminary. The chantry was founded by these several persons for 
the good of the souls of Thomas Maunsell and his wife ; there is 
nothing to show that Maunsell had anything to do with the founda- 
tion, and there is evidence that he was no longer living. The 
commissioners had no right to expect to find any " writing " by 
him: probably both they and the incumbent were unaware of the 
terms of the original Patent, and loosely adopted the assumption 
that Maunsell was the founder, on the ground that the chantry was 
founded for his benefit. 

There are some official records concerning this Thomas 
Maunsell which do not present him in a very favourable 

On March 24, 1391, we find the following: "Pardon, out 
of regard for the day, Good Friday, and at the supplication of John 
Maxficld, to Thomas Maunsell for the death of John Musard, 
killed oi\ 1 August, 1390." x 

On July 12, 1391, Thomas is again pardoned, " at the suppli- 
cation of the king's cousin, the Earl of Derby," 2 in respect of a 
formidable array of offences which, though not involving murder or 
manslaughter, constitute collectively a very odious and unsavoury 
catalogue of misdeeds, which may be summarised as follows : 
Harbouiing murderers, and receiving lands, tenements, etc., for so 
doing ; assenting to a murder, and bribing the jury to acquit the 
prisoners, whom he afterwards held " at fee and livery for the cause 
aforesaid, and is a maintainer and supporter of them, and a common 
oppressor of the people and of the duke's (of Lancaster) tenants 
within the honour of Pontefract, to the duke's damage of £1,000 ; 
and further, for harbouring at Cridlyng (Cridling) Richard de Barton 
of Malton by YVath. and others, well knowing that on Monday after 
the octave of St. Martin in the same year at Kirksmethon they 

Cal. Pat. Rolls 1388-1392 ; p. 391. 

Henry, Earl of Derby, ion of John of Gaunt, 


ravished Matilda, late the wife of Walter de Rosseby, and in doing 
so killed Richard de Scargill." ' 

Truly, Thomas was in sore need of the king's pardon, and of 
prayers for his soul. 

Among the wills in the York Registry occurs the name of 
Thomas Maunsell of Credilyng (Cridling, or Cridling Stubbs, a small 
township in the parishes of Womersley and Darrington, six miles 
east of Pontefract). His will is dated July 12, 1396, but it is not 
clear in what year it was proved. He desires to be buried " in the 
new chapel of the Blessed Virgin Mary, within the church of all 
Saints, Darrington "■; the residuary legatee and sole executrix is 
his wife Agnes. 2 

From this document it would appear that there existed in 
1396 a new chapel to the Blessed Virgin in Darrington church, as 
distinct from the chantry afterwards founded there in 1402, which 
was also dedicated to St. Mary. 

The Yen. Archdeacon H. Armstrong Hall, writing from 
Methley Rectory, Leeds, in reply to some enquiries concerning the 
chantry at Darrington. adds to his notes the following remark : 
" I don't know how I got it into my head that the Watertons and 
John Nevylle had knocked Thomas Maunsell on the head, and were 
compelled to found this chantry as an act of reparation." 

The hypothesis is by no means wildly improbable ; some 
explanation is needed to account for the erection of a chantry by 
these several persons for the benefit of a man to whom they were in 
no way related. The identity of Thomas Maunsell of Cridling with 
that very unscrupulous Thomas tor whom the Earl of Derby inter- 
ceded with the king is quite clear ; and it must be reluctantly 
confessed that he was the sort of person who might very likely incur 
the wrath of decent men, even to the extent of the extreme measure 
of putting him to death. Life was held somewhat cheap in those 
days, and official records teem with instances of royal pardon for 
this offence. 

1 Cal. Pat. Rolls, 1388-1392 ; p. 4.63. 

: Yorkshire Archaeological Society, Record Series, vol. vi., p. 113. York Register of 
Wills, fol. 1, vol. xcix. 


The following entry in the Yorkshire Fines establishes ap- 
proximately the year of Thomas Maunsell's death : " Henry, King 
&c. Whereas our father the King l lately granted to Agnes late wife 
of Thomas Maunsell the site of the Manor of Cridling for the term of 
her life ; the King doth now confirm the said gift " 3 (1402). 

From' this it would appear that Thomas Maunsell died 
between July 12, 1396, the date of his will, and September 29, 1399, 
the date of King Richard's abdication, since the grant was made 
in the first instance by Richard, and its terms clearly involve the 
fact of Maunsell's death, the manor being granted to his widow. 

The site of the chantry in question is undoubtedly on the 
north side of the church, at the east end ; but the structure which 
here projects beyond the north aisle is now variously known as the 
Scargill Chapel, the Stapleton Chapel, and the Maunsell Chapel ; 
and we have the evidence, already quoted, in Maunsell's will, that 
this was a new chapel in 1396, dedicated to the Blessed Virgin. 
Scargill and Stapleton were ancient Yorkshire families, and had 
intermarried in the thirteenth century. 

It appears probable that the chantry founded by the 
Watertons and John Nevylle for the benefit of Thomas Maunsell 
and his wife consisted in the erection of a separate altar in this 
chapel, at which mass was to be said exclusively for the repose of 
their souls. 

In connection with this chapel there is a fine stone rood-loft, 
in perfect condition, and still accessible by a spiral stone staircase, 
entered from the chapel, which ha? been recently converted into an 
organ chamber. 

In the east wall of Darrington church there is a curious and 
perhaps unique crucifix, which was removed by the present vicar 
(191 S) from the garden wall of an old farmhouse in Cridling Park, 
and thus placed for preservation. The peculiarity consists in the 
introduction of a second transverse beam, longer than the upper one, 

1 This is a curious mistake : Richard II. was not father to Henry IV. ; his father was 
John of Gaunt. Possibly the charter originally contained, or was intended to contain, the 
words '• King of Castile," a title which John of Gaant held by his second marriage rvith Constance, 
eldest surviving daughter and he:- of Fed--, kir.s : •' C ile ■- - Lern 

: V- *■'" ' '■ ' L '-~- -•'- <■■ h2?oiogicaI Society, vol. x., p. 371. 


about half-way down the upright shaft. The crucifix is stated 
upon good authority to date back to the end of the twelfth century. 

There was one John Maunsell who, at the end of the thirteenth 
and beginning of the fourteenth century, held the office of verderer 
of the Forest of Galtres. There were several of these verderers ; 
the duties of the office consisted in caring .for the trees and under- 
growth of the forest, and also in keeping the assizes, viewing, 
receiving, and enrolling attachments and presentments of all manner 
of trespass. The locality of the Forest of Galtres does not seem 
clear ; but we find John Maunsell alluded to as verderer in 1295, 
1296, and later in 1304 and 1306. He does not appear, however, to 
have taken his duties serious!}- ; perhaps the emoluments of the 
office were not liberal enough to compensate for the trouble involved 
in punctilious performance of the various duties above enumerated. 
At any rate. John did not latterly give satisfaction, for in the year 
1311 we find the following : " 4 April. Order to the Sheriff of York 
to cause three verderers for the forest of Galtres to be elected in the 
places of Walter le Graunt, John Maunsell, and Robert de Shupton, 
whom the king has amoved for insufficiency." '- 

As in so many instances the relationship of this John Maunsell 
to others of the name is obscure ; he may have been of Brudeford, 
or of Ossett. It is not possible to place him. 

Another office which was held by one Henry Maunsell is that 
of Keeper of York Castle. 

" 8 Feb. 1400. Grant for life to the King's Esquire, Henry 
Maunsell, of the offices of gaoler, keeper, and porter of the castle of 
York, with the accustomed fees, wages, and other profits for the 
offices of gaoler and keeper, and 2d daily for the wages of porter at 
the hands of the Sheriff of York." 3 

This same Henry, " King's Esquire." on February 24 in the 

1 '• An Ancient Sculpture atCridling Park." by Richard Holmes. " Yorkshire Archaeo- 
logical Journal," vol. xi., pp. 18-2Z. This and other details concerning the chantr ', etc., in 
Darrington church have been kindly commuiicated by the Rev. Canon H. S. Atkinson, the 
present vicar. 

- Cal. Close Rolls, 1307-1313 ; p. 305 

' Ibid., 1399-1401 ; p. 192. 


same year was granted for life / 10 yearly from the custom and subsidy 
in the port of Kyngestone and Hull. 1 

On September 6 following : " Two prisoners having escaped 
from the gaol of the castle of York out of the custody of Henry 
Maunsell, keeper of the gaol, the Kino pardons to the said Henry all 
that pertains to him in this." 2 

Apparently there were more escapes a few weeks later, or 
perhaps the Patent was repeated, as not infrequently occurs, without 
apparent reason ; at any rate, on November ij the pardon of Henry 
Maunsell under similar circumstances is recorded. 3 
_ Then perhaps it occurred to the keeper that these untoward 

incidents might not always be so leniently regarded, and that some 
explanation is due. 

. "fl N ° V " .Whereas the King's Esquire, Henry Maunsell, 

keeper of the King s gaol within the castle of York, has informed the 
King that the castle is ruinous, and lacking in bonds of iron, so that 
felons and other evil doers often escape ; the lung has appointed the 
Sheriff of \ ork to make -cod the defects." J - 

It is remarkable that similar dilapidations and defects were 
by no means uncommon in keens and strongholds, etc., in these and 
earlier times. When John Maunsell, the chancellor and favourite 
of King He„ ry II].. was appointed Constable of the Tower of London 
he found it necessary to apply for fund, to repair the building, which 
was, he reported, insecure against atta th king's enemies 1 his 

was during the Barons' Wars, ■ and there are other instances. 
The British manana is responsible for as many catastrophes, perhaps 
as that of the Spaniard ! V 

This Henry Maunsell was evidently in considerable favour 
with the king ; the title of ' king's esquire " indicates that he held 

upon-H^ ; tt T;^:^,Zll^ d — * ™ «. » Kin, 

Hid., P . 560. 


P- 37°. 

'_ /W.,pp. 377) 37 8 Though this record precec 
See vol. i., p. 177, 



some office — probably a purely honorary post — in the king's house- 
hold. On this same elate we find the grant to him of February 24 
repeated, " surrendered because invalid," and learn that he had 
meanwhile been granted the " office of parker of the park of Kilburn 
with wages of 1 id. daily and 30s. ad. yearly for his lift- from the issues 
of the manor of Kilburn." ] 

On the same date — November 17 — Henry Maunsell's patent 
as keeper of York Castle is also repeated, " surrendered because 
invalid." There was apparently some irregularity with regard to the 
seal used for these documents. Henry is here alluded to as the 
" King's servant." 

Maunsell did not, however, retain his post in York Castle for 
life, as provided for in the original patent, as the following 
demonstrates : 

" 12 May, 1402. Grant to William de Hoton of the 
offices of gaoler, keeper, and porter of the Castle of York, in 
lieu of a like grant to Henry Maunsell by letters patent sur- 
rendered." 3 

Why Henry Maunsell surrendered his patent, whether volun- 
tarily or by compulsion, there does not appear to be any evidence. 
Perhaps it was just a royal caprice ; such favours were held entirely 
at the will of the reigning monarch, and if King Henry desired to 
find a good post for William de Hoton the terms of the original 
patent would not be permitted to stand in the way. Henry Maunsell 
would probably be called upon to surrender it, and would have no 
option but to comply. 

However, the grant to him of £10 yearly, on November 17, 
1401, was confirmed on June 12. 1413, and July 8, 1423, 3 by King 
Henry's two successors, on coming to the throne. 

There is mention, in a letter fiom Robert Lyster to the Earl 

1 Cal. Pat. Rolls, 1401-1405 ; p, 15. The Srst patent was invalid ''because grants from 
the subsidy were annulled in the last Parliament." The appointment as " parker " of Kilburn 
was issued, we are told, " ui der r ; ' ised by the King when he was Earl of Derby " ; but it 

is aot stated to be on that account in\ahd. 

- Ibid., p. Q2. 

3 Ibid., I413-I416; p. 40. 1422-1429; p. 136. 


of^Shrewsbury, December 2 , I53 S, of one M^^^I^Tyo^ 

remark?-^' r * "^ ? Y °* ^ b ^ ^roductory 
remarks says . For over eight hundred years the Castle of York 
has held a distinguished place in the annals of England It hat 
memories deeply associated with our national history and the struggle 
or civil and religious liberty. Here momentous Councils of War 
he ancient Courts of Exchequer and of the King's Bench have' 
.quently been held It was the King's storehouse and armoury 
01 the North , and here sturdy craftsmen fabricated the long bow A^t ^ WeaP ° nS ° f War - • • " AS the Pri«« for th 
whole of Northumbna. not a few brave Englishmen have been led 
through its gates to an ignominious death. Martyrs for conscience 
sake have died broken-hearted within its dark dungeons A 

Royal Mint was sometime established within its walls. ' ' Many 
notable events are associated with the old fortress; and 'as the 
centre of authority in the North h has played many parts thTou'l 
successive ages and generations." • *arougn 

rn t Y + °" k ^; tle ' ' di ' firSt erected b >- W ^iam the Conqueror, was 

to bfh T t r^ ° f th ° ^^ X ° rman ^rongholds. which had 
to be hurriedly -built to meet the exigencies of the moment_of earth 

eatrasV rd' *? *"" ^~^— known, for lome 
reason as Clifford s Tower-was built in the reign of Henry III 
upon the original mound-or " motte "-which formerly held the 

ii z wo r r n k r p , , Durin§ the reigns ° f Ed - rd j ^ e ^ 

astone wall and f s —ding the keep were replaced by 

a stone wal and sundry stone towers and other structures were added 
_ At the time when Henry Maunsell was keeper there was 
proviso withm the castle for the Courts of Exchequer and Kin- 
Bench, the Royal Mint, and lodgings for royal visitors besfdes a 
gaol-house, which may have been of masonry, but which, as w have 
^n, was not altogether effectual as a place of detention. The othe 

buildings were of timber and plaster. 

Letters and Papers of tie Reign of Henry VIII. Vol 

l--,n--„ ■ \- . r ;"-•'-- lx -i^ °r nenrv Vlll. Vo . xiii ^ ii n ,, v 

lso o,.ur, .a Yorkshire Star Chamber proceedings, in r 5+I . ' ' l 

' " The History of the Castle of York/' by T. P. Cooper ; pp. i, 2 . 


A plan of the castle in 1910 shows that it contains the gaol- 
built on the radial plan— with the mound and the old keep beside 
it ; a spacious yard, with the court-house on the south-west side, 
and the old gaol building near it, all enclosed within a high wall, 
the River Foss skirting the eastern boundary. 1 

Among the Inquisitions Post Mortem, 7 Edward I. (1279), 
occurs that of Walter Giffard. Archbishop of York, which contains 
the following entry : " Burlay in the wapentake of Skireock. The 
manor, which he bought of Sir Ralph Maunsell, to be held by him 
and his heirs of the Archbishop of York for the time being, by service 
of half a knight's fee, and suit at the archbishop's court of Ottelay." a 
Burlay is Burley-in-Wharfedale ; the Maunsells appear to 
have held land there continuously, for a grant of land there was 
made by Ralph, son of German Maunsell, in the year 1437 ; 3 but 
the intermediate steps cannot be traced. 

In the year 1260, at the York Assizes, the question was raised 
as to whether Peter de Manley unjustly obstructed a certain way in 
Lokington to the nuisance of the free tenement of John Maunsell, 
the reeve of Beverley. * 

The word " reeve " has more than one signification ; it may 
either mean the chief magistrate of a town, or a bailiff or agent. In 
this instance it probably bears the first interpretation ; to speak of 
the agent of a town would be somewhat of an absurdity. It would 
appear improbable at fust sight that this John Maunsell the reeve 
should be identical with the Provost of Beverley. There is evidence, 
however, that this was the case ; he is alluded to in official records 
as 'John Maunsell, treasurer of York and reeve of Beverley." 5 
That he could have had leisure to perform the duties of this office 

1 " The History of the Castle of York," by T. P. Cooper ; pp. 8", 88, 247. 

2 Inq. Post Mortem, Edward I, vol. ii., no. 314. Walter Giiard was a man of great 
importance in has day. He was made chancellor in 1265, and was one of the arbitrators for 
framing the award of Kenilworth in the folbwing year ; on the death of Henry III., in 1272, 
he held the Great Seal, and was one of the deputies appointed to govern die kingdom until 
the return of Edward I. from France in 1274. It is curious that Giffard's name is omitted 
from the list of Archbishops of York in Dugdale's Monasticon (vol. vi., pt. iii., p. 11-;). 

' Yorkshire Arch^o'cgiral Societv Record Series. Vol. Uiix., p. 42. 
4 Ibid., vol. xliv., P . no. 


it is not, in view of the minute record of hiTdoTngs at this period 
poss^to believe; probably he cmployed a ^ as J^; 

In the year 1536 Robert Haldes worth, vicar of Halifax 
presented a long petition to the king, which was referred to the 
Yorkshire Star Chamber. 

vear hJlns" frT ^ ^ le f' resented tha * » March of that 
J ear he was in God s peace and yours, sovereign Lord at his said 
vicarage o Halifax, meaning nor intending any^vil to any person 
when one John Lacy, son-in-law to Sir Richard Tempest bebS 
steward to your grace of the lordship of Wakefield [others also named 
and one Richard Maunsell, of the city of York, servants and officer 
unto the said Sir Richard Tempest . . . came and repaired unto 
the sa:d village of Halifax, then being riotously arrayed with swords 
bucklers daggers, staves, and other weapons invasive, riotously and 
forcibly brake and entered into the said vicarage, and then and there 
made assault upon your said orator, and put him in fear and jeo^ 

The vicar has Luther complaints against these and other 
"and concludes with a very Ion, list of articles ore b ly 

X PI : d " ^ S T ° f UhiCh ^ ° bvi0U ^ ° f considerable 

value, and prays that these persons may be brought before the 
king s court at Westminster to answer for their misdeeds ' 
f . + J hlS * a S f I0US indic tment against Richard Maunsell and 
the others ; but there is a considerable amount of evidence forth- 
coming to show that Robert Haldesworth was not such a peaceable 
and well-disposed individual as he would have us believe 

rebH,^ 6 T " TT ° f SUbStanCe ' and ln the P reviou5 ^ar had 
rebuilt a portion of the vicarage, in process of which he found a s um 
of money amounting, according to his own account, to i" 3 oo ~but 
e sewhere stated to have been a much larger sum, concealed "in an 
old wall. Haldesworth can scarcely be blamed if he considered that 
he had a right to the money, but others were of a different opinion. 
Inaj etter from Christopher Jen neyJoThoma^m^n ^0^, 

1 Yorkshire Arch. Society Record Series, vol. xlv, p. 184 It >,g~~ 



remarks, apropos, of this find : " You may do as you like here, 
for the King's general pardon does not pardon treasure trove." 1 

This was certainly true enough of Henry VIII., who had no 
scruples about laying hands upon money, whether he was justly 
entitled to it or not ; but he evidently had a truculent and rebellious 
subject in Robert Haldesworth. 

On March 27, 1535. Jenney writes to Cromwell: "Dr. 
Haldesworth. Vicar of Halifax, is accused of very shameful words, 
sounding to treason, for which, if true, he deserves imprisonment for 
life. Has bound him and his accuser to appear before your master- 
ship and the Lord Chancellor next term. The Vicar is said to be a 
man of great substance, and to have deceived the King very much at 
the time of his valuation." 2 

On September 21 one William Bodinam, formerly servant 
with Haldesworth, lays information against him: "The vicar had 
said to him that he had lost upon mortuaries taken by the King from 
that one benefice 80 marks, and that if the King weie to reign much 
longer he would take all from the church. He added also these 
words : ' a pou Herre all Yngland mey werre ' (upon Henry all 
England may war ?). Has not deposed to these words till he was 
advised to appear before his friend Sir Richard Tempest, Steward of 
Wakefield." 3 

A few days later, on September 28, Sir Richard Tempest, 
writing to Cromwell, says : " Since, by Cromwell's command, he 
showed Serjeant St. Johns where Dr. Haldesworth. Vicar of Halifax, 
was, the Vicar lias delivered to him (Tempest) and his sons clivers 
injunctions, under a penalty of 500 marks, to keep the peace against 
him and not burn his house. He is very cruel, and is maintained by 
Sir Henry Saved. He reports he shall have 1000 marks to put his 
neighbours and use to trouble. Since he departed from you he has 
been indicted for felony at York assizes. An information was given 
to the justices that he had found great sums of gold in an old wall of 
a house." 

1 Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. ix., p. 10. 
* Ibid., vol. viii., p. 17S. 
' Ibid., vol. ix., p. 133. 


Tempest encloses a petition from Haldesworth's parishioners, 
in which many serious cruelties and misdemeanours are laid against 
him, winding up with the assertion : " He does not scruple to 
forswear himself by his priesthood, by St. John Baptist, or by any 
book before him, if he can turn it to his profit, or to the hurt of his 
parishioners." > 

There is another side to this story, however ; Sir Richard 
Tempest maintained a constant feud with his neighbour, Sir Henry 
Saville, who was a staunch ally of Haldesworth ; and it may well be 
that all these charges were trumped up by Sir Richard, whose 
influence would probably be quite equal to obtaining signatures to 
the petition, and so forth. Haldesworth was summoned to London 
to answer the charges against him ; he was, however, acquitted, or 
pardoned, and returned full of boasts as to what he would do to 
Tempest and others, saying that he had " cast such a flower into the 
queen's lap" that he would be heard as soon as Tempest. 

In what sense Richard Maunsell of York was a " servant " of 
Sir Richard Tempest is not quite clear ; it probably means that he, 
with the others, was urged and incited by Sir Richard to perpetrate 
the outrage at the vicarage, which cannot be defended from any 
point of view. 

Robert Haldesworth (or Holdsworth) appears later in con- 
nection with what is termed " The Pilgrimage of Grace," concerning 
which there is a good deal to be said, seeing that more than one 
Maunsell took a prominent part in it.' 3 

The causes which led up to the Northern Rebellion, or Pil- 
grimage of Grace, were no doubt in the first instance the king's cruel 
treatment of Katharine of Aragon, his marriage with Anne Boleyn, 
his assumption of ecclesiastical supremacy in his own realm, 
and the suppression of the smaller monastic houses which speedily 

1 Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. ix., pp. 151, 152. 

2 The account here given of this great upheaval is in large measure taken from " The 
Pilgrimage of Grace and the Exeter Conspiracy," by Madeleine Hope Dodds and Ruth Dodds 
(1915). These two ladie 3 have written an admirable history of the whole affair, in die spirit 
of true historians, giving full authority and reasons for all their statements and deductions, 
without bias. 



Queen Katharine was universally admired and beloved, while 
Anne Boleyn, partly on account of her usurpation of Katharine's 
position as the king's wife, and partly by reason of her discreditable 
philanderings, with the king and others, before her marriage, which 
gossip speedily communicated, with or without exaggeration, was 
held in contempt and hatred. 

Then came the matter of the " New Learning " in religion ; 
the declaration of the king as supreme head of the Church in England ; 
the martyrdom of Sir Thomas More, Bishop Fisher, and others for 
no other cause than their maintenance of papal jurisdiction. 

News travelled slowly in those clays, and even when such 
startling and disturbing rumours as these first permeated country 
districts they were at the outset received with a certain amount of 
incredulity. Nor is this altitude in the least surprising ; Henry had 
not up to that time revealed himself as the monster of cruelty which 
he eventually became, and these firstfruits of the new development 
of his character were indeed, at first sight, incredible. 

Nevertheless, as time went on, and rumour crystallised into 
fact, there began to be much searching of hearts and shaking of 
heads among the people, simple and gentle, priest and layman. 

Symptoms of unrest and rebellion were apparent in many 
quarters. Naturally the wave of antagonism spread from the home 
counties northward ; and the expression, by word or act, of resent- 
ment was more speedily apparent in the Midlands than in the 
northern counties, not only on account of the greater distance of the 
latter from the capital, but also by reason of the northern tempera- 
ment. The north-countryman is naturally reticent of speech, 
cautious of action ; but he has to be reckoned with very seriously 
when once he makes up his mind. 

The suppression of the monasteries, supervening upon these 
other disturbing events, kindled the smouldering fires to a blaze. 
Not that the king was without adherents and supporters ; such he 
undoubtedly had, whether from self-interest or conviction ; more 
probably the former in almost every instance, for it is difficult to 
believe that even the most ignorant could be sincerely persuaded of 
his good faith and probity in the matter of his marriage, and his 


repudiation of papal jurisdiction, which were so obviously bound up 

It may be that these amenities were not completely 
comprehended among the common people, though a general 
condition of unrest and resentment prevailed ; but when they 
beheld the monks being turned out of their houses, their lands 
appropriated and sold to the highest bidder, or bestowed upon 
already wealthy men, the objects of the king's favour, their buildings 
dismantled and unroofed, reducing to a scene of desolation the well- 
kept enclosures and hospitable dwellings which they had been used 
for generations to regard, together with their inmates, with 
admiration and respect, they commenced to realise that they were 
in the hands of a cruel and relentless tyrant, who would stop at 
nothing to gain Ids ends. 

Thomas Cromwell was, indeed, the first to suggest the 
appropriation of monastic lands to the king ; and he was already 
hated by lords and gentlemen, priests and commoners— hated in the 
first instance by gentlemen, as an upstart of low origin who had risen 
to a post of high importance, 1 and regarded also with suspicion and 
bitter hostility as a zealous supporter and exponent of the New 
Learning, which was almost universally held in detestation by a 
people naturally conservative in their instincts, and alive also to the 
nature of the king's motives, both in the matter of his repudiation of 
the pope and the suppression of the monasteries. 

The religions houses were naturally centres of revolt against 
the new regime ; the monks were always foremost in denouncing it 
in fiery discourses, which stirred up the people to fiercer resentment, 
until the dour and stubborn spirit of the northerners prompted the 
seeking of some means whereby their ancient faith might be retained 
among them. 

Instances of defection were not, indeed, unknown among the 
religious ; there is extant a letter from one Robert Ward, a friar, to 
Cromwell, wherein the writer describes certain stained class windows 

1 Thomas Cromwell (created Baron Cromwell, July 9, 1536, and Earl of Essex, April 17, 
I 54°)> vva5 the ' on of Walter Cromwell, alias Smyth, who combined the occupation of black- 
smith with that of a ,he r : in ': ft llerof cl< th ; he also kept a ! telrya id brewhouse at Putney. 


in a church, depicting the life of St. Thomas of Canterbury 

commonly known as Thomas a Beckett — to whom the church was 
dedicated. Similar representations were, of course, to be found in 
any church in the kingdom ; but Ward disingenuously condemns 
them, alluding to one as " a superstitious and popish remembrance " ; 
and he is careful to impart the impression that the friars went about 
among the " aged and simple," inculcating what he was pleased to 
regard, in his ardour for the New Learning, as dangerous notions, 
which will " do much hurt." And he concludes : " Also, for the 
quietness of my conscience to be at liberty to preach God's Word, to 
which our statutes, local and ceremonial, are an impediment, I have 
obtained the good will of my master provincial to send for 
dispensation of my habil and obedience to the friars. And as you 
are general visitor 1 will do nothing without your advice ; for if I 
could do more good in the habit and coat of a friar I would not 
change it." ' 

This effusion is here introduced as a specimen of the 
shallowness and futility of the professed motives of such persons 
as this renegade friar for throwing over the faith and the traditions 
in which they had been brought up. Here was a man who had from 
his childhood held the beliefs and doctrines of the Catholic Church 
without question, and who had adopted, as the most Messed part, in 
accordance with the traditions of the Church, based upon the words 
of its Divine Founder, the self-dem nig ordinances of the religious life. 
This he now declare- himself ready to abandon a1 the bidding of a 
licentious tyrant and his cruel and unscrupulous minister. Is it 
possible to credit him with sincere conviction of the truth of the Xew 
Learning, and of its acceptability in the sight of God, whose Word 
he proclaimed himself so eager to preach ? It is quite impossible ; 
the motives of Robert Ward, and others of his stamp, who were ready 
to quit the shelter of their religious houses, and disseminate what 
they well knew to be false doctrine, can only be attributed to a 
newly developed aversion from the religious life — the lack of a 
" voc: don " — and the hope of temporal gains. The Provincial of 
the order to which Ward belonged would be readv enough to assent 

Letters and Papers. Vol. viii., p. 236. 


to his application for dispensation from his vows, after exhortation 
and remonstrance had failed to persuade him to remain faithful to 
them ; and let it be noted that he professed himself ready to go about 
his preaching of the New Learning in a friar's habit, if Thomas 
Cromwell so desired— to proclaim to the world, with callous 
effrontery, his deliberate breach of the most solemn vows to God. 

Such persons and such doings as these do not convince 
hard-headed and practical folk such as the men of Yorkshire, 
Cumberland, and the other northern counties ; and it was not many 
month? before their attachment to the old faith, their hot resentment 
against innovations, began to assume concrete form, to threaten 
open and organised insurrection. 

There were, of course, risings in other counties, but we are 
dealing at the present chiefly with the county of York, and the 
Rebellion of the North, which was by far the most extensive and the 
most persistent. 

There was at first some combination of effort inaugurated 
between Yorkshire and Lincolnshire ; but Lincoln led the way with 
an abortive and badly-organised insurrection, which fizzled out in 
something under three weeks. 

The leader of the northern movement was Robert Aske, third 
son of Sir Robert Aske, of Aughton on the Derwent. 

Robert Aske was born in 1501, and so was about five-and- 
thirty years of age when, in the year 1536, he came to the front 
in connection with the Pilgrimage of Grace. He was admitted to 
Gray's Inn in 15:7. and was a practising barrister. Immediately 
after his admission to Gray's Inn lie appears to have been in the 
employ of the Earl of Northumberland. 1 in a secretarial or some such 
capacity. He was unmarried, which was very unusual in a man of 
his age at that time. Possibly his celibate condition may have been 
in some measure attributable to his personal appearance, which is 
said to have been singularly unprepossessing ; he had only one eye, 
and Hall the Chronicler said o! him that " there lived not a verier 
wretch as well in person as in conditions and deeds." a 

1 Henry Percy, sixth Earl (1502-1537) ; known as " the unthrifty.' 
3 Hall's Chronicle, p. S24. 


Whatever may have been the case with regard to Aske's 
personal appearance, for which he was obviously not accountable, it 
is certainly not true that he was " a wretch in conditions (i.e., in 
character) and deeds." The Chronicles of Edward Hall, while they 
are universally acknowledged to be of considerable value from an 
historical point of view, must be accepted with much caution where 
they deal with the characters or attributes of men and women. He 
had assumed the office of panegyrist of the Tudors, and anyone who 
was in opposition or rebellion against Henry VIII. was necessarily, 
in his eyes, a " wretch." 

Aske was, on the contrary, a man of fine character, who felt 
bound, by his religious convictions and his innate sincerity and love 
of fair play, to protest strongly against the king's high-handed and, 
in his view and that of his co-religionists, absolutely unjustifiable 
proceedings ; and when protest failed of effect, the appeal to 
force remained as the only means of obtaining redress. 

Whether Aske and his followers were justified in their act uf 
rebellion is a question upon which there may well be differences of 
opinion ; the world's history teems with similar instances of armed 
resistance against oppression on the part of cruel and tyrannical 
monarchs and governors, which lias been ultimately condoned and 
even approved by the verdict of later generations, more frequently, 
perhaps, where rebellion has been crowned with success ; though the 
test of success or failure as to the morality of such action is obviously 
unfair. Aske's rebellion was ultimately unsuccessful, and disastrous 
to himself and many others ; nevertheless, it was a gallant protest 
against undoubted and cruel wrongs, and it is impossible to withhold 
sympathy from him and his pilgrims in their desperate venture. 

The story of the Pilgrimage of Grace is a long one, and cannot 
here be recounted in detail ; nor is it, indeed, expedient that it 
should be. 

The following summary affords a sufficient outline of the 
leading circumstances ; the part played by Thomas Maunsell, Vicar 
of Drayton, and his 1 roth r \ . scessitate a more precise 


While the king and Cn mwell were congratulating themselves 


upon the speedy submission of the Lincolnshire malcontents, the far 
more dangerous rising in the North was in process ol organisation, 
and so swift was its development that, before the Lincolnshire 
insurgents had laid down their arms, the Commons of the East 
Riding had entered York, and the movement had assumed such 
formidable proportions that it appeared possible, and even probable, 
that Aske and his followers would shortly be in a position to dictate 
their own terms. The army of the Pilgrims was reckoned as number- 
ing something like 40,000 men — hard-bitten, fighting north country- 
men, who. once they laid hands to the sword, would not readily 
succumb even to a superior force : and the king had no force at his 
immediate disposal which was in the least degree adequate to deal 
with the matter. 

Robert Aske issued, from Pontefract Castle, the following 
manifesto to the Catholics of the North, which was read at the 
market cross in every town from Trent to the Border, from cast to 
west. The spelling has been here modernised, leaving the construction 
as in the original : 

" Lord?, Knights, Masters, Kinsmen, and Friends. We 
perceive that you be informed, that this assembly or pilgrimage, 
that we, by the favour of Almighty God, do intend to proceed in his 
cause ; the King, our Sovereign Lord, hath had many impositions 
of us ; we doubt not but ye do light well know that, to our power, 
we have been always ready in payments and services to His 
Highness, as any of his subjects ; and" therefore, to ascertain you of 
the cause of tins our assembly and pilgrimage is this. Forasmuch 
that such simple and evil disposed persons, being of the King's 
Council, hath not only incensed His Grace with many and sundry 
new inventions, which' be contrary to the faith of God, and honour 
to the King's Majesty, and the commonwealth of this realm, and 
therebv intendeth to destroy the Church of England, and the ministers 
of the same, as ye do well know, as well as we ; but also the said 
Council hath spoiled and robbed, and further intending utterly to 
spoil and rob, the whole body of this realm ; and that as well you, 
as us, if God, of His infinite mercy, had not caused such as hath 
taken, or hereafter shall take this pilgrimage upon them, to proceed 
in the same ; and whether all this aforesaid be true or not, we put it 
to your consciences ; and if you think it be true, and do fight against 
us, that intendeth the common wealth of this realm, and nothing 
else, we trust, by the grace of God, ye shall have small speed ; for 


this pilgrimage we have taken, it is for the preservation of Christ's 
Church of this realm of England, the King our Sovereign Lord, the 
Nobility and Commons of the same ; and to intent to make petition 
to the King's Highness for the reformation of that which is amiss 
within this his realm, and for the punishment of the heretics and 
subvertcrs of the laws ; and we, neither for money, malice, dis- 
pleasure to no persons, but such as be not worth}- to remain nigh 
about the King our Sovereign Lord's person. And further you 
know, if you shall obtain, as we trust in God you shall not, ye put 
both us, and you, and your heirs and ours in bondage for ever ; and 
further, ye are Mire of intention of Christ's curse, and we clear and 
out of the same. And if we overcome you, then you shall be in our 
wills. Wherefore, for a com lusion, if you will not come with us, for 
reformation of the premisses, we certify you, by this our writing, 
that we will fight and die against both you, and all those that shall 
be about towards to stop us in the said pilgrimage ; and God shall be 
judge, which shall have His grace and mercy therein, and then you 
shall be judged hereafter to be the shedders of Christian blood, and 
destroyers of your own Christian. From Robert Aske, Chief Captain 
of the conventual assembly, or pilgrimage, for the same Barony, or 
commonalty of the same. 

" Per me, Robertum Asken, in the name of all the Baronage 
and Commonalty of the same. 

" The Articles. 

" First, for the suppression of Religious Llouses. 

" The 2 for the Act of Uses. 

" The 3 for the First Fruits. 

" The 4 for the payment of money of the Temporality. 

" The 5 is for the base Council about the King. 

" The 6 is for the new Bishops." x 

This proclamation met with ready response, the Northerners 
flocking from all sides to join the pilgrimage. 

Meanwhile Aske, with some 20.000 men, was before the gates 
of York, demanding admission for himself and his host. 

It would be imagined, and would be in accordance with the 
common practice of a crowd of insurgents, smarting under a sense of 
oppression, that these men, well knowing that the mayor and 
burgesses of York had not the means of effective resistance, would 
have rushed the gates and plundered the city ; but Aske had them 

1 State Papers, Henry VIII. ; vol. i., p. 466. 


well in hand, and moreover the very term? of the oath they had 
taken, and the solemnity of their cause, tended to inculcate a sober 
demeanour, while preserving on unbroken front. 

About five o'clock in the afternoon of October 16, Aske 
entered the city at the head of four or five thousand horsemen ; he 
did not permit his footmen to join the procession, lest, being poorer 
men, they might yield to the temptation to plunder : the horsemen 
were mostly composed of gentlemen and their servants, well-to-do 
yeomen, etc. 

Aske had previously sent to the Mayor and Aldermen a copy 
of the " Articles." and also probably of the proclamation transcribed 
above, demanding a free passage through the city " at their peril " ; 
but was careful to add that the burgesses " should not find them- 
selves grieved, but that they should truly be paid for all such things 
as the}- took there " ; and on the previous night a proclamation had 
been issued to his followers to the same effect— that there should be 
no spoiling, and that meals, etc., should be paid for at a fixed rate. 

And then was seen this remarkable spectacle of the long 
procession of armed rebel horsemen, organised in little more than a 
fortnight, entering as conquerors without bloodshed this ancient city 
and fortress. The}' rode straight for the Minster, whence, as they 
approached, a long procession came forth to meet them— to wit, all 
the ecclesiastics in full vestments, with the choristers and the whole 
cathedral staff. The Treasurer of York welcomed Aske and the 
faithful Commons who came to defend Christ's Holy Church, and 
solemnly led him up the aisle to the High Altar, where he made his 

Aske was not content with this demonstration ; he immediately 
proceeded to utilise his victory in a practical manner. 

On coming out of the minster he posted at the doors an order, 
already prepared, for the religious orders, which had been evicted 
from their houses, to re-enter them. " and there to do divine service 
as the King's bedemen to such times as our petition be granted " ; 
making all arrangements for the supply of food, etc., from the sur- 
rounding farmers—" and we trust in God that we shall have the 
right intent of our prayer granted of our most dread sovereign lord, 


plenteously and merciful!}-. And that no person nor persons do 
move no farmer nor alienate nor take away any manner of goods of 
the aforesaid houses, upon pain of death." 

Among the most prominent names which appear in connection 
with the Pilgrimage of Grace is that of Thomas, Lord Darcv. 1 He 
had held sundry offices under Henry VII., and had been employed 
both by that king and Henry VIII. upon various missions. He 
favoured the king's cause in the matter of the divorce of Katharine 
of Aragon, volunteering evidence thereon; in the parliament of 
1532, however, he expressed the view, in opposition to a speech by 
the Duke of Norfolk, that matrimonial causes belonged to spiritual 
and ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; after which he received an intimation 
that his attendance at the January session in 1534 would be dis- 
pensed with. 

Darcy, who was in charge of Pontefract Castle, was among 
the first to get wind of tiie serious nature of the Northern rising. On 
October 10 he warned the lord mayor of York that lie must be 
prepared for an attack, but that he need have no fear of the rebels, 
as they had no artillery. At the same time he sent his son, Sir 
George Darcy, into Marsliland — on the border of Lincolnshire — to 
waylay and capture Robert Aske, who, however, made good his escape. 

While affecting to be on the king's side, Darcy was not a\ery 
staunch ally in that respect ; he was in communication with many 
who secretly favoured the rebels, and acted as spies for him. He 
used the information r.hus obtained jus. as it suited him at the 
moment, sometimes sending it on to the king, and at others keeping- 
it for private ends. 

Among Darcy's informants was one Thomas Maunsell, Vicar 
of Brayton, a village some fifteen miles south of York. 2 His dealings 

1 Baron Darcy of Temple Hum ; this was a baron.- " by writ," :.<■., by virtue of a sum- 
mons to Parliament as a lord. The barony probably dated from 1504. Darcy was born about 
1467; he was son and heir of Sir William Darcy. Having been attainted at the time of his 
execution, in 1537, the tit'e became extinct, having been held on! by him. 

1 Brayton is stated to have had two hundred and fifty inhabitants in the year I S3 1. 
The church is described a; "'a neat edifice, comprising a nave and aisles, a chancel, and a tine 
Xorman tower, finished with a ^pire. at the west end." ('•History of the County of York," 
by Thomas Allen ; vol.iii., p. 50S.) Rather an anachronism, tids spire surmounting a Norman 
tower ! 


with Darcy and others give a strong impression that both he and 
Darcy were, as the phrase is, " sitting on the fence," watching the 
progress and vicissitudes of the rebel movement, prepared to jump 
down upon cither side as prudence and self-interest might dictate. 
The sayings and doings of the Vicar of Brayton will be more fully 
dealt with later on. 

William Maunsell, brother to Thomas, was Escheator of York, 
and a peison of importance in the North. His name occurs 
repeatedly in official records, in correspondence with Cromwell and 
other state magnates. 

On July 27, 1533, William Maunsell, writing to Cromwell 
concerning certain matters at York, urges Cromwell " to preserve 
the esteem he has already gained in these parts." 1 This is, of 
course, a proper and becoming attitude on the part of the escheator ; 
but Cromwell was then and afterwards the object of hatred among 
Yorkshiremen, combined with a certain fear of offending him, by- 
reason of his all-powerful position at court. 

On November n, 1536, William Maunsell writes to Sir Arthur 
Darcy : " The last insurrection did much come of the friars of St. 
Robert's (Knaresborough), who made bills and proclamations that 
the King should have 6s. Sd. of every plough, 6s. Scl. of every baptism, 
and ad. of every beast. Now by their superiors other devices are 
made, wherein the people arc determined against the King's council. 
There is spoiling of true men daily, and because the King's letters 
have not come, men trust (believe ?) that those who never offended 
shall suffer like offenders. ' He is not in Yorkshire dare misname 
any of the Commons, calling them traitors,' for they say they will 
fight all the world with the King's person, and yet his laws are daily 
broken. . . . Commends Sir Arthur's loyalty and asserts his own. 
Could never get letters nor write until he had counselled with Sir 
Arthur's brother (Sir George), who sore repents that he went with 
' them,' and the Commonalty do not trust him, for he has openly 
spoken that he will take the King's part. If they were sure the King 
would accept their service, many of high worship ' would sure me to 

Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII 


the King.' As touching the abbeys. ' if every man be commanded 

to bring in the head governoi of the house, I shall sure bring in my 
prioress, or else all my friends shall do worse.' ... If the nobles and 
honest persons knew the falsehood of these feigned religious persons, 
other snits might the better take place. ' Sir, consider, seeing ye 
put me +0 the King, I will never dishonour you and shame myself for 
ever.' " 1 

From this letter it appears that Sir George Darcy had not 
proved staunch to the king, and to his duty as sheriff — repenting of 
his disloyalty after the king's pardon had been proclaimed. He was 
afterwards in direct correspondence with the king and Cromwell 
concerning the custody of Pontefract Castle and oilier matters. 

In a letter from Sir George to Cromwell, on January 26, 1537, 
the writer says : " My kinsman, William Maunsell, who should have 
accounted for me in the Exchequer this term, cannot come up yet," 
etc. In what manner or degree Sir George was akin to William 
Maunsell is not very clear ; the term " kinsman " was frequently 
used in those days with very scanty justification. The Maunsells 
and Darcys were, it is true, connected by marriage with the Nevilles, 
Earls of Westmoreland, but the relationship is so remote that the 
term kinsman seems almost absurd. If Sir George Darcy claimed 
kinship on this ground, it would be through that Richard, already 
mentioned, who married Margaret, daughter of Sir Thomas Fairfax, 
and widow of William Sayre, in 1535. 

There is an inscription in York Minster as follows : " Pray 
for the soul of Master William Maunsell, Esq., who died 6 Dec. 1541." a 

It is probably not this William whose will is preserved at 
York ; it is dated November 23, 1541, and was proved January 14, 
1541-2. The testator mentions that he had been Clerk of York 
Castle, — his appointment to the post is officially recorded, February 
12, 1529 3 — and he is probably identical with the Maunsell (Christian 
name omitted) alluded to in a letter to the Earl of Shrewsbury in 1538. 4 

Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII., vol. xi., pp. 421-122. 
Drake's "Eboracum," p. 502. 

Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. iv., pt. iii., p. 
See ar.te, p. 554. 


He alludes to his brothers, Sir Thomas and Richard Maunsell. 
We find the Vicar of Brayton frequently alluded to as " Sir Thomas " ; 
if the Thomas in the will is intended for him, his brother William, 
who " smote at him " when he, Thomas, affected to be warning him 
of danger, would be identical with the testator, who was Clerk of 
York Castle. If appears very improbable, however, that the 
Escheator of York would also be clerk of the castle ; and, in fact, 
there are various evidences which point to the existence of two 
William Maunselis at this time, who were both of York, and probably 
nearly related— perhaps first cousins. This Sir Thomas who is 
mentioned in the will must therefore be accounted as probably 
distinct from the Vicar of Brayton ; but the point i.> not absolutely 

William Maunsell's will affords material for a sketch pedigree, 
as under, all those included therein being named in that document. ' 

Maunsell (?) 

Sir Thomas William Maun- = Anne Richard =, Market dan 

Maunsell sell (testator), Mauns£ll I ofsir Thos. 

'-'■ |! -- <-'- 1 Fairfax (:) 

I I 

Georgie William 

Maunsell Maunsell 

A daughter 


A daughter = — Blanchardc 







Arthur Maunsell and Custance (Constance ?) are also named 
in the will, but their connection is not apparent ; Custance or Con- 
stance was to receive £6 13s. jd. towards her marriage. The 
executors are Richard Maunsell, Anne, the testator's wife, Thomas 
Blaike, John Herbert, and John Shadloke ; Sir Arthur Darcy, Sir 
Nicholas Fairfax. William Babthorpe, and Mr. Chaloner are named 
as supervisors. The final clause runs as follows : '* Residue to 


executors, and if my brother Richard vox my wife. I will he be no 
executor "■ — a somewhat delicate and difficult point fur the other 
executors to settle : what legally constitutes " vexing " ? Sir Nicholas 
Fairfax was son and heir to Sir Thomas Fairfax, which tends to confirm 
the hypothesis that it was this Richard who married Margaret Sayre, 
ntc Fairfax. Sir Nicholas would be brother-in-law to Richard Maunsell. 

The reasonable assumption that this William the testator was 
not the escheator of York does not help in cleaving up the question 
of Sii Geoige Farcy's kinship with the Maunsells, as his allusion was 
undoubtedly to William the escheator ; evidently a much more 
important person than the clerk of York Castle. 

Of this William Maunsell we hear a good deal, both before and 
during the rebellion. He was zealously on the king's side during the 
whole business, and was repeatedly the bearer of letters, etc., between 
the Duke of Norfolk, Cromwell, and the king. 

On October 6, 1537, he and Sir Arthur Darcy weie appointed 
" stewards of Galtres Forest and of the lawn in the said forest ; and 
masters of the hunt of deer there," etc. 1 

To resume the story of the Pilgrimage of Grace. 

So formidable was the array of Robert Askc and his host of 
enthusiasts, that the king, not having at hand the force to cope with 
it, and fearing a more general ri ing and a possible march on London, 
was ultimately compelled to adopt a conciliatory attitude. 

A comparatively small and inefficient force was, indeed, 
despatched to deal with the matter, under the command of Thomas 
Howard, third Duke of Norfolk, who was well known and respected 
in the north, and was, moreover, a skilled general, who could be 
relied upon to make the most of a difficult military situation. 

Norfolk, however, determined to try wdiat policy could 
accomplish in lieu of battle, the issue of which would probably be 
disastrous to his small army ; and on October 24 he despatched a 
herald with the proposal that " four of the discreetest men of the 
north parts " should meet him at Doncaster, hostages being duly 
given for their safety, and should state their grievances and the 
cause of their hostile array. The rebels, suspicious of the duke. 

1 Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. xii., pt. il~; :;: 

offere d in reply to send U,u. six. u,ht oTt^e^r^^^ 
meet a like number betwixt the hosts." The duke rejoined with a 
manifesto of some length, in winch he reproached the rebels for " this 
most shameful rebellion against our most noble and righteous King 
and Sovereign ; who is more worthy for his innumerable -races and 
noble virtues, and gentle conditions, to be king, master, and governor 
of all Christendom, than of so small a realm as England." 

The northerners probably did nut accept this fulsome courtier's 
portrait of King Henry ; and Norfolk's final ultimatum, that they 
should either disperse and go home, when he would himself be a 
suitor to the kin, for their pardon, or stand the brunt of battle was 
more or less of the nature of what is commonly called "bluff" 

The rebels did not receive this communication kindly, and 
were mostly for .. ceptin ; the challenge ; Aske. however, dissuaded 
them, pointing out that it was no dishonour, but a duty, to declare 
their grievances to their sovereign lord, when the opportunity was 
presented to them. 

™ n ?,V iP pf ° f thlS * and ° f a ?eCOnd conference at Doncaster, 
" b Llmth ' Rl f «* agi-eed to disperse and go to their horn,,, on 
the promise of a free pardon from the king, and due consideration of 
their several grievances and demands. 

, • X ^' f , Jk ™ t0 g ° t0 London and la y their case before the 
kmg and the Pilgnm leaders undertook to keep the North quiet 
until his return. Such an undertaking redounds to the credit of Aske 
and h * fohowers = but * also bear, witness to their credulity, in 
accepting vague promises on behalf of King Henrv, from the mouth 
of his subservient and unscrupulous lieutenant. Their one hone of 
success had lam in force of arms ; but Aske. a sincere and high- 
minded man, shrank from the horrors of civil war, which would, 
indeed, have been signally disastrous at this time 

Having laid down their arms, they were beaten , Norfolk's 
return was long delayed, and Sir Francis Bigod » meanwhile in- 
augurated a second rising, which Aske and his lieutenants mQ$t 
loyally endeavoured to frustrate. 

Earl of Norf-ouT" 5 ^'^ (lS ° 8 " 153 ^ Was diS «nded from John, brother of Roger Bigod, fifth 


And so they awaited the return of the Duke of Norfolk with 
substantial redress in his pocket, us they hoped ; but the duke had 
got his orders from the king, and was quietly enjoying himself at 
Kenninghall, his estate in Norfolk, until the beginning of February, 
1537, when he was to go north with certain instructions. 

Meanwhile the king, on December 15, had despatched a letter 
to Robert Aske, saying that as he had granted him a free pardon, he 
had conceived a great desire to speak with him, and thereby sum- 
moned him to London. A safe-conduct was enclosed, which held good 
until January G ; and Aske was instructed not to inform anyone of 
the summons. Aske, however, told Lord Darcy of if, and set out 
for London with six servants. 

His reception at court was most flattering ; according to one 
account, the king threw his arms about him, saying, " Be ye welcome, 
my good Aske ; it is my wish that here, before my Council, you ask 
what you desire and I will grant if " ; that he promised to provide 
for the destitute priests for whom Aske pleaded, and gave him a 
great chain of gold and £3,000 ; and ordered that after the North 
was pacified and settled, Aske should come to court, end be made a 
member of the Council. 

This is undoubtedly an exaggeration ; but Aske himself 
alludes to " a jacket of crimson satin " which the king had given him, 
and it is certain that he was handsomely treated, and sent north 
with the conviction that the king was fully resolved to grant most, if 
not all, of the Pilgrims' requests. Furthermore, the king invited him 
to write out a full account of the part he had played in the Pil- 
grimage, which he did. It is an apparently ingenuous and truthful 
narrative, 1 written in good faith, and with the desire to place the 
facts frankly before the king, whose handsome reception of him had 
evidently produced a favourable impression. 

Aske and his followers were, however, quite unfitted in 
temperament to cope with a cruel and unscrupulous tyrant such as 
Henry VIII. ; that he should, while coni'eiring a free pardon, and 
promising consideration of their grievances, have been merely acting 

1 Aske's account is given in full in '"The English Historical Review," vol. v., pp. 531 


a part in order to keep them quiet until his plans for their destruction 
hae 1 matured, was a contingency which neve, for a moment presented 

Z L e m,nd5; ,,L ' v " rt,,d " , ' this was ^ k «y — "™ y 

Pending the arrival uf the Duke of Norfolk, there was meat 
unrest among ihc Ko[tlmKI ^ independently , j( ^ 

ate a rT,T,' 0US rUm ° U - S afi0at - ttat U» duke was not coming 

Ion he del at length make his appearance, it was not in the 

character of an envoy from a beneficent prince, the bearer of favours 

.nvestcd\ n P '° Ple ' bl " rather '" " iat « l a " '«*■-'- 

"vested with plenary powers, though this attitude was subtly veiled 
under various pretences. 

The king's instructions to Norfolk are embodied in a lengthy 
docu m e nt dated January r 5 . 1537 . He was first to administer he 
ohm a prescribed form, to everyone, commencing with the gentry 
and peisons of rank and importance, enlarging upon the king's 
clemency and their offences. Faithful subject, who have been 

^f»'>«-ntdis,nrbance,and m akeappkationforres;itntt 
are to be exhorted to keep quiet and wait patiently for the kin-'s 
commg down : Tims they shall neither despair of their suits no 

be sme ,,,s ,t,;t,on which might cause the offenders, in despair o 

TCI .' '"I "" "nience ." Anyone tvho refuses the oath fa 
to be tleat d as the Kjng , s rebc) „_. e _ cvtcuud 

be done without danger," Norfolk is to " pretend to make light of such 
a fool and proceed to swearing the rest until a better opportunity " 
Likewise, those who have "committed spoils, robberies, or other since the King's pardon," are to be executed. » if it mly 

canons" A™ ' a !' S - '"• eSPedaUy " " le - V hM b «' n ■"•eleadcrs o 

was .to " In u ", I", C ° Uld Mt be d0 " C vvithout *«*». N»folk 
was to look through his fingers at their offences, and fee them to 
continue till the King's Majesty's arrival in those parts " 

Another clause runs as follows : " One of the grounds of the 
ate icbellion was that certain lords and gentlemen have enclosed 
commons and taken intolerably excessive fines. The Duke is to 
receive complaints touching this, enquire who have ten mo 


extreme, and moderate between them, so that gentlemen and 
yeomen ' may live together as they be joined in one body politic,' 
under the King." ' 

The effect of this clause was, as no doubt the king intended, to set 
the gentry and Commons at loggerheads, and so weaken their position. 

All this was, however, merely temporising; the free pardon, 
the effusive reception of Aske, the promise of concessions, of a 
parliament to be held at York, and of sundry beneficent results which 
were to attend the king's coming to ihe North, were just so many 
sops to keep the Northerners quiet, and prevent suspicion of the 
king's ultimate designs. 

The ruse was eminently successful ; on October 27 the king's 
" generous offer " of a free pardon and a parliament was read, first 
to Aske and the leaders of the Pilgrimage, and afterwards to the 
people in the market place at Pontefract, and was accepted in good 
faith ; the Pilgrims, relying upon the royal promises, dispersed with 
thankful hearts, rejoicing that bloodshed had been avoided, and 
assisting at masses of thanksgiving in the churches on the road to 
their homes, there to await the coming of the Duke of Norfolk, which 
was, as we have seen, unexpectedly delayed until February. 

When he arrived lie did not long delay the tragic revelation 
of the king's real attitude and intcnti >ns. 

Norfolk must have been in Henry's confidence with regard to 
these cruel and treacherous designs, and it appears almost incredible 
at first sight that he should have lent himself to such an outrage ; 
but he was, before all else, a courtier and a seeker after royal favours, 
and whatever qualms of conscience he may at first have entertained 
in the matter were speedily stifled upon consideration of the 
alternative loss of the king's favour, and of probable disgrace and 
attainder — nay, possibly, of the loss of his head, for Henry had no 
scruple about murdering his quondam favourites if they displeased 
him, as Norfolk and his son, Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey, were 
subsequently to learn to their cost. 

On February 19, 1537, Norfolk, in a letter to the Council, 
reveals his plan of operations. " Thanks for their last letter, with 

1 Letters m J P.ipersof the Reign of 11. nn \ III. Vol. xii., pt, i., pp. 50 et sc:. 


the King's approval oi his proceedings. Thinks, if suffered to follow 
his own mind for one month, he could give his Highness satisfaction. 
Has so man)' places to punish it will require some leisure, as he must 
be present at every punishment and proceed by martial law ; for if 
he were to proceed by indictments many a great offender would be 
acquitted as having acted against his will. There is no lord or 
gentleman of these two shires but his servants and tenants have 
been at this new rebellion. 'And, good Mr. Comptroller, provide 
you of a new bailey at Embleton, for John Jackson your bailey will 
be hanged Thursday or Friday at the furthest, and I think some of 
youi tenants will keep him company.' " ' 

On February 22 the king writes to Norfolk : "We approve 
of your proceedings in the displaying of our banner, which being now- 
spread, till it is closed again, the course of our laws must give place 
to martial law ; and before you close it up again you must cause 
such dreadful execution upon a good number of the inhabitants, 
hanging them on trees, quartering them, and setting their heads and 
quarters in every town, as shall be a fearful warning, whereby shall 
ensue the preservation of a great multitude." 2 

To make an end of this sorry business, the king's orders were 
carried out to the letter, not only in the case of the more recent 
insurgents under Sir France, Bigod, but indiscriminately among the 
people of the northern counties, of whom thousands were murdered 
in this barbarous fashion ; there was no trial, no opportunity of 
defence or exculpation. 

Robert Aske was dragged in chains to London, and thence 
sent north again, to be hanged at York Castle ; Sir Robert Constable 3 
was executed in the market place at Hull ; Lord Darcy was beheaded 

1 Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. xii., pt. i., p. 224. 

' Ibid., P . 226. 

» Sir Robert was eldest son of Sir Marmaduke Constable, who had fought beside the 
Duke of Norfolk— then Earl of Surrey— at Flodden Field. The families of Howard and Con- 
stable were, many years later, in 1904, •■■ the marriage of Gwendolen, elder daughter 
of Marmaduke, eleventh Lord Hemes, with Henry, fifteenth Duke of Norfolk. William Con- 
stable Maxwell, a direct descendant of Sir Robert Constable, was declared in 1858 to be Baron 
Hemes. At the wedding of the Duke of .Norfolk there was displayed the badge of the " Five 
Wounds," which was adopted by A ke's followers as their symbol; and which Sir Robert had 
worn when he mustered his tenants and friends to join the Pilgrimage. 


on Tower Hill, while his sons were rewarded with lands and honours. 
Norfolk, writing to Cromwell on July S, makes the somewhat callous 
remark — seeing that Sir Robert and his father had been his personal 
friends : "On Friday, being market day at Hull, Sir Robert Con- 
stable suffered, and doth hang above the highest gate of the town, so 
trimmed in chains, as this bearer can show you, that I think his bones 
will hang there this hundred year." 

With regard to the part which Thomas Maunsell, Vicar of 
Drayton, played in the Pilgrimage, there is a statement or confession 
by him, dated about December, 1536, which shall be transcribed in 

It is headed : " Misdemeanour of Sir Thomas Maunsell, Vicar 
of Drayton, during the Commotion." 

" On Tuesday 10th October he went to Cotiies in Holdenshire 
(Howdenshire ? i.e., the country about the town of Howden, just 
north of the River Ouse) to receive £0, and was taken at Holden 
(Howden ?) by Thomas Davye. one Concet, and Sir Richard Fi-her, 
as a spy of the Sheriff, 1 and kepi till Wednesday nth October. Was 
then sworn to meet them at Skipwith Moor. 3 Went and shoved this 
to Sir George Darcy, the sheriff, who sent him to Pontefract, to 
inform his father. Lord Darcy, who commanded him to keep his 
oath and bring him word on the morrow. Did so, and ran great 
danger fi run the mistrust of the Commons. Wrote that night to 
Leonard Beckwith and William Maunsell, his brother, to provide 
for their safety. Came then and showed Darcy at Pontefract how 
the Commons intended to come over the water to Darcy's h.v ^ jv.<] 
the Bishop's. Darcy bade him go home, and if the Commons did 
press to come over the water, raise all the people in Darcy's room, so 
that the Commons, seeing them ready to go with them," should not 
come over. Darcy said he would thus do the King service. On 
Friday, 13th October, 2 1 of the Commons came over and raised the 
town, and he promised them he would raise all the towns in Darcy's 
room ; which he did on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. On Sunday 
he had summons to meet Aske at York on Monday. Answered that 
he had not a sufficient company, and sent for counsel to Darcy, who 

1 Sir Georee Darcy was she.:rl ; probably Maunsell was suspected of being concerned 
in Sir George's attempt to capture Robert Aske, as related above. 

' Robert Aske had issued a proclamation summoning the Pilgrims to a meeting on 
Skipwith Moor on October ir. Skipwith i ; about ten miles south c E Yorl 


sent him word, by Strangwich, to go with his company and lie at 
Beilbrugh. Did so ; but at 3 p.m., hearing that his brother was in 
danger at York for refusing the oath, he hastened thither, and 
obtained from Aske leave to swear his brother. Went to the house 
of his brother, who, on seeing him, smote at him and drove him from 
the house. Told Aske he had sworn his brother, and returned to 
Beilbrugh, where he met Strangwich, Darcy's steward, and Gilbert 
Scote, one of Darcy's gentlemen, in harness, going to Aske. who told 
him to retire towards Pontefract and raise "Pontefract, Wakefield, 
and the towns towards Doneaster. Left his company and went 
that Monday night to Ferybridges, and on Tuesday "morning to 
Pontefract Abbey, where he warned the mayor to raise the town, and 
had a letter from Lord Darcy to raise Wakefield, and the towns 
towards Doneaster. That day the Earl of Northumberland sent 
asking him to come himself to take him (the Earl) ' because he would 
be taken with no villains.' Went on the morrow to St. Oswald's 
and Wakefield and towards Doneaster, six men of which came out 
to him a mile from the town and were sworn. Then came one Dale 
and asked that the Earl of Northumberland, as ' craysede ' 
(crazied ?) might pass through the Commons towards Topclif ; and 
Maunsell gave leave. Came from Doneaster to Ferybric 
Wednesday night, and tarried there and at Pontefract till the castle 
nup. Strangwich came and showed him how to assault the 
castle ll it were not given up. The same night Aske came to Ponte- 
fract, and the castle was given up. 

" /sever spoiled anyone till the castle was given up. Was 
afterv.a: h o; : . : . ; ln spoil Sir Brian Hastings and the Dean of 

Darrington, which was done by unthrifty persons to the amount of 
£77, whereof he (Maunsell) 'never had 'one pennyworth saving 15 
head of cattle and other goods extending to the value of £3/ "Yet 
as he was ' named to be their unthrifty governor,' he was imprisoned 
and compelled to make assurance to Hastings and the Dean of 
restitution according to the pardon. Never "stopped any of the 
King's letters or wrote against the King. Never, after the giving up 
ofthe castle, meddled with Darcy or the captains, but repented his 
misdemeanours. Has never, since the proclamation at Pontefract. 
offended the King's laws For a week before he advised all men to 
receive the pardon, and he and his brother came to the field on the 
day of the proclamation in harness to withstand all that would 
refuse it. 

" If any of the premisses can be before ' your lordship ' 
disproved, he is ready to refuse the King's pardon." Begs favour. 
Signed. Thomas Maunsell." 1 

1 Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. xl, pp. 555-556. 


Maunsell's allusion to the Ling's pardon is explained by the 
proclamation which had been issued on November 2 preceding, in 
which a general pardon is granted " to the Commons dwelling north 
of Doncaster, who have lately committed open rebellion. . . . But 
as their offences proceeded from ignorance, his Highness has caused 
certain books to be sent to them, by which they may see and 
acknowledge their errors," etc. Certain persons were, however, 
excepted from the pardon, among whom Robert Aske naturally 
figures first, and " Maunsell Vicar of Brayton " is included. 

This is scarcely surprising ; but his statement, as above 
transcribed, is a curious medley of confession and self-vindication. 
Darcy tells him that by a certain proceeding he would " thus do the 
King service " ; he does not appear to have demurred to this 
expression, yet he went about " raising " the neighbourhood, while 
Darcw professing loyalty, affected to yield Pontefract Castle on 
compulsion only. 

A little later, however, we hear of the Vicar of Brayton in a 
different light from that of a rebel. 

Dorothy, wife of Sir George Darcy, writing to her husband on 
Januaiy 13, 1537, entreats him to return home, as she, her children, 
and her goods are in great danger, the whole country is " so fervently 
set of wilfulness." This was at the commencement of Sir Francis 
Bigod's rebellion, and Lady Darcy goes on to say that " these 
countries " — i.e., about Pontefract— would also have risen, " but 
were stayed by the Vicar of Brayton and others of your friends and 
servants," : 

As a seboft against this, one William Talbot, in his evidence 
against Lord Darcy, says that " as far as he can judge the Vicar of 
Brayton was the most busy fellow that was amongst the Commons, 
and the greatest robber and paler." (?) 2 

Richard Coren (or Curwen), Archdeacon of Oxford, writing to 
Cromwell on July 20, 1537, says that the Vicar of Brayton had sent Aske 
ten sheep and thirty shillings, " but of whose goods he knows not." 3 

1 Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. iii., pt. 
= Ibid., pp. 3S,--3S6. 
s It:J., pt. ii., p. 121. 


It is probable, however, that this gift was a portion of the 
" spoil " which the vicar owned in his confession that he had received 
of the " unthrifty persons " who plundered Sir Brian Hastings and 
the Dean of Darrington. 

The end of parson Thomas Maunsell is somewhat obscure ; 
there is no actual record of his execution or imprisonment, but we 
hear something more about him in an official document in the year 
1541, when his name appears in connection with a series of charges 
headed " Traitors in the North." 

Here, among the expenses incurred by one John Skayff, 
messenger, is the following : " For 2 horses for Sir Thomas 
Maunseil and Sir John Dixson, priests, to Pontefract for 2 days, 

And again : " Edmund Nevyll and 2 men with him, going to 
Pontefract with the ' condam ' of Crokstone, Vicar Brayton, and 
John Dyeson (Dixon ?)." 2 

This list of various charges was compiled, or completed, in 
May, 3541, but the two entries above quoted du not bear any date, 
and possibly may be in their wrong precedence in this respect. 

It is quite possible, moreover, that these expenses were 
incurred at a considerably earlier period ; such payments were 
frequently very irregular and long postponed ; these men may have 
had to wait for two or three years for their money. On the other 
hand, if the entries indicate the disbursement of these sums— of 
which theie is quite a long list — in payment of expenses recently 
incurred, it would appear that the seeking out and punishing of 
participators in the rebellion was much more prolonged than might 
have been expected, after the drastic measures adopted by the king 
and the Duke of Norfolk in 1537. 

There are some interesting deductions to be drawn from these 
two entries concerning the Vicar of Brayton. 

It appeals that he was, upon two separate occasions, conducted 
from his vicarage to Pontefract at the public cost ; in view of his 
confession and arrest, it may safely be assumed that these visits were 
neither voluntarily undertaken, nor of a pleasant character for the 

1 Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. xvi., pp. 414., 415. 


vicar ; he was obviously under the charge of the men respec- 
tively named in the two entries, and travelled with them nolens 

One John Dixon (Dixson, Dyesonh also a priest, was his 
companion on each occasion, also making an involuntary journey ; 
and on the second occasion there was a third prisoner — for so they 
must be regarded — alluded to as " ' Condam ' of Crokston." 

The editor of the " Letters and Papers " construes " condam " 
as " quondam " — quite justifiably— and identifies " Condam of 
Crokston " as the late Abbot of Croxton. 

Croxton Abbey was in Leicestershire, and was surrendered to 
the king's commissioners on September S, 1538. 1 

This " quondam of Croxton " referred to in the list of 
expenses was therefore Thomas Grene, or Green, the last abbot ; 
and he appears to have migrated to Yorkshire, and to have fore- 
gathered with some of the " pilgrims." who were still in a state of 
apprehensive but indignant unrest. Thomas would have displayed 
more worldly wisdom had he settled down quietly somewhere and 
enjoyed his pension, which was quite enough to live upon comfortably 
in those days ; but he apparently elected to associate himself with 
the Vicar of Brayton and others, who were stirring up the still 
red-hot ashes of the rebellion — or were, at any rate, under suspicion 
of doing so, which would amount to much the same thing in respect 
of the consequences — hence this compulsory journey to Pontefract j 
for inquisition and examination, no doubt. 

There is some evidence extant which appears at first sight to 
concern the sequel of these journeys, and the fate of the three men 
named in the list of charges. 

Chapuys, the ambassador and court gossip, writing to the 
Queen of Hungary on June 10, 1541, says : " The news is that on 

1 Croxton Abbey was founded soon after the Norman Conquest ; the monks were of 
the order known as Premonstratensiones, or White Canons. In the deed of surrender the abbot 
and monks declare that they give up the abbey, etc., with full consent, and so forth, a; was 
customary on these occasions ; the abbot received the liberal pension of £So for his obedience. 
The rich possessions of the abbey were granted in March, 1539, to Thomas, first Earl of Rutland 
(creation of 1525), under a yearly rental of £297 95. .fd. (See '•The History and Antiquities of 
the County of Leicester," by John Nichols. Vol. ii., pt. i., pp. 151-157.") 


the 27th May three of the chief conspirators in the North— an abbot 
and two gentlemen— were hung and quartered." 1 

Marillac, the French ambassador, in a letter to Francis I., 
dated June 14, writes : " Three of those of the North have since been 
publicly executed for the aforesaid conspiracy, two of whom were 
priest-, and the other a gentleman of the short robe, who were drawn, 
hanged, and quartered in the accustomed manner." a 

These statements, coming so soon after the appropriation of 
money for the expenses of the journeys to Pontefract, would appear 
to warrant the conclusion that Thomas Maunsell and his companions 
in travel are the three here alluded to; though Marillac's phrase, 
" a gentleman of the short robe," is obscure ; it was probably a 
colloquialism of the time, and might have meant an abbot. 

There is, however, precise evidence that Thomas, Vicar of 
Brayton, was living some five years later ; for on September 17, 
154G, he was one of the witnesses to the will of John Fitzwilliam of 
Brayton, as was also his curate, William Thomson ; they are styled 
" Sir " Thomas and " Sir " William in the will, 3 and Thomas is 
described as Vicar of Braton. 

There can be no doubt, therefore, that Thomas Maunsell 
survived the ordeal of May, 1541 ; perhaps, after all, he was only 
wanted as a witness at Pontefract. 

No further mention of him is to be found in State Papers or 
correspondence. He appears, from his intimacy with Aske, Lord 
Darcy, and other prominent leaders, to have been regarded as a man 
to be reckoned with ; his conduct and language alike indicate 
considerable force of character ; but that he was in any degree an 
admirable person, or an ornament to his cloth, cannot perhaps be 
confidently maintained. 

Of William Maunsell, the vicar's brother, there is a good deal 
to be found in state documents, and he is evidently regarded as a 
man of importance. 

On October 26, 1536, one Anthony Brakynbery, writing to 

1 Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. xvi., p. 4.36. 

2 Ibid., p. 440. 

5 " Testaments Eboraceasia." (Surtees Society) ; vol. vi., p. 241. 


Cromwell, alludes to an apparent quibble whereby Anthony Heron, 
whom Brakynbery had been instrumental in getting apprehended 
for playing some part in the rebellion, seemed likely to get off scot- 
free, which, of course, would not be agreeable to Brakynbery, who 
says : " The matter has been stayed to this day by favour, and they 
have put me clear from it. saying my servant made wrong informa- 
tion to your Lordship that he was attainted, and I had no right to 
enter. I beg your Lordship's help, for he has friends, such as 
Maunsell of York, who have been at London at this time, for what 
intent I know not." ' 

This allusion is almost certainly to William Maunsell, 
Escheator of York ; there is no other Maunsell to the fore at the 
moment who would be at all likely to be alluded to as " Maunsell of 
York " ; and it is somewhat remarkable that he should apparently 
be regarded by Brakynbery as a person who was disposed to befriend 
Heron the traitor, seeing how zealous he was upon the king's side. 
Possibly Maunsell was aware that Heron was being treated with 
some injustice, and was prepared, to a certain extent, to influence 
Cromwell in his favour ; but there was such wholesale injustice and 
cruelty afoot that if William were going to make any attempt at 
neutralising it he would certainly have his hands full. The most 
probable explanation is that Brakynbery knew Heron to be a personal 
friend of Maunsell, and was afraid thai the latter might frustrate 
his own designs against Heron. 

On January 20, 1537, William Maunsell writes to Mr. Bekewith 
(or Beckwith. whom he addresses as " Cousin Bekewith," but the 
relationship is not clear), about Sir Francis Bigod's insurrection ; he 
asks Bekewith, who was apparently in London, to explain to the 
lord chief baron (of the Exchequer) that he cannot then come to 
London, as he is better employed upon the king's service in the 
North ; and Sir Oswold Wyllestrop, writing to Cromwell on the 
same day, says : " Though William Maunsell has great charges in 
the Exchequer, has caused him to remain here to serve the King." '-' 

"Testaments Eboracensia " (Si 
Ib:d., vol. xii ., pr. i . pp. 76-77. 


Sir George Darcy, writing six clays later to Cromwell, also 
explains that his " kinsman," William Maunsell, cannot then come 
to London upon Exchequer business ; Sir George was sheriff, and 
Maunsell was to have taken his accounts also to the chief baron of 
the Exchequer — but they were too busy in the North. 

That Maunsell was very vigilant in and about York is shown 
by his arrest of a man named Shottilworth (Shuttleworth), a servant 
of the Abbot of Sawley, who was the bearer of a letter from the 
abbot and monks to Sir Thomas Percy. This appears to have been 
in itself a very harmless document ; the monks, driven out by the 
king's commissioners, and reinstated by Robert Aske, implored Sir 
Thomas Percy's advice and assistance in the situation created by 
Sir Francis Bigod's rising. 1 Shuttleworth, however, was found in 
the company of one Leach, who had joined him on his travels, and 
as Leach was known as a rebel, Maunsell had Shuttleworth seized 
for associating with him. 3 

Later on, Maunsell appears as an envoy horn the Duke of 
Norfolk to the jury who were on the trial of one Levenyng, a gentle- 
man. Thomas Delaryver, one of the jury, made a confession of the 
circumstances attending their deliberations. From this it appeals 
that they differed materially in their views, and sat from o a.m. 
on Friday until Sa turday night. The duke sent his gentleman usher 
to them at noon on Saturday, 10 know whether they were agreed ; 
subsequently he appeared in person and called the jury before him. 
On his departure he left " his men Scarlit and Brigham to keep the 
jury more straitly ; who took away from them all that might keep 

1 Sawley (or Sallay) Abbey was founded by William de Percy in 1146, so the abbot would 
naturally seek counsel of the founder's family. John Stevens, in his " addition" " to Dugdale's 
Monasticon, alluding to Sawley Abbey, says : "The names of the abbots of this monastery I 
have not anywhere met with, except only the last of them, William Tiafford, who alone may 
stand for many, being one of that small number who in those days had the courage to give up 
his life a sacrifice to his conscience, for he was hanged at Lancaster, in the year 1558, for opposing 
the sacrilegious havock of churches and monasteries, and standing up for his own. On which 
account his name will for ever remain honourable to posterity." There are two Sawleys in 
Yorkshire, one near to Ripon, the ether, the site of Sawley Abbey, about four miles from 
Clitheroe, close to the Lancashire border. The lands of Sawley Abbey '-ere granted by 
Henry VIII. to Sir Arthur Darcy ; us yearly value is estimated in " Valor Ecclesiasacus ' at 
£147 3s. iod. 

' Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. xii., pt. i., p. 230. 


them warm." Finally, at night, the duke sent Leonard Beckwith 
and Maunsell (here spelled Mans/eld) to them, with the object, no 
doubt, of inducing them to come to a decision. Levenyng was 
accused ol joining in Sir Francis Eigod's rebellion, and the Duke no 
doubt desired a verdict against him. What Beckwith and Maunsell 
said to the jury does not appear, but the result was that " they fell 
all to prayer, and rose up and agreed to acquit Levenyng." ' 

Maunsell 's name also constantly appears as the bearer of 
letters between Norfolk and Cromwell ; indeed, he must have spent 
a good deal of his time journeying between London and York. In 
1538 he was appointed a justice of the peace. 

On September i, 1530, Maunsell was one of the commissioners 
appointed to survey all the king's forests north of Trent ; 2 and on 
December n in the same year he writes to Cromwell concerning the 
award to him of the receivership of St. Mary's abbey — it is not 
precisely stated where the abbey is situated : " Has delivered 
Cromwell's letters and one from the Chancellor of the Augmentations 
to the King's commissioners in his favour for the receivership of St. 
Mary's Abbey, and has found sureties. Is put in possession, but 
Master Bekewith declares he intends to labour to stop his 
proceedings. As his officer in these parts, asks Cromwell to help 
that his bill may bo preferred to the King end signed. Has written 
to Mr. Popley and sent him £20 for Cromwell according to his 
promise. As a reason for the King's favouring him, reminds Cromwell 
how he rode several times from London to give evidence for the King 
concerning the indictments of the attainted persons in Yorkshire, 
and found offices of all their lands in all the shires of England 
' affore the excheatoury,' for which the King promised to see him 
recompensed, as he trusts Master Wreesley can declare." 3 

The office of " receiver " of abbey lands under the king's 
commissioners no doubt carried substantial " pickings," and Maunsell 

1 Letters and Papers of the Reier. of Henry VIII. Vol. xii., pt. i., p. 3:2. 

! Ibid., vol. xiv., pt. Li., p. 3j. 

" Ibid., p. 244. The Court of Augmentations was so styled because it had to do with 
the lands of the monasteries, etc., the suppression of which ;o : ge! mgmented the king's 



apparently found it worth while to propitiate Cromwell by means 
of what is vulgarly termed "palm oil." Probably Cromwell made 
a very handsome profit from similar offerings ; ' the practice was 
frankly recognised in those days, and no one considered himself 
above it ; but perhaps we need not go so far back as Tudor times to 
find examples of it — only we are more discreet nowadays. Maunsell's 
cousin Beckwith appears on this occasion to have endeavoured to 
frustrate his designs. 

On July 13, ^537. the Court of Augmentations granted to 
William Maunsell, gentleman, the tenure of the lands attached to 
Clementhorpe (St. Clement's) Priory, York ; the grant was to him 
and his heirs for the term of twenty-one years, dating from March 25 
in the previous year (1556) ; the priory and lands were granted in 
fee simple to Edward Skipwith, to whom Maunsell paid £8 15s. od. 
annually. 2 

William Maunsell dates some of his letters from Clementhorpe ; 
he is also named as of Huntington, which is some five miles north of 

Among the grants in May, 154.2, occurs the following 
" Edward Skipwith and Margaret his wife. License to alienate the 
late priory of Clementhorpe, with appurtenances . . . late in tenure 
of William Maunsell deceased," etc. 3 

This appears to raise once move the question of the identity 
of William the escheator, a gentleman usher of the king's chamber, 
and a member of the Council of the North, with that William whose 
will has been noticed on a previous page. The grant to Edward 
Skipwith is dated some six months after the death of this William 
as recorded in the inscription in York Minster ; just about the 

1 In Cromwell's Accounts, among the receipts for December, 1539, appears: " 16th 
Maunsell, of the North, by Pcpley, £zo." 

* Monasticon (second edition). Vol. iv., p. 327. St. Clement's Priory 
was founded by Archbishop Thurstan, about the year 1130. or possibly later; it was a com- 
munity of Benedictine nuns. The last prioress was Isabella Warde, who received a pensi m 
£6 135. |d. on surrendering the priory to the king's commissioners; in sharp contrast with 
that awarded to Thomas Green, Abbot of Croxton, who, ^i we have seen, received £$c ; 

' Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. svii., p. 211. 


period which usually elapses before action is taken upon the decease 
of a tenant. 

In a book of orders taken by the Council with the king's 
debtors, in 1546, the following entry appears, under date July 15 : 
" Executors of Wm. Maunsell (Richard Maunsell, who alleges that 
his brother William died about Michaelmas anno 33) " (i.e., 1541). 1 
The date on the tablet in York Minster is December 6 ; and although 
nearly three years had elapsed, it appears strange that Richard 
should not recollect more precisely the date of his brother's death. 

It does not seem to be possible to clear up the question as to 
the identity or otherwise of these two Williams ; we hear no more, 
officially, of William of the North after 1541, so it is most probable 
that he died in that year. 

In a volume of English Miscellanies, published by the Surtees 
Society, there are transcribed from the York City Records "Certificates 
of the English parentage and birth of certain persons who have been 
charged with being Scots." Among these occurs the plaint of one 
John Malson, of York, that " evil disposed people and children of 
wickedness, through malice and envy, by the temptation of an evil 
spirit, falsely and untruly hath ' noysed ' (annoyed ?) and slandered " 
him, a true Englishman. 2 His English parentage is vouched for 
by a large number of persons, ami ng whom are John Maunchell and 
Robert Maunchell, requires ; these are, of course, Maunsells. The 
year given is 14S2, but, as in other instances, it must be admitted 
that the relationship of John and Robert, mutual or otherwise, 
cannot be determined ; they may have been of York, or perhaps of 

Fr >m the Visitation of London in 1634 we learn that certain 
Maunsells then resident in London, or at least in Middlesex, claim 
descent from those of Brudeford (Burford, Birdforth). 

The pedigrtes appear to have been declared by Thomas 
Maunsell, Esq., of Gray's Inn, and another Thomas Maunsell, his 
first cousin, described as of London. 

1 Letters and Papers of the Reign of Henry VIII. Vol. xxi., pt. L, p. 632. 
* "A Volume of English M;:^ei'jnie ; . illustrating the History and Lang 
Northern Counties of England." Surtees Society, 1S90 ; pp. 4c, 4.1. 


Maunsell, Aldersgate Ward 

Richard Maunsell, descended from = F.hanor Le 
— Burford, in Com. York 

I. George Maunsell of = Joan, dau.of i. Robt. Maunsell, Esq., Clarke == 
London, I sonne | — Aspech of the Crowne and Prothono- I 

tarv in Wales 

i ~ ' I I 

I. Thomas Maunsell of 2. Geo. Maunsell of 1 nomas Maunsell of Gray's 

London, ano. 1634 Northamptonshire Inn, Esq. 

Richard Maunsell, Esq., of = Elianor, dau. of — Lewes 
The Stroud in Com. Midx., i of Glamorganshire 

descended of • he > hunsells, co. I 
York, from Burford | 


Roberi Maunsell, Esq., Clarke = Mary, dau. of Thomas Browne, 
of the Crowne, and Prothono- | sitter of John Browne of 

tary in Wales London 

I i ! 

Martha, wife to 1 ho - . Maunsell = Anne, d.ui. of John Anne, wif" to Fran- 

WilliamWalker of Gray's Inn, Bartholomew of cis Loundes of 

of London Esq., liv. ano. Sandwich, de- London 

1634 ceased 

Thomas Maunsell (spelled Mansell in the register) was 
admitted to Gray's Inn, June 2, 1619 ; he is described as son and 
heir of Robert Mansell of London, gent. 

A coat-of-arms is presented with each pedigree, viz., First 
and fourth quarters, or, on a fesse dancettee gules, three lions 
rampant of the field ; second and third quarters, argent, on a 
chevron sable, between three falcons, gules, three stags' heads, 
cabossed, of the held. 

The second shield is similar, with a crescent for difference, 
which is in accordance with the position of Robert as second son ; 
the crest in each instance is a falcon proper, billed and belled or, 
with a crescent for difference in the second. 1 

The arms in the first and fourth quarters are those of 
Maunsell ; 2 in the second and third quarters they are probably those 
of Lewes (or Lewis), of Wales. 

It would be interesting to know when these Maunsells of 

Visitations of London. Han. Soc, vol. xvii., p. oo. 
Burke's " General Armory." 


Yorkshire came to London ; it is quite possible, even probable, that 
Richard was the first. In declaring the pedigree, on the occasion of 
the visitation of London. Thomas Maunsell would very naturally 
start from the period of the hist connection of his family with the 
metropolis. There is a considerable gap between the latest mention 
of the Maunsells of Brudeford in old records and the date of this 
visitation, so that it is not possible to trace the descent of Richard 
from any one of them. 

It is of some interest that these pedigrees indicate a connection 
with Wales, and also with Northamptonshire. Robert Maunsell 
was, about the end of the sixteenth century, or later, prothonotary — 
i.e., chief clerk or registrar of the courts — in Wales, and his mother 
was a Welsh lady from Glamorganshire ; from which it may reason- 
ably be argued that Richard Maunsell, either before or after his 
migration from Yorkshire to London, had been in Wales, possibly 
upon legal business, which would pave the way for his son to obtain 
an official post there. But conjecture will carry us no further. 

George of Northamptonshire is too vague to build upon ; it 
is to be presumed that he acquired an estate in that county. It is 
worthy of note that this George Maunsell's connection with 
Northamptonshire dates, in all probability, from about the same 
period as that of John Maunsell c 1 Chicheley, who bought the Thorpe 
Malsor estate in 1622. George would, from the pedigree, be his 
contemporary, though younger There is no evidence as to the 
connection, remote or otherwise, between the Yorkshire Maunsells 
and those of Chicheley ; and so George Maunsell's advent into 
Northamptonshire can only be regarded as purely fortuitous. 

In the Register of the Freemen of the City of York appear the 
names of several Maunsells, 1 to wit : 

1 Previous to the passing of the Municipal Corporations Act, in 1S35, each borough 
admitted freemen according to its own especial customs and bye-laws ; the privilege usually 
included the right to vote at a parliament, ry :k-c:ion of the borough, and exemption from all 
tolls and dues. Fre i <m was ol Servitude, i.e., having served full time as an 

apprentice; by patrimony, as being the child of a freeman; or by redemption, that is, by 
order of the Mayor and Court of Aldermen, either upon payment of money, or as a reward for 
services rendered to the city. In the city of York only freemen were allowed to carry on any 
trade; hence many purcha lege, including some women. The wife of a freeman 

was not allowed to trade independe itl i her [, unless she 1 btai . . I . . 


Henricus Maunsall — 12S5. 
Matilda Maunsall — 1310. 
Johannes Maunsall — 1359. 
Willelmus Maunsall — 1477. 
Johannes Maunsell — 1505. 
Willelmus Mawnesell — 1525. 
Johannes Manssell — 1585. 

John Maunsell (1359) is described as " cocus," i.e., cook ; 
William (1477) as " yoman " ; John (1505) as " shereman " (that is. 
one who pursued the trade of shearing woollen cloths) ; William 
(1525) as " gentylman " ; and John (1585) as " surgion." The 
capricious spelling of the name is, of course, characteristic of the 

William Maunsell, gentleman, who became a freeman in 1525, 
was very probably identical with William of the North, escheator of 
York, etc., of whom we have been hearing a good deal. 

John Manssell, the surgeon, was evidently a man of some 
local importance, as he was one of the four city chamberlains elected 
in that year ; 1 and he was also apparently the last Maunsell who 
became a freeman of York. There is no further mention of them up 
to the year 1835. 2 

1 It was the dut) of the chamberlains to receive the tees of those who became freemen, 
to see that no person carried or. any trade in the cit • withott first obtaining the fr 
to keep a list of all tl .... f. een en during their ; tar of office. See " Registei 

of the Freemen oi the Citv of ^ or*. " : Publications cf the Surtees Society, vol. xcvi., 1S96. 
This register extends from 1272 to 1759 : ch ve ; a later register, tier.'. 1760 to 1S35, was 
published in the latter year by the corporation, but does not include any Maunsells. 

1 On August 20, 1537, theDake of Norfolk wrote to Cromwell from Kenninghall, N01 ; 
" IMy very good lord, I desire you to v. rite by this bearer to young Mawnnsfeld, or any one that 
has the skill of old Mawnnsfeld to put my sen's arm in joint." 

"Mawnnsfeld"' i= very probably intended for Ma, nsell ; it is perhaps possible that 
" young Mawnnsfeld," evidently a surgecn, as was his father before him, may be ider ti al v .-;. 
John Maunsel (or Maunsell' 1 . surgeon, who was a chamberlain of York : though the interval, to 
15S5, was a long one — some eight-and-forty years. Norfolk may have heard of John Mawnns- 
feld the elder when he ■■■ as in the North, as a surgeon of local celebrity. 

Norfolk's son, Henry H ward, Earl of Surrey, accompanied his father in 1536 when he 
went North; seme - cused him of c implicny with A:ke ir.d his fol 

in the Pilgrimage of Grace. Surre\ was at this time (A igust, 1337) in confinement at V, indior, 
by order of the Privy Council, for having struck a courtier who repeated this rumour, in the 
park at Hampton Court : br ill-..: •;•'.::. :1. : re; .1 pr cinct- was ilways severely dealt •, it!. 
Probably his arm was put out - : joint in a personal encounter with this gossiping gentleman 


In the latter half of the thirteenth century some Maunsells 
were connected with Naburn, about four miles south of York. The 
deeds in which these Maunsells of Naburn are mentioned are, with 
one exception, undated, but the period of the others is pretty clearly 
indicated by inference. 

In one deed Richard Pinchewar and Helewissa his wife quit- 
claim to Richard Maunsell " all right in the assarts, 1 made or to be 
made on account of two bovats of land which they held of him in 
the Vill of Naburn," in return for certain other lands. 

Later (apparently) there is a grant by Richard le Maunsell of 
Naburn of considerable lands, etc., to the canons of St. Andrew of 
York, in frankalmoign, 2 for the health of his soul. 

About July 14, 1295, there is a grant by Edmund Maunsell to 
William Helewise of Naburn and Alice his wife of certain lands in 

By another deed. Martin de Nortfolck (Norfolk ?) exchanges 
some lands with Richard Maunsell of Naburn, knight ; so this deed 
is probably subsequent to the others in which he is not alluded to 
as a knight. There is reference in this deed to " Helewise, the said 
Richard's sister " ; it appears probable that she was wife to Richard 
Pinchewar, named in the other deed : but it is curious that the 
surname of one of the parties to the deed of 1295 should be 
spelled precisely the same as the Christian name of Richard*s 
sister. Was she possibly named after Helewise, or Helwiss, or his 
father ? 

We hear again of William Helewys and Alice his wife in the 
year 1300 ; on October 23 Edmund Maunsell granted them licence 
"to dig turfs in his moor of Fulmoss in Naburn," under certain 
prescribed conditions. 3 

The village of Naburn had a population, in 1831, of three 
hundred and sixty ; it was then remarkable chiefly for a fine maypole, 
upwards of sixty feet in height, which still stands in the village 

1 Assart — a clearing in a wood, or other overgrown land, in order to adapt it for agricul- 
tural purposes ; to assart is to make such a clearance. 

2 Frankalmoign — i.e., in perpetual tenure a^ a free gift of charity. 

' Yorkshire Archaeological Society Journal. Vol. xvii., pp. 103, 104, 106. 


square. In 1888 the Corporation of York built a fine lock there on 
the River Ouse, one hundred and fifty-two feet in length, and capable 
of passing a vessel of four hundred tons. 1 

One John Maunsell (spelled Mansell), of York, who died in 
1507, left a rather curious will : " To be buried in my parish church 
aforesaid {i.e., the parish of St. Petei the Little) before the rood. 
To the same church 3s. ad. ; and to the curate 8d. To my mother 
a gown of tawny and as much cotton to line it. To my eldest 
brother my doublet that J was wed in. To my youngest brother 
my prentice, a pair of shears. To Christopher Brewster of St. 
Leonards my wedding hose and cap. Residue to Johannet my wife, 
whom 1 make executrix." - 

The testator was a " sherman," or shearer of woollen cloths ; 
hence the very significant and appropriate bequest of a " pair of 
shears " to his youngest brother, who was apprenticed to him ; but 
it is most unusual to find legatees thus mentioned in a will without 
their Christian names. 

From the accounts of the " succentor " 3 of the vicars and 
warden of the fabric of York minster, it appears that there was one 
William Maunsell of York, who for many years supplied material 
such as iron, nails of various sorts, etc., for use in the rebuilding and 
repairs of the minster. 

These accounts aie in Latin, witli the usual abbreviations, but 
interspersed with the quaint names of sundry articles for which 
there was no Latin equivalent. Thus, an account covering the 
period from November 29, 1515, to November 28, 1516, runs as 
follows : 

" Empcis Ferri et Clavorum. 
" Willelmo Maunsell pro ij m et di dubblespykyng, ij. bragges, 
j. c sharpliuges, ij et di dub! spyking, xj m et di Scoteseyme, et ij m 
Stone broddes, 25s. Sd. Pro j. m et di duble spykyng, iiij single 

tr- ' "*^°7 of ^ eCount y o f York," by Thomas Allen. Vol. ii., p. 360. "Picturesque 
History of \ orkshire," by J. S. Fletcher Vol. i„ p. ioo. 
8 Yorkshire Wills. 

» " Succentor » was an assistant to the librarian (armaria.) of a church or monaster-,, 
and apparently kept die accou:;, for the maintenance oi the fabric. 


spykyng, j. m tendil naiil, j. c bragges, iij c et di sharplinges, iiij m 
leid naill, 28s. 4d.," etc. 1 

There is another account in 1537-3S to William Maunsell, 
presumably the same person, though possibly his son and successor 
in the business. 2 This is probably a third William, distinct from the 
Escheator of York and the other, whose possible identity has been 
discussed on another page. 

There is not much more to be said about the Maunsells of 
Yorkshire ; there are various isolated records respecting individuals, 
but they are not of any interest — a parson who held some living here 
and there, and other similar references, evidence as to their connection 
with other Maunsells being entirely wanting. Indeed, the family 
appears to have practically disappeared from the county, at least 
with regard to upper and middle-class representatives. 

There is an entry in the Parish Register at Rotherham, to the 
effect that a theological work presented to the vicars of Rotherham 
by the Honourable Thomas Wentworth, in 1709, was placed by the 
vicar, in 1729. in " the library given by Mrs. Mansel (Maunsell ?) " ; 
but who was Mrs. Maunsell, or her husband, there is nothing to 
show ; and this is about the latest record in the county. The parish 
registers have nothing to sav about them. 

1 They bought their Rails by the thousand ; " m et di " stands for " one thousand and 
a half." " Scoteseyme," always spelt with a capital initial, is a curious word; it may have 
been the " trade " name of some article at that time, procured from Scotland. 

* Surtees Society : '" The Fabric RoN of York Minster " (vol. xxv. for 1S5S) ; pp. 96, 


Mansels (Maunsclls) of Dorset and Somerset 

t j ["""^HERE is but scanty record of Mansels in Dorsetshire at 

an early period, nor is there material for constructing a 

^j|_ pedigree from those first mentioned to the present time. 

There was a suit for recovery of lands by William 

Halley against John Mauncell in 1548 ; the property was in Loscombe 

and Porestoke (Pourstock), near Bridport ; but there is no more to 

be said about this John. 1 

The Dorset Pines, transcribed in " Dorset Records," do not 
contain the name of Mansel, nor does it appear in the parish registers 
quoted in the same series, save in one instance ; among the Christen- 
ings at Tarrant Hinton, in 1809, appears the following : " Bishop's 
Visitation, Sep. 1, 1809. Elizabeth Francis and Lenora Dig<de 
confirmed (by Mansel)." 2 (This is evidently Bishop William Lort 
Mansel ; the See of Bristol includes Dorsetshire.) 

In the year 1448 Henry Court and Thomas Maunsell, Esqrs., 
were seised of the Manor of Canford (or Canefordj and of the Vill of 
Poole, with other lands and tenements, e;c. ; this Thomas also 
appears to be isolated ; but he is most probably identical with 
Thomas, Escheator of Somerset and Dorset, who flourished at this 
time, and who, as related in a former chapter, was entrusted by 
King Henry VI. with the collection and conveyance of treasure for 
his army in France. 3 

There is an allusion to Thomas Maunsell, Escheator, in 1404, 
as presiding at an inquisition "taken at Yevell (Yeovil?) in Co. 

1 "Notes and Queries for Somerset and Dorset." Vol. -r.., p. 119. 

2 " Dorset Records.'' Vol. viii., p. 51. 

3 Vide vol. i., pp. 258-261; 


Dorset," who is evidently the same individual ; he is twice men- 
tioned again in these records. 1 

The parish church register at Radipole, near Melcombe Regis, 
contains the following — 

Marriages : John Munsel and Johane Pitt, 25 Feb. 1568. 

John Mockett and Elinor Munsel, 15 Sept. 1574. 

William Whiteway and Mary Mounsel, iG Nov. 159S. 
Burials : John Mounsell, alderman, 16 Oct. 15S6. 2 

The name Munsel, or Mounsell, is probably identical with 

These entries are of some interest, as a descendant of John 
Munsel (Mounsell, or Monsell) became Baron Emly, of Tervoe, 
county Limerick. Burke gives the pedigree with considerable 
detail, dating from the marriage of John Mounsell with Joan (or 
Jane), daughter of John Pitt, of Causeway, February 25, 156S, as in 
the register ; Causeway is a hamlet adjoining Radipole. The Pitt 
family was of long residence and of some importance in the neighbour- 
hood ; Richard Pitt, brother to Joan, who died in 1622, was four 
times Mayor of Weymouth. Joan married, secondly, in 158S, 
Thomas Barfoot, of Knowle, county Somerset. 3 The Pitts in several 
instances married into Somerset families, and held lands in that 
county ; Richard Pitt's second wife was Elizabeth Orchard, of North 
Crickett, Somerset. 

John Mounsel! had, according to Burke, one son, John, and 
three daughters, viz. : Margaret, born 1575, married in 1591 Robert 
Middleton of London ; Joan, born 1577, married in 1594 Robert 
Bateman of London ; Mary, born 1579, married, November 16, 159s, 
William Whiteway. A pedigree of Bateman by Sjdvanus Morgan 
confirms Joan's marriage. 4 

John Mounsell, the son, of London, went to Ireland in 1612, 

1 " Notes and Queries for Somerset and Dorset." Vol. ix., pp. 293, 295. If Yeovil is 
meant, the scribe has placed it in the wrong county ; it is in Somerset. 

1 " History of the County of Dorset," by John Hutchins. Vol. ii., p. 4S2. 

s Ibid., pp. 479, 480. 

1 " Sphere of Gentry," by Sylvanus Morgan. Bk. i., p. 51. 


and there purchased lands at Court Browne Castle, near Askeaton, 
county Limerick, returning to England in 1634; he married Mary 
(or Margery) Ash, of Westcombe, county Somerset, in 160S. 

Ephraim, third son of John Mounsell, is stated to have sold 
his estates in Somerset and migrated to Ireland in 1644 ; he was 
apparently the first holder of the Tervoe estates, in Limerick. 

His direct descendant, William Monsell — the spelling finally 
adopted— born September 21, 1S12, was created Baron Emly of 
Tervoe, January 12, 1S74. He died in 1894, and was succeeded by 
his son, Thomas William Gaston, the present Baron Emly. 

The coat given in Burke is : Argent, on a chevron between 
three mullets, sable, a trefuii slipped, or. 

There is certain evidence to hand which tends to traverse 
Burke's account of the family. 

There was one Peter Mansel (Munsell, Mounsell) who matricu- 
lated at Brasenose College, Oxford, on December 8, 15S7 ; B.A. 
July 9, 1591 ; M.A. July 4, 1594 ; admitted student of the Middle 
Temple April 27, 1594, as " son and heir " of John, late of Wey- 
mouth and Melcombe Regis, deceased. 1 

There is further mention of this Peter in a deed, dated March 
25, 1617, granting an annuity to Edward Biss and others. The 
grant is made by John Pitt the younger, of Weymouth and Melcombe 
Regis ; it consists in an annuity of £10, issuing out of certain lands 
in Radipole and elsewhere, "for ninety-nine years if Margery, now 
wife of John Mounsell of Weymouth and Melcombe Regis, and Peter 
their son, or either of them, shall so long live, in trust to pay the 
same to Margery for her life, and after her death to Peter. Recites 
a deed of bargain and sale, May 11, 1616, by John Mounsell and 
Margery, his now wife, granting sundry tenements in Weymouth 
and Melcombe Regis to John Pitt the younger, without molestation 
of any persons claiming under John Mounsell and Peter Mounsell 
deceased, father and brother of the aforesaid John." 2 

Burke states that John Mounsell married Mary Ash ; it 

1 " Alumni Oxoniensis " ; " Middle Temple Records.'" Vol. i., p. 342. 

3 "Municipal Records of the Borough of Dorchester," edited bv C. H. Mayo and 


appears probable, however, that her name was Margery. There is 
another deed, dated August 4, 1623 ; a lease of certain lands to 
James Aish (or Ash), " to hold for 99 years if Margery Mounsell, now 
wife of John Mounsell, of Courte Broome (Browne), Co. Limerick, 
Margaret and Mary their daughters, or either of them, shall so long 
live," etc. 1 

Peter may thus have been correctly described as " son and 
heir " of the late John, at the time of his admission to the Middle 
Temple. Burke states that Peter the younger was living in 16S3, 
and that his father's marriage took place in 160S. which is probably 
correct, though it lias not been verified. 

There is, however, the will of John Maunsell to be considered, 
and it traverses directly some of the above deductions. 

This will is dated May 18, 1637, and was proved February 19, 
1638, by Peter Maunsell : the follow ing is an abstract of its contents : 

" John Maunsell, Citizen and Salter of London, Merchant 
Adventurer of England, late of Court Brown Castle, in Co. of Limerick, 
aged 55 last 3rd Dec. To be buried at Radipole. in Melcombe 
Regis, Dorset. To the parish of Launceston 20/- in memory of my 
grandfather, Peter Maunsell, born there, and to Blandford, vvhi : • 
was married and lived. My father John Maunsell was born there. 
He married at Melcombe Regis, where I and his six children were 
born. My wife Margery. £400 to {"500 in the hands of John Ashe, 
of Freshford, near Bath. Money in the hands of Joseph Pitt, of 
Weymouth, and Christopher Clark", in right of Frances, his wife, 
lately deceased, executrix of Phineas Pitt, late of Weymouth. 
Money in the hands of James Ashe, of Westcombe, Somerset, 
Clothier. My wife's brother John Pitt. My eldest son Peter was 
born at Batcombe, Nov. 25. 1616. My son Jonathan was born at 
Courte Browne, June 12, 1624. He is to go to Oxford. My son 
Ephraim was born at Courte Browne, Aug. 19, 1627. Joan my 
eldest child, wife of Latymer Sampson, was born at Melcombe Regis, 
Dec. 31, 1610." (Then follows the births of her children.) " My 
daughter Margaret was born Feb. 3. 161 9, and my daughter Mary 

1 "Municipal Records of the Borough of Dorchester," edited by C. H. Mayo and 
W. H. Gould; p. 506 (No. 685). 


was born Dec. I, 1622. My late brother Pitt, late Alderman of 
Weymouth. My brother-in-law William Whiteway. My cousin 
Joseph Ash, of Freshford. John Pitt, junior, now resident with me. 
Picture of my father-in-law, Thomas Barfoot." ' 

It will be noticed that, although the name is spelled Mounsell 
or Munsell in the Radipole register, and the spelling finally adopted 
by the Irish branch is Monsell (according to Burke), in the above 
abstract it is spelled Maunsell. This is by no means justifiable ; in 
the original will it is spelled, and signed, Mounsell. There can be 
little doubt that the names are actually identical. In " Alumni 
Oxoniensis " Peter's surname is given as Mansell or Munsell. The 
abstract of a will should, however, retain the spelling of a surname 
precisely as in the original. 

Another point which occurs in the original is ignored in the 
abstract. It will be noticed that the will goes back one generation 
beyond John Mounsell [d. 15SG), from whom Burke starts his 
genealogy. His father was Peter, of Taunceston, in Cornwall— the 
two last words are omitted in the abstract ; an unfortunate omissii >n, 
as there happens to be a hamlet named Tarent Launston in Dorset, 
not far from Blandford, where, as stated in the will, Peter Mounsell 
lived after his marriage, and the obvious inference, failing other 
evidence, would be that Launceston, mentioned in the will, is 
identical with this place. The difference in spelling might, of course. 
be disregarded. 

Peter, however, came from Cornwall ; but there is not much 
to be found concerning Mounsells of that county. One Anne 
Mounsell was married, in 1614. at Lansalloes, to Peter Trubody, or 
Trewbody ; probably she was related to Peter Mounsell. 2 

In a paper read before the Somersetshire Archaeological and 
Natural Hi-tory Society, by the Rev. E. H. Bates Harbin, " The 
History of the Manor of Newton Surmaviile " (which in 160S came into 
the possession of the Harbin [or Harbynl family), occurs the following — 

1 "Abstracts of Somersetshire Wills," by Rev. F. Brown. Series V., p. 63. ,'i i. ■ 
reference to the will at Somerset House is 19, Lee.) 

* " The Visitation of the Countv of Cornwall, 1620 "; H I. S Pub. V.-'..; ,i 
Lansalloes is on the south coast, near Fov.\ I r forty mi La. 


" Since Robert Harbin began life a? a merchant a1 Blandford, 
it is very probable that he came from Milton Abbas, a small village 
some eight miles west of that town. . . . From the date painted on 
his portrait it appears that Robert was born in 1526. During his 
residence at Blandford he married Margaret, daughter of Peter 
Maunsell (or Monsell), who, though a native of Launceston, was 
settled there in 1546, when his goods were assessed at £17. . . . 
However, there is no tradition that Robert was apprenticed to her 
father." l 

Mr. Harbin does not supply any reference for this marriage, 
or other statements, but it is to be presumed that, as a member of 
the Harbin family, he was in possession of authority for them : 
probably he also possessed Robert Harbin's portrait to which he 

The marriage of John Mounsell with Margery Ash has not 
been found, and it is worthy of note that he mentions " my wife's 
brother, John Pitt," and " my late brother, John Pitt, late Alder- 
man of Weymouth." The term was constantly used, however, in 
wills of this period, with reference to brothers-in-law ; the inference 
would appear to be that there was a Pitt-Ash marriage. Maunsell 
mentions that his eldest son Peter was born at Batcombe, Somerset ; 
Westcombe is a hamlet aboul one mile from Batcombe, midway 
between Frome and Bruton, and Margery (or, as Burke says, Mary, 
though this is at variance with her husband's will), Ash was of 
Westcombe ; her son was probably born in her father's house. 

Joan Pitt, wife of John Mounsell who died in 15S6, married 
in 1588 Thomas Barfoot ; hence the allusion in the wi)l to " my 
father-in-law. Thomas Barfoot." .Margaret . widow of John Pitt, 
and mother of Joan, mentions in her will, " my daughter Joan 
Barfoot," and " Peter Mounsell, eldest son of my daughter Joan." - 

Burke is correct in placing Ephraim as third son of John 
Maunsell ; but he is guilty of an anachronism further on, in stating 

1 Somersetshire Archaeological and Natural History Society : Proceedings. Vi 
p. 18. 

* "Abstract of Somerset -in e Wills," by F. Brown, Series II., p. 36. 


that this Ephraim, the year of whose birth he gives accurately as 
1627, " sold his lands in Somerset and purchased estates in Limerick, 
and settled there in 1644 " ; he would then be only seventeen years 
of age. Possibly this is a misprint ; no record of any such purchase 
appears in the Calendar of Irish papers. 

Jonathan did not, apparently, go to Oxford, as his name does 
not appear in " Alumni Oxoniensis " ; he was only thirteen at the 
time of his father's death. 

From John Maunsell's will, and the deeds above quoted, the 
pedigree may be deduced as on page 401. 

It appears, from some contemporary correspondence, that in 
1642 one of John Maunsell's sons was involved in some manner with 
the Irish rebellion. 

Thomas White, writing from Limerick to his son Francis, a 
prisoner in Ilchester Gaol, on September 21, 1642, says : 

" It is vain to expect that Mr. Mansell and his company being 
13 in number will be exchanged for you, inasmuch as Sir Geoffrey 
Gallway took him and his company prisoners for committing rob- 
beries in the river of Limerick and betraying Edward Gould and his 
ship to Captain Cole, who by Mansell's persuasion brought them 
prisoners to Cork. I cannot prevail to get Mr. Mansell disguarded, 
till he or his friends procure that you and the rest of our friends there 
committed with their goods be sent to Cork. Am sorry your im- 
prisonment and that of others in England is like to prove a dear 
purchase, for ethers here are like to pay dear for you." ! 

On September 30, the Earl of Cork, - writing from Youghal 
to Latimer Sampson, of Freshford, Somerset, says : " Concerning 
the means for procuring the release of Mr. Mounsell [sic]. Had sent 
an Irish footman to Limerick with Francis Whyte's letters, who is 

v ■ \!^ tL ? d ; M f- P f f- ^ SS - Com -)- Vol. i., p. 60. It would appear, however, that 
trancis White nad already been liberated, for in the Commons Journals vol ii p 71 • the 
resolution is recorded <' that Francis White and Hugh Clansev, Irish gend'emen^'staye'd at 
Ilchester Gaol be forthwith released from any further restraint,' putting in any food security 
that they will net trar ■ jrt to the Re! els no ammunition," etc. 

.. , \ K \' '' " ! V ' ' "■ : Cork; created Se P l - 2 9> 16:6, Lord Bode, Baron of 

*° u g hil ; Oct. ,6, 1620, discount Dungarvan and Earl of Cork. He and his sons' took 1 prom- 
inent part in the suppression of the rebellion in Munster. One of his sons was killed at the 
battle of Liscarrol, on Sept. 3, 1042. 


B " 





° 3 . «' 



13 ^ •• oo 


5 K 5 -' 









S c _-. 




lj 30 



< c ? 


= o 


► 3 

. j 







( 4 oi) 


returned with the answers. Those from the merchants of Limerick 
show what high and insolent demands they made for exchange. I 
suggest therefore that the order should be procured from the Parlia- 
ment to apprehend Thomas Fower . . . merchants of Limerick, and 
one Carney, merchant of Kilmallock, now skulking in or near London, 
and am confident Mr. Mounsell will thus get freed on better terms 
than had been proposed. I have a commander of theirs, Captain 
Prendergast, in prison, but they refuse to exchange Mr. Mounsell for 
him.''' ' 

On December 30 John Ashe writes from Freshford to William 
Lenthall (Speaker of the House of Commons) : "I forward these 
letters from Ireland from the Earl of Cork, one written by himself, 
the other two from the rebels of Limerick. The reason I send them 
is that about the end of June, upon the petition of Mr. Latimer 
Sampson, Mr. Mounsell's brother-in-law. you ordered that two 
Irishmen taken on suspicion at Minehead named White and Clansy 
should be kept in safe custody till the House ordered their enlarge- 
ment, which was done to gain the release of the said Mr. Mounsell. 
. . . This Mr. Mounsell now in miserable captivity is my father's 
sister's son, and hath lost an estate in Ireland near the value of 
£10,000, out of which he was to pay his brothers' and sisters' por- 
tions, who arc now oil undone and live upon the charity of their 
friends." 2 

John Ashe was nephew to Margery, wife of John Maunsell. 
It is not clear which of John Maunsell 's sons is alluded to in these 
letters, as his Christian name is not mentioned ; nor does the state- 
ment that he was to provide portions for his brothers and sisters 
out of his Irish estates agree with the provisions of John Maunsell's 
will, quoted above. It is probable, however, that this was Peter, 
the eldest son ; there is no information to be found concerning his 
ultimate release. 

Robert Middleton, who married Margaret, daughter of John 
Maunsell, was of the family of Middleton of Chirk Castle, county 

1 Portland MSS. ; vol. i., pp. 6$, 64. 
' Ibid., p F . 82, S3. 


Denbigh. He was a merchant established in Mincing Lane, parish 
of St. Dunstan in the East, and was one of the original Adventurers 
in the Virginia Company, and also in the East India and North-West 
Passage Companies ; was M.P. for Melcombe Regis, 1603-4, aiic * Ior 
the City of London, 1614 ; he died in 1616, his wife, Margaret, having 
died in 1610. 

On November 9, 1676, administration of the estate of Thomas 
Mansell, of Sherborne, was granted to Honor, his widow ; she died 
before March 8, 1679, as on that date administration of her estate 
was granted to Simon, Thomas, and Honor, her children ; and there 
was a further grant on August 5, 1GS5. of administration of Thomas 
Mansell 's estate to his son Thomas, " Honor, relict, not having fully 
administered." 1 

It was probably this Thomas, the son of Thomas and Honor, 
who placed in Sherborne Minster a tablet in commemoration of a 
remarkable hailstorm and flood which occurred on May 16, J 709, 
and did considerable damage to the pavement, etc., in the church. 
According to W. B. Wildrnan, in " Notes and Queries," this Thomas 
who erected tire tablet was " the son of Thomas Mansell of the same 
place, and he entered Sherborne School circa 1660. He was chosen 
a Governor of the school in 1691, and acted as Warden of the 
Governors in 1702-3, in 1713-14, and 1724-5. He was church- 
warden in 1094-5, in 1703-4, and in 1704-5, and is described as 
Thomas Mansell, gentleman." 

There is a will of Thomas Mansell of Sherborne, apothecary, 
dated April 2, 1729, and proved in the same year. He desires to be 
buried in Sherborne church, "in my father's sepulchre," and that 
the date of his death may " be inserted under my wife's monument." 
The property bequeathed included a house in the borough of Newland 
in Sherborne and a living " called Hound street in the Manor of 
Sherborne," and the legatees were a wife named Susanna, daughters 
named Arm Thornton, Honor Leaton, and Sarah Mansell, and a 
grandson named John Thornton.- 

1 "Notes ar.d Queries for Somerset and Dorset." Vol. v., pp. 207, 210, 302. 

2 J bid., vol. vii., pp. 16S, 205, 204. 


So here we have, at any rate, four generations of Mansell of 
Sherborne : 

Thomas Mansell, = Honor, ob. 1679 
ob. 1676 

I I 

Simon .Mansell Thomas Mansell, = Susanna 

ob. 1729 I 

- Thornton = Ann Sarah, ob. 1771 Honor, ob. Dec, = Stephen Beaton 

I 176; 

. I 

John 1 hornton 

There is no mention of any Mansell monument in Sherborne 
Minster in Hutchins' History of Dorset ; the dates of the decease of 
Sarah Mansell and Honor Beaton, her sister, are recorded upon a 

Thomas Mansell left particular instructions concerning his 
funeral ; his body was to be " sung to church by several of the best 
singers the organist shall appoint, and a psalm of thanksgiving to be 
sung immediately after the sermon," etc. ; also the funeral, if in 
summer, was to take place not later than four o'clock, and if in 
winter not later than ten o'clock. He appointed his unmarried 
daughter, Sarah, his sole executrix, though his wife was living, which 
is certainly unusual. This family of Mansells of Sherborne appears 
to have become extinct with the death of Sarah in 1771, unless her 
uncle, Simon, had issue ; no record oi such issue has been found. 

On August 25, 16S0, administration of the estate of William 
Mansell, of Weymouth, was granted to his widow, Joyce ; a further 
grant was made on December 12, 16S1, to Hannah Street, widow, 
daughter of William Mansell (Joyce having died without fully 
administering) . William is named in the second grant as of Meicombe 
Regis, which is practically the same as Weymouth ; and he is said 
to have died on board the New Oxford, frigate. There was a fifty- 
four gun-ship named the Oxford in commission at that time, but no 
record appears to exist of any vessel called New Oxford. Tiie Oxford 
was launched in 1674, and superseded a much smaller vessel of the 


same name, which was probably broken up by that time. Seamen 
may possibly have christened the larger vessel New Oxford when she 
first went afloat, and the name would stick to her among the crew. 1 

There was one John Mauncell who, in the year 1455, was 
granted the appointment of Controller of the Customs in the port of 
Pole (Poole), Dorset ; it does not necessarily follow, however, that 
he was of the Dorset branch, and there is no connection to be traced. 2 

The later connection of the Mansels with Dorset lies further 
east, in the neighbourhood of Kimmeridge, and of interborne, near 

" Kimmeridge is a quaint little village, something like a 
capital T in shape, the cross at the top being composed of the church, 
vicarage, and a farm, and the centre stroke of a row of small flower- 
decked cottages with thatched roofs. The church, till recently one 
of the twenty-two churches that were donatives, has a Norman door 
and gables, and is very small and plain, the chief object of interest 
being the tomb of Sir William Clavell, knight banneret." 3 

Kimmeridge lies close to the bay of the same name, and within 
the parish is the manor of Smedmore, which was held at the time of 
Domesday by one Richard, of William de Braose. Richard's 
descendants, as so frequently occurred, became known as de Smed- 
more (variously spelt ; it is Metmore in Domesday) ; and these 
Smedmores held the lands until early in the fifteenth century, when 
they passed to the Wyots. Somewhere about 1420, on the failure of 
heirs male, Johanna Wyot became sole heir ; she married John 

1 " Notes and Queries for Somerset and Dorset." Vol. v., pp. 257, 259. " The Royal 
Navy," by \V. Laird Clowes. Vol. ii., pp. Ill, 246, 349. 

* Cal. Patent Roll;, I452-I461 ; p. 202. 

• " In and Around the Lie of Purbeck," by Ida Woodward ; pp. 73, 74. The so-called 
" Isle of Purbeck " is in reality a peninsula, about 1 welve miles by ten, bounded on the north by 
the River Frome and by Poole Harbour, on the east and south by the English Channel, and on 
the west by an imaginary line drawn northward from Worbarrow Bay ; it is famous for its 
stone quarries. The volume from which the above description is taken is a very pleasantly 
written account of the locality, giving adequate information without too much profusion of 
detail ; it is illustrated by a series of delightful drawings in water-colour by Mr. J. \\ . G. Bond ; 
some of these are veritable little gems, t] u excellently :■■■:' b: ■■'. giv: . ' ie 
effect of tr orig 

"Donative" benefice— one w] the founder is at liberl :o - it 

presentation to or investment by ; 


Ciavell (or Clavyle), and thus Smedmore came into the possession of 
this family, who held it for about four hundred years. 

The Cla veils probably came of a Norman family, and Walter 
de Ciavell is said to have come over with the Conqueror ; it was 
certainly of ancient origin, and is the only family mentioned in 
Domesday which has still a representative in the Isle of Purbeck. 

The Clavells do not appear, however, to have been prominent, 
either as soldiers or statesmen. Sir William, to whose tomb in 
Kimmeridge church reference has already been made, is said to 
have had a command in Ireland during the Tyrone rebellion, at the 
end of Queen Elizabeth's reign, and to have been knighted for his 
services ; but his name only occurs once in State Papers of that 
time, without any title, as " an agent of the Lord President " ; nor 
does it appear in Morgan's " Sphere of Gentry " or Shaw's " Knights." 
He was knighted, however, for we have come across him before in 
connection with Vice-Admiral Sir Robert Mansel and the glass 
business. Sir William Ciavell, like. many others, found himself 
worsted when he endeavoured to interfere with the admiral's 
monopoly., and in fact spent some weeks in the Marshalsea prison 
for his pains. 1 

The insciiption upon his tomb in Kimmeridge church runs as 


" Within this marble ca=kett lies 
He who was learned, stout and wise, 
Who would for no expence conceal! 
His projects for the common weall : 
And when disloyall Irish did 
Rebel] against the Queane their head, 
Approved valour then did gett 
Him the reward of Bannerett." 

^ Sir William's loyalty and valour did not obtain for him 
sufficient fame foi his name to appear in the Dictionary of National 
Biography ; but one John Ciavell, a nephew of his, is noticed therein 
by reason of his misdeeds and subsequent pardon. Apparently, 
after throwing away even' penny in gambling and other undesirable 
pastimes, he " took to the road," as a highwayman, and, after some 

1 Fide vol. i. 


success in tins capacity, was caught in 1627, and condemned to 
death. He found favour, however, with the king and queen, and 
was eventually pardoned ; and, in common with a good many other 
shady characters of those days, devoted his leisure time in prison to 
writing a long self-conscious screed in verse, setting forth the iniquity 
of his own life, and warning his readers against the wiles of robbers 
like himself, and so forth. It is styled " A Recantation of an ill-led 
Life ; or a Discovery of the Highway Law " ; it went into three 
editions, and is said to have been published by express command of 
the king. The publisher, in a foreword to the third edition, remarks 
that " it is become very disputable amongst wise men, whether they 
should more admire (i.e., marvel at) his former ill ways, or his now 
most singular reformation." 

Sir William had no issue, and John, his brother's son, would 
naturally have been his heir ; but he was entirely ignored, the 
estates being willed to Roger Clavell of Winfrith, a distant cousin. 

There is an excellent Clavell Pedigree in Hutchins' History 
of Dorset (vol. i., p. 570), but it is not necessary to trace it in 
detail from the beginning ; the subjoined summary of the later 
steps sufficiently indicates the final devolution of the estates. 

From this it is clear that George, the last male representative 
of the Clavells, devised his estates to his nephew, William Richards, 
eldest son of his sister Margaret, with the stipulation that he should 
assume the name and arms of Clavell. William died without issue, 
and was succeeded by his brother John, who also assumed the name 
and arms of Clavell ; he died unmarried in 1S33, when the estates 
devolved upon the co-heirs, his eldest sister, Mrs. Pleydell— or, as 
she was then deceased, her issue — and Maria Sophia, his youngest 
sister. The latter bequeathed her moiety to Mrs. Mansel, who had 
already inherited one share as co-heir, and who obtained a further 
share by gift from her sister, Lady Bingham. The remaining shares 
were purchased by Colonel John Mansel, who thus became possessed 
of the whule of the estates. 

Lieutenant-Colonel John Mansel was an enthusiastic soldier 
of some distinction. He entered the army in 1795, and saw active 
service in many parts of the world. The:.:!: - appeared 

a I* 

B% I 

W^ 2 g >, 









-c g 

J a ' 


-° +* B 

!3 .TO g « £ < 

OB S 5 

'"■5.11 5|^E°^ 

/) u S u C "" 


< "O - _ 

i-, o 



in the Gentleman's Magazine at the time of his death, January 29, 

" Colonel John Mansel, C.B., of Smedmore, Co. Dorset, entered 
the British army as ensign in the 53rd Regiment. He embarked in 
1795 for the West Indies, and sailed in that ill-fated fleet com- 
manded by Sir H. Christian. He was present in the attack on Morne 
Chabot, at the siege of Morne Fortunee. in the island of St. Lucia; 
the whole of the Carib war in St. Vincent ; at the capture of Trinidad, 
and at the siege of Moro Castle, in the island of Porto Rico. In 1805 
he was promoted to a majority without purchase. In 1807 he 
joined the 1st Battalion 53rd Regiment in Bengal. In 1S09-10, in 
consequence of a disturbance in Madras, his regiment formed part 
of an expedition under Colonel Martindell (Bengal army). In 
August, 1811, he joined the second battalion in Spain ; he was 
selected to command all the light companies of the sixth division 
during the campaigns of 1811-12, which included the skirmish with 
the enemy's cavalry near Carpio, when Major-General Anson's 
brigade of cavalrv was attacked by superior numbers and forced to 
retreat. At this juncture, the light troops under Mansel's command 
succeeded in gaining the rear of the enemy, killing and capturing 
men and horses. He was present at the sieges of Ciudad Rodrigo, 
Badajos, the forts of Salamanca, and at the battle of Salamanca. 
In this memorable conflict the command of the regiment devolved 
upon him, and for it he received the gold war medal, and was pro- 
moted to the rank of Brevet Lieutenant-Colonel. During this 
action his horse was killed under him. He commanded a brigade of 
the sixth division during the pursuit of the enemy to Arevola. He 
then returned to his regiment, and remained in command of it until 
the arrival of the army before Burgos. In 1813 he led the second 
provisional battalion, composed of four companies of the Queen's 
and four of the 53rd Regiment, during the operations on the Garonne, 
and in the general action at Toulouse, for which he received a clasp. 
He headed a brigade in the fourth division at Eaux for a considerable 
time, and on the march to Bordeaux the command of the whole 
division devolved upon him. The second battalion 53rd Regiment 
having been selected to - Xaj ' : t St. Helena, Lieu- 



tenant-Colonel Manse! took the command of it on the promotion of 
his brother-in-law, Sir George Bingham, K.C.B., to the brevet rank 
of General. He was made Companion of the Bath at the institution 
of that order, and retired from the service in 1S27." 1 

This account, contributed no doubt by a member of the family, 
may be accepted as accurate in substance. Sir Hugh Christian's 
fleet is alluded to as " ill-fated " ; and in fact he was twice turned 
back in the Channel by stormy weather. On the first occasion 
several of the convoy foundered, others were driven on shore ; more 
than two hundred dead bodies were picked up on the coast between 
Portland and Bridport ; the men-of-war put back to Spithead, all 
more or less damaged. At the second attempt, December 9, 1795, 
the fleet was again scattered ; the Glory (flagship) with five others 
and about fifty of the convoy got back to Spithead ; the rest of the 
men-of-war and some of the convoy arrived in the West Indies ; 
many were lost, many were captured. 

Christian arrived at Barbadoes at the end of April, and thence 
proceeded, in concert with Sir Ralph Abercrombie, to the conquest 
of St. Lucia. This beautiful island had already seen many vicissi- 
tudes in the matter of ownership. In 1748 the British and French 
agreed to consider it " neutral," but in 1762 it surrendered to Admiral 
Rodney ; in the following year, by the treaty of Paris, it was 
declared French ; was captured by Britain in 177S, restored to 
France by the peace of Versailles in 17S3, surrendered to Admiral 
Jervis (Lord St. Vincent) in 1794. Yic L or Hugues, a partisan of 
Robespierre, however, got together an army chiefly composed of 
insurgent slaves— alluded to by the British as "the Brigands "—and 
made it so hot for our men, already greatly exhausted, and reduced 
by yellow fever, that we evacuated the island on June iS, 1795. 

It was to reverse this mishap that the expedition started from 
Barbadoes in 1796, and John Mansei, ensign, was one of the units 
therein. He had escaped the peril of the Channel gales, where too 
many of his comrades had perished, and was now to taste his first 
experience of actual warfare. 

•ieman 's Magazine (New Series) . Vol . 


Unfortunately, the troops under Sir Ralph Abercrombie were 
mostly raw recruits, and, we arc told, the officers were little better ; 
so that the task which should have been, against forces little better 
than a rabble, something of a " walk-over," was nothing of the sort. 

The 53rd appears, however, to have been composed of 
some better stuff than this ; at the capture of Morne Chabot— where 
John Mansel probably received his " baptism of fire " — -the regiment 
came in for some rough handling, and carried the post in gallant 
fashion, in spite of the non-arrival of another column, which was to 
have participated in the attack. In the account given in the 
" History of the British Army," it is stated that the whole of the 
casualties— seventy killed and wounded— fell upon the flank com- 
panies of the 53rd Regiment ; and this is corroborated in the 
regimental records, according to which the loss was one drummer 
and twelve rank and file killed. Captain Charles Stuart, Lieutenants 
Richard Collins and John Carmichael, two sergeants, and forty- four 
rank and file wounded : one drummer and eight privates missing. 
Sir Ralph Abercromby thanked the regiment on parade for its good 
services, and promised to mention it to H.R.H. the Duke of York. 1 

The regiment returned to England in 1802 ; Mansel, after 
some service in Ireland, during part of which time he was — as major 
— in command of the 2nd Battalion, newly formed, embarked for 
India with a draft of two hundred men for the 1st Battalion, on 
April 22, 1806. 

He returned to England early in 1811, and thence joined the 
2nd Battalion, on September 18, to take his part in the more im- 
portant theatre of the Peninsular War. 

Wellington's position towards the end of 1S11 was by no means 
satisfactory ; he was not strong enough to take the offensive, and 
had been compelled to fall back within the Portuguese frontier. 
In the early winter, however, Napoleon himself came to Wellington's 
aid, and opened the way for a British attack. He separated 15,000 
of General Marmont's army, sending them across to take part in the 
invasion of Valencia. Wellington resolved to take immediate 

1 .: H j tor . •• I - • • 

Record of th_- Fii'ty-tl irJ 1 „irr.e ." b - \\ 


advantage of this disintegration of the enemy's forces, and to besiege 
and capture Ciudad Rodrigo before they could concentrate against 
him. It was a time problem, as all concerned thoroughly realised, 
and the British, from general to private, toiled incessantly to 
complete the preparation for the final assault. Two knolls, or 
hillocks, named the Greater and Lesser Teson, commanded the town 
on the north side ; the French had constructed a redoubt on the 
former to prevent it from falling into our hands. The first tiling was 
to gain possession of this work, and Wellington ordered the Light 
Division, under General Cranford, to perform this task. Mansel's 
regiment was no doubt in this division; but it was to the 52nd, 
a corps of sturdy veterans who had already distinguished themselves 
on many occasions, that the duty fell : with three companies, 
Colonel Coiborne assaulted and captured the redoubt in ten minutes, 
with the trilling loss of six killed and nineteen wounded. 

On January 14. 1812, after Jive days' work under lire, the 
batteries on the Greater Teson opened fire upon the northern angle 
of the defences ; the convent of San Francisco, a huge building in a 
suburb on the east, was captured on the following day : another 
battery on the slope of the Lesser Teson opened fire on the i8th, 
to make a second breach. Both breaches were considered to be 
practicable on the 19th, and at dusk the columns moved out to their 
respective positions. The Light Division had the easier task, as 
their breach had been more recently made, and the enemy had not 
had time to retrench within it ; in a lew minutes they were over it, 
driving the enemy from the ramparts. At the other breach more 
adequate preparation had been made, and a mine was exploded just 
as the storming party topped the broken wall, killing and maiming 
a number of men— among them General Mackinnon, whose body 
was found at some distance. However, the assault was completely 
successful, and Ciudad Rodrigo was ours. It does not appear, from 
Sir William Napier's and other histories of the war, that the 53rd 
Regiment took part in the actual storming of the breaches ; indeed, 
in the regimental record, already quoted, it is stated that : "In 
January (1812) when Lord Wellington besieged and captured Ciudad 
Rodrigo, the 53rd was at Penna Verde ; but it advanced to the 


frontiers on the approach of the French army ; when it withdrew 
the 53rd fell back to Grajal. They subsequently traversed the 
country to Elvas, and formed part of the covering army during the 
siege of Badajoz, which was captured by storm on the 6th of 
April." ] 

Penna Verde and Grajal cannot be located, either in the 
general atlas or in the military maps in Fortescue's work ; possibly 
the names have been wrongly spelled in the regimental record ; but 
the account here given clashes with that in the obituary notice above 
quoted, which distinctly states that Colonel Mansel was present at 
Ciudad Rodrigo and Badajos. Elvas is within the Portuguese 
frontier, about twelve miles west of Badajos ; Carpio, where the 
skirmish with the enemy's cavalry is said to have taken place, is 
about nine miles west of Ciudad Rodrigo. 

Following these successful operations came the two battles — 
first that which is known as the Salamanca Forts, and afterwards that 
of Salamanca. 

The French had fortified three convents which commanded 
the bridge at Salamanca with considerable ingenuity, in which they 
left a garrison of eight hundred men. These forts being too strong 
to be taken by assault, the 6th Division — which included the 53rd 
Regiment — was ordered to besiege them. On June 16th parallels 
were dug within two hundred yards of the most important work, 
San Vincente ; the workers suffered considerably, the distance being 
so short, and the height of the building giving the enemy complete 
command. When the heavy artillery — four eighteen-pounders 
and two twenty-four pounder howitzers— arrived upon the scene, 
their attack was sadly discounted by the shortage of ammunition. 
On the 23rd an attempt was made to storm one of the smaller works, 
but the breach was not practicable, the scaling ladders were in- 
efficient, and the attempt was abandoned, with considerable loss. 

On the 27th, however, a flag of truce was displayed from San 
Vincente, and Wellington gave the French five minutes to sur- 
render ; while they were parleying, a Portuguese regiment very 

History of the British Army," by VV. J. Fortescue. Vol. iv., p. 59. 


promptl)' and opportunely gained an entrance unopposed and 
settled the business. The 53 rd had three killed and seven 
wounded in this affair ; Lieutenant J. A. Devonish died of wounds 
before the capitulation. 

A considerable time was now occupied in following up the 
French army towards the Douro, and in retiring once more towards 
Salamanca, the French having been considerably reinforced. 

Early on the morning of July 22 Marshal Marmont seized one 
of two circular hills, named Arapiles, on the plain, the allied army 
simultaneously occupying the other. Wellington played a waiting 
game, and during the afternoon, with characteristic 'acumen, per- 
ceived his chance. Marmont, in an endeavour to turn the'right 
flank of the allied forces, presented a weak spot, and the 3rd Division 
falling upon the left hank of the French, carried all before them. 

The 6th Division had been moved up to the support of the 
4th, which was opposed to the strongest part of the enemy's line 
Before the nth and 61st Regiments had succeeded in driving the 
enemy from the high ground on which they had successfully resisted 
the attack of the 4 th Division, the 53rd Regiment was brought up 
to support the 23rd Portuguese Regiment, and having less ground to 
cover, came into action sooner than the rest of the brigade ; the 
Portuguese regiment, which had suffered considerably, retiring, left 
the 53rd in a very perilous position, confronted by a large body of 
infantry and cavalry, and exposed to a flank tire from the Arapiles. 
Casualties becoming numerous, the regiment fell back in good order 
until the remainder of the brigade came into line. This little 
independent manoeuvre of the 53rd is mentioned with approval, by 
Napier in his History of the Peninsular War ; whether Colone* 
Bingham or Major Mansel was in command at the moment is not 
clear. The enemy's cavalry advanced to sabre this small force- 
there were not more than two hundred and forty men of the 53rd 
under arms that day, by reason of previous casualties— but the 
British regiment formed square and stood firm, and the cavalry were 
forced to retire. 

The 53rd was on the left of the 6th Division in the final 
attack, and again suffered considerably ; night brought a termination 


of hostilities, and victory to the allied forces, eleven guns and seven 
thousand prisoners remaining in their hands. 

In the official report the 6th Division is stated to have " re- 
stored the fortune of the day," and Colonel Bingham is mentioned by 
name. He and Major Mansel received afterwards the Peninsula 
gold medal. 1 

" Lieutenant-Colonel Bingham having been wounded and 
obliged to quit the field, the command of the battalion iir the latter 
part of the action devolved on Major Mansel, who added to the 
reputation which he had obtained by his coolness and conduct 
during his long service in the regiment." 2 

Such is the comment of the writer of the regimental records ; 
and there is indication in more than one place of the esteem in which 
Mansel was held by his brothers in arms. 

On the day after the action, Major-General Hulse, who com- 
manded the brigade, was placed in command of the 5th Division ; 
and in the absence of his chief, Colonel Bingham, Mansel now found 
himself a brigadier, being selected for the command of the brigade, 
which he held during the pursuit of the enemy to Arevalo. 3 Bing- 
ham, however, recovered rapidly from his wound, and on August 16 
assumed command of the brigade, Mansel commanding his regiment. 

Colonel Mansel was with the regiment at the commencement 
of the siege of Burgos — September 19, 1S12 — but, according to the 
regimental record, he was invalided home on October 7, suffering 
from fever and ague, and so was not present when the siege was 
raised on the 21st of that month. 4 

There is no further mention of Colonel Mansel in these records 
until early in 1814, when he commanded the regimental depot at 

1 Colonel John Mansel's medal is now in the possesion of his grandson, Canon J. C. 
Morton Mansel-Pleydell. It is known as the smaller Peninsula Gold Medal ; the larger one was 
bestowed upon general officers. The two are precisely similar in design ; on the obverse is a 
figure of Britannia, holding a wreath, a lion beside her : on the reverse of Colonel Mansel's 
medal is engraved " Salamanca." and there is a clasp for Toulouse. The gold medal is skilfully 
enclosed in slightly com .-\ gla^s of brilliant quality, and forms a very handsome decoration. 

2 "Historical Record of the 53rd Regiment," p. 69. 

' So spelled in the atlas and military maps — not Are:;: 1 ..!, as in the obituary notice. 
* In the regimental records it is stated that Colonel Mansel embarked at St. Andero — 
probably Santander, on the north coast of Spam. 


Brabourne Lees, in Kent ; whence, the remnants of six companies 
which had been sent home having been restored to their proper 
strength, they sailed once more, on March 3, for Spain, under Mansel's 
command— he being now brevet lieutenant-colonel. On April 3 
he took command of the 2nd Provisional Battalion, and assisted at 
the battle of Toulouse ; his brother, Captain Robert Christopher 
Mansel, was also present with the Light Infantry. 

Upon the suspension of hostilities after the battle of Toulouse, 
Mansel with the Provisional Battalion marched to Valence, and 
subsequently, on May 7. 1814, to Eaux, where he once more com- 
manded a brigade ; and on June 7, when Wellington reviewed the 
troops encamped at Blankfort previous to their departure from 
France, Mansel was in command of the 4th Division. 

The 53rd sailed for Cork on June 22, arriving on July 4 ; and, 
after a brief sojourn at Kinsale, sailed for Spithead, and arrived on 
August 1, marching on the 2nd to quarters at Hilsea, just outside 

Here Colonel Bingham, who had returned to England in 
January on urgent private affairs, rejoined the battalion, and in a 
Regimental Order issued on September 24, after congratulating the 
officers and men upon their good conduct and appearance, adds: 
" He particularly thanks Lieutenant-Colonel Mansel for his care and 
attention, and congratulates him on commanding in so distinguished 
a manner as he did the four companies at Toulouse. He ceases to 
regret not having been present, knowing how well his place was 

A handsome and generous tribute, and no doubt well deserved. 

In April, 1815, the battalion being then quartered in Ports- 
mouth, the renewed outbreak of hostilities consequent upon 
Napoleon's escape from Elba caused great activity in recruiting ; 
the 53rd was not, however, called upon to take part in this brief 
campaign ; but on July 28 the 2nd Battalion received orders to 
prepare for immediate embarkation for "distant service," which, 
there was little doubt, meant the Island of St. Helena, where it had 
been decided to intern Napoleon, who had surrendered himself to 
Captain Maitland, of the Bellerophon, after Waterloo. 


The 53rd, and a company of Royal Artillery, with six guns, 
embarked on August i, Colonel Sir George Bingham — he had been 
made K.C.B. on January 2 — being in command of the troops, and 
Major Fehrszen of the battalion ; Lieutenant-Colonel Mansel having 
obtained permission to remain at home on leave. 1 Colonel Mansel 
did not, in fact, join his regiment in St. Helena until May 3, 1S16. 

Sir Hudson Lowe arrived on April 14, 1S16, to assume his 
duties as governor and comrnander-ii -chief, and Sir George Bing- 
ham was appointed brigadier-general on the staff of the island. 

Of Napoleon's captivity in St. Helena much has been written 
— perhaps too much. 

When the ex-emperor surrendered himself to the British 
Government, he must certainly have anticipated some such fate ; 
and he must a^ surely have expected that a more secure place of 
confinement, and more stringent measures to render escape impossible, 
would be adopted. 

The island of St. Helena was an ideal place of detention for 
the mighty disturber of the peace of the world ; no one questions this 
fact, or lias ever questioned it ; nor can there be any doubt that such 
measures as were adopted to ensure the safe custody of the prisoner 
were reasonable and necessary. 

Nevertheless, from the earliest period of his captivity there 
were endless intrigues, bitter criticisms, unjustifiable accusations of 
cruel treatment, etc., launched in the first instance by his immediate 
staff and companions, and in many instances more or less accepted 
or condoned by later writers on the subject. 

Sir Hudson Lowe, the governor and commander-in-chief, 
has, of course, been the target for most of these poisoned shafts. 
Probably he was not, in some respects, the best man for the post ; 
he was lacking in tact, in the power of combining joiiiicr in re with 
suaviter in mode — a rare gift, when all is said and done — but he did 
his duty, securely guarded his charge until the end ; and there is 
abundant evidence that, among those who knew him, officially or 

1 In order to be married. His first wife had died July 25, 1806. flis second marriage 
took place in July or August, 1S15 : the announcement appears in the Gentleman's Magazine 
for August, "lately,"' without precise J. te. 



otherwise, he was by no means regarded as a cruel or unreasonable 
man. On the contrary, he is frequently alluded to as a kind-hearted, 
courteous gentleman ; and that he was, after Napoleon's death, 
cruelly calumniated and unjustly ostracised there can be no question. 

Sir George Bingham sailed for St. Helena on board the 
Northumberland, which carried Napoleon ; he kept a journal on the 
voyage, in which he makes some interesting comments upon the 
bearing of the ex-emperor, describes conversations with him, and so 
forth. This journal, together with some letters to Lady Bingham, 
and other correspondence, appeared in the Cornhill Magazine for 
January and February, 190':. 1 The originals, it is stated, " were 
collected after Napoleon's death and copied into three books by Miss 
Margaretta Pleydell, whose great-grandniece, Miss Dorothy Mansel- 
Pleydell, has been at the pains of making a fresh copy with a view- 
to publication." 

(Miss Margaretta Pleydell was sister to Louisa Pleydell, 
Colonel John Mansel's second wife ; Miss Dorothy Mansel-Pleydell is 
the daughter of Canon J. C. Mansel-Pleydell, Colonel Mansel's 
grandson — now Mrs. Pelham Smith.) 

Napoleon appears to have conversed with considerable ingenu- 
ousness about his own expats and plans, but displayed a curious 
mixture of ignorance and acumen when discussing general subjects. 

Writing to Lady Bingham on April 19, 1816, Sir George says : 
" I called on Bonaparte last Sunday, before the Phaeton had anchored, 
to announce to him the ai rival of the new Governor. He received 
me in his bedroom en robe de chambre, and a dirtier figure I never 
beheld ! He was pleased with the compliment. He received Sir 
Hudson Lowe with marked attention, behaving at the same time in 
a manner pointedly rude to Sir George Cockburn (the Admiral). 
You have no idea of the dirty little intrigues of himself and his set ; 
if Sir H. Lowe has firmness enough not to give way to them, he will 
in a short time treat him in the same manner." 

This was a true forecast ; Sir Hudson Lowe set about doing 

1 - Mere Light on St. Helena " ; Cornhill Magazine, vol. x„ pp. 18-36, 155-174. La ly 
I '- '-- ■■-'■ Emma, younger daughter of Edmund Morton Plevdell, and sister of I ■. ■ 
Cdosel Mansel's wife. 


his duty, if not with consummate tact, at least with conscientious 
aim ; and thereby incurred the bitter animosity of Napoleon and 
his set, whose accusations, as has already been remarked, were too 
readily accepted in many quarters. 

Napoleon would sometimes shut himself up, and refuse to be 
seen for days ; this was in direct contravention of the instructions 
issued to the governor by Lord Bathurst, 1 that he was to be seen 
daily — surely a most reasonable and necessary provision under the 
circumstances. Indeed, it is not easy to see how Sir Hudson Lowe 
could fulfil the conditions of his position without such precaution ; 
unless he could see his prisoner daily he certainly could not be sure 
that the latter had not somehow effected his escape ; and there 
were several schemes afoot to this end. 

In a letter from Major Harrison to Sir George Bingham, after 
the latter had gone home, there is an amusing description of the 
manner in which this " viewing " of the captive was accomplished on 
one occasion. It is dated August 14, 1819 : 

" I told you in my last letter that Napoleon had shown a 
strong disposition towards seclusion again. A short time ago he did 
not appear for some days ; he, however, came to his senses again ; 
but about ten days ago he had a relapse, and did not show himself 
till yesterday, when the Governor was about to proceed in a way that 
I believe I should have had to superintend. I need not attempt to 
impress on your mind what a set of rascals they are at Longwood, 
but I will relate to you how it was brought about. When Bonaparte 
shut himself up, the Governor wrote him a letter enclosing him a 
copy of his instructions from Lord Bathurst, relating to his being 
seen every day. This letter both Bertrand and Montholon refused 
two or three times to receive. 2 On the list instant the Governor 

1 Henry, third Earl Bathurst (1762-1S34) ; he was Secretary for War and the Colonies 
in Lord Liverpool's ministry, and subsequently, under the Duke of Wellington, Lord President 
of the Council. 

3 Napoleon's establishment at Longwood comprised the following persons : Count 
Bertrand, Count de Montholon, Count de Las Cases, B.iron Gourmand, Monsieur Emanuel de 
Las Cases, Captain Pioutkowski ; Countess Bertrand, Countess de Montholon, three children 
of the former and one of the latter ; six valets of various degrees, a mdi'.re d'hotel, cook, confec- 
tioner, two grooms, two valets for Count Bertrand, a maid for each of the Indies— total, twenty- 
seven. (See "Napoleon in Exile : St. Helena." by Norwood Young. Vol. i., pp. 157, 158.) 


sent Colonel Wynyard up with the letter, and directed him to take 
me with him. His instructions were to give the letter to Captain 
Nichols (orderly officer), who was first to offer it to Montholon ; but 
he was ill and could not be seen. He was then directed in my 
presence to offer it to Bertrand. We then proceeded to Longwood. 
Captain Nichols said, ' Here is a letter for General Bonaparte from 
the Governor ; will you take it ? ' but Bertrand refused to do so. 
Captain Nichols was then instructed to say, ' There is an officer of 
the Governor's personal staff waning with a letter from the Gover- 
nor ; will you inform him of it ? ' Bertrand's reply was, ' If the 
Governor will communicate with the Emperor in the usual manner 
through me, 1 will do it ' ; he then left him. The next part of the 
instructions to be carried out was that Colonel Wynyard was to go 
to the front door of the house, knock, and ask to be admitted to the 
presence of Bonaparte. In the event of no one answering, he was to 
try the door, and, if open, to proceed till he came to the room in 
which he was, but not to use any force. The door was locked. 
Colonel Wynyard, having executed these orders, ordered me to 
accompany Captain Nichols and try another door, which leads 
from the kitchen to the dining-room ; this we did, but to no purpose. 
Colonel W. then went away and reported the whole to the Governor, 
who was perfectly satisfied. Yesterday 1 again received an order 
from Gorrequer to go immediately to Longwood. When I arrived 
there I found Captain Nichols had received instructions to see 
Bonaparte ; Nichols sent for Marchand (Napoleon's chief valet-de- 
chambre) and said, ' I am directed by the Governor to see Bona- 
parte.' Marchand's reply, through Verling, the interpreter, was, 
' The Emperor had a bad night last night, and is now in his bath.' 
Nichols said, ' Will you deliver a message to Bonaparte to say I 
must see him ? ' Marchand flatly refused, and said it must be done 
by the Grand Marshal. Nichols had then nothing to do but, as 
before, to try the doors, which were locked ; he then retired to make 
his report, and I left him, of course expecting to be called again in 
the afternoon, or as soon as the answer could come from the Governor. 
Just after I had left Nichols, and he had made out his report, Ber- 
trand came to him and asked him what he wanted ; did he wish to 


see the Emperor ? He replied. ' Yes, it was all he wanted.' Ber- 
trand said, ' If you will go past the window of the room in which the 
bath is, you will see him.' Nichols went back to his room, took off 
his red jacket, put on his blue great-coat, returned, found the window 
open, and his Imperial Majesty up to his neck in water. The object 
was thus attained and he retired. But what do you think of our 
friends at Longwood now ? " 

Well, one can only think that they wanted to make things as 
difficult as possible for the governor, and to manufacture evidence of 
his alleged cruelty and perversity ; but he was merely acting upon 
his instructions from the Government, and, it must be reiterated, 
very reasonable instructions. 

Lord Rosebery is very strong in his condemnation of Sir 
Hudson Lowe for refusing Napoleon any other title than that of 
General Bonaparte ; it was perhaps unnecessarily galling, an instance 
of Lowe's want of tact ; but it was a quite logical position, after all. 

There is only one letter from Colonel Mansel in this collection, 
dated June 14, 1S16 : " We neither hear nor see much of Bonaparte 
now ; I fancy he confines himself much more than usual to the house, 
which will tend to increase his corpulence. He appears to be 
dropsical, and his complexion is very sallow ; in short, he looks 
exceedingly out of health. I understand the Governor is rather 
desirous to move him to Plantation House (the Governor's own 
residence), being suspicious of his attempting to escape, which makes 
Sir Hudson uneasy and feel somewhat alarmed ; for this he has not 
the slightest cause, as he is perfectly secure both by sea and land." 
It is not stated to whom this letter is addressed. 

On May 30 Lady Bingham writes : " On Tuesday I went with 
Six George Bingham and Colonel Mansel to pay a visit to Bonaparte. 
. . . After asking me a few frivolous questions, he desired me to 
walk into the garden, handed me out, and did me the honour, as I 
afterwards found it was intended, to walk with his head uncovered. 
... He asked me several questions about Louisa, and made some 
remark relating to her husband and herself, but this I lost as, owing 
to his speaking so remarkably fast, it is sometimes with the utmost 
difficulty he can be understood." 


On July. 17, 1 Si 7, the 53rd embarked for England, having 
been relieved by the 66th, from India. Sir Hudson Lowe, in a 
General Order, spoke very highly of the good services of Sir George 
Bingham and Lieutenant-Colonel Mansel. The battalion joined the 
depot at Canterbury on September 25, and on October 21 was 
reduced, the officers being placed on half-pay from that date. 

As has already been remarked, too much has been written 
about Napoleon's captivity in St. Helena, and he has been repre- 
sented in some quarters as an injured and persecuted individual. 
There is no ground whatever for any such contention. His ambition 
and personal power had kept the nations in arms for years ; he had 
already made his escape from Elba, and it was necessary to find some 
place of detention much more distant from the scenes of his former 
exploits, and not accessible to his friends. St. Helena answered 
these purposes admirably, and the most he could expect was decent 
quarters, and ordinary civility from his custodians. These he cer- 
tainly received, and to accuse the British Government or Sir Hudson 
Lowe of cruelty and oppression is disingenuous and untrue. No 
doubt Napoleon was greatly to be pitied it: his downfall, from one 
point of view ; but his secure detention was obviously a necessity, 
and it was ensured by measures which were perfectly humane and 

Colonel Mansel was awarded the Companionship of the Bath 
— " C. B. " — for his services. 1 

Colonel Mansel, as major, went to India in 1S07 ; and in the 
following year Lieutenant-General Hewitt, commander-in-chief, 
after inspecting the battalion, expresses his satisfaction with the 
53rd and the movements of the Light Infantry, and " requests 
Lieutenant-Colonel Mawby, the officers, and troops under arms this 
morning will accept his best thanks. Major Mansel also has ample 
claim to them for his very earnest and successful endeavour in the 
promotion of the Light Infantry." 

The first introduction of the Light Infantry companies into 

1 The Order of the Bath, established by George I. in 1725, was in 1S15 instituted in 
three cla^e* : G.C.B., K.C.B., and C.B. — "to commemorate the auspicious termination of 
the long and arduous contest in which the empire has been engaged.*' 


the native regiments was due to Mansel's initiative at Cawnpore, 
where he volunteered to instruct the regiments ; the system became 
general throughout the company's troops after the commander-in- 
chief's inspection at Cawnpore. 

Mansel. as has been recounted, went to Spain in r8ii, and to 
St. Helena in 1816, returning thence in the following year 

In 1S23 he took command of the regiment— now reduced to 
one battalion — which was moved about to various places, and in 
1826 to Ireland. 

On June 6, 1S27, it was inspected in marching order by 
Major-General Sir George Bingham — its former colonel — and on the 
10th Lieutenant-Colonel Mansel went on leave, with the intention of 
retiring from the service, having on the previous day issued the 
following Regimental Order : 

" Cork. June 9. 1827. 

" Circumstances compelling Lieutenant-Colonel Mansel to 
tender his resignation, he cannot take leave of the regiment, in which 
he has served upwards of 32 years, without expressing his humble but 
unfeigned thanks to each rank for the willing co-operation they have 
afforded him upon all occasions ; and his immutable solicitude for 
the continued honour and welfare of the corps. The future pros- 
perity and happiness of the 53rd Regiment, collectively and in- 
dividually, will never cease to be an object of his most anxious 
interest ; and wherever it may be ordered in its routine of service 
Lieutenant-Colonel Manseli's most cordial wishes will ever accom- 
pany it." 

On July 3, in an order of the day issued by Major Cuppaidge, 
in temporary command, announcing the appointment of Mansel's 
successor, is the following : 

" The 53rd Regiment has thus lost the services of an officer 
who, for zeal for the service and for energy and gallantry in the field, 
has frequently obtained the approbation of his superiors ; and his 
manners as a gentleman and his deportment as an officer in carrying 
on the duties of the regiment have insured to him the esteem and 
regard of all ranks. The officer at present in temporary charge 
presumes, on his having served 24 years in the corj - kvkh 


Lieut. -Colonel Mansel, to record his best wishes, with those of his 
brother officers, for the Lieutenant-Colonel's future happiness." 

When Sir Hudson Lowe brought an action for libel against 
Barry O'Meara, the author of a very violent and inaccurate tirade 
against Lowe and others, 1 Sir George Bingham, Colonel John ManscI, 
and his brother, Robert Christopher Mansel, were among those who 
signed affidavits in defence of Sir Hudson. 

Captain Robert Mansel was with the Provisional Battalion at 
Toulouse, and is subsequently alluded to — in respect of the above- 
mentioned affidavit— as " Major and Captain of the 66th." He is 
also mentioned as Captain of the 531 d, and D.A.Q.M.G. at St. 

Colonel John Mansel's eldest son, John Clavell Mansel, born 
in 181 7, was well known as a naturalist and geologist, etc. ; he was 
elected president of the Dorset Natural History and Antiquarian 
Field Club, when that society was first formed, in 1S75. Evidences 
of his varied knowledge may be found in " Notes and Queries for 
Somerset and Dorset " ; he writes successively about ancient terrace 
cultivation, the origin and use of what are termed " pen-pits " in 
Somerset, of the locus of Sulphate of Baryta (Barytes), of the migra- 
tion of birds ; lie also wrote on the Flora of Dorsetshire, and con- 
tributed the section on " Some remarkable particulars of Natural 
History " in the second edition of Hutchins' History of Dorset 
(1861) ; he undertook a series of dredgings on the coast, which added 
considerably to the knowledge of local marine shells, etc. ; and he 
published a volume on " The Birds of Dorsetshire." He was a 
Justice of the Peace, a member of several learned societies, and of the 
County Council. He died May 3, 1902. 

Mr. Mansel assumed, by Deed Poll dated July 4, 1S71, the 

1 " Napoleon in Exile ; or a Voice from St. Helena," by Barry E. O'Meara. O'Meara 
was surgeon on toard the Bellerophon when Napoleon surrendered to Captain Maitiai ! 
Napoleon was attracted by O'Meara 's command of Italian, and when hi; own surgeon refu; :d 
to accompany him to 8:. Helena, he asked that O'Meara should take his place. It was not a 
happy selection ; O'M. !ra. expected by Lowe to act as a spy and report constantly upon the 
conversations, etc., oi Napci - ir.d hi ;et, soon got to loggerheads with the Governor, and 
became his vicious and - .. meet opp< nent. "A Voice from St. Helena" created a groat 
sensation at the time — 1S23— but it is now generally - rd ; is an exaggerated and in many 
respects an untrue arraignment of Sir Hudson Lowe, the outcome of persona] spite. 

of Smedmore, Dorset, 
rn 1 6 August. 1776; died 29 January, 


■ m 





5f - 



4, •» : 


additional name of Pleydell, in accordance with the wishes of his 
grandfather, Edmund Morton Pleydell, Esq., who entailed the 
Whatcombe estate upon him. 

Colonel John Mansel's second son, George Pleydell Mansel, 
— twin brother of John Gavel Mansel — joined the 53rd Regiment in 
1836, exchanged into the 60th Rifles in 1844, and after serving 
abroad in the Ionian Islands and Halifax, retired from the service in 
1848. In 1S60 he was instrumental in raising the Dorset Rifle 
Volunteer Corps, was gazetted lieutenant-colonel of the battalion, 
and after commanding it for sixteen years he retired and was 
appointed hon. colonel. He died at Smedmore in 1S96. 

Colonel Mansel adopted as the badge of the Dorset Volunteer 
Battalion the crest of the Dorset Mansels— a flaming cap of main- 
tenance, said to have been assumed in honour of the exploits of the 
Mansel Crusaders. This badge is still worn by the 4th Battalion 
Dorset Regiment ; the device is stamped on their note-paper. 

Colonel George Pleydell Mansel's eldest son, John Delalynde 
Mansel, was born in 1850, and in 1S69 joined the Rifle Brigade, with 
which he served in the Jovaki-Afridi expedition of 1S77-7S — medal 
with clasp ; in the Afghan Campaign of 1878-80 ; was present at 
the capture of Ali Musjid, and with the expedition to Kunar Valley 
and Lughman Valley ; mentioned in despatches. Served as A.D.C. 
to General Ros:> in the march from Cabul to the relief of Candahar 
and in the battle of September 1 ; mentioned in despatches, brevet 
of major, medal witli two c.asps, bronze star. Served in Burmah 
campaign in 1SS5, and retired in 1891. The South African War, 
however, saw Colonel Mansel again in the field ; he served with the 
Imperial Yeomanry — a corps which included many veterans who 
had deemed their war-service over, but came forward at the call to 
arms — and was on the staff of the general commanding tiie 7th 
Division ; mentioned in despatches. Promoted colonel in the 
Reserve of Officers — Queen's medal and five clasps. 

Colonel Mansel's second son, Captain Eustace Gambier 
Mansel, was born in 1853, and joined the 52nd Light Infantry in 
1S73. He served in the Egyptian Expedition and the Soudan, 
1S82-S4 ; at the battles of El Tub and Tamai— medal with clasp, 

1 2 


bronze star ; he retired in 1894. In 1900 he served as Adjutant to 
the Royal Irish Fusiliers Reserve, and with the Royal Home Counti. s 
Reserve Regiment until it was disbanded in 1901. He died Decern 
ber 31, 1915. 

Major Ernest Digby Mansel, third son of Colonel George 
Pleydell Mansel, was born in 1S55. and joined the 71st Highland 
Light Infantry in 1874 ; after serving abroad at Malta, at the 
occupation of Cyprus, and in India, he retired from the service in 
1S95. During the South African War he joined the Royal Scottish 
Reserve Regiment in 1900, and assisted in forming the' 2nd Royal 
Garrison Regiment in 1901, in which regiment he served at Gibraltar 
and in South Africa until it was disbanded in 1905. He died in 1911. 

Colonel George Clavel Mansel., D.S.O., fourth son of Colonel 
George Pleydell Mansel, was born in 1S61. He joined the 68th 
Durham Light Infantry in 1880. In 1899, at the outbreak of the 
South African War, he embarked for the Cape and landed at Durban. 
He was present at the battles of Colenso and Vaal Kranz and the 
Relief of Ladysmith ; mentioned in despatches and received the 
Queen's Medal with lour clasps and the King's Medal with two clasps, 
as well as the Distinguished Service Order. In 1904 he commanded 
his battalion and retired from the service in 1908. He died in 1910. 

This is a fine family record. Colonel John Mansel's son and 
grandsons certainly maintained the high repute in which he was 
held in his time Nor is the tale complete ; the next generation has 
given of its best in the Great War of 1914 and following years. 

The late Captain Eustace Gambier Mansel, mentioned above, 
composed the coat-of-arms, with fifty-two quartering*, here repro- 
duced ; it is inserted as it stands, entirely on the authority of Captain 
Mansel. The heraldry is as follows : 

1. Argent, a chevron between three maundies sable ; Mansel. 

2. Gules, a saltire engrailed or ; Long (or Longe). 

3. Argent, three bars gules ; Scurlage. 

4. Sable, a carbuncle argent ; Pennard. 

5. Chequy or and gules, a fesse ermine ; Turberville. 

6. Argent, three m ullets pierced sable ; Stackpoole. 1 

1 This is not in Burke's " General Axniorv." 




Majok Erskst Dici 
Bora 10 Octobei 
Dud S Mas-, mi 


Compiled by Captain Eustace Gambier Mansel. 



7. Per pale indented argent and gules ; Penrice. 

8. Gules, two lions passant in pale argent ; Delamare. 

9. Barry of six, vaire gules ermine and azure ; Braose. 1 

10. Gules, two bends wavy or ; Briwere. 

11. Gules, two bends, or and argent ; Eitzwalter (Earl of 

12. Gules, five fusils conjoined in fesse or ; De Novo Mercato 
(Bernard Nev.march). 

13. Barry of six indented argent and gules ; Balun (Bada- 
low). 2 

14. Gules, three leopards' faces inverted jessants-de-lis ; 

15. Gules, a cinquefoil between eight crosses crosslet in 
ode or ; Umfraville. 3 

16. Sable, three scaling ladders argent ; on a chief gules a 
castle triple-towered argent, in the honour point a spear's head 
argent, its point imbrued ; Cadifor ap Dynawall. 

17. Ermine, a cross flory sable ; Kene or Kyne. 

18. Argent, a lion rampant guardant sable, armed and 
langued gules ; Morgan of Muddlescombe. 4 

19. A zure, a wolf salient argent, armed and langued gules ; 
Dwnn of Muddlcscombe. 

20. Or, a cinquefoil gules ; Vernon of Muddlescombe. 

.21. Azure, on a fesse between two chevror.els or three eagles 
displayed gules ; name not known. 5 

22. Or, on a chief sable, three martlets of the field ; YVogan. 

1 Not in Burke ; Papworth has the conect blason, as tricked on the shield — Barry of 
six, three azure, and three vaire gules and ermine ; Brewes (Braose). 

! May be expressed : argent, three tars indented gules ; harry of six i? not strictly in 
accordance with the "tricking." Burke has: Balun; argent, three bars dar.cettee and 
a base indented gules. 

* Burke has : Gules, a cinquefoil or, within eight crosses pattee in orle of the last. 

* Burke has : Morgan (Langston, county Monmouth), Argent, a lion rampant guardant 
sable ; on a dexter canton or, a griffin segreant sable, on a sinister canton argent, three bulls' 
heads cabossed sable armed gold ; the two latter charges being the arms of Morgan of Tre- 
dunnuck, county Monmouth, and Morgan of Llangattock, county Monmouth, respectively. 

* This is labelled : " Name not known, arms brought in by Kene or Kyne, and should 
be next to No. 17." No such blason can be found in Burke attached to Kene or Kyne. 


23. Sable, a bend argent ; in sinister chief a castle triple- 
towered of the second ; Plunket. 

24. Gules, three trefoils bendwise argent, in sinister chief .1 
lion passant guardant, or ; De Londres. 

25. Argent, three mallets gules ; Malley. 1 

26. Gules, three pikes naiant in pale argent ; Picton. 

27. Barry of ten gules and argent ; on a chief or a lion 
passant sable ; Malefant. 

28. Vaire argent and sable, a canton argent ; Staunton. - 

29. Gules, a chevron ermine ; Gwys. 

30. Gules, a lion rampant or, within a bordure indented of 
the second ; Rhys ap Tudor. 

31. Sable, a stork proper within a bordure argent ; Mathew 
of Rhaiader. 3 

32. Sable, billettee argent, a cross flory of the second ; 
Nonas of Penlyne. 

33. Or, a griffin segreant sable ; Morgan of Tredegar. 

34. Argent, a lion rampant gules, incensed azure ; Ang- 
harad ap Tredegar. 4 

35. Sable, a chevron between three spearheads argent ; Seys. 3 

36. Sable, a lion rampant argent ; Griffith ap Cydrych. 

37. Sable, a boar argent, head gules, collared and chained 
or, browsing beneath a holly-tree proper ; Llwchllawen Yaur.' 

38. Argent, a lion rampant guardant sable, armed and 
langued gules, in the dexter chief a crescent for difference ; Morgan 
of Iscoed. 7 

1 Burke has, for Mallet, not Malley : Gules, three mallets argent. 

* This is not in accordance with the tricked shield on the coat, where the canton is 
obviously gules ; Burke also has gules ; coat of Staunton of Leicester. 

' Burke has : A stork proper, legged and beaked gules, within a bordure argent ; Mathew 
of Tresunger and Pennytenny, county Cornwall. 

4 Angharad was the heir of Morgan ap Meredith, Lord of Tredegar, and conveyeu 
Tredegar to her husband, Llewellyn ap Ivor, ancestor of Morgan of Tredegar. 

5 Burke has " their points imbrued." 

8 Burke has : Sable on a mount in base proper under a holly-bush vert a boar pa: ant 
argent collared gules ; Vaur Ihawen-Ihwarch (Wales). In the tricked coat the is en - 

' The crescent is not shown on the shield. 


39. Gules, a buck trippant argent ; Rees David Hopkin. 1 

40. Argent, a lion rampant sable, collared and chained or ; 
Philipps of Cold-gainge. 

41. Azure, a wolf salient argent ; Dwnn of Picton Castle. 

42. Argent, a lion rampant sable, crowned or ; Llewellyn ap 
Ririd ap Rees Greg. 

43. Argent, a bend gules guttee of the first, between two 
plovers of the second, a chief chequy or and sable ; Pleydell. 3