MALLORY, Sir William (d.1603), of Hutton Park and Studley, Yorks.

Published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1558-1603, ed. P.W. Hasler, 1981
Available from Boydell and Brewer



Family and Education

2nd s. and h. of Sir William Mallory of Hutton Park and Studley by Jane, da. of Sir John Norton of Norton. m. Ursula, da. of George Gale of York, at least 5s. inc. John 4da. Kntd. by 1560.1

Offices Held

J.p. Yorks. (N. Riding) from 1559, (W. Riding) from 1561, (E. Riding) from 1583; member, council in the north from 1582; sheriff, Yorks. 1592-3; dep. lt. Yorks. (N. Riding) by 1596; high steward, Ripon from c.1570; member, high commission, province of York 1599.2


Mallory, related to Cardinal Allen through the Conyers family, had a recusant mother, wife, sister and brother. His heir was suspected of sheltering priests, and another son and two daughters became outright Catholics. Two other sons, however, became Anglican dignitaries: one archdeacon of Richmond and dean of Chester, another an ecclesiastical lawyer in Durham. Mallory himself was ostentatiously loyal. In 1560 he was one of the English captains ‘as best served’ under Lord Grey in Scotland, and was evidently knighted during the campaign. At the time of the northern rebellion, he was one of the first to inform the Earl of Sussex, lord president of the north, of the ‘bruits’ in Yorkshire, and also warned him to take heed for his own person. Mallory and ‘divers other honest gentlemen’ suddenly left their houses. As they would not have done this without great cause, their action served as a warning of impending trouble to those who were already on their guard. In 1569, when Queen Mary was moved from Bolton castle to Tutbury, it was suggested that she might stop at Mallory’s house, one mile from Ripon. In 1570 Sussex recommended Mallory for the office of high steward because he had ‘truly served the Queen, from the first suspicion of the rebellion’, but it is not clear when he was actually appointed. Mallory’s relative Sir William Ingleby was also recommended for reward, because together, Sussex informed the Queen, they had delivered him more intelligence than any other, and they were honest and loyal. If she rewarded them, they would be comforted, she would be truly served, and it would stop them from further suit.3

The 3rd Earl of Huntingdon, the next president of the council in the north, wrote to Walsingham in 1577 that Mallory was one of the four ‘most fit’ persons to be added to the council. His name was included in the commission of 1582. As knight of the shire for Yorkshire he would have been on the subsidy committee 24 Feb. 1585. He also took charge of the bill for the better observing of the Sabbath day (27 Nov. 1584), and was named to a conference with the Lords 15 Feb. 1585 concerning fraudulent conveyances.4

It was thought in 1581 that Sir William Mallory and Sir Robert Stapleton, would be able, ‘by their tenants, kinsfolk and friends’, to furnish 200 horse, and in 1588 Huntingdon declared Mallory ‘a very fit man’ to lead 100 horse, ‘being himself well furnished with horse and geldings’.5

In 1593 Mallory had a quarrel with Sir Edward Yorke, a matter which seems to have been connected with the murder of one of Mallory’s sons by one of Yorke’s servants. The parties evidently appealed to the Earl of Essex, whom Mallory went to see at Richmond. Yorke therefore wrote to Essex craving that he might not ‘utterly be beggared’, which was all Mallory’s ‘bloody and greedy mind doth thirst after’. The quarrel seems to have dragged on, since Mallory was summoned by the Privy Council in February 1596, upon which occasion the ‘unkindness and difference’ between him, his sons and Sir Edward Yorke were ended, to the satisfaction of all parties. The Privy Council was anxious that Mallory, a gentleman ‘of good reputation and calling’ should not suffer on account of their having sent for him. They therefore thought good to inform the council in the north and the archbishop of York that ‘the cause of his sending for up grew upon no evil opinion had of him in any sort’.6

Mallory supported Sir Thomas Posthumous Hoby and Sir John Stanhope in the contested county election of 1597. In 1599 he was reported to be one of those on the council in the north who had become ‘aged and weak and cannot conveniently attend any service’. In spite of this, he wrote to Cecil in August 1599 to offer his services to the Queen because it was reported in the north that foreign forces were to be employed against her. Again, in 1601, upon hearing of the ‘conspiracies and wicked treasons intended against the sacred person of our most gracious Queen’, he wrote to Cecil to offer his life and all he possessed. He expressed his willingness to repair to the court either privately or ‘with such company as you, from her Highness, shall direct me’. Mallory was not, in fact, too aged or ill to make the journey from Yorkshire to Westminster, and he went to court in the summer of 1600, apparently hoping to obtain some reward for his past services. In January 1601 he wrote to Cecil of the ‘gracious speeches’ the Queen had made him at that time. But she was then so heavily charged with the cost of defence ‘as she must for a time restrain her bountiful hand from rewarding her servants, giving me this comfort, that she would not be forgetful of the duty and service she had always found in me’. Mallory wished to know ‘how her Majesty’s disposition resteth at this time’. So far as is known he received no reward. In October 1602 Mallory again wrote to Cecil, this time to complain of Sir Stephen Proctor, who had brought a case against him in the Star Chamber, charging him with negligence in enforcing the religious laws, and with corruption in connexion with the musters. Mallory denied the charges and asked for satisfaction against Proctor. This was not ‘for pride’, but because he had been a justice of the peace for 44 years, was ‘her Majesty’s sworn servant’, and had been on the council in the north for 20 years, ‘in all which time my loyalty and service have been known’. He therefore desired justice in order to be ‘enabled to serve her Majesty the better’. But the days of his service were already numbered, and he was buried on 22 Mar. 1603. His will, which is at York, was dated 15 June 1586. His wife Ursula and his son and heir John were the executors. He provided for his family but does not appear to have possessed extensive lands.7

Ref Volumes: 1558-1603

Author: N. M. Fuidge


  • 1. Vis. Yorks. (Harl. Soc. xvi), 195-6; CSP Scot. 1547-63, p. 438; Walbran, Lords of Studley in Yorks. 9.
  • 2. HMC Hatfield, ix. 396; xii. 452-3; CSP Dom. Add. 1580-1625, p. 80; 1595-7, p. 167; 1598-1601, p. 61.
  • 3. H. Aveling, ‘W. Riding Recusants 1558-1790’, Procs. Leeds Phil. and Lit. Soc. x(6); J.J. Cartwright, Chapters in Yorks. Hist. 68; CSP Scot. 1547-63, p. 438; 1563-9, p. 605; Gooder, Parl. Rep. Yorks. ii. 30; CSP Dom. Add. 1566-79, pp. 91, 92, 93, 181-2.
  • 4. CSP Dom. Add. 1566-79, p. 516; 1580-1625, p. 80; D’Ewes, 333, 349; Lansd. 43, anon. jnl. f. 171.
  • 5. CSP Scot. v. 585; Cal. Border Pprs. i. 324.
  • 6. HMC Hatfield, iv. 285; xiv. 144; APC, xxv. 192, 261.
  • 7. HMC Hatfield, vii. 416; ix. 242, 303; xi. 18, 76-7; xii. 452-3; Walbran, 9.