Pympe, daughter of Reginald Pympe, and of Elizabeth late his wife, cousin and heir of John Gower, late of Clapham in Surrey, Esquire, now dead; that is to say, daughter of the said Elizabeth, daughter of Lowys, sister of the same John," who she states lost all his lands and goods for supporting Henry the Sixth, at Palm Sunday Field, and afterwards, attending the late Prince of Wales at Tewksbury Field, was taken and slain '. From her petition, which was successful, and the will of Thomas Gower, in 1458, it is manifest that the said John and Richard Gower, and William and Isabel Paselse, all died without issue before 1485, and that the petitioner, Anne Pympe, became the heiress of the families of Passele and Gower of Clapham. She was heir to her mother, and married first Sir John Scott of Kent, and was ancestrix of the ancient family name. Her second husband was Sir John Raynsford 2. There is only presumptive evidence in favour of the Gowers of Clapham being descended from the family of the poet, namely, the circumstance of Thomas Gower having lands in Southwark, and appointing, on a certain contingency, a priest in one of the hospitals to which the poet was a benefactor. It is deserving of remark, that the families of Passele, Pympe, and Scott, all belonged to Kent, and two of them, Passele and Scott, are interred in Braborne Church, where Sir Robert Gower lies. The probability arising from these facts would, however, be entirely negatived, if the arms assigned to the name of Gower, in the quarterings of Scott, could be proved to have been those of Thomas or John Gower of Clapham; for Philpot in one place described them as, Gules a fesse Ermine, between six cross crosslets fitchy Argent, and in another, in the same page, as Gules, a fess Ermine; a variation which admits of the inference that he was by no means sure of what they really were. The original will of Thomas Gower, in 1458, is not preserved, and no means exist of ascertaining what coat he actually used. The following, Mr. Todd says 3, occurs in some manuscripts of the "CONFESSIO AMANTIS," but it has been here copied, with the title assigned to it, from one of the Cottonian MSS.+, which appears to have been the common-place book, if the expression may be allowed, of some priest about the reign of Edward the Fourth. "Epitaphium sive dictum Johannis Gower "Henrici quarti primus regni fuit Annus Omnia tempus habens finem natura ministras, MS. in the College of Arms, marked Philpot's A, where it is said that John Pashley and Lewis Gower had issue besides Elizabeth, who married Reginald Pympe, a son William, two daughters who were both called Joan and one of whom was the wife of Philip Cecill, and a daughter Isabel. As the daughter of the said Elizabeth Pympe calls herself the heiress of John Gower, neither of the other children of John Passele and Lewis Gower could have left issue that survived until the year 1485. 2 Philpot's A, before cited. 3 Illustrations, p. 100. 4 Julius, F. vii. f. 167. Quem virtute sua frangere nemo potest. Ultra posse nichil quamvis michi velle remansit; "Electus Christi pie rex Henrice fuisti; Et tibi nam grata gracia sponte data." As so very little is known of the personal history of the poet, it may be thought desirable that the following extracts from his writings, in which he alludes to himself, should be here given at length. The first occurs in some copies of his "Vox CLAMANTIS" in the British Museum 1. "Nota hic in fine, qualiter a principio illius Cronice que Vox Clamantis dicitur, una cum sequenti cronica que bipartita est; tam de tempore regis Ricardi secundi, usque in ipsius deposicionem, quam de coronacione Illustrissimi domini Regis Henrici quarti, usque in annum Regni sui secundum. Ego licet indignus inter alios scribentes scriptor a diu solicitus, precipue super hiis que medio tempore in Anglia contingebant, secundum varias rerum accidencias, varia carmina que ad legendum necessaria sunt, sub compendio breviter conscripsi. Et nunc quia tam gravitate senectutis quam aliarum infirmitatum multipliciter depressus, ulterius de cronicis scribere discrete non sufficio: excusacionem meam necessariam, prout patet consequenter, declarare intendo. "Henrici regis annus fuit ille secundus, Scribere dum cesso, sum quia cecus ego. Ultra posse nichil, quamvis michi velle ministrat : Cottonian MSS. Tiberius, A. iv. f. 175, &c. Deprecor ergo meis lacrimis, vivens ego cecus, Daque michi sanctum lumen habere tuum. Amen." To the preceding remarks two facts can fortunately be added, which unquestionably related to the poet, and which are now printed for the first time. On the 6th August, 6 Ric. II.,1382, an indenture was made between John Gower, on the one part, and Thomas Blakelake, parson of the church of Saint Nicholas at Feltwell, John Sybile, Edmund Lukynghethe, and John Warmington, of the other part, by which the said John Gower granted to the aforesaid Thomas, John, Edmund, and John, and their heirs and assigns, the manors of Feltwell in Norfolk and Multon in Suffolk, they paying, during the life of John Gower, the sum of 401. annually to him or his assigns in the conventual church at Westminster 1. Thus it is evident, that the poet was possessed of the manor of Feltwell in Norfolk, as he is identified as the granter, by his mentioning the manor of Multon, of which he is proved by his will to have been seised. 66 The other notice is more curious: in the 17th Ric. II., 1393-4, Henry of Lancaster, afterwards King Henry the Fourth, is recorded to have presented un esquier John Gower" with a collar 2, and which, there can be little doubt, was bestowed on him in consequence of his having then become one of that prince's retainers. It is well known, that the poet is represented with a collar on his tomb, to which a swan is appended; but as the latter is believed not to have been assumed by Henry the Fourth until after the demise of Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, in 1397, the swan must have been given to Gower at a subsequent period. But this article must not be concluded without an observation being made, in which Mr. Todd is interested. Even if what has been here stated of the family of Gower prove nothing else, it will perhaps convince that gentleman that "the proud tradition in the Marquess of Stafford's family"" has been founded upon error; and that, however much " ingenuity may be puzzled to excuse the neglect" of Mr. Gough's "Sepulchral Monuments," which he charges Mr. Ellis, Mr. Ritson, and Mr. Godwin with having evinced; it is still more difficult to explain or to justify "the neglect," which the author of the "Illustrations of the Life and Writings of Gower" has himself displayed, in not discovering some, at least, of the particulars here collected. 1 Enrolled in Chancery 29 February, 7 Ric. II. 1384. Rot. Claus. 7 Ric. II. m. 17. From information obligingly communicated by Henry Petrie, Esq. 2 From a Record in the Duchy of Lancaster Office; for a notice of which we are indebted to George Frederick Beltz, Esq. Lancaster Herald. 3 "Illustrations," p. xxi. 4. Ibid. p. xiii. THE PEERAGE BILL IN 1719. THE extraordinary and, in a constitutional point of view, perhaps dangerous increase, which has taken place in the Peerage of this country since the year 1760', may bring to the recollection of most persons the attempt which was made in the reign of George the First to restrain the exercise of that branch of the royal prerogative; but as little is known on the subject, some attention has been bestowed on the proceedings which then took place, and on the various works that appeared on the question. The results of these researches are submitted in the following pages. A few remarks on the nature of the danger which is to be apprehended from such frequent creations of peers, and some suggestions of what appears to be the most feasible mode of preventing it, will not, perhaps, be deemed misplaced. To the common objection, that it is always in the power of the crown to carry any measure through the upper house, by a sudden infusion of the necessary number of new peers, it is sufficient to answer, that no real evil has been produced in this manner. The objection, however, to creations, similar to some which have recently taken place, is prospective rather than immediate, and arises from the probability that the inheritors of the dignity will not be possessed of sufficient fortune to support it; that they may consequently degenerate into the mere creatures of the crown; and that, if they derive their means of existence from the minister, they will repay their benefactor by a servile devotion to his wishes. We are very far from contending, that wealth should be an indispensable qualification in a man who, by splendid services, had really merited the honours of the peerage, and still less do we wish that the influence of money in this country should increase; but no peer ought to be created who does not possess an income of at least 30007. per annum, and upon each of whose descendants, to whom the title is limited, that revenue is indefeasibly entailed. That merit ought to be the only path to honours, is a truism as ge His present majesty has added sixty-four members to the upper house. In this number, individuals who have been raised to the peerage, or in whose favour an abeyance has been terminated, as well as peers of Scotland and Ireland, who have obtained English baronies, are of course included. No notice, however, is taken of the Scotch peerages which have been restored, of the creations of peers of Ireland, of claims which have been admitted to English peerages, or of elevations of English peers to higher honours. His late majesty is said to have created 239 English peers in about fifty-three years, i. e. from 1760 to 1814, or on the average something more than four per annum. The average number since 1814, the year in which the Prince Regent first created an English peer, has been as nearly as possible the same. nerally admitted as it is continually neglected; but if family connexions, the royal favour, or parliamentary influence, are passports to the upper house of parliament, the individuals so selected should be possessed of a sufficient annual revenue; and a bill might be introduced for the settlement of the estates of peers upon the inheritors of the title to prevent their ever being mortgaged or alienated. In cases of important public services, and services of an extraordinary nature alone should be so rewarded, the revenue in question might be granted by the country, and attached to the dignity. The evils of an impoverished peerage would be thus avoided, and the number of creations be much less numerous, since those who received the honour from interest would be obliged to possess the means of supporting it; and it but rarely happens that a man can perform services to his country, which ought to justify its being charged with such a burthen; whilst, by rendering it necessary that the grant should be anterior to the creation, an opportunity would be afforded to parliament to canvass the grounds upon which it was claimed, and as much control on the royal prerogative as is consistent with the dignity of the crown and the spirit of the constitution would thus be given to the legislature. No valid reason can be assigned why services should now be rewarded with the peerage, which, in earlier periods of our history, were deemed to be sufficiently recompensed by the expression of the sovereign's applause, especially as the individuals by whom they are performed are generally well paid by the government; or why every country esquire of a good fortune, who happens to have sat in the house of commons for a few sessions, should deem he has so materially benefited his country as to be entitled to a peerage. Two other modes exist by which the evils that may arise from the increase of peers might be avoided. The one by creating individuals peers for life only: the other by attaching a seat in the upper house, and perhaps with the title and other privileges of a baron, to certain high offices: for example, to the chancellor, to one or two of the chief-justices, and to some of the ministers of the crown; by which measure the state would derive all the advantage of their talents in the house of lords, without the entail of future evils on, or expense to, the country. The peerage, however, is not the only dignity which has been extravagantly extended. The increase of baronets has been still greater; and this title is now conferred, not merely on the favourites of royalty, but even on those of powerful noblemen. It is true, that a few persons have received the dignity in reward of civil or military services; but they bear no proportion to those upon whom it has been bestowed "For some gracious service unexpressed:" |