Monthly Archives: September 2018



In Chancery – Bazett etc against Stevenson – Order

Lord Chancellor:

Friday the twenty fourth day of December in the sixtieth year of the reign of His Majesty King George the Third, one thousand eight hundred nineteen between RICHARD CAMPBELL BAZETT and DAVID COLVIN (Plaintiffs) and CHARLES CHAPRONIERE, JAMES STEVENSON and FERDINAND MEATH MCVEAGH (Defendants)

Upon opening of the matter this present day unto the Right Honourable the Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain by Mr Bligh of Counsel for the defendant, Ferdinand McVeagh, it was alleged that the plaintiffs filed their bill in this court against the defendants stating among things that Richardson MCVEAGH, late of His Majesty’s Settlement of Calcutta in the East Indies, deceased, being in his lifetime and at his death seized of or well-entitled to some real estate consisting of divers freehold lands, messuages, tenements and hereditaments situate in Calcutta aforesaid and elsewhere abroad in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty five died intestate and without issue, leaving Amelia MCVEAGH, his widow and Joseph MCVEAGH his brother and heir at Law but who has since deceased him surviving, that upon the death of the said Richardson McVeagh, the said Amelia McVeagh entered into possession of his freehold estates in Calcutta or into the receipt of the rents, profits or produce thereof, and she, the said Amelia McVeagh continued in such possession or receipt until she quitted the said settlement as after mentioned, that the said Amelia McVeagh left the said settlement of Calcutta in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven, and that previously to her departure therefrom, the said Amelia McVeagh did appoint Alexander Colvin, who was then and has ever since continued to be resident in Calcutta aforesaid, Merchant, her attorney or agent to receive the rents, profits and produce of the said intestate’s freehold estates in the said settlement of Calcutta and elsewhere abroad for the use of her, the said Amelia McVeagh, who claims to be entitled to the same by virtue of a certain indenture or deed of settlement made on her marriage with the said intestate that the said Alexander Colvin, as such attorney or agent as aforesaid, received the rents, profits and produce of the said intestate’s freehold estates in Calcutta aforesaid, and has from time to time remitted from Calcutta to the plaintiffs as his agents the said rents, profits and produce which became due up to the time of the death of the said Amelia McVeagh, and that the plaintiffs have passed over and applied the same money to the (administrators) of the said Alexander Colvin to and for the use of the said Amelia McVeagh during her life and to and for the use of her executors after mentioned since her decease; that the said Amelia McVeagh died in the month of January one thousand eight hundred and eight, having, as it is alleged by the said defendants, Charles Chaproniere and James Stevenson, duly made and published her last will and testament, and thereby given and devised all her real estates whatsoever to the said Charles Chaproniere, his heirs and assigns for ever, and thereby appointed him, the said Charles Chaproniere sole executor thereof; that (the defendant Ferdinand Meath McVeagh, the heir at Law of the intestate) in the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety four, having duly duly made his last will and testament bearing date he seventh day of July one thousand seven hundred and ninety four and thereby devised and bequeathed all his freehold estate and effects whatsoever and wheresoever which should remain after payment of his debts and funeral expenses and necessary charges and all his real estate whatsoever whether in England or in Ireland or the East Indies or elsewhere unto and to the use of his executors and their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns forever upon certain trusts as in the said Will mentioned and that the said testator thereby appointed John Clements Esquire, Sir Benjamin Chapman Bt., and James Peter Auriol Esquire, together with such son of the said testator as should first attain his age of twenty five years executors of his will, and he the said defendant Ferdinand Meath McVeagh soon after the said testator’s decease as his eldest son and having attained his age of twenty five years and the other executors named in the said will having renounced probate thereof duly proved the said will in the proper Ecclesiastical Court and undertook the executorship and execution of the trusts thereof; that the said Charles Chaproniere has lately taken advantage of a certain Act of Parliament lately passed for the relief of insolvent debtors and that by virtue of such Act the said defendant James Stevenson has been duly appointed the sole assignee of the said Charles Chaproniere’s real and personal estates; that since the death of the said Amelia McVeagh, the said Alexander Colvin has continued to receive the rents profits and produce of the said intestate’s estates in Calcutta aforesaid and that the said Alexander Colvin has remitted to the plaintiffs as her agents Ana amount of such rents as have become due since the death of the said Amelia McVeagh the sum of five hundred pounds and that, after making certain deductions set forth in the schedule to the plaintiffs’ bill, there now remains in the hands of the plaintiffs a balance or sum of four hundred and eighty eight pounds and eight shillings to be paid to the person or persons entitled to receive the same, that the said plaintiffs have been at all times willing and offer to pay the said sum of four hundred and forty eight (sic.) pounds in their hands on account of such receipts aforesaid as this court shall direct, but the defendants severally set up claims to the said rents profits and produce of the said intestate’s estate in Calcutta and to the balance in the plaintiffs’ hands as received by them on account thereof as such agents of the said Alexander Colvin as aforesaid and the plaintiffs submit and insist that under the (circumstances) aforesaid they cannot safely part with the monies in their hands on account of the rents profits and profits (sic.) of the said intestate’s estates in Calcutta aforesaid without the indemnity and direction of this court and praying amongst other things that the defendants might severally set forth what right or title they and each of them claim to have in or to the said sum or balance of four hundred and forty eight pounds and eight shillings in the hands of the plaintiffs on account of the rents profits and produce of the said intestate’s freehold estates, and might inter plead and settle and adjust their said claims and demands among themselves, the plaintiffs being ready and willing and they offering to pay the said monies in their hands to such of the said defendants to whom it shall appear of right to belong the plaintiffs being indemnified and paid their costs and that the plaintiffs might be at liberty in the meantime to bring the said monies into this court which they thereby offer to do for the benefit of such of the several parties who might be entitled to the same, that the defendants James Stevenson and Ferdinand Meath McVeagh have put in their answers to the plaintiffs’ bill and the defendant James Stevenson by his answer says he admits that Richardson McVeagh in the bill named was at his death seized or entitled to such real estate as in the said bill mentioned and that in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty five the said Richardson McVeagh died intestate’s and without issue, leaving Amelia McVeagh in the said bill also named his widow him surviving, and believes that the said Richardson McVeagh left Joseph , in the said bill likewise named his brother and heir at Law and admits that upon the decease of the said Richardson McVeagh, the said Amelia McVeagh who resided in the settlement of Calcutta in the said bill mentioned with her husband at the time of his death entered into the possession of his freehold estates in the said settlement or into the receipt of the rents profits and produce thereof and believes that the said Amelia McVeagh entered into such possession or receipt under and by virtue of the limitations contained in the deed of settlement made on her marriage with the said intestate as after mentioned, (though) the said defendant believes that the said Amelia McVeagh was afterwards persuaded from a suppression of her just rights under the said settlement in consequence of such fraud practiced upon her as after mentioned, to claim a life right and interest in the said intestate’s real estates than she was entitled to claim under the said settlement and believes that the said Amelia McVeagh entered into such possession or receipt of the said intestate’s freehold estates in the said settlement as aforesaid until the time when she quieted the said settlement as (in) the said bill mentioned, and that previously to her departure therefrom, she the said Amelia McVeagh appointed Alexander Colvin in the said bill mentioned her attorney or agent for her and on her behalf to receive the rents profits and produce of the said intestate’s real estates in the said settlement, and generally to act in the management thereof as her agent and says he believes for the reasons after mentioned that the said Amelia McVeagh for some time before her death only claimed to be entitled to the rents profits and produce o f the said intestate’s estates for her life by virtue of the aforesaid deed of settlement, yet the said defendant denies that the said AmeliaMcVeagh was only entitled to a life estate in the said intestate’s estates but on the contrary the said defendant believes and insists and doubts not to be able to prove that by virtue of the said deed of settlement made on the marriage of the said Amelia McVeagh with the said intestate as afore mentioned, and for want of issue of the said marriage as aforesaid, the said Amelia McVeagh upon the decease of her said husband became absolutely entitled to all the said intestate’s real and personal estate and to the rents profits and produce thereof and to no other less estate or interest therein, and believes that as such agreement aforesaid the said Alexander Colvin duly received collected and got in the rents profits and produce of the said intestate’s freehold estates aforesaid and generally acted as the steward or manager thereof on the behalf of the said Amelia McVeagh and believes that the said Alexander Colvin remitted from India all the rents profits and produce of the said freehold estates which become due in respect thereof during the life of the said Amelia McVeagh, and that the same had been duly paid to and applied for the use of the said Amelia McVeagh or to the defendant Charles Chaproniere as the devisee under her will or for his use since the decease of the said Amelia McVeagh and that she or the said Charles Chaproniere received the same from the said plaintiffs up to the time of her death and admits that the said Amelia McVeagh died in the month of January on thousand eight hundred and eight and admits that the said Amelia McVeagh did duly make her last will and testament bearing date the twentieth day of October one thousand eight hundred and seven and that she thereby gave devised and bequeathed all her real and personal estate and effects either in possession, remainder, reversion or expectancy and of what nature or kind soever either in England or at or near Calcutta in the East Indies or elsewhere unto the said Charles Chaproniere to hold to him and his heirs to and for his and their own use and benefit for and that she appointed the said Charles Chaproniere sole executor of her said will or to such effect and says that the said Charles Chaproniere soon after the decease of the said Amelia McVeagh duly proved her said will in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury and the said defendant insists that the said Charles Chaproniere as the sole devise under the aforesaid will of the aforesaid Amelia McVeagh became absolutely entitled to all the real estates of the said intestate in the said settlement and to the rents profits and produce thereof and admits that the said Charles Chaproniere on the thirtieth day of April one thousand eight hundred and sixteen took the benefit of an Act of Parliament passed in the fifty-third year of the reign of this present Majesty entitled “An Act for the Relief of Insolvent Debtors in England” and that by virtue of such Act the said defendant has been appointed and in fact is the sole assignee of the estate and effects of the said Charles Chaproniere and that an indenture of bargain and sale of the real estates of the said Charles Chaproniere and an assignment of his personal estate has been duly executed to the said defendant as such sole assignee as aforesaid under the directions of the aforesaid Act of Parliament and says that as such assigned as aforesaid he claims and insists to be entitled to the freehold estates in the said settlement formerly belonging to the said intestate, and which were devised by the aforesaid will of the said Amelia McVeagh, his widow, to the said Charles Chaproniere as before mentioned and to the rents profits and produce of such estates due and in the hands of the said plaintiffs and to become due in respect thereof and to all other the real and to all the personal estate whatsoever of the said intestate of or to which he was in any manner seized or entitled at the time of his death which passed to the said Charles Chaproniere by the will of the said Amelia McVeagh and says that among the writings belonging to the said Charles Chaproniere at the time of his insolvency which were delivered up to the said defendant as his assignee was an indenture purporting to be a deed of settlement made previously to and in contemplation of the marriage between the said intestate and the said Amelia McVeagh, and such indenture bears date the seventeenth day of December one thousand seven hundred and seventy and is made between and to be only executed by the said Richardson McVeagh of the first part, the said Amelia McVeagh, then Amelia DURNFORD, widow, of the second part, and Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Flemmings of the third part, and thereby after reciting the said intended marriage and that the said Amelia McVeagh was seized of an estate tail in possession of and an undivided third part of certain freehold hereditaments in the County of Kent, late the real estate of Charles BROWN, her grandfather and that she was entitled to one sixth part of the personal estate of Charles ROOKE (Roche?) Esquire, her late brother, deceased, it was witnessed that the said Richardson McVeagh and Amelia his wife and did thereby covenant that, in case the said marriage should take effect, they would sell and dispose of the said Amelia McVeagh’s share in the said real estate and that the produce thereof together with her share in the said personal estate should be paid to the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistreand George Flemmings upon the trusts therein mentioned and declared of and concerning the same and in the said indenture is contained a covenant on the part of the said Richardson McVeagh in the words and figures or the purport and effect following, that is to say, and she and the said Richardson McVeagh in commission of the said intended marriage and for making a further provision for the said Amelia Durnford in case she should survive him and her issue does hereby for himself his heirs executors and administrators covenant with the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Flemmings his executors administrators and assigns that in case the said intended marriage shall take effect and the said Amelia Durnford shall survive him the said Richardson McVeagh and in such case he the said Richardson McVeagh shall and will in and by his last testament in writing or otherwise give or leave all such real and personal estate as he the said Richardson McVeagh shall be seized or possessed of or any ways entitled to at the time of his decease after payment thereout of his just debts and funeral expenses or settle or cause the same to be settled to or to the use of the said Amelia Durnford his intended wife for and during the term of her natural life and from and immediately after her decease unto and amongst all and every the child and children of the said Richardson McVeagh on the body of the said Amelia Durnford lawfully to be begotten to be equally divided between them, share and share alike, and to take as tenants in common and not as joint tenants; and for want of such issue to or to the use of the executors and administrators and assigns of the said Amelia Durnford but the said defendant says that the words to or to the use of the executors and administrators or assigns of the said Amelia Durnford appear to have been obliterated and were obliterated as the said defendant believes since the execution of the said deed of settlement and that the words to or to the use of the heirs executors and administrators of the said Richardson McVeagh appear to have been written upon such obliteration; however, the said defendant says that the words “to or to the use of the executors, executors and administrators or assigns of the said Amelia Durnford” are visible and the said defendant believes for the reasons after mentioned that such words last mentioned were the words originally made use of and inserted in the said deed of settlement at the time of the execution thereof, and that the same were obliterated by the said Joseph McVeagh in his lifetime or by some persons or persons by his means or procurement or with his knowledge and who acted in concert with him in order to deceive and defraud the said Amelia McVeagh and to deprive her of her just rights under the said deed of settlement, and as after more particularly stated, and believes that the said Richardson McVeagh at the time of the execution of the aforesaid deed of settlement was a person of no property except his half pay as a lieutenant and that the  ( ) of the real and personal estate comprised in the said deed of settlement and thereby Covenanter to be settled belonged to and was the property of the said Amelia McVeagh, and therefore the said defendant believes that the covenant as entered into by the said Richardson McVeagh as aforesaid was intended as a provision by him for the said Amelia McVeagh in case she should survive him and says that in case the words so substituted as aforesaid were permitted to stand or had been used as original words of limitation in the said covenant, the intention of the said Richardson McVeagh in the respect last mentioned would be defeated and believes that the words “to or to the use of the executors, executors, administrators or assigns of the said Amelia Durnford were the original words of the limitation contained in the aforesaid covenant at the time of the execution of the said deed of settlement and that the same was afterwards obliterated and such other words substituted in their places as aforesaid by such person or persons and under such fraudulent circumstances as before mentioned, and says he is induced the more particularly to believe that the obliteration in the words so originally contained in the said deed of settlement as before mentioned was made or caused to be made by or by the means or procurement or at the instance of the said Joseph McVeagh by reason that he was the heir at Law of the said intestate, was the person solely entitled to the real estate and as one of the next of kin of the said intestate jointly entitled to the personal estate of the said intestate, and submits that, for the reasons before mentioned) that he as such assignee as aforesaid is entitled to be paid the said sum of four hundred and forty-eight pounds eight shillings in the said plaintiffs’ bill mentioned, and all other monies received or to be received for rents of the said intestate’s real estates accrued due since the death of the said Amelia McVeagh, that the defendant, (Frederick (sic.)) Meath McVeagh by his answer says he admits that Richardson McVeagh in the said bill mentioned was at his death seized of a well, entitled to such real estate as in the said bill mentioned and that in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty five the said Richardson McVeagh died intestate and without issue, and that he left Amelia McVeagh, his widow, and Joseph McVeagh, his brother and heir at Law, him surviving, and that upon the decease of the said Richardson McVeagh, the said Amelia McVeagh entered into possession of his freehold estates in the settlement of Calcutta in the said bill mentioned or into the receipt of the rents profits and produce thereof, but the said defendant says that she so entered claiming a life estate only in all her husband’s property under her Marriage Settlement as after stated and believes that the said Amelia McVeagh continued in such possession or receipt of the said rents and profits and produce until she quitter the said settlement of Calcutta as in the said bill mentioned and that previous to her departure therefrom she appointed Alexander Colvin in the said bill mentioned her attorney or agent for her and on her behalf to collect and receive the rents produce and profits of the said intestate’s real estates and generally to act in the management thereof as her agent and admits that the said Amelia McVeagh claimed and was entitled to the rents produce and profits of the said intestate’s estates for her life and for no other or longer estate and interest under and by virtue of a certain indenture or Deed of Settlement made on her marriage with the said intestate, and believes that as such agent as aforesaid the said Alexander Colvin has duly received or collected and got in the rents profits and produce of the said intestate’s freehold estates before mentioned and generally acted as steward or manager thereof and believes that the said Alexander Colvin remitted from India all the rents produce and profits of the said real estates of the said intestate which became due in respect thereof during the life of the said Amelia McVeagh and the same have been duly paid and applied to and for the use of the said Amelia McVeagh during her life or the defendant Charles Chaproniere or for his own use since her decease, and that she or the said Charles Chaproniere has duly received the same from the said plaintiffs up to the time of her death and admits that the said Amelia McVeagh died in the month of January one thousand eight hundred and eight and believes that the said defendant Charles Chaproniere and James Stevenson or one of them allege that the said Amelia McVeagh did duly make and publish her last will and testament to such purport as in the said bill set forth and the said defendant says that such will could have no effect or operation upon the said real estates of the said intestate for the reasons before and after mentioned, and admits that it is alleged by the said defendant that the defendant’s late father Joseph McVeagh in the said bill named the heir at Law of the said Intestate died in the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety four and that he did duly sign and publish his last will and testament of such date to such effect as in the said bill stated and admits that the said defendant as his eldest son and having attained his age of twenty five years and the other executors named in the said will having renounced probate thereof did duly prove the said will in the proper Ecclesiastical Court and undertook the execution of the trusts thereof and believes that the said defendant Charles Chaproniere has lately taken the benefit of a certain Act of Parliament lately passed for the benefit of insolvent debtors and that by virtue of such Act the said defendant James Stevenson has been appointed the sole assigned of the said defendant Charles Chaproniere’s real and personal estate and effects and admits that he insists that by reason of the said intestacy of the said Richardson McVeagh, the said Joseph McVeagh as the heir at Law of the said Richardson McVeagh did become entitled to all his real estates in Calcutta aforesaidand elsewhere subject to the life estate of the said intestate’s widow therein and that the said defendant as devise appointed by the the said will of his father the said Joseph McVeagh is entitled to the said rents profits and produce of the said estates accrued since the death of the said Amelia McVeagh and to the monies received from the said Alexander Colvin or from him and his partners by the said plaintiffs on account thereof as such agents as aforesaid and that he has given notice to the said plaintiffs not to pay the monies in their hands to any other person or persons but himself and believes that a deed of Settlement was made on the marriage of the said Richardson McVeagh with Amelia Durnford afterwards the said Amelia McVeagh to the effect after stated and be,dives that the defendants Charles Chaproniere and James Stevenson allege that they are in possession of settlement made on the said marriage and that they represent the same to contain some limitations under which the said last named defendants or one of them are entitled to the rents and profits of the said real estate of the said Richardson McVeagh accrued since the death of the said Amelia McVeagh but believes that the said defendants have not not have either of them ever produced any such settlement to the said defendant’s solicitor or to the said plaintiffs or to any other person on their behalf though frequently required on behalf of the said defendant so to do and though as the said defendant believes the said plaintiffs were frequently before the filing of their bill desired by the said defendant’s solicitors to insist on the production of the original settlement so alleged to be in the custody of the said defendants or one of them but which the said plaintiffs neglected to do and says that the said Amelia McVeagh having upon or soon after the death of her said husband the said Richardson McVeagh obtained letters of administration of the goods and chattels of the said Richardson McVeagh to be granted to her by the Prerogative Court of Canterbury and her son James Rowland Caesar DURNFORD having obtained the like letters of administration of the goods of the said intestate in the East Indies to be granted to him by some count or proper authority there the said Joseph McVeagh as one of the next of kin of the said Richardson McVeagh on the twelfth day of March one thousand seven hundred and eighty eight filed his bill in this court against the said Amelia McVeagh, James Rowland Caesar Durnford and others praying amongst other things that an account might be taken of the personal estate and effects of the said Richardson McVeagh and that the clear surplus thereof might be placed out during the life of the said Amelia McVeagh so that the capital might be secured and ready to be paid or transferred to the said plaintiffs and the other parties entitled thereto, and says that this said bill amongst other things set forth that previous to the marriage of the said Richardson McVeagh with the said Amelia his wife by indenture bearing date the seventeenth day ofDecember one thousand seven hundred and seventy and made between the said Richardson McVeagh of the first part, the said Amelia McVeagh by her then name of Amelia Durnford of the second part, and Stephen Caesar Le Maistre Esquire and George Hemmings of the third part in consideration of the marriage then intended between the said Richardson McVeagh and the said Amelia Durnford and for making a further provision for her above the settlement made of her fortune or the greatest part thereof for her separate use during her life and after her death in case of the said Richardson McVeagh dying in her lifetime without issue by her for her sole and separate use absolute for the benefit of the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford, her son by a former husband or one of them and also for making a further provision for her issue by him the said Richardson McVeagh, he the said Richardson McVeagh did covenant and agree with the said Stephen Caesar Le Maistre and George Flemmings, that in case the said intended marriage should take effect and the said Amelia Durnford should survive the said Richardson McVeagh would by his last will leave all such real estate as he should be seized or possessed of or in any ways entitled unto at the time of his death after payment thereout of his just debts and funeral expenses or cause the same to be settled to the use of the said Amelia Durnford for her life, and immediately after her decease unto and among all the children of the said Richardson McVeagh by her to be equally divided amongst them, and for want of such issue to the use of the heirs executors and administrators of the said Richardson McVeagh, that the said Richardson McVeagh died in the East Indies in September one thousand seven hundred and eighty five intestate and without issue, leaving the said Amelia McVeagh his widow and the said Joseph McVeagh his only brother, and Jane Maria Shaw, wife of Thomas Shaw, Elizabeth Wilson, widow and Alice Anderson his only sisters and the said bill insisted that therefore as no child of any deceased brother or sister of the said Richardson McVeagh was living at the time of his death, the said Joseph McVeagh, Jane Maria Shaw, Elizabeth Wilson and Alice Anderson were his only next of kin and that, by virtue of the aforesaid indenture, the said Amelia McVeagh became entitled on the death of the said Richardson McVeagh to the whole income to arise during her life on the clear residue or surplus of all the personal estate and effects belonging to the said Richardson McVeagh at the time of his death and that by virtue of the statute made for distribution of the intestate’s estates and by reason of such provision as aforesaid having been made for the said principal of such residue subject to such right of the said Amelia McVeagh to receive the interest and income thereof during her life was distributed in equal shares between the plaintiff and the said Jane Maria Shaw, Elizabeth Elizabeth Wilson and Alice Anderson and that all the defendants to the said bill having put in their answers to the same and the said cause being at issue it was afterwards agreed between the parties to the said cause that the matters of difference between them should be settled without the further prosecution thereof and for that purpose certain articles of agreement in writing bearing date the eighteenth day of May one thousand seven hundred and ninety were duly made and executed by the said Amelia McVeagh and others in which amongst other things her said marriage settlement was again recited to the effect before set forth and it was agreed that the principal question in the said cause namely what interest the said Amelia McVeagh was entitled to in the personal estate of the said Richardson McVeagh by virtue of the said settlement should be determined by the opinion of His Majesty’s then Attorney General and Solicitor General in manner therein mentioned and such provision was made as therein expressed for securing to the brothers and sisters of the said intestate after the death of his widow the said Amelia McVeagh the whole of the personal estate or such part thereof as it should be determined in manner aforesaid that they were entitled to after her death and says that afterwards in the month of July one thousand seven hundred and ninety four a certain other indenture bearing date the seventh day of the said month of July and made between the said Joseph McVeagh, Jane Maria Shaw and Samuel Heron and Elizabeth his wife of the first part, the said Amelia McVeagh of the second part, and the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford and certain other persons therein named of the third part and fourth parts was duly executed by all the said parties thereto, and by the last mentioned indenture again reciting the said marriage settlement to the effect before set forth and stating amongst other things that the proceedings in this court and the case prepared or mentioned in the said articles of agreement had been laid before the attorney and solicitor general who ere of the opinion that the said Amelia McVeagh by virtue of the said articles, settlement and the statute of distribution of intestates’ estates was absolutely entitled to one moiety of the personal estate of the said Richardson McVeagh and was entitled to the interest of the other moiety during her life. It was by the indenture declared that certain stock therein mentioned (lodged) in the names of the trustees therein named and which had been purchased with part of the (said) personal estate of the said Richardson McVeagh should be held upon the trusts therein expressed and it was by the said indenture declared and agreed by and between all the said parties thereto that nothing therein contained should extend or be deemed or considered to extend to release or discharge any right or interest which the said Joseph McVeagh, Jane Maria Shaw and Samuel Heron and Elizabeth his wife or any of them had or might have in or to all or any of the houses and landed property late of the said Richardson McVeagh deceased in the East Indies and being the real estate in the said bill mentioned in case the same should be deemed or determined to be personal property it being confessed and agreed that no part or parcel thereof was mentioned as personal estate in the account settled between the said parties to leave the question whether the same or any particulars thereof were of the nature of the real or personal estate for legal discussion and decision after the death of the said Amelia McVeagh  and says it never has appeared or could appear that all or any of the said houses or landed property late of the said Richardson McVeagh in the East Indies were personal property, the same being as stated in the plaintiffs Bill and as the said defendant is advised, Real property; and says he believes that no claim has ever been made to the said houses and landed property or any part thereof by the said defendants Charles Chaproniere and James Stevenson or any other person on the ground of the same being personal property and believes that the said plaintiffs before the filing of their said bill were acquainted by the solicitors for the said defendant fully and minutely with the said defendants title to the said property in Calcutta and the rents and profits thereof accrued since the death of the said Amelia McVeagh and with the grounds for believing that no such settlement containing such limitation as pretended by the said other defendants was executed particularly that no such document had ever been produced and that the said Amelia McVeagh had executed the said indenture of the seventh day of July one thousand seven hundred and ninety four in which her marriage settlement and said proceedings as before mentioned and that the said Charles Chaproniere had on many occasions confessed that the said Amelia McVeagh had no great interest in the said property than for her life of such fact no doubt was ever expressed by the said plaintiffs and that in all events the said defendant as devisee of the heir at law of the said Richardson McVeagh was entitled to his said real estate until a settlement appeared under which some other person derived a title to the same which had not nor ever has been the case and submits to this court for the reasons before mentioned that he is entitled to be paid the said sum of four hundred and forty eight pounds eight shillings in the said bill mentioned and all other sums received for rents for the said estates of the said Richardson McVeagh accrued since the death of the said Amelia McVeagh that by an order made in this cause bearing date the thirtieth day of May one thousand eight hundred and eighteen it was ordered that the plaintiffs should be at liberty to pay the sum of four hundred and forty eight pounds eight shillings into the bank with the privity of the accountant general of this court to be there placed to the credit of this cause subject to the further order of this court that the said sum of four hundred and forty eight pounds eight shillings was accordingly paid into the bank and has been laid out in the purchase of five hundred and eighty two pounds four shillings and nine pence bank three pounds per cent annuities in the name and with the privity of the said accountant general in trust for this cause.  It was therefore prayed that the sum of five hundred and eighty two pounds four shillings and nine pence bank three pounds per cent annuities standing in the name of the accountant general of this court in trusty in this cause and purchased with the sum of four hundred and forty eight pounds eight shillings in the plaintiffs bill mentioned with the dividends of the said bank annuities may be transferred and paid to the said defendant Ferdinand Meath McVeagh or that an issue may be directed to try whether such indenture of settlement was made and executed on the marriage of Richardson McVeagh in the pleadings mentioned with Amelia his wife as stated and alleged in the answer of the defendant James Stevenson; whereupon and upon hearing Mr Teed of Counsel for the plaintiffs – Mr Loraine of Counsel for the defendant James Stevenson; and an affidavit of notice of this motion to the defendant Charles Chaproniere read – and Mr Bligh of Counsel for the defendant Ferdinand Meath McVeagh.

His Lordship doth order that the defendant’s James Stevenson and Ferdinand Meath McVeagh do proceed to a trial at Law at the Sittings of the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas to be Holden for the County of Middlesex at the sittings to be Holden in next Easter Term on the following issue – “whether any settlement was ever ever (sic.) executed on the marriage of Richardson McVeagh with Amelia his wife, then Amelia Durnford under which she took any other or future interest in the real and personal estate of which the said Richardson McVeagh died seized and possessed than a life interest commencing at his death”, and the said defendant James Stevenson is to be plaintiff at Law and the said defendant Ferdinand Meath McVeagh is to be defendant at Law who is forthwith to name an attorney, accept a declaration, appear and plead to issue, and it is hereby to Mr Jekyll, one of the Masters of this Court to settle the issue in case the parties differ about the same, and it is ordered that the parties be at liberty to inspect the indenture of settlement which the said defendant James Stevenson has been ordered to leave with the said Master, and it is ordered that all deeds papers and writings relating to the matters in question in the custody or power of any of the parties be produced at the trial of the said issue and it is ordered that either of the parties at the said trial be at liberty to examine the said Charles Chaproniere as a witness saving all just exceptions and if any special matter shall arise on the trial of the said issue, the same are to be indorsed on the (Postea) and his Lordship doth reserve the consideration of the costs of this suit and of all further directions until after the trial of the said issue and any of the parties are to be at liberty to apply to the Court as there shall be occasion.

This indenture made the seventeenth day of December in the eleventh year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord George the Third, by the Grace of God of Great Britain, France Ireland King, Defender of the Faith and so forth, and in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy between Richardson McVeagh, Lieutenant in His Majesty’s Sixth Regiment of Foot of the first part, Amelia Durnford of the Parish of Saint Mary Paures in the County of Middlesex, widow of the second part, and Stephen Caesar LeMaistre Esquire of the same parish and George Hemmings of Caldecott Hall in the County of Warwick Esquire of the third part.  WHEREAS a marriage is intended by the permission of God to be shortly had and solemnised between the said Richardson McVeagh and Amelia Durnford AND WHEREAS the said Amelia Durnford is possessed of an estate tail in possession of and in an undivided third part of certain messuages, lands, tenements and hereditaments situate in the County of Kent, late the real estate of Charles BROWN Esquire, her late grandfather, deceased AND WHEREAS the said Amelia Durnford is entitled to one sixth part of the personal estate of Charles ROCHE Esquire, her late brother, deceased AND WHEREAS upon a treaty for and in prospect and consideration of the said intended marriage it was agreed between the said Richardson McVeagh and Amelia Durnford that the said Amelia Durnford’s estate of the said real estate late of the said Charles Brown deceased should be sold with all convenient speed  and the money arising by the sales thereof as also the money to arise from the said Amelia Durnford’s share of the personal estate of the said Charles Roche deceased should be paid into the hands of the said Henry Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings to be by them paid applied and disposed of in manner hereinafter respectively mentioned concerning the same. NOW THIS INDEMNITY WITNESSES that the said Richardson McVeagh does hereby (for) himself his heirs executors and administrators and the said Amelia Durnford by and with the consent and approval of the said Richardson McVeagh (testifies) by this being made a (party) to and executing of these presents, does for herself her heirs, executors and administrators, covenant promise and agree to and with the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings, their executors, administrators and assigns, that in case the said intended marriage shall take effect, he the said Richardson McVeagh and the said Amelia Durnford shall and will with all convenient speed sell and dispose of the said Amelia Durnford’s undivided third part of the said messuages, lands, tenements and hereditaments late the real estate of the said Charles Brown deceased by public auction or otherwise as the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings their executors or administrators shall think best and in order thereto and for completing such sale and barring all estates tail remainders and reversions in the same they the said Richardson McVeagh and Amelia Durnford shall and will before the end of (Hilary) term next levy a fine and suffer a common recovery thereof or join with the other persons interested in and entitled to the other two thirds of the said estates in levying a fine and suffering such recovery of the whole of the said (promise); AND it is hereby (somated) and agreed by and between all the said parties to these presents that the money to arise by sale of  the said Amelia Durnford’s said third part of the said freehold premises and also the money to arise from the sixth part of the personal estate of her late brother Charles Roche deceased shall as the same can be severally got in be paid into the hands of the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings, their executors and administrators upon the trusts and to and for the several  (…) intents and purposes hereinafter expressed and declared touching the same, that is to say, UPON TRUST in the first place to discharge what shall appear to be remaining due from the said Amelia Durnford to Sir Alexander Grant, Bt., upon an original debt of one hundred and twenty pounds secured by bond and after payment thereof to lay out the remainder of the said monies as the same shall be received in the purchase of East India stock in the names of them the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings, their executors or administrators, and when the same shall have been so laid out and invested, then UPON TRUST that they the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings, their executors and administrators do and shall during the joint lives of the said Richardson McVeagh and Amelia Durnford pay the dividends, interest or produce of the said East India stock into the proper hands of the said Amelia Durnford and not otherwise TO THE INTENT that the same may be for her own sole and separate use and disposal and not at the disposal or subject to the control, debts or engagements of her said intended husband, and her receipt alone, notwithstanding her convenience shall from time to time be a good and sufficient discharge for the same, and then and immediately after the decease of the said Amelia Durnford, then in trust  to pay the dividends, interest and produce  of the said stock unto the said Richardson McVeagh and his assigns for and during the term of his natural life or order (not) to permit and empower them and (…) to receive the same and pay (…) also the (…) the survivor of them the said Richardson McVeagh and Amelia Durnford UPON TRUST to sell and dispose of the said India stock with all convenient speed and out of the money to arise from such sale to pay the sum of two hundred pounds of lawful money of Great Britain unto such person or persons as the said Amelia Durnford, notwithstanding her coverture and whether covert or sole shall, by any deed or instrument in writing with or without a power of revocation to be by her seals delivered in the presence of and attested by two or more credible witnesses or by her last will and testament in writing or any writing in the nature of a last will and testament to be by her signed published and delivered in the presence of and to be attested by the like number of witnesses, direct give or appoint and for want of such direction gift or appointment to the executors or administrators of the said Amelia Durnford AND UPON FURTHER TRUST out of the remainder of the money to arise from the sale of the said East India stock in case there shall be issue of the said intended marriage and James Rowland Caesar Durnford, son of the said Amelia Durnford shall be living and shall have attained the age of twenty one years to pay unto the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford as much money (as with the sum of four hundred pounds already provided for him and now invested or intended to be invested on mortgages or other securities in the names of Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and Felix (Mardonough) Doctor in Physick, on trust for the use and benefit of the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford and in such manner as is mentioned in a certain indenture tripartite bearing date on or about the fourth day of Novemberone thousand seven hundred and sixty three and made between the said Amelia Durnford of the first part, the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and Felix Mardonough of the second part, and the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford of the third part, will make him the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford (a certain) fortune with every child of the said intended marriage accounting the said sum of four hundred pounds and the whole money to arise by such sale (except the said sum of two hundred pounds which is at the disposal of the said Amelia Durnford joint as one aggregate fund to be equally divided between the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford and the children of the said marriage) and in case the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford shall not have attained the age of twenty one years (obscured by fold) to lay out his said share of the money to arise from the sale of the said East India stock in the purchase of the like or any other stock annuities in any of the public funds or companies or to lend and place out the same at interest on (such) securities as the trustees for he time being shall think proper AND UPON FURTHER TRUST to assign or transfer the said stock annuities or securities to the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford when and as soon as he shall have attained the age of twenty one years, and in the meantime to pay and apply the dividends interest or produce thereof for or towards his maintenance and education, and in case the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford shall die before he attains the age of twenty one years without leaving lawful issue then UPON TRUST to transfer or assign the said stock annuities or securities unto and amongst all and every the child and children (if more than one) of the said Richardson McVeagh and Amelia Durnford, his intended wife, in equal shares and proportions, and if but one, the whole to such only child, the share or shares of such child or children as shall be a son or sons to be transferred or assigned to him or them when and as soon as he or they shall attain the age of twenty one years and the share or shares of such of them as shall be a daughter or daughters to be transferred or assigned to her or them at her or their age or ages of twenty one or day or days of marriage which shall first happen, and in the meantime UPON TRUST to pay the dividend interest or produce thereof towards his her or their maintenance and education PROVIDED ALWAYS and (illegible on fold, but the gist is that if such son or sons shall happen to die) before he or they shall attain the said age of twenty one years and without lawful issue and the daughter and daughters before she or they shall attain such age or be married, then the share or shares of him her or them so dying shall go and belong to the survivor and survivors of them and with the dividends interest or produce thereof be assigned transferred and applied to him, her or them and for his, her or their benefit in the like shares and in such times and in such manner as is hereinbefore directed with respect to higher or their original share or shares, AND UPON FURTHER TRUST that they the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings, their executors administrators or assigns do and shall with all convenient speed and in like manner invest or place out the remainder of the money to arise from the sale of the said East India Stock in public or real securities at their discretion, and after the same shall have been so invested or placed out UPON FURTHER TRUST to transfer or assign such last mentioned securities unto and equally between all and every the child and children (if more than one) of the said Richardson McVeagh and Amelia Durnford, his intended wife, and if be one the whole to such only child, the share or shares of such child or children as shall be a son or sons also to be assigned and transferred unto him or them when and so soon  as he or they shall attain the age of twenty one years, and that the share or shares of them as shall be a daughter or daughters to be assigned and transferred to her or them at her age of twenty one years or day or days of marriage which shall first happen, and in the meantime to pay the dividends interest or produce thereof towards his her or their maintenance and education, PROVIDED ALWAYS that in case any such children shall die the son or sons before he or they shall attain the age of twenty one years and without lawful issue and the daughter or daughters before she or they shall attain such age or be married, then the share of such child or children  so dying shall go and belong to the survivors or survivor of such child or children and the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford  and to the survivor of them and with the dividends interest and produce thereof shall be assigned transferred and paid to him her or them and for his her or their benefit in like shares and proportions as at such times and in such manner as is before directed with respect to their respective original fortunes hereby provided for them, PROVIDED ALWAYS and it is hereby further declared and agreed by and between all the parties to these presents that in case the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford  and all or any of the sons of the intended marriage shall die before he or they shall attain the age of twenty one years leaving lawful issue then such issue shall be entitled to and for such share and interest in the whole monies (illegible due to the fold in the vellum) as their respective (…) parents would have been entitled unto (illegible due to the fold in the vellum) declared and agreed by and between the parties to these presents that in case there shall be no child or children of the said intended marriage or if there shall be any and all of them as also the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford  shall happen to die the said James Rowland Caesar Durnford  and the sons of the said intended marriage before he or they  shall attain the age or ages of twenty one years and without lawful issue, and the daughter or daughters before she or they shall attain such age or be married, then they the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings their executors administrators and assigns shall pay assign or transfer the whole of the monies to arise from the sale of the East India stock except the said sum of two hundred which is to be at the separate disposal of the said Amelia Durnford or the securities in which the same shall be invested or placed out unto such person or persons and for such uses and purposes as the survivor of them the said Richardson McVeagh and Amelia Durnford shall by any deed or instrument in writing with or without a power of revocation to be by him or her sealed and delivered in the presence of and attested by two or more credible witnesses or by his or her last will and testament in writing or any (…) in the nature of a last will and testament to be signed published and declared in the presence of and to be attested by the like number of witnesses direct give or appoint and for want of such direction gift or appointment then to the executors and assigns of the survivor of them the said Richardson McVeagh and Amelia Durnford PROVIDED ALWAYS and it is hereby further declared and agreed by and between the said parties to these presents that it shall and may be lawful to and for the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings their executors administrators and assigns (that) to with the consent and approbation of the said Richardson McVeagh and Amelia Durnford during their joint lives and after the decease of either of them then of the survivor of them in writing under their hands or the hands of such survivor for that purpose first had and obtained to sell and dispose of the said East India stock or any part thereof and with such consent and approbation as aforesaid to lend place out or invest the monies arising from such sale or sales in any of the public funds or on government or real securities or in the purchase of any freehold copyhold or leasehold messuages lands and tenements and so from time to time as often as the said trustees shall think proper with such consent and approbation as aforesaid to call or take in receive sell and dispose of reinvest and vary the said trust estates funds and securities so as nevertheless all such new funds messuages lands tenements or securities in or upon which the said monies shall from time to time be laid out or (invested) shall be to for and upon the same uses trusts intents and purposes as are therein before declared and agreed upon touching the above said East India stock or as (much thereto) as may be PROVIDED ALSO and it is hereby further declared and agreed by and between all the said parties to these presents that if the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings or either of them shall die or be desirous to quit or be discharged from the trusts hereby in them reposed before the trusts shall be fully executed and performed, then and in such case and when and so often as the same shall happen it shall and may be lawful to and for the said Richardson McVeigh (sic.) and Amelia Durnford or the survivor of them by any writing or writings under their his or (her) hands or seals hand or seal to be executed in the presence of and attested by two or more credible witnesses to nominate substitute or appoint any other person or persons to be a trustee or trustees for the purposes aforesaid in the place and stead of them the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings or of either of them who shall so die or be desirous to quit and be discharged from the said trusts and so from time to time and as often as the Trustees or either of them for the time being shall die or be desirous to quit and be discharged from the said trusts to nominate substitute and appoint any other person or persons to be a trustee or trustees in manner and for the purposes aforesaid in the place and stead of the present or any successor or other trustee or trustees who shall so die or be desirous to be discharged as aforesaid and that when and so often as any new trustee or trustees shall be nominated or appointed as aforesaid all the then trust estate whatsoever shall thereupon with all convenient speed be assigned  transported and conveyed to and in such sort as that the same shall be legally and effectually vested in the surviving or continuing former trustee and such new trustees upon the trusts aforesaid any thing herein contained to the contrary thereof in any wise notwithstanding AND it is hereby further declared and agreed by and between the said parties to these presents that no trustee of the said premises shall be charged or chargeable with  or accountable for any more of the trust monies or estate than he shall actually receive nor for any loss which shall happen to the same but what shall happen through his own wilful neglect or default nor shall chargeable  charged or accountable for the acts deeds receipts or defaults of the other but each trustee for his own acts deeds receipts and defaults only when joining in receipts for convenience sake notwithstanding AND ALSO that it shall and may be lawful for the trustee and trustees for the time being in (case they stand) out of the Trust estate to deduct such (cost) that him and themselves (respectively and jointly the co-trustee all costs) and to pay the (… … …) and expense do (tally) so either of them shall sustain no expense or be put (… …) by reason of the (trust) aforesaid and the management and the execution thereof or anything in any ways related thereto AND the said Richardson McVeagh in consideration of the said intended marriage and to making a further provision for the said Amelia Durnford in case she shall survive him and (not) issue does thereby for himself his heirs executors and administrators covenant promise and agree to and with the said Stephen Caesar Lemaistre and George Hemmings tinier executors administrators and assigns that in case the said intended marriage shall take effect and  the said Amelia Durnford  shall survive him the said Richardson McVeagh that and in such case he the said Richardson McVeagh shall and will in and by the last will and testament in writing or otherwise give or leave all such real and personal estate as he the said Richardson McVeagh shall be seized or possessed of or any ways entitled to at the time of his decease after payment thereout of the just debts and funeral expenses or settle or cause the same to be settled to or to the (…) the said Amelia Durnford the intended wife for all (…) the term of her natural life and from and immediately after her decease unto and amongst all and every the child or children of the said Richardson McVeagh on the body of the said Amelia Durnford lawfully to be begotten to be equally divided between them share and share alike (… …) as tenants in common and not as joint tenants and for want of (such issue) or to the use of the (heirs) executors and administrators (… … …) IN WITNESS whereof the said parties to these presents have (… … and set their names and seals …  … …)

Signed and sealed by:

Richardson McVeagh

Amelia Durnford

James Rowland Caesar Durnford

Stephen Caesar Lemaistre

George Hemmings

1811 Joseph McVeagh
1808 Jane Maria Shaw

1879 Family of Coghill

The Family of Coghill


James Henry Coghill, 1879

(transcribed and annotated by Julian D S Lyon, 2001)

The Family of Coghill, 1377 to 1879: with some sketches of their maternal ancestors, the Slingsbys, of Scriven Hall, 1135 to 1879

First published by CAMBRIDGE and Printed at the Riverside Press 1879


Could I have foreseen the difficulties to be encountered, the large outlay of money, and the amount of labor to be expended upon this work, it would probably never have been undertaken by me. But now that it is finished I cannot say that I regret the impulse which first prompted me to engage in it.

When I first entered upon this work it was with no thought of extending my researches beyond the limits of our own country, and with but little hope of tracing the family very far back here. I was fortunate, however, at the beginning, in having the assistance and cooperation of a gentleman (A. R. Micou, Esq., of Tappahannock, Virginia) whose qualifications and position enabled him to render me valuable aid. To his patient and thorough examination of the old and musty records of Essex County, in that State, I am indebted for many links of the family chain; these, and others which came to me through family records and members now living, were, by carefully examining and comparing the different records, put each in its place, and properly connected, forming, when finished, an unbroken chain from 1664 to 1879.

Encouraged by success, I determined to extend my inquiries beyond the seas. This new field was hardly entered, when so many obstacles presented themselves that I was more than once on the point of abandoning the work in despair. I was held to it, however, by the encouragement and assistance given by friends, and, I may add, strangers also, for many kind letters and much valuable information were from persons with whom I had not the pleasure of a personal acquaintance. It is a most pleasant duty to mention and thank them here, as well for their uniform kindness in answering my numerous letters, as for the assistance I received from them.

I am under special obligations to Sir John Jocelyn Coghill, Bart., of Belvedere House, Drumcondra, in the County of Dublin, and Glen Barrahane, Castle Townsend, in the County of Cork, Ireland, for the pedigree of the eldest branch of the family, which was invaluable as a basis of further research, and also for other useful information.

I am hardly less indebted to Henry Hucks Gibbs, Esq., of Aldenham House, County of Hertford, and of St. Dunstans, Regents Park, London, former Governor of the Bank of England (who is the present representative of the principal estates of the Coghills of Hertfordshire, and the representative of the family of Hucks, through whom these estates descended to him), for records from the family papers now in his possession, and for revising and correcting the pedigree of the junior branch of the family, and also for photographs of the old family portraits of John Coghill, and Sir Thomas, his son, from which their pictures in this book were made.

My thanks are also due to Henry Coghill, Esq., of Brampton Tree House, Newcastle, Staffordshire, England, for much of the information relating to the Scottish branch, a part of which is from a manuscript “History of the County of Caithness,” not yet published, which the author permitted him to use. Other information, referring to the same branch, was given me by Miss Jane Coghill, of Castletown, in the County of Caithness, Scotland, and John Coghill, senior magistrate of Thurso. Miss Martha Coghill, of Ivy House Farm, West Uxbridge, County of Middlesex, and Mr. Anthony Coghill, her uncle, of Notting Hill, London, gave information relating to the unconnected branch.

To my valued friend, Capt. Charles H. Townsend, of New Haven, Connecticut (a cousin of my wife), I am under obligations for copies of records from York, Knaresborough, London, and other places which he visited at no little personal inconvenience, to obtain for me.

I have had the services of professional gentlemen in examining records in each of the countries, and take special pleasure in expressing my thanks to Joseph L. Chester, LL. D., of London, member of the council of the Historical Society of Great Britain, for valuable information, and also for suggestions and advice which were of great service to me.

With the exception of two or three books which had to be obtained from England, most of those consulted were found in the Astor Library of this city.

It may be necessary, in our country, where there is a feeling of real or assumed prejudice against all concern about family descent, to offer an apology for printing a pedigree. I cannot better communicate to my numerous relatives the reasons for so doing, than by the following extracts from Burke’s “Family Vicissitudes:” –

“I am well aware that to many the genealogical tree appears to be little better than a barren trunk, producing no fruits, or none of any value. Such, however, is not my conviction. If it be a natural and laudable feeling for the living to glory in the fame of their dead ancestors – if such recollections seem as a spur to the good, and a check to evil in ourselves – genealogy is a valuable and important science.  Can anyone for a moment doubt the influence, the beneficial influence exercised upon most minds by the noble pride of lineage? If I have not exaggerated – as I trust I have not – the uses to be drawn from genealogical pursuits, little apology will be needed for the following work.”

In such a spirit I would give to the members of the family connection the results of my labor, trusting that they may not be without some benefit, especially to the young. The present moment is ever fleeting, and we all live mainly in the past and the future. May these records of the past stimulate our young kinsmen to seek for themselves a noble future, and in their turn leave a worthy example. J. H. C.

NEW YORK, January, 1879


PREFACE……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2

CONTENTS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4

PART 1 – Knaresborough……………………………………………………………………………………………… 5

Part 2 – The Eldest Branch……………………………………………………………………………………………. 9


From Knaresborough Parish Register…………………………………………………………………………. 19

APPENDIX to PART II…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 21

Grant from Marmaduke Coghill to his youngest son John, 1575………………………………… 21

Abstract of Thomas Coghill’s Will, 1624……………………………………………………………………… 22

Marriage Licence – John Coghill, 1639……………………………………………………………………….. 23

Purchase of Crake Manor – Thomas Coghill, 1648…………………………………………………….. 23

Major Kendal Josiah William Coghill (13)……………………………………………………………………. 24

Lieutenant Nevill Josiah Aylmer Coghill (14)………………………………………………………………. 24

Letter of condolence: Maj. Gen. M A Dillon to Sir John Jocelyn Coghill Bt…………………… 26

Poems to the memory of Lieutenants Coghill and Melvill………………………………………….. 26

Part 3 – The Junior Branch of England……………………………………………………………………….. 30

TOMB INSCRIPTIONS, ETC…………………………………………………………………………………………. 38

REFERRING TO HENRY COGHILL’S WILL…………………………………………………………………….. 39

ABSTRACT OF HENRY COGHILL’S WILL………………………………………………………………………. 39

ABSTRACT OF ELIZABETH COGHILL’S WILL………………………………………………………………… 39

WILL OF SIR THOMAS COGHILL…………………………………………………………………………………. 40

ALDENHAM, CO. HERTFORD. BAPTISMS……………………………………………………………………. 41

ALDENHAM, CO, HERTFORD. BURIALS………………………………………………………………………. 41

BLECHINGDON, CO. OXFORD. BAPTISMS………………………………………………………………….. 42

BLECHINGDON, CO. OXFORD. BURIALS…………………………………………………………………….. 43

BLECHINGDON CHURCH…………………………………………………………………………………………… 43

PART 4 – The Unconnected Branch of the Family in England……………………………………… 45

Part 5. The Scottish Branch……………………………………………………………………………………….. 49

Part 6. The American Branch…………………………………………………………………………………….. 49

Part 7. The Family of Slingsby……………………………………………………………………………………. 49

SCRIVEN HALL…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 50

The Family of Slingsby………………………………………………………………………………………………. 50


PART 1 – Knaresborough

The ancestors of the Coghill family had their homes in the county of York in England, and are traced back in a direct line to Knaresborough, AD 1378, on the paternal, and AD 1135, on the maternal side.  The name as above written was first assumed there.   It may not then be inappropriate to preface the pedigree and outline history of the family with a few allusions to that county, and a brief historical sketch of Knaresborough.

The section of country comprehended by the present boundaries of Yorkshire was inhabited by Brigantes, the most numerous and powerful of all the British tribes that possessed the island before the Roman Conquest.  In AD 71 they were overpowered and passed under the Roman yoke.  From that period until the abandonment of England by the Romans, AD 426-7, there were occasional revolt, but comparative quiet continued.  Many fine roads, some of which continue to the present time, and other improvements were made.  After the departure of the Romans the country sunk into a state of anarchy; civil discords terminated in the establishment of military tyrannies; “kings appointed, but not by God, who in their turn gave way to men more ferocious than themselves.” [1]  The standards of the Picts and Scots, the Saxons, the Danes, and the Normans were successively carried over its territory, and later those of the barons, the Houses of York and Lancaster; and the Parliament and the royal banners were here raised, and drew around them men of the same country and blood to engage in fraternal strife.

Within the present boundaries of this county some of the world’s rulers have resided: amongst them the Roman Emperors, Adrian (sic), Severus, Caracalla and Geta (sons of the latter, and joint emperors), Constantius, and Constantine the Great.  These all resided in Eboricum, afterwards York.  The Imperial Court of Rome was for three years held at this place by Severus, who died there.  Constantine arrived from Rome in time to be at his father’s deathbed, and was inaugurated emperor there.  Marcus Aurelius Lucius, a British king, said to have been the first crowned head in the world who embraced Christianity, was born there, and also John Wickliff, “the morning star of the Reformation,” in 1324.  In 1160, Henry II held in York the first Parliament mentioned in English history by that name.  In 1298, another Parliament was held there, when the barons attended, and the king’s confirmation of Magna Carta, and also Charta de Foresta, was read to them.  Charles I assembled his great council of all the peers of England in York, and Charles II was proclaimed there.  York in the ninth century was the seat of letters, as well as of trade and commerce.  The library collected by Archbishop Egbert, and placed in the cathedral, ranked among the first in Christendom.

The town of Knaresborough is situated on a rocky eminence on the northeast bank of the river Nidd, which runs here between precipitous banks, and through a romantic valley in the parish of the same name, in the Wapentake of Claro, West Riding, Yorkshire.  It is eighteen miles from York, and two hundred and three from London.  Hargrove supposes its name was derived from its situation, as Knares, in the German language, signifies a hard knot, and, when applied to situation, a rocky mountain.  He also conjectures that this may have been a fortified place of the Romans, as it is easy to trace the remains of a ditch, or ramparts; and numerous Roman coins have been found here, particularly some of the Emperors Claudius and Constantine.  It is one of the ancient burghs that were part of the demesnes of the crown, found under the title of Terra Regis in Doomsday Book and other records, all of which, and the land belonging to them, were held by royal grant.[2]  Littleton observes that burghs are the most ancient towns in England; such situations were chosen by the Saxons, as being already places of strength, to erect their castles upon.

For some centuries after the departure of the Romans this part of the country in particular was dreadfully harassed by contending armies.   Malmesbury states that it was always exposed to the fury of the northern nations, receiving the barbarous shocks of the Danes, and groaning under repeated depredations.  The Saxons finally prevailed, rather by exterminating than subduing the ancient inhabitants, in consequence of which they preserved unaltered all their civil and military institutions.  Whatever may have been the condition and privileges of Knaresborough before the Conquest, we find at that period a complete Saxon manor, that is, one township presiding over ten others.  Knaresborough and its villages suffered in the general devastation made by the ruthless and cruel Norman, who, after the siege of York in the year 1070, laid waste all the country between that city and Durham.  Malmesbury, writing half a century afterwards, says: “Thus the resources of a province, once flourishing, were cut off by fire, slaughter, and devastation; the ground for more than sixty miles, totally uncultivated and unproductive, remains bare to the present day.”

Hume finishes this sad story with these words: “The houses were reduced to ashes, the cattle seized and driven away, and many of the inhabitants perished in the woods from cold and hunger: the lives of one hundred thousand persons were computed to have been sacrificed to this stroke of barbarous policy.”  More than two centuries afterward came the long and bloody struggle between the houses of York and Lancaster, in which more than fourscore princes of the blood royal, and nearly the whole body of the ancient nobility, perished; and later still, the war between Charles I and the parliament, causing cruel disasters to the best families in the realm.  A writer has truly remarked: “York County seemed a land of destiny, echoing on every side with the solution of fearful problems.  What were the assured advantages accruing from so many changes?  What were the promptings of so many sad events?  Why should one portion of a people become so vividly alive to a need of defence from another portion?  It could only have been a strong faith that in the issues involved was a remedy for all social wrong, bad laws, and abuses.  The test of war was a final solution of the political problem.”

At the time of the Conquest, the manor of Knaresborough, which comprehended the town and ten surrounding villages, formed a part of the demesnes of the crown.  The castle, celebrated in history from its very founding to its dismantlement by order of Parliament in 1646, once the ornament and security of the town, and of which the venerable though scanty remains recall the recollection of other times, was built by Serlo de Burg, Baron of Tonesburg, in Normandy, who accompanied the Conqueror into England, and received this, with several other lordships, as a reward for his services.  In 1170, Hugh de Morville, Reginald Fitz-use, William de Tracey, and Richard Brito, the four knights who slew Thomas à Becket, fled to the castle, where they remained shut up for a year, but, submitting to the church, were pardoned, on condition of performing a pilgrimage to Jerusalem.  In 1319 the Scots, entering England, burnt both Knaresborough and Skipton.  In 1337 the castle was taken by John de Lilburn, an officer of the great Earl of Lancaster, the chief and most powerful of the discontented barons.  It was, however, soon invested by the king’s troops, and De Lilburn surrendered, after having destroyed all the records, and with them every memorial of the liberties, customs, and privileges of the place.  In 1371 the castle, honour, and manor of the town, with the house and cell of St Robert, were granted by the king (Edward III) to his fourth son, John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster; and from that time they have belonged to the Duchy of Lancaster.  About 1400, Richard II was imprisoned in this castle, as appears from the following lines in Hardyng’s ‘Chronicle’ –

“The Kyng then sent Kyng Richard to Ledis,

There to be kepte surely in privitie;

Fro thens after to Pykering went he nedis,

And to Knaresburgh after led was he,

But to Pontefrete last, where he did de.”

The place of confinement is supposed to have been in that part of the ruins called the “king’s chamber.”  In 1590 the castle was repaired under the direction of Henry Slingsby Esq,. Who held it as barbican, by lease from the queen.  In 1616 it was granted by James I to his son Charles, before that prince ascended the throne of England, ion the troubles of whose unhappy reign the town had a considerable share.  In the early part of the civil wars, till the reduction of York by the Parliamentarians, the royal garrison of Knaresborough, consisting of a great number of horse and foot, was a terror to the surrounding country.  In 1642 Lord Fairfax arranged to place a garrison in the castle, but was prevented from doing so by Sir Henry Slingsby, who occupied and held it until reinforcements arrived.  In November, 1644, after the battle of Marston Moor, Lord Fairfax, with a division of Scotch forces, appeared before the town, and on the 12th of that month began the attack.  The garrison defended their works with spirit, but at last were obliged to retreat within the castle; Lord Fairfax being now master of the town, the castle was closely invested, and bravely defended by the resolute garrison, who prolonged the siege to the 20th of December, when they surrendered upon honourable terms.  Oliver Cromwell was in Knaresborough soon after this and lodged in a house on High Street, which was afterwards rebuilt, but the chamber in which he slept was preserved, as we learn from the “Gentleman’s Magazine” for March 1791.

The castle contained two and a half acres within its walls, which were flanked with eleven towers.  The front room on the ground floor has been from time immemorial the repository of the ancient court records, where Hargrove says they were still preserved in 1798, and the keys were then in the custody of the steward of the honour, and the chief of the Slingsby family.[3]

In 1758 a human skeleton was discovered by a man digging for limestone on Thistle Hill, near the town, which led to the discovery of the murder of Daniel Clark by Eugene Aram, a schoolmaster of Knaresborough, and others, committed fourteen years before.  Aram was tried, convicted and executed.  He employed no counsel, but conducted his own defence, and made a very able and ingenious argument, attacking with great acumen, plausibility ad curious erudition, the doctrine of circumstantial evidence.  His name was afterwards immortalised by that intellectual monarch of fallacious reasoners, Bulwer, who seized upon the strangely opposing elements in the moral character of this curious man, and the facts connected with the murder committed by him, as the text of his “Eugene Aram”, into which story, by his vivid and powerful fancy and capacity, his fine, subtle reasoning and impassioned eloquence, he has so insiduously interwoven his own dark and dangerous views of fate and destiny.  It is a grand and sublime work, so far as language and power of reasoning are concerned; beautiful and plausible, as only a man of his rare powers can make error appear; but, like the fabled Upas-tree, giving poison and death to all who seek rest and repose under its bright and inviting foliage.

A writer near the close of the last century, after describing the ruins of the castle at Knaresborough, says:  “Placed on an eminence projecting into the river, and from its towers commanding all advances into the town, it possesses all the advantages of strength and situation that could be desired before the introduction of artillery; and, even after that period, was found to be a place not easily reduced. From these mouldering remains of pride and dominion the eye is relieved, and the mind cheered, by the romantic beauty of the adjacent vale; a delicious compound of enclosures, woods, and rocks, at the bottom of which a fine river takes its bending course, shaded in many places with hanging wood ; on one side the houses and trees, ranging along the edge of the precipices, with parts of the town, the church, the bridge, and Coghill Hall; on the other side, Bellmont, with its woods and enclosures, the more elevated situation of Belton Hall, with a distant view of Brimham rocks, complete the beautiful scene.”

Hargrove, writing in 1798, remarks: “Considerable manufacture of linen has been carried on here for many ages, and is at present in a flourishing condition.” In that year there were “two hundred looms employed for cotton goods, averaging four hundred pieces each week.”

The population in 1821 was 5,283.

One of the peculiar customs observed in Knaresborough is that on Easter Sunday, the men take off the women’s shoes, which are only to be redeemed by a present on the day following. The women retaliate, and treat the men in like manner by taking their hats. This is supposed to be the remains of a festival called Hoketide, instituted at the sudden death of Hardi-Canute, and the downfall of the Danes, in 1042.[4] There are many places and things of interest in and around Knaresborough, but they cannot be mentioned in this short sketch.

It was once a place of fashionable resort for its mineral springs, but was succeeded by Harrowgate, some two or three miles distant, which, during the summer months, is a great resort of the nobility and gentry of Great Britain and Ireland, who come to drink the waters and to enjoy the pure and healthful air. The waters are chalybeate and sulphur. We spent a night there in September, 1866.

Part 2 – The Eldest Branch

Playfair, in his “British Family Antiquity” vol. vii., page 226, says: “The origin of this name (Coghill) was most probably derived from a place anciently called Cockel-hall,[5]  but now Coghill-Hall, in the hundred of Claro, in the West Riding of Yorkshire; or perhaps from the residence of one of the family on a hill near the river Cock, which runs through a part of that county.”[6]

As the greater part of the English family names were derived from local residences, it is safe to infer that the author of “Family Antiquity” is correct in his conjectures.

The first ancestor, as appears by records formerly in the Castle of Knaresborough, in the same county in which he resided during the reigns of Richard II and Henry IV (1378 to 1413), was –

  1. John Cockill, or Cockhill Esq., Gentleman of Cockhill.  It further appears that either he, or his only son and heir of whom we find any mention, changed the name to Coghill, and that all who have borne this latter name descended from him.  In our researches we find that in all of the baptisms, marriages and burials recorded in Knaresborough Church the name is spelt Coghill.  In the Diocesan Register of York, we find between 1544 and 1650 the wills of Thomas Cockhill, 1549; Edward Cockhill, 1612; Stephen Cockhill; 1618; Thomas Cockhill, 1620; George Cockhill of Leeds, 1635; Grace Cockhill of Lower Hall, 1637; and Henry Coggill, 1637; and in the records of the Archdeaconry of Richmond, where search was made for Coghill only from the earliest period to 1700, but two wills were found (abstracts of which are given at the end of this section), that of Thomas Coghill of Tentergate, in the township of Scriven and parish of Knaresborough, eldest son of Marmaduke Coghill, dated 9th October, 1585, and that of Jane Coghill, daughter of Thomas of Knaresborough (spinster), dated 22nd February, 1626-7.  In the Consistory Court of London, the will of Phoebe Coghill, 1665.  In the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, the will of Richard Cockhill, 1582, and a large number of wills and administratorships of Coghill.  In the Consistory Court of Oxford, and in numerous church and parish records in London, Hertforshire, and Oxfordshire we find the name of Coghill; all the persons thus indicated, with three exceptions, can be traced back to the first of that name at Knaresborough.  In the Fairfax Correspondence, Charles I, vol. ii, page 376, we find the following paragraph in a letter written by Thomas Stockdale to Lord Fairfax, dated at Knaresborough, February 25th 1641: “Mr Cockill of London Bridge wrote last week to some friends of his to make way to get himself elected Burgess of Knaresborough; for he writ Dearlove was absolutely rejected by the House, and that a writ would presently come for a new election.” [7]  The person here referred to most probably belonged to, or was a descendant of, the Coghills of Knaresborough.  Mr Stockdale may not have spelt the name correctly, and this is made more probable as we learn from records that there were Coghills living in that part of London about the date of his writing.  The records examined leave it no longer a matter of conjecture, but of certainty, that a part of the family, commencing with the John Cockhill mentioned, or else his son and heir, changed the name to Coghill, which has been borne only by his descendants, while another part adhered to the original.  We have no way of learning why the change was made, but it was probably the result of the great freedom exercised in all matters of orthography at that early period.[8]

The crest indicates that it was adopted by the family prior to the change of name.  The arms of the eldest branch are: Quarterly; 1st and 4th, erm, a chevron, between three cocks, gu. for Coghill; 2nd and 3rd, or, on a chief indented, az, three fleurs-de-lis of the field, a canton er, for Cramer.  Crest on a mount, vert, a cock, wings expanded, or.  Motto, Non dormit qui custodit (the guardian sleepeth not).

The arms of the youngest branches are gules on a chevron; argent, three pellets, a chief, sable.  Crest and motto same as those of the eldest branch.  An engraving of the latter is given on the opposite page.

The only child of John Cockhill that we find any record of was –

  1. Thomas Coghill (once we find it spelt Coughyll), his successor, who married Marjory, daughter of John Slingsby Esq., of Scriven (chief forester of Knaresborough), by his wife Joan, daughter of Walter Calverly Esq., of Calverly.[9]

By this marriage he had issue two sons, besides other children of whom we find no record –

  1. Thomas Coghill
  2. Robert Coghill.  We find no other mention of the latter than his name.

Thomas, the eldest son and heir, was twice married: first to Jane, daughter of Sir Thomas Tempest, Knight, of Bracewell in Craven, a descendant of John Tempest, Lord of Bracewell and Waddington, who descended from Roger Tempest, who lived during the reign of Henry I, when his name is subscribed to several charters, cited in the Monasticon.

By this marriage he had issue –

  1. Peter Coghill, who died at the age of twenty-four years.
  2. Catherine Coghill, a nun in Nun-Monkton.
  3. Ellen Coghill, a votaress; and other children of whom we find no mention, probably dying young.

His second wife was Anne, daughter of ? Nettleton, Esq., of Roundegrange (by his wife, who was sister to Sir Robert Suttle, or Sothill, Knight, of Suttle, or Sothill Hall, in Yorkshire), by whom he had issue –

  1. Marmaduke Coghill
  2. Thomas Coghill
  3. Elizabeth Coghill
  4. Margery Coghill

We can find no further mention of the last three than their names.

Marmaduke, eldest son and heir, succeeded his father, and in 1555 rebuilt the present Coghill Hall, near Knaresborough, which was for several centuries the seat of the heads of the family.  The frontispiece in this book was engraved from a photograph of the place taken in 1878.  It shows the south, or river front, and a part of the east, or main entrance front.  The heliotype shows the main front.  The building is of stone.  The following description of the place is taken from Hargrove’s “History of Knaresborough” published in 1798.


“Situated on a small elevation above the river Nidd; the length of the south front is one hundred and thirty feet, and that of the east eighty feet. In the course of the buildings are five projections, forming so many large bow-windows, from which the Town and Church of Knaresborough, the stately ruins of the Castle, the Bridge over the river, with Belmont wood and Bilton Park, compose a most beautiful landscape.

“The Dining Room is thirty-two feet by eighteen.

“The Drawing Room is thirty-one by twenty-four.

“The music Room is twenty-four by sixteen.

“The Library is twenty by twenty.

“The Lawn falls gently towards the river, on the bank of which a fine gravel walk winds through a thick grove, to a retired and pleasing spot called the Hermitage, where a rustic cell, built of stones and moss, is placed near a natural cascade, which the river forms by falling over a ridge of rocks; from hence the walk is carried up the hill, winding through a variety of flowering shrubs and evergreens, to the front of the house. The meadows, wood, and water, which lie below and opposite the shrubbery, afford some views scarce to be equaled in the extensive lawns of Studley, or amidst the wild and Alpine scenery of Hagfall.”

Coghill Hall, County of York, England – Main Front

This house for several centuries belonged to the Coghill family, but was purchased of Sir John Thomas Coghill, Bart., with fifty-one acres of land, by the Right Honorable the Countess of Conyngham, in the year 1796.[10] Later it came into the possession of Sir Francis Nathaniel Burton, as heir to the Countess of Conyngham, and in 1831 was sold by him to Marcus Worsley Esq., who in 1856 sold it to its present owner, Basil Thomas Woodd Esq., the present MP for Knaresborough.

This Marmaduke married Maude, daughter of John Pullein Esq., of Killinghall, steward of Knaresborough and Ripon, by his wife Jane (daughter of Thomas Roos, Esq., of Ingmanthorp), and Playfair incorrectly states that twenty-one children were the result of this marriage.  He was probably led into the error by including with his issue the children of his son Marmaduke, and possibly those of a grandson bearing the same name.  The will of Thomas Coghill, the eldest son of Marmaduke (an abstract of which may be seen at the end of this section), mentions his brother Marmaduke and his younger brother John (William, another brother, died young).  In entailing his estate at the end of the will, he would certainly have named other brothers if there had been any.  We learn from the records of Knaresborough Parish that one Marmaduke Coghill was buried September 27, 1577, and another April 14, 1607.  We also find on the same records the marriages of three Marmaduke Coghills, one to Jane Alice Thornton, October 22, 1593.  The first was probably a son of Marmaduke and Maude, who may have married twice, and the last was probably his son.

We find reference to only four children of the first Marmaduke –

  1. Thomas Coghill
  2. William Coghill
  3. Marmaduke Coghill
  4. John Coghill

William died young.  John was a merchant in London, and will be referred to under the head of the Junior Branch of the Family in England.  We have no other record of Marmaduke than the mention of him in his brother Thomas’ will, unless it is in the records of marriages and burials referred to.  Thomas, the eldest son, succeeded his father, and in the twenty-second year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth (1580) married Isabel, daughter of ? Tallentyre Esq., of Carlisle, sister of William Tallentyre, incumbent of Kirby Overblows, in Yorkshire, and Routhbury, in Northumberland.  He had issue two sons and three daughters –

  1. Thomas Coghill (eldest son)
  2. Henry Coghill
  3. Frances Coghill
  4. Mary Coghill
  5. Jane Coghill

Frances must have died young, as no mention is made of her in her father’s will.  Henry was born after the will was executed, and was baptised 8th December 1585, as is seen by parish records.  We have no other record of him than his baptism and that made in his sister Jane’s will.  Mary married Richard Andrews Esq., and had a daughter, Maude Hargrove, mentioned also in Jane’s will.  Jane died unmarried, as will be seen from the extract of her will at the end of this section.

Thomas, who succeeded his father, married Beatrice, daughter of William Halley Esq., of York.  This lady was buried at Knaresborough, July 9, 1623.  They had issue –

  1. John Coghill, baptised at Knaresborough, March 11, 1615
  2. Thomas Coghill, baptised same place, September 18, 1617
  3. Isabella Coghill, baptised same place, February 2, 1619

We find no further record of Thomas than the mention of his name, with that of his brother John and sister Isabella, in the will of his aunt, Jane Coghill.  Isabella married William Mann Esq., of Thorp Hazelwood, York, of a very old and distinguished family.

John, the eldest son, married Lucy, daughter of Charles Tancred Esq., of Whixley, a family both ancient and honourable.  The name was originally Tankred, which ”Le Nerve” says was a great name among the Danes.  There is a full pedigree of the family in Hargrove’s “History of Knaresborough,” taken from a painting on the side of the grand staircase at Whixley Hall, the seat of the family.

Charles Tancred, father of Lucy who married John Coghill, was eleventh in descent from the first in the pedigree.  He died 1644.  Against the wall in the Whixley Church is a monument with the inscription –

“In this Chancel is buried Charles Tancred [the same mentioned above], Sir Richard Tancred, his son, Kn’t, Charles Tancred Esq., his grandson, and Christopher Tancred, Esq., his great grandson, Master of Harriers to King William III, all Lords of the Manor of Whixley.  He was the youngest son of Thomas Tancred Esq., of Boroughbridge, by Jane, co-heir of Mr Paver of Branton, and married Barbara, daughter of William Wyville Esq., by whom he had two sons and four daughters.  Sir Richard, his eldest son, was knighted by Charles I for his services and great sufferings in the Civil wars.  But through his posterity may have found the effects of loyalty by the diminution it made in their fortune, yet it was lost in espousing the Royal Cause.”

This monument and inscription were probably placed there by Christopher Tancred Esq., son of the one last named on the monument.  He died August 1754 unmarried, left Whixley Hall and his estate there for the maintenance of twelve decayed gentlemen, four in each of the learned professions, who must be fifty years of age, or upwards, and unmarried.  A separate apartment is assigned to each, and the whole company, if in health, dine together every day.

Attached to the mansion is a chapel, and an annuity is provided for clergymen who officiate.  In a vault under the chapel, it is said, the noble founder is interred. [11]

We are inclined to the opinion that James Coghill, the first American ancestor, who came over to Virginia in 1664, and died in 1685, was a son of this John Coghill or of his brother Thomas; but about the probable date of his birth the civil war had commenced, and during its continuance and the time of the Commonwealth there is in many parishes a hiatus in the records of baptisms, marriages, and burials, which renders it very difficult to trace and connect pedigrees.  The only issue of John Coghill and Lucy Tancred of whom we fin any record is –

  1. John Coghill, LLD, who succeeded him and died in 1699.  He was Master in the High Court of Chancery in Ireland, and an advocate of the Ecclesiastical Court in that kingdom; was knighted in the Castle of Dublin, June 5, 1686, by Henry, Earl of Clarendon, Lord Lieutenant of that kingdom.  Sir John was probably sent to Ireland by his government, and took up his residence in Dublin, still, however, retaining Coghill Hall.

He and his successors are always mentioned in the various works in which we have seen their names, as of the latter place.  He married Hester, daughter of Tobias Cramer Esq., of Ballyfoile, who for his services in the reduction of Ireland under Cromwell, had the lands of Ballyfoile assigned him, was Sheriff of Dublin in 1653, and died 1655.  He was the eldest son of Belthazar Cramer, a high German born, colonel of a regiment in Ireland, and made a denizen of that country 28th May, 1639.  By this marriage Sir John had issue nine children –

  1. Thomas Coghill
  2. John Coghill
  3. Toby Coghill                         died young
  4. Henry Coghill
  5. Forrard Coghill
  6. Mary Coghill, died unmarried
  7. Hester Coghill
  8. Marmaduke Coghill
  9. James Coghill

We have not the dates of birth of any of the children, and they are probably not mentioned here in their regular order.

Marmaduke, the eldest son and heir, died unmarried in 1739.  The following sketch of him is copied from the “History of the University of Dublin” by WBS Taylor FMA; London edition, p.419.

“Marmaduke Coghill was a native of Dublin, born in the year 1673.  At fifteen years of age he was admitted as a student of the University.  Here he graduated and eventually took the degree of Doctor of Civil Law; soon after which the College elected him to the rank of one of its representatives in Parliament, and this very distinguished honour was continued to Mr Coghill at every general election whilst he lived.  Having filled several important offices in the State, he was in the year 1721 appointed Chancellor of the Irish Exchequer.  This office he held during the remainder of his life.  He died 1738. [12]  In the performance of his public duties he was a man of unwearied diligence and clearness of judgement; he combined the very rare qualities of being an honest Councillor of the Crown and an independent representative of the people.  Among the many many benefits that this learned and excellent man conferred on society is, that being one of the original commissioners of the ‘board of first fruits’ he in a great measure organised that body, and thus became the great and indeed principal cause of the numerous benefits which have arisen to the Established Church of Ireland from this circumstance.  In private life he was greatly esteemed for his benevolence and all the social virtues.  He wrote several able papers on finance, etc., which have been published in the Transactions of the learned Societies.”

In the same work, and on page 222, under the head of “Returns to Parliament”, we find –

“In 1713, Sir Marmaduke Coghill, J.U.D., and John Elwood, J.U.D., were returned.  In 1715, Sir Marmaduke Coghill was again returned, along with Samuel Doping, Esq., LL.D.  In 1727, the Right Honourable Marmaduke Coghill was again returned, along with the Right Honourable Samuel Molyneux.  In 1739, Alexander MacAuley was elected in the room of Mr Coghill, deceased.”

In a letter from Sir Jocelyn Coghill to the compiler of this book, dated January 1878, referring to Marmaduke Coghill, he says: “I have full-length oil painting of him among the family portraits, from which I am forced to the conclusion that any good looks that are to be found in the family were not derived from him. He is a fat, apoplectic-looking old gentleman, clad in Chancellor’s robes, with very short legs and a shorter throat; and the large marble statue of him in Drumcondra Church tells the same story.” James, the brother of Marmaduke, was Doctor of Law and Register Prerogative Court. He died in 1734 having married Anne, daughter of – Pierson, Esq., by whom he had one child, a daughter:-

  1. Hester Coghill. She married first, in 1737 Lord Tullamore, [13] afterwards created Earl of Charleville, who died 1764; and secondly, Major John Mayne, who assumed the name of Coghill by sign-manual, and was created a Baronet in 1781.[14] He died 14th, and was buried at Aldenham Church in Hertfordshire, England, 22nd November, 1785. His wife, as Hester, Countess Dowager of Charleville, died without issue, and was buried in the same church, 1778. She bequeathed her property to her cousin, the issue of Balthazar John Cramer.

Of the two sisters of Marmaduke and James, Mary died unmarried. Hester married Oliver Cramer a cousin, and had three sons:-

  1. Balthazar John, Oliver, and John. Balthazar John married Judith, daughter of Brinsley Butler, Viscount of Lanesborough, and fourth in descent from Lord Abergavenny, who was a Neville(sic), and had three sons and one daughter, – John, Oliver, Marmaduke, and Catherine, who married Ralph Smith. Pursuant to the will of his great uncle, Marmaduke Coghill, Oliver, the second son, was made his heir upon his assuming the name of Coghill, and by so doing he became –
  2. Oliver Coghill. He married first, Anne, daughter of Robert Hucks, Esq., by his wife Sarah, daughter of Henry Coghill, Esq., of Aldenham House, in the county of Hertford, England;[15] She died leaving no issue, after which he married Jane, daughter of – Holl, Esq., by whom he had issue one daughter:-
  3. Jane Coghill who married George Mowbray, Esq., of Ford, County Durham, and Mortimer Co. Bucks. Oliver died in 1774, leaving no male issue, when, in conformity to the conditions of the aforesaid will of Marmaduke Coghill, and the will of his cousin Hester Coghill, Countess of Charleville, John Cramer, the eldest son and heir, became his brother’s successor by assuming the name of Coghill, which he did by sign-manual was made a Baronet and became –
  4. Sir John Coghill.  He married, in 1754, Mary, daughter of Josiah Hort, Archbishop of Tuam (whose wife was the grand-daughter of William, 20th Lord Kerry), and had issue –
  5. John Thomas Coghill
  6. Josiah Coghill
  7. Mary Cramer Coghill, died unmarried
  8. Judith Coghill, married Rev. Dr. W. Forrard
  9. Elizabeth Coghill, married Rev. N. Hinde
  10. Frances Coghill, married E. Sankey Esq
  11. Charlotte Priscilla Coghill, married Rev. – Offley
  12. Sophia Coghill, married Lieutenant-General Sir Charles Doyle
  13. Theodiscia Cramer Coghill, died unmarried

Sir John died in 1790, and was succeeded by Sir John Thomas Coghill, Baronet, his eldest son, who was born in 1766.  We learn from Playfair that he was residing in Coghill Hall in 1789.

From records in the Castle of Knaresborough (extracts of which were furnished us by Messrs. Samuel and Charles Powell, stewards of the castle), we find that in 1796, Coghill Hall was purchased of him by the Right Honourable the Countess of Conyngham, and thus the place which for centuries had been the seat of the heads of the family passed into other hands.  Sir John Thomas never married.  We hear of him some years later as visiting Italy and spending some time in Naples.  While there he purchased a very fine collection of Greek vases, which had been made by M. de Lalo, and afterwards owned by M. le Chevalier de Rossi, who had thirty-nine of the most valuable vases carefully engraved on large plates.  When the collection came into the possession of Sir John Thomas Coghill, he largely augmented it by purchases made in Naples, and added thirteen new plates to the thirty-nine which came to him with the collection.  In 1817 these engravings, with several letters from M. de Rossi and full explanations of the plates, were published in Rome by James Millingen, of the Society of Antiquaries of London, and of the Academy of Archaeology of Rome, in a work entitled “Peintures Antiques des Vases Grecs de la Collection de Sir John Coghill Bart.” (Impl. folio.)  This work is now very rare.  We obtained a copy by advertising for itin London.  Sir John Jocelyn Coghill, in a letter to the compiler, says –

“My uncle, Sir John Thomas, lived principally abroad, and was a great dabbler in art matters.  He spent a large sum in bringing out the work on Grecian and Etruscan vases.  I recollect hearing that after the war my father had a good deal of trouble in getting all my uncle’s art treasures over into England.  My father who was a through sailor of the old school, although one of the finest fellows and most lovable (sic.) of characters, cared little for such matters.  The vases were most of them, if not all, sold to the British Museum, and the marbles and a quantity of the pictures were reserved as heirlooms.  I am sorry to say that in my father’s time these works of art did not receive the fairest of play, but came to me in a very knocked-about condition, statues minus noses, fingers and arms, and pictures with holes in them and paint off.  I have done what I could in the way of judicious restoration, but some of them were as battered and weather-beaten in appearance as the dear old admiral himself.  My uncle, whilse detained in France during the war with the first Napoleon, became acquainted with Lafayette, and through him was induced to purchase a large amount of land at New Orleans.  I believe a large part of that City is now built over this very land and, had my father kept possession of it, I have no doubt that it would now be of immense value, and have added largely to our estate; but he did not foresee what was to happen, and sold it in the full belief that his brother had been well swindled by Lafayette, as in taking possession it was found that at a few spades’ depth there was nothing but water.”

Sir John Thomas died in 1817 without issue, and was succeeded by (12) Sir Josiah Coghill, his brother, vice-admiral in the Royal Navy, – born 1773.  He was twice married, – first in March, 1803, to Sophia, daughter of James Dodson Esq.  This lady died in Normandy in 1817.  By her he had issue three daughters –

  1. Caroline Mary Coghill
  2. Emeline C. E. Coghill, married Rev. Chas. Bushe, 1839
  3. Josephine Coghill, married George de Morgan, 1844

He next married, 27th January, 1819, Anna Maria, eldest daughter of the late Right Honourable Charles Kendal Bushe, Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King’s Bench in Ireland (who died in 1848), by whom he had issue –

  1. John Jocelyn Coghill, born 11th February, 1826
  2. Kendal Josiah William Coghill, born August 1832
  3. Rosanna Louisa Coghill
  4. Sidney Catherine Coghill
  5. Anna Georgiana Coghill
  6. Alice E. Judith Coghill
  7. Adelaide Eliza Coghill
  8. Florence Charlotte Coghill
  9. Sylvia Maria Coghill

Kendal Josiah is an officer in the army.

Rosanna L., married, 1849, to John Harrison Aylmer, Esq,. Of Walworth Castle, County Durham.  Sydney C., married in 1854 to Rev. Samuel Allen Windle.  Anna G., married in 1860 to Rev. William Izon Chevasse.  Alice E. J., married in 1850 to Rev. George Henry Ray.  Adelaide E., married, 1857, to Major Thomas H. Somerville, late 68th Light Infantry.  Sylvia M., married to Thomas Greene Esq.

Sir Josiah died 20th June, 1850, and was succeeded by his eldest son –

(13) Sir John Jocelyn Coghill, present Baronet.  He married, 18th February, 1851, Catherine Frances, second daughter of John, third Lord Plunket, and has issue –

  1. Neville Josiah Aylmer Coghill, born 1852
  2. Egerton Bushe Coghill, born 1853
  3. Gerald Cramer Coghill, born 1854, died 13th July 1873
  4. Ethel Charlotte Coghill
  6. Beatrice Anna Coghill
  7. Violet Alice Penrose Coghill

Neville Josiah Aylmer [16] is a lieutenant in the 24th Regiment, and at the present time (1878) is aid-de-camp to Gen. Sir A. Connynghame at the Cape of Good Hope.

We are indebted to Sir John Jocelyn Coghill for the pedigree of the eldest branch of the family, which has aided us very much in our researches.

In looking at the pedigree of Lord Plunket, we noticed that one of his sons, born before the marriage of his daughter to Sir John Jocelyn Coghill, bore the name of Patrick Henry Coghill.  Sir John, in answer to a letter from us inquiring if there was any relationship between the families before his marriage, writes –

“Patrick Henry Coghill Plunket is my godson and first cousin.  He was christened ‘Coghill’ in compliment to me.  I married my first cousin, Miss Plunket, and my connection with that family is easily explained.  My mother was a Miss Bushe, daughter of the celebrated Chief Justice of that name, and her sister married Mr John Plunket, afterwards Lord Plunket, who was a son of the still more celebrated Lord Plunket, Chancellor of Ireland, and the first possessor of the title.  His eldest son, Bishop of Tuam, died without male issue, and the title went to his second son, John, my father-in-law, from whom it descended to my brother-in-law, the present peer, who is also Bishop of Meath.  On the same day I received your letter, I got another announcing the approaching marriage of the very Patrick henry Coghill Plunket about whom you inquire to a Miss Murray, a match agreeable to all parties.”

Having followed the eldest branch of the family down to the present time, we will close this section of our work by giving the few records of the courts and parishes relating to it which have come directly to us.  Some of them may be of service in any future investigations which may be undertaken.


Thomas Coghill, of Tentergate, in the township of Scriven, in the parish of Knaresborough, Gentleman; dated 9th October, 1585.  To be buried in my parish church, near where my father lyeth.  To Jane and Mary my daughters, and to such child as my wife goeth with, sundry closes of lands, &c. (described in will), when twenty-one years of age, and I appoint my wife and my brother, William Tallentyre,[17] tutors and governors of my said children.  To my wife certain lands, &c. (described).  All my other lands, tenements, &c. to Thomas, my son, when twenty-one years old, and the heirs of his body, and in default thereof, to my said brother Marmaduke, and his heirs male, and in default thereof, to John Coghill my youngest brother, and his heirs, &c.

There is no probate act attached to the will of Thomas Coghill; it was probably a copy deposited in the office for safe keeping.

Jane Coghill, of Knaresborough, County York, spinster; dated 22d February, 1626-7. To be buried in the church-yard among my friends.  To John and Thomas Coghill, sons of my late brother, and to Isabella their sister, each twelve pence. To my brother, Henry Coghill,[18] half a crown; to Maude Hargrove, daughter of my brother Richard Andrews,[19] of Scriven, five pounds.  To Jane Pearson, daughter of John Pearson of the Bond End, in Scriven, twenty shillings.  All the residue of my estate to my brother, Richard Andrews, and Mary his wife, and I appoint them executors.

The will was proved 6th May, 1628, by Richard Andrews, power being reserved to his wife Mary.

From Knaresborough Parish Register.[20]


                                               May 24 1563              Richard Coghill

                                                               Sept 14 1584              Maria Coghill

                                                               June 5 1585                Jane Coghill

                                                               Dec 8 1585                 Henry Coghill

                                                               Feb 21 1595               Frances Coghill

                                                               Dec 29 1596               Thomas Coghill

                                                               June 14 1598              Anna Coghill

                                                               July 12 1599               Maria Coghill

                                                               March 1 1600            Jane Coghill

                                                               Nov 12 1603               Thomas Coghill

                                                               April 3, 1605              William Coghill

                                                               March 11, 1615         John Coghill

                                                               Sept 18, 1617             Thomas Coghill

                                                               Feb 2, 1619                Isabella Coghill


                         Dec 18, 1564              William Simondson – Jane Coghill

                         June 23, 1565            John Kirkman – Dorothy Coghill

                         Jan 21, 1569               Marmaduke Coghill – Jane Thornton

                         Oct 20, 1578              Marmaduke Coghill – Anna Gervia

                         Oct 22, 1593              Marmaduke Coghill – Alicia Thornton

                         Jan 28, 1605               Richard Andrews – Maria Coghill

                         June 8, 1613               Matthew Gibson – Ellen Coghill


                                                               May 29, 1563             Richard Coghill

                                                               Aug 25, 1565              William Coghill

                                                               Sept 16, 1568             Matilda Coghill

                                                               Sept 27, 1577             Marmaduke Coghill

                                                               Nov 6, 1585                Thomas Coghill

                                                               Dec 31, 1586              Jane Coghill

                                                               Feb 26, 1595              Frances Coghill

                                                               July 18, 1606              Alice Coghill

                                                               April 14, 1607            Marmaduke Coghill

                                                               July 9, 1623                Beatrice Coghill

                                                               Aug 30, 1627              Jane Coghill

                                                               Aug 4, 1665                Thomas Coghill


The copies of records and other matter contained in this Appendix were received after Part II had gone through the press.  As they refer exclusively to the eldest branch of the family, we have deemed it best to insert them here, even at the expense of disturbing the uniformity in paging the book.

Grant from Marmaduke Coghill to his youngest son John, [21] 1575

Be yt knowne unto all men to whome this p’sent wryting shall come to be sene harde or Rede that I Marmaduke Coghill of Tentergate within the Towneshipe of Scrivinge in the Countye of Yorke th elder Gentilman, Sendyth greting in our Lorde God ev’lasting.  Knowe ye me the saide Marmaduke th elder for divers causes and consideracions me specially movinge to have closely and absolutelye Geven, granted bargained solde assigned and sett over and by this my present wrytinge doith clerelye fullye and absolutelye geve grannt bargaine sell assigne and sett over unto John Coghill my youngest sonne all that my estait Right Tytle Interest possession tearme of yeres clames and demandes that I the said Marmaduke Coghill th elder nowe hath holdyth or by any weyes or meanes clamyth or of ryght ought to have of and in the several closes and acres of grounde hereafter in this p’sent wryting named and expressed  That is to say, of and inone close of medowe called Sandhills conteynyng fower acres ofLand and medowe scytuate lying and being w’hin the terrytories and feides of fferingbie nowe in the holding and occupacion of Wilton Wreye, m’chant one other close lying and being w’hin the saide field of fferingbie called Symson close, contenying[  ] acres of lande pasture and medowe nowe in the occupacion of Thomas Horner, m’chant two other closes of medowe and pasture ther the one called Netherbutterells contenyng [  ] acres and the other called calfe close contenyng [  ] acres whh two severall closes ar nowe in the occupacion of Thomas Palliser and others, all which said closes and acres of lande ar p’cell of the Quenes matia demaines of her Highnes castle of Knaresburgh  To have and to hold the said closes and all other the premisses with all and singuler th appurtenances unto the said John Coghill his heires and assignes for ever.  Yieldinge and paying to the said Soveraigne Ladye, her heires and successors all suche Rentes as ar yerely paide to her Highnes for the premisses.  In witnes whereof I the saide Marmaduke Coghill to this my p’sent wryting and grannt have putt my seale and subscribed my name the ffyfteynth day of November in the seaventeanth yere of the Rayne of our saide soveraigne Ladye Elizabeth by the grace of [God?] Quene of England France and Ireland defender of the ffayth &c. 1575

Abstract of Thomas Coghill’s Will, 1624

With a facsimile of his signature; original in the possession of Henry Hucks Gibbs Esq.[22]

March 21 22 Jac: 1. 1624  I, Thomas Coghill of Tentergate co: York, doe make this my last will … in manner afor following: … For my personal estate …Whereas it hath pleased Almighty God to bless me with three children viz: two sonnes and one daughter, & since my owne kindred are all for the moste pte for their owne endes & profitts soe as I doe much feare to repose soe greate a truste in them as the care & charge of my children, I have therefore left them to the … care of such worthye… frends as I shall hereafter name.

…I…bequeathe to John Coghill my eldest sonne, all my Mansion House called Coghill Hall… with all other tenements &c lease or copyhold thereunto annciently belonging & descended to me from my ancestors; all freeholds hereunto belonging & all copyholds as I have purchased.  To Thomas Coghill my youngest sonne one capital messuage…called Spittle Crofte…near Knaresborough, and sundry closes of meadow, & a house &  land bought of one Richard Craven of Tentergate.  Also for his better mayntenance and advancement during his mynoritye £100.

I give and bequeathe to my daughter Issabell Coghill £300.

I nomynate and apointe John Coggen & Thomas Coggen,[23] my two sonnes, Executors.

I bequeathe to Henry Coggen my brother the yearely annuitye of twentye nobles p. annum out of the rent of a certayne close called fferribye close & one close called Sandhills.  Then to my hoble and worthye master Sir Richd Hutton, Knt. £10 in memoriall of my dutye & servyse.  Then to my Hoble good lady, £5 in meml [as above] Then unto my worthy ffreinds Sir HyGoodricke Kt and Rd Hutton & John Dawney Esq & Thos Losse, clarke ffeoffers and overseers of this my…will…40p a peece.

Then to … sonne John all my household stuffe…in Coghill Hall and theBooks that were my Grandfathers, & half my other books; & the other half to my sonne Thomas [Said books to be delivered to them on their coming to “full yeares”]

To my daughter Issabell tenne poundes of old gould which…was her mothers.

…Unto Thomas Hutton £5, unto Henry Hutton 40p, unto MrsKatheryne Hutton & to MrsJudith Hutton 40p a peece.

Item I give unto my poore sister Jane Coghill [24] twenty nobles.  Item…unto my sister Mary Andrew fyve […]. Item…unto Maud Andrew daughter of my sister Andrew, tenne poundes whereof her father owes me seaven poundes ten shillinges.

[Legacies to his servants and to the poor of the parishes of Knaresborough and Wythern ffrary [25]]


Marriage Licence – John Coghill, 1639

A marriage licence was granted in 1639, by the Ecclesiastical Court of York Minster, to John Coghill, Gent., bachelor, age twenty-four years, of the Parish of Monkton, and Lucy Tancred, spinster, age twenty-three years, of the Parish of Whixley.  H.H. Gibbs Esq., writes:  “I have the marriage settlement of John Coghill of Coghill Hall, and Lucy, daughter of Charles and sister of Richard Tancred, of Whixley, dated September 28, 15th Charles I.

Purchase of Crake Manor – Thomas Coghill, 1648

In looking through Nichols’ “Collectanea Topographica et Genealogica,” which we found at the Astor Library, vol. i., p. 126, we saw that Sir Thomas Waddrington and Thomas Coghill, in March 1648, were the purchasers of the manor of Crake, in the County of Durham, being a part of the lands of the bishopric sequestrated by the Parliament.  Price paid, £1163. 8. 2½ .  And in the same volume, page 290, it is stated that on July 27, 1649, the manor of Howdens, in Yorkshire, being a part of the lands of the Bishpric of Durham, also sequestrated by the Parliament, was purchased by William Underwood, Thomas Coghill, and Matthew Bigg, for £592. 5. 0.

This Thomas Coghill was probably the brother of John, who maried Lucy Tancred, and was spoken of in the early part of this section as possibly being the father of the American ancestor.

We have very recently come into possession of a copy of the “Visitation of Yorkshire” made in 1584-5 by Robert Glover, to which is added the subsequent visitation made in 1612 by Richard St. George, Norroy king of arms, edited by Joseph Foster and privately printed for him in London, 1875.

On page 398 of this work we find the name of Thomas Coghill, Gent., amongst those of the Libertas de Knaresburgh, who, in 1584-5 and 1612, were summoned to appear and enter their pedigrees.

On page 505 we find a partial pedigree of the family, beginning with Thomas Coghill who married Marjory Slingsby, and ending with Thomas who married Beatrice Halley.  Only two of the first Thomas’ children are given in this pedigree, – Thomas and Nicholas.  In our pedigree another son, Robert, is mentioned, but the name of Nicholas does not appear.

We also learn from this work that coats of arms were granted to Thomas Coghill of Knaresborough, and John Coghill of London, his brother, 10th May 612, by Richard St. George, Norroy.  Two different coats are given, one corresponding with that borne by the eldest branch (without the Cramer impaling), the other with that of the younger branches,[26] differing only in the crest of the latter, which is given as a demi lion rampant argent, crowned or, holding a cross crosslet fitchée, and is evidently a mistake, as that crest belongs to the Earl of Essex.  All the branches of the family used the cock as a crest, differing only in position and colour.  Henry Hucks Gibbs Esq., informs us that among the family papers in his possession are deeds sealed with both of these coats.  The portrait of John Coghill, painted in 624 (a heliotype of which may be seen farther on), has in one corner the arms of the junior branch, impaling the arms of Viell, argent, a fesse reguly between three amulets gules.

Major Kendal Josiah William Coghill (13)

We learn from “Hart’s Army List,” 1878, that “Major Coghill, of the 19th Hussars, was appointed Second Lieutenant in 85, Lieutenant in 1855, Captain in 1863 and Major in 1877.

“He served with the 2nd European Bengal Fusileers in Burmah, 1853-55.  Served as Adjutant 2nd E.B. Fusileers throughout the Indian Mutiny campaign of 857-58.  Was present at the battle of Budleekeserai, and storming the heights in front of Delhi on 8th June, 857.  Served throughout the siege of Delhi from 8th June 1857, to its capture.  Present in all the actions in front of the city, including the repulse of the sortie on the 10th; capture of the Metcalf position on the 12th; repeeling sorties 19th and 20th; capture of Subzimundy on 24th; repelling sortie on the 27th and 30th June, and 8th, 9th and 14th July; capture of Pahrypore, under Gen. Sir John Jones; repelling sortie of 30th July, and 1st and 2nd August; present with the storming column during the assault on the Cashmere Bastion breach, and during the capture of Delhi, from 14th to 21st September 1857.

“Served with General Showers’ pursuing column from 1st October to 10th November 1857 and was present at the taking of the forts Rewarrie Jujjher, Ranaude, Furrucknugur, and Bullumbghur, and the capture of the heights of Sonah.  He received a medal with clasp”

Lieutenant Nevill Josiah Aylmer Coghill (14)


Of that deed of noble daring,
In its chivalry sublime,
Vivid, grand, historic pages
Shall descend to future ages;
Poets, painters, hoary sages
Shall record it for all time.

The death of this gallant young officer was mentioned at the foot-note of page [  ].  Since that was printed some of the details of the disaster to the British arms at Isandula, and also the particulars of the desperate courage and energy displayed by Lieutenants Coghill and Melvill in cutting their way through the dense lines of savages, and bearing off the colours of the regiment from that bloody field, have reached England and become a part of history.  Every London Journal has given a leading article in praise of that act of heroism, and poets have already woven it into song.  The names of Coghill and Melvill will ever be held in proud and grateful remembrance by their countrymen, and honoured by those of every nationality who respect courage and appreciate noble daring.

Our young kinsman has proved himself no degenerate scion of his house, but added new lustre to the old name.  Before the memory of his gallant deeds we hang our humble wreath of immortelles.

The following sketch of Lieutenant Coghill was at our request sent to us by a member of his family: –

Lieut. Nevill Josiah Aylmer Coghill was born in Dublin, January 25, 1852, and wanted but two days to be twenty-seven years old when he met his death.  He was educated at Hailebury College, in Hertfordshire, England, and passed his examination for the army and received his commission in 1873.  He went through the Gaika and Gallka war in 1877 as aide-de-camp to General Sir Arthur Cunnynghame, Bart., and was mentioned by him in dispatches for efficiency and coolness under fire.  In the spring of 1878 he returned with that general to England, but went out again almost immediately, and on his arrival at the Cape was appointed aide-de-camp to the Lord High Commissioner, Sir Bartle Frere, Bart., and accompanied him to the Transvaal. Upon the declaration of war against the Zulus, at his own request, he was allowed to go to the front as extra aide-de-camp to Colonel Glyn, commanding the column.

A few days before the battle of Isandula he unfortunately twisted his knee, which he had injured some years before at football, so that when Lord Chelmsford marched out of camp on the 22d January, he was obliged to remain behind.

In the afternoon of that day the small force left at the camp were surrounded and attacked on all sides by Cetewayo’s army, and when the ammunition was all expended, and the six or seven hundred were overwhelmed by twenty thousand Zulus, Colonel Pulleyn ordered Melvill, the adjutant, and Lieutenant Coghill (they being mounted officers), to take the colours of the regiment, and endeavour to get through the enemy’s lines and notify the posts in the rear of the disaster.[27]They succeeded in cutting their way through dense masses of the enemy, but were hotly pursued to the banks of the Buffalo River, which at a distance of twelve miles from the battle-field separates Natal from Zululand.  Here they attempted to cross the river, which was in a dangerous state of flood.  Lieutenant Coghill got over in safety, and was breasting the hill on the opposite side, quite out of danger, when he perceived that Melvill’s horse was shot under him in the river; he immediately turned and rode back into the river to his assistance, when unfortunately his horse too was shot.  In this struggle with the swollen river and the Zulus, the colours escaped them.  They managed with difficulty to reach the bank, and, though much exhausted, continued to stagger on for about a quarter of a mile, when they were again attacked by a party of Zulus who had crossed the river, and were both killed; not, however, without one more desperate struggle, for their bodies were found, and around them ten dead Zulus.

On Lieutenant Coghill’s body were found his diamond ring, a small Zulu bangle that he used to wear, and his boots and spurs – everything else had been taken.  The party who discovered their bodies also found the colours which they had died to save, among the bowlders in the river on the Natal side.

We learn from a letter written by Lady Bartle Frere that the articles found on the person of Lieutenant Coghill were forwarded by her to Sir J.J. Coghill, his father.

Letter of condolence: Maj. Gen. M A Dillon to Sir John Jocelyn Coghill Bt.

The following official letter of condolence was sent to Sir John Jocelyn Coghill, after his son’s death –

“SIR – I am directed by the Field Marshal Commanding in Chief to inform you that his Royal Highness perused with melancholy interest the report forwarded to him by Lord Chelmsford from Colonel Glyn, showing how the Queen’s colour of the 1st Battalion 24th Foot would have fallen into the hands of the enemy but for the gallant behaviour of your son, Lieutenant Coghill, and Lieutenant and Adjutant Melvill, of that regiment.  His Royal Highness in communicating this dispatch desires me to assure you of his sincere sympathy with you in the loss of your son, whose gallant death in the successful endeavour to save the colour of his regiment has gained the admiration of the army.  It is gratifying to His Royal Highness to inform you that if your son had survived his noble effort it was her Majesty’s intention to confer upon him the Victoria Cross, and a notification to that effect will be made in the London Gazette.

                                      “I have the honour to be, sir,

                                                                            “Your obedient servant,

                                                                                                                 “M. A. Dillon,

                                                                                                                                “Major General.

“To Sir Joscelyn Coghill, Bart.”

Poems to the memory of Lieutenants Coghill and Melvill

From the many tributes to the memory of Lieutenants Coghill and Melvill now before us, we have selected for preservation with these family records two poems.  The first was written by Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, who was one of England’s greatest diplomats some thirty years since.  He is now upwards of ninety years of age.  The other is from “The Battle of Isandula”, a poem of thirteen stanzas, by Robert Buchanan, published in the “Contemporary Review” (London) of April, 1879.

ISANDLANA,[28]  JANUARY 22, 1879

It was a fearful battle, a dread, ill-omen’d day,
When sudden, as by swoop of storm, in the pride of their array,
Full half the gallant Twenty-fourth to a man were swept away.

A brotherhood in arms were they, surpassed in fame by none;
And even on the battlefield, when all but hope was gone,
The beat of the surviving hearts was as the beat of one.

Their blazon’d colours proudly told of many a glorious fight,
And when from thickest of the fray they shed their meteor light,
There was not, and there could not be, a thought of fear or flight.

The column doomed to move apart trod firm a hostile land,
And all at ease the tents were spread, when from his rocky stand
The watcher’s cheery voice declared no enemy at hand.

But soon a word of ruder tone throughout th’encampment rang;
”They come, in swarms, they come; our lives on instant action hang.”
Not one but hurries to his post, and, swift as lightning’s flash,
The line is formed and all in place to meet the tempest’s crash.

From the hills
Down, downward pouring,
Streams to sight the swarthy flood,
Dark as clouds,
Which, thunder storing,
O’er a wilder’d city brood.
Alert to fight, athirst to slay,
They shake the dreaded assegai,
And rush with blind and frantic will
On all, when few, whose force is skill.

E’en so; but while they gather strength to strike the fatal blow,
Their front sustains a deadly shock, which lays a thousand low,
Yet thousands more replace the slain, and what can hundreds do,
But bravely face their doom, and die, to fame and duty true?

A whisper! – hark! – The guns, the guns! – No ready voice replies;
But lo! each gun in silence spiked, the captor’s grasp defies;
A brave and meritorious act; alas! who does it dies.

Far, far away, at fearful risk, a nobler charge was moved,
And those in trust right well achieved what more than valour proved;
Both still were young, and firm in minds that ne’er from duty roved.

Quick, quick, they mount the bridled steeds, while near each loyal breast
The colours lie, from ill secured, as in a miser’s chest.
What could be done in haste they did; to faith they gave the rest.

In fast succession forth they passed along the straggling host;
On, gallant youths! ye may not heed the peril or the cost.
Oh! speed them Heav’n! direct their course; what shame if such were lost!

A stare of silent brief surprise, and then a deaf’ning yell;
As if the imprison’d souls below had burst the bonds of hell;
On dash’d the dauntless riders still; who dares to cross them fell.

Soon clear of foemen, side by side, athwart the pathless wild,
Conveyors of a precious charge, by capture ne’er defiled,
On, boldly on, they stretched with speed, by youthful hope beguiled.

Alike through pools of rotten marsh, o’er beds of flint they rode;
They cross’d the dell, they scal’d the hill, they shunn’d the lone abode,
Nor ceased to urge the foaming beasts their weary limbs bestrode.

At length the frontier stream appears; hurrah! What need of more?
Oh fate! They plunge, the waters flash, the rushing waters roar,
Unseated, wounded, all but drown’d, they touch, they clasp the shore.

A few brief hours of calm succeed, they share the joy of those
Who, purpose gained and danger past, from anxious toil repose:
But nature sinks – too great the strain, and wounds are slow to close.

One slept – nor woke again; like him too soon the other slept;
And those who sought and found them dead, the colours near them kept,
In pity – doubt not – stoop’d awhile, and o’er the bodies wept.

MELVILL and COGHILL! honour’d names! ye need no verse of mine
To fix the record of your worth on memory’s faithful shrine;
To you a wreath that may not fade shall England’s praise assign.

Ye crown the list of glorious acts which form our country’s boast,
Ye rescued from the brink of shame what soldiers priz’d the most,
And reached by duty’s path a life beyond the lives ye lost.

                                                               STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFE


“Save the colours!” shrieks a dying voice, and lo!

Two horsemen breast the raging ranks, and go. –

                   (In thy sacred list, O Fame!

                   Keep each dear and noble name.)[29]

                       See, they flash upon the foe,

                       Fierce as flame –

                   And one undaunted form

                   Lifts a British banner, warm

With the blood-rain and the storm of Isandula!

“Save the colours!” and amidst a flood of foes,

At gallop, sword in hand, each horseman goes –

                   Around the steeds they stride

                   Cling devils crimson-dyed,

                       But God! through butchering blows,

                       How they ride!

                   Their horses’ hoofs are red

                   With blood of dying and dead,

Trampled down beneath their tread at Isandula!

“Save the colours!” – They are saved – and side by side

The horsemen swim a raging river’s tide –

                   They are safe – they are alone –

                   But one, without a groan,

                       After tottering filmy-eyed,

                       Drops like stone;

                   And before his comrade true

                   Can reach his side he too

Falls, smitten through and through at Isandula! …

Bless the Lord, who in the hollow of his hand,

Kept the remnant of that little British band!

                   But give honour everywhere

                   To the brave who perish’d there,

                       Speak their praise throughout the land

                       With a prayer –

                   More than sorrow they can claim:

                   They have won the crown of Fame!

They have glorified the name of Isandula!

                                                                     ROBERT BUCHANAN

Part 3 – The Junior Branch of England

Having completed the pedigree of the family by descent from the eldest sons, with occasional sketches of some of its members, we next proceed to state what we have been able to learn with reference to the junior branches, confining this section of our history to those of them who remained in England.

It will be remembered that Marmaduke Coghill, fourth in descent, had only four sons of whom we could find any record:  William who died unmarried; Thomas, the eldest surviving son, who succeeded his father; Marmaduke, mentioned in the will of his brother Thomas; and John, a merchant in London, – all of whom were referred to in the preceding section.  If Marmaduke had other children, we have no means of ascertaining why they were not mentioned in the will of his eldest son, or in any of the numerous books we have examined.

  1. John Coghill, the youngest son of Marmaduke, was a merchant in London, and, as we learn from the records of St. Bartholmew’s by the Exchange, London, was married on the 20th January, 1588-9, to Susannah, daughter of Denis Viell, Esq., of Charleval, in Normandy; and the records show that he was buried in the chancel of St. Michael’s Bassishaw, London, 28th March 1625.[30]  He left two sons: –
  2. Henry Coghill, the eldest son [of whom later].
  3. Sir Thomas Coghill, of Blechingdon (a large lordship near Oxford). These two brothers, as will be seen further on, married sisters.  We will refer to Sir Thomas and his descendants first, and then return to Henry.  The records of St. Bartholemew’s the Less, London, show that “Thomas Coghill of this parish, London, Gent.,” and “Elizabeth, daughter and co-heiress of John Sutton, merchant of the same parish,” and Aldenham, Co. Hertford, youngest son of John Sutton of Horsell, Co. Surrey, and heir to his eldest brother Thomas, were married October 20, 1622.  He was knighted at Woodstock in 1633, and died June 2, 1659.  The records of the Blechingdon church show that he was buried there June 5, 1659.  By this marriage Sir Thomas had eleven children: –
  4. An abortive child, buried May 17, 1623, at St. Bartholemew’s the Less, London
  5. John Coghill, died September 19, 1628
  6. Thomas Coghill, baptized September 17, 1626, at Blechingdon
  7. Elizabeth Coghill, baptized December 28, 1628 at Blechingdon
  8. Susan Coghill, baptized December 26, 1630, at Blechingdon
  9. John Coghill, baptized April 28, 1633, at Blechingdon
  10. Sutton Coghill, baptized July 17, 1634, at Blechingdon
  11. Faith Coghill, baptized March 24, 1636-7, at Blechingdon
  12. Anne Coghill, baptized January 30, 1637-8, at Aldenham
  13. Catherine Coghill, baptized January 20, 1640-1, at Blechingdon
  14. Mary Coghill, baptized January 16, 1644-5, at Blechingdon.

All of these children except the first John and Anne, are named in their father’s will.  He also makes a bequest to his grandchild, Thomas Coghill, who was most probably a son of Thomas.  The records at Blechingdon show that Thomas Coghill, son of Thomas Coghill, Esq., was buried September 19, 1665, and the inference is that this is the grandchild referred to in Sir Thomas’ will.

Susan married George Pudsey, Gent., as we learn from her father’s will, but we find no recored of any of her descendants.

John married, but when, and to whom, we have not been able to learn.  The Blechingdon records show that he was buried there February 20, 1694-5, and the records of the Consistory Court of Oxford, that letters of administration were granted to Mary, relict of John Coghill, November 2, 1695.  Mary, relict of John Coghill, was buried at Blechingdon, as the records there show, February 22, 1702-3.  They had issue two daughters living July 28, 1698: –

  1. Elizabeth Coghill, married John Knapp, Esq.
  2. Mary Coghill, married [-] Hernson Esq., as we learn from their renouncing their father’s estate to his sister, and their aunt, Mary Courtney (John’s widow, Mary, renouncing at the same time).  We find no records of any other children.

Mary (7) married Peter Courtney, Esq., as we find from the records of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, where letters of administration were granted to Mary, wife of Peter Courtney, on the estate of her brother, John Coghill, July 28, 1698; and the same records show that she died prior to May 14, 1703, when letters of administration on John Coghill’s estate were granted to his eldest daughter, Elizabeth Knapp, said Mary Courtney (his sister) being dead.

Sutton married, but we could not learn to whom, further than that her name was Jane, and that she lies buried at Blechingdon.  The only issue that we can find any record of are –

  1. Sutton Coghill, eldest son, died May 15, 1708, buried at Blechingdon.
  2. John Coghill, died January 31, 1716, buried at Blechingdon.
  3. Elizabeth Coghill
  4. Thomas Coghill, baptized at Blechingdon July 30, 1681.

Sutton we hear of only once.  Henry Hucks Gibbs, Esq., writes that “Sutton Coghill the younger was trustee to a post-nuptial settlement of Henry Coghill and Sarah Blythe in 1699,” as he learns from family records and papers now in his possession.  Thomas we have placed as the son of the eldest Sutton, but it is possible that he may have been the son of Sutton the younger.  John we trace by two monuments in Blechingdon Church,[31] one to his grandfather, father and two uncles, his brothers, and his mother and grandmother, and the other to his sister, Elizabeth, who married Charles Collins Esq., of Betterton, in the County of Berks, and died in 1713, as we learn from the monument just referred to, and which bears the following inscription: –

“Elizabeth ux. Charles Collins of Betterton, Co. Berks, only daughter of Sutton Coghill of Blechingdon, died in childbed, 19th October, 1713: Erected by her surviving brother, John Coghill, Esq.”

Faith married Sir Christopher Wren (the celebrated architect of St. Paul’s, London) December 7, 1669; she died, and was buried September 4, 1675, at St. Martin’s in the Fields, leaving an only son, Christopher Wren, born 1675.  (After her death Sir Christopher married, in February, 1676-7, Jane, daughter of Viscount Fitzwilliam, by whom he had other children.)  Christopher, the son, was a member of Parliament for Windsor from 1712 to 1714.  He wrote the memoirs of his family, entitled “Parentalia,” and also several other works, which are mentioned in Allibone’s “Dictionary of Authors.”  In 1710 the topmost stone of St. Paul’s, London, was with fitting ceremonies laid by him. He died in 1747, leaving one son.

Of the other children of Sir Thomas, or any of their descendants except those mentioned, we know nothing definitely.  We shall insert at the end of this section the baptisms and burials at Blechingdon and Aldenham, so far as we have been able to obtain them.  Most of those of the name who were buried at Blechingdon, and some few at Aldenham, were doubtless his descendants.  The authorities consulted state that the male line has been extinct for more than a century.  A copy of Sir Thomas’s will may be seen at the end of this section.

We now return to Henry Coghill, Esq. (6), of Aldenham (eldest son of John and brother of Sir Thomas). He was born in London in 1589; was first a merchant in that city, but afterwards resided at Bushey, and later at Aldenham, both in the County of Hertford, and in 1632 was sheriff of that county.  There is some uncertainty as to whether he resided at the older house which once stood on the land still called Penne’s Place, [32] [33] and the foundations and moat of which are still visible, or at another place, called Wigbournes.  Chauncy speaks of a “fair house of brick built by H. Coghill.”  It is not quite clear whether this was the old house of Penne’s Place, perhaps modernised by him about 1630 under the name Aldenham Hall, or the conversion of this house of Wigbournes (which dated from the previous century, and was inherited by Henry Coghill from his father-in-law, John Sutton) into the shape in which it came to its present owner.  Penne’s Place was apparently the chief seat of this branch of the family for two or three generations.  It is spoken of as a mansion apparently still existing, in the will of Sarah Coghill, 1767, but had sunk to a mere parcel of land in the deed of partition made by her great-grand-daughters in 1815.  Aldenham House, under its former name of Wigbournes, belonged to Faith, wife of Henry Coghill.  In 1734 we find it in possession of Thomas, a younger and surviving brother of the third Henry Coghill, and from him descended to his niece, Sarah Hucks.  Thomas made his will June 2, 1784, proved P.C.C., 24th of the following month.[34]

We learn from the records of St. Bartholemew’s the Less, London, that he, Henry (6) married Faith, daughter and co-heiress of John Sutton, merchant of the same parish, January 16, 1620.  This lady died 31st May, 1670, and was buried in the south chancel of Aldenham Church.  Her husband died August 20, 1672, and was buried by her side.  The inscriptions on both monuments may be seen among the monumental inscriptions in Aldenham and Blechingdon Churches at the end of this section.  By this marriage he had issue –

  1. Elizabeth Coghill, baptised in London, at St. Bartholemew’s the Less, May 15, 1623; died August 20, 1628.
  2. John Coghill, baptised in London, June 23, 1624; died young.
  3. Thomas Coghill, baptised in Blechingdon, July 10, 1625; died August 18, 1628.
  4. Faith Coghill, baptised in Blechingdon, September 30, 1626; died May 3, 1630.
  5. Elizabeth Coghill, baptised in Aldenham, October 29, 1629.
  6. Henry Coghill, baptised in Aldenham, February 13, 1633-4.
  7. John Coghill, baptised in Blechingdon, July 2, 1637; born same day.

It will be observed that the first four children died young.  Elizabeth never married, as may be seen by an abstract of her will at the end of this section.  John Coghill, of Bentley, the youngest son, married Debora, daughter of William Dudley, Esq., of Ellstree.  She died August 31, 1714, and John Coghill, her husband, October 13, 1714; both she and her husband were buried in Aldenham Church, where their monuments are still to be seen.  A full description of them, and also of one to Mrs Coghill’s mother, Lucy Dudley, may be found at the end of this section.

They had issue –

  1. John Coghill, baptised at Aldenham, November 24, 1669; died following December, and was buried in south chancel of Aldenham Church.
  2. Lucy Coghill, died young.
  3. Thomas Coghill.
  4. Lucy Coghill.

            There were other children who died in infancy.

Lucy was living October 26, 1676, as may be seen by a bequest in the will of her aunt Elizabeth, daughter (7) of Henry Coghill, Esq., an abstract o which is given at the end of this section.  Thomas, the only surviving son, was an officer in the army.  He was with the army which marched under the Duke of Marlborough from Flanders up into Germany, and was slain in the battle of Donawert, 2d July, 1704, in the twenty-second year of his age.  This sanguinary battle was long remembered by many English families.  The French and Bavarian armies were posted in an almost impregnable entrenched camp, earth-works with the town of Donawert. The allied army, after a hard day’s march, reached the base of the hill late in the afternoon, and notwithstanding the fatigue of his troops, Marlborough gave his orders to storm the works.  It was in that terrible charge against a pitiless storm of lead, in many respects so closely resembling the one made on the same day of the same month, and about the same hour of the day, one hundred and fifty-nine years later, by a division of General Lee’s army on the Federal position at Gettysburg, that along with more than five thousand of his comrades in arms, this young officer fell, the last male descendant of John Coghill of Bentley.

Returning now to Henry Coghill (7), of Aldenham Hall, alias Penne’s Place, as his house was called in his marriage settlement (the eldest son of Henry), we find that he married Sarah, daughter of Thomas Blythe, of the family of Blythes in Elferrat, in Yorkshire.  She was buried in linen[35] at Aldenham, 3d March, 1723-4; and he, 24th June, 1709, having been high sheriff of the county in 1673.  They had issue –

  1. Elizabeth Coghill, baptised 23d April, 1674.
  2. Henry Coghill, baptised 24th March, 1675-6.
  3. John Coghill, baptised 29th January, 1678-9.
  4. Thomas Coghill, baptised 13th May, 1684.
  5. Charles Coghill, baptised 2d December, 1686.

We find no other record of John than his baptism and burial.  Thomas was buried in linen at Aldenham, 2d February, 1734-5, and devised the manor of Bentley (now called Bentley Priory[36]), as we learn from Lyson’s “Environs of London”, to his nephew (grand), Thomas Wittewronge, grandson of his sister Elizabeth; and his other lands, left him by his brother Henry, and coming to the latter from their uncle John, descended to his nephew, Henry Coghill; and from him to Sarah, his sister.  We find no other mention of Charles than his baptism. Elizabeth was twice married; first, as we learn from the records of St. Andrew’s, Holborn, on 14th February, 1693-4, to Jacob Wittewronge, of Lincoln (Son of James and grandson of Sir John Wittewronge).  He was born in 1671, and was fourth in descent from James Wittewronge, a native of Ghent, in Flanders, who fled from that country during the time of the Protestant persecution under Philip II. of Spain, and settled in England in the reign of Queen Elizabeth.  He (Jacob) died, leaving one son, Jacob, who married, 9th May, 1719, Anne, widow of – Hale, Esq., of Coventry, and died 26th and was buried 30th June, 1727, at Harpenden.  He left issue, James; Jacob, baptised 16th October, 1722, and died the following December; Thomas, baptised 16th October, 1723, and died 14th June, 1763; Elizabeth, died infant, and buried 16th April, 1729.

James married Martha, daughter of Sir John Strange, Knight and Master of the Rolls, and died 1748, leaving no issue.  Thomas was the nephew to whom the manor of Bentley was bequeathed by his great-uncle, Thomas Coghill, in 1734.  He died without issue, and was buried at Harpenden, 14th June, 1763; and, being the last of the male line, bequeathed his estate to John, the grandson of Thomas Bennet, Esq., who married his great-aunt. Elizabeth Wittewronge, after the death of her husband, married, in May, 1700, Anthony Ettrick, Esq., of High Barnes, County Durham, a widower with one daughter.  They had issue, William, baptised at Aldenham, December 29, 1701; Walter, baptised at Aldenham, November 17, 1706; Sarah, baptised at Aldenham, November 6, 1707; Helen, baptised at Aldenham, May 7, 1710; Henry, baptised at Aldenham, December 25, 1711.

We know nothing of the four younger children; but the eldest, William, married Isabella Langley, of Higham-Gobion, County Bedford, and left a son,William, baptised at Harpenden, County Hertford, May 16, 1726; married at St. Nicholas, Durham, January 27, 1752; died, February 22, 1808, and was buried at Bishop’s Wearmouth.  His wife was Catherine Whorton, of Old Park, Durham; she was buried at High Barnes, November 24, 1794.  Their son, Rev. William Ettrick, was baptised at St. Nocholas, Durham, May 15, 1757; was admitted to certain copyholds in Hertfordshire, on the death of Sarah Noyes, as customary heir to her grandmother, Sarah Hucks, born Coghill.

We go back now to Henry Coghill (8), of Aldenham House (formerly called Wigbournes).  He married Anne, daughter of Robert Nicoll, Esq., of St. Michael’s, County Hertford, and was buried at Aldenham, 2d August, 1728.

They had issue –

  1. Sarah Coghill, baptised at Aldenham, Aug. 3, 1705.
  2. Mary Coghill.
  3. Henry Coghill.
  4. Anne Coghill.
  5. John Coghill.
  6. Thomas Coghill.
  7. Lucy Coghill.

In the pedigree sent by Sir John Jocelyn Coghill, all of these children, except Sarah, are said to have died young; but Henry Hucks Gibbs, Esq., writes that both Henry and John lived to be of age.  John, the younger son, he writes, was married; his wife’s name was Anne, and she was buried at Aldenham, January 9, 1725, and her will was proved on the 26th of the same month, leaving her property to her husband, who himself died the following year, and was buried August 30th, at Aldenham.  Another Ann Coghill was witness to her will; this may have been the wife of Henry, her father-in-law, born Ann Nicoll, and who was buried at Aldenham, August 3, 1739, as “Ann Coghill, widow, from London.”

Henry Coghill, the eldest son, and last male of the family, inherited the main estates of his father, and also some lands which belonged to John, his younger brother.  He died unmarried, and was buried at Aldenham, August 2, 1728, and administration was granted in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, to his sister –

Sarah,[37] who married, December 22, 1730, Robert, only son of William Hucks, Esq., of Bloomsbury, M.P. for Wallingford; and died February 25, 1771.  Her husband died in 1745, in the forty-fifth year of his age.  Both are buried in Aldenham Church, where their monument still remains.  A full description is given of it at the end of this section.

Mr Hucks was a Member of Parliament for Abbingdon [sic], and recorder of Wallingford.

They had issue –

  1. Elizabeth, Sarah, Mary and William Hucks, who died infants.
  2. Anne Hucks, baptised December 2, 1731.
  3. Harriet Hucks, baptised August 7, 1736.
  4. Sarah Hucks, baptised January 3, 1738.
  5. Robert Hucks, baptised November 8, 1742, at St. George’s Bloomsbury.

Anne, in 1757, married Oliver Coghill, of Coghill Hall, who was Oliver Cramer, but in pursuance of the will of Marmaduke Coghill, his great-uncle, assumed the name of Coghill by sign-manual, and became his heir as well as heir to his cousin Hester (daughter of James Coghill), Countess of Charleville.  Anne died leaving no issue, and Oliver Coghill afterwards married Jane, daughter of – Holl, Esq., by whom he had one daughter, Jane. (See Part II.)

Sarah married Thomas Buckeridge Noyes, Esq., of Southcote in Reading, who died 1797, and had issue –

  1. Sarah Noyes, died April, 1842.
  2. Anne Noyes, died December, 1841.

Robert Hucks died June 8, 1814, and his will, dated July 4, 1771, was proved on the 29th July of that year. He was declared a lunatic in 1792, and so continued till his death. His nieces, Sarah and Anne Noyes, succeeded to his estates as heirs-at-law; and executed a deed of partition in April, 1815, whereby the Oxfordshire and Berkshire estates, which came from the Hucks family, and the land in Lambeth, fell to Anne, and the Hertfordshire, Middlesex, and Cambridgeshire estates, which came from the Coghills, fell to Sarah. On her death intestate, as to, her real estate, the freehold portion of these estates passed to her heir ex parte malerna, George Henry Gibbs, Esq., of London, representative through his mother of Joseph Hucks, of Bloomsbury, next brother of “William Hucks first before mentioned. Such of her copyhold estates as had descended from the Coghills to Sarah, wife of Robert Hucks, passed to the Rev. William Ettrick, eldest representative of Elizabeth Coghill by her second husband (from which we may conclude that the descendants of her first husband, Jacob Wittewronge, were wholly extinct), and such as came to her from the Nicolls descended to John Smith, a clerk in the India Office, who was admitted to them as next heir of Anne Nicoll, the wife of Henry Coghill, and mother of the said Sarah Hucks, as sixth in descent from her grandfather, Robert Nicoll, of Hendon~ County Middlesex. Henry Hucks Gibbs, Esq., of Aldenham House, and of London, late Governor of the Bank of England, the eldest son of the above named George Henry Gibbs, Esq., is the present representative of the Hucks family, and of the principal estates of the family of Coghill.


The records of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, London, refer to five Coghills whose names are not mentioned in this pedigree. These records furnish the only information we have been able to obtain concerning them; first, –

John Coghill, of Lincoln, whose estate was administered upon in 1639-40.

Susanna Coghill, of the parish of Leonard, Eastcheap, London, whose will was probated August 28, 1657.

Thomas Coghill, of the parish of Leonard, Eastcheap, London, husband of Susanna, whose estate was administered upon October 27, 1657, by Henry Bonner and John Spencer, who were also appointed guardians to Thomas Coghill, a minor, the only child of the deceased.

Thomas Coghill, a minor, son of Thomas and Susanna mentioned above, late of the parish of Leonard, Eastcheap, London, whose estate was administered upon by John Cogbill, the nephew by the brother and next of kin, March 14, 1666.

Thomas Coghill, of Knaresborough, County of York, whose estate was administered upon by John Coghill, the cousin and next of kin, February 14, 1665-6.

Recorded in the same court is the WILL of Susanna Coghill (referred to above), wife of Thomas Coghill, of the parish of Leonard, Eastcheap, and mother of Thomas, his son, who was, when she married Mr. Coghill, the widow of the late Brandon Wetherill, of London. After giving several small legacies to her relations, and to Sir Thomas Trevor and “My Ladie Trevor,” she bequeathes the residue of the property which she held in her own right to her husband and their son. Sir Thomas Trevor is sole executor. The will is dated 12th May, 1655. witnesses: Ed. Owen, Ann House, and Thomas Barber. Proved 28th August, 1657.

The records of St. Michael’s, Bassishaw, London, show that Thomas Coghill, son of John Coghill, Barber-Surgeon,[38] was baptized January 29, 1603-4. We can find no mention of this John anywhere else.

Thomas, the son, was most probably the husband of Susanna just before mentioned, who died in the parish of Leonard, Eastcheap, in 1657.


Henry Coghill, of Aldenham, must have made provision for his two youngest children, John and Elizabeth, during his life, as by his will he bequeathed only twenty shillings each, to them. John, it is known, was a gentleman of wealth, and Elizabeth, who died unmarried six years after her father, as will be seen by her will, after leaving, including annuity, some sixteen hundred pounds to various persons, gave the remainder of her property, “personall and reall” (which was probably much the larger part), to her eldest brother, Henry.


“I, Henry Coghill of Aldenham in the County of Hertford, Esqr,” – “to the poore of the parish of Aldenham Five pounds ” – ” to each of such servants that shall be dwelling with mee att the time of my decease a yeares wages over and above what they ought to have and receive for theire service” – ” to my maid servant Anne Miillington ” an Annuity of £5 for life to be paid “att or in the now dwelling house of mee the said Henry Coghill, called Wigbournes situate in Aldenham aforesaid “

– “unto my God daughter, Elizabeth Downing” “£10 per annum – to my sonne Jolin and my daughter Elizabeth Coghill, to each of them twenty shi1lings” – “my son Henry Coghill sole Exectr and to him all my Goods and Chattels whatsoever.” – Dated 8 May, 1672. – Witnesses: John Nicoll and George Smith. – Proved 20 November, 1672.


“I, Elizabeth Coghill of Aldenham in the Conntie of Hertford, Spinster” – “unto .Anne Millington my Servant ” an Annuity of £ 15 for life charged on property in Aldenham and to be paid ” at or in the now dwelling house of Henry Coghill, esq. in Alden ham aforesaid” – “to my loving Brother John Coghill of Bentley, gent, and Deborah his wife fiftie pounds a peece” – “to Lucy Coghill, Daughter of the said John Coghill £100 ” – “to my loving Sister in Law, Sarah Coghill, now wife of Henry Coghill of Aldenham aforesaid esqr £100 ” – “to Elizabeth Coghill, daughter of the said Henry Coghill £500 ” – “to Henry Coghill, SONNE of the said Henry £500 ” – ” my loving Brother, the said Henry Coghill, sole Exe., to whom after payment of my legacies and funeral expenses I give and bequeath all my personall and Reall Estate whatsoever.” -Dated 26 October, 1676. – Witnesses: John Nicholl, Bithiah Nicholl, and Margaret Russell. – Proved 1 December, 1677.


“I, Sir Thomas Coghill of Bletchingdon in the County of Oxford, Knight” – “to be buried in the Chancell of the Church of Bletchingdon ” – Testator revokes a Conveyance made upon certain Trusts to Vincent Barry, the younger, of Tame in the said Co. of Oxford, Gent., Ralph Deane of Princes Risborough in Bucks, Gent., and John Dixon of Rowleright in said Co. Oxford, Gent., by Indenture dated 18 July, 1656, of “All those Mannors called or known by the name of Poures Mannor and Adderburges Mannors, with their appurtenances and of divers messuages, lands, Tenements, and hereditaments lying and being in Bletchingdon aforesaid and in Hampton Poell to the said Mannor or one of them belonging,” and devises as follows : ”all my lands unsould and conteyned in the said Lease are Assigned” ” To my deare and loveing wife, Dame Elizabeth Coghill” for life, remainder “to such person and persons to whom I shall hereby give and dispose of the inheritance or Fee Simple of the several lands therein conteyned unto.” – “unto my second sonne, John Coghill and his heires, the Inheritance and Fee Simple of all that Messuage or Tenement with all and Singular the lands,” &c. belonging thereto in Bletchingdon, now in the possession of John Edgerly, Gent. my Messe or Tenet, with the lands, &c. now in my possession, and heretofore in that of William Hawkins, all those four Cottages, &c., now in the possession of– Goodwife, George Goodwife, Stiles Goodwife, Gyles and Goodman Falconer, the Messe where I live and now dwell, with the gardens, that Messe or Tenet with the lands now in the possession of William Anyson, otherwise Daker with the appurte (except Chitsnell meade ), that Messe or Tenet, with the Close adjoining, now in the possession of Robert Munchion. One Messe or Tenet, with the lands now or late in the possession of Fra Brathwayt that Messe or Tenet now or late in the possession of Richard Prickett, and all that Messe or Tenet now or late in the possession of Edward Silversides, all that Messe or Tenet now or late in the possession of John Spindler, that Messe or Tenet now or late in the possession of Hester Buckley, and all those several Messes or Tenets now or late in the several possessions or occupations of Richard Kent, Richard Parratt, William Greene, John Bidwell and Thomas Judge, and also the house called the Towne house – “unto my sonne, Sutton Coghill, and his heires” All that Messe or Tenet, with the Lands, &c., heretofore in the possession of Mary Bowden, widow deceased, and now in the possession of me or my assigns, my Messe or Tenet and Lands now or late in the possession of Henry Verney, all that Messe or Tenet and Lands, now or late in the possession of Richard Dennett, that Messe or Tenet and Lands now or late in the possession of –Mathews, and all those Cottages now in the possession of “‘Widdow Dodur, Tho. Drake, Rice Evans, Rich. Gibbs, Widdow Kent and Richard Munchion, and also all that my Coppice, called the Lynch – “unto my Deare Wife, Dame Elizabeth Coghill; Vincent Barry the elder, of Tame, Esquire, and Vincent Barry, the younger, his sonne,” certain Messes, Tenets, Lands, &c., in Trust to sell same, ant1 pay thereout “unto my said Sonne John Coghill,” £800, to “my said Sonne Sutton,” £800, to “my daughter Faith Coghill” £1,000, to “my Daughter Catherine Coghill” £800, to “my daughter Mary Coghill” £800, to “my GRANDCHILD Thomas Coghill” £500, unto my daughter Elizabeth Coghill £50 to buy her a Ring and same sum to my daughter Susan for a like purpose, to my son Thomas Coghill £100 to buy him a Ring, and to my “loving friend and Counsellor, S. William Moreton” £5 to buy him a Ring – All my books, wheresoever they are, to my Sonne John Coghill; to my daughter Susan Pudsey, wife of John Pudsey Esquire – ” Residue of my lands in Blechingdon herein and hereby not disposed of, given or bequeathed, together with the said Two Mannors, called Poures Mannor and Aderburyes Mannor” “unto my said Sonne John Coghill and his heires after the decease of Dame Elizabeth my wife, whom I doe hereby make, &c., sole Exector, to her all my Leases, Goods, Plate, Household Stuff and Personal Estate whatsoever” – “my very loving friends, Sir Robert Croke Knt. and my Cosen Jo Dixon” Overseers. – Dated 26 May, 1659. – Witnesses: “‘William Norton, William Wansbrough, and Lawrence Bruer.

By Codicil, dated 1 June, 1659, and witnessed by William Marton, Christopher Barry, and Nicholas Gawdy, Testator revokes his bequest to his sd son John Coghill, of the Inheritance and Fee Simple of the Messe or Tenet and lands in Blechingdon, in the possession of John Edgerly, Gent, and the Messes Lands &c. or Cottages in the occupation of William Hawkins Goodwife, George Goodwife, Stiles Goodwife, Giles and Goodman Falconer, and gives the same to his deare and loving Wife, Dame Elizabeth Coghill, to be disposed of as she shall think fit. Proved December, 1659.


1629, Oct. 29. Elizabeth, daughter of Henry Coghill, Esq.

1633-4, Feb. 3. Henry, son of same.

1637-8, Jan. 30. Anne, daughter of Sir Thomas Coghill, Knt., and

Dame Elizabeth.

1669, Dec. 7. John, son of John and Mrs. Debora Coghill, born 24


1674, April 23. Elizabeth, daughter of Henry Coghill.

1675-6, Mar. 24. Henry, son of Henry Coghill, Esq., and Sarah.

1678-9, Jan. 29. John, son of same.

1684, May 13. Thomas, son of same.

1686, Dec. 2. Charles, son of same.

1705, Aug. 3. Sarah, daughter of Mr. Henry Coghill and Anne.


[Records of Burials from 1678 to 1700 are lost.]

1669, Dec. 7. John, ye child of Mr. John Coghill, in South Chancel.

1670, June 4. Mrs. Faith, wife of Henry Coghill, Esq., in South Chancel, her grandchild, John Coghill, being taken up and laid in the same grave.

1672, Aug. 26.  Henry Coghill, Esq., in South Chancel, by his wife.

1676, April 3.  Mrs. Elizabeth Coghill, in South Aisle.

1709, June 24.  Henry Coghill, Esq., in linen.[39]

1714, Sept. 3.  Madam Debora, wife of John Coghill, Esq.

1714, Oct. 18.  John Coghill, Esq., age seventy-eight.

1716, Aug. 18.  Henry Coghill, Esq., of Aldenham Wood, in linen, died 13th.

1723-4, Mar. 3. Mrs. Sarah Coghill, widow, in linen.

1724-5, Jan. 9. Mrs. Anne Coghill.

1726, Oct. 30. Mr. John Coghill.

1728, Aug. 2. Henry Coghill, Esq.

1734-5, Feb. 2. Mr. Thomas Coghill, in linen.

1739, Aug. 3. Mrs. Ann Coghill, widow, from London.

1785, Nov. 22. Sir John Coghill, Bart., from London.[40]


1625, July 10. Thomas, son of Henry Coghill.

1626, Sept. 17. Thomas, son of Thomas Coghill.

1626, Sept. 30. Faith, daughter of Henry Coghill.

1628, Dec. 28. Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Coghill.

1630, Dec. 26. Susan, daughter of same.

1633, April 28. John, son of same.

1634, July 17. Sutton, son of same, born 3d.

1636-7, Mar. 24. Faith, daughter of Sir Thomas Coghill, Knt.

1637, July 2. John, son of Henry Coghill, Esq., born same day.

1640-1, Jan. 20. Catherine, daughter of Sir Thomas Coghill, Knt.

1644-5, Jan. 16. Mary, daughter of same.

1681, July 30. Thomas, son of Sutton Coghill, Gent.


1659, June 5. Sir Thomas Coghill, Knt.

1665, Sept. 19. Thomas, son of Thomas Coghill, Esq.

1694, May 17. Thomas Coghill, Esq., died 12th.

1694-5, Feb. 20. Johan Coghill.

1702-3, Feb. 22. Mary, relict of John Coghill.

1706, Dec. 10. Thomas Coghill, Lord of the Manor.

1713, Oct. 22. Elizabeth, daughter of Sutton Coghill, Esq., and

wife of Charles Collins of Betterton, Co. Berks.

1716-7, Feb. 3. John Coghill, Esq., Lord of the Manor.


On the north wall of the chancel is a monument with the following inscriptions:-

THOMAS, son and heir of Henry Coghill, of Aldenham, Herts, Esq.,
age 3 years, died 18 Aug., 1628.

ELIZABETH, eldest daughter of same,
age 5 years, died 20 Aug., 1628.

JOHN, eldest son of Thomas Coghill
of Blechingdon, Esq., age 4 years,
died 19 September, 1628.

Also, FAITH, second daughter of sd Henry Coghill,
age 4 years, died 3 May, 1 G30.


Aldenham Church, in which are the monuments and inscriptions following this, is situated in the parish of that name, in the County of Hertford. It is built almost entirely of flints, and has a handsome square embattled tower at its west end, surmounted by a short spire, a nave with side aisles covered with lead, and a chancel, tiled.

ON THE FLOOR, ON THE NORTH SIDE, are the following inscriptions: –

Arms: Gules, on a chevron three pellets, Coghill: empaling, a chevron between three bulls passant guardant, Sutton, with the crest of Coghill.

“Here lyeth interred the body of

wife of Henry Coghill, Esqr., and daughter and co-heir of John Sutton, Esqr., who departed this life upon the 31st day of May, Anno Domini 1670, at 75 years of age. She left issue behind her, two sons, Henry and John, and one daughter named Elizabeth. By her son John, who married Deborah Dudley, daughter of William Dudley, of Elstree, Esqr.,  she had two grandchildren, John and Lucy, both of which are buried under this stone.”

“HENRY COGHILL, Esqr., deceased the 22nd of August, 1672, aged 83 years.”

”Here lieth the body of the pious and truly religious gentlewoman
relict of William Dudley, Esqr., who lived to the 80th year of her age, and departed this life the first of March, Anno Domini, 1684-5. She left issue only one daughter, Debora, the wife of John Coghill of Bentley, Gent. In the same grave lyes burried three children of the said Coghills, viz.: one daughter and two sons, who died young.”

ON THE SAME SIDE is an altar-tomb of white marble, on which are the figures of a gentleman and lady, with these arms and inscriptions: –

Arms: Gules, on a chevron three pellets, a chief Sable, Coghill, empaling, or, two lions passant azure; Dudley. Crest, on a wreath, Argent and Gules, a cock crowing ermine, crested and winged, or.

“Here lyeth the body of
late of Bentley, in this county, Gent, younger son of Henry Coghill, heretofore of Aldenham, Esq., who died October 13th 1714, in the 79 year of his age.

“ALSO DEBORAH, his wife (only daughter of “William Dudley, Esq.), who dyed August 3lst, 1714, in the 73rd year of her age.

“Their only son, Thomas Coghill, who lived to about the age of twentytwo years, in commission in the army which marched under the Duke of Marlborongh from Flanders, up into Germany, was unfortunately slain at the attack of Donawert, An° 1704.”

Against the wall, on the south side of the chancel, is a marble monument, the upper part of which consists of a sarcophagus of Sienna marble, in front of which, carved in relief, is a medallion, with a male and female head, beneath which is a tablet, between two pillars of the Ionic order, with this inscription : –

“Sacred to the memory of
ROBERT HUCKS, Esqr., and of
Sarah, his wife;

he was the only son of William Hucks, Esqr., of wallingford, in Berkshire, who served for that Borough in four successive parliaments, by Mary Selwood, his wife. He was a tender and affectionate husband, a fond parent, a warm and firm friend, a kind and generous landlord, an indulgent master. No man was more beloved by his friends, or more esteemed and trusted by all that knew him. It was his constant object to live well with every one, and every office to his neighbours, was a gratification to himself; his benevolent heart was warm in the interest of all mankind, and of this nation and Government in particular. He served for the Borough of Abbingdon, in Berkshire, in several Parliaments, respected and approved by his constituents; the good of his country was the unerring rule of his conduct; it was difficult to mislead, impossible to corrupt him; he looked back on his past life with humble diffidence, and was only confident in that Gospel that offereth mercy and peace to all men. He died after a long and painful illness, which he bore with manly fortitude and Christian resignation, in the prime and strength of his days, in the 45th year of his age, lamented by his friends and forever to be lamented by his family. Sarah, his wife, was the only surviving child of Henry Coghill, Esqr., of Wigbourns, in this Parish, by his wife Ann Nicoll, daughter of Robert Nicoll, Esqr.; she survived her husband many years, ever regretting his loss ; her long widowhood fully evinced she merited the confidence he placed in her; with ample means to have formed a second connection at a time when the temptations of health and pleasure were in their strength, she rejected every offer; and, as a never-ceasing testimony of her affection for him, devoted her life to the care of their children. She died after a short illness, February 25th 1771, in the 65th year of her age. They had issue: Ann, married Oliver Cramer Coghill, Esqr., of Coghill-Hall, in Yorkshire, who died without children; Elizabeth, Sarah, Mary, and William, who died infants, and Harriet, Sarah, and Robert, now living; the last of whom, out of respect and gratitude to the best of parents, erected this monument, a small tribute of filial duty to preserve their memory in this world; but their virtues are written in the eternal records, and will remain in lasting characters when this marble shall be mouldered into dust.”

Beneath this inscription are two shields, with these arms: Dexter, argent, a chevron between three owls, azure. Hucks. An escutcheon gules, on a chevron argent, three pellets, a chief sable. Coghill. Sinister, the arms of Coghill.

PART 4 – The Unconnected Branch of the Family in England

THE following pedigree was furnished by Mr. Anthony Gogliill, of 9 Prince Road, Notting Hill, London, and Miss Martha Coghill, daughter of Mr. Daniel Coghill, of Ivy House Farm, Ichenham, W. Uxbridge, in Middlesex.

They are both of the opinion that they descended from Sir Thomas Coghill, of Blechingdon, and the fact of Anthony Coghill, their ancestor, having been a resident of Oxfordshire, would seem to favor their supposition. On the other hand, the descendants of Sir Thomas Coghill are all said to be extinct in the pedigree sent to us by Sir John Jocelyn Coghill, and further, if the first Anthony in the pedigree which follows had been a descendant of Sir Thomas, he would in all probability have inherited some of his estates. Joseph L. Chester, LL. D., of London, who has had a long experience in genealogical researches, and whose opinion is considered authority, is positive that they did not descend from Sir Thomas.

We give the pedigree and leave it for others who may feel inclined to pursue the investigations.

  1. ANTHONY COGHILL, farmer, resided at Worminghall, near Oxford, and died, and was buried at that place March 1, 1779; age, sixty-eight years. The only issue that we know of was a son, –
  1. THOMAS COGHILL, born October 10, 1736, and died January 27, 1804. He was parish clerk and schoolmaster at Stanton for over forty years, and was buried there. He married, and his wife Katharine died December 5, 1806 ; age, seventy-three years. He had issue –
  5. ANTHONY COGHILL, born 1768.

Thomas married, and had one son, who died single. Katharine married R. Bradford, and had two sons. Elizabeth married Thomas Ray, and had one daughter.

Anthony married Elizabeth Neighbour in 1788, who died 29th March, 1840; age, seventy-three years. He was a farmer, and held the same farms that the first Anthony held at Worminghall, and also the following places: Wadelsdon and Homage farm, Chelton farm, both in Bucks County; also Lobbs farm, Great Haseley, in Oxfordshire, at which place he died June 1, 1841, and was buried at Worminghall Church, Buckinghamshire. He had issue twelve children: –

  1. ANTHONY COGHILL, born 18th March, 1789; died December, 1802.
  2. ELIZABETH COGHILL, born 10th May, 1790.
  3. THOMAS COGHILL, born 7th October, 1791.
  4. KATHARINE COGHILL, born 15th January, 1793 ; died 20th June, 1793.
  5. WILLIAM COGHILL, born 25th April, 1794; died 1849.
  6. JOHN COGHILL, born 17th November, 1796; died 3d June, 1810.
  7. JAMES COGIIILL, born 14th August, 1798.
  8. DANIEL COGHILL, born 12th October, 1800.
  9. MARY COGHILL, born 3d December, 1802 ; died 1st July, 1876.
  10. ANTHONY COGHILL, second, born 10th May, 1805.
  11. KATHARINE COGHILL, second, born 20th September, 1808.
  12. JOHN COGHILL, second, born 5th February, 1812.

Elizabeth married James Garner, and died leaving seven children. Thomas was apprenticed on board a merchant ship, and, in the war between England and America in 1812, was pressed into service on board a man-of-war (family tradition says the “Bellerophon “), and when the war was over he left the navy. He sailed in the American brig” Mary,” Captain Thorndyke, in 1816, and was never heard of afterwards; a brig answering the description of the “Mary” was captured off the Malay coast, the captain and mate murdered, and the crew made prisoners.

William was a farmer and resided at Tetsworth, Oxon. He married Martha Lovejoy, 6th January, 1825; and died May 14, 1840, and had issue –

  1. THOMAS COGHILL, born 12th October, 1825; died 24th February, 1839.
  2. WILLIAM COGHILL, born 4th June, 1827.
  3. ANN COGHILL, born 17th March, 1830; died 6th April, 1854.
  4. ELLEN ELIZABETH COGHILL, born 30th January, 1832.

Ellen E. married Robert Pratt, of Lynham, Oxon, farmer, and had one son, Freeman, now living.

William married Rachael Jones (widow, maiden name Hardwick), June 4, 1850, at St. George’s, Hanover Square, London. He died 26th August, 1872. Rachel, his wife, died 22d August, 1876 ; both buried at Kensal-green Cemetery. He left issue eight children : –

  1. E. ELIZABETH COGHILL, born 2d February, 1851; now living single.
  2. SARAH HUSS COGHILL, born 20th February, 1853; living and single.
  3. DRUCILLA ADELAIDE COGHILL, born 2d May, 1854.
  4. WILLIAM ANTHONY COGHILL, born 22d May, 1855; died 7th July, 1856.
  5. ALICE MARTHA COGHILL, born 10th March, 1857; living and single.
  6. LYDIA LOUISE COGHILL, born 14th December, 1858; died 19th August, 1859.
  7. JESSIE AGNES COGHILL, born 11th August, 1860; 30th December, 1860.
  8. ANTHONY ·WILLIAM COGHILL, born 2d November, 1862; died 19th December, 1862.

Drucilla Adelaide married William Anthony French, 8th December, 1874, and has one son, Arthur William, born 3d February, 1876.

James (4) married Elizabeth Emmerton. He was a surveyor and resided at Long Crendon, Buckingham; died 9th February, 1851, and was buried at Ickford in the same county. He had issue –

  1. ELLEN COGHILL, not living.
  2. HARRIET COGHILL, married.

And one son who died in infancy.

Daniel (4), of Ivy House Farm, near Ichenham, in Middlesex, married his cousin Elizabeth Burnard, at Thane Church, 23d December, 1830, and in 1852 removed from Thane, Oxon, to his present residence. He is a farmer, and both he and his wife are living. He had issue –

  1. MARTHA COGHILL, born 24th December, 1831; unmarried.
  2. HORATIO COGHILL, born 26th September, 1834; died 30th April, 1835.
  3. ANTHONY COGHILL, born 28th March, 1837; died 6th April, 1841.

Mary (4) married Joseph Wheeler, and died January 1, 1876, leaving one son and one daughter.

Anthony (4) was married three times: first, to Alice Edmunds; second, to Mary Ann Buckle; and last, to Sarah Mason. All of the children by the first two wives are dead. There are now living by the last marriage nine children: –

  1. ELIZABETH COGHILL, unmarried.
  5. SARAH COGHILL, unmarried.
  7. SUSANNAH ALMA COGHILL, unmarried.
  8. ALICE COGHILL, unmarried.
  9. AGNES COGHILL, unmarried.

Thomas is living at Warwick, Queensland. Anthony is married and resides at Portland Road, South Norwood, London; has no issue. Mary married Mr. W. T. Martin, and has two children, Frederick Chandos and William Thomas Coghill. She resides at 18 High Street, Hampstead.

William married and resides at 16 Queen’s Road, Notting Hill, W. London, and has three sons: –


Katharine (4) married Robert Cunning, and had two children. John ( 4) married Miss Corbett, and removed to Canada, and resided near Toronto, where he died, leaving two sons: –


Both of them are farmers, living near Toronto.

Joseph L. Chester, LL. D., of London, very kindly sent us the following monumental inscriptions and parish records, from a volume of collections which he was having indexed.

“On a stone on the floor of the nave of the CHURCH AT STANTON ST. JOHN, Oxfordshire: –

“‘In memory of Elizabeth, the wife of Anty Coghill, who died 5th April, 1753, aged 89 years. Also of Eliz., the wife of Thomas Gilbert, who died 29th May, 1761, aged 75 years. Also of Anty Coghill, who died lst March, 1779, aged 68 years.’

“In the parish register of Stanton St. John these persons are thus described in the burials : –

“‘1753 April 9 Elizabeth Cockle.

“‘1761June1 Elizth wife of Thos Gilbert.

“‘1779 March 3 Anthony Coghill of Wormall,[42] Co. Bucks.’

“I should say the last two were son and daughter of the first.”

This Elizabeth Cockle, or Coghill, is the earliest member of this branch of the family that we hear of. We find no record of her husband’s death. It is possible that the name may have been changed by the descendants from Cockle, as entered on the parish register, to Coghill, and, if so, that of Elizabeth may have been included in the change to conform to her son’s name. These inscriptions were not made until after the death of Anthony, some twenty-six years later than that of Elizabeth.

Part 5. The Scottish Branch

(not transcribed)

Part 6. The American Branch

(not transcribed)

Part 7. The Family of Slingsby




“A SEAT of the ancient family of the Slingsbys,[43] pleasantly situated in the park on the right of the road leading from Knaresborough to Ripley.

It has undergone many alterations. Some additions were made to it in the early part of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and a full suite of rooms then finished were first occupied by Thomas, the seventh Earl of Northumberland, brother to Lady Mary Slingsby. The new front was added, with many other improvements, and the road made through the park,[44] by Sir Henry Slingsby, about the year 1730. A winding walk, near a mile in extent, leads from the west side of the house through a very fine wood of elm and beech trees, whose foliage meeting above forms a most pleasing solitary shade, rendered still more agreeable by the distant clamor of the rookery, and the soft notes of the plaintive stock-doves.” – Hargrove’ s History of Knaresborough.

The Family of Slingsby.

THE family of Slingsby is, to a greater or less extent, identified with English history for a long period. Its members intermarried at an early date with the Percys, the heads of which house were successively the earls of Northumberland; and, later, with several other noble families. Many of them held high positions under their government, and some were the recipients of special honors from their sovereigns. One, from deliberately matured convictions of duty, the sublimest of all promptings, suffered the loss of his fortune and his head, for his loyalty to his king ; and one, from the impulse of a noble and generous nature, lost his own life in trying to save that of his servant. The descendants from such men, who do not look back with noble pride of lineage, can hardly be expected to emulate their virtues, or to bequeath to posterity like laudable examples.

As the Coghills were all descended on the maternal side from the Slingsbys by the marriage of Thomas Coghill Esq., son and heir of John Cockhill, Gentleman, the first ancestor of whom we find any record, with Margery, daughter of John Slingsby, Esq., of Scriven, that family belongs also to our ancestry; and to make our pedigree more full and complete, we propose to add to it a part of theirs, together with some sketches of the more prominent members of the family.

The Slingsbys are, as we learn from various authors, a very ancient and famous family, being descended on the maternal side from one Gamel, the king’s forester, who settled near Knaresborough soon after the Conquest. He had a confirmation of his lands in Scriven by Henry I. (A. D. 1100 to 1135). He was the first of his house who enjoyed the feudal honor of capital or chief forester of the forests and parks of Knaresborough. The posterity of this Gamel took the name of Scriven from their habitation.

Joanna de Scriven, the fourth in descent from Gamel, and daughter of Henry de Scriven by his wife Alice, daughter of Richard de Caperon, of Scotton, was heiress to her father’s estates, and carried the manor of Scriven, with several others, and also the dignity of capital forester of the forests and parks of Knaresborough, into· the family of Slingsby, by intermarrying with William de Slingsby of Studley, in 1357. This William de Slingsby of Studley, in whose issue the families of Slingsby and Scriven were thus united, was son of John de Slingsby (greatgrandson of William de Selingisbye, of Selingisbye, in the North Riding of Yorkshire), by his wife Agnes, daughter of William de Stodleigh (Studley), and heir to her brother William. By this marriage he had issue: –

Richard Slingsby, who died without issue, in the thirty-first year of the reign of Edward III., and

Gilbert Slingsby, who married a daughter of William Calverly, Esq., and had issue:-

William Slingsby, who married the daughter of Thomas Banks, Esq., of Whixley, and had issue :-

Richard Slingsby, who married Anne, daughter and coheiress of John Nesfield, by whom he had the manors of Scotton, Brereton, and Thorp ; and had issue :-

William Slingsby, living in the twentieth year of Henry VI., who married Joan, daughter of Sir Robert Plompton, of Plompton, Knight, and had issue, William, John, Robert, Thomas, and Agnes, who married Thomas Knaresborough.

William Slingsby, Esq., of Scriven, son and heir, married Janet, daughter of Sir John Melton, of Afton, Knight, and had issue : –

John Slingsby, of Scriven, son and heir, chief forester of Knaresborough, who married Joan, daughter of Walter Calverly, Esq., of Calverly, and had issue: –

John; Jane, prioress of Nun-Monkton ; Margery, wife of Thomas Coghill, Esq ., of Coghill Hall, and Margaret, wife of William Tancred, Esq.

John Slingsby, Esq., son and heir, married Margery, daughter of Simon Pooley, of Badley, in Suffolk. He was mortally wounded at the battle of Flodden-field, September 9, 1513, and died four days after. He had issue,

Thomas, John, Marmaduke, Peter, Simon, Anne, Margery, wife of Walter Pullein, Esq., of Scotton, and Isabel.

John and Marmaduke died without issue. Peter married, and had issue, one daughter. Simon married, and had issue, Christopher, Robert, and Peter, which Peter was the father of Sir Anthony Slingsby, Governor of Zutphen, in the Low Countries, who was advanced to the degree of an English baronet, October 23, 1628, but as he died without issue, in 1630, the title in this branch became extinct. Anne and Isabel both married.

Thomas Slingsby, Esq., of Scriven, eldest son and heir, married Joan, daughter of Sir John Mallory, Knight, of Studley, and had issue : –

Francis, Marmaduke, Christopher, William, Peter, Thomas, Elizabeth, Dorothy, Anne, Joanna.

Marmaduke married Elizabeth, daughter of Sir William Mallory, of Studley.

Christopher married Elizabeth, daughter of Richard Tancred, of Pannall. William, Peter, and Thomas died without issue; the daughters all married.

Francis Slingsby, of Scriven, eldest son and heir, married Mary, only sister of Thomas and Henry Percy, who were successively Earls of Northumberland.[45] This lady died in 1508, aged sixty-six years, and Francis died in 1600.

They were both buried in the Slingsby family chapel, on the north side of the choir, in Knaresborough Church.

On an altar tomb are placed fine and full-length figures of each. The knight is in complete armor, except helmet, which is placed under his head; ·a small frill encircles the upper part of the neck, his beard flowing gracefully in ringlets over his breast. On his left side is his sword, and on his right, at some distance, lies his dagger; his hands are elevated, and at his feet lies a lion, the crest of the family.

The lady is habited in a long white robe, her head resting on a pillow; on her right side, upon the skirt of her robe, are the arms of Percy and Brabant; one foot rests against a crescent, as the other, now broken off, formerly did against a lion passant, both crests of the Percys. The inscriptions are in Latin, and of great length, covering two pages in the “History of Knaresborough.”

In the same chapel is a full-length figure of Sir William Slingsby, son of Francis, born in 1562, died in 1624. It stands in a niche. His head reclines a little on one hand, the elbow resting on the guard of his sword; the other hand hangs down and holds a shield with family arms. Pennant, in his “Tour from Alston Moor to Harrowgate,” says of this figure, after having minutely described it, “It is one of the best sculptures I have seen in any of our churches.” There is also a very long Latin inscription on this monument.

Francis had nine sons and three daughters, namely:

(1) Thomas, drowned in the river Nidd while endeavouring to save his servant, in 1581, in the twenty-eighth year of his age; (2) Francis and (3) Henry, both died young; (4) Sir Henry; (5) Arthur, who died without issue; (6) Charles, who was a clergyman, married and had issue; (7) Sir William; (8) Sir Guilford; (9) Sir Francis. The three daughters were Eleanor, Anne, who died young, and Elizabeth.

Sir William, whose monument is referred to above, was the founder of the Kippax branch, and was made Commissioner General in 1595, Cibicida Honorarius to Anne Queen Consort, in 1603, and one of the deputy lieutenants of Middlesex in 1617. He married Elizabeth, daughter of Sir Stephen Board, of Sussex, and had issue,

William, died young; Elizabeth, married John Villiers, Viscount Purbeck, eldest brother of George, first Duke of Buckingham by that name; Henry, Master of the Mint to King Charles II., and as such said to be the author of that notable motto on British coins,” Decus et Tutamen.” He married a daughter of Sir — Cage, and had issue,

Henry, who married Katherine, daughter of Sir William Lowther, and died without issue, 1695; and Anthony, who died unmarried, April 3, 16 97; when the male issue of Sir William became extinct.

Sir Guilford (8) was comptroller of the navy in the reign of James I. He married Margaret, daughter of William Water, Alderman of York, and had issue twelve children:

Guilford,[46] Robert, Percie, Walter, George, Francis, Arthur, William, and four daughters, Dorothy, Margaret, Maria, and Anne. Robert and Walter were colonels in the king’s army, and were at the siege of Bristol, in 1645, where they were of Prince Rupert’s Council of War. Whitlock’s “Memorials,” p.460, relates that July 9, 1650, “an act passed for the trial of Walter Slingsby” and others, “by an high court of justice.”

Arthur was created a baronet at Bruges, October 9, 1657.

Sir Francis,[47] (9) Knight, of Kilmore, near Cork, was Constable of Haulboline, and of the Royal Council of the Province of Munster. He married in 1605, and had issue two sons, Francis and Henry, and five daughters.

Henry was knighted ; one of the daughters was mother of the celebrated Henry Dodwell. She is said, in the “Biographia Britannica,” to have died at the house of her brother, Sir Henry.

Sir Henry, fourth but eldest surviving son of Francis and Mary Slingsby, succeeded to the representation of the family. He was knighted by Queen Elizabeth, and held sundry offices under the Duchy of Lancaster; was one of the Council of the North, and several times vicepresident.

He married Frances, daughter of William Vavasour, Esq., of Weston (by his wife, daughter and heir of Sir Leonard Beckwith, of Selby, Knight, and Elizabeth, his wife, daughter and co-heir of Sir Robert Cholmeley, Knight, Chief Justice of England). He had issue, William, killed at Florence, 1617;[48] Henry, of whom presently; Thomas (said in the printed pedigrees to have died in France in 1617), who was a colonel in the King’s army during the rebellion, was at the siege of York, and “had a fine set for his loyalty in 1646,” died without issue in February, 1670, and was buried on the 11th of that month at Knaresborough; Elizabeth, wife of Sir Thomas Metcalf; Mary, wife of Sir Walter Bethel ; Catherine, wife of Sir John Fenwick; Alice, wife of Thomas Waterton, Esq. ; Anne, died unmarried ; Frances, wife of Bryan Stapleton, Esq., and Eleanor, wife of Sir Arthur Ingram. Sir Henry died 17th, and was buried at Knaresborough Church, 28th December, 1634. Sir Henry Slingsby, of Scriven, eldest surviving son and heir, was born in 1601.

He was at school under Mr. Otby, parson of Foston, in the North Riding of Yorkshire. In January, 1618, he was entered a Fellow-Commoner of Queen’s College, Cambridge, where he resided till 1621, at which time, in company with his tutor, he made a tour of the Continent.

From this period until his marriage, his time seems to have been spent between Yorkshire and London, in which city his father possessed considerable property.[49] He was created Baronet of Nova Scotia by Charles I., 1638, as may be seen by the original letters patent, under the great seal of Scotland, now remaining at Scriven: “Apud

Striveling secundo die mensis Martij, Anno Domini millesimo sexcentesimo trigesimo octavo, et anno regni nri decimo tertio.”

The king had a short time previously (1633) honoured him with a visit to the Red. House.[50] The bed on which the royal guest slept is still preserved.

Clarendon, referring to him in his “History of the Rebellion,” says:-

“Sir Henry Slingsby was in the first rank of the gentlemen of Yorkshire, and was returned to serve as a member in the Parliament that continued so many years, where he sat till the troubles began, and having no relation to or dependence upon the Court, he was swayed duly by his conscience to detest the violent and undutiful behavior of that Parliament. He was a gentleman of good understanding, but of a melancholic nature, and of very few words; and when he could stay no longer with a good conscience in their councils, he returned to the country, and joined with the first who took up arms for the King, and when the war was ended, he remained still in his own house, prepared and disposed to run the fortunes of the Crown in any other attempt, and having a good fortune, and a general reputation, he had a greater influence upon the people than they who talked more and louder, and was known to be irreconcilable to the new government, and was therefore cut off. He, with John Mordaunt, and Dr. Hewet, an earnest preacher in London, were the first brought before the High Court of Justice (?), of which John Lisle, who gave his vote in the King’s blood, and continued an entire confidant and instrument of Cromwell, was president.

“Mordaunt escaped by bribing some of the judges; Sir Henry and Dr. Hewet were less fortunate, and their blood was the more thirsted after, for the other’s indemnity. The former had been two years in prison, in Hull, and was brought now up to the Tower, for fear they might not discover enough of any new plot to make so many formidable examples as the present conjuncture required. The charge against him was that he had contracted with some officers in Hull, two years before, for the delivery of one of the Block Houses to him for the King’s service. He did not care to defend himself against the accusation, but rather acknowledged and justified his affection, and owned his loyalty to the King, with very little compliment or ceremony to the present power.

Notwithstanding very great intercession to preserve him, for he was uncle to Lord Falconberg, who engaged his wife and alI his new allies to intercede for him, he was condemned and beheaded. ‘When he was brought to die, he spent very little time in discourse, but told them he was to die for being an honest man, of which he was glad.”

Playfair says of him : –

”He did and suffered much for Charles I.; having a large estate, he spent the greater part of it in the King’s service, and for doing so, the Parliament sequestered the rest; he brought six hundred men, horse and foot, into the field, to assist the Prince, and did more real service than any other gentleman in Yorkshire, being constantly in action, until he was overpowered and taken prisoner.”

Burke remarks : –

”Sir Henry adhered to the King through all his troubles, had his estates sequestered and sold,[51] and lived a ruined man, till 1658, when for an attempt, unhappily for him, a little too early made, to restore his Majesty, Charles II., he was beheaded after a mock trial, before a pretended Court, 8th June, 1658, on Tower Hill, being the time and place also of the execution of the eminent Dr. Hewet.”

Hargrove’s “Knaresborough” contains a full pedigree of the Slingsby family, and referring to Sir Henry, says :

“He was a man of deeds, rather than words; he said very little upon his trial, and as little upon the scaffold, persisting in his loyalty, and told the people he died for being an honest man.”

The opinion of the republican General Ludlow, on the trial and sentence of Sir Henry, is a valuable record of the general impression which they made on the minds of a party very unfriendly to him, and to all loyalty : –

“Sir Henry Slingsby was called to the bar, and the witnesses on each side being heard, he was pronounced guilty, though in the opinion of many men he had very hard measure. For it appeared that he was a prisoner at the time when he was charged to have practiced against the government; that he was a declared enemy, and therefore by the laws of war, free to make any such attempt: Besides it was alleged that the persons whom he was accused of having endeavoured to corrupt, had trapan’d him by their promises to serve the King in delivering Hull, if he would give them a commission to act for him. But all this being not thought sufficient to excuse him he was adjudged to die.” -Memoirs, vol. i., p. 606.

In one of the rooms in the Public Library of Boston is Copley’s historical painting of “King Charles I. demanding, in the House of Commons, the five impeached members,” A.D. 1641-42. There are fifty-eight portraits in this picture, and among them, one of Sir Henry Slingsby. The descriptive pamphlet says: –

“Of the other party in this group is Sir Henry Slingsby; he stands behind Whitlocke, a little raised above the level of the floor, his eyes steadfastly fixed upon the countenance of Charles. His temper was inclined to sorrow and melancholy; he opposed, from the beginning, the measures of the republicans, and at length terminated on the scaffold a close confinement of two years in the common prison of Hull.”

We have at this writing received from London a book ordered some time since, entitled “The Diary of Sir Henry Slingsby, of Scriven, Bart., now first published entire from the MS. A reprint of ‘Sir Henry Slingsby’s Trial.’ His rare tract, ‘A Father’s Legacy.’ Extracts from Family Correspondence, etc.” By Rev. Daniel Parsons, M.A. London, 1836. The editor, in his preface, says:-

“And had it so happened that Sir Henry Slingsby was to be spoken of merely as a link in a chain of respectable ancestry, it would have been scarcely possible to avoid feeling, that in such times, a chivalrous and loyal character might have been expected in him: but we find him rather exceeding the high standard of the patriotism of his day, than falling short of it, and throwing into the shade his unblemished descent by the lustre of his personal history.”

The “Diary” commences in 1638 and ends in 1648, the last entry being in reference to the execution of the King! At this crisis, Sir Henry, with characteristic loyalty, gives up all notice of public events. The lack of space restricts us to a few quotations from the “Diary,” “Trial,” and “A Father’s Legacy;” the latter contains more sound advice for young men than is often found in so small a compass. In the “Correspondence” are very many interesting letters, not only from members of the family, but also from many of the most prominent men of the times, among whom were Bryan and Thomas Fairfax, of the same family as the Fairfaxes of America.

There are also in the work facsimile autographs of twenty-seven distinguished persons, including Charles I., Sir Henry Slingsby, and the Duke of Buckingham. It must be remembered that Sir Henry’s writings are in the style of the middle of the seventeenth century, a period when there were few, if any, examples of what would now be considered elegant writing, and a diary is the last place where carefulness of expression is to be looked for.

The “Diary” furnishes a detail of many of the events of those calamitous years, and gives information as to the manner of life of a country gentleman of that day, and enables us to form a correct estimate of the character of the writer himself The editor, after deducing from his diary that he was a gentleman whose disposition and tastes would lead him to the leisure and employments of a country life, and who was rather fitted for serving the public interest by filling the stations to which in the common course of things he would be appointed in his county, than in taking a lead in state policy or in war, says : –

“But when the new kind of circumstances in which he found himself placed by the breaking out of the rebellion forced him, like the majority of that class in his day, to follow the path of duty in very different courses, he addressed himself to his altered condition of life, with the energy and consistency of a man who had one great and honest end in view – the preservation of his country. Nor can we fail to be impressed with the conviction, that whatever he did was under the correction of higher motives than those of human expediency; and that he owed his firmness to the support of sober and sincere religion.”

No one who has carefully examined into all the circumstances connected with his arrest, imprisonment, and trial, and who has studied the character of the man, can for a moment question his patriotism and honesty of purpose, or doubt that he fell a victim to a long preconcerted plot, by which he was entrapped into conduct exactly such as it was known his loyalty would lead to under the circumstances. He had been arraigned and sentenced before an officer of the army and a commission at York, as one of the “late plotters,” as may be seen by a letter written by Col. Robert Lilburn to the Protector in 1655, his estates sequestered, and he sent to Hull as a prisoner, where he was held until his removal to the Tower of London in 1658. It was during his imprisonment at Hull that he was entrapped by Cromwell’s decoys.

The following extracts from his diary will throw some light upon his arrest, and show that the articles of surrender were violated by the Parliamentarians, which was in keeping with their general conduct. He commences his diary, which, during his two years of active service in the army, had been suspended, as follows :-

“Now I will tell my own story, where I have been ever since I marched out of York [July16, 1644] until ye 7 of May [1646]; for I have now good leisure in ye solitariness wherein I live; & ye setting down ye places & times wherein I spent my two years’ peregrination, & ye taking & review thereof will serve to put off ye tediousness of my close retirement; for ever since my coming out of Newark[52] (wch this day is 27 weeks & 2 days) I have for ye most part kept wth in my bottle; but since they came for me, I have escap’d ym ; & I betake myself to one room in my house, scarce known to my servants, where I spend my days in great sylence, scarce daring to speak or walk, but with great heed taken least I be discovered. Et jam veniet tacito curva senecta pede: & why I should be thus aim’d at I know not, if my neighborhood to York makes them not more quarrelsome. As acerima proximorum odia, so, beat and cold if they meet in a cloud produceth thunder. My own disposition is to love quietness, & since ye King will’d me to go home wn I parted from him at Topcliff…

“I resolved to keep at home, if my Lord Mayor & Alderman Watson would have permitted me quietly to live there; but they would not suffer me to have ye benefit of ye articles of Newark, which gave us liberty 3 months to live at home undisturbed;[53] but from York they send to take me wth in ye first month; & all is to try me wth ye Negative oath & national Covenant. The one makes me renounce my allegiance, ye other my religion. For ye oath, why it should be impos’d on us not to assist ye King wn all means is taken from us whereby we might assist him, and to assist in this warr wch is now come to an end & nothing in all England held for ye King, I see no manner of reason, unless they would have us do a wicked act, & they the authors, out of greater spite to wound both soul & body. For now ye not taking of it cannot much prejudice prejudice ym, and ye taking of ye oath will much prejudice us, being contrary to former oaths wch we have taken; & against civil justice, wch as it abhors neutrality, so it will not admit a man should falsify ye trust wch he hath given.”

In referring further on to the oaths which they required him to take, he says:-

“I should be convinced of ye lawfulness of it before I take it & not urged, as ye Mahometans do their disciples, by force & not by reason….. By this new religion wch is impos’d yon make every man yt takes it up guilty, either of having no religion, & so become an Atheist, or else a religion put off or on, as he doth his hat, to every one he meets; but you would have me conform to ye faith or the definition of faith & religion wch you have made! but wth all see how impartiall you are, for mutato nomine de te fabula narratur; where in former times it was thought grievous that conformity should be impos’d by ye bishopps wn ye scruple should be only a Cap or a Sirples, you scrupled at ye out branches only, but we scruple to have root & branch plucked up; therefore judge of our scruple by your own.”

When all had turned out to the wish of the usurper, and he had ample proofs against Sir Henry of what would have been treason, if he had been lawful king, still so little could he rely upon the ordinary course of legal procedure, that he denied Sir Henry, and Dr. Hewet and Mr. Mordaunt, his fellow-prisoners, their right of trial by jury, and bad them arraigned before an unlawful body, called a high court of justice, constituted for the occasion, and composed exclusively of his creatures, with the infamous Lisle as president. Sir Henry knew that his conviction was a foregone conclusion. In his letter to “Persons of Quality and Others,” he says, “I insisted not much upon my defense, nor vindication of mine innocence, for I understood it was effectless.” He insisted upon his right to be tried by a jury. We make the following extracts from his trial : –

“Lord President. Thou here standest charged for high treason; this court requires that thou give a positive answer, whether guilty or not guilty.

”Sir Henry S. I desire to have counsel assigned me.

“Lord Pres. There is matter of fact laid to your charge, which amounts to treason, and there is no law allowed in matters of fact.

“Sir Henry S. There is also matter of law; and I desire to be tried by a jury, which is according to the law of the land.

“Lord Pres. We are all here your jury as well as your judges; we are the number of two or three juries, and your jury is well known, for they are chosen by the Parliament; you are to plead to your indictment…..

“Sir Henry S. If it be by the laws of the land that the trial should be by a jury, I desire I may have that privilege.

“Lord Pres. Acts of Parliament make justice and law; they are both; they think fit to change the custom of trials that have been in former times, and all persons must submit to it. And the Parliament hath thought fit to make this court both jury and judges ; and therefore I require that you answer, whether guilty or not guilty.

“Sir Henry S. I desire that the Act of Parliament may be read.

“Lord Pres… Parliament has appointed this court, and his Highness hath appointed you to be tried by us; you ought, therefore, to plead to your indictment.

“Sir Henry S. The law gives liberty in case of juries to the party accused, to make his exceptions against the jury, which he cannot do here, where you are both judge and jury.

“Lord Pres. If you have any particular exception to any man you may make it. You were, sir, of the Parliament when this Act was made.

“Sir Henry S. I was a prisoner at the same time.

“Lord Pres. Although a prisoner, yet yon are bound by Act of Parliament.

“Sir Henry S. I am, my lord, of an opinion (though you may count it a paradox) that I cannot trespass against your laws because I did not submit to them.

“Lord Pres. All the people of England must submit to the laws of England – to the authorities of England; all must submit to my Lord Protector and Acts of Parliament …..

“Sir Henry S. The laws have been so uncertain with me that I could not well know them, and when I was a prisoner, I could not take notice of them. I could have no benefit by your laws, because that is no law to me which does not give me interest and property to what I have. It is the benefit of laws that they do distinguish between meum and tuum; but when you take all from me, in my case it is not so.”

When asked what he had to say why the court should not proceed to judgment, he replied: –

“My lord, I humbly desire I may be tried by a jury, for I must say you ‘are my enemies’ (pardon the expression); if not so why did you sequester me, and sell my whole estate? and why did you deny me the act of oblivion? There is no man would willingly appeal to his adversaries; there are some among you that have been instrumental in my sequestration, and in the selling of my estate, for which they gave me no reason but this, that I would not compound, when I thought not fit so to do, when there was no establishment or settled peace; if I had compounded, I had not been sure whether I might not have compounded over again; my estate hath been sequestered, and sold; now to be my judge and jury. I humbly pray, being a commoner, I may be tried by commoners.”

This just and lawful right was of course denied, and the lord president proceeded to make a speech, which was characteristic of many of the hypocritical, canting creatures of the ambitious and bigoted, if not hypocritical, Cromwell:-

“Sir,” said he, “was it not a great aggravation of the sins of the Egyptians, that when God had declared Himself with so many signs in behalf of the Israelites, that notwithstanding, they would still pursue Moses and Israel? Who is so great a stranger in this nation as to be ignorant what God has done amongst us, by a series of wonderful providences so many years together, against that very party who are still hatching treason and rebellions amongst us? It grieves my soul to think of it, that after so many signal providences, wherein God seems to declare Himself (as it were by signs and wonders), that your heart still should be hardened, I may say, more hardened than the very hearts of the Egyptians, for they did not only see, but confessed, that the Lord fought against them; hut you, oh, that you would confess and give glory to God.”

After much more of the same sort of cant, and expressing great sorrow for Sir Henry, because “he, being a Protestant, should assist such a confederacy as this,” this devout Christian closes by informing the prisoner “that he shall never have done praying for him as long as he is alive,” and then “ordered the judgment of the court to be read.” The following is a copy of that humane and Christian (of the Cromwell kind) sentence:-

“That SIR HENRY SLYNGSBY, as a false Traytor, to his said Highness the Lord Protector and this Commonwealth, shall be conveyed back again to the Tower of London, and from thence through the middle of the city of London, directly shall be drawn unto the Gallows at Tibourn, and upon the said Gallows there shall be hanged, and being alive, shall be cut down to the ground, and his Entrails taken out of his Belly, and, he living, be burnt before him; and that his head shall be cut off, and that his body shall be divided into four quarters,” etc.

“His Highness” the Lord Protector, who was the author of the murder of Sir Henry, and of that eminent Episcopal divine, Dr. Hewet, was “graciously pleased” to change their sentence to beheading.

Sir Henry was beheaded 8th June, 1658, and by permission of the usurper his remains were privately taken to Yorkshire, and buried in the Slingsby Chapel in Knaresborough Church. His tombstone is of black marble removed from St. Robert’s Chapel, in Knaresborough, belonging to the family, and bears the following inscription:[54]


Huc Saxum advertum est sub eodemq; nunc Jacet hic Henricus Slingesby Henrici filius cui e Parliamento Ejecto & ex plebiscito bonis omnibus exuto nihil aliud supererat.

Quam ut vellet Animam suam salvam esse passus est Anno Etatis suoe LVII. Sexto Idus Junias, annoq; Christi 1658. Fidei in Regem Legesque patrias causa : Non perjit, sed ad Meliores Sedes translates est a Tyranno Cromwellio Capite Mulctatus; posuit Thomas Slingesby Baronetus. Non Degener Nepos.

Anno Aerae Christi 1693.

If this work was being prepared for general circulation we should consider it almost a duty to embody in it “A Father’s Legacy to his Children” entire, for, as before stated, we have rarely met with more sound and practical advice than is contained in this dying legacy of a Christian father. We shall, however, give only a few quotations, – just enough to enable the reader to get an idea of the general character of the paper. After cautioning his sons against religious controversies and their barren results, he says: –

“How fruitlessly bestowed are those empty hours, that are employed with what subtilty of arguments they may dispute, but never with what purity they may live. Polite orators, but profane professors. Such sophisters are but titular Christians. Believe it, there ought to be no controversie, but conference among the servants of Christ, which being discreetly seasoned with meekness and mildness, beget more converts to God’s honour, than a thousand fiery spirits shall ever do by speaking in thunder.”

In reference to the choice of company, he says: –

“Good acquaintance will improve both your knowledge and demean; by your conversing with these, you shall every day get by heart some new lesson, that may season and accommodate you, whereas our debauched gallantry (the greatest impostor of youth) would by their society quickly deprave you. Now to apply a Remedy to so dangerous and infectious a malady, be tender of your Honour; beware with whom you consort. Be known to many, but familiar with few ….. Make ever choice of such for your companions of whom you retain this grounded opinion, that you have either hope to improve them, or be improved by them.”

Referring to the value of time, he says: –

“And great pity it is, that our youth, even in the most eminent extractions, should make so light an estimate of time; as to hold no consorts fitter for their concerns nor corresponding with their tempers, than such who only study a fruitless expense of time; making no other account of hours, than harbingers of pleasure….. In private and retired hours consult with the dead,· being the best means to make men wise; make devout Books your discreet consorts: they will tell you what you are to do without fear of censure ….. Let it be the lowest of your scorn to suffer your thoughts to be depressed with inferior objects.”

“In the carriage of public affairs appear cautious. Many by putting themselves upon numerous employments have lost themselves; though in neighborly offices to be modestly active, manifests signal arguments of piety. But in all concerns appear just. This will beget you a good report among men; and acceptance before the throne of grace. All justice is comprehended in this Word Innocence, all injustice reprehended.

“As for your hours of recreation, let them never so overtake you as to make your thoughts strangers in what most concerns you, and make choice of suitable consorts in these. For though precepts induce, examples draw, and more danger there is in a personal example, than any Doctrinal motive.

“I could challenge from many descents, but my thoughts have ever been estranged from titular arrogance; holding only Fame to be the strongest continuer of family, being borne up with such an impregnable arch as it needed no groundling buttresses to preserve it, nor any secondaries to prevent an untimely ruin ….. After a troublesome voyage, encountered with many cross winds and adverse billows, I am now arriving in a safe Harbour; and I hope without touch of Dishonour…. Prefer your fame before all fortunes; it is that sweet odour which will perfume you living and embalm you dying….. My peace I hope is made with God: having in these solitary hours of my retirement made this my constant ejaculation: O, how can we choose but begin to love him whom we have offended; or how should we but begin to grieve that we have offended him whom we love! …. Be zealous in your service of God; ever recommending in the prime hour of the day, all your ensuing actions designed and addressed for that day, to his gracious protection.

Be constant in your Resolves, ever grounded on a religious Fear that they may be seconded by God’s favour. Be serious in your studies: and with all humility crave the assistance of others, for your better proficiency.

Be affable to all, familiar with few. Be provident and discreetly frugal, in your expense: never spending where honest Providence bids you spare; neither sparing where reputation invites you to spend. Continue firm in brotherly unity; as you are near in blood be dear in your affection….

“I find myself now, through the apprehension of my approaching summons, which I shall entertain with a cheerful admittance, breathing homeward: the eye of my body is fixt on you; the eye of my Soul on Heaven. Think on me as your natural Father, and of Earth as your common mother. Thither am I going, where by course of nature, though not in the same manner, yon must follow, I am to act my last scene on a stage; you in a turbulent state. Value earth as it is; that when you shall pass from Earth, yon may enjoy what earth cannot afford you; to which happiness your dying Father, hastening to his dear spouse and your virtuous mother, faithfully commends you.”


Dead unto Earth before I past from thence.
Dead unto Life, alive to conscience.
Just, and by justice doom’d ; impeached by those
Whom Semblance writ my Friends, their witness Foes.
My Silence in reply impli’d no guilt.

Words not believ’d resemble Water spilt
Upon the parched surface of the floor,
No sooner dropt, than heat dries up the Showre.
To plead for life when ears are prepossest,
Sounds but like airy Eccho’s at the best.
The Hatchet acted what the court decreed,
Who would not for his Head, lay down his head?
Branches have their dependance on the Vine,
And Subjects on their Princes, so had mine.
The Native Vine cut down her cyenes wither,
Let them then grow or perish both together.
Thus liv’d I, thus I dy’d, my Faith the wing
That mounts my Kingly zeal to th’ Highest King.

These extracts, it will be borne in mind, are from the writings of a leading Cavalier, and show that our Puritan friends did not possess all of the religion and morality of that period.

Sir Henry was married July 7, 1631, at Kensington Church, London, to Barbara, daughter of Thomas Bellasyse, first Viscount Falconberg (a lady who seems to have been as pious as she was naturally amiable; she died 3lst December, 1641), and by her had issue: –

Thomas, born 15th June, 1636.

Henry, born 14th and baptized 29th January, 1638, in chapel of Red House. He was one of the gentlemen of the bed-chamber to King Charles II.

Barbara, born 14th May, 1633; married Sir John Talbot.

Sir Henry was succeeded by his eldest son, – Sir Thomas Slingsby, who was Member of Parliament for Knaresborough from 1678 to 1681, and for Scarborough in 1685. He married Dorothy, daughter and co-heiress of George Cradock, Esq., of Caversall Castle, County Stafford (who died 24th January and was buried 2d February, 1673, in the Slingsby Chapel in Knaresborough Church), by whom he had issue:-





Dorothy. ·

Barbara, thrice married: first, to Sir Richard Mauleverer, of Alberton Mauleverer, County York; second, to John, Lord Arundel, of Trerice; and third, to Thomas, Earl of Pembroke and Montgomery.

He was succeeded by his eldest son, –

Sir Henry Slingsby, Member of Parliament for Knaresborough, who died without issue in 1692, and was succeeded by his brother, Sir Thomas Slingsby, who married, 1602, Sarah, daughter of John Savile, Esq., of Methley, County York, and had issue eight children: –

  1. Henry.
  2. Thomas.
  3. Savile.
  4. Charles, who dying before his last elder brother, never succeeded to the title. He married Miss Turner in 1738, and by her had issue: –

Thomas Turner, who succeeded as eighth baronet.

Sarah, died without issue.

  1. Mary, maid of honor to Queen Anne, married, 18th August, 1714, at Moor-Monkton, to Thomas Duncombe, Esq., of Helmsley, of which marriage the first Lord Feversham is the lineal descendant.
  2. Sarah.
  3. Barbara.
  4. Jane, died without issue.

Sir Thomas was succeeded by his eldest son,

Sir Henry Slingsby, Member of Parliament for Knaresborough in the last parliament of Queen Anne and the first of George I., who married a daughter of John Ainslie, Esq., of Studley, Chancellor of the Exchequer (who died 3lst May, 1736), by whom he had no issue, and, dying in 1763, was succeeded by his brother, –

Sir Thomas Slingsby, who died without issue 1765, and was succeeded by his brother, –

Sir Savile Slingsby, who died without issue 1780, when the title devolved on his nephew, –

Sir Thomas Turner Slingsby; he married, first, his cousin, Catherine Turner Buckley, and second, a natural daughter of his uncle, Sir Henry, by whom he had no issue. He died in 1806, leaving issue by his first wife : –


Charles, of Loftus Hall, who, dying before his eldest brother, never succeeded to the title. He married, October 1, 1823, Emma Margaret, daughter of John Atkinson, Esq., by whom he had issue: –

Charles, born 1824, the tenth baronet.

Emma Louisa Catherine, born 1829; married 19th July, 1860, to Captain Leslie, Royal Horse Guards, son of Charles Powell Leslie, born 1826.

He was succeeded by his eldest son, –

Sir Thomas Slingsby, who died without issue February, 1835, and was succeeded by his nephew, –

Sir Charles Slingsby, who was drowned in the river Ure, opposite to Newby Hall, the residence of Lady Mary Vyner, near Ripon, in Yorkshire, on the 11th of February, 1869, while hunting, he being master of the York and Ainsty Fox Hounds.[55] Sir Charles was never married: he was succeeded by his brother-in-law, Thomas Leslie, Esq., who, in 1869, assumed the name of Slingsby and became Sir Thomas Slingsby, the eleventh baronet. He has no issue, and in default of issue, the property and title will go to Sir Charles’ maternal uncle, Rev. Thomas Atkinson, and his son.

Our first intention was only to give a condensed pedigree, with a few sketches, of some of the members of the family. We have, however, been led on, almost imperceptibly, into writing a synopsis of its history. It will be readily seen that what we have written is only a compilation.

This was a necessity, as our information was mostly obtained from published works.

[1] Turner’s History of the Anglo-Saxons

[2] Brady on Burghs

[3] The present stewards are Messrs. Samuel and Charles Powell – one of whom, for the time being, as Bailiff of the borough, is the returning office of the members of the borough to Parliament.  We are under obligations to these gentlemen for copies of records and other valuable information.

[4] Hargrove

[5] We learn from The Book of Family Crests, tenth edition, London, 1862, that there was once living in England a family of Cockell, whose arms were “on a mural coronet, or a cock; gules, sémé of roundles, resting on the dexter claw on an escallop shell; and in the beak a sprig of laurel.

[6] On Teasdale’s map of Yorkshire, which we received from London after these sketches were written, and on which are all the principal family seats in the county, we find a place situated about seven miles from York, and one mile from the Red House (one of the seats of the Slingsbys, a description of which will be given in the last section of this book), called Cock Hill.  This was most probably the residence of some member of this family, – possibly of John, prior to his going to Knaresborough.  It is eight to ten miles in a straight line from the river Cock, a small rivulet, in most places about twelve feet wide.

[7] In 1641, Sir Henry Slingsby, like the rest of the loyal party, finding that he could no longer perform his legislative duties in Parliament with safety to his life, was compelled to absent himself.  His seat was declared vacant, and at an election held at Knaresborough in 1641, William Dearlove was chosen in his place; but the election was contested as illegal by Sir William Constable, his opponent on the grounds of his being deputy steward and judge of the court, and therefore the “burghers durst not give their voices for fear of him.”  Instead of another election, we learn from the Journal of the House of Commons, under date March 19, 1642, that William Dearlove’s election was decided void and Sir William Constable was duly elected.

[8] In a Gazetteer and Directory of Yorkshire, published in 1822, we find the names of one Cockell, four Cockills, three Cockhills and but one Coghill – Richard Coghill, gentleman, residing in York.

[9] By this intermarriage the Slingsbys became the ancestors of all who have borne the name Coghill; this Thomas Coghill being the first who presents the name as it is now spelled.  We shall devote some space in the latter part of the book to a notice of the distinguished family of Slingsby.

[10] Various other properties in Yorkshire, belonging to the Coghill estate, were sold about the same time.

[11] Allen’s History of Yorkshire

[12] Musgrave’s Obituary gives his death as 11th March, 1739, which is probably correct.

[13] Charles Moore,  a descendant of the Moores, Earls and Marquesses of Drogheda

[14] Sir John Coghill purchased of the Duke of Northumberland Richings Park, in Buckinghamshire, where he afterwards resided.

[15] Referred to in part III, Junior Branch

[16] We had barely finished reading the printer’s proof of this very page, when the news of the death of Lieutenant Coghill reached us.  He fell on the 22nd January 1879 in the disastrous engagement between a column of the British army, numbering eight or nine hundred men, and twenty thousand Zulus, at the village of Isandula, near the Buffalo River, in South Africa.

Referring to a letter received from his father in June last, we find the following mention of him:  “my eldest boy has just come back to us on a short leave from the Kaffre war, where he has been serving as aid-de-camp to the general, and at which he has the good fortune to be mentioned in dispatches.

“It seems to have agreed with him wonderfully, and he looks brown and hardy.  He expects that the war will not close without a sharp battle with the Zulus on the Transvaal border, who are a much more warlike nation, and will show better fight than the other Kaffre tribes; but he thinks it the intention of the government to make this war a final one, and settle the black question for once and for all.  My son will probably be off there again by the next draft of troops.”

[17] William Tallentyre was Thomas’ brother-in-law.

[18] Henry was the unborn child referred to in his father’s will.

[19] her brother-in-law, husband to her sister Mary

[20] “Church registers were first enjoined to be kept by Cromwell, the king’s vicegerent in spiritual affairs, in 1538, just upon the dissolution of religious houses.  In 1547, Edward VI enjoined the same; as did Elizabeth in 1559; from which last period these parochial records were generally kept with tolerable regularity; and since the abolition of inquisitions post mortem, by Charles II, are the best evidence of family descents.” (Cullum’s Hawsted and Hardwick, page 73, note.)  These records were obtained from the parish clerk, who probably made a loose examination, and omitted a number of names, as there must have been many more under each head than are given here.  We wrote on two occasions, asking him to make a more thorough search, but could get no reply.

[21] The London merchant whose portrait appears in this work.

[22] [This will with numerous other family papers was passed to the compiler by Henry Hucks Gibbs during a visit to Aldenham House in July 1880 – according to pencil note in a copy of the Book]

[23] Evidently an error of the scribe.

[24] The same whose will is on page [ ]

[25] We find no such parish as Wythern ffrary in the County of York.  The Priory of Wythernfey was founded in the seventeenth year of the reign of King John (1216)

[26] These arms are given on page [  ]

[27] Mr Young, who escaped, described how, when looking back, he saw these two officers with the colours, trying to force their way through the ring of yelling savages.  Coghill, he said, was wounded, and he saw no chance of escape for him; but the gallant young fellow cut his way through, and crossed the river in safety; but on looking back and seeing his companion disabled, true to the instincts of a noble and unselfish nature, he returned to rescue or to die with him – Compiler.

[28] Spelt Isandlana, Isandusana and Isandula; the last has been adopted by the press.

[29] Lieut. Nevill Josiah Aylmer Coghill (24th Regiment), Lieut. Teignmouth Melvill (24th Regiment), both killed while escaping with the colours, January 22, 1879.

[30] Henry Hucks Gibbs, Esq., writes under date of October 23, 1878, from his country seat, Aldenham House, County Hertford (once the residence of Henry Coghill Esq., son of John, and which descended to Mr Gibbs through the family of Hucks; Robert Hucks, Esq., having married Sarah Coghill, a great-granddaughter of Henry Coghill Esq.): “I have a portrait of this John Coghill, in a panel in the hall, with an inscription saying that he was seventy years old in 1624.  Also the portrait of Denis Viell, his father-in-law. I have portraits of his two sons, Henry and Sir Thomas Coghill, and their respective wives.”

[31] See reference to these monuments in Appendix to Part III

[32] Henry Hucks Gibbs, Esq., in a letter to the compiler, says: “Penne’s Place is always spoken of in our title deeds in the same terms as are used to describe it in the deed of conveyance from Fitzwilliam Coningsby to Henry Coghill, of the 27th November, 1640, namely, ‘the Site of the Mannor or Capitall Messuage commonly called Aldenham Hall alias Penne’s Place, together with all houses, edifices, buildings, barnes, stables, outhouses, cottages, dovehouses, gardens, orchards, fishponds, courts, yards, and folds to the said Site or Capitall Messuage belonging or in any wise appertaining;’ so that it is possible that even in those early days the manor-house was not in existence, mention being always made of the site; but, on the other hand, the buildings, etc,. should be the house, and it seems most probable that it was for some generations at least the chief residence of the family.

[33] [Henry Hucks Gibbs continued:] “The house in which I am now writing is distant about a furlong from Pennes Place, and is now and was in 1815 known by the name of Aldenham House, but was, when it descended to Henry Coghill in 1614, called Wigbournes, and bore that name even in the days of his great-granddaughter. (See monument of Robert Hucks in Aldenham Church.)  At one time this house also seems to have borne the name of Pennes Place; for my friend Baron Dinsdale, of Essendon, in this county, has a drawing of it made about one hundred and fifty years ago, when the trees in the avenue were yet young, and at the bottom of the drawing is the name Pennes Place.  The Coghill arms are still in the pediment of the west front of the building.”

[from Haberdashers’ Aske’s School Web-site: –

“Although the school only moved to its present location in 1961, the estate dates back 700 years when in about 1250, a certain Reginald de la Penne built a moated manor house near the present site of the North Gate [presumably Pennes Place]

.  Aldenham House itself dates back to the British Civil War, and eventually passed into the hands of Henry Hucks Gibbs [Director and Governor of the Bank of England] (later Lord Aldenham) in 1843.  The grounds akin to the house stretch far and wide, and the school’s grounds include 108 acres of land.

The present Lord Aldenham lives close to the school.  Since the 17th Century very little has changed in the structure of the house, although parts of the house were damaged in the two World Wars.  Some surrounding woodland has been cleared to make way for school buildings.”

Aldenham House, now Haberdashers’ Aske’s School]

[34] We are indebted to Henry Hucks Gibbs, Esq., for these particulars.

[35] See explanation of “buried in linen” in note at the end of this section.

[36] RAF Fighter Command Base during World War II – especially the Battle of Britain:

[37] Sarah was the last of the Hertfordshire Coghills.  Henry Hucks Gibbs, Esq., writes: “I have a full-length portrait of him [Robert Hucks], and a half-length of his father and wife, all by James Vanderbank.  I have also another portrait of his wife, taken at a later period of life.”

[38] In reply to an inquiry made by the compiler, Joseph L. Chester, LL. D., of London, writes: “In olden times in London there was a company of Barbers and a company of Surgeons. These two companies were united in the year 1540, and continued as the company of Barber-Surgeons, until 1745, when they dissolved ; you know, I presume, the nature and character of these old city companies; all of them were of great respectability, though some ranked higher than others. It is supposed that at the time of the union the Barbers were not very strong, and so sought an alliance with the Surgeons.

The combination seems to us in modern times a strange one, but in old times the Barbers were always called in to bleed patients, it being beneath the dignity of the Surgeons to do so. The probability is, that in this company the Surgeons predominated; but I must also add that a man might become a member of the company without being either a Barber or a Surgeon. The Earl of Beaconsfield and the Marquis of Salisbury were the other day admitted into the Merchant Taylors Company, and the late Prince Consort was a member of the Fisher Mongers Company. I have little doubt, from the position of the family in London and England, that John Coghill was a regular professional man.”

[39] In 1679 an act of Parliament was passed, directing that henceforth no persons should be buried in linen shrouds, but in woolen. The object of this was, according to the act, “for the lessening of the importation of linen from beyond the seas, and the encouragement of the woolen and paper manufactures of this Kingdom.” The penalty for burying in linen was five pounds. Those who preferred this mode followed it by paying the penalty.

[40] This was Major John Mayne who married Hester Coghill, Countess of Charleville, and assumed the name of Coghill by sign-manual.

[41] These inscriptions are taken from Clutterbuck’s History and Antiquities of the County of Hertford.

[42] Worminghall

[43] See a description of the Red House, another seat of the heads of the Slingsby family

[44] Anciently styled Heal Park (heal, Saxon, hall), q. d., Hall Park.

[45] 1 This Henry Percy was the father of Captain Percy, who succeeded Captain

Smith as President of the Virginia Colony (1609). “Percy, who succeeded

Smith as president, came over in the first fleet; he was brother to the Earl of Northumberland [his father had died, and his eldest brother Henry had succeeded him. – Compiler], and was esteemed for honor, courage, and industry; he had been, for some time, in bad health, and had taken his passage for England ; but when Smith was disabled, and advised to return to England, he yielded to the solicitations of the people and took upon himself the government of the Colony.” – Southern Literary :Messenger, vol. ii., p. 352.

[46] Guilford was M. A. of St. Andrews, and was incorporated in Oxford, November 14, 1629. He was Secretary to the Earl of Strafford, and by him was made lieutenant of the ordnance, and Vice-Admiral of Munster. At the earl’s trial, he managed his papers for him, and gave evidence in his behalf.

During the parliamentary war, he levied a regiment in York, was defeated in an engagement with Sir Hugh Cholmley, badly wounded, and taken prisoner.

Both legs were amputated in order to save his life, but he survived the operation only three days. He was buried in York Minster.” -Appendix to Diary of Sir H. Slingsby.

[47] For several extraordinary instances of this gentleman’s military prowess, see Stafford’s Pacata Hibernia.

[48] In ” Instructions for Mr. Snell, for the guidance of his pupil, William Slingsby” (during his travels on the Continent), dated 31st March, 1610, Sir Henry directs him to “send all letters to London, to Mr. Philip Bourlemache, near the Exchange, and from thence to be sent to Mr. John Coghill, near Blackwell-hall, and from thence to Thomas Scoley, at Wafefeilde.” This John Coghill was probably the son of Marmaduke.

[49] Family papers

[50] The Red House, situated on the southern bank of the river Onse, about seven miles northwest of York, was formerly the seat of the Oughtreds, one of whom granted to William Fairfax, Esq., and his heirs, “free liberty to hunt, hawk, and fish in his manor; rendering, for all, one red rose at midsummer. In the year 1562, Francis Slingsby, Esq., purchased the Red House and Scagglethorp, of Robert Oughtred, Esq., and the house was built. by Sir Henry Slingsby, in the reign of Charles I., except the chapel, which was built by his father.” It is still in the Slings by family. On the south front of the house is inscribed, – “PRO TERMINO VITAE, SIC NOS, NON NOBIS”. On the west front, – “PAULISPER ET RELUCEBIS, ET IPSE M.R. 29, 1652”. Under which is the figure of a setting sun.

In the room called the Star-Chamber are four shields of arms, beautifully stained on glass: first, Slingsby and Mallory; second, Slingsby and Percy; third, Slingsby and Vavasour; and fourth, Slingsby and Bellasyse. In this room also are the figures of Truth, Justice, Temperance, and Fortitude, supporting a carved chimney-piece; in the divisions of which are symbolical representations of the five senses, well executed. The great staircase is thus described in the Memoirs of Sir Henry Slingsby: “The staircase is above five feet within the rails in width, the posts eight inches square; upon every post a crest is set, of some one of my especial friends, and of my brothers-in-law; and upon that post that bears up the half-pace, that leads into the painted chamber, there sits a blackamoor (cast in lead, by Andrew Karne), with a candlestick in each hand, to set a candle in, to give light to the staircase.”

Among the crests set in the posts are those of the Earl of Pembroke, Sir Walter Vavasour, who married a daughter of Lord Falconberg, and therefore brother-in-law to Lady Slingsby, Bryan Stapleton, Thomas Watterton, Thomas Ingram, Sir Walter Bethel, Sir Thomas Metcalf, Sir John Fenwick (whose son, Colonel John, was slain at Marston Moor), all brothers-in-law to Sir Henry; Thomas, Viscount of Falconberg, Lady Slingsby’s father, Henry Clifford, Earl of Cumberland, Sir Williarn Savile, Algernon Percy, tenth Earl of Northumberland, Lord Ferdinand Fairfax, and Sir Charles Slingsby, Knight, a relation of Sir Henry who was slain at Marston Moor, and buried in York Minster. On the 24th of August, 1665, the Duke of York, afterwards James II., honored Sir Thomas Slingsby with his and his duchess’ company, at the Red House.

The chapel is a neat building paved with black and white marble. The seats and pulpit arc oak, embellished with Gothic ornaments. In the east window, above the communion table, are the following paintings on glass: the arms of Thomas Morton, Bishop of Litchfield, who consecrated the chapel; the arms of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. In the centre of the window are the Slingsby arms, with fifteen quarterings, and a margin round the shield, whereon are inscribed the marriages of some of the ancestors of that family. On the south side of the chapel are two windows. In one are the heads of five of the Apostles, and in the other, the figures of Faith, Charity, and Justice; also the arms of the King of England and the Prince of Wales.

The Red House is about two miles from Marston Moor. It ceased to be the family residence about the middle of the last century. Sir Thomas, son of Sir Thomas Turner Slingsby, caused the greater part of it to be pulled down. Two pillars of a gateway were removed, and now stand at the entrance gateway into Scriven Park. – Hargrove.

[51] They were bought in for him by Mr. Stapleton and Mr. Slingsby Bethell, whom he mentions in the Father’s Legacy as his “friendly trustees.”

[52] Newark was surrendered May 8, 1646

[53] Article third of the surrender of Newark fully confirms this statement. It is given by Rushworth, pp. 638-9, 40, part 3, vol. ii.

[54] There are a few mistakes in spelling and punctuation which the Latin scholar can easily correct.

[55] At the same time were also drowned, while crossing the river in a ferryboat, Mr. E. Lloyd, of Lingeroft, near York, Mr. Edmund Robinson, of York, William Oveys (first whip), C. Warrener (gardener at Newby Hall), and J.Warrener, his son.

Coghills and Cramers

A Genealogical Note on the Family of Cramer or Coghill

From Materials collected by BERTRAM C.  A.  WINDLE, LL.D., F.R.S., F.S.A.

The only excuse which I can offer for the appearance of these Notes in the pages of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Journal is that they relate to a family which has long been seated in this county, and contain notices of various persons and places concerned with the City and County, and notably of one individual who enjoyed the distinguished honour of having been Mayor of Cork.   They may thus some day be of interest and value to a future continuator of the County History; and in the hope that this may be the case, I have put them together, and have ventured to offer them to the editors of this Journal.

These papers consist of:

  • a letter written from Pisa in 1826 by Thomas Cramer, a copy of which I obtained from my mother;
  • a note written by Ambrose Cramer in 1828, containing some interesting matters in connection with the relation of the family to this City;
  • a letter respecting the French family of Cramer, dated 1904; and
  • a letter respecting the American branch of the same family, dated 1905.

I owe these last three to the kindness of my cousin, Sir Egerton Coghill Bt., the head of the senior branch of the family.   To these I have added:

  • a genealogical tree of the Cramer family, compiled by Mr Ambrose Cramer, the writer of the American letter; and
  • another tree of the senior branch as far as the generation to which I belong myself, and one stage further in the case of the line of direct descent of the title. This is partly from Lodge but as Lodge’s facts are not complete, I have brought the matter to a state of greater accuracy, and made it as complete as was possible.

With respect to Thomas Cramer’s letter, I entertained some doubts as to whether it should be published in full.   It was not intended for the public eye, and it contains appreciations of his own family which the writer was quite entitled to express to a relative, but would probably not have committed to print.   However, on due consideration, it seemed better to publish the letter just as it was written.   It is many years since Thomas Cramer was gathered to his fathers, and its publication cannot affect him, while his letter gains –at least so I think – by the familiar tone in which it is written.[1]

One curious genealogical point may be made clear to those who are not in the habit of studying “family trees”.   It will be noticed that Sir Josiah Coghill (born Cramer) was twice married.   By his first wife he had three daughters, one of whom died unmarried.   His second daughter married a son of Charles Kendal Bushe, whilst Sir Josiah himself married, as his second wife, a daughter of the same Charles Kendal Bushe, thus becoming the brother-in-law of his own daughter.

As a result it follows that all the descendants of Sir Josiah, except the children of his daughter Josephine, can claim descent from that very distinguished man, C.  K.  Bushe, for a time Solicitor-General, and afterwards Lord Chief Justice of Ireland.

He was a member of the Irish House of Commons and may be seen in the well-known picture of that body in 1790, his head being immediately above those of Grattan and Flood, who are placed in the foreground.   He voted consistently against the Act of Union, and in Sir John Barrington’s ‘Red List’ there appears after his name the word “incorruptible”.   There is only one other member of the House thus described, and that is John Ball, member for Drogheda, and, oddly enough, in the picture above alluded to, he is represented as in conversation with Bushe.   Whatever views Bushe’s posterity may take about politics, they can all agree that this description of their ancestor is not the least cherished of their family possessions.   Perhaps it might be mentioned as a curious piece of family history, and as a link with the past, that the last surviving child of the Lord Chief Justice, Mrs Maria Harris, died two years ago, in her ninety-ninth year, and in full possession of all her faculties.   My mother, who died earlier in this year, often sat on the Bench with her distinguished grandfather when he was Lord Chief Justice and she a young girl.   It is, perhaps, not amiss to record these links of today with the giants of the last century in Ireland

University College, Cork

(i)           letter from Pisa in 1826 by Thomas Cramer


In compliance with your repeated desire, I proceed to execute my promise of committing to paper what information I have been able to collect relative to our family, which is, after all, very scanty and derived almost entirely from reminiscences of the conversations of my father and of our cousin the late Lady Forster, from occasional researches in books of Genealogy and Heraldry, and from the perusal of several old Registers and Chronicles of the Irish Civil Wars of the 17th Century.

My brother and my sister Homan, and also your late good father have communicated to me a few family traditions, which I avail myself of; but unfortunately from a variety of circumstances I had never an opportunity of exploring the true and genuine source of information on this subject – I mean the papers of Sir J.  Coghill Coghill, which alone can throw any light on the first establishment and alliances of our ancestors in Ireland.  Many authentic and interesting facts might also be gleaned from examining the Registers of the Prerogative Court in Dublin, and of all such Records and Archives of the County Kilkenny as are in preservation, to all of which I suppose you could easily procure access.  Without any further preamble I now attempt my sketch of our family history.

The founder of our family in Ireland was Colonel Tobias von Cramer, who commanded a regiment of cavalry under Prince Maurice in the wars of the Low Countries in the 16th Century, and after the Peace of 1609, being received into the same military rank into the service of King James the First, was employed by that monarch in Ireland where he finally settled.

He was a native of Suabia, of a noble family (from the prejudices of that age considered in Continental services essential to military command), but you must not here associate the grand ideas we attach in our country to the word nobility with the term it is understood on the Continent, where being noble implies little more than genteel birth, the privilege of armorial bearings, and exemption from certain taxes and the right of sporting one’s own property – in fact, nineteen out of twenty of the Continental nobility would in Ireland be considered very private gentlemen.

From our ancestor expatriating himself to such a wild unsettled country as Ireland then was, we may very naturally presume that he was either of a very adventurous disposition, or that he was a younger brother little favoured with gifts of fortune, and this latter conjecture seems to me not improbable, having met about two years ago, at the waters of Aix-la-Chapelle, a Baron de Cramer, who was a Suabian by either by birth or extraction (I am not positive which), who told me his family had a tradition that about the latter end of the 16th Century a younger brother of it, after extraordinary vicissitudes of fortune, had settled in Ireland, where he married a lady of great birth and property.

Whom our ancestor married I have never been able to ascertain, but his Suabian origin and time of arrival in Ireland so singularly coincide with Baron de Cramer’s tradition, that I am inclined to think he was the identical person he alludes to.

The Colonel was unquestionably in his time considered an excellent officer, and, if implicit credit may be given to one of our family traditions, was Governor of Ostend in the beginning of that memorable siege in the early part of the 17th Century, that lasted three years, three months, three weeks and three days, and when 136,000 persons on both sides are said to have perished before its reduction by the Spaniards.  I must, however, acknowledge I doubt the fact of such an important fortress being confided to the government of an officer having no higher rank than that of Colonel, and think it more probable he might have been Deputy-Governor or Commandant, not but there are numerous instances in the wars of that period and in the Thirty Years War of Colonels commanding corps of four and five thousand men, and in the English Civil Wars of the 17th Century we find ranks of General and Colonel frequently confounded – thus the celebrated Harrison, though he was one of the most distinguished of the Parliamentary Generals, and we are struck with the same circumstance in reading of Lambert, Pride, Desborough, and other Generals of the Republican Party.

Lodge’s Peerage refers Tobias Cramer’s Letters of Denization to 1639, but he had long before established in the country, and probably then went through the forms of denization, as did many of the recent English and Scottish settlers, to prevent any chicanery of the Government at a future period, contesting their rights of their posterity to landed property acquired by their ancestors, who, according to the strict letter of the law, would have been otherwise aliens – a precaution not ill-founded, Lord Stafford, the then Lord Lieutenant, having caused a general alarm through Ireland by researches as to the original titles many of them possessed of their estates for centuries, many of whom were forced to pay large fines and surrender one-third and even one-half of their lands to the Crown, under the pretext of their having been irregularly acquired by their first possessors.

Our ancestor died at a very advanced age in 1649, nor did his eldest son Balthazar [Balthazer], survive him above four years; of the latter we know little or nothing.  There appears, however, little doubt but that Balthazar was born several years before his father settled in Ireland, which could not have been earlier than 1610; now Balthazer had a son old enough for military service in 1641, only thirty-one years afterwards.

I remember half-length portraits of both father and son [presumably Col.  Tobias and Balthazer Cramer] in the hall of Sallymount, which have been unaccountably mislaid.   The old gentleman was represented with a beard and a ruff, and in a kind of Spanish dress, leaning on an ivory-headed cane.  The son as a young man of four and twenty in the costume of the early part of the reign of Charles the First.

I may here observe that it is very singular, and can only be explained by the little intercourse between the two countries now, that very shortly all connection appears to have ceased between the expatriated branch and the Teutonic parent stock; our immediate progenitors heard nothing of their German relatives, nor, I believe, did their fathers before them.

Some thirty years ago there was a Genevese family named Cramer Delon, that I understand have since settled in England, who considered themselves of our blood, and were remarkably civil to any of the family that visited Geneva, but I believe had no other proof of affinity but bearing the same arms.

The third representative of our family in Ireland, and grandson of our founder, whom he was named after, distinguished himself on the Royal side in the unfortunate Civil Wars of 1641, in which he attained the rank of Colonel.  As he was a very zealous Protestant, his support of the Crown probably proceeded more from animosity to the Roman Catholics than any real attachment to the Royal Family.  Generally suspected by the Irish Protestants of having instigated the rebellion, he therefore appears not only very readily to have submitted to the authority of the English Commonwealth on the reduction of the country by Cromwell, but what may have been less excusable to have taken advantage of the distracted state of the times to improve his fortune, having acquired considerable tracts of confiscated land by purchasing the Debentures of the English officers and adventurers.

It may be alleged, in his justification, that these lands were already lost to ancient possessors, and if he had not purchased them, others would, so great indeed at that time was the violence of party spirit, and such the blindness of religious zeal, that it is extremely probable that he who was in other respects a man of high honour was not on this occasion for a moment sensible that he was supporting a rapacious system of unjust spoliation.  This description of property was at that time so little valued that Ludlow says 1,000 acres of the best confiscated land in the county Dublin sold for £1,500, in the county Kilkenny for £1,000, in the county Wexford for £800, and in other counties of Leinster for £600.

Our ancestor’s acquisitions were principally in the county of Kilkenny, where he settled himself on the estate of Ballyfoyle that had previously belonged to the Purcell family, who, to judge by their Norman name, had probably acquired it either directly or indirectly by confiscation some centuries earlier.  There he made considerable improvement, and was distinguished by intelligence and activity in the discharge of the usual duties of a country gentleman.

Some editions of Debrett’s Baronetage mention him as Sheriff of the City of Dublin for 1653, but this appears to me evidently an error, the business of such a situation being totally incompatible with military avocations.   He may possibly have been mistaken for a paternal uncle of the same name, who died without issue; he himself died in 1680, having had, besides two sons, Balthazar  and Tobias, a daughter [Hester] married to Sir John Coghill, of very ancient family in Yorkshire, who, patronized by Bramall, Archbishop of Armagh, also a Yorkshireman, settled in Ireland in the reign of Charles the Second, and held many eminent legal situations.[2]

Both Balthazar and Tobias appear in the list of 3,000 Protestant gentlemen attained by King James’ Parliament.  They therefore had ample reason for supporting the cause of King William, which they appear most cordially to have done, and after the Battle of the Boyne, Balthazar, with two other commissioners, was appointed by that monarch to receive the submission of all in the county of Kilkenny who were disposed to acknowledge his authority.  Balthazar does not seem to have been forgetful of what he conceived his rights, for I find his name in a large folio, containing the claims for compensation of suffering Protestants in that war, but unfortunately his appeal was totally rejected.

In the list of attained gentlemen, his brother Tobias is described as an inhabitant of Thomas Street, Dublin, but though that part of the city is not at present the most polite, do not imagine that this derogates in the least from your ancestor’s respectability (for with him commences your branch of the Cramer family), as it was by far the most fashionable quarter at that time.  The Earl of Kildare’s town residence was in that very street, and we find by the Rawdon papers, lately published, that in the days of Charles the Second the Duke of Ormond, the Primate, and the Earl of Mountrath lodged in Skinner’s Row adjoining it.

I have not been able to learn any further particulars of Tobias, who was either father or grandfather of Ambrose Cramer, who was Mayor of Cork in 1724, and was the father of Balthazar Cramer, your grandfather, and of another son from whom is descended a branch of the family, that being some time established in Ulster, emigrated to the United States,[3] where they are numerous and all in respectable situations.

Your grandfather, I believe, was the first Cramer that fixed his residence at Rathmore, where by an able and enlightened discharge of his duties as a magistrate, he acquired the general esteem of his neighbourhood.  I have more than once in my early days heard him described as of uncommonly amiable and engaging manners; he married a lady of the name of Stephens, said to have been a lineal descendant of the celebrated Robert FitzStephen, the first Anglo-Norman Chieftain that landed in Ireland, but this being your own immediate line, of course you are infinitely better acquainted with its fortunes, alliances and connection than I could possibly be, and might, therefore, at your leisure add a supplement to this little essay, illustrative of all these points, which will thus transmit to your posterity the most precise information relative to their direct ancestry.

I now go back to the elder branch.  After the reduction of the country by William of glorious, pious and immortal memory, Balthazar once more fixed his residence at Ballyfoyle, which, however, dismantled and denudated, was then by every account a spacious and venerable castle embosomed in woods; here he appears to have passed the remainder of his days in the usual pursuits of country life.

I do not know the precise year of his death, nor indeed anything more of him but that he was succeeded in his estates by his son Oliver, who continued to inherit Ballyfoyle, and married his cousin-german, Hester Coghill, sister of Drs. Marmaduke and James Coghill.  The former was judge of the Prerogative Court, a Privy Councillor, and represented the University of Dublin for more than thirty years in Parliament.

He was a man highly esteemed by his contemporaries for talents, integrity and patriotism; in the letters of Archbishop Boulter, who managed the English interests in Ireland from 1724 to 1740, that prelate speaks in a strain of peevishness and virulence of Dr. Coghill’s uncompromising attachment to Ireland, that can now but reflect a brighter lustre on his name.  In his latter years he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, consequently first responsible minister of the Crown.  It not being till many years afterwards, in the Duke of Dorset’s second administration, that public opinion rather attached this responsibility to the office of the Lord Lieutenant’s Secretary; Lord George Sackville, the Viceroy’s son, then holding that situation, and evidently directing all the affairs of Government.

Dr. Coghill’s principal residence was at Drumcondra House, where the adjoining church was built and endowed by him, and where may be seen his monument executed by Shomacher, considered as a fine piece of scupture.  The neighbouring mansion of Belvedere[4] was the seat of his brother, Dr. James Coghill, the handsomer man to judge by their portraits at Sallymount, but who never attained the reputation of his brother.

He [Marmaduke] died a King’s Councillor, leaving an only daughter, who married very young the Earl of Charleville, and after his death, Sir John Mayne, who took the name of Coghill, by neither of whom she had issue.  The estate in the Co. Kildare my brother inherits from her, containing 2,400 plantation acres, originally purchased by her father from Lord Loftus Ely, the greatest part of which at that time was an immense sheep walk, scarcely worth half a crown an acre, which he enclosed and divided into farms and otherwise so improved that I am assured the rental would now average forty shillings an acre.  I make no apology for this digression relative to the Coghills, for we are so closely allied and the name in Ireland is so entwined with ours that we may almost be considered the same family, independently of the head of the Cramers being now the representative of the house of Coghill and bearing the name.

Let us now return to Oliver Cramer of Ballyfoyle, of whom, however, I know little else than that by his wife Hester he had two sons, John Balthazar  and Oliver, and that she survived him several years.  All accounts represent her as a singular woman, uniting much natural genius with a deal of eccentricity; though she lost both her breasts from cancer it did not deter her from the freak of taking a second husband, a Mr. Helsham, of the County Kilkenny, a man much younger than herself, by whom, however, she had no issue, which has preserved to the family a good estate she possessed in her own right in that county, which now belongs to my brothers: the adjoining lands of Ontrath that I hold under the See of Ossory also formed part of her inheritance.

Whether from caprice or mistaken tenderness, she so neglected the education of her elder son, who was of a very delicate constitution, that I have been told that he could scarcely read or write, being in other respects of slender capacity as well as homely person, yet withal of such an amiable disposition and so truly honourable, generous and noble in all his conduct and sentiments as to have acquired more than general esteem.

He married the Hon. Judith Butler, daughter of the first Viscount Lanesborough, and a little anecdote on the subject which I have heard my father relate is, in my opinion, highly creditable to them both.  His external accomplishments, as I have said, were by no means prepossessing, and she, in a manner, had been obliged by her parents to receive his addresses.  Some time after their being accepted an opportunity of her forming a much more advantageous alliance occurred, and she was earnestly solicited by her family to avail herself of it and break off the match with Mr. Cramer.  This she would not consent to do, declaring that as it was fro a sentiment of duty alone she had originally promised him her heart, now that they were better acquainted and she could appreciate his worth, no consideration whatever should tempt her to act unkindly towards him.  Their marriage took place in 1724, and was followed by numerous issue.

His younger and only brother, Oliver, possessed property in the County Carlow, where he married a Miss Rudkin, a lady of more beauty than fortune; by her he left two children, Marmaduke Coghill and Hester.  The former married first a Miss Humphreys, also of County Carlow, by whom he had two or three children that died in infancy, and secondly the daughter of Jacob Warren, Esq., of Grangely, in the County Kildare, a family related to the house of Wellesley.  The descendants of this marriage are Maurice Cramer, who inherits the estate of Beamore under the will of the Countess of Charleville, Captain Cramer of the R.N., and our other cousins residing at Drumcondra.

Hester, the sister of Marmaduke Coghill, was married when very young to Charles Tisdall, Esq., of Charlesfort, in the County Meath, by whom she had two sons; the elder was father of the present Mr Tisdall, of Charlesfort, and of several other children, and her second son, distinguished for more wit than prudence, was for some time in the Army.  He was father of Charles Tisdall, residing in College Green, with whom you are probably acquainted.

Some years after the demise of her first husband, Mrs Tisdall married Sir Nicholas Forster, of the County Monaghan (father by a former wife of the present Sir Thomas); the issue of this marriage were Humphrey, killed in the landing of the British Army in Egypt in 1801, and George Forster, my brother-in-law.

Having thus brought down the posterity of Oliver Cramer to our time, I now return to his brother Balthazar, who had by his wife, Judith Butler, a numerous offspring, of whom only four lived beyond childhood: – John Balthazar, the first Baronet of the family; a second son named, I believe, Oliver, who by the will of his grand-uncle, Doctor Marmaduke Coghill, inherited his Yorkshire property, took the name of Coghill, and settled at Coghill Hall, where, dying without male issue, the estate as regulated by Doctor Coghill’s will, went to his elder brother, who also took the name of Coghill.

The third son, my father [Marmaduke Cramer], was not born till a year after the Doctor’s death, otherwise from his apparent wish of grafting his name on a second branch of our family, he might probably have given him the reversion of the English estates.

The fourth child was a daughter, Catherine, married to the son of Archdeacon Smyth, of Gaybrook, in the County of Westmeath, the issue of which marriage was the late Ralph Smyth Esq., who by his second wife, the daughter of Sir Robert Staples, Bt., was the father of the present possessor of Gaybrook.

My grandfather [Balthazer John] was the last of the family that inhabited Ballyfoyle.  After his marriage, having attached himself immediately to his wife’s family, and his health requiring constant care, he resided almost continually in Dublin, where he had a home in Dawson Street.  He died in 1741, and was interred in St. Andrews Church, the ancient burial place.  His widow inhabited a villa near Rathfarnham, and survived him about eight years.

You, like myself, have probably heard of their eldest son, the first Sir John Coghill, lively, frolicsome, and sportive beyond even the gifts of an Irish gentleman; he sat in several of our National Parliaments, and generally voted with the opposition.  He spoke occasionally, but his elocution was not brilliant, to judge by the pointed satires and lampoons of that day, where he is repeatedly stigmatized as a babbler.

He married the younger daughter of Josias Hort, Archbishop of Tuam, by his wife, a Lady Fitzmaurice, daughter of the 21st or 22nd Lord Kerry; Lady Coghill was thus, by her mother cousin-german of the late Earl of Kerry and the first Marquis of Lansdowne.  I believe my uncle was not a little indebted to the latter for his baronetage conferred in 1788, as was his brother-in-law, the late Sir John Hort, for his title, which dates from the preceding year.  I was even told by the late Sir John Coghill that his father had been offered an Irish Peerage, but declined it on account of the inadequate fortune of his younger children.

In the early years my uncle resided principally at Bella Vista, in the County of Kildare, but after inheriting Coghill Hall almost entirely in England.  Ballyfoyle, long neglected, received from him its final degradation.  Many pleasant groves and extensive woods of fine old timber that yet surrounded it formed a considerable ornament to that part of the County of Kilkenny.  These he unmercifully had cut down, and so complete was the work of devastation that I am assured it would require no little effort of fancy to conceive it possible it ever could have been the noble seat it certainly was in the beginning of the last century.

Sir John Coghill died of gout at Bath in 1790.  He had the mortification in the preceding year, on the death of the Countess of Charleville, of finding all his hopes frustrated of adding her rich inheritance to his other demesnes, expectations he was fully authorised to entertain, both as being heir-at-law, and from her apparent partiality to his children.  However, by her last will she bequeathed her Kildare, Tipperary and Dublin estates to my father and his issue (merely assigning their reversion to him and his posterity), and her land in the County Meath to the late Mr Coghill Cramer, whose son, Mr. Maurice, of Charlemont Bridge, now possesses them.

Besides two sons my uncle left a numerous issue of daughters; of these some are since dead and others remain in single blessedness, and five were married; one to Mr. Mitchell, a clergyman; another to Captain Ottley of the R.N., since dead; a third to Col. Sankey of the Dublin Militia, since dead; a fourth to an English gentleman, since dead, of the name of Hynde; and a fifth to Major-General Sir Charles Doyle, who does or lately did command the military district of Limerick.

Some years after the death of his father [1796], the late Baronet [Sir John Thomas Coghill] sold Coghill Hall to a Lady Conyngham, and with the purchase money bought Randalls in Surrey, which I understand his brother [Admiral Sir Josiah Coghill] has disposed of; he also purchased an immense tract of land on the banks of the Mississippi from Marquis de la Fayette, which it is now thought may prove a more advantageous speculation than his friends originally supposed.

He was one of the British subjects detained as hostages by Bonaparte from 1803 to 1814, but this captivity was not very severe, as he was allowed nearly the whole time to reside in Paris, and even latterly to travel in Italy – a favour granted to no other prisoner, notwithstanding their earnest solicitations to obtain it.  In this tour he acquired a collection of Etruscan Vases, of such exquisite beauty as to have been since engraved with much typographical luxury, forming a costly volume known to the Dilettante by the title of the Coghill Vases.[5]

He died in Caen in Normandy in 1817, and was succeeded in his title and estates by his brother, Captain Cramer of the R.N. [Admiral Sir Josiah Coghill]  By his will be has bequeathed the reversion of all his landed property, in the event of the present Baronet dying without male issue, to his nephew, Hastings Doyle, but with the condition of adopting the name and arms of Coghill.

Shortly after Sir John’s death his brother purchased and settled at Ballyduff, and has thus once more reseated the family in the County of Kilkenny, and terminated its long absenteeship – a circumstance you may recollect that was particularly satisfactory to us all, and for which I shall ever esteem and respect him.  My letters this year inform me his lady has at last given him a son and heir.[6]  This consequently removes every immediate fear of the extinction of our elder branch, which by its aliances can claim a very particular illustration, the present Baronet being through his mother (a granddaughter of Lord Kerry [Lady Elizabeth Fitzmaurice], whose ancestors had frequently intermarried with the house of Thomond, lineally descended from Brian Borough,[7] [Boru, ancestor of the O’Briens] King of Munster and supreme Monarch of Ireland), and through his grandmother, the Honble. Judith Butler, great grand-daughter of Col. Edward Neville, younger son of the sixth Lord Abergavenny, of Gloucester, sixth son of King Edward the Third.

Consequently, Sir J [Josiah] Coghill can claim descent from that Monarch, and through him from William the Conqueror, Alfred and Egbert, also from Philip le Bel, St. Louis and Hugh Capet, Kings of France, and from the Kings of Castile and Scotland.

To complete this genealogical essay, I must now make some mention of my father’s branch of the family, with which you are so well acquainted that a very concise account will suffice.  He was born in 1739, took orders at the age of 23, having the best founded hopes of very high church preferment through the patronage of his cousin, Lord Lanesborough, whose influence with the Irish Government was then very considerable; these expectations from political causes were never realised.

In 1763 he married the daughter of Alderman Thomas Taylor, who had served the office of Lord Mayor of the City of Dublin in 1751, and was father of the late John Taylor, well known for his years on the turf, and who sat in our last two National Parliaments, being extremely attached to the Ponsonby party, and he uniformly voted with the opposition.

About 1768 my father settled at Sallymount, then a very small demesne that had previously belonged to Mr Myler, a Roman Catholic gentleman, and originally formed part of James the Second’s appanage when Duke of York.  By a singular coincidence he some years afterwards inherited the Charleville estate, lying within three miles of the place; and being about the same time promoted to the Chancellorship of Christ Church, he acquired the living of Kilcullen attached to it, which is the Parish Church of Sallymount.

After the Insurrection of 1798 my father principally resided at Dublin, where he died in 1802.  I believe his death was not a little hastened by the uneasiness and agitation he had suffered from the political convulsions of our unfortunate country in the preceding years.

My worthy brother, the Rev. John  Cramer, succeeeded him in his Kilkenny and Kildare estates, and during these last years has entirely resided at Sallymount, which he has considerably improved.  In 1794 he married the daughter of Sir Thomas Roberts, Bart., by whom he has six children now living.  Of these five are sons, all stout props of the family, but not of the name [Cramer], my sister-in-law having in 1801, on the death of her younger brother, Randal Roberts, inherited the Glassonbury estate in Kent, when she and her husband, according to the regulations of the Duchess of St. Albans’ will, took the name and arms of Roberts; but as that estate by her father’s second marriage has again reverted to Sir Thomas’ male issue, I cannot conceive why my brother and his children do not resume their family name, which is indeed a subject of surprise to all their acquaintance.

The task you have enjoined me, my dear cousin, is now completed.  I have transcribed, as accurately as my memory and distant situation will permit, the principal information I have been able to collect relative to the Cramer family.

Much, of course, is extremely vague, and what can be obtained proves little more than that since its establishment in Ireland it has been uniformly respectable, well connected by its alliances, and distinguished through all its branches by men of worth and honour.  In fact, at no period have we heard of any individuals of it being of dubious probity or of an indifferent character.  These my dear cousin, are just causes of honest pride; and though the family with future generations may possibly increase in illustration or opulence, I doubt if we can make for it a better wish than that it may ever preserve its hitherto fair reputation.


Pisa, October 1st, 1826.

(ii)       a note written by Ambrose Cramer in 1828,


Name, Ambrose Cramer, married Susanna Brow, near Middleton, in the County Cork, and I understood had sixteen children.  All I recollect of them was Richard Cramer, a Capt. In the Army and died in Philadelphia; came there from the West Indies for the benefit of his health.  Ambrose Cramer, a lieutenant of a man-of-war.  My father had a large family; many died young.  I was the eldest of the whole family.  Alexander Hamilton Cramer in the British Navy.  Theophilus S. Cramer, a surgeon in Barbadoes, and married a lady of the name of Eliza Swoke, and got a good estate with her; he died young and left three children.  Hugh Cramer went to Georgia in this country [USA], married there, died and left several children.  Mary and Susanna Cramer, two daughters, married and were both widows.  James Cramer a son of my grandfather, his youngest son, went to the West Indies, and died in Dominica there.  All I recollect of my brother Aleck was at the cove of Cork on board Ld. Howe’s Fleet, when he went to relieve Gibraltar; wrote a letter to his uncle Balthazar Cramer and could not find an opportunity to send; threw it overboard, and the person directed to picked it up one day when he was off the Old Head of Bengore, dried the letter and sent it to my father.  I read the letter.

I forgot to mention in its proper place the number of daughters my grandfather had that I recollect.  Catherine Cramer married a gentleman in the town of Newry (Thos. Searer), which place my grandfather was collector of, and here J.T.C.’s [John Thomas Coghill’s?] father lived for at least seven years.  He and I slept in one bed.  Jane Cramer and Elizabeth Cramer both died unmarried; long dead.

 I now give some account of my mother’s relations.  My mother’s name was Elizabeth Smith.  Baron Hamilton and his brother, a bishop, my mother and their brother’s and sister’s children; and my wife’s name, Elizabeth Johnston, whose mother was from the same stock, and by her we were related to the late General Ross, killed at Baltimore.  My grandfather was fifteen years old at the Battle of the Boyne, and lived seventy years after it.  He had a very extensive business at Cork, and built several houses there, and there was a place called Cramer’s Lane, on which he had a good deal of property; very wrong to give up business for a place in the revenue.  He was first made Collector of Lisburn; then after some time he removed to Newry.  My father had a post (revenue) in different places – a poor way of living.  I would rather be an American farmer.

My grandfather sold his collectorship several years before he died, and lived on the interest of his money, and left it to his two unmarried daughters.  Mrs Searer was left eleven hundred guineas by Dr. Coghill, and she lived with him some time.


(iii)   a letter respecting the French family of Cramer, dated 1904

[original French version]


Lorsque mon gendre m’a envoyé votre lettre du mois Octobre dernier je l’ai lue avec grand interêt, mais j’etais absent de mon domicile ordinaire en Suisse et je n’avais pas sous la main les documents necessaire pour vous répondre.

Christian Cramer de Strasbourg, mort en 1622, avait un fils.

Jean Ulrich, médecin né à Strasbourg en 1610, qui vint s’établir à Genève le 29 Mars, 1634, et y épousa Gabrielle fille de Sp. Isaac Caille, docteur médecin, il fut reçu bourgeois de Genève le 10 Novembre, 1668, avec ses fils – Gabriel, Jacques, André, et Jean Antoine (qui fut l’ancêtre de notre branche).  Il y mourut en 1687.

 Sur l’arbre genealogique de notre famille que je posséde il est dit; qu’un autre fils de Christian Cramer quitta Strasbourg pour aller s’établir en Irlande où cette branche existe encore (1816) en la personne de Cramer Coghill, chevalier Baronet, homme de mérite et propriétaire aisè.  D’après vos renseignements ce second fils de Christian Cramer serait le Colonel Tobias qui aurait été reçu Irlandais en 1639, et qui serait incontestablement le frère de notre ancêtre, nous en ignorions le pré nom.

Quant à l’origine de notre famille, nous ne possédons aucun document positif, mais nous la croyons originaire du Holstein et venue s’établir à Strasbourg à une epoque qui nous est inconnu.

Nos armoiries sont: parti, au premier d’argent à la main de gueules sortant d’un nuage d’azur à dextre, et tenant un rameau de laurier de Sinople, au second d’azur à une ancre d’argent mise en pal.  Ces armoiries suivant Galiffe, l’auteur des Genealogies genevoises, Tome iii., page 147, doivent avoir été concedées pour quelque grand exploit naval.

Quant au renseignements que nous posédons sur Christian Cramer père de notre ancêtre et de celui de votre mère, un de mes oncles, Auguste Cramer ancien Syndic né en 1795, mort en 1855, a écrit dans un manuscrit de notes et de souvenirs ce qui suit: – “Le document suivant, don’t l’original doit être chez Mr. Cramer Ashton en Angleterre contient sur Christian Cramer auteur de notre famille des particularités interessantes.  (Je l’ai copiée sur l’original en 1830 chez M. Cramer Pietet qui m’a dit plus tard l’avoir confie à son dit neveu).”

L’original est en Allemand je vous en donne la traduction faite par mon oncle: – “Nous Christophe Wauner, Tribun, Echevins et Consul de la louable Tribu des Maréchaux en cette ville libre Royal de Strasbourg sur le Rhin, reconnaissons et faisons ce qui suit.

“Il y a longtemps que Christian Cramer qui faisait un commerce de metaux en étains et autre marchandises, a été nomme de notre dit Tribu et d’une charge à l’autre, il a été élu successivement juge, puis en 1620, échevin et en 1622 Tribun, charge dans laquelle il est mort la même année.  Et comme maintenant Monsieur son fils et Messieurs ses petits fils ont demandé par écrit à nous Tribun Echevins et Conseillers de la Tribu un document sur ses emplois et sur sa conduite honorable et que nous n’avons aucun motif de la refuser, biens au contraire le désir d’acceder à leur demande.  Nous declarons sur notre obligation comme Tribun Echevins et Conseillers de la Tribu, et avec l’agrément de nos gracieux Magistrats de cette ville; que feu Christian Cramer a rempli les dits emplois honorifiques avec distinctions en sorte que si Dieu lui avait accordé une plus longue il aurait été sans doute promu et elevé à des emplois plus distingués encore.

“Nous Tribun, Echevins et Conseillers de la Tribu des Marichaux avons delivré la present en temoignage de vérité et y avons appliqué notre sceau suivant l’usage.  Donné à Strasbourg, lundi 24 Avril, l’an de grace 1684.”

Mon oncle ajoutait: – “On sait que l’Alsace a été réunie à la France par la traité de Munster en 1648, mais que la ville de Strasbourg re l’a été qu’en 1681; ses inhabitants etaient presque tous Lutherens à cette époque depuis pres d’un siecle.

“J’ai fait demander par un ami en 1842 quelques récherches dans les archives des Tribu ou autre dépots Municipaux à Strasbourg afin de constater davantage les droits de bourgeoisié de notre famille.  On m’a repondu que les registres et archives des Tribu sont entàpes en désordre dans un des combles de la Mairie, et on m’a envoyé la copie d’une piece des Archives de la Tour aux Pfennings qui est une reconnaisance de Christian Kremer fondeur et bourgeois de cette ville, datée Strasbourg 1e Mars, 1612, portant: que dans la Maison don’t il est propriétaire Grande (Langestrasse) contigue par derriere au Muntzhof, il a obtenu à bien plaire de Messieurs les intendants des Batiments de la Messieurs les Tribuns de la Tour aux Pfennings la permission d’ouvrir des jours sur la Muntzhof qu’il s’engage à supprimer à première réquisition.  L’archiviste qui à la copie authentique de cette piece y a joint la facsimile de la signature de Christian Kremer et son sceau qui est un écu on l’on reconnait distinctement une montagne dans le bas et au depuis deux mains tenant celle de droite un ancre celle à gauche une branche; au depuis de l’écu les initiales C. et K.; entre deux une grande étoile et des deux côtes une petite.”

Le Cramer Ashton dout parle mon oncle et entre les mains de qui devait se trouver l’original du document ci depuis cité, descendait de Gabriel Cramer, un des fils d’Ulrich notre ancêtre qui a formé une branche qui s’éteint dernièrement à Genève en la personne de Henri Cramer fils de Cramer Pietet mais qui a des descendants en Angleterre.  Cramer Ashton etait le fils de Noble et Spectable Jean Antoin Cramer, professeur en droit en 1757, mort en 1817, qui avait épousé Henriette Courtet, don’t il eut trois fils reconnus Anglais.

John Henri né en 1796.  Louis, officier de marine né en Angleterre en 1794, mort aux Indes en 1828.  Jean Antoine né en 1792, mort en 1848, professeur á Oxford, doyen de l’église de Carlisle, marié à Henriette Ashton, dout il eut trois fils sur lesquels vous porriez avoir des renseignements ou sur leurs descendants, ils ont hérité il y a quelques années de la fortune assez considerable de leur cousin Henri, mort sans enfants à Genève.

Le No. du journal le Graphic du 24 Novembre, 1900, donne le portrait et la biographie de Major Jocelyn Henry Cramer qui venait de mourire de la fièvre à Prahsu, Afrique Occidentale, et qui très probablement est un des descendants de Jean Antoine, professeur à Oxford.

D’après votre lettre la descendance de Tobias Cramer ne ressort pas clairement.  Sa fille Hester épousa le chevalier Sir John Coghill, don’t elle eut 4 enfants et sa fille Hester I., épousa un Oliver Cramer, quel est il?  Si vous pouvez me donner la descendance exacte de Tobias vous me seriez plaisir.

Notre famille a toujours occupé une place honorable dans le governement de la republique de Genève tant qu’il etait aristocratique, et d’apres Galiffe: “a produit un nombre singulier de savants don’t quelques uns ont été fort distingués et surtout le grand Mathematicien” (Sp. Gabriel Cramer, né en 1704, mort en 1752).

La branche ainée d’étant éteinte il y a quelques années par la mort de Henri Cramer, il ne reste plus a Genève que celle à laquelle j’appartiens.  Mon père avait 4 frères, tous morts que leurs femmes, je reste le seul survivant male de ma generation, mais il reste encore survivants males fils de mes cousins germains, et j’ai de plus un fils qui à 3 enfants don’t 2 garçons. La femme de mon arrière grand père etait fille de Abraham Wesselowsky, noble russe aide de camp de Pierre le Grand, refugié à Genève, il eut 3 autres filles qui se marrièrent en Angleterre et devinrent Mesdames Clason, Simpkinson, et Jack.

Je souhaite que ces details sur notre famille puissent vous interesser, et si vous en desirez d’autres je suis tout disposé à vous completer.

                                                                                                                    Bien à vous,   


[English Translation by Julian D S Lyon]


When my son-in-law sent me your letter of last October I read it with great interest but I was away from my usual residence in Switzerland and I did not have to hand all the requisite documents to be able to respond to you.

Christian Cramer from Strasbourg who died in 1622 had a son:

John Ulrich, a doctor, born in Strasbourg in 1610, set himself up in Geneva on 29th March 1634 and married there Gabrielle, daughter of Isaac Caille, medical doctor; he was received as a citizen of Geneva on 10th November 1668 with his sons, Gabriel, Jacques, André and Jean Antoine (who was the ancestor of our branch).  He died there in 1687.

On the family tree in my possession it is mentioned that another son of Christian Cramer left Strasbourg to set himself up in Ireland where that branch still exists today (1816) in the person of Cramer Coghill, knight baronet, a man of merit and free property.  According to your information this second son of Christian Cramer was the Colonel Tobias who was accepted as Irish in 1639 and who was indisputably the brother of our ancestor and whose given name we did not know.

With regard to the origin of our family we do not possess any positive documentation but we believe the family originated in Holstein and moved to Strasbourg at some time we know not when.

Our coat of arms is:[on the first part, Argent (silver) with a hand (of mouths/muzzles/heads) emerging from an Azure (blue) cloud to the right and holding a Sinople (green) laurel branch; on the second Azure (blue) with an Argent (silver) anchor ‘mise en pal’ (two sections divided vertically ‘in pale’].  These arms, according to Galiffe, the author of the (Genevan genealogies) Volume iii, page 147, must have been awarded for some great naval exploit.

According to the information we possess in respect of Christian Cramer, father of our ancestor, and that of your mother, one of my uncles, Auguste Cramer former Syndic (member of the Syndicate), born in 1795, who died in 1855, wrote the following in a manuscript of notes and memories: – “The following document, the original of which must be with Mr Cramer Ashton in England, contains interesting details in respect of Christian Cramer, founder of our family. (I copied this from the original in 1830 which was with Mr Cramer Pietet who told me later he had given it to his above-mentioned nephew).”

The original is in German; I am giving you the translation made by my uncle: – “We, Christophe Wauner, Tribune, ‘Echevins’ and Consul of the worthy Tribunal of Marshals in this royal free city of Strasbourg on the Rhine, recognise and enact the following:

“It is a long time ago that Christian Cramer, who ran a business of tin/pewter metals and other merchandise, was nominated to our afore-mentioned Tribunal and from one role to another, he was elected successively judge, then in 1620, (échevin) and in 1622, Tribune, in which position he died the same year.  And as now his son together with his other young sons have requested in writing to us, Tribune, (Èchevins) and Counsellors of the Tribunal, to provide a document in respect of his employment and honourable conduct and as we have no reason to refuse, indeed on the contrary we are pleased to accede to their request.  We declare according to our duties as Tribune, (Èchevins) and Counsellors of the Tribunal and with the consent of our gracious magistrates of this city; that the late Christian Cramer occupied the said honourable roles with distinctionof a kind whereby if God had accorded him a longer (life) he would without doubt been promoted and elevated to even more distinguished works.

“We, Tribune, ‘Echevins’ and Consul of the Tribunal of Marshals have delivered this document in testament of truth and have applied our seal hereto according to custom.  Granted at Strasbourg, Monday 24th April 1684.” [perhaps this should have read 1634?]

My uncle added: – “We know that Alsace was reunited with France by the treaty of Munster in 1648, but that the city of Strasbourg (did not join?) until 1681; its inhabitants had almost all been Lutherans at this time for almost a hundred years.

“I asked through a friend in 1842 for some research to be done in the Tribunal’s archives or other municipal stores in Strasbourg in order to establish the advantage of our family’s rights of citizenship.  They replied to me that the registers and archives of the Tribunal are in a state of disorder in one of the basements of the Town Hall and they sent me the copy of an item from the Archives de la Tour at Pfennings which is a recognition of Chistian Kremer, founder and citizen of this city, dated Strasbourg 1st March 1612 stating that: in the House of which he is the proprietor Grande (Langestrasse) and fronting to the rear onto Muntzhof, he obtained at the pleasure of the Messieurs the Inspectors of Buildings of the Messieurs the Tribunes of the Tower at Pfennings permission to open during the days onto Muntzhof which he undertook to abolish at the first time of asking.  The archivist who authenticated the copy of this item also added a facsimile of Christian Kremer’s signature and his seal which is a shield whereon one can distinctly identify a mountain at the bottom and above it two hands holding, in the right hand an anchor and in the left a branch; above the shield the initials C. and K.; between the two a large star and at each side a small one.”

The Cramer Ashton to whom my uncle refers and in whose handsthe afore-mentioned document should be found, was a descendant of Gabriel Cramer, one of the sons of Ulrich our ancestor who formed a branch in Geneva which was finally extinguished in the person of Henri Cramer, son of Cramer Pietet but who has descendants in England.  Cramer Ashton was the son of the noble and respected Jean Antoine Cramer, professor of law in 1757, who died in 1817 having married Henrietta Coutet with whom he had three sons recognised as English.

John Henri, born in 1796.  Louis, naval officer born in England in 1794, died in the Indies in 1828.  Jean Antoine born in 1792, died in 1848, professor at Oxford, doyen of the church in Carlisle, married to Henrietta Ashton with whom he had three sons in respect of whom you could have information or in respect of their descendants; some years ago they inherited the sizeable fortune of their cousin Henri who died without issue in Geneva.

The issue of the journal le Graphic of 24th November 1900 gives a portrait and the biography of Major Jocelyn Henry Cramer who had just died of fever at Prahsu in East Africa and who was probably one of the descendants of Jean Antoine, professor at Oxford.

According to your letter the descendancy of Tobias Cramer is not clear.  His daughter Hester married the knight Sir John Coghill by whom she had 4 children and her daughter Hester I., married an Oliver Cramer, who is he?  If you could give me the exact descendancy from Tobias you would give me great pleasure.

Our family  always occupied an honorable place in the government of the the republic of Geneva whilst it was aristocratic and, according to Galiffe: “produced a singular number of wise men of which some were highly distinguished especially the great Mathematician”. (Gabriel Cramer, born in 1704, died in 1752)

The branch having been extinguished for some years by the death of Henri Cramer, there is no other Cramer branch in Geneva except the one to which I belong.  My father had four brothers, all dead as are their wives, I remain the only surviving male of my generation, but there remain male sons of my (paternal) cousins and I also have a son who in turn has three children of which two are boys.  The wife of my great grandfather was the daughter of Abraham Wesselowsky, the noble Russian aide de camp of Peter the Great who was exiled in Geneva; he had three other daughters who married in England and became Mrs Clason, Mrs Simpkinson and Mrs Jack.

I hope that these details of our family are of interest to you and if you would like any more I would be pleased to oblige.

Best wishes


(iv)     a letter respecting the American branch

                                                                                                                301, Erie Street

                                                                                           Chicago, Ill., Nov. 15th 1895


I received your very kind letter, and was very much interested by it.  Mr J. H. Coghill, of New York, very generously sent me a copy of his Coghill Family. It is a very valuable book, and reflects great credit upon the compiler.  I hope at some future date to see Mr. Coghill.  He resides at New York, about 24 hours’ journey from here.

I should very much like to see the portraits you speak of, as a good many of their names most likely have been told me when a lad at my grandfather’s knee.  My grandfather, A. M. C. Cramer, [Ambrose Marmaduke Coghill Cramer] was a most enthusiastic warm-hearted Irishman, and delighted in gathering his children about him and relating tales of Ireland and his father and people, and we took great pleasure in these tales.  He has been dead many a year, and all his brothers.

I do not know exactly where my relationship comes in with you, and think it remote.  My branch starts with Tobias Cramer, brother to Balthazar and Hester Cramer, who married Sir John Coghill, and your branch starts with Balthazar.  It is the same blood.  My name Ambrose is first heard of in our family record in 1724, Ambrose Cramer, Mayor of Cork.  Since that date there had always been one named Ambrose.  I know the family is German, and not very long ago had a notice sent to me, “That for saving the Church of Polycarp at Smyrna from the Turks, Ambroise Herman de Cramer, Austrian Consul at Smyrna in 1799, was created Chevalier of the Order of Christ by Bull of Pope Pius VII.  March 5th every year a Mass is celebrated to his memory”.  I have no doubt on account of the similar name that our Cramer family that went to Ireland was of the same extraction.

I wish to know all I can relative to my family.  Mrs Homan’s book would be invaluable to me in making up my Cramer book.  I have heard of Mrs Homan, I think, in a letter dated Pisa, 1826, from Thomas Cramer.  He says “my sister, Homan”, and at some time speaks of “our cousin the late Mrs Forster”.  Most likely some of Mrs Homan’s descendants are living and have the book.  I would not wish to bother them by enquiries; but if I knew where to locate them, I would write to some one in the place and try to have a copy made.  It is very kind of you to offer to have a copy made if yours comes to light, and I assure you I appreciate it very much.  Under ordinary circumstances I could not accept your going to any such trouble, but I know of no other way to get information that I really desire.

I note position and occupancy of the various places I wrote of as being vaguely connected in my mind with our family.  It is too bad that they have slipped away.  In this country it is much easier to make than to hold.  I suppose your good uncle must have been a friend of Sir Richard Boyle[8] and acted upon his precept of “What shall I do for posterity; posterity never did anything for me”.

I am,

        Yours sincerely

                                AMBROSE CRAMER

To Sir John J. Coghill, Bart.,

            Glen Barrahane, Ireland

[1] Perhaps it should be mentioned that the footnotes to this letter are mine, and not Thomas Cramer’s [the square bracketed notes are by Julian D S Lyon made (July 2001) in transcribing these texts for his own purposes]

[2] He is mentioned in several places in “The Bellingham Diary[written by Colonel Bellingham in the 17th Century], where it is stated that “he was Master in Chancery in Ireland.  He was the seventh in decent from John Cockhill, of Cockhill, who was in the reigns of Richard II and Henry IV living at Russesborough”.

[3] See letter (iv) and “tree” (v) of this branch at end.

[4] This house, in which many of Sir J. Coghill’s children were born, is now St. Patrick’s Training College for Teachers.  It contains one of the finest eighteenth Century inlaid mantel-pieces in existence, and I have little doubt that this was erected by that very distinguished connoisseur, Sir John Coghill.

[5] Sir John was a man of some note on the Continent, and a most interesting and amusing account of one of his journies with Mdme. Recamier will be found in her life. The “Coghill Vases” is a handsome volume, now extremely difficult to obtain.  What became of the priceless collection of vases themselves is a mystery which has never been cleared up.

[6] The late Sir John Jocelyn Coghill of Glen Barrahane, Catletownshend, Co. Cork.

[7] Sic.

[8] Sir Boyle Roche

1800s The Charlotte Letters

Correspondence to Charlotte McVeagh (née Brooke), Ferdinand Meath McVeagh and Maria McVeagh (née Rotheram)


March 1813 from W Brooke.. 1

July 1813 from W Brooke.. 2

December 1813 from Emma.. 3

A) Historical Note 1. 4

May 1814 from W Brooke.. 5

April 1816 from E. White.. 6

B) Historical Note 2. 7

April 1816 from Edith Shaw… 8

July 1816 from Flora McVeagh.. 10

C) Historical Note 3. 12

September 1816 from Emma.. 13

January 1818 from Flora McVeagh.. 14

April 1819 from E White.. 15

May 1819 from J Hallett.. 16

November 1820 from Emma.. 17

February 1821 from Flora Deacon.. 19

February 1821 from Jane Hallett.. 20

D) Historical Note 4. 21

September 1821 from Harriet Brooke.. 22

September 1821 from E Walsh.. 23

October 1821 from Emma.. 25

October 1821 from Catherine Bowles. 26

November 1821 from Flora Deacon.. 27

November 1821 from Mary Brooke 28

April 1822 from H Brooke 29

May 1822 from Mary Brooke 30

July 1822 from E White.. 32

January 1823 from John Morron.. 33

December 1828 from John Hughes. 34

July 1865 from Ellen Campbell.. 35

1.  March 1813 from W Brooke

Franked in Lisbon 1813 and sealed

To Mrs McVeagh


Devonshire, [that is then crossed out and re addressed to Combe  Hill, Near Bath]

                                                                                                                            Lisbon March 7th 1813

Your letter dearest Charlotte of the 8th ultimo caused me inexplicable concern the melancholy particulars of which I have this day transmitted to your brother Henry, the premature demise of your dear engaging sister has completely and indeed entirely overcome me – Her cheerful animated and endearing disposition had made too deep an impression on my affection not to occasion me the deepest sorrow but as it has pleased the Almighty to take her away we must not in too strong a sense repine at his decree – had she lived dear amiable soul. I feel perfectly convinced she would have approved, all we could have wished, for I perceived Mary[1] hails of character in her which would they had been brought to maturity, would have amply confirmed my opinion I hope your unhappy mother bears her misfortune with Christian fortitude, give her my love – tell her Henry is doing well and from every account received likely to do so.

You’ll no doubt experience much surprise at my not having received your letter ere this but the fact is so tho’ Packer not having arrived before the 3rd inst. and the one for England sails tomorrow, I therefore lose not a moment in writing from the hope of this reaching you before you take your departure from Sidmouth[2] for Combe Hill Villa. My last to you acquainting you of my appointment as Brigadier General on the staff in this country has I trust reached you – in your future direction of your letters to me, leave out 5th Dvn Gds and merely state “Staff Lisbon” [3] as had I not by chance opened the packet of letters for the Regiment, I would not have received yours, (it being among them) until it had reached the Regiment and come down again here.

With respect to my future movements on destination, I am still in the dark, however you shall know when anything is decided relative to myself.

With best love to you dear

Believe me

your truly sincere

and affectionate uncle

W Brooke

2.  July 1813 from W Brooke

To Mrs McVeagh

Combe Villa
Near Bath                                                                   

                                                                                                                              Lisbon July 13th 1813

How strange and unaccountable my darling Charlotte that your letter of 3rd inst should have been the first intelligence I had of your accouchement tho’ it took place on the 13th ultimo from the various superscriptions on the back of it, it appeared evident that you had not post paid it, and without which foreign letters are not forwarded – therefore take warning in future – accept now my tender congratulations on the late event, your present health and also that of your blue eyed boy[4] (the colour as I am informed by Aunt Mary of his olios or eyes), would, they had been the similitude of your own beauteous ones, but fortunate for the rising female generation they are not, as they would have penetrated their susceptible hearts by 100’s – indeed will I accept  the serious trust with pleasure of making myself answerable for all the high crimes, misdemeanours, misnomers or misconceptions he may be guilty off(sic) ere he attains the age of twenty one – therefore you may dub Mr “Godfather” Honeycombe on receipt of this – So you are the nurse on the occasion – success attend your endeavours my sweet one. I highly approve and hope you will perform the same natural and praiseworthy office to all the rest provided your health admits and of which, I cannot entertain a doubt. Tell your unhappy mother with my love, that I will with pleasure enter into any plan judged most eligible for obtaining the £300 due pay for your brother William’s equipment.[5] It appears to me very possible that, that sum could be raised, on my entering into a joint bond on the part of my brother Robert, and myself making it payable in six months from this date and which, will take upon me, to make good. I know of no other way, as his last dividend was, by my order invested back into the fund, and as for myself advancing £1 I, could not, having given the last I had for the purchase of a horse for your brother Henry and their (sic) being at present 6 months staff and 6 Dv Regimental pay due me.

I had a letter some few days since from Henry. He was very well, in high spirits, and in charming quarters at Tafalla between Pamplona and Tudela in the direction of Saragossa[6]vide map” as soon as you have put your boy “to sleep”. I have forward your letter to him.

When you see Tucker tell her to ask Sally Combes if she would like to come out to this country as my cook in case I am appointed to a stationary command (not one of paper, pens, and ink, with a circulating library!) as I think the climate would agree with her, should she like such an aquatick (sic) excursion the interest must be made (piece of the letter is torn at this point due to the seal) her passage thro’ Mrs Brooke[7] at Southampton and from her to Col Towers – adieu my dear love, and with kind remembrance to Mr McVeagh. Believe me ever and anon

Your affectionate

W Brooke

3.  December 1813 from Emma

Postmarked December 26th 1813 Swansea

from Emma

to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy, Meath, Ireland

Dearest Charlotte I am much afraid you must have thought me troublesome in so often teasing you with reproaches for not writing. One letter I did receive informing me of your accouchement but the other was seized by the Fates. I was glad however to hear you were well Your last arrived at a fortunate period, I was entering my 25th year and it helped to beguile my thoughts from dwelling too intensely on the days past and to come with many painful and as many happy retrospections. I think now my life will glide quickly on till I attain my half century. I shall hope to see you before another twelve months passes over your head and mine. Louisa[8] has been in Miss McVeagh’s[9] company for a few days at Swindon where she and Miss Thaynes were to be also. I long to hear from her and quite envy her such a pleasant week she has been very fortunate since she left home having seen many old friends.

We are all spending our Christmas together and enjoying this true Christmas weather which for some years we have not known especially in Wales snow being a thing almost unknown here it is now what they call a deep snow about two inches thick. We have been making ourselves warm by quadrilles and Colin Maillard our guide is come every now and then. The consequence is that you get fatigued and feel warm and it does not quite agree with me tho’ I feel so much better than I did some little time ago. As to your excuse of poor women I agree with you in all at the same time I think that it is in their power to remain single and in that case happy, it seems to me however that they prefer a “stalled ox and hatred therein all” to a dinner of herbs when peace is in some respects I think the ox better than the herbs and can preach very well till I am tired when I fear I shall fall like the mist. One’s affections once engaged and worthily so the suggestions of prudence are little thought of, too little sometimes I fear for our peace and it is only at my steady time of life that the scales are properly balanced and the lightest weight suffered to pass unheeded – Cuthbert[10] has been in Pembrokeshire hunting but as he is not in all things the favourite of fortune, first incessant rain and next hard frost have prevented his joining the hunt and he is now on his road home – I wish you could come by way of Swansea into England we shall all be too happy to see you dear Charlotte and by your smile give our best love to your mother and Harriet[11] and tell the latter Mosca still bears a faint recollection of her in her mind’s eye; my father is looking older but feels the same. Lady Bucklington (whom your mother may recollect as Miss Blagrove) has been visiting her relations in the neighbourhood and we saw a great deal of her, she did not know my Father, expecting to see some good old man, declaring he looked just the same as ever – I really believe this mild fine climate regenerates every lady that lives in it, I advise you dear Charlotte when you are tired of Ireland and the world come here and live amongst us should we still be a part of this pleasant neighbourhood – remember your letters are always welcome and the subject of self will never fatigue me – Louisa has even the Queen[12] passing thro’ Hungerford, the Duke of Gloucester is at the Pearces – tell your mother Charles Craven is at last caught by a 20,000 with her other charms external I mean and that Robt Wraughton is supposed to be paying his divorcées in Suffolk – Papa Berkshire is as she remembers it except poor Mrs Shaw whom Louisa thinks will not see Inglewood again. Richmond is still in France, The [Mayes …[13]] up to Chilton in the Spring. Adieu dear Charlotte accept all the love of our party and that of your most affectionate Emma.

Miss Wallis is sick of dull England and the other they fear has consumption hanging about her, no true happiness without alloy

December Christmas Day

A)   Historical Note 1

In 1807, Napoleon’s forces had moved through Spain, invaded Portugal and captured Lisbon.  This move was especially directed against the trade between Portugal and Britain, which was causing a breach in the ‘Continental System’ – Napoleon’s enforced precursor to the European Union!  In January 1808, the King of Spain was replaced by Napoleon’s brother, Joseph.  At this time, Portugal appealed to Britain for help and Arthur Wellesley (later Duke of Wellington), recently returned from India, ws sent out with a British force, which defeated the French at Vimiero.  The ensuing Convention of Cintra, however, was negotiated by a General senior to Wellesley, and the French were allowed to withdraw from Portugal.

In 1808, the British commander, Sir John Moore, landed in Spain with a force intended to assist the native guerrilla movement against the French.  He was forced to retreat to Corunna, where he successfully evacuated his forces but was himself killed. The effect of his diversion had been to weaken the French movement against both the Spanish and Portuguese, and it gave time for Wellesley, who took command of British and Portuguese forces in 1809, to strengthen the defences of Lisbon.  The defensive emplacements around Lisbon, known as the ‘Lines of Torres Vedras’ were supported by a ‘scorched earth’ area up to thirty miles from Lisbon, in which the French could not adopt their usual methods of living off the country.

Portland’s government (the Duke of Portland became Prime Minister in 1807) had greatly increased the training and efficiency of the British Army, and the forces under Wellesley were far superior to those previously used.  They proved, by all accounts, as good as, if not better than, the forces Napoleon could bring against them.  From the Lisbon base Wellesley (easily supported from the sea by the navy) drove the French back towards Madrid, and the battle of Talavera, July 1809, was an important victory.

The French were now beginning to lose battles and an ominous change was coming over the war.  The very geography of Spain itself was against them for they had to move their supplies across the main valleys and rivers (Nelson having won naval supremacy over the French at Trafalgar in 1805).  The most significant change occurred in 1810 when Massena, one of the most brilliant of Napoleon’s generals, succeeded in advancing to Lisbon but completely failed to penetrate the Lines of Torres Vedras.  He commenced a siege of Lisbon but the French suffered terribly from the lack of food supplies and about 30,000 died of fever.  Massena was now forced to retreat and this was the decisive turning point of the Peninsular War.  Wellesley’s success had been achieved by the endurance of his forces and his skilful alternation of attack and retreat in order to draw the French deeper into the country.  He now followed up his success at Lisbon by defeating the French at Almeida, 1811, and capturing the key fortresses of Ciudad Rodrigo and Badajoz in 1812.

The withdrawal of troops from Spain to join Napoleon’s invasion of Russia in June 1812 strengthened Wellesley’s position there and, in 1812, he won the battle of Salamanca and, in 1813, that of Vittoria (following which he was made Duke of Wellington).  In April 1814 he reached Toulouse in Southern France where he again defeated the French.

The Napoleonic Wars culminated, on 18th June 1815, in the Battle of Waterloo.

4.   May 1814 from W Brooke

Letter postmarked Lisbon

from W Brooke (uncle)

to Mrs McVeagh

Combe Villa

Nr Bath

England                                                                                                                Lisbon May 14th 1814

Well, my dear Charlotte, I think your ardent wishes as expressed in your letter of the 10th ultimo of seeing me and your brother[14] soon are likely to be realized at least I should imagine so from what you have ere this seen in the papers, viz – that the allied forces shall evacuate the French Territory on the 1st June[15] – consequently the British troops will be embarked as soon as shipping can be sent for that purpose. Those poor few will in my opinion be the last, however, even the, the period cannot be far distant – there are at this moment, two Packets descried off the Coast and which may possibly bring some instructions on that Head, but as this letter must be put into the office this Evening on account of the Packet sailing tomorrow I shall not have it in my power to give you any positive information at present.

I’m sorry you have taken such a professional antipathy to Mr Hicks as his abilities as a surgeon are unquestionable and tho’ you prefer one of your own sex the moment might arrive when such skill would be indispensably necessary, however, don’t imagine I wish you to employ him in any way whatsoever, as I never wish to even mention his name, but for your benefit in cases of surgical emergency – So poor Emma[16] won’t marry, I hope you have persuaded her not to adhere to such resolve, should an eligible opportunity offer, but which from their very secluded residence is not likely to happen- They are all to be pitied having such a father and from such a one, I think you have had, by your Union with your beloved Ferdinand a most fortunate escape – what say you to a trip to the continent by Holland, Paris etc etc when I return, should I not succeed to a staff situation at Home hey my bonnie lassie – how do you and aunt  rub  on – hey –

The last letter I received from Henry was dated the 17th ultimo from near Toulouse[17] – he was well and as happy as possible, as ever indeed all the British officers from the very kind welcome and attention of the French towards them. I sent him your letter the day after I received it but have not since heard from him – Henry’d know if poor William[18] has sailed if he has I trust with his Uncle Arthur’s[19] case and my introductory letter to Lt Col Nicolls[20] Qu Ma G  to Lord Moria, he will do well;

I have not heard from your mother a long time, but perhaps these packets now in sight may bring me one from her – give her my affectionate love when you write and tell her should I land at Plymouth she will be the first person I shall call on and from her to Combe Villa but not to enliven it with my rattle as I’m grown very serious and grave you understand. God bless you my darling and believe me your affectionate uncle W Brooke

My best regards to Ferdinand.

5.  April 1816 from E. White

Marked Aylesbury

to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy, Meath, Ireland                                                                                                                                                                                                         Hardwyke

                                                                                    April 17 1816

My dearest Charlotte

I cannot as yet give up the familiar title I have been accustomed hitherto to address you by, tho’ I have too much reason to doubt whether I hold that place in your remembrance I must ardently aspire too(sic) the idea of being thus forgotten you cannot judge how painful it has been to me in the reflection unless it were possible for you to look into my mind and to know the true regard I have for you and the anxious wish I have to hold your good opinion and how much I have prided myself as I hoped in possessing a share of it and thus flattering myself, I have long been expecting to hear from you. For a time I was willing to make very great allowances as you were on a travelling system and as you had much to see and correspondences with connextions(sic) to fill up your vacant time and on your going to Ireland where everything was new and of course most interesting, it being to be your future home, I could even then excuse delays for a certain time from my young friend. From other quarters I have been so happy to hear of your welfare and that you are pleased with Drewstown. I hope you are far removed from any danger of the rioters[21] that the newspapers seem so much with. I never read them without my mind recurring to you. I hope that Mr McVeagh from his situation is not called on to act in an magisteriable situation, as I understand it is that class of gentleman that are most obnoxious.

That Mrs McVeagh[22] accompanied you to Ireland gave me great pleasure to know, to have a sensible companion so nearly connected with you by the ties of relationship and friendships must have been most desirable as your entering a new stage of life where you would find the habits of people varying from this country. I hope its air and climate agrees with you and that you have regained a little more flesh on your bones and that Mr McVeagh and dear little Ferdinand enjoy their health. I most sincerely hope and pray tell me what chances there are of little Ferdinand having a playmate in a brother or sister, I must wish it, as one only darling stands a sad chance of being spoilt he is a pretty interesting plaything as yet but higher objects must be thought of for him when a succession would be wished for. Though last mentioned not less thought of my and your good friend Mrs Boyson. I hope both her and her little girl are well, she is so very valuable in every point of view that I hope she will ever be stationary with you. I never knew any person so disinterested as to emoluments for herself and so careful to the interest of her employers.

I have little to say of myself having passed through the winter in a very sedentary quiet way and excepting chronic pains in a very tolerable state of health. I can only compare myself to an old snail lies dormant in the winter in the crook of an old knoll and in the spring when the glorious sun revives all nature glides forth from her retirement such has been my case having made such pleasant visits to distant friends and within the last six weeks, we have within this last few days been experiencing exceptional winter weather severe frosts and night falls of snow to the degree of some inches on the ground and vegetation considerably injured. My brother has also enjoyed his usual good health and has varied his scene by a trip to France to Sarum and town.

Betty and her children are just now all well she poor soul just had a most painful winter from a most violent scarlatic humans that fell in her arms and deprived her of helping herself in the hand for some weeks and had many fear she would not recover not do I think she will every be wholly free from the complaint it is vastly troublesome to her on any exertion and washing.

My brother had a letter from your mother not long since on business and expressed herself most highly gratified with your and Mr McVeagh’s invitation to Drewstone(sic), no doubt she has many inducements to accept it and wish she could do it without incurring so much expense as such a movement will occasion.

I had a letter today from Miss Samber giving a more promising account of her health, she has been a great invalid from Xmas day when she took a chill and has experienced the different Fevers of Typhus and Inflammatory[23].  Her letter gave me the melancholy death of Mrs Wm Brodie, Louisa Hussey that was, you cannot I think have forgotten her she has left a young family but her poor mother is the great object of my pity and I scarcely think she will sustain the loss. Miss Moore was fortunately with her. Do you remember young Harry Eyre[24] he has just lost his wife they were a very attached couple, your school fellow Caroline Eyre in a bad state of health, your school fellows the Miss Lyons’s have lately lost their father, his second wife you may recollect was my next door neighbour Miss Robbins she has 3 children, the eldest son runs away with the estate and I fear the younger ones are slenderly provided for. I can only add my best attend the trio and am ever yours

E White.

B)                      Historical Note 2

The Act of Union had been passed in 1800, and Ireland was now subject to the parliament at Westminster.  The failure of the union was not inevitable.  Indeed there might have been great advantages for Ireland in being linked with what was then the richest country in the world.  Irishmen no longer decided the destiny of Ireland.  Of the 658 members of the House of Commons, only 100 represented Irish constituencies.  Clearly the success or failure of the union would depend on the attitudes taken to Irish problems by the MPs from Britain who formed the great majority. For Irish problems existed in plenty.  The most serious of these problems was the question of the land.  The land of Ireland was simply not sufficient to feed all those who were trying to get a living off it.  Population was increasing rapidly.  This led to competition for land and drove up rents, thus reducing still further the people’s resources.  Things could have been better if farming methods had improved, but most farmers had no security of tenure and they had learnt by experience that, if they improved their holdings, the landlord was quite likely to put up the rent.

Although the land problem seems to have been the worst problem of early 19th Century Ireland, it is fair to say that it was not the problem which most preoccupied politicians until the great famine of 1845-8 made it impossible to ignore it.  In earlier years both British Ministers and Irish politicians were more concerned with other and more immediate problems.  Catholics and Presbyterians resented paying tithes to the established church.  Local government was controlled by small oligarchies in each borough.  There was no provision for relief of the destitute.  Many Irish industries were declining, under competition from large-scale industry in Britain.

The most prominent issue of all, in the early years of the union period, was the catholic demand for full emancipation.  Most of the penal laws had been repealed in the 1780s and 1790s. Catholics could now maintain schools, join the professions and vote at parliamentary elections.  They were still, however, debarred from all the more important offices in the state.  They could not sit in parliament, they could not be judges, or colonels in the army, or captains in the navy, or be ministers in the government, or hold any except the most junior offices in the civil service.  These restrictions naturally galled catholics, all the more as Pitt had virtually promised, when he carried the union between Britain and Ireland in 1800, that it would be followed by complete emancipation for the catholic body.  Opposition from King George III and from Pitt’s fellow ministers proved too strong and the plan was dropped.

In the first twenty years of the century the catholic agitation was carried on by a coterie of landlords, merchants and professional men.  They had no claim to speak for the mass of Irish catholics and they quarrelled continually amongst themselves.  So, although their doings took up plenty of space in the newspapers, it is not surprising that successive British governments found it unnecessary to take notice of them.

6.  April 1816 from Edith Shaw[25]

Salmoni           April 1816


to Mrs McVeagh
Nr Athboy

My dear Charlotte

You with enquiries or letters……………..Piece of the paper has been torn off

as I have nothing to com………………

of your being well and ………………..

you are persuaded I hope ……………..

are not neglectful, and (will ever) be interested in your happiness and that of our little cousin and his Papa – the subject of my letter now will not be particularly agreeable to you as I understand from Flora you have received numerous epistles on the same topic from the fountainhead and mine and mine can only be considered as third hand. I make this application to your kind heart, I hope you will use all your influence with Ferdinand to obtain some assistance for its object, however shall (feel) gratified by your generosity

……….the person for whom I

……….and I do so at the

……….ation Mrs Lumsden[26]. I

……….(le)tter from that lady stating

……….Emily and her young family

……….oldest cannot be quite

……….they are literally starving!

……….Aberdeen, and had dined at Mrs Lumsden’s. Mrs L strenuously recommended his taking his family out to America, and engaging either as a clerk in some mercantile concern, or in the cultivation of land. Mr McC[27] did not seem to like the plan, saying he is the first on the list of the Member of Parliament for the County for any situation that may be in his power to bestow, and would prefer a situation in Aberdeen or near home. Mrs Lumsden however suggests the improbability of anything being given to him which could indemnify the expense of moving so large a family into a town where everything is infinitely more expensive than in the remote part of the country where Mr McC now resides, and the little chance there is of his getting any place at all; but such is their present misery that some immediate relief is absolutely essential to their existence!

Mrs L gave Mr McC a letter of introduction to her brother in law Mr Innes who passed some years in America, requesting him to receive Mr McC and endeavour to persuade him to adopt this plan. Mr Innes was a Mr Farquharson of good family but being a younger brother was sent to Ireland and put into the linen business; at Mr Shaw’s he saw Miss McVeagh whom he married, and they settled in Dublin but finding business slack, they went to America and stayed there till recalled to inherit a fine fortune which they possess and have taken the name of Innes. Mrs Innes[28] knew Emily[29] as a child and was the most intimate friend of Ferdinand’s mother[30] and a very near relation of his father’s[31]; these circumstances joined to an excellent heart, will induce her and Mr Innes to afford Mr McC any assistance of information and introduction in their power, and if they can persuade him to go abroad he may yet do well should he consent to this plan, a little purse for the expenses of the voyage would be indispensably requisite, perhaps a hundred pounds, it would do much good. I have spoken to Flora[32] who with her usual generosity has promised me some aid, and I trust I shall not in vain apply to you. I will write to Mrs Henry McV[33] and hope to obtain something there, as to myself all I can do is to beg, for tho’ I would gladly add a mite it is really not in my power, the dreadfully distressed state of my unfortunate sister in law Mrs Blood demands every shilling we have to spare – I trust to your generosity and Ferdinand’s kind heart; any relief given to those eight suffering innocents will be real charity, place yourself for one moment in the situation of this poor mother and imagine your little Ferdinand crying for bread while you are yourself in want dear Charlotte! how very lamentable is poor Emily’s sad state, with eight children! For God sake prevail on Ferdinand to grant a trifle to their sad necessities it will bring a blessing on your child. Flora is and looks extremely well – Jane[34] I heard from today she is as well as she can be just now and perfectly happy – I got a letter ……

Paris tomorrow. Tom[35] sails…….

I am sorry to add poor John[36] …..

this evening in ill health – I ……

him on Friday, that I sent the….

expect him hourly, his complaint ….

Give my love to Ferdinand ……

Remember me to Mrs Boyson …..

of Combe Down enquired for  …..

is dead – Mrs Bonner asked …..

I would send her duty to you …..

is in Bath today, and is……

is staying with her. Adieu …..

pray send a favourable answer to my letter and

Believe me yours affectionately

Edith Shaw

7.  July 1816 from Flora McVeagh

Letter 1816 postmarked 18 July

To Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy, Meath, Ireland

from Flora McVeagh                                                                                      Hotel D’Irlande

                                                                                                                         Rue …  de Luxembourg,


                                                                                                                        July 13th

My dearest Charlotte

I have for some days been thinking of writing to you, the recollection of this being our dear little Ferdinand’s birthday has banished all my laziness and I feel most anxious to assure you he has my fervent wishes for every happiness when capable of enjoying it. I sincerely trust he may through life give you and my brother[37] every possible satisfaction and be an ornament to his family. I must now endeavour to inform you of my proceeding and I am sure you will rejoice to hear I am perfectly happy – Mrs Popkin and I have been together for three weeks which is sufficient time to form some little insight into a person’s character and I find her exactly what she appeared to me in London very good tempered and pleasant to live with, not requiring any form or becoming and most anxious to enjoy any pleasant amusement within our reach – We left London the 21st of June; reached Paris the 25th, the road from Calais is rather uninteresting until you reach Beauvais although you must feel struck with the endurance of the fields, not one inch of ground appears lost. The roads are magnificent the whole way without one turnpike, the posting good and we contrived to stop at the best inns where we were tolerably comfortable – from the buz of French which surrounds us everywhere I can imagine myself in France otherwise I should have had some difficulty at first to believe the first wish of my heart was actually accomplished – I have for so many years been desirous of visiting the continent and had so little prospect of ever being gratified. We are in very handsome apartments for which we pay 8 guineas a week, but I fear we must now move as the lease of the house shortly expires and there will be another proprietor – we have a delightful garden, the hotels are all very airy and we are neither inconvenienced with noise or dust. I cannot say much for the beauty of the streets they are narrow and dirty and as all the hotels are enclosed in courts you do not see any splendour the Place de Louis quatre is very fine, the Boulevards and Champs Elisee quite delightful drives, the gardens in the Tuilleries are beautiful and a charming place of rest – We drive to them and walk every evening – The Royal Family[38] drive about every day in a coach and eight attended by a troop of cavalry which has a splendid appearance – Paris is dull at this season although the best time for seeing the environs but as Mrs Popkin has many acquaintances and we are both pleased with the place we have agreed to spend the winter here and enjoy the gaiety deferring our excursion to Italy until next year. We were at a Ball at Sir Charles Stuart’s the English Ambassador last week where General Barnes was my Beau for the evening. He is a great person and being second in command I am sorry to say the troops will soon be ordered to Cambracy. We arrived too late for the fÃtes in honour of the Duchesse de Berne the only amusing one was a play, opera and ballet performed at the theatre in the Tuilleries Palace for which we were fortunate enough to procure tickets through the interest of the of the Comte Fecouncer? the dancing is beautiful beyond description – we are going to the opera on Monday and mean to take the round of the theatres likewise to see all that is to be seen at our leisure and we are not pushed for time – The Marquis de Villedenols family are our intimates they are charming people the Miss Villedenols very nice girls. We are much together, their brother Le Comte is very good natured but my heart is no danger although Mrs Popkin discovers he is paying me attention – you must ever expect me to mention anything under Monsieur le Comte or Marquis as everybody here is titled. The Villedenols own lots.

Mr Noun a brother of Mrs Wrigton’d spent a most delightful day at Versailles yesterday twelve miles from Paris. The Palace exceeds anything you can imagine. It may justly be called the finest in the world. It is worth coming to France purposely to see it, My eyes were quite dazzled with the splendour and I believe so influences all from 12 till 7 – We never rested walking about the gardens and palaces, I really once felt ready to faint with fatigue although I had the support Le Comte’s arm. Mrs Popkin was gallanted by a gentleman whose name I cannot recollect. He is about 30 and married to his aunt who is only 45 and threatens to plague him which delights me – we were all very weary returned to the inn at Versailles to drinks but my chief amusement was plaguing Mr Noun? the whole day who complains of being very solitary and miserable. I recommended him to marry. He is turned 40 and has no time to lose. I wish he would propose to one of the Miss Villedenols. He is a good deal with them – Everything reminds one of the unfortunate events occasioned by the Revolution[39]. They showed us the room at Versailles where poor Marie Antoinette escaped en chemise and we every day pass the  … in the Place de Louis ‘15’ where the unfortunate royal family were guillotined. It makes one shudder, at present everything promises a continuance of peace. At the theatre at the Tuilleries we had an excellent friend of all the royal personages. The Duchess des Berne is very pleasing but plain. Mrs Popkin has been to court but I do not intend to be presented until the mourning for the Queen of Portugal is over. We had a small party of selects the other evening amongst the number Sir Charles and Lady Morgan who was Miss Primrose She pleased me extremely and I think is far from plain. She spoke a good deal of my brothers[40] and said she had often heard of me. When Mrs Popkin introduced me she immediately enquired if my name was not Flora. Sir Charles was in ecstasy with some music I played he seemed to enjoy it thoroughly and even put on his spectacles for the occasion – Mrs P and I divide all expenses but as the living to me is more expensive and we keep horses for her carriage I have sometimes doubts about how I shall be able to afford it – dress is the only thing cheaper here and is my support. I bought crêpe the other day, a French yard which is five English quarters for 3/ 4d . Plain silk stockings for 6s/8d embroidered for 9/-, pocket handkerchiefs for less than 4/- a piece. Satins, silks and shoes in proportion. Therefore I calculate with Payne’s assistance in Mantua making I may dress for half I spent in England – Hats are worn very high and nothing is as fashionable as a square shawl India or imitation, silk shoes are not worn at all – the gowns are worn very full and everywhere the petticoats very long. Sashes very much flounced or muslin doubled over to run a stick through. No mixture of colours, no such thing as a pelisse to be seen. Artificial flowers are more worn than feathers and very cheap and only think of getting beautiful long white gloves for 2s/7d a pair 1s/4d for short ones- There is no particular fashion in the evening dresses blond[41] hanging down and a little pleating of net above and about the neck is the general way. There is much simplicity in the French style of dress. The trimmings at the bottom of the gowns are very handsome but I dare say you will hear all about the fashions from Mrs Tandy who will receive them from Lady Chapman. Pray tell me how Ferdinand’s law suit goes on and remember me to Mrs Tandy and Boyson. When my money is remitted I wish Ferdinand would send it to George Baynes 36, Crutched Friars. The bills be payable to his order that they may not be posted after me to sign. I think your tenants are improving and beg to hear all about Drewstown and its improvements. I wish you would send this letter to Mary with my kind love. The same to both my brothers and pray write soon and cannot you hurry to pay the postage of your own letter. I am in daily expectation of the Shaws who were to leave London the 6th. Where are the Brooke’s and what are their plans? God bless you my dearest Charlotte. In the midst of my enjoyments be assured you are often thought of with affection and I feel sincere regret at the distance which separates us. I trust should we not meet for several years that you will retain the same friendship and kindness you have ever carried for me and believe me your most truly attached friend and sister Flora McVeagh.

My beautiful friend Miss Keating whom you have heard me mention was married the 1st July to a Colonel Willy. She is now in Switzerland but returns to Paris in the winter.

C)   Historical Note 3

The French Revolution of 1789 was one of the most important events of world history.  The revolutionaries overthrew the monarchy and the old system.  Louis XIV had announced ‘L’état, c’est moi’ but by the reign of Louis XVI France was no longer the powerful state she had been one hundred years before.  Discontent was widespread, especially among the peasantry (from whom the nobility extracted feudal taxes of various kinds) and among the wealthy middle class, or bourgeoisie, who had little political influence.

At Versailles the King had collected an aristocracy who had left their estates.  In 1788 a bad harvest and food shortages made matters worse and Louis was compelled to summon the States General in May 1789. This comprised representatives of the church, the nobility and the commons, or middle class, voting separately by estates.  When in 1789 the Third Estate, or commons, declared themselves the National Assembly and invited the First and Second Estates to join them, the Revolution had really begun.  The Revolution came to be dominated by the Jacobins, and this led to the establishment of the Republic in 1792 and the execution of the King and Queen in 1793.

Louis XVIII (1755-1824), younger brother of Louis XVI, was king of France from 1795.  Married in 1771 to Princess Louise of Savoy, he was active in politics in the years leading up to the revolution (1789).  He fled to Belgium in 1791 and proclaimed himself Regent for Louis XVII in 1793 and king in 1795.  The victories of the republic and Napoleon’s enmity compelled him frequently to change his place of abode, until in 1807 he found a refuge in England.  On the fall of Napoleon (April 1814) he landed at Calais and then began the ascendancy of the ‘Legitimist’ party.  The Napoleonic constitution was set aside and a new constitution granted with two chambers on the British model.

The nobles and priests moved him to severe treatment on Imperialists, Republicans and Protestants.  This opened the way for Napoleon’s return from Elba (the Hundred Days in 1815), when the royal family fled from Paris and remained at Ghent till after Waterloo.  From Cambrai Louis issued a proclamation in which he acknowledged former errors and promised an amnesty and moderation to all but traitors and returned to Paris ‘in the baggage of the Allies’.  He was, however, powerless to prevent a backlash, the so-called ‘White Terror’, when the Royalist fanatics slew hundreds of adherents of the Revolution and Protestants.

8.  September 1816 from Emma

Letter franked Bath 1816 5th September

to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy, Meath, Ireland

from Emma                                                                             Green Park Buildings

                                                                                                September 1st

my new direction Sketty, Swansea

My dearest Charlotte

Before I leave Bath I must just write you a few lines to inform you of the day of our departure and at the same time to offer you and Mr McVeagh my warm congratulations on the success of your law suit. I can enter into all your feelings on this head for we have so often suffered in the courts of law and from the ….. of lawyers that I cannot sufficiently rejoice with you upon your fortunate escape from them. Villany in Guardians is by no means uncommon and it is a rare thing to find one that is not tempted to injure those that they have in their power[42]. I beg you will tell Mr McVeagh how sincerely I rejoice with him and could I be with you at the time of your merry ball my heels would join in the festivities, tho’ I have long given up kicking and jumping, yet in your services I think I would once more delay the goose –

I have not seen the account in the papers – we leave Bath on Tuesday evening and I must say that the least I expect is a drownding(sic) I feel getting very cowardly as the time draws nigh and the weather having changed from calm to storm and wind seems rather to increase than diminish the fears I have – I will write to you a long account of our new abode and will endeavour to do it justice though I know I shall fail in that point. I shall hope some day to greet you there. I am surprised at your Aunt Mary’s returning from France after crossing the water. I should have had no fears about distance but I make no doubt she likes Bath and its many enjoyments too much to forego them. I am no friend to it myself though I cannot help saying that it certainly does possess almost everything that can render it delightful. I hope we shall visit it in the course of next year or I shall be a little disappointed. We have a number of charming friends here now among their number ranks foremost Dr Wilkinson. You never said that you were surprised at my large sheet I forgot to inclose the piece of lace. I will send it to you when I am in Wales. I mean to bathe and lay in a stock of good sound health.

My father is now getting better very fast I am happy to say and he can ride upon his pony, walking he is not yet able to accomplish, his legs swell dreadfully but I hope in time he will lose that.

I hope you will often think of us and you can always imagine that after all that we have suffered how doubly we are enjoying the many beauties of this sweet place and the memory of a happy charming home. My sisters send kind love to you and I hope you will kiss little Frederic(sic) for me. I shall not be able to send you any Bath news again but I hope my letters will not want that to be welcome to you. Adieu my dear Charlotte believe me yours with every affectionate wish. Emma.

My brother[43] is still without a profession but his many amiable qualities and the creations he has always made for his family and his love of farming and every domestic and country engagement render him far from an idle gentleman a thing you so much dislike and which is often the source of much mischief. I am glad your love is destined for the Bar it is certainly the finest field in the world for advancement and brings forth talents if there are any, it besides renders him equal to superintend his own affairs without the assistance of law that rack so many split upon. Adieu

9.  January 1818 from Flora McVeagh

Letter postmarked 22 Jan 1818                                                                            46 Southampton Row

to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy, Ireland                                                              Russell Square
                                                                                                                                                  Jany 22nd
 I am beginning to wonder at your silence my dearest Charlotte, uneasy I am not, having heard from others that you are well, but still I should be better satisfied to receive the assurance from yourself – I hope you received a letter I sent you from Mr Assheton Smith’s in December, we spent a fortnight there very agreeably, the  Miss Smiths are good natured and Miss Elizabeth particularly agreeable – On our way back to (Banscot) we spent a couple of days with the Vilett’s where I met Miss Johnson[44], who informed me you were soon coming to England and that you wished her sister to return with you to Ireland – I recollect in your last, hints about projects, and to conclude you are like me, reluctant to communicate plans without having the certainty, or rather probability of putting them into execution – I have been sometime in London, the Pages are extremely kind and never suffer me to feel alone, but you may imagine I feel some difference in the contrast of Parisian life, and one in lodgings in Southampton Row! – Mrs Popkin has not been blessed with the good fortune she expected as she and her companion were scarcely settled together, when Miss Jones was called back to England by the death of a brother, and a week ago I read in the papers the demise of her lovely sister Mrs Cumberbatch so I imagine Mrs Popkin will spend the whole winter alone, an annoyance fully as great to her, as all my little disappointments – I saw Mrs Paulette the other morning, still in weeds, looking very dismal, talking of lost happenings and gloomy anticipations – and  I have been spending a week with Mr & Mrs George Wynch[45] at Hampton Wick, about 14 miles from town – one week perfectly satisfied me, as I never was in greater horror occasioned by four large French cats crawling about the whole house all day – Every room was to be open to receive them, no door save my bedroom to be closed – There were besides 2 large poynters and a terrier admitted as parlour boarders – Poor Mr Wynch is reduced to crutches having quite lost the use of his limbs he looks nearer eighty than sixty – They lease a very pretty cottage, leave it in the spring for Dorsetshire, where they will reside with Henry[46] who has taken orders and got a curacy – John[47] is getting on well in India. I hope your brother[48] does the same – Mrs Wynch has desired me to inform both my brothers that there is 10£ 18/ 6d coming to each of Col J Wynch’s [49] money since paid – I have just rec’d my share – shall I have it paid to me as part of my next remittance and Ferdinand can settle with Henry about it? My red carriage is looking very shabby, and I am buying a new one on which I wish to have my arms, so pray make a very good impression with Ferdinand’s seal and do not lose one day in writing to me – Mrs Shaw wants me to leave town on the 9th of February which day Jane arrives, but I cannot set off without having my carriage finished and at the very least it will take a week to have the arms put on – I shall be very glad to see Jane again as likewise the rest of my Widcome friends, but I so cordially detest the idea of being in Bath – I hope you convey my love to Henry and Mary in your letters – I would write if I thought they could court it – I am glad you have had Mrs Brooke and your sisters with you this winter pray offer my best regards to them – Adieu my dearest Charlotte with love to Ferdinand and best wishes to the children, believe me invariably your affectionate friend and sister Flora McVeagh
write immediately and do not at your peril forget the seal.

10.     April 1819 from E White

Letter postmarked 29 April 1819 from Aylesbury 42

to Mrs McVeagh, 39 Rivers Street, Bath

from E White                                                                                                Hardwyke[50] April 27 1819

My dear Mrs McVeagh

Indeed it was an unexpected pleasure the receiving a few lines from you, for I had begun to think you had given up writing to such distant friends under the very mistaken idea that generally prevails, that because you cannot amuse your correspondent with the local news around you, that there can be no subject for writing, overlooking the most important object for epistularity writing, that of communicating the passing secrets of the writer, little else that can be truly interesting to the receiver of letters and in proportion to the distance it is more ardently read.

It must be a great pleasure to you to visit Bath again, and recall the many scenes you have enjoyed in it. I wish your children had been with you and fully supposed they would have been fellow travellers with you, it must give you a divided heart having them left in Ireland, pray tell me about Mrs Boyson, as in a former letter from Harriet, she was got feverish and fallen into the inures of love, a circumstance I should not have suspected, having experienced its crosses and two children to maintain.

You write most flatteringly, saying you recall with pleasure the time you spent at Hardwyke cannot it be managed for you to come again, I shall not like your returning to Ireland without seeing you, I wish to have ocular demonstration whether you are taller, shorter, fatter or thinner than when I saw you last, I have a thousand questions to ask and to have answered that would make but a poor simple figure on paper. Therefore Mr McVeagh must be prevailed on to let you come. If he be still in London, write to him and tell him to call on my brother at his lodgings, 24 South Moulton Street, Oxford Street and the very sure way of finding him would be to catch him at his breakfast at about nine, he is in town this week and I make no doubt will be also there next, beyond that I cannot answer as I am expecting visitors to come to us, among the number Mr & Mrs Andrews from Swathling, the Miss Wayeshures and the Sandovers whom you met here…. before the marriage of Mary Sandover takes place at midsummer thus circumstanced I am sorry to say can only give accommodation to you and Mr McVeagh for whenever your mother and sisters come they must make a long (journey) and I wish I could ask the pleasure of their company now but the house will not stretch to make beds sufficient. It gives me much real pleasure that your dear mother finds Mrs General Brooke such an agreeable relative, Harriet writes last an indifferent account of your Aunt Mary, remember me most kindly to her as also but respects to the General and Mrs Brooke[51], Accept yourself and distribute to your mother and sisters the affectionate love of your very sincere friend, Well wishes

E White.

11.     May 1819 from J Hallett

Postmarked 24th May 1819     Lyme 146

To Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Near Athboy, Ireland

From J Hallett (Jane Maria we think)

                                                                                    Axmouth Vicarage

                                                                                    May 19th 1819

My dearest Charlotte

I can scarcely say whether I feel most gratified by your very liberal consideration of our darling child, or grieved at the length of time which has elapsed since your kind letter was written as both claim my grateful and speedy acknowledgement, and I much fear the delay in dispatch rendering me so apparently indifferent may have led you to deem me unworthy of your continued regard; I only wish it were in my power to prove mine for you by deed as well as word! your leaving England without my having the satisfaction I once anticipated of meeting you in Bath has really distressed me and had I not been aware that your visit there was too interesting and short that to admit of innovation I certainly should have expressed my wish of seeing you here as our comforts are daily increasing and our cordial welcome united with every endeavour to please might have compensated you for the privation of luxury: Richard begs I will not omit his thanks for the beautiful dress you sent his pet and to tell you it arrived very apropos on Tuesday last, just as we were going to take him out of his own Parish for the first time, to wait upon his Godfather, it has been universally admired and so I added must have been the Donor had she graced the party: I was delighted to hear of your looking so well and trust the trip may have proved so beneficial to your health and spirits as to tempt you soon across the water again. I conclude you will not very long defer placing your sweet boy in school and that event may accelerate our meeting. I was quite charmed by the descriptions Mrs Shaw gave me of both your little cherubs: she was so much pleased with our baby who is all life and spirits that she has tempted my dear father to promise him a visit prior to their departure for Scotland which will be a great treat to me as his late numerous engagements and my domestic or rather maternal duties have kept us apart much longer than either distance or inclinations can warrant. We are expecting dear Flora here in June and also hope to see Mr & Mrs Good who are just arrived from Denmark with the intention of placing their only son whom you may remember at a good school far from his home and within reach of anxious friends, a plan I think the most likely to be conducive to his future happiness. I am deeply interested by early friendship for all that family. The loss of my first child has rendered me so timid that I almost wonder at Mary’s courage in leaving her baby, pray remember me kindly to her and your Caro Sposos I shall continue a complete recluse two months longer when I intend to wean William who has just cut his second tooth – our neighbourhood is always gay in the autumn but very dull in the winter and spring. I am anxious not to lose another post in sending this which I direct to Drewstown where I should prefer it’s awaiting your arrival to being exposed to still greater delay in following you from Chester.

Believe me dearest Charlotte always your affectionate

J M Hallet

12.    November 1820 from Emma

Letter postmarked Swansea 6th November 1820

to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy, Ireland

from Emma J (Johnson)                                                          Sketty Hall

                                                                                                November 1st

My dear Charlotte, when your letter was put into my hand, every feeling but that of pleasure vanished, that you were well, as well as your children, and though unknown to me Mr McVeagh, afforded me almost as much satisfaction as your long silence had caused me uneasiness. I really at first imagined your letter might be from the shades and contain a warning to me you may gauge then how aghast I was to find in it a notice of your being in Bath this winter where I think it is more than probably that we may meet. Sketty is now advertised to be let for ten years, Papa and Mama have determined to show “we innocents” the world as it now stands, tho God knows, I have seen and known too much of the worst part of it; however we are to move from here, as soon as it is taken off our hands, it is a bad time for letting a place of this sort, but I rather suppose Mama will prefer its remaining empty, to spending another winter here, every Autumn she has such severe seizures at her chest, that she is obliged to remain confined at home till March or April which is rather too much of a good thing – I anticipate much pleasure in the idea of seeing you once more and of giving ourselves a new impression of each other, I trust you will let me know when you are on the way that I may know of your arrival in Bath in order that I may have a stimulus to move from this wintry spot which I am loathe to leave – Our friends the Wilkinsons, whom perhaps you may remember, are here, and have been in Swansea ever since the summer, we have seen a great deal of them, he is concerned in lighting this famed town with gas – We often talk over Bath news and Bath pleasures with them – I wish I could enlighten your mind with regards to the circumstances you mention I alluded to in a former letter. Nothing I assure you is likely to happen to me to make a change of circumstances but I merely fancied that you would, from not ever seeing me being so far removed so lose all interest in your humble servant which would have much discomforted me indeed Charlotte, I have lived here three years, and I believe my sisters will say the same thing without sighing for a soul, and shall come to Bath free from any impression perhaps there I may not escape as wiser heads and colder hearts have been caught napping than mine true it is that we were gay merry girls when you knew us but after that period we were rather shut out from the world and in that period we grew wary , circumspect and not to be deceived, I believe by outward appearances – what says “crazy Jane”[52] when men flatter and think them false. I found them so”. When you mention your life resembling that of a Harriet[53], it rather increases my wish to be your neighbour to deter me from it were it in my power to do anything half as [  ] to myself as that would be, I am sure we should be most satisfied people, let me at least only mention to answer for myself.

It is so long since we heard anything of Harriet that your mentioning your mother’s departure rather surprised me, where is she then? I should be sorry were she not in Bath when we go there, it would not be Bath without her to us at least – As to our poor Queen[54], to use a common saying “she is more sinned against than sinning” in the opinion of my family and in mine; judging of her actions, from my own feelings, I should say her facing this country was a strong and proof of a conscience clear of all guilt, and I am fully convinced of it from the circumstances of the trial, it delights me to see Prince Leopold’s name as one of the first to call after Dennison’s able summing up of the case, which I must say, I would not relish reading throughout the evidence I would not look at but I saw enough in the sheet, I have mentioned to shock me, for the queen, for myself, and her accusers –I have always left her cause in the hands of “the mighty to save”, and I hope to see her yet righted – your Aunt Mary[55] seems to move about as the wind blows, she has left the General’s roof there, why does she not marry and have her own establishment, it is so odd that she should never have married – My father and Cuthbert have been in the north these last six weeks the latter is just come home my father will join us next week – they have been shooting also, but have never reached Scotland. When you talk of your boy not being yet eight, I should not have said he was six, so unheeded has time passed but on looking back I am soon convinced of my being in the wrong – In evil hour for you I sat down to my desk for I have filled my paper with various kinds of nonsense, and I feel so much in scribbling mood, that I think it is not unlikely I may cover the whole sheet, but all you can do is to send me one in return, and however egotistical you may think it is never considered too much so by me, you are so far removed that it is the only way in which I can bring you to my view, by knowing your employ, events, your occurrences and your thoughts if it were possible – let me soon hear from you again dearest Charlotte, memories too are ever waxing I shall dispatch you another of my terrible illegible scrawls – my sisters and Mama desire their best love to you, Cuthbert also begs to  you his remembrances I think he is the only one you would be likely to pass without recognising him – Rosa is hasting up into the woman and will soon cause me to hide my diminished load in a sober bed and make me sound my retreat from the varieties as well as the pleasures of the gay world – I will then strain a point and visit you in your solitude if you will take a grey headed spinster into your household who will promise to be very manageable. I have spent a very lively summer, Jane and myself visited some equable Berkshire friends the Baughams who were at that time living at a sweet place in the Vale of Bath while we were with them we made a charming party to Ragland (sic), Tintern and Pearcefield the beauties of which places we find has not done justice to, I saw the spot that proved fatal to those helpless persons who were drowned under Chepstow Bridge – I shuddered when I received the short distance they were from the land and determined in my own mind to refrain from all water parties, however tempting. We had lovely weather for our excursion. I rode all the way there and back again, there were some of our party who preferred lumping it to going in Mr V’s Borouche and I was glad to join them. What do you think of my  persevering 60 miles? I suffered no fatigue or other inconvenience. Will you ever be able to wade through this tremendously covered sheet or will you soon forgive me if ever for sending it to you – we have some thoughts of visiting the continent, I wish I could spend the time in Erins Isle for I have the greatest possible dislike to taking such a journey.

Adieu my dearest friend, believe me, constantly and affectionately yours

Emma J

Drink my health on the 21st it is my jour de naissance. I dare not tell you how old I am – somewhere about three times nine.

13.     February 1821 from Flora Deacon

Letter (frank mark unclear)? 1821

seal torn off

to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy, Ireland

                                                                                                11 Park Place

                                                                                                St James’s Street

                                                                                                February 8th

My dearest Charlotte

From day to day I postpone writing – if my silence continues much longer I shall almost feel ashamed to terminate it, therefore sans faute by today’s post a letter shall be sent to you, thanking you sincerely for your last. It would be difficult to convey to your mind half the state of confusion we are in with so many things to get and so many arrangements to make but I find it both an easy and pleasant task to assure you I am perfectly happy a more delightful character than Mr Deacon’s cannot exist, nor a more affectionate indulgent husband and as we can have every comfort in life I might and do feel that I have every reason to be grateful to providence for the fate allotted to me. It would indeed afford me much pleasure to make you and Mr J Deacon acquainted. We are in very fashionable situation and pay high rent but have no super abundance of bedrooms in as much as two of the men servants are obliged to sleep out of the house – All Mr Deacon’s family are very kind to me and I have already had lots of cards left at my door but my craze for dissipation has long since subsided and I anticipate much more happiness from domestic life, which, I am certain of enjoying. Mr R Hallett[56] is in town. He dined here yesterday and I was heartily wishing Jane (could have) accompanied him – he is come up with the hopes of obtaining a living in Hertfordshire. You have doubtless heard, dear Charlotte that my marriage took place on the 23rd when we set off for Windsor where we spent a week – your little Flora may now be called Miss McVeagh without giving me any pangs – I cannot express the delight I feel in being settled, in having objects to interest me and being of essential importance to one person. If everybody could be equally fortunate I would have no hesitation in recommending the married state to all single women however advantageously they might be situated, but it is a lottery I confess. When Ferdinand remits my money in future let it be to Sir J Perring & Co, Bankers, Cornhill, London instead of Mr Barnes – I hear that Henry and Mary are at Bath – The Watts were very kind to me both took much interest in my affairs and were quite pleased with Mr James Deacon. To my infinite amazement my aunt presented me with a very handsome set of gold ornaments. Payne is entreating me to mark the linen and look over an inventory which I have neglected doing, so adieu dearest Charlotte with best love to my brother believe me

very affectionately yours

Flora Deacon

miss the dear children

14.     February 1821 from Jane Hallett

Postmarked 9 Feb 1821

to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy, Meath, Ireland                                            

from Jane Hallett


                                                                                                Feby 9th 1821

To anyone less kindly disposed towards me my dearest Charlotte than yourself, I should find it difficult to account sufficiently for my apparent … of your truly affectionate letter, but you will believe my assurance that it was most cordially welcomed and that my delaying it s acknowledgement proceed entirely from my anxiety to procure all the interesting information you so naturally desired relative to our dear Flora’s marriage the exact period for which could not be fixed until within a very few days of its solemnization, after which Mrs Shaw’s having immediately addressed you, induced me to defer my epistle until I could give you further intelligence on the subject and also mention other friends in Bath to whom we are both attached. We arrived here on the 30th January and were gratified by meeting Henry and Mary[57] looking extremely well, as also my dear Father and his kind hearted wife she is a great favourite with your little Godson[58], whom I long to introduce to you; he is naturally timid, but with those he likes is exceedingly sociable and has already had a flirtation with little Fanny who has promised him another visit, she is a very find good tempered child, and appears uncommonly well managed; my satisfaction would be complete if your lovely Flora[59] could join their party, with Ferdinand as acting Manager of the trio; I hope I am not too sanguine in imagining Mrs Chapman’s expected accouchement may induce you to leave home early enough for me to anticipate the happiness of seeing you here prior to our departure on the 3 March; at all events we must contrive to meet ere you leave England, and I am sure Richard[60] would share my delights in welcoming you to our snug abode at any time you might have it in your power to gratify us with your company; it seems quite an age since I saw you and Ferdinand, to whom pray offer my best remembrances; my husband often wishes to become better acquainted with you both: he is gone to London to see some old friends and on his return here is engaged to spend his mornings very agreeably in singing with Mary[61] who will then complete her conquest; for he already shares my p…(piece of the letter here is missing) in her favour and with Henry chats away famously about Guns, Dogs etc –  they were at the Rooms last night where they found Mrs and Miss Watts and I daresay we shall meet them at a party the latter have announced for next Monday. I wish I could see you there dearest Charlotte – Your Aunt Mary talks with pleasure of your visiting England, she appears particularly animated in discussing Flora’s marriage[62], which was so long considered a grand secret, though known I am told all over Bath: you would enjoy hearing Mrs Shaw’s account of all the goings doings they had here and of the lively part Miss Jackson performed on the occasion. Flora wrote to Mrs S on the third day after her marriage from Windsor, and said though an early day she might pronounce herself fortunate and wish her three bridesmaids might be equally so, it appears quite a dream to us that she is actually married and though it may seem strange it was a great comfort to me, that I could not be present at what most truly delighted me to hear of but ever since my own marriage I have thought a wedding as most serious and somewhat melancholy affair especially where the feelings are deeply interested. I understand Flora was remarkably composed most fervently do I pray that she may enjoy the happiness of which she has every prospect. Mr Deacon is universally allowed to be a very genteel, good looking man with pleasing manners and in his conversation embracing a thorough knowledge of the world, his fortune is ample and his attachment to his family which is highly respectable renders him particularly so: he is very fond of children and of domestic life and I have no doubt will make his wife equally so in due time for she only wants a sensible good husband to make her all that her friends could wish – Richard writes me that he was not so fortunate as to  find Mrs Deacon at home but depends on having an opportunity of congratulating her in person before he leaves town , he is on a visit at Lady Sullivan’s with whose son he is very intimate and they have a house in Upper Montague Street which I think is not far from Flora’s present residence. She received many handsome offerings from Mr Deacon in valuable trinkets and from his brother in law Mr Colquhoun various articles of rich plate. Mrs Walter too gave her some beautiful ornaments – in short she continues one of Dame Fortune’s Favourites. I have had so many interruptions while scribbling this that I scarcely know whether you will be able to make any sense of my (scholomando) pardon its defects my dearest Charlotte, and with our united good wishes for you and yours believe me however hurried most unchangeable your affectionate JMH

Lucy is flattered by your remembrance and begs me to thank you for it.

D)   Historical Note 4

In 1820, the government lost sympathy over the ‘Queen’s Affair’. The Prince Regent (who became George IV) had married Mrs Fitzherbert secretly, then he committed bigamy by marrying the Princess Caroline of Brunswick.  The Prince had tried to divorce her by making charges against her moral conduct, but this led to an official enquiry into the conduct of both himself and Queen Caroline – which did neither of them any good.  In 1820, on the death of his father, George III, the new King determined to prevent Caroline becoming Queen, and Lord Liverpool (Prime Minister) was persuaded to introduce a Bill of Pains and Penalties against her in the House of Lords, but the majority was so narrow that he dared not put it before the Commons.  At the coronation, supported by a large and sympathetic crowd, Caroline attempted to gain entry to the Abbey, but failed.  She died a month later.

This affair did harm to the Royal Family and to Liverpool’s reputation.  William Cobbett had become an adviser of Queen Caroline.

15.    September 1821 from Harriet Brooke

to Mrs McVeagh
Athboy                                                                                                                                    Hardwyke
Ireland                                                                                                                                  Sep 15 1821                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

My dearest Charlotte

I fully intended to have answered your letter last week but owing to some unpleasant accounts from Weymouth we were detained in Salisbury much later than we intended – You will I am sure be much grieved to hear our darling Mary[63] has been suffering much from the effects of a severe bilious attack and till we felt assured that her illness was merely temporary my mother could not think of commencing our journey, on Sunday we received the desired information from the Medical Man attending her that her complaint was transient and she was now quickly recovering I fear that the change from home to school if not the chief cause greatly contributed to affect her health and most sincerely do I hope that it is the last time for some years at least that she will quit us as I am convinced she is too delicate to encounter the hardships of school. As soon as we are relieved from our suspense last Tuesday was named for our departure and we were so fortunate as to reach Hardwyke the same day accompanied by Caroline Everitt and were received with the purest affection and the greatest kindness by dear Miss White. Mr White is at present absent so you may easily form an idea of our party the weather has been deplorable since our arrival and I fear the harvest has suffered most undeniably.

I wish you could redress the quartette discussing these stories round the fire for it has been very cold and settling the affairs of the nation but at the conclusion of every wise obscuration the burden of the song was on, that Charlotte were here in this wish we all write most fervently. Miss White speaks of you with much delight and to expatiate on your virtues is a never pasting theme. I conclude long ere this you are peaceably settle in Drewstown and expect you will write me soon a long circumstantial account of all your proceedings, what changes have taken place, if you have any chance of Kitty Bowles for the winter; How the Tisdalls are and where they are; and more particularly everything relative to yourself and dear little Flora the most trifling incident in which you are concerned becomes interesting to me; I much wish to hear how Ferdinand likes Miss Hays as you know he has always been a favourite of mine. My aunt Brooke[64] wrote me word that they had called on him but unluckily he was out walking but they were determined to see him previous to their quitting Bath which they did last Wednesday so that it was provoking enough owing to a mistake of Bandalls they passed through Salisbury the very day after we left it. Do you correspond with sister Elizabeth I have not heard from her lately but understand I may expect one by Mr White (who is to come home on Thursday) as my uncle took it to Bath expecting to meet me there. Mrs Wyndham is at Hyde and I hope soon to hear from her she is gone for perfect … and bathing – Miss Samber at Weymouth I heard from her this morning she is better and says Mary is well but looking thin she will be an acquisition to the poor child as she frequently invites her. She desired me to give her love to you and let you know she was very anxious to hear from you. Do pray gratify all your correspondents ever remembering to place me at the head of your list and recollect that I am now living quite as secluded as yourself and have even less intelligence to communicate so no excuses. I wrote to Jane Johnson[65] yesterday and said everything civil I could think of for you. I hope should Louisa visit Dublin you will be able to see her as she would divert you exceedingly they talk of spending the winter in Bath. My mother, Miss White and Caroline write in love to you and your little precious Flora. With your sincerely attached sister Harriet Brooke.

16.     September 1821 from E Walsh

Letter franked Bath 17th September 1821

from ?E Walsh

to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Nr Athboy, Ireland

                                                                                                Bath, September 16th

My dearest sister’s most fond affectionate letter reached me last Monday and I would have answered it immediately but that I was sure you would excuse the delaying it a few days when I could I hoped be able to tell you I had seen your son I had walked to Grosvenor Place the week before last with your uncle and Mrs Brooke but the boys were out and we were therefore disappointed as twice afterwards set out and were stopped by the rain and we have had so much wet weather that they were obliged to leave Bath without seeing him. But on Friday last I armed myself with an umbrella and a little plum cake and all alone I made my way to the school and had the pleasure of finding Ferdinand at home. The dear boy threw his arms around my neck and burst into tears and then told me he was very glad to see me. After a little while he got quite gay and I can assure you he is looking the picture of health and happiness. He said he was quite reconciled to the school and that he was getting on so well that he should soon be at the head of his class and Miss Hay and all the boys were very kind to him. However, when I was coming away he looked a little grave and said he wished I would ask you when his Papa would come over for him as he promised him he should spend his Christmas holydays in Ireland. He also said he got but one letter from you since you parted and he hoped you would soon write again. And so do I dear sister for I too shall long to hear from you again and as I trust I shall always be able to tell you something about your darling may I not hope that you will often write to me. I know so well how idle living in the country makes one feel about writing thinking that one has no event to relate that I am doubly anxious to secure hearing from you and therefore shall be quite content if you tell me what you and Flora have been about. Kitty Bowles too I fancy I am acquainted with tells me how she liked the little filigree candlesticks. I was writing to you while the people are all at church for I was so overcome with the heat last Sunday that that I was obliged to come out in the middle of the service and have therefore determined to go in the afternoon while the warm weather lasts. Your uncle and Mrs Brooke[66] set out for Chichester on Wednesday and hoped to meet your mother and sister at Salisbury. I have not heard from Harriet for some time but am in dayly(sic) expectation of getting a letter from her from Hardwicke. Whenever I saw the General he was in a fuss either coming from or going to an auction. I think he will be quite at a loss for some employment when he returns and is quietly settled in Alford that I cannot say how I long for November when I may hope to see your dear mother and sister once more I feel sadly lonely and my spirits are so depressed that when I got your letter I absolutely sobbed over it till I could not see to read it. Your mother taught me to esteem you ere I saw you and when I became so intimate with you need I say that I loved you and I trust I shall ever retain a place in your affection. My dear brother[67] is still unmarried the lady putting it off from day to day why I cannot imagine. I have many fears for his happiness but I hope they may prove groundless. To see him wretched would be a misery I could not bear. If I continue writing in this gloomy strain I fear that not even the hopes of hearing of your son will tempt you to correspond with me but if now and then only I thus permit some of my dreary feelings to escape I am sure you will forgive me and still let me write on as it is some relief to my mind to do so. But to change the subject I am sorry you could not see the king at Panescourt. I think you were very right not to venture to Dun Leary[68] the accounts in the papers of the crowd there was truly terrific and running such a risk would be foregoing law for a sight of His Majesty. Almost everyone here is now out of mourning and I think the Queen is nearly forgotten[69]. We too have been delayed with rain since September commenced we have had but 2 fine days and the farmers say that the harvest is in a most deplorable condition[70]. For my part I think they are always grumbling for I recollect last summer when I was in the country hearing the rich ones complain that it was not worth their while to carry their corn to market they go so little for it. I believe I ought to apologise for sending you such a blotted sheet of paper but Willy has twice knocked the pen out of may hand and I should not have time to write it all over again today. Ferdinand desired me to tell you to give Flora a dozen kisses for him and I and my little pet a dozen more. Tell her I hope she will not forget me and that I flatter myself she will sometimes talk of me to you. And now I believe I must say farewell. When November comes I trust I shall be able to make my letters much more interesting but even before that time arrives I shall feel sadly disappointed if I do not often hear from you. And let me again assure you that I require not news yourself and Flora are to send me the most interesting subjects you can write about. God bless you my dearest sister ever believe me your sincerely attached friend E Walsh.

Tell me when you hear anything of Mrs Deacon[71] how she is getting on.

17.     October 1821 from Emma

Letter postmarked Swansea October 1821

from Emma

to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy, Ireland                                                         October 4th

My dear Charlotte, you are I find from a letter to Jane from Harriett, got back to Drewstown, therefore I shall not suffer my pen though a dull one to remain any longer idle, your travelling address I was ignorant of or I should have waylaid you – My sister Louisa leaves Sketty next Monday for Warwickshire from whence at the end of three weeks then journeys on to Dublin, the only case of a little envy I feel with regard to her visit there is the possible chance she may have of seeing you. It is rather an unkind stroke of fate that I should be the only person deprived of the pleasure of seeing you, though I would give at least half I possess to enjoy a little of your society, I must hope that my meeting with you is only still a short time longer delayed – Louisa and her friends will be with the Kinsey in Harcourt Street and will be there till April, Perhaps before they return we may have moved our headquarters to some more animated part of the world though not more beautiful, I think we shall pay Bath or Clifton a passing visit, and I fear it is not likely we shall see you there as a journey from Bath is not at all times an easy thing to undertake – I have been from home these last three weeks and I find that change of air benefits me as much, and I have been so uncomfortable since I returned to this wild and chasing air that I shall be not a little glad to get away  from the sea – On reading over your last letter I find you mention yourself that August would see you at Drewstown; I shall hope to hear  that both yourself and Mr McVeagh have been expressing loyalty to the Sovereign, it must have been most gratifying to him to have been so warmly received in a country so generally looked upon as cruelly in … by this, but it only serves to convince me that the Irish are a warm hearted amiable people and I admire them for their loyalty, though I cannot like them better than I did before; I have so many charming Irish friends that I love the nation for their sake extremely. A young friend of mine is lately married to a Mr Stewart whose brother I believe is member for Tyrone. Do you know him? – Cuthbert has left us for three months, our property in Berkshire is lately sold and he is required to remain there till the purchaser takes possession of it which will not be till the winter, his horses and dogs are gone to him and we are left alone, we miss him not a little but e is enjoying himself so much that we ought not to regret his absence. He is now with the Fitches at Swindon – let me hear my dear Charlotte from you, and be as epistitial as you like, the more you are so, the better I shall be pleased – Remember you often call yourself so, or I should not have given you such a harsh word – Jane returned from France delighted with all she saw and heard and my Father was so enraptured with Nantes that he took a cottage there, but Mama is so regularly a John Bull that she detests the very thoughts of such a banishment, as she will call it, to tell you the truth I am rather inclined to her way of thinking, but the pleasures of country you may enjoy them upon such easy terms that it offers great attractions will you, if you leave Drewstown and we go there, will you come and peep at us? You recommend matrimony so strongly my dear Charlotte that when I go from here, I shall really think of it, but why do you not effect a change in pretty little Harriett she is as bent on single life as we seem to be; but the fact is that I have not yet met with one person whom I could like to have father and mother and home for, in my life – Our friends often ask after the bright star that appeared in our hemisphere so suddenly and vanished so soon, Jane tells me she is looking very well and now cuts an ounce of meat. All my family desire their kindest remembrances to you and Jane sends a kiss to Flora whom she describes as a sweet little girl –

Adieu then very dear friend

Believe me your sincerely


I have omitted Jane’s compliments to Mr McVeagh and …

18.     October 1821 from Catherine Bowles

Postmarked 13th October 1821

Letter to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy

from Catherine Bowles

                                                                                                49 Lower Mount Street

                                                                                                October the 13th

My dear Mrs McVeagh

I hope this will find you quite well of the pain in your head and dear little Flora as happy as ever, I travelled with a respectable party of six – but a pain in my head came to torment when I got half way to Dublin – I dined and slept at Harris’s that night their father and mother are not come home yet the next day I settled with Mrs King to remain with her – from that I went to Dodds where they had no calico that would suit you and they were selling by auction all sorts of furniture. I then went to every shop I could find and they all asked me ten pounds but at last I found a shop in Henry Street where I can get a pair for five pound ten they are selling by commission or you would not get them so cheap and they tell me it will take 16 yds of calico to make the covers which I can get for 10d a yard and as you have no lining calico yourself I think they might be made at home they will charge for the packing besides. Mrs Allen asked me 22 shillings for doing the screens but I found a much cheaper shop in Dawson Street where they have promised to do them for 15 shillings or less if they can. It is a glass shop where they will give you a very handsome glass and pier table such as you want for 12 guineas or perhaps they may make it pounds and for thirty pounds you can have very handsome bell ribbons with tassels – but see some of worsted – they are made of very thick ribbons but not so wide as what you have. I have bought the umbrella it is large than Mr Tisdalls a big one. You never gave me John’s apron but if you tell me the quantity and quality I can get it, the fashionable way of cricking the cushions now they will charge 6/6 a chair but they take very little calico. We have got summer in Dublin but dreadful fogs in the morning. The streets look quite gay in their summer attire. I can scarcely think of my winter (yet) – will you be so good as to tell Mrs Chapman that I fear the Dyer will not do her ribbon to her liking as they say it is very much abused and I can match the calico but it is not so bright a pink and if it is half a yd I am to get – and let me hear from you very soon and let me know if there is anything else I can do for you tell Mr McVeagh I put his letters in the penny post and I shall send the basket for the grapes the day before I set off for Drewstown but I have done nothing for myself yet. I hope I have been explicit in all things – I hope Mr McVeagh is lively give him my kindest regards with a thousand loves and kisses to Flora and accept the same from your ever sincere and affectionate Cathn Bowles

in haste

all the above articles are very reasonable from what I see in other shops.

19.     November 1821 from Flora Deacon

Letter franked 1821 and sealed

to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy, Meath, Ireland

from Flora Deacon                                         

                                                                                                Chesterfied Street[72]


                                                                                                November 1st

 My dearest Charlotte

I heard yesterday from Mary that you have returned to Drewstown and as I begin to fear you never received the letter I wrote you from Banscot[73] I venture again upon a few lines which is rather an exertion to me at present – until the last week I have been wonderfully well and able to take constant exercise, but I now have so many uncomfortable sensations that I think the dreadful hour must be approaching fast and I feel very nervous and out of spirits – I did not calculate upon being confined before the 20th or end of this month and possibly I may not. I returned to town from Leamington the 13th of this month and engaged our present abode for three months by which time I rust we may have met with a house that will suit to take on lease as I am quite tired of moving from one place to another. Our present abode is very geniable the rooms are excellent and the situation ‘centrical’ with the advantage of being airy and quiet looking into Chesterfield Gardens. I trust the disturbances in Ireland are not so great as the newspapers represent. Have you any prospect of letting Drewstown? Mrs Schingler has again surrendered her liberty to Mr George Loftus who bears an excellent character and is of high family and very gentlemanly – the disadvantages are that he is 8 years her junior and has no fortune. They are gone abroad to winter in Florence where Mrs Loftus’ aunt the Duchess of Leeds is residing – Miss Sarah Praed is to be married to a clergyman. We spent six weeks at Leamington which is a very nice place – the country about is extremely pretty and the drives remarkably good in all directions – it is almost worth going so far to see Warwick Castle – it surpassed my expectations – I shall be anxious to hear from you soon and to be informed that you are cheerful and happy – nothing can exceed the affection and kindness of my husband, it is very consolatory to experience such anxious attention in my present situation and I feel most grateful for it. How is little Flora[74], and did you leave Ferdinand at Miss Hay’s? Is Mrs Chapman still with you and have you many resident neighbours?

Adieu my dear Charlotte, give my love to my brother and with fondest regards to you both believe me ever

Yours affectionately

Flora Deacon[75]

20.     November 1821 from Mary Brooke [76]

Sealed and postmarked 10 Nov 1821

to Mrs McVeagh, Drewstown, Athboy, Ireland

                                                                                                29 Rivers St, Bath

                                                                                                9th Nov 1821

My dearest Charlotte

You are no doubt surprised to find out opening this, the writing of your darling boy which must give you pleasure, he came to me at 12 o’clock and previous to taking our walk, I thought you would be happy to see his improvement in this way, and on my letting him so, he most willingly sat down, and sent you the above, after my dictating. I never saw him look better, and he is improved in every aspect and grown tall, we dined at 3 and amused ourselves afterwards with a walk till near tea time and Sally Combes with Jane escorted the little fellow back to Miss Hays at 7. I postponed sending this till I saw Harriet and your mother, who arrived here last Tuesday, both quite well, the former better than when last in Bath, and desires me to say, as I was writing she would defer doing so for a week when you might depend on hearing from her. Many thanks dear Charlotte for your wish of having me at Drewstown, believe me I want no inducement, but your society so never think it necessary to hold out any gaiety but you know full well what I suffer on the matter which I wish did not separate us. With respect to the Archdeacon, I do not flatter myself I should love the least chance, so pray tell Miss Kitty Bowles, I should be very sorry she had to depend on my changing my name for wedding sake as she would have a great wait, but I shall expect some of hers whenever there is any forthcoming, give her my kind remembrance. I fully enter into your feelings my dear Charlotte with respect to having Louisa Johnson with you still I think a little of her lively society would be of use to your spirits, however painful your domestic concerns may be, I am sure she would be delighted to be a little with you.

Bath begins to assume a more lively appearance and promises to be full this winter. The Music Meeting went off very well. I went one night to the Abbey and one to the Rooms where there were 1600 people besides 200 who could not get in, I never was so overcome with heat, having had the patience to go at 5 and remain until ½ past 11. Catalan was most wonderful but I prefer the witness of Mrs Salmon. I do not expect your uncle till next month when I hope to see him, I remembered you to both him and his better half, you’ll not know his house when you come again to this part of the world, it is so improved, but not finished yet. I wonder very much you have not heard from Mrs Deacon she must be confined by this, I wonder what she has produced, could I see Mrs Shawe I should hear all about it. Miss Walsh sends her love and says she will answer your letter soon excuse this bad scrawl but my hand is tired having written a long epistle to your uncle so God bless you and with Harriett’s and your mother’s love Believe me. Theresa begs for best respects to you

truly yours

M Brooke

My kind regards to Mr McVeagh and love to Flora.

[There is a short note written in Ferdinand’s hand]

My dear Mama

I am come to spend the day with Aunt Mary and am going to walk on the canal with best love to you and Papa. F. Mac Veagh  My love to Flora. [Ferdinand is 8 at this time]

21.     April 1822 from H Brooke [77]

Sealed ‘Entre nous’ on the seal

postmarked Bath 26 April 1822

to Mrs McVeagh
Ireland                                                                                     Bath, 30 St James Square

                                                                                                Tuesday April 23rd

My dearest Charlotte

I have this moment heard from my uncle the distressing intelligence of my Aunt Agnes’s[78] death and lose no time in making you acquainted with the unhappy event the account came from my uncle Robert[79] who simply mentions the occurrence without any particulars. My mother is suffering from an attack of Erysipelas in her face and head and is much weakened from the pain and fever attending the complain which must plead my excuse for this hurried letter as I am fully occupied reading to her the infection having nearly closed up her eyes, her spirits are much affected by her illness that when  she is able to employ herself I hope to write you a long letter, in the mean time let me thank you for your kind and considerate present which I know would only distress you to say anymore about only bear in mind I shall expect you to contribute  your share of amusement for my mother if not by your presence at least by writing constantly as you cannot conceive how much pleasure we all derive from hearing from you. Miss Walsh is at her brother’s and all impatience to hear from you her direction is Cambridge House, Nr Romsey, Hants. all the Nicholls[80] are staying with my Uncle and Aunt owing to my mother’s illness I have not seen them. Mary and your dear boy quite well tho’ the same cause has prevented my seeing him very lately and with the united love of all the family believe me ever in haste your sincerely attached

H Brooke

No account from William[81], it is believed that James Brooke[82] is also dead I trust it is not true.

22.     May 1822 from Mary Brooke [83]

Sealed with the name Mary on the sealing wax

Postmarked 3 June 1822 Bath

to Mrs McVeagh
Ireland                                                                                                             Rivers Street, Bath

                                                                                                                        May 31st

My dear Charlotte

I cannot describe to you how depressed my spirits have been for the last month, in the first place the report of my brother Arthur having lost his beloved Agnes, caused one to feel deeply for him, knowing them to be so truly happy a couple, I may say, each other’s idol, I am truly grieved to tell you a letter this day from my poor brother corroborates the sad intelligence, poor Agnes was within two months of her confinement when she was seized with sore throat and fever which proved fatal in a few day, judging of my poor brother’s affliction, losing a beloved wife and in the prime of life, and leaving five little girls makes her death more to be lamented, my heart aches for Mr & Mrs Kirchoffer from whom I heard last Monday, when they had no idea of the dreadful blow that awaited them. She gave me a most satisfactory account of the darling children, little Arthur having lost his Asiatic look, more like a European child, she has sent out their pictures by their Uncle Frank[84] who has got a Chaplaincy to India to the longing eyes of their dear parents and saying she preferred the Almighty in his mercy would spare Arthur and his Agnes, to their interesting family my dear Charlotte you who as a mother, must feel deeply for the affliction of those in Russell Place, having the dear children before them every hour and little Sally is of an age to feel the lost of her beloved Mama. God’s will must be submitted to with patience and Christian fortitude but indeed this is a severe trial for my poor brother – a letter from your brother William came by the same ship, to which there was neither wafer nor seal came open all the way however there was not any contents but what all the world might see, it was to your Uncle William. As Harriet writes to you, I’ll leave her to mention the particulars he had been spending a month with poor Agnes shortly before her illness, he was quite well and likes his corps much, young Wynch[85] is in the same – my brother Robert[86] arrived from Calcutta at Weymouth a week ago when your Uncle William set off to meet him, he did not find him so very much altered as he expected after an absence of 23 years in a boiling climate of course he has the look of an Asiatic but he will recover that when a little recovered in this country, they remained three days when the former went to London to clear his baggage out of the India House and the latter returned here having his wife’s family[87] on a visit going on 7 weeks next Thursday they make their exit or departure the end of next week when my brother goes to London for a short time, I think of going with him to see Robert and other friends – you’ll be sorry to hear Mrs Brooke has lost her eldest son James at Calcutta, he was coming home and she had prepared his room, this is the third she has buried in India, his 3 children are with her, what trouble and affliction she has gone through in her time but the Almighty has given her wonderful strength of mind to bear all his dispensations with fortitude, she now lives in London – your darling boy looked enormously well and happy when last I saw him and is much grown and improved. I had a visit lately from Mrs Col Shawe who has been spending a month with Mrs Deacon and says she is quite well and continues to nurse her baby. She is a fine child but not handsome.

Does Mr McVeagh come over for his son, is it time you all are coming to England in the autumn. I was very sorry to hear Mrs N McVeagh[88] was not at all well but hope she is better for the June air of Drewstown. I daresay there are great improvements in that quarter since I left it remember me kindly to her and her Caro Sposos. This town is now very stupid and hot. Harriett I think looking rather better but is still delicate. Mary[89] goes to a day school is perfectly well and much grown and promises to be as tall as yourself and exactly your own figure.

My kind love to your hubby and little Flora with a kiss and believe me dear Charlotte very affectionately yours

M Brooke

23.     July 1822 from E White

Letter postmarked Aylesbury 42 18th July 1822

to Mrs McVeath (sic), Drewstowe (sic), Athboy, Meath, Ireland

from E White

My dearest Charlotte

Your letter tho’ brought to me late in the day and am to have a dinner party, yet I will not lose a post to tell you how delighted I am in the prospect of seeing you at Handwyke once more, and make your stay with me as long as you can and if it be extended to months the better we shall like it, you know enough of my brother not to wish to be any restraint on him as he likes occasional moving about. Flora I shall be delighted to see and she must be of a most entertaining age I should much like to see Ferdinand but school time must not be broken in on.

I am sorry to hear your account of your mother I have not heard from them very lately, daring a certain question was in agitation a quick correspondence was passing I must confess I could not give a vote in favour of it as I saw no advantage to any party but in the contrary the prospect of great discomfort your mother has half promised to come to us this autumn if she be prevented perhaps she could spare Hariett to accompany you would it not be pleasant to you both, I am glad she is on a visit to Mrs Wyndham. How mortified and not without reason in my opinion the Slaebe family are at the marriage of their father to a young woman of 19 whom they always considered as full sister to their mother, but it is now made public that Mrs Slaebe was unhappily born before marriage. The young men are I hear all violent at present and declare they will never enter their father’s door as Papa keeps the purse they must submit in the end Miss Slaebe will probably be mostly with her sister in Ireland has its boast for genuine wit pray collect all the bon mots and scraps from newspapers for my scrap book.

Pray does your neighbouring poor escape the dreadful suffering that are so pathetically related in the newspapers. A collection is making in every town and village towards the end of procuring a fund for the present relief of your peasantry. In our village we raised near fourteen pounds.

Pray make my brother and my best compnacceptable to Mr McVeagh and that we should be very glad to see him and with our best love and wishes to you my dearest Charlotte believe me

Ever your affectionate friend

E White

Handwyke July 15th 1822

24.     January 1823 from John Morron

Postmarked 10th January 1823

from John Morron

to Ferdinand McVeagh
Post Office


                                                                                                2nd January 1823

Dear Sir

I have for the last two years deferred applying to you in the hope that your sense of justice would have made it evident that my situation as your Tenant deserves and absolutely requires amelioration.

In the agreement between us for the Lands of Rawdonstown, you are to pay to me the value of all the Slated Buildings which I have erected thereon. – Independent of these slated buildings, which at the lowest calculation have cost four thousand pounds, I have expended in other buildings and in draining, mannering and other permanent improvements on the land at least £6,000 -, yet notwithstanding these improvements, I find it impossible with every exertion to make the annual rent by the produce of the soil putting out of the question, any reasonable remuneration that I might have expected for the Capital which I have thus employed – I therefore submit to your justice, the absolute necessity there is for making me an abatement in the annual rent.

The lands of Rawdonstown, altho’ highly improved with house, Working Mill, and offices, obtained at the before mentioned heavy expenses, would not if now to be let, bring the rent that I took it at, previous to its being possessed by any of these advantages, in consequence of the overwhelming depression in the value of landed property that has occurred since I became your Tenant for these lands.

Therefore, finding that it is impossible to make the rent I now pay, and as that rent is unquestionably beyond the intrinsic value of the Premises, I most earnestly request that you will take the whole of my case into your serious consideration and make to me a permanent annual abatement commensurate to the depression of the times, as well as adequate to, and in lieu of, “the value of all slated buildings erected by me thereon”. – By this measure you will perform towards me an act of justice to which I am every way entitled, and thereby also benefit yourself – trusting that I shall receive your speedy and favourable answer.

I remain

Dear Sir

Very sincerely yours

John Morron

25.     December 1828 from John Hughes

Letter postmarked Pulhely Dec 19 1828

To Ferdinand McVeagh Esq., Drewstown, Nr Athboy, Meath, Ireland

                                                                                    Revd John Hughes

                                                                                    Tynewydd, Nr Rollkely


                                                                                    Dec 16th 1828


I have received the letter with which you favoured me in answer to an advertisement inserted in the St James’ Chronicle, and beg leave to answer your questions in the order in which they are proposed. I have had eight years’ experience in teaching. I receive the limited number of five young gentlemen into my family, under a course of education preparatory to admission into university. I reside in N. Wales, in the County of Carnarvon, near the market town of Rollkely. I am a graduate of the university of Oxford and have been married for some years. I am sorry that I have nobody in Dublin to whom I can refer you. Consequently I am under the necessity of referring you to Gentlemen this side (of) the water. When I mention the name of Col. Edwards of Nanhorrn, a gentleman of ten thousand a year who is my neighbour, and the Bishop’s Chaplain, Dr. Williams, Rector of Trefdraeth, Anglesey. I deem it unnecessary to add to the number. My pupils are treated at home and abroad as part of my family. They have each a separate chamber to sleep in, not very large, but well aired and commodious. My terms including washing and the etcetera of domestic comforts are 100 guineas per annum. Three month’s notice is required of every young gentleman ere quitting my family or three months’ payment. I like to be explicit. If more particulars be required, I am Sir,

                                                Your humble servant

                                                            John Hughes

26.     July 1865 from Ellen Campbell

Black-lined letter (although part of the envelope has been torn off it looks as if Maria has written that it is the last letter from her dear friend Ellen.)

postmarked Navan 13 July ’65 (1865)

from Ellen Campbell[90]                       

to Maria McVeagh

My very dear Maria

I scarcely know how to write to you it is so long since I either wrote or heard from you; but you are often in my thoughts and prayers and still my oldest and dearest girlhood’s friend – I have been waiting hoping that bitter from such heavy trial would be … to write to you, and now dearest Maria I cannot tell you how desolate and sorrowing we are by the death of our beloved Father. I can scarcely realize it, yet and it seems like a bad dream which this lovely season making all so beautiful around, the feeling of a blanc and loss to us irreparable – My poor dear mother is tolerable and has borne the shock of losing the beloved husband of nearly 49 years, better than we could have almost hoped but then she has all her life so striven to hide her own sorrows that those who know her well an alone feel how her earthly prop and stay is taken from her – My poor dear father was not more than ten days ill and only declared to be in danger a few days before he died. And so short was the notice that we had, I did not reach here from Leamington where I was staying until Monday afternoon and he died a little before three on that morning – My dearest father is deeply and sincerely regretted by many and it is a comfort to receive a numbers of letters helping his worth and services, though the vain wish arises that he could have known in life how much he was loved and valued – I hope you will write and tell me how your kind husband and dear little girl[91] are – I have felt I could give so little happiness to my friends situated as I have been and living a life of sorrow and trial that really letter writing has been most painful and so dearest Maria I have made it my comfort to do all I could for them by remembering them in my regular prayers to the loving merciful father who … all things willing – My dear husband and darling children are at South Wales which is now our home as my dear husband’s poor brother died last September and left no children – I cannot say more dearest Maria but trusting you, your good husband and darling little girl are all quite well and very happy – love I …

My very dear Maria

your most affectionate friend

Ellen H Campbell

[1] This reference to Mary is confusing taken together with a later reference (letter 15) to Mary

[2] Later correspondence from the Halletts is postmarked from Lyme Regis, close to Sidmouth

[3] See Historical Note 1

[4] Ferdinand (born in June 1813)

[5] William, Charlotte’s brother, was off to India with the East India Company.  It seems clear from this that their father, Henry, was no longer around.

[6] See Historical Note 1

[7] ? William Brooke’s (the writer’s) wife?

[8] Louisa Johnson, Emma’s sister

[9] Flora McVeagh, Charlotte’s sister-in-law

[10] Emma’s brother

[11] Presumably Charlotte’s sister

[12] Queen Charlotte, wife of George III

[13] Is this Wayeshure? – the name occurs in later correspondence

[14] Probably Henry

[15] Under the Treaty of Chaumont – see Historical Note 1.

[16] Is this Emma [Johnson] from Swansea or did Charlotte have a sister, Emma?

[17] See Historical Note 1 (“In April 1814 [Wellington] reached Toulouse…where he again defeated the French”)

[18] Charlotte’s brother

[19] Presumably this refers to Arthur Brooke – the writer’s brother who was living in India

[20] According to IGI, William Eyre Joseph Brooke married a Mary Nicolls  – perhaps this is a relative (see Letter 21)

[21] see Historical Note 2

[22] we do not know which Mrs McVeagh this might be – possibly Henry’s wife?

[23] There was a widespread Typhus epidemic which continued until December 1819, causing some 50,000 deaths

[24] Any relation to Charlotte’s uncle, William Eyre Joseph Brooke

[25] Charlotte’s father-in-law (Joseph McVeagh)’s sister, Jane Maria McVeagh, married a Thomas Shaw.  Various letters refer to ‘Miss Shaw’ and this is perhaps Edith.  Are they perhaps related?

[26] Joseph McVeagh’s cousin-german, Catherine McVeagh (daughter of Joseph’s uncle, Hugh McVeagh and Margaret Lumsden) married her cousin Harry Lumsden in Aberdeen.

[27] Although somewhat tenuous, around the appropriate time (in 1802) IGI records that an ‘Emery’ McVeagh married William McCulloch – is this perhaps the Emily and Mr McC referred to here?

[28] Formerly Margaret McVeagh, daughter of Joseph McVeagh’s brother Hugh – she married Lewis Farquharson who assumed the name of Innes on inheritance of the estates of his Innes ancestors

[29] We do not know the relationship of Emily to the McVeaghs

[30] Margery Wynch

[31] Major Joseph McVeagh

[32] Flora McVeagh, Charlotte’s sister-in-law

[33] Mrs Henry McVeagh, née Mary Uniacke (daughter of John Uniacke) – Henry McVeagh was Charlotte’s brother-in-law

[34] Jane is possibly Jane Maria McVeagh who married Thomas Shaw (possibly Edith’s brother)

[35] Possibly Edith’s brother.

[36] No indication as to the identity of John, possibly another of Edith’s brothers?

[37] Ferdinand Meath McVeagh, Charlotte’s husband

[38] Louis XVIII (see Historical Note 3)

[39] See Historical Note 3

[40] Ferdinand and Henry, Charlotte’s brothers-in-law

[41] ‘blond’ being a type of fine lace which hung down over dresses at that time.

[42] Ferdinand’s parents died in 1794, leaving behind them an infant family (Joseph, who died young, Ferdinand, Flora and Henry).  This is presumably a law-suit brought by Ferdinand against their guardian.

[43] Presumably Cuthbert Johnson

[44] Presumably either Louisa or Emma referring to the other

[45] Presumably the son and daughter-in-law of Flora’s maternal Grandfather, Governor Alexander Wynch of Madras

[46] Probably Henry Wynch, son of George and Mary (chr. 19/2/1793 at Fort St. George, Madras)

[47] Presumably Henry’s brother, John, son of George and Mary (chr. 17/4/1797 at Fort St. George, Madras)

[48] Probably Charlotte’s brother William

[49] Presumably Flora’s mother’s (Margery’s) brother John (chr. 12/9/1757, Fort St. David, Cuddalore)

[50] is this Hardwick, Nr Aylesbury where a Revd. John White was a vicar from 1807-33?

[51] General William Brooke and his wife, Mary – Charlotte’s uncle and aunt

[52] Could this be a reference to Jane Austen and ‘Emma’ which was published around three years before this letter?

[53] In ‘Emma’ by Jane Austen, Harriet Smith is Emma Woodhouse’s friend – this is only conjecture on our part.

[54] Queen Caroline, wife of George IV.  “As king he sought to divorce her but her death in 1821 ended a struggle and a scandal in which the people sympathised with the queen.” (Chambers Biographical Dictionary). See Historical Note 4.

[55] Charlotte’s father’s sister, Mary?

[56] Jane Hallett’s husband, Jane being the writer of letters 11 and 14.

[57] Henry and Mary may be Henry Brooke, nephew of Charlotte’s paternal grandfather who lived in Bath (b. 1750) and was married to Mary

[58] William Hallett, mentioned in Jane Hallett’s previous letter (Letter 11)

[59] Charlotte’s infant daughter, Flora Harriet McVeagh

[60] Richard Hallett, Jane Hallett’s husband.

[61] If the hypothesis about Henry and Mary is correct, this is probably their daughter, Mary

[62] Charlotte’s sister-in-law, Flora McVeagh’s marriage to James Henry Deacon

[63] See footnote to Letter 1.

[64] No clear indication as to who this may be

[65] Jane Johnson is presumably Emma’s sister

[66] Probably Charlotte’s uncle, General William Brooke due to reference a few lines later to the General

[67] This may not sit well with reference to Edith Shaw’s possibly being the sister of Thomas Shaw (see note to Letter 6)

[68] George IV visited Ireland 12th August to 3rd September 1821; Dun Leary harbour was renamed Kingstown

[69] Queen Caroline

[70] The famine of 1821, particularly on the West coast of Ireland, was followed in 1822 by widespread fever

[71] Flora McVeagh

[72] off Curzon Street, Mayfair, London

[73] presumably the same place referred to in Letter 9

[74] Flora Harriet McVeagh [m. Ralph Sadleir]

[75] Formerly Flora McVeagh (Ferdinand’s sister, Charlotte’s sister-in-law)

[76] Is this from the daughter of Henry & Mary in Bath

[77] Harriet presumably – although it could conceivably be Henry, the writing is similar to the Harriet letters

[78] Aunt Agnes is Arthur Brooke’s (Uncle Robert Brooke’s brother)’s wife, née Kirchoffer, whom Arthur married on 21/5/1807 at St. George’s Church, Dublin

[79] Uncle Robert is Robert Brooke, Charlotte’s father’s brother (chr. 10/12/1771, Fort St. George, Madras)

[80] These are General William Brooke’s in-laws

[81] Charlotte’s brother presumably

[82] James is presumed to be the son of Anna Maria (Wynne) Mapletoft and Colonel Robert Brooke, former Governor of St. Helena. James Henry Brooke (d. 22/11/1821, Fort William, Calcutta) was Charlotte’s paternal grandfather’s sister’s grandson.

[83] Mary Brooke, presumably, Charlotte’s father’s sister (chr. 9th June 1776, Fort St. George, Madras)

[84] Kirchoffer presumably

[85] presumably John Wynch

[86] Robert Brooke, Charlotte’s father’s brother

[87] The Nicolls family, referred to in letter 21

[88] is this Mrs H McVeagh (in other words, Mrs Henry McVeagh)?

[89] See note to Letter 1

[90] Ellen Campbell died at Leamington Nov 11 1865

[91] presumably Maude Mary McVeagh

1689 Ralph Lord Stawell


In the name of God Amen. I Ralph Lord STAWELL, Baron of Somerton in the County of Somerset being of sound and perfect understanding though very infirm in body, considering the uncertainty of man’s life and of the things in this world, do make this my last will and testament revoking and making void any former will or wills by me made as follows:  FIRST, I give and resign my soul to God Almighty who y chapel it in assured hope of a blessed and glorious resurrection by the alone merits of my gracious Saviour Jesus Christ, and my body to the earth from whence it came, to be decently interred at my chapel at Netherham on the left side of my late deceased dear wife, and my desire is that when my now dear wife shall depart this life she may be laid on my other side, and that such of my children as shall die in their infancy may be buried near me, and that I may have a handsome and decent monument erected for myself, both my wives and such of my children as shall be so buried there at the discretion of my executors hereinafter named; and as for all the worldly goods and estate wherewith it has pleased God of his inifinite goodness and mercy to bless me, I dispose in manner following.  INPRIMISn I give devise and bequeath unto Sir William Portman of Orchard Portman in the said County of Somerset, Baronet, Henry Bull of Shapwick in the said County of Somerset, Esquire, John Hunt of Compton Pansfoot in the County of Somerset aforesaid,  Esquire, George Rives of Ranston in the County of  Dorset, Esquire, and John Sandford of Mynehead in the said County of Somerset, Esquire, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns according to the nature of the several estates and interests that I have therein in law or equity, and as the same will bear all those my messuages, farms, lands, tenements and hereditaments with their and every their appurtenances hereinafter mentioned (except as hereinafter is excepted); that is to say I do hereby devise as aforesaid all that my moiety or halfendeale of the purporty part or portion of the manor of Wraxall in the said County of Dorset with the appurtenances late in the tenure or possession of one Robert Lawrence, Gentleman, deceased, and now in lease to or in the tenure of Gerrard Newcourt of Ivythorne in the said County of Somerset, Gent., in trust for me, my executors, administrators and assigns, and all that my capital messuage, farm or tenement with the appurtenances called or known by the name of Wraxall Lodge otherwise Rampisham Park situate lying and being within the lordships or manors of Wraxall and Rampisham in the said County of Dorset wherein the said Gerrard Newcourt and Anthony Morris stand also instructed for me, my executors, administrators and assigns together also with one copy parcel of the premises called the Middle Coppice with the other moiety or halfendeale of the purporty part or portion of the said manor of Wraxall late in the tenure of one William Lawrence Esquire, deceased, with the rights, members and appurtenances thereof; and all that close of pasture ground containing by estimation one hundred acres called by the name or names of Gainsham, alias Southams, lying within the parish and manor of Poulett in the said County of Somerset which was given unto or settled upon me by my late father, Sir John STAWELL, Knight of the Noble Order of the Bath, deceased, in his lifetime for the residue of a term of about four score and seventeen years then to come therein and all such other leases as I have made or granted or caused to be made or granted or caused to be made or granted to the aforesaid Gerrard Newcourt and Anthony Morris in trust for me, and all other my messuages, lands, tenements and hereditaments whatsoever, set, lying and being in the several counties of Somerset, Dorset and Southampton or elsewhere within the kingdom of England which I am or at my decease shall be any ways entitled to or interested in either in possession, reversion, remainder or otherwise howsoever in law or equity and all my estate, right, interest, claim and demand whatsoever in law or equity of or to the same subject nevertheless to the trusts hereinafter limited, directed and appointed (except always out of the said devise such messuages, farms, lands, tenements and hereditaments with the appurtenances as hereinafter are particularly devised to any other person or persons for such estate or estates only as thereby are therein devised), that is to say, I do hereby devise and and bequeath to my dear and loving wife, her executors, administrators and assigns, all that my manor of Hartley Waspell and all my messuages, land, tenements and hereditaments whatsoever thereunto belonging, lying and being in Hartley a Waspell aforesaid in the said County of Southampton which are held by lease of the Dean and Canons of the King’s Free Chapel of St George within the Castle of Windsor, which lease was taken in the name of Richard Newcourt, Gent., in trust for me and my said dear wife, and also the lease of a meadow or pasture ground in Hartley Waspell afore and granted by the Provost and Scholars of Queen’s College in the University of Oxford, Warden of the hospital of God’s house in the town of Southampton, which said lease is taken in my own name or the name or names of some other person or persons in trust for me, and all my estate, right, title, interest, terms, claim and demand whatsoever in law or equity therein or in any part or parcel thereof with the appurtenances to the only use and benefit of my said dear wife, her executors and assigns, and I do hereby further give and bequeath unto my said dear and loving wife all my household goods, plate, cattle, stock and other goods whatsoever in or belonging to my house or estate at Hartley Waspell as aforesaid and also all her wearing clothes and apparel and all such rings and jewels as she has in her possession or has ever worn as my wife, together with the furniture and goods of and in her chamber and closet (except the old hanging there), in lieu whereof I give unto her two hundred pounds in money to buy her a new set of hangings, and also I give unto her, my dear and loving wife, my coaches and six coach horses together with one such other old horse or gelding as at the time of my decease I shall have or keep, for a supply to my coach horses, and also all the furniture and harnesses belonging to the said coaches, and I also give unto her all such gold and silver coins as I have formerly given her and that shall be in her custody at my decease, and my desire is that my said dear wife may (if she pleases) continue to dwell in my house at Ham until one of my sons shall attain the age of one and twenty years, and for that time to have the convenience of and to enjoy the gardens, orchards and warrens thereunto belonging, as also my part in the (decoy) pond in all rent free, the repairing the same premises so long as she shall continue her dwelling there.  ITEM; I give and devise to my daughters in case I die without issue male of my body, all that the inheritance of my farm of Avebury in the County of Wiltshire, and to the heirs of their bodies lawfully to be begotten but so nevertheless that if any or either of them shall happen to die without issue of her or their bodies lawfully to be begotten that then her or their part or parts of the said farm so dying shall remain over and be to the survivors or survivor of them and the heir and heirs of the bodies and body of such survivors and survivor lawfully to be begotten.  ITEM; in case of and immediately after default of heir male of me, the said Lord Stawell on the body of my said dear wife begotten or to be begotten, I give and bequeath unto my said daughters and the heirs of their bodies lawfully begotten, and in case of failure of issue of any or either of them, the part or parts of such of them so dying without issue to be and remain over to the survivors or survivors; all that pretend or parsonage of Wivelscomb with the appurtenances in the said County of Somerset and all lands, tenements, profits, glebelands, tythes, oblations, (obventions) and hereditaments whatsoever to the same belonging or part or parcel thereof, reputed, taken or accepted, lying, being, growing or renewing in the towns, parishes, hamlets and fields of Fitzhead and Wivelscombe in the said County of Somerset or elsewhere which were heretofore granted unto me and my heirs determinable upon three lives by Charles Thirlby, Clerk Prebendary of the said pretend, since deceased, and all my estate, right, tithe, interest, claim and demand whatsoever therein either in law or equity.  ITEM; I give and bequeath to my daughter Anne STAWELL and to all the daughters which I have or shall have of the body of my said dear wife the sum of twelve thousand pounds equally to be divided between them, and to be respectively paid unto them when they shall respectively attain the age of one and twenty years or be married which shall first happen and in case any or either of my said daughters shall die before marriage and age of one and twenty then the portion and portions of such my said daughter and daughters so dying shall be and remain to the survivors and survivor of my said daughters and my son Edward STAWELL and in case all my said daughters  shall so happen to die then my will as to this bequest is to be void and of none effect other than that in such case my will is that my said son Edward out of the same shall have four thousand pounds more paid him and added to the portion hereinafter by this my will given him and no more provided and it is my express direction and desire that my said daughters marriages shall be by the consent of my said dear wife and of my said trustees before named or the major part of them living, and if all of them shall happen to be dead then by the only consent of my said dear wife and after her decease by the consent of my said trustees before named or the major part of them then living if either of them shall happen to be living, and I do hereby declare and my will is that the portions so hereby given to my said daughters are to be in full of what is directed or intended by me to be raised for them or any or either of them out of any of my manors, lands, tenements or hereditaments by virtue of any trust in any settlement deed or writing by me at any time or times heretofore made or directed and my will and intention is that the sum of two thousand pounds charged upon the one hundred acres of meadow or pasture lying and being in (Allen) Moore by a deed of settlement formerly made by me thereof shall be raised and paid out of the same towards the payment of the portions hereby given and bequeathed to my said daughters.  ITEM; I give unto every of my said daughters respectively the sum of one hundred and twenty pounds yearly to be be paid unto them by quarterly payments after my decease for their respective maintenances out of the interest and product of their respective portions until their said respective portions shall be raised and paid unto them as aforesaid, and the overplus of the said interest and product of their said portions beyond their said maintenances to go in augmentation of their said portions.  ITEM; I give and bequeath unto my said son Edward Stawell the sum of four thousand pounds to be paid unto him at his age of one and twenty years if he shall live to that time, and the said sum of four thousand pounds to be raised within six calendar months next after my decease and my will and desire is and I do hereby empower my said trustees or the major part of them or of the survivors of them by the approbation and consent of my said dear wife if living from time to time to place out the said sum of four thousand pounds so bequeathed to my said son Edward as aforesaid at such interest as they shall think fit and out of the same interest and product thereof to pay unto my said son Edward by quarterly payments the sum of one hundred and twenty pounds yearly for his maintenance and education until he shall attain his age of one and twenty years and his said portion shall be paid unto him, and in case my said son Edward Stawell shall happen to die before he attain his age of one and twenty years then his said portion so given and bequeathed unto him as aforesaid to remain over and be to my daughter Anne Stawell and the rest of my daughters and the survivors and survivor of them equally to be divided between them, and my desire is that my said son Edward may be bred a scholar.  ITEM; my will further is that if my said dear wife shall happen to be (enseint) or with child with a son at the time of my decease, then I give unto such son the sum of four thousand pounds and if with more than one son then I give unto them the sum of four thousand pounds equally to be divided between them and to be paid at his or their respective ages of one and twenty years, and I give and bequeath unto him or them until his or their said respective portions shall be payable and paid as aforesaid the sum of three score pounds yearly to each of them for his and their respective maintenance and education, and my will is that in case either of such sons so to be born after my decease as aforesaid shall happen to die before he or they shall attain his or their respective ages of one and twenty years then his or their share or portion so dying shall come to the survivors or survivor of such sons and if such son and sons all happen to die before he or they shall attain their respective ages of one and twenty years then this bequest made concerning them shall be void, and whereas I have had and received of my brothers George STAWELL, deceased and of my uncle, the said George Ryves Esquire the sum of three thousand pounds being the portion of Anne my late wife deceased, mentioned in certain articles indented, bearing date the eighth day of April one thousand six hundred sixty seven made between me by the name of Ralph Stawell Esquire and my brother George Stawell deceased of the one part and John Ryves, then Ranston aforesaid Esquire, since deceased, the said Anne my said late wife by the name of Anne RYVES, daughter of the said John Ryves, and the said George Ryves and Audelay GREY Esquire of the other part, and also the sum of one thousand three hundred and four score pounds, being a dividend due to Anne, my said late wife out of her father’s estate, I do hereby desire and enjoin my son John STAWELL and all and every my son and sons and every other person and persons who is or are to have any benefit of the said portion or any way interested or concerned in the same to discharge and release my said uncle George Ryves, his heirs, executors and administrators of and from the same, and that neither my said uncle George Ryves, nor his heirs, executors or administrators, or his or their estate be molested, troubled or charged for or by reason of the payment of the said sums or either of them unto me.  ITEM; I give to the poor of the parish of Netherham aforesaid the sum of one hundred pounds to be from time to time put out at interest by the trustees of my Lady Hext’s money give you’re her to the poor of the said parish of Netherham, and the interest of the said (money) hereby given by me be employed from time to time for the binding out every year two poor children of the said parish apprentices and if there be no poor child in Netherham aforesaid to be bound out apprentice as aforesaid, then for the binding out one or more poor child our children of the parish of Somerton aforesaid.  ITEM; I give to every servant that shall be living with me at my death one year’s wages beyond what shall be then due unto them.  ITEM; my will further is that my wife and children and all my domestic servants that shall be living with me at the time of my death shall have mourning given them and all my said servants to be continued three months in my house after my decease doing their several services there in that time unless they or any of them can before better provide for themselves.  ITEM; I give and bequeath to the several persons named in the schedule hereunto annexed the several sums of money or legacies therein expressed to be paid unto them at such time and times and in such manner as is therein expressed.  And as for all and singular the several messuages, farms, lands, tenements and hereditaments with the appurtenances before in and by this my last will and testament given and devised unto my said trustees, the said Sir a William Portman, Henry Bull, John Hunt, George a Ryves and John Sandford, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns (except the said moiety or halfendeale of the said manor of Wraxall with appurtenances before mentioned, late in the tenure of the said Robert Lawrence deceased, and now in lease to the said Gerrard Newcourt and Anthony Mowrie in trust for me as aforesaid, and also except all that the said capital messuage, farm or tenement with the appurtenances called a Wraxall Lodge alias Rampisham Park, lying within the Lordships or manors of Wraxall and Rampisham aforesaid wherein the said Gerrard Newcourt and Anthony Mowrie stand entrusted for me as aforesaid together with the coppice called a Middle Coppice and the other moiety or halfendeale of the said manor of a Wraxall late in the possession of the said William Lawrence, deceased, with its rights, members and appurtenances, I do hereby declare the same to be so devised to them as aforesaid in trust for the payment of my debts and of the said legacies and portions hereby devised which my personal and executors estate will not reach or be sufficient for, and for the indemnifying my said uncle George Ryves, his heirs, executors and administrators of and from all such damages, costs, charges and expenses as he the said George Ryves, his heirs, executors or administrators shall or may be any ways put unto for or by reason or omission of his payment of the several sums of three thousand pounds and one thousand three hundred and four score pounds before mentioned unto me as aforesaid or of my part or parcel thereof, and also for indemnifying and saving harmless of my said trustees, the said Sir William Portman, Henry Bull, John Hunt, George Ryves and John Sanford, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns of and from all such costs, charges, expenses and damages as they or any or either of them shall be in any ways put unto for and by reason or occasion of the execution of the said trust hereby reposed in them and for the reimbursing unto them all such sums of money, costs, charges, expenses and damages as they or any or either of them shall expend or be any ways put unto touching the same; and for that end and purpose I do hereby empower and desire my said trustees and the survivors and survivor of them and the heirs, executors, administrators and assigns of such survivor out of the rents, issues and profits of the said messuages, land, tenements, hereditaments and premises hereby devised unto them (except as aforesaid) or by sale, mortgaging or letting the same or any part or parcel thereof from time to time as in their discretions shall be thought fit, and as the case or cases shall require or by all, any or either of the said ways or by any other ways or means whatsoever, to pay  and discharge my said debts and the said legacies and portions hereby given and bequeathed or so much thereof as my personal and executors estate not hereby otherwise devised and bequeathed will not be sufficient for, and also to indemnify my said uncle George Ryves, his heirs, executors and administrators as aforesaid, and I do hereby desire and empower all and every person and persons entrusted for me to act and join with my trustees named by this my will as they shall direct for the better performance and execution of this my will and that my said trustees do out of my said estate indemnify them therein and my will is that my said trustees shall as well in the first place out of my personal and executors estate (not herein otherwise disposed of and given to my dear wife or to any other as aforesaid) as out of the said devised messuages, lands, tenements and hereditaments reimburse and pay themselves all such monies, costs and charges as they shall be any way put unto in the execution and performance of this my will, and particularly it is my will and desire that my said trustees in the placing and putting out the portion of my said son Edward Stawell at interest or in putting out any money parcel of my daughters’ portions at interest shall not suffer any damage by any casual loss therein, and I do appoint my dear and loving wife during her widowhood to be guardian for all my children, both sons and daughters (except my son John Stawell) during their respective minorities, but if my said wife should happen to die or marry during the minority of my said children or any or either of them then I do appoint my said trustees and the survivors and survivor of them to be guardian and guardians of my said children (except my son John) during their respective minorities.  ITEM; my will is that as to all that my said moiety of the manor of Wraxall, late in the tenure of the said Robert Lawrence, deceased, and as to all that my said other lease of the capital messuage, farm or tenement with the appurtenances called Wraxall Lodge, alias Rampisham Park, lying within the Lordships or manors of Wraxall (and) Rampisham aforesaid together with the said Coppice called the Middle Coppice, and the other moiety or halfendeale of the said manor of Wraxall, late in the tenure of the said William Lawrence Esquire, deceased, with the appurtenances before mentioned wherein the said Gerrard Newcourt and Anthony Mowrie stand entrusted for me, my executors, administrators and assigns as aforesaid I do hereby declare the same to be hereby devised to my said trustees only for the use of and in trust for my son William STAWELL, his executors, administrators and assigns during the several terms and estates therein, provided always, and my will is that if the lease of the Prebend or Parsonage of Wivelscomb before mentioned be at any time or times hereafter to be renewed by changing or adding a life or lives therein, pursuant to any covenant or clause contained in an indenture tripartite dated the twenty-ninth day of June in the four and twentieth year of the reign of the late King Charles the Second, made between me, the said Lord Stawell by the name of Ralph Stawell Esquire of the first part, William PITT Esquire and my now dear wife, daughter of the said William Pitt of the second part, and the Right Honorable John Lord DIGBY, now Earl of Bristol, William PITT the younger, Baldwin PITT and the said George Ryves of the third part, that then the charge and expense thereof shall be borne and raised out of the rents, issues and profits of the several moieties of the said Manor of Wraxall, the said capital messuage, farm or tenement called Wraxall Lodge, alias Rampisham Park, and the said coppice called Middle Coppice, and other the premises given and bequeathed to my said son William Stawell as aforesaid.  ITEM; I give to each of my said trustees who shall act and take upon them the trouble of executing the trust hereby reposed in them, mourning for himself and two servants, and also ten pounds apiece to each of the said trustees to buy each of them a ring.  ITEM; my will and desire is that my true and faithful servant Anthony Mowrick be continued steward and manager of my said son’s lands and of the devised premises, and to receive the rents, issues and profits thereof, he accounting for the same and to be no longer continued therein then he shall justly and faithfully discharge the said employment, and my will and desire is that he be allowed forty pounds per annum for his pains and service therein, and my will further is that if my said daughter Anne Stawell or any person or persons for or under her shall at any time or times hereafter claim or any ways disturb the occupiers of that close of pasture ground called Gainsham alias Southams before mentioned and of the several tenements lying in Somerton aforesaid or any or either of them in the quiet enjoyment thereof as the same is now hereby devised, or as the same or any part thereof shall be otherwise disposed of by me, that then my said daughter Anne Stawell is to have no benefit or advantage by this my will.  And lastly, I do hereby nominate, constitute and appoint the said Sir William Portman, Henry Bull, John Hunt, George Ryves and John Sandford my whole and sole executors of this my last will and testament till such time as my debts and the legacies and portions hereby given be paid, and my said trustees and my said trustees and my uncle George Ryves indemnified as aforesaid.  And all the rest and residue of my personal and executory estate and the said messuages, lands, tenements and premises, except what is otherwise hereby before particularly given and bequeathed to any other person or persons, I give and bequeath to my son John Stawell, his heirs, executors and administrators, provided always that if my said son John Stawell shall give such security as my said trustees or the major part of them shall think fit to accept of for the payment of my said debts and the legacies and portions hereby given and for the true performance of this my will, that then my will is that all my messuages, land, tenements and hereditaments and all my other estates both real and personal (except what is hereinbefore otherwise particularly given and disposed of) shall come unto and be granted, surrendered, transferred and passed over unto my said son John Stawell his heirs, executors, administrators and assigns by my said trustees and executors before named to and for his only use and benefit; but if my said son John Stawell shall refuse to give such security as aforesaid, then my will is that my said son John Stawell shall upon request join with my said trustees or the major part of them, their heirs, executors and administrators in the doing any act for the performance and execution of this my will and shall not do any act or thing whatsoever that may impede or hinder the execution or performance of the same; and in case my said son John Stawell shall refuse to give such security as aforesaid and shall refuse to act and join with my said trustees in the execution of my said will or shall impede and hinder the same, then my said son John Stawell is not to have or take any advantage or benefit by this my will, and in such case my son William Stawell shall have the benefit of my residual estate before mentioned in such and the like manner as my said son John Stawell should have had the same subject to the terms and limitations aforesaid, he giving such securities or joining with my said trustees in such manner as is before expressed.  In witness whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and set my seal to every individual sheet of this my last will and testament the nineteenth day of July in the fourth year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord James the Second, King of England etc. AD 1688.  ITEM; my will further is that in case my son William Stawell shall happen to die before he attain the age of one and twenty years then my son Edward Stawell is to have all that said moiety of the Manor of Wraxall late in the tenure of the said Robert Lawrence deceased and also all my said other lease of the capital messuage, farm or tenement with the appurtenances called Wraxall Lodge alias Rampisham Park lying within the Lordships or manors of Wraxall and Rampisham aforesaid together with the said coppice called the Middle Coppice and the other moiety or halfendeale of the said manor of Wraxall late in the tenure of William Lawrence Esquire deceased during the several terms and estates that shall be therein. – Stawell – sealed signed and published as my last will in the presence of John Bell, Anthony Mowrie, Miles Stowing, Richard Marshall

Proved 3rd December 1689