NAPER, Gerard (1606-73), of More Crichel, Dorset.

Although they claimed descent from the ancient Scottish Napier family, the Dorset Napers were parvenus, whose wealth was Elizabethan in origin.36Hutchins, Dorset, iii. 123. Sir Gerard’s grandfather, Sir Robert Naper, was the first of the family to rise to prominence, becoming lord chief baron of the Irish exchequer in 1593.37Hutchins, Dorset, iii. 126. The rising local status of the Napers was reflected in various building projects: Sir Robert built Middlemarsh Grange, ‘a fair mansion’ noted for its ‘beauty and ornaments’, in the parish of Minterne Magna, and endowed the ‘Napper’s Mite’ almshouses in Dorchester; his son, Sir Nathaniel, built a still finer house at More Crichel, north of Wimborne, being ‘allured by the pleasantness of the situation’.38Whiteway Diary, 180; Coker’s Survey of Dorset, 1623, 95, 116-7. On his death, Sir Nathaniel left substantial estates in the western counties, and provided his daughters with portions of between 2,000 marks (£1,332) and £1,500 apiece.39PROB11/170/97.

When Sir Gerard Naper succeeded his father in 1635, he already enjoyed a prominent place in Dorset society. He had sat for Wareham borough in the 1628 Parliament, and, with Richard Rogers*, was a leading light of the east Dorset social set which met at the bowling green at Handley. Naper was not universally liked, however. Even his friend and neighbour, Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper*, was reserved in his praise, saying that ‘Sir Gerard Naper had one of the best estates in the county ... [was] a good housekeeper [ie dispenser of hospitality], well versed in all his country business and employments, but had not a genius above that, and of a temper inclined to envy, not obliging, and to speak as ill as he could of the absent’.40Christie, Shaftesbury i. appx. i, p. xvii. Apart from Rogers and Cooper, Naper’s local connections included his wife’s relatives, the Colles family of Pitminster in Somerset, who were related by marriage with the Coventry and Portman families; and his properties in Milborne Port in Somerset may have brought him into contact with the Seymours and the Digbys, both of whom had interests within that borough.41Hutchins, Dorset, iii. 125; Whiteway Diary, 127. In religion, Naper seems to have been a conformist member of the Church: as patron of livings he supported William Stronge at Long Crichel and Thomas Willoughby at Minterne, both of whom were ejected during the 1640s.42IND1/17001, Dorset, p. 38; Walker Revised, 138.

Politically, however, Naper seems to have been critical of some of the Caroline regime’s policies in the 1630s. In 1636 he refused to act against local magistrates who had failed to enforce the pressing of Dorset sailors, and although he did not refuse to pay Ship Money, he sent no reply to the privy council’s request for contributions to the first Bishops’ War in 1639.43CSP Dom. 1636-7, p. 533; Rushworth, Hist. Collns. iii. 913. A year later he was criticised by the 3rd earl of Suffolk, as lord lieutenant of Dorset, for his obstruction of the raising of men to fight the Scots.44CSP Dom. 1640, pp. 55, 111. Naper was summoned to the privy council, and his case was referred to the attorney general (Sir John Bankes†).45CSP Dom. 1640, pp. 120, 125. Naper’s lukewarm attitude to the crown may have brought him into closer contact with other local opponents of the government, such as Sir John Strangways*. Strangways was probably the figure who secured Naper’s election to the double borough of Weymouth and Melcombe Regis in October 1640, when he was returned with Strangways, Richard King (another Strangways ally), and Sir Walter Erle.

Naper’s parliamentary service was undistinguished, sporadic, and brief. Although he was willing to stand security for £1,000 of the loan raised by Parliament to pay the armies in November 1640, his commitment after this was apparently slight.46D’Ewes (N), 52. He was named to only two committees in the first four months of the Parliament: to consider the case of St Gregory’s church by St Paul’s Cathedral (4 Dec.) and the bill to allow the 5th marquess of Winchester to lease lands in Hampshire (13 Mar.).47CJ ii. 44b, 103b. On 15 April 1641 Naper was granted leave to go to the country, whence he returned only after the conclusion of the 1st earl of Strafford’s trial, to take the Protestation on 8 May.48CJ ii. 121a, 141a. His absence during the trial mirrored that of Strangways, Rogers and others. Perhaps the baronetcy granted to Naper on 25 June 1641, and the knighthood conferred four days later, were rewards for this strategic absence, or incentives for future loyalty to the crown.49CB. On 28 June 1641 (the day before he was knighted) Naper was again granted leave of absence, and there is no record of his attendance in Parliament thereafter.50CJ ii. 191a. Indeed, Naper’s activities in the twelve months from June 1641 are difficult to trace. He seems to have returned to Dorset, and in October he was active as a subsidy commissioner, signing the assessment in the Shaftesbury division.51E179/105/335, m. 5d. In January 1642 he was a commissioner for oyer and terminer on the western circuit.52C181/5, ff. 220-1v. In February 1642 Naper became trustee for the estate of his wife’s brother-in-law, Sir William Portman*.53C54/3711.

In May 1642 the sheriff of Dorset wrote to Naper, informing him of Parliament’s orders for his return to Westminster.54Bodl. Nalson II, ff. 36-7. Further orders were issued in June.55CJ ii. 685b. By then it seems that Naper had been recruited by the king’s friends, as he was appointed a commissioner of array for the county at the end of the month.56Northants RO, FH133, unfol. From the outbreak of the first civil war in August, Naper increasingly acted in conjunction with Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper – a fact which helps to explain his rather inconsistent behaviour during the next few years. On 12 October 1642, it was reported at Westminster that ‘Sir Gerard Naper and Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper dealt with Sir Walter Erle not only to permit the Lord of Hertford to pass away quietly out of the country, but to conduct him’.57Add. 18777, f. 27a. Yet, despite evidence of his royalism, there was no move to disable Naper from sitting as an MP at this stage, and in January 1643 the Commons assumed his loyalty when they rated him for assessment, asking that he lend £500 to the war effort.58CJ ii. 916a. By April, however, the Commons had changed its tune, and a warrant was issued for Naper’s arrest as a delinquent.59CJ iii. 38a. In May, however, Naper was defended by Sir Walter Erle and John Browne I*, who wrote of the money, horses and arms received from him, his willingness to return to the House, and his readiness ‘to contribute in a large manner to the service of the Parliament’.60CJ iii. 105b; Bodl. Tanner 62, f. 100. The accounts of the treasurer for Dorset show that Naper gave £200 to the parliamentarians in May 1643.61Bodl. Gough Dorset 14, f. 85.

The intervention of Browne and Erle seems to have stayed Parliament’s hand, but they were unable to win over Naper for their cause completely. The royalist ascendancy during the summer of 1643, and the seizure of Dorset by the king’s forces after the fall of Bristol in late July, encouraged Naper to side with the king publicly. On 3 August 1643, Naper, Ashley Cooper and others were commissioned by the marquess of Hertford to treat for the surrender of Dorchester and Weymouth, and in the same month it was reported to the Commons that Naper and Ashley Cooper had been put in charge of raising money for the king in Dorset.62Bodl. Tanner 62, f. 217; Harl. 165, f. 146. In January 1644 Naper attended Charles I’s royalist Parliament in Oxford, and he was disabled as a Westminster MP as a result.63Rushworth, Hist. Collns. iv. 573; CJ iii. 374a. Yet barely three months after the opening of the Oxford Parliament, Ashley Cooper defected to the Westminster Parliament, and Naper went with him.64Christie, Shaftesbury i. 51. At the beginning of March 1644, Arthur Trevor reported to the marquess of Ormond from Oxford that ‘Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper and Sir Gerard Naper are both run away to the Parliament from their brethren the Commons here’.65Bayley, Dorset, 107.

Although he had abandoned the king, Naper was not readily welcomed by Parliament. He was assessed at £3,500 by the Committee for Advance of Money in July 1644, and despite formally submitting to the Commons in September of that year, his disablement was not overturned, and a new election for his Melcombe Regis seat was ordered in September 1645.66CCAM 429; CCC 1061-2; CJ iv. 286b. In his composition, Naper received support from the local county committee, which sent certificates attesting to his service tendered to Parliament in Dorset, and the damage inflicted by the king’s forces to his estate; indeed, Naper seems to have had the rare distinction of having his lands sequestered by both sides simultaneously.67CCC 1061-2; Add. 8845, f. 12v. Although Naper’s cash payments to the Dorset parliamentarians were taken into account, he was fined £3,514 in December 1646, and the case was still open as late as 1649.68CCC 1061-2. By contrast, Naper’s local reputation seems to have recovered remarkably quickly. This was no doubt partly due to the good offices of the county committee and to Ashley Cooper in particular. Ashley Cooper’s diary shows that he was very close to Naper socially in the mid-1640s, and that that Naper did not share the financial ruin which attended other royalists. He lent Ashley Cooper £500 by bond in 1646 (repaid in 1648),69Christie, Shaftesbury i. appx. i, xxxv, xxxix, xli, xlvii, xlviii. and in the same year sent wheat to plague-ridden Poole, a town where Ashley Cooper had considerable influence.70Poole Borough Archives, MS 177 (A18), unfol. The Dorset Presbyterian, John Fitzjames*, was also in contact with Naper in the same period; and on 25 March 1646 Fitzjames assured Naper of his support for efforts to persuade the earl of Salisbury to return a walk in Cranborne Chase to Naper’s care, ‘so that if Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper does obtain it above, you may be confident of no obstructions here’.71Alnwick, Northumberland MS 547, ff. 28v-29r. In 1649 Fitzjames sought Naper’s help in various land purchases.72Alnwick, Northumberland MS 548, ff. 49v, 50v, 51, 57. Naper remained in contact with Fitzjames during the 1650s, and may have been instrumental in bringing together Fitzjames and Ashley Cooper, who had formed a political alliance by the late 1650s.73Alnwick, Northumberland MS 549, ff. 82, 89v, 93; 551, ff. 13, 87; 552, f. 49v.

During the 1650s, Naper continued to be active locally. In 1650 the markedly puritan Dorchester corporation recognised his right to nominate poor men to fill vacancies in the ‘Napper’s Mite’ almshouses, and he was still acting as feoffee of the free school in the borough.74Recs. of Dorchester ed. Mayo, 560-1; Dorset RO, D/DOB/16/3, f. 51v. At times, the Rump Parliament and the protectoral government seemed inclined to rehabilitate Naper. On 7 November 1650 he was appointed sheriff of Dorset; in December 1652 he was appointed assessment commissioner in the county; and in February 1655 he was made commissioner for the Poole gaol delivery.75CJ vi. 492a; A. and O.; C181/6, p. 95. Yet Naper never lost the stigma of royalism. He was reported to have sent 500 gold pieces to Charles Stuart in exile, and he was strongly suspected of involvement, with Sir Hugh Wyndham and Sir John Strangways, in the Penruddock rising in 1655.76Hutchins, Dorset, iii. 126; TSP iv. 336. Naper’s movements in London during 1656 were carefully monitored as a ‘suspected person’, and he was forced to petition for exemption from the decimation tax in May 1656.77Add. 34014, ff. 10, 25, 75v; CCC 1062. Although Naper was never entirely trusted by the government in the 1650s, he was not unduly oppressed either, and he was able to devote his time to the improvement of his estates. Despite the cost of war and sequestration, between 1640 and 1653 his rental income had increased by two-thirds, and in 1657 he secured a lucrative match for his eldest son with the daughter of Sir Hugh Wyndham, a former royalist with connections to the powerful Digby family.78Dorset RO, D84 (manorial); HP Commons 1660-90; Oxford DNB.

In April 1660 Naper joined Sir John Strangways and other former royalists who signed a declaration of their willingness to submit to Parliament ‘in order to the public peace’.79Declaration of the Knights and Gentry of Dorset (1660, 669.f.24.66). After the Restoration he continued to enjoy a prominent position in the county elite. He was re-appointed as deputy lieutenant in July 1660, and sat regularly as j.p. on the Dorset bench between 1663 and 1669.80SP29/8, f. 67; Dorset Hearth Tax, 117. In 1665 he was honoured by a visit from the king and queen to his house at More Crichel, and, possibly as a result of royal favour, in 1668 he was granted permission to divert the highway away from the house.81Hutchins, Dorset, iii. 126; CSP Dom. 1667-8, p. 369. Naper remained on good terms with Ashley Cooper, now Lord Ashley, and the two men corresponded during the mid-1660s.82PRO30/24/7/565. In the winter of 1668-9 Naper was negotiating for the purchase of the Athelhampton estate, using another old friend, Sir John Fitzjames, as a go-between.83Alnwick, Northumberland MS 553, ff. 4, 8v. Naper’s will, which runs to ten folios with three codicils, shows the extent of his personal wealth, the generous provision made for his grandchildren, and the care with which he disposed of his estate.84PROB11/343/180. Naper died on 14 May 1673, and was buried in the family vault at Minterne Magna church, his tomb bearing the somewhat inexact claim that here lay ‘the body of Sir Gerard Naper, knight and baronet ... who was deputy lieutenant to King Charles the First, and never deserted him’.85Hutchins, Dorset, iv. 483. The inscription typifies the man. Despite changing sides on numerous occasions between 1640 and 1660, Naper was able to cover his traces effectively, using the influence which came with his position as one of the Dorset elite. Naper’s son and heir, Sir Nathaniel Naper, the second baronet, sat for various Dorset boroughs from 1679 until 1702.86CB; Oxford DNB.