In the year 1620, Cavendish was raised to the peerage. The Duchess says:— “About this time King James of blessed memory, having a purpose to confer some Honour upon My Lord, made him Viscount Mansfield, and Baron of Bolsover”. But the event is less prettily described in a State Paper:— “John Woodford to Sir Fras. Nethersole. “November 7th, 1620. “The parliament is now resolved ... for the accommodating of your disputes between the heyres of the late Earl of Shrewsbury and Sir William Cavendish, a nephew of the Earl of Devonshire who hath been intitled to some of those lands by the Countess of Shrewsbury, prisoner in the tower, as an expedient to create the said Sir William, at the request of the heyres above mentioned, Viscount of Mansfield, which is newly done by pattent.” From this it seems that the Duchess would have been nearer the mark if she had writen:— “About this time King James, of blessed memory, having a purpose to smooth over a troublesome dispute, made my Lord Viscount Mansfield and Baron Ogle, There is reason for suggesting the last clause. From what the Duchess wrote, it might be inferred that these honours were given simply as the reward of merit, without any monetary payment on the part of the recipient; but judging from the following very matter-of-fact letter from Cavendish, about a peerage, not for himself but for another, a somewhat different inference might excusably be drawn. “State Papers, Domestic, Charles 1st. Vol. LV, No. 26. 1627, Feb. 27. “Mansfield to the Duke of Buckingham.“To my most Honble Patron the Duke of Buckingham his Grace. “May it please your Grace, “Accordinge to your Lop commands I have treated with my cosen Pierepoint, and as effectually as I coulde, his answer in his own wordes are these: he sayeth that Doctor Moore treated with him in King James his times aboute Honor, and tolde him that if he woulde be a Baron he might and for 4000£. Soone after that creation, he shoulde have the Honor to be a Viscount for 4000£ more, and within a little space after that to have the Dignety of an Erle conferr’d upon him for 4000£ more. And further he sayeth that a Scotch Knight offered him the Honor of a Viscount for 5000£ at the first, slippinge the title of a Baron. So that by this Valuation an Erle by purchase is but a reasonable bargaine att 12,000£ and a Viscount at 5000£ and a Barron 4000£.... For my parte, I never herde that a Baron was under 9 or 10,000£, but for my one experience I had little more than in the quittinge of an olde debt.” Cavendish, even early in his life, lent, or gave, large sums to the King, and by what he says about “quittinge of an olde debt,” he probably means that his peerages were given to him in lieu of payment of the debts owed to him by the King. He continues:— “He sayeth further that he is not a moneyde man and I believe itt, for he purchases mutch and therefore he sayeth he can not paye any great sum downe uppon the nayle, butt as he gets itt oute of his revenues, and so he must paye itt, and I think he would be loth to gve upon interest for Honor ... I protest, my Lo: I have dun my uttermost, and can get no more oute of him but infinite thankes to your Grace for his favour, and sweares he will never be a Lord but by your Grace’s favour, or your Hoble Mother’s whilst he lives. I thinke that if your Lop “Your Grace’s “W. “1626.” It may have been observed that Cavendish writes as if payment for peerages were a matter of course, a rule in fact; and, allowing for the difference in the value of money, they appear to have cost as much then as they cost now, or even more. Evidently any man “willing to receave honor,” and willing to pay for it, was looked upon as fair game. In the seventeenth century there was no central Conservative or central Liberal fund to receive the payments for peerages. Who then received them? Would it be the King? or would it be Buckingham? “My cosen Pierepoint” must have submitted to be bled and to be bled freely; for a couple of months later he was created Baron Pierrepont, of Holme Pierrepont, Co. Nottingham, and Viscount Newark; and a year later he was created Earl of Kingston-upon-Hull. In the year 1628, Cavendish was created Earl of Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Baron Cavendish of Bolsover; In spite of what we have read as to Cavendish being out of favour with Buckingham, the letter just quoted shows that Buckingham entrusted him with so delicate and confidential an errand as the squeezing of money out of a candidate for a peerage. The following letter, written a year later than the first, and shortly before Cavendish’s promotion to an earldom, proves that Buckingham employed him also in an, if possible, even more purely business transaction, although with the same negotiator, namely, “my cosen Pierepoint,” who had now become Lord Newark. “State Papers, Domestic, Charles Ist. Vol. CVIII, No. 72. June 1628. “William Viscount Mansfield to the Duke of Buckingham.“May it please your Grace, “To give you an account of your Commandes to me in treatinge with my Lo: of Newarke. I protest to God I did use as much diligence and care posibly I could to bringe him on.” The business, apparently, was a proposed sale of land. Cavendish had just begun to be hopeful of making his bargain, when Lord Newark suddenly protested:— “That he had made sollem vowe which was nott to be broken that he would never sell that lande or part with itt any waye, and that he had made another vowe before the Docter bought his Lande, that he would never bye ... though I sett before him the goodness of the bargin and what a small value that was to advance himself to that Honor, and how mutch he should serve and please so Hoble a friend as your Grace was to him, not forgettinge of the contrary side to laye sum dangers before him.” Cavendish might well point out that there would be “sum dangers” in opposing the will of Buckingham; Newcastle, as we must now call William Cavendish, had a rent-roll of more than £22,000 a year—a very large income at the then value of gold—besides more than £3000 a year from his wife. Even with this wealth, he found his visits to the Court very expensive and by degrees even embarrassing, as will be seen presently. Of Newcastle’s private correspondence at the period which we have lately been considering, there is a good deal among the manuscripts at Welbeck. “The King to William, Viscount Mansfield.“1621, March 10. The Palace of Westminster.—Permitting him on account of his wife’s sickness to be absent from Parliament, but directing him to send up his proxy to some fit person. Signed. Seal of Arms. Countersigned, ‘Windebank’.” How many a modern legislator would be thankful to be allowed to send a proxy to the House! “T. Earl of Arundel to Viscount Mansfield at Welbeck.“1621, June 5. Whitehall.—I am sorry that this accidente of myne had that effecte to my frendes—especially farre of—as to make them, out of theyre care to me, give themselves trouble. For myselfe I thanke God it gave much ease and rest whilst I was in the Tower, and when I came out, it shewed the King’s constancy and favor to his servantes that love him truly, and made me see I had some true frendes.” To be sent to the Tower was no rare event to a peer in those times. The father of the writer of the above letter had died in it. “W. Earl of Newcastle to his Wife, the Countess of Newcastle, at Welbeck.“1629, July 28. Chatsworth.—There is great change in Chatsworth since the death of the Lord. For privacy I could be weary, but I will not, out of respect for my lord.” “Henry Bates to the Earl of Newcastle, at Welbeck.“1631, April 30th. London.—The Lord Castlehaven is tryd by his peeres, condemned upon” certain horrible crimes “Think this while you’re drinking tobacco”. The appointment of Newcastle to attend the King to Scotland, noticed at the end of the next letter, was destined to put him to enormous expense. “Francis, Lord Cottington to the Earl of Newcastle.“1632, December 13. Charing Cross.—The death of the two Kings, Sweden and Bohemia, with his Majesty’s late sickness of the small-pox, has almost put by here all kind of home negociations; yet I must tell you from my Lord Treasurer that you are lively in the memory both of the King and of his lordship. The King is now well though he still keeps his chamber, and my Lord Deputy The “good motive for your friends to put it to a period” probably alluded to an object that Newcastle had very much at heart, of which we shall hear more by and by. |