Family and Education

b. c.1525, (?illegit.) s. of Robert Fleetwood of Heskin, Eccleston, Lancs. by Anne, da. of William Tyldesley of Lancs. educ. ?Eton; Brasenose and/or Broadgates Hall, Oxf. c.1538-43; Clifford’s Inn c.1543; M. Temple c.1551, called. m. Marian, da. of John Barley of Kingsey, Bucks., 6s. inc. William Fleetwood II 2da. suc. fa. 1561.1

Offices Held

Commr. for eccles. causes 1559-94; escheator of Durham, j.p. by 1562; j.p. London, Mdx., Surr. by 1571, Bucks. by 1569, Lancs. by 1577.

Autumn reader, M. Temple 1564, Lent reader 1568; serjeant-at-law 1580, Queen’s serjeant 1592.

Serjeant-at-law within duchy of Lancaster 1559, counsel 1560; steward and bailiff of the Savoy ?1559-d.; steward of duchy manor of Penwortham 1567-d., of manor of Mildenhall 1571-80; duchy feodary and bailiff of Beds. and Bucks. 1577-82; deputy chief steward south parts 1586.

Merchant Taylors, freeman 1557, ct. of assistants 1562; steward, Wigan church by 1559; steward of Newton, Lancs. by 1559; steward, Ruchock manor, Worcs. 1564; recorder, London c. 23 Apr. 1571-92; steward, Farnham Royal and St. Helen’s, Berks. c.1576; steward, Bernwood forest, Bucks. 1577; recorder, Preston by 1584.

Member, Antiq. Soc. c.1591.2

Biography

The Fleetwood family, long established in Lancashire, did well out of the dissolution of the monasteries. Two of Fleetwood’s uncles and his father migrated to London and obtained government jobs. Fleetwood himself was born in Lancashire; authorities differ as to the legitimacy of his birth. His name appears in the Eton College Register, and in the records of two Oxford colleges, but his early life is obscure. He certainly went up to Oxford, did not take a degree, and owed his early advancement to Sir William Cecil, to whose notice he may have been drawn by Sir Ambrose Cave, chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster. Cecil and Fleetwood served together on the 1559 ecclesiastical commission, visiting the dioceses of Oxford, Peterborough, and Coventry and Lichfield. Bishop Pilkington of Durham wrote of Fleetwood ‘if I might have such a helper I would not doubt by God’s help to conquer many things’. In spite of the description of Fleetwood as ‘Leicester’s Mad Recorder’ in the notorious Leycester’s Commonwealth, Fleetwood was essentially Burghley’s man, his friend, loyal supporter and the promoter of his policies in Parliament.3

Fleetwood was one of the great parliament men of Elizabeth’s day, active in the Commons for over 30 years. Returned to the first two Parliaments of the reign by Sir Ambrose Cave at Lancaster, and to that of 1571 at St. Mawes (probably this was arranged by Burghley), in later Parliaments Fleetwood automatically sat for London by virtue of being its recorder. This more or less eliminates the possibility of confusion with other members of his family. He was a frequent speaker, described in the debates on the vagabonds bill, 30 May 1572, as being ‘long, tedious ... nothing touching the matter in question’, but at his best, he was a skilled debater. On one occasion in 1584 he asked ‘leave of the House to go to the assizes, but was denied of the House’. Afterwards, when he would have gone out of doors, they cried ‘No, no ... and would not suffer him’. And the clerk noted, ‘He did ask of glory, knowing they would not spare him’.4

Fleetwood was appointed to two committees in the ill-reported 1559 Parliament, considering bills to restore first fruits and tenths to the Crown (6 Feb.) and against the cancellation of records (1 Mar.). By the 1563 Parliament he had emerged as one of the puritan leaders who were trying to restore the religious establishment to the position it had reached at the death of Edward VI and to force the Queen to make a statement on the succession. He was one of the two MPs to whom John Hales showed his tract on the succession, and a member of the Commons committee considering the succession in the second session of this Parliament, 31 Oct. 1566.5

In the 1571 Parliament Fleetwood took part in the business of the House almost daily, sometimes several times a day. On 6 Apr. he spoke against bishops ‘who perhaps would be slow’ being given charge of the bill on attending church. He was anxious ‘that the penalty ... should not go to promoters’ which brought about ‘no reformation ... but private gain to the worst sort of men’, and was put on the ensuing committees. He was named the same day to the committee considering returns. Next day, 7 Apr., he was appointed to the subsidy committee. In the debate on the treasons bill, 9 Apr., he

learnedly showed the due making of laws to be for the one of these three ends, the glory of God, the profit of the prince and realm, or safety of ourselves.

The bill was ‘most worthy the consideration’ but ‘we may not proceed but slowly and with good advice’. He remembered that ‘he himself hath for hasty speech ... before the Council sustained reproach’ and urged that the second reading should be postponed until ‘some other day’ lest the bill, ‘instead of committing for consideration be committed to the chest of forgetfulness, or quite cast out of doors’. On the prayer book, the same day,

coming to the bishop of London and desirous to learn the warrant of deprivation of such who refused to fulfil some of the prescribed orders, I was willed to look in the book of common prayer. ‘Of all things under heaven, I never looked’, quoth he, ‘for a law in the rubrics of a matins book, but since so it is, let it be better seen unto, and let further or other order be taken for such hidden matter wrapped up in clouds.’

On 11 Apr. Fleetwood introduced a bill against rogues and spoke on fraudulent conveyances and the Bristol bill. He was appointed to the committees. His speech on Mary Queen of Scots the next day was cautious. He remembered

the cunning of the prelates ... in Edward IV his time when King Edward required the suppressing of all such abbeys as King Henry VI had erected. To hinder this, contrary to the King’s meaning, some would needs add the colleges in Cambridge which by him were also founded [so that] the intent of the first as of the last was subverted ... He concluded therefore it were well ... to be referred to the Queen’s learned counsel, as Mr. Heneage had desired.

Fleetwood spoke on fraudulent conveyances 14 Apr., and was appointed to the committee. On the same day he spoke ‘learnedly and withal pleasantly’ on licences and dispensations issued by the archbishop of Canterbury:

the Queen is sworn to minister justice with mercy and discretion. What mercy is (he said), he knew, but what discretion was, he would gladly learn.

His speech on usury, 19 Apr., caught the point of the debate:

he had read the civil law, and of the canon law something, but ... what usury was he said he was not to learn.

Next day, on the sequestration of Strickland, he was in cautious mood:

... the only and whole help of the House for ease of their grief in this case [was] to be humble suitors to her Majesty and neither to send for him nor demand him of right.

Perhaps, as with his friend Yelverton, whose speeches he so often prefaced or followed, the passage of the years and the prospect of promotion tended to induce conformity. In any case within a day or two he was appointed recorder of London, and is thenceforth almost always referred to as such in the journals, rather than by his surname. As the anonymous journal breaks off in the middle of the account of the proceedings of 21 Apr. and the official Commons journal reports no further speeches in the Parliament, any that Fleetwood may have made are lost. His other committees in 1571, in addition to those already mentioned, were on the treasons bill (12 Apr.), nonresident burgesses (19 Apr.), respite of homage (25 Apr.), order of business (26 Apr.), lands without covin (14 May), tellers and receivers (26 May), barristers’ fees (26, 28 May) and an investigation into whether some MPs had taken money for their votes (28, 29 May).6

Fleetwood was not especially prominent in the main business of the first session of the 1572 Parliament, that of Mary Queen of Scots, though he was on the joint committee appointed on the first working day of the Parliament, 12 May, and on other related committees, 28 May and 9 June. He spoke twice on the subject, making an interesting point on 17 May, concerning privileged speech in the Commons: Arthur Hall was entitled to speak for Mary there, but not outside. ‘Words tolerable in this House are not sufferable at Blount’s table’. On 9 June, in the changed situation created by the execution of the Duke of Norfolk, he was dull and unconstructive, considering that the matter was, in his own words, ‘very weighty cause concerning the crown of England’. All the same, Fleetwood’s standing as a debater at this time is demonstrated by his being chosen, with Christopher Yelverton, to put on a show for the French ambassadors who had come to negotiate the Alençon marriage project. On 26 June:

The bill of jeofails the third time read, to the reading whereof one French lord was permitted to enter the House and to sit by Mr. Treasurer, certain others to stand at the bar, which was argued in their presence by Mr. Yelverton against the bill and Mr. Recorder with the bill.

Fleetwood felt strongly (11 June) about those who curried favour with the Queen by reporting to her the proceedings of the House. This speech has a neat reference to the widely held belief that the legal profession still included Catholic lawyers surviving from Mary Tudor’s reign:

These tale tellers very ripe [sic] in Queen Mary’s time. It was the practice of the papists, and they were traitors. Some of them be dead since and some of them walk now in Westminster Hall. [Fleetwood was] assured, whensoever the tale teller is found it shall appear he is an errant papist.

Fleetwood also intervened in debates on fraudulent conveyances (16 May), the clerk of the market (23 May), London taxes (24 May), procedure (24 May), Norfolk’s execution (28 May—‘we ought to deal modestly when we deal with them that carry the sword’), a restrictive trade bill (31 May), the Stafford assizes bill (25 June), a legal point on parliamentary privilege for debtors (27 June), and, the same day, the duchy of Lancaster, ‘which hath of very old time enjoyed many privileges’. His committees included fraudulent conveyances (16 May), Tonbridge School (23 May), weights and measures (23 May) and fines and recoveries (31 May).7

In the 1576 session Fleetwood had his fair share of the committee work, but only two speeches are recorded, both quoting precedents on matters of privilege. On 13 Feb. the issue was that of strangers found in the House, and on 20 Feb. Arthur Hall’s servant Smalley. During this session, however, there was plenty of business transacted concerning London, and Fleetwood may well have spoken more frequently than the inadequate records suggest. He was appointed to the following committees on the dates indicated: promoters and the subsidy (10 Feb.), ports (13 Feb.), privileges (13 Feb.—examining a stranger found in the House), fines and recoveries (13 Feb.), jeofails (15 Feb.), leather (18 Feb.), Mr. Hall’s servant (21 Feb.), reciprocal treatment of foreigners (24 Feb.), Chester (25 Feb.), church discipline (29 Feb.), aliens’ children (3 Mar.), foreign artificers (5 Mar.), justices of the forest (8 Mar.) and Lord Stourton (12 Mar.).8

Similarly in 1581 there are no records of speeches by Fleetwood, though it is inconceivable that he made none. His committees included the subsidy (25 Jan.), the clerk of the market (27 Jan.), unlawful marriages (31 Jan.), encumbrances against purchasers (4 Feb.), sheriffs (4 Feb.), Worcestershire copyholders (6 Feb.), Arthur Hall’s ‘dangerous and lewd book’ (6 Feb.), counterfeit seals (11 Feb.), Sir Thomas Gresham’s debts (20 Feb., 9 Mar.), hats and caps (22 Feb.), wax (24 Feb.), Dover harbour (4, 6 Mar.), fines and recoveries (10 Mar.), preservation of the Queen’s honour (14 Mar.), fraudulent conveyances (14 Mar.), seditious words and practices (17 Mar.) and iron mills (18 Mar.).9

On 29 Nov. 1584 Fleetwood sent Burghley ‘my especial good lord, my lord treasurer of England’, an account of the opening proceedings (23 Nov.) of the 1584 Parliament:

First there appeared in the parliament house the knights and burgesses, out of all order, in troops, standing upon the floor making strange noises, there being not past seven or eight of the old parliaments. After this we were all called in to the White Hall and there called by name before my lord steward and the rest of the council, and after that we were sworn, whereby we lost the oration made by my lord chancellor. And after that Mr. Treasurer moved the House to make an election of a Speaker, whereupon he himself named my brother Puckering, who sat next to me, and there was not one word spoken. And then I said to my companions about me ‘cry Puckering’, and then they and I beginning, the rest did the same. And then Mr. Speaker made his excuse standing still in his place, and that done, Mr. Treasurer and Mr. Comptroller, being by me called upon, sitting near, they rose and set him to his place, where indeed they should have set him either before his speech or else at the beginning, and his speech should have been before the chair. And that done we all departed until Thursday that the Speaker was presented.

On 27 Nov. Fleetwood was appointed to the committee for the better observing of the Sabbath day, which he reported to Burghley as follows:

The committees amounted in number to 60 at the least [33 are named in the D’Ewes list, but of course others could have attended] all young gentlemen, and at our meeting in the afternoon 20 at once did speak and there we sat talking and did nothing until night so that Mr. Chancellor [of the Exchequer] was weary, and then we departed home.

The next day, Fleetwood reported the debate on the proceedings for which the Parliament had been called, the Queen’s safety. ‘Before this time’, Fleetwood noted, ‘I never heard in Parliament the like matters uttered ... they were magnalia regni’. Mildmay spoke for over an hour and Hatton for over two hours, but Fleetwood’s own preoccupation was with ‘a lewd fellow called Robinson’ who ‘sat in the parliament house all the whole day and heard what was said’. Fleetwood was put in charge of the committee to look into the matter, making his report the next sitting day, Monday 30 Nov. Robinson, a skinner, was imprisoned for a week. Others among Fleetwood’s committees this Parliament were parsonages impropriate (1 Dec.), juries (4 Dec.), validity of the Huntingdonshire county returns (8, 12, 21 Dec.), tanners and common informers (both 9 Dec.), grants by corporations (11 Dec.), local government at Westminster (15 Dec., 17, 22 Mar. 1585), religion (16, 19 Dec., 15, 18, 22 Feb., 9, 19 Mar. 1585), fraudulent conveyances (18 Feb., 17 Mar. 1585), Canterbury almshouses (20 Feb., 2 Mar.), insufficient justices in Wales (22 Feb.), the subsidy (24 Feb.), London apprentices (2 Mar.), a ‘bill against the detestable sin of adultery’ (3 Mar.) and London curriers (16 Mar.). On 10 Feb. 1585 Fleetwood was one of three appointed to protest to the chancellor and the master of the rolls against the serving of subpoenas on MPs and next day he again entered the lists on behalf of the Commons against one of his own profession, moving

that those of this House towards the law, being the most part of them at the bars in her Majesty’s courts attending their clients’ causes, and neglecting the service of this House, be called by the serjeant to repair unto this House presently, and to give their attendance in the service of the same.

It was ordered that the serjeant should repair

unto all the said courts and there give notice and charge from this House that all those of this House that are in any the same courts, or at any of the bars of the same courts, shall presently make their repair unto this House, and give their attendance here. And ... many of them came into this House upon the said commandment accordingly.

The sequel was absurd, for Fleetwood himself, the same day, ‘was presently pleading at the common pleas bar, to the great abuse of this whole House’ and the serjeant had to be sent to ‘charge the said Mr. Recorder to make his present repair unto this House ...’. A number of undated snippets survive from various speeches and interventions made by Fleetwood in this Parliament. In a speech on a bill for ministers to be at least 24 years of age he was playing to the gallery:

You would think I had studied this year I am so ready and perfect in it, but I promise you I never heard this bill before, but I could keep you here till two o’clock with like cases, for I had a collection of them till my book was picked from me ... The bishop of Winchester’s cook had spurge comfits given him. Do you laugh at it? I tell you it is no laughing matter when you hear the end. He in revenge hereof made certain porridge which an old woman died after she had eaten of them—and so I think she would though she had not eaten of them, for she was very old. But then was a statute for poisoners that they should be boiled to death in hot lead, let down by little and little. I remember I saw one once when I was a little boy sitting behind m[y] grandfather upon a horse, and was taken away when I cried for fear, for I tell you it was a terrible matter to behold ... I think you would be content to hear me these two hours.

On separate occasions: ‘I never saw bills so illiterately drawn’, and ‘All our bills are long bills, full of tautology and cacophony, penned in barbarous English’. The court of wards was ‘very honourable for justice’. Fleetwood had ‘found it so in mine own case or else I might have had that laid on my back would have made it crack’. But

the pipe of the court of wards dried up 1,000 marks a year. We must learn of them of London that are now searching the pipes because the water runs not as it was wont to do.

The water motif recurs in a debate on shoemakers: ‘water purifies the nerves and causeth these rheums and spitting and sputling’. In another, about fish nets at Orford whose mesh was so narrow that the young fry was destroyed, Fleetwood mentioned a law

called hippodromia. It is no marvel if you ... have no knowledge in it ... We have very good order for the river of Thames, it costs us a great deal of money, and there is a time that it is not lawful to take certain kinds of fish, as barbels, and they be called fence months.

Once Fleetwood was ‘reading of a book’ while a bill was being discussed. ‘ "Mr Speaker", he complained, "we here at this end of the House cry aye and no and indeed hear ne'er a word". Then, being repeated again, said nothing at all to it'. Another cryptic intervention, at least in the context as presented by the anonymous diarist: 'Mr. Speaker, if a man do sup of my porridge, is it lawful for me to have a lick of his ladle?'. On forest laws:

The King to please Londoners did disaforest round about London. Then you will ask me why did he not Enfield? Marry, it was none of his, but afterwards when he erected Marylebone and Hyde, he did write to the city of London and had an Act of Parliament ... It is a comfort to me when my Lord Russell and my good neighbours round about me and Sir William Pelham come to me, to ride with them and show them sport in my grounds, and I have good store I tell you.

Finally, on promoters ('they have gotten a finer name, informer'):

We make laws against them but the burden lights upon the backs of the people of the kingdom ... They were wont to take an oath in the Exchequer but the King's bench did receive it without an oath, which made them to resort so fast thither as the Exchequer was fain to do so too.10

Soon after the commencement of the 1586 Parliament on 4 Nov., Fleetwood moved for the setting up of a committee 'for the examining and reporting cases of privilege', which was done, with Fleetwood in charge. He was put on the committee considering the disputed Norfolk returns (9 Nov.), and (11 Nov.) made

a large and plentiful discourse of the ancient privileges and liberties of this House, furnished with recital of sundry precedents and examples [before] coming down to the matter in hand.

On Mary Queen of Scots (21 Nov.) he was 'bending many speeches and reciting many precedents [to] persuade very earnestly the said insisting of this House upon the said petition' for her execution. He was on committees concerned with the court of common pleas (24, 25 Feb.), fraud (25 Feb.), writs of errors (27 Feb.), and on 2 Mar. wanted a proviso inserted in the subsidy 'for saving the liberties of the officers of the mint'. Next day he was against committing a bill against purveyors (but it was committed) and on 6 Mar. after he had spoken in favour of committing a fish bill it was put in his charge. He was appointed to a privilege committee the same day. On 7 Mar. he spoke on the second reading of the purveyors bill. The remainder of Fleetwood's activity this Parliament comprised his membership of committees on a learned ministry (8 Mar.), the fish bill again (9 Mar.), fraudulent conveyances (13 Mar.), the Members put in the Tower (13 Mar.), curriers (14 Mar.) and the continuation of statutes (17 Mar.).11

Fleetwood was a member of the committees on privileges (7 Feb. 1589) and returns (8 Feb.), and of the following other committees in this Parliament: the subsidy (11 Feb.), forestallers and regrators (12 Feb.), the Puleston privilege case (12 Feb.), Orford harbour (13 Feb.), too many attorneys (17 Feb.), the New Romney election (25 Feb.—referred to the committee on returns mentioned above), the Queen's dislike fo the purveyors bill (27 Feb.), inns and wine casks (27 Feb.) and children of aliens (18 Mar.). On the New Romney election dispute and on inns and wine casks he made minor interventions.12

Fleetwood's parliamentary activities comprised but a small part of his life. As recorder of London he was in charge of all lawsuits and other legal aspects of the administration of the city. He sat with the court of aldermen (until, with time, his attendance fell off and a deputy was appointed); conferred with the Privy Council over demarcation disputes involving other cities, Trinity House, the Cinque Ports and so on, and made frequent journeys to the court on ceremonial business such as presenting the newly elected lord mayor to the Queen, and the sheriffs at the Exchequer. In the course of a single week, he might preside as justice of the peace at the quarter session of London, Middlesex, or Southwark; sit in judgment at the court of hustings, or at sessions of oyer and terminer; hold a gaol delivery at Newgate; charge the jury on presentment of nuisances; sit with the sessions of Admiralty to punish pirates, or with the court of conservancy of the River Thames, or with commissions for the muster or subsidy of Middlesex. Once he wrote to Burghley:

Truly, my singular good lord, I have not leisure to eat my meat, I am so called upon. I am at the best part of an hundred nights a year abroad in searches. I never rest.

It was on one of these 'searches' for Catholic spies—his enjoyment in them is evident—on 4 Nov. 1576, that he broke into the Portuguese ambassador's house, forced his way past the porter, and with drawn sword seized the Host, the chalice and the ambassador's wife—a display of zeal which cost him a week's imprisonment, the Queen being unwilling to offend an ambassador with whom she had just concluded a commercial treaty. In July 1578, when he learned that the French ambassador was conferring in Paris Gardens at night with suspected persons in a 'thicket so dense that one man cannot see another except [he] have lynceos oculos or else cats' eyes', Fleetwood accompanied the watch on its rounds to discover the identity of the conspirators. But however zealous he may have been in arresting recusants, massmongers, or libellers, when he came to judge them he was fair. He ruled, for example, that Robert Blosse, a Catholic accused of spreading rumours about the Queen, should be freed because the prosecution was out of time. Fleetwood disliked attempts to interfere with justice and complained about requests for reprieves which came from the court. 'We are wont to have either a great man's letter, a lady's ring, or some other token' to make us yield to their unlawful request. 'When the court is farthest from London, then is there best justice done'.13

In 1586 Fleetwood was about to be made a judge, but at the last moment the Queen intervened

out of an opinion she hath that it were not fit to have him removed out of the place he now supplieth until another fit man be found out for that room. She doubteth they will choose some Puritan.

Five years passed and the appointment never materialised. Fleetwood surrendered the recordership on 11 Jan. 1592 in return for an annuity of £100, and was made Queen's serjeant, in which capacity he served as an assistant in the House of Lords in the Parliament of 1593. He died intestate 28 Feb. 1594 (administration to his widow 7 Mar.) in the house he had built in Noble Street, Aldersgate, and was buried at Great Missenden, Buckinghamshire, where in rare moments of leisure he had played the country gentleman and entertained 'my Lord Russell and my good neighbours round about me'. Described as 'of a marvellous merry and pleasant conceit', he was easily wounded by criticism, and resented particularly those who found his speeches tedious. He presented to London in 1576 a colllection of English laws and customs, the Liber Fleetwood, containing the names and descriptions of the courts of England, the liberties, franchises, and customs of the city, forest laws, and the coats of arms of the aldermen. Besides, he compiled a table of the common law and wrote commentaries on the statutes and a treatise on the justices of the peace.

I have found some strange and rare things in the law. If God blessed me with that leisure that others have that serve the Queen, I could with God's help bring forth very strange matters. And now I do learn after thirty years' study that our forefathers were marvellous deep and profound learned men.14

Ref Volumes: 1558-1603

Author: P. W. Hasler

Notes

• 1. PCC 23 Loftes; T. W. King, Lancs. Funeral Certificates (Chetham Soc. lxxv), 28-29.
• 2. C. M. Clode, Early Hist. Merchant Taylors , ii. 272-3; Merchant Taylors, list of freemen, ct. bks.; Somerville, Duchy , i. 433; C219/26/44, 29/71; G. T. O. Bridgman, Hist. Wigan (Chetham Soc. n.s. xv), 134; DKR, 37, i. 79; Strype, Annals, i. 167; Lay Subsidy Roll, 1576; SP12/80/7, 161/37, 231/27; Lansd. 24, f. 196; 52, f. 135; 68, f. 106; London Rep. 17; CPR, 1560-3, p. 445; 1569-72, p. 324; J. Evans, Hist. Antiq. Soc. 12.
• 3. Fleetwood Fam. Recs. ed. Buss; CPR, 1548-9, pp. 133, 171-3; LP Hen. VIII, viii. 240; Lansd. 52, ff. 133-4; 81, f. 163; SP12/20/5; Strype, Annals, i. 167.
• 4. HMC Lords, n.s. xi. 8; Lansd. 43, anon jnl. f. 166.
• 5. Haynes, Burghley State Pprs. 412-14; CJ, i. 54, 56; D’Ewes, 127.
• 6. Trinity, Dublin, anon. jnl. ff. 6-7, 9, 10, 12, 18, 20, 23, 32, 35; CJ, i. 83, 84, 85, 85, 86, 93; D’Ewes, 156, 160, 161, 162, 164, 165, 166, 167, 174, 176, 179, 183, 189, 190.
• 7. CJ, i. 95, 99, 101; D’Ewes, 206, 207, 214, 220, 222; Trinity, Dublin, Thos. Cromwell’s jnl. ff. 19, 20, 22, 41, 43, 45, 46, 47, 58, 62-63, 66, 67.
• 8. Trinity, Dublin, Thos. Cromwell’s jnl. ff. 119, 121; CJ, i. 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 112, 114; D’Ewes, 247, 248, 249, 250, 252, 255, 260.
• 9. D’Ewes, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 294, 299, 300, 302, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308; CJ, i. 120, 122, 123, 124, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136.
• 10. Lansd. 41, f. 45, Wm. Fleetwood's jnl.; Lansd. 43, anon. jnl. ff. 166, 172, 173, 174; D'Ewes, 333, 334, 337, 338, 339, 340, 343, 344, 345, 347, 349, 352, 353, 354, 356, 361, 362, 365, 368, 369-70, 371.
• 11. D'Ewes, 393, 396, 399, 405, 410, 412, 413, 414, 415, 416; Harl. 7188, anon. jnl. ff. 95, 100, 102.
• 12. D'Ewes, 429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 438, 440, 447; Townshend, Hist. Colls. 16, 21.
• 13. Lansd. 16, f. 17; 20, f. 20; f. 127; 23, ff. 110-22; 26, f. 191; 35, f. 89, 44, f. 113; SP12/125/20/24.
• 14. Lansd. 24, f. 198; 35, ff. 87-90; 41, f. 45; 43, ff. 164-75; 67, f. 219; 68, f. 250; 69, f. 62; SP12/188/41; London Rep. 21, 22; PCC admon. act. bk. 1594, f. 90; VCH Bucks. ii. 350.