AGMONDESHAM, John II (c.1543-98), of Rowbarns, East Horsley, Surr.
Available from Boydell and Brewer
Family and Education
b.c.1543, 1st s. of John Agmondesham I. educ. M. Temple 1559, called by 1571. m. c.1569, Elizabeth, da. and coh. of George Smith of Clopton Hall, Suff., s.p. suc. fa. 1573.
J.p. Surr. 1575.
Bencher, M. Temple by 1579, Autumn reader 1579, Lent reader 1589.
Agmondesham was a puritan lawyer, with chambers at the Middle Temple which he relinquished in 1576 when given permission to build a new set in the Old Hall. He was probably returned for Christchurch through the 3rd Earl of Huntingdon, and for Bossiney through either William Peryam or John Hender, both Middle Templars. In 1586-7 he was appointed to committees concerning Mary Queen of Scots (4 Nov.) and a learned ministry (8 Mar.); in 1593 to committees concerned with privileges and returns (26 Feb.), the subsidy (26 Feb.), recusancy (28 Feb., 4 Apr.), explanation of statutes (7 Apr.) and the punishment of rogues (12 Mar.); in 1597 he was again on the privileges committee (5 Nov.), and also on committees for armour and weapons (8 Nov.) and Staines Bridge (1 Dec.). He is not known to have spoken in the House.
He continued his father’s policy of enclosing common ground at East Horsley in the face of bitter opposition. William Fleetwood I complained to Burghley that Agmondesham was never in a fit state to be spoken with at midsummer. A dispute between Agmondesham and a certain Thomas Cornwallis about pasture rights led to the intervention of the Privy Council in 1592.
In his will, made on 6 Apr. 1598, Agmondesham asked to be buried ‘without Egyptian pomp’ and set out a puritan declaration of faith. He remembered the poor and several relatives and friends, including John Boys, William Morgan III and the wife of Drew Pickesse. On the death of his wife, the sole executrix, his property, including lands in London, Essex and Buckinghamshire, was to pass to the grandson of his sister and heiress Mary Muschamp. He died at Rowbarns on 1 Aug. 1598. His sister contested the will, and on 13 Feb. 1599 judgment was given in favour of the widow, who had re-married.
Vis. Surr. (Harl. Soc. xliii), 54; D’Ewes, 394, 413, 471, 474, 477, 499, 517, 520, 552, 553, 566; HMC Hatfield, iv. 295; Surr. Arch. Colls. ix. 384; HMC 7th Rep. 646, 647, 650; Lansd. 71, f. 30; APC, xxiii. 388; PCC 71 Lewyn, 14 Kidd; C142/254/31, 257/86.