Goring came from a junior branch of a long-established Sussex family based at Burton, and was the second cousin of Sir William Goring*. His grandfather, a younger son, became receiver-general of the Court of Wards and purchased Danny Park in the parish of Hurstpierpoint, six and-a-half miles north-west of Brighton. His father also entered royal service, becoming a gentleman pensioner, and both father and grandfather were twice returned for Lewes, where the family owned property.
Both his father and grandfather and had speculated heavily in the Sussex property market, leaving the family heavily in debt. ‘At my first entrance into the world’, Goring told the rising favourite, Buckingham, in 1618, ‘I had not 100 marks by year free, nor many years after. I so sucked in debt from my cradle as I never knew what freedom was’.
Goring was well suited to the courtier’s life that now opened before him. Anthony Weldon, a hostile critic, dismissed him as ‘master of the game for fooleries’ at the Jacobean Court, but his survival and promotion in the more sedate Court of Charles I demonstrates his possession of more enduring qualities.
Goring secured a position in the Household of Prince Henry in 1610, but may have been travelling abroad when his master died in November 1612, having obtained a licence to travel the previous June. He was certainly in Paris in early 1613, from where he went on to Heidelberg to see the reception of Princess Elizabeth, recently married to the Elector Palatine.
Goring was returned for Lewes to the third Jacobean Parliament, thanks presumably not only to his own interest, but that of his father-in-law, Edward, 1st Lord Bergavenny, who was one of the joint owners of the honour of Lewes. During the Parliament Goring and Bergavenny’s younger son, Christopher Neville*, were appointed trustees for the marriage settlement of Anne, another daughter of William Cecil.
During the 1621 Parliament Goring made three recorded speeches and was appointed to one committee. Nevertheless, his impact on its history was far greater than this meagre contribution would suggest. He made his first speech on 2 Mar., following the flight of the monopolist (Sir) Giles Mompesson*. Goring stated that he had been standing behind Mompesson at a meeting of the investigating committee the previous evening, although he was not formally one of its members. Thinking Sir Giles was ill, Goring unsuccessfully moved the committee to give the patentee leave to go home. With remarkable frankness Goring admitted that ‘heretofore he would have been glad of his escape’, although he ‘now never intended, or desired it’.
Goring seems to have regarded himself as much Buckingham’s representative in the Commons as his constituency’s. When Buckingham was mentioned on 15 Mar. by Randolph Davenport, a witness before the committee for courts of justice, Goring made haste to report the incident to his patron. Writing that day, he assured Buckingham that Davenport had ‘faithfully and clearly’ stated that when the marquess had been asked to intervene in a court case, ‘your lordships answer was that you would never write in any cause depending between party and party’, and that this testimony ‘was so recorded by all and again distinctly repeated’ by the chairman Sir Robert Phelips. Goring also reported that he had, ‘without your lordships licence’, tackled Sir Edward Sackville* about the latter’s alleged involvement in plotting against the favourite among the peerage, and passed on Sackville’s ‘sense of suffering in your [Buckingham’s] good opinion’.
Goring’s final contribution to the proceedings of the first sitting came on 1 May, when he outbid all other contributors to the debate on punishing the Catholic lawyer Edward Floyd, accused of slandering the Elector Palatine and Princess Elizabeth, in the gruesomeness of his proposal. Referring to the prayer beads which had been found in Floyd’s possession, he suggested that he should be whipped at twelve stages and forced to swallow a bead at each. This was to be followed by cutting off his nose and possibly also his ears and tongue, cutting his cheeks, and then by hanging at the Tower, ‘and there is an end to him’. His hostility to Floyd may well have been exacerbated by concern for the Protestant cause in Europe. According to one account, he made reference to a recent massacre in the Valtelline, a strategically important valley in the Alps, where the year before the native Catholics had, with the help of Habsburg forces, slaughtered 600 Protestants.
During the recess Goring was again ordered to accompany Hay, now Lord Doncaster, to France, but he successfully pleaded with Buckingham on 13 July that his private affairs made it very difficult for him to obey, having mortgaged his ‘chief house and lands for the payment of £6,000 within eight months’. Moreover, his wife was eight months pregnant, and ‘though she can dispense with a progress, yet will she not condescend to a voyage’.
During the second sitting Goring made regular reports to Buckingham of proceedings in the Commons. On 27 Nov. he told his patron that the House had decided to debate the issues of supply, religion, ending the session, and an address to the king about those issues the following day. He was keen to defend his colleagues, assuring Buckingham that ‘the House is now in much better order and temper than yesterday’ and that ‘having disported themselves they will ... let His Majesty see that it was nothing but their zeal that first transported them’. He argued that their ‘affections’ were ‘as great as ever was to any king’ and denied that they intended to ‘cross upon his prerogative or direct him in his councils’.
Buckingham, however seems to have had other ideas, and having learnt from Goring that the Commons intended to petition the king, he instructed his client to propose an additional clause concerning the recovery of the Palatinate. Consequently on 29 Nov. Goring moved, in the words of his report to the marquess written that night, for the Commons to petition that, if the king of Spain did not ‘procure presently a general cessation of arms from the emperor in the Palatinate’ then ‘his Majesty will be pleased to declare unto them that he will not spare to denounce war as well against the king of Spain and any other prince or state that shall oppose or assist against his children’. Goring, no doubt aware that he was treading on dangerous territory, was worried that Buckingham might think that he had exceeded his instructions and assured his patron that these were ‘the very words, ... I moved it and with as much circumspection in every kind for his Majesty’s service as my poor judgment could afford’. He also asked Buckingham not to believe any reports he might receive to the contrary. Goring went on to report that the motion ‘took wonderfully well, but the House was much distracted therewith’, particularly as it came from Goring, thinking ‘either ... that I have undone myself at Court, or else that I had some underhand advice to do that I did’. In the margin he added that ‘His Majesty’s end is not known to any’, suggesting that he shared this last suspicion. The House referred this proposal to the sub-committee already established to prepare an address on recusancy and draw the session to an end, which Goring himself attended in the afternoon.
When the draft petition was read at the committee on 1 Dec. the clause proposing war with Spain was no longer conditional on failure to withdraw from the Palatinate. Moreover, it included an additional proposal calling for Prince Charles to be married to a Protestant, which had not been part of Goring’s original motion.
On the following day Goring was ordered to hand over the address to the chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir Richard Weston*. However, that same day the Commons received James I’s outraged letter attacking the undelivered petition, and further plans to present it were shelved as Members sought to justify their right to debate foreign policy. Goring was one of the four Members who were appointed on 18 Dec. to inform the king of the Commons’ refusal to complete legislation.
In April 1623 Goring was among the courtiers summoned to join Buckingham and Prince Charles in Spain. Shortly afterwards he was sent to report the progress of the marriage negotiations to the Prince’s sister, Elizabeth of Bohemia, now an exile at The Hague. He was back at The Hague at the end of the year to excuse the failure of the dukes of Buckingham and Richmond to attend the christening of Queen Elizabeth’s son, Louis. (Sir) Dudley Carleton*, ambassador to The Hague, wrote that his ‘good company’ greatly augmented their Christmas cheer.
Goring was returned for Stamford in 1624 on the interest of his friend Cecil, but chose to sit for Lewes, though yielding precedence to Christopher Neville.
Later in 1624 Goring was sent to France to assist his fellow-mignards, now Lords Kensington and Carlisle, in the negotiations for a French marriage for Charles, or rather to reconcile the quarrelling ambassadors themselves, as the Venetian ambassador reported: ‘he is a very discreet man and a friend of both’. Early in 1625 he was commissioned to take the garter to Carlisle, returning just after the king’s death. He made several more trips in connection with the marriage, and was one of the small party which went with Buckingham to escort the new queen back to England.
Goring was re-elected for Lewes to the first Caroline Parliament. His only committee appointments were to consider a bill in mitigation of the sentence of excommunication (27 June) and to investigate two petitions, read on 10 Aug., complaining that the treasurers of the subsidies voted in 1624 were refusing to pay money on warrants from the Council of War. His only recorded speech was delivered on 5 Aug. when, reacting to perceived criticism of his patron, he unsuccessfully moved for a committee and ‘the duke to be called to it, that he may give satisfaction for any aspersions which shall be cast upon him’. According to Sir Francis Nethersole*, this suggestion was as unwelcome to Buckingham as to the Commons, but it is more likely that Goring was again acting on his patron’s instructions.
Re-elected at Lewes, Goring was named to seven committees in 1626, including the committee for privileges on 9 Feb., and made 13 recorded speeches.
Goring inevitably became closely involved in defending Buckingham, especially over the allegations relating to arrest of the St. Peter of Le Havre. On 23 Feb. he was added to the committee for investigation of the detention of English shipping in France. On 1 Mar. he seconded Pym’s motion for Buckingham to be heard by his counsel, stating that he ‘thinks good the duke does desire it’,
Goring was keen to hasten a vote of subsidies. When a message from Charles I calling for supply was read out on 11 Mar., Goring unsuccessfully opposed moves to set up a subcommittee to draft a reply, which he evidently considered a delaying tactic, moving ‘that here our answer may be made, punctual and profitable’. On 18 Apr., responding to arguments that grievances should come before supply, he stated that ‘we may not go less with His Majesty than with others’, and that he thought ‘the king cannot take this well at our hands’.
Goring was appointed on 15 Feb. to consider the bill to allow the trustees of the Sackville estate to sell lands. He was also among those named on 14 Mar. to consider the proposal of Sir Dudley Digges* for the financing of war at sea ‘by the voluntary joint stock of adventurers’, and the merchants’ petitions presented on 16 March. On 7 June he helped carry the Commons’ reply to the king’s message on the duke’s election to the chancellorship of Cambridge University.
Soon after the dissolution Goring was appointed vice-chamberlain to the queen. In August he made a successful bid for the farm of the sugar imposts, and in 1627 he was granted control of the retail trade in wine. In a letter to Buckingham the following November he commented on the difficulty of raising money in the City, stating that, such was the distrust of the Court, that no wealthy Londoner would lend money to the government, whatever security was offered.
Goring was elected a fifth time for Lewes in 1628. Although the borough returned two indentures, Goring was named in both and so was allowed to take his seat immediately. He was appointed to attend the conference with the Lords on 21 Mar. about the proposed fast. On 2 Apr. he seconded Sir Robert Phelips’ motion to defer further debate on supply and the following day he unsuccessfully moved for a fresh writ to fill the other seat at Lewes. He made no further recorded contributions to proceedings in the Commons before his ennoblement on 14 April.
Goring remained in the queen’s service until 1639, when he became a privy councillor and vice chamberlain of the Household. He acquired several lucrative offices and developed commercial interests in which he took a more active concern than was common among courtiers, finally acquiring a share in the great farm of the customs in 1638. On the eve of the Civil War he had an annual income of £26,800. His affairs, however, remained in disorder, and he also had to cope with those of his equally extravagant elder son George, an unscrupulous but brilliant soldier who sat for Portsmouth in the Long Parliament before becoming a ruthless royalist general in the Civil War. Goring himself was most active as a diplomat during the first Civil War, and was created earl of Norwich in 1644. The refusal of Parliament to recognize this title accounts in part for the very common confusion between Goring and his son. During the second Civil War in 1648 Goring led the royalist forces in Kent and was subsequently captured after the fall of Colchester. He was tried by a specially constituted High Court of Justice and sentenced to death, but was reprieved by the Rump on 8 Mar. 1649 thanks to the casting vote of Speaker Lenthall. He subsequently joined Charles II in exile. He survived the Restoration, but died on 6 Jan. 1663, allegedly of a broken heart after failing to recover his interest in the great farm. He was buried eight days later in Westminster Abbey. His will, dictated to a servant four days before his death, was solely concerned the settling of his debts. His younger son, Charles, succeeded to the earldom and a leasehold estate worth, by his own account, no more than £450 per annum, and died without issue in 1671.