DOWNING, Sir George (1623-84), of St. Stephen's Court, Westminster and East Hatley, Cambs.
Available from Boydell and Brewer
Family and Education
b. Aug. 1623. 2nd s. of Emmanuel Downing, attorney, of Fleet Street, London and Salem, Mass., being 1st s. by 2nd w. Lucy, da. of Adam Winthrop of Groton, Suff. educ. Harvard 1639, BA 1642. m. 1654, Frances (d.1683), da. of Sir William Howard of Naworth Castle, Cumb., 3s. 5da. Kntd. 21 May 1660; cr. Bt. 1 July 1663.1
Chaplain, New Model Army 1646-7; scoutmaster-gen. 1649-57.2
Envoy to Swiss cantons 1655; commr. for security 1656, registers [S] 1656; teller of the Exchequer 1656-d.; resident, Holland 1658-May 1660, envoy extraordinary 1661-5, ambassador 1671-2; commr. for trade Nov. 1660-72; sec. to the Treasury 1667-71; commr. for trade with Scotland 1668, customs 1671-d.; freeman, E.I. Co. 1672; commr. for marine treaty with Holland 1674.3
J.p. Mdx. and Westminster 1656-?58, Cambs. 1674-d.; commr. for statutes, Durham college 1656, assessment Cumb., co. Dur., Westmld. and Westminster 1657 Northumb. Aug. 1660-1, 1673-80, Cambs. 1663-80, Westminster 1667-80.4
Downing’s ancestors can be traced in Suffolk back to the opening years of Elizabeth’s reign, and one of the family sat for Orford in 1586. His grandfather was master of Ipswich grammar school, but his father, a puritan lawyer who practised chiefly in the court of wards, emigrated to New England in 1638. Downing, one of the first graduates of Harvard, was educated for the ministry and became preacher to the regiment of John Okey. He came into the north as secretary to Sir Arthur Hesilrige, and Cromwell made him director of military intelligence. As an ardent advocate of the offer of the crown in 1656, he was rewarded with the post of resident in Holland, with special responsibility for penetrating royalist organizations. He succeeded in suborning the Hon. Thomas Howard, through whom he made his peace with the King in May 1660. He was confirmed as teller of the Exchequer and knighted on board ship. About this time Thomas Widdrington died at The Hague, thereby creating a vacancy at Morpeth. Downing’s brother-in-law Charles Howard enjoyed the dominant interest in the borough, and he was returned at a by-election in June, retaining the seat for the rest of his life.5
Downing became an active Member of the Convention, in which he was appointed to 34 committees, taking the chair in five. He carried seven bills to the Lords, and made nine speeches. On 27 July he urged the House to ‘pass the bill for money, and not by way of condition, but trust his Majesty to hasten the bill of indemnity’, and four days later he was named to the revenue committee. But for the most part he confined himself to commercial matters, on which his residence in Holland gave him expert status. On 15 Aug. he was ordered to seek the concurrence of the Lords in asking for a proclamation to forbid the export of raw materials used for the cloth industry. He was chiefly responsible for the re-enactment of the Commonwealth Navigation Act, taking the chair in the committee, and later carrying the bill to the Lords. On 31 Aug. he reported the bill to regulate the Colchester bay trade. He was the first Member appointed to the committee for the disbandment bill, and helped to draft the amendment deferring the withdrawal of garrisons. After the recess he moved to revive the committee for the cloth industry, ‘and desired they might also consider the state of the herring fishery and the settlement of the East India Company’, two particularly sore points in Anglo-Dutch relations. On 16 Nov. he spoke in support of his brother-in-law’s bill to prevent theft and rapine on the northern borders. Lord Wharton sent him the case for modified episcopacy with objections and answers, but this debate he took no part in. On 24 Nov. he reported a petition from the surveyor-general of the customs, and was among those sent to ask the lord chief justice and the lord chief baron to enforce the laws against smuggling. As self-appointed adviser to the Government, he played a key role in the financial settlement, helping to draft the clause settling half the excise on the crown as compensation for the loss of feudal revenues, and moving on 27 Nov. that the other half should be settled on the King for life. He told the House two days later that there were at least 80,000 people in France employed in working up English and Irish wool, and had the satisfaction of carrying up the bill to prohibit its export. Another mercantilist measure which he steered through the House was the bill to prevent the planting of tobacco in England. He supported the restoration of the dukedom of Norfolk to the head of the Howard family, and, with characteristic stinginess, the privilege of free postage for Members during sessions. On 21 Dec. he urged the House to lay aside the bill for compensation to officials of the court of wards and proceed with the bill to encourage fishing, to such good effect that this bill too he reported and carried to the Lords before the dissolution. His last speech in the Convention was to urge the payment of the debts incurred by the Queen of Bohemia during her long exile in Holland.6
In the opening session of the Cavalier Parliament Downing was appointed to the committee of elections and privileges and that for confirming the Act of Indemnity. ‘From a pedagogue and a fanatic preacher, not worth a groat’, he was, as Evelyn noted, ‘becoming excessive rich’. He purchased an estate in Cambridgeshire, which he steadily expanded. In his absence it was entrusted to his mother’s management on an allowance of £23 p.a. ‘I really believe one of us two is indeed covetous’, she wrote to her American kinsfolk, and certainly neither believed in cosseting the tenants, even at Christmas. After the coronation Downing returned to The Hague, where he succeeded in capturing Okey and two other regicides, and sending them over to England for execution. Though Samuel Pepys, once his deputy in the Exchequer, wrote that ‘all the world takes notice of him for a most ungrateful villain for his pains’, he was rewarded with a baronetcy. ‘Almost the sole source of initiative making for a solution of the crown’s financial problems’, he was given leave to attend the session of 1663, in which he again made his mark in mercantilist legislation. ‘A very voluminous speaker, who would be thought wiser than any of the merchants’, according to Clarendon, he was the first Member named to the committee to bring in measures for the advancement of trade, and on the same day acted as teller for the recall of a proclamation against the export of geldings. As chairman of the trade committee he recommended an increase in the duty levied on cattle imports during the second half of the year. Two further reports were necessary before the bill was ready for engrossment, but on 13 June he was able to carry it to the Lords. ‘A fertile legislator’, he also steered through the Commons, the bill to regulate the herring fishery and served on the deputation sent to ask the King for the punctual and effectual observance of the Navigation Act. He was listed as a court dependent in 1664, though he was at his post throughout the session. Convinced of English superiority in strength and of the Dutch propensity to bluff, he fomented the rivalry between the two peoples. Remaining at The Hague for several months after the second Dutch war had broken out, he was able to forward naval intelligence obtained with ‘the keys taken out of De Witt’s pocket when he was a-bed’. But his expectation that the Dutch economy would collapse under the strain of war proved unfounded; on the contrary he witnessed with envy the oversubscription of the Dutch war-loan at a mere 4 per cent. On his return to England he set himself to improve government credit, much to the disgust of Clarendon, who believed that he was chiefly concerned to increase the income from his tellership. Resuming his seat for the Oxford session, he was named to the committee for attainting English officers in the enemy forces, and gave the Commons ‘a speech of an hour painting forth the Dutch and their conditions in all their colours’. Supported by Arlington and the King he took over from Heneage Finch the management of supply, in which his principal achievement was the additional aid bill. Aiming to revolutionize public borrowing by appealing to the small investor, he revived the principle of appropriating the revenue to specified purposes; but his great innovation, resisted by Clarendon as an entrenchment on the prerogative, provided for the repayment of loans ‘in course’ instead of by treasury whim or favour. Returning to London, which was still infected by the plague, he used every publicity device available, including advertisements in the Gazette and personal application to his acquaintances, to make the loan a success. Exhausted by his volubility and pertinacity, one reluctant investor confessed: ‘the beginning, end, and every part of it is to be imputed to him’. In the next session he again took the chair of a committee on trade, which on 8 Oct. 1666 recommended a total prohibition of French imports. After seeking the Lords concurrence, he helped to manage one conference and to prepare reasons for another, and acted as teller against a hostile merchants’ petition. He was named to the committee of inquiry into the insolence of Popish priests. On 10 Nov. he carried up a bill to encourage coinage, later taking the chair for consideration of the Lords’ amendments and reporting a conference. He was less prominent in supply in this session, telling Pepys that ‘it is not the fault of the House but the King’s own party that hath hindered the passing of the bill for money by their popping in of new projects’. On 5 Dec. he ‘excellently made good’ the justice of a bill for the total exclusion of Irish cattle from England, later helping to prepare and manage conferences on the subject. He was named to the committee to prepare reasons for cancelling the Canaries Company patent. Another recommendation from the trade committee was for compulsory burial in woollen to reduce imports of linen; Downing reported a bill for this purpose on 2 Jan. 1667, and acted as teller on third reading a week later.7
On the death of Lord Treasurer Southampton in May 1667, Downing became secretary to the new treasury commissioners, ‘rough and ill-natured men, not to be moved with civilities or importunities in the payment of money’, whose appointment marks an epoch in financial administration. Downing’s contribution has been the subject of controversy, but there can be no doubt that he established and regularized procedure, producing a great blossoming of Treasury records into a systematic series, and it was almost certainly on his suggestion that payment in course was extended to cover loans secured on the ordinary revenue, ‘the most important financial experiment of the period’. He became known as the bankers’ enemy, who by his own admission would have no bank in England but the Exchequer. Doubtless he welcomed the fall of Clarendon, who had publicly ‘given some very sharp reprehensions to Downing for his presumption in undertaking to set such a design on foot that concerned the whole fabric of the Exchequer, in which he was an inferior officer’. But he took no known part in the proceedings against the fallen minister. His principal concern was to legalize the assignment of Exchequer orders, an essential element in the expansion of government credit. He brought in a bill for this purpose on 15 Oct., and despite the political excitement reported it from committee three weeks later. He had been granted £5,000 for the relief of English prisoners-of-war in Holland, but ‘so well did he husband the money’ that not more than £3,500 was spent. Nevertheless he expressed concern at the failure of the peace treaty to provide for their release, and was one of five Members sent to ask the King to relieve them. He brought in a bill to balance trade with Ireland, and recommended a commission on Scottish trade for the same purpose. He also introduced a bill to promote tillage, navigation, and the breeding of cattle, and took the chair for the leather export bill. ‘He labours very worthily to advance our trade’, Pepys admitted, ‘but doth it with mighty vanity and talking.’ As a mercantilist he favoured taxing wine, brandy, and linen on entry into the country, not at the point of sale, which other Members believed would reduce smuggling. He was on both lists of the court party in 1669-71 as a dependant, and acted with (Sir) Thomas Clifford as the chief government spokesman on supply. A hostile writer described him as
formerly Okey’s little chaplain, and a great promoter of the Dutch war. A teller in the Exchequer, of the council of trade, and secretary to the Treasury, he keeps six whores in pay, and yet has got £50,000. A great driver of the law tax.
His frank statements of accounts were generally well received by the Commons. On 27 Oct. 1670 he claimed that the Treasury commission had redeemed one-third of the three million pound debt which they had inherited. But on 12 Dec. he ‘gave great offence to the House’ by alleging that of the residue a significant proportion was due from official Members ‘who pleaded their privilege and would not pay it’. Ordered to produce details, he was able to name only Walter Strickland, Thomas Prise, Lionel Walden I, and Thomas Harlackenden as principals, with Richard Kirkby and Anthony Gilby as sureties, while the total sum involved was less than a fifth of the £110,000 he had estimated. Not for the first time he had proved ‘a mighty talker, more than is true’. After the Christmas recess, as one of the leading government spokesmen on supply, he opposed the deferment of all other business for the bill to punish the assault on Sir John Coventry. He was teller for committing the subsidy bill on 16 Jan. 1671, and took the chair for the bills to confirm the Duke of York’s surrender of wine licensing and to prevent the planting of tobacco in England. He also helped to prepare or manage conferences on the additional excise, the tobacco bill, and the export of wool.8
Downing’s credit operations foundered on the inability of the Exchequer to compete with private banks, and in 1671 he was replaced by Sir Robert Howard as secretary to the Treasury. He was compensated with a seat on the customs board at a salary of £2,000 p.a. His return to Holland as ambassador later in the year was widely and correctly interpreted as a prelude to another war. In fact he exceeded his instructions by breaking off relations before the King was ready for war, and returning hastily for fear of the mob. He was sent to the Tower, but released before the next session. On 10 Feb. 1673, in the debate on the Declaration of Indulgence, he defended the suspending power with disarming autobiographical candour. ‘Gentlemen that make account of their loyalty may give their votes freely’, he said; ‘he, that has done otherwise, cannot be so free.’ Nevertheless he was appointed to the committee to draft an address. He was named to the committee to prevent moor-burning in the north, and took the chair for bills to extend the Coinage Act and to regulate the trade with Greenland and the plantations, which he considered of great consequence. In expectation of a flood of useful Dutch refugees, he proposed the general naturalization of Protestant aliens, and acted as teller for committing the bill. His name appeared on the Paston list of court supporters in 1673-4. In the next session he vigorously opposed the address for the removal of Arlington:
Let him stand or fall, as he shall appear. Several have aggravated his crimes with circumstances, and yet are for the address to the King. Should not your proceedings be higher? ... To aggravate the crimes, and not proceed upon them, agrees not with reason. ... Articles against him are entered, and you vote him not fit to come into the King’s presence ... and he keeps his offices of freehold still. Can this be honorable for you, the grand inquest of the kingdom? Why must you do this? Because the gentleman has a pardon, you must try him! No pardon hinders proceedings of justice. After sentence, then possibly a pardon is pleadable, but then, and not before. ... God forbid that men should not be accused by common fame, but not condemned! Lord Arlington, an old Cavalier, who served the King, was with him abroad, was never suspected to be a villain, and now must be sequestered from the King upon common fame!
He was among those ordered to bring in an impeachment accordingly. On the proposals for peace with Holland, he said that he would not tell the House his opinion of the war, which most Members knew; although he could not consent to the treaty as it stood, the articles were too intricate for detailed debate, and he would simply have the King desired to procure peace. He was appointed to the committees to prevent illegal exactions and to consider the condition of Ireland.9
In the spring session of 1675 Downing’s committees included those for enlarging the scope of habeas corpus and extending the Border Act. Although he supported the abolition of the levy on coal exports, he was teller against a second reading for a bill to ease the trade. From the customs figures he was convinced of ‘the mischief we suffered by the French trade’, and he produced a highly influential report showing an adverse balance of £800,000 p.a., though it seems that he over-valued the silk and linen imports. He was twice named to committees for appropriating the customs to the use of the navy; but a further proposal to lodge in the chamber of London the revenue granted for the building of warships brought him to his feet in defence of the department in which he had served, in person or by deputy, for 20 years.
What was done to stop the Exchequer was by order of Council and by the great seal, not orders of the Exchequer. That place that gives accounts most sure and constantly is the best place. Money was paid in to London at the beginning of the rebellion, and [he] dreads everything that may have its likeness. Would [expect] devils from Hell to say: ‘Destroy the Exchequer, and take this way’, which is one of the best securities. With it you destroy property. The Exchequer is one of the fundamental pillars of monarchy, the easiest and cheapest. In the year 1660 money was paid into the chamber of London, not yet accounted for, for disbanding the army, and no man can ever find out how it can be accounted for, nor ever will. Had it been in the Exchequer, it might. Shall it be said we put it in such hands, nay voted it in such hands? Some are hot enough that the Exchequer is not to be trusted; when that trust is gone, the government is gone. Has anything been misplaced in the Exchequer? Mend it. Resolve that the money be appropriated, and refer it to the committee to make it effectual.
Though the distinction between a political and an administrative decision was too subtle for the House, the opposition proposal was rejected, and an attempt to tack a clause for the bankers to the warships bill was also unsuccessful. ‘When you go in such an untrodden way’, he warned them, ‘you may repent when it is too late. Things of this kind are altering the government.’ Downing’s name was included in the lists of officials and government speakers in the Commons, and with the other customs commissioners on the working lists. In 1677 Shaftesbury marked him ‘thrice vile’, and in A Seasonable Argument he was described as
a poor child bred up on charity. Like Judas, betrayed his master; what then can his country expect? He drew and advised the oath of renouncing the King’s family, and took it first himself. For his honesty, fidelity, etc., rewarded by his Majesty with £80,000 at least, and is commissioner of the customs. The House bell to call the courtiers to vote at six o’clock at night.
In this session he spoke against the illegal exactions bill because it deprived customs officials of the power to make ‘contingent and necessary variations’ while extending the penalties for treason to a new range of offences. In addition, the injunction to ‘withstand’ exactions would ‘let in all outrages, which this sort of men are too inclined to already’. He was nevertheless appointed to the committee. He supported the naval programme, observing that:
Whatever is bestowed on building ships makes a Parliament still more necessary; for the King must have supply to support them, and so there is no danger of our not meeting. Here is not one that says thirty ships are not necessary. This great fleet of France can intend no other neighbour than we.
The addition of an appropriation clause, on the other hand, he regarded as ‘going by an ill way to a good end. ... The just prerogative of the crown is as necessary as the being of the House of Commons. He takes tacking to be of the most mischievous consequence imaginable.’ Although anxious to end dependence on imported linen, he ridiculed the bill introduced by John Birch for the compulsory growing of hemp and flax in every parish, attacking the poor law in the course of his speech as a ‘specious pretence ... For mankind ... hoot them out of the parish; but for foxes ... spare them to make more sport.’ When it was proposed to bring the mad Duke of Norfolk home from Italy, he warned the House that the Lords would take exception to removing his guardians. He helped to draft the addresses on the danger from French power and the need to form alliances against it. ‘The way now is to make war and declare it afterwards’, he told the House, drawing on his experience in Holland. ‘You should block up the river of Bordeaux, Rochelle, and the Seine that France may vent nothing by sea. Now is the time or never.’ A member of the committee for the recall of British subjects from the French service, he denounced the recruitment and despatch of mercenaries: ‘If any by order, trick or connivance have suffered these men to go over, he would have them declared enemies to their King and country’. But he protested that the customs board was unable to prevent it. He opposed the bill brought in by Thomas Neale to establish the ballast shore on the Tyne estuary because it was not supported by Newcastle, and denied that exports of corn had been increased by the bounty. He served on the committee for the bill to suppress pedlars, hawkers, and petty chapmen, defending them ‘tooth and nail’ against the corporations.10
Downing was on both lists of the court party in 1678. He was appointed to the committee to draft the address for reducing France to her frontiers of 1659. In support of Birch’s land registry bill, he observed: ‘Every man’s estate is the worse for the fraud and deceit of another; something of this kind is necessary’. He resumed his own activity as a legislator, taking the chair in seven committees in the spring and summer sessions, including that for the border bill. He introduced and chaired bills for the export of coal and cider, burial in woollen, and the encouragement of woollen manufactures, the last of which he carried to the Lords on 16 Mar. When the Opposition demanded the removal of Councillors responsible for the rejection of addresses on foreign policy, he offended the House by inquiring whether it was apparent that the King had acted on their advice. He took part in drafting the address for an immediate war with France, and was sent to the Lords to desire a conference. After helping to summarize foreign commitments he declared his dislike of them, principally because of his mistrust of the Dutch. Meanwhile a conference had been arranged on his bill for burial in woollen, and he helped to prepare reasons; but all these measures were lost by the short prorogation in May. When Parliament met again he urged the retention of the new-raised forces. ‘Let all jealousies be laid aside’, he said, ‘and let common safety be looked upon only.’ He was summoned to a meeting of the government caucus, acted as teller for the Court on this issue on 11 June, and helped to manage a conference. He took part in the inquiry into the distribution of leaflets attacking the bill for burial in woollen. He reported the revived bill on 18 June, and also those to enforce the measurement of colliers and to encourage the woollen industry. After returning them to the Lords, he reported the subsequent conferences, and had the satisfaction of witnessing the royal assent to all except the last measure. In the final session of the Cavalier Parliament, he was among those ordered to draw up an address for the removal of Papists from the metropolitan area, to consider the bill for hindering them from sitting in Parliament, and to prepare reasons for belief in the Plot. For positive measures he was at a loss, though he affirmed that a law for castrating priests and Jesuits had been highly successful in Sweden. But he would agree with the Lords’ proviso to allow the Duke of York to retain his seat. His last speech was in defence of Danby, who, he affirmed, required no patent to authorize him to issue instructions to ambassadors. A very active Member, Downing had been appointed to 289 committees, carried 18 messages, and acted as teller in 14 divisions. Over a hundred of his speeches to the Commons are recorded, in addition to 37 reports from committee.11
Despite Downing’s inclusion on the ‘unanimous list’ circulated by the Opposition, he was re-elected to all the Exclusion Parliaments. A moderately active Member in 1679, with 11 committees, he was marked ‘vile’ on Shaftesbury’s list. On the Lords bill against Popery, he remarked:
It will never be well till you settle the minds of the people by a clause that no treaty of marriage shall be for the future with a Papist, and so you will give no countenance to priests to be at Whitehall.
William Garway, however, jeered at his claim that the matter had lain long upon his spirits, and he did not speak again in this Parliament. On 15 Apr. 1679 he reported that only a minute saving was possible on the disbandment estimates. He voted against exclusion. He was given leave to bring in a bill to simplify the taking of the affidavits required for burial in woollen, but he was unable to do so before the prorogation. In the second Exclusion Parliament he was very active as a committeeman. He was named to 19 committees, though none of them was of greater political significance than that to draw up the address for a fast. He took the chair for the burial affidavit bill, and the bills to encourage woollen manufactures and to prohibit the import of cattle from Scotland. The first and last of these measures he carried to the Lords. He supported the general naturalization of foreign Protestants, though only so far as to ‘enable them to buy land and exercise their trades’, and was appointed to the committee to bring in a bill. On 7 Jan. 1681 he enraged William Harbord by speaking well of Laurence Hyde. He left no trace on the records of the Oxford Parliament, but remained active as commissioner of customs until a few weeks before his death. It was during these years that he developed the famous street in Westminster that bears his name. He was buried, of course in woollen, in the Cambridgeshire village church of Croydon on 24 July 1684. His eldest son was feebleminded, but his grandson, the third baronet, sat for Dunwich as a Whig with one interval from 1710 to 1749.12
Downing’s character has usually been painted to match his only surviving portrait, which reveals him as a phenomenally ugly man. The first of the Yankee go-getters, he valued himself ‘upon having things do well under his hand’, as another notable adminstrator observed. There was not much originality in his ideas, according to the historian of the Treasury, ‘but he was surely unique in the energy and practicality with which he applied them’. As secretary of the Treasury he played a vital part in professionalizing the staff. His pulpit training stood him in good stead as a debater, despite occasional lapses of grammar and a candour which sometimes shocked the House but makes for excellent reading.13
Ref Volumes: 1660-1690
Author: John. P. Ferris
- 1. DNB; J. Beresford, Godfather of Downing Street, 24, 138; J. J. Muskett, Suff. Man. Fams. i. 99.
- 2. Beresford, 48, 52, 63.
- 3. CSP Dom. 1655, p. 606; 1657-8, pp. 62, 222; 1660-1, p. 74; 1671, p. 505; 1673-5, p. 287; Old Parl. Hist. xxi. 5; Cal. Treas. Bks. i. 308, 672; iii. 1125, 1281; Bulstrode Pprs. 17; Cal. Ct. Mins. E.I. Co. ed. Sainsbury, ix. 142.
- 4. CSP Dom. 1655-6, p. 297.
- 5. Beresford, 18, 24, 41, 51; Thurloe, vii. 429; Carte, Orig. Letters, ii. 319-23.
- 6. Bowmen diary, f. 99; L. A. Harper, Eng. Navigation Laws, 57; CJ, viii. 142, 151, 194, 199, 218, 222, 228; Old Parl. Hist. xxiii. 7, 15-16, 25, 32, 36, 56, 61, 64; Pepys Diary, 28 June 1660; C. D. Chandaman, Eng. Pub. Revenue, 38.
- 7. Beresford, 125, 130; Evelyn Diary, iii. 445; Pepys Diary, 17 Mar. 1662, 6 Nov. 1665, 12 May, 23 Nov. 1666, 27 Feb. 1667, 27 Dec. 1668; H. Roseveare, Treasury: Foundations of Control, 23, 25-26; Cal. Cl. SP, v. 125-6; Clarendon, Life, 594, 599, 606; Roseveare, Treasury: Evolution of a British Inst. 60-62; CJ, viii. 494, 496, 515, 519, 632, 637, 665, 670, 673, 674, 675; Milward, 55.
- 8. Clarendon, Life, 609, 793; Chandaman, 214-17; Treasury Evolution, 62, 71; Treasury Foundations, 27; Milward, 87, 139, 202, 236; CJ, ix. 16, 26, 36, 182, 200, 224, 233, 238; Beresford, 198-9; Cal. Treas. Bks. i. 693; ii. 474-5; Pepys Diary, 10 Jan. 1666, 27 Feb., 28 May, 8 Sept. 1667; Harl. 7020, f. 37; Grey, i. 271, 322-3; Dering, 31, 46.
- 9. Hatton Corresp. (Cam. Soc. n.s. xxii), 70, 78; CSP Ven. 1671-2, p. 116; HMC 6th Rep. 368; Grey, i. 286; ii. 18, 313-14, 350; Dering, 112, 115; CJ, ix. 275, 296.
- 10. Grey, iii. 333, 360, 450; iv. 125, 134-5, 162, 183-4, 220, 256; CJ, ix. 373, 387, 392; Dering Pprs. 320; Bulstrode Pprs. 17; HMC Lords, n.s. x. 155; Treasury Evolution, 66-67; Eg. 3345, ff. 34, 39, 45v; HMC 7th Rep. 468.
- 11. Grey, v. 147, 246-7, 308-9; vi. 7, 204, 244-5, 376; CJ, ix. 439, 443, 446, 451, 453, 459, 495, 502-5, 513-15; CSP Dom. 1678, pp. 154-4, 194.
- 12. Grey, vii. 80; viii. 226; CJ, ix. 627, 656, 682, 683, 695, 696; HMC 12th Rep. IX, 113; HMC 5th Rep. 187; Beresford, 134, 287; Luttrell, i. 313.
- 13. Beresford, 16; Pepys Diary, 27 May 1667; Treasury Evolution, 60, 71.