Category Archives: Wynch

Alexander Wynch – Genealogy

This page draws from other posts to piece together the genealogy of Alexander Wynch, Governor of Madras in the second half of the eighteenth century.

Paternal Lineage

Wynch

From contemporary records (notably wills and apprenticeship bonds) it has been possible to trace Alexander’s origins back to James Wynch of Bray (will dated 1589, proved 1590).

Set out below is the short-form descendancy from James Wynch to Alexander, and more information on the discoveries and background documents will, in due course, be brought forward in future posts.

1. JAMES WYNCH of Bray, Berkshire (d.1590) had issue including:

a. ROBERT WYNCH of Bray, Berkshire (d.1618) who married firstly Joane LUTMAN the daughter of Roger Lutman of Cookham, Berkshire, Yeoman (whose will was dated Jan 30 1581/2); they had issue:

i) Symon Wynch (will dated 7th October 1643, proved [ ] 1646) who married Ellen or Eleanor Loggins, baptised 16th September 1571 at White Waltham, Berks (IGI), daughter and heir of Symon Loggins (who married Elizabeth Foord the daughter of Thomas Foord of White Waltham, Berks), the son of Robert Loggins and his wife Elianor Stafferton daughter and sole heir of Henry Stafferton (or Staverton) of Warfield, Berks; and had issue:

A. Richard Winch of Fyfield or Fifield in Bray, gentleman (d. 1658; will dated 3rd August 1657; proved 9th February 16589) who married Mary Mayot the daughter of Thomas Mayott of Culham, Oxfordshire and had issue:

a) Simon Winch of Fifield who married Mary Byshop the daughter of Robert Bysshopp of Bray and had issue:

‘1. Simon Winch of Fifield, Bray, gentleman (will dated 4th November 1699; proved 10th April 1700) who married Ann Bishop (brother of George Bishop, gent., died before 6th January 1706) (will dated 6th January 1706, proved 10th November 1712) and had issue:

‘a. Richard Winch (his father left him leases of lands at Didworth in the Parish of New Windsor, Fifield, East Oakely and Winkfield)

‘b. John Winch (his mother left him several parcels of land at Bray called Sparkbarrow, Long Close, Guelins and Askins – all late the lands of her brother George Bishop)

‘c. Elizabeth Winch who married William Davis

‘d. Mary Winch who married Edward Cotterell

‘e. Ann Winch who married Thomas King

‘f. Elinor Winch

‘2. Richard Winch

‘3. Robert Winch

‘4. Mary Winch

b) Mary Winch who married John Blake of Reading and had issue including:

‘1. Rev Charles Blake (1664-1730) b. Reading, Berkshire; Archdeacon of York; d. 22nd November 1730 at Wheldrake, East Riding of Yorkshire

c) Elianor Winch

B. Simon Winch who married Ann Montague of Winkfield

C. Elizabeth Winch who married William Powney of Bray, yeoman (will dated 27th November 1654; proved 18th December 1654) and had issue:

a) Ann Powney who married Noah Barnard and had issue:

‘1. Noah Barnard baptised 10th March 16701 Cookham, Berks (IGI) was apprenticed 7th November 1684 to Nathaniell Winch DISTILLERS COMPANY

C. Ellen or Elianor Winch who married Simon Beckley of Fifield in Bray

D. Jane Winch (will dated 23rd November 1676, proved 9th August 1680) who married John Page of Bray, gent (will dated 21st December 1654, proved 20th October 1657), the son of Randolph Page of Bray and his wife [ ? ] Eldridge of Middlesex and grandson of John Page Keeper of the Wardrobe to Henry VIII and his wife Mary Fowler (daughter of [ ? ] Fowler, Alderman of London), and had issue:

[a) Symon Page (referred to in his father’s will but not his mother’s)

b) John Page (referred to in his father’s will but not his mother’s)

c) Thomas Page of Bray, gent. (referred to in his mother’s will but not his father’s) who had issue:

‘1. Jane Page

‘2. Sarah Page

d) Cicely Page married [ ? ] Farmer (referred to in her father’s will but not her mother’s)

e) Elizabeth Page (referred to in her father’s will but not her mother’s)

f) Jane Page who married Capt. Abraham Spooner of Burnham, Bucks and had issue:

‘1. Jane Spooner

‘2.  John Spooner

g) Elinor Page who married Samuell Nelson and had issue:

‘1. Samuell Nelson (overseas at the time of his grandmother’s will)

‘2. Abraham Nelson

‘3. Jane Nelson]

E. Mary Winch who married John Periman of Farnham Royal in Buckinghamshire; they had issue:

a) Symon Perryman who married Frances Umfreville and had issue:

‘1. Mary Perryman

F. Ann Winch who married Henry Southen of Stanwell, Middlesex

ii) Richard Winche, Clothier of Reading, Berks (will dated 8th November 1629, proved 21st November 1633) bur. 6th August 1633 at St Mary’s Church Reading, “a Burgess of the town and a good man to the poor”; was made guardian of his father’s youngest son by his first marriage and all five children of his second marriage when, shortly after his father Robert’s death in 1618, his step-mother died in 1619 leaving six orphaned children. He married Judith Lydall (will dated 20th September 1637, proved 17th October 1637) bur. 28th September 1637 at St Mary’s Church Reading, “widow, a good woman to the poor and a good neighbour”, the daughter of Thomas Lydall of Reading, gent (will dated 6th March 16067, proved 10th December 1608) and his wife Margery (Drewe?); Richard and Judith had issue:

A. Judith Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 7th November 1604; buried St Mary’s Church Reading 9th March 16045;

B. Ann Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 11th May 1606; married 4th May 1625 at St Mary’s Church Reading to Robert Mayot of St Nicholas Abingdon, gent (will dated 13th November Charles I 19; proved 13th August 1646 in which he refers to lands at Fifield, Bray and a house at Abingdon) and had issue:

a) Alice Mayott;

b) John Mayott;

c) Elizabeth Mayott;

d) Ann Mayott;

e) Robert Mayott;

f) Thomas Mayott;

g) Richard Mayott;

C. Elizabeth Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 21st January 16078; married at St Mary’s Church Reading 9th April 1629 to William Gandye;

D. Mary Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 10th February 16089; buried at St Mary’s Church Reading 3rd March 16089;

E. Judith Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 15th April 1610; buried at St Mary’s Church Reading 15th November 1614;

F. Richard Winch Master of Arts and Fellow of Oriel College, oxford (will dated 16th January 16456; proved 6th January 16467) baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 25th August 1611;

G. Mary Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 5th October 1612; buried at St Mary’s Church Reading 8th March 16301;

H. Robert Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 15th May 1614; buried at St Mary’s Church Reading 22nd September 1635 “son of widow Winch”;

I. Jane Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 11th August 1615; buried at St Mary’s Church Reading 30th December 1617;

J. Thomas Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 15th September 1616; buried at St Mary’s Church Reading 7th April 1619;

K. Judith Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 18th November 1617; married 15th September 1634 at St Mary’s Church Reading to William Thorne (probably baptised 4th October 1609 at St Mary’s Church Reading the son of George Thorne);

L. Katherine Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 3rd February 16189; buried at St Mary’s Church Reading 10th January 16201;

M. Ellin Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 26th March 1620;

N. Thomas Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 6th May 1621; living January 16456;

O. John Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 12th November 1622; living January 16456;

P. Jane Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 4th January 16234;

Q. James Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 5th September 1625; Apprenticed to John Bunburie 8th November 1641 GROCERS; living January 16456;

R. Simon Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 5th September 1625; living January 16456;

iii) Robert Wynch

iv) James Winche, Clothier of Reading, Berks (will dated 9th August 1665; proved 28th September 1665) married firstly Ann who died 20th June 1639 and had issue:

A. Robert Winch baptised St Mary’s Church Reading 19th November 1614;

James married secondly 21st December 1643 at St Mary’s Church Reading as her second husband (she had issue by her first husband) Sara Fellow and had issue:

B. Sarah Winch;

iv) Elizabeth Winch who married Thomas Grove

v) Grace Winch who married William Lewyn

vi) Ann Winch who married Robert Groave

vii) Mary Winch who married William Groave

viii) William Winch (<21 in 1619; living 19th July 1676)  of Reading, Broadweaver – he was probably the last son by Robert’s first marriage rather than his first by his second wife; he had issue:

A. James Wynch, apprenticed 12th August 1645 to Peter Morris, FARRIERS

ROBERT WYNCH  (211 211 211 111 1)  married secondly Joane HATHORNE  (211 211 211 111 2) who was baptised 5th January 1572 at Binfield, Berkshire and died 18th February 16189, and who was the daughter of William HATHORNE (211 211 211 111 21) the elder of Bray, yeoman of Bray  (will dated 13th September 1620, proved 1st July 1626) and his wife (married on 25th June 1570Ann PERKINS  (211 211 211 111 22)  who died in 1626. They had issue:

i) Richard Wynch

ii) John WYNCH (211 211 211 111) ( -1675), Citizen and Haberdasher of London, married firstly in 1633 to Ann GIBBS (211 211 211 112) daughter of John GIBBS  (211 211 211 112) originally from Dunchideock, Devon but late of St Dunstan in the West, London (his will was dated October 23, 1622 and was proved November 2, 1622) and Anne his wife; they had issue[1]:

A. John WINCH baptised December 11, 1640 at St Bride Fleet Street, London; buried 20th March 1644 at St Bride Fleet Street

B. Ann WYNCH married by licence[2] dated 29th October 1663 at St Olave Old Jewry, London to William WALTHAM; they had issue:

a)  John WALTHAM

b) Anne WALTHAM

c) Susan WALTHAM

d) Sarah WALTHAM

e) Mary WALTHAM

C. Judith WYNCH baptised 16th August 1646 at St Bride Fleet Street, London; she married by licence[3] on April 13, 1669 at St Katherine Creechurch, London to John BURT; they had issue:

a) John BURT
b) Susanna BURT, born January 31, 1671/2, baptised 5th February 1671/2 at St Vedast Foster Lane & St Michael le Quere, London, and married March 23, 1692 at St Mary Abchurch, London to Robert PEAD, Citizen and Apothecary of London; they had issue:

‘1. Robert PEAD, born 19th January 1693-4, baptised 19th January 1693-4 at St Olave’s Old Jewry, London, and died 21st September 1705.

‘2. Susanna PEADE, born 30th June 1695, baptised 1st July 1695 at St Olave, Old Jewry, London, and was buried 9th October 1695 at St Olave Jewry, London

Robert Pead, Citizen and Apothecary of London, widower, married secondly, and as her second husband, Hester Wynch, widow of John Wynch, the daughter of William Rous

D. Robert WYNCH (211 211 211 11) Citizen and Haberdasher of London, baptised 28th November 1647 at St Bride Fleet Street and was buried 25th July 1676 at St Bride’s Fleet Street:; he married (licence[4] dated 3rd August 1672) at St Bartholemew The Great, London 3rd August 1672  Susanna HENBURY (211 211 211 12), (the daughter of James HENBURY (211 211 211 121) and his wife Susanna JOHNSON (211 211 211 122)), who was born 19th July 1657 and was baptised 28th July 1657 at St Bride Fleet Street; Susanna, widow of Robert Wynch, married secondly to William Rous; they had issue:

a) John WYNCH (211 211 211 1), born 31st July 1673 and baptised 12th August 1673 at St Giles Cripplegate; he married Hester Rous (211 211 211 2) 22nd May 1694 at St Bartholemew the Great, London; they had issue:

‘1. William WYNCH who was baptised 14th September 1695 at St Michael, Highgate; he was buried 9th October 1695 at St Olave Jewry, London (on the same day and at the same church as Susanna Pead noted above NB: error in father’s name);

‘2. Hester WYNCH who died unmarried was baptised 15th June 1697 at St Michael, Highgate.

‘3. John WYNCH (211 211 211) was baptised 6th October 1698 at St Michael, Highgate; he married at All Hallows Staining on 25th February 1719/20 to Mary KENTON (211 211 212), daughter of Captain Alexander Kenton, Mariner, of Bermondsey and his wife Margaret Peters, the daughter of Peter Peters, Surgeon, of Dover; they had issue:

‘a. Alexander WYNCH (211 211 21), (Governor of Madras) who was baptised on 2nd January 1720/1 at St Gregory by St Paul, London

‘4. Reverend Robert WYNCH, Chaplain of Fort St. George, Madras from 1731, born 5th December 1699  and baptised 8th December 1699 at St Olave’s Old Jewry, London (“the son of John Winch, gentleman and Hester his wife” Parish Records). He was the second husband of Margaret MANSELL (who married firstly Francis ROUS, brother of Sir William ROUSaccording to Penny, head of the Suffolk family but this does not seem to be borne out by research –  by whom she had four daughters).  He died 28th December 1748 at Madras.

‘5. William WYNCH, born 27th February 1701-2  and baptised 1st March 1701-2 at St Olave’s Old Jewry, London; he married (as her second husband Mary [GUNTER]

E. Susanna WYNCH married 24th December 1669 to Charles HARPER; they had issue (before 1675):

a) Susan HARPER baptised 19th January 1672 at St Dunstan in the West, Fleet Street

b) Elizabeth HARPER baptised 13th February 1675/6 at St Dunstan in the West, Fleet Street

John Wynch, Haberdasher, married secondly (by licence[5] dated 27th September 1666) to Susanna MARKLAND (widow of William Markland of St Michael Wood Street London, Freeman of the Company of Innholders –  will dated 2nd May 1664; proved 19th January 1664/5) on 2nd October 1666 at St Mary, Stoke Newington, and previously widow of James Henbury, daughter of George JOHNSON by his wife Katherine HASTINGS); he died in 1675 and was buried at St Bride, Fleet Street on 1st November 1675.

iii) Joane WINCH married on 20th December 1625 at St Martin in the Fields, Westminster, London to William MATTINGLY (son, by the first marriage to William Mattingly (will dated 17th February 16145; proved 14th November 1615; challenged 16th February 161920), and Ann LOGGINS who married secondly to Nathaniel HATHORNE (brother of Joane HATHORNE see above; will dated 27th September 1652; proved 29th July 1654 – in which he refers to “my nephew John Winche and his wife Anne Winche” and “my kinsman John Winche of London, Haberdasher”), whose second wife Martha WHISTLER (will dated 24th September 1666; proved 9th November 1666) referred to John Winch of the Parish of St Giles without Cripplegate (“my kinsman”)

iv) Judith WINCH (will dated 8th April 1684; proved 19th August 1684) who married on or shortly after 6th August 1650 William EDRIDGE or Etheridge of Aspiden, Herts (will dated 5th August 1678; proved 17th November 1678 in which he refers to a “deed made by me and sealed before my intermarriage with the said Judith unto John Winch and William Mattingly”;

v) George Wynch

b. RICHARD WYNCH the elder of Bray, Berkshire, yeoman (d.1618) who possibly married Joane POWNEY (referred to as Joane Winche in the will of Jone Hawthorn of East Ockley, Bray, widow – dated June 28 1577 – in which she also refers to her sons William Hawthorne and Richard Powney and son-in-law Richard Winche); they had issue:

i) James Winch who married and had issue (before 1618):

A. Elizabeth Winch

B. Jane Winch

ii) Ann Winch who married [ ? ] Smyth

c. William Wynch (presumably died before his father’s will was written in 1589) who had issue:

i) James Wynch

d. Thomas Wynch (presumably died before his father’s will was written in 1589) who had issue:

i) Thomas Wynch

ii) Elizabeth Wynch

e. Catherine Wynch who married firstly Thomas Foord and had issue; she married secondly William Slye and had issue.

 

 


[1] It is thought (from IGI evidence) John married first to Ann, with whom he had issue and subsequently married Susanna (hence Robert Wynch’s reference in his will to Susanna as ‘My Mother in Law’

[2] From London Marriage Licences 1521-1869: Waltham, William of Cliffords Inn, gent, bachelor, about 26 and Anne Winch of St Giles Cripplegate, spinster, about 23, consent of father John Winch, leatherseller – at St Mary Colechurch or St Olave Old Jury 12th November 1663

[3] Marriage Licence from the Vicar-General of the Archbishop of Canterbury (Harleian Society 1669 to 1679 vol. 34): 10th April 1669 John Burt of St Clement Danes, Middx, Goldsmith, Bachelor, about 34 and Judith Wynch of St Giles Cripplegate, London, Spinster, about 22, at her own disposal, at St James, Duke’s Place or St Katherine’s Creechurch, London

[4] From London Marriage Licences 1521-1869: Winch, Robert of St Giles Cripplegate, gent, bachelor about 24, and Susan Henbury of same, spinster, about 24 – at Great St Bartholemew, London 3rd August 1672

[5] From London Marriage Licences 1521-1869: Winch, John (Wynch) of Bowe, Middlesex, widower, about 50 and Suzanne Markland of same, widow, about 40 – at Newington or Bromley, Middx 27th September 1666

 

 

Comments or questions are welcome.

* indicates required field

Rous of Topsham

The origins of William Rous, Apothecary and Citizen of London are by no means easy to discern.

His desire to be buried in the vault under the tomb of Sir John Frederick (whose wife was Mary Rous) sent me on a search mission that led through Huguenot families but was ultimately fruitless.

I had wondered whether a reference to his father being Thomas Rous “of Topsham” was born more out of a desire to find a connection rather than as a genealogical fact.

I looked out the apprentice records at the Society of Apothecaries and found the following:

Apothecary1

 

William Rous (211 211 211 21), Apothecary, was apprenticed to Alderman John Lorrimer (also Lorymer, Lorrymer and Lorimer)[2] on 9th April 1657 for nine years (see below) and became free in 1664 (two years earlier than the indenture provided) and became Junior/Senior Warden of Apothecaries in 1702 and Master of the Society of Apothecaries in 1705.

From the marriage licence of his first marriage to Anne Regnier we see he was born circa 1640 – entry in the Marriage Allegations in the Registry of the Vicar-General of the Archbishop of Canterbury as follows:

July 3rd 1669William Rous of St. Olave’s Old Jury London, Cit. & Apothecary, Bachelor abt 29 & Anne Regnier of St. Leonard’s Shoreditch Middx. Spr abt 20 with consent of her father; at St. Bartholomew the Great or St. Botolph Aldersgate, Lond. or St Mary Newington or Clerkenwell Middx.

On 5th July 1669 (as shown below) at St Bartholemew the Great in London William Rous married Ann Regnier

Apothecary3Extract from the Parish Register of St Bartholemew the Great held at the Metropolitan Archives, London, accessed via www.ancestry.co.uk

William married second, by licence from the Vicar-General (dated 1679/80)[1] to Susanna WYNCH (211 211 211 12), the widow of Robert Wynch of London, haberdasher, on 24th February 1679/80 at St Bartholemew the Great, London:

23rd February 1679-80: William Rous of St Olave Old Jury, London (aged about 39) licence to marry Susanna Wynch of St Giles, Cripplegate, London (aged about 34) at St Bartholemew the Great or Less, or St Sepulchre, London). (Marriage Allegations in the Registry of the Vicar-General of the Archbishop of Canterbury)

His subsequent marriage to Susannah Wynch (widow), therefore, puts him at aged about 39 on 23rd February 1679-80.

The combined dates from his Marriage Licences suggest that William may have been born between 6th July 1639 and 22nd February 1639/40.

This does not match any entry in the Trees excellently deduced in his book by Professor John C. Street (A Genealogy of the Rouses of Devon; Madison, Wisconsin, 2002).

Three further interesting coincidences, however, seem to give credence to the concept that William was an unrecorded youngest son of Thomas Rous of Topsham:

  1. William’s mother would have been Hester Martyn – he then giving his surviving daughter the name Hester;
  2.  Luke Justice, son of Luke Justice of Knighton, Staffs, gent. was apprenticed to William Rouse on Jul 3 1677; and
  3. John Rouse, son of Robert Rouse of Farringdon, Devon, gent. was apprenticed to William Rouse on May 6 1690;

Luke Justice, Apothecary of London, married Catherine Rous (Thomas’s granddaughter) and John Rous, apothecary of Topsham and Farringdon, was Thomas’s grandson.

It seems appropriate, therefore, in the absence of firm evidence of lineage, to consider in greater detail the Rous family from Professor Street’s gleanings.

First of all, here is an outline of the Family descent from the thirteenth Century in Cornwall (to see the various branches and detailed genealogy, it is necessary to search out a copy of the book (I read it at the Society of Genealogists in London) – to this (in red) I have annotated information deduced from www.stirnet.com:

Ralph LE RUFUS (211 211 211 211 111 111 111 111 11) of “Little Modbury” (alive between 1234-1250) (26 generations back from our daughter)
possibly married daughter of Asceline de Yvery ;

William LE ROUS (211 211 211 211 111 111 111 111 1Sheriff of Devonshire (living 1175!?)

..Ralph LE ROUS (211 211 211 211 111 111 111 111) of “Little Modbury” died circa 1290,
..and his wife Alice (211 211 211 211 111 111 111 112)

John LE ROUS (211 211 211 211 111 111 111 11
…note there is some doubt as to whether this was a separate generation
;

….William LE ROUS kt (211 211 211 211 111 111 111 1) of “Little Modbury” (living 1291-1309)
….and his wife Joan SPECCOT (211 211 211 211 111 111 111 2), daughter of
….Richard SPECCOT kt (211 211 211 211 111 111 111 21) of “Speccot” at Merton, Devon
….by his wife Matilda de BELSTON (211 211 211 211 111 111 111 22), the daughter of
….Baldwin de BELSTON (211 211 211 211 111 111 111 221) who died circa 1240 and his wife
….Agnes (211 211 211 211 111 111 111 222);

…..Ralph LE ROUS (211 211 211 211 111 111 111) and his wife
…..Joan GODNESFORD (211 211 211 211 111 111 112), daughter of
…..Robert GODNESFORD (211 211 211 211 111 111 112 1)

……Robert LE ROUS kt (211 211 211 211 111 111 11Governor of Cherbourg (living 1376)
……[Knight Banneret under the Black Prince]

…….William LE ROUS (211 211 211 211 111 111 1) who, probably in 1376, married
…….Alice EDMERSTON (211 211 211 211 111 111 2), the daughter and heiress of
…….Thomas EDMERSTON (211 211 211 211 111 111 21and Rosa AUNTE daughter of
…….William AUNTE 

……..William ROUS (211 211 211 211 111 111) of “Edmerston” married
……..Margery LOWER (211 211 211 211 111 112), daughter of
……..William LOWER (211 211 211 211 111 112 1) of Cornwall

………John ROUS (211 211 211 211 111 11) who married before 1464 to
………Isabel WORTH (or possibly DREWE) (211 211 211 211 111 111 12)

……….William ROUS (211 211 211 211 111 1) of “Edmerston” born before 1450 who married
……….Sybil FOWELL (211 211 211 211 111 2), daughter of
……….William FOWELL (211 211 211 211 111 21) and Eleanor of Fowlescombe at Ugborough

………..Roger ROUS (211 211 211 211 111) of “Edmerston” (living 1515-1544) who married
………..Juliana HILL (211 211 211 211 112), daughter of
………..William HILL (211 211 211 211 112 1) and Mabel of “Penguit” and “Fleet”

…………Richard ROUS (211 211 211 211 11) of Rogate, Sussex (1516-1587) who married
…………Eleanor MERVYN (211 211 211 211 12), daughter of
…………Sir Edmund MERVYN (211 211 211 211 121) of Fonthill Gifford, Wilts and his wife
…………Eleanor WELLS (211 211 211 211 122)

………….Edmund ROUS (211 211 211 211 1) of Rogate, Sussex died 1633;
………….he marrried at Rogate Jan 18 1572/3 to Jane LEGG of Chalton, Hants who died 1632

…………..Thomas ROUS (211 211 211 211), eventually ‘of Topsham’ (1589-1657) who married
…………..Hester MARTYN (211 211 211 212), daughter of
…………..Robert MARTYN (211 211 211 212 1) of Burford, Oxford

……………William ROUS, Apothecary and Citizen of London (211 211 211 21)

And so, taking the most recent two generations:

1. THOMAS ROUS (1589-1657)  (211 211 211 211) Gentleman, “eventually of Topsham”, was baptised at Rogate, Sussex July 28 1589 and buried at Topsham Feb 2 1657/8, and married HESTER MARTYN  (d. 1670) (211 211 211 212), the daughter of ROBERT MARTYN of ‘Upton’, Burford, Oxfordshire; she was buried at St Saviour Denmark Park, Southwark on 10th October 1670. Apothecary25-HesterRous

They had issue:

a. Anthony Rous (d. 1663), Gentleman, was buried at st Saviour Denmark Park, Southwark on May 8 1663, “Attorney in the Quire”; he married Lettice Warcupp, the daughter of Samuel Warcupp (probably of London); they had issue:

i) Robert Rous who was christened October 14 1654 at St Saviour Denmark Park, Southwark

b. Robert Rous (d. 1691) Attorney of Farringdon, Devon; he married Katherine Bartholemew (d. 1700), the daughter of Reverend Wiliam Bartholemew and his wife, Catherine Harvey; they had issue:

i) Catherine Rous (1665-1686) was buried on April 4 1686 at St Olave Old Jewry, London; she married by licence dated May 19 1685 (she was a spinster aged 20, marrying with the consent of her father, Robert Rous of Exon, Co. Devon, Attorney, and he was a bachelor aged 23) to Luke Justice (1659-1686/7), Apothecary of London (having been apprenticed on Jul 3 1677 to William Rous), son of Luke Justice of Adbaston, Knighton, Staffordshire, gent, and his wife Mary. Luke was buried on January 25 1686/7 at St Olave Old Jewry, having made a will on January 17 1686/7 in which he refers to his uncle William Rous, Citizen and Apothecary of London and William’s wife Susanna Rous, his cousins Hester Rous and John Wynch; he also refers to another uncle Thomas Rous of Hatton Garden, London, Gentleman and his wife Elizabeth Rous among others – his will was proved October 16 1690:Apothecary24-KatherineJustice

 

Apothecary23-LukeJusticethey had issue:

A. Hester Justice

ii) Elizabeth Rous (1667- ) who married Richard Beavis and had issue;

iii) William Rous (1668-1742) Attorney of Exeter and Farringdon

iv) Anthony Rous apprenticed for seven years on October 28 1685 to John Daston, Citizen and Musician of London, (living in 1698);

v) Thomas Rous who had issue;

vi) Mary Rous

vii) Robert Rous (1673-1742) of Offwell, Devon, who married Elizabeth Satt who died before 1741.

viii) John Rous (1675-1763) Apothecary of Topsham and Farringdon (Apprentice on May 6, 1690 to William Rous); he married Judith Bishop (died 1745) and they had issue;

ix) Bartholemew Rous (died 1682)

x) Joseph Rous (died 1751)

xi) Hester Rous (1679- ) who married (1708) William Tross of Farringdon (1678- ); they had issue;

xii) Richard Rous (1681-1760) of Farringdon

xiii) Bartholemew Rous (1683-1749)

xiv) Martha Rous (1689- )

c. Lawrence Rous (1628- )

d. John Rous (1629- )

e. Hester Rous (1630- ); she married (1658) Thomas Skinnet

f. Edmund Rous (1631- )

g. Rebecca Rous (1633- )

h. Frances Rous who married (1657) Thomas Boomer; she is referred to as ‘My Aunt Mrs Frances Boomer’ by Luke Justice in his will (see above);

i. Thomas Rous (1635- ) who married Elizabeth and they had issue, a daughter, Elizabeth mentioned in Luke Justice’s will

j. Anne Rous (1637- )

k. WILLIAM ROUS (c1639-1719) Citizen and Apothecary of London

The clear link between Luke Justice and William Rous and the family of Thomas Rous of Topsham seem to indicate that William Rous, Citizen and Apothecary of London, is indeed, therefore, an undocumented son of Thomas Rous “eventually of Topsham”. 

[catlist name=”rous” orderby=title numberposts=5000 order=asc]

William Rous – Will

William Rous (will dated 8/10/1718)

In the name of God Amen.  I William Rous Citizen and Apothecary of London out of a serious consideration of the uncertainty of the time of my decease do make this my last Will and Testament in manner following (that is to say) first and principally I commend my immortal soul into the hands and protection of Almighty God hoping and assuredly believing through the alone meritts death and passion of my blessed Saviour Jesus Christ to obtain free pardon and forgiveness of all my sins and to inherit everlasting life and as to my body I comitt to the earth to be decently buried as herein after is mentioned And as  touching the disposal of such Worldly Estate as it pleased Almighty God to bestow upon me I dispose of the same in manner following(that is to say) Imprimis my will and mind is that all and every my just debts and funeral expenses be fully paid and satisfyed as soon as may be after my decease. Item I give devise and bequeath unto my Son in Law Robert Pead and Hester Pead his Wife one Moiety or half part of my personal Estate the whole into two equall parts to be divided according to the Custom of the City of London. Item I give devise and bequeath the other Moiety or half part of my personal Estate unto my three Grandsons John Wynch Robert Wynch and William Wynch to be equally divided between them share and share alike But if my said Grandson John Wynch do not relinquish and release all his right and Title to my said real estate as claiming under his father John Wynch deceased or otherwise that then I give and bequeath the shares of my said personal and real estate (hereinbefore devised unto him) unto my Grandsons Robert Wynch and William Wynch  to be equally divided between them share and share alike. Item my will and desire is that my body be interred near the Vault belonging to the family of Sir John Frederick [1] under the Monument of Sir Nathaniel Herne deceased on the South side of the Parish Church of St Olave Old Jury London and I do order and allow the sum of fifty pounds or less for to pay and defray my funeral charges; And I do hereby nominate and appoint my Grandchildren Hester Wynch John Wynch and Robert Wynch Executrix and Executors of this my last Will and Testament hereby revoking and making void all other Will or Wills by me at any time heretofore made published or declared and hereby declaring these presents to be my only last Will and testament; In Witness whereof I have hereunto sett my hand and seal this eighth day of October in the fifth year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord George by the grace of God of Great Britain France and Ireland King Defender of the Faith & Anno Dom 1718. Wm Rous – Signed sealed published declared and delivered by the said William Rous as and for his last Will and Testament in the presence of us and by us subscribed as Witnesses thereto in the presence of the said Testator – Thos Reddell Peter Hays Mary Rous Mary Tramillion

Probate 27/1/1719

Probatum – in Latin

…London dicesimo Septimo die Mensis January anno domini millesimo septuigentesimo decimo nono [27/1/1719] in the presence of Hester Wynch and Robert Wynch

The inventory from the will is shown here:
prob3-19-18_WilliamRous_inventory
The will was contested by Hester Pead (née Rous, formerly Wynch) against her grandsons John Wynch & Robert Wynch:


[1] It seems Sir John Frederick 1st bt. Married (1637) Mary Rous, the daughter of Thomas Rous of St Olave Jewry

 

Comments or questions are welcome.

* indicates required field

William Rous – Apothecary

William Rous, Citizen and Apothecary of London

The evidence of Penny and the wills of William Rous, Apothecary and Citizen of London and Hester Wynch, spinster of London (qv) suggest that Alexander Wynch (211 211 21) was Hester Wynch’s nephew, and that Hester Wynch was herself the granddaughter of William Rous, apothecary; These wills also, therefore, tell us that Alexander’s father was John Wynch (211 211 211) (who died before 29th September 1744 when Hester Wynch’s will was written) and that Alexander was the grandson of John Wynch (211 211 211 1) (who had died before 8th October 1718 when William Rous’s will was written).  There is compelling evidence in further wills and marriage licences that John Wynch (211 211 211 1) married William Rous’s daughter Hester Rous and died before 1711 when Hester Rous remarried (see later below).

So:

William Rous (211 211 211 21) (will dated 8 Oct 1718) had issue:

.     Hester Rous (211 211 211 2) who married
.     sp. John Wynch (211 211 211 1) (who died before 1711) and had issue:

.           Hester Wynch (will dated 29 Sept 1744)

.           John Wynch (211 211 211) (died before 29 Sep 1744) who had issue:

.                   ALEXANDER WYNCH (211 211 21), Governor of Madras

Further research (from Boyd’s Inhabitants of London, for example) would suggest that Alexander’s great-grandfather, William Rous, was born in 1640[1] the son of Thomas Rous of Topsham, Devon.

William Rous (211 211 211 21), Apothecary, was apprenticed to Alderman John Lorrimer (also Lorymer, Lorrymer and Lorimer)[2] on 9th April 1657 for nine years (see below) and became free in 1664 (two years earlier than the indenture provided) and became Junior/Senior Warden of Apothecaries in 1702 and Master of the Society of Apothecaries in 1705.

Apothecary1Society of Apothecaries Court Minutes 1651 – 1680 (courtesy of the Archivist at the Society of Apothecaries in London)

Apprenticeship at the age of fifteen or sixteen agrees with the Boyd but Patrick Wallis: London Apprentices Volume 32 Apothecaries’ Company 1617 – 1669 seems to confuse John and George Lorimer or Larrymer and cites William’s father as William Rous of Topsham.

  • William Hodgkinson, son of Thomas Hodgkinson of Wentworth Woodhouse, Yorks, gent. was apprenticed to William Rouse on Aug 6 1672.
  • Luke Justice, son of Luke Justice of Knighton, Staffs, gent. was apprenticed to William Rouse on Jul 3 1677
  • Charles Summer, son of Henry Summer of Dinton, Bucks, gent. was apprenticed to William Rouse on Dec 7 1680
  • Arthur Edgley, son of Samuel Edgley of Acton, Cheshire, clerk, was apprenticed to William Rouse on Feb 7 1681/2
  • John Rouse, son of Robert Rouse of Farringdon, Devon, gent. was apprenticed to William Rouse on May 6 1690
  • Robert West, son of John West of Horton, Bucks, papermaker, was apprenticed to William Rouse on Apr 4 1699
  • Henry Bushell, son of William Bushell of St Margaret Westminster, Middx, yeoman, was apprenticed to William Rous on Jun 5 1711.

In 1666, the Hearth Tax records show a William Rowse (with six hearths) living at Windmill Corte in St Olave Old Jewry.

There is an entry in the Marriage Allegations in the Registry of the Vicar-General of the Archbishop of Canterbury as follows:

July 3rd 1669: William Rous of St. Olave’s Old Jury London, Cit. & Apothecary, Bachelor abt 29 & Anne Regnier of St. Leonard’s Shoreditch Middx. Spr abt 20 with consent of her father; at St. Bartholomew the Great or St. Botolph Aldersgate, Lond. or St Mary Newington or Clerkenwell Middx.

Apothecary2Allegations for marriage Licences issued by the Vicar General of the Archbishop of Canterbury

On 5th July 1669 (as shown below) at St Bartholemew the Great in London William Rous married Ann Regnier (according to Boyd’s Inhabitants of London, the daughter of Mathew Regnier of St Leonard Shoreditch, Merchant).

Apothecary3Extract from the Parish Register of St Bartholemew the Great held at the Metropolitan Archives, London, accessed via www.ancestry.co.uk

Anne Regnier (211 211 211 22) was probably not, however, the daughter of Matthew Regnier as Boyd suggested, but rather was the daughter of Henry Regnier of St Leonard, Shoreditch by his wife Elizabeth.

Regnier of Hoxton

The presumption Boyd appears to have made was that the parent s of Anne were Mathew Regnier by his wife Marie Drente (De Rante) who married at the French Church in Threadneedle Street, London on 5th April 1638:

Apothecary4
Public Record Office RG4/4643

Elizabeth Regniere was buried 27th September 1684 at St Leonard, Shoreditch, London: Apothecary5

The will of Elizabeth Regnier of 13th September 1682 (proved 15th January 16845), however, refers to her Son in Law William Rouse and her Granddaughter Hester Rouse); in her will she does not refer to her daughter Anne who had died by then, but she refers to her two other daughters, Elizabeth Coddington and Susanna Abrooke.

In the London Marriage Licences is the following entry:

Coddington, James, of the Inner Temple, gent., bachelor, 25, and Elizabeth Regnieur, spinster, 20, daughter of ___ Regnieur, of Hogsdon, St. Leonard, Shoreditch, Middlesex, merchant, who consents – at St. Mary Magdalen, Old Fish Street, St. Catherine Creechurch, or All Hallows-the-Less, in Thames Street, London. 20 Feb. 16634.”

London Marriage Licences 1521-1869

Henry and Elizabeth’s other daughter, Susanna, married [William] Abrooke.

In the will of Susanna Waad of Dover, widow, of 20th June 1677 (proved 17th October 1677) there is reference to “my sister Regniere of London and her three daughters” and also to her daughter Anne Wright – referred to in Elizabeth’s will as “my cousin Anne Wright”.  This would suggest that Susanna Waad (née Regnier) was Henry Regnier’s sister.  Thomas Waad and Susanna had four children baptised in the Huguenot church in the Crypt of Canterbury Cathedral, namely: Alice (24th January 16467), Susanne (26th November 1648), Henry (22nd June 1651) and Marie (2nd April 1654).

There was some difficulty for Elizabeth Regnier (referred to in her will but also to be found in the Court Rolls of the time).  When Henry died, he had applied for Naturalisation but died before the Bill before Parliament was enacted (see below), and his property was surrendered to King Charles II because Henry was ‘alien-born’, meaning that he was born overseas. Elizabeth appealed to the King and the property in Hoxton.

Apothecary6Letters of Denization and Acts of Naturalization (published by the Huguenot Society of London Volume XVIII

In the Derbyshire Records Office is the following entry:

D5430/59/2/12

Lease for seven years of a messuage with an orchard, two gardens and a stable in Hoggesdon alias Hoxton (Middlesex), with attached schedule of fixtures, Charles Farwell of London, Esq. to Henry Regnier of London, merchant, 25 Sep 1660

In 1666 Henry Reneere was assessed for Hearth Tax (he had 20 hearths!) at Hogsdon Libertie in the Parish of St Leonard Shoreditch.

See Below from Survey of London:

(ii) Hoxton, between Kingsland Road and Hoxton Street.

Among the possessions of Holywell Priory acquired by Sir Thomas Legh was a close called Star Close. On 14th July, 1565, Sir James Blount, Lord Mountjoy, and Dame Katherine his wife, Legh’s heiress, mortgaged (fn. 1) to Robert Browne, citizen and goldsmith of London, a considerable portion of the Legh property, comprising, inter alia, three closes in Hoxton, Shoreditch and Haggerston, respectively. This mortgage was never redeemed. On 20th June, 1579, Thomas, son of Robert Browne, sold (fn. 2) the whole of the property to Thomas Harris. In the Notes of Fines (Midd.) for 33 Elizabeth (Hilary), [1581], is a record of a final concord between William Peake quer: and Thomas Harris def: concerning a messuage, a garden, an orchard and four acres of pasture in Hoxton. The details, however, are not very clear, as the entry is mutilated, and the Feet of Fines for that term are missing. In January, 1596–7, Peake died, leaving (fn. 3) the whole of his property in Middlesex to William Wall, his nephew. On 25th June, 1639, Wall died, and in the inquisition (fn. 4) taken of his property, mention is made of a close of meadow called “Starre close,” containing about 4 acres, (fn. 5) adjoining the messuage and garden called “the Starre.” It is said to be held of the King in chief by knight’s service. There can be little doubt, therefore, that the pasture purchased by Peake was Star Close.

A plan of the close in 1588 (Plate 2) shows that it included the whole of the land south of Augustine Steward’s property, and north of Old Street, except a rectangular plot at the south-east corner. It was then devoid of buildings except in the north-west. (fn. 6)

On 28th May, 1658, William Wall, grandson of the elder William, (fn. 7) sold a portion of the close, one rood in extent, for the site of Walter’s Almshouses, and on 19th October, 1670, disposed of (fn. 8) the greater part (3¾ acres) of the remainder to Allen Badger. This latter portion contained seven houses, and in 1684 the number had risen to fourteen. (fn. 9) Wall’s successors in 1689 sold to Thos. Toller, ten messuages on the eastern frontage of the close, (fn. 10) and Chassereau’s map of 1745 (Plate 1) shows that considerable building had taken place during the preceding half century, though even then a large part lay open. (fn. 11) From a deed (fn. 12) dated 12th November, 1770, the estate is found at that time to comprise 14 messuages in Kingsland Road, including the Red Lion “lately the Crooked Billett,” a parcel of ground “being part of a close formerly called Starr Close,” containing 2¾ acres, and 10 messuages in Hoxton Street.

The Star, from which the close obtained its name, was one of the buildings shown on the plan of 1588 (Plate 2). It is referred to as early as 1501–2 in a plea by John Austen (fn. 13) as to “iiij messuagis wherof one is called the Sterre in Shordyche.” On 6th September, 1502, Austen sold (fn. 14) to Edward Hales three houses: (1) a messuage called Toller house “in which I, the aforesaid John Austen, used lately to dwell,” between the tenement late of William Hungerford east, that late of John Redy west, the land of the prioress of “Halywell” [Star Close] north, and the royal way south; (ii) a messuage called “le Sterre”; (iii) a messuage late called “le Belle,” next to the Star on the north side of it.

In 1541–2 Marcelyn Hales sold to Thos. Armerer the house called The Star, the house to the south of it called “the corner house,” and the house to the north of it called The Bell. Armerer died in 1549–50, leaving (fn. 15) to his wife, “my mansyon house . . . called the Starre,” and to his sister, Maud Howton, the house called The Bell “lyenge on the north syde of my mansyon house called the Sterre, with a garden and an orchard thereto joynynge,” and the house called The Corner House “lyenge on the southe syde of the Sterre afforesayd with the iij chambres over the sayd house . . . also the stayres betwyxte the foresayd corner house and the Sterre afforesayd.”

The corner house is heard of again nearly a century later. On 20th April, 1646, Thomas Hill, of Fulham, demised (fn. 16) to George Cotterell “all that corner messuage or tenement . . . next adjoyning to the inn called the Starr.” (fn. 17) This suggests that the Star was either still standing or had been rebuilt.

From the relative positions of the Bell, the Star and the Corner house, it is probable that their sites corresponded roughly with those of Bull Yard, Red Lion Court and Spread Eagle Court in Chassereau’s Map. The first named is heard of in 1653, (fn. 18) when Euodias Inman and Jane his wife demised to George Cotterell 18 messuages (“ruinous and ready to fall down”) called Bull Yard “thentofore known as the Bull Inn.” In 1681 the premises were sold to William Cowland, (fn. 19) and in 1706 were again “in a ruinous state.” (fn. 20) In 1720 (fn. 21) tenements “formerly belonging to John Cowland” are given as the northern boundary of the Red Lion Court property, which contained 18 messuages or tenements.

The property north of Star Close at the beginning of the 16th century consisted of a messuage with garden, pasture, and orchard. The Register of Augustine Steward, preserved at the British Museum, (fn. 22) contains transcripts of deeds relating to this property as far back as 1501. (fn. 23)

On 13th November in that year, John Burnet and Thomas Pulton released to Katherine Page “a certain messuage and divers buildings with garden, orchard, and close containing three acres and half a rood.” extending on the west from the tenement of John Strete to the close of the nuns of Holywell called “le Starre Close,” for 234 feet 6 inches, and on the east for 284 feet 6 inches. (fn. 24) On 12th May, 1521, Katherine sold the property to John Williams. On 22nd January, 1532–3, Williams disposed of it to Nicholas Serle, from whom it passed to Lawrence Serle, (fn. 25) who died in 1569, leaving his daughter, Lucy Campion, his sole heir. (fn. 26) The property is described as a messuage, toft, barn, garden and orchard which “of old were three roods of land and known by the name of three roods of land,” held of the prebendary of Hoxton, and three acres, containing by estimation two acres, formerly belonging to Katherine Page, and held of the Queen as of the manor or priory of Holywell. (fn. 27) On 20th October, 1576, Lucy Campion leased the premises to John Curwyn, citizen and musician of London, for 21 years, and on 20th February following sold them to Augustine Steward, (fn. 28) whom she married a few months later. Among the records of this property contained in the Steward Register is a particularly interesting one of a survey made in 1588 (Plate 2). (fn. 29)

Steward died on 5th May, 1597, leaving a son, Augustine, aged 12, who, in 1628, sold the property to William Wall. (fn. 30) On the latter’s death (25th June, 1639) he was found in seisin of a messuage, with a toft, garden and orchard, as well as of “all those closes or parcels of land containing two acres,” all said to have been lately purchased of Augustine Steward. (fn. 31) His son Joseph died on 1st August, 1643 (fn. 32) , and the property passed to William Wall the younger, who on 23rd April, 1658, disposed of it to William Moy. It was said to comprise a close or piece of ground, a stable standing at the west end of the close and adjoining the messuage, a barn erected on the other part of the close adjoining south on the garden wall, and a small tenement and garden near Ratcliff Row. On 2nd June, 1659, Moy sold the property, with 200,000 burnt bricks and 160,000 unburnt bricks then on the premises, to Richard Slater, (fn. 33) who, a few weeks later, transferred it to Charles Farewell. (fn. 34) In 1667–8 the premises were purchased (fn. 35) on behalf of Henry Regnier (or Reginer) “an alien born.” After the latter’s death, the premises were forfeited to the Crown, (fn. 36) but the King restored them to the widow Elizabeth. (fn. 37) By will, dated 30th September, 1682, (fn. 38) she left all her property in Hoxton to her daughter Susanna and the latter’s husband, Captain Wm. Abrooke.

Anne Regnier (211 211 211 22) was probably the same ‘Ann dau. of Hen: Reynar merchant’ who was baptised on 21st March 16478 at St Giles Cripplegate, London:

Apothecary7

She married William Rous on 5th July 1669 at St Bartholomew the Great, London (aged about 20 according to the licence):

Apothecary8

Henry Regneire was baptised at St Giles Cripplegate, London on 28th June 1650, son of Henry Regneire, Merchant:

Apothecary9

Rebecka Regnaire was buried 11th September 1654 at St Giles Cripplegate, daughter of Henry Regnaire, Merchant.

Apothecary10

So, we can now show this as follows:

Henry Regnier (211 211 211 221) (died before 1671)
sp. Elizabeth Regnier (211 211 211 222) (will dated 13 Sep 1682) and had issue:

.   Elizabeth Regnier who married on 20 Feb 16634
.   sp. James Coddington

.   Anne Regnier (211 211 211 22) married on 5 Jul 1669
.   sp. William Rous (211 211 211 21) (will dated 8 Oct 1718)  and had issue:

.         Hester Rous (211 211 211 2)
.         sp. John Wynch (211 211 211 1) (who died before 1711) and had issue:

.                  John Wynch (211 211 211) (died before 29 Sep 1744) and had issue:

.                          ALEXANDER WYNCH (211 211 21), Governor of Madras

Anne (Regnier) Rous (211 211 211 22) died after 15th December 1673 (Hester’s birth) and before February 16789 – within nine years of her marriage to William, during which time three of her four children did not survive infancy.

William married second, by licence from the Vicar-General (dated 1679/80)[1] to Susanna WYNCH (211 211 211 12), the widow of Robert Wynch of London, haberdasher, (and mother of John Wynch who married William’s daughter, Hester), on 24th February 1679/80 at St Bartholemew the Great, London:

23rd February 1679-80: William Rous of St Olave Old Jury, London (aged about 39) licence to marry Susanna Wynch of St Giles, Cripplegate, London (aged about 34) at St Bartholemew the Great or Less, or St Sepulchre, London). (Marriage Allegations in the Registry of the Vicar-General of the Archbishop of Canterbury)

Children of William Rous

And so, whilst this article has not explored further proof of his ancestry (see Rous of Topsham) apart from references provided by the Society of Apothecaries and by Boyd, that William’s father was Thomas Rous of Topsham, Devon. We do know from his marriage licence that William Rous was born around 1640 and that he married Anne Regnier on 5th July 1669.[1]

Apothecary11Register of St Bartholomew the Great, London

William and Anne’s first child, Elizabeth, was born on 7th June 1670, baptised the next day at St Olave Old Jewry, London, and was buried in the same place on 12th September 1670

Apothecary12

Apothecary13Registers of St Olave, Old Jewry, London

William and Anne’s second child, Anne, was born 22nd September 1671, baptised 22nd September 1671 at St Olave Old Jewry, London, and died 29th April 1675

Apothecary14Registers of St Olave, Old Jewry, London

William & Anne’s son, William, was born 3rd November 1672, baptised 3rd November 1672 at St Olave Old Jewry, London, and was buried 5th April 1677

Apothecary15

Apothecary16
Registers of St Olave, Old Jewry, London

The fourth child born to William and Anne was Hester ROUS (211 211 211 2), who was baptised 15th December 1673 at St Olave’s, Old Jury, London.

Apothecary17Registers of St Olave, Old Jewry, London

According to the will of William Rous (211 211 211 21), Hester married[2] Robert PEAD, apothecary.  The marriage record (shown below) shows that Hester was a widow and her previous married name was ‘Winch’.

Apothecary19

 

Her previous deceased husband was her father’s (non-blood-related) step-son John Wynch, the son of Robert Wynch by his wife Susanna Wynch, later the wife of William Rous.

This view is consolidated by the references in William Rous’s will to “my three Grandsons John Wynch Robert Wynch and William Wynch” and to his grandchild Hester Wynch; at the same time he refers to John Wynch’s late father as distinct from calling him his son deceased.

It seems likely, therefore, that Hester Rous married firstly John Wynch (written in the registers as Esther Rous and John Winch, both of the Parish of St Olave’s Jury) on 22nd May 1694 at St Bartholemew the Great, London.

Apothecary20Registers of St Bartholomew the Great, London

William’s first wife, Anne died after 15th December 1673 (Hester’s birth) and before February 16789 – within nine years of her marriage to William, during which time three of her four children did not survive infancy.

William married second, by licence from the Vicar-General (dated 1679/80)[3] to Susanna WYNCH (211 211 211 12), the widow of Robert Wynch of London, haberdasher, (and mother of John Wynch who married William’s daughter, Hester), on 24th February 1679/80 at St Bartholemew the Great, London.

Apothecary21Registers of St Bartholomew the Great, London

It seems William’s wish to be buried in the Frederick family tomb was not fulfilled as he was buried at St Helen, Bishopsgate in London 6th November 1719.

Apothecary22Registers of St Helen, Bishopsgate, London

John Wynch (211 211 211 1) was educated in Law at Trinity College Cambridge:

 “Adm. pens. (age 16) at TRINITY, Sept. 17, 1689. S. of Robert. B. in London. School, Mercers’ (Mr Seth Bonde). Matric. 1690. Adm. at the Inner Temple, Jan. 21, 1690-1.”

This John Wynch was grandfather to Alexander Wynch.  His descendants are set out in a separate post.

William Rous, Apothecary of London, is not mentioned in “A Genealogy of the Rouses of Devon” by Professor John C Street with the Assistance of C. Douglas Peters (Madison, Wisconsin, 2002).

Thomas Rous (“eventually of Topsham”) is referred to and, encouragingly, he married Hester Martyn (daughter of Robert Martyn of Burford, Oxfordshire) who died in 1674 and was buried at Southwark on 10th October 1674. This would explain why William Rous named his surviving daughter Hester.

I have identified Hester Rous, widow of Thomas Rous, Gent, as being buried at St Saviour Denmark Park, Southwark on 12th October 1670.

Apothecary25-HesterRous

 

Thomas and Hester’s son Anthony Rous, gent, was buried at St Saviour Denmark park, Southwark on 8th May 1663, an “Attorney in the Quire” and, Thomas having died in 1657, Hester may have decided to live with Anthony’s family after Anthony’s death – Anthony had marrieed Lettice Warcupp (daughter of Samuel Warcupp) and had a son, Robert, baptised 14th october 1654 at St Saviour Denmark Park, Southwark.

Thomas Rous was baptised in Rogate, Sussex on 28th July 1589 (Street’s source: IGI) and was buried at Topsham, Devon, on 2nd February 1657/8.

Intriguingly, in 1630, William Castleton and Phebe his wife conveyed Polesden Manor and Farm near Leatherhead, Surrey, to Anthony Rous (William’s uncle by this genealogy) and his [second] wife Anne.

Street’s tree, whilst not actually referring to William, shows John Rous, Apothecary of Topsham and Farringdon, Devon (William’s apprentice, the son of Robert Rous, Attorney of Devon), as William’s nephew. A reasonably likely link, especially when we consider that Luke Justice (another of William’s apprentices,married William’s niece Katherine.

This link will be explored further on a separate post Rous of Topsham.

 

 


[1] Marriage Allegations in the Registry of the Vicar-General of the Archbishop of Canterbury:

July 3rd 1669: William Rous of St. Olave’s Old Jury London, City & Apothecary. Bachr abt 29 & Anne Regnier of St. Leonard’s Shoreditch Middx. Spr abt 20 with consent of her father; at St. Barth. The Great or St. Botolph Aldersgate, Lond. or St Mary Newington or Clerkenwell Middx.

[2] Robert Pead, widower married at St Katherine by the Tower, London on 8th January 1711 (aged about 40) to Hester Wyind, widow (aged about 30) by licence.

[3] Marriage Allegations in the Registry of the Vicar-General of the Archbishop of Canterbury:

23rd February 1679-80: William Rous of St Olave Old Jury, London (aged about 39) licence to marry Susanna Wynch of St Giles, Cripplegate, London (aged about 34) at St Bartholemew the Great or Less, or St Sepulchre, London)

 

 

John Lorrimer, Haberdasher and Alderman of London

John Lorymer or Lorrimer was Master of the Company of Apothecaries in 1655.  In his will (proved 16th January 1660/1) he refers to a great many friends and relatives.  He says of William Rous (211 211 211 21):

I give unto my servant William Rowse forty pounds; and also I give him the thirty pounds his brother owes me by bond; and I desire my wife [Frances] to have a special regard to the said William Rowse if either she keeps or parts with the house and shop wherein I now live.

John Lorimer was buried at St Olave’s Jewry in London where his monumental inscription (on the floor near the Communion Rail) said:

UNDER THE COMMUNION TABLE IN YE VAULT
IS DEPOSITED THE BODY OF JOHN LORYMER
LATE OF LONDON ESQUIRE WITH TWO
OF HIS CHILDREN SAMUELL AND SARAH.
HERE LYETH ALSO THE BODY
OF FRANCES LORYMER THE RELICT OF
THE SAID JOHN LORYMER ESQUIRE WHO
DYED SEPTEMBER THE IX MDCLXXIV.

HERE ALSO IS BURIED THE BODY OF DOCTOR
WILLIAM CROUNE ONE OF THE FELLOWS OF
THE ROYAL SOCIETY AND OF THE
COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS IN LONDON
WHO DYED THE XII DAY OF OCTOBER
MDCLXXXIV
AND HATH LEFT BEHIND HIM HIS
SORROWFUL WIDDOW, MARY CROUNE
DAUGHTER OF THE SAID
JOHN AND FRANCES LORYMER
WHICH SAID MARY AFTERWARDS INTERMARRIED WITH
SR EDWIN SADLEIR OF TEMPLE DINSLEY IN YE COUNTY
OF HERTFORD BART AND LYES INTERRED HERE. SHE
DYED THE 30TH SEPTR 1706

This is relevant inasmuch as William Rous (211 211 211 21) who had been apprenticed to John Lorimer, was named as a trustee of the will of Lady Sadleir (formerly Croune, née Lorymer) and he later named John Wynch to be a fellow trustee.

Lady Sadleir’s will was dated 25th September 1701, bore codicils dated 2nd November 1704 and 25th September 1706 (all witnessed by Robert Pead) and was proved 6th November 1706.  In it she says:

ITEM; I give unto my good friend Mr William Rous one of my Executors hereinafter named, my medal of gold of the value of twelve pounds or thereabouts and I do hereby also further give and bequeath unto him the said William Rouse the sum of thirty pounds of lawful English money to be paid unto him at the time of my decease, and to his the said William Rous his wife Mrs Susanna Rous I hereby give and bequeath the sum of ten pounds to be paid unto her also at my decease.

she continues:

…and whereas before my intermarriage with my now husband Sir Edwin Sadleir I did convey and make over all my copyhold estates unto my then two trustees, Mr Nevill Norton[3] deceased and Mr Rous, one of my Executors hereinafter named, it is now my desire that the said Mr William Rous my surviving trustee and his executors do and shall dispose and make over my said copyhold estates to such use and uses as by this my will I have directed and appointed.

she appoints “Mr William Rous of the Parish of St Olave’s Jury, London, Apothecary” as one of her three Executors and continues:

…and whereas my good friend Mr William Rous, one of the Executors hereinbefore named has as my trustee acted and transacted several great concerns for me and in my estate I do hereby declare that all accounts are settled and evened between us to this day and therefore I do hereby for me my executors and administrators remise, release and forever quit and acquit him his executors or administrators of and from all manner of action or actions, cause or causes of actions, claims, demands and accounts whatsoever which I now have or hereafter may or can have against him or them from the beginning of the world to the date of this my last will and I do hereby heartily and really thank him for his great trouble care and pain he has had from and by me therein.

 


[1] Boyd reference 17597 (Secondary Source)

[2] Cliff Webb; Apothecaries Apprentices 1617-1699 states: “William s William, Topsham, Dev gentleman to George Larrymer 8th April 1657”

[3] Her cousin

Footnotes to Extract on Hoxton re. Henry Regnier

1 Close Roll, 695.
2 Ibid., 1059.
3 P.C.C., 2, Cobham.
4 Inq. P. M., Chancery, 2nd Series, 604/116.
5 This is an underestimate; it was nearer 5½ acres.
6 The house, etc., represented here, which is perhaps the messuage mentioned in the sale by Harris to Peake, must be one of two referred to in Wall’s inquisition, viz., either (i.) the “capital messuage with a garden thereto adjoining . . . late in the tenure of William Coates and now of Richard Gibbes and widow Mason,” held of St. Paul’s; or (ii.) the “messuage, with a barn and garden thereto adjoining, late in the tenure of Alice Herne, widow, and Matthew Dale,” held of the King in chief by knight’s service. As it was obviously built on Star Close, the similarity of tenure would render its identity with (ii.) practically certain were it not for the possibility that “Mrs. Heron,” shown in the plan of 1598 as occupying a house to the north of the Steward property, was the “Alice Herne” referred to in occupation of (ii.). For the later history of the house, see p. 134.
7 Close Roll, 3984.
8 Ibid., 4291.
9 Final concord between Wm. Harding and Thos. Beesely, quer: and Daniel Badger and Sarah, his wife, deforc. (Feet of Fines, Midd., 36–7, Chas. II., Hil.).
10 Feet of Fines, Midd., 1 Wm. and Mary, Easter. The position of the property is not stated, but later documents (e.g., sale by Hannah Sladen to John Morrison, 3rd May, 1734, Middlesex Reg. Memls., 1730, I., 313–4) give the information.
11 This part had been let on 14th March, 1701–2, to John Harding and then contained inter alia 209 pear-trees, codling trees and cherry trees left by the preceding tenant. (Chancery Proceedings, C. V., 341/24.)
12 Indenture between Thos. Edwards (1), John Mayhew (2), and Edward Sawbridge (3). (Middlesex Reg. Memls., 1770, VI., 268.)
13 Early Chancery Proceedings, 247/9. John Austen and his brother, Robert Austen, clerk, sons of William Austen and Agnes, afterward wife of William Willebye, cannot be shown to be related to the Austens who, during the 16th and 17th centuries, were one of the chief families in Hoxton (see p. 60).
14 Close Roll, 363.
15 P.C.C., 8, Coode.
16 He had obtained it through his first wife, Joan, only child of Margaret Yeomans (died 1625).
17 Chancery Proceedings, C. VII., 181/41.
18 Chancery Proceedings, C. II., 34/11.
19 Feet of Fines, Midd., 33 Chas. II., Trinity.
20 Chancery Proceedings, C. VII., 637/13.
21 Middx. Reg. Memls., 1720, VI., 220.
22 Egerton MS., 2599.
23 Its history before 1501, except for Katherine Page’s allusion to the warranty of Thomas “Halwaye,” has not been traced, but there can be little doubt that the “mese, a garden, iij rodes and iij acres of londe” in Hoxton left by Richard Hert some time in the third quarter of the 15th century (see Early Chancery Proceedings, 54/20) was the same.
24 According to Steward, only 230 feet 9 inches and 281 feet 3 inches respectively.
25 On 10th March, 1537–8, Dame “Sibell Newdegatt,” prioress of Holywell, leased to Laurence Serle” one of the yemen usshers of the chamber of the Kyng,” a strip, 12 feet wide, along the north boundary of Star Close, for the purpose of setting up a pale between the latter close and Laurence’s close, called Page’s Close (Augmentation Office, Conventual Leases, Midd. 28.).
26 Inq. P. Mortem, Series II., Chancery, 152/90.
27 Ibid., 158/4.
28 Augustine Steward, son of Simon of Lakenheath, born 27th August, 1542. Lucy survived her second marriage a very short while, and Steward married again in 1580, his second wife being Anne, daughter of Thos. Argoll, and widow of Clement Sisley (Flyleaf of Register).
29 The explanation reads: “This mapp of my house in Hoxton made by Mr. Troswell the 30th of March, 1588, sheweth yt the lengh of the close on eche side from diche to diche, countinge in garden, barne, and house, is 27 pole. And the est end is 13 pole demi & 2 foot and the west end is 13 pole demi & 8 foot. Summa, 2 acres, 1 rode 13 pole. The orchard is in lenghe 27 pole and 6 foote, and in bredth at ye west end 3 pole, and at thest end 3 pole 7 foote, and in the midest 4 pole 5 foote, demi. Summa 2 rodes 26 pole. The whole lenghe of ye orchard and close on the est side is 281 fote 3 inches. On ye west part from Mr. Hearns house toward ye Starr Close is 230 fote 9 inches.”
30 Feet of Fines, Midd., 4 Chas. I., Mich.
31 Inq. P. M., Chancery, 2nd Series, 604/116.
32 Inq., P.M., Chancery, 2nd Series, 623/46.
33 Close Roll, 4035.
34 Ibid., 4033.
35 Final concord between William Abrooke and Henry Waad quer: and Chas. Farewell deforc.: (Feet of Fines, Midd., 19–20, Chas. II., Hil).
36 Close Roll, 4318.
37 Patent Roll, 23 Chas. II., 3132.
38 P.C.C., 9 Cann (proved 15th January, 1684–5).

 

Comments or questions are welcome.

* indicates required field

 

William Rous – Wild Goose Chase

Sir John Frederick, Lord Mayor of London

Curiously, William Rous (211 211 211 21), in his will, asks to be buried:

in the vault belonging to the family of Sir John Frederick under the monument of Sir Nathaniel Herne deceased on the South side of the Parish Church of St Olave Old Jury London 

Nathaniel Herne’s inscription (on the South Wall) noted:

HERE LYETH IN HOPES OF A GLORIOUS
RESURRECTION THE BODY OF SR NATHANIEL
HERNE, KNIGHT, LATE SHERIFFE, AND AT HIS DEATH
ALDERMAN OF THIS FAMOUS CITTY AND GOVERNOR
OF THE HONOURABLE EAST INDIA COMPANY, SON
TO NICHOLAS AND GRANDSON TO RICHARD HERNE
SOMETIMES ALDERMAN ALLSO OF THIS CITTY A
PERSON OF GREAT PRUDENCE AND INDEFATIGABLE
INDUSTRY IN THE MANNER OF ALL PUBLICK
AFFAIRS OF EXEMPLARY PIETY, SPOTLESS INTEGRITY
AND DIFFUSIVE CHARITY HAVEING WITH HIS OWNE
HAND DISPENCED VERY CONSIDERABLE SUMMES TO
MANY CHARITABLE USES PARTICULARLY TO THE RELEIFE
OF POORE SEAMEN & EDUCATING OF THEIR CHILDREN.
HE TOOKE TO WIFE JUDITH ELDEST DAUGHTER OF SR
JOHN FREDERICK, KNIGHT, ALDERMAN AND SOMETIMES
LORD MAYOR OF LONDON, HIS NOW SORROWFULL
WIDDOW BY WHOME HE HAD DIVERS CHILDREN
AND LEFT THREE HOPEFULL SONS SURVIVING VIZ.
FREDERICK, NATHANIEL AND THOMAS TO WHOSE
& TO THIS CITTYES & NATIONS GREAT LOSS AS ALLSO
TO YE GREIFE OF ALL THEM THAT KNEW HIM HE
DEPARTED THIS LIFE YE 16TH AUGUST 1679 AETAT 50.

There is no reference to the family vault, nor even of Sir John Frederick in the catalogue of Monumental Inscriptions[1] but in the Parish registers for St Olave’s Jewry there is reference to the burials of Sir John Frederick on 19th March 1684/5 (will[2] proved 4th May 1685) and of his widow, Dame Mary Frederick on 19th October 1689.

Sir John Frederick was the fourth son of Christopher Frederick of London, Surgeon to King James I, who died in October 1623.  Sir John married (16th January 1636/7 at St Helen Bishopsgate) Mary Rous, the daughter of Thomas Rous of London, Merchant of Lime Street, London by his wife.  Examination of the ancestry of Mary Rous might, therefore, reasonably be expected to shed light on the ancestors of William Rous (211 211 211 21).

Dame Mary Frederick (née Ruys or Rous)

Examination of the records of Austin Friars shows the marriage on 21st April 1617 of Thomas Ruijs and Judith Moenen of Norwich (the daughter of Martin Moenen).

Extract from Parish Registers of the Dutch Congregation of Austin Friars, London

Extract from Parish Registers of the Dutch Congregation of Austin Friars, London

 

The will of Martin Moenen, Merchant, from Great Yarmouth (dated 9th March 16278 and proved seven weeks later on 28th April 1628) refers to his wife, Marie, his three sons, John, Abraham and Nathaniell (A), and his three daughters, Sara (B), Judith (C) and Abigail (D).  He also refers to his “Son in Law Thomas Russe”. His reference to his Brother in Law Angell Hollwicke Leonardson may suggest his wife might have been Marie Leonardson – but there is no evidence to support this and he may have been a brother-in-law by way of the marriage of his sister or even a step brother by way of a remarriage of his mother.

The Dutch at Yarmouth had a chapel for their use, which had originally been the mansion of Thomas de Drayton, a bailiff and a representative of the town, temp. Edw. III.  Whether they converted it into a chapel or not, does not appear; it was afterwards used as a theatre… but by an order of the King in 1632, it was … termed a chapel, and was theretofore used by the Dutch for their assembling and divine service…within less than forty years it was a warehouse, and it was ordered that it should therefore be used no longer for the celebration of divine service[3]

The name ‘Moenen’ seems to have become anglicised as ‘Moone’ within the first generation from Martin Moenen.

A John Moone, Merchant was noted in the Parliamentary Papers in 1642:[4]

Ordered, That the Ten Chests of Glasses, belonging to John Moone of London, Merchant, imported from Venice, and seized aboard the Ship, by Sir Robert Mansfeild, by virtue of his Patent, shall be forthwith delivered to Mr. Moone, he paying the King’s Duties and Customs for the same. And it is further Ordered, That all such other Merchants as have their Glasses seized by Sir Robert Mansfeild, by virtue of his Patent shall have the same delivered unto them. And Sir Robert Mansfeild is to attend this House forthwith; and to bring his Patents with him; and to shew unto this House, by what Authority he hath seized the Merchants Glasses.

It is not known if this is the same John Moenen.

Abraham Moone[5] (son of Abraham Moone, and grandson of Martin Moone/Moenen) was listed as being in the Parish of Bishopsgate Within between 1675-79 and in Great St Helens in London in 1677; he was born in 1638 and was buried at St Helens Bishopsgate on 4th June 1688 having married in 1663 Anne Daniel (daughter of Thomas Daniel of St Michael Wood Street).

Nathaniell Moone (A), Citizen and Merchant tailor of London refers, in his will (dated 26th April 1637 and proved 2nd September 1637), to both Thomas Ruys the Elder and Thomas Ruys the Younger (Thomas Ruys Senior was Executor with Abraham Cullen).  Nathaniell also refers to his brother John Moone, his sister Sara Moone and his Partner John Frederick.  The will was witnessed by Adam Lawrence.

WildGooseChase2

Index of Wills of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury (1637)

WildGooseChase3Burial Register, St Olave, Old Jewry, London (1637)

Nathaniel Moone (A) married Elizabeth whose will was dated 14th October 1640, with a codicil of the same date and proved 9th November 1640.  In it she refers to her late husband Nathaniell Moone; her uncle Adam Lawrence and his wife; John Frederick; her husband’s brother John Moone and his three children; Judith Ruis, widow, her late husband’s sister; the eight children of Sara Puits her late husband’s sister whose legacies are to be “paid to Richard Lawrence their brother in law”; Abigaill, wife of Abraham Keullen her late husband’s sister.  In a codicil she itemises possessions as particular bequests, including:

to my sister Ruys I give my wedding ring with the diamond in it, and to my said sister Anne (sic.) daughters, cousin Mary Frederick and cousin Judith Ente, all my chaine, the turkey carpet, the three best wrought cushions to be equally divided amonge them two; and to my cousin Anne Ruys the gould wrought purse with all the same money that is therein.

Sara Moene (B) married James de Puydt or Payt (who predeceased her) and, in her will of 13th November 1638 (written in Dutch and proved 7th December 1638), she refers to her eight living children: James, Thomas, Mary, Sara, Ann, Priscilla, Judith and Abigail – she also refers to her Son in Law Richard Lawrence.  The will was witnessed by Abraham Moone (her brother) and Thomas Ruys.

WildGooseChase4Index of Wills of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury (1638)

Judith Moenen (C) married at the Dutch Church of Austin Friars on 29th April 1617 to Thomas Ruijs of Gorchum (Gorinchem near Dordrecht in Holland – the Netherlands).

WildGooseChase5

Extract from Parish Registers of the Dutch Congregation of Austin Friars, London

Abigail Moenen (D) married Abraham Van Cuelen (or Van Galulen):

Abraham Van Cuelen changed his name to Cullen and it was this Abraham Cullen and Thomas Rous whos obtained a Patent in 1626 for the manufacture of stone jugs, pots and bottles.[6] Individual consignments of stoneware to the alien merchants in London in the period 1600-1640 were often very large; it was noted that in May 1633 Thomas Rous received one consignment of 10,000 cast, valued at £125.[7]

Abraham Cullen the Elder of London, Merchant, died in 1658 (his will was dated 16th January 16578 and was proved 7th September 1658). He refers in his will to his family (including to his late wife Abigaell who is buried in St Hellens Parish Church in Bishopsgate, London.  Unfortunately for these present purposes, he makes no mention of Thomas Ruys the Younger, nor any reference to William Rous which would help to tie these loose ends together.

The records of Mortlake Church[8] show:

Esther, daughter of Sr Abraham Cullen and Abigail, baptized Sep. 28, 1665;

Sr Abraham Cullen, buried Sep. 2, 1668.

Sir Abraham Cullen was the son of Abraham Cullen and Abigail Moenen (D).

Thomas Ruijs or Ruys etc.

Thomas Ruijs (or, variously, Russe, Rowse, Ruys or Rous) from Gorchum (or Gorinchem in the Netherlands) was buried on 3rd September 1640, and his will (written in Dutch 17th April 1640 and translated at the time, proved 10th September 1640) refers to his wife, Judith Ruys, and five living children: Thomas (a), Abraham (b) and Anne (c) (all under twenty-one years of age and at least Anne being unmarried) and his daughters Mary (d) and Judith (e) (both of whom, by implication, are married and have received their marriage portions). He also leaves a bequest to his Niece Anne de Puydt if she has not reached twenty-one years of age or married before his death.  He also refers to Adam Lawrence as his Uncle. Thomas Ruys also refers in his will to his Son in Law John Frederick.

WildGooseChase6

Extract from Parish Registers of St Dionis Backchurch, London

WildGooseChase7

Index of Wills of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury (1640)

The registers of Austin Friars also show the baptisms of three of Thomas’s children:

WildGooseChase8 

Extract from Parish Registers of the Dutch Congregation of Austin Friars, London

Thomas Rouse (senior) was shown as living in Lime Street in the Ward of St Dionis Backchurch in 1638,[9] in a property with rental value of thirty pounds per year.

Thomas Ruys senior’s will ties in with his daughter being the same Mary Rous (d) who married John Frederick, and further research supports this.

These families combined with their great wealth a certain foregnness, which continued from generation to generation, as did their financial and trading interests.  The pre-Revocation Huguenots did not perhaps feel themselves part of a great community of their fellow-countrymen and co-religionists, but of a smaller one of protestant foreigners who had settled in England and prospered.  Both Flemish and French, they intermarried also with the Dutch community, as in the match in 1662 of Sir John [Frederick], later Sheriff of London, whose son married Leonora Maresco, to the daughter of the merchant Thomas Rouse (Ruys), a member of the Dutch Church, Austin Friars.”

Proceedings of the Huguenot Society of London VOL. XXIII, NO.6
(the original reference to Sir John Lethieullier is a mistake and should read Sir John Frederick)

Mary Rous (d) or Dame Mary Frederick as she became, died in 1689 and was buried on 19th December 1689 at St Olave’s, Old Jewry, London:

WildGooseChase9

She had a number of children with Sir John Frederick, of whom some did not survive to adulthood:

Her children were:

  1. John Frederick (chr. 1st January 16378, St Olave, Old Jewry, London;

WildGooseChase10

bur. 24th May 1638, St Olave, Old Jewry); WildGooseChase11

  1. Judith Frederick (chr. 7th August 1639, St Olave, Old Jewry, London),

WildGooseChase12

who became Dame Judith Herne, wife of Sir Nathaniell Herne as shown in the Marriage Register of St Olave, Old Jewry, London of 1656:

WildGooseChase13

  1. Mary Frederick (chr. 3rd October 1641, St Olave, Old Jewry, London,

WildGooseChase14

bur. 21st January 16456, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase15

  1. Robert Frederick (b. 8th August 1646, chr. 17th August 1646, St Olave, Old Jewry, London,

WildGooseChase16

bur. 25th December 1651, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase17

  1. Mary Frederick (b. 16th April 1648, chr. 26th April 1648, St Olave, Old Jewry, London);

WildGooseChase18

bur. 8th January 16567, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase19

  1. Thomas Frederick (b. 7th July 1650, chr. 11th July 1650, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase20

  1. Anne Frederick (b. 16th September 1651; chr. 25th September 1651, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase21

  1. John Frederick (bur. 30th March 1652, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase22

  1. John Frederick (chr. 9th December 1652, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase23

bur. 6th May 1653, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase24

  1. Elizabeth Frederick (chr. 31st October 1655, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase25

  1. Mary Frederick (chr. 29th March 1657, St Olave, Old Jewry, London,

WildGooseChase26

bur. 11th June 1658, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase27

  1. Rebecca Frederick (chr. 6th November 1658, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase28

who married Francis Godsprit (or Gosfight or Gosfrith) on 22nd December 1689 at St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase29

  1. Sarah Frederick (bur. 28th July 1662, St Olave, Old Jewry, London)

WildGooseChase30

Mary’s older surviving son, Thomas Frederick (who lived at Downing Street in Westminster), was baptised in 1650.  He had issue including Sir John Frederick 1st Bt, and Sir Thomas Frederick Kt. Thomas Frederick died in June 1720.

The National Archives summarises the background to this branch of the Frederick family:[10]

WildGooseChase31

Christopher Frederick, founder of the family, came to England from Hainault during the reign of Elizabeth I, and enjoyed the queen’s patronage. He became a member of the Worshipful Company of Barber-Surgeons in 1595 and was appointed Sergeant-Surgeon to James I. The family settled in the City of London, in the parish of St Olave, Old Jewry, where they acquired considerable property.

The earliest member of the family for whom records survive in this accession is Christopher’s fourth son, John (1601-1685), who was Lord Mayor of London, 1661-1662. He was knighted in 1660. His son, Thomas (1650-1720), followed the family tradition of marrying an heiress, Leonara Maresco, in 1676. They had five children: two sons, John and Thomas (1680-1731), and three daughters, the youngest of whom, Jane, became Duchess of Atholl by her second marriage. Thomas’s marriage was stormy and, after a series of lawsuits over the Maresco property, he and his wife separated in 1715 (see 183/28/6).

The elder son, John, was created a baronet in 1723. His two sons succeeded him in turn, John in 1755, and Thomas in 1757. When the latter died in 1770 without leaving a son, the title passed to his cousin John Frederick of Burwood, who became 4th baronet.

Thomas Frederick, the younger son of Thomas (1650-1720), served in the East India Company and became governor of Fort St David and Fort St George, Madras, where he married in 1705, and where most of his children were born. He was a director of the South Sea Company and was knighted in 1721. The City of London properties were left to him by his father, who also left large legacies to his sons. Thomas used his legacy to acquire the Burwood estate at Walton on Thames. His three eldest sons, Thomas, John (later 4th baronet) and Charles, and three daughters, Mary, Henrietta and Hannah, appear in these records. Mary married Alexander Hume, MP, and Hannah his brother Abraham, who was created a baronet in 1769. Henrietta married Luke Spence of South Malling, Sussex (see 183/22/1-17). The younger Thomas Frederick (1707-1740) was MP for Shoreham-by-Sea, West Sussex, until his death, when his brother John took over the seat. He relinquished it to his younger brother, Charles, in 1746, and became MP for West Looe in Cornwall.

Charles Frederick was MP for Shoreham, 1746-1754, and then for Queenborough, Kent, until 1784. He entered the Office of Ordnance and was Comptroller in 1749 at the time of the celebrations of the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, being responsible for the ill-fated firework display. In 1761 he was created a Knight of the Bath. In 1746 he married the Hon Lucy Boscawen, a daughter of Viscount Falmouth. They had three sons, Charles, Thomas Lenox and Edward Boscawen Frederick, and two daughters, Augusta, who married Thomas Prescott, and Lucy who married Crispe Molineux.”
(my emphasis and footnotes)

Kimber & Johnson[11] note, under 321. FREDERICK, of Westminster:

Created BARONET, June 10, 1723.

This family is descended from Sir John Frederick, Knt. (son of Christopher Frederick, citizen of London) lord-mayor of the city of London, 1662, who was one of the most considerable traders in the said city.  He was a worthy benefactor to christ’s Hospital, and left issue Thomas Frederick, of Downing street, Westminster, Esq; who had three sons,

  1. Sir John Frederick, Bart, of whom hereafter;
  2. Sir Thomas Frederick, Knt. who went to the Indies, acquired a considerable fortune, and there married; and left issue, Thomas Frederick, Esq; member of parliament for Shoreham, in Sussex, who died in 1740; John Frederick, of Burwood, in Walton upon Thames, in Surry, Esq; who succeeded his brother in estate, and as member for Shoreham, and married a daughter of Sir Roger Hudson, Bart.  Sir Charles who has served in several parliaments for Queenborough, in Kent, in 1746, he was appointed clerk of deliveries in the office of Ordinances; in 1750 was made surveyor of the Ordnance, and assistant to the master-general of the Ordnance; in March 1761, he was elected Knight Companion of the noble order of the bath, and installed May 26 following.  He married Lucy, daughter to the Right Hon. Hugh Boscawen, Viscount Falmouth, and has issue.  The other children of Sir Thomas were, Marisco, who is a colonel on half pay; and four daughters, of which the eldest married Alexander Hume, Esq.  Lady Frederick, surviving Sir Thomas, was remarried to William Pointz, Esq; receiver-general of the excise.
  3. Charles Frederick, Esq; who died unmarried; also three daughters, Mary, the eldest, married Thomas Powell, of Nanteos in Cardiganshire, Esq; Leonora, (deceased) who married Rumney Diggle, of Grays-Inn, Esq; and Jane, who married, first, James Lannoy, of hammersmith, in Middlesex, Esq; and since, his grace the Duke of Athol.

Sir John Frederick, Bart, the eldest son, was advanced to this dignity in the ninth year of King George I.  He married, in July 1727, one of the daughters of __ Kinnersley, Esq; by whom he left two sons, Sir John, his successor, and Sir Thomas, the present Baronet.  His lady died Aug. 31, 1749, and Sir John in Oct. 1755. He was succeeded by his eldest son, Sir John Frederick, who died unmarried, March 24, 1757, and was succeeded by his only brother.

Sir Thomas Frederick, the present baronet, who married Elizabeth, daughter of Pater Bathurst, of Clarendon Park, in Wiltshire, Esq; by which lady, who died Sept 11, 1764, he has two daughters.

ARMS: Ot, on a Chief, Azure, three Doves, Argent.

CREST: On a Cap of Dignity, Azure, turned up Ermine, a Dove, as in the Arms, holding in his Beak and Olive-Branch, proper.

SEAT: At Hampton, in Middlesex.”

Judith Ruys (e), who was baptised 26th March 1622 at the Dutch Church of Austin Friars, the daughter of Thomas Ruijs and Judith Moenen (C), married firstly, 21st August 1638 at St Dionis Backchurch, London, to Peter Ent of St. Lawrence Jewry, London and of Sandwich in Kent.  Peter Ent was a Clothworker and Citizen of London.  His brother was Sir George Ent kt. (born 6th November 1604, died 13th October 1689, recorded in various volumes as the son of Josias Ent (sometimes called John Ent), a Belgian immigrant.  The Heraldry of Foreigners in England 1400-1700 (Harleian Society) notes that Josias Ent, a Dutchman probably married Judith, the daughter of Francis Beake (or Beke) of Norwich, whose ancestors came out of Flanders.  Judith Ruys and Peter Ent had a son and two daughters, who died young. The second daughter, Judith was baptised 11th December 1642 at St Olave Old Jewry, London, and was buried on 20th July 1655 at St Christopher-le-Stocks.  Peter Ent’s will was dated 16th June 1644 and was proved 3rd September 1644, in which he refers to his Mother in Law Judith Ruys (C).

WildGooseChase32Register of St Olave, Old Jewry, London (1639)

WildGooseChase33Burial Register of St Olave, Old Jewry, London (1640/41)

WildGooseChase34Register of St Olave, Old Jewry, London (1640)

WildGooseChase35Register of St Olave, Old Jewry, London (1642)

Judith Ruys or Rous (e) married secondly on 22nd February 16523 to John Adrian, a Merchant of London who was born circa 1603.  John Adrian’s first wife, Hester de la Tombe had died in September or October1652 (she was buried on 7th October 1652) by whom he had three surviving infant children, and, at the time of his second marriage, Judith’s infant daughter was still alive. John Adrian was assessed in 1662 with 11 hearths at Broad Street in St Christopher’s Precinct in the City of London. John Adrian died at Caen in France on 5th October 1669 and in his will (dated 6th November 1667, proved 22nd October 1669) he refers to “Judith Rouse my wife’s mother”.

WildGooseChase36Register of St Christopher-le-Stocks, London (1669)

Judith Adrian died in 16867 and was buried on 6th January that year at St Christopher-le-Stocks.

WildGooseChase37Register of St Christopher-le-Stocks, London (1687/88)

WildGooseChase38Visitation of London 1634 (Hester la Tombe, first wife of John Adrian)

Thomas Adrian was born on 28th December 1653

WildGooseChase39Register of St Christopher-le-Stocks, London (1653)

Thomas Adrian married Anne Crispe 16th November 1675 at St Sepulchre, Holborn by licence[12]:

11 Nov 1675 Thomas Adrian, of St Sepulchre’s, Lond., Bachr, abt 22, & Anne Crispe, of the same, Spr, abt 22, with her brother’s consent; alleged by Thomas Rock, of Doctors’ Commons, Lond., Gent.; at St Peter’s the Poore or St Christopher’s the Stocks, Lond.”

WildGooseChase40Register of St Sepulchre, Holborn, Middlesex (1675)

Thomas Adrian’s will, dated and proved in 1701 refers to his late mother Judith Adrian but gives no further clues to unlocking William Rous’s identity.

Judith Adrian was born 21st January 16556

WildGooseChase41Register of St Christopher-le-Stocks, London (1655/56)

Judith married Sir Nicholas Crispe 30th April 1674 at St Mary, Islington, by licence dated 20th April 1674:[13]

Crispe, Sir Nicholas, of the Middle Temple, bart., bachelor, about 30, and Mrs Judith Adrian, of St Dunstan-in-the-West, spinster, about 20, her mother’s consent – at, St. Pancras, Middlesex. 20 April, 1674. V.”

WildGooseChase42Register of St Mary, Islington, Middlesex (1674)

Judith Crispe, daughter of Sir Nicholas Crispe, died in 1700: [14]

27 Jul 1700 Mrs Judith Crispe d. of ye late Sr Nicholas, Patron of ys Church, was Buried in yr own Vault”

Anne Rous (c) married John Niclaes, a Merchant who was engaged in trade with India for the Honourable East India Company (for example the following excerpt from 1662: [15]

That the undermentioned persons are to take place in order as they are underwritten in each place, vidiz :

Fort St. George. Sir Edward Winter, Knt. and Bart., Mr. William Gifford, Shem Bridges, James Noell, Nathaniel Budlie, Thomas Stiles, Robert dearinge, William Dawes, Edward Harris, Thomas Haslewood, Stephen Charlton, John Grover, John ffeild, Isack Jones, John Hopkins.

Metchlepatam. Mr. William Jearsie [and five others].

Mettapollum. Mr John Niclaes [and two others].

Pettepolie. Ambrose Saulsbury [and another].

To go downe into the bay. Mr. William Blake [and three others].

(Fac. Rec. F. St. G., vol i., 20th Oct., 1662.)

The volume: “The English factories in India, 1618-1669: a calendar of documents in the India Office, British Museum and Public Record Office” indicates that John Niclaes first went to India in 1662.  Niclaes was injured in fighting on the Coromandel Coast in 1663.  In 1664 Niclaes was summoned to Madras which he resisted.  Niclaes was arrested and imprisoned and, in due course in 1664 ordered back to England.  In 1668 in the Court Rolls of January 15, Niclaes was ordered back to Madras.[16]

In the Prerogative Court of Canterbury the will of John Niclaes’s father was proved in 1649 – apparently before John Niclaes married Anne Rous (c).

WildGooseChase43

Anne Rous (c) and John Niclaes (or Nicholas) had, according to Dame Mary Frederick’s will, three daughters:

Judith Niclaes who married first William Edwards and had a daughter Anne Edwards– referred to in Dame Mary Frederick’s will as “my Cousin Anne Edwards, spinster, Daughter of William Edwards, late Citizen and Apothecary of London, deceased”:

“20 Mar 1670-1 William Edwards, of St Matthew’s, Friday Street, Lond., Apothecary, Widr, abt 40, & Mrs Judith Niclaes, of Wandsworth, Surry, Spr, abt 22, with consent of her mother; at St Alphage, Lond.”[17]

Judith married secondly to Valentine Sparrow on 23rd April 1685 at St Botolph, Aldgate:

WildGooseChase44Register of St Botolph, Aldgate (1685)

Judith may be the same Judith Sparrow, widow who was buried at St Giles Cripplegate on 13th June 1720 (Valentine Sparrow’s will was proved in 1703, leaving behind his widow, Judith; his two sons, Valentine and Edward; and his daughter, Judith):

WildGooseChase45Register of St Giles, Cripplegate (1720)

Anne Niclaes married Thomas Willie on 26th December 1682 at St Olave, Old Jewry, London by licence:

22 Dec 1682 Thomas Willie, of St Bottolph’s, Aldersgate, Lond., Mariner, Bachr, abt 30, & Mrs Anne Nicleas, of St Olave’s Jury, Lond., Spr, abt 24, at her own disp.; at St Olave’s or St Lawrence, Old Jewry, Lond.[18]

WildGooseChase46Register of St Olave, Old Jewry, London (1682)

Mary Niclaes whose married name was Price.

Going back to the children of Thomas Ruijs (or, variously, Russe, Rowse, Ruys or Rous) from Gorchum and his wife, Judith Ruys née Moenen (C); from the records of St Dionis Backchurch, London, we can see the baptism on 18th February 16267 of twin boys Abraham (b) and Jacob Rowse born to Thomas Rouse.

WildGooseChase47Extract from Parish Registers of St Dionis Backchurch, London (1626/27)

Jacob did not survive more than a few days and was buried at St Dionis.

No clear evidence has been discovered yet to identify what became of Abraham Rouse (b), although in 1664 an Abraham Rous was assessed for Hearth Tax at Codpis Courte in the Ward of St Margaret Westminster (he had three hearths).

Abraham le Roux, Merchant of London (will of 1652) refers to several of the same names from the Dutch Congregation as cousins – including John Adrian, the second husband of Judith Ruys (e), daughter of Thomas Ruys and Judith Ruys (née Moenen (C)).  He does not, however, seem to be the same Abraham Ruys.

Adam Lawrence (sometimes also referred to as Abraham Lawrence), referred to in Thomas Ruys’s will as his Uncle, refers to Judith Rowse (C) in his will of 1656:

I give to my kinswoman Judith Rowse widow the sum of twenty five pounds to buy her a piece of plate in remembrannce of me provided that she shall makeseal and deliver her act and deed unto my executor a full release and discharge of all legacies gifts and bequests whatsoever given to her by the last will and testament of my late loving wife and of all claims and demands or other pretences whatsoever for or concerning the same, I having in my lifetime given unto each of the daughters of my said cousin Judith Rowse the sum of two hundred pounds apiece for and towards their preferment in marriage; otherwise this legacy to be void.”

Judith Rouse (Rowse or Ruys, née Moenen) (C) refers in her will (dated 10th October 1667 and proved 27th April 1670) to five children, namely her daughters Anne Niclaes (c) (wife of John Niclaes), Dame Mary Frederick (d) (wife of Sir John Frederick) and Judith Adrian (e) (wife of John Adrian), and her sons Thomas Rowse (a) (and his wife Anne) and Abraham (b).  She also refers to her Grandson Nathaniel Herne and his wife Judith, and other named grandchildren: Thomas Frederick, Elizabeth Frederick, Rebeckah Frederick; Thomas Adrian, Judith Adrian, Mary Adrian; Judith Niclaes, Anne Niclaes, Mary Niclaes; Anne Rowse, Judith Rowse and Elizabeth Rowse.  There is still no reference to William Rous, but it seems that not all grandchildren are listed.  The will suggests there were children of Thomas and Anne and that there may have been children of Abraham, although no reference is made to Abraham having (had) a wife.  The will divides Judith’s estate into twenty parts of which five parts to Thomas Rowse, five parts to Anne Niclaes, three and a half parts to Abraham Rowse with six and a half parts remaining between Judith Adrian, Mary Frederick and her Grandson Nathaniel Herne.

WildGooseChase48

From bequests register accessed through www.londonlives.org (April 13th 2013)

No record has yet been found of the baptism of Thomas Ruys or Rouse Junior (a).  Boyd’s Inhabitants of London suggests that Thomas Rouse junior married Anne Nicholas, daughter of John Nicholas at Holy Trinity Minories in 1647.  The extract from the Marriage Register of Holy Trinity Minories (below) – written in the margin of the register – suggest that Thomas Rowse (a) married his cousin Ann Niclaes on 4th November 1647, and Boyd notes that Thomas Rouse was a Merchant and was also His Majesty’s Agent in Tunis.  The Boyd entry (ref 29516) suggests Thomas Rouse junior had six children: John (1651), Anne, Judith, Elizabeth, Abigail and Mary.  Again, no sign of William Rous (211 211 211 21).

WildGooseChase49Marriage Register of Holy Trinity Minories (1647)

The marriage of Thomas Rowse and Ann Niclaes in 1647 was too late for them to be the parents of William Rous (211 211 211 21), given that he was apprenticed in 1657. Perhaps (assuming this was the same Thomas Rowse (a)) he had married before and/or had William before he was married to Ann.

There was a Thomas Rowse who was admitted to the Freedom of the East India Company on 27th March 1650, and who subsequently transferred five hundred pounds in United Joint Stock to John Frederick.

Thomas Rowse [and others] admitted to the freedom [of the East India Company] on payment of 5L each and 10s to the poor box.” [19]

And then again on 28th May 1652:

Thomas Rowse transfers to John Fredericke 500/. adventure and profits in the United Joint Stock, all of which is paid in.” [20]

There is a further reference to a Thomas Rouse on 28th April 1675:

Thomas Rouse to be paid 5I. for transcribing the Ledger and Journal of Surat Factory No. L” [21]

And on 2nd June 1675:

The accounts of John Niclaes and Charles Smeaton to be examined and reported.”

And on 20th September 1675:

(Court Book, vol. xxix, P. 314)

Dr. William Aglionby is admitted to the freedom by redemption. A report touching the account of the late John Niclaes is read certifying that he is debited 200L for 500 pagodas for his debt to Sir Thomas Chamber which debt Sir Thomas in the late award assigned to the Company, the bond being in Mr. Jerzey’s hands, which the executrix of Niclaes alleges is satisfied by his inventory amounting to 593 pagodas, which sum came to Jerzey’s hands.”

And, finally, on 10th November 1675

(Court Book, vol. xxix, P- 371)

A report touching the account of the late John Niclaes is read and approved, and order given for the sum of 194L. 6s. 8d. due on the said account to be paid to those authorized to receive it.”

Summary of Descendants of Martin Moenen

From the above analysis we can deduce the following:

1.  Martin Moenen (d. 1628) of Great Yarmouth

sp. Marie; they had issue:

.    a.  John Moenen (alias Moone) who had issue including

.        i.   Judith Moone

.    b.  Abraham Moenen (alias Moone) who had issue including

.        i.   Mary Moone

.    c.  Nathaniell Moenen (A) (alias Moone) Citizen and Merchant Tailor of London
(d. 1637; bur. Sep 1 1637, St. Olave Old Jewry, London

.    sp.  Elizabeth (d. 1640); they had no issue

.    d.  Sara Moene (B) (d. 1638)

.    sp1. __ Lawrence; they had issue

.         i.   Richard Lawrence

.    sp2.  James de Puydt (d. bef. 1638); they had issue

.         i.   James de Puydt

.         ii.  Thomas de Puydt

.         iii. Mary de Puydt

.         iv. Sara de Puydt

.         v.  Ann de Puydt

.         vi. Priscilla de Puydt

.         vii. Judith de Puydt

.         viii. Abigail de Puydt

.    e.  Judith MoenenC) (bur. Nov 12 1669, St Dionis Backchurch, London)
.         m. Apr 21 1617 (Austin Friars, London)

.    sp.  Thomas Ruijs of London but from Gorinchem, Netherlands, Merchant
.         they had issue

.        i.    Thomas Ruys (Rous) (a)

.        sp.   Ann Niclaes; they had issue

.        ii.   Mary Ruys (Rous) (d) (bap. Mar 8 1617/18, Austin Friars, London)
.          m. Jan 10 1636/37 (St. Hellen, Bishopsgate, London)

.        sp.  Sir John Frederick (d. Aug 16 1679); they had issue

.               1.  John Frederick (b. 1637; d. 1638)

.               2.  Judith Frederick (b. 1639)

.               sp.  Sir Nathaniell Herne

.               3.  Mary Frederick (b. 1641; d. 1645/6)

.               4.  Robert Frederick (b. 1646; d. 1651)

.               5.  Mary Frederick (b. 1648; d. 1656/7)

.               6.  Thomas Frederick (b. Jul 7 1650; bap. Jul 11 1650)
.                 m. 1676

.               sp. Leonora Maresco; they had issue two sons and three daughters

.               7.  Anne Frederick (b. 1651)

.               8.  John Frederick (d. 1652)

.               9.  John Frederick (b. 1652; d. 1653)

.               10. Elizabeth Frederick (b. 1655)

.                 sp.  Joseph Herne

.                11. Mary Frederick (b. 1657; d. 1658)

.                12. Rebecca Frederick (b. 1658)
.                 m. 1689

.                 sp.  Francis Gosfright

.                13. Sarah Frederick (d. 1662)

.        iii.   Judith Ruys (Rous) (bap. Mar 26 1622, Austin Friars, London)
.         m1 Aug 21 1638

.        sp1. Peter Ent; they had issue

.                1.   Thomas Ent (b. 1639; d. 1640)

.                2.   Judith Ent (b. 1640; d. 1641/42)

.                3.   Judith Ent (b. 1642; d. 1655)

.         m2  Feb 22 1652/3

.         sp. John Adrian; they had issue

.                1.   Thomas Adrian (b. 1653)

.                2.   Judith Adrian (b. 1655/6)

.                3.  Mary Adrian

.        iv.  Abraham Ruys

.        v.   Jacob Ruys

.        vi.  Anne Ruys (c)

.        sp.  John Niclaes, Merchant

.   f.  Abigail Moenen (D)

.   sp.  Abraham van Cuelen or Galulen (changed his name to Cullen)
.          they had issue including

.       i.   Sir Abraham Cullen

In the will of Dame Mary Frederick[22]Mary Rous (d) – far from unravelling any mystery of William Rous’s forebears, Mary refers only to ‘my Sister Anne Rouse’ – whom I take to be the wife or widow of Thomas Rous (a) – and to her sister Anne Nicholas (c) and her surviving children.

What is not clear, therefore, is how William Rous (211 211 211 21) fits into this emerging set of relationships.  A reasonable working hypothesis would be that, since William Rous wanted to be buried in the vault where Mary Rous was buried, there was a close familial relationship between them.

All in all, this seems to be a Wild Goose Chase, but the mystery of William Rous’s testamentary request remains nonetheless.

 


[1] Monumental Inscriptions in the Church of St Olave’s Jewry, London; privately printed for Frederick Arthur Crisp, 1887 (accessed via www.archive.org)

[2] 11/380/16870&1 – National Archives, Kew

[3] Swinden’s Yarmouth p. 849

[4] ‘House of Commons Journal Volume 2: 12 April 1642’, Journal of the House of Commons: volume 2: 1640-1643 (1802), pp. 523-524. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=789  Date accessed: 19 April 2013

[5]     ‘Maycock – Mynne’, The Rulers of London 1660-1689: A biographical record of the Aldermen and Common Councilment of the City of London (1966), pp. 101-119. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=31889&amp;strquery=abraham moone    Date accessed: 03 April 2013.

[6] http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/arch-457-1/dissemination/pdf/vol06/vol06_05/06_05_132_138.pdf :

“The recipients [of the Patent in 1626] were brothers-in-law of Netherlands descent who had come to London from Norwich by 1618 and were general import merchants. Rous had been born at Gorinchem in the province of South Holland, some 25km from Dordrecht; Cullen, though born in England, was descended from an old Brabant family. In this case there is certainly evidence of serious intent to establish stoneware manufacture in the London area, provided by records made in the winter of 1626-7 by a Dordrecht lawyer, which were noted by the late Karl Gobels, Frechen archivist, in the course of his studies of the history of Frechen stoneware. These show that there were negotiations between a  Dordrecht merchant ,  Pieter  Jaspersz Leysten,  acting  for Rous  in London,  and a Frechen potter, Hermann Statz, with a view to the latter moving to London with his family to make stoneware for Rous”

[7] A   J   Toppin   ‘Rous   and   Cullen, merchants  and  potters’ Trans English  Ceram  Cirde  1 no  5

( 1937)  38-48 and  R  Edwards  (1974)

[8] P. 371.—Extracts from the Register (Mortlake) – ‘Appendix: Corrections to volume 1’, The Environs of London: volume 4: Counties of Herts, Essex & Kent (1796), pp. 577-617. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=45496 Date accessed: 03 April 2013.

[9] ‘Inhabitants of London in 1638: St. Dionis Backchurch’, The inhabitants of London in 1638 (1931), pp. 47-48. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=32004 Date accessed: 17 April 2013

[11] The Baronetage of England (Kimber & Johnson) Volume 3 (1771)

[12] The Harleian Society. Allegations for Marriage Licences Issued by the Vicar-General of The Archbishop of Canterbury, 1669 To 1679. Volume 34

[13] London, England, Marriage Licences, 1521-1869: Kent: Canterbury – Marriage Licence allegations, Dean of Westminster, 1558-1699 and Vicar-General of the Archbishop of Canterbury, 1660 to 1679 (Marriage)

[14] London: St. Mildred (Bread Street) & St. Margaret Moses – Parish Registers, 1558 – 1853

[15] Indian Records Series Vestiges of Old Madras 1640-1800 By Henry Davidson Love

[16] Commission to Capt. John Brookehaven, William Jearsey, Captains John Price, Henry Risby, Thomas Harman, Richard Goodlad and William Wildy, John Niclaes, Walter Clavell, Roger Broadnax, John Bridger, Richard Smithson, Joseph Hall, Matthew Manwareing and Thomas Moore, merchants. Whereas 11 April last we required Sir Edward Winter and his adherents, then unduly in possession of Fort St. George and the town of Madraspatan, to surrender the same to George Foxcroft, agent for the East India Company, or others appointed by the said Company, declaring that, if Sir Edward Winter and his adherents should notwithstanding refuse to yield up the same, they should be proceeded against as rebels and traitors; now forasmuch as it is yet unknown whether the said declaration safely arrived in those parts and what effect it produced and that the East India Company, being sending ships to those parts, have besought us to give commission (in case Sir Edward and his adherents have refused and shall still persist to refuse to yield obedience to our commands) to endeavour to reduce the said fort by force of arms or otherwise, we therefore grant to you or any three of you full power (in case the said Sir Edward and his adherents have hitherto refused to obey our said commands) in our name again to command Sir Edward to deliver up the said fort to the said George Foxcroft or such other person as shall be appointed by the said Company and, in case he shall endeavour by force of arms to hold the same, to endeavour by force of arms or otherwise according to the annexed instructions or such further orders as you shall receive from the said Company to reduce the said fort and town to obedience, and we grant you or any three of you full power to commissionate such persons as shall be thought fit to levy, arm, train and lead such number of seamen and soldiers and to employ such number of vessels equipped in a warlike manner as the service shall require, therewith to block up by sea and land and to take the said fort and town and to fight with and kill or take prisoners any that shall resist and to detain such as shall be taken prisoners or send them for England or release them and to do as the emergency shall require, and you are to observe the orders and directions of the said Company

 

From: ‘Charles II: January 1668’, Calendar of State Papers Domestic: Charles II, Addenda 1660-1685 (1939), pp. 234-250. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=58212&amp;strquery=niclaes Date accessed: 12 April 2013.

[17] England: Canterbury – The Harleian Society. Allegations for Marriage Licences Issued by the Vicar-General of the Archbishop of Canterbury, 1669 To 1679. Volume 34.

[18] England: Canterbury – Marriage Licences Issued by the Archbishop of Canterbury, 1679-1694

[19] A Court of Committees for the Fourth Joint Stock – March 27, 1650 (Court Book, vol. xx p.516) A Calendar for the Court Minutes of the East India Company 1650-1654 (Ethel Bruce Salisbury) p33-4

[20] A Court of Committees for the Fourth Joint Stock and the United Joint Stock, May 28, 1652 {Court Book vol. xxi) A Calendar for the Court Minutes of the East India Company 1650-1654 (Ethel Bruce Salisbury) p. 187.

[21] The Court Minutes etc. of the East India Company 1674—1676 (Ethel Bruce Sainsbury)

[22] Dame Mary’s will was dated 18th September 1689 and proved 20th June 1692

Alexander Wynch – Will

Alexander Wynch Esq (Will Dated 4/11/1778)

(Transcription by Julian Lyon)

This is the last will and testament of me Alexander Wynch of Upper Harley Street in the County of Middlesex Esquire.  After resigning my soul into the hands of Almighty God and my body to the earth to be decently buried at the discretion of my executors hereinafter named or such of them as can most conveniently act or attend upon that occasion.  I order will and direct that all my just debts funeral expenses and the probate of this my will shall be fully paid and satisfied out of my personal estate as soon as conveniently may be after my decease. And I give devise and bequeath unto my dear wife Florentia Wynch the sum of one thousand pounds of lawful money of Great Britain to be paid to her as soon as conveniently may be after my decease and also all her wearing apparel rings jewels and other things serving to the use or ornament of her person.  I give and bequeath unto my said dear wife all that my messuage or dwelling house in Upper Harley Street aforesaid with the coach houses offices stables and appurtenances whatsoever to the same belonging or therewith usually occupied possessed or enjoyed and all my estate term of years and interest therein and likewise all the plate linen china pictures household goods furniture fixtures and other things which shall belong to my said dwelling house and premises at the time of my death to and for her own absolute use and benefit in case she shall continue my widow and not intermarry with any other person after my death but in case she shall marry again to any other person then I give to my said wife the said messuage coach house offices stables and appurtenances and the plate linen china pictures household goods furniture fixtures and other things which shall so belong to my said dwelling house and premises at the time of my death for the term of her natural life only and from and after her death I will and direct that the same shall be considered part of my personal estate and be divided amongst my seven sons, William, Alexander, George, John, James, Charles and Francis Wynch in the manner and with such benefit of survivorship as the residue of my personal estate is hereafter by me given and disposed of.  And I give devise and bequeath all my messuages tenements lands hereditaments and premises situate standing lying and being at Wandsworth in the County of Surrey in manner and form following that is to say one third part thereof the whole into three equal parts to be divided I give devise and bequeath unto my said dear wife Florentia for and during the term of her natural life and from and immediately after the decease of my said dear wife I give devise and bequeath the said third part to my eldest son William Wynch his heirs and assigns for ever and the remaining two third parts thereof I give and devise to my said son William Wynch and his heirs from and immediately after my own death.  I likewise give and bequeath to my said son William Wynch the sum of five thousand pounds of lawful money of Great Britain to be paid to him as soon as conveniently may be after my decease and I hereby declare that the same is to be given to him over and besides such share or proportion of my personal estate as he will be entitled to with the rest of my sons under and by virtue of this my will and I hope and desire that my said son William will entertain a due sense of the preference so shown to him and have a proper regard  for his brothers and sisters and assist them as much as lies in his power.  I give and bequeath unto my good friend William Smyth King Esquire and to my son in law Edward Watts Esquire one hundred pounds each for a mourning ring hereby earnestly entreating them to accept of the trusts hereinafter in them reposed for the benefit of their relations and my children. I give and bequeath unto my son Robert Wynch the sum of one hundred pounds to be paid to him immediately after my death.  I also give and bequeath unto my said son Robert for and during the term of his natural life one annuity or clear yearly sum of three hundred pounds of lawful money of Great Britain free from all taxes and reductions whatever to be paid to him by four equal quarterly payments on the most usual feasts or days of payment in the year that is the twenty fifth day of December the twenty fifth day of March the twenty fourth day of June and the twenty ninth day of September in each year the first quarterly payment thereof to begin and be made on such of those feast days as shall first happen next after my decease provided always and my will and mind is and I do hereby order and direct that the said annuity or yearly sum of three hundred pounds hereinbefore given and bequeathed to my said son Robert and every part thereof when and as the same shall respectively become due and payable shall be paid unto and into his proper hands only and not into the hands of any other person or persons by his order or for his use to the end that the said annuity shall not be transmissible or at the disposal or at the disposal of my said son it being my intention or desire that the same shall cease to be paid on any attempt by my said son to assign sell or otherwise dispose of the same or any part thereof by any art device or contrivance whatsoever.  I also give and bequeath unto my said dear wife Florentia for and during the term of her natural life one annuity or clear yearly sum of one thousand two hundred pounds of like lawful money free from all taxes and deductions whatsoever to be paid to her by four equal quarterly payments on the most usual feasts or days of payment in the year that is the twenty fifth day of December the twenty fifth day of March the twenty fourth day of June and the twenty ninth day of September in each year the first quarterly payment thereof to begin and be made on such of those feast days as shall first happen next after my decease.  I give and bequeath to Mrs Mary Wynch of Paradise Street in the Parish of Mary le Bone and her assigns for and during the term of her natural life one annuity or clear yearly sum of one hundred pounds free from all taxes and deductions whatsoever to be paid to her by four equal quarterly payments on the most usual feasts or days of payment in the year that is the twenty fifth day of December the twenty fifth day of March the twenty fourth day of June and the twenty ninth day of September in each year the first quarterly payment thereof to begin and be made on such of those feast days as shall first happen next after my decease.  I also give and bequeath to each of my daughters Margery Wynch and Frances Wynch the sum of ten thousand pounds to be paid to them respectively on their attaining their age of twenty one years or day or days of marriage which shall first happen and I will and direct that my trustees hereinafter named do and shall pay and apply such sum and sums of money by and out of my personal estate for and towards the maintenance and education of my said daughters respectively until their said portions shall become payable as to my said executors and trustees shall deem fit and necessary not exceeding the interest of their said respective portions after the rate of four pounds per centum per annum provided nevertheless and my will and mind is that the legacies so given to my said daughters respectively shall not be considered as vested interests until the same shall respectively become payable as aforesaid but in case my said two daughters Margery and Frances or either of them shall happen to die under the age of twenty one years and unmarried then that the portion or portions of her or them so dying shall sink into the residue of my personal estate and be considered as part thereof. And I do hereby charge and make liable all my personal estate of whatever nature or kind so ever to be with the payment of the said legacies and annuities before by me given and bequeathed as aforesaid and I do order and direct my executors herein after named to set apart and appropriate so much and such part or parts of my said personal estate as shall by them or the survivors of them be thought necessary and expedient for answering paying and discharging the said several legacies and annuities respectively.  All the rest and residue of my personal estate and effects of what nature or kind so ever subject and chargeable as aforesaid I give to my dear wife Florentia and to my said good friend William Smyth King my said son William Wynch and my said son in law Edward Watts upon the several trusts and to and for the ends intents and purposes hereinafter expressed or declared of and concerning the same that is to say in trust for my said sons William, Alexander, George, John, James, Charles and Francis Wynch in equal shares and proportions and to be paid to them respectively in manner following that is to say the shares of such of them as shall have attained the age of twenty one years as soon as conveniently may be after my decease and the shares of such of them as shall be minors at their respective ages of twenty one years or to be sooner advanced or paid for his or their advancement or preferment in the world either in the way of putting out such son or sons an apprentice or apprentices or in some genteel calling or profession or otherwise as to my said trustees or the survivors of them shall seem meet; and in case any of my sons shall happen to die before his or their share or shares of and in the said trust monies shall become payable or shall be sooner advanced or paid as aforesaid I will that the share or shares of him or them so dying or so much thereof as shall not have been sooner advanced or paid shall go or remain to the survivors or survivor of them his equal shares or proportions if more than one and shall be paid to him or them respectively at such time or times as his or their original share or shares of or in the said trust monies is or are hereinbefore directed to be paid and that what shall so survive as aforesaid shall from time to time likewise survive and go or be paid in like manner and also upon this further trust that my said trustees or the survivors of them shall and do by or out of the interest dividends or produce to arrive by placing out the said trust monies at interest in their own names and which they are hereby authorised and empowered to do raise or pay so much money for or towards the maintenance and education of my said sons respectively in the mean time or until their respective shares of or in the said trust monies shall become payable or shall be sooner advanced or paid as aforesaid not exceeding the interest of such shares respectively as they my said trustees or the survivors of them shall think fit provided always and I do hereby declare my will to be that the monies so to be advanced for any one of my said sons for or towards his advancement or preferment as aforesaid shall not exceed the sum of two thousand five hundred pounds provided also and I do hereby further will and direct that in case any of my said son or sons shall happen to die under the age of twenty one years leaving issue one or more child or children living at his or their decease respectively the share or shares of or in the said trust monies which would have belonged to such son or sons respectively in case he or they had lived to attain the age of twenty one years or so much thereof as shall not have been sooner advanced or paid as aforesaid shall not survive but shall be considered as an interest vested in such son or sons respectively at the time of his or their death and be transmissible to his or their respective representatives provided also and I do hereby further direct that it shall and may be lawful to and for my said trustees or the survivors of them at any time after placing out the said trust monies or any part thereof at interest as aforesaid to call in the same or any part thereof and to reinvest the same or any part thereof in their own names on any other security or securities at interest and afterwards to call in and reinvest the same from time to time in like manner as there shall be occasion but so as that such new or other security or securities and subject to such and the money thereby to be secured shall be made and subject to such and the like trusts as are hereby declared of or concerning the said original trust monies or such of the said trusts as shall be then existing or capable of taking effect provided always and I do hereby direct that when and so often as my said trustees shall be reduced to two that such two surviving trustees shall nominate and appoint another fit person to be a trustee with them in the management of the trusts hereby in whom reposed and that such new or other trustee so from time to time to be nominated shall be invested with the same powers and authorities as are hereby vested in the trustees named in this my will and I also direct that such sum or sums of money as shall remain at interest upon government or other securities shall be from time to time transferred by the surviving trustees into the names of themselves and such new trustees so to be from time to time nominated and appointed as aforesaid and I do hereby will order and direct that my said trustees and executors and the survivors or survivor of them his or her executors or administrators shall and may deduct and retain to him her or themselves all such costs charges damages and expenses as they or all of them shall pay sustain expend or be put into in or about the execution performance and defence of the trusts in them respectively reposed and also that they my said trustees and executors shall not be answerable or accountable for the acts receipts neglects or defaults of the other or others of them but each of them for his or her own acts receipts neglects or defaults only and that no one of them shall be answerable or accountable for any more money than what he or she shall actually receive by virtue of the trusts of this my will (their joining in any receipt or receipts for the sake of conformity only notwithstanding nor for any loss or damage which may happen to the said trust monies by failure of securities or otherwise unless the same shall happen through wilful neglect or default only And I do hereby nominate constitute and appoint the said Florentia Wynch, William Smyth King, William Wynch and Edward Watts executors of this my last will and testament and also guardians of all my younger children and I do hereby revoke all former wills by me at any time or times heretofore made and declare this to be my last will and testament. In witness whereof I have to the six first sheets hereof set my hand and to the seventh and last sheet my hand and seal this fourth day of November in the nineteenth year of the reign of his Majesty King George the Third and in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy eight – Ar Wynch – signed sealed published and declared by the said Alexander Wynch the testator as and for his last will and testament in our presence who at his request in his presence and the presence of each other have subscribed our names as witnesses – Jos Allen, Thos Brooke, W M Sellon

 

Codicil 28/8/1780

Whereas I Alexander Wynch of Upper Harley Street in the County of Middlesex Esquire did by my last will and testament bearing date the fourth day of November one thousand seven hundred and seventy eight amongst other things give and devise unto my dear wife Florentia Wynch all that my messuage or dwelling house in Upper Harley Street aforesaid with the coach houses offices and appurtenances to the same belonging and all my estate term of years and interest therein and likewise all the plate china pictures household goods furniture fixtures and other things which should belong to my said dwelling house and premises at the time of my death to and for her own absolute use and benefit in case she should continue my widow and not intermarry with any other person after my death but in case she married again then I gave to my said wife the messuage and premises with the appurtenances and the plate linen china pictures household goods furniture fixtures and other things which should so belong to my said dwelling house and premises at the time of my death for the term of her natural life only and from and after her death I willed and directed that the same should be considered as part of my personal estate and be divided amongst my seven sons, William, Alexander, George, John, James, Charles and Francis Wynch in the manner and with such benefit of survivorship as the residue of my personal estate was therein by me given and disposed of and whereas since the making of my said will I have purchased a messuage with the out offices gardens and appurtenances thereto belonging at Westrop otherwise Westhrop in the county of Bucks together with several closes pieces and parcels of land thereunto also belonging and which are all now in my own occupation and whereas I am desirous that my said dear wife Florentia Wynch should have her election either to take the said messuage and premises in Upper Harley Street with the plate pictures household goods and other things which shall be therein at the time of my death or the said messuage estate and premises at Westrop otherwise Westhrop aforesaid in the County of Bucks with the plate linen china pictures household goods furniture fixtures cattle and other things which shall be in or upon my said estate and premises at Westrop otherwise Westhrop at the time of my death upon the same terms and conditions as I have in and by my said will given and bequeathed my said house and premises in Upper Harley Street now I do hereby direct and declare that it shall and may be lawful for my dear wife at any time within six months next after my decease by any writing under her hand to elect and determine whether she will take and accept the said messuage and premises in Harley Street aforesaid with the plate pictures household goods and other things which shall be therein at the time of my decease or the said messuage lands and premises with the appurtenances in Westrop otherwise Westhrop aforesaid in the County of Bucks together with the plate pictures household goods and other things which shall be therein at the time of my decease and in case my said dear wife shall elect to accept and take the said messuage land and premises at Westrop otherwise Westhrop aforesaid together with the plate pictures household goods and other things which shall be therein at the time of my decease then and in that case I do hereby revoke and make void the devise and bequest in my said will to my dear wife of the said messuage and premises in Upper Harley Street aforesaid with the plate pictures household furniture and other things which shall be therein at the time of my death and do direct that the same shall be deemed and considered as part of the residue of my personal estate and divided amongst my said seven sons in the manner mentioned in my said will and in lieu thereof I do hereby give and devise unto my said dear wifeand her heirs my said messuage lands and premises at Westrop otherwise Westhrop aforesd together with the plate pictures household goods furniture cattle and other things which shall be in or upon the same at the time of my death upon condition that she shall remain my widow and not intermarry with any other person after my death but in case she shall marry again to any other person then I give to my said wife the said messuage lands and premises at Westrop otherwise Westhrop aforesaid together with the plate pictures household goods furniture cattle and other things which shall be in or upon the same at the time of my death for the term of her natural life only or in case my said wife shall elect to accept and take the said meesuage and premises in Harley Street then I give and devise the said messuage lands and premises at Westrop otherwise Westhrop aforesaid together with the plate pictures household goods furniture cattle and other things which shall be in or upon the same at the time of my death unto my good friends William Smyth King Esquire and my son in law Edward Watts Esquire their heirs executors administrators and assigns upon trust that they or the survivor of them his heirs executors or administrators do and shall with all convenient speed after my said wifes death or after she shall have elected to take the said messuage and premises in Upper Harley Street aforesaid sell and dispose thereof for the most money or best price that can be got for the same and do and then pay apply and divide the money to arise by such sale to and amongst my said seven sons William, Alexander, George, John, James, Charles and Francis Wynch in equal shares and proportions in the like manner and to be paid at such time and times and with such benefit of survivorship as I have in and by my said will given and bequeathed the residue of my personal estate to or for their use or benefit and whereas I have in and by my said will given and bequeathed unto my son Robert Wynch the sum of one hundred pounds and also a clear yearly annuity of three hundred pounds to be paid to him quarterly as therein mentioned Now I do hereby give unto my said son Robert Wynch the further yearly sum of one hundred and fifty pounds clear of all taxes and deductions whatsoever for and during the term of his natural life over and above the annuity of three hundred pounds given to him by my said will the same to be paid by four quarterly payments and on the days and times in my said will mentioned for the payment of the said annuity of three hundred pounds a year and I do hereby direct my executors to set apart and appropriate a sufficient part of my personal estate for answering the said annuities of three hundred pounds and one hundred and fifty pounds making together four hundred and fifty pounds during the life of my said son Robert and invest the same in the publick funds or on real securities and from and after the death of my said son Robert then I will and direct that the money so to be set apart for answering the said annuities shall be deemed part of my personal estate and be paid and divided amongst my said seven other sons and the survivors of them in the manner I have in and by my said will given and disposed of the residue of my personal estate to and for their use or benefit provided always and my will and mind is and I do hereby order and direct that the said annuity or yearly sum of one hundred and fifty pounds herein before given and bequeathed to my said son Robert and every part thereof when and as the same shall respectively become due and payable shall be paid unto and into his own proper hands only and not into the hands of any other person or persons by his order or for his use to the end that the said annuity shall not be transmissible or at the disposal of my said son it being my intention or desire that the same shall cease to be paid on any attempt of my said son to assign sell or otherwise dispose of the same or any part thereof by any act device or contrivance whatsoever.  I give and bequeath to my son William Wynch the sum of three thousand pounds as an addition to the fortune or provision I have given him in and by my said will.  I give and bequeath to William Spence for and during the term of his natural life one annuity or yearly sum of thirty pounds clear of all taxes and deductions whatsoever to be paid to him by four equal quarterly payments on the most usual feasts or days of payment in the year that is the twenty fifth day of December the twenty fifth day of March the twenty fourth day of June and the twenty ninth day of September in each year the first quarterly payment thereof to begin and be made on such of those feast days as shall first happen next after my decease.  I give and demise my messuage garden and premises at Madras in the East Indies to such of my sons as shall be resident at or belong to the settlement at Madras aforesaid at the time of my decease their heirs executors and administrators as tenants in common and I do hereby declare this to be a codicil to my will and to be taken as part thereof In witness whereof I have to the first five sheets hereof set my hand and to the sixth and last my hand and seal this twenty eighth day of August in the twentieth year of the reign of his Majesty King George the Third and in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty – Ar Wynch– signed sealed published and declared by the said Alexander Wynch the testator and as and for a codicil to his last will and testament in our presence who at his request in his presence and in the presence of each other have subscribed our names as witnesses – Jos Allen, WM Sellon, Jos Allen Junr

 

Probate 30/5/1781

This will was proved at London with a codicil the thirtieth day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty one before the worshipful William Trott doctor of laws and surrogate of the right worshipful Peter Calvert also doctor of laws master keeper or commissary of the prerogative court of Canterbury lawfully constituted by the oaths of Florentia Wynch widow the relict of the deceased William Smyth King Esquire William Wynch Esquire the son of the said deceased and Edward Watts Esquire the executors named in the said will to whom administration was granted of all and singular the goods chattels and credits of the said deceased having been first sworn duly to administer.

 

Lincolns Inn – Master of the Rolls for Lord Chancellor 21/2/1788

Alexander Wynch by his will, gave to each of his daughters Margery and Frances Wynch, the sum of 10,000l. to be paid them respectively at their attaining the age of 21 years, or day or days of marriage, which should first happen; and he directed his trustees should pay and apply such sum and sums of money out of his personal estate towards the maintenance and education of his said daughters respectively until their said portions should become payable, as to his executors and trustees should deem fit and necessary, not exceeding the interest of their respective portions after the rate of 4 per cent; and he declared it to be his will that the legacies so given to his said daughters respectively should not be considered as vested interests until the same should become payable as aforesaid; but in case the said Margery and Frances, or either of them should happen to die before 21 and unmarried, then that the portion or portions of her or them so dying should sink into the residuum of his personal estate, and be considered as part thereof.

 

The question made on this part of the will was, whether Margery and Frances Wynch were entitled absolutely to interest at 4 per cent. on their legacies, or only to a maintenance, till the time they became payable.

 

A paper which was found wrapped up with the testator’s will was produced, which was strongly in favour of the daughters’ claim of interest; but it appearing to the Court to be of a testamentary nature, and not proved in the Spiritual Court, his Honour devclared he could take no manner notice of it, and that he should deliver his opinion upon this point, as if he had never seen or heard of the paper.

 

The Solicior-General and Campbell argued that on the clause itself the daughters were entitled to interest on their legacies at 4 per cent.; that if nothing had been given by the will by way of interest or maintenance, yet this being a legacy to a child, it would of itself carry interest from the death of the testator, whether a vested legacy or not; for in that case the Court always gave the whole interest of the legacy as a maintenance for the child.

 

Master of the Rolls:- It is very clear that when a father gives a legacy to a child, whether it be a vested legacy or not, it will carry interest from the death of the testator, as a maintenance for the child; but this will be only where no other fund is provided for such maintenance; for it is equally clear, that where other funds are provided for the maintenance, then if the legacy be payable at a future day, it shall not carry interest, until the day of payment comes as in the case of a legacy to a perfect stranger.  Now here the father has directed that maintenance shall be paid out of his personal estate; if it had been payable out of the interest of the legacies, I should have thought the daughters entitled to what they claim; but as it is, I think they are not entitled to interest on their legacies, until the same become payable, but only to maintenance not exceeding 4 per cent. on their said legacies.

 

His Honour at first objecting to directing the Master to settle the maintenance, except by petition, but at last made it part of the decree.

 

After the decree was pronounced, the counsel for the two daughters Margery and Frances Wynch, desired that the consideration of the interest might be reserved until they could have an opportunity of propounding the paper above-mentioned in the Ecclesiastical Court, which his Honour thought reasonable and directed accordingly.

 

Alexander Wynch – Fall from Grace

Proceedings of a Court of Directors of the East India Company (4th April 1777) – the removal of Governor Alexander Wynch from Office

Resolved unanimously,

That the Orders for removing Mr Wynch in consequence of the Tanjore War, the Commissions to the Right Hon. Lord Pigot as President and Governor, and as Commander in Chief of Fort St. George, and the Orders given to his Lordship and his Council; also the Company’s Commission to Sir Robert Fletcher as Commander of the Company’s Troops on the Coast of Coromandel, and the Consultations and other Records on Political Subjects from the Arrival of Lord Pigot to those last received from that Presidency, be forthwith printed for the Use of the Proprietors.

Letter from Alexander Wynch, Esquire, Late President of the Council and Governor of Fort Saint George

To the Right Honourable Lord Pigot, President and Governor, and the rest of the Council.

My Lord and Gentlemen,

I was duly informed by the Right Honourable the President, that the Governor-General and Council of Fort William had given orders to Captain Preston to call here with the Hillsborough, to afford me an opportunity of going to England.  I have the fillest sense of the polite attention which the Governor-General and Council have shewn to me on this occasion; but being acquiainted, in a letter from Captain Preston himself, that he had already disposed of his great cabin, and finding that I could have a convenient accommodation on the Ankerwyke, I have therefore taken my passage with Captin Barwell.

By the Coventry frigate, which arrived here six weeks before the dispatch of the Nottingham, I received advice that the Court of Directors had been pleased to remove me from the Company’s service.  The injury that I felt I had sustained at first prompted me to resign it immediately, and embrace that opportunity of returning home; but on a little more reflection, I determined to wait their orders, and deliver up the Government to whoever should be appointed to receive it from me.  I thought it was a duty I still owed to the Company, notwithstanding what had been done to me by the Court of Directors; and being fully confident of the uprightness of my intentions, I thought it was a duty I owed to my character in the world, and to the satisfaction of my friends and my children.

The only instance of my conduct that the Court of Directors have pointed out as reprehensible, is that part of it which relates to the last expedition against Tanjore; it would however, in my opinion, have been but well in them to have recollected, that it was a measure of the Government here, not of the Governor alone.

The subject of that expedition was first considered in the Select Committee, where all the members were present; it was unanimously recommended by the Committee to the Council and there also it was resolved without one dissenting voice.  A very short and simple investigation of the Company’s records will prove, I think, to the entire conviction of every one who may be candid and impartial enough to be open to conviction, that the Select Committee and Council could not have done otherwise than they did.

In 1769, the Court of Directors thought proper to appoint a Select Committee, and did me the honour to nominate me one of the members.  In their letter of the 17th March of that year they write as follows:

Par. 7. “It appears most unreasonable that the Raj of Tanjore should hold possession of the most fruitful part of the country, which can alone supply our armies with subsistence, and not contribute to the defence of the Carnatic.  We observe the Nabob makes very earnest representations to you on this subject in his letter  entered in the country correspondence, wherein he takes notice, that the Zemindars of the Carnatic have been supported, and their countries preserved to them, by the operations of our forces employed in his cause; and that nothing was more notorious, than that three former princes of the Carnatic had received from the Tanjore Rajah, seventy, eighty, nay even an hundred Lacks of Rupees at a time; that to the preceding Nizam he had paid a contribution of fifty Lacks; and the present, if he had met with success against our army, would not have been content with less than a Crore of Rupees from this Rajah.  How just then does it appear that he should be made to bear some part of the expense of those measures, to which he owes his security and the peace of his country?  We therefore enjoin you to give the Nabob such support in his pretentions on the Rajah of Tanjore as may be effectual; and if the Rajah refuses to contribute a just proportion to the expenses of the war, you are then to pursue such measures as the Nabob may think consistent with the justice and dignity of his Government.”[1]

In 1771 the Nabob made application to Mr Du Pré and the Council to assist him with the Company’s troops against the Rajah, for various reasons, which are set forth in the records of that time; and he was strongly supported in this demand by His Majesty’s Plenipotentiary in India, Sir John Lindsay.  The President and Council, after a good deal of correspondence upon it with the Nabob and Plenipotentiary, complied with the Nabob’s desire, and issued orders for the army to march against the Rajah.  The Nabob’s eldest son, Umdut ul Omrah, accompanied it.  He was furnished with powers from his father, either to proceed to the final reduction of the Rajah or treat and make peace with him as he should find most expedient; and General Smith had orders to prosecute or suspend the war as the young Nabob should recommend.  It was resolved, both in the Select Committee and Council, that in case the fort and country of Tanjore were reduced, they should be left in the Nabob’s hands.[2]  The fort was invested, a breach was made in the wall, and the troops were on the point of making the assault, when Umdut ul Omrah, in consideration of a large sum of money offered by the Rajah, came to an accommodation with him.  The Select Committee, in their leter to the Court of Directors, dated 28th February 1772, stated very fully to them the difficulties and embarrassments they had found themselves under, while deliberating on this subject, from what, on one hand, seemed to them to be the part the Company ought to take, and on the other, what appears to be the spirit and intention of their orders, added to the requisitions of the Nabob, supported with all the arguments that could be urged by the Plenipotentiary; they pointed out the danger of leaving the Rajah in possession of all his power, disgusted as he then was, and in the precarious situation he then stood, by being continually liable to fresh attacks from the Nabob; they represented the probability of misunderstandings soon arising again between them, wherein the Government and Council would again be constrained to act; and they requested to be furnished as soon as possible with such direct and clear instructions as should not leave any doubt what they were to do.

In April 1773 a letter from his Majesty to the Nabob[3] was presented to him by Sir Robert Harland, wherein his Majesty is pleased to express his satisfaction at hearing the President and Council had sent the Company’s troops to assist the Nabob in reducing the Rajah to obedience.

Early in June 1773 the Select Committee received a letter from Mrs Mostyn, the Company’s Resident at Poonah, advising them that the Tanjore Vackeel there, a person known to be such, had applied in the name of the Rajah for leave to raise ten thousand horse which he said were to be employed by him against the Nabob Mahomed Ally.[4]

In the same month the Nabob represented that the Rajah had not performed his engagements with him; that he was ten Lacks of Rupees in arrears; that he had intelligence of his having applied to the Marattas and Hyder Ally for troops to act against him; that he had encouraged the Colleries to pluder and lay waste some parts of the Carnatic; that he had entered into dangerous connexions with the Dutch, to whom and the Danes he had alienated some districts of the Tanjore country.  That on his (the Nabob’s) writing to the General of Batavia, complaining that the gentlemen at Negapatnam had assisted the Rajah during the late expedition against him, the General wrote to him in reply, that those gentlemen had done no more than they were bound to do by their engagements with the Rajah, and that in conforming to them they had done right.  The Nabob, for all these reasons, called upon and required the Governor and Council to assist him with the Company’s troops to reduce the Rajah, and acquainted them that it was indispensably requisite they should do so, not only to enable him to obtain his revenue, but for the security of his possessions.

The President and Council had every reason to believe, that the connexion which the Nabob alledged to subsist between the Rajah and the Dutch was no more than true; that he had made over some districts to them was certain:  The Nabob affirmed that he was greatly in arrears to him, and that he had instigated the Colleries to ravage his country.  Allowing that his application to the Marattas and Hyder Aly were not likely to prove efficacious, or even that it was doubtful whether he had seriously made such, still his assiduity in strengthening Tanjore, in purchasing warlike stores and entertaining European foreigners in his service, seemed to portend a hostile intention.  The President and Council had before them the orders of the 17th march 1769; the examples of Mr Du Pré and the Council on the late expedition; the arguments then used, both by the then President and Council and Plenipotentiary; his Majesty’s approbation of that measure, expressed in his letter to the Nabob of the 7th April, 1772; and by the Court of Directors not having replied to the letter from the Select Committee of the 22nd February, 1772, it might surely be inferred, that they had approved also.  The President and Council therefore, after having used every possible means for obtaining further information, and after having very maturely reflected, thought themselves under the necessity of again complying with what the Nabob required, and of adhering to the former resolutions of the Select Committee and Council, respecting the fort and country, in a case they should be conquered.  But so far from this latter part being a matter of choice with me, the Company’s records will shew that I have ever used my utmost efforts to restrain the Nabob in all his attempts to increase of power and independency, being convinced that they were incompatible with the interest and security of the Company. My sentiments and endeavours on that subject have, though very contrary to my inclinations, engaged me in disagreeable controversies with some of the other members of the Council, who were of opinion that this Government had no right or authority to interfere.

From the nature and matter of this address, your Lordship, &c. will be sensible how unpleasant it has been to me; it must doubtless have proved tiresome to you, but I hope you will forgive me for it; I have continued it merely to justify and explain that part of my conduct which the Court of Directors have condemned.  There are other parts I could point out, particularly the very great increase of the investment, and having obtained security and payment of the whole of the Nabob’s debt to the Company, which I flatter myself would claim their approbation; but in these I pretend to no further merit than in that part they have disapproved; in both I meant to discharge my duty.

The attachment I have to the Company, of which I never can divest myself, and the particular interest I take in the prosperity of their affairs under this Settlement, make me feel infinite satisfaction in the choice they have made of their President in these delicate and critical times.  Be assured that your Lordship, &c. have my warmest wishes for your having uninterrupted harmony in your Councils and success abroad, being with much regard and esteem,

My Lord and Gentlemen,

Fort St George                                    Your most obedient

7th February 1776                                            and very humble servant

Alexander Wynch

Enclosure No. 1

Extract from the Proceedings of the Select Committee, 10th August 1771

We are therefore further of opinion, that of two evils we ought to chuse the least, and that it is less dangerous to let the conquest, if any be made, pass of course into the Nabob’s hands and possession, than that the Rajah should be left dissatisfied, as he most certainly will be, and with power to become dangerous, which, as aforesaid, we think must be the consequence of any compromise made by the Nabob under the influence of his fears and jealousies.

In delivering this opinion we do not forget the opinion we gave in our address to the Honourable Court of Directors, under date the 31st January 1770, paragraph 4 we remain fully and clearly of the same opinions we have expressed in our former minutes, particularly those of 9th July of the propriety of keeping the fort of Tanjore in our own hands should it be taken.  We are clearly of the opinion, that we ought not to yield the point to the Nabob, if greater apparent dangers were not incurred by refusing it; but as we think a present acquiescence with the Nabob’s proposition the least of the dangers which surround us, though it leads to danger, so we are of the opinion it ought now to be complied with as an act of political necessity.

We deliver it further as our opinion, that although it leads to danger it is not immediately dangerous, for there is no doubt, that while we have garrisons in the principal forts of the Carnatic, and have on foot such a military establishment as the present, we may with great ease control the Nabob, should it be necessary, and should we be authorised to do so; at present we have no authority to control him.  It is not necessary here again to state the sense of the Court of Directors on the subject, or the spirit of the ministry; or to say any thing more of the 11th article of the treaty of Paris, hung over our heads in terrorem; we have been sufficiently explicit in former minutes, particularly those of the 29th July, with extracts annexed as piéces justificatives, if we may be permitted to use the French phrase.  The state of affairs here will be clearly before our Superiors at home; they will also have our opinion of what may be expected as natural consequences of increasing the Nabob’s power.  If they and the ministry should continue of opinion that, the Nabob’s fidelity and attachment is such that the increase of his power is the same as the increase of his power is the same as an increase of the British power on the Coast; the resolution of leaving the whole conquests, if any be made, in his hands must be approved, and we shall only be liable to censure for having doubted the propriety of doing so.  If, on the other hand, it should be thought that such an increase of power in the Nabob may become dangerous, the remedy is at home, and there only; and legal orders to the British delegates of the national power on the Coast may model and restrain it within such bounds as shall be thought fit.

Extract from the Proceedings of the Select Committee[5], 10th August, 1771

That we ought not to receive that, or any other sum, or any consideration of what kind soever, by way of compensation, compact, or agreement, for resigning him the said conquests, should they be made, because we mean to leave the Company at full liberty to make what arrangements they shall think best in these respects; but if we were to receive any considerations for resigning the conquest, the public faith must be pledged for the performance of the agreement, and the Company could not deviate therefrom, without an apparent and dangerous breach of that faith.  We are therefore of the opinion, that if it be necessary to take the fort and country of Tanjore, that the Nabob be tacitly left in possession of the whole, in the same manner as it has been before done, when Worriarpollam, Arialoor, and other Polygars were reduced, as a matter of course, aand without any declaration respecting the same; and that if the Nabob shall think proper to give the Company ten Lacks of Pagodas, or any other sum, as a voluntary gift for their friendly aid, it be received, subject to the future pleasure of the Court of Directors.

Extract from the Consultation in the Military Department, 15th August, 1771

The Select Committee communicate to the Board the substance of the conference between the Nabob and the President, as recited in their minutes of the 10th instant, on the subject of suffering the fort and coutry of Tanjore to fall into the hands of the Nabob, in case they should be reduced, together with the reasons which induced the Committee to think it expedient to comply with the Nabob’s requisition in this instance; and with which the Board acquiesce.

Enclosure No. 2 [6]

George the Third, by the Grace of God, King of Great-Britain, France and Ireland, Defender of the Christian Faith, Duke of Brunswick and Lunenburgh, Arch-Treasurer and PrinceElector of the Holy Roman Empire, and Sovereign of the Seas, &c.

To Nabob Waulaujab, Urumeer Ul Hind, Oudet Ul Mulk, Serajab Dowlab, Anver Ul Dee Khan Behauder, Munsoor Jung, Sepoy Serdar, Nabob of Arcat and the Carnatic.

We received with pleasure your letter[7] in which you express to us your gratitude for the additional naval force which we have sent for your security, as well as that of our East-India Company, and your confidence that we shall tread in the steps of our royal Grandfather, by granting our protection to you and your family.  We have given our Comnmander in Chief and Plenipotentiary, Sir Robert Harland, our instructions for that purpose, and we flatter ourselves that he will reconcile the differences which have arisen between you and the Company’s servants against your mutual interest.  It gave us satisfaction to hear that the Governor and Council of Madrass has sent the Company’s troops with your’s to reduce your tributary, the Rajah of Tanjore, to obedience, in which we hope, by the blessing of God, they will be successful; and so we bid you farewell, wishing health and prosperity to you and your family.  Given at our Court of St James’s, the seventh day of April, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-two, in the twelfth year of our reign.

Your affectionate Friend

GEORGE R.

Enclosure No. 3

Extract of a Letter from Mr Mostyn, the Company’s Resident at Poonah, dated 14th May 1773

I had the honour of your commands of 3d ultimo the 27th following; and this is purposely to advise you, that some days ago, a Gosamie by name Mohimgeer (who has been here some time) applied to this Durbar, as Vackeel from the king of Tanjore, for leave to raise ten thousand horse for the service of his master, and which he made no secret were to be employed against Mahomed AllyCawn.  He at first, by means of presents to some of the ministers, had a promise of leave, of which I advised my superiors at Bombay, under date the 6th; but since the Dewan has started objections, and I believe he will not succeed; though was he to obtain permission, he would find it very difficult to raise men, as the Durbar are enlisting people as fast as possible for themselves.  Should he hereafter procure leave, and any probability of his getting the troops, I will not fail to advise your Honour, &c.

Extract of Letter from the Select Committee at Fort St. George, dated 31st January, 1770

Par. 4.  The stipulative tribute paid by Tanjore to the Carnatic, in peace as well as in war, should we think be considered only as an acknowledgement of superiority.  What quota of troops or treasure should be furnished in time of war we cannot ascertain either by usage or compact.  It appears therefore to us to have been arbitrary; that is to say, the Government of the Carnatic hath exacted whatever it hath had power to compel; and Tanjore hath refused succours or money as far as the Government thought it had power to support such refusal.  And this is by no means peculiar to these TWO STATES. – The same principle prevails invariably throughout Indostan. – Upon this principle, which is wholly that of power, it is certainly contrary to sound policy for the Carnatic to suffer the existence of such a STATE; and there can be no doubt but that the RULERS of the Carnatic would have long ago reduced Tanjore to the same terms as other dependant rajahships, had not Tanjore been sufficiently powerful in itself, or by connexion, to oppose such attempts effectually.  Upon this reasoning therefore, it appears to us if the Nabob of the Carnatic possessed the whole power of the Carnatic, it would be good policy in him, and consistent with the principles of the Indostan governments, to reduce Tanjore to the same terms of obedience and control that other Rajahs have been reduced to.  And if the Company possessed the whole power of the Carnatic, it would be equally good policy in the Company to do so.  But it is a great question with us, whether it would be good policy in the Company to suffer the Nabob of the Carnatic to reduce Tanjore, if he were powerful enough of himself to do so; and it is another question with us, upon the present divided system of power in the Carnatic, if it would be good policy in the Company to reduce Tanjore, and place it under the management and control of the Nabob.  We incline to the opinion that it would not; but that whilst the present system, or want of system, remains between the Company and the Carnatic, if the reduction of Tanjore should be resolved on, it would be more adviseable for the Company to retain it in their own possession, or (reserving the sovereignty) place in the management of it either the present Rajah or any other, subject to such limitations and conditions as might make him useful, but put it out of his power to be dangerous.  The impropriety and inconvenience of such a STATE, subsisting in the heart of the province, is evident from the Rajah’s conduct in the late war with Hyder Ally.  The junction of his troops, particularly his cavalry, to our army, might have greatly contribuited to the prevention of those ravages which the Carnatic sustained, but that would have exposed the Tanjore country to the resentment of the common enemy; and the Rajah thought he saw his particular interest in purchasing a peace for his own country: this conduct in the Rajah might now furnish us with a just plea for calling him to account; but when your Honours are informed of all our reasons for declining such an attempt at this time, we flatter ourselves that our conduct will meet with your approbation.

Extract of Select Letter from Fort St. George, 28th February 1772

With respect to the guarantee of the treaty of 1762 between the Nabob and the Rajah, we are under some doubt whether, according to the law and usage of nations, it is abolished or still in force.  The Rajah, upon a plea of injustice on the part of the Nabob, declined to comply with the terms of the treaty, by punctually paying the peishcush, as guarantees we interposed, and marched a force to compel him; open war ensued; the Rajah in the end submits, pays the peishcush, with a futher sum, as an indemnification for the charges of the war; a new treaty passes between the Nabob and him, in which we have no part, and in which not a word is mentioned of the treaty of 1762, nor a word in respect to the payment of the peishcush in future, nor of its remission; the Question is, whether that treaty and guarantee are, or are not virtually restored.  We have carefully avoided any hint to the Nabob on this subject, either for or against the Question; and the Nabob is equally reserved.  How long it may be possible to preserve this silence will depend on circumstances; for whenever a case may happen that shall require a decisive measure, our conduct in the one case or the other would be very different; we therefore hope your Honours will see the necessity of tracing a strong line for the guidance of your government in this respect.  If you resume the right, or rather acknowledge the Company still bound by their guarantee of 1762, it will be absolutely necessary, that you empower your government confidentially to carry it effectually into execution, by exerting the right, and interposing power, if necessary, to prevent injustice to the Rajah.  Had your government here stood in such a degree of confidence with their constituents, as that they might have entertained a reasonable hope of support and justification in an impartial and spirited conduct, the part they should have taken ought no doubt to have been this; upon the Rajah’s complaint, that he was entitled to an indemnification for the expenses he sustained in the assistance given to the Nabob in the late war[8], and that the Marawar and Nalcooty Polygars with-held from him his just rights; on the other hand the Nabob complaining that the Rajah with-held the peishcush unjustly, had no right to the indemnification he demanded nor any just claim on Marawar and Nalcooty; this Government, as guarantees, ought to have marched a force to maintain peace between the complaining parties, to have marched a force to maintain peace between the complaining parties, to have required deputies from both, to state the demands of each respectively, and, upon a fair discussion, to have decided between them, and to have enforced the decision, whether in favour of the Nabob or in favour of the Rajah; but your Government here did not dare to act in such a part.  It was plain from your orders to this Committee, under the date the 17th March 1769, as well as subsequent orders, that you thought the Rajah stood in a degree of favour with this Government, which you did not approve; and that you adopted all the Nabob’s ideas of levying crores, as an equitable pretension, because other Soubahs had done so.  At the same time the Minister of the Crown, ranging himself on the side of the Nabob, received all his complaints against the Rajah as gospel, attacked us openly, but with flagrant injustice, and accused us of with-holding that assistance from the Nabob which our trust required.  The designs of the Ministry are plain, and we know the extent of ministerial powers; we should otherwise have thought a refutation needless, and have consigned such partial zeal to contempt and oblivion.  The Rajah, so early as September 1770, represented to the President his apprehensions of the Nabob’s designs and representations to the King’s Minister, but finding no tendency to redress, and feeling the weakness of this Government, and its inability to protect him, too hastily and indiscreetly stood forth in open opposition; most probably expecting support either from the French or the Marattas.  The contest hath ended not dishonourably to the Company’s arms; but we hope your Honours will not on that ground be too confident of future success, even at the hazard of being thought timid.  A steady regard for the public welfare obliges us to say, we are amazed that we have got thus far so well; and if your Honours will attentively consider every embarrassment in which we have been entangled by the Nabob, his chicanery in respect to money and provisions, his views to compel us into a Maratta alliance, his wishes to possess Tanjore, his fears of the Company if it were subdued, his hope of support against the Company from the Crown, and his jealousy of the future effects even of that support, we think your Honours will see cause to rejoice, that we are in no worse state at present.  Should your Honours think it best to revive the guarantee, and take it upon you, we are persuaded the Nabob will oppose it by every means in his power, and it will certainly be the cause of a fresh quarrel with him; but should that be got over, and the guarantee acknowledged, and at the same time should your Government, from whatever cause, not to be relieved from its present weakness in respect to the Nabob, his designs against Tanjore, or some other indirect purpose, may again drag you into hostility.  If you do not resume the guarantee, but leave the Rajah wholly at the mercy of the Nabob, we do not hesitate to declare it as our opinion, that his apprehensions of the Nabob are so great, that whenever we shall be involved in trouble, he will become dangerous, and take part against us, to save himself from impending ruin, should he see a probability of success.  Our conclusion is, that one of these decisive measures should be adopted with firmness and vigour; either to take Tanjore openly and avowedly under your protection, and give him proofs of your impartial justice, which we think, even now, notwithstanding what has passed, will bind him firmly to your interest, or to conquer and subdue him totally; but in the latter case, the consequent arrangements will be matter of the most serious consideration.  What we said on this subject by the Britannia, contains our tense; and since the year 1768 such lights have been thrown on the Nabob’s character and conduct, as may amply suffice to enable your Honours to determine with justice and propriety; we therefore only add, that every day convinces us we have not been mistaken, and we confirm every word we have wrote.

 

Comments or questions are welcome.

* indicates required field


[1] By a letter dated 23rd March 1770, the Court of Directors suspended the execution of these orders as “utterly impossible to be carried into execution, without committing a ‘breach of treaty’”

[2] See enclosure 1

[3] See enclosure 2

[4] See enclosure 3

[5] Should this be the Court?

[6] Delivered to the Nabob after his return (to Madras), 30th April 1773 and a copy was shewn to the President the night before he presented it by Sir Robert Harland.  The troops of this garrison assisted on the occasion, as the Military Consultation of that day shews

[7] Written from the Nabob to his Majesty by Sir John Lindsay, received by Sir Robert Harland at Bombay, by the Prudent Ship of War

[8] The war with Hyder Ally

Alexander Wynch – Life and Times

The Life and Times of Alexander Wynch

The following are excerpts from books written about or around the lifetime of Alexander Wynch and pertaining to characters identified and explored herein.

The Church in Madras (Penny)

Extracts from The Church in Madras: Being the History of the Ecclesiastical and Missionary Action of the East India Company by Rev. Frank Penny LL.M. (Late Chaplain in H.M. Indian Service (Madras Establishment) published by John Murray, Albermarle Street 1904.

The Chaplains from 1647 to 1805

Robert Wynch was appointed (Chaplain) in 1731 and arrived the same year.  In 1739 he married Margaret (Mansell) widow of Francis Rous of the Company’s Service, who was brother to Sir William Rous.  She died in 1741.  He went to Fort William in 1743 and died there in 1748[1] without issue.  He was not a graduate of any British or Irish University[2].  He was probably nearly related to George Wynch of the Company’s Bengal Service. (p672)

From 1712 to 1746

At the beginning of the (following) year the Directors wrote[3]:-

“We are sorry for the death of Mr Smedley and have chosen Robert Wynch to succeed him, who takes his passage upon The George; he bears a very good character here, and we hope he will behave himself so in his station with you so as to merit your countenance and favour upon all occasions, his salary and gratuity is to commence at the time of his arrival,…”

Shortly afterwards the news of Mr Consett’s death reached the Directors.   They referred to it in their next General Letter to Fort St George thus[4]:-

The death of Mr Consett, your Chaplain, is very much regretted, as it deprived you some time of the regular preaching of the Gospel; but we have supplied Mr Smedley’s place by sending to your assistance the Reverend Mr Wynch last year, and on The Prince of Orange comes the Reverend Mr Howard; and having so good characters of both these gentlemen; we don’t doubt but their arrival will be agreeable to you.”

Robert Wynch was entertained in October 1730, and was given a gratuity of £50,[5] a larger sum than had been given to any Chaplain before him except Consett, who was favoured for a special reason.  One of the Company’s servants in the Bay at the beginning of the (18th) century was a George WynchPossibly Robert was the son of George, and was reaping the reward of his father’s faithful service; but no evidence has been found of this, nor indeed of Robert’s identity; for he was not a graduate of any British or Irish University.  Eden Howard apparently received no gratuity.[6]

Wynch arrived at the Fort in July 1731 and was in sole charge for a year.  When Eden Howard arrived in August 1732 the Governor and Council ordered Wynch to Fort St. David.[7]  Here he remained till the end of the year.  At the beginning of 1735 Wynch returned to England on private business.[8]  Having finished his business he applied to the Directors to be allowed to return to Fort St. George; but stipulated that he should return to the place as he left it, that is, as Senior Chaplain.  The Directors agreed and wrote thus[9]:-

The Reverend Mr Wynch having desired to return as Chief Chaplain, we have granted his request; but as he came to England on his own private affairs, his salary must not commence till he arrives at Fort St. George.”

Wynch and Howard were together at Fort St. George from July 1736 till November 1742.  The only incident on record during this period is the application of Wynch for house allowance in lieu of the lodgings which were occupied by others.  The application was granted[10] on the ground that all the lodgings in the (inner) Fort were taken up by the covenanted servants and that it had been usual for one of the Chaplains to be furnished with lodgings by the Company.  Wynch was on very friendly terms with a member of the Council named Francis Rous, a brother of Sir William Rous the head of the Suffolk family of that name[11].  Rous died in 1738, and Wynch married the widow[12] in the following year.  She died at Fort St. George in 1741.

In 1738 Wynch applied to the Directors to be allowed to proceed to the bay as Chaplain.  Fort St. George was still the most important settlement of the Company in the East; the request, therefore, strengthens the supposition that he had a family connection with Bengal, and that George Wynch of the Company’s Bengal Service was his father.  The Directors permitted the transfer but ordered the he should remain at Fort St. George till a vacancy occurred.[13]  This did not take place till 1742.  The Directors then wrote:-

“We have appointed the Rev. Mr James Field to be one of your Chaplains; but Mr Wynch must have his option whether he will be Chaplain at your place or Bengal; and in case he chooses the Bay, or Mr Howard is come for England, Mr Field must officiate at your place; but otherwise he is to be one of our Chaplains in Bengal.”

The newly appointed Chaplain and the Company’s letter arrived in August 1743.  Wynch at once applied to the Council to avail himself of the Company’s indulgence and to proceed to the Bay[14].  Permission was granted and he went.  Eden Howard had already gone home[15].  And so James Field was left alone at Fort St. George.  Robert Wynch died at Fort St. William in 1748[16].  He left no direct descendants; but Alexander Wynch, the Merchant Governor of Fort St. George, whose descendants have adorned various departments of the public service in the Presidency of Madras from the middle of the 18th Century to the present day, was his nephew. (pp158-160)

The SPCK from 1710 to 1750

July 1747:        The Governor (Charles Floyer) produces the Charity Books for the year ending this day, balance being 889 pagodas; which he being desirous to quit himself of, Agreed that he make over the same to Alexander Wynch, the present Paymaster; that his bond be taken for 800 pagodas at 9 per cent; the odd money to remain in his hands to defray the expenses of the Charity School.

Oct 1748:        Mr Prince being appointed Paymaster, Mr Wynch delivers in the Charity Books, which it is ordered to deliver to Mr Prince; that his bond be taken, etc.

Oct 1749:        Mr Richard Prince delivers over to Mr Wynch in the same terms as above. (p198)

The Church Stock

Penny sets out a lengthy letter…

The date of this lengthy Despatch was the 17th June 1748; it arrived at Fort St David at the beginning of the following year.  The Council welcomed the promise of receiving a copy of the St. Mary’s Church Ledger, and appointed a committee, consisting of Messieurs R. Prince, A. Wynch, and F. Westcott to examine the copy when received, and to carry out the directions received from the Court[17].  The proceedings of this committee are not recorded. (p213)

From 1746 to 1761

The French remained in possession (of Fort St George) nearly three years (from 1746 to 1749).  Before the rendition they removed the guns to Pondicherry and many other things they had a fancy for; but the Commissioners appointed by Admiral Boscawen for receiving back the Fort – Major Stringer Lawrence, Messieurs Wynch and Westcott – were instructed to ask no questions and to make no difficulties. (p305)

In November 1755 the Churchwardens reported that they had Pagodas 7859 in hand, “with no prospect of employment of it”. In February 1757 this credit balance had increased to Pagodas 12000. It was resolved to offer this amount to the Governor and Council as a loan at 7 per cent.  The offer was accepted; and in July 1761 the Vestry offered the Government Pagodas 4000 more.  The Ministers and Churchwardens received bonds in exchange.[18]  The careful nursing of this Fund for the benefit of the Church, the poor, and the School reflects the greatest credit on successive Ministers and Churchwardens of St. Mary’s.  It has been already mentioned how this fund arose and grew; but one source of income has not been mentioned.  The following letter to the Governor explains what it was[19]:-

“We beg leave to remind you that before the capture of this place all boats that were employed of a Sunday used to pay 6 fanams every trip to the School Stock which is now incorporated with the Church stock, the charitable expenses of which are lately increased by the erecting of a public Charity School here under the Rev. Mr Staveley, and by a monthly allowance to several of the European inhabitants.”

(signed) Sam Staveley, Minister

Alex. Wynch & Charles Bourchier, Churchwardens (pp313-314)

The St, Mary’s Vestry

“In September 1739 occurs this payment “paid Alexander Wynch for transcribing the Church Register, 50 pagodas”.  This determines the date of the parchment register book.  It is to be presumed that the older books were perishing, as paper books will in the climate of Madras; and that the new parchment book was intended to be a better means of preserving the important records they contained.  Alexander Wynch was the nephew of Robert Wynch the Chaplain.  It may have been a piece of nepotism which obtained for him the work; if so, it is certain that nepotism is not always a bad system; for the work of transcription is most carefully and excellently done.”

Gordon Campbell[20] had had occasion to look at the parish records of St Mary’s Church in Fort St George and wrote: “Two aspects of the registers became immediately obvious: the first was that they were parchment rather than paper; the second was that the entries from October 1680 to September 1739 were written in the same neat hand.  These were clearly not original parish records but rather a later transcription.  In fact the transcription had been prepared in 1739 by Alexander Wynch, then a little-known nephew of the garrison chaplain, but eventually to become Governor of Madras.  The paper records had been succumbing to the climate of India, so Wynch had prepared a durable parchment copy, for which he was paid a fee of 50 pagodas”.

Penny sets out as an illustration a page of the Ledger for October 1739; in it are three entries as follows:

Mr Cradock rec’d int. at 7% on                                   P2000

Robert Wynch do.                                                       P1300

Profit and Loss; pd. For burying Widow Wynch       P1

There was a footnote against the last item that was, unfortunately, illegible. (p555)

Alexander Wynch was Churchwarden in 1754 and 1755 (p559)

Fort St George Madras (Penny)

Extracts from Fort St. George Madras by Fanny Emily Farr Penny published by Elibron Classics as an unabridged facsimile of the edition published in 1900 by Swan Sonnenschein & Co. London

Governors of Fort St. George

The first Governor was Mr Aaron Baker, appointed 1st Sept 1652.

Other (relevant) Governors were:

Mr Thomas Pitt (7th July 1698 to before 18th Sept 1709)

Mr George Morton Pitt (14th May 1730 to before 23rd Jan 1735)

Mr Charles Bourchier (25th Jan 1767 to before 31st Jan 1770)

Mr Alexander Wynch (2nd Feb 1773 to before 11th Dec 1775)

The latter dates are the dates of the appointment of their respective successors.

Reference to a Thomas Cooke as cash-keeper for the East India Company who was arrested when Hastings had required him to sell the Company’s silver. (p144)

George Morton Pitt, who became Governor in 1730, was born in Fort St. George and baptised in St. Mary’s Church in 1693.  He was the son of John Pitt and Sarah Wavell[21] who were married at St. Mary’s and he was a distant cousin of Thomas Pitt the earlier Governor.  He remained in power till 1735, when he left India for England. (p 151)

“In 1763 Robert Palk, who was in Deacon’s Orders and came out as a Chaplain to the Fort, but afterwards dropped his Holy Orders for the more lucrative service of the Company, became Governor.  His name occurs frequently in the St. Mary’s registers, performing baptisms, marriages and burials soon after the restoration of the Fort to Admiral Boscawen.  He was succeeded by Charles Bourchier in 1767, Josias Du Pré in 1770 and Alexander Wynch in 1773.  All these men found the work of governing beyond their strength and were imbued with the notion that native princes must be subsidised with troops as well as money, and the consequence was that the Company soon became involved in war.  In Du Pré’s time Hyder Ally dictated terms of peace at St. Thomas’ Mount to the Governor and Council, who placed themselves at his mercy.  And in Wynch’s time Tanjore was unblushingly handed over by the Company’s troops to the Nabob.  The Directors thought it was time to interfere; and they recalled Wynch.” (p 173)

Monuments of the OldCemetery

CASAMAJOR, NOAH[22]: died Sept 4th 1746, aged 45 years (he married Rebecca Powney in June 1736 and is entered in the Burial Register as Factor and the Registrar of the Mayor’s Court.  His eldest son, James Henry, was baptised 3rd January 1746 in St Mary’s Church.  Mrs Casamajor was the daughter of Captain John Powney and his wife Mary Horne (or Heron), and she was baptised in September 1715. (Page 191)

COOKE, Mr Francis: he served the Company for twelve years a Merchant and Assay Master.  He died Feb 1711-12, aged thirty-nine years.

CRADOCK, THOMAS; son of Christopher and Florentina (sic.); he died Aug 13th 1712 in his fourth year. (Christopher Cradock married Florentina (sic.) Charleton in April 1707.  Their son Christopher was baptised in 1710 and he married Grace Cook (sic.) in 1736.  See Warre and Wynch.  In 1735 Christopher Cradock commanded the Royal George, one of the Company’s ships). (Page 192)

WARRE, WILLIAM; Armiger, he died Third in Council May 6th 1715 aged about 35 years.  He married (1) Ann Nicks in May 1704, and (2) Florentia Crodock March 1715.  See Cradock.  Ann Nicks was the daughter of John Nicks who married Catherine Barker Nov 11th 1680.  Ann was baptised April 22nd 1689 and was buried March 24th 1711.  John Nicks was in the Company’s service and went out to India in 1668.  He had nine daughters and one son baptised at the Fort; the latter died in Dec 1686.  Mrs Catherine Nicks died at Madras in Dec 1709 and John Nicks, March 14th 1711.

WYNCH, SOPHIA; wife of Alexander Wynch. She was one of the daughters of Edward Croke Esq., and died June 3rd, 1754, aged twenty-five years.

WYNCH, HARRY; son of Alexander Wynch and Sophia his wife. He died Dec 11th, 1754, aged one year and eight months. (Alexander Wynch became Governor of Madras. He married for his second wife, Florentia Cradock, in Dec 1754. See Warre and Cradock) (Page 201)

 

Alexander Wynch before becoming Governor of Madras

Penny notes that nothing is heard of Alexander Wynch until he became an unpaid assistant at Madras in 1730; whereafter, he wasn’t brought onto the List of Civil Servants until 1740.  Perhaps his efforts (recorded above) in transcribing the old church register at St. Mary’s Church in Madras in 1739 had helped to convince the East India Company that he should be duly engaged.  He became a Councillor at Fort St David in 1744, and in 1758 when the Fort yielded to the French he was serving as Deputy-Governor.

The snippet below[23] shows the increases in some elements of cost between the financial year 1st May 1737 to 30th April 1738 and the following year 1st May 1738 to 30th April 1739.  This indicates the allowance to the widow of Francis Rous, a former functionary of the East India Company.  It also indicates that Alexander Wynch had been taken on as a ‘monthly writer’.

Widow Rous and Mr Wynch 

This monthly writer role pre-dated his formal employment by the East India Company and subsequent entries through 1739 as shown in the entry for December 1739 when he was paid 10 pagodas (whilst his uncle Rev Robert Wynch was paid 7 pagodas in the month for house rent and Margaret Rous was paid 20 pagodas allowance money to 4 children of Mr Rous deceased).

The records show that Alexander became an employee of the East India Company on the 15th August 1740 as a Writer working for the Accountant (as shown below).

LifeAndTimes2

The Vestiges of Madras describe the relationship between Alexander and his uncle as follows:

Wynch – The Rev. Robert Wynch, Chaplain of Fort St. George, who went home with G.M.Pitt in 1735, soon obtained permission to return to Madras.  In 1739 he married Margaret, widow of the Councillor Francis Rous, and in 1743 he was at his own request, ttransferred to Bengal.  Alexander Wynch, who was perhaps a nephew of the chaplain, is first mentioned in August, 1738, when he was entertained as a monthly writer after serving four years as unpaid assistant to the Secretary[24].  In 1740 he was brought onto the permanent list, and in the following January he named as his security ‘Mr. William Wynch, who, he hopes, will be able to engage some other person to stand with him in England, from whence he came so yound as to have no acquaintance there of whom to ask that favour.’[25]  Alexander was admitted to the Council of Fort St. David in 1744, and in 1758, when that place was given up to the French, he was officiating Deputy Governor.  Wynch was made prisoner of war, resigned the service, and went to England; but in 1768 he was reappointed, and became Chief at Masullipatam.  From 1773 to 1775 he served as Governor of Fort st. George.  He married, first, Sophia,[26] daughter of Edward Croke, a member of the Council of Fort St. David, and, secondly, in 1754, Florentia Cradock, daughter probably of Christopher Cradock, jun.  The lady known for many years in Calcutta society as ‘Begum Johnson’ was a sister of the first Mrs Wynch.  Alexander Wynch, who died in Harley Street in May, 1781,[27] gave three sons, William, George, and John, to the Madras Civil Service.  William Wynch joined in 1766, and in 1784 was a Commissioner of the Board of Accounts.  George Wynch became a Writer in 1773, was Collector of Kărũr in 1791, and appears to have retired in 1798.  John Wynch, first a free merchant, was appointed to the service in 1775, and in 1797 was Paymaster at Vellore.  Alexander Wynch, who is believed to have been another son of the Governor, entered the Madras Army in 1768, rose to the rank of Colonel, and retired in 1800.  The next generation saw a John Wynch in the Madras Artillery.  He entered in 1814, and still held the rank of Captain in 1825.  The Wynch family is still represented in the Indian Civil Service in the Southern Presidency.”

The reference in the above extract to the surrender of Fort St. David to the French was an episode about which further published accounts are available. Set out below is an account of the surrender of Fort St. David to the French army under the command of General Lally in 1758.

Surrender of Fort St. David by Alexander Wynch (1758)

“The English were greatly deficient in regard to land forces, and the re-establishing of Bengal had greatly exhausted them of men on the coast of Coromandel, where all their military force consisted of no more than 700 effective troops; while M. Lally was at the head of 5000 men well disciplined and officered; so that it is no wonder Fort St. David fell a sacrifice.

“General Lally marched from Pondicherry to Fort St. David, with an army of 3500 Europeans and a large body of sepoys.  Their vanguard consisted of the French horse, a battalion of the regiment of Lorrain, 200 of the company’s troops, and 100 artillery-men, with eight pieces of cannon accompanied by 4000 sepoys, entered the district of Fort St. David on the 29th April.  They plundered the villages, and destroyed the outposts until they came to Cuddalore, which they invested and obliged to surrender on the 3rd may, with permission for the garrison to retreat to Fort St. David with their arms.

“The French then began the siege of Fort St. David, and fired upon it from Cuddalore on the 16th with two guns; as also with five mortars from the new town on the 17th; but on the 26th, a battery was opened at the distance of between eight and nine hundred yards west; another of nine guns and three mortars between seven and eight hundred yards north; and another of four guns at about the same distance to the north-east.

“The country troops and artificers deserted the place, which was badly fortified, and poorly defended.  No breach was made; but thirty guns and carriages were dismounted and disabled; besides many of the parapets, platforms and other works were destroyed by the shot and shells.  Water was difficult to be got, as the reservoirs had suffered by the bombardment, and the best well was destroyed.  Ammunition grew also scarce, as it had been inconsiderately fired away before the besiegers had erected their batteries.

“Major Polier commanded in the fort, and finding it untenable, he desired Alexander Wynch, Esquire, who acted as deputy-governor, to hold a council of war; which was accordingly done, when it was unanimously agreed, by Mr Wynch and the gentlemen of the council, to surrender the place upon terms of capitulation.  The principal articles granted by general Lally were: “That the garrison should be allowed the honours of war; be exchanged; and allowed to carry with them their baggage and effects; that care should be taken of the sick and wounded; and deserters should be pardoned upon condition of returning to their colours: but that two commissaries should be appointed and remain to deliver up the magazines and military stores; as also to shew the French all the mines and subterraneous works.”  These articles were signed on 2nd June by Ar. Wynch; P. Polier de Bottens; and Rich. Fairfield; on the part of the English and by Lally; on the French part.”

Alexander left India following that incident and we have very little insight  into Alexander’s life and works until he became Governor of Madras although we do know that some of his children were born in England.

Alexander Wynch as Governor of Madras

Alexander Wynch became Governor of Madras with effect from 2nd February 1773 until he was recalled in 1775.

The incident that led to his recall is summarised here in which the Court decision is spelt out in brief and Alexander’s response is set out in detail.

Alexander Wynch in England

During his absence from india between 1758 and 1768, and after his return in 1776, Alexander maintained a house or houses in England.

At the time of George Pitt Cradock’s will (29th December 1763), for example, his brother in law bequeathed the residue of his estate to “my loving sister, Florentia Wynch, wife of Alexander Wynch of Bilton Park in the County of York” (located near Harrogate and Knaresborough and where the keeper of the King’s Castle at Knaresborough, Peter Slingsby, once resided, and shown below as it looked in 1623).[28]

LifeAndTimes3

Three of Alexander’s children were born in England during Alexander’s break from the Honourable East India Company’s service: Florentia, James and Margery.

He had a lease of Gifford Lodge in Twickenham (seen below in 1753) from the Marchioness of Tweeddale from 1776 following his recall from Madras.

LifeAndTimes4

Alexander also took a house in Upper Harley Street. It was from there that his daughter Frances eloped with the unreliable son and heir of Sir William Twysden of Roydon to marry at Gretna Green, she at the age of 15, and he fleeing to France immediately afterwards to escape his creditors.  Perhaps he had been looking to the dowry of £10,000 (British pounds) that Alexander typically paid to each of his children upon the coming of age or marriage.

Wynch then moved to Westhorpe House in Marlow[29], where he died in 1781. George III visited Westhorpe in 1781 and bought some of the furniture to give to Queen Caroline. It came into the possession of the Prince of Wales and was installed in the Pavilion at Brighton before finding its way to Buckingham Palace where today it forms a part of the Royal collection.

”While traveling in Buckinghamshire in October 1781, the king stopped at Westhorpe House near Marlow, the home of the recently deceased Alexander Wynch (governor of Madras, 1773-5), and was shown a quantity of ivory furniture by the auctioneer James Christie,” Jonathan Marsden writes in ”George III and Queen Charlotte: Patronage, Collecting and Court Taste” (Royal Collection Publications, 2004). ”The king purchased a settee, 10 chairs and two miniature bureau-cabinets.”

LifeAndTimes5

A similar lot sold at Christies in New York in 2002 for $14,340; it was described (pictured above) as:

“AN ANGLO-INDIAN ENGRAVED IVORY AND TORTOISESHELL MINIATURE KNEEHOLE DESK**

Vizigapatam, late 18th century

The rectangular top with central lozenge reserve overhanging a long frieze drawer, the kneehole with four sandlewood-lined drawers and two pigeonholes flanked by a removable panel enclosing four further drawers and two pigeonholes, each side similarly with a lozenge reserve, on bracket feet, with scrolling foliate-engraved borders and moldings overall, with the remnants of a printed BADA label to the underside

17in. (43cm.) high, 16¾in. (42.5cm.) wide, 8¾in. (22cm.) deep

Special Notice

Notice Regarding the Sale of Ivory and Tortoiseshell Prospective purchasers are advised that several countries prohibit the importation of property containing ivory or tortoiseshell. Accordingly, prospective purchasers should familiarize themselves with relevant customs regulations prior to bidding if they intend to import this lot into another country.

Lot Notes

This miniature desk, designed in the distinctive English manner of the 1720s and decorated with engraved scrolling floral vines, is part of a group of exotic ivory-veneered furniture probably executed under the direction of the Dutch and English East India Companies at Vizagapatam, a port on the Coromandel Coast in southern India, in the second half of the 18th century. Two miniature cabinets of circa 1770 brought to England by Alexander Wynch, Governor of Fort St. George from 1773 to 1775 and now in the Royal Collection display similar decoration (one illustrated in J. Harris et al, Buckingham Palace and Its Treasures, New York, 1968, p.126). A second miniature kneehole desk with blank ivory panels sold in these Rooms, 30 January 1993, lot 138 ($24,200), making for a strong comparison in form and in the similarly engraved ivory borders.

By the 1760s, Vizigapatam artisans were regularly decorating such miniature furniture with engraved architectural scenes or more entertaining vignettes based loosely on European print sources. This type of decoration can be seen in miniature bureau-cabinet of circa 1780-90 in the Peabody Essex Museum (A. Jaffer, Furniture from British Indian and Ceylon, 2001, cat. no. 46, pp. 200-203 and also in ‘Art & the East India Trade’, Exhibition Catalogue, Victoria and Albert Museum, London, 1970, fig. 21). Other examples include one in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, of similar date (illustrated in Jaffer, op. cit., fig. 93, p. 202).

While the decoration is representative of many objects made at the time, the use of tortoiseshell panels points to a distinct sub-group. Perhaps the most pertinent related example is a table cabinet dated to the late 18th century with tortoiseshell-veneered reserves to each drawer front and panel sold Christie’s London, 27 June 1983, lot 62A”

A note of some of Alexander’s possessions is contained in references in the Royal collection such as:

Indian (Vizagapatam)

Settee c.1770

Sandalwood veneered with ivory,
engraved and inlaid

101.0 x 184.0 x 82.5 cm

LifeAndTimes6

Alexander Wynch (d. 1781); his sale, Christie and Ansell, Westhorpe House, 6 October 1781, lot 54; purchased by George III (48 gns.) and presented to Queen Charlotte; her sale, Christie‘s, London, 7-10 May 1819, lot 107; purchased by Loving on behalf of the Prince Regent (£52 10s)[30]

It was not just furniture that was sold following Alexander’s death:

“A catalogue of all the genuine stock of excellent wines, consisting of about 400 dozen of oriental madeira, near 200 dozen of fine old red port, red and white constantia, old arrack, &c. Also, some valuable jewels, two gold repeating watches, … and other effects, of Alexander Wynch, Esq; deceased, which will be sold by auction, by Mess. Christie and Ansell, (by order of the executors) … on Monday, November 5, 1781, and two following days (catalogue held in the Library of University College London)”

It is also noted that, in Alexander’s will, he leaves each of his daughters not yet of age (namely, Frances and Margery), ten thousand pounds each in 1781.

 

 



[1] Hyde’s Parochial Annals of Bengal pp96-98

[2] There is reference to a Robert Wynch being a graduate of Cambridge at about the right time

Cambridge University Alumni, 1261-1900: Robert Wynch, EmmanuelCollege, pens. At Emmanuel, May 8, 1717. of Middlesex.  One of these names chaplain to the East India Company, 1731. Died at Fort William, 1748 (F.Penny)

[3] Despatch 12 Feb 1730-1, para 57

[4] Despatch 11 Feb 1731-2, para 78

[5] Court Minutes, 15 Dec 1730

[6] Court Minutes, 26 Jan 1730-1

[7] Consultations, 14 Aug 1732, and letter, 28 Aug 1732, para 79

[8] Consultations, 23 Jan 1734-5

[9] Despatch, 12 Dec 1735, para 23

[10] Consultations, 21 Sept 1737

[11] This is unlikely as no connection has been shown

[12] Mistress Margaret Rous

[13] Despatch, Jan 1738-9

[14] Consultations, 29 Aug 1743

[15] Consultations, 15 Sept 1742

[16] Hyde’s Parochial Annals of Bengal pp97-8

[17] Fort St. David Consultations, March 1748-9

[18] Consultations, October 1761

[19] Consultations, May 1754

[20] Milton Quarterly 31.2 (1997) pp61-63

[21] Née Charlton or Charleton (see later references to Sarah Pitt)

[22] IGI notes that his parents were Luiz Juan Casamajor and Clemence Lapeyre, that he was born in 23rd December 1702 in Bristol, was baptised at the French Episcopal Church in Bristol on 1st January 1703 and married Rebecca Powney at Fort St. David on 15th June 1736.  He was presumably the father of John Casamajor who married Hannah Cradock (daughter of Christopher Cradock and Florentia Charlton).

[23] From: Records of Fort St. George; Selections from Public Consultations, Letters from Fort St. George, and Fort St. David Consultations, 1740 (published by the Government Superintendent Press of Madras, 1916)

[24] This suggests Alexendar was out in India by the time he was fourteen years of age.

[25] “P.C., vol. lxxi., 3rd Jan. 17401.  In January, 1742, we find the Rev. Robert Wynch remitting £100 to William Wynch.  It is conjectured that the latter was Alexander’s father and Robert’s brother” (in fact it appears William Wynch is Alexander’s other uncle alongside Rev. Robert Wynch).

[26] “She died in 1754, and her tombstone is in St. Mary’s pavement.”

[27] “Bills of Sale, etc., No. 76, dated 22nd Feb., 1785.”

[28] Though much of what can be seen externally today dates from when the outside was re-modelled in the Tudor style during the second half of the 19th century, parts of the interior date from the late 14th century.

It was in 1380 that John of Gaunt, Lord of Knaresborough and son of Edward III, ordered the building of a new hunting lodge in Bilton Park that was held by the Crown until the park was sold by Charles I in 1628. Interestingly, parts of that original 1380 building are still in use today.

Previous to this sale the lodge which evolved into Bilton Hall was held from the middle of the 16th century by members of the Slingsby family who were, at the time, possibly the most powerful family in the district. However, in 1615 charges were levied against Henry Slingsby, keeper of Bilton Park, concerning the dilapidated state of the park and the diminishing number of deer held in the park and this led to the family’s eviction and the lease was passed to Esme Stuart, Lord Aubingy.

Three years after Charles I sold the park, Bilton Hall was bought by Thomas Stockdale, a staunch parliamentarian, a friend of Thomas Fairfax, and a bitter political rival of the Slingsbys. Thomas Stockdale represented Knaresborough as Member of Parliament throughout the civil war years and was followed by his son William and later Christopher, who stood until 1713.

The last Stockdale to own Bilton Hall was Thomas, who mortgaged Bilton Park in 1720 to raise £1,000 to invest in the ill-fated South Sea company.

Unfortunately, like so many others, when the South Sea bubble burst, the Stockdales lost everything and were forced to leave, eventually settling in America.

In 1742 the estate passed into the hands of the Watson family, who remained here for many years and presumably leased the property to Alexander Wynch.

[29] Alexander Wynch insured the property against fire: 1780 Sun Fire Insurance 11936/284/432163      15 Aug 1780   (Alexander Wynch of Westhorpe parish of Little Marlow Esq)

[30] Catalogue entry adapted from George III & Queen Charlotte: Patronage, Collecting and Court Taste, London, 2004