JERMYN, Henry (c. 1636-1708)

Henry Jermyn’s career is inextricably linked with that of his master, York, whom he served as master of horse from the years of exile through to 1673, when he was disabled because of his religion. On York’s accession as James II, Jermyn was one of those to benefit from the new regime, but although he joined his king in exile at the Revolution, he was quick to seek reconciliation with the new government of William and Mary.

The younger son of an established Suffolk family, Jermyn appears early on to have been taken under the wing of his courtier uncle, also named Henry Jermyn, later earl of St Albans. Jermyn joined the court in exile at some point in the 1650s, and it was presumably during this period that he converted to Catholicism. By 1656 he was a member of York’s household and by 1659 serving as master of horse to the duke at a salary of £400 p.a. As such, Jermyn was part of the group closely associated with York that included John Berkeley, later Baron Berkeley of Stratton, and his nephew Charles Berkeley, later earl of Falmouth. Callow, Making of King James II, 70. Jermyn’s older brother, Thomas Jermyn, later 2nd Baron Jermyn, may also have been part of this circle. Jermyn’s unsavoury influence was noted long before the Restoration. As a Catholic, his religious convictions were suspect, but more particularly he quickly acquired a reputation as a lothario, chief among his many conquests said to have been the Princess Royal. CCSP, iv. 211.

Jermyn accompanied his master back to England at the Restoration. Following the revelations of York’s secret marriage to Anne Hyde, Jermyn was prominent among those eager to persuade the duke to renounce the relationship. He even went so far as to claim to have been one of the duchess’ many lovers. In December 1660 he was at the centre of another potential royal scandal, when it was rumoured that he had married his supposed former mistress, the Princess Royal. Pepys Diary, i. 320. He was involved in further controversy when York insisted that his master of horse should ride behind him in the coronation procession, which was criticized as a French innovation. Rushbrook Par. Regs, 311.

Jermyn’s rakish behaviour continued throughout the 1660s. In 1662 he and another member of York’s household, Colonel Giles Rawlings, fought a duel with Thomas Howard (possibly Hon. Thomas Howard^‡) and Colonel Dillon (younger son of Thomas Dillon, Viscount Dillon [I]). The affray, in which Rawlings was killed, had supposedly arisen out of a quarrel over the notorious countess of Shrewsbury. Pepys Diary, iii. 170-1. Two years later, in February 1664, it was reported that a ‘daughter of the duke of Lennox’ (possibly a Miss Lawson, niece of James Stuart^†, duke of Richmond and 4th duke of Lennox [S]) was compelled to seek the king’s protection to prevent her being married to Jermyn by force. Ibid. v. 58. By 1667 Jermyn had attracted the attention of Barbara Villiers, countess of Castlemaine, who, it was said, was incandescent at reports that her beau was to be married to Falmouth’s widow. Pepys summed up the situation, ‘The king, he is mad at her [Castlemaine] entertaining Jermyn, and she is mad at Jermyn’s going to marry from her, so they are all mad’. Middleton, 72; Pepys Diary, viii. 366.

Jermyn was forced to resign his offices as a result of the Test Act in 1673. Two years later he married the daughter of one of his Suffolk neighbours, a lucrative match that brought with it £8,000 from the bride’s uncle, William Crofts, Baron Crofts, while St Albans undertook to settle a further £7,000 p.a. on his nephew. The Poleys’ only reservation was Jermyn’s catholicism, but despite their stipulation that he should promise not to convert their daughter and a report that Jermyn ‘being a great bigot’ had refused to make the undertaking, the match went ahead. Verney ms mic. M636/28, Sir R. to E. Verney, 15 Feb. 1675. Jermyn was appointed one of the executors of Crofts’ will in 1677 (and was promised a legacy of £4,000). Add. 22065, ff. 59, 76. St Albans’ death in January 1684 presented Jermyn and his brother (now 2nd Baron Jermyn) with greater difficulties as they had to settle their uncle’s substantial debts (estimated to be in excess of £65,000). In theory, Henry Jermyn stood to inherit £10,000 as well as a share of St Albans’ property, but over the ensuing three years he expended almost £15,000 of his own money as well as £37,386 from his uncle’s estate in an effort to pay off the debts. TNA, C33/267, ff. 1155-56; C10/214/50.

Following the accession of James II, Jermyn was created Baron Dover (one of three members of James’ circle to be ennobled at that time) and appointed to the council of the queen dowager (Catharine of Braganza). NLW, Wynnstay, L463. During the new king’s brief reign, Dover swiftly acquired considerable power both in local offices and as a commanding figure in James’ inner councils. Risking James’ displeasure early in 1686, Dover joined with Robert Spencer, 2nd earl of Sunderland, Richard Talbot, earl of Tyrconnel [I] and Henry Arundell, 3rd Baron Arundell of Wardour, in attempting to force the king’s protestant mistress, the countess of Dorchester, from court. HMC Rutland, ii. 103; Add. 72481, f. 113. Her continued presence there was said to be a ‘reproach of the government and was as dangerous to it as the rebellion it self and a scandal to the Catholic religion’. According to Morrice, the king seemed not to be ‘disturbed at what they spoke’. Morrice, Ent’ring Bk. iii. 95. This appeared to be borne out in February when it was rumoured, inaccurately, that Dover was to purchase the office of master of the horse from George Legge, Baron Dartmouth, for £20,000 (half of which was to be paid by the king). Add. 72481, f. 115. Instead he was appointed colonel of the 4th Horse Guards, a specifically Catholic unit. In May it was speculated that Dover had acted as a mediator between the former Speaker, William Williams^‡ and Henry Mordaunt, 2nd earl of Peterborough, over payment of Williams’ fine for scandalum magnatum. Halifax Letters, i. 464. Dover was appointed to the Privy Council in July, and in September he succeeded as lord lieutenant of Cambridgeshire; a rumour that he was also to be lord lieutenant of Kent proved to be unfounded. Morrice, Ent’ring Bk. iii. 273. Anxiety about Dover’s presence on the council was enhanced by concerns about his probity. As early as October, complaints were circulating of corruption in his new regiment. NAS, GD 406/1/3374. It was said that ‘a Turk’ might gain a place provided he was able to pay the expected bribe of 50 guineas. J. Childs, Army, James II and the Glorious Revolution, 34. The king refused to believe it and Dover remained prominent at court. By the close of the summer rumours were circulating that he was to be promoted to an earldom; by early autumn it was reported both that he was to be made a duke and would replace Henry Hyde, 2nd earl of Clarendon, as lord lieutenant of Ireland. NLS, ms 7010, f. 138; Verney ms mic. M636/41, John Stewkeley to Sir Ralph Verney, 20 Oct. 1686; Clarendon Corresp. ii. 10-11, 25.

By the end of 1686 Dover was said to be in league with Tyrconnel and Sunderland against Laurence Hyde, earl of Rochester. When Rochester was displaced as lord treasurer shortly after, Dover was one of those appointed to the new treasury commission. Ellis Corresp. i. 219-20; Glasgow UL, ms Hunter 73, xvi. Unsurprisingly, lists of peers and their attitudes to the king’s policies compiled in January and May 1687 simply noted that Dover was a Catholic. He accompanied the king on his western progress later that summer, during which he appears to have acted as lord chamberlain. W. Suss. RO, Goodwood ms 5/6/9; Ellis Corresp. i. 344. He was expected to succeed to the post, which had previously been held by his uncle, St Albans, and was then vacant. Verney ms mic. M636/42, Dr H. Paman to Sir R. Verney, 24 Aug. 1687; Lady P. Osborne to Sir R. Verney, 31 Aug. 1687; Dr W. Denton to Sir R. Verney, 31 Aug. 1687; HMC 7th Rep. 505; Beinecke Lib. OSB mss 1, box 2, folder 65, Cooke to Poley, 2 Sept. 1687. As a further indication of Dover’s commanding influence at this time, the elevation of Thomas Watson, a spy on behalf of the court, to the bishopric of St Davids was also said to have been through his interest. Add. 5841, f. 9. Despite flourishing under the new regime, he appears to have been increasingly frustrated by affairs, and it was reported that he intended to leave England if the king was unable to secure a Parliament willing to repeal the Test Act within six months. UNL, Pw A 2103; Add. 34515, f. 34.

Active in Cambridge and in Suffolk in the winter of 1687, recommending potential members for the anticipated Parliament (though with little success), Dover was again included among the Catholics in a third assessment of likely attitudes to repeal of the Test in January 1688. Add. 34510, f. 66; Longleat, Bath mss Thynne pprs. 42, f. 326. Said to be ‘very ill-satisfied’ with the corporation of Bury St Edmunds, over the ensuing months Dover oversaw a series of purges in the town. In May he was appointed high steward of Cambridge, which enabled him to employ his interest in the city to rebalance the corporation there, nominating the majority of the new non-resident freemen. By June he had managed to engineer a satisfactory loyal address from Bury St Edmunds (much of which was his own work), but he still struggled to secure suitable potential candidates for the anticipated Parliament. HP Commons, 1660-90, i. 148, 397-8. His labours did not go unrecognized, and during the summer there were renewed rumours of further honours: an earldom and the lord chamberlaincy or lord stewardship being suggested. Longleat, Bath mss Thynne pprs. 43, ff. 146-7, 160-1, 164; Beinecke Lib. OSB mss 1, box 2, folder 88, ? to Poley, 17 Aug. 1688. Although Dover was one of the signatories to the order for committing the Seven Bishops, he was also said to have been one of those urging the king to moderation at the time of the bishops’ trial. Bodl. Carte 76, f. 28; Add. 34510, f. 123.

Dover was in London towards the end of November 1688, when he announced the news of the defection of Prince George, of Denmark (later duke of Cumberland), and others to the Prince of Orange. Staffs. RO, D(W)1778/I/i/1589. Late that month he was appointed to the crucial governorship of Portsmouth and was given secret instructions to ensure that the infant Prince of Wales was safely evacuated: instructions which he failed signally to fulfil. Ellis Corresp. ii. 340; Verney ms mic. M636/43, C. Gardiner to Sir R. Early in December he escorted the infant prince back to London accompanied by William Herbert, marquess of Powis. The same month he was put out of the treasury commission. Morrice, Ent’ring Bk. iv. 372.

The king’s flight in the early hours of 11 Dec. caused a number of his close advisors, Dover among them, ‘to complain most bitterly of him that has betrayed them and utterly ruined them in that he gave them no notice neither to provide for the security of their persons nor for any part of their estates.’ Ibid. iv. 376. Although he had been one of a number of prominent members of the court to secure general pardons from the king at the beginning of the month, this (unsurprisingly) failed to prevent Dover’s possessions being targeted by rioters during the chaotic days of November and December, during which his house at Cheveley was attacked and the chapel pulled down. Add. 61486, f. 162; Luttrell, Brief Relation, i. 490; Morrice, Ent’ring Bk. iv. 430-1, 456. Dover resolved to quit the country, but although he was able to secure a passport from William of Orange, he was recognized and briefly arrested before effecting his escape to the continent where he joined the former king. Morrice, Ent’ring Bk. iv. 448; Beinecke Lib. OSB mss fb 210, ff. 327-8; Add. 28053, ff. 378-9; Portledge Pprs. 54. In his absence, Dover’s estates appear to have been managed by his brother, Jermyn.

In July 1689 Dover was at last promoted earl of Dover by the exiled king, although his new honour was not recognized in England. HMC Stuart, i. 46. That month he was included in a bill of attainder as one of those known to be with the former king. Despite a number of witnesses providing testimony that they had seen Dover with James II in Ireland, the House of Lords, where Dover appears still to have enjoyed significant interest, insisted on excepting him out of the attainder’s provisions; the bill was subsequently shelved by the Commons. PA, HL/PO/JO/10/1/412/129; HMC Lords, ii. 227-9. In France, entrusted by James II with diplomatic tasks, Dover proved himself to be woefully inadequate to the task. When John Drummond, earl of Melfort [S], visited the French court in October, while en route to Rome, he reported to the king (James) that the French, ‘pitied your majesty for having been reduced to the necessity of sending such a man.’ Bodl. Carte 181, ff. 372-3.

Following the failure of the Commons’ attainder bill, Dover was indicted as a rebel at the Old Bailey in October 1689. Add. 28085, f. 218. He was then outlawed, a process which amounted to attainder and consequent forfeiture of lands and peerage. By November 1689 Dover’s enthusiasm for the Jacobite cause was waning and he was reported, while still in France, to have declared openly that, ‘the best [that] could befall him was to be taken by the way and carried to England, he had friends there, and the Prince of Orange would be kind to him …’. Bodl. Carte 181, f. 375. He was exempted from the general bill of indemnity in May 1690 but equally was also excepted from the provisions of another attainder bill drafted by the Commons in early 1691. Morrice, Ent’ring Bk. v. 444; PA, HL/PO/JO/10/1/431/374. Eager to return to England, he turned to his brother, Jermyn, and to John Churchill, earl (later duke) of Marlborough, and Hans Willem Bentinck, earl of Portland, to use their interest on his behalf. HMC Finch, ii. 454; UNL, Pw A 694-5. Writing to Marlborough in June 1691 from Bruges (‘this ugly place’) Dover complained of his and Lady Dover’s extreme want and appealed to his former associate to save them from ‘downright begging’,

I know this is no time for a poor private man to be thought on, but really I am brought to such a pass, that I am forced to speak untimely as it is. I write to my Lord [Sidney Henry Sydney, Viscount Sydney, later earl of Romney] pray help me with him if you can … you helped me out of England, he out of Ireland … both together get me thither again, though it be to the Tower and from thence to the scaffold, it will be more friendly to help me to die there than to let me beg for bread here. Add. 61363, ff. 7-8.

Dover’s prayer was answered. In October he was pardoned and given leave to return to England, though he was not immediately restored to possession of his estate. Beinecke Lib. OSB mss 1, box 2, folder 94, Yard to Poley, 6 Nov. 1691. In the Easter term of the following year (1692) he sued successfully for a writ of error for reversal of his outlawry. R. Comberbach, Reports of Several Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of King’s Bench, (1724), 189; Add. 61608, f. 104. Nevertheless, his name was included on a list of outlawed peers that was presented to the House of Lords in 1699. HMC Lords, n.s. iv. 18. He remained under suspicion. In June 1692 the deputy lieutenants of Cambridgeshire seized his horses and, before he could acquire an order for their restitution, sold them. Bodl. Tanner, 25, ff. 344-5, 347, 350-1. He suffered similar poor fortune in January 1694 when goods worth £200 were stolen from his London residence. Luttrell, Brief Relation, iii. 259.

Despite his prominent association with James II’s regime and reduced circumstances, Dover retained considerable interest, and in January 1695 it was suggested that a motion in the Commons for excusing recusants from paying double taxes who had taken an oath of fidelity had been ‘set on foot’ by Dover’s friends. Lexington Pprs. 44-45. In 1698 he was given special licence to remain in England by the king. Luttrell, Brief Relation, iv. 337.

In 1703 he succeeded his brother as 3rd Baron Jermyn, thereby finally reuniting the Jermyn lands with St Albans’ property (comprising much of Queen Henrietta Maria’s former possessions), which had been divided between the brothers at St Albans’ death. Noted as a Jacobite in an analysis of the peerage in relation to the succession in or about April 1705, on 21 Jan. 1707, 22 years after having first been elevated to the peerage, Dover was listed for the first time as attending the Lords. His extraordinary appearance elicited no comment in the Lords Journal. Why he chose to attend the House at this point is uncertain. It is similarly unclear whether he submitted to taking the oaths in order to do so.

On 1 Apr. 1708 (the fifth anniversary of his succession to his brother’s barony) he attended the House for a second time. Once more, no comment was made. Five days later, he died at his house at Cheveley. In the absence of any children of his own, he directed that his considerable wealth be distributed among his many great-nieces (of which there were at least 13), making bequests in excess of £26,700. He was buried at the Carmelite priory in Bruges. Grammont Mems. 347; Add. 61596, f. 130. At his death, both the baronies of Dover and Jermyn became extinct.