DARCY, James (1650-1731), of Sedbury Park, nr. Richmond, Yorks.

Published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1690-1715, ed. D. Hayton, E. Cruickshanks, S. Handley, 2002
Available from Boydell and Brewer

Constituency

Dates

1698 - Nov. 1701
1702 - 1705

Family and Education

b. 21 Aug. 1650, 1st s. of Hon. James Darcy† (yr. s. of Conyers, 5th Baron Darcy and 1st Earl of Holdernesse) by Isabel, da. of Sir Marmaduke Wyvill, 2nd Bt.†, of Burton Constable, Yorks.  educ. Sidney Sussex, Camb. 1668.  m. (1) Bethia (d. 1671), da. of George Payler of Nun Monkton, Yorks., 1da.; (2) Anne, da. of Ralph Stawell†, 1st Baron Stawell of Somerton, 3da.; (3) lic. 19 Oct. 1693, Mary (d. 1710), da. of Sir William Hickes, 2nd Bt., of Ruckholts, Essex, s.p.; (4) 6 Apr. 1725, Margaret Garth, of Forcett, Yorks., s.psuc. fa. 1673; cr. Baron Darcy of Navan, co. Meath [I] 13 Sept. 1721.1

Offices Held

Biography

Darcy’s return for Richmond in 1698 was largely the result of the electoral influence of his Whig cousin, the 3rd Earl of Holdernesse, and presumably for this reason he was classified as a Court supporter in a comparative analysis of the old and new Parliaments. However, he was in fact a political follower of the Tory William Bromley II*, who, like Darcy, had married a daughter of Ralph, 1st Lord Stawell. In late 1698 Darcy was forecast as likely to oppose a standing army. However, he was not an active Member, which may help to account for the fact that in an analysis of the House into interests in 1700 he was classed as doubtful or of the opposition. Having been returned unopposed for Richmond in the first 1701 election, he was listed as likely to support the Court in agreeing with the supply committee’s resolution to continue the ‘Great Mortgage’.2

Darcy did not contest the second 1701 election, at which time it was reported that John Hutton I*, a Whig, ‘turns out of Richmond Mr. Darcy’. However, he was returned unopposed once more in the general election of 1702, though he continued to be inactive in Parliament. In early 1704 he was noted as a supporter of Lord Nottingham (Daniel Finch†) over the Scotch Plot. At the beginning of the 1704–5 session he was forecast as a probable supporter of the Tack, and was included in Robert Harley’s* lobbying list. On 28 Nov. Darcy voted for the Tack, an action that provoked the anger of Lord Wharton (Hon. Thomas*), who was actively trying to increase his own interest in Richmond. In December Wharton declared himself willing to serve Lord Holderness’ brother and Darcy’s cousin, Conyers Darcy*, but that he would oppose James Darcy, whatever the expense. Wharton did not like the behaviour of Darcy, ‘who has very much of late increased that dislike’. In the 1705 election Wharton secured the election of one of his own relations, Wharton Dunch*, in place of Darcy. Darcy petitioned, on the grounds that Wharton, as a peer, should not have ‘meddled’ in the election at all, let alone by corrupt means. However, he was given permission to withdraw his petition on 21 Nov., following a motion to that effect by Bromley, possibly so that Darcy could contest the by-election at Richmond necessitated by Dunch’s death. However, Darcy did not contest the by-election the following month. In 1710 Robert Monckton*, a Whig, reported Darcy’s dinner conversation to Robert Harley*, stating that he believed that what Darcy had said ‘was not his own but the dictates of the [Tory] party’. Aside from his elevation to an Irish peerage in 1721, which argues some modification in his political views, little more has been discovered of Darcy prior to his death on 19 July 1731. The newly acquired title devolved on his grandson, James Jessop, afterwards Darcy, the son of William Jessop* by Mary, Darcy’s daughter by his first wife.3

Ref Volumes: 1690-1715

Authors: Eveline Cruickshanks / Ivar McGrath

Notes

  • 1. Dugdale’s Vis. Yorks. ed. Clay, ii. 81–82.
  • 2. Fieldhouse and Jennings, Hist. Richmond and Swaledale, 263; HMC Portland, iv. 574; Bagot mss at Levens Hall, Bromley to James Grahme*, 26 July 1707.
  • 3. Add. 24475, f. 134; G. Holmes, Electorate and National Will, 6; Fieldhouse and Jennings, 413–14; L. P. Wenham, Richmond Burgage Houses (N. Yorks. publ. 16), 2–3; Robbins thesis, 195–7, 442–3; Quinn thesis, 123–5, 237, 239; HMC Portland, 574; Clay, 82.