| |
William Parker
11th Baron Morley,
4th Baron Monteagle
by Jennifer O'Brien

Born: 1575
Died: 1
July 1622, Great Hallingbury, Essex
William Parker came from a
family with strong catholic sympathies on both
sides. The 8th Baron Morley was a devoted
catholic under Henry VIII, and the 9th Baron Morley, William's
grandfather, was considered a dangerous recusant
who left England in 1569 and lived under Spanish
protection. His father, Edward Parker, 10th Baron
Morley also spent some time abroad as a recusant,
and was forced to resign his hereditary office of
Lord Marshal of Ireland. However, William seems
to have learned the art of conformation quite
well from his father, who later received the
exclusive rights to publish a book instructing
children on the taking of the Oath of Allegiance,
and who served as a commissioner for the trials
of Mary Stuart and Philip, Earl of Arundel, in
spite of retaining his catholic sympathies.
His mother Elizabeth was the
daughter and heiress of William Stanley, 3rd Lord
Monteagle, and her mother was a firm supporter of
the Jesuits.
The eldest son of Edward and
Elizabeth, he had a younger brother Charles, who
served with Ralegh in 1617, and a sister Mary who
married Thomas Habington of Hindlip,
Worcestershire.. Through his mother he was
connected to the powerful families of the
Stanleys and the Howards, including Thomas
Howard, Earl of Arundel, both families who were
also known for their catholic tendencies.
His marriage in 1589 to
Elizabeth Tresham, younger sister of the
conspirator Francis Tresham brought him a much needed dowry of 3800
pounds, including the property at Hoxton. It also
brought him more firmly into the recusant world
through his new connections to the Tresham, Vaux
and Catesby families, and as a brother-in-law to
Lord Stourton. His principal residence was at
Great Hallingbury, near Bishop Stortford in
Essex, but he also kept a town house in the
Strand, and owned Hornby Castle in the Vale of
the Lune.
In spite of his father's
conformation, Parker's own record as a recusant
was spotless before the accession of James, and his life and actions within the
catholic community closely paralleled those of
the other plotters.
In 1599 he joined the Earl of
Essex in his Irish campaign as a cavalry officer
under Southampton. He was involved in the brave,
if not foolhardy rescue of Essex's forces in a
skirmish near Arklow on 30 June 1599 and was
knighted by Essex on 12 July. He became a devotee
of the Earl, and assisted him in his abortive
rebellion on 7 February 1600. He went with Essex
and his entourage to see a specially requested
presentation of Shakespeare's play Richard II prior to the rebellion, and during the
Earl's march on the City, he attempted
unsuccessfully to prevent a herald accompanying
Lord Burleigh from proclaiming Essex a traitor,
his men only driving them away after the
proclamation had been read. While trying to make
his way back to Essex House with the others, he
fell into the river Thames and nearly drowned.
He gave himself up with the
others after the siege at Essex House, and wrote
a letter to Sir Robert Cecil on 13 March 1600 hoping to obtain
mercy. "My conscience tells me that I am in
no way guilty of these Imputations and that
mearley the blindness of ignorance led me into
these infamous errors." This letter, along
with his confession that was used to help convict
the Earl of Essex, perhaps earned him his life.
He was released in August, however, he was fined
the enormous sum of 8,000 pounds, leading some to
speculate that he became a government spy at this
point.
However, he remained involved
in catholic activities, helping Robert Catesby to fund a trip by Thomas Wintour and Father Tesimond to Spain in 1602 to
seek Spanish aid (unsuccessfully) soon after his
release - but there were no repercussions that
one would have imagined would have occurred had
he indeed been a spy at that point.
The accession of James created a change in fortunes and a
change in course for William Parker. He was
granted the right to sit in the House of Lords in
right of the title on his mother's side as Lord
Monteagle, had his estates in Essex restored,
King James personally asked Henri IV for the
release of his brother from prison in Calais, he
served as a Lord Commissioner who prorogued
Parliament on October 3, 1605, a great honor, was
appointed to the court of Queen Anne in some
capacity, and his name appears on the charter
creating Prince Charles the Duke of York.
These honors in and of
themselves need not be suspicious, as James
showed great favour to all those involved in the
Essex Rebellion, in which James had a hand. But
Parker's letter to James professing his
conversion to protestantism could not have hurt,
saying "I was breed upp in the Romish
religion and walked in that, because I knew no
better" and that he had "come to
discerne the Ignorance I was formerly wrapped In,
as I nowe wonder that ether myself, or any other
of common understandinge, showld bee so
blynded".
Although compromise was not
uncommon at the time, and not indicative of
Parker's true feelings, it is unlikely that his
catholic friends and family ever knew how far he
had been willing to go to vindicate himself, as
shown by of this particularly strong letter, as
he certainly maintained close relations with
them. To Catesby he was particularly close, to
whom he wrote "in what languishment have we
led our life since we departed from the dear
Robin whose conversation gave us such warmth as
we needed no other heat to maintain our
health...ever fast tied to your friendship, W.
Monteagle".
Although he initially told
Thomas Wintour, who served Monteagle as a
secretary, that henceforth he was resolved to
stand wholly for the King, and that Wintour
should have no speech with him of Spain, he was
soon indicating his dissatisfaction with the new
monarch amongst his catholic friends.
In July of 1605, he was at
Fremlands with Father Garnet, Robert Catesby and
Francis Tresham, when Father Garnet, concerned
(rightly) about possible catholic stirs had
questioned the group. "I asked what they
three thought of the force of Catholics, whether
they were able to make their part good by arms
against the King." said Garnet, "My
Lord Monteagle answered, if ever they were, they
were able now, and then added the reason: 'the
king (saith he) is so odious to all sorts'"
Monteagle is also reported to have said
"What, will the Spaniards not help us? It is
a shame." Garnet also claimed in his initial
confession that Catesby had shown Monteagle the
papal breves of 1603, instructing catholics not
to give the oath of allegiance to any
non-catholic successor to Elizabeth, and also
that Monteagle had given letters along with
Catesby's to Baynham to take to Rome. It is also
possible that he met up with Catesby and Thomas Percy at Bath in September of 1605.
So Monteagle was playing both
sides of the fence very well, and far from
seeming the likely saviour of the government, he
in many ways seemed more like an ideal
conspirator. Robert Catesby must have had
suspicions of his own not to include Monteagle in
his plans for the Gunpowder Plot, in spite of being involved in several
other schemes together. Some have suggested that
Monteagle was a conspirator, however this seems
unlikely as he would not then have exposed
himself by being the recipient of the letter, nor
would have Catesby needed to suspect Tresham as
the traitor.
Even if not a plotter himself,
the fact that there was more to the circumstances
of the letter and the revelation to the plot is
obvious, even at the time. The official story
from the King's Book has the events of 26 October
1605 as follows:
"...the Lord Monteagle,
son and heir to the Lord Morley, being in his own
lodging, ready to go to supper, at seven of the
clock at night, one of his footman, whom he had
sent of an errand over the street, was met by a
man of reasonable tall personage, who delivered
him a letter, charging him to put it in My Lord
his master's hands; which my Lord no sooner
perceived, but that having broken it up, and
perceiving the same to be of an unknown and
somewhat unlegible hand, and without either date
or superscription, did call one of his men unto
him, for helping him to read it. But no sooner
did he conceive the strange contents thereof,
although he was somewhat perplexed what
construction to make of it, as whether a matter
of consequence, as indeed it was, or whether some
foolish devised pasquil by some of his enemies to
scare him from his attendance at the Parliament,
yet did he, as a most dutiful and loyal subject,
conclude not to conceal it, whatever might come
of it.
Whereupon, notwithstanding the
lateness and darkness of the night in that season
of the year, he presently repaired to his
Majesty's palace at Whitehall, and there
delivered the same to the Earl of Salisbury, his
Majesty's principal secretary."
The Lord Admiral Howard, Earls
Northampton and Worcester, as well as the Lord
Chamberlain were also conveniently in attendance,
although this fact was omitted from the official
version. Salisbury said that this put him in mind
of rumors he had received that catholics were to
deliver at this Parliament a petition for
toleration, in "such order, and so well
backed, as the King should be loth to refuse
their requests; like the sturdy beggars, craving
alms with one open hand, but carrying a stone in
the other, in case of refusal." However, it
was decided to leave the matter to the King's
"fortunate judgement, in clearing and
solving obscure riddles and doubtful
mysteries", and to do nothing until the
King's return from hunting 5 days later. On
presenting it to the King, Cecil said "that
it was likely to be written by a fool or
madman", but the King "did thereupon
conjecture, that the danger mentioned should be
some sudden danger by blowing up of powder".
It was decided to search the Parliament, but in
order for the "staying of idle rumours"
it was decided to defer it until the day before
the opening.
Monteagle accompanied Thomas
Howard, Lord Chamberlain for the search, and upon
discovering that a vault filled with a
"great store of billets, faggots and
coals" was owned by Percy, he not only
exclaimed surprise that Percy should have such a
large store, considering he had seldom occasion
to stay there, but that due to Percy's
"backwardness in religion, and the old
dearness of friendship between him and the said
Percy, he did greatly suspect the matter, and
that the letter should come from him".
The problems with this official
account are well laid out by Father Oswald
Tesimond, who writes:
"...who can really believe
that the Earl of Salisbury and his friends, men
who showed the utmost astuteness in everything
else, would have proved so dense when
interpreting a letter that was clear
enough?...even a schoolboy would have found it
easy enough to guess at , without taking it to
the King as if he were some prophet...on the
night he received the letter, Baron Monteagle
supped in a house of his a mile outside of
London. This was something he did rarely. In
fact, he had neither dined nor supped there for
more than a month previously. Whoever took the
letter to him was, therefore, someone who knew
the Baron intimately, and consequently was well
known to his household. How was it, then, that
the page did not know the man to whom he spoke
and gave the letter? One could add to this the
incredible foolishness of anyone who entrusted a
letter of this kind, being of such importance, to
the hands of a page. It also showed monumental
carelessness on the part of the baron to have
such a letter read out in the presence of all who
were at supper. This letter had been sent to him
confidentially, and as something of the utmost
significance. The secretary was at least right
when he said that whoever wrote it showed great
stupidity, if only for having written so openly
of a secret so enormous."
Given these and other problems
with the official story, it is certain that the
circumstances were contrived. Edmund Church, a
reputed confidant of Monteagle, claimed that he
knew there was a letter to be sent to him. But
the circumstances and extent of his foreknowledge
can only be speculative at this point.
What is certain is the degree
to which the government lauded, rewarded and
protected him. He was hailed as a national hero,
and received an annuity of 500 pounds for life,
plus lands worth a further 200 pounds per year.
The government also went to great lengths to
shield his reputation, making Garnet revise his
confessions implicating Monteagle in his
statements against the King and involvement in
the Spanish Treason, and papering over or
striking his name if it appeared in any
confessions. The King banned the use of Garnet's
original testimony in any trial. The whole
statement of Thomas Wintour that Monteagle had
told him that the Prince would not be attending
Parliament was stricken from the official copy
(it appears in the Hatfield copy). In fact,
Salisbury wrote to Coke:
"Lastly, and this you must
not omit, you must deliver, in commendation of my
Lord Monteagle, words to show how sincerely he
dealt, and how fortunately it proved that he was
the instrument of so great a blessing,...because
it is so lewdly given out that he was once of
this plot of powder, and afterwards betrayed it
all to me."
Further rumors continued to
circulate about Monteagle, including that he had
Francis Tresham poisoned in the Tower. Although
from the confessions it was clear that Frances
had wanted to warn him about the plot, Monteagle
made no effort to help his brother-in-law,
although he did intervene to spare the life of
his other brother-in law Thomas Habington, the
husband of his sister Mary.
After the plot, Monteagle
continued to attend parliament regularly and
inherited the title of Lord Morley upon his
father's death in 1618. He invested in the second
Virginia Company and was elected to member of its
council in 1609. He also invested in the East
India and Northwest Passage companies.
In spite of his part in the
Gunpowder Plot, it seems that he continued in his
catholic practices. On 1 August , 1609 Waad
complained that "the disorders of Lord
Monteagle's house were an offence to the
country", and he was suspected of sheltering
students from St. Omer's seminary. His eldest son
of 6 children, Henry, was a known catholic and
Monteagle gave permission for his crippled
daughter Frances to become a nun. Further, on his
death at his residence in Great Hallingbury on 1
July, 1622, he was reported to have received the
last rites of the Roman church. His estate
claimed that his annuity at that time was 2000
pounds in arrears.
Reproduced by kind
permission of the Gunpowder Plot Society
Sources
.............
Akrigg, G.P.V., Shakespeare
and the Earl of Southampton
Archaelogia
British
Museum MSS Add 6177
British
Museum MSS Add 19402, f. 146
Caraman, Philip, Henry
Garnet 1555-1605
Cobbett's
Complete Collection of State Trials, King's Book
Dictionary
of National Biography
Durst, Paul, Intended
Treason: What really happened in the Gunpowder
Plot, 1970
Edwards, Francis, S.J., The
Gunpowder Plot: the narrative of Oswald Tesimond
alias Greenway, trans. from the Italian
of the Stonyhurst Manuscript, edited and
annotated, 1973
Finch, Mary E., The
Wealth of five Northamptonshire Families
1540-1640
Fraser, Antonia, Faith
and Treason - The Story of the Gunpowder Plot,
1996
Gerard, John, S.J., What
Was the Gunpowder Plot? The traditional story
tested by original evidence.
Harrison, G.B., The
Life and Death of Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex
Haynes, Alan, The
Gunpowder Plot, 1994
Nicholls, Mark, Investigating
Gunpowder Plot
Sidney, Philip, A
History of the Gunpowder Plot
Parkinson, C. Northcote, Gunpowder
Treason & Plot, London, 1976
Spink, Henry Hawkes, The
Gunpowder Plot and Lord Mounteagle's Letter,
1902
Aims
of the Gunpowder Plot Society
The aims of the Gunpowder Plot
Society are to promote and encourage research on
all aspects of the Gunpowder Plot by providing a
central repository for information, source
material, and research assistance, as well as to
provide an open forum for discussion through our
mailing list and newsletters.
Copyright ©1996, 1997, 1998 Britannia Internet Magazine. Design by Unica Multimedia
|